Something of Men I Have Known
With Some Papers of a General Nature, Political, Historical, and Retrospective (2024)

E-text prepared by an anonymous volunteer

Transcriber's notes:

The diaeresis is transcribed by a following hyphen.

The contraction "n't" appears both as a separate word and as a suffix in the text. Since this seems to be the choice of the Linotype operator, not the author, it has been changed to modern usage. Differing spellings of "Lafayette" and "judgment" have been standardized. The author's spelling of "Pittsburg", "Alleghanies", "Tombs", "McDougall", and "Breckenridge" has been retained.

Hyphenations at the end of lines have been eliminated wherever possible. Those remaining are words that are hyphenated elsewhere in the text, or in general usage.

A few corrections of punctuation and of single letters have
been made.

This transcription was typed into MS-DOS Editor under Windows
XP, spell-checked in Word Perfect, and examined with Gutcheck.

With Some Papers of a General Nature, Political, Historical, and
Retrospective

by

ADLAI E. STEVENSON

Fully Illustrated

Second Edition

[Frontispiece]

[Publisher's logo]

ChicagoA. C. McClurg & Co.1909

Copyright
A. C. McClurg & Co.
1909
Published October, 1909
Second Edition, December 17, 1909
The Lakeside Press
R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company
Chicago

TO MY WIFE
Letitia Green Stevenson
THE PATIENT LISTENER TO THESE
"TWICE-TOLD TALES"

FOREWORD

To write in the spirit of candor of men he has known, and of greatevents in which he has himself borne no inconspicuous part, hasbeen thought not an unworthy task for the closing years of morethan one of the most eminent of our public men. It may be thatthe labor thus imposed has oftentimes enabled the once activeparticipant in great affairs submissively "to entertain the lagend of his life with quiet hours."

Following the example of such at a great distance and along ahumbler path, I have attempted to write something of events ofwhich I have been a witness, and of some of the principal actorstherein during the last third of a century.

My book in the main is something of men I have personally known;the occasional mention of statesmen of the past seems justified bymatters at the time under discussion.

With the hope that it may not be wholly without interest to someinto whose hands it may fall, I now submit this slight contributionto the political literature of these passing days.

A. E. S.BLOOMINGTON, ILLINOIS,August 1, 1909.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I. ON THE CIRCUIT II. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES III. AGAIN IN CONGRESS IV. THE VICE-PRESIDENT V. THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES VI. A TRIBUTE TO LINCOLN VII. STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS VIII. THE FIRST POLITICAL TELEGRAM IX. ALONG THE BYPATHS OF HISTORY X. THE CODE OF HONOR XI. A PRINCELY GIFT XII. THE OLD RANGER XIII. THE MORMON EXODUS FROM ILLINOIS XIV. A KENTUCKY COLONEL XV. FORGOTTEN EVENTS OF THE LONG AGO XVI. ROBERT G. INGERSOLL XVII. A CAMP-MEETING ORATOR XVIII. CLEVELAND AS I KNEW HIM XIX. THE UNANIMOUS CHOICE FOR SPEAKER XX. A LAWYER OF THE OLD SCHOOL XXI. HIGH DEBATE IN THE MOUNTAINS XXII. THE SAGE OF THE BAR XXIII. "THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSISSIPPI" XXIV. AN OLD-TIME COUNTRY DOCTOR XXV. A QUESTION OF AVAILABILITY XXVI. A STATESMAN OF A PAST ERA XXVII. NOT GUILTY OF PREACHING THE GOSPEL XXVIII. AMONG THE ACTORS XXIX. THE LOST ART OF ORATORY XXX. THE COLONELS XXXI. REMINISCENCES XXXII. A TRIBUTE TO IRELAND XXXIII. THE BLIND CHAPLAIN XXXIV. A MEMORABLE CENTENNIAL XXXV. COLUMBUS MONUMENT IN CENTRAL PARK XXXVI. A PLATFORM NOT DANGEROUS TO STAND UPON XXXVII. ANECDOTES OF GOVERNOR OGLESBYXXXVIII. THE ONE ENEMY XXXIX. CONTRASTS OF TIMES XL. ENDORSING THE ADMINISTRATION XLI. ANECDOTES ABOUT LINCOLN XLII. FIRST LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN AMERICA XLIII. A NEW DAY ADDED TO THE CALENDAR XLIV. A MOUNTAIN COLLEGE XLV. DEDICATION OF A NATIONAL PARK XLVI. A BAR MEETING STILL IN SESSION XLVII. THE HAYNE-WEBSTER DEBATE RECALLED XLVIII. IN THE HIGHLANDS XLIX. ANECDOTES OF LAWYERS L. OUR NOBLE CALLING LI. THE "HOME-COMING" AT BLOOMINGTON

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

[facing] PAGE
ADLAI E. STEVENSON Frontispiece
ADLAI E. STEVENSON AT 30 8
JAMES S. EWING 9
GEORGE F. HOAR 12
SAMUEL J. TILDEN 13
JAMES G. BLAINE 18
ROBERT E. WILLIAMS 19
JAMES A. GARFIELD 22
NATH. P. BANKS 23
WILLIAM R. MORRISON 26
WILLIAM M. SPRINGER 27
SAMUEL J. RANDALL 30
ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS 30
LUCIUS Q. C. LAMAR 30
JAMES B. BECK 30
DAVID DUDLEY FIELD 31
HENRY WATTERSON 33
SAMUEL S. COX 34
LEVI P. MORTON 48
JAMES A. McKENZIE 49
WILLIAM McKINLEY 56
SENATE TESTIMONIAL TO MR. STEVENSON AS PRESIDENT
OF SENATE 57
ABRAHAM LINCOLN 82
ANDREW JOHNSON 83
ULYSSES S. GRANT 100
HORATIO SEYMOUR 101
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS 126
SAMUEL F. B. MORSE 127
WILLIAM M. GWIN 170
JAMES SHIELDS 171
JAMES SMITHSON 174
JOSEPH HENRY 175
JOHN REYNOLDS 196
JOSEPH SMITH 197
R. G. INGERSOLL 226
PETER CARTWRIGHT 227
CLEVELAND AND STEVENSON 240
WILLIAM FREEMAN VILAS 241
WILLIAM M. EVARTS 262
JOE WHEELER 263
DAVID DAVIS 286
S. S. PRENTISS 287
EDWIN BOOTH 304
JOSEPH JEFFERSON 305
RUFUS CHOATE 312
ISAAC N. PHILLIPS 313
WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 316
W. H. MILBURN 317
R. J. OGLESBY 346
JOSEPH W. FIFER 347
LAWRENCE WELDON 352
THOMAS F. MARSHALL 353
MATTHEW T. SCOTT 372
ADLAI E. STEVENSON 373
LYMAN TRUMBULL 382
HOME OF ADLAI E. STEVENSON, BLOOMINGTON, ILL.
383

SOMETHING OF MEN I HAVE KNOWN

ION THE CIRCUIT

DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTRY AFTER THE CIVIL WAR—SLAVERY THE APPLE OFDISCORD BEFORE THE WAR—LINCOLN AS A COUNTRY LAWYER—SOCIABILITYOF THE LAWYERS OF THE PERIOD—THEIR EXCELLENCE AS ORATORS—HENRYCLAY AS A PARTY LEADER—EULOGIUMS ON LAWYERS—LINCOLN'S ADMIRATIONFOR GENERAL WINFIELD SCOTT—THE WRITER'S ADDRESS ON THE LAW ANDLAWYERS.

The period extending from my first election to Congress in 1874,to my retirement from the Vice-Presidency in 1897, was one ofmarvellous development to the country. Large enterprises wereundertaken, and the sure foundation was laid for much ofexisting business conditions. The South had recovered from thesad effects of the Civil War, and had in a measure regained itsformer position in the world of trade, as well as in that pertainingto the affairs of the Government. The population of the countryhad almost doubled; the ratio of representation in the Lower Houseof Congress largely augmented; the entire electoral vote increasedfrom 369 to 444. Eight new States had been admitted to the Union,thus increasing the number of Senators from seventy-four to ninety.

The years mentioned likewise witnessed the passing from the nationalstage, with few exceptions, of the men who had taken a conspicuouspart in the great debates directly preceding and during the Civil Warand the reconstruction period which immediately followed. Bythe arbitrament of war, and by constitutional amendment, oldquestions, for a half-century the prime cause of sectional strife,had been irrevocably settled, and passed to the domain of history.New men had come to the front, and new questions were to be discussedand determined.

To the student of history, the years immediately preceding theCivil War are of abiding interest. In some of its phases slavery wasthe all-absorbing subject of debate throughout the entire country.It had been the one recognized peril to the Union since the formationof the Government. Beginning with the debates in the conventionthat formulated the Federal Constitution, it remained for seventyyears the apple of discord,—the subject of patriotic apprehensionand repeated compromise. The last serious attempt to settlethis question in the manner just indicated was by the adjustmentknown in our political history as "the compromise measures of 1850."These measures, although bitterly denounced in the South as wellas in the North, received the sanction in national convention ofboth of the great parties that two years later presented candidatesfor the Presidency. It is no doubt true that a majority of thepeople, in both sections of the country, then believed that thequestion that had been so fraught with peril to national unity fromthe beginning was at length settled for all time. The rudeawakening came two years later, when the country was aroused, as ithad rarely been before, by impassioned debate in and out of Congress,over the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. It was a period ofexcitement such as we shall probably not see again. Slavery inall its phases was the one topic of earnest discussion, both upon thehustings and at the fireside. There was little talk now ofcompromise. The old-time statesmen of the Clay and Webster, Winthropand Crittenden, school soon disappeared from the arena. Men hithertocomparatively unknown to the country at large were soon to thefront.

Conspicuous among them was a country lawyer whose home was atSpringfield, Illinois. With the mighty events soon to follow, hisname is imperishably linked. But it is not of Lincoln the President,the emancipator, the martyr, we are now to speak. It is of Lincolnthe country lawyer, as he stepped upon the arena of high debate,the unswerving antagonist of slavery extension half a centuryand more ago.

His home, during his entire professional life, was at the capital ofthe State. He was, at the time mentioned, in general practice as alawyer and a regular attendant upon the neighboring courts. Hisearly opportunities for education were meagre indeed. He had beena student of men, rather than of books. He was, in the mostexpressive sense, "of the people,"—the people as they then were.For,

"Know thou this, that men are as the time is."

His training was, in large measure, under the severe conditions tobe briefly mentioned. The old-time custom of "riding the circuit"is to the present generation of lawyers only a tradition. The fewwho remember central Illinois as it was sixty years ago will readilyrecall the full meaning of the expression. The district in which Mr.Lincoln practised extended from the counties of Livingston andWoodford upon the north, almost to the Indiana line—embracing thepresent cities of Danville, Springfield, and Bloomington. The lastnamed was the home of the Hon. David Davis, the presiding judge ofthe district. As is well known, he was the intimate friend of Mr.Lincoln, and the latter was often his guest during attendance uponthe courts at Bloomington. At that early day, the term of courtin few of the counties continued longer than a week, so that much ofthe time of the judge and the lawyers who travelled the circuitwith him was spent upon horseback. When it is remembered that therewere then no railroads, but few bridges, a sparse population,and that more than half the area embraced in that district wasunbroken prairie, the real significance of riding the circuit willfully appear. It was of this period that the late GovernorFord, speaking of Judge Young,—whose district extended from Quincy,upon the Mississippi River to Chicago,—said: "He possesses inrare degree one of the highest requisites for a good circuit judge,—he is an excellent horseback rider."

At the period mentioned there were few law-books in the State.The monster libraries of later days had not yet arrived. Thehalf-dozen volumes of State Reports, together with the Statutesand a few leading text-books, constituted the lawyer's library.To an Illinois lawyer upon the circuit, a pair of saddle-bags was anindispensable part of his outfit. With these, containing thefew books mentioned and a change or two of linen, and supplied withthe necessary horse, saddle and bridle, the lawyer of the pioneer dayswas duly equipped for the active duties of his calling. The lackof numerous volumes of adjudicated cases was, however, not anunmixed evil. Causes were necessarily argued upon principle. Howwell this conduced to the making of the real lawyer is well known.The admonition, "Beware the man who reads but one book," is of deepsignificance. The complaint to-day is not of scarcity, but that"of the making of many books there is no end." Professor Phelpsis authority for the statement that "it is easy to find singleopinions in which more authorities are cited than were mentioned byMarshall in the whole thirty years of his unexampled judicial life;and briefs that contain more cases than Webster referred to in allthe arguments he ever delivered."

The lawyers of the times whereof we write were, almost withoutexception, politicians—in close touch with the people, easy ofapproach, and obliging to the last degree. Generally speaking,a lawyer's office was as open to the public as the Courthouseitself. That his surroundings were favorable to the cultivationof a high degree of sociability goes without saying. Story-tellinghelped often on the circuit to while away the long evenings atcountry taverns. At times, perchance,

"the night drave on wi' sangs and clatter."

Oratory counted for much more then than now. When an importantcase was on trial all other pursuits were for the time suspended, andthe people for miles around were in prompt attendance. This wasespecially the case when it was known that one or more of theleading advocates were to speak. The litigation, too, was to alarge extent different from that of to-day. The country wasnew, population sparse; the luxuries and many of the comforts oflife yet in the future; post-offices, schools, and churches manymiles away. In every cabin were to be found the powder-horn,bullet-pouch, and rifle. The restraints and amenities of modernsociety were in large measure unknown; and altogether much was tobe, and was, "pardoned to the spirit of liberty." There were nogreat corporations to be chosen defendants, but much of the timeof the courts was taken up by suits in ejectment, actions forassault and battery, breach of promise, and slander. One, notinfrequent, was replevin, involving the ownership of hogs, when byunquestioned usage all stock was permitted to run at large. Butcriminal trials of all grades, and in all their details, arousedthe deepest interest. To these the people came from all directions,as if summoned to a general muster. This was especially true ifa murder case was upon trial. Excitement then ran high, and thearguments of counsel, from beginning to close, were listened towith breathless interest. It will readily be seen that suchoccasions furnished rare opportunity to the gifted advocate. Invery truth the general acquaintance thus formed, and the popularityachieved, have marked the beginning of more than one successfuland brilliant political career. Moreover, the thorough knowledge ofthe people thus acquired by actual contact—the knowledge of theircondition, necessities, and wishes—resulted often in legislation ofenduring benefit to the new country. The Homestead law, the lawsetting apart a moiety of the public domain for the maintenance offree schools, and judicious provision for the establishment of thevarious charities, will readily be recalled.

Politics, in the modern sense—too often merely "for what there isin it"—was unknown. As stepping-stones to local offices and evento Congress, the caucus and convention were yet to come. Aspirantsto public place presented their claims directly to the people, andthe personal popularity of the candidate was an important factorin achieving success. Bribery at elections was rarely heard of.The saying of the great bard,

"If money go before,
All ways do open lie,"

awaited its verification in a later and more civilized period. Aslate even as 1858, when Lincoln and Douglas were rival aspirantsto the Senate, when every voter in the State was a partisan of oneor the other candidate, and the excitement was for many monthsintense, there was never, from either side, an intimation of thecorrupt use of a farthing to influence the result.

No period of our history has witnessed more intense devotion togreat party leaders than that of which we write. Of eminentstatesmen, whose names were still invoked, none had filled larger spacethan did Henry Clay and Andrew Jackson. The former was theearly political idol of Mr. Lincoln; the latter, of Mr. Douglas.Possibly, since the foundation of the Government, no statesman hasbeen so completely idolized by his friends and party as wasHenry Clay. Words are meaningless when the attempt is made toexpress the idolatry of the Whigs of his own State for their greatchieftain. For a lifetime he knew no rival. His wish was lawto his followers. In the realm of party leadership a greater thanhe hath not appeared. At his last defeat for the Presidency strongmen wept bitter tears. When his star set, it was felt to be thesignal for the dissolution of the great party of which he wasthe founder. In words worthy to be recalled, "when the tidingscame like wailing over the State that Harry Percy's spur was cold,the chivalrous felt somehow the world had grown commonplace."

The following incident, along the line indicated, may be consideredcharacteristic. While Mr. Clay was a Senator, a resolution, inaccordance with a sometime custom, was introduced into the KentuckyHouse of Representatives instructing the Senators from that State tovote in favor of a certain bill then pending in Congress. Theresolution was in the act of passing without opposition, when ahitherto silent member from one of the mountain counties, springingto his feet, exclaimed: "Mr. Speaker, am I to understand that thisLegislature is undertaking to tell Henry Clay how to vote?" TheSpeaker answered that such was the purport of the resolution.At which the member from the mountains, throwing up his arms,exclaimed "Great God!" and sank into his seat. It is needlessto add that the resolution was immediately rejected by unanimousvote.

Two-thirds of a century ago the Hon. John P. Kennedy wrote ofthe lawyers of his day:

"The feelings, habits, and associations of the bar in general, havea very happy influence upon the character. And, take it altogether,there may be collected from it a greater mass of shrewd, observant,droll, playful, and generous spirits, than from any other equalnumbers of society. They live in each other's presence like a setof players; congregate in courts like the former in the green room;and break their unpremeditated jests, in the intervals of business,with that sort of undress freedom that contrasts amusingly withthe solemn and even tragic seriousness with which they appear inturn upon the boards. They have one face for the public, rife withthe saws and learned gravity of the profession, and another forthemselves, replete with broad mirth, sprightly wit, and gaythoughtlessness. The intense mental toil and fatigue ofbusiness give them a peculiar relish for the enjoyment of theirhours of relaxation, and, in the same degree, incapacitate themfor that frugal attention to their private concerns which theirlimited means usually require. They have, in consequence, aprevailing air of unthriftiness in personal matters, which, howeverit may operate to the prejudice of the pocket of the individual, hasa mellow and kindly effect upon his disposition. In an old memberof the profession, one who has grown gray in the service, there isa rich unction of originality that brings him out from the ranksof his fellowmen in strong relief. His habitual conversancy with theworld in its strangest varieties and with the secret history ofcharacter, gives him a shrewd estimate of the human heart. Heis quiet, and unapt to be struck with wonder at any of the actionsof men. There is a deep current of observation running calmlythrough his thoughts, and seldom gushing out in words; the confidencewhich has been placed in him, in the thousand relations of hisprofession, renders him constitutionally cautious. His acquaintancewith the vicissitudes of fortune, as they have been exemplified inthe lives of individuals, and with the severe afflictions that have'tried the reins' of many, known only to himself, makes him anindulgent and charitable apologist of the aberrations of others.He has an impregnable good humor that never falls below the level ofthoughtfulness into melancholy."

A distinguished writer, two generations ago, said of the early
Western bar:

"Not only was it a body distinguished for dignity and tolerance,but chivalrous courage was a marked characteristic. Personalcowardice was odious among the bar, as among the hunters who hadfought the British and the Indians. Hence, insulting language,and the use of billingsgate, were too hazardous to be indulgedwhere a personal accounting was a strong possibility. Not onlydid common prudence dictate courtesy among the members of the bar,but an exalted spirit of honor and well-bred politeness prevailed.The word of a counsel to his adversary was his inviolable bond.The suggestion of a lawyer as to the existence of a fact was acceptedas verity by the court. To insinuate unprofessional conduct wasto impute infamy."

I distinctly recall the first time I saw Mr. Lincoln. In September,1852, two lawyers from Springfield, somewhat travel-stained withtheir sixty miles' journey, alighted from the stage-coach in frontof the old tavern in Bloomington. The taller and younger of thetwo was Abraham Lincoln; the other, his personal friend and formerpreceptor, John T. Stuart. That evening it was my good fortune tohear Mr. Lincoln address a political meeting at the old Courthousein advocacy of the election of General Winfield Scott to thePresidency. The speech was one of great ability, and but littlethat was favorable of the military record of General Pierce remainedwhen the speech was concluded. The Mexican War was then of recentoccurrence, its startling events fresh in the memory of all, andits heroes still the heroes of the hour. The more than half-centurythat has passed has not wholly dispelled my recollection of Mr.Lincoln's eloquent tribute to "the hero of Lundy's Lane," and hishumorous description of the military career of General Franklin Pierce.

The incident now to be related occurred at the old National Hotel inBloomington in September, 1854. Senator Douglas had been advertisedto speak, and a large audience was in attendance. It was his firstappearance there since the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill.The writer, then a student at the Wesleyan University, with hisclassmate James S. Ewing and many others, had called upon Mr.Douglas at his hotel. While there the Hon. Jesse W. Fell, aprominent citizen of Bloomington and the close friend of Mr.Lincoln, also called upon Mr. Douglas, and after some conversationwith him said in substance, that inasmuch as there was profoundinterest felt in the great question then pending, and the peoplewere anxious to hear both sides, he thought it would be well tohave a joint discussion between Judge Douglas and Mr. Lincoln. Towhich proposition Mr. Douglas at once demanded, "What party doesMr. Lincoln represent?" The answer of Mr. Fell was, "the Whigparty, of course." Declining the proposition with much feeling Mr.Douglas said, "When I came home from Washington I was assailedin the northern part of the State by an old line abolitionist,in the central part of the State by a Whig, and in Southern Illinoisby an anti-Nebraska Democrat. I cannot hold the Whig responsible forwhat the abolitionist says, nor the anti-Nebraska Democrat responsiblefor what either of the others say, and it looks like dogging a manall over the State." There was no further allusion to the subject,and Mr. Lincoln soon after called. The greeting between JudgeDouglas and himself was most cordial, and their conversation,principally of incidents of their early lives, of the most agreeableand friendly character. Judge Lawrence Weldon, just then at thebeginning of an honorable career, was present at the above interview,and has in a sketch of Mr. Lincoln given its incidents more indetail.

Courts of justice, and the law as a distinctive calling, are thenecessary outgrowths of civilization. In his rude state, manavenged his wrongs with his own strong arm, and the dogma, "Might makesright," passed unchallenged. But as communities assumed organicform, tribunals were instituted for the administration of justice andthe maintenance of public order. The progress of society, froma condition of semi-barbarism and ignorance to a state of thehighest culture and refinement, may be traced by its advancementin the modes of administering justice, and in the character andlearning of its tribunals. The advance steps taken from time totime in the history of jurisprudence are the milestones which standout on the highway of civilization. All along the pathway of humanprogress, the courts of justice have been the sure criteria bywhich to judge of the intelligence and virtue of our race.

Truly it has been said: "With the coming of the lawyer came a newpower in the world. The steel-clad baron and his retainers wereawed by terms they had never before heard and did not understand, suchas precedent, principle, and the like. The great and real pacifierof the world was the lawyer. His parchment took the place ofthe battle-field. The flow of his ink checked the flow of blood.His quill usurped the place of the sword. His legalism dethronedbarbarism. His victories were victories of peace. He impressedon individuals and on communities that which he is now endeavoringto impress on nations, that there are many controversies that itwere better to lose by arbitration than to win by war andbloodshed."

It is all-important, never more so than now, that the people shouldmagnify the law. Whatever lessens respect for its authority bodesevil and only evil to the State. No occasion could arise moreappropriate than this in which to utter solemn words of warningagainst an evil of greater menace to the public weal than aught tobe apprehended from foreign foe. In many localities a spirit oflawlessness has asserted itself in its most hideous form. The ruleof the mob has at times usurped that of the law. Outrages havebeen perpetrated in the name of summary justice, appalling toall thoughtful men. It need hardly be said that all this is intotal disregard of individual rights, and utterly subversive ofall lawful authority.

By the solemn adjudication of courts, and under the safeguardsof law, the fact of guilt is to be established, and the guiltypunished. The spirit of the mob is in deadly antagonism to allconstituted authority. Unless curbed it will sap the foundationof civilized society. Lynching a human creature is no less murderwhen the act of a mob than when that of a single individual. Thereis no safety to society but in an aroused public sentiment thatwill hold each participant amenable to the law for the consequencesof the crime he either perpetrates or abets. This is the landof liberty, "of the largest liberty," but let it never be forgottenthat it is liberty regulated by law. Let him be accounted a publicenemy who would weaken the bonds of human society, and destroy whatit has cost our race the sacrifice and toil of centuries to achieve.

The sure rock of defence in the outstretched years as in thelong past, will be the intelligence, the patriotism, the virtue ofa law-abiding, liberty-loving people. To a degree that cannotbe measured by words, the temple of justice will prove the city ofrefuge. "The judiciary has no guards, no palaces, no treasuries; noarms but truth and wisdom; and no splendor but justice."

IIIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOTABLE MEMBERS OF THE FORTY-FOURTH CONGRESS—TRIAL OF GENERALBELKNAP—THE PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST BETWEEN HAYES AND TILDEN—CREATIONOF THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION—THE WRITER'S SPEECH ON THAT OCCASION—PROMINENT MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE DURING THIS CONGRESS—ANECDOTESOF MR. BLAINE—OTHER MEMBERS—ANECDOTES OF MR. HOAR—ELECTION OFTHE "BLIND PREACHER"—MR. LAMAR'S ERROR AT TABLE—"BLUE JEANSWILLIAMS"—RETIREMENT OF DR. BUTLER FROM THE CHAPLAINCY—MR.BLACKBURN'S SPEECH AT AN EXECUTION—MR. COX'S READY WIT—PROCTORKNOTT'S ABILITY AS A LAWYER—HIS SPEECH ON DULUTH—HIS REPLY TOHIS COMPETITOR FOR THE GOVERNORSHIP.

The forty-fourth Congress—the first of which I was a member—assembled December 6, 1875. Among its members were many gentlemenof distinction, some of whom had known active service in the field.Political disabilities had been in large measure removed, andthe South was now, for the first time since the war, represented inCongress by its old-time statesmen. Of this number may be mentionedMr. Stephens of Georgia, Mr. Lamar of Mississippi, and Mr. Reagan ofTexas. From the membership of this House were afterwards chosentwenty-six Senators, ten members of the Cabinet, one Justice ofthe Supreme Court, and from this and the House immediately succeeding,three Vice-Presidents and two Presidents of the United States. Theproceedings of this Congress marked an important epoch in ourhistory. During its first session occurred the masterful debateupon the General Amnesty Bill. The very depths of partisan feelingwere stirred, and for many days it was indeed a titanic struggle.The speeches attracting the greatest attention were those of Blaineand Garfield upon the one side, and Hill of Georgia and Lamar uponthe other. This great debate recalled vividly that of Webster andHayne, in the other wing of the Capitol, almost half a century before.

This session also witnessed the impeachment of a Cabinet officer, GeneralBelknap, Secretary of War. The trial occurred before theSenate, sitting as a court of impeachment during the closing weeksof the session, and resulted in his acquittal, less than two-thirdsof the Senators voting for conviction. General Belknap wasrepresented by an able array of counsel, chief of whom wereJudge Black of Pennsylvania and the Hon. Matthew H. Carpenterof Wisconsin. Mr. Knott of Kentucky, Mr. Hoar of Massachusetts,and Mr. Lord of New York, conducted the prosecution in the main asmanagers on the part of the House of Representatives. The principalcontention on the part of the counsel for the accused was that therecould be no conviction, inasmuch as Belknap had resigned his officebefore the article of impeachment had been preferred. This viewseems to have been decisive of the final vote of many Senators,and the accused stood acquitted at the bar of the Senate.

When the second session of this Congress convened, in December,1876, the excitement throughout the country was intense over thepending Presidential contest between Hayes and Tilden. As will beremembered, the electoral vote of two States, Louisiana and Florida,was claimed by each of the candidates. These votes were decisive ofthe result. As the days passed and the time approached for thejoint session of the Senate and the House, for the purpose ofcounting the electoral votes and declaring the result, the tensionbecame greater, and partisan feeling more intense. The friends ofHayes were in the majority in the Senate; those of Tilden, inthe House. With conflicting certificates, both purporting to givethe correct vote from each of the States named, and no lawfulauthority existing to determine as to their validity, it can readilybe seen that the situation was one to arouse the grave apprehensionof all thoughtful men. The condition was without a precedent inour history. Twice had there been a failure to elect a President bythe people, and by constitutional provision the election in eachinstance devolved upon the House. In the first-mentioned case, in1801, Mr. Jefferson was chosen; and in the latter, in 1825, Mr.John Quincy Adams. In neither of the cases just mentioned hadthere been a question as to how any State had voted. It wassimply that no person had received a majority of all of the electoralvotes cast. The method of settlement was clearly pointed out bythe Constitution. As already indicated, the case was whollydifferent in the Hayes-Tilden controversy. The question then was asto how certain States had voted. It was for the purpose ofascertaining this fact and certifying the same to the joint sessionof the Senate and House, that the Electoral Commission was constituted.The bill having this end in view originated in the House in January,1877; the Commission was constituted, and the controverted questionswere soon thereafter determined.

The Electoral Commission was an imperative necessity. As suchit was created,—consisting of five members each from the Senate, theHouse of Representatives, and the Supreme Court. Its decisionswere adverse to Mr. Tilden from the beginning, and resulted in thefinding that all disputed votes should be counted for his opponent.This, it will be remembered, gave Hayes a majority of one on thefinal count, and resulted in his induction into office. Partisan feelingwas at its height, and the question of the justice of the decisionof the Electoral Commission was vehemently discussed.

To the end that there might be a peaceful determination of theperilous question, that of disputed succession to the Presidency, Iwas an earnest advocate of the bill creating the Commission. Uponthe question of concurrence by the House of Representatives in thefinal determination of the Commission, bitter opposition wasmanifested upon the part of friends of Mr. Tilden, and a heatedpartisan debate resulted, and during this debate I spoke as follows:

"When this Congress assembled in December, it witnessed the Americanpeople from one end of the country to the other divided upon thequestion as to which candidate had been lawfully elected to thehigh office of President of the United States. The businessindustries of the country were paralyzed, public confidence destroyed,and the danger of civil war was imminent. That Mr. Tilden hadreceived a majority of more than two hundred thousand of the popularvote was not disputed. That he had secured a majority of thePresidential electors in the several States, and was lawfullyentitled to be inducted into the great office, was the firm beliefof fully one-half of the people of this country. The hour was oneof great peril to our institutions, and many were apprehensive thatwe were but entering into the dark night of anarchy and confusion.After many weeks of angry discussion, which resulted in stillfurther arousing the passions of the people, a measure of adjustmentwas proposed. It was believed that there was still patriotismenough left in the American Congress to secure an honorable and fairsettlement of this most dangerous question. We all recall how ourhopes revived, and how gladly we hailed the introduction of thebill recommended by a joint committee of conference of the Senate andHouse of Representatives. It was welcomed as the harbinger ofpeace by the entire people of our country.

"I gave that bill my earnest support. It had in the House no friendmore ardent in its advocacy than myself. I believed it to be ameasure in the interest of peace. I believed that those who framedit, as well as those who gave it their support upon the floor, werehonest in their statements, that no man could afford to take thePresidency with a clouded title, and that the object of the bill wasto ascertain which of the candidates was lawfully entitled tothe electoral votes of Florida and Louisiana. I never mistrusted fora moment that statesmen of high repute could in so perilous anhour, upon so grave a question, palter with words in a double sense.

"We who are the actors in this drama know, and history will recordthe fact, that the Conference Bill became a law, and the ElectoralCommission was organized, not for the purpose of ascertaining whichcandidate had prima facie a majority of the electoral votes; notfor the purpose of ascertaining that the Governor of Florida,and the de facto Governor of Louisiana, had given certificatesto the Hayes electors. It was never dreamed that a tribunal,consisting in part of five judges of the highest court on earth,was to be constituted, whose sole duty was to report a fact known toevery man in the land, that the returning-board of Louisiana hadgiven the votes of that State to the Hayes electors. The avowedobject of that bill was to ascertain which candidate had received amajority of the legal votes of those States. The avowed object ofthe bill was the secure the ends of justice; to see that the will ofthe people was executed; that the Republic suffered no harm; tosee that the title to this great office was not tainted with fraud.How well the members of this tribunal have discharged the sacredtrust committed to them, let them answer to history.

"The record will stand that this tribunal shut its eyes to thelight of truth; refused to hear the undisputed proof that a majorityof seven thousand legal votes in the State of Louisiana for Tildenwas by a fraudulent returning-board changed to eight thousandmajority for Hayes. The Republican Representative from Florida,Mr. Purman, has solemnly declared upon this floor that Florida hadgiven its vote to Tilden. I am not surprised that two distinguishedRepublican Representatives from Massachusetts, Mr. Seelye and Mr.Pierce, have in such thrilling tones expressed their dissent from thejudgment of this tribunal. By this decision fraud has become one ofthe legalized modes of securing the vote of a State. Can it bepossible that the American people are prepared to accept the doctrinethat fraud, which vitiates all contracts and agreements, whichtaints the judgments and decrees of courts, which will even annul thesolemn covenant of marriage—fraud, which poisons wherever it enters—can be inquired into in all the relations of human life save onlywhere a returning-board is its instrument, and the dearest rights ofa sovereign people are at stake?

"But we are told that we created this tribunal and must abide byits arbitrament. I propose to do so in good faith. I have, from thebeginning, opposed every movement that looked only to delay. Ihave voted against all dilatory motions. But the decision of thistribunal is too startling and too far-reaching in its consequencesto pass unchallenged. That the returning-board of Louisianawill find no imitators in our future history is more than I darehope. The pernicious doctrine that fraud and perjury are to berecognized auxiliaries in popular elections is one that may returnto plague its inventors. The worst effect of this decision willbe its lesson to the young men of our country. Hereafter old-fashionedhonesty is at a discount, and villainy and fraud the legalizedinstruments of success. The fact may be conceded, the proofoverwhelming, that the honest voice of a State has been overthrownby outrage and fraud, and yet the chosen tribunal of the peoplehas entered of solemn record that there is no remedy.

'O Judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts!'

"My criticism of the decision of this tribunal rests upon itsfinding in the cases of Louisiana and Florida; upon the Oregon caseI have no criticism to offer. It is true that but two votes ofthat State could have been given to Hayes had the decision firstadopted by the Commission been followed in the case of Oregon.However inconsistent it may be with other rulings of the Commission,standing alone it is in the main correct. The sanctity of seal ofState and certificate of Governor applied only to Louisiana andFlorida; the Governor of Oregon was not of the household of thefaithful.

"The people of Oregon cast a majority of their votes for Hayes,and no vote or act of mine shall stand in the way of its beingso recorded. Such have been my convictions from the beginning,and the great wrong done in Louisiana and Florida cannot warp myconvictions at this hour.

"We have now reached the final act in this great drama, and therecord here made will pass into history. Time, the great healer, willbring a balm to those who feel sick at heart because of this grievouswrong. But who can estimate, what seer can foretell, the evilsthat may result to us and our children from this judgment? Fortunate,indeed, will it be for this country if our people lose not faithin popular institutions; fortunate, indeed, if they abate not theirconfidence in the integrity of that high tribunal, for a century thebulwark of our liberties. In all times of popular commotion andperil, the Supreme Court of the United States has been looked toas the final arbiter, its decrees heeded as the voice of God. Howdisastrous may be the result of decisions so manifestly partisan, Iwill not attempt to forecast.

"Let this vote be now taken and the curtain fall upon these scenesforever. To those who believe, as I do, that a grievous wrong hasbeen suffered, let me entreat that this arbitrament be abided ingood faith, that no hindrance or delay be interposed to the executionof the law, but that by faithful adherence to its mandates, byhonest efforts to revive the prostrate industries of the country, byobedience to the constituted authorities, we will show ourselvespatriots rather than partisans in the hour of our country'smisfortune."

Some mention will now be made of prominent members of the Houseduring this Congress. The Hon. Michael C. Kerr of Indiana waselected Speaker of the House. The vote of the Republican minoritywas given to the Hon. James G. Blaine, who had been Speaker duringthe three Congresses immediately preceding. Mr. Kerr was a gentlemanof high character and recognized ability. He had been for manyyears a member of the House, and was familiar with the detailsof its business. He was in failing health at the time of hiselection, and died before the close of the first session of thatCongress. He was physically unable to preside during the greater partof the session, and was frequently relieved from the onerous dutiesof the Chair by two new members who were yet to achieve distinctionin that body, Mr. Blackburn of Kentucky and Mr. Springer ofIllinois.

Mr. Blaine, the leader of the minority, had been for twelve years amember of the House, having been first elected at the age ofthirty-three. He was a brilliant debater, well versed in parliamentarylaw, and at all points fully equipped for the conflict. With theexception of Henry Clay, the House of Representatives has probablynever known his equal as a party leader. That he possessed a touchof humor will appear from the following. While the discussion wasat its height upon his amendment excluding Jefferson Davisfrom the benefit of the General Amnesty Bill, Mr. Blaine,looking across to the opposite side of the Chamber, said:"I confess to a feeling of commiseration for some gentlemenupon the other side, who represent close districts. Surrounded bytheir Southern associates here, and with intense Union constituenciesat home, their apprehension, as they are called to vote uponthis amendment, is indeed deplorable. It remind me of a Hibernianprocession I once saw moving down Broadway, where the seriousquestion was how to keep step to the music, and at the same timeto dodge the omnibuses!"

My seat was just across the aisle from that of Mr. Blaine. Whenintroduced, I handed him letters of introduction from two of hiscollege classmates, the Hon. Robert E. Williams and the Rev. John Y.Calhoun. After reading the letters and speaking most kindly ofhis old Washington College classmates, he brusquely inquired, "Whatare John Y. Calhoun's politics?"

I answered, "He is a Democrat."

Blaine instantly replied, "Well, how strangely things do come aroundin this world! When we were in college together, Calhoun wasthe strongest kind of Presbyterian."

I intimated that his sometime classmate was still of that eminentlyrespectable persuasion. The reply was, in manner indicating apparentsurprise, "Is it possible that out in your country a man can bea Presbyterian and a Democrat at the same time?"

I was a member of the Board of Visitors to West Point in June,1877. Mr. Blaine and Bishop Quintard of Tennessee were also members.General Hancock was with our Board for some days at the little WestPoint Inn, and delivered the address to the graduating class ofcadets. He was then in excellent health, and as superb in appearanceas he had been courageous in battle. I have never heard morebrilliant conversation than that at our table, in which the chiefparticipants were Gail Hamilton, Bishop Quintard, General Hancock,Senator Maxey, and Mr. Blaine. The last named, "upon the plainhighway of talk," was unrivalled.

While the Board was in session, Mr. Blaine and I spent some hours withthe Hon. Hamilton Fish, late Secretary of State, at his countryhome near West Point. Near by was still standing the historicBeverly Robinson House, the home of Benedict Arnold when he was incommand of the Colonial forces at West Point. As we passed throughthe quaint old mansion, Mr. Blaine, whose knowledge of ourRevolutionary history was all-embracing, described graphically theconditions existing at the time of Arnold's treason, and just whereeach person sat at the breakfast table in the old dining-room inwhich we were then standing, on the fateful morning when the courierfrom the British camp hurriedly announced to General Arnold thecapture of Major Andre.

Mr. Blaine and I were once passing along Pennsylvania Avenue, athird of a century ago, when he remarked that the old building justto our right had once been a high-toned gambling house; that therewere traditions to the effect that some well-known statesmen were notwholly unadvised as to its exact location and uses. He then told methat during his first term in Congress he was early one morningpassing this building on his way to the Capitol. Just as he reachedthe spot where we were then standing, the Hon. Thaddeus Stevenscame down the steps of the building mentioned, and, immediatelyafter his cordial greeting to Mr. Blaine, was accosted by anegro preacher, who earnestly requested a contribution towardthe building of a church for his people. Promptly taking a rollfrom his vest pocket, Mr. Stevens handed the negro a fifty-dollar bill,and turning to Blaine solemnly observed,

"God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform!"

At the time first mentioned, Mr. Blaine was in excellent health,buoyant in spirits, aggressive to the last degree, and full of hopeas to the future. The disappointments and bereavements that saddenedthe closing years of his life had as yet cast no shadow upon hispathway.

Next in leadership to Mr. Blaine, upon the Republican side, wasthe Hon. James A. Garfield. He possessed few of the qualitiesof brilliant leadership so eminently characteristic of Blaine, butwas withal one of the ablest men I have ever known. Gifted withrare powers of oratory, with an apparently inexhaustible reservoirof information at his command, he knew no superior in debate.At one period of his life he was the recipient of public honorswithout a parallel in our history. While yet a Representative inCongress, he was a Senator-elect from Ohio, and the President-electof the United States. For once, it indeed seemed that "fortunehad come with both hands full." In the words of the Persian poet,"he had obtained an ear of corn from every harvest." And yet, afew months later, in the words of his great eulogist, "the statelymansion of power had become to him the wearisome hospital of pain,and he begged to be taken from its prison walls, from its oppressive,stifling air, from its homelessness and its hopelessness."

My personal acquaintance with Mr. Garfield began early in January,1876, when we were members of the House Committee appointed by theSpeaker to convey the remains of a deceased member to his latehome, Norwich, Connecticut, for burial. Another member of theCommittee was Representative Wheeler of New York. It was lateSaturday afternoon when we were conveyed by carriages from thecrossing at Jersey City to the depot where the Norwich train wasin waiting. Our route lay for some distance along Broadway, throughthe very heart of the great metropolis. As we passed the hurryingthrongs that crowded the great thoroughfare that sombre winterevening, Mr. Garfield remarked that it was a scene similar tothe one we were then witnessing that suggested to Mr. Bryant oneof the most stirring of his shorter poems.

At our request and in tones that linger even yet in my memory,he then repeated these lines:

"Let me move slowly through the street
Filled with an ever shifting train,
Amid the sound of steps that beat
The murmuring walks like autumn rain.

How fast the flitting figures come,
The mild, the fierce, the stony face;
Some bright with thoughtless smiles, and some
Where secret tears have left their trace!

They pass to toil, to strife, to rest,
To halls in which the feast is spread,
To chambers where the funeral guest
In silence sits beside the dead.

Each where his tasks or pleasures call
They pass, and heed each other not.
There is Who heeds, Who holds them all
In His large love, and boundless thought.

These struggling tides of life that seem
In wayward, aimless course to tend,
Are eddies of the mighty stream
That rolls to its appointed end."

Norwich, the home of the deceased member, Mr. Starkweather, andwhere he was laid to rest, is a beautiful city and one of muchhistoric interest. It was here that Benedict Arnold was born, andthe ruins of his early home were still to be seen. Of greaterinterest was a monument standing in an old Indian burying-groundnear the centre of the city,—"Erected to the Memory of Uncas."It was within the memory of the oldest inhabitant that the Presidentof the United States and his Cabinet were in attendance at thededication of this monument, and deeply interested in the impressiveceremonies in honor of "the last of the Mohicans."

An exceedingly courteous gentleman upon the same side of the chamberwas the Hon. Nathaniel P. Banks of Massachusetts. He had been aMajor-general during the late war and was an ex-Governor of hisState. He first achieved national distinction in the thirty-fourthCongress, when after a protracted and exciting struggle, he was electedSpeaker of the House of Representatives. In the body over which he had soably presided in ante-bellum days, he had again taken his seat.While by no means taking the highest rank as a debater, he wasfamiliar with the complicated rules governing the House, and hisopinion challenged the highest respect. He and Mr. Blaine werethe only members of that House who had previously held the positionof Speaker.

Near General Banks sat the Hon. William D. Kelley of Pennsylvania.He had known many years of legislative service, and was long"the father of the House." One of the features of its successiveorganization, as many old members will recall, was the administrationof the official oath to the Speaker-elect by the member who had knownthe longest continuous service—"the gentleman from Pennsylvania."When in the fulness of times he passed to "the house not made withhands," his mantle fell upon Judge Holman of Indiana.

The House probably contained no member of rarer attainments inscholarship than Julius H. Seelye of Massachusetts. He stood inthe front ranks of the great educators of his day, and was Presidentof Amherst College during the latter years of his life. Hispolitical service was limited to one term in Congress. His speechnear its beginning upon the General Amnesty Bill challenged theprofound attention of the House, and at once gave him honored placein its membership.

The Congressional career of the Hon. George W. McCrary, of Iowa,terminated with this Congress. He was recognized as one of theablest lawyers of the House, and was one of its most agreeable andcourteous members. During the presidency of Hayes he held theposition of Secretary of War, and was later a Judge of theUnited States Circuit Court.

The Hon. Joseph G. Cannon of Illinois, the present Speaker, wasjust at the beginning of his long Congressional career. Formany years he has been an active leader of the House and a prominentparticipant in its important debates. His characteristic patienceand long-suffering courtesy have no doubt at times been sorelytried by attempts to enlarge the sum total of appropriationbills reported by the Committee of which he was chairman. Tothe important post of "watch-dog of the Treasury," he was, nem.con., the successor to the lamented Holman. In this connectiona suggestive incident is recalled. One of the guides of the Capitol,when some years ago showing a visitor through the Vice-President'schamber, called attention to a little old-fashioned mirror uponits walls. The guide explained that this mirror was purchased at acost of thirty dollars when John Adams was Vice-President, but whenthe bill for its payment was before the House, Mr. Holman objected.A Western member, who had just been defeated upon a proposedamendment to an appropriation bill, by reason of a fatal pointof order raised by the chairman, promptly exclaimed, "I move tostrike out Holman and insert Cannon."

The sagacity and untiring industry of Mr. Cannon have elevated himto the Speakership, and possibly yet higher honors await him.It is a significant fact in this connection, however, thatnotwithstanding the brilliant array of ambitious statesmen who haveheld the Speakership for more than a century, only one, Mr. Polk, hasever reached the Presidency.

The forty-fourth Congress was the last of which the Hon. William A.Wheeler of New York was a member. He was elected Vice-presidentin 1876, and the duties of that office have rarely been dischargedby an abler or more courteous officer. He was highly esteemedby his associates during his long service in the House. Hisprinciple in action seemed ever to be, "there is nothing so kinglyas kindness."

Messrs. Hale and Frye of Maine, Aldrich of Rhode Island, Moneyof Mississippi, Taylor of Tennessee, and Elkins of West Virginia, weremembers of this House; all of whom are now Senators of markedability, and well known to the entire country.

A member of this House, who at a later date, and in the other wingof the Capitol, achieved yet greater distinction, was the Hon.George F. Hoar of Massachusetts. At the close of this Congress hewas transferred to the Senate, where for more than a quarter ofa century he was a prominent leader. His ability and attainments wereof the highest, and he was the worthy successor of Webster inthe great body of which he was so long an honored member.

In addition to more solid qualities, Mr. Hoar was gifted with akeen sense of humor, as will appear from one or two incidents tobe mentioned. In the House, Mr. Springer, in order to prevent thereconsideration of resolutions and debate thereupon under the rules,had frequently cut off the possibility of such debate by the timelyinterposition of the words, "Not to be brought back on a motion toreconsider." Now, it so fell out that upon a certain day Mr.Springer received a telegram calling him home just as the roll-callwas ordered upon an important bill. Earnestly desiring to vote—which owing to the early departure of his train was impossibleif he waited until his name was regularly reached upon the roll—he moved to the front of the Speaker, and after brief explanation,asked unanimous consent to vote at once. Permission was of coursegranted, his name at once called, and his vote given. Gratefulfor the courtesy, he bowed repeatedly to each side of the Chamber,and, hurrying up the aisle, was about to take his exit, when Mr.Hoar, pointing his finger at the retreating figure, solemnlyexclaimed, "Not to be brought back upon a motion to reconsider!"

At a much later day the Senate was "advising and consenting" over theappointment of a distinguished gentleman whose name had justbeen sent in for confirmation as Ambassador to an important EuropeanCourt. The gentleman in question had voted for the then incumbentof the great office, but his former political affiliations had beenwholly with the opposing party. The nomination was about beingconfirmed without objection when Mr. Hoar, arising with apparentreluctance, said:

"As this is in some measure a family affair, Mr. President, Ihesitate to interfere. If our friends upon the opposite side ofthe Chamber are satisfied with this appointment, I certainly shallinterpose no objection. The gentleman named is well qualified,and has more than once held high place at the hands of the partywhich he has but recently deserted, and to which he will nodoubt return in due time. We have, however, in New England anold-time custom, as sacred as if part of the written law, that if aman is so unfortunate as to lose his companion he will not marryagain within one year. Now sir, I have always thought this rule, asto time, might well be applied to the matter of office-seeking.Where a man has been repeatedly honored by his party as thisappointee has been, but where, prompted by motives purely unselfishno doubt, he has gone over to the camp of the enemy, I think a duesense of modestly should impel him to serve in the ranks at leastone year before being an applicant for high office at the handsof his newly found friends."

Coming over to the Democratic side of the Chamber, well to itsfront sat the Hon. William R. Morrison of Illinois. By virtueof his position as Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Meanshe was the traditional leader of the House. Possessing littleof the brilliancy of the leader of the minority, Colonel Morrison wasnone the less one of the ablest and most useful members of thatbody. He had for many sessions been a member of the House, andhad been a soldier in the Mexican and in the Civil War. His recordwas honorable, both as soldier and legislator. He was the author ofthe Tariff Bill which was fully debated during the first sessionof that Congress, and was in some measure a determining factorin the Presidential campaign that soon followed. At a laterday, Colonel Morrison was a prominent candidate for nominationas President by the national convention of his party. His personalfriendships and antagonisms were well known. It is related of himthat during a serious illness, apprehending that the dread messengerwas in near waiting, arousing himself to what appeared to be a lasteffort, he said in scarcely audible tones to a sorrowing colleagueat his bedside: "I suppose when this is all over they will havesomething to say about me, as is the custom, in the House. Well, ifSpringer, and Cox, and Knott, and Stevenson want to talk, let themgo ahead, but if old Spears tries to speak just cough him down."

Never in any political gathering has there been a more effectivespeech, of a single sentence, than that in which ColonelMorrison presented to the Democratic caucus of the House membersthe name of the "Blind Preacher" for Chaplain. Three or fourcandidates were already in nomination when Morrison arose and said:"Mr. Chairman, I present for the office of Chaplain of the Housethe name of Doctor Milburn, a man who loves God, pays his debts, andvotes the Democratic ticket!" Before the applause that followedhad entirely died away the names of his competitors were withdrawn,and the "Blind Preacher" was nominated by acclamation.

The Hon. William M. Springer, of the same State, had just entered uponhis twenty years of continuous service in the House. He camepromptly to the front as a ready debater and skilful parliamentarian.He was thoroughly educated, ambitious, and withal an excellentspeaker, and was the possessor in full measure of the suaviter inmodo. His personal popularity was great, and a more obliging,agreeable, and pleasing associate it would have been difficult tofind. He was optimistic to the last degree. To him every cloudhad a silver lining,—the lining generally concealing the cloud.It was said of him by one of his colleagues that when the electionreturns were coming in, showing overwhelming defeat to his party,—even before they were fully summed up,—Mr. Springer withbeaming countenance would promptly demonstrate by figures of hisown how we were sure to be victorious four years later.

The Hon. Carter H. Harrison was a prominent member of the Illinoisdelegation. He soon took high rank as an orator, and never failedto command the attention of the House. Few speeches deliveredduring that session of Congress were so generally published, ormore extensively quoted than were those of Mr. Harrison. At theend of four years' service in Congress he was elected Mayor ofChicago, an office he filled most acceptably for many years.His tragic death, upon the concluding day of the great Exposition,was universally deplored throughout the entire country.

The Hon. John H. Reagan, of Texas, was a Representative in Congressbefore the war. At its beginning he resigned his seat in the House,and cast in his fortunes with the South. He was early selecteda member of the Davis Cabinet, and continued to discharge the dutiesof Postmaster-General until the fall of the Confederacy. He wasa citizen of Texas while it was yet a Republic, and took an activepart in securing its admission to the Federal Union. Judge Reaganwas a gentleman of recognized ability, and of exceedingly courteousand dignified bearing.

An old-time statesman, on the same side of the Chamber, was theHon. Fernando Wood of New York. A generation had passed sincehe first entered Congress. He was a Representative in the old hallof the Capitol while Webster, Calhoun, and Clay were in their prime.Erect, stately, faultless in his attire, and of bearing almostchivalric, Mr. Wood was long one of the active and picturesquepersonages of the House. At the time whereof we write, his sands werealmost run, but, courageous to the last, he was in his accustomed seatbut a little time before the final summons came, and he died, aswas his wish, with the harness on. All in all, we shall hardlysee his like again.

Surrounded by his colleagues near the centre of the hall sat oneof the most remarkable men of his day, philosopher, jurist, statesman,orator, Lucius Q. C. Lamar of Mississippi. In his early manhoodhe was a member of the House, and even then was recognized as one ofthe most brilliant of the many brilliant men his section had sent tothe national councils. During the war his services in field andcouncil were given to the South, and something less than a decadeafter the return of peace, Mr. Lamar, still in his prime, againtook his seat in the hall where his first laurels had been won.His great speech—one that touched all hearts—was not long delayed;the occasion was the day set apart in the House for tributes tothe memory of the lamented Sumner. Many eulogies were delivered; thatof Lamar still lingers in the memory of all who heard it. "Thetheme was worthy the orator; the orator, the theme." As a splendidtribute to a great tribune, as a plea for peace,—abiding, eternal,between all sections of a restored union,—it stands unsurpassedamong the great masterpieces of ancient or modern eloquence.

Later, Mr. Lamar was a prominent participant in one of the fiercestdebates the Senate has ever known. A leading Senator upon theopposite side of the chamber, in advocating the passage of the"Force bill," reflected bitterly upon Mississippi and her Senators.In replying to the personal portion of the speech, Lamar said, "theSenator has uttered upon this floor a falsehood—knowing it tobe such. The language I have used, Mr. President, is severe.It was so intended. It is language, sir, that no honest man woulddeserve, and that no brave man will wear!"

Mr. Lamar was one of the most absent-minded of men. A number ofyears ago, by invitation of the Faculty, he delivered an addressto the graduating class of Centre College, Kentucky. The daywas quite warm, the exercises somewhat protracted, and, at theclose of his able and eloquent address, he was very much exhausted.

An excellent collation, prepared by the ladies connected withthe College, was served in the chapel near by, at the close of theexercises. Seated upon the platform, with Mr. Lamar at the headof the table, were Doctor Young, the President, Justice Harlan,Governor Knott, the Rev. Doctor Bullock, Chaplain of the Senate,Judge McCormick, and others.

At the plate of each guest a large tomato was in readiness and,excellent itself, was, moreover, the earnest of better things tocome. Immediately upon being seated, Mr. Lamar "fell to" and,wholly oblivious of the surroundings, soon made way with the oneviand then in visible presence. Just as its last vestige disappeared,the President of the College arose and, with a solemnity eminentlybefitting the occasion, called upon Doctor Bullock to offer thanks.Deeply chagrined, Mr. Lamar was an attentive listener to theimpressive invocation which immediately followed. At its conclusion,with troubled countenance, he turned to Knott and said, "I amhumiliated at my conduct. I should have remembered that Presbyteriansalways say grace before meals, but I was very hungry and exhausted,and the tomato very tempting; I have really disgraced myself." Towhich Knott replied, "You ought not to feel so, Mr. Justice; theblessing of Doctor Bullock's was broad and general; in large measureretrospective as well as prospective. It reminds me of a littleincident that occurred on the 'Rolling Fork.' An old-time deacon downthere was noted for the lengthy blessing which at his table wasthe unfailing prelude to every meal. His hired man, Bill Taylor, anunconverted and impatient youth, had fallen into the evil habit ofcommencing his meal before the blessing thereon had been fullyinvoked. The frown and rebuke of the good deacon were alikeunavailing in effecting the desired reform. Righteously indignantthereat, the deacon, in a spirit possibly not the most devout,at length gave utterance to this petition, 'For what we are aboutto receive, and for what William Taylor has already received,accept our thanks, O Lord!"

In cheery tones the great orator at once replied, "Knott, youare the only man on earth who could have thought of such a storyjust at the opportune moment." The temporary depression vanished;Lamar was himself again, and was at once the brilliant conversationalistof the delighted assemblage.

The surviving members of that Congress will recall a little chair thatdaily rolled down the aisle to the front to the Speaker's desk.It contained the emaciated form of a man whose weight at his best wasbut ninety pounds—Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia, "whose littlebody lodged a mighty mind." No one who saw Mr. Stephens could everforget him. He looked as though he had just stepped out froman old picture, or dropped down from the long-ago. There wasprobably as little about him "of the earth, earthy" as of any mortalthis world has known. Upon his weak frame time had done its work,and, true it is, "the surest poison is time." And yet, his feeblepiping voice—now scarcely heard an arm's length away—was potent inthe contentions of the great hall when he was the honored associate ofmen whose public service reached back to the formation of the Government.In the old hall near by—now the Valhalla of the nation—he hadsat with John Quincy Adams and contemporaries whose names atonce recall the Revolutionary period. After serving as Vice-Presidentof the Confederacy, whose rise and fall he had witnessed, Mr.Stephens, with the shadows falling about him, was, by unanimousvoice of his people, again, in his own words, "in our father'shouse." His apartments in the old National Hotel, as he neverfailed to explain to his visitors, were those long ago occupied byhis political idol, Henry Clay. His couch stood in the exact spotwhere Mr. Clay had died; and he no doubt thought—possibly wished—that his own end might come just where that great Commoner hadbreathed his last. This, however, was not to be. His last hours werespent at the capital of his native commonwealth, which had, withscarce a dissenting voice, just honored itself by electing himto its chief executive office.

The Hon. Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania, was the successorof the lamented Kerr as Speaker of the House. As such he presidedduring the last session of the forty-fourth Congress, and duringthe two Congresses immediately succeeding. He had long been amember, coming in with Blaine and Garfield just before the closeof the war. Able, courageous, and thoroughly skilled in parliamentarytactics, he had achieved a national reputation as the leader of theminority in the forty-third Congress. During the protracted andexciting struggle near its close, over the Force Bill—the Houseremaining in continuous session for fifty-six hours—Mr. Randallhad displayed wonderful endurance and marvellous capacity forsuccessful leadership. He was more than once presented by hisState in Democratic national conventions for nomination to thePresidency. He was an excellent presiding officer, prompt,often aggressive, and was rarely vanquished in his many brilliant passageswith the leaders of the minority. One incident is recalled, however,when the tables were turned against the Speaker, no one joiningmore heartily than himself in the laugh that followed. Mr. Conger,of Michigan, with great earnestness and persistency, was urgingthe consideration of a resolution which the Speaker had repeatedlydeclared out of order. By no means disconcerted by the decision, Mr.Conger, walking down the aisle, was vehement in his demand for theimmediate consideration of his resolution. At which the Speakerwith much indignation said, "Well, I think the Chair has a rightto exercise a little common sense in this matter." To which Mr.Conger instantly responded, "Oh, if the Chair has the slightestintention of doing anything of that kind, I will immediately takemy seat!"

The Hon. David Dudley Field, elected to fill a vacancy, was aRepresentative from the city of New York during the closing sessionof the forty-fourth Congress. He was an eminent lawyer, and, atthe time, stood at the head of the American bar. His name isinseparably associated with many important reforms in legal procedureduring the last half century. He had been instrumental in securingthe appointment of a committee of distinguished jurists, chosenfrom the leading nations, to prepare the outlines of an internationalcode. His report accompanying the plan, to the preparation ofwhich he had given much thought and time, received the earnestcommendation of leading publicists and jurists in Europe, as well asin his own country. His untiring efforts, looking to the substitutionof international courts of arbitration for war, have given his namehonored place among the world's benefactors.

Mr. Field was the eldest of four brothers, whose names are knownwherever our language is spoken. The family was distinguished fortalents of the highest order. It would indeed be difficult to findits counterpart in our history. One of the brothers, Stephen J.Field, was for a third of a century a distinguished justice of theSupreme Court of the United States. The youngest, Dr. Henry M.Field, was eminent alike as theologian and author. The name ofthe remaining brother, Cyrus W. Field, is, and will continue, ahousehold word in two hemispheres. After repeated failures, tothe verge even of extremity, "the trier of spirits," the dream of hislife became a reality. The Atlantic cable was laid, and, in the wordsof John Bright, Mr. Field had "moored the New World alongside the Old."

The Hon. Henry Watterson, of Kentucky, was a representative duringthe closing session of Congress. As the editor of a great journal,Mr. Watterson was already well known to the country. His talents wereof a high order. In his chosen field he had no superior. For manyyears he was a recognized leader of his party, and one of the chiefmanagers in all its national conventions. His contributions to theliterature of three decades of political campaigns were almostunparalleled. As a forcible, trenchant writer he is to be mentionedwith Greeley, Raymond, Prentice, and Dana. His career, too, asa public lecturer, has been both successful and brilliant. TheCongressional service of Mr. Watterson terminated with the sessionjust mentioned. His speech, near its close, upon the bill creatingan electoral commission to determine the Tilden-Hayes Presidentialcontroversy was listened to with earnest attention, and at oncegave him high place among the great debaters of that eventfulCongress.

While a passenger on a train to Washington, to be present at theopening of Congress, my attention was directed to a man of venerableappearance, who entered the sleeping-car at a station not manymiles out from Cincinnati. He was dressed in "Kentucky jeans" andhad the appearance of a well-to-do farmer. Standing in the aisle nearme, he was soon engaged in earnest conversation with the porter,endeavoring to secure a berth. The porter repeatedly assuredhim that this was impossible, as every berth was taken. He told theporter that he was quite ill, and must get on his journey. I thenproposed that he share my berth for the night. He gladly did sountil other accommodations were provided.

On the Monday following, when the House was in the process oforganization, the name of James D. Williams of Indiana being called,my sleeping-car acquaintance, still attired in blue jeans, steppedforward with his colleagues to the Speaker's desk and was dulysworn in as a member of Congress. This was his first term, but hesoon became quite well known to the country. As chairman of theCommittee of Accounts, having to do with small expenditures, heclosely scrutinized every claim presented, and scaled to the lowestmany pet measures. His determination to economize, as well as hispeculiarity of dress and appearance, soon made him an especialobject of amusement to newspaper correspondents. He was the butt ofmany cheap jokes; one being his alleged complaint that hundreds oftowels were being daily used by members at the Capitol, at thepublic expense, while at his home, on his farm, one towel wouldlast a week, with eleven in the family. Despite, however, alljokes and gibes, he soon became the most popular man in his State."Blue Jeans Williams" became a name to conjure with; and in thecelebrated campaign of 1876, after an exciting contest, he waselected Governor, defeating an able and popular leader, who, twelveyears later, was himself elected President of the United States.

No sketch of "the American Commons" during the last fifty yearswould be in any measure complete that failed to make mention ofthe man who was nineteen times elected a Representative, theHon. William S. Holman, of Indiana. Whatever the ups and downs ofparty supremacy, despite all attempts by gerrymandering to relegatehim to the shades of private life, Judge Holman, with unruffledfront, "a mien at once kindly, persuasive, and patient," heldsturdily on his way. Amid political upheavals that overwhelmedall his associates upon the ticket, his name, like that of Abou BenAdhem, led all the rest. From Pierce to McKinley—whatever theissues, and howsoever determined—at each successive organization ofthe House "the gentleman from Indiana" was an unfailing respondentto the opening roll-call. An old English stanza comes to mind:

"And this is law, that I'll maintain
Until my dying day, sir,
That whatsoever King shall reign,
Still I'll be vicar of Bray, sir."

His integrity was unquestioned; his knowledge of public business,phenomenal. With no brilliancy, little in the way of oratory, JudgeHolman was nevertheless one of the most valuable members ever known tothe House of Representatives. The Lobby regarded him as its mortal foe.He was for years the recognized "watch-dog of the Treasury." Personalappeals to his courtesy, to permit the present consideration of privatebills, had, in the main, as well have been made to a marble statue.His well known and long to be remembered, "I object, Mr. Speaker,"sounded the knell of many a well devised raid upon the Treasury. Itmay be that he sometimes prevented the early consideration of meritoriousmeasures, but with occasional exceptions his objections werewholesome. He kept in close touch with the popular pulse, andknew, as if by instinct, which would be the safe and which thedangerous side of the pending measure. It sometimes seemed thathe could even "look into the seeds of time and tell which grainwill grow and which will not."

It has been said that even great men have at times their littleweaknesses. An incident to be related will show that possiblyJudge Holman was no exception to that rule. The considerationof sundry bills for the erection of post-office buildings in anumber of districts having "gone over" by reason of his objection,the members having the bills in charge joined forces and lumpedthe several measures into an "omnibus bill" which was duly presented.The members especially interested in its passage, to "make assurancedoubly sure," had quietly inserted a provision for the erection of aGovernment building in one of the cities of Holman's district. Whenthe bill was read, Judge Holman, as he sat busily writing at hisdesk, was, without solicitation upon his part, the closely observedof every member. Apparently oblivious, however, to all that wasoccurring, he continued to write. No objection being made, thebill was in the very act of passing when an exceedingly brightmember from Wisconsin, "being moved and instigated by the devil," nodoubt, rushed to the front and exclaimed, "Mr. Speaker, I desireto call the attention of the gentleman from the fourth district ofIndiana to the fact that the Treasury is being robbed!" Unmovedby the appeal, the Judge continued to write, and, as one of hiscolleagues afterwards remarked, "was chewing his tobacco very fine."After a moment of suspense, and amid applause in which even thegalleries took part, the member from Wisconsin, in tragic tones,exclaimed, "Ah, Mr. Speaker, our watch-dog of the Treasury, likeall other good watch-dogs, never barks when his friends arearound!"

Mr. Blackburn, of Kentucky, began his long and eventful legislativecareer as a member of this Congress. As the representative of theAshland District, he was the successor of Clay, Crittenden, Marshall,Breckenridge, Beck—illustrious names in the history of the State andof the nation. He was worthy of the succession, and, at the closeof ten years' service in the House, was elected to the Senate. Hecame within a few votes of being chosen as the candidate of hisparty for Speaker at the opening of the forty-sixth Congress. Hewas a born orator. It was as natural for him to speak as to breathe.Wake him up at any hour of the night, and he would be ready uponthe instant for an eloquent speech of any length, upon any subject.Thoroughly familiar with all that pertained to our political history,with a voice easily heard above the storm, he was ever in theforefront of the hurly-burly of heated partisan debate. There waslittle that was conciliatory about him. He neither gave nor askedquarter. A born fighter, he had rather

"Follow his enemy through a fiery gulf,
Than flatter him in a bower."

Possessing neither the keen wit of his colleague, McKenzie, northe profound humor of Knott, he was nevertheless the hero ofmore interesting narratives than any member who ever crossed theBlue Ridge Mountains.

The incident to be related may have suggested the witty reply ofSenator Proctor to the Vice-President when invited by the latterto come into the devotional exercises: "Excuse me, I am paired withBlackburn on prayers." This equals his reply when asked by SenatorHale what he thought of Senator Chandler: "I like him, but itis an acquired taste."

Upon the occasion of the retirement of the Rev. Dr. Butler fromthe Chaplaincy of the Senate—a position he had filled most acceptablyfor many years—many of the Senators spoke regretfully of hisretirement. The speech of Mr. Blackburn, for beauty of expressionand pathetic eloquence, was unrivalled. He spoke most tenderly ofthe faithfulness of the venerable man of God; how for long yearshe had gone in and out before us; of his daily walk and conversation;how, like the Blessed Master, his only thought was of doing good;of how he had often invoked the Divine blessing upon us and ourloved ones, and lifted us as it were in his arms up to the verythrone of grace. The orator seemed inspired, as though his lipswere indeed touched with a live coal from the altar. The counterpartof the scene that followed his closing words had never been witnessedin legislative assembly. All were in tears. It was even said thatvenerable Senators, who had never shed a tear since the ratificationof the treaty of Ghent, actually sobbed aloud, and refused to becomforted. At length, amid silence that could be felt, an adjournmentwas effected, and the Senators passed sadly out to their homes.As he passed the Chair, Senator Vest, in undertone, remarked tothe Vice-President, "Jo never saw him!"

The next day, in the absence of his successor, "the blind chaplain,"Dr. Butler again, and for the last time, officiated, simply repeatingin manner most solemn and impressive, the Lord's Prayer. At itsconclusion, Senator Blackburn, who had been a most attentivelistener, came forward to the desk and remarked to Vice-PresidentStevenson: "I tell you, sir, I like that new chaplain of ours.What a splendid prayer! There is something original about that man!"

Thirty years and more ago, when first a candidate for Congress,Mr. Blackburn attended a public execution—in common parlance "ahanging"—in one of the counties in his district. Being a gentlemanof great distinction, and a candidate for Congress, he wasappropriately invited by the sheriff to occupy a seat with theprisoner and his spiritual adviser upon the gallows. At thenear approach of the fatal hour, the sheriff, with watch in hand, amidthe sea of upturned faces, stated to the prisoner that he hadyet five minutes to live, and it was his privilege if he so desiredto address the audience. The prisoner meekly replied that hedid not wish to speak. Whereupon Mr. Blackburn, stepping promptlyto the front of the scaffold, said: "As the gentleman does notwish to speak, if he will kindly yield me his time, I will takethis occasion to remark that I am a candidate for Congress, regularlynominated by the Democratic Convention," etc. This incident beingtold in the presence of Mr. Marshall, the opposing candidate,the latter remarked that he remembered it well, and could vouchfor its truth. He then added that when Mr. Blackburn proposedto speak out the prisoner's time, the latter turned to the Sheriffand inquired who that was. To which the officer replied, "CaptainBlackburn." At this the prisoner, who had amid all the excitingscenes of his arrest and trial, and even up to the present moment,with his open coffin beside him, displayed marvellous fortitude,suddenly exhibiting deep emotion, piteously exclaimed, "Please hangme first, and let him speak afterwards!"

When, in the tide of time, will the House of Representatives witnessthe like of "Sunset" Cox? Beginning a Congressional career, whichwas to terminate only with his death, when scarcely of theconstitutional age, he was in close succession a representativefrom two great States,—in his early manhood from the Capitaldistrict of Ohio, and in his maturer years, even down to old age, themost prominent of the delegation from the great State of New York.Mr. Cox was gifted as few men have been in this world. His literaryattainments were of a high order, and some of the books of whichhe was the author will no doubt furnish instructive and entertainingreading for many generations to come. He was an indefatigablestudent, and seemed, as did Lord Bacon, to have "taken all knowledgefor his province." His accurate knowledge of the history of allcountries and times was a marvel, and, all at his instant command,placed him upon rare vantage ground in the many forensic strugglesin which he took part. Woe betide the unfortunate antagonist whoserecord was other than faultless. He was a born debater, full ofresources, and aggressive to the last degree. He never waited foropportunities, but sought them. In great emergencies he was oftenput forward by his political associates for the fierce encounterwith the great leaders upon the opposite side of the Chamber.He was withal one of the most kindly of men. He was the soul ofpersonal and official honor. His integrity could know notemptation. It may truly be said of him that—

"Whatever record leaps to light,
He never can be shamed."

His sympathies were deeply enlisted for the safety of those "whogo down to the sea in ships." For years he was the earnest advocateof a thorough life-saving system. Much of the present efficiency ofthis humane branch of the public service is due to his untiringefforts. He had travelled to all countries, and even to the islandsof the sea. He was of sunny disposition, and believed that "whateverplaces the eye of Heaven visits are to the wise man ports and happyhavens."

Mr. Cox was one of the most genial and delightful of associates.With him and Vance, Knott, and Randolph Tucker as companions forthe social hour, the night would flee away like a shadow. His witwas of the rarest order. He would have been on terms of recognizedkinship with Sydney Smith and Charles Lamb. He once said of avinegar-visaged member that the only regret he had on earth wasthat there were no more commandments to keep; what few there were hekept so easily. As illustrating his readiness and elasticity,whatever the emergency, two instances, out of the many that crowdupon memory, will be given. During an all-night session of theHouse, amid great confusion, the roll-call was ordered. The firstname, "Mr. Archer," was called, and the response "Aye" was given.The clerk, failing to hear the response, immediately repeated, "Mr.Archer," to which the latter, in tones heard above the din of manyvoices, again answered "Aye." Instantly Mr. Cox exclaimed:"Insatiate Archer, would not one suffice?"

A new member from a district far to the westward entered the House.His advoirdupois was in keeping with the vast territorial areahe represented. As a wit, he was without a rival in his section.The admiration of his constituents over the marvellous attainmentsof the new member, scarcely exceeded his own. Only the opportunitywas wanting when the star of the gentleman from New York should godown and his own be in the ascendant. The opportunity at lengthcame. Mr. Cox was the victim of the hour; the recipient of manycompliments much more fervid than kind. The seven vials of wrath wereopened upon him. A vast storehouse of wit, ancient and modern,was literally exhausted for the occasion. Even the diminutive sizeof the New York member was mentioned in terms of disparagement.The speech caused much merriment in the House during its delivery,and its author with an air of self-satisfaction rarely witnessedeven in that body, resumed his seat. Mr. Cox at once took thefloor. No attempt will be made to do justice to his speech.The manner, the tone of voice, which caused an uproar upon thefloor and in the galleries, can never find their way into print.Referring to the ill-mannered allusion to his size, he said "that hisconstituents preferred a representative with brains, rather thanone whose only claims to distinction consisted in an abnormalabdominal development." In tragic tones he then pronounced afuneral eulogy over his assailant, and suggested, as a fittinginscription for his tombstone, the pathetic words of Byron,

"'T is Greece, but living Greece no more!"

Soon after the nomination of Tilden for President, Mr. Cox wasinvited to attend a political meeting at the State capital, andaddress the Democracy of Vermont. When the scarcity of Democrats inthe Green Mountain State is taken into account, the significanceof Mr. Cox's reply will readily appear. His telegram was to theeffect that pressing engagements prevented his attending, but"if the Democracy of Vermont will drop into my library anyafternoon, about four o'clock, I will address them with greatpleasure."

In attempting to write something of a member so long and so favorablyknown to the House as the Hon. J. Proctor Knott of Kentucky, Iam reminded of the opening sentences of the touching tribute ofJudge Baldwin to an honored associate:

"I nib my pen and impart to it a fine hair stroke in order thatI may give the more delicate touch which can alone show forththe character of this distinguished gentleman. If I hold the pen inhand in idle reverie, it is because my mind rests lovingly upona picture I feel incapable of transcribing with fidelity to theoriginal; and therefore I pause a moment to look once more atthe original, before it is obscured by the rude counterpart."

It was worth while to have known Proctor Knott, to have been hiscotemporary in public life, the sharer of his confidence, the guestat his hearthstone. In the highest sense of the expression, hewas a gentleman of the old school. To him there was rare meaning inthe words, "Old wood to burn! Old wine to drink! Old friendsto trust!"

He was as familiar with the Bible, with Shakespeare, and Burns, asthough he had written them. His quotations, whether in privateconversation, or in public speech, were always timely. Therewas little in the way of the best literature, ancient or modern,that he had not read. As was truly said of the gifted Prentiss:

"His imagination was colored and imbued with the light of theshadowy past. He lingered spell-bound among the scenes of mediaevalchivalry. His spirit had dwelt until almost naturalized in themystic dreamland of the Paladins, Crusaders, and Knights Templars;with Monmouth and Percy, with Bois-Guilbert and Ivanhoe and thebold McGregor; with the Cavaliers of Rupert, and the iron enthusiastsof Fairfax."

He was the inveterate hater of shams of all kinds, and of merepretenders of every description. He ever avoided the short cuts, andkept steadily along in the old way. His heroes, like those ofDickens, were taken from the common walk; the men he had met inthe road and at the hustings, at whose firesides he had passed manyhours. Whatever concerned them, whatever involved in any mannertheir welfare, was of deep interest to him. If he had chosenhis own epitaph it might have read:

"In common ways, with common men,
I served my race and time."

He was both an artist and a poet. He loved flowers, and there wasto his ears no music so sweet as the merry laughter of children.And, whether in private life, or in his great executive officeas "the arbiter of human fate," the tale of woe never failed totouch a sympathetic cord. He had in very deed,

"A tear for pity, and a hand open as day to melting charity."

He was welcome at every hearthstone, as one "who cometh unto youwith a tale which holdeth children from play, and old men from thechimney corner."

Soon after his admission to the bar, Mr. Knott removed to Missouri,where he was almost immediately elected to the responsible positionof Attorney-General of the State. In due time he returned tohis native State, and was for six terms a representative in Congress.Yet later, and as the shadows were beginning to fall to the eastward,he was, almost by common acclaim, called to the chief executiveoffice of the commonwealth. It may truly be said of him that "withclear head, and with clean hands, he faithfully discharged everypublic trust."

Mr. Knott entered Congress just at the close of the great CivilWar. It was a period of excitement throughout the entire country,and of intense foreboding to the section he represented. In thedebates of that stormy period he bore no mean part. He was counteda foeman worthy the steel of the ablest who entered the lists.A thorough student from the beginning, of all that pertained toMagna Charta, the Bill of Rights, and the Federal Constitution, hewas equipped as few men have been, for forensic contests that haveleft their deep impress upon history. The evidence of his abilityas a lawyer is to be found in the satisfactory manner in which forthree Congresses he discharged the duties of the trying positionof Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.The ablest lawyers of both political parties constituted this greatcommittee, and its chairman, if possessing only mediocre talentsor attainments, would have been sadly out of place.

But with his heavy armor laid aside, the genius of Knott wasmade manifest along more pleasing lines. Few speeches ever deliveredin Congress have been so generally read, or so thoroughly imbeddedinto current literature, as one he delivered soon after hisfirst admission to the House. Duluth awoke the morning afterits delivery to find itself famous. As, "the zenith city of theunsalted seas," it has been known and read of all men. As such,it will probably continue to be known for ages to come. The speechhopelessly defeated a bill making a land grant to a proposedrailroad, of which Duluth was to be the terminus. His mirthfulprediction, however, as to its marvellous future has been fulfilled.How true it is that "jesters do oft prove prophets!" Bearing inmind that the great city of to-day then had no place even upon themap, the words quoted from the speech will be appreciated:

"Duluth, Duluth! The word fell upon my ear with peculiar andindescribable charm, like the gentle murmur of a brook stealingforth in the midst of roses, or the soft sweet accent of an angel'swhisper in the bright joyous dream of sleeping innocence. Duluth!'T was the name for which my soul had panted for years, as the hartpanteth for the water brooks. I was convinced that the greatestcalamity that ever befell the benighted nations of the ancientworld was their having passed away without a knowledge of the actualexistence of Duluth; that their fabled Atlantis, never seen saveby the hallowed vision of inspired poesy, was in fact but another namefor Duluth; that the golden orchard of the Hesperides was but apoetical synonym for the beer-gardens in the vicinity of Duluth. Asthat name first fell upon my ear, a resplendent scene of ineffableglory opened before me, such as I imagine burst upon the enrapturedvisions of the wandering Peri through the opening gates ofParadise."

Mr. Knott was often the sad and silent man. His real intimacieswere few, and to strangers he was reserved. But to those who camewithin the circle of his personal friendship he was one of the mostdelightful of companions. No man was ever given less to aparade either of his friendships or of his animosities. His enemies—and it would have been strange if, passing through the eventful sceneshe did, he had had none—knew just where to find him. He was,in very truth,

"Lofty and sour to them that loved him not;
But, to those men that sought him, sweet as summer."

The cause often of mirth in others, he was at times far from beingjoyous himself. Few men have been the possessors in so rare degreeof the gift of humor, the sure indication of the humane andsympathetic in our nature; that "which blends the pathetic withthe ludicrous, and by the same stroke moves to laughter and totears." As Emerson says, "Both an ornament and a safeguard—geniusitself." The line of separation between wit and humor is shadowy,not easily defined. There may be in the same individual, insome measure, a blending of the two. As has been said: "Whilewit is a purely intellectual thing, into every act of the humorousmind there is an influx of the moral nature. Humor springs upexuberantly, as from a fountain, and runs on, its perpetual gameto look with considerate good-nature at every object in existence,and dismiss it with a benison." While wit, the purely intellectualquality, sparkles and stings, humor, "touched with a feeling ofour infirmity," would "gently scan thy brother man," rememberingever that

"What's done we partly may compute,
But know not what's resisted."

It is not strange, then, that he who in large degree possessesor is possessed by this subtle quality should be subject to moods,it may be melancholy—"the effect of that humor that sometime hathhis hour with every man." That Governor Knott was deeply endowed withhumor in its best sense, no one who knew him could doubt. Inrelating incidents that convulsed his listeners, he gave nosign; his own features remained as solemn as if he were attending theobsequies of his dearest friend. There is something that issuggestive in the lines of Thomas Hood,

"There's not a string attuned to mirth
But has its chord in melancholy."

While Governor of Kentucky, he sent to the Hon. Stoddart Johnsona certificate, officially signed and bearing the impress of thegreat seal of State, duly commissioning him as "Mister," a distinctiveand honorable title that no Kentuckian had previously borne. Thisrecalls the witty remark of Max O'Rell: "The only thing thatMr. Ingersoll appears to hold in common with his countrymen isthe title of Colonel."

Many years ago McCullough, the tragedian, was giving hissplendid impersonations of the two masterpieces of Shakespeareat the national Capital. The morning following one of these,Mr. Knott and I, passing along the avenue on our way to the House,were stopped by an exceedingly solemn-visaged individual who,addressing the former, said: "Mr. Knott, I would like to have yourjudgment as to which is the best play, Hamlet or Macbeth."

Gazing earnestly at his inquisitor, and in a tone at once deprecatoryand inimitable, Knott replied: "My friend, don't ask me thatquestion. I am a politician, and a candidate for re-election toCongress; my district is about equally divided; Hamlet has hisfriends down there, and Macbeth his, and I am unwilling to takeany part between them!"

When in joint canvass with his competitor for the Governorshipof the State, Mr. Knott, having, by appointment, at one of thecounty seats in "the Purchase," made the opening speech, was seatednear by to listen to that of the opposing candidate. The latter, agentleman having a high sense of propriety, and a dignity of bearingthat would have done no discredit to an assembly of divines, hadbeen exceedingly annoyed by Knott's speech, which had in very truthkept the audience in an uproar during its entire delivery. Beginninghis reply, he said:

"Fellow-citizens, I will endeavor to indicate to you the kind ofa man who, in my judgment, should be elected to the position ofGovernor of this grand old commonwealth. In the first place, thatexalted position would never be filled by one who, for lack ofserious argument, constantly appeals to the risibilities of hisaudience; never by a wit, a mere joker, a story-teller; in otherwords—if you will pardon me, my fellow-citizens—by a mere buffoon.On the contrary, the incumbent of the exalted position of chiefexecutive of this grand old commonwealth should be a gentlemanof character, of ability, the worthy successor of Shelby, ofMorehead, of Crittenden; he should be a gentleman of scholasticattainments and of dignified bearing, well versed in classic loreand a thorough student of the higher order of state-craft. In aword, fellow-citizens, you should elect as your Governor a gentlemanof lofty character, of ripe scholarship, of commanding dignity, ofexalted statesmanship, of ——"

At this point, Knott, interrupting, said, in manner and tone theexact counterpart of that of the speaker, "Pardon me, Colonel Smith,but I am too modest a man to listen longer to the beautiful andtruthful description you have just given of me!"

Whereupon, amidst the wildest applause, he retired from the hall, asdid the audience, and the speaking for the day, and the jointdiscussion for the campaign, were closed.

IIIAGAIN IN CONGRESS

CHANGES IN THE PERSONNEL OF THE HOUSE CONTRASTED WITH THOSE IN THE
BRITISH HOUSE OF COMMONS—LEVI P. MORTON—MR. COVERT AND MR. SHELLEY
—GEN. JOSEPH E. JOHNSTON—TWO NOTABLE SPEECHES BY JAMES A. McKENZIE
—JOHN E. KENNA—BENJAMIN BUTTERWORTH—MR. KEIFER OF OHIO—MR.
CARLISLE OF KENTUCKY—SPEAKER REED—PRESIDENT McKINLEY—THE WRITER'S
SPEECH AT THE PEACE JUBILEE BANQUET, 1898.

After an absence of two years I was returned to the forty-sixthCongress. Circumstances over which I had no control had preventedmy taking a seat in the intervening Congress, my successful competitorbeing the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton. In politics, however, as inother things, "the whirligig of time brings in his revenges," and Iwas in turn the successful competitor of my late opponent in hiscandidacy for re-election.

Meanwhile, many changes had occurred in the personnel of the House.Many familiar names had been dropped from its roll. Of these, ninehad been transferred to that of the Senate, a former member wasnow in the Cabinet, and Mr. Wheeler of New York was Vice-President.A significant fact in this connection, and one illustrating theuncertainty of the tenure by which place is held in that body, wasthat more than one-third of those with whom I had so recently servedwere now in private life. Possibly no feature of our governmentalsystem causes more astonishment to intelligent foreigners than themany changes biennially occurring in the membership of the Houseof Representatives. There is marked difference between the BritishHouse of Commons, and the popular branch of the American Congress.A seat lost in the latter—it may be by a single unfortunateutterance, or unpopular vote—is usually a seat lost forever; whilein the former, membership may continue for an almost indefiniteperiod, and until an "appeal to the country" by the Ministry upon anew and vital issue. If defeated by one constituency, the member ofParliament may soon be returned by another, the question of residencehaving no significance. In fact if possessing superior talents,the member is liable to be chosen by two or more constituencies atthe same election, the choice then resting with himself as to whichhe will represent. Such has been the experience of the most eminentof British statesmen. The names of Burke, Peel, Gladstone, andBalfour, quite recently, will readily be recalled in this connection.In the little island the aspirant to legislative honors has severalhundred constituencies from which to choose, or be chosen, whilein the larger America his political fortunes are usually boundup in his own residence district.

Upon the roll of the House in the new Congress, called inspecial session in March, 1879, in addition to some heretoforementioned, were names well known to the country. Of these none ismore worthy of honorable mention than that of the Hon. Levi P.Morton of New York. In the business world his name was a synonym forintegrity. The head of a great banking house, he was almost aswell known in the principal cities of Europe as in the great city ofhis residence. At the time of his first election to CongressMr. Morton was, by appointment of the President, an honorarycommissioner to the Paris Exposition. At the close of his legislativecareer he held successively the honored positions of Ambassador toFrance, Vice-President of the United States, and Governor of NewYork. In Congress, Mr. Morton was the able representative of agreat constituency; as chief executive of his State his name isworthy of mention with the most eminent of those who have beencalled to that exalted station; as ambassador to a foreign courtthe honor of his country was ever in safe keeping; as Vice-President,he was the model presiding officer over the greatest deliberative bodyknown to men.

One of the brightest members of the New York delegation was theHon. James W. Covert of Flushing. Altogether he served ten years inthe House, and became in time one of its leading members. He was anexcellent lawyer, a delightful associate, and an able and ready debater.That he was gifted with a touch of the humorous will appear from thefollowing. The House was passing through the agony of an all-nightsession. Confusion reigned supreme. During it all, Mr. Shelley, fromone of the Gulf States, stood at his desk and repeatedly made the pointof order upon Covert, Springer, Kenna, McKenzie, and others, as theysuccessively addressed the Chair, that "The gentleman is not speakingfrom his desk." The point of order was as repeatedly sustained bythe Speaker, the rules requiring members to address the Chair onlyfrom their respective desks. The confusion at length became sogreat that many members, in their eagerness to be heard, pressedto the front. The voice of Mr. Shelley, however, was heard above thedin still calling for the enforcement of the rule; to which theSpeaker, his patience exhausted, now turned a deaf ear. Desperatebeyond measure, Mr. Shelley at length left his own desk, andtaking his position immediately in front of the clerk's desk fiercelydemanded, "Mr. Speaker, I call for the enforcement of the rule."At which Covert immediately exclaimed, "Mr. Speaker, I call for theenforcement of the rule in Shelley's case!"

Almost directly in front of the Speaker's desk sat a gentleman,small in stature, and of quiet dignified bearing, "The silent man,""whose voice was in his sword," General Joseph E. Johnston ofVirginia. Until this, his first election to Congress from theCapital District of the Old Dominion, he had known none other thanmilitary public service. He was a born soldier. No one who sawhim could mistake his calling. Napoleon did not more truly lookthe soldier than did General Johnston. A graduate of West Point, hisfirst service was in the Black Hawk War, and later in Mexico. Forgallant conduct at the battle of Cerro Gordo, he was brevettedcolonel in the regular army. His last service was when, asLieutenant-General of the Confederate Army, he surrendered toSherman, thus ending the great Civil War. He had already reached theallotted threescore years and ten when he entered Congress, andits ordinary details apparently interested him but little. Heearnestly desired the return of the era of good feeling betweenthe North and South, and upon his motion the House duly adjourned inhonor of the day set apart for the decoration of the graves ofUnion soldiers.

No member of this House attracted more attention than did the Hon.James A. McKenzie of Kentucky, the representative from what inlocal parlance was known as "the pennyryle district." He wasthe youngest member of the body, tall, erect, and handsome. Mr.McKenzie rendered a valuable service to his constituents and thecountry during this Congress, by securing the passage of a billplacing quinine upon the free list. His district was seriouslyafflicted with the old-time fever and ague, and the reduction byhis bill to a nominal cost of the sure and only specific placedhis name high upon the list of benefactors.

Two of his kinsmen, one from Illinois, the other from Florida,occupied seats immediately in his front. Addressing them one day,he said: "It seems strange, indeed, that we three cousins—onefrom Illinois, one from Florida, and one from Kentucky—are allhere together in Congress"; and then added, with apparent gravity,"and ours not an office-seeking family either!"

As the session drew near its close, he made repeated efforts toobtain unanimous consent for the consideration of a bill for theerection of a Government building in the principal city of hisdistrict. The interposition of the stereotyped "I object" had,however, in each instance, proved fatal. During a night session, nearthe close of the Congress, requests for recognition came to theSpeaker from all parts of the chamber. In the midst of the tumultMr. McKenzie arose and, addressing the Chair, stated with greatsolemnity of manner that he arose to a question of personalprivilege. This at once arrested the attention of the Speaker,and he requested the gentleman from Kentucky to state his questionof privilege. "I rise, Mr. Speaker," said McKenzie, "to a questionof the highest privilege, one pertaining to the right of a memberto a seat upon this floor—in the next Congress. If I don't getthat post-office bill through now, my seat will be imperilled.I beg the House for unanimous consent for its immediate consideration."The House was convulsed; no objection was interposed, the bill wasconsidered and passed, and McKenzie's seat was safe for many yearsto come.

Has there ever been a more feeling two-minutes' speech, than that ofMcKenzie in the National Convention of 1892, when he arose to secondthe nomination of Cleveland? After a night of intense excitement,the convention was still in session at three o'clock in the morning.A storm was raging without, while within, thousands in the greathall were impatiently and loudly demanding an immediate vote. Morethan one of the chief orators of the party,—men well known to thecountry—had in vain attempted to be heard. Chaos seemed tohave come again at the crucial moment that McKenzie, standing uponhis chair in the centre of the vast enclosure, began: "If I speaklonger than two minutes, I hope that some honest half-drownedDemocrat will suspend my carcass from one of the cross-beams ofthis highly artistic, but terribly leaky auditorium. Clevelandneeds no nomination from this convention. He has already beennominated by the people all along the line—all the way fromHell Gate to Yuba Dam!"

The bedlam that now broke loose exceeded all that had gone before.The uproar drowned the voice of the orator within, and even, forthe time, called a halt upon the raging elements without. Thespeech was never concluded. What might have been the closing wordsof McKenzie's speech, with such a beginning, can never be known.The effect of his opening, however, was instantaneous. It was theimmediate prelude to the overwhelming nomination of his candidate.

The Hon. John E. Kenna, of West Virginia, was just at the beginningof a remarkably brilliant career. He was under thirty years ofage when he first entered Congress. At the close of his third termin the House, he was elected to the United States Senate, and heldhis seat in that body by successive elections until his death atthe early age of forty-four. He possessed rare gifts as a speaker,and was an active participant in many of the important debatesduring that eventful period. Senator Kenna was the beloved of hisState, and his early death brought sorrow to many hearts.

His manners were pleasing, and he was companionable to the lastdegree. He often related an amusing incident that occurred in theconvention that first nominated him for Congress. His name waspresented by a delegate from the Crossroads in one of the mountaincounties, in substantially the following speech: "Mr. President, Irise to present to this convention, as a candidate for Congress,the name of John E. Kenna—the peer, sir, of no man in the Stateof West Virginia."

Among the new members elected to this Congress was the Hon. BenjaminButterworth of Ohio. His ability as a lawyer and his readiness indebate soon gave him prominence, while his abundant good-natureand inexhaustible fund of anecdotes made him a general favorite inthe House. One of his stories was of a Western member whose dailywalk and conversation at the national Capital was by no means upto the orthodox home standard. The better element of his constituentsat length became disgusted, as reports derogatory to their member fromtime to time reached them. A bolt in the approaching Congressionalconvention was even threatened, and altogether serious trouble wasbrewing. The demand was imperative upon the part of his closestfriends that he at once come home and face his accusers. Homewardhe at length turned his footsteps, and was met at the depot by alarge concourse of his friends and constituents. Hurriedly alightingfrom the train and stepping upon the platform, with beamingcountenance and heart made glad by such an enthusiastic reception,he thus began:

"Fellow-citizens, my heart is deeply touched as my eyes behold thissplendid assemblage of my constituents and friends gathered herebefore and around me. During my absence in Congress my friendshave spoken in my vindication. I am here now to speak for myself.Vile slanders have been put in circulation against me. I have beenaccused of being a defaulter; I have been accused of being adrunkard; I have been accused of being a gambler; but, thankGod, fellow-citizens, no man has ever dared to assail my goodmoral character!"

One incident is related by Butterworth of a judge in his State who,becoming thoroughly disgusted with the ease with which naturalizationpapers were obtained, determined upon a radical reform. Thatthe pathway of the reformer—along this as other lines—was byno means one of flowers will appear from the sequel. Immediately upontaking his seat, the judge, with great earnestness of manner,announced from the bench that thereafter no applicant could receivefrom that court his final papers, entitling him to the exercise ofthe high privilege of citizenship, unless he was able to readthe Constitution of the United States. A few mornings later,Michael O'Connor, a well-known partisan of the Seventh Ward, appearedin court accompanied by a diminutive-looking countryman, DennisFlynn by name. Mr. O'Connor stated to the judge that his friendDennis Flynn had already taken out his first papers, and the legaltime had passed, and he now wanted His Honor to grant him his finalpapers. With much solemnity of manner the judge inquired whetherMr. Flynn had ever read the Constitution of the United States.Somewhat abashed by the unusual interrogatory, Mr. O'Connor lookedinquiringly at Mr. Flynn, at which the latter, wholly unconscious ofthe purport of the inquiry, looked appealingly to Mr. O'Connor.The latter then replied that he presumed he had not, at whichthe judge, handing the applicant a copy of the revised statutescontaining the Constitution, admonished him to read it carefully.Mr. Flynn, carrying the volume in his arms, and followed by hispatron, sadly left the court-room. Just eight minutes elapsed,the door suddenly opened and both reappeared, Mr. O'Connor in front,bearing the book aloft, and exclaiming, "Dinnie couldn't rade it,Your Honor, but I rid it over to him, and he is parefictly deloightedwid it!"

Three gentlemen, each of whom at a later day reached the Speakership,had served but a single term in the House at the opening of theforty-sixth Congress: Mr. Keifer of Ohio, Mr. Carlisle of Kentucky,and Mr. Reed of Maine. Mr. Keifer was a gentleman of ability and ofexceedingly courteous manners. He took a prominent part in debate,and was the immediate successor of Mr. Randall in the chair. Afteran absence of twenty years he has again been returned to his seat inthe House.

Few abler men than Mr. Carlisle have been in the public service.He was a recognized leader of his party from his first appearance inthe House, and an authority upon all questions pertaining to tariffor finance. During his long service as Speaker he establishedan enduring reputation as an able presiding officer; as possessingin the highest degree "the cold neutrality of the impartial Judge."While a Senator, he was appointed by President Cleveland to theimportant position of Secretary of the Treasury. The duties ofthat great office have never been discharged with more signalability.

Mr. Reed stood alone. He was unlike other men, a fact which probablycaused him little regret. Self-reliant, aggressive, of willindomitable, he was a political storm centre during his entirepublic career. His friends were devoted to him, and he wasnever forgotten by his enemies. Whoever was brought into closecontact with him, usually carried away an impression by which toremember him. Upon one occasion, in the House, when in sharp debatewith Mr. Springer, the latter quoted the familiar saying of HenryClay, "Sir, I would rather be right than be President." Mr. Reed,in a tone far from reassuring, retorted, "The gentleman from Illinoiswill never be either!"

The retort courteous, however, was not always from the lips of theSpeaker. Mr. Springer, having at one time repeatedly attempted,but in vain, to secure the floor, at length demanded by what righthe was denied recognition. The Speaker intimated that such rulingwas in accord with the high prerogative of the Chair. To whichSpringer replied:

"Oh, it is excellent
To have a giant strength; but 't is tyrannous
To use it like a giant."

Of immense physical proportions, towering above his fellows,with voice by no means melodious, a manner far from conciliatory, acapacity for sarcastic utterance that vividly recalled the days ofJohn Randolph and Tristram Burgess, and, withal, one of the ablestmen of his generation, Mr. Reed was in very truth a picturesquefigure in the House of Representatives. He apparently acted upon thesupposition of the philosopher Hobbes that war is the natural stateof man. The kindly admonition,

"Mend your ways a little
Lest they may mar your fortunes,"

if ever given him, was unheeded. In very truth,

"He stood,
As if a man were author of himself,
And knew no other kin."

No man in his day was more talked of or written about. At one timehis star was in the ascendent, and he seemed to be on the highroadto the Presidency. His great ambition, however, was thwarted bythose of his own political household. At the close of a turbulentsession, while he was in the Chair, the usual resolution of thanksto the Speaker "for the able, fair, and courteous manner in which hehad presided" was bitterly antagonized, and finally adopted onlyby a strictly party vote. It was an event with a single antecedentin our history, that of seventy-odd years ago, when the Whig minorityin the House opposed the usual vote of thanks to Speaker Polk uponhis retirement from the Chair. In the latter case, the cry ofpersecution that was instantly raised had much to do with Mr. Polk'salmost immediate election to the Governorship of his State, andhis subsequent elevation to the Presidency. The parallel incidentin Mr. Reed's career, however, failed to prove "the prologue tothe swelling act."

The Hon. William McKinley, of Ohio, was a member of this Congress.He was one of the most pleasing and delightful of associates, and myacquaintance with him was of the most agreeable character. One ofhis earliest official acts as President was my appointment as amember of the Bimetallic Commission to Europe.

Mr. McKinley was in very truth one of Fortune's favorites: fivetimes elected a member of the House of Representatives, three timesGovernor of his State, and twice elevated to the Presidency. Hewas the third of our Presidents to fall by the hand of an assassin.His tragic death is yet fresh in our memories.

The last time I met President McKinley was at the Peace JubileeBanquet at the Auditorium in Chicago, on the evening of October19, 1898. On this occasion, following the toast to the President ofthe United States, I spoke as follows:

"The incumbent of this great office holds with unchallenged title themost exalted station known to men. Monarchs rule by hereditaryright, or hold high place only by force of arms. The elevation ofa citizen to the Presidency of the United States is the deliberateact, under the forms of law, of a sovereign people. As an aspirant,he may have been the choice only of a political party; as theincumbent of the great office, he is the representative of all thepeople—the President of all the people. It augurs well for thefuture of the Republic when the American people magnify this office;when the honor, as now, the President who has so ably upheld itsdignity, so worthily met its solemn responsibilities, so patrioticallydischarged its exacting and imperative duties.

"The office of President of a self-governing people is unique. Ithad no place in ancient or mediaeval schemes of government, whetherdespotic, federative, or in name republican. It has in realitynone amongst the nations of modern Europe. The Presidency ofthe United States, in the highest degree, represents the majestyof the law. It stands for the unified authority and power ofseventy-five millions of free men. It typifies what is most sacredto our race: stability in government and protection to libertyand life. The President is the great officer to whom the founders ofthe government entrusted the delicate and responsible function oftreating with foreign States; in whom was vested in time of peace andof war, chief command of the army and of the navy.

"An eminent writer has well said: 'The ancient monarchs of Francereigned and governed; the Queen of England reigns but does notgovern; the President of France neither reigns nor governs; thePresident of the United States does not reign, but governs!'

"Experience has demonstrated the more than human wisdom of theframers of the great federal compact which for more than a century,in peace and amid the stress of war, has held States and people inindissoluble bond of union. In no part of their matchless handiworkhas it been more clearly manifested than in the creation of aresponsible executive. To secure in the largest measure the greatends of government, responsibility must attach to the executiveoffice; and of necessity, with responsibility, power. The soonerFrance learns from the American Republic this important lesson,the sooner will government attain with her the stability to which itis now a stranger. Her statesmen might well recall the words ofLord Bacon: 'What men will not alter for the better, Time, thegreat innovator, will alter for the worse.'

"The splendid commonwealth in which we are assembled contains apopulation a million greater than did the entire country at thefirst inauguration of President Washington. The one hundred andnine years which have passed since that masterful hour in history havewitnessed the addition of thirty-two States to our federal Union, andof seventy millions to our population. And yet, with but fewamendments, our great organic law as fully meets the requirementsof a self-governing people to-day as when it came from the handsof its framers. The builders of the Constitution wisely ordained thePresidential office a co-ordinate department of the Government.Moving in its own clearly defined orbit, without usurpation orlessening of prerogative, the great executive office, at the closeas at the beginning of the century, is the recognized constitutionalsymbol of authority and of power. The delegated functions andprerogatives that pertained in our infancy and weakness have provedample in the days of our strength and greatness as a nation.

"It is well that to the people was entrusted the sovereign powerof choosing their chief magistrate. It is our glory, in theretrospect of more than a century, that none other than patriots—statesmen well equipped for the discharge of its timeless duties—have ever been chosen to the Presidency. May we not believe thatthe past is the earnest of the future, and that during the rollingyears and centuries the incumbents of the great office—the chosensuccessors of Washington and of Lincoln—in the near and in theremote future, will prove the guardians and defenders of theConstitution, the guardians and defenders of the rights of all thepeople?

"Luminous will be the pages of history that tell to the ages thestory of our recent conflict, of its causes and of its results.In brilliancy of achievement, the one hundred days war with Spain isthe marvel of the closing century. It was not a war of our seeking.It was the earnest prayer of all, from the President to the humblestin private life, that the horrors of war might be averted. Hadour ears remained deaf to the cry of the stricken and starvingat our doors, we would not have been guiltless in the high courtof conscience, and before the dread judgment seat of history. Theplea 'Am I my brother's keeper?'—whether interposed by individualor by nation—cannot be heard before the august tribunal of theAlmighty.

"Justified then, as we solemnly believe, in the sight of God forour interposition, we rejoice over the termination of a strugglein which our arms knew no defeat. The dead hand of Spain has beenremoved forever from the throats of her helpless victims. Emphasizingour solemn declaration as a nation, that this was a war for humanity,not for self-aggrandizement, we demand no money indemnity from thedefeated and impoverished foe.

"The sacrifice of treasure and of blood has not been in vain.However it may have been in the past, the United States emergesfrom the conflict with Spain a united people. Sectional lines areforever obliterated. Henceforth, for all time, we present toforeign foe and unbroken front. In the words of Webster: 'Ourpolitics go no farther than the water's edge.'

"No less important is the fact, that the United States ofAmerica to-day, as never before, commands the respect and admirationof the world. No foreign coalition, however formidable, can exciteour serious apprehension or alarm. For all this, all honor to ourbrave soldiers and sailors; all honor to the helpful hands andsympathetic hearts of America's patriotic women.

"As in the early morning and in the noon of the nineteenth century,America gave to the world its best lessons in liberty and inlaw, so in its closing hours, it has given to all the nations anever-to-be-forgotten lesson in the dread art of war. In quickresponse to the splendid achievements of American valor comes fromacross the sea the startling proposal of despotic Russia for thedisarmament of continental Europe—and in the end universal peace.

"Thankful to God for all he has vouchsafed to us in the past,and with the prayer that henceforth peace may be the priceless boonof all nations, we await the dawn of the new century, and turn ourfaces hopefully to the future."

IVTHE VICE-PRESIDENCY

ELECTION, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT—NAMES AND DATESOF ALL THE VICE-PRESIDENTS—FOUR WHO BECAME PRESIDENTS BY ELECTION—FIVE WHO SUCCEEDED UPON THE DEATH OF THE PRESIDENT—ATTEMPTSTO SECURE THE IMPEACHMENTS OF PRESIDENTS—THE TWELFTH AMENDMENT TOTHE CONSTITUTION—REMARKS ON SOME OF THE VICE-PRESIDENTS—THEWRITER'S FAREWELL ADDRESS TO THE SENATE.

By the provisions of the Federal Constitution, a Vice-President ofthe United States is elected at the same time, for the same term, andin like manner as the President—by electors chosen in each of theStates. A majority of the votes cast in the several electoralcolleges is necessary to an election. The Vice-President is thePresident of the Senate, and in the event of an equal divisionin that body, he gives the deciding vote. Under no other contingencyhas he a vote. The powers and duties of the office of Presidentdevolve upon the Vice-President in case of the death, resignation,or removal from office of the President. The Vice-President isincluded in the list of public officers liable to removal fromoffice on impeachment, on conviction for treason, bribery, or otherhigh crimes and misdemeanors. By the twelfth amendment to theConstitution no person constitutionally ineligible to the officeof President can be elected to that of Vice-President. In theevent of a vacancy occurring in the office of Vice-President,the Senate is presided over by a member of that body. In suchcontingency the death of the President would, under existinglaw, devolve the office of President upon the Secretary of State.

Twenty-seven persons have held the office of Vice-President; thedates of their respective elections are as follows: John Adams ofMassachusetts, in 1788, re-elected in 1792; Thomas Jefferson ofVirginia, in 1796; Aaron Burr of New York, in 1800; George Clintonof New York, in 1804, re-elected in 1808; Elbridge Gerry ofMassachusetts, in 1812; Daniel D. Tompkins of New York, in 1816,re-elected in 1820; John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, in 1824,re-elected in 1828; Martin Van Buren of New York, in 1832; RichardM. Johnson of Kentucky, in 1836; John Tyler of Virginia, in1840; George M. Dallas of Pennsylvania, in 1844; Millard Fillmore ofNew York, in 1848; William R. King of Alabama, in 1852; John C.Breckenridge of Kentucky, in 1856; Hannibal Hamlin of Maine, in1860; Andrew Johnson of Tennessee, in 1864; Schuyler Colfax ofIndiana, in 1868; Henry Wilson of Massachusetts, in 1872; William A.Wheeler of New York, in 1876; Chester A. Arthur of New York, in1880; Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana, in 1884; Levi P. Morton ofNew York, in 1888; Adlai E. Stevenson of Illinois, in 1892; GarrettA. Hobart of New Jersey, in 1896; Theodore Roosevelt of New York, in1900; Charles W. Fairbanks of Indiana, in 1904; James S. Shermanof New York, in 1908.

Four Vice-Presidents were subsequently elected Presidents, namely:John Adams in 1796; Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and 1804; MartinVan Buren in 1836; and Theodore Roosevelt in 1904. The dates givenhave reference to the election by vote of the electors in theseveral States by whom the President and Vice-President weresubsequently chosen. Six Vice-Presidents died in office: namely,Clinton, Gerry, King, Wilson, Hendricks, and Hobart. In thePresidential contest of 1836, Martin Van Buren received a majorityof the electoral votes for President, but no candidate received amajority for Vice-President. By Constitutional requirement theduty of electing a Vice-President then devolved upon the Senate,the candidates from whom such choice was to be made being restrictedto the two who had received the highest number of electoral votes.One of these, Richard W. Johnson of Kentucky, was duly electedby the Senate. The only Vice-President who resigned the officewas John C. Calhoun. This occurred in 1832, and Mr. Calhounsoon thereafter took his seat in the Senate, to which body hehad been elected by the Legislature of South Carolina.

Five Vice-Presidents have, upon the death of the President, succeededto the Presidency. The first President to die during his incumbencyof the great office, was William Henry Harrison. His death occurredApril 4, 1841, just one month after his inauguration. TheVice-President John Tyler, then at his country home in Virginia, wasofficially notified of the event, and upon reaching the seat ofGovernment at once took the oath of office as President. Therewas much discussion for a time in and out of Congress as to hisproper title, whether "Vice-President of the United States acting asPresident," or "President." The language of the Constitutionhowever, is clear, and it is no longer controverted that uponthe death of the President the Vice-President becomes, in nameas in fact, President. Upon the death of President Zachary Taylor,July 9, 1850, Vice-President Millard Fillmore succeeded to thePresidency, and was at a later date an unsuccessful candidatefor election to that office. The third Vice-President who reachedthe Presidency by succession was Andrew Johnson; this occurredApril 15, 1865, the day following the assassination of PresidentLincoln. President Garfield was shot July 2, 1881, and died inSeptember of that year, when he was succeeded by Vice-PresidentChester A. Arthur. Vice-President Roosevelt was the successorof President McKinley, who died by the hand of an assassin inSeptember, 1901.

Two attempts have been made to secure the impeachment of Presidents,the incumbent in each instance having been elected Vice-President andsucceeded to the higher office upon the death of the President.A resolution looking to the impeachment of President Tyler wasintroduced into the House of Representatives in January, 1843, butwas defeated, and no further steps were taken. Articles ofimpeachment, for "high crimes and misdemeanors," were presented bythe House of Representatives against President Johnson in 1868.By constitutional provision the trial was by the Senate, the ChiefJustice of the United States presiding. Less than two-thirds ofthe Senators voting for conviction, he was acquitted.

Until the adoption of the twelfth amendment, no Constitutionalprovision existed for separate votes in the electoral colleges forPresident and Vice-President; the candidate receiving the highest numberof votes (if a majority of all) became President, and the onereceiving the second highest, Vice-President. In 1801, Jefferson andBurr each received seventy-three electoral votes, and byconstitutional requirement the election at once devolved uponthe House of Representatives, voting by States. On the thirty-sixthballot a majority of the States voting for Jefferson, he becamePresident, and Burr, Vice-President. The Constitutional amendmentabove indicated, by which separate ballots were required in theelectoral colleges for each office, was the result of theintense excitement throughout the country engendered by this contest.The earnest opposition of Alexander Hamilton to Aaron Burr inthe above-mentioned contest, was the prime cause of the duel bywhich Hamilton lost his life at the hands of Burr in 1804.

George Clinton, the fourth Vice-President, had as a member ofthe Continental Congress voted for the Declaration of Independence,and held the rank of Brigadier-General during the War of theRevolution. The fifth Vice-President, Elbridge Gerry, had beena prominent member of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.William R. King, elected in 1852, by reason of ill health neverentered upon the discharge of the duties of his office. By specialact of Congress, the oath of office was administered to him in Cubaand his death occurred soon thereafter. Of the twenty-sevenVice-Presidents thus far elected, ten have been from the Stateof New York. Adams and Jefferson, the first and secondVice-Presidents, rendered valuable service to the young Republic atforeign courts; each by election was elevated to the Presidency; andtheir deaths occurred upon the same historic Fourth of July,just fifty years from the day they had signed the Declaration ofIndependence.

A marble bust of each of the Vice-Presidents has been placed inthe gallery of the Senate Chamber. The office of Vice-Presidentis one of great dignity. He is the presiding officer of themost august legislative assembly known to men. In the event of anequal division in the Senate, he gives the deciding vote. Thisvote, many times in our history, has been one of deep significance.It will readily be seen that the contingency may often occur when theVice-President becomes an important factor in matters oflegislation.

On the occasion of the writer's retirement from office, March 4,1897, he delivered the following farewell address before the Senate:

"Senators: The hour has arrived which marks the close of thefifty-fourth Congress, and terminates my official relation to thisbody.

"Before laying down the gavel for the last time, I may be pardonedfor detaining you for a moment, in the attempt to give expression tomy gratitude for the uniform courtesy extended me, for the manykindnesses shown me, during the time it has been my good fortuneto preside over your deliberations. My appreciation of the Resolutionof the Senate personal to myself, can find no adequate expression inwords. Intentionally, I have at no time given offence; and I carryfrom this presence no shadow of feeling of unkindness toward anySenator, no memory of any grievance.

"Chief among the favors political fortune has bestowed upon me,I count that of having been the associate—and known somethingof the friendship—of the men with whom I have so long held officialrelation in this chamber. To have been the presiding officer ofthis august body is an honor of which even the most illustriouscitizen might be proud. I am persuaded that no occupant of thisChair, during the one hundred and eight years of our Constitutionalhistory, ever entered upon the discharge of the duties pertaining tothis office more deeply impressed with a sense of the responsibilitiesimposed, or with a higher appreciation of the character and dignityof the great Legislative Assembly.

"During the term just closing, questions of deep import to politicalparties and to the country have here found earnest and at timespassionate discussion. This Chamber has indeed been the arenaof great debate. The record of four years of parliamentary struggles,of masterful debates, of important legislation, is closed, andpasses now to the domain of history.

"I think I can truly say, in the words of a distinguished predecessor,'In the discharge of my official duties, I have known no cause, noparty, no friend.' It has been my earnest endeavor justly tointerpret, and faithfully to execute, the rules of the Senate. Attimes the temptation may be strong to compass partisan ends by adisregard or a perversion of the rules. Yet, I think it safe tosay, the result, however salutary, will be dearly purchased by adeparture from the method prescribed by the Senate for its ownguidance. A single instance, as indicated, might prove the forerunnerof untold evils.

''T will be recorded for a precedent,
And many an error by the same example
Will rush into the State.'

"It must not be forgotten that the rules governing this body arefounded deep in human experience; that they are the result ofcenturies of tireless effort in legislative hall, to conserve,to render stable and secure, the rights and liberties which havebeen achieved by conflict. By its rules, the Senate wisely fixes thelimits to its own power. Of those who clamor against the Senateand its mode of procedure it may be truly said, 'They know not whatthey do.' In this Chamber alone are preserved, without restraint,two essentials of wise legislation and of good government—theright of amendment and of debate. Great evils often result fromhasty legislation, rarely from the delay which follows fulldiscussion and deliberation. In my humble judgment, the historicSenate, preserving the unrestricted right of amendment and ofdebate, maintaining intact the time-honored parliamentary methods andamenities which unfailingly secure action after deliberation,possesses in our scheme of government a value which can not bemeasured by words. The Senate is a perpetual body. In theterse words of an eminent Senator now present: 'The men who framedthe Constitution had studied thoroughly all former attempts atRepublican government. History was strewn with the wrecks ofunsuccessful democracies. Sometimes the usurpation of the executivepower, sometimes the fickleness and unbridled license of the people,had brought popular governments to destruction. To guard against thesedangers, they placed their chief hope in the Senate. The Senatewhich was organized in 1789, at the inauguration of the Government,abides and will continue to abide, one and the same body, untilthe Republic itself shall be overthrown, or time shall be no more.'

"Twenty-four Senators who have occupied seats in this Chamber duringmy term of office are no longer members of this body. Five of thatnumber—Stanford, Colquitt, Vance, Stockbridge, and Wilson—'shattered with the contentions of the Great Hall,' full of years andof honors have passed from earthly scenes. The fall of thegavel will conclude the long and honorable terms of service ofother Senators, who will be borne in kind remembrance by theirassociates who remain.

"I would do violence to my feelings if I failed to express my thanksto the officers of this body for the fidelity with which they havedischarged their important duties, and for the kindly assistanceand unfailing courtesy of which I have been the recipient.

"For the able and distinguished gentleman who succeeds me asyour presiding officer, I earnestly invoke the same co-operationand courtesy which you have so generously accorded me.

"Senators, my parting words have been spoken, and I now discharge mylast official duty, that of declaring the Senate adjourned withoutday."

VTHE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

DIFFICULTY OF FORMULATING A FEDERAL CONSTITUTION—THE CONVENTIONOF 1787 SEES THE NECESSITY FOR A GENERAL GOVERNMENT WITH PLENARYPOWERS—JEALOUSY OF THE SMALLER TOWARD THE LARGER STATES—BRITISH PARLIAMENT TAKEN, WITH QUALIFICATIONS, AS THE MODEL FOR THEHOUSES OF CONGRESS—EQUAL STATE REPRESENTATION IN THE SENATE—NON-EXISTENCE OF ANY METHOD FOR TERMINATING DEBATES IN THE SENATE—POTENCY OF THE PRESIDENT'S VETO—ABUSE OF THE CLOTURE IN THEHOUSE—PROCEDURE IN THE EVENT OF THE FAILURE OF THE PEOPLE TO ELECTA PRESIDENT OR A VICE-PRESIDENT—THE HAYES-TILDEN CONTEST—DANGER OFUSURPATION OF POWER BY THE EXECUTIVE—THE SENATE AS A HIGH COURTOF IMPEACHMENT—TRIAL OF CHASE OF MARYLAND—TRIAL OF BELKNAP,SECRETARY OF WAR—TRIAL OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON.

It is a well-known fact in our political history that the conventionwhich formulated our Federal Constitution greatly exceeded thepowers delegated to its members by their respective States. Itwas the supreme moment, and upon the action of the historic assemblagedepended events of far-reaching consequence. The Constitutionof the United States is the enduring monument to the courage, theforecast, the wisdom of the members of the Convention of 1787. Itwas theirs to cut the Gordian knot, to break with the past, and,regardless of the jealousies and antagonisms of individual States,to establish the more perfect union, which has been declared by aneminent British statesman "the greatest work ever struck off ata given time from the brain and purpose of man."

The oft-quoted expression of Gladstone is, however, more rhetoricalthan accurate. The Constitution of the United States was not"struck off at a given time," but as declared by Bancroft, "thematerials for its building were the gifts of the ages." In thewords of Lieber, "What the ancients said of the avenging gods, thatthey were shod with wool, is true of great ideas in government.They approach slowly. Great truths dwell a long time with smallminorities."

The period following the treaty of peace with Great Britain in1783, which terminated the War of the Revolution, has been notinaptly designated "the critical period of American history." TheRevolutionary Government, under which Washington had been chosento the chief command of the colonial forces, the early battlesfought, and the Declaration of Independence promulgated, hadbeen superseded in 1781 by a Government created under the Articlesof Confederation. The latter Government, while in a vital sensea mere rope of sand, was a long step in the right direction; theearnest of the more perfect union yet to follow.

Under the Government, more shadowy than real, thus created, theclosing battles of the Revolution were fought, independence achieved,a treaty of peace concluded, and our recognition as a sovereignRepublic obtained from our late antagonist and other Europeannations.

The Articles of Confederation, submitted for ratification by theColonial Congress to the individual States while the country wasyet in the throes of a doubtful struggle, fell far short ofestablishing what in even crude form could properly be designated aGovernment. The Confederation was wholly lacking in one essentialof all Governments: the power to execute its own decrees. Itsavowed purpose was to establish "a firm league of friendship," or,as the name indicates, a mere confederation of the colonies.The parties to this league were independent political communities,and by express terms, each State was to retain all rights, sovereignty,and jurisdiction not expressly delegated to the Confederation. Ina Congress consisting of a single House were vested the powers thusgrudgingly conferred. Its members were to be chosen by the Statesas such; upon every question the vote was given by States, each,regardless of population, having but a single vote. The revenues andthe regulation of foreign commerce were to remain under the controlof the respective States, and no provision was made for borrowingmoney for the necessary maintenance of the general Government. Ina word, in so far as a Government at all, it was in the main oneof independent States, and in no sense that with which we arefamiliar, a Government of the entire people. Whatever existedof executive power was in a committee of the Congress; the onlyprovision for meeting the expenses of the late war and the interestupon the public debt was by requisition upon the States, with noshadow of power for its enforcement.

Under the conditions briefly mentioned, with the United Statesof America a byword among the nations, the now historic Conventionof 1787 assembled in Philadelphia, in the room where elevenyears earlier had been promulgated the Declaration of Independence.It consisted of fifty-five members; and without a dissenting voice,Washington, a delegate from Virginia, was elected its President.Not the least of his public services was now to be rendered in thework of safeguarding the fruits of successful revolution by a stableGovernment. Chief among the associates with whom he was dailyin earnest, anxious counsel in the great assemblage, were men whosenames live with his in history. If Franklin, Wilson, Sherman,King, Randolph, Rutledge, Mason, Pinckney, Hamilton, Madison,and their associates had rendered no public service other thanas builders of the Constitution, that alone would entitle themto the measureless gratitude of all future generations of theircountrymen.

When they were assembled, the startling fact was at once apparent that,under the Confederation, with its constituent States at times inalmost open hostility to one another, the country was graduallydrifting into a condition of anarchy.

It is our glory to-day, and will be that of countless on-cominggenerations, that the men of '87 were equal to the stupendousemergency. Regardless of instructions, expressed or implied,the master spirits of the Convention, looking beyond local prejudicesand State environment, and appealing to time for vindication, witha ken that now seems more than human, discerned the safety, thewell-being, the glory of their countrymen, bound up in a generalGovernment of plenary powers, a Government "without a seam in itsgarment, to foreign nations."

To this end the proposition submitted by Paterson of New Jersey,in the early sittings of the Convention, for a mere enlargement ofthe powers of the Confederation, was decisively rejected. Withthe light that could be gleaned from the pages of Montesquieu, thesuggestive lessons to be drawn from the fate of the short-livedrepublics whose wrecks lay along the pathway of history, and from theunwritten Constitution of the mother country, as their only guides,the leaders of the Convention were at once in the difficult roleof constructive statesmen. The Herculean task to which withunwearied effort they now addressed themselves was that of "builders"of the Constitution; the establishers, for the ages, of thefundamental law for a free people.

One of the perils which early beset the Convention, and whosespectre haunted its deliberations till the close, was the hostilityengendered by the dread and jealousy of the smaller toward thelarger States. This fact will in some measure explain what inlater years have been denominated the anomalies of the Constitution.To a correct understanding of the motives of the builders, andan appreciation of their marvellous accomplishment, it must not beforgotten that "The foundations of the Constitution were laid incompromise." The men of '87 had but recently emerged from thebloody conflict through which they had escaped the domination ofkingly power. With the tyranny of George the Third yet burning intheir memories, it is not to be wondered that the Revolutionarypatriots of the less populous States were loath to surrender rights,deemed, by them, secure under their local governments; that theydreaded the establishment of what they apprehended might provean overshadowing—possibly unlimited—central authority.

The creation of a general Government, with its three separateand measurably independent departments, happily concluded, withthe delegated powers of each distinctly enumerated, the salientquestion as to the basis of representation in the Congress at oncepressed for determination. Upon the question of provision for achief executive, and his investment with the powers necessarilyincident to the great office, there was after much debate a practicalconsensus of opinion. And practical unanimity in the end prevailedregarding the judicial department, with its great court withouta prototype at its creation, and even yet without a counterpart inforeign Governments.

The rock upon which the Convention barely escaped early dissolution,was the basis of representation in the Congress created underthe great co-ordinate legislative department. The model for ourSenate and House of Representatives was unquestionably the BritishParliament. This statement is to be taken with weighty qualifications;for hereditary or ecclesiastical representation, as in the Houseof Lords, is wholly unknown in our system of government. Thesignificant resemblance is that of our Lower House to theBritish Commons. In these respective chambers, the people, assuch, have representation.

The earnest, at times violent, contention of the smaller States,in our historic Convention, was for equal representation in bothbranches of the proposed national legislature. This was strenuouslyresisted by the larger States under the powerful leadership ofMadison of Virginia, and Wilson of Pennsylvania. Their equallyearnest, and by no means illogical contention was for popularrepresentation in each House, as outlined in the Virginia planwhich had been taken as the framework of the proposed Constitution.The opposing views appeared wholly irreconcilable, and for a time theparting of the ways seemed to have been reached. Threats ofdissolution were not uncommon in the Chamber, and for many daysthe spirit of despair brooded over the Convention. A delegate fromMaryland vehemently declared: "The Convention is on the vergeof dissolution, scarcely held together by the strength of a hair."Well has it been said: "In even the contemplation of the fearfulconsequence of such a calamity, the imagination stands aghast."

At the crucial moment mentioned, Sherman and Ellsworth presentedupon behalf of Connecticut the first and most far-reaching ofthe great compromises of the Constitution. The Connecticut planwas in brief to the effect that in fixing the ratio of representationthere should be recognition alike of the federal and of the nationalfeature in government, in a word, that in the Lower House thenational, and in the upper the federal principle should havefull recognition. This was a departure from the Virginia planto the extent that it in effect proposed the establishment of afederal republic,—in the concrete, that the House should be composedof representatives chosen directly by the people from districts ofequal population; while representation in the Senate should be thatof the States, each, regardless of population, to have two members,to be chosen at stated periods by their respective legislatures.

After heated debate, this compromise was carried by a bare majority,and the provision for popular representation in the House, andequal State representation in the Senate, became engrafted uponour Federal Constitution. This feature, an eminent foreign writer hasdeclared, "is the chief American contribution to the common treasuresof political civilization." The eminent writer, De Tocqueville,has well said: "The principle of the independence of the Statestriumphed in the formation of the Senate, and that of the sovereigntyof the nation in the composition of the House of Representatives."

The success of the Connecticut plan made possible that of otheressential compromises which followed; and the result was, as thesublime consummation of wise deliberation and patriotic concession,the establishment of the Government of the United States.

It is the proud boast of the Briton, that "the British Constitutionhas no single date from which its duration is to be reckoned,and that the origin of English law is as undiscoverable as that ofthe Nile." Our Government, buttressed upon a written Constitutionof enumerated and logically implied powers, had its historicbeginning upon that masterful day, April 30, 1789, when Washingtontook solemn oath of office as our first President.

The Senate of the United States has been truly declared "the greatestdeliberative body known to men." By Constitutional provision itconsists of two members from each State, chosen by the Legislaturethereof, for the term of six years. No person has the legalqualification for Senator "unless he shall have attained the ageof thirty years, be an inhabitant of the State for which he ischosen, and have been nine years a citizen of the United States."No State, without its consent, can ever be deprived, even byConstitutional amendment, of its equal representation in the Senate.Nevada with a population of less than forty thousand has her equalvoice with New York with a population exceeding seven million.This anomaly was occasioned by concession by the larger to thesmaller States in the Convention of 1787, a concession whichmade possible the establishment of the federal Union.

One essential difference between the House of Representativesand the Senate is that to the latter "the previous question" isunknown; no method existing for terminating debate, other thanby unanimous consent. Here, unlimited discussion and amendmentcan have their perfect work. Within the last three or four decadesmany fruitless attempts have been made to introduce a modified"previous question" or cloture, by which the Senate could bebrought to an immediate vote. At first blush such change mightseem desirable, but experience has demonstrated the wisdom ofthe method to which there has been such steady adherence. Itsecures time for consideration and full discussion upon everyquestion. In the end the vote will be taken. Debate is rarelyprolonged beyond reasonable limit. Not infrequently the publicwelfare is imperilled by too much, rather than too little, legislation.It was the belief of Jefferson that government should touch thecitizen at the fewest possible points. The quaint lines of theold English poet have lost nothing of their significance:

"How small, of all that human hearts endure,
That part which laws or kings can cause or cure!"

The House of Representatives has in large degree ceased to be adeliberative body. Under the iron rule of the "previous question"measures of importance are hurriedly passed without the possibilityof discussion or amendment. The rights of the minority are attimes but as the dust in the balance.

Unlike the House of Lords, the Senate is in reality an importantfactor in legislation. As is well known in recent years, governmentin Great Britain is virtually that of the House of Commons, inlarge measure through a cabinet practically of its own appointment.The King is little more than a ceremonial figure-head, and theHouse of Lords is almost in a death struggle for existence. Theend would probably come by serious attempt upon its part to thwartthe popular will as expressed through the House of Commons. Thepower of Edward the Seventh is but a shadow of that exercised almostwithout let or hindrance by the predecessors of Queen Victoria.The veto power, so potent an instrumentality in the hands of theAmerican President, is to all intents a dead letter in the mythicalBritish Constitution. For a century and a half it has remained inpractical abeyance. It is believed that its attempted exercise atthis day would produce revolution; possibly endanger the existenceof the throne.

By means of what is known as a suspension of the rules, underthe operation of the "previous question," much important legislationis enacted in our House of Representatives, without the minorityhaving the privilege of debate, or amendment, or even the necessarytime to a full understanding of the pending measure. The constantlyrecurring "River and Harbor Bill," with its enormous sum totalof appropriations, is a striking object lesson of the viciouscharacter of such methods.

In the light of what has been suggested, the wisdom displayed inthe establishment of the bicameral, or two-chamber system, inour legislative scheme, is strikingly apparent. At the time ofits creation, it had no counterpart in any of the Governments ofcontinental Europe. Its only prototype, in so far as it was such,was the British House of Lords as already indicated.

Save only in the right to originate revenue bills, the power ofthe Senate is concurrent with that of the House in all mattersof legislation; and these are wisely subject to amendment by theSenate. The presiding officer of the Senate is the Vice-Presidentof the United States, and in his absence a Senator chosen asPresident pro tempore.

In the event of a failure on the part of the people to elect aPresident or a Vice-President of the United States, through electorsduly appointed at the stated time, the duty of such election devolvesupon the House and the Senate acting independently of each other.The choice of President is limited to the three candidates who havereceived the highest number of votes in the several electoralcolleges. The determination is by the House of Representatives,the vote being by States. In such event the vote of Nevadawould again count equally with that of New York. In the contingencymentioned, of a failure to elect a Vice-President, the electiondevolves upon the Senate, each Senator having a personal vote; andthe person chosen must by Constitutional requirement be one of thetwo receiving the highest number of electoral votes. In 1836, Mr.Van Buren of New York received a majority of the electoral votesfor President; but no person receiving a majority for the secondoffice, Colonel Richard M. Johnson, of Kentucky, one of the twopersons eligible, was chosen by the Senate. No similar instancehas occurred in our history.

In the Presidential election of 1800, and in that of 1824, theultimate determination was by the House of Representatives. Inthe former, Jefferson and Burr each received seventy-three electoralvotes, without specification as to whether intended for the first orsecond office. The protracted struggle which followed resulted inthe choice of Jefferson for the higher office. This fortunatetermination was in large measure through the influence of AlexanderHamilton, and was the initial step in the bitter personal strifewhich eventuated in his early death at the hands of Burr. Inthe light of events, we may well believe that not the least of thepublic services of Hamilton was his unselfish interposition at thecritical moment mentioned. The possibility of similar complicationagain arising in the election of the President was soon thereafterobviated by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution.

Seldom in Presidential contests has there been such an array ofgreat names presented as in that of 1824. The era of good feelingwhich characterized the administration of Monroe found suddentermination in the rival candidacy of two members of his cabinet, forthe succession—Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, and Mr. Crawford, ofthe Treasury. The other aspirants were Clay, the brilliant Speakerof the House of Representatives, and Jackson, with laurels yetfresh from the battlefield of New Orleans. Mr. Clay receiving thesmallest number of electoral votes, and no candidate themajority thereof, the selection again devolved upon the House,resulting eventually in the choice of John Quincy Adams.

In the two Presidential contests last mentioned, the Senate had nopart in the final adjustment. An occasion, however, arose nearly ahalf-century later, involving the succession to the Presidency, inwhich the Senate, equally with the House, was an important factor inthe final determination. The country has known few periods ofprofounder anxiety to thoughtful men, or of greater peril to stablegovernment, than the feverish hours immediately succeeding thePresidential contest of 1876. The shadow cast by the Hayes-Tildencontest even yet, in a measure, lingers. As a Representative inCongress at the time, I was deeply impressed with the gravity ofthe situation. In the instances first mentioned it was the merequestion of the failure of any candidate to receive a majorityof the electoral votes. The framers of the Constitution had wiselyprovided for such contingency by action of the House in mannerindicated. The far more serious question now confronting was, Forwhom had the disputed States of Florida and Louisiana cast theirvotes? The settlement of this question virtually determined whichcandidate should be inaugurated President. Conflicting certificatesfrom the States named had been forwarded to the seat of government,and were in keeping of the officer designated by law as the custodianof the electoral returns from the several States. The contingencywhich had now arisen was one for which there was no provision.The sole function of the joint session of the Senate and the Housewas "to open all the certificates and count the votes." Thiswas "the be all and end all" of its authority. Upon the arisingof any question demanding a vote, or even deliberation, the membersof the joint session could only return to their separate chambers.They could act only in their separate capacities. In a word,the perilous exigency presented was, the friends of one candidate havinga majority in the Senate, and of the other in control of the House;conflicting certificates presented, upon which hinged the result, andthe tension throughout the entire country assuming alarmingproportions. Coupled with the question of peaceable succession tothe great office was that of the durability of popular government.Tremendous issues, upon which depended unfathomable consequences, pressedfor settlement; and no tribunal was in existence for theirdetermination.

The sober second thought of those upon whom was then cast theresponsibility asserted itself at the opportune moment, and acommission consisting of an equal number of Senators, Representatives,and Judges of the Great Court was created. This commission—extra-Constitutional, as was believed by many—decided as to thevalidity of the conflicting certificates, and in effect determinedas to the Presidential succession.

The justification of the act creating the commission might wellrest upon the fact that an overshadowing emergency had arisen,where necessity becomes the paramount law. "The pendulum of historyswings in centuries," and a single term of the great office weighedlittle in view of the perils that surely awaited a failure to securepeaceful adjustment.

I may be pardoned for adding that in the retrospect of a life,no longer a short one, I have no regrets that my humble voiceand vote were given for peaceable and lawful adjustment of a perilouscontroversy, that cast its dark shadow across our national pathway—such a one, as, please God, our country may never witness again.

Unquestionably the least satisfactory of the devices of our FederalConstitution is that for the election of President and Vice-Presidentthrough the instrumentality of colleges of electors chosen bythe several States. Upon this subject notes of warning havebeen many times sounded by eminent statesmen of the past. In viewof the hazardous complications through which we have happily passed,and of those which may possibly beset our future pathway as anation, it would indeed be the part of wisdom, if by Constitutionalamendment a less complicated and cumbrous instrumentality could bedevised for ascertaining and making effective the popular willin the selection of President and Vice-President of the UnitedStates.

One of the apprehensions of the framers of the Constitution wasthat of executive usurpation of functions lawfully pertaining tothe co-ordinate department of the Government. This was measurablyguarded against by the provision requiring appointment to highoffice to be by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.While the President by the exercise of the veto power possessesa negative upon legislation, the Senate by virtue of the provisionquoted has an equally effective negative upon executive appointmentsto important office.

To the President is confided primarily the treaty-making power.Treaties are the law of the land, and their observance in spiritas well as letter touches the national honor. Upon this oftendepends the issue of peace or war. Before becoming effective theirratification by a two-thirds vote of the Senate is indispensable.From these and other safeguards strikingly appear what are knownas "the checks and balances" of the Constitution.

An important function of the Senate yet to be mentioned is that ofsitting as a high court of impeachment. The President, Vice-President,and other high officials are amenable to its jurisdiction. Theinitial step, however, in such procedure is by the House ofRepresentatives, as the grand inquest of the nation, presentingarticles of impeachment, the Senate possessing the sole power oftrial. Six times only in our history has the Senate been resolvedinto a Court of Impeachment, and only twice—in the case of districtjudges—has there been a conviction. The earliest trial, more thana century ago, was that of a supreme justice, Chase of Maryland.Apart from the high official position of the accused, and the augusttribunal before which he was arraigned, this trial is ofhistoric interest from the fact that it involved the once famousAlien and Sedition Laws; that John Randolph was chief of the managerson the part of the House; Pinckney, Martin, and William Wirt ofcounsel for the defence; and Vice-President Aaron Burr, the presidingofficer of the court.

The trial of Belknap, Secretary of War, is still within the memoryof many. As a member of the House, I attended it from the beginning.It appearing from the evidence that Belknap had resigned his officebefore the presentation of the articles of impeachment, he wasacquitted. The fate of General Belknap was indeed a sad one, thatof a hitherto honorable career suddenly terminated under a cloud.Morally guiltless himself, his chivalric assumption of responsibilityfor the act of one near to him, and his patiently abiding theconsequence, has invested with something of pathos, and even romance,the memory of his trial.

An impeachment that has left its deep impress upon history, andbefore which all others pale into insignificance, was that ofPresident Johnson, charged by the House of Representatives withthe commission of "high crimes and misdemeanors." He had beenelected to the second place upon the ticket with Mr. Lincoln in1864, and upon the death of the latter, succeeded to the Presidency.Radical differences with the majority in the Congress, upon questionsvital and far-reaching, ultimately culminated in the presentation ofarticles of impeachment. Partisan feeling was at its height,and the excitement throughout the country intense. The trialwas protracted for many weeks without jot or tittle of abatementin the public interest. The chief managers on the part of theHouse were Benjamin F. Butler and Thaddeus Stevens. The arrayof counsel for the accused included the names of Benjamin R. Curtis,Henry Stanberry, and William M. Evarts. The Senate, in its highcharacter of a court, was presided over for the first and only timeby the Chief Justice of the United States. The trial was conductedwith marked decorum; every phase of questions touching the exerciseof executive authority, or lawful discretion, was fully discussed,the very springs of legislative power, and its limitation underConstitutional government, were laid bare—all with an eloquenceunparalleled save only in the wondrous efforts of Sheridan, Fox,and Burke in the historic impeachment of Warren Hastings beforethe British House of Lords. The spectacle presented was onethat challenged the attention and wonder of the nations; that ofthe chief magistrate of a great republic at the bar of justice,calmly awaiting judgment without popular disturbance or attempted revolt,under the safeguards of law and its appointments. The highest testof the virtue of our system of representative government, and ofthe unfaltering devotion of our people to its prescribed methods, isto be found in the fact, that during the protracted trial thevarious departments proceeded with wonted regularity; the verdict ofthe Senate was acquiesced in without manifestation of hostility;partisan passion soon abated and the great impeachment peaceablyrelegated to the domain of history.

The House of Representatives has an official life of short duration.Its reorganization is biennial. The Senate is enduring. Alwaysorganized, it is the continuing body of our national legislature.Its members change, but the Senate continues the same now, as inthe first hour of the Republic.

In his last great speech in the Senate, Mr. Webster said:

"It is fortunate that there is a Senate of the United States; abody not yet moved from its propriety, not lost to a full sense ofits own dignity and its own high responsibilities, and a body towhich the country looks with confidence for wise, moderate, patriotic,and healing counsels."

Upon the first assembling of the Senate in its present magnificentchamber nearly half a century ago, the Vice-President closed hiseloquent dedicatory address with the words:

"Though these marble walls moulder into ruins, the Senate in anotherage may bear into a new and larger chamber the Constitution vigorousand inviolate, and the last generation of posterity shall witness thedeliberations of the representatives of American States stillunited, prosperous, and free."

VIA TRIBUTE TO LINCOLN

THE WRITER'S SPEECH AT THE LINCOLN CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION, 1909—PATRIOTIC CHARACTER OF THE MEETING—LEADING HISTORICAL EVENTSBETWEEN 1809 AND 1909—BIRTH OF LINCOLN—TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION OFILLINOIS—BIRTH OF DARWIN AND GLADSTONE—CAREER OF NAPOLEON—WAROF 1812—THE SLAVERY QUESTION—SEIZURE AND SURRENDER OF MASONAND SLIDELL—EMANCIPATION OF SLAVES.

February 12, 1909, will long be remembered as the day of thecelebration of the hundredth anniversary of the birth of AbrahamLincoln. For on that day was the culmination of a celebrationwhich, in various parts of the country, had begun at least aweek before. Rarely has there been an occasion of so much decoration,so many addresses, or so much patriotism. The largest celebrationoccurred in New York City, but that of Chicago, if not so large,was at least as interesting and impressive, for in it and surroundingparts of Illinois some of the most memorable events in the life ofLincoln took place. Yet these manifestations were not a whit morepatriotic than those of many small towns and villages.

Every hamlet, every town, and every city of the United States seemedto be imbued with a desire to do honor to the memory of the manLincoln. Every newspaper and every magazine of whatever name ororder was filled with pictures, anecdotes, and sketches of the lifeof "Honest Abe." Books galore were published emphasizing everyphase of his life, character, work, and influence; and they soldwell.

My contribution to this occasion was the following speech deliveredat Bloomington, Illinois, February 12:

"We have assembled to commemorate one of the epoch-making eventsin history. In the humblest of homes in the wilds of a new andsparsely settled State, Abraham Lincoln was born one hundred yearsago, this day.

"The twelfth day of February, like the twenty-second day of thesame month, is one of the sacred days in the American calendar.It is well that this day be set apart from ordinary uses, theheadlong rush in the crowded mart suspended, the voice of fiercecontention in legislative halls be hushed, and that the Americanpeople—whether at home, in foreign lands, or upon the deep—honorthemselves by honoring the memory of the man of whose birth thisday is the first centennial.

"This coming together is no idle ceremony, no unmeaning observance.To this man, more than to any other, are we indebted for the supremefact that ninety millions of people are at this hour, in the loftiestsense of the expression, fellow-citizens of a common country. Someof us, through the mists of half a century, distinctly recallthe earnest tones in which Mr. Lincoln in public speech utteredthe words, 'My fellow-citizens.' Truly the magical words'fellow-citizens' never fail to touch a responsive chord in thepatriotic heart. Was it the gifted Prentiss who at a criticalmoment of our history exclaimed:

"'For whether upon the Sabine or the St. John's; standing inthe shadow of Bunker Hill or amid the ruins of Jamestown; nearthe great northern lakes or within the sound of the Father ofWaters flowing unvexed to the sea; in the crowded mart of thegreat metropolis or upon the western verge of the continent,where the restless tide of emigration is stayed only by theocean—everywhere upon this broad domain, thank God, I can stillsay "fellow-citizens"!'

"Let us pause for a moment and briefly note some of the marvellousresults wrought out by the toil, strife, and sacrifice of thecentury whose close we commemorate. The Year of Our Lord 1809 wasone of large place in history. The author of the Declaration ofIndependence was upon the eve of final retirement from public place,and the Presidential term of James Madison just beginning, when ina log cabin near the western verge of civilization the eyes ofAbraham Lincoln first opened upon the world. The vast areastretching from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean was underthe dominion of Spain. Two decades only had passed since theestablishment of the United States Government under the FederalConstitution, and the inauguration of Washington as its firstPresident. Lewis and Clark had but recently returned from the nowhistoric expedition to the Columbia and the Oregon,—an expeditionfraught with momentous consequences to the oncoming generations ofthe Republic. Only five years had passed since President Jeffersonhad purchased, for fifteen millions of dollars from NapoleonBonaparte, the Louisiana country, extending from the Gulf of Mexicoto the frozen lakes, out of which were to be carved sixteenmagnificent States to become enduring parts of the AmericanRepublic. From the early Colonial settlements that fringed theAtlantic, a tide of hardy emigration was setting in to the westward,and, regardless of privation or danger, laying the sure foundationof future commonwealths. Four States only had been admitted into theFederal Union, and the population of the entire country was lessthan that of the State of New York to-day. This same year witnessedthe first organization of Illinois into a distinct politicalcommunity and its creation, by act of Congress, as the Territoryof Illinois, with a white population less than one-twentieth ofthat of this good county to-day. The United States havingbarely escaped a war with France,—our ally in securing ourindependence,—was earnestly struggling for distinct place amongthe nations.

"No less significant, and fraught with deep consequences, wereevents occurring in the Old Worlds. The year 1809 witnessed thebirth of Darwin and Gladstone. The despotism of the Dark Agesstill brooded over Continental Europe, and whatever savored ofpopular public rule—even in its mildest form—was yet in thedistant future. Alexander the First was on the throne of Russia,—and her millions of serfs were oppressed as by the iron hand ofthe Caesars. The splendid German Empire of to-day had no place onthe map of the world; its present powerful constituencies wereantagonistic provinces and warring independent cities. NapoleonBonaparte—'calling Fate into the lists'—by a succession ofvictories unparalleled in history had overturned thrones, compelledkings upon bended knee to sue for peace, and substituted thoseof his own household for dynasties that reached back the entirelength of human history. With his star still in the ascendant,disturbed by no forecast of the horrid nightmare of the retreatfrom Moscow, 'with legions scattered by the artillery of the snowsand the cavalry of the winds,' tortured by no dream of Leipsic, ofElba, of Waterloo, of St. Helena, he was still the 'man of destiny,'—relentlessly pursuing the ignis fatuus of universal empire.

"The year that witnessed the birth of Abraham Lincoln witnessedthe gathering of the disturbing elements that were to precipitate thesecond war with the mother country. England—with George the Thirdstill upon the throne—by insulting and cruel search of Americanvessels upon the high seas, was rendering inevitable the declarationof war by Congress,—a war of humiliation upon our part by thedisgraceful surrender of Hull at Detroit and the wanton burning ofour Capitol, but crowned with honor by the naval victories ofLawrence, Decatur, and Perry, and eventually terminated by thecapture of the British army at New Orleans. As an object lessonof the marvels of the closing century, an event of such momentousconsequence to the world as the formulation of the Treaty of Ghent,by which peace was restored between England and America, would to-daybe known at every fireside a few hours after its occurrence. And yet,within the now closing century, the battle of New Orleans was foughttwenty-three days after the Treaty of Ghent, coming by slow-sailingvessels across the Atlantic, had received the signature of ourcommissioners; all unsettled accounts squared eternally between Americaand Great Britain; and the United States, by valor no less than bydiplomacy, exalted to honored and enduring place among the nations.

"The fifty-six years that compassed the life of Abraham Lincolnwere years of transcendent significance to our country. Whilehe was yet in his rude cradle the African slave trade had justterminated by constitutional inhibition. While Lincoln was still inattendance upon the old field school, Henry Clay—yet to be known asthe 'great pacificator'—was pressing the admission of Missouriinto the Union under the first compromise upon the question ofslavery since the adoption of the Federal Constitution. Fromthe establishment of the Government the question of humanslavery was the one perilous question,—the one constant menace tonational unity, until its final extinction amid the flames of war.Marvellous to man are the purposes of the Almighty. What seercould have foretold that, from this humblest of homes upon thefrontier, was to spring the man who at the crucial moment shouldcut the Gordian knot, liberate a race, and give to the ages enlargedand grander conception of the deathless principles of the declarationof human rights?

"'Often do the spirits of great events
Stride on before the events,
And in to-day already walks to-morrow.'

"The first inauguration of President Lincoln noted the hour ofbreaking with the past. It was a period of gloom, when the veryfoundations were shaken, when no man could foretell the happening ofthe morrow, when strong men trembled at the possibility of thedestruction of our Government.

"Pause a moment, and recall the man who, under the conditionsmentioned, on the fourth of March, 1861, entered upon the dutiesof the great office to which he had been chosen. He came from thecommon walks of life—from what, in other countries, would be calledthe great middle class. His early home was one of the humblest,where he was a stranger to the luxuries and to many of the ordinarycomforts of life. His opportunities for education were only such aswere common in the remote habitations of our Western country onecentury ago.

"Under such conditions, began a career which in grandeur andachievement has but a single counterpart in our history. And whata splendid commentary this upon our free institutions,—upon thesublime underlying principle of popular government! How inspiringto the youth of high aims every incident of the pathway that ledfrom the frontier cabin to the Executive Mansion,—from the humblestposition to the most exalted yet attained by man! In no othercountry than ours could such attainment have been possible for theboy whose hands were inured to toil, whose bread was eaten underthe hard conditions that poverty imposes, whose only heritagewas brain, integrity, lofty ambition, and indomitable purpose.Let it never be forgotten that the man of whom I speak possessedan integrity that could know no temptation, a purity of life that wasnever questioned, a patriotism that no sectional lines could limit,and a fixedness of purpose that knew no shadow of turning.

"The decade extending from our first treaty of peace with GreatBritain to the inauguration of Washington has been truly denominatedthe critical period of our history. The eloquence of Adams andHenry had precipitated revolution; the unfaltering courage ofWashington and his comrades had secured independence; but the moredifficult task of garnering up the fruits of victory by stablegovernment was yet to be achieved. The hour for the constructivestatesman had arrived, and James Madison and his associates, equal tothe great emergency, formulated the Federal Constitution.

"No less critical was the period that bounded the active life ofthe man whose memory we honor to-day. One perilous question tonational unity which for nearly three-quarters of a century hadbeen the subject of repeated compromise by patriotic statesmen;the apple of discord producing sectional antagonism, whose shadow haddarkened our national pathway from the beginning,—was now for wealor woe to find determination. Angry debate in the Senate and uponthe forum was now hushed, and the supreme question that took hold ofnational life was to find enduring arbitrament in the dread tribunalof war.

"It was well that in such an hour, with such tremendous issuesin the balance, a steady hand was at the helm; that a conservativestatesman—one whose mission was to save, not to destroy—was inthe high place of responsibility and power. It booted little thenthat he was untaught of schools, unskilled in the ways of courts, butit was of supreme moment that he could touch responsive chordsin the great American heart, all-important that his very soulyearned for the preservation of the Government established throughthe toil and sacrifice of the generation that had gone. Howhopeless the Republic in that dark hour, had its destiny hung uponthe statecraft of Talleyrand, the eloquence of Mirabeau, or thegenius of Napoleon! It was fortunate indeed that the ark of ourcovenant was then borne by the plain, brave man of conciliatoryspirit and kind words, whose heart, as Emerson has said, 'was aslarge as the world, but nowhere had room for the memory of a wrong.'

"Nobler words have never fallen from human lips than the closingsentences of his first inaugural uttered on one of the pivotal daysof human history, immediately after taking the oath to preserve,protect, and defend his country:

"'I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. Thoughpassion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield andpatriot's grave to every heart and hearthstone of this broad land,will yet swell the chorus of the Union when touched as they willbe by the better angels of our nature.'

"In the light of what we now know so well, nothing is hazardedin saying that the death of no man has been to his country soirreparable a loss, or one so grievous to be borne, as that ofAbraham Lincoln. When Washington died his work was done, his lifewell rounded out. Save one, the years allotted had been passed.Not so with Lincoln. To him a grander task was yet in waiting,one no other could so well perform. The assassin's pistol proved theveritable Pandora's box from which sprung evils untold,—whoseconsequences have never been measured.—to one-third of the Statesof our Union. But for his untimely death how the current of historymight have been changed,—and many a sad chapter remained unwritten!How earnestly he desired a restored Union, and that the blessings ofpeace and of concord should be the common heritage of every section,is known to all.

"When in the loom of time have such words been heard above the dinof fierce conflict as his sublime utterances but a brief time beforehis tragic death—

"'With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmnessin the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive onto finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds; tocare for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widowand his orphan, to do all which may achieve a lasting peaceamong ourselves, and with all nations.'

"No fitter occasion than this can ever arise in which to referto two historical events that at crucial moments tested to theutmost the safe and far-seeing statesmanship of President Lincoln.The first was the seizure upon the high seas of Mason and Slidell,the accredited representatives from the Southern Confederacy tothe courts of England and France, respectively. The seizure wasin November, 1861, by Captain Wilkes of our navy; and the envoysnamed were taken by him from the Trent, a mail-carrying steamer ofthe British Government. The act of Captain Wilkes met withenthusiastic commendation throughout the entire country; he wasvoted the thanks of Congress, and his act publicly approved by theSecretary of the Navy.

"The demand by the British government for reparation upon the partof the United States was prompt and explicit. The perils that thenenvironed us were such as rarely shadow the pathway of nations.Save Russia alone, our Government had no friend among the crowned headsof Europe. Menaced by the peril of the recognition of the SouthernConfederacy by England and France, with the very stars apparently warringagainst us in their courses, the position of the President wasin the last degree trying. To surrender the Confederate envoyswas in a measure humiliating and in opposition to the popularimpulse; their retention, the signal for the probable recognition ofthe Southern Confederacy by the European powers, and the certainand immediate declaration of war by England.

"The good genius of President Lincoln—rather his wise, just,far-seeing statesmanship—stood him well in hand at the criticalmoment. Had a rash and impulsive man then held the executiveoffice, what a sea of troubles might have overwhelmed us! How theentire current of our history might have been changed!

"The calm, wise President, in his council chamber, aided by hisclosest official adviser, Secretary Seward, discerned clearlythe path of national safety and of honor. None the less was theact of the President one of justice, one that will abide thesure test of time. Upon the real ground that the seizure of theenvoys was in violation of the Law of Nations, they were eventuallysurrendered, and war with England, as well as the immediate dangerof recognition of the Confederacy, averted. Let it not be forgottenthat this very act of President Lincoln was a triumphant vindicationof our Government in its second war with Great Britain—a war wagedas a protest on our part against British seizure and impressmentof American citizens upon the high seas.

"The other incident, to which I briefly refer, was the proclamationof emancipation. As a war measure of stupendous significance inthe national defence, as well as of justice to the enslaved,such proclamation, immediate in time and radical in terms, hadto greater or less degree been urged upon the President from theoutbreak of the Rebellion. That slavery was to perish amid thegreat upheaval became in time the solemn conviction of all thoughtfulmen. Meanwhile there were divided counsels among the earnestsupporters of the President as to the time the masterful act 'thatcould know no backward steps' should be taken. Unmoved amid dividedcounsels, and at times fierce dissensions, the calm, far-seeingexecutive, upon whom was cast the tremendous responsibility,patiently bided his time. Events that are now the masterful themeof history crowded in rapid succession, the opportune moment arrived,the hour struck, the proclamation that has no counterpart fell uponthe ears of the startled world, and, as by the interposition of amightier hand, a race was lifted out of the depths of bondage.

"To the one man at the helm it seemed to have been given to knowthe day and the hour. At the crucial moment, in one of the exalteddays of human history,

"'He sounded forth the trumpet that has never called retreat.'

"The men who knew Abraham Lincoln, who saw him face to face, whoheard his voice in public assemblage, have with few exceptionspassed to the grave. Another generation is upon the busy stage.The book has forever closed upon the dreadful pageant of civilstrife. Sectional animosities, thank God, belong now only tothe past. The mantle of Peace is over our entire land, and prosperitywithin our borders.

"'The war-drum throbs no longer,
And the battle flags are furled
In the parliament of men,
The federation of the world.'

"Through the instrumentality, in no small measure, of the man whosememory we now honor, the Government established by our fathers,untouched by the finger of Time, has descended to us. Theresponsibility of its preservation and transmission rests upon thesuccessive generations as they come and go. To-day, at thisauspicious hour sacred to the memory of Lincoln, let us, hiscountrymen, inspired by the sublime lessons of his wondrous life, andgrateful to God for all He has vouchsafed to our fathers and to usin the past, take courage and turn our faces resolutely, hopefully,trustingly to the future. I know of no words more fitting withwhich to close this humble tribute to the memory of Abraham Lincoln,than those inscribed upon the monument of Moliere:

"'Nothing was wanting to his glory; he was wanting to
ours.'"

VIISTEPHEN A. DOUGLAS

DOUGLAS'S HARDSHIPS IN YOUTH—HE IS ADMITTED TO THE BAR—JACKSON'STRIUMPH OVER ADAMS IN 1828—DOUGLAS ENTERS THE ARENA OF DEBATEAT THE AGE OF 22—BECOMES ATTORNEY-GENERAL—CHOSEN TO THE TENTHGENERAL ASSEMBLY OF ILLINOIS—BECOMES SECRETARY OF STATE IN ILLINOIS—DEFENDS JACKSON'S DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW AT NEW ORLEANS—TAKES PART IN THE OREGON BOUNDARY DEBATE—ADVOCATES THE ANNEXATIONOF TEXAS—IS ELECTED TO THE SENATE—ADVOCATES THE ADMISSION OFCALIFORNIA AS A FREE STATE—HE PROCURES A LAND GRANT TO THE ILLINOISCENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY—IN DEBATING THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA BILLHE CONTENDS FOR POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY—ORIGIN OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY—DOUGLAS LOSES THE FRIENDSHIP OF THE SOUTH—DEBATES BETWEEN DOUGLASAND LINCOLN—LINCOLN'S EARLY HISTORY—DOUGLAS'S REASONS FORADVOCATING POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY—LINCOLN'S REPLY—THE SLAVERY QUESTION—THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY RENT ASUNDER—CONSEQUENT FAILURE OF DOUGLASTO WIN THE PRESIDENCY—HIS DEATH.

History has been defined, "the sum of the biographies of a fewstrong men." Much that is of profound and abiding interest inAmerican history during the two decades immediately precedingour Civil War is bound up in the biography of the strong man ofwhom I write. Chief among the actors, his place was near the middleof the stage during that eventful and epoch-making period.

Stephen A. Douglas was born in Brandon, Vermont, April 23, 1813,and died in Chicago, Illinois, June 3, 1861. Between the datesgiven lie the years that up a crowded, eventful life. Left pennilessby the death of his father, he was at a tender age dependent upon hisown exertions for maintenance and education. At the age of fifteenhe apprenticed himself to a cabinet-maker in the town of Middleburyin his native State. Naturally of delicate organization, he wasunable long to endure the physical strain of this calling, andat the close of two years' service he returned to his early home.Entering an academy in Brandon, he there for a time pursued withreasonable diligence the studies preparatory to a higher course.Supplementing the education thus acquired, by a brief course ofstudy in an academy at Canandaigua, New York, at the age of twentyhe turned his footsteps westward.

One of his biographers says:

"It is doubtful if among all the thousands who in those early dayswere constantly faring westward from New England, Virginia, andthe Carolinas, there ever was a youth more resolutely and boldlyaddressed to opportunity than he. Penniless, broken in health,almost diminutive in physical stature, and unknown, he made hisway successively to Cincinnati, Louisville, and St. Louis, in searchof employment, literally of bread."

By a sudden turn in fortune's wheel his lot was cast in CentralIllinois, where his first vocation was that of teacher of a villageschool. Yet later—after laborious application—admitted to thebar, he courageously entered upon his marvellous career.

His home was Jacksonville, and to the hardy pioneers of Morgan andneighboring counties, it was soon revealed that notwithstandinghis slight stature and boyish appearance the youthful Douglas was atonce to be taken fully into the account. Self-reliant to the veryverge, he unhesitatingly entered the arena of active professional andpolitical strife with foemen worthy the steel of veterans at thebar, and upon the hustings.

The issues were sharply drawn between the two political partiesthen struggling for ascendancy, and Central Illinois was the home ofas brilliant an array of gifted leaders as the Whig party at anytime in its palmiest days had known. Hardin, Stuart, Browning,Logan, Baker, Lincoln were just then upon the threshold of careersthat have given their names honored and enduring place upon thepages of our history. Into the safe keeping of the leaders justnamed, were entrusted in large degree the advocacy of the principlesof the now historic party, and the political fortunes of its greatchieftain, Henry Clay.

As is well known, the principal antagonist of the renowned Whigchieftain was Andrew Jackson. Earlier in their political careers,both had been earnest supporters of the administration of PresidentMonroe, but at its close the leaders last named, with Adams andCrawford, were aspirants to the great office. No candidate receivinga majority of the electoral votes and the selection by Constitutionalrequirement devolving upon the House of Representatives, Mr. Adamswas eventually chosen. His election over his principal competitor,General Jackson, was largely through the influence of Mr. Clay;and the subsequent acceptance by the latter of the office ofSecretary of State gave rise to the unfounded but vehement cryof "Bargain and corruption," which followed the Kentucky statesmanthrough two presidential struggles of later periods, and died whollyaway only when the clods had fallen upon his grave.

Triumphant in his candidacy over Adams in 1828, President Jackson,four years later, encountered as his formidable competitor hiscolossal antagonist—the one man for whom he had no forgiveness,even when the shadows were gathering about his own couch.

"The early and better days of the Republic" is by no means anunusual expression in the political literature of our day. Possiblyall the generations of men have realized the significance of thewords of the great bard:

"Past and to come seem best;
Things present worst.
We are time's subjects."

And yet, barring the closing months of the administration of theelder Adams, this country has known no period of more intense partypassion, or of more deadly feuds among political leaders, than wasmanifested during the presidential contest of 1832. The Whig party,with Henry Clay as its candidate and its idol, was for the firsttime in the field. Catching something of the spirit of its imperiousleader, its campaign was recklessly aggressive. The scabbard wasthrown away, and all the lines of retreat cut off from the beginning.No act of the party in power escaped the lime-light; no delinquency,real or imaginary, of Jackson—its candidate for re-election—but was ruthlessly drawn into the open day. Even the domestichearthstone was invaded and antagonisms engendered that knew nosurcease until the last of the chief participants in theeventful struggle had descended to the tomb.

The defeat of Clay but intensified his hostility toward his successfulrival, and with a following that in personal devotion to its leaderhas scarcely known a parallel, he was at once the peerless frontof a powerful opposition to the Jackson administration.

Such were the existing political conditions throughout the countrywhen Stephen A. Douglas, at the age of twenty-two, first enteredthe arena of debate. It would not be strange if such environment leftits deep impress, and measurably gave direction to his politicalcareer. The period of probation and training so essential toordinary men was unneeded by him. Fully equipped—and with aself-confidence that has rarely had a counterpart—he was from thebeginning the earnest defender of the salient measures of theDemocratic administration, and the aggressive champion of PresidentJackson. Absolutely fearless, he took no reckoning of the opposingforces, and regardless of the prowess or ripe experience ofadversaries, he at all times, in and out of season, gladly welcomedthe encounter. To this end, he did not await opportunities, buteagerly sought them.

His first contest for public office was with John J. Hardin, by nomeans the least gifted of the brilliant Whig leaders alreadymentioned. Defeated by Douglas in his candidacy for re-electionto the office of Attorney General, Colonel Hardin at a later dayachieved distinction as a Representative in Congress, and at theearly age of thirty-seven fell while gallantly leading his regimentupon the bloody field of Buena Vista. In the catalogue of menworthy of remembrance, there is to be found the name of no braver,manlier man, than that of John J. Hardin.

With well-earned laurels as public prosecutor, Douglas resigned,after two years' incumbency of that office, to accept that ofRepresentative in the State Legislature. The Tenth General Assembly—to which he was chosen—was the most notable in Illinois history.Upon the roll of members of the House—in the old Capitol at Vandalia—are names inseparably associated with the history of the Stateand the nation. From its list were yet to be chosen two Governorsof the commonwealth, one member of the Cabinet, three Justicesof the Supreme Court of the State, eight Representatives in Congress,six Senators, and one President of the United States. Thatwould indeed be a notable assemblage of law-makers in any country ortime, that included in its membership McClernand, Edwards,Ewing, Semple, Logan, Hardin, Browning, Shields, Baker, Stuart,Douglas, and Lincoln.

In this assembly, Douglas encountered in impassioned debate, possiblyfor the first time, two men against whom in succession he was soonto be opposed upon the hustings as candidate for Congress; andlater as an aspirant to yet more exalted stations, another, withwhose name—now "given to the ages"—his own is linked inseparablyfor all time.

The most brilliant and exciting contest for the national Houseof Representatives the State has known—excepting possibly that ofCook and McLean a decade and a half earlier—was that of 1838between John T. Stuart and Stephen A. Douglas. They were therecognized champions of their respective parties. The districtembraced two-thirds of the area of the State, extending from thecounties immediately south of Sangamon and Morgan, northward toLake Michigan and the Wisconsin line. Together on horseback, oftenacross unbridged streams, and through pathless forest and prairie,they journeyed, holding joint debates in all the county seats ofthe district—including the then villages of Jacksonville, Springfield,Peoria, Pekin, Bloomington, Quincy, Joliet, Galena, and Chicago.That the candidates were well matched in ability and eloquencereadily appears from the fact that after an active canvass ofseveral months, Major Stuart was elected by a majority of but eightvotes. By re-elections he served six years in the House ofRepresentatives and was one of its ablest and most valuable members.In Congress, he was the political friend and associate ofCrittenden, Winthrop, Clay, and Webster. Major Stuart lives in mymemory as a splendid type of the Whig statesman of the Golden Age.Courteous and kindly, he was at all times a Kentucky gentlemanof the old school if ever one trod this blessed earth.

Returning to the bar after his defeat for Congress, Douglas was,in quick succession, Secretary of State by appointment of theGovernor, and Judge of the Circuit and Supreme Courts by election bythe Legislature. The courts he held as nisi prius judge were inthe Quincy circuit, and the last-named city for a time his home.His associates upon the Supreme Bench were Justices Treat, Caton, Ford,Wilson, Scates, and Lockwood. His opinions, twenty-one in number,will be found in Scammon's Reports. There was little in any ofthe causes submitted to test fully his capacity as lawyer orlogician. Enough, however, appears from his clear and concisestatements and arguments to justify the belief that had his lifebeen unreservedly given to the profession of the law, histalents concentrated upon the mastery of its eternal principles,he would in the end have been amply rewarded "by that mistress whois at the same time so jealous and so just." This, however, wasnot to be, and to a field more alluring his footsteps were nowturned. Abandoning the bench to men less ambitious, he was soonembarked upon the uncertain and delusive sea of politics.

His unsuccessful opponent for Congress in 1842 was the Hon. OrvilleH. Browning, with whom, in the State Legislature, he had measured swordsover a partisan resolution sustaining the financial policy ofPresident Jackson. "The whirligig of time brings in his revenges,"and it so fell out that near two decades later it was the fortune ofMr. Browning to occupy a seat in the Senate as the successor ofDouglas—"touched by the finger of death." At a later day, Mr.Browning, as a member of the Cabinet of President Johnson, acquittedhimself with honor in the discharge of the exacting duties ofSecretary of the Interior. So long as men of high aims, patriotichearts, and noble achievements are held in grateful remembrance,his name will have honored place in our country's annals.

The career upon which Douglas now entered was the one for which hewas pre-eminently fitted, and to which he had aspired from thebeginning. It was a career in which national fame was to beachieved, and—by re-elections to the House, and later to the Senate—to continue without interruption to the last hour of his life.He took his seat in the House of Representatives, December 5, 1843,and among his colleagues were Semple and Breese of the Senate, andHardin, McClernand, Ficklin, and Wentworth of the House. Mr.Stephens of Georgia,—with whom it was my good fortune to serve inthe forty-fourth and forty-sixth Congresses—told me that he enteredthe House the same day with Douglas, and that he distinctly recalledthe delicate and youthful appearance of the latter as he advanced tothe Speaker's desk to receive the oath of office. Conspicuousamong the leaders of the House in the twenty-eighth Congress wereHamilton Fish, Washington Hunt, Henry A. Wise, Howell Cobb, JoshuaR. Giddings, Linn Boyd, John Slidell, Barnwell Rhett, Robert C.Winthrop, the Speaker, Hannibal Hamlin, elected Vice-President uponthe ticket with Mr. Lincoln in 1860, Andrew Johnson, the successorof the lamented President in 1865, and John Quincy Adams, whosebrilliant career as Ambassador, Senator, Secretary of State, andPresident, was rounded out by nearly two decades of faithful serviceas a Representative in Congress.

The period that witnessed the entrance of Douglas into the greatCommons was an eventful one in our political history. John Tyler,upon the death of President Harrison, had succeeded to the greatoffice, and was in irreconcilable hostility to the leaders ofhis party upon the vital issues upon which the Whig victory of 1840had been achieved. Henry Clay—then at the zenith of his marvellouspowers—merciless in his arraignment of the Tyler administration, wasunwittingly breeding the party dissentions that eventually compassedhis own defeat in his last struggle for the Presidency. DanielWebster, regardless of the criticism of party associates, and afterthe retirement of his Whig colleagues from the Tyler cabinet, stillremained at the head of the State Department. His vindication, ifneeded, abundantly appears in the treaty by which our northeasternboundary was definitely adjusted, and war with England happilyaverted.

In the rush of events, party antagonisms, in the main, soon fadefrom remembrance. One, however, that did not pass with the occasion,but lingered even to the shades of the Hermitage, was unrelentinghostility to President Jackson. For his declaration of martial law inNew Orleans just prior to the battle—with which his own name isassociated for all time—General Jackson had been subjected to a heavyfine by a judge of that city. Repeated attempts in Congress looking tohis vindication and reimbursement, had been unavailing. Securing thefloor for the first time, Douglas—upon the anniversary of the greatvictory—delivered an impassioned speech in vindication of Jacksonwhich at once challenged the attention of the country, and gave him highplace among the great debaters of that memorable Congress. Inreply to the demand of an opponent for a precedent for the proposedlegislation, Douglas quickly responded:

"Possibly, sir, no case can be found on any page of American historywhere the commanding officer has been fined for an act absolutelynecessary to the salvation of his country. As to precedents, let us makeone now that will challenge the admiration of the world and stand thetest of all the ages."

After a graphic description of conditions existing in New Orleans atthe time of Jackson's declaration of martial law, "the city filledwith traitors, anxious to surrender; spies transmitting informationto the camp of the enemy, British regulars—four-fold the numberof the American defenders—advancing to the attack—in this terribleemergency, necessity became the paramount law, the responsibility wastaken, martial law declared, and a victory achieved unparalleledin the annals of war; a victory that avenged the infamy of thewanton burning of our nation's Capitol, fully, and for all time."

The speech was unanswered, the bill passed, and probably Douglasknew no prouder moment than when, a few months later, upon a visitto the Hermitage, he received the earnest thanks of the venerablecommander for his masterly vindication.

Two of the salient and far-reaching questions confronting thestatesmen of that eventful Congress pertained to the settlement ofthe Oregon boundary question, and to the annexation of the republicof Texas. The first-named question—left unsettled by the treaty ofGhent—had been for two generations the apple of discord betweenthe American and British governments. That it at a critical momentcame near involving the two nations in a war is a well-known factin history. The platform upon which Mr. Polk had, in 1844, beenelected to the Presidency, asserted unequivocally the right of theUnited States to the whole of the Oregon Territory. The boundary lineof "fifty-four-forty" was in many of the States the decisive partywatchword in that masterful contest.

Douglas, in full accord with his party upon this question, ablycanvassed Illinois in earnest advocacy of Mr. Polk's election.When, at a later day, it was determined by the President and hisofficial advisers to abandon the party platform demand of "fifty-fourdegrees and forty minutes" as the only settlement of thedisputed boundary, and accept that of the parallel of forty-ninedegrees—reluctantly proposed by Great Britain as a peaceable finalsettlement—Mr. Douglas earnestly antagonizing any concession, wasat once in opposition to the administration he had assisted tobring into power. Whether the part of wisdom was a strict adherenceto the platform dicta of "the whole of Oregon," or a reasonableconcession in the interest of peaceable adjustment of a dangerousquestion, was long a matter of vehement discussion. It suffices thatthe treaty with Great Britain establishing our northwestern boundaryupon the parallel last named was promptly ratified by the Senate, andthe once famous Oregon question peaceably relegated to the realmof history.

A question—sixty odd years ago—equal in importance with thatof the Oregon boundary was the annexation of Texas. The "Lone StarState" had been virtually an independent republic since the decisivevictory of General Houston over Santa Ana in 1837 at San Jacinto, andits independence as such had been acknowledged by our own andEuropean governments. The hardy settlers of this new Commonwealthwere in the main emigrants from the United States, and earnestlysolicitous of admission into the Federal Union. The question ofannexation entered largely into the Presidential canvass of 1844, andthe "lone star" upon Democratic banners was an important factor insecuring the triumph of Mr. Polk in that bitterly contestedelection. In the closing hours of the Tyler administration,annexation was at length effected by joint resolution of Congress,and Texas passed at once from an independent republic to a Stateof the American Union. This action of Congress, however, gave deepoffence to the Mexican government, and was the initial in a seriesof stirring events soon to follow. The Mexican invasion, thebrilliant victories won by American valor, and the treaty of peace—by which our domain was extended westward to the Pacific—constitute a thrilling chapter in the annals of war. Brief induration, the Mexican War was the training school for men whosemilitary achievements were yet to make resplendent the pages ofhistory. Under the victorious banners of the great commanders,Taylor and Scott, were Thomas and Beauregard, Shields and Hill,Johnston and Sherman, McClellan and Longstreet, Hancock and StonewallJackson, Lee and Grant. In the list of heroes were eight futurecandidates for the Presidency, three of whom—Taylor, Pierce,and Grant—were triumphantly elected.

Meanwhile, at the nation's Capitol was held high debate overquestions second in importance to none that have engaged the profoundconsideration of statesmen—that literally took hold of the issuesof war, conquest, diplomacy, peace, empire. From its inception,Douglas was an unfaltering advocate of the project of annexation, andas chairman of the Committee on Territories, bore prominent partin the protracted and exciting debates consequent upon the passageof that measure in the House of Representatives. In his celebratedcolloquy with Mr. Adams he contended that the joint resolutionhe advocated was in reality only for the re-annexation of territoryoriginally ours under the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. That somethingakin to the spirit of "manifest destiny" brooded over the discussionmay be gathered from the closing sentences of his speech:

"Our Federal system is admirably adapted to the whole continent;and while I would not violate the laws of national or treatystipulations, or in any manner tarnish the national honor, I wouldexert all legal and honorable means to drive Great Britain and thelast vestige of royal authority from the continent of North America,and extend the limits of the republic from ocean to ocean."

Elected to the Senate at the age of thirty-four, Douglas tookhis seat in that august body in December, 1847. On the same dayAbraham Lincoln took the oath of office as a member from Illinois inthe House of Representatives. The Senate was presided over by theable and accomplished Vice-President, George M. Dallas. Seldomhas there been a more imposing list of great names than that whichnow included the young Senator from Illinois. Conspicuous amongthe Senators of the thirty States represented, were Dix of NewYork, Dayton of New Jersey, Hale of New Hampshire, Clayton ofDelaware, Reverdy Johnson of Maryland, Mason of Virginia, Kingof Alabama, Davis of Mississippi, Bell of Tennessee, Corwin ofOhio, Crittenden of Kentucky, Breese of Illinois, Benton of Missouri,Houston of Texas, Calhoun of South Carolina, and Webster ofMassachusetts. It need hardly be said that the debates of thatand the immediately succeeding Congress have possibly never beensurpassed in ability and eloquence by any deliberative assembly.

The one vital and portentous question—in some one of its manyphases—was that of human slavery. This institution—until itsfinal extinction amid the flames of war—cast its ominous shadowover our nation's pathway from the beginning. From the establishmentof the Government under the Federal Constitution to the periodmentioned, it had been the constant subject of compromise andconcession.

Henry Clay was first known as "the great pacificator" by his tirelessefforts in the exciting struggle of 1820, over the admission ofMissouri—with its Constitution recognizing slavery—into theFederal Union. Bowed with the weight of years, the Kentuckystatesman, from the retirement he had sought, in recognition ofthe general desire of his countrymen, again returned to the theatreof his early struggles and triumphs. The fires of ambition hadburned low by age and bereavement, but with earnest longing thathe might again pour oil upon the troubled waters, he presentedto the Senate, as terms of final peaceable adjustment of the slaveryquestion, the once famous compromise measures of 1850.

The sectional agitation then at its height was measurably the resultof the proposed disposition of territory acquired by the then recenttreaty with Mexico. The advocates and opponents of slavery extensionwere at once in bitter antagonism, and the intensity of feelingsuch as the country had rarely known.

The compromise measures—proposed by Mr. Clay in a general bill—embraced the establishment of Territorial Governments for Utahand New Mexico, the settlement of the Texas boundary, an amendmentto the Fugitive Slave Law, and the admission of California as afree State. In entire accord with each proposition, Douglas had—bydirection of the Committee on Territories, of which he was thechairman—reported a bill providing for the immediate admission ofCalifornia under its recently adopted free State Constitution.Separate measures embracing the other propositions of the general billwere likewise duly reported. These measures were advocated by theIllinois Senator in a speech that at once won him recognized placeamong the great debaters of that illustrious assemblage. Aftermany weeks of earnest, at times vehement, debate, the bills in theform last mentioned were passed, and received the approval ofthe President. Apart from the significance of these measures asa peace offering to the country, their passage closed a memorable erain our history. During their discussion Clay, Calhoun, and Webster—"the illustrious triumvirate"—were heard for the last time inthe Senate. Greatest of the second generation of our statesmen,associated in the advocacy of measures that in the early day ofthe Republic had given us exalted place among the nations,within brief time of each other, "shattered by the contentionsof the Great Hall, they passed to the chamber of reconciliation andof silence."

Chief in importance of his public services to his State was thatof Senator Douglas in procuring from Congress a land grant to aid inthe construction of the Illinois Central Railroad. It is butjustice to the memory of his early colleague, Senator Breese, tosay that he had been the earnest advocate of a similar measure in aformer Congress. The bill, however, which after persistent oppositionfinally became a law, was introduced and warmly advocated by SenatorDouglas. This act ceded to the State of Illinois—subject tothe disposal of the Legislature thereof—"for the purpose of aidingin the construction of a railroad from the southern terminus ofthe Illinois and Michigan Canal to a point at or near the junctionof the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, with a branch of the same toChicago, and another to Dubuque, Iowa, every alternate sectionof land designated by even numbers for six sections in width oneach side of said road, and its branches." It is difficult at thisday to realize the importance of this measure to the then sparselysettled State. The grant in aggregate was near three million acres,and was directly to the State. After appropriate action by theState Legislature, the Illinois Central Railroad Company was dulyorganized—and the road eventually constructed.

A recent historian has truly said:

"For this, if for no other public service to his State, the nameof Douglas was justly entitled to preservation by the erectionof that splendid monumental column which, overlooking the bluewaters of Lake Michigan, also overlooks for long distance that ironhighway which was in no small degree the triumph of his legislativeforecast and genius."

The measure now to be mentioned aroused deeper attention—moreanxious concern—throughout the entire country than any with whichthe name of Douglas had yet been closely associated. It pertaineddirectly to slavery, the "bone of contention" between the Northand the South, the one dangerous quantity in our national politicsfrom the establishment of the Government. Beginning with itsrecognition—though not in direct terms—in the Federal Constitution,it had through two generations, in the interest of peace, been thesubject of repeated compromise.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories, Douglas in theearly days of 1854 reported a bill providing for the organization ofthe Territories of Nebraska and Kansas. This measure, which sosuddenly arrested public attention, is known in our politicalhistory as the "Kansas-Nebraska Bill." Among its provisions wasone repealing the Missouri Compromise or restriction of 1820. Theend sought by the repeal was, as stated by Douglas, to leave thepeople of said Territories respectively to determine the question ofthe introduction or exclusion of slavery for themselves; inother words, "to regulate their domestic institutions in their ownway, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."The principle strenuously contended for was that of "popularsovereignty" or non-intervention by Congress, in the affairs ofthe Territories. In closing the protracted and exciting debatejust prior to the passage of the bill in the Senate, he said:

"There is another reason why I desire to see this principle recognizedas a rule of action in all time to come. It will have the effect todestroy all sectional parties and sectional agitation. If youwithdraw the slavery question from the halls of Congress and thepolitical arena, and commit it to the arbitrament of those who areimmediately interested in and alone responsible for its consequences,there is nothing left out of which sectional parties can be organized.When the people of the North shall all be rallied under one banner,and the whole South marshalled under another banner, and eachsection excited to frenzy and madness by hostility to the institutionsof the other, then the patriot may well tremble for the perpetuityof the Union. Withdraw the slavery question from the politicalarena and remove it to the States and Territories, each to decide foritself, and such a catastrophe can never happen."

These utterances of little more than half a century ago, fallstrangely upon our ears at this day. In the light of all that hasoccurred in the long reach of years, how significant the words,"No man is wiser than events"! Likewise, "The actions of men are tobe judged by the light surrounding them at the time—not by theknowledge that comes after the fact." The immediate effect of thepassage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill was directly the reverse ofthat so confidently predicted by Douglas. The era of concordbetween the North and the South did not return. The slaveryquestion—instead of being relegated to the recently organizedTerritories for final settlement—at once assumed the dimensionsof a great national issue. The country at large—instead of asingle Territory—became the theatre of excited discussion. Thefinal determination was to be not that of a Territory, but ofthe entire people.

One significant effect of the passage of the bill was the immediatedisruption of the Whig party. As a great national organization—of which Clay and Webster had been eminent leaders, and Harrisonand Taylor successful candidates for the Presidency—it now passesinto history. Upon its ruins, the Republican party at once cameinto being. Under the leadership of Fremont as its candidate, andopposition by Congressional intervention to slavery extension asits chief issue, it was a formidable antagonist to the Democratic party,in the Presidential contest of 1856. Mr. Buchanan had defeatedDouglas in the nominating convention of his party that year.His absence from the country as Minister to England, during theexciting events just mentioned, it was thought would make him asafer candidate than his chief competitor, Douglas. He had beenin no manner identified with the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, or the stormyevents which immediately followed its passage. In his letter ofacceptance, however, Mr. Buchanan had given his unqualified approvalof his party platform, which recognized and adopted "the principlecontained in the organic law establishing the Territories of Nebraskaand Kansas as embodying the only sound and safe solution of theslavery question." Upon the principle here declared, issue wasjoined by his political opponents, and the battle fought to thebitter end.

Although Douglas had met personal defeat in his aspiration tothe Presidency, the principle of non-intervention by Congress inthe affairs of the Territories, for which he had so earnestlycontended, had been triumphant both in the convention of the party,and at the polls. This principle, in its application to Kansas,was soon to be put to the test. From its organization, thatTerritory had been a continuous scene of disorder, often of violence.In rapid succession three Governors appointed by the President hadresigned and departed the Territory, each confessing his inabilityto maintain public order. The struggle for mastery between theFree State advocates and their adversaries arrested the attention ofthe entire country. It vividly recalled the bloody forays read ofin the old chronicles of hostile clans upon the Scottish border.

The parting of the ways between Senator Douglas and PresidentBuchanan was now reached. The latter had received the cordialsupport of Douglas in the election which elevated him to thePresidency. His determined opposition to the re-election of Douglasbecame apparent as the Senatorial canvass progressed. The incidentsnow to be related will explain this hostility, as well as bring tothe front one of the distinctive questions upon which much stress waslaid in the subsequent debates between Douglas and Lincoln.

A statesman of national reputation, the Hon. Robert J. Walker, wasat length appointed Governor of Kansas. During his brief administrationa convention assembled without his co-operation at Lecompton,and formulated a Constitution under which application was soon madefor the admission of Kansas into the Union. This convention wasin part composed of non-residents, and in no sense reflected thewishes of the majority of the bona fide residents of the Territory.The salient feature of the Constitution was that establishingslavery. The Constitution was not submitted to the conventionto popular vote, but in due time forwarded to the President, andby him laid before Congress, accompanied by a recommendation forits approval, and the early admission of the new State into theUnion.

When the Lecompton Constitution came before the Senate, it at onceencountered the formidable opposition of Senator Douglas. Inunmeasured terms he denounced it as fraudulent, as antagonistic tothe wishes of the people of Kansas, and subversive of the basicprinciple upon which the Territory had been organized. In theattitude just assumed, Douglas at once found himself in linewith the Republicans, and in opposition to the administration hehad helped place in power. The breach thus created was destinedto remain unhealed. Moreover, his declaration of hostility to theLecompton Constitution was the beginning of the end of years ofclose political affiliation with Southern Democratic statesmen.From that moment Douglas lost prestige as a national leader of hisparty. In more than one-half of the Democratic States he ceased tobe regarded as a probable or even possible candidate for thePresidential succession. The hostility thus engendered followedhim to the Charleston convention of 1860, and throughout the excitingPresidential contest which followed. But the humiliation of defeat—brought about, as he believed, by personal hostility to himself—was yet in the future. In the attempted admission of Kansas underthe Lecompton Constitution, Douglas was triumphant over theadministration and his former political associates from the South.Under what was known as the "English Amendment," the obnoxiousConstitution was referred to the people of Kansas, and by themoverwhelmingly rejected.

The close of this controversy in the early months of 1858 leftDouglas in a position of much embarrassment. He had incurredthe active hostility of the President, and in large measure of hisadherents, without gaining the future aid of his late associatesin the defeat of the Lecompton Constitution. His Senatorial term wasnearing its close, and his political life depended upon hisre-election. With a united and aggressive enemy, ably led, in hisfront; his own party hopelessly divided—one faction seeking hisdefeat—it can readily be seen that his political pathway was by nomeans one of peace. Such, in brief outline, were the politicalconditions when, upon the adjournment of Congress, Douglas returnedto Illinois in July, 1858, and made public announcement of hiscandidacy for re-election.

In his speech at Springfield, June 17, accepting the nomination ofhis party for the Senate, Mr. Lincoln had uttered the words which havesince become historic. They are quoted at length, as they soonfurnished the text for his severe arraignment by Douglas in debate.The words are:

"We are now far into this fifth year since a policy was initiatedwith the avowed object and confident promise of putting an endto slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, thatagitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented.In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have beenreached and passed. 'A house divided against itself cannot stand.'I believe this country cannot endure permanently half slave andhalf free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do notexpect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to bedivided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Eitherthe opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of itand place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief thatit is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocateswill push it forward until it shall become alike lawful in all theStates, old as well as new, North as well as South."

This, at the time, was a bold utterance, and, it was believed bymany, would imperil Mr. Lincoln's chances for election. Mr. Blainein his "Twenty Years of Congress," says:

"Mr. Lincoln had been warned by intimate friends to whom he hadcommunicated the contents of his speech in advance of its delivery,that he was treading on dangerous ground, that he would bemisinterpreted as a disunionist, and that he might fatally damage theRepublican party by making its existence synonymous with a destructionof the Government."

The opening speech of Senator Douglas at Chicago a few days later—sounding the keynote of his campaign—was in the main an arraignmentof his opponent for an attempt to precipitate an internecineconflict, and array in deadly hostility the North against the South.He said:

"In other words, Mr. Lincoln advocates boldly and clearly a war ofsections, a war of the North against the South, of the freeStates against the slave States—a war of extermination—to becontinued relentlessly until the one or the other shall be subdued,and all the States shall either become free or become slave."

The two speeches, followed by others of like tenor, aroused publicinterest in the State as it had never been before. The desireto hear the candidates from the same platform became general. Theproposal for a joint debate came from Mr. Lincoln on July 24 andwas soon thereafter accepted. Seven joint meetings were agreedupon, the first to be at Ottawa, August 21, and the last at Alton,October 15. The meetings were held in the open, and at each placeimmense crowds were in attendance. The friends of Mr. Lincolnlargely preponderated in the northern portion of the State, those ofDouglas in the southern, while in the centre the partisans ofthe respective candidates were apparently equal in numbers. Theinterest never flagged for a moment from the beginning to the close.The debate was upon a high plane; each candidate enthusiasticallyapplauded by his friends, and respectfully heard by his opponents.The speakers were men of dignified presence, their bearing such asto challenge respect in any assemblage. There was nothing ofthe "grotesque" about the one, nothing of the "political juggler" aboutthe other. Both were deeply impressed with the gravity of thequestions at issue, and of what might prove their far-reachingconsequence to the country.

Kindly reference by each speaker to the other characterized thedebates from the beginning. "My friend Lincoln," and "My friendthe Judge," were expressions of constant occurrence during thedebate. While each mercilessly attacked the political utterances ofthe other, good feeling in the main prevailed. Something beingpardoned to the spirit of debate, the amenities were well observed.They had been personally well known to each other for many years; hadserved together in the Legislature when the State Capitol was atVandalia, and at a later date, Lincoln had appeared before theSupreme Court when Douglas was one of the judges. The amusingallusions to each other were taken in good part. Mr. Lincoln'sprofound humor is now a proverb. It never appeared to betteradvantage than during these debates. In criticising Mr. Lincoln'sattack upon Chief Justice Taney and his associates for the DredScott decision, Douglas declared it to be an attempt to secure areversal of the high tribunal by an appeal to a town meeting.It reminded him of the saying of Colonel Strode that the judicial systemof Illinois was perfect, except that "there should be an appealallowed from the Supreme Court to two justices of the peace."Lincoln replied, "That was when you were on the bench, Judge."Referring to Douglas's allusion to him as a kind, amiable, andintelligent gentleman, he said:

"Then as the Judge has complimented me with these pleasant titles,I was a little taken, for it came from a great man. I was not verymuch accustomed to flattery and it came the sweeter to me. Iwas like the Hoosier with the gingerbread, when he said he reckonedhe loved it better and got less of it than any other man."

In opening the debate at Ottawa, Douglas said:

"In the remarks I have made on the platform and the position ofMr. Lincoln, I mean nothing personally disrespectful or unkindto that gentleman. I have known him for twenty-five years. Therewere many points of sympathy between us when we first got acquainted.We were both comparatively boys, and both struggling with poverty ina strange land. I was a school-teacher in the town of Winchester,and he a flourishing grocery-keeper in the town of Salem. Hewas more successful in his occupation than I was in mine, and hencemore fortunate in this world's goods. Lincoln is one of thosepeculiar men who perform with admirable skill everything which theyundertake. I made as good a school-teacher as I could, and when acabinet-maker I made a good bedstead and table, although my old bosssaid I succeeded better with bureaus and secretaries than anythingelse. I met him in the Legislature and had a sympathy with himbecause of the up-hill struggle we both had in life. He wasthen just as good at telling an anecdote as now. He could beatany of the boys wrestling or running a foot-race, in pitching quoitsor tossing a copper, and the dignity and impartiality with whichhe presided at a horse-race or a fist-fight, excited the admirationand won the praise of everybody. I sympathized with him becausehe was struggling with difficulties, and so was I."

To which Lincoln replied:

"The Judge is woefully at fault about his friend Lincoln being agrocery-keeper. I don't know as it would be a sin if I had been;but he is mistaken. Lincoln never kept a grocery anywhere inthe world. It is true that Lincoln did work the latter part ofone Winter in a little still house up at the head of a hollow."

The serious phases of the debates will now be considered. Theopening speech was by Mr. Douglas. That he possessed rare poweras a debater, all who heard him can bear witness. Mr. Blaine inhis history says:

"His mind was fertile in resources. He was master of logic. Inthat peculiar style of debate which in its intensity resembles aphysical combat, he had no equal. He spoke with extraordinaryreadiness. He used good English, terse, pointed, vigorous. Hedisregarded the adornments of rhetoric. He never cited historicprecedents except from the domain of American politics. Insidethat field, his knowledge was comprehensive, minute, critical. Hecould lead a crowd almost irresistibly to his own conclusions."

Douglas was, in very truth, imbued with little of mere sentiment.He gave little time to discussions belonging solely to the realmof the speculative or the abstract. He was in no sense a dreamer.What Coleridge has defined wisdom—"common sense, in an uncommondegree"—was his. In phrase the simplest and most telling, hestruck at once at the very core of the controversy. Possibly noman was ever less inclined "to darken counsel with words withoutknowledge." Positive, and aggressive to the last degree, he neversought "by indirections to find directions out." In statesmanship—in all that pertained to human affairs—he was intensely practical.With him, in the words of Macaulay, "one acre in Middlesex is wortha principality in Utopia."

It is a pleasure to recall—after the lapse of half a century—thetwo men as they shook hands upon the speaker's stand, just before theopening of the debates that were to mark an epoch in Americanhistory. Stephen A. Douglas! Abraham Lincoln! As they stood sideby side and looked out upon "the sea of upturned faces"—it wasindeed a picture to live in the memory of all who witnessed it.The one stood for the old ordering of things, in an emphatic sensefor the Government as established by the fathers—with all itscompromises. The other, recognizing equally with his opponent thebinding force of Constitutional obligation, yet looking, away frompresent surroundings, "felt the inspiration of the coming of thegrander day." As has been well said, "The one faced the past; theother, the future."

The name of Lincoln is now a household word. But little can bewritten of him that is not already known to the world. Nothingthat can be uttered or withheld can add to, or detract from, hisimperishable fame. But it must be remembered that his greatopportunity and fame came after the stirring events separated fromus by the passing of fifty years. It is not the Lincoln of history,but Lincoln the country lawyer, the debater, the candidate ofhis party for political office, with whom we have now to do. Bornin Kentucky, much of his early life was spent in Indiana, andall his professional and public life up to his election to thePresidency, in Illinois. His early opportunities for study,like those of Douglas, were meagre indeed. Neither had had theadvantage of the thorough training of the schools. Of both itmight truly have been said, "They knew men rather than books." Fromhis log-cabin home upon the Sangamon, Mr. Lincoln had in his earlymanhood volunteered, and was made captain of his company, in what wasso well known to the early settlers of Illinois as the BlackHawk War. Later on, he was surveyor of his county, and three timesa member of the State Legislature. At the time of the debates withSenator Douglas, Mr. Lincoln had for many years been a resident ofSpringfield, and a recognized leader of the bar. As an advocate,he had probably no superior in the State. During the days ofthe Whig party he was an earnest exponent of its principles, andan able champion of its candidates. As such, he had in successivecontests eloquently presented the claims of Harrison, Clay, Taylor,and Scott to the Presidency. In 1846, he was elected a Representativein Congress, and upon his retirement he resumed the active practiceof his profession. Upon the dissolution of the Whig party, he castin his fortunes with the new political organization, and was invery truth one of the builders of the Republican party. At itsfirst national convention, in 1856, he received a large vote fornomination to the Vice-Presidency, and during the memorable campaignof that year canvassed the State in advocacy of the election ofFremont and Dayton, the candidates of the Philadelphia convention.

In the year 1858—that of the great debates—Douglas was the betterknown of the opposing candidates in the country at large. In aspeech then recently delivered in Springfield, Mr. Lincoln said:

"There is still another disadvantage under which we labor and towhich I will ask your attention. It arises out of the relativepositions of the two persons who stand before the State as candidatesfor the Senate. Senator Douglas is of world-wide renown. All theanxious politicians of his party have been looking upon him ascertainly at no distant day to be the President of the UnitedStates. They have seen in his ruddy, jolly, fruitful face,postoffices, land-offices, marshalships, and cabinet appointments,and foreign missions, bursting and sprouting out in wonderfulexuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy hands. Onthe contrary, nobody has ever seen in my poor lank face that anycabbages were sprouting out."

Both, however, were personally well known in Illinois. Each wasby unanimous nomination the candidate of his party. Douglas hadknown sixteen years of continuous service in one or the other Houseof Congress. In the Senate, he had held high debate withSeward, Sumner, and Chase from the North, and during the lastsession—since he had assumed a position of antagonism to theBuchanan administration—had repeatedly measured swords with Tombs,Benjamin, and Jefferson Davis, chief among the great debaters ofthe South.

Mr. Lincoln's services in Congress had been limited to a singleterm in the lower house, and his great fame was yet to be achieved,not as a legislator, but as Chief Executive during the most criticalyears of our history.

Such, in brief, were the opposing candidates as they entered thelists of debate at Ottawa, on the twenty-first day of August, 1858.Both were in the prime of manhood, thoroughly equipped for theconflict, and surrounded by throngs of devoted friends. Both weregifted with remarkable forensic powers and alike hopeful as to theresult. Each recognizing fully the strength of his opponent,his own powers were constantly at their tension.

"the blood more stirs
To rouse a lion than to start a hare."

In opening, Senator Douglas made brief reference to the politicalcondition of the country prior to the year 1854. He said:

"The Whig and the Democratic were the two great parties then inexistence; both national and patriotic, advocating principles thatwere universal in their application; while these parties differed inregard to banks, tariff, and sub-treasury, they agreed on theslavery question which now agitates the Union. They had adoptedthe compromise measures of 1850 as the basis of a full solution ofthe slavery question in all its forms; that these measures hadreceived the endorsement of both parties in their National Conventionsof 1852, thus affirming the right of the people of each Stateand Territory to decide as to their domestic institutions forthemselves; that this principle was embodied in the bill reported byme in 1854 for the organization of the Territories of Kansas andNebraska; in order that there might be no misunderstanding,these words were inserted in that bill: 'It is the true intentand meaning of this act, not to legislate slavery into any Stateor Territory, or to exclude it therefrom, but to leave thepeople thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domesticinstitutions in their own way, subject only to the FederalConstitution.'"

Turning to his opponent, he said:

"I desire to know whether Mr. Lincoln to-day stands as he did in1854 in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive SlaveLaw; whether he stands pledged to-day as he did in 1854 againstthe admission of any more slave States into the Union, even if thepeople want them; whether he stands pledged against the admission ofa new State into the Union with such a Constitution as the people ofthat State may see fit to make. I want to know whether hestands to-day pledged to the abolition of slavery in the District ofColumbia; I desire to know whether he stands pledged to prohibitslavery in all the Territories of the United States north as well assouth of the Missouri Compromise line. I desire him to answerwhether he is opposed to acquisition of any more territoryunless slavery is prohibited therein. I want his answer tothese questions."

Douglas then addressed himself to the already quoted words ofMr. Lincoln's Springfield speech commencing: "A house dividedagainst itself cannot stand." He declared the Government hadexisted for seventy years divided into free and slave States asour fathers made it; that at the time the Constitution was framed therewere thirteen States, twelve of which were slave-holding, and one afree State; that if the doctrine preached by Mr. Lincoln thatall should be free or all slave had prevailed, the twelve wouldhave overruled the one, and slavery would have been established bythe Constitution on every inch of the Republic, instead of beingleft, as our fathers wisely left it, for each State to decidefor itself. He then declared that:

"Uniformity in the local laws and institutions of the differentStates is neither possible nor desirable; that if uniformity hadbeen adopted when the Government was established it must inevitablyhave been the uniformity of slavery everywhere, or the uniformity ofnegro citizenship and negro equality everywhere. I hold thathumanity and Christianity both require that the negro shall haveand enjoy every right and every privilege and every immunityconsistent with the safety of the society in which he lives.The question then arises, What rights and privileges are consistentwith the public good? This is a question which each State and eachTerritory must decide for itself. Illinois has decided it forherself."

He then said:

"Now, my friends, if we will only act conscientiously upon thisgreat principle of popular sovereignty, it guarantees to each Stateand Territory the right to do as it pleases on all things localand domestic; instead of Congress interfering, we will continue atpeace one with another. This doctrine of Mr. Lincoln of uniformityamong the institutions of the different States is a new doctrinenever dreamed of by Washington, Madison, or the framers of theGovernment. Mr. Lincoln and his party set themselves up as wiser thanthe founders of the Government, which has flourished for seventyyears under the principle of popular sovereignty, recognizingthe right of each State to do as it pleased. Under that principle,we have grown from a nation of three or four millions to one ofthirty millions of people. We have crossed the mountains and filledup the whole Northwest, turning the prairies into a garden, andbuilding up churches and schools, thus spreading civilizationand Christianity where before there was nothing but barbarism.Under that principle we have become from a feeble nation themost powerful upon the face of the earth, and if we only adhere tothat principle we can go forward increasing in territory, in power,in strength, and in glory, until the Republic of America shallbe the North Star that shall guide the friends of freedom throughoutthe civilized world. I believe that his new doctrine preached byMr. Lincoln will dissolve the Union if it succeeds; trying to arrayall the Northern States in one body against the Southern; to excitea sectional war between the free States and the slave States inorder that one or the other may be driven to the wall."

Mr. Lincoln said in reply:

"I think and will try to show, that the repeal of the MissouriCompromise is wrong—wrong in its direct effect, letting slaveryinto Kansas and Nebraska; wrong in its prospective principle,allowing it to spread to every other part of the wide world wheremen can be found inclined to take it. This declared indifference,but as I must think covert zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannotbut hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slaveryitself. I hate it because it deprives our Republic of an example ofits just influence in the world—enables the enemies of freeinstitutions with plausibility to taunt us as hypocrites. I have noprejudices against the Southern people; they are just what we wouldbe in their situation. If slavery did now exist amongst us wewould not instantly give it up. This I believe of the masses Northand South. When the Southern people tell us they are no moreresponsible for the origin of slavery than we, I acknowledge thefact. When it is said that the institution exists, and that it isvery difficult to get rid of in any satisfactory way, I can understandand appreciate the same. I surely will not blame them for whatI should not know how to do myself. If all earthly powers weregiven me, I should not know what to do as to the existinginstitution."

Declaring that he did not advocate freeing the negroes, and makingthem our political and social equals, but suggesting thatgradual systems of emancipation might be adopted by the States, headded, "But for their tardiness in this, I will not undertake tojudge our brethren of the South. But all this to my judgmentfurnishes no more excuse for permitting slavery to go into our freeterritory than it would for reviving the African slave trade bylaw."

He then added:

"I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with theinstitution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe Ihave no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality betweenthe white and black races. But I hold that notwithstanding allthis there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitledto all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration ofIndependence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit ofhappiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as thewhite man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal inmany respects—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral andintellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, withoutthe leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal,and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."

Referring to the quotation from his Springfield speech of the words,
"A house divided against itself cannot stand," he said:

"Does the Judge say it can stand? If he does, then there is aquestion of veracity, not between him and me, but between the Judgeand an authority of somewhat higher character. I leave it to you tosay whether, in the history of our Government, the institutionof slavery has not only failed to be a bond of union, but on thecontrary been an apple of discord and an element of division inthe house. If so, then I have a right to say that in regard tothis question the Union is a house divided against itself; and whenthe Judge reminds me that I have often said to him that theinstitution of slavery has existed for eighty years in some Statesand yet it does not exist in some others, I agree to that fact,and I account for it by looking at the position in which our fathersoriginally placed it—restricting it from the new Territories whereit had not gone, and legislating to cut off its source by abrogationof the slave trade, thus putting the seal of legislation againstits spread, the public mind did rest in the belief that it wasin the course of ultimate extinction. Now, I believe if wecould arrest its spread and place it where Washington and Jeffersonand Madison placed it, it would be in the course of ultimateextinction, and the public mind would—as for eighty years past—believe that it was in the course of ultimate extinction."

Referring further to his Springfield speech, he declared that hehad no thought of doing anything to bring about a war betweenthe free and slave States; that he had no thought in the world thathe was doing anything to bring about social and political equalityof the black and white races.

Pursuing this line of argument, he insisted that the first step inthe conspiracy, the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, followed soonby the Dred Scott Decision—the latter fitting perfectly intothe niche left by the former—"in such a case, we feel it impossiblenot to believe that Stephen and Franklin, Roger and James, allunderstood one another from the beginning, and all worked upon acommon plan or draft drawn before the first blow was struck."

In closing, Douglas, after indignant denial of the charge ofconspiracy, said:

"I have lived twenty-five years in Illinois; I have served you withall the fidelity and ability which I possess, and Mr. Lincoln isat liberty to attack my public action, my votes, and my conduct,but when he dares to attack my moral integrity by a charge ofconspiracy between myself, Chief Justice Taney, and the SupremeCourt and two Presidents of the United States, I will repel it."

At Freeport, Mr. Lincoln, in opening the discussion, at once declaredhis readiness to answer the interrogatories propounded. He said:

"I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditionalrepeal of the Fugitive Slave Law; I do not now, nor ever did, standpledged against the admission of any more slave States into theUnion; I do not stand pledged against the admission of a new Stateinto the Union with such a Constitution as the people of that Statemay see fit to make; I do not stand to-day pledged to the abolitionof slavery in the District of Columbia; I do not stand pledgedto the prohibition of the slave trade between the different States;I am impliedly, if not expressly, pledged to a belief in the rightand duty of Congress to prohibit slavery in all the UnitedStates Territories."

Waiving the form of the interrogatory, as to being pledged, he said:

"As to the first one in regard to the Fugitive Slave Law, I havenever hesitated to say, and I do not now hesitate to say, that Ithink under the Constitution of the United States the people ofthe Southern States are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive SlaveLaw. Having said that, I have had nothing to say in regard to theexisting Fugitive Slave Law further than that I think it shouldhave been framed so as to be free from some of the objections thatpertain to it without lessening its efficiency. In regard towhether I am pledged to the admission of any more slave States intothe Union, I would be exceedingly glad to know that there wouldnever be another slave State admitted into the Union; but I mustadd that if slavery shall be kept out of the Territories duringthe Territorial existence of any one given Territory, and then thepeople shall, having a fair chance and a clear field when they cometo adopt the Constitution, do such an extraordinary thing as toadopt a slavery Constitution uninfluenced by the actual presenceof the institution among them, I see no alternative, if we own thecountry, but to admit them into the Union. I should be exceedinglyglad to see slavery abolished in the District of Columbia. Ibelieve that Congress possesses Constitutional power to abolishit. Yet, as a member of Congress, I should not be in favor ofendeavoring to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia unless itwould be upon these conditions: First, that the abolition should begradual; second, that it should be on a vote of the majority ofqualified voters in the district; third, that compensation should bemade unwilling owners. With these conditions, I confess I should beexceedingly glad to see Congress abolish slavery in the District ofColumbia, and in the language of Henry Clay, 'Sweep from our Capitalthat foul blot upon our nation.'"

These carefully prepared answers will never cease to be of profoundinterest to the student of human affairs. They indicate unmistakablythe conservative tendency of Mr. Lincoln, and his position atthe time as to the legal status of the institution of slavery.But "courage mounteth with occasion." Five years later, and from thehand that penned the answers given came the great proclamationemancipating a race. The hour had struck—and slavery perished.The compromises upon which it rested were, in the mighty upheaval,but as the stubble before the flame.

Recurring to the Freeport debates, Mr. Lincoln propounded to hisopponent four interrogatories as follows:

"First, if the people of Kansas shall by means entirely unobjectionablein all other respects adopt a State Constitution and ask admissioninto the Union under it before they have the requisite number ofinhabitants according to the bill—some ninety-three thousand—will you vote to admit them? Second, can the people of a UnitedStates Territory in any lawful way, against the wish of any citizenof the United States, exclude slavery from its limits prior to theformation of a State Constitution? Third, if the Supreme Court ofthe United States shall decide that States cannot exclude slavery fromtheir limits, are you in favor of acquiescing in, adopting, andfollowing such decision as a rule of political action? Fourth,are you in favor of acquiring additional territory in disregard ofhow such acquisition may affect the nation on the slavery question?"

The questions propounded reached the marrow of the controversy,and were yet to have a much wider field for discussion. Thiswas especially true of the second of the series. Upon this widelydivergent—irreconcilable—views were entertained by Northernand Southern Democrats. The evidence of this is to be found inthe respective national platforms upon which Douglas and Mr.Breckenridge were two years later rival candidates of a dividedparty. The second interrogatory of Mr. Lincoln clearly emphasizedthis conflict of opinion as it existed at the time of the debates.It is but just, however, to Douglas—of whom little that is kindlyhas in late years been spoken—to say that there was nothing inthe question to cause him surprise or embarrassment. It wouldbe passing strange if during the protracted debates withSenators representing extreme and antagonistic views, a matterso vital as the interpretation of the Kansas-Nebraska Act—asindicated by the interrogatory—had never been under discussion.Conclusive evidence on this point is to be found in the speechdelivered by Senator Douglas at Bloomington, July 16, forty-twodays before the Freeport debate, in which he said:

"I tell you, my friends, it is impossible under our institutionsto force slavery on an unwilling people. If this principle ofpopular sovereignty, asserted in the Nebraska Bill, be fairlycarried out by letting the people decide the question for themselvesby a fair vote, at a fair election, and with honest returns, slaverywill never exist one day or one hour in any Territory againstthe unfriendly legislation of an unfriendly people. Hence ifthe people of a Territory want slavery they will encourage it bypassing affirmatory laws, and the necessary police regulations; ifthey do not want it, they will withhold that legislation, and bywithholding it slavery is as dead as if it were prohibited by aConstitutional prohibition. They could pass such local laws andpolice regulations as would drive slavery out in one day or onehour if they were opposed to it, and therefore, so far as thequestion of slavery in the Territories is concerned in its practicaloperation, it matters not how the Dred Scott case may be decidedwith reference to the Territories. My own opinion on that pointis well known. It is shown by my vote and speeches in Congress."

Recurring again to the Freeport debate, in reply to the firstinterrogatory, Douglas declared that in reference to Kansas it washis opinion that if it had population enough to constitute a slaveState, it had people enough for a free State; that he would notmake Kansas an exceptional case to the other States of the Union; thathe held it to be a sound rule of universal application to require aTerritory to contain the requisite population for a member ofCongress before its admission as a State into the Union; that ithaving been decided that Kansas has people enough for a slave State,"I hold it has enough for a free State."

As to the third interrogatory, he said that only one man in theUnited States, an editor of a paper in Washington, had held suchview, and that he, Douglas, had at the time denounced it on thefloor of the Senate; that Mr. Lincoln cast an imputation uponthe Supreme Court by supposing that it would violate the Constitution;that it would be an act of moral treason that no man on thebench could ever descend to. To the fourth—which he said was very"ingeniously and cunningly put"—he answered that, whenever itbecame necessary in our growth and progress to acquire more territoryhe was in favor of it without reference to the question of slavery,and when we had acquired it, he would leave the people to do as theypleased, either to make it free, or slave territory as theypreferred.

The answer to the second interrogatory—of which much has beenwritten—was given without hesitation. Language could hardly bemore clear or effective. He said:

"To the next question propounded to me I answer emphatically, asMr. Lincoln has heard me answer a hundred times, that in my opinionthe people of a Territory can by lawful means exclude slavery fromtheir limits prior to the formation of a State Constitution. Itmatters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide asto the abstract question whether slavery may or may not go intoa Territory under the Constitution, the people have the lawfulmeans to introduce it or exclude it, as they please, for the reasonthat slavery cannot exist a day, or an hour anywhere, unless it issupported by local police regulations. These police regulationscan only be established by the local Legislature, and if the peopleare opposed to slavery they will elect representatives to that bodywho will by unfriendly legislation effectually prevent the introductionof it into their midst. If, on the contrary, they are for it, theirLegislature will favor its extension. Hence, no matter what thedecision of the Supreme Court may be on that abstract question,still the right of the people to make a slave Territory or a freeTerritory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska Bill."

The trend of thought, the unmeasured achievement of activitieslooking to human amelioration, during the fifty intervening years,must be taken into the account before uncharitable judgmentupon what has been declared the indifference of Douglas to thequestion of abstract right involved in the memorable discussion.It must be remembered that the world has moved apace, and that amighty gulf separates us from that eventful period, in whichpractical statesmen were compelled to deal with institutions asthen existing. And not to be forgotten are the words of the greatinterpreter of the human heart,

"But know thou this, that men are as the time is."

The great debates between Douglas and Lincoln—the like of whichwe shall not hear again—had ended and passed to the domain ofhistory. To the inquiry, "Which of the participants was the victor?"there can be no absolute answer. Judged by the immediate result, theformer; by consequence more remote and far-reaching, the latter.Within three years from the first meeting at Ottawa, Mr. Lincoln—having been elected and inaugurated President—was upon thethreshold of mighty events which are now the masterful theme ofhistory; and his great antagonist in the now historic debateshad passed from earthly scenes.

It has been said that Douglas was ambitious.

"If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath he answered it."

We may well believe that, with like honorable ambition to thetwo great popular leaders of different periods—Clay and Blaine—his goal was the Presidency.

In the last three national conventions of his party precedinghis death, he was presented by the Illinois delegation to be namedfor the great office. The last of these—the Charleston conventionof 1860—is now historic. It assembled amid intense party passion,and after a turbulent session that seemed the omen of its approachingdoom, adjourned to a later day to Baltimore. Senator Douglas therereceived the almost solid vote of the Northern, and a portion ofthat of the Border States, but the hostility of the extreme Southernleaders to his candidacy was implacable to the end. What had seemedinevitable from the beginning at length occurred, and the greathistorical party—which had administered the Government with briefintermissions from the inauguration of Jefferson—was hopelesslyrent asunder. This startling event—and what it might portend—gave pause to thoughtful men of all parties. It was not a mereincident, but an epoch in history. Mr. Blaine, in his "TwentyYears of Congress," says:

"The situation was the cause of solicitude and even grief withthousands to whom the old party was peculiarly endeared. Thetraditions of Jefferson, of Madison, of Jackson, were devoutlytreasured; and the splendid achievements of the American Democracywere recounted with the pride which attaches to an honorable familyinheritance. The fact was recalled that the Republic had grown toits imperial dimensions under Democratic statesmanship. It wasremembered that Louisiana had been acquired from France, Floridafrom Spain, the independent Republic of Texas annexed, and California,with its vast dependencies, and its myriad millions of treasure,ceded by Mexico, all under Democratic administrations, and in spiteof the resistance of their opponents. That a party whose history wasinwoven with the glory of the Republic should now come to its end ina quarrel over the status of the negro in a country where his laborwas not wanted, was to many of its members as incomprehensibleas it was sorrowful and exasperating. They might have restoredthe party to harmony, but at the very height of the factionalcontest, the representatives of both sections were hurried forwardto the National Convention of 1860, with principle subordinated topassion, with judgment displaced by a desire for revenge."

The withdrawal from the Baltimore Convention of a large majorityof the Southern delegates and a small following, led by CalebCushing and Benjamin F. Butler from the North, resulted in theimmediate nomination by the requisite two-thirds vote of SenatorDouglas as the Presidential candidate. The platform upon thequestion of slavery was in substance that contended for by thecandidate in the debates with Lincoln. The Democratic party divided—Breckenridge receiving the support of the South—Douglas'scandidacy was hopeless from the beginning. But his iron will, andcourage, that knew no faltering, never appeared to better advantagethan during that eventful canvass. Deserted by former politicalassociates, he visited distant States and addressed immense audiencesin defence of the platform upon which he had been nominated, andin advocacy of his own election. His speeches in Southern States wereof the stormy incidents of a struggle that has scarcely known aparallel. Interrogated by a prominent citizen at Norfolk, Virginia,"If Lincoln be elected President, would the Southern States bejustified in seceding from the Union?" Douglas replied, "I emphaticallyanswer, No. The election of a man to the Presidency in conformitywith the Constitution of the United States would not justify anattempt to dissolve the Union."

Defeated in his great ambition, broken in health, the sad witness ofthe unmistakable portents of the coming sectional strife—thefew remaining months of his mortal life were enveloped in gloom.Partisan feeling vanished—his deep concern was now only for hiscountry. Standing by the side of his successful rival—whosewondrous career was only opening, as his own was nearing its close—he bowed profound assent to the imperishable utterances of theinaugural address: "I am loath to close. We are not enemies butfriends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained,it must not break our bonds of affection."

Yet later—immediately upon the firing of the fatal shot at Sumterthat suddenly summoned millions from peaceful pursuits to arms—by invitation of the Illinois Legislature Douglas addressed hiscountrymen for the last time.

Broken with the storms of state, the fires of ambition foreverextinguished, standing upon the threshold of the grave, his soulburdened with the calamities that had befallen his country, intones of deepest pathos he declared:

"If war must come—if the bayonet must be used to maintain theConstitution—I can say before God, my conscience is clear. I havestruggled long for a peaceful solution of the trouble. I deprecatewar, but if it must come, I am with my country, and for my country,in every contingency, and under all circumstances. At all hazardsour Government must be maintained, and the shortest pathway topeace is through the most stupendous preparation for war."

Who that heard the last public utterance that fell from his lipscan forget his solemn invocation to all who had followed hispolitical fortunes, until the banner had fallen from his hand,—to know only their country in its hour of peril?

The ordinary limit of human life unreached; his intellectual strengthunabated; his loftiest aspirations unrealized; at the criticalmoment of his country's sorest need—he passed to the grave. Whatreflections and regrets may have been his in that hour of awfulmystery, we may not know. In the words of another: "What blight andanguish met his agonized eyes, whose lips may tell? what brilliantbroken plans, what bitter rending of sweet household ties, what sunderingof strong manhood's friendships?"

In the light of what has been discussed, may we not believe thatwith his days prolonged, he would during the perilous years havebeen the safe counsellor—the rock—of the great President, inpreserving the nation's life, and later in "binding up the nation'swounds."

Worthy of honored and enduring place in history, Stephen A. Douglas—statesman and patriot—lies buried within the great city whosestupendous development is so largely the result of his own wiseforecast and endeavor,—by the majestic lake whose waves break nearthe base of his stately monument and chant his eternal requiem.

VIIITHE FIRST POLITICAL TELEGRAM

SENATOR SILAS WRIGHT NOMINATED FOR VICE-PRESIDENT—WORD OF HISNOMINATION SENT HIM BY THE MORSE TELEGRAPH—MORSE'S FIRST CONCEPTIONOF AN ELECTRO-MAGNETIC TELEGRAPH—OBSTACLES TO THE CARRYING OUT OFHIS INVENTION—A BILL APPROPRIATING $30,000 TO TEST THE VALUE OFHIS TELEGRAPH—EARLIER FORMS OF TELEGRAPHIC INTERCOURSE—A EULOGY ONTHE INVENTOR BY MR. GARFIELD—ANOTHER, BY MR. COX—THE FIRST MESSAGETHAT EVER PASSED OVER THE WIRE—DR. PRIME'S PRAISE OF MORSE AFTER HISDEATH.

By all odds, the most venerable in appearance of the Representativesin the forty-sixth Congress, was Hendrick B. Wright of Pennsylvania.After a retirement of a third of a century, he had been returnedto the seat he had honored while many of his present associateswere in the cradle. Of massive build, stately bearing, loftycourtesy; neatly appareled in blue broadcloth, with brass buttonsappropriately in evidence, he appeared indeed to belong to apast generation of statesmen.

"And thus he bore without abuse
The grand old name of gentleman."

In one of the many conversations I held with him, he told me that hewas the president of the Democratic National Convention which met inBaltimore in 1844. As will be remembered, a majority of thedelegates to that convention were favorable to the renomination ofMr. Van Buren, but his recently published letter opposing theannexation of Texas had rendered him extremely obnoxious to apowerful minority of his own party. After a protracted struggle, Mr.Van Buren, under the operation of the "two-thirds rule," wasdefeated, and Mr. Polk nominated. The convention, anxious toplacate the friends of the defeated candidate, then tendered thenomination for Vice-President to Senator Silas Wright, the closefriend of Mr. Van Buren.

At the time the convention was in session, Samuel F. B. Morsewas conducting in a room in the Capitol the electrical experimentswhich have since "given his name to the ages." Under an appropriationby Congress, a telegraph line had been recently constructed fromWashington to Baltimore.

Immediately upon the nomination of Senator Wright, as mentioned,the president of the convention sent him by the Morse telegrapha brief message, the first of a political character that ever passedover the wire, advising him of his nomination, and requestinghis acceptance. Two hours later he read to the convention a messagefrom Senator Wright, then in Washington, peremptorily decliningthe nomination.

Upon the reading of this message to the convention, it wasopenly declared to be a hoax, not one member in twenty believingthat a message could possibly have been received. The conventionadjourned till the next day, first instructing its president tocommunicate with Senator Wright by letter. A special messenger, byhard riding and frequent change of horse, bore the letter of theconvention to Wright in Washington, and returned with his reply bythe time the convention had reassembled. As will be remembered, Wrightpersisting in his declination, George M. Dallas was nominated and dulyelected.

Later, in conversation with the Hon. Alexander H. Stephens ofGeorgia, he told me that he was in the room of the Capitol setapart for the experiments which Mr. Morse wished to make, anddistinctly remembered the fact of the transmission of the message toand from Senator Wright, as stated.

The incident mentioned recalls something of the obstacles encounteredby Morse in the marvellous work with which his name is inseparablyassociated. He first conceived the idea of an electro-magnetictelegraph on shipboard on a homeward-bound voyage from Europe in1832. Before landing from his long voyage, his plans for a seriesof experiments had been clearly thought out. Having constructedhis first recording apparatus, his caveat for a patent was filedfive years later; and in 1838, he applied to Congress for anappropriation to enable him to construct an experimental line fromWashington to Baltimore in order to demonstrate the practicabilityof his invention. His proposal was at first treated with ridicule—even with contempt; and for more than three years no favorableaction was taken by Congress. With abiding faith, however, in themerits of his invention, his zeal knew no abatement during years ofpoverty and discouragement. At length in the Twenty-seventhCongress, Representative Kennedy of Maryland—at a later daySecretary of the Navy—introduced a bill appropriating thirtythousand dollars "to test the value of Morse's Electro-MagneticTelegraph," to be expended under the direction of the Secretary ofthe Treasury.

By the untiring efforts of Mr. Kennedy and other Representatives, thebill was finally brought before the House for consideration nearthe close of the session. In the light of events, the discussion thatimmediately preceded the vote is of interest, and in no small degreeamusing, to this generation. On February twenty-first, 1843, Mr.Johnson of Tennessee wished to say a word upon the bill. As thepresent Congress had done much to encourage science, he did notwish to see the science of Mesmerism neglected and overlooked. Hetherefore proposed that one-half of the appropriation be givento Mr. Fisk to enable him to carry on experiments as well asProfessor Morse. Mr. Houston thought that Millerism should alsobe included in the benefits of the appropriation. Mr. Stanley saidhe should have no objection to the appropriation for Mesmericexperiments provided the gentleman from Tennessee was the subject.Mr. Johnson said he should have no objection provided Mr. Stanley wasthe operator. Several gentlemen now called for the reading of theamendment, and it was read by the clerk as follows: "Provided thatone-half of the said sum shall be appropriated for trying Mesmericexperiments under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury."

Mr. Mason arose to a question of order. He maintained that theamendment was not bona fide, and that such amendments werecalculated to injure the character of the House. He appealed tothe Chair, the House being then in committee of the whole, to rulethe amendment out of order.

The Chairman said that it was not for him to judge of the motives ofmembers who offered amendments, and that he could not thereforeundertake to pronounce the amendment not bona fide. Objectionmight be raised to it on the ground that it was not sufficientlyanalogous in character to the bill under consideration; but, inthe opinion of the Chair, it would require a scientific analysisto determine how far the magnetism of mesmerism was analogous tothat employed in telegraphs. He therefore ruled the amendmentin order.

The amendment was rejected. The bill was subsequently reportedfavorably to the House, and two days later passed by the close voteof eighty-nine to eighty-three.

The bill then went to the Senate, and was placed upon the calendar.A large number of bills were ahead of it, and Mr. Morse was assuredby a kindly Senator that there was no possible chance for itsconsideration. All hope seemed to forsake the great inventor, as,from his seat in the gallery, he was a gloomy witness of the waninghours of the session. Unable longer to endure the strain, he soughthis humble dwelling an hour before final adjournment. Onarising the next morning, a little girl, the daughter of a faithfulfriend, ran up to him with a message from her father, to the effectthat in the hurry and confusion of the midnight hour, and justbefore the close of the session, the Senate had passed his bill,which immediately received the signature of the President.

With the sum thus appropriated at his command, Morse now earnestlyresumed the experiments, which a few months later resulted sosuccessfully. Referring to the homeward voyage from Europe, in1832, his biographer says:

"One day Dr. Charles S. Jackson of Boston, a fellow passenger,described an experiment recently made in Paris by means of whichelectricity had been instantaneously transmitted through a greatlength of wire; to which Morse replied, 'If that be so, I see noreason why messages may not instantaneously be transmitted byelectricity.'"

The key-note was struck, and before his ship reached New Yorkthe invention of the telegraph was virtually made, and even theessential features of the electro-magnetic transmitting and recordingapparatus were sketched on paper. Of necessity, in reachingthis result, Morse made use of the ideas and discoveries of manyother minds. As stated by his biographer:

"Various forms of telegraphic intercourse had been devised before;electro-magnetism had been studied by savants for many years;Franklin even had experimented with the transmission of electricitythrough great lengths of wire. It was reserved for Morse to combinethe results of many fragmentary and unsuccessful attempts, and putthem, after many years of trial, to a practical use; and thoughhis claims to the invention have been many times attacked in thepress and in the courts, they have been triumphantly vindicatedalike by the law and the verdict of the people, both at home andabroad. The Chief Justice of the United States in deliveringthe opinion of the Supreme Court in one of the Morse cases, said:'It can make no difference whether the inventor derived hisinformation from books or from conversation with men skilled inthe science; and the fact that Morse sought and obtained thenecessary information and counsel from the best sources andacted upon it, neither impairs his right as an inventor, nor detractsfrom his merits.'"

It will be remembered that soon after his first successful experiment,Morse was harassed by protracted litigation, and that many attemptswere made to deprive him of the just rewards of his great invention.True, he had been preceded along the same lines by great discoveries.This fact no man recognized more unreservedly than himself. Hewas the inventor, his work, that of gathering up and applying themarvellous discoveries of others to the practical purposes of humanlife. As stated by Mr. Garfield:

"His to interpret to the world that subtle and mysterious element withwhich the thinkers of the human race had so long been occupied.As Franklin had exhibited the relation between lightning and theelectric fluid, so Oersted exhibited the relation between magnetismand electricity. From 1820 to 1825, his discovery was furtherdeveloped by Davy and Sturgeon of England, and Arago and Ampere ofFrance. The electro-magnetic telegraph is the embodiment, I mightsay the incarnation, of many centuries of thought, of many generationsof effort to elicit from Nature one of her deepest mysteries.No one man, no one century, could have achieved it. It is thechild of the human race, the heir of all ages. How wonderfulare the steps that led to its creation! The very name of thistelegraphic instrument bears record of its history—Electric,Magnetic.

"The first, named from the bit of yellow amber whose qualitiesof attraction and repulsion were discovered by a Grecian philosophertwenty-four centuries ago, and the second, from Magnesia, thevillage of Asia Minor where first was found the lodestone, whosetouch turned the needle forever toward the north. These werethe earliest forms in which that subtle, all-pervading force revealeditself to men. In the childhood of the race men stood dumb in thepresence of its more terrible manifestations. When it gleamedin the purple aurora, or shot dusky-red from the clouds, it wasthe eye-flash of an angry God before whom mortals quailed in helplessfear."

More than three centuries ago, Shakespeare put into the mouth ofone of his creations the words,

"I'll put a girdle round about the earth
In forty minutes."

The words spoken in jest were in the nature of a prophecy. After thepassing of many generations, in a country unknown to the greatbard, Morse, in the words of Mr. Cox, one of the most eloquentof his eulogists—

"Gave to the universal people the means of speedy and accurateintelligence, and so stormed at once the castles of the terribleGiant Doubt and Giant Despair. He has saved time, shortened thehours of toil, accumulated and intensified thought by the rapidityand terseness of electric messages. He has celebrated treaties.Go to the uttermost parts of the earth; go beneath the deep sea;to the land where snows are eternal, or to the tropical realmswhere the orange blooms in the air of mid-winter, and you will findthis clicking, persistent, sleepless instrument ready to giveits tireless wing to your purpose."

It was my good fortune to serve in the House of Representativeswith Mr. Stephens of Georgia, and Mr. Wood of New York, both ofwhom more than a third of a century before had given their votesin favor of the appropriation that made it possible for Morse toprosecute experiments fraught with such stupendous blessing to ourrace. The member who reported back the bill from the Committee onCommerce, with favorable recommendations, and then supported it byan eloquent speech upon the floor of the House, was Robert C.Winthrop of Massachusetts. No public man I have ever known impressedme more favorably than did Mr. Winthrop. He had been the closefriend of Everett, Choate, Webster, and Clay. He was the lastsurvivor of as brilliant a coterie of party leaders and statesmen asour country has ever known. On a visit he made to the House ofRepresentatives, of which he had many years before been the Speaker,business was at once suspended, and the members from all partsof the Great Hall gathered about him. In a letter to the MorseMemorial meeting in Boston, Mr. Winthrop stated that he was presentin the Capitol while the first formal messages were passing along themagic cords between Washington and Baltimore. He referred to thedeclination read by Senator Wright in his presence, of the nominationto the Vice-Presidency tendered him, and added:

"All this gave us the most vivid impression, not only that a newkind of wire-pulling had entered into politics, but that amysterious and marvellous power of the air had at length beensubdued and trained to the service of mankind."

It is an interesting fact in this connection, to note that thelittle girl, Miss Ellsworth, who brought to Mr. Morse the joyfultidings of the passage of the bill on that early May morning in1843, was rewarded by being requested by the great inventor towrite the first message that ever passed over the wire. Whenshe selected,

"What hath God wrought,"

words to find utterance by all tongues—she builded better thanshe knew, for in the words of Speaker Blaine:

"The little thread of wire placed as a timid experiment betweenthe national capital and a neighboring city grew, and lengthened, andmultiplied with almost the rapidity of the electric current thatdarted along its iron nerves, until, within his own lifetime,continent was bound to continent, hemisphere answered throughocean's depths to hemisphere, and an encircled globe dashed forth hiseulogy in the unmatched eloquence of a grand achievement."

Words of praise, spoke by Dr. Prime, of the great inventor justafter he had passed from the world, to which he left such a heritage,can never lose their interest:

"Morse in his coffin is a recollection never to fade. He lay likean ancient prophet or sage such as the old masters painted forAbraham, or Isaiah. His finely chiselled features, classical intheir mould and majestic in repose, and heavy flowing beard; thedeath calm upon the brow that for eighty years had concealed ateeming brain, and that placid beauty that lingers upon the faceof the righteous dead, as if the freed spirit had left a smile uponits forsaken home—these are the memories that remain of themost illustrious and honored private citizen that the New Worldhas yet given to mankind."

IXALONG THE BYPATHS OF HISTORY

THE WIDOW OF GEN. GAINES CLAIMS PROPERTY AT NEW ORLEANS WORTH$30,000,000—HER SUCCESS AFTER MUCH LITIGATION—THE WIDOW OF JOHN H.EATON, SECRETARY OF WAR—A CLOUD ON HER REPUTATION—HER HUSBANDA FRIEND OF GEN. JACKSON—A DUEL BETWEEN RANDOLPH AND CLAY—HOSTILITYOF THE LEADERS OF WASHINGTON SOCIETY TO MRS. EATON—SECRETARY EATONDISLIKED BY HIS COLLEAGUES—CONSEQUENT DISRUPTION OF JACKSON'SCABINET—MRS. EATON'S POVERTY IN HER OLD AGE.

Nearly a third of a century ago, as the guest in a Washington house,I had the opportunity of meeting Mrs. Gaines, the widow of GeneralEdmund P. Gaines, a distinguished officer of the War of 1812,and Mrs. Eaton, the widow of the Hon. John H. Eaton of Tennessee, fora number of years a Senator from that State, and later Secretary ofWar during the administration of President Jackson. Their namessuggested interesting events in our history, I gladly availed myselfof the invitation to meet them.

I found Mrs. Gaines an old lady of small stature, with a profusionof curls, and gifted with rare powers of conversation. Shespoke freely of her great lawsuits, one of which was then pending inthe Supreme Court of the United States. As I listened, I thought ofthe wonderful career of the little woman before me. Few names,a half-century ago, were more familiar to the reading publicthan that of Myra Clark Gaines. She was born in New Orleans inthe early days of the century; was the daughter of Daniel Clark,who died in 1813, the owner of a large portion of the land uponwhich the city of New Orleans was afterwards built. She was hisonly heir, and soon after attaining her majority, instituted a suit,or series of suits, for the recovery of her property. After yearsof litigation, the seriously controverted fact of her being thelawful heir of Daniel Clark was established, and the contest, whichwas to wear out two generations of lawyers, began in dead earnest.The value of the property involved in the litigation then exceededthirty millions of dollars. At the time I saw her, she had justarrived from her home in New Orleans to be present at the argumentof one of her suits in the Supreme Court. She had already receivednearly six millions of dollars by successful litigation, and sheassured me that she intended to live one hundred years longer, ifnecessary, to obtain her rights, and that she expected to recover everydollar to which she was rightfully entitled. The air of confidencewith which she spoke, and the pluck manifested in her every wordand motion, convinced me at once that the only possible questionas to her ultimate success was that of time. And so indeed itproved, for,

"When like a clock worn out with eating time,
The wheels of weary life at last stood still,"

numerous suits, in which she had been successful in the lowercourts, were still pending in the higher.

She told me with apparent satisfaction, during the interview, thatshe could name over fifty lawyers who had been against her sincethe beginning of her contest, all of whom were now in their graves.Her litigation was the one absorbing thought of her life, herone topic of conversation.

General Gaines had died many years before, and her legal battles,—extending through several decades and against a host of adversaries,—she had, with courage unfaltering and patience that knew no shadowof weariness, prosecuted single-handed and alone.

In view of the enormous sums involved, the length of time consumedin the litigation, the number and ability of counsel engaged,and the antagonisms engendered, the records of our American courtswill be searched in vain for a parallel to the once famous suit ofMyra Clark Gaines against the city of New Orleans.

At the close of this interview, I was soon in conversation withthe older of the two ladies. Mrs. Eaton was then near the closeof an eventful life, one indeed without an approximate parallel inour history. Four score years ago, there were few persons inthe village of Washington to whom "Peggy O'Neal" was a stranger.Her father was the proprietor of a well-known, old-style tavern onPennsylvania Avenue, which, during the sessions of Congress,included among its guests many of the leading statesmen of that day.Of this number were Benton, Randolph, Eaton, Grundy, and othersequally well known. The daughter, a girl of rare beauty, on accountof her vivacity and grace soon became a great favorite with all.She was without question one of the belles of Washington.

It was difficult for me to realize that the care-worn face before mewas that of the charming Peggy O'Neal of early Washington days.Distress, poverty, slander possibly, had measurably wrought thesad change, but after all,

"the surest poison is Time."

Traces of her former self still lingered, however, and her erectform and dignified mien would have challenged respect in anyassembly.

While yet in her teens, she had married a purser in the Navy,who soon after died by his own hand, while on a cruise in theMediterranean. A year or two after his death, with reputationsomewhat clouded, she married the Honorable John H. Eaton, thena Senator from Tennessee. He was many years her senior, was oneof the leading statesmen of the day, and had rendered brilliantservice in the campaign which terminated so triumphantly at NewOrleans. He was the devoted personal and political friend ofGeneral Jackson, his earliest biographer, and later his earnestadvocate for the Presidency. Indeed, the movement having in viewthe election of "Old Hickory" was inaugurated by Major Eaton assistedby Amos Kendall and Francis P. Blair.

This was in 1824, before the days of national conventions.Eaton visited several of the States in the interest of his oldcommander, and secured the hearty co-operation of many of the mostinfluential men. It was in large degree through his personalefforts that the Legislatures of Pennsylvania and Tennessee proposedthe name of Andrew Jackson for the great office.

The Presidential contest of that year marked an epoch in ourpolitical history. It was at the close of the Monroe administration,"the era of good feeling." The struggle for supremacy whichimmediately followed was the precursor of an era of political strifewhich left its deep and lasting impress upon the country. Ofthe four candidates in the field, two were members of the outgoingCabinet of President Monroe: John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State,and William H. Crawford, Secretary of the Treasury. The remainingcandidates were Henry Clay, the eloquent and accomplished Speaker ofthe House of Representatives, and Andrew Jackson, "the hero of NewOrleans." The candidates were all of the same party, that foundedby Jefferson; the sun of the once powerful Federalists had set,and the Whig party was yet in the future.

No one of the candidates receiving a majority of the electoralvote, the election devolved upon the House of Representatives.Mr. Clay being the lowest upon the list, the choice by constitutionalrequirement was to be made from his three competitors. The influenceof the Kentucky statesman was thrown to Mr. Adams, who was dulyelected, receiving the votes of a bare majority of the States. Thedetermining vote was given by the sole representative from Illinois,the able and brilliant Daniel P. Cook, a friend of Mr. Clay.The sad sequel was the defeat of Cook at the next Congressionalelection, his immediate retirement from public life, and early andlamented death.

Not less sad was the effect of the vote just given upon the politicalfortunes of Henry Clay. His high character and distinguished publicservices were scant protection against the clamor that immediatelyfollowed his acceptance of the office of Secretary of State tenderedhim by President Adams. "Bargain and Corruption" was the terribleslogan of his enemies in his later struggles for the Presidencyand its echo scarcely died out with that generation.

In this connection, the bitter words spoken in the Senate byJohn Randolph will be recalled: "the coalition between the Puritanand the blackleg." The duel which followed, now historic, stands alonein the fierce conflicts of men. Whatever the faults of Randolph, letit be remembered to his eternal honor, that after receiving atshort range the fire of Mr. Clay, he promptly discharged his ownpistol in the air. Even after the lapse of eighty years how pleasingthese words: "At which Mr. Clay, throwing down his own pistol,advanced with extended hand to Mr. Randolph, who taking his handquietly remarked, 'You owe me a coat, Mr. Clay,' to which the latterexclaimed, 'Thank God the obligation is no greater!'"

Immediately upon the defeat of Jackson, his friends began theagitation which resulted in his overwhelming triumph over Adams,in 1828. Chief among his supporters in this, as in his formercontest, was Major Eaton. The untiring devotion of Jackson to hisfriends is well known. It rarely found more striking illustrationthan in the selection of Eaton as Secretary of War, and in the zealwith which he sustained him through good and evil report alike,during later years.

When it became known that Senator Eaton was to hold a seat inthe Cabinet of the new administration, the fashionable circlesof the capital were deeply agitated, and protests earnest andvehement assailed the ears of the devoted President. The objectionsurged were not against Major Eaton, but against his beautifuland accomplished wife. Rumors of an exceedingly uncomplimentarycharacter, that had measurably died out with time, were suddenlyrevived against Mrs. Eaton, and gathered force and volume with eachpassing day. It is hardly necessary to say that this hostility was,in the main, from her own sex. To all remonstrances andappeals, however, President Jackson turned a deaf ear. The kindnessshown by the mother of Mrs. Eaton to the wife of the Presidentduring a former residence, and while he was a Senator, in Washington,had never been forgotten. It will be remembered that during thelate Presidential contest not only had Jackson himself been theobject of merciless attack, but even his invalid wife did notescape. Divorced from her first husband because of his crueltreatment, she had married Jackson, when he was a young lawyerin Nashville, many years before. As the result of the aspersions castupon her, the once famous duel was evolved in which Charles Dickinsonfell by the hand of Jackson in 1806.

After his election, but before his inauguration, Mrs. Jackson died,the victim of calumny as her husband always believed. A fewdays after he had turned away from that new-made grave, he wasin the turmoil of politics at the national capital. With the pastfresh in his memory, it is not strange that he espoused the cause ofhis faithful friend, and the daughter of the woman who had befriendedone dearer to him than his own life. Thoroughly convinced of theinnocence of Mrs. Eaton, he made her cause his own, and to the endhe knew no variableness or shadow of turning.

The new administration was not far upon its tempestuous voyagebefore the trouble began. The relentless hostility of the leadersof Washington society against Mrs. Eaton was manifested in everypossible way. Their doors were firmly closed against her. This, ofitself, would have been of comparatively little moment, but seriousconsequences were to grow out of it. From private parlors anddrawing-rooms the controversy soon reached the little coterie thatconstituted the official family of President Jackson. While this isalmost forgotten history now, one chapter of Jackson's biographypublished soon after the events mentioned, was headed, "Mr. VanBuren calls upon Mrs. Eaton." As is well known, the creed in actionof the most suave of our presidents was,

"The statues of our stately fortunes
Are sculptured with the chisel, not the axe."

Mr. Van Buren was Secretary of State, and one of the most agreeableand politic of statesmen. He was in line of succession to thegreat office, and understood well the importance of maintaininghis hold upon President Jackson. A widower himself, the call uponwhich so much stress was laid at the time subjected the Secretary ofState to no embarrassment at home. Not so, however, with three ofhis colleagues in the Cabinet: Mr. Ingham, Secretary of theTreasury, Mr. Branch of the Navy, and Mr. Berrien the Attorney-General.The wife of each of these gentlemen refused to return Mrs. Eaton'scall, or to recognize her in any possible manner. No remonstranceon the part of the President could avail to secure even a formalexchange of courtesies on the part of these ladies. All this onlyintensified the determination on the part of the President to secureto the wife of the Secretary of War the social recognition to whichhe considered her justly entitled, but it would not avail; thepurpose of the most resolute man on earth was powerless againsta determination equal to his own. Never was more forcibly exemplifiedthe truth of the old couplet:

"When a woman will, she will, you may depend on't,
And when she won't, she won't, and there's an end on't."

As to how Mrs. Eaton meanwhile appeared to others, something maybe gleaned from the statement of a distinguished gentleman whocalled at the home of the Secretary of War:

"I went to the house in the evening, and found assembled there alarge company of gentlemen who paid assiduous court to the lady.Mrs. Eaton was not then the celebrated character she was destined erelong to be made. To me she seemed a strikingly beautiful andfascinating woman, all graciousness and vivacity—the life ofthe company."

That the discordant status of the households of the official advisersof the President was the topic of discussion among leading statesmen,may be inferred from the following extract from a letter writtenat the time by Daniel Webster:

"Mr. Van Buren has evidently, at this moment, quite the lead ininfluence and importance. He controls all the pages on the backstairs, and flatters what seems to be, at present, the Aaron'sserpent among the President's desires, a settled purpose of makingout of the lady of whom so much has been said, a person ofreputation."

Of curious interest even now, is the closing sentence in Mr.Webster's letter, in which with prophetic ken he forecasts theeffect of the Eaton controversy upon national politics: "It isodd enough, but too evident to be doubted, that the consequence ofthis dispute in the social and fashionable world is producing greatpolitical effects, and may very probably determine who shall besuccessor to the present chief magistrate."

As explanatory of the above quotation, it will be rememberedthat next to President Jackson, the two most prominent leadersof the dominant party were Vice-President Calhoun and Secretary ofState Van Buren. The political forces were even then gatheringaround one or the other of these great leaders, and there was littlequestion in official circles that the successor to Jackson wouldbe either Van Buren or Calhoun. It was equally certain that thesuccessful aspirant would be the one who had the good fortune tosecure the powerful influence of Jackson. Chief among the friendsof Calhoun were the Cabinet officers Ingham, Branch, and Berrien.The incumbent of the office of Postmaster-General—now for thefirst time a Cabinet office—was William T. Barry of Kentucky. Hewas the friend of Van Buren, and in the social controversy mentioned,he sided with the President and the Secretary of State as a championof Mrs. Eaton. As to the views of the Vice-President upon theall-absorbing question, we have no information. Not being oneof the official advisers of the President, he probably kept entirelyaloof from a controversy no doubt in every way distasteful to him.

Meanwhile the relations between Secretary Eaton and his colleaguesof the Treasury, Navy, and Department of Justice, became moreand more unfriendly, until all communication other than of the mostformal official character ceased. The soul of the President wasvexed beyond endurance; and as under existing conditions harmonyin his official family was impossible, he determined upon areorganization of his Cabinet. To this end, the resignations ofVan Buren, Eaton, and Barry were voluntarily tendered, and promptlyaccepted. A formal request from the President to Messrs. Ingham,Branch, and Berrien secured the resignation of these three officialadvisers; and thus was brought about what is known in our politicalhistory as "the disruption of Jackson's Cabinet."

The three gentlemen whose resignations had been voluntarily tendered,were, in modern political parlance, at once "taken care of."Mr. Van Buren was appointed minister to St. James, Barry to Madrid,and Eaton to the governorship of Florida Territory. No suchgood fortune, however, was in store for either Ingham, Branch,or Berrien. Each was, henceforth, persona non grata with PresidentJackson.

The end, however, was not yet. A publication by the retiring
Secretary of the Treasury contained an uncomplimentary allusion to
Mrs. Eaton, which resulted first in his receiving a challenge from
her husband, and later in a street altercation.

The almost forgotten incidents just mentioned were rapidly leadingup to matters of deep consequence. The true significance of thewords of Webster last quoted will now appear. A rupture, neveryet fully explained, now occurred between President Jackson andMr. Calhoun. The intention of the former to secure to Mr. VanBuren the succession to the presidency was no longer a matter ofdoubt.

Van Buren, "the favorite," was meanwhile reposing upon no bed ofroses. He was, in very truth, "in the thick of events." Hisconfirmation as Minister was defeated by the casting vote ofVice-President Calhoun, after the formal presentation of hiscredentials to the Court to which he had been accredited. Itwas believed that this rejection would prove the death knell toVan Buren's Presidential hopes. But it was not so to be. Hisrejection aroused deep sympathy, secured his nomination upon theticket with Jackson in 1832, and for four years he presided overthe great body which had so lately rejected his nomination, and asis well known, four years later he was chosen to succeed Jacksonas President. Unfortunately for Calhoun, one of the ablest andpurest of statesmen, he had incurred the hostility of Jackson, andnever attained the goal of his ambition.

During my interview with Mrs. Eaton I said to her, "Madam, you musthave known General Jackson when he was President?" "Known GeneralJackson," she replied, "known General Jackson?" "Oh, yes," I said,"your husband was a member of his Cabinet and of course you musthave known him. I would like to know what kind of a man GeneralJackson really was?" "What kind of a man," replied Mrs. Eaton in amanner and tone not easily forgotten. "What kind of a man—agod, sir, a god." The spirit of the past seemed over her, as withtrembling voice and deep emotion she spoke of the man whose powerfuland unfaltering friendship had been her stay and bulwark duringthe terrible ordeal through which she had passed.

Accompanying her that evening to the humble home provided for her bya distant relative, she remarked, "I have seen the time, sir, whenI could have invited you to an elegant home." She then saidthat when Major Eaton died, he left for her an ample fortune butthat some years later she unfortunately married a man younger thanherself, who succeeded in getting her property into his handsand then cruelly deserted her.

Fiction indeed seems commonplace when contrasted with the story ofreal life such as this now penniless and forgotten woman had known.Once surrounded by all that wealth could give, herself one ofthe most beautiful and accomplished of women, her husband theincumbent of exalted official position,—now, wealth, beauty,and position vanished; the grave hiding all she loved; sittingin silence and desolation, the memories of the long past almosther sole companions. When in the tide of time has there been truerrealization of the words of the great bard—

"The web of our life is of a mingled yarn,
Good and ill together?"

XTHE CODE OF HONOR

BLADENSBURG, A PLACE NOTORIOUS FOR DUELS—FRANKLIN'S OPINION OF
DUELLING—NOTABLE MEN WHO FELL IN DUELS—FATAL DUEL BETWEEN COMMODORES
BARRON AND DECATUR—THE LAST DUEL FOUGHT AT BLADENSBURG—ITS CAUSE A
MERE PUNCTILIO—THE WRITER'S INTERVIEW WITH ONE OF THE SECONDS—
A DUEL IN REVOLUTION DAYS—GEORGE WASHINGTON DISSUADES GEN. GREENE
FROM ACCEPTING A CHALLENGE—GEN. CONWAY, FOR CONSPIRING AGAINST
WASHINGTON, WOUNDED BY COL. CADWALLADER—GEN. CHARLES LEE, ANOTHER
CONSPIRATOR, WOUNDED BY COL. LAURENS—DUEL BETWEEN CLINTON,
"THE FATHER OF THE ERIE CANAL," AND MR. SWARTOUT—THREE NOTABLE
REPLIES TO CHALLENGES—THE FATAL DUEL BETWEEN HAMILTON AND BURR
—UNHAPPINESS OF BURR'S OLD AGE—DUEL BETWEEN SENATOR BRODERICK
AND JUDGE TERRY—A HARMLESS DUEL BETWEEN SENATOR GWIN AND MR.
McCORKLE—A MURDER UNDER THE GUISE OF A DUEL—DUELLING BY ILLINOISANS
—LINCOLN'S INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRELIMINARIES OF HIS DUEL WITH
SENATOR SHIELDS.

The very name "Bladensburg" is suggestive of pistol and bullet,savors indeed of human blood. It is associated with tragic eventsthat during successive generations stirred emotions of indignationand horror that have not yet wholly died out from the memoriesof men. As the words "Baden-Baden" and "Monte Carlo" bring beforeus the gambler "steeped in the colors of his trade," so the meremention of Bladensburg calls to mind the duellist, pistol in hand,standing in front of his slain antagonist.

Personal difficulties are now rarely if ever in this country adjustedby an appeal to "the code." The custom, now universally condemnedas barbarous, was at an early day practically upheld by analmost omnipotent public opinion. As is well known, in manylocalities to have declined an invitation to "the field of honor" fromone entitled to the designation of a "gentleman" would have entailednot only loss of social position, but to a public man would havebeen a bar to future political advancement. Thanks to a highercivilization, and possibly a more exalted estimate of the sacrednessof human life, the code in all our American States is a thing ofthe past.

And yet, revolting as the custom now appears, it held its place asa recognized method for the settlement of personal controversiesamong "gentlemen," to a time within the memories of men stillliving. The code, a heritage from barbaric times, lingered tillit had caused more than one bloody chapter to be written, until ithad taken from the walks of life more than one of our mostgifted American statesmen.

Truer words were never written than those of Franklin at thetime when the code was appealed to for the settlement of everydispute pertaining to personal honor: "A duel decides nothing;the man appealing to it, makes himself judge in his own cause,condemns the offender without a jury, and undertakes himself to bethe executioner." And yet, the startling record remains that inthe State of New Jersey, one of the ablest and most brilliant ofstatesmen met death at the hands of an antagonist scarcely lessgifted, who was at the time Vice-President of the United States.The survivor of an encounter equally tragic, occurring near thebanks of the Cumberland in 1806, was a little more than a score ofyears later elevated to the Presidency. The valuable life ofthe Secretary of State during the administration of the youngerAdams was saved only by his antagonist magnanimously refusing toreturn the fire which came within an ace of ending his own life.Thirteen years after the Clay and Randolph duel, a member of Congressfrom Maine perished in an encounter at Bladensburg with arepresentative from Kentucky. Sixty-six years ago, a challenge tomortal combat was accepted by one who in later years was twiceelected to the Presidency. One of the signers of the Declarationof Independence fell in a duel with an officer of the Colonialarmy, soon after that great event. There are many yet livingwho read the startling telegram from the Pacific coast that aSenator from California had fallen in a duel with the Chief Justiceof that State, and sad as it is, this dreadful recital might bemuch farther extended.

While a member of Congress many years ago, in company withRepresentatives Knott and McKenzie of Kentucky I spent some hours uponthe historic duelling ground at Bladensburg, a Maryland village ofa few hundred inhabitants, six miles from the city of Washington.Governor Knott pointed out the exact spot where Barron and Decaturstood in the memorable duel in 1820, in which the latter was killed.It is impossible to read the account of this fatal meeting evenafter the lapse of more than four score years, without a feelingof profound regret for the sad fate of one of the most gallantof all the brave officers the American Navy has known. It wastruly said of Decatur: "He was one of the most chivalric men ofany age or country." He was one of the little band of navalcommanders who by heroic exploits at sea did so much to redeem theAmerican name from the humiliation and disgrace caused by incompetentgeneralship upon land, in our second war with Great Britain.His encounters with the enemy were of frequent occurrence, andin each instance added new laurels to our little navy. If CommodoreDecatur had rendered no other service to his country, that of thedestruction of the Algerine pirates would alone entitle him to aplace among its benefactors. His skill and daring when in commandof our little fleet upon the Mediterranean destroyed forever thepower of "the common enemy of mankind," avenged the insult toour flag, and secured for the American name an honored place amongthe nations of the world.

The tragic death of Decatur—recalling so much of gallant service—has cast a spell about his name. It belongs in the list of immortals,with the names of Sir Walter Raleigh, Captain Lawrence, Lord Nelson,and Oliver Hazard Perry. Cities and counties without numberthroughout our entire country have been given the honored nameof Decatur.

Commodore Barron, too, had known much active service. For analleged official delinquency, he had been court-martialed near theclose of the War of 1812, and sentenced to a suspension of fiveyears from his command. Smarting under this humiliation, he wasbitter in his denunciation of all who were in any way concerned inwhat he regarded an act of flagrant injustice to himself. Chiefamong the officers who had incurred his displeasure was Commodore Decatur.A protracted and at length hostile correspondence ensued between thetwo, and this correspondence resulted at length in a challenge fromBarron, accepted by Decatur. The latter had repeatedly declaredthat he bore no personal hostility toward Barron. Before going tothe fatal field he told his friend William Wirt—then theAttorney-General of the United States—that he did not wish to meetBarron, and that the duel was forced upon him. When he receivedthe challenge, he assured a brother officer that nothing couldinduce him to take the life of Barron. In connection with thissad affair, Mr. Wirt—who was untiring in his efforts to effecta reconciliation—has left the record of a conversation with Decaturin which the latter declared his hostility to the practice ofduelling, but that he was "controlled by the omnipotence of publicsentiment." "Fighting," said he, "is my profession, and it would beimpossible for me to keep my station and preserve my respectabilitywithout showing myself ready at all times to answer the call ofany one who bore the name of gentleman."

The hostile meeting between Barron and Decatur occurred at theplace already mentioned, March 22, 1820. The distance was eightpaces, the weapons, pistols. Decatur's second was Captain Bainbridge,at a later day a distinguished admiral in our navy. As theytook their places at the deadly range, Barron said, "I hope onmeeting in another world we will be better friends than in this."To which Decatur replied, "I have never been your enemy, sir." Atthe word both pistols were discharged, making but a single report.Both combatants fell. Decatur was supported a short distance, andsank down near his antagonist, who was severely—and as it was thensupposed, mortally—wounded. Mr. Wirt says:

"What then occurred reminded me of the closing scenes of the tragedybetween Hamlet and Laertes. Barron proposed that they should makefriends before they met in another world. Decatur said he hadnever been his enemy, that he freely forgave him his death, but hecould not forgive those who had stimulated him to seek his life.Barron then said: 'Would to God you had said that much yesterday.'"

Thus they parted in peace. Decatur knew he was to die, and hisonly regret was that he had not died in the service of his country.

The last duel fought at Bladensburg was in 1838, between Jonathan Cilleyand William J. Graves. The former was at the time a Representativein Congress from Maine, and the latter from Kentucky. In its mainfeatures, this duel is without a parallel. It was fought upon apure technicality. The parties to it never exchanged an unkindword, and were in fact, almost up to the day of the fatal meeting,comparative strangers to each other.

Briefly related, the fatal meeting between Cilley and Gravescame about in this wise. In a speech in the House, Mr. Cilleyin replying to an editorial in The New York Courier and Inquirer,criticised severely the conduct of its proprietor, James WatsonWebb, a noted Whig editor of that day. At this, the latter, beingdeeply offended and failing to obtain a retraction by Cilley ofthe offensive words, challenged him to mortal combat. The bearer ofthis challenge was William J. Graves, a prominent Whig member ofthe House. Mr. Cilley in his letter to Mr. Graves, in which hedeclined to receive the challenge of Webb, said: "I decline toreceive it because I choose to be drawn into no controversy withhim. I neither affirm nor deny anything in regard to his character,but I now repeat what I have said to you, that I intended by therefusal no disrespect to you."

This letter was considered unsatisfactory by Graves, and heimmediately sent by his colleague Mr. Menifee, a note to Cilleythen in his seat in the House, saying: "In declining to receiveColonel Webb's communication, you do not disclaim any exception tohim personally as a gentleman. I have, therefore, to inquirewhether you declined to receive his communication on the ground ofany personal exception to him as a gentleman or a man of honor."Mr. Cilley declining to give the categorical answer demanded, wasimmediately challenged by Graves. The challenge was borne byMr. Wise, a Representative from Virginia. On the same evening,Mr. Jones—then a delegate and later a Senator from Iowa—as thesecond of Cilley, handed the note of acceptance of the latter toGraves. Bladensburg was designated as the place of meeting, riflesthe weapons, the distance eight yards, the rifles to be heldhorizontally at arm's length down, to be cocked and triggers set, thewords to be, "Gentlemen, are you ready?" Some delay was occasionedby the difficulty in procuring a suitable rifle for Mr. Graves.This was at length obviated, as will appear from the following noteof Mr. Jones to Mr. Wise: "I have the honor to inform you thatI have in my possession an excellent rifle, in good order, whichis at the service of Mr. Graves." With every courtesy proper tothe occasion rigidly observed, the rifle mentioned, "through thepoliteness of Dr. Duncan," was sent to Mr. Graves, and the hostilemeeting occurred at the designated time, February 24, 1838.

From the report of a special committee of the House of Representativesat a later day appointed to investigate this affair, it appearsthat Mr. Graves was accompanied to the ground by his second, Mr.Wise, Mr. Crittenden, and Mr. Menifee, two of his colleagues,and Dr. Foltz his surgeon. The attendants of Mr. Cilley werehis second, Mr. Jones, Representative Bynum of North Carolina, andColonel Schoenberg, and Dr. Duncan as his surgeon. The Committee'sreport then continues in these words:

"Shortly after three o'clock P. M. the parties exchanged shotsaccording to the terms of meeting. Mr. Cilley fired first beforehe had fully elevated his piece, and Mr. Graves one or two secondsafterwards. Both missed. It is to the credit of both the secondsand to the other gentlemen in attendance, than an earnest desirewas then manifested to have the affair terminated, as will appear fromthe report already mentioned."

Mr. Jones now inquired of Mr. Wise whether Mr. Graves was satisfied,to which Mr. Wise replied: "These gentlemen have come here withoutanimosity toward each other; they are fighting merely upon a pointof honor. Cannot Mr. Cilley assign some reason for not receiving atMr. Graves's hands Colonel Webb's communication, or make somedisclaimer which will relive Mr. Graves from his position?" Mr.Jones replied: "While the challenge is impending, Mr. Cilley canmake no explanation." Mr. Wise said: "The exchange of shotssuspends the challenge, and the challenge is suspended forexplanation." Mr. Jones thereupon went to Mr. Cilley, and afterreturning said:

"I am authorized by my friend Mr. Cilley to say, that in decliningto receive the note from Mr. Graves purporting to come from ColonelWebb, he meant no disrespect to Mr. Graves because he entertained forhim then as he does now, the highest respect and the most kindfeeling; but that he declined to receive the note because he chosenot to be drawn into any controversy with Colonel Webb."

The above not being satisfactory to Mr. Graves, and Mr. Cilleydeclining to make further concession, the challenge was renewedand the parties resumed their positions and again exchanged shots.Mr. Graves fired first, before he had fully elevated his piece;Mr. Cilley about two seconds afterwards. They both missed, althoughthe witnesses then thought from the motions and appearance ofMr. Graves that he was hit. The latter immediately and peremptorilydemanded another shot.

The challenge was here again, for the time, withdrawn andanother unsuccessful attempt made by the seconds to effect anadjustment. In the light of what was so soon to follow, it ispainful to read that all this came about and continued to the bloodyend, because Mr. Cilley in substance refused to disclaim thathis declination of Webb's challenge was for the reason that he didnot consider him a gentleman. His repeated assurance that in doingso, he intended no disrespect to the bearer of the challenge,for whom he entertained the most kindly feelings, strangely enoughto us was deemed insufficient.

The challenge being renewed, the parties, after due observanceof the formalities as before, confronted each other for the third andlast time. And now closes the official report: "the rifles beingloaded, the parties resumed their stations, and fired the thirdtime very near together. Mr. Cilley was shot through the body.He dropped his rifle, beckoned to some one near him, and said,'I am shot,' put both his hands to his wound, fell, and in twoor three minutes expired."

What a commentary all this upon "the code of honor"! Upon whatappears the shadow of a technicality even, two young men of recognizedability, chosen representatives of the people, confronted eachother in continued combat, until death closed the scene, and neitherhad the slightest feeling of hostility toward the other! Thisduel, so utterly groundless in its inception and bloody in itstermination, was the last fought in Bladensburg. Intense excitementfollowed the death of the lamented Cilley and public sentiment wasdeeply aroused against the horrible custom of duelling. But thepublic sentiment that existed at the time must be taken into accountbefore a too ready condemnation of one of the actors in this fearfultragedy. In announcing the death of Mr. Cilley to the Senate, Mr.Williams of Maine said: "In accepting the call, he did nothingmore than he believed indispensable to avoid disgrace to himself, hisfamily, and his constituents."

While the presiding officer of the Senate, a gentleman of smallstature and advanced age called upon me and introduced himselfas George W. Jones, former Senator from Iowa. I have rarely meta more interesting man. He was then ninety-two years of age,apparently in perfect health, and as active as if, for his exclusivebenefit, the hands had been turned back three decades upon thedial. He had been a delegate from the Territory embracing thepresent States of Iowa and Wisconsin, in the twenty-fifth Congress,when the sessions of the House were held in the Old Hall. Upon theadmission of Iowa as a State, he was chosen a Senator, a position heheld by successive elections for many years. As delegate, hehad been the associate of John Quincy Adams, and as a Senatorthe contemporary of Benton, Wright, Douglas, Cass, Seward, Preston,Clay, Calhoun, and Webster. He had personally known some of themen whose public life reached back to the establishment of theGovernment. He had taken part in the discussion of great questionsthat have left a deep impress upon history. As I listened to hisdescription of the men I have named, and of the momentous eventswith which their names are associated, he seemed indeed the soleconnecting link between the present and the long past.

But what interested me most deeply in the almost forgotten old manbefore me, was the fact that he was the second of the unfortunate Cilleyupon the ill-fated day at Bladensburg. The conversation at lengthturned to that event, and strangely enough, he manifested nosuggestion of embarrassment at its mention. He spoke in the highestterms of Mr. Cilley, as a gentleman of lofty character, of unfalteringcourage, of rare gifts, and of splendid promise. It was evidentthat the passing years had not dimmed his memory of the tragicevent, nor lessened his regret at the sad ending of an affair withwhich his own name is inseparably associated.

The first duel between men of prominence in this country, was thatof Gwinett and McIntosh. The fact that one of the parties, ButtonGwinett, was a signer of the Declaration of Independence givesit historic interest. He was one of the three delegates fromGeorgia in the second Continental Congress, and an earnest championof independence. Six years before, he had emigrated from England,purchased a large tract of land, and devoted himself to agriculturalpursuits. Less is known of him, probably, than of any of thesigners of the Declaration.

In 1777, he became involved in a bitter personal quarrel withGeneral McIntosh, an officer of the Revolution. Deeply offendedat his conduct, Gwinett challenged him to mortal combat. Theyfought with pistols at a distance of twelve feet, and Gwinettwas killed. He is buried at Augusta, Georgia, with his two colleaguesin the Continental Congress.

It is now an almost forgotten fact that, but for the wise counsel ofhis superior officer, Nathaniel Greene, next to Washington theablest of the American generals, would have been a party to a duelat a time when his services were so greatly in demand. Soon afterhis transfer to the southern army, Greene was challenged by acaptain of his command. Fearing that a declination upon hispart would be misunderstood by his brother officers, Greenewrote General Washington a full account of the transaction,concluding: "If I thought my honor or reputation would sufferin the opinion of the world, and more especially with the militarygentlemen, I value life too little to hesitate a moment toaccept the challenge." The answer of one of the wisest of menpossibly saved to our little army one whose loss would have beendisastrous to his country at that critical moment. Said Washington:

"I give it as my decided opinion, that your honor and reputationwill stand not only perfectly acquitted for the non-acceptanceof his challenge, but that your prudence and judgment would havebeen condemned by accepting it; because if a commanding officer isamenable to private calls for the discharge of his public duty, hehas a dagger always at his heart, and can turn neither to the rightnor to the left without meeting its point."

The timely words of Washington had the desired effect, and veryprobably saved General Greene to a brilliant career of usefulness andglory.

One of the most interesting incidents of our Revolutionary history,is what is known as "The Conway Cabal," the attempt to displaceWashington from the supreme command and substitute General HoratioGates in his stead. The latter was then in high favor as the heroof Saratoga and the capturer of the invading army of Burgoyne. Inthis connection, the prophetic words of the deeply embitteredGeneral Charles Lee will be recalled. On his way to take command ofthe southern army to which he had just been assigned, Gates calledupon Lee, then in disgrace and retirement at his home. Bothwere Englishmen, had known service together in the British army,and were at the time owners of neighboring plantations in whatis now Jefferson County, West Virginia. When parting, Leesignificantly remarked to this old comrade, "Gates, yourNorthern laurels will soon be turned into Southern willows."The disastrous defeat at Camden soon thereafter terminated themilitary career of Gates no less effectually than the timely "curse"of Washington had terminated that of Lee upon his disgracefulretreat at the battle of Monmouth.

The result of the "Cabal" above mentioned was a challenge fromColonel Cadwallader to General Conway, whose name has come down tous associated with the conspiracy to supersede Washington by Gates.In an encounter which immediately followed, Conway was seriouslywounded. Believing his wound to be mortal, he called for penand paper and did much to retrieve his reputation by writing thefollowing letter to Washington:

"SIR: I find myself just able to hold my pen during a few momentsand take this opportunity of expressing my sincere grief for havingwritten, said, or done anything disagreeable to Your Excellency.My career will soon be over, therefore justice and truth prompt meto declare my last sentiments. You are in my eyes the great andgood man. May you long enjoy the love, esteem, and venerationof these States whose liberties you have asserted by your virtues."

Conway eventually recovered, entered the army of France, and died inits service.

General Charles Lee was indeed a soldier of fortune. A nativeof England, he held a commission in the British army, and later inthat of the King of Italy. As the result of a duel in which heslew an Italian officer, he fled to America, and tendered hisservices to the Continental Congress just at the beginning ofthe struggle for independence. He was placed second in command toWashington and was not without supporters for the coveted positionof Commander-in-chief. He was from the beginning the enemy ofWashington, and deeply resented the fact that his position wassubordinate to that of the younger and less experienced officer,for whose ability he expressed great contempt. He was a friend ofGates and one of the chief conspirators in the Conway Cabal. Hismilitary career closed at the battle of Monmouth, and from lettersthat have come to light there is little doubt that he was thenin treasonable correspondence with the enemy.

After being deprived of his command at Monmouth, he was challengedby Colonel John Laurens, one of the aides of the Commander-in-chief,because of his denunciation of Washington. The challenge wasaccepted, and the parties fought with pistols in a retired spotnear Philadelphia. Additional interest attaches to this duel fromthe fact that Colonel Alexander Hamilton of Washington's staff,was the second for Laurens.

At the first fire Lee was wounded, and then, through the interpositionof Hamilton the affair terminated. The gratifying narrative hascome down to us that, "upon the whole, we think it a piece ofjustice to the two gentlemen to declare that, after they met, theirconduct was strongly marked with all the politeness, generosity,coolness, and firmness, that ought to characterize a transactionof this nature."

The last years of Lee's life were spent at his Virginia plantation.He died in an obscure boarding-house in Philadelphia, in 1782.Upon a visit I made to his Virginia home some years ago, I wasshown a certified copy of his will, which contained this remarkableprovision:

"It is my will, that I shall not be buried within one mile ofany churchyard, or of any Presbyterian or Anabaptist church, forthe reason that as I have kept a great deal of bad company in thisworld, I do not wish to do so in the next."

This country has known few abler or more eminent men than DeWittClinton. He was successively Mayor of the city of New York, Governorof that State, a Senator in Congress, and in 1812 an unsuccessfulcandidate for the Presidency against Mr. Madison. Distinguished as alawyer and statesman, he is even better known as "the Father of theErie Canal." His biographer says:

"After undergoing constant, unremitting, and factious resistance, hehad the felicity of being borne, in October, 1825, in a barge onthe artificial river—which he seemed to all to have constructed—from Lake Erie to the Bay of New York, while bells were rung,and cannon saluted him at every stage of that imposing progress."

In 1803, while in the Senate, Clinton accepted a challenge fromGeneral Dayton, a Senator from New Jersey. The ground of thechallenge was words spoken by the former in debate. Before thehostile meeting, however, through the interposition of friends asatisfactory explanation upon the part of Clinton resulted in apeaceable adjustment, and the restoration of friendly relationsbetween the two Senators.

An "affair of honor" in which Clinton was engaged one year earlier,was not quite so easily adjusted. This was with a noted politicianof that day, John Swartout of New York. The latter was the friendof Aaron Burr, the political and personal enemy of Clinton. Swartoutwas the challenging party, and the hostile meeting occurred nearthe city of New York. On the ground, after the parties had beenplaced in position, Clinton is said to have expressed regretthat Burr—the real principal in the controversy—was not beforehim. History might have run in a different channel had such been thefact.

Three pistol shots were exchanged without effect, at the end ofeach the second of Clinton demanding of Swartout, "Are you satisfied,sir?" to which the answer was, "I am not." To this, at thethird exchange, was added, "neither shall I be until that apology ismade which I have demanded of Mr. Clinton." Mr. Clinton declined tosign a paper presented, but declared that he had no animosityagainst Mr. Swartout, and would willingly shake hands and agree tomeet on the score of former friendship. This being unsatisfactory,the fourth shot was promptly exchanged. Fortune, heretoforereluctant to decide between her favorites, now leaned toward thechallenged party—Mr. Swartout being struck just below the knee.In reply to the inquiry, "Are you satisfied, sir?" standingerect while the surgeon kneeling beside him removed the ball, heanswered, "I am not; proceed." The fifth shot being exchanged, Mr.Swartout's other leg was the recipient of his antagonist's bullet.The voice of the wounded man being still for war, Mr. Clinton herethrew down his pistol, declaring he would fight no longer, andimmediately retired from the ground. The second of the remainingbelligerent now advised his principal to retire also and have hiswounds dressed, which certainly seemed reasonable under all thecircumstances.

An answer to a challenge that might well stand for a model for alltime, was that given during the administration of the older Adams byMr. Thatcher of Massachusetts, to Blount of North Carolina. Thechallenge grew out of a heated debate in the House. In reply,Thatcher said in substance, that being a husband and father, hisfamily had an interest in his life, and that he could not think ofaccepting the invitation without the consent of his wife, thathe would immediately consult her, and if successful in obtaining herpermission, he would meet Mr. Blount with pleasure. WhereuponFisher Ames, one of the great men of the day, wittily remarked to abachelor colleague, "Behold now the advantage of having a wife—God preserve us all from gunpowder!"

The reply of Thatcher was read in the House, causing much merrimentand leaving his adversary—

"Sacred to ridicule his whole life long,
And the sad burden of some merry song."

It is hardly necessary to add that at last accounts the consent of
Mrs. Thatcher had not been obtained.

It is scarcely remembered that Lord Byron, angered by a bittercriticism, once challenged the poet Southey. Accepting the challengeconditionally, Southey added:

"In affairs of this kind, the participants ought to meet onequal terms. But to establish the equality between you and methere are two things that ought to be done, and a third may also benecessary before I meet you on the field. First, you must marryand have four children—all girls. Second, you must prove thatthe greater part of the provision which you make for them depends uponyou life, and you must be under bond for four thousand pounds not tobe hanged, commit suicide, nor be killed in a duel, which arethe conditions upon which I have insured my life for the benefitof my wife and daughters. Third, you must convert me to infidelity.We can then meet on equal terms, and your challenge will becheerfully accepted."

Since the writing of the letters of Junius, nothing probably hasappeared equal in invective to the correspondence seventy yearsago between Daniel O'Connell and Benjamin Disraeli. The formerwas at the time a distinguished member of Parliament, and an oratorwithout a peer. Disraeli, at first a supporter of the policy ofthe great Liberator, had joined the ranks of his enemies, andwas unsparing in his denunciation of O'Connell and his party.In his reply O'Connell, after charging his assailant with ingratitudeand treachery, concluded as follows:

"I cannot divest my mind of the belief that if your genealogy weretraced, it would be found that you are the lineal descendant andtrue heir-at-law of the impenitent thief who atoned for his crimesupon the cross."

The challenge from Disraeli, which immediately followed, was treatedby O'Connell with supreme contempt.

The duel between Hamilton and Burr is of perennial interest to theAmerican people. Both were men of great distinction andsplendid talents. Both had been soldiers during the RevolutionaryWar, and Hamilton was the confidential friend and for a timechief-of-staff of Washington. Burr had been a Senator from NewYork, and was at the time of the duel Vice-President of the UnitedStates. He was one of the recognized leaders of the dominant party,and by many considered the probable successor of Jefferson inthe great office. Whatever hopes he might have had for the Presidencywere destroyed by his alleged attempt to defeat Jefferson and securehis own elevation by the House of Representatives in 1801. Hishostility to Hamilton had its beginning in the opposition of thelatter to Burr's aspirations to the Presidency. Differing widely,as Hamilton did, with Jefferson upon important questions thenpending, he nevertheless preferred the latter to Burr, and hisinfluence eventually turned the scales—after a protracted struggle—in favor of Jefferson.

The valuable service just mentioned was one of the many renderedby Hamilton. He was the earnest advocate of the adoption of theFederal Constitution, and his papers during that pivotal struggle havejustly given him high place in the list of American statesmen. Hewas the first Secretary of the Treasury, and possibly no manpossessed in larger degree the confidence of Washington.

Aaron Burr was the grandson of the great New England minister,Jonathan Edwards, whose only daughter, Edith, was the wife ofthe Reverend Aaron Burr, an eminent Presbyterian clergyman andPresident of Princeton College. From all that is known of thisgentleman, there can be no doubt that his ability and piety wereunquestioned. Edith, his wife, was a woman of rare gifts and one ofthe loveliest of her sex. The pathetic reference to her in thefuneral sermon over Hamilton will be remembered: "If there be tearsin Heaven, a pious mother looks down upon this scene and weeps."

Hamilton and Burr were both citizens of New York, the latter, ofAlbany, the former, of New York City. At the time of the challengeHamilton held no public office, but was engaged in a lucrativepractice of the law. Burr was near the expiration of his termas Vice-President, and was a prospective candidate for Governor ofNew York. This candidacy was the immediate cause of the correspondencewhich resulted in the fatal encounter. Four letters passed betweenBurr and Hamilton prior to the formal challenge. The first wasfrom Burr, and bears date June 18, 1804. In it attention is directedto a published letter of Dr. Cooper containing the words, "GeneralHamilton and Judge Kent have declared in substance that theylook upon Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not tobe trusted with the reins of government. And I could detail to youa still more deplorable opinion which General Hamilton has expressedof Mr. Burr."

It was to the last sentence that the attention of Hamilton wasespecially directed by Mr. Van Ness, the bearer of the letter,which closed with the demand upon the part of Burr of "a promptand unqualified acknowledgment or denial, of the use of any expressionwhich would warrant the assertion of Dr. Cooper."

In his reply the next day Hamilton said:

"I cannot reconcile it with propriety to make the acknowledgmentor denial you desire. I will add that I deem it inadmissable onprinciple to consent to be interrogated as to the justness ofthe inferences which may be drawn from others, from whatever I mayhave said of a political opponent in the course of fifteenyears' competition. I stand ready to avow, or disavow promptlyand explicitly, any precise or definite opinion which I may becharged with having declared of any gentleman. More than thiscannot be fitly expected from me; and especially it cannot bereasonably expected that I shall enter into an explanation upona basis so vague as that which you have adopted. I trust onmore reflection, you will see the matter in the same light withme. If not, I can only regret the circumstance, and must abidethe consequences."

The immediate response of Burr to the above, after repeating hisformer demand, contained the following:

"Political opposition can never absolve gentlemen from the necessityof a rigid adherence to the laws of honor and the rules of decorum.I neither claim such privilege, nor indulge it in others."

Hamilton's reply being unsatisfactory, the formal challenge of Burrwas soon thereafter handed to him by W. P. Van Ness. The lastnamed was the second of Burr, and Nathaniel Pendleton was the friendof Hamilton.

Some days elapsed after the formal acceptance of the challengebefore the fatal meeting. That Hamilton was anxious to avoidthe conflict, clearly appears from a perusal of the many publicationsthat immediately followed. A paper he prepared explanatory incharacter, the second of Burr declined to receive, on the groundthat he considered the correspondence closed by the acceptanceof the challenge.

It touches our sympathies deeply even after the lapse of a centuryto read the letter written by Hamilton to his wife to be deliveredin the event of his death, in which he states that he has endeavoredby all honorable means to avoid the duel which probably he wouldnot survive. He begs her forgiveness for the pain his death wouldcause her, and entreats her to bear her sorrows as one who hasplaced a firm reliance on a kind Providence.

A few days before his death, he and Burr were guests at a dimmergiven by the Cincinnati Society, of which both were members.Few persons were aware of what was pending, but it was observedthat Hamilton "entered with glee into all the gayety of a convivialparty, and even sang an old military song." Burr, upon the contrary,was "silent, gloomy, and remained apart."

In his will, written July 9, Hamilton expressed deep regret thathis death will prevent the full payment of his debts. He expressesthe hope that his children will, in time, make up to his creditorsall that may be due them. After tenderly committing to his childrenthe care of their mother, he says, "in all situations you arecharged to bear in mind, that she has been to you the most devotedand best of mothers."

The last paper that came from his pen was evidently intended ashis vindication to posterity, his appeal to time. In this he says:

"I was certainly desirous of avoiding this interview, for the mostcogent reasons. My religious and moral principles are stronglyopposed to duelling, and it would give me pain to be obliged toshed the blood of a fellow-creature in a private combat forbidden bythe laws. My wife and children are extremely dear to me, and mylife is of the utmost importance to them. I am conscious of noill-will to Colonel Burr distinct from political opposition, whichI trust has proceeded from pure and upright motives. Lastly, Ishall hazard much and shall possibly gain nothing by the issueof the interview. But it was impossible for me to avoid it."

He candidly admits that his criticisms of Colonel Burr have beensevere. He says:

"And on different occasions, I—in common with many others—havemade very unfavorable criticisms of the private character ofthis gentleman. It is not my design to fix any odium on the conductof Colonel Burr in this case. He may have supposed himself under thenecessity of acting as he has done. I hope the grounds of hisproceeding have been such as to satisfy his own conscience. Itrust, at the same time, that the world will do me the justiceto believe that I have not censured him on light grounds, nor fromunworthy inducements."

How strangely in the light of history sounds the following: "Itis my ardent wish that he, by his future conduct, may show himselfworthy of all confidence and esteem, and prove an ornament andblessing to the country."

That some lingering apprehension existed in the mind of GeneralHamilton that his criticisms of Colonel Burr might not have beenaltogether generous, appears from the following:

"As well because it is possible that I may have injured ColonelBurr, however convinced myself that my opinions and declarationshave been well-founded, as from my general principles and temperin relation to similar affairs, I have resolved, if our interview isconducted in the usual manner, and it please God to give me theopportunity, to reserve and throw away my first fire; and I havethought even of reserving my second fire, and thus giving to ColonelBurr a double opportunity to pause and to reflect."

And then, before laying down his pen for the last time, he struck thekeynote to the conduct of many brave men who, like himself,reluctantly accepted a call to "the field of honor." These arehis closing words:

"To those who with me, abhorring the practice of duelling, maythink that I ought under no account to have added to the number ofbad examples, I answer, that my relative situation as well in publicas in private enforcing all the considerations which constitutewhat men of the world denominate honor imposed on me a peculiarnecessity not to decline the call. The ability to be in futureuseful, whether in arresting mischief or effecting good in thiscrisis of our public affairs which seemed likely to happen,would probably be inseparable from a conformity with public prejudicein this particular."

At seven o'clock in the morning of July 11, 1804, at Weehawken,New Jersey, the fatal meeting took place. After the usualformal salutation, the parties were placed in position by theirseconds, ten paces apart, the pistols placed in their hands, andthe word being given both fired. General Hamilton instantly fell.The statement subsequently given out by the seconds is as follows:

"Colonel Burr then advanced toward General Hamilton with a manner andgesture that appeared to be expressive of regret, but withoutspeaking turned about and withdrew, being urged from the fieldby his friends. No further communication took place between theprincipals, and the barge that carried Colonel Burr immediatelyreturned to the city. We conceive it proper to add that the conductof the parties in this interview was perfectly proper as suitedthe occasion."

The surgeon in attendance states that after Hamilton was borneto the barge he observed, "Pendleton knows that I did not intendto fire at him." As they approached the shore he said, "LetMrs. Hamilton be immediately sent for; let the event be gradually brokento her, but give her hopes." His physician adds:

"During the night his mind retained its usual strength and composure.The great source of his anxiety seemed to be in his sympathy with hishalf-distracted wife and children. 'My beloved wife and children'was his often used expression, but his fortitude triumphed overhis situation, dreadful as it was. Once, indeed, at the sightof his children, seven in number, brought to his bedside together,his utterance forsook him. To his wife he said in a firm voicebut with a pathetic and impressive manner, 'Remember, my Eliza,that you are a Christian.' His words and the tone in which theywere uttered, will never be effaced from my memory."

After indescribable agony, death came at two o'clock of the daysucceeding the duel. Thus, at the age of forty-seven, perishedAlexander Hamilton, a great man in any country or time. Citiesand counties bear his name in almost every American State. Thestory of his wondrous life and tragic death will never lose itspathetic interest. His unswerving devotion to the country ofhis adoption, his untiring efforts in the establishment of thenational Government, and his friendship for Washington, which knewno abatement, have given Hamilton honored and enduring place inAmerican history.

As to Burr, the proverb found instant verification that "in duels thevictor is always the victim." Had he, instead of Hamilton, fallenon that ill-fated July morning, how changed their possible places inhistory. A halo has gathered about the name of Hamilton. Monumentshave been erected to his memory, his statue has been given highplace in the Capitol. The hour of his fall was that of hisexaltation.

The self-same hour witnessed the ruin of his antagonist. From thefatal field, unharmed in body, he turned away, henceforth to thefollowed by the execrations of his countrymen. Past services wereforgotten, brilliant talents availed nothing. His desperate attemptto found a rival government by the partial dismemberment of theone he had helped to establish was thwarted, and after years ofpoverty and misfortune abroad, he returned to die in neglect andobscurity in his own country. As was truly said: "He was the lastof his race; there was no kindred hand to smooth his couch, or wipethe death-damp from his brow. No banners drooped over his bier;no melancholy music floated upon the reluctant air."

The Hon. Hamilton Spencer, one of the ablest of lawyers, gave mean interesting account of an interview he had with Colonel Burr inAlbany not long before his death. Notwithstanding his advancedage, broken health, and ruined fortunes, he deeply impressed Mr.Spencer as a gentleman of most courteous manners, dignified bearing,and commanding presence such as he had rarely seen.

The one object of his love was his daughter, the beautiful Theodosia.Her devotion to her father increased with his accumulating misfortunes.The ship in which she sailed from her home in Charleston, SouthCarolina, to meet him in New York, never reached its destination.In all history, there are few pictures more pathetic than thatof the gray-haired, friendless man, with faded cloak drawn closelyabout him, day after day wandering alone by the seaside, anxiouslyawaiting the coming of the one being who loved him, the idolizeddaughter whose requiem was even then being chanted by the waves.

One of the men I occasionally met in Washington was Joseph C.McKibben, a former representative in Congress from the Pacificcoast. He was thoroughly familiar with the history of California fromits cession to the United States at the close of the Mexican War.He had been an active participant in many of the stirring eventsoccurring soon after the admission of the State into the Union.

"Men, except in bad novels, are not all good, or all evil."

Colonel McKibben was the second of David C. Broderick in his
duel with Judge Terry. At the time of the duel, Broderick was a
Senator of the United States, and Terry the Chief Justice of
California. The challenge given by Terry was promptly accepted.
As will be remembered, in the encounter which immediately followed,
Terry escaped unhurt and Broderick was killed.

I recall vividly the description given me of the meeting betweenthese men in that early Spring morning in 1859. Both possessedunquestioned courage. Their demeanor upon the field, as in deadlyattitude they confronted each other a few paces apart, was that ofabsolute fearlessness. "Each had set his life upon a cast, andwas ready to stand the hazard of the die."

Rarely have truer words been uttered than those of the gifted Bakerover the dead body of Broderick:

"The code of honor is a delusion and a snare; it palters withthe hope of true courage, and binds it at the feet of crafty andcruel skill. It surrounds its victim with the pomp and grace ofthe procession, but leaves him bleeding on the altar. Itsubstitutes cold and deliberate preparedness for courage and manlyimpulse, and arms the one to disarm the other. It makes the meretrick of the weapon superior to the noblest cause and the truestcourage. Its pretence of equality is a lie; it is equal in all theform, it is unjust in all the substance. The habitude of arms,the early training, the frontier life, the border war, the sectionalcustom, the life of leisure, all these are advantages which nonegotiations can neutralize, and which no courage can overcome.Code of honor! It is a prostitution of the name, is an evasion ofthe substance, and is a shield blazoned with the name of chivalry tocover the malignity of murder."

The tragic ending of the eventful career of Judge Terry, whichoccurred within the last decade, will be readily recalled.Immediately following his assault upon Justice Field at the railwaystation in Lathrop, California, he was slain by a deputy UnitedStates marshal. The wife of Terry was at his side, and the scene thatfollowed beggars description.

The name of Terry at once recalls the "Vigilance Committee" ofearly San Francisco days. The committee was composed largely ofleading men of the "law-and-order" element of the city. Robberiesand murders were of nightly occurrence, and gamblers and criminalsin many instances were the incumbents of the public offices.The organization mentioned became an imperative necessity forthe protection of life and property. The work of the committeeconstitutes one of the bloodiest chapters of early Californianhistory.

Nearly a third of a century ago, Colonel Thornton, a prominentlawyer of San Francisco, related to me an incident which he hadwitnessed during the time the famous Vigilance Committee was incomplete control. A young lawyer, recently located in San Francisco,was arrested for stabbing a well-known citizen who was at the timeone of the most active members of the Vigilance Committee. Thename of the lawyer was David S. Terry, at a later day Chief Justiceof the State. The dread tribunal was presided over by one ofthe most courageous and best known citizens of the Pacific coast.At a later day, his name was presented by his State to the NationalConvention of his party for nomination for the Vice-Presidency.

When brought before the Vigilance Committee, the demeanor of Terrywas that of absolute fearlessness. Standing erect and perfectlyself-possessed, he listened to the ominous words of the president:"Mr. Terry, you are charged with attempted murder; what have youto say?" Advancing a step nearer the committee "organized toconvict," and in a tone that at once challenged the respect of all,Terry replied, "If your Honor please, I recognize the jurisdictionof this court, and am ready for trial." He then clearly establishedthe fact that his assault was in self-defence, and after a masterlyspeech, delivered with as much self-possession as if a life other thanhis own trembled in the balance, was duly acquitted.

Another California with whom I was personally acquainted, wasWilliam M. Gwin. He had long passed the allotted three scoreand ten when I first met him at the home of the late Senator Sharon.Few men have known so eventful a career. He had been theprivate secretary of Andrew Jackson. He knew well the public men ofthat day, and related many interesting incidents of the stormyperiod of the latter years of Jackson's Presidency. In hisearly manhood Gwin was a member of Congress from Alabama. At theclose of the Mexican War he removed to California, and upon theadmission of that State he and John C. Fremont were chosen itsfirst Senators in Congress.

During a ride with him, he pointed out to me the spot where he hadfought a duel in early California days. He was then a Senator,and his antagonist the Hon. J. W. McCorkle, a member of Congress.A card signed by their respective seconds appeared the day following,to the effect that after the exchange of three ineffectual shotsbetween the Hon. William M. Gwin and the Hon. J. W. McCorkle, thefriends of the respective parties, having discovered that theirprincipals were fighting under a misapprehension of facts, mutuallyexplained to their respective principals how the misapprehensionhad arisen. As a result, Senator Gwin promptly denied the causeof provocation and Mr. McCorkle withdrew his offensive languageuttered at the race-course, and expressed regret at having used it.

To a layman in these "piping times of peace" it would appear themore reasonable course to have avoided "a misapprehension of facts"before even three ineffectual shots.

At the beginning of the great civil conflict, the fortunes ofSenator Gwin were cast with the South, and at its close he became acitizen of Mexico. Maximilian was then Emperor, and one of hislast official acts was the creation of a Mexican Duke out of thesometime American Senator. The glittering empire set up by Napoleonthe Third and upheld for a time by French bayonets, was even then,however, tottering to its fall.

When receiving the Ducal coronet from the Imperial hand theself-expatriated American statesman might well have inquired,

"But shall we wear these glories for a day,
Or shall they last, and we rejoice in them?"

A few months later, at the behest of our Government, the Frencharms were withdrawn, the bubble of Mexican Empire vanished, andthe ill-fated Maximilian had bravely met his tragic end. Thenceforth,a resident but no longer a citizen of the land that had givenhim birth, William M. Gwin, to the end of his life, bore thehigh sounding but empty title of "Duke of Sonora."

Frequent as have been the instances in our own country where deathhas resulted from duelling, it is believed that in but one has thesurvivor incurred the extreme penalty of the law. That one caseoccurred in 1820 in Illinois. What was intended merely as a "mockduel" by their respective friends, was fought with rifles by WilliamBennett and Alphonso Stewart in Belleville. It was privately agreedby the seconds of each that the rifles should be loaded with blankcartridges. This arrangement was faithfully carried out so far asthe seconds were concerned; but Bennett, the challenging party,managed to get a bullet into his own gun. The result was theimmediate death of Stewart, and the flight of his antagonist. Uponhis return to Belleville a year or two later, Bennett was immediatelyarrested, placed upon trial, convicted, and executed.

In more than one instance, at a later day, while well-knownIllinoisans have been parties to actual or prospective duels, noinstance has occurred of a hostile meeting of that character withinthe limits of the State. A late auditor of public account, butrecently deceased, killed his antagonist in a duel with riflesnearly half a century ago in California.

William I. Ferguson, one of the most brilliant orators Illinoishas known, in early professional life the associate of men who havesince achieved national distinction, fell in a duel while a memberof the State Senate in California.

During the sitting of the Illinois Constitutional Convention of1847, two of its prominent members, Campbell and Pratt, delegates fromthe northern tier of counties, became involved in a bitter personalcontroversy which resulted in a challenge by Pratt to mortal combat.The challenge was accepted and the principals with their seconds repairedto the famous "Bloody Island" in the Mississippi, when by theinterposition of friends a peaceable settlement was effected. The sequelto this happily averted duel was the incorporation in the Constitution,then in process of formulation, of a provision prohibiting duelling inthe State, and attaching severe penalties to sending or acceptinga challenge.

The earliest hostile meeting of Illinoisans was upon the islandlast mentioned before State organization had been effected. Theprincipals were young men of well-known courage and ability—oneof whom, Shadrack Bond, upon the admission of Illinois was electedits Governor. His adversary, John Rice Jones, was the first lawyerto locate in the Illinois country, and was the brother of the secondof the unfortunate Cilley in the tragic encounter already related.The late Governor Bissell of Illinois was once challenged byJefferson Davis. Both were at the time members of Congress, andthe casus belli was language reflecting upon the conduct of someof the participants in the then recently fought battle of BuenaVista. After the acceptance of the challenge, mutual friends ofDavis and Bissell effected a reconciliation, just before the hour setfor the hostile meeting.

So far as Illinois combatants are concerned, the historic islandmentioned above has little claim to its bloody designation, inasmuchas the "affairs" mentioned, and one much more famous, yet to benoted, were all honorably adjusted without physical harm to any ofthe participants.

The "affair of honor," the mention of which will close this chapter,owes its chief importance to the prominence attained at a laterday by its principals. The challenger, James Shields, was at thattime, 1842, a State officer of Illinois, and later a general intwo wars and a Senator from three States. The name of his adversaryhas since "been given to the ages." Mr. Lincoln was, at the time heaccepted Mr. Shields's challenge, a young lawyer, unmarried, residingat the State capital. He was the recognized leader of the Whigparty, and an active participant in the fierce political conflictsof the day. Some criticism in which he had indulged, touching theadministration of the office of which Shields was the incumbent,was the immediate cause of the challenge.

That Mr. Lincoln was upon principle opposed to duelling would bereadily inferred from his characteristic kindness. That "we aretime's subjects," however, and that the public opinion of sixty-oddyears ago is not that of to-day will readily appear from thepublished statement of his friend Dr. Merryman:

"I told Mr. Lincoln what was brewing, and asked him what course heproposed to himself. He said that he was wholly opposed to duellingand would do anything to avoid it that might not degrade him inthe estimation of himself and friends; but if such a degradation, ora fight, were the only alternatives, he would fight."

It is stated by one of the biographers of Mr. Lincoln that hewas ever after averse to any allusion to the Shields affair. Fromthe terms of his acceptance, it is evident that he intended neitherto injure his adversary seriously nor to receive injury at hishands. In his lengthy letter of instruction to his second, heclosed by saying:

"If nothing like this is done, the preliminaries of the fight are tobe, first, weapons: cavalry broadswords of the largest size,precisely equal in all respects. Second, position: a plank tenfeet long and from nine to twelve inches broad, to be firmly fixedon edge on the ground as the line between us which neither is topass his foot over upon forfeit of his life. Next, a line drawnon the ground on either side of said plank and parallel with it,each at the distance of the whole length of the sword, and threefeet additional from the plank; the passing of his own line byeither party during the fight shall be deemed a surrender of thecontest. Third, time: on Thursday evening at five o'clock withinthree miles of Alton on the opposite side of the river, the particularspot to be agreed on by you. Any preliminary details coming withinthe above rules you are at liberty to make at your discretion, butyou are in no case to swerve from these rules or to pass beyondtheir limits."

The keen sense of the humorous, with which Mr. Lincoln was soabundantly gifted, seems not to have wholly deserted him even inthe serious moments when penning an acceptance to mortal combat.The terms of meeting indicated—which he as the challenged partyhad the right to dictate—lend color to the opinion that he regardedthe affair in the light of a mere farce. His superior heightand length of arm remembered, and the position of the less favoredShields, with broadsword in hand, at the opposite side of the board,and not permitted "upon forfeit of his life" to advance an inch—the picture is indeed a ludicrous one.

Out of the lengthy statements of the respective seconds—thepublication of which came near involving themselves in personalaltercation—it appears that all parties actually reached theappointed rendezvous on time.

But it was not written in the book of fate that this duel was totake place. Something of mightier moment was awaiting one ofthe actors in this drama. Two level-headed men, R. W. English andJohn J. Hardin, the friends respectively of Shields and Lincoln,crossing the Mississippi in a canoe close in the wake of thebelligerents, reached the field just before the appointed hour.These gentlemen, acting in concert with the seconds, Whiteside andMerryman, soon effected a reconciliation deemed honorable to all, andthe Shields-Lincoln duel passed to the domain of history. Thatthe reconciliation thus brought about was sincere was evidenced bythe fact that one of the earliest acts of President Lincoln wasthe appointment of General Shields to an important military command.

How strangely "the whirligig of time brings in his revenges!" Afew paces apart in the old Hall at the Capitol at Washington, standtwo statues, the contribution of Illinois for enduring place inthe "Temple of the Immortals." One is the statue of Lincoln,the other that of Shields.

XIA PRINCELY GIFT

DESCENT OF JAMES SMITHSON, FOUNDER OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION—HIS EDUCATION AND HIS WRITINGS—HIS WILL—THE UNITED STATES HISRESIDUARY LEGATEE—SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTION OF THE CLAIM OF THE UNITEDSTATES TO THE LEGACY—PLANS SUGGESTED FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THE FUND—PROF. JOSEPH HENRY APPOINTED SECRETARY—BENEFICENT WORK OF THEINSTITUTION.

Although a third of a century has passed since I met ProfessorJoseph Henry, I distinctly recall his kindly greeting and thecourteous manner in which he gave me the information I requestedfor the use of one of the Committees of the House.

The frosts of many winters were then on his brow, and he was near theclose of an honorable career, one of measureless benefit to mankind.He was the first secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, and theoriginator of the plan by which was carried into practical effect thesplendid bequest for "the increase and diffusion of knowledge amongmen."

As Vice-President of the United States, a regent ex-officio ofthe Smithsonian Institution, I had rare opportunity to learn much ofits history and something of its marvellous accomplishment. As iswell known, it bears the name of James Smithson. He was anEnglishman, related to the historic family of Percy, and alineal descendent of Henry the Seventh, his maternal ancestor beingthe ill-fated Lady Jane Grey, cousin to Queen Elizabeth.

Mr. Langley, the late secretary of the institution, said:

"Smithson always seems to have regarded the circumstances of hisbirth as doing him a peculiar injustice, and it was apparently thissense that he had been deprived of honors properly his which made himlook for other sources of fame than those which birth had deniedhim, and constituted the motive of the most important action ofhis life, the creation of the Smithsonian Institution."

The deep resentment of Smithson against the great families who hadvirtually disowned him, finds vent in a letter yet extant, of whichthe following is a part: "The best blood of England flows in myveins; on my father's side I am a Northumberland, on my mother'sI am related to kings; but this avails me not. My name shall livein the memory of man when the titles of the Northumberlands andthe Percys are extinct and forgotten."

How truly his indignant forecast was prophetic is now a matterof history. Few men know much about the once proud families ofNorthumberland or Percy, but the name of the youth they scornfullydisowned lives in the institution he founded, the greatestinstrumentality yet devised for "the increase and diffusion ofknowledge among men."

Smithson was born in 1765, and received the degree of Master ofArts from Pembroke College at the age of twenty-one. A year laterhe was admitted a Fellow of the Royal Society, upon the recommendationof his instructors, as being "a gentleman well versed in the variousbranches of Natural Philosophy, and particularly in Chemistry andMineralogy." As a student, he was devoted to the study of thesciences, especially chemistry, and his entire life, in fact,was given to scientific research. Twenty-seven papers from hispen were published in "The Philosophical Transactions of the RoyalSociety" and in "Thompson's Annals of Philosophy," near the close ofthe eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century, and"all give evidence that he was an assiduous and faithfulexperimenter."

In this connection, the statement of Professor Clarke, Chief Chemistof the United States Geographical Survey, is in point:

"The most notable feature of Smithson's writings from the standpointof the analytical chemist, is the success obtained with the mostprimitive and unsatisfactory appliances. In Smithson's day, chemicalapparatus was undeveloped, and instruments were improvised fromsuch materials as lay readiest to hand. With such instruments,and with crude reagents, Smithson obtained analytical results ofthe most creditable character, and enlarged our knowledge ofmany mineral species. In his time, the native carbonate and thesilicate of zinc were confounded as one species under the namecalamine; but his researches distinguished between the two minerals,which are now known as Smithsonite and Calamine, respectively.

"To theory Smithson contributed little, if anything; but from atheoretical point of view, the tone of his writings is singularlymodern. His work was mostly done before Dalton had announcedthe atomic theory; and yet Smithson saw clearly that a law ofdefinite proportions must exist, although he did not attempt toaccount for it. His ability as a reasoner is best shown in hispaper on the Kirkdale Bone Cave, which Penn had sought to interpretby reference to the Noachian Deluge. A clearer and morecomplete demolition of Penn's views could hardly be written to-day.Smithson was gentle with his adversary, but none the less thorough,for all his moderation. He is not to be classed among the leadersof scientific thought; but his ability and the usefulness of hiscontributions to knowledge, cannot be doubted."

The life of Smithson was uncheered by domestic affection; he wasof singularly retiring disposition, had no intimacies, spent theclosing years of his life in Paris, and was long the uncomplainingvictim of a painful malady. Professor Langley said of him:

"One gathers from his letters, from the uniform consideration withwhich he speaks of others, from kind traits which he showed, andfrom the general tenor of what is not here particularly cited, theremembrance of an innately gentle nature, but also of a man who isgradually renouncing not without bitterness the youthful hope offame, and as health and hope diminished together, is finally livingfor the day, rather than for any future."

He died in Genoa, Italy, June 27, 1829, and was buried in the littleEnglish cemetery on the heights of San Benigno. The Institutionhe founded has placed a tablet over his tomb and surrounded it withevidences of continued and thoughtful care.

His will—possibly of deeper concern to mankind than any yet written—bears date October 23, 1826. In its opening clause he designateshimself: "Son of Hugh, First Duke of Northumberland, and Elizabeth,heiress of the Hungerfords of Studley, and niece to Charles theproud Duke of Somerset." Herein clearly appears his undyingresentment toward those who had denied him the position in life towhich he considered himself justly entitled.

The only persons designated in his will as legatees are a faithfulservant, for whom abundant provision was made, and Henry JamesHungerford, nephew of the testator. To the latter was devised theentire estate except the legacy to the servant mentioned. Theclause of the will which has given the name of Smithson to the agesseems to have been almost casually inserted; it appears betweenthe provision for his servant and the one for an investment of thefunds.

The clause in his will which was to cause his name "to live in thememory of man when the titles of the Northumberlands and the Percysare extinct and forgotten," was,—

"In the case of the death of my said nephew without leaving a childor children, or the death of the child or children he may have hadunder the age of twenty-one years, or intestate, I then bequeaththe whole of my property subject to the annuity of one hundredpounds to John Fitall (for the security and payment of which I havemade provision) to the United States of America, to found atWashington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, anestablishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge amongmen."

Why he selected the United States as his residuary legatee has longbeen, and will continue to be, the subject of curious inquiry. Hehad never been in America, had no correspondent here, and nowhere inhis writings has there been found an allusion to our country.So far as we know, he could have had no possible prejudice in favorof our system of representative government.

It is a singular fact, however, in this connection, that the pivotalclause in his will bears striking resemblance to the admonition,"Promote as an object of primary importance institutions for thegeneral diffusion of knowledge," contained in the farewell addressof President Washington.

The contingency provided for happened; the death of the nephewHungerford unmarried and without heirs occurred six years afterthat of the testator. The first announcement to the people of theUnited States of the facts stated was contained in a special messagefrom President Jackson to Congress, December 17, 1835. Accompanyingthe message was a letter with a detailed statement, and copy ofthe will, from our Legation in London. In closing his brief messageof transmission, President Jackson says: "The Executive having noauthority to take any steps for accepting the trust and obtaining thefunds, the papers are communicated with a view to such measures asCongress may deem necessary."

On the first day of July, 1836, a bill authorizing the Presidentto assert and prosecute the claim of the United States to theSmithson legacy became a law. This, however, was after muchopposition in Congress; a member of the House indignantly declaringthat our Government should receive nothing by way of gift fromEngland, and proposing that the bequest should be denied. Theprophetic words of the venerable John Quincy Adams—then a member ofthe House after his retirement from the Presidency—in advocatingthe passage of the bill are worthy of remembrance:

"Of all the foundations of establishments for pious or charitable useswhich ever signalized the spirit of the age, or the comprehensivebeneficence of the founders, none can be named more deserving theapprobation of mankind than this. Should it be faithfully carriedinto effect with an earnestness and sagacity of application and asteady perseverance of purpose proportioned to the means furnishedby the will of the founder, and to the greatness and simplicity ofhis design as by himself declared,—'the increase and diffusion ofknowledge among men,'—it is no extravagance of anticipation to declarethat his name will hereafter be enrolled among the benefactors of mankind."

In the execution of this law, the President immediately upon itsenactment appointed Richard Rush, a distinguished lawyer ofPhiladelphia, to proceed to London, and take the necessary stepsto obtain the legacy. To the accomplishment of this purpose a suitwas soon thereafter instituted by Mr. Rush. The hopelessness ofits early termination in an English Chancery Court of that day willat once occur to the readers of Dickens's famous "Jarndyce againstJarndyce." It was truly said, that a chancery suit was a thingwhich might begin with a man's life, and its termination be hisepitaph.

A wiser selection than Mr. Rush could not have been made. Heentered upon the work to which he had been appointed, with greatdetermination. In a letter to our Secretary of State just afterhe had instituted suit, he says:

"A suit of higher interest and dignity, has rarely perhaps beenbefore the tribunals of a nation. If the trust created by thetestator's will be successfully carried into effect by the enlightenedlegislation of Congress, benefits may flow to the United States,and to the human family, not easy to be estimated, because operatingsilently and gradually throughout time, yet not operating the lesseffectually. Not to speak of the inappreciable value of lettersto individual and social man, the monuments which they raise toa nation's glory often last when others perish, and seem especiallyappropriate to the glory of a Republic whose foundations are laid inthe assumed intelligence of its citizens, and can only be strengthenedand perpetuated as that improve."

The successful termination of the suit came, however, soonerthan could have been expected; and in May, 1838, the amount of thelegacy, exceeding the substantial sum of five hundred thousanddollars, was received and invested as required by law.

The facts stated were communicated by special message from PresidentVan Buren to Congress, in December, 1838. Attention was then calledto the fact that he had applied to persons versed in science,for their views as to the mode of disposing of the fund which wouldbe calculated best to meet the intent of the testator, and provemost beneficial to mankind.

During the eight years intervening between this message and thepassage of the bill for the incorporation of the SmithsonianInstitution, much discussion was had in and out of Congress, as tothe best method of making effective the intention of the testator.

In the light of events, some of the many plans suggested are even nowof curious interest. The establishment of a magnificent national libraryat the Capital; the founding of a great university; of a normalschool; a post graduate school; and astronomical observatory "equalto any in the world," are a few of the plans from time to timeproposed and earnestly advocated.

The act of incorporation in 1846, the appointment of a Board ofRegents, and the selection of a Secretary, mark the beginning ofthe Smithsonian Institution. In the selection of a Secretary, thechief officer of the institution, the regents builded betterthan they knew. The choice fell upon Professor Joseph Henry ofPrinceton, then peerless among men of science in America. Theappointment was accepted, and the essential features of the planof organization he proposed were adopted in December, 1847.This plan recognized as

"Fundamental that the terms 'increase' and 'diffusion' shouldreceive literal interpretation in accordance with the evidentintention of the testator; that such terms being logically distinct,the two purposes mentioned in the bequest were to be kept in view inthe organization of the institution; that the increase of knowledgeshould be effected by the encouragement of original researchesof the highest character; and its diffusion by the publicationof the results of original research, by means of the publicationof a series of volumes of original memoirs; that the object of theinstitution should not be restricted in favor of any particularkind of knowledge; if to any, only to the higher and more abstract,to the discovery of new principles rather than that of isolatedfacts; that the institution should in no sense be national; thatthe bequest was intended for the benefit of mankind in general,and not for any single nation.

"The accumulation and care of collections of objects of nature andart, the development of a library, the providing of courses oflectures, and the organization of a system of meteorologicalobservation, were to be only incidental to the fundamental design ofincreasing and diffusing knowledge among men."

In its inception, and in its widening influence during the passingyears, those entrusted with the actual management of this institutionhave conscientiously kept in view the clearly expressed intention ofits founder. Following the distinctive but parallel paths, "increase"and "diffusion," the Smithsonian Institution, yet in its infancy, hasadded largely to the sum of useful knowledge. Its accreditedrepresentatives are out upon every pathway of intelligent researchand discovery. Under the wise operation of this marvellousinstrumentality, long-concealed secrets of nature have beendiscovered, and it can hardly be doubted that all that is given toman to know will yet be revealed, and it will be permitted him

"To read what is still unread,
In the manuscripts of God."

By indefatigable investigation, and by world-wide publication ofthe results, mankind has indeed become, as was intended, thebeneficiary of the princely bequest.

More fitting words could not be selected with which to closethis sketch than those of the gifted and lamented Langley, whosebest years were given to scientific research, and whose name isinseparably associated with the Smithsonian Institution:

"What has been done in these two paths the reader may partly gatherfrom this volume—in the former from the various articles bycontemporary men of science, describing its activities in researchand original contributions to the increase of human knowledge;in the latter, in numerous way—among others from the description ofthe work of one of its bureaux, that of the International Exchanges,where it may be more immediately seen how universal is the scopeof the action of the Institution, which, in accordance with itsmotto 'PER ORBEM,' is not limited to the country of its adoption, butbelongs to the world, there being outside of the United States morethan twelve thousand correspondents scattered through every portionof the globe; indeed there is hardly a language, or a people, wherethe results of Smithson's benefaction are not known, and associatedwith his name.

"If we were permitted to think of him as conscious of what hasbeen, is being, and is still to be done, in pursuance of his wish,we might believe that he would feel that his hope at a time whenlife must have seemed so hopeless, was finding full fruition;for events are justifying what may have seemed, at the time, buta rhetorical expression, in the language of a former President ofthe United States, who has said: 'Renowned as is the name of Percyin the historical annals of England, let the trust of James Smithsonto the United States of America be faithfully executed, let theresult accomplish his object, the increase and diffusion of knowledgeamong men, and a wreath more unfading shall entwine itself inthe lapse of future ages around the name of Smithson than the unitedhands of history and poetry have braided around the name ofPercy through the long ages past.'"

XIITHE OLD RANGER

JOHN REYNOLDS, GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS, A BORN POLITICIAN—HIS KNOWLEDGEOF THE PEOPLE—HIS AFFECTATION OF HUMILITY—ADMITTED TO THE BAR—HE CONDEMNS A MURDERER TO DEATH—HIS CURIOUS ADDRESS TO ANOTHERMURDERER—BECOMES A MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE—ELECTED GOVERNOR—HIS GENEROSITY TO HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES—BECOMES A MEMBER OFCONGRESS—HIS ADMIRATION FOR HIS ASSOCIATES—ELECTED A MEMBER OF THEGENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE—RETIRES TO PRIVATE LIFE.

This world of ours will be much older before the like of JohnReynolds, the fourth Governor of Illinois, again appears uponits stage. The title which he generously gave himself in earlymanhood, upon his return after a brief experience as a trooperin pursuit of a marauding band of Winnebagoes, stood him well inhand in all his future contests for office. "The Old Ranger" was asobriquet to conjure with, and turned the scales in his favor inmany a doubtful contest.

The subject of this sketch was a born politician if ever onetrod this green earth. He was a perennial candidate for office,and it was said he never took a drink of water without seriousmeditation as to how it might possibly affect his political prospects.The late Uriah Heep might easily have gotten a few points in"'umbleness," if he had accompanied the Old Ranger in one or twoof his political campaigns.

While Illinois was yet a Territory, his father had emigrated from themountains of Tennessee and located near the historic village ofKaskaskia. This was at the time the capital of the Territory.The village mentioned was then the most, and in fact, the only,important place in the vast area constituting the present State ofIllinois. There were less than five thousand persons of allnationalities and conditions in the Territory, and they mainlyin and about Kaskaskia, and southward to the Ohio. Beck's Gazetteerpublished in 1823—five years after the admission of the State intothe Union—contains the following: "Chicago, a village of PikeCounty, situated on Lake Michigan at the mouth of the Chicago Creek.It contains twelve or fifteen houses, and about sixty or seventyinhabitants."

The acquaintance of John Reynolds with what was then known as "theIllinois Country" began in 1800, and his thorough knowledge of thepeople and their ways gave him rare opportunities for acquiringgreat personal popularity. Fairly well educated for the times,gifted with an abundance of shrewdness, and withal an excellentjudge of human nature, he soon became a man of mark in the newcountry. He was at all times and under all circumstances theself-constituted "friend of the people." He affected to be one ofthe humblest of the sons of men; and his dress, language, anddeportment were always in strict keeping with that assumption. Forthe pride of ancestry he had a supreme contempt. In his "My OwnTimes," published a few years before his death, he said: "I regardthe whole subject of ancestry and descent as utterly frivolous andunworthy of a moment's serious attention."

This recalls what Judge Baldwin said of Cave Burton:

"He was not clearly satisfied that Esau made as foolish a bargain withhis brother Jacob as some think. If the birth-right was a merematter of family pride, and the pottage of agreeable taste, Cave wasnot quite sure that Esau had not gotten the advantage in his famedbargain with the Father of Israel."

Humility was Reynolds's highest card, and when out among the peoplehe was always figuratively clothed in sackcloth and ashes. Afew extracts from his book may be of interest:

"I was a singular spectacle when in 1809 I started to Tennessee tocollege. I looked like a trapper going to the Rocky Mountains.I wore a cream-colored hat made of the fur of the prairie wolf,which gave me a grotesque appearance. I was well acquainted with themysteries of horse and foot races, shooting matches, and other wildsports of the backwoods, but had not studied the polish of theball-room and was sorely beset with diffidence, awkwardness, andpoverty."

Later, and when out in pursuit of the Indians, he said: "Butdiffidence never permitted me to approach an officer's tent, orsolicit any one for office."

None the less, the office of Orderly Sergeant being thrust uponhim, he managed in his humble way to get through with itpassably well.

When the State Government was organized in 1818, while shrinkingfrom even the gaze of men, and spurning from the depths of his soulthe arts of politicians, he managed in some way to be designatedone of the judges of the Supreme Court of the new State. Hisadmiration for the dispensing hand appears as follows: "Wisdomand integrity, with other noble qualities, gave Governor Bond ahigh standing with his contemporaries. Wisdom and integrity shed abeacon light around his path through life, showing him to be oneof the noblest works of God."

Four years prior to this appointment, he had been admitted tothe bar, after "undergoing with much diffidence" his examination.This accomplished, he adds: "In the Winter of 1814, I establisheda very humble and obscure law-office in the French village ofCahokia, the county seat of St. Clair County." The bearing of theone whose meat was locusts and wild honey, and whose loins weregirt about with a leathern girdle, was arrogance itself, whencompared with the deportment of the later John in the wildernessat the period whereof we write.

That he was orthodox upon what pertained to medical practice will nowappear: "It was the universal practice to give the patient of thebilious disease, first, tartar emetic; next day, calomel and jalap;and the third day, Peruvian bark. This was generally sufficient."The latter statement will hardly be questioned.

How his first visitation of the tender passion was mingled witha relish of philosophy is recorded for the benefit of posterity:

"During all my previous life until within a short time before Imarried, I had not the least intention of that state of existence,and I expressed myself often to my friends to the same effect; buton the subject of matrimony, a passion influences the parties whichgenerally succeeds. Judgment and prudence should be mixed inequal parts with love and affection in the transaction, to secure alasting and happy union."

With all his diffidence, however, the Old Ranger happened to turn upat the seat of Government in time "to be persuaded by my friendsto be a candidate for a Judgeship. It broke in on me like a clap ofthunder." The mite of philosophy with which he excused himselffor giving way to the urgent demand of his friends is as follows:"Human nature is easier to persuade to mount upwards than to remainon the common level."

His mind, as will appear, was essentially of the strictly practicalcast. He no doubt believed with Macaulay that "one acre in Middlesexis worth a principality in Utopia."

That the Republican simplicity of the new Judge followed him from his"very humble and obscure law-office" to the Bench, will now appear:

"The very first court I held was in Washington County, and it was tome a strange and novel business. I was amongst old comradeswith whom I had been raised, ranged in the war with them, and livedwith them in great intimacy and equality, so that it was difficultto assume a different relationship than I had previously occupied withthem. Moreover I detested a mock dignity. Both the sheriff andclerk were rangers in the same company with myself, and it seemed wewere still ranging on equal terms in pursuit of the Indians.The sheriff was of the same opinion and very familiar. He opened courtsitting astride on a bench in the Court-house, and without rising,proclaimed: 'The court is now open, and our John is on the bench.'"

It may here be mentioned that the first case of importance thatcame before Judge Reynolds, was the trial of one William Bennettfor murder. He had killed his antagonist in a duel in St. ClairCounty, for which he suffered the death penalty. This is the onlyduel ever fought in Illinois. No doubt the prompt execution ofBennett did much to discourage duelling in the State.

In reply to the charge that he had acted with unbecoming levityupon the trial of Bennett, the Judge said, "No human being of myhumble capacity could have acted with more painful feelings andsympathy than did I on this occasion." Having thus vindicatedhimself from the serious charge mentioned, he adds:

"I am opposed to capital punishment in any case where the convict canbe kept in solitary confinement without pardoning his life; it wasextremely painful and awful to me to be the instrument in the handsof the law to pronounce sentence of death upon my fellow-man,extinguishing him forever from the face of the earth, and deprivinghim of life, which I think belongs to God and not to man."

He consoles himself, however, as he closes his narrative of thissad affair, that "it never did assume the character of a regularand honorable duel." It is very satisfactory also, even at thisdistant date, to be assured by the Judge that "the prisoner embracedreligion, was baptized, and died happy, before spectators to thenumber of two thousand or more."

Governor Ford, in his history of Illinois, relates the followingincident as characteristic of Judge Reynolds. The latter washolding court in Washington County when one Green was found guiltyupon an indictment for murder. The court was near the hour ofadjournment for the term, when the prosecuting attorney suggested tothe court that the prisoner Green be brought in in order thatsentence be passed upon him. "Certainly, certainly," said theJudge, and the prisoner was at once brought in from the jailnear by.

"Mr. Green," said the Judge in a familiar tone, "the jury inyour case have found you guilty. I want you to understand, Mr.Green, and all your friends down on Indian Creek to know, thatit is not I who condemns you, but the jury and the law. The lawallows you time for preparation, Mr. Green; and so the court wantsto know what time it would suit you to be hung?" The prisonerreplying that he was ready to suffer at whatever time the courtmight appoint, the Judge said;

"Mr. Green, you must know that it is a very serious matter to behung. It can't happen to a man more than once in his life, andyou had better take all the time you can get; the court will give youtill this day four weeks. Mr. Clerk, look at the almanac and see ifthis day four weeks comes on Sunday." The Clerk after examinationreported that that day four weeks came on Friday. The Judge thensaid: "Mr. Green, the court gives you till this day four weeks,and then you are to be hanged."

Whereupon the prosecuting officer, the Hon. James Turney, an able anddignified lawyer, said:

"May it please the court, on solemn occasion like the present, whenthe life of a human being is to be sentenced away for crime byan earthly tribunal, it is usual and proper for courts to pronouncea formal sentence, in which the leading features of the crime shallbe brought to the recollection of the prisoner, a sense of hisguilt impressed upon his conscience, and in which the prisonershould be duly exhorted to repentance and warned against the judgmentin a world to come."

To which the Judge replied: "Oh, Mr. Turney, Mr. Green understandsthe whole matter as well as if I had preached to him a month.He knows he has got to be hung this day four weeks. You understandit that way, Mr. Green, don't you?"

"Yes," said the prisoner, upon which the Judge again expressingthe hope that he and all his friends down on Indian Creek wouldunderstand that it was the act of the jury and of the law, andnot of the Judge, ordered the prisoner to be remanded to jail,and the court adjourned for the term.

For some reason, by no means satisfactorily explained, Judge Reynoldsretired from the bench at the end of his four years' term. In"Breese," the first volume of Illinois reports, is an opinion byJudge Reynolds which has been the subject of amusing comment bythree generations of lawyers. After giving sundry reasons whythere was error in the judgment below, the learned Judge concludes:"Therefore, the judgment ought to be reversed; but inasmuch asthe court is equally divided in opinion, it is thereforeaffirmed."

He then resumed the practice of the law, and as he says, "wasfamiliar with the people, got acquainted with everybody, and becamesomewhat popular. I had no settled object in view other than tomake a living, and to continue on my humble, peaceable, and agreeablemanner." In view of the aversion already shown to office-holding,the following disclaimer upon the part of the Judge seems whollysuperfluous: "I had no political ambition or aspirations for officewhatever."

It is gratifying to know that at this time his domestic affairswere in a satisfactory condition: "Plain and unpretending; never keptany liquor in the house—treated my friends to every civility exceptliquor; used an economy bordering on parsimony."

Under the favorable conditions mentioned, the Judge was enabled toovercome his aversion to holding office, and became a humble memberof the State Legislature immediately upon his retirement fromthe bench. That his "modest aspirations" were on a higher planethan that of ordinary legislators will clearly appear from thefollowing: "I entered this Legislature without any ulterior views,and with an eye single to advance the best interests of the State,and particularly the welfare of old St. Clair County. My onlyambition was to acquit myself properly, and to advance the bestinterests of the country."

Two years later, the aversion of the Old Ranger for office wasagain overcome, as will appear from the following: "I entered thisLegislature, as I had the last, without any pledge or restraintswhatever; I then was, and am yet, only an humble member of theDemocratic party."

His friends were again on the war-path and the shadow of the chiefexecutive office of the State was now beginning to fall across hispathway. He says:

"It would require volumes to record the transactions of theseLegislatures, and of my humble labors in them; but it was my courseof conduct in these two sessions of the General Assembly thatinduced my friends, without any solicitation on my part, to offerme as a candidate for Governor. I was urged not by politicians,but by reasonable and reflecting men, more to advance the interestof the State than my own."

If we did not, from his own lips, know how the Judge loathed"the arts of politicians," we might almost be tempted to conclude fromthe following that he was one of them:

"I traversed every section of the State, and knew well the people.My friends had the utmost confidence in my knowledge of the people,and when I suggested any policy to be observed, this suggestionwas consequently carried out as I requested—thus placing all underone leader."

This, it will be remembered, was in 1830, and neither Reynolds norKinney, his competitor, had received a party nomination. Both wereof the same party, Kinney being a strong Jackson man of theultra type, and the Judge only a "plain, humble, reflecting Jacksonman."

At one time during the campaign it seemed as if there were realdanger of this candidate of the "reflecting men of the State"actually falling into the ways and wiles of politicians. "I oftenaddressed the people in churches, in courthouses, and in theopen air, myself occupying literally the stump of a large tree;at times also in a grocery."

The fiery and abusive hand-bills against his competitor he did notattempt to restrain his friends from circulating, "as they had aright to exercise their own judgment"; but he declares he didnot circulate one himself. He moreover felicitates himself uponthe fact that his conciliatory course gained him votes.

This noted contest lasted eighteen months, as Reynolds says, and, theState being sparsely populated, he enjoyed the personal acquaintanceof almost every voter. The fact, as he further states, that hisopponent was a clergyman, was a great drawback to him, and almost allthe Christian sects, except his own—the anti-missionary Baptists—opposed him. With a candor that does him credit, the Judge admits"the support of the religious people was not so much for me, butagainst him."

No national issues were discussed, but one point urged by Kinneyagainst the proposed Michigan canal was, "that it would floodthe country with Yankees." It would be a great mistake to supposethat Reynolds himself wholly escaped vituperation. On the contrary,he claims the credit of being "the best abused man in the State."He relates that one of the stories told on him was, "that I sawa scarecrow, the effigy of a man in a corn-field, just at dusk,and that I said, 'How are you, my friend? Won't you take some ofmy hand bills to distribute?'"

Some light is shed on the politics of the good old days of ourfathers by the following: "The party rancor in the campaign ragedso high that neighborhoods fell out with one another, and the angryand bitter feelings entered into the common transactions of life."

If the contest had lasted a year or two longer it is not improbablythat our candidate would have fallen from his high "reflecting"state to the low level of artful politician. "It was the universalcustom of the times to treat with liquor. We both did it; buthe was condemned for it more than myself by the religious community,he being a preacher of the Gospel."

Some atonement, however, is made for the bad whiskey our modelcandidate dispensed by the noble sentiment with which he closesthis chapter of his contest: "I was, and am yet, one of the people,and every pulsation of our hearts beats in unison."

Having been elected by a considerable majority as he modestlyremarks, our Governor-elect falls into something of a philosophicaltrain of thought, and horror of politicians and their wiles andways again possessed him. He says:

"It may be considered vanity and frailty in me, but when I waselected Governor of the State on fair, honorable principles by themasses, without intrigue or management of party or corrupt politicians,I deemed it the decided approbation of my countrymen, and consequentlya great honor."

The admonition of this sage statesman to the rising generation uponthe subject of office-seeking, is worthy of profound consideration:

"But were I to live over again another life, I think I would have themoral courage to refrain from aspiring for any office within thegift of the people. By no means do I believe a person should besordid and selfish in all his actions, yet cannot a person be moreuseful to the public if he possesses talents in other situationsthan in office?"

Some memory of the well-known ingratitude of republics evidentlyentered like iron into his very soul when his memoirs were written:

"Moreover, a public officer may toil and labor all his best dayswith the utmost fidelity and patriotism, and the masses who reapthe reward of his labors frequently permit him, without any particularfault upon his part, to live and die in his old age with disrespect.Witness the punishment inflicted on Socrates, on our Saviour,and many others for no crime whatever. But this contumely anddisrespect ought not to deter a good and qualified man fromentering the public service, if he is satisfied that the good ofthe country requires it."

At this point in the career of this eminent public servant, deepsympathy is aroused on account of the conflict between his humilityand a not very clearly-defined belief that something was due tothe great office to which he had been elevated. As preliminary,however, to accomplishing what was for the best interests of thepeople it must not be forgotten that "my first object was to softendown the public mind to its sober senses." That no living man wasbetter qualified for the accomplishment of so praiseworthy a purposewill now appear: "It has been my opinion of my humble self,that whatever small forte I might possess was to conciliate andsoften down a turbulent and furious people."

This being all satisfactorily accomplished and the abundant rewardof the peacemaker in sure keeping for this humble instrument,his efforts were now directed toward the discharge of the dutiesof the office to which he had so unexpectedly been called.

That this hitherto unquestioned "friend of the people" was nowmanifesting a slight tendency toward the frailties and vanities ofthe common run of men, will appear from the following:

"It was my nature not to feel or appear elevated, but I discoveredthat my appearance and deportment, at times, might look like affectedhumility or mock modesty, which I sincerely despised, and thenI would straighten up a little."

It may be truly said of Reynolds, as Macaulay said of Horace Walpole:"The conformation of his mind was such that whatever was littleseemed to him great; and whatever was great, seemed to him little."

Having in his inaugural given expression to the noble sentimentthat "proscription for opinion's sake is the worst enemy to theRepublic," he at once generously dispelled whatever apprehensions hislate opponents might feel as to what was to befall them, by theassurance: "Therefore, all those who honestly and honorablysupported my respectable opponent in the last election for Governorshall experience from me no inconvenience on that account."Unfortunately no light is shed upon the interesting inquiry asto what "inconvenience" was experienced by those who had otherwisethan "honestly and honorably" supported his respectable opponentin the late contest.

The Black Hawk War was the principal event of the administrationof Governor Reynolds. A treaty of peace being concluded, theIndians were removed beyond the Mississippi River. In all thisthe Governor acquitted himself with credit.

That his aversion to office-holding was in some measure lessening,will appear from the following:

"Being in the office of Governor for some years, I was preventedfrom the practice of the law, and in the meantime had been engagedin public life until it commenced to be a kind of second natureto me. Moreover, I was then young, ardent, and ambitious, so thatI really thought it was right for me to offer for Congress; andI did so, in the Spring of 1834."

An "artful politician" would probably have waited until the expirationof his term as Governor. Not so with this "friend of the people."He was not only elected to the next Congress, but the death of thesitting member for the District creating a vacancy, Reynolds wasof course elected to that also, and was thus at one time Governor ofthe State and member elect both to the next and to the presentCongress.

His triumph over his "able and worthy competitor" is accounted forin this wise: "I was myself tolerably well informed in the scienceof electioneering with the masses of the people. I was raised withthe people, and was literally one of them. We always acted together,and our common instincts, feelings and interests were the same."He here modestly ventured the opinion that his "efforts on thestump, while making no pretension to classic eloquence, yetflowing naturally from the heart, supplied in them many defects."

A mite of self-approval, tinged with a philosophy which appears tohave been always kept on tap, closes this chapter of his remarkablecareer. He says:

"I sincerely state that I never regarded as important the salaryof the office, but I entered public office with a sincere desireto advance the best interest of the country, which was my mainreward. If a person would subdue his ambition for office and remaina private citizen, he would be a more happy man."

That he must have been the most miserable of men, during the greaterpart of his long life, clearly appears from the following: "Thereis no person happy who is in public office, or a candidate foroffice."

A more extensive field of usefulness now opened up to the Old Rangeras he took his seat in Congress. He had many projects in mind forthe benefit of the people—one, the reduction of the price ofthe public lands to actual settlers; another, the improvement ofour Western rivers. But like many other members both before andsince his day, he found that "these things were easier to talkabout on the stump than to do." He candidly admits: "This body wasmuch greater than I had supposed, and I could effect much less thanI had contemplated."

He informs us that he felt like a country boy just from home thefirst time, as he entered the hall of the law-makers of thegreat Republic. The city of Washington, grand and imposing,impressed him deeply, but was as the dust in the balance to "theassemblage of great men at the seat of Government of the UnitedStates, and at the opening of Congress, when a grand and reallyimposing spectacle was presented."

His profound admiration for some of his associates upon the broadertheatre of the public service found vent in the following eloquentwords:

"When the Roman Empire reached the highest pinnacle of literaryfame and political power in the reign of Augustus Caesar, the periodwas called the Augustan age. There was a period that existedeminently in the Jackson administration and a few years after thatmight be called the Augustan age of Congress. So extraordinarya constellation of great and distinguished individuals may neveragain appear in office at the seat of government."

If apology were needed for the new members' exalted opinion of hisassociates, it can readily be found in the fact that among them inthe House were John Quincy Adams, John Bell, Thomas F. Marshall,Ben Hardin, James K. Polk, Millard Fillmore, and Franklin Pierce.The first named had been President of the United States, and thelast three were yet to hold that great office. At the same time"the constellation of great stars" that almost appalled the Illinoismember upon his introduction included, in the Senate, Crittenden, Wright,Cass, Woodbury, Preston, Buchanan, Grundy, Benton, Clay, Calhoun, andWebster.

On finally taking leave of Congress, our member congratulateshimself that during seven years of service he was absent fromhis seat but a single day. That all his humble endeavors werein the interest of the people, of course, goes without saying. Hedeprecates in strong terms the extravagance of some members ofCongress in allowing their expenses to exceed their salaries,and then leaving the capital in debt. That he did nothing ofthe kind, but practised economy in all his expenses, it ishardly necessary to state. He is not, however, entitled to a patentfor the discovery that "the expenses for living at the seat ofGovernment of the United States are heavy."

Being a widower, conditions were now favorable for a little romanceto be mingled with the dull cares of state. Near the close of hislast term, he says: "I became acquainted with a lady in the Districtof Columbia, and we, in consideration of mutual love and affection,married. The same tie binds us in matrimonial happiness to thepresent time." He here admits a fact that might at this later daysubject him to Executive displeasure: "Posterity will have anunsettled account against us for having added nothing to the greatreservoir of the human family."

It may be of interest to know that while in Congress our memberhumbly accepted the appointment tendered him by Governor Carlin asCommissioner to negotiate the Illinois and Michigan Canal bonds.His earnest desire to have some one else appointed availed nothing,and in the interest of the great enterprise, upon the success ofwhich the future of the State seemed to hang, he spent the summer of1839 in Europe. While his mission abroad was fruitless as toits immediate object, it is gratifying to know that our commissionerreturned duly impressed with "the immense superiority in everypossible manner of our own country, and all its glorious institutions,over those of the monarchies of the old world."

It would be idle to suppose that the retirement of the Old Ranger fromCongress was to terminate his career of usefulness to the people.On the contrary, he says: "In 1846, I was elected a member fromSt. Clair County to the General Assembly of the State. The mainobject of myself and friends was to obtain a charter for a macadamizedroad from Belleville to the Mississippi River, opposite St. Louis."

This all satisfactorily accomplished, and the Legislature adjourned,"I turned my time and attention to the calm and quiet of life.With my choice library of one thousand volumes I indulged in thestudy of science and literature. I soon discovered that the bustleand turmoil of political life did not produce happiness."

Sad to relate, this faithful public servant, worn with the caresof state, was not even yet permitted to lay aside his armor.The happiness of private life, for which his soul yearned as thehart panteth for the water brooks, was again postponed for thehated bustle and turmoil of politics. In 1852, against hisremonstrances, he was again elected to the Legislature, and uponthe organization of the House unanimously chosen Speaker.

Reluctantly indeed, we now take leave of John Reynolds—the quaintestof all the odd characters this country of ours has known. In doingso, it is indeed a comfort to know that, true as the needle to thepole, his great heart continued to beat in unison with that of thepeople. Ascending the Speaker's stand, and lifting the gavel, withdeep emotion he said—and these are to us his last words: "I havenothing to labor for but the public good. My life has been devotedto promote the public interest of Illinois, and in my latter days itwill afford me profound pleasure to advance now, as I have always donein the past, the best interests of the people."

XIIITHE MORMON EXODUS FROM ILLINOIS

DELEGATE CANNON AND SENATOR CANNON, MORMONS—SKETCH OF MORMONISMBY GOVERNOR FORD—JOSEPH SMITH'S OWN ACCOUNT OF THE ORIGIN OFHIS CHURCH—HOW "THE BOOK OF MORMON" WAS MADE—NAUVOO, "THE HOLYCITY"—EFFORTS OF WHIGS AND DEMOCRATS TO WIN THE VOTES OF THEMORMONS—VICTORY OF THE DEMOCRATS, AND CONSEQUENT ANTI-MORMONISMOF THE WHIGS—JOSEPH SMITH'S PRETENSIONS TO ROYALTY—THE ORIGIN OFPOLYGAMY IN THE MORMON CHURCH—CONFLICT WITH THE STATE AUTHORITIES—SURRENDER OF THE LEADERS—ASSASSINATION OF SMITH—BRIGHAMYOUNG CHOSEN AS HIS SUCCESSOR—THE EXODUS BEGINS.

Just across the aisle from my seat in the House of Representativesduring the forty-sixth Congress sat George Q. Cannon, the delegatefrom the Territory of Utah. He held this position for many years,and possessed in the highest degree the confidence of the Mormonpeople. Fifteen years later, when presiding over the Senate, Iadministered the oath of office to his son, the Hon. Frank J.Cannon, the first chosen to represent the State of Utah in the UpperChamber of the National Congress. Senator Cannon was then in highfavor with "the powers that be" in Salt Lake City, but for somecause not well understood by the Gentile world, is now personanon grata with the head of the Mormon Church. The younger Cannonwas not a polygamist, and no objection was urged to his being seatedupon the presentation of his credentials as a Senator. His father,the delegate, was in theory a polygamist, and had "the courageof his convictions" to the extent of being the husband of fivewives, and the head of as many separate households. This,before the days of "unfriendly legislation," was, in Mormonparlance, called "living your religion."

The delegate and the Senator were both men of ability, and possessedin large degree the respect of their associates. The former wasin early youth a resident of Illinois, and was of the advance guardof the Mormon exodus to the valley of the Great Salt Lake soonafter the assassination of the "prophet." When I first visitedSalt Lake City, in 1879, George Q. Cannon, in addition to beingthe delegate in Congress, was one of the "Quorum of the Twelve,"and was in the line of succession to the presidency of the Church.From him I learned much that was of interest concerning the historyand tenets of the Mormon people. The venerable John Taylor wasthen the president of the Church, the immediate successor of BrighamYoung. He was in early life a resident with his people in Nauvoo,Illinois, and was a prisoner in the Carthage jail with the "ProphetJoseph" at the time of his assassination, in 1844. President Taylorgave me a graphic description of that now historic tragedy, and ofhis own narrow escape from the fate of his idolized leader.

A brief notice of this singular people, and of what they did andsuffered in Illinois, may not be wholly without interest. Mormonismwas the apple of discord in the State during almost the entireofficial term of the late Governor Ford. More than one little armywas, during that period, sent into Hancock County—"the Mormoncountry"—to suppress disturbances and maintain public order.

Governor Ford says:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, as this organizationis denominated by its adherents, is to be viewed from the antagonisticGentile and Mormon standpoints.

"Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church and its prophet,was born in Vermont, in 1805, of obscure parentage. His earlyeducation was extremely limited. When he first began to act theprophet, he was ignorant of almost everything which pertained toscience; but he made up in natural cunning for many deficienciesof education. At the age of ten, he was taken by his father toWayne County, New York, where his youth was spent in an idle,vagabond life, roaming the woods, dreaming of buried treasures,and exerting himself to find them by the twisting of a forked stickin his hands, or by looking through enchanted stones. He andhis father were 'water witchers,' always ready to point out theexact points where wells could be successfully dug. While leadingan idle, profligate life, Joseph Smith became acquainted with SidneyRigdon, a man of talents and great plausibility. Rigdon was thepossessor of a religious romance written some years before by aPresbyterian clergyman. The perusal of this book suggested toSmith and Rigdon the idea of starting a new religion. By them astory was accordingly devised to the effect that golden plates hadbeen found buried near Palmyra, New York, containing a recordinscribed on them in unknown characters, which, when deciphered bythe power of inspiration, gave the history of the ten lost tribes ofIsrael in their wanderings through Asia into America, where theyhad settled and flourished, and where, in due time, Christ cameand preached the Gospel to them, appointed his twelve Apostles,and was crucified here, nearly in the same manner he had been inJerusalem. The record then pretended to give the history of theAmerican Christians for a few hundred years until the wickednessof the people called down the judgment of God upon them, whichresulted in their extermination. Several nations from the Isthmusof Darien to the northern extremity of the continent were engaged incontinual warfare. The culmination of all this was the battleof Cumorah, fought many centuries ago near the present site ofPalmyra, between the Lamanites and the Nephites—the former being theheathen and the latter the Christians of this continent. Inthis battle, in which hundreds of thousands were slain, the Nephitesperished from the earth, except a remnant, who escaped to thesouthern country. Among this number was Mormon, a righteous manwho was divinely directed to make a record of these important eventson plates of gold, and who buried them in the earth, to bediscovered in future times. 'The Book of Mormon'—none other thanthe religious romance above mentioned—is the pretended translationof the hieroglyphics said to have been inscribed on the goldenplates.

"The account given of himself by the 'prophet' is of far differenttenor from the one just given. While yet a youth he became greatlyconcerned in regard to his soul's salvation; and being deeplyagonized in spirit, he sought divine guidance. While ferventlyengaged in supplication, his mind was taken away from the surroundingobjects and enwrapped in a heavenly vision, and he saw two gloriouspersonages similar in form and features and surrounded with abrilliant light, outshining the sun at noonday. He was then informedby these glorious personages that all religious denominations werein error, and were not acknowledged of God as His church and kingdom,and that he, Joseph, was expressly commanded not to go after them.At the same time, he received a promise that the fulness of theGospel should at some future time be known to him."

Subsequently, on the evening of September 23, 1823, at the hour ofsix, while he was engaged in prayer, suddenly a light like that ofday, only far more pure and glorious, burst into the room, as thoughthe house were filled with fire, and a personage stood beforehim surrounded with a glory far greater than he had yet seen. Thismessenger proclaimed himself to be an angel of God, sent withthe joyful tidings that the covenant which God had made with ancientIsrael was about to be fulfilled; that the preparatory work forthe second coming of Messiah was speedily to commence; that thetime was at hand for the Gospel to be proclaimed in all its fulnessand power to all nations, to the end that a peculiar people mightbe prepared for the millennial reign. He was further informed thathe, Joseph, was to be the instrument in God's hand to bring about thisglorious dispensation. The angel also informed him in regard tothe American Indians, who they were, and whence they came, witha sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, righteousness,and iniquity, and why the blessing of God had been withdrawnfrom them as a people. He was also told where certain plates weredeposited, whereon were engraved the records of the ancient prophets,who once existed on this continent. And then, to wit, on the lastday mentioned, the angel of the Lord delivered into his hands therecords mentioned, which were engraved on plates which had theappearance of gold. They were filled with engravings inEgyptian characters and bound together in a volume as the leavesof a book; with the records was found a curious instrument whichthe ancients called "Urim and Thummim," which consisted of twotransparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate.By the instrumentality of the Urim and Thummim, Joseph was enabledto translate the hieroglyphics aforementioned.

Thus translated, the records mentioned became "The Book of Mormon."The last of the ancient prophets had inscribed these records upon thegolden plates by the command of God, and deposited them in theearth, where, fifteen centuries later, they were divinely revealedto Joseph Smith.

It is not pretended that the golden plates are still in existence,but that after being translated by Joseph Smith, by the aid of thewonderful instrument mentioned, they were re-delivered to the angel.The non-production of the plates thus satisfactorily explained,and secondary evidence being admissible, eleven witnesses appearedand testified to having actually seen the plates; three of thenumber further declaring that they were present when Joseph receivedthe plates at the hands of the angel.

Upon my giving expression, to a high Mormon official, of somelingering doubts as to the absolute authenticity of the abovenarrative, I was significantly reminded of the words of the immortalbard:

"Disparage not the faith thou dost not know,
Lest, to thy peril, thou aby it dear."

At all events, upon the pretended revelations mentioned, JosephSmith as "prophet" founded the Church of the Latter-Day Saints,near Palmyra, New York, in 1830. Nor did he lack for followers.The eleven witnesses mentioned, and others, were commissionedand sent forth to proclaim the new gospel, and disciples inlarge numbers soon flocked to the standard of the "prophet."

The history of delusions from the days of Mahomet to the presenttime illustrates the eagerness with which men are ever ready toseek out new inventions and to discard the old beliefs for the new.There is no tenet so monstrous but in some breast it will findlodgment.

"In religion
What damned error, but some sober brow
Will bless it and approve it with a text."

In 1833, Mormon colonies were established at Kirtland, Ohio, andin Jackson County, Missouri, but, owing to Gentile persecution,the "saints" at length shook the dust of those unhallowed localitiesfrom their feet, and settled in large numbers in Hancock County,Illinois. Here they built Nauvoo, the "Holy City," "the beautifulhabitation for man." The Mormon historian says: "The surroundinglands were purchased by the saints, and a town laid out, which wasnamed 'Nauvoo' from the Hebrew, which signifies fair, very beautiful,and it actually fills the definition of the words, for naturehas not formed a parallel anywhere on the banks of the Mississippi."

The sacred city, as it was called, soon contained a populationof fifteen thousand souls, gathered from all quarters of the globe.Here were built the home of the prophet, the hall of the seventies,a concert hall, and other public institutions. Chief amongthese buildings was the Temple, described by the same historian as"glistening in white limestone upon the hilltops, a shrine inthe wilderness whereat all the nations of the earth may worship,whereat all the people may inquire of God and receive His holyoracles."

This temple, erected at a cost of nearly a million dollars, was ata later day visited by Governor Reynolds, and is thus described byhim:

"I was in the Mormon temple at Nauvoo. It was a large and splendidedifice, built in the Egyptian style of architecture; and itsgrandeur and magnificence truly astonished me. It was erectedon the top of the Mississippi bluff, which has a prospect whichreached as far as the eye could extend over the country and up anddown the river. The most singular appendage of this splendidedifice was the font in which the immersion of the saints waspractised. It was composed of marble."

At the time of the Mormon emigration to Illinois, in 1839, the Whigand Democratic parties in the State were in a heated strugglefor supremacy. The respective party leaders at once realized thatthe new importation of voters might be the controlling politicalfactor in the State. To conciliate the Mormons and gain theirsupport soon became the aim of the politicians. This fact isthe keynote to the statement of Governor Ford:

"A city charter drawn up to suit the Mormons was presented tothe Legislature. No one opposed it, but both parties were active ingetting it through. This charter, and others passed in the samemanner, incorporated Nauvoo, provided for the election of a mayor,four aldermen, and nine councillors, and gave them power to passall ordinances necessary for the benefit of the city which werenot repugnant to the Constitution. This seemed to give them powerto pass ordinances in violation of the laws of the State, and toerect a system of government for themselves. This charter alsoincorporated the Nauvoo Legion,—entirely independent of the militaryorganization of the State, and not subject to the commands ofits officers. Provision was also made for a court-martial for theLegion, to be composed of its own officers; and in the exercise oftheir duties they were not bound to regard the laws of the State.Thus it was proposed to establish for the Mormons a Governmentwithin a Government, a Legislature with power to pass ordinancesat war with the laws of the State. These charters were unheardof, anti-republican and capable of infinite abuse. The great law ofthe separation of the powers of government was wholly disregarded.The mayor was at once the executive power, the judiciary, and partof the Legislature. One would have thought that these chartersstood a poor chance of passing the Legislature of a republicanpeople, jealous of their liberties, nevertheless they did pass bothHouses unanimously. Each party was afraid to object to them,for fear of losing the Mormon vote."

Some indications of the hopes and fears of party leaders may begleaned from the statement of the politic John Reynolds, then arepresentative in Congress. He thus speaks of the visit of JosephSmith to the national capital:

"I had recently received letters that Smith was a very importantcharacter in Illinois, and to give him the civilities that weredue him. He stood at the time fair and honorable, except hisfanaticism on religion. The sympathies of the people were inhis favor. It fell to my lot to introduce him to the President,and one morning the Prophet Smith and I called at the White House tosee the chief magistrate. When we were about to enter the apartmentsof President Van Buren, the prophet asked me to introduce him asa Latter-day Saint. It was so unexpected and so strange to me thatI could scarcely believe he would urge such nonsense on this occasionto the President. But he repeated the request, and I introducedhim as a Latter-day Saint, which made the President smile. TheProphet remained in Washington a greater part of the winter, andpreached often. I became well acquainted with him. He was a personrather larger than ordinary stature, well proportioned, andwould weigh about one hundred and eighty pounds. He was ratherfleshy, but was in his appearance, amiable and benevolent. He didnot appear to possess barbarity in his nature, nor to possess thatgreat talent and boundless mind that would enable him to accomplishthe wonders he performed."

Referring again to the narrative of Ford:

"Joseph Smith was duly installed Mayor of Nauvoo—this Imperiumin Imperio—he was ex-officio Judge of the Mayor's court, andChief Justice of the Municipal court; and in this capacity he was tointerpret the laws he had assisted to make. The Nauvoo Legion wasorganized with a multitude of high officers. It was dividedinto divisions, brigades, cohorts, battalions, and companies;and Joseph Smith as Lieutenant-General was the Commander-in-Chief.The common council of Nauvoo passed many ordinances for the punishmentof crime. The punishment was generally different from, and muchmore severe than, that provided by the laws of the State."

That any Legislature would ever, under any stress of circumstances,have conferred—or have attempted to confer—such powers upon amunicipality is beyond comprehension. The statement, if unsustainedby the official State records, would now challenge belief.

Under the favorable conditions mentioned, the Mormons were now uponthe high wave of prosperity in Illinois. Their number had increasedto more than twenty thousand in Hancock and the counties adjoining.The owners of large tracts of valuable land, protected by legislationthat finds no parallel in any State, courted by the leaders of bothparties, and actually holding for a time the balance of political powerin the State—they seemed indeed to be "the chosen people," asclaimed by their prophet.

It needed no prophet, however, to foretell that this could not longcontinue. The Mormon leaders failed to realize that to championthe cause of either party would of necessity arouse the fiercehostility of the other, as in very truth it did. Politics, theprime cause of fortune's favors to them in the beginning, provedtheir undoing in the end.

Joseph Smith had, soon after his removal from Missouri, been arrestedupon a requisition from the Governor of that State. From thisarrest he was discharged when brought upon a writ of habeas corpusbefore Judge Pope, a Whig. The ground of the decision was, thatas Smith was not in Missouri at the time of the attempt upon thelife of Governor Boggs, and that whatever he did—if he did anything—to aid or encourage the attempt, was done in Illinois, and notwithin the jurisdiction of Missouri laws, he was not a fugitivefrom justice within the provision of the Constitution of the UnitedStates. The decision excited much comment at the time, but, asstated by Judge Blodgett, it "has borne the test of criticism, andis now the accepted rule of law in interstate extradition cases."

This for a time inclined the Mormons to the support of the Whigparty. Again arrested, the prophet, under similar proceedings,was discharged by a Democratic Judge. This, as Governor Ford says,

"Induced Smith to issue a proclamation to his followers declaring JudgeDouglas to be a master spirit, and exhorting them to vote forthe Democratic ticket for Governor. Smith was too ignorant to knowwhether he owed his discharge to the law or to party favor. Such wasthe ignorance of the Mormons generally, that they thought anythingto be law which they thought expedient. All action of the Governmentunfavorable to them they looked upon as wantonly oppressive, andwhen the law was administered in their favor they attributed it topartiality and kindness."

The last hope of the Whigs for Mormon support was abandoned in1843. In the district of which Hancock County was a part, theopposing candidates for Congress were Joseph P. Hoge, Democrat,and Cyrus Walker, Whig, both lawyers of distinction. The latterhad been counsel for Smith in the Habeas Corpus proceedings lastmentioned. Grateful for the services then rendered, Smithopenly espoused the candidacy of Walker in the pending contest.That there were tricks in politics even more than sixty years ago,will now appear. One Backinstos, a politician of Hancock County,declared upon his return from the State capital that he had assurancesfrom the Governor that the Mormons would be amply protected as longas they voted the Democratic ticket. It is hardly necessary tosay that the Governor denied having given any such assurance.However, the campaign lie of Backinstos, like many of its kindbefore and since, proved a "good enough Morgan till after theelection." This, it will be remembered, was before the days ofrailroads and telegraphs, and the Mormon settlement was far remotefrom the seat of government. A partisan jumble, in which the"saints" were the participants, and the low arts of the demagoguesand pretended revelations from God the chief ingredients, isthus described by the historian just quoted:

"The mission of Backinstos produced an entire change in the minds ofthe Mormon leaders. They now resolved to drop their friend Walkerand take up Hoge, the Democratic candidate. A great meeting ofseveral thousand Mormons was held the Saturday before the election.Hiram Smith, patriarch and brother of the prophet, appeared in thisassembly and there solemnly announced to the people, that Godhad revealed to him that the Mormons must support Mr. Hoge. WilliamLaw, another leader, next appeared and denied that the Lord hadmade any such revelation. He stated that to his certain knowledgethe prophet Joseph was in favor of Mr. Walker, and that the prophetwas more likely to know the mind of the Lord than the patriarch.Hiram again repeated his revelation, with a greater tone of authority,but the people remained in doubt until the next day, Sunday, when theprophet Joseph himself appeared before the assemblage. He therestated that he himself was in favor of Mr. Walker and intendedto vote for him; that he would not, if he could, influence any manin giving his vote; that he considered it a mean business forany man to dictate to the people whom they should vote for; thathe had heard his brother Hiram had received a revelation fromthe Lord on the subject; but for his own part, he did not muchbelieve in revelations on the subject of election. Brother Hiram was,however, a man of truth; he had known him intimately ever since hewas a boy, and he had never known him to tell a lie. If brotherHiram said he had received a revelation he had no doubt he had.When the Lord speaks let all the earth be silent."

That the prophet Joseph well understood how to

"By indirections find directions out,"

clearly appears from his cunning expression of faith in the pretendedrevelation of the patriarch Hiram. The effect of this speechwas far-reaching. It turned the entire Mormon vote to Hoge, therebysecuring his election to Congress, and at once placed the Whigs inthe ranks of the implacable anti-Mormon party then in process ofrapid formation. The crusade that now began for the expulsionof the Mormons from the State, was greatly augmented by acts ofunparalleled folly upon their own part. In order to protect theirleaders from arrest, it was decreed by the City Council of Nauvoothat no writ unless issued and approved by its Mayor should beexecuted within the sacred city, and that any officer attemptingto execute a writ otherwise issued, within the city, should besubject to imprisonment for life, and that the pardoning powerof the Governor of the State was in such case suspended. Thisordinance when published created great astonishment and indignation.The belief became general that the Mormons were about to set upfor themselves a separate Government wholly independent of that ofthe State. This belief was strengthened by the presentation ofa petition to Congress praying for the establishment of aTerritorial Government for Nauvoo and vicinity.

Apparently oblivious of the gathering storm, Joseph Smith early in1844 committed his crowning act of folly by announcing himself acandidate for the high office of President of the United States.Not only this, but as stated by Governor Ford,

"Smith now conceived the idea of making himself a temporal Prince aswell as the spiritual leader of his people. He instituted a newand select order of the priesthood, the members of which were tobe priests and kings, temporal and spiritual. These were to bethe nobility, the upholders of his throne. He caused himself tobe crowned and anointed king and priest far above all others.To uphold his pretensions to royalty, he deduced his descent by anunbroken chain from Joseph, the son of Jacob, and that of his wifefrom some other renowned personage of Old Testament history.The Mormons openly denounced the Government of the United States, asbeing utterly corrupt, and about to pass away and be replaced bythe government of God, to be administered by his servant Joseph.It is at this day certain, also, that about this time, the prophetinstituted an order in the Church called the Danite Band. Thiswas to be a body-guard about the person of their sovereign, sworn toobey his commands as those of God himself."

During late years a war of words has been waged within theMormon church over the question of the responsibility of the prophetJoseph for the introduction of polygamy as a cardinal tenet of itscreed. The son of the prophet, it will be remembered, led a revoltagainst Brigham Young, soon after the succession of the latterto the presidency of the Church, and is now at the head of theMormon establishment at Plano, Illinois. This branch of the Churchrejects the dogma of polygamy, declaring it to be utterly repugnantto the divine revelation to Joseph, and to early Mormon belief andpractice.

Upon the contrary, the main body in Utah—of which Joseph F. Smiththe nephew of the prophet and son of Hiram the patriarch is nowthe president—found their belief in the divine character of theirpeculiar institution upon alleged revelations direct from God tothe founder of the Church. The statement of Governor Ford, writtennearly sixty years ago, sheds some light upon this controversy:

"A doctrine was now revealed that no woman could get to heavenexcept as the wife of a Mormon elder. The elders were allowedto have as many of these wives as they could maintain; and it wasa doctrine of the Church that any female could be 'sealed up toeternal life' by uniting herself as wife to the elder of her choice.This doctrine was maintained by appeal to the Old Testament scripturesand by the example of Abraham and Jacob and Daniel and Solomon,the favorites of God in a former age of the world."

As the necessary result of the causes mentioned, the followersof the prophet soon found themselves bitterly antagonized by almostthe whole anti-Mormon population of the "Military Tract." Chargesand counter-charges were made, the arrest of the leaders of theopposing parties followed in rapid succession, and outrages andriots were of daily occurrence. Public meetings were held; allthe crimes known to the calendar were charged against the Mormons,and resolutions passed demanding their immediate expulsion from theState. What is known in Illinois history as the "Mormon war"followed closely in the wake of the events just mentioned. Innocentpersons were, in many instances, the victims of the folly and ofthe crimes of unprincipled and brutal leaders.

The events of this period constitute a dark chapter in the historyof the State—one that can be recalled only with feelings of horror.The great body of citizens, it is needless to say, favored therigid maintenance of order and the protection of life and property;but it was the very heyday for the lawless and vicious elementof all parties.

That this condition of affairs could not long continue was manifest.The bloody termination, however, came in a manner unexpected toall. Two of the Mormon leaders, William and Wilson Law, were,at the time mentioned, in open revolt against the newly-assumedpowers and the alleged practices of the prophet. To strengthentheir opposition they procured a printing-press and equipment, andissued from their office in Nauvoo one number of a small weekly,"The Expositor." By order of the Mayor, Smith, and decree ofthe Council, the press was seized and destroyed, and the Law brothersand their few adherents compelled to flee the Holy City. Immediatelyupon their arrival at Carthage, they caused warrants to be issued forthe arrest of Joseph and Hiram Smith, John Taylor, and others, forthe destruction of the printing-press. The almost sovereign powerspreviously conferred upon the city of Nauvoo now play an importantpart in this drama. The persons arrested, as above mentioned, wereat once brought by writs of habeas corpus, issued by the Mayorof Nauvoo, before the Municipal Court and there promptly discharged.Governor Ford, whose righteous soul had been vexed to the limit ofendurance by unmerited abuse from Mormon and Gentile alike fromthe beginning of this controversy, here indulges in a few expressionsof justifiable irony. Of these proceedings he says:

"It clearly appeared both from the complaints of the citizensand the admissions of the Mormons, that the whole proceedings ofthe Mayor, Council, and Municipal Court were illegal and not to beendured in a free country; but some apology might be made forthe court, as it had been repeatedly assured by some of the ablestlawyers in the State of both political parties, when candidatesbefore that people, that it had full and complete power to issuewrits of habeas corpus in all cases whatever."

"In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt,
But, being seasoned with a gracious voice,
Obscures the show of evil."

The incidents mentioned added quickly fuel to the flame. A newwarrant was issued by a magistrate in Carthage for the arrest ofthe Mormon leaders and placed in the hands of an officer of theState for execution. The latter at once summoned the citizensof the county, as a posse comitatus, to aid in the arrests.At this critical moment Governor Ford, in the interest of peace,reached Carthage, the county seat. Upon his arrival he foundthe situation truly alarming. Several hundred armed men fromthe country around had hastily assembled and were encamped uponthe public square. By order of the Governor, this force wasorganized into companies and placed under the immediate command ofofficers of his appointment. At the conclusion of a speech by theGovernor, the officers and men pledged themselves to aid him inupholding the laws, and in protecting the Mormon prisoners whenbrought to Carthage for trial.

Meanwhile, Smith as lieutenant-general had called out the NauvooLegion and proclaimed martial law in that city. The Mormons from thecountry promptly obeyed the call of their leader and marched tohis assistance, and Nauvoo became at once a vast military camp.Governor Ford now demanded of the Mormon leaders the return of theState arms furnished at the time of the organization of the Legion,this demand, if not promptly complied with, to be enforced by animmediate attack upon Nauvoo by the assembled forces encamped atCarthage.

Appreciating now for the first time the hopelessness of a conflictwith State authorities, a number of the weapons were surrenderedand the Smiths, accompanied by Taylor and Richards, two other Mormonleaders, went to Carthage and surrendered themselves to the officerholding the warrant for their arrest. Upon giving bond for theirappearance, they were at once released on charge of riot. A newcomplaint, charging them with treason—in levying war againstthe State, declaring martial law in Nauvoo, and ordering out theLegion to resist the execution of lawful process—was immediately lodgedagainst them, a warrant duly issued, the prisoners rearrestedand committed to the common jail of the county. On the eveningfollowing this arrest, the guards stationed at the jail for theprotection of the prisoners were attacked and overpowered by a mobof several hundred persons. Governor Ford states:

"An attempt was now made to break open the door; but Joseph Smith,being armed with a six-barrel pistol furnished by his friends,fired several times as the door was burst open and wounded threeof the assailants. At the same time, several shots were fired intothe room, wounding John Taylor and killing Hiram Smith. JosephSmith now attempted to escape by jumping out of the second-storywindow; but the fall so stunned him that he was unable to rise,and being placed by the conspirators in a sitting posture, theydespatched him by four balls shot through his body."

Thus perished, at the age of thirty-nine, the founder and prophet ofthe Mormon Church. Contradictory statements as to his real characterhave come down to the present generation. The estimate of GovernorFord, who knew him well, is as follows:

"He was the most successful impostor in modern times; a man who,though ignorant and coarse, had some great natural parts whichfitted him for temporary success, but which were so obscured andcounteracted by the inherent corruptness of his nature that henever could succeed in establishing a system of policy which lookedto permanent success in the future. It must not be supposed that thepretended prophet practised the tricks of a common impostor; that hewas a dark and gloomy person with a long beard, a grave and severeaspect, and a reserved and saintly carriage of his person. On thecontrary, he was full of levity, even to boyish romping; dressedlike a dandy, and at times drank like a sailor and swore like apirate. He could, as occasion required, be exceedingly meek inhis deportment, and then, again, be as rough and boisterous as ahighway robber; being always able to prove to his followers thepropriety of his conduct. He always quailed before power, and wasarrogant to weakness. At times he could put on an air of a penitent,as if feeling the deepest humility for his sins, and sufferingunutterable anguish, and indulging in the most gloomy foreboding ofeternal woe. At such times he would call for the prayers of thebrethren in his behalf with a wild and fearful anxiety andearnestness. He was six feet high, strongly built, and uncommonlyfull muscled. No doubt he was as much indebted for his influenceover an ignorant people to the superiority of his physical vigor asto his great cunning and intellect."

Of a wholly different tenor is the tribute of Parley P. Pratt, thepoet and historian of the Mormon Church:

"President Smith was in person tall and well built, strong andactive; of a light complexion, light hair, blue eyes, and of anexpression peculiar to himself, on which the eye naturally rested withinterest and was never weary of beholding. His countenance wasvery mild, affable, and beaming with intelligence and benevolence mingledwith a look of interest and an unconscious smile of cheerfulness, andentirely free from all restraint or affectation of gravity; andthere was something connected with the serene and steady penetratingglance of his eye, as if he would penetrate the deepest abyss ofthe human heart, gaze into eternity, penetrate the heavens, andcomprehend all worlds. He possessed a noble boldness and independenceof character; his manner was easy and familiar, his rebuke terribleas the lion, his benevolence unbounded as the ocean, hisintelligence universal, and his language abounding in originaleloquence peculiar to himself."

For a brief period following the assassination of the Smiths,comparative quiet prevailed in the Mormon country. The selection ofa successor to their murdered prophet, was now the absorbing questionamong the Mormon people. Revelations were published that theprophet, in imitation of the Saviour, was to rise from the dead,and some even reported that they had seen him attended by a celestialarmy coursing the air on a great white horse.

Sydney Rigdon now aspired to be the head of the Church as thesuccessor to the martyred prophet. His claims were verified bya pretended revelation direct from heaven. He was, however, atonce antagonized by the "quorum of the Twelve," and after a bitterstruggle, Apostle Brigham Young was chosen, and Rigdon expelledfrom the Church and "given over to the buffetings of Satan."

The quiet immediately succeeding the tragedy was of short duration.It was only the calm which precedes the storm. While his followerswere invoking the vengeance of the law upon the murderers of theprophet, the anti-Mormons were quietly organizing a crusade forthe expulsion of the entire Mormon population from the State. Thetrial of the assassins of the Smiths resulted in their acquittal, aswas to have been expected when the intense anti-Mormon feelingexisting throughout the immediate country is taken into account.The result is even less surprising when it is remembered thatthe principal witness for the prosecution supplemented his testimonyof having seen the crime committed, by the remarkable declaration thatimmediately upon the death of Joseph, "a bright and shininglight descended upon his head, that several of the conspiratorswere stricken with total blindness, and that he heard supernaturalvoices in the air confirming the divine mission of the murderedprophet."

In the narration of these exciting events, the names of men who ata later day achieved national distinction frequently occur. TheHon. O. H. Browning, since Senator and member of the Cabinet,was chief counsel for the alleged murderers of the Smiths. He wasat the time a distinguished Whig leader, and one of the most eloquentmen in the State. The disorder and outrages that followed theacquittal just mentioned called Governor Ford again to the seat ofwar. He says:

"When informed of these proceedings, I hastened to Jacksonville,where in a conference with General Hardin, Judge Douglas, andMr. McDougal the Attorney-General of the State, it was agreed thatthese gentlemen should proceed to Hancock County in all haste withwhatever force had been raised, and put an end to these disorders.It was also agreed that they should unite their influence with mineto induce the Mormons to leave the State. The twelve apostles hadnow become satisfied that the Mormons could not remain, or, if theydid, that the leaders would be compelled to abandon the swaythey exercised over them. Through the intervention of GeneralHardin, acting on instructions from me, an agreement was madebetween the hostile parties for the voluntary removal of the greaterpart of the Mormons across the Mississippi in the spring of 1846."

Of the advisors of the Governor in the adjustment mentioned, Douglasand McDougall were at a later day distinguished Senators, respectivelyfrom Illinois and California, and Hardin was killed while gallantlyleading his regiment at the battle of Buena Vista.

To the peaceable accomplishment of the purposes mentioned, a smallforce under a competent officer was stationed for a time in HancockCounty. The Governor justly felicitates himself that thereby "thegreater part of the Military Tract was saved from the horrors ofcivil war in the winter time, when much misery would have followedby the dispersion of families and the destruction of property."

The Mormon exodus from Illinois, once the "land of promise," nowbegan in terrible earnest. Many farms and homes and large quantitiesof personal effects were hastily disposed of at a great sacrifice.The speeding was far different from the welcome but a few yearsbefore so heartily extended to the incoming "saints." The "HolyCity" and sacred temple soon to be destroyed were abandoned forperilous journeyings in the wilderness. The chapter thatimmediately follows in the history of this people is indeed pathetic.The terrible sufferings of the aged and infirm, of helpless womenand children, as the shadows of the long night of winter gathered aboutthem on their journey, can never be adequately told. But, inspiredwith the thought that they were the Israel of God, that BrighamYoung was their divinely appointed leader, that the pillar of cloudby day and of fire by night ever went before them on their journeyings,they patiently endured all dangers and hardships.

High upon the western slope of the Wasatch hard by the old wagontrail which led down into the valley stands a huge rock aroundwhose base the Mormon leader assembled his followers just as thelast rays of a summer sun were falling upon the mountains. Instirring words he recalled their persecutions and trials, told themthat their long pilgrimage, the weary march by day and lonely vigilby night, were now ended, and their Canaan the great valleywhich stretched out before them.

Upon a visit to Salt Lake City nearly a third of a century ago,I attended service in the great Tabernacle when it was filled tooverflowing, and yet so excellent were its acoustic arrangementsthat every word of the speaker and every note of the organ couldbe heard distinctly. The surroundings were indeed imposing. Uponthe great platform sat the President and his Council, the twelveapostles, the seventy elders, with an innumerable army of bishops,teachers, deacons, and other functionaries constituting thelower order of the Mormon hierarchy. The sermon was deliveredby the famous Orson Pratt, the Saint Paul of the Mormon Church,a venerable patriarch of four score years, and yet, withal, a man ofwonderful power.

As our little party passed in front of the speaker's platform toreach the door, he halted in his discourse, and stated to theaudience that the strangers within their gates were leaving becauseof the near departure of their train and not because of any disrespectto the service. Then, bowing his aged head, he invoked the blessingof the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, upon the Gentilestrangers, and prayed "that their long journey might be ended insafety, and that in the fulness of time, having witnessed themanifestations of Almighty Power, they might return again, notas sojourners, but as fellow-citizens with the saints, to dwell inthe Holy City."

XIVA KENTUCKY COLONEL

COL. WINTERSMITH'S GREAT POPULARITY—HIS ADMIRATION FOR MR. CLAY—HIS MARVELLOUS MEMORY—HIS WIT AND HUMOR.

Few men were better known in Washington, a quarter of a centuryand more ago, than Colonel Dick Wintersmith of Kentucky. He hadcreditably filled important positions of public trust in his nativeState. His integrity was beyond question, and his popularity knewno bounds. Without the formality of party nomination, and withhardly the shadow of opposition at the polls, he had held the officeof State Treasurer for nearly a score of years. An ardent Whig inearly life, he was a devout worshipper at the shrine of Henry Clay.In the later years of his life, he would often with the deepestemotion refer to himself as "the last of the old guard." He nevertired of relating interesting incidents of Mr. Clay. It was hisglory that he had accompanied "the great pacificator" to Washington,when, with the fond hope of being able by his historic "compromise"to pour oil on the troubled waters, he returned to the Senatefor the last time.

Wintersmith was the close friend of Theodore O'Hara, and stoodbeside him when at the unveiling of the monument to the Kentuckianswho had fallen at Buena Vista he pronounced his now historic linesbeginning—

"On fame's eternal camping-ground
Their silent tents are spread."

Colonel Wintersmith knew, as he knew his children, two generationsof the public men of Kentucky. His memory was a marvel to all whoknew him. He could repeat till the dawn, extracts from famousspeeches he had heard from the lips of Clay, Grundy, Marshall, andMenifee. More than once, I have heard him declaim the wonderfulspeech of Sargent S. Prentiss delivered almost a half-centurybefore, in the old Harrodsburg Court-house, in defence of Wilkinsonfor killing three men at the Galt House.

It is hardly necessary to say that the Colonel was the soul ofgenerosity. It was a part of his living faith that—

"Kind hearts are more than coronets."

That he was possessed in no stinted measure of wit and its kindredquality, humor, will appear from an incident or two to be related.

The Hon. Ignatius Donnelly, member of Congress from Minnesota, hadwritten a book to prove that Lord Bacon was the veritable authorof the plays usually accredited to Shakespeare. Soon after theappearance of Donnelly's book, he met Colonel Wintersmith onPennsylvania Avenue.

After a cordial greeting, the Colonel remarked, "I have been readingyour book, Donnelly, and I don't believe a word of it."

"What?" inquired Donnelly, with great surprise.

"Oh, that book of yours," said the Colonel, "in which you tried toprove that Shakespeare never wrote 'Hamlet' and 'Macbeth' and 'Lear'and all those other plays."

"My dear sir," replied Donnelly with great earnestness, "I canprove beyond all peradventure that Shakespeare never wrote thoseplays."

"He did," replied Wintersmith, "he did write them, Donnelly, Isaw him write three or four of them, myself."

"Impossible!" replied Donnelly, who was as guiltless of anythingthat savored of humor as the monument recently erected to the memoryof Hon. John Sherman, "impossible, Colonel, that you could haveseen Shakespeare write those plays; they were written three hundredyears ago."

"Three hundred years, three hundred years," slowly murmured theColonel in pathetic tone, "is it possible that is has been so long?Lord, how time does fly!"

The Colonel often told the following with a gravity that gave itat least the semblance of truth. Many years ago, his State wasrepresented in part in the Upper House by a statesman who rarely, whenin good form, spoke less than an entire day. His speeches, inlarge measure, usually consisted of dull financial details,statistics, etc. He became in time the terror of his associates, andthe nightmare of visitors in the galleries. His "Mr. President," wasusually the signal for a general clearing out of both Senate Chamberand galleries.

"Upon one occasion," said Colonel Dick, "I was seated in thelast tier in the public gallery, when my Senator with books anddocuments piled high about him solemnly addressed the Chair. Aswas the wont, the visitors in the gallery as one man arose to maketheir exit. With a revolver in each hand, I promptly planted myselfin front of the door, and in no uncertain tone ordered the crowd toresume their seats, and remain quietly until the Senator fromKentucky had concluded his remarks. They did so and no word ofcomplaint reached my ears. Hour after hour during the long summerday the speech drew itself along. At length as the shadows werelengthening and the crickets began to chirp, the speech endedand the Senator took his seat. I promptly replaced my pistols andmotioned the visitors to move out. They did so on excellent time.As the last man was passing out, he quietly remarked to me, 'Mister,that was all right, no fault to find, but if it was to do overagain, you might shoot.'"

XVFORGOTTEN EVENTS OF THE LONG AGO

THE WRITER MEETS MISS GRAHAM, SISTER-IN-LAW OF MR. GILES, AREPRESENTATIVE IN THE DAYS OF WASHINGTON—HIS MEETING WITH THEDAUGHTER OF THOMAS W. GILMER, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY UNDER PRESIDENTTYLER—THE SECRETARY KILLED, AND THE PRESIDENT ENDANGERED BY ANEXPLOSION—SPECULATION AS TO POSSIBLE POLITICAL CHANGES HAD THEPRESIDENT BEEN KILLED.

During my sojourn in Washington I visited the "Louise Home," oneof the splendid charities of the late W. W. Corcoran. Two ofthe ladies I there met were Miss Graham and Miss Gilmer. The turnof Fortune's wheel had brought each of them from once elegantVirginia homes to spend the evening of life in the Home whichMr. Corcoran had so kindly and thoughtfully provided. It was invery truth the welcome retreat to representatives of old Southernfamilies who had known better days. Here in quiet and somethingof elegant leisure, the years sped by, the chief pastime recallingevents and telling over again and again the social triumphs of thelong ago. Thus lingering in the shadows of the past, sadlyreflecting, it may be, in the silent watches, that—

"The tender grace of a day that is dead
Will never come back to me,"

these venerable ladies were in sad reality "only waiting till theshadows had a little longer grown."

There was something pathetically remindful of the good old Virginiadays in the manner in which Miss Graham handed me her card andinvited me to be seated. Looking me earnestly in the face, shesaid, "Mr. Vice-President, you must have known my brother-in-law, GovernorGiles."

"Do you mean Senator William B. Giles of Virginia?" I inquired.

"Yes, yes," she said, "did you know him?"

"No, madam," I replied, "I did not; he was a member of Congresswhen Washington was President; that was a little before my day.But is it possible that you are a sister-in-law of Governor Giles?"

"Yes, sir," she answered, "he married my eldest sister and I wasin hope that you knew him."

I assured her that I had never known him personally, but that Iknew something of his history: that he was a soldier of theRevolution; that he began his public career with the passing ofthe old Confederation and the establishment of the National Union;that as Representative or Senator he was in Congress almostcontinuously from the administration of Washington to that ofJackson. I then repeated to her the words Mr. Benton, his long-timeassociate in the Senate, had spoken of her brother-in-law: "Maconwas wise, Randolph brilliant, Gallatin and Madison able in argument,but Giles was the ready champion, always ripe for the combat." AndI told her that John Randolph, for many years his colleague, hadsaid: "Giles was to our House of Representatives what CharlesJames Fox was to the British House of Commons—the most accomplisheddebater our country has known."

I might have said to Miss Graham, but did not, that her brother-in-law,then a member of the House, had voted against the farewell addressof that body to President Washington upon his retirement fromthe great office. Strange indeed to our ears sound the words thateven mildly reflect upon the Father of his Country. Of this,however, we may be assured, that the Golden Age of our historyis but a dream; "the era of absolute good feeling,"—the era that hasnot been.

"Past and to come seem best;
Things present, worst."

Before condemning Mr. Giles too severely the words of Edmund Burkemay well be recalled: "Party divisions, whether upon the wholeoperating for the best, are things inseparable from free Government."Party divisions came in with our Constitution; partisan feelingalmost with our first garments.

In this connection it will be remembered that this country hasknown no period of more intense and bitter party feeling than duringthe administration of the immediate successor of Washington, theperiod which witnessed the downfall of the Federal party, andthe rise of the party of Jefferson. It was after the election butbefore the inauguration of John Adams, that the following wordswere spoken of President Washington by the brother-in-law of thelittle old lady to whom I have referred:

"I must object to those parts of the address which speak of thewisdom and firmness of the President. I may be singular in myideas, but I believe his administration has neither been firmnor wise. I must acknowledge that I am one of those who do notthink so much of the President as some others do. I wish that thiswas the moment of his retirement. I think that the Governmentof the United States can go on without him. What calamities wouldattend the United States, and how short the duration of itsindependence, if but one man could be found fitted to conductits administration! Much had been said and by many people aboutthe President's intended retirement. For my own part, I feel nouncomfortable sensations about it."

As I thus recalled the man whose public life began with that ofWashington, his kinswoman at my side seemed indeed the one living bondof connection between the present and the long past, that pastwhich had witnessed the Declaration of Independence, the War ofthe Revolution, and the establishment of the Federal Government.

The younger, by many years, of the two ladies, was the daughter ofthe Hon. Thomas W. Gilmer, a distinguished member of Congress duringthe third decade of the century, later the Governor of Virginia,and at the time of his death the Secretary of the Navy. The mentionof his name recalls a tragic event that cast a pall over the nationand shrouded more than one hearthstone in deepest gloom. Duringlater years, the horrors of an internecine struggle that knows noparallel, the assassination of three Presidents of the UnitedStates, and the thousand casualties that have crowded in rapidsuccession, have almost wiped from memory the incident now to bementioned.

The pride of the American Navy, the man-of-war Princeton, CommodoreStockton in command, was lying in the Potomac just below Washington,on the morning of February 28, 1843. The day was beautiful, and thedistinguished commander, who had known much of gallant service,had invited more than one hundred guests to accompany him on a sailto a point a few miles below Mount Vernon. Among the guestswere President Tyler and two members of his Cabinet; Mr. Upshur,Secretary of State, and Mr. Gilmer, Secretary of the Navy; thewidow of Ex-President Madison; Mr. Gardner, a prominent citizen ofNew York, and his accomplished daughter; Commodore Kennan; and anumber of Senators and Representatives. Commodore Stockton wasanxious to have his guests witness the working of the machinery ofhis vessel and to observe the fire of his great gun, his especial pride.Mr. Gardner and his daughter were guests at the Executive Mansion;and to the latter, the President—then for many years a widower—was especially attentive. Officers and guests were all in thebest of sprits, and nothing seemed wanting to make the occasionone of unalloyed pleasure. Upon the return, and when almost directlyopposite Mount Vernon, the company were summoned by the Commodore fromthe dinner table to witness the testing of the gun. Preceded byan officer, the guests were soon assembled in proximity to the gun.A place at the front was reserved for the President, but just ashe was advancing, his attention was directed by his fair guestto some object on the shore. This for a moment arrested hisprogress, and prevented his instant death, for at this criticalmoment the gun exploded, causing the immediate death of morethan twenty persons, and serious injuries to many others. Amongthe injured were Senator Benton and Commodore Stockton. The listof the dead included Secretary of State Upshur, Secretary of theNavy Gilmer, Commodore Kennan—one of the heroes of the second warwith Great Britain,—and Mr. Gardner, the father of the lady whosetimely interposition had caused the moment's delay which had savedthe President from the terrible fate of his associates. Uponthe return of the Princeton to Washington the dead were removed tothe Executive Mansion, and the day, so auspicious in the beginning,ended in gloom.

Something in the way of romance is the sequel to that sad event.A few months later Miss Gardner, the fair guest of the Presidentupon the ill-fated Princeton, became his bride, and during theremainder of his term of office did the honors of the ExecutiveMansion.

The thousands of visitors who have, during the past sixty years,passed through the spacious rooms of that Mansion, have pausedbefore a full-length portrait of one of the most beautiful of women.Possibly the interest of no one who gazed upon her lovely featureswas lessened when told that the portrait was that of the wife ofPresident Tyler, the once charming and accomplished Miss Gardner, whosename is so closely associated with the long-ago chapter of sorrow andof romance.

A thought pertaining to the domain of the real rather than ofthe romantic is suggested by the sad accident upon the Princeton.But for the trifling incident which detained President Tyler from theside of his Cabinet officers at the awful moment, the administrationof the Government would have passed to other hands. As the lawthen stood, the Speaker of the House of Representatives would havesucceeded to the Presidency; and how this might have changed thecurrent of our political history is a matter of at least curiousspeculation.

Remembering that—

"Two stars keep not
Their motion in one sphere,"

might not the removal of one have healed the widening breach inthe Whig party? What might have been its effect upon the grandInternal Improvement Scheme—the darling project of Henry Clay?what upon the determination of the Oregon Boundary Question—whetherby diplomacy or war? and how might the destiny of the "Lone Star,"the Republic of Texas, have been changed? What might have beenthe effect upon the political fortunes of Tyler's great antagonist,around whom the aggressive forces of the party he had founded wereeven then gathering for a life-and-death struggle against acomparatively obscure rival in the Presidential campaign of 1844?

Trifles light as air are sometimes the pivots upon which hingemomentous events. The ill-timed publication of a personalletter defeated Cass in 1848; and within our day the utterance of asingle word, unheard by the candidate to whom it was addressed,lost the Presidency to Blaine.

The antagonism of Tyler and his adherents eliminated, it is withinthe bounds of probability that Henry Clay would have triumphedin his last struggle for the Presidency. If so, what change mightnot have been wrought in the trend of history? Under the splendidleadership of the "great pacificator," what might have been thetermination of vital questions even then casting their dark shadowsupon our national pathway?

With Clay at the helm, himself the incarnation of the spirit ofcompromise, possibly—who can tell?—the evil days so soon to followmight have been postponed for many generations.

XVIROBERT G. INGERSOLL

MR. INGERSOLL'S ELOQUENCE WHILE A YOUNG MAN—HIS CANDIDACY FORCONGRESS—HIS AGNOSTICISM A HINDRANCE TO HIS POLITICAL ADVANCEMENT—HIS ORATION AT THE FUNERAL OF HIS BROTHER.

It was in April, 1859, that for the first time I met Robert G.Ingersoll. He came over from his home in Peoria to attend theWoodford Circuit Court. He was then under thirty years of age, ofsplendid physique, magnetic in the fullest significance of theword, and one of the most attractive and agreeable of men. He wasalmost boyish in appearance, and hardly known beyond the limits ofthe county in which he lived. He had but recently moved to Peoriafrom the southern part of the State.

To those who remember him it is hardly necessary to say that even atthat early day he gave unmistakable evidence of his marvellousgifts. His power over a jury was wonderful indeed; and woe betidethe counsel of but mediocre talents who had Ingersoll for anantagonist in a closely contested case.

The old Court-house at Metamora is yet standing, a monument of thepast; the county seat removed, it has long since fallen from itshigh estate. In my boyhood, I have more than once heard Mr. Lincolnat its bar, and later was a practitioner there myself—and State'sAttorney for the Circuit,—when Mr. Ingersoll was attendant uponits courts. Rarely at any time or place have words been spokenmore eloquent than fell from the lips of Lincoln and Ingersollin that now deserted Court-house, in the years long gone by.

The first appearance of Mr. Ingersoll in the political arena wasin the Presidential struggle of 1860. In his later years he wasa Republican, but in the contest just mentioned he was the earnestadvocate of the election of Mr. Douglas to the Presidency andwas himself the Democratic candidate for Congress in the PeoriaDistrict. His competitor was Judge Kellogg, a gentleman of well-knownability and many years' experience in Congress. Immediately upon hisnomination, Ingersoll challenged Kellogg to a series of jointdebates. The challenge was accepted, and the debates which followedwere a rare treat to the throngs who heard them. The discussionturned upon the vital issues yet pending at the outbreak of theCivil War, issues which were to find their final determinationon the field of battle. Possibly, with the exception of the historicdebates two years earlier, between Lincoln and Douglas, the countryhas known no abler discussion of great questions. It was then forthe first time that Ingersoll displayed the marvellous forensicpowers that at a later day—and upon a different arena—gave himworld-wide renown.

It was at a period subsequent to that just mentioned that he becamean agnostic. I recall no expression of his during the early yearsof our acquaintance that indicated a departure from the faith inwhich he had been reared. That his extreme views upon religioussubjects, and his manner, exceedingly offensive at times, ofexpressing them, formed an insuperable barrier to his politicaladvancement, cannot be doubted. But for his unbelief, what politicalhonors might have awaited him cannot certainly be known. Butrecalling the questions then under discussion, the intensity ofparty feeling, and the enthusiasm that his marvellous eloquencenever failed to arouse in the thousands who hung upon his words, itis probable that the most exalted station might have been attained.To those familiar with the political events of that day, it isknown that the antagonism aroused by his assaults upon the citadelof the faith sacred to the many, compassed his defeat in hiscandidature in 1868 for the Governorship of Illinois. His explanationwas, that his defeat was caused by a slight difference ofopinion between himself and some of the brethren upon the highlyexciting question of total depravity.

Some years later, the nominee of his party for the Presidencywas exceedingly obnoxious to him. Meeting the Colonel the morningafter the adjournment of the convention I inquired, "Are you happy?"To this he replied, that he was somewhat in the condition of a veryprofane youth who had just got religion at a backwoods camp-meeting.Soon after his conversion, the preacher, taking him affectionately bythe hand, inquired: "My young friend, are you very happy?" "Well,parson," replied the only half-converted youth, "I am not damn happy,just happy, that's all."

His only brother was for many years a Representative in Congressfrom Illinois. Clark Ingersoll was himself able and eloquent, butovershadowed by the superior gifts of his younger brother, thesubject of this sketch. The death of the former was to ColonelIngersoll a sorrow which remained with him to the last. The funeraloccurred in Washington in the summer of 1879, and of the pall-bearersselected by Colonel Ingersoll for the last sad service to hisbrother, were men well known in public life, one of whom but twoyears later, while President of the United States, fell by the handof an assassin.

From a Washington paper of the day succeeding the funeral of ClarkIngersoll, the following is taken: "When Colonel Ingersoll ceasedspeaking the pall-bearers, Senator Allison, Senator David Davis,Senator Blaine, Senator Voorhees, Representatives Garfield of Ohio,Morrison, Boyd, and Stevenson of Illinois, bore the casket tothe hearse and the lengthy cortege proceeded to the Oak HillCemetery where the remains were interred."

The occasion was one that will not easily pass from my memory.There was no service whatever save the funeral oration which hasfound its way into all languages. I stood by the side ofColonel Ingersoll near the casket during its delivery, and vividlyrecall his deep emotion, and the faltering tones in which thewondrous sentences were uttered. It is probable that this orationhas no counterpart in literature. It seemed in very truth theknell of hope, the expression of a grief that could know no surcease,the agony of a parting that could know no morrow.

In such an hour how cheerless and comfortless these words:

"Life is a narrow vale between the cold and barren peaks of twoeternities. We strive in vain to look beyond the heights. We cryaloud, and the only answer is the echo of our wailing cry.

"Every life, no matter if its every hour is rich with love, andevery moment jewelled with a joy, will at its close become a tragedyas sad and deep and dark as can be woven of the warp and woof ofmystery and death."

And yet in those other words, "But in the night of death, hope seesa star, and listening love can hear the rustle of a wing," and,"while on his forehead fell the golden dawning of a granderday," there is a yearning for "the touch of a vanished hand," and ahope that no philosophy could dispel of a reunion sometime andsomewhere with the loved and lost.

Two decades later, again "the veiled shadow stole upon the scene,"and the sublime mystery of life and death was revealed. The awfulquestion, "If a man die shall he live again?" was answered, and tothe great agnostic all was known.

XVIIA CAMP-MEETING ORATOR

PETER CARTWRIGHT, METHODIST PREACHER—HIS FEARLESSNESS AND ENERGY—HIS OLD-FASHIONED ORTHODOXY—HOW HE CONVERTED A PROFANE SWEARER—HIS ATTENDANCE AT A BALL—OLD-TIME CAMP-MEETINGS—CARTWRIGHT'SAVERSION TO OTHER SECTS—CONVERSION OF A DESPERADO INTO A PENITENT—CARTWRIGHT MR. LINCOLN'S COMPETITOR FOR REPRESENTATIVE—HIS SPEECHAT A DEMOCRATIC STATE CONVENTION.

The Rev. Peter Cartwright was a noted Methodist preacher of pioneerdays in Central Illinois. Once seen, he was a man never to beforgotten. He was, in the most expressive sense of the words, suigeneris; a veritable product of the times in which he lived,and the conditions under which he moved and had his being. All inall, his like will not appear again. He was converted when a mereyouth at a camp-meeting in southern Kentucky; soon after, he waslicensed to preach, and became a circuit rider in that State,and later was of the Methodist vanguard to Illinois. It was said ofhim that he was of the church military as well as "the churchmilitant." He was of massive build, an utter stranger to fear,and of unquestioned honesty and sincerity. He was gifted withan eloquence adapted to the times in which he lived, and thecongregations to which he preached. There would be no place forhim now, for the untutored assemblages who listened with batedbreath to his fiery appeals are of the past.

"For, welladay! Their day is fled,
Old times are changed, old manners gone."

The narrative of his tough conflicts with the emissaries of Satan iseven now of the rarest reading for a summer's day or a winter'snight. How he fought the Indians, fought the robbers, swam rivers,and threaded the prairies, in order that he might carry the Gospelto the remotest frontiersmen, was of thrilling interest to many ofthe new generation as his own sands were running low. He literallytook no thought of the morrow, but without staff and little evenin the way of scrip unselfishly gave the best years of a lifeextending two decades beyond the time allotted, to the serviceof his Master.

Until the Judgment leaves are unfolded the good which this man andmany of his co-laborers did in the new country will never be known.A journey of days on horseback to fill an appointment, to perform amarriage ceremony, preach a funeral sermon, or speak words of hopeand comfort to the sick or the bereaved, was part of the sum ofa life of service that knew little of rest.

There would probably be few pulpits open to Peter Cartwright inthese more cultivated times. Old things have passed away; thepioneer in his rough garb, with axe upon his shoulder, and riflein hand, is now but a tradition, while the border line of civilizationhas receded westward to the ocean.

None the less, the typical minister of to-day would have hadvery scant welcome in the rude pulpits of the days of which wewrite. His elegant attire, conventional manners, written sermons,and new theology, would have been sadly out of place in thecamp-meeting times, for be it remembered that Cartwright calledthings by their right names. He gave forth no uncertain sound.His theology was that of the Fathers. We hear little in thesemodern days of "The fire that quencheth not" and of "total depravity"and of "the bottomless pit." Such expressions are unfitted for earspolite. Higher criticism, new thought, and all kindred ideasand suggestions,

"Sapping a solemn creed with solemn sneer,"

were believed by Cartwright and his contemporaries to be merecontrivances of Satan for the ensnaring of immortal souls. Hisabhorrence of all these "wiles of the devil," and his scorn fortheir advocates, knew no bounds.

His preaching was of the John Wesley, George Whitefield, and JonathanEdwards type. Mingled with his denunciations of sin, hisearnest exhortations to repentance, his graphic description of theNew Jerusalem, with its "streets of gold, walls of jasper, andgates of pearl," and of the unending bliss of the redeemed, wereexpressions now relegated to the limbo of the past. Littletime, however, was wasted by the Rev. Peter in picking out softwords for fear of giving offence. To his impassioned soul "thefinal doom of the impenitent," the "torment of the damned," and"hell fire" itself, were veritable realities. And so indeed, whenrolling from his tongue, did they appear, not alone to the raptbeliever, but oftentimes to the ungodly and the sinner as well.

More than one marvellous conversion under his ministration isrecorded by Brother Cartwright in the autobiography written in theclosing years of his life. At one time in crossing a stream, hewas deeply offended by the profanity of the boatman. The kindlyadmonition and the gentle rebuke of the minister apparently added zestand volume to the oaths of the boatman. Suddenly seizing theoffender, the irate preacher ducked him into the river, and turneda deaf ear to his piteous appeals for succor until the half-drownedwretch had offered a prayer for mercy and made profuse promises ofrepentance. Hopeful conversion, and an ever-after life of Christianhumility, were the gratifying sequels to the baptism so unexpectedlyadministered.

Another experience no less remarkable occurred when, during theearly years of his ministry, he was crossing the mountains onhis way to the General Conference. At a tavern by the wayside,where he had obtained lodging for the night, he found preparationsin progress for a ball to come off that very evening. The protestationof the minister against such wickedness only aroused the ire ofthe landlord and his family. The dance promptly began at theappointed time.

"Soft eyes looked love to eyes which spake again,
And all went merry as a marriage-bell."

There being but a single room to the house, and a storm ragingwithout, the outraged and indignant minister was the unwillingwitness to the ebb and flow of this tide of ungodliness. At length,as partners were being chosen for the Virginia Reel, a beautifulgirl approached the solitary guest and requested his hand forthe set just forming. The minister arose and intimated a readycompliance with her request, at the same time assuring her that henever entered upon any important undertaking without first invokingGod's blessing upon it; and seizing her by the hand he fell uponhis knees and with the voice of one born to be obeyed commandedsilence and began his prayer. The dance was immediately suspended,and a solemnity and horror, as if the presage of approaching doom,fell upon the startled assemblage. Above the agonizing sobs ofthe lately impenitent revellers was heard, as was that of theancient prophet above the din of the worshippers of Baal, the voiceof the man of God in earnest appeals to the throne of grace formercy to these "hell-deserving sinners."

An hour passed; lamentation and groans of sin-sick soul mingledmeanwhile with the fervent exhortations and appeals of the manof prayer. Suddenly and in rapid succession shout after shoutof victory from redeemed souls ascended, and as if by magic thelate abode of scoffers became indeed a very Bethel. The incidentsmentioned, and others scarcely less remarkable, will be found in Mr.Cartwright's autobiography. The present generation knows but littleof the old-time camp-meeting; as it existed in the days and under theadministration of Peter Cartwright and his co-laborers, it is verilya thing of the past.

"New occasions teach new duties;
Time makes ancient good uncouth."

Seventy years and more ago, the country new, the population sparse,the settlements few and far between, the camp-meeting was of yearlyand, as it was believed, of necessary occurrence. It was, especiallywith the early Methodists, a recognized instrumentality for preachingthe Gospel for the conversion of souls.

A convenient spot—usually near a spring or brook—being selected,a rude pulpit was erected, rough seats provided, a log cabin ortwo for the aged and infirm hastily constructed, and there inthe early autumn large congregations assembled for worship. Formany miles around, and often from neighboring counties, the peoplecame, on horseback, in wagons, and on foot. Each family furnishedits own tent, the needed bed-clothing, cooking utensils, and abundantprovisions for their temporary sojourn in the wilderness. It was noholiday occasion, no time for merry making. It was often atmuch sacrifice and discomfort that such meetings were held, andpreachers and people alike were in terrible earnest. Rigid rules fortheir government were formulated and enforced, and a proper decorumrequired and observed. Woe betide the wretch who attempted tocreate disturbance, or depart from the strictest propriety ofdeportment. Not infrequently in the early camp-meetings of Kentuckyand Tennessee there were stalwart men keeping guard over thesereligious gatherings, who had in their younger days hunted thesavage foe from his fastness, faced Tecumseh at Tippecanoe and theThames, possibly been comrades of "Old Hickory" through the Evergladesand at New Orleans.

A sufficient time being set apart for meals and the needed hoursof rest, the residue was in the main devoted to public orprivate worship. Family prayer-meetings were held in each tent atthe early dawn; public preaching by the most gifted speakers duringtwo hours or more of the forenoon. After a hasty midday mealthe public services were resumed, to be followed at the appointed timeby meetings for special prayer, class meetings, and love feasts,all conducted with the greatest possible solemnity; and the exercises,after supper had been served and the candles lighted, concludedfor the day with an impassioned sermon from the main stand. Duringthe last-mentioned service especially, the scene presented wastruly of a weird and picturesque character. The flickering lightsof the camp, the dark forest around, the melodious concert of athousand voices mingling in sacred song, the awe-inspiring,never-to-be-forgotten hymn,

"Come, humble sinner, in whose breast
A thousand thoughts revolve,"

the fervid exclamations as convicted sinners gathered around themourners' bench and the shouts of joy heard far beyond the limits ofthe camp as peace found lodging in sin-distracted souls, allimpressed the memory and heart too deeply for even the flight ofyears wholly to dispel.

It need hardly be added that these scenes, of which but feebledescription has been given, marked the hour of triumph of the trulygifted of the revival preachers of camp-meeting times. The echoeswill never awake to the sound of such eloquence again. The oratorand the occasion here met and embraced. In very truth, the joysof the redeemed, and the horrors of lost souls, were depicted incolors that only lips "touched with a live coal from the altar"could adequately describe. In the presence of such lurid imagery,even the inspired revelation of the apocalyptic vision seems butsober narrative of commonplace events.

With camp-meetings and their thrilling incidents of two generationsago in our Western country, the name of Peter Cartwright isinseparably associated. He was the born leader; par excellence,the unrivalled orator. Since the passing of Whitefield and Asburya greater than he had not appeared. To those who have never attendedan old-time camp-meeting the following quotation from Mr.Cartwright's autobiography may be of interest:

"The meeting was protracted for weeks and was kept up day and night.Thousands heard of the mighty work, and came on foot, on horseback,and in wagons. It was supposed that there were in attendance atdifferent times from twelve to twenty-five thousand. Hundreds fellprostrate under the mighty power of God, as men slain in battle;and it was supposed that between one and two thousand souls werehappily and powerfully converted to God during the meetings. Itwas not unusual for as many as seven preachers to be addressingthe listening thousands at a time, from different stands. At times,more than a thousand persons broke out into loud shouting, all atonce, and the shouts could be heard for miles around."

Strange as the following may sound to the present generation, itis one of the many experiences recorded by Cartwright:

"The camp-meeting was lighted up, the trumpet blown, I rose in thestand and required every soul to leave the tents and come into thecongregation. There was a general rush to the stand. I requestedthe brethren, if ever they prayed in their lives, to pray now. Myvoice was strong and clear, and my preaching was more of anexhortation than anything else. My text was: 'The gates ofhell shall not prevail.' In about thirty minutes the power of Godfell upon the congregation in such a manner as is seldom seen; thepeople fell in every direction, right and left, front and rear.It was supposed that not less than three hundred fell like deadmen in mighty battle; and there was no need of calling mourners,for they were strewed all over the camp ground. Loud wailings wentup to Heaven from sinners for mercy, and a general shout fromChristians so that the noise was hear afar off."

That it was by no means an unusual occurrence for those who cameto scoff to remain to pray will appear from the same book:

"Just as I was closing up my sermon and pressing it with all theforce I could command, the power of God suddenly was displayed,and sinners fell by scores all through the assembly. It was supposedthat several hundred fell in five minutes; sinners turned pale;some ran into the woods; some tried to get away, and fell in theattempt; some shouted aloud for joy."

The horror of Brother Cartwrights for "immersionists" and Calvinistsof every degree, appears throughout his entire book. That hisrighteous soul was often sorely vexed because of them is beyondquestion. That his cup had not been drained to the dregs willappear from a new element he encountered when sent across the Ohioto the Scioto conference.

"It was a poor and hard circuit at that time, and the country roundwas settled in an early day by a colony of Yankees. At the timeof my appointment I had never seen a Yankee, and I had heard dismalstories about them. It was said they lived almost entirely onpumpkins, molasses, fat meat, and Bohea tea; moreover that theycould not bear loud and zealous sermons, and that they had broughton their learned preachers with them, and were always criticising uspoor backwoods preachers."

The "isms" our circuit-rider now encountered would have appalleda less resolute man. He seems, however, to have gotten along fairlywell except with one "female," who, from all accounts, was givenover in about equal parts to "universalism" and "predestinarianism."This troublesome female, that he candidly admitted he had ahard race to keep up with, he has left impaled for all time asa "thin-faced, Roman-nosed, loquacious, glib-tongued Yankee."

Something of the antagonism of the different persuasions in thegood old pioneer days, may be gathered from the tender farewelltaken by Brother Cartwright of a former associate, one Brother D.,"who left the Methodists, joined the Free-will Baptists, left themand joined the New Lights, and then moved to Texas, where I expectthe devil has him in safe keeping long before this time!"

It would be idle to suppose that Peter Cartwright was a merevisionary or dreamer. Nothing could be farther from the truth.He was abundantly possessed with what, in Western parlance, isknown as "horse sense." He was a student of men, and kept in closetouch with the affairs of this world. His shrewdness, no less thanhis courage, was a proverb in his day. Upon one occasion, atthe beginning of his sermon before a large audience, he was morethan once interrupted by the persistent but ineffectual attempt ofa saintly old sister to shout. Annoyed at length, turning to her hesaid: "Dear sister, never shout as a matter of duty; when youcan't help it, then shout; but never shout as a mere matter ofduty!"

At a camp-meeting on the banks of the Cumberland in the early yearsof the last century, an attempt was made by a band of desperadoes tocreate a disturbance. To this end their leader, a burly ruffian, stalkedto the front of the pulpit, and with an oath commanded Cartwright to"dry up." Suspending divine service for a few minutes, and layingaside his coat, the preacher descended from the pulpit and springingupon the intruder, felled him to the earth and belabored him untilthe wretch begged for mercy. The precious boon was withheld untilthe now penitent disturber, after promising to repent, had beengiven the humblest seat in the "amen corner." This all satisfactorilycompleted, and his garment replaced, the minister, scarcely ruffledby the trifling incident, re-entered the pulpit, and with the words,"As I was saying, brethren, when interrupted," continued hisdiscourse.

This little sketch would be unpardonably incomplete if the importantfact were withheld that Peter Cartwright had a relish for politics,as well as for salvation. He was more than once a member of theGeneral Assembly of Illinois, and be it said to his eternal honor hisspeech and vote were ever on the side of whatever conduced tothe best interests of the State. In him the cause of education,and the asylums for the unfortunate, had ever an earnest advocate.

Though many years his senior, he was the contemporary of AbrahamLincoln, and a resident of the same county. Mr. Lincoln was, in1846, the Whig candidate for Representative in Congress. Thedistrict was of immense area, embracing many counties of CentralIllinois. Newspapers were scarce, and the old-time custom of jointdiscussions between opposing candidates for high office were stillin vogue. Mr. Lincoln's unsuccessful competitor was none otherthan the subject of this article. The great Whig leader and hisDemocratic antagonist—"My friend the Parson," as Mr. Lincolnfamiliarly called him—were soon engaged in joint debate. It isto be regretted that there is no record of these debates. Thereis probably no man now living who heard them. But what rare readingthey would be at this day, if happily they had been preserved.The earnest, inflexible parson,—even then "standing upon theWestern slope,"—backed by his party, then dominant in the nationalgovernment, upon the one side; the comparatively youthful lawyer, whosefame was yet to fill the world, upon the other. No doubt, dailyupon "the stump" and at night at the village taverns, the changeswere rung upon the then all-absorbing subjects, the Walker Tariff,the War with Mexico, and the Wilmot Proviso. These questions belongnow to the domain of history; as do indeed issues of far greaterconsequence, upon which Lincoln and an antagonist more formidable thanCartwright crossed swords a dozen years later.

At the Democratic State Convention, which assembled in Springfieldin the early spring of 1860, a resolution instructing the Illinoisdelegates to support Stephen A. Douglas for nomination to thePresidency at the approaching National Convention was adopted amidstgreat enthusiasm. Immediately upon its adoption, a delegate calledattention to the fact that the venerable Peter Cartwright waspresent, and said he knew the Convention would be glad to hear aword from him. Immediately "Cartwright," "Cartwright," "Cartwright,"was heard from all parts of the chamber. From his seat, surroundedby the Sangamon County delegates, near the central part of thehall, Mr. Cartwright arose, and with deep emotion, and scarcelyaudible voice, began:

"My friends and fellow-citizens, I am happy to be with you onthe present occasion. My sun is low down upon the horizon, andthe days of my pilgrimage are almost numbered. I have lived inIllinois during the entire period of its history as a State. Ihave watched with tender interest its marvellous growth from itsfeeble condition as a Territory, until it has reached itspresent splendor as a State. I have travelled over its prairies,slept with only the canopy of heaven for a covering; I have followedthe trail of the Indians, fought the desperadoes, swam the rivers,threaded the almost pathless forests, in order that I might carry thetidings of the blessed Gospel to the loneliest cabin upon theborder. Yes, my friends, for seventy long years, amid appallingdifficulties and dangers, I have waged an incessant warfare againstthe world, the flesh, the devil, and all the other enemies of theDemocratic party!"

XVIIICLEVELAND AS I KNEW HIM

CLEVELAND'S SPEECH ACCEPTING HIS NOMINATION—MR. BLAINE'S FRUITLESSTOUR AS A CANDIDATE—CLEVELAND'S INSIGHT INTO HUMAN CHARACTER—HISTARIFF-REDUCTION MESSAGE—WITHDRAWAL OF THE HAWAIIAN ANNEXATIONTREATY—HIS VENEZUELAN MISSION—HIS ACQUAINTANCE WITH THE SCIENCE OFGOVERNMENT—HIS QUALIFICATIONS FOR SOCIAL LIFE AND FOR SERVING THECOUNTRY.

Upon the adjournment of the Democratic National Convention of 1884,which had nominated Mr. Cleveland for the Presidency, in companywith other delegates I visited him at the Executive Mansion atAlbany, New York. The Hon. William F. Vilas was the chairman ofour committee, and the purpose of the visit to notify Mr. Cleveland,officially, of his nomination to the great office. I saw him thenfor the first time.

He was then Governor of New York, having been but recently electedby an unprecedented majority. I recall him distinctly on thisoccasion as he responded to the eloquent speech of Colonel Vilas.Standing near him at the time were three men well known at a laterdate as members of his cabinet and his closest friends, DanielManning, William C. Whitney, and Daniel S. Lamont.

Cleveland's response to the speech of notification was in dignified,forceful phrase, and at once challenged public attention and gave thekeynote to the memorable contest which immediately followed. Insome of its aspects it was a Presidential struggle the like ofwhich we may not again witness. As the day of election drew near,the excitement increased in intensity, and no efforts that gavehopes of success were spared by the opposing party managers.

The defection from his ranks by what in campaign publications ofthe day was known as the "mugwump" element, caused Mr. Blaine toventure upon a hazardous tour of speech-making. Enthusiasticaudiences gathered around the brilliant Republican candidate duringhis Western tour. This, however, as the sequel showed, was timeand energy wasted; Illinois and Ohio were safely in the Republicancolumn, and the real battle-ground was New York state. Homewardbound at length from this strenuous pilgrimage demanded by no partynecessity, Mr. Blaine was fated during his brief sojourn in NewYork to listen to the now historical words of Burchard, words whichin all human probability proved the political undoing of thecandidate to whom, with the best intentions, they were earnestlyaddressed.

New York, as has been its wont before and since, proved the pivotalState. For many days after the election the result was still indoubt. Party feeling was intense, and the result hinged uponthe narrow margin in the vote of Blaine and Cleveland in one State.

During the strenuous days that passed from the election untilthe authoritative announcement of the result, one man alone, amid thehigh tide of party passion, remained calm. To all appearancesunmoved, Grover Cleveland sat in his office day after day, no detailof official duty failing to receive his careful attention. Thefact just stated is explanatory of much in his subsequent career.

When first nominated for the Presidency, Mr. Cleveland hadlittle personal knowledge of public men outside of his own State.How rapidly he acquired the information necessary to a successfuladministration of the government was indeed a marvel. It was no"Cleveland luck" or haphazard chance that called into his first Cabinetsuch men as Bayard, Manning, Garland, Vilas, and Whitney. It can safelybe asserted that Mr. Cleveland was an excellent judge of men and oftheir capacity for the particular work assigned them. As if byintuition, he thoroughly understood after a single interview the menwith whom he was brought in contact. As an object lesson a betterappointment to high office has rarely been made than that of Fullerto the chief justiceship of the great court. No less fortunate washis selection of Vilas to the responsible position of Postmaster-General.And yet both of these gentlemen were personally strangers to Mr. Clevelandwhen he was first named for the Presidency. His appointments to importantdiplomatic positions likewise strikingly illustrated his aptnessin forming a correct estimate of men from whom his appointees wereto be chosen.

No incumbent of the Presidency was ever less of a time-server thanCleveland. "Expediency" was a word scarcely known to his vocabulary.Recognizing alike the dignity and responsibility of the greatoffice, he was in the highest degree self-reliant. None the less heat all times availed himself of the wise counsel of his officialadvisers. In matters falling within their especial province theirdetermination was, except in rare instances, conclusive. In nosense was his mind closed against the timely counsel of his friends.Far from being opinionated, in the offensive sense of the word, theultimate determination, however, was after "having taken counselfrom himself."

The incident contributing perhaps more than any other to his defeatin 1888 was his tariff-reduction message to Congress one year priorto that election. An abler state paper has rarely been put forth.It was a clear, succinct presentation of existing economic conditions;in very truth an unanswerable argument for tariff reduction. Itis not yet forgotten how promptly this message was denounced bythe entire opposition press as a "free-trade manifesto," and howthis cry increased in voice and volume until the close of thePresidential contest. And yet, in sending this message to Congress,Mr. Cleveland was entirely consistent with himself. Its utteranceswere in clear accord with the platform upon which he had beennominated and with his letter of acceptance. It is one of theanomalies of politics that the clear-cut sentences measurablyinstrumental in compassing his defeat in 1888, were upon the bannersof his triumphant partisans in the campaign of 1892.

In the year last named, Mr. Cleveland was for the third time thecandidate of his party for the Presidency. His nomination, by atwo-thirds vote, was upon the first ballot, and marked an era inthe history of national conventions. His candidacy was bitterlyantagonized by the delegation from his own State, his name beingpresented by Governor Abbott of New Jersey. It is a fact ofmuch significance that neither in the platform upon which he wasnominated, nor in the letter of acceptance, was there the slightestdeparture from his emphatic utterances upon the tariff in thememorable message of 1887. The salient issues of the campaign were"tariff reform" and hostility to the then pending "Force bill."From first to last Mr. Cleveland was in close consultation withthe leaders of his party and advised as to every detail of thecontest. The result was a vindication of his former administrationand an unmistakable endorsement of the tenets of the Democraticfaith.

In this brief sketch, there can be but slight reference to theimportant questions which now for four years engaged his attention.Almost his first official act after his second inauguration wasthe withdrawal from the Senate of the Hawaiian Annexation Treatyrecently submitted by President Harrison for ratification. Firmlybelieving that the late United States Minister to the unfortunate islandhad at least acquiesced in the overthrow of the Hawaiian Government,President Cleveland, with the hope that he might measurably repairthe wrong, recalled the Annexation Treaty, as stated. In hismessage of withdrawal were the words: "A great wrong has been doneto a feeble and independent State." This almost forgotten incidentis now recalled only to emphasize the spirit of justice thatcharacterized his dealings with foreign Governments.

And yet history will truly say of him that, while just to otherGovernments, no President has more firmly maintained the rights ofhis own. This assertion finds verification in the Venezuelanmessage, which, for the moment, almost startled the country. Bymany it was for the time believed to be the prelude to war. Invery truth, as the sequel proved, it was a message of peace. Itwas a critical moment, and the necessity imperative for prompt,decisive action. If the Monroe Doctrine was to be maintained,Great Britain could not be permitted arbitrarily to divest Venezuelaof any portion of her territory. The arbitration proposed byPresident Cleveland, resulting in peaceable adjustment, establishedwhat we may well believe will prove an enduring precedent. Onesentence of the memorable message is worthy of remembrance bythe oncoming generations: "The Monroe Doctrine was intended toapply to every stage of our national life, and cannot become obsoletewhile our Republic endures."

I had excellent opportunities to know Mr. Cleveland. I was a memberof the first and third conventions which named him for the Presidency,and actively engaged in both the contests that resulted in hiselection. As assistant Postmaster-General during his first term, andVice-President during the second, I was often "the neighbor to hiscounsels." I am confident that a more conscientious, painstaking officialnever filled public station. In his appointments to office hischief aim was to subserve the public interests by judiciousselections. The question of rewarding party service, while by nomeans ignored, was immeasurably subordinate to that of the integrityand efficiency of the applicant. He was patriotic to the core,and it was his earnest desire that the last vestige of legislationinimical to the Southern States should pass from the statute books.He did much toward the restoration of complete concord between allsections of the country.

Mr. Cleveland possessed a kind heart, and was ever just and generousin his dealings. Wholly unostentatious himself, the humblest feltat ease in his presence. Possibly no incumbent of the great officewas more easily accessible to all classes and conditions. Courteousat all times, no guards were necessary to the preservation ofhis dignity. No one would have thought of an undue familiarity.

He was a profound student of all that pertained to human affairs.He had given deep thought to the science of government, and wasfamiliar with the best that had been written on the subject. Caringlittle for the light literature of the day, his concern was withthe practical knowledge bearing upon existing conditions andthat might aid in the solution of the ever-recurring problemsconfronting men in responsible positions. He loved to talk of thefounders of the Government, and of the matchless instrument, theresult of their wise deliberations, declared by Gladstone, "themost wonderful work ever struck off at a given time from the brainand purpose of man." The Constitution was in very truth "the man ofhis counsel," and, in my opinion, no statesman in ancient or moderntimes so challenged his profound admiration as did James Madison.

Mr. Cleveland was sociable in the best sense of that word, and thecares of state laid aside, in the company of friends he was anexceedingly agreeable companion. While by no means the best ofstory-tellers himself, he had a keen appreciation of the humorous andludicrous phases and incidents of life. I shall not soon forgetan evening I spent with him in company with Governor Proctor Knottof Kentucky. The greatest story-teller of the age was at his best,and the delight of the occasion was, as Cleveland declared, "beyondexpression."

More than once I have been a guest in his home. During the campaignof 1892, when his associate on the national ticket, I spent somedays in conference with him at Gray Gables. The memory of thatlong-ago visit lingers yet. He was the agreeable host, the gentleman;more than that, the tender, considerate husband, the kind, affectionatefather. It has never been my good fortune to cross the threshold ofa more delightful home.

I saw Mr. Cleveland last upon the occasion of his visit to ArborLodge, Nebraska, to deliver an address at the unveiling of a statueof the late Sterling Morton, former Secretary of Agriculture. Theaddress was worthy of the occasion, and indeed a just and touchingtribute to the memory of an excellent man, an able and efficient CabinetMinister. In my last conversation with Mr. Cleveland upon theoccasion mentioned, he spoke feelingly of our old associates, manyof whom had passed away. I remember that the tears came to hiseyes when the name of Colonel Lamont happened to be mentioned.

During our stay at Arbor Lodge, the beautiful Morton home, byinvitation of the superintendent, Mr. Cleveland visited theState Asylum for the Blind at Nebraska City. In his brief addressto the unfortunate inmates of the institution, Mr. Clevelandmentioned the fact that in his early life he had been for some timea teacher in an asylum for the blind, and spoke of his profoundinterest in whatever concerned their welfare. I have heard himmany times, but never when he appeared to better advantage, orevinced such depth of feeling as upon this occasion.

The passing of Cleveland marks an epoch. He was indeed a strikingfigure in American history. Take him all in all, we may notlook upon his like again. The "good citizenship," an expressionfrequently on his lips, to which he would have his countrymenaspire, was of the noblest, and no man had a clearer or loftierconception of the responsible and sacred character of public station.With him the oft-quoted words, "A public office is a public trust,"was no mere lip-service. His will be a large place in history. Hisadministration of the government will safely endure the test oftime.

"Whatever record leaps to light,
He never can be shamed."

In victory or defeat, in office or out, he was true to his own selfand to his ideals. His early struggles, his firmness of purpose, hisdetermination that knew no shadow of wavering, his exalted aims,and the success that ultimately crowned his efforts have given himhigh place among statesmen, and will be a continuing inspirationto the oncoming generations of his countrymen.

XIXA UNANIMOUS CHOICE FOR SPEAKER

A MEETING OF PROSPECTIVE SPEAKERS—DR. ROGERS WITHIN SIGHT OFTHE GOAL OF HIS AMBITION—HE STATES THE GROUND OF HIS HOPE—THEFOUNDATION PROVES TO BE ONLY SAND—A TEMPEST CALMED BY THE DOCTOR.

At a banquet in Washington in the winter of 1880-81, a large numberof Representatives were present. Among the number were Reed,McKinley, Cannon, and Keifer. These gentlemen were all prospectivecandidates for the Speakership of the then recently elected House ofRepresentatives. The best of feeling prevailed, and the occasionwas one of rare enjoyment and mirth. Each candidate in turn wasintroduced by the toast-master as "the Speaker of the next House,"and in his speech each claimed all the others as his enthusiastic andreliable supporters. The apparent confidence of each candidate inthe support of his rivals reminded Mr. Cannon of the experience ofan Illinois legislator, which he requested his colleague fromthe Bloomington district to relate.

That the reader may appreciate the incident then related, somemention must be made of Dr. Thomas P. Rogers of Bloomington. Hewas a gentleman of the old school, a politician from the beginning,of inflexible integrity and an earnestness of purpose that knew noshadow of turning. He was as devoid of any possible touch of humoras was his own marble bust of Thomas Jefferson. He was the personalfriend of Lincoln and of Douglas, and the political follower ofthe latter. The fondness of a mother for her first-born hardlyexceeded that of Dr. Rogers for the party of his choice. Anyuncomplimentary allusion to his "principles" was considered apersonal injury, and his devotion to party leaders, from Jacksonto Douglas, savored of idolatry. Some camp-meeting experiences inearly life had given zest and tone to his style of oratory,which stood him well in hand in his many political encounters ofa later day.

For three consecutive terms the Doctor had been a member of theLegislature, and his record from every point of view was withouta blemish. At his fourth election, it was found that for the firsttime in a decade or more his party had secured a majority in theHouse, to which the Doctor had just been elected. The goal of hisambition was the Speakership, and it truly seemed that his hourhad now come.

Soon after these facts were known beyond peradventure, the Doctor cameone day into my office. After election matters had been talkedover at length and with much satisfaction, the Doctor modestlyintimated a desire to be a candidate for the Speakership. I atonce gave him the promise of my earnest support and inquired whetherhe had any friends upon whom he could rely in the approachingcaucus. He assured me that there were four members of the lastHouse re-elected to this, upon whom he knew he could absolutelydepend under all circumstances. Upon my inquiry as to their names,he said:

"Hadlai,"—the Doctor, it may be here mentioned, had from my boyhoodkindly given me the benefit of an "H" to which I laid no claim andwas in no way entitled—"Hadlai, you take your pencil and take downtheir names as I give them to you."

I at once took my seat, and pencil in hand, looked inquiringlytoward the Doctor.

"Hadlai," he continued, "put down Heise of Cook. John and Ihave been friends for more than thirty years; I worked for him fora delegate-at-large to the last National Convention, and he toldme then, 'Doctor, if there is anything I can do for you, just let meknow.'"

To which I replied, "Heise of Cook, dead sure," and his name wasat once placed in the Rogers column.

"Now, Hadlai," continued the Doctor, "there is Armstrong of LaSalle; Wash and I were boys together in Ohio, and sat side by sidein the Charleston Convention when we were trying to nominate Douglas.He has told me more than once that if ever we carried the House,he was for me for Speaker above any man on earth." At which Iunhesitatingly placed Armstrong of La Salle in the same column withHeise of Cook.

"Now, Hadlai," continued the Doctor, after a moment's pause, "thereis Cummins of Fulton; I helped elect Jim Chairman of the last StateConvention, and he has told me again and again that he hoped hewould live to see me Speaker, so I can count on Jim without doubt."

I at once placed Cummins in the column of honor with Heise and
Armstrong, and calmly awaited further instructions.

"Now, Hadlai, there is Moore of Adams; Alf got into trouble overa bill he had in the last Legislature; he could neither get it outof the committee, nor the committee to take any action, so he cameover to my seat terribly worried, and says he, 'Doctor, forGod's sake, get me out of this!' I did, Hadlai, and Alf was themost grateful man you ever saw on earth, and told me then, 'Doctor,I would get up at two o'clock at night to do you a favor.' Ican safely count on him."

It is needless to say that Moore of Adams rounded out the quartetteof faithful supporters.

"Now, Hadlai," remarked the Doctor, after contemplating with apparentsatisfaction the list I had handed him, "if you will give mesome paper and envelopes and a pen and some stamps, if you havethem handy, I will write to all of them now." The articles mentionedwere produced, the letters written, stamped, and duly mailed, andthe good Doctor departed in an exceedingly comfortable frame ofmind.

Time passes, as is its wont; but for some weeks I neither sawnor heard from the Doctor. Meeting him on the street at length,I at once inquired whether he had received replies to his letters.

"Come into the office, Hadlai, and I will explain." Pained toobserve that the tone and air of confidence so perceptible inour last interview was lacking, I followed with some misgiving intohis office.

"Yes, Hadlai," he slowly began, "I have heard from all of them.Heise of Cook [the familiar appellations of the former interviewwere wanting] writes assuring me that there is no man living forwhom he entertains a more profound respect then for myself, Hadlai;but that owing to unforseen complications arising in his county,he has reluctantly consented to allow his own name to be presentedto the caucus."

The name of Heise of Cook was immediately stricken from the headof the list. Then a reverie into which the Doctor had fallen was atlength disturbed by my inquiry, "What about Armstrong?"

"Yes, Hadlai, Armstrong of La Salle writes me that in his judgmentthere is no man living so deserving of the gratitude of the party,or so well qualified for the office of Speaker as myself, but thatthe pressure from his constituents has been so great that he hasfinally consented to allow his own name to be presented to thecaucus."

"Fare-you-well, Mr. Armstrong," was my hurried observation, as thename of that gentleman disappeared from my list.

Arousing the Doctor at length from the reverie into which he hadagain fallen, I ventured to inquire as to the state of mind of Mr.Cummins.

"Yes, Hadlai, Cummins of Fulton says that in a certain contingencyhe will himself be a candidate, and Moore of Adams writes me thathe is a candidate!"

It may not be out of place to supplement this little narrativeby relating an incident that illustrates the fact that a man whollydevoid of any sense of humor himself may at times be the unconsciouscause of amusement in others.

Imprimis: The Doctor, while a member of the General Assembly,voted for a measure known in local parlance as "the Lake FrontBill." The criticisms which followed vexed his righteous soul,and he patiently awaited the opportunity for public explanationand personal vindication.

Now it so fell out that at the time whereof we write there was muchexcitement—a tempest in a tea-pot—in the little city of Bloomington,over a change in "readers" recently ordered in the schools bythe Board of Education. After much discussion on the streets and atthe corners, a public indignation meeting was called for Saturday eveningat the east door of the Court-house. Meanwhile the indignationagainst the offending Board intensified, and there was someapprehension even of serious trouble. At the appointed time andplace, the meeting assembled and was duly organized by the selectionof a Chairman. Calls at once began for well-known orators atthe bar and upon the hustings. "Ewing," "Fifer," "Rowell," "Prince,""Lillard," "Phillips," "Kerrick," "Weldon," were heard from thecrowd in rapid succession. It was like "calling spirits fromthe vasty deep." No response was given, no orator appeared; and, asis well known, an indignation meeting without an orator is asimpossible as "Hamlet" with the Prince of Denmark omitted.

But sure enough—

"Fortune sometimes brings in boats that are not steered."

At the auspicious moment, from the rear of the crowd Tom Hullingercalled out, "Doctor Rogers, Doctor Rogers!" The hour had struck.Without waiting further call, the Doctor promptly took the standand waiving the formality of an introduction, began:

"I am deeply gratified to have this opportunity to explain to myfellow-citizens who have known me from my early manhood my voteupon the Lake Front Bill," and a two-hour vindication immediatelyfollowed. No allusion being made to the object of the meeting,or the change of school-books, of which the Doctor knew as little andcared as little as he did of the thirteenth century controversybetween the Guelphs and the Ghibellines, with the waning hours theexcitement subsided. The change of readers became a dead issue;the era of good feeling was restored; and to this blessed hour,except in a spirit of mirth, the school-book question has neverbeen mentioned.

XXA LAWYER OF THE OLD SCHOOL

JUDGE ARRINGTON, THE IDEAL LAWYER—EULOGIZED BY OTHER JUDGES—BOOKSHIS EARLY COMPANIONS—BECOMES SUCCESSIVELY A METHODIST PREACHER,A LAWYER, AND A JUDGE—WRITES SOME SKETCHES OF LIFE IN THE SOUTHWEST—HIS APOSTROPHE TO WATER RECITED BY GOUGH.

In the old Supreme Court-room at Ottawa, almost a half-century ago,I saw and heard Judge Alfred A. Arrington for the first time. Fortwo hours I listened with the deepest attention to his masterlyargument in a cause then exciting much interest because of thelarge amount involved. The dry question of law under discussion, "asif touched by the enchanter's wand," was at once invested withan interest far beyond its wont. As I listened to the argument ofJudge Arrington, and witnessed the manner of its delivery, heappeared in the most comprehensive sense the ideal lawyer. Heseemed, indeed, as he probably was, the sole survivor of the schoolof which Wirt and Pinckney were three generations ago thetypical representatives. His dignified bearing, old-time apparel,and lofty courtesy toward the Court and opposing counsel, allstrengthened this impression. He had a highly attractive appearance,and as was said by a contemporary, "to crown all, a massiveWebsterian forehead, needing no seal to give the world assurance ofa man."

"Sage he stood,
With Atlantean shoulders, fit to bear
The weight of mightiest monarchies; his look
Drew audience and attention still as night
Or summer's noontide air."

Since then I have listened to advocates of national renown inour great court and in the Senate sitting as a High Court ofImpeachment, but at no time or place have I heard an abler, morescholarly, or more eloquent argument than that of Judge Arrington inthe old court-room at Ottawa, Illinois, on that day long gone by.

The most eminent members of the Chicago bar were the eulogistsof Judge Arrington when he passed to his grave, near the closeof the great Civil War. Judge Wilson, in presenting resolutionsin honor of the deceased, voiced the sentiments of his associates whenhe said:

"For more than thirty years at the bar and upon the bench, Ihave been associated with the legal profession; and I may saywithout offence that of the many able men I have known I regardJudge Arrington, take him all in all, as the ablest."

The venerable Judge Drummond said:

"I have rarely heard a man whose efforts so constantly riveted theattention from the beginning to the close of his discourse. Forwhile he trod with firm and steady steps the path of logic, hisvivid imagination was constantly scattering on each side flowersof fragrant beauty, to the wonder and delight of all who heard him.He was a great lawyer in the highest and largest sense of the term—great in the extent and thoroughness of his legal learning, inthe vigor and acuteness of his reasoning, and in the power ofhis eloquence."

The Hon. Melville W. Fuller, the present Chief Justice of the United
States, said:

"When he arose to discuss a question, he exhibited a perfectknowledge of every phase in which it could be presented; and mennever grew weary (especially if the argument involved Constitutionalconstruction, in which department he stood primus inter illustres)of admiring the amplitude of his legal attainments, the accuracyof his learning, the compactness of his logic, and the majesticflow of his eloquence, and more than all, that firmness and breadthof mind which lifted him above the ordinary contest of the forum.

"It is a source of the deepest consolation that he found peaceat the last; that the grand spirit, before it took its everlastingflight, reposed in confidence on the Book of Books; that itsdeparture was illumined by that precious light which everrenders radiant the brief darkness 'twixt mortal twilight andimmortal dawn."

And yet, alas, his name has now almost passed from the memories ofmen; the veil of time has settled over him; no distinct image isrecalled by the mention of his name. How suggestive this, ofthe ephemeral fame of even a great lawyer:

"Swift as shadow, short as any dream
Brief as the lightning in the collied night."

Words long since uttered by an eminent jurist have not losttheir significance:

"There is, perhaps, no reputation that can be achieved amongst menthat is so transitory, so evanescent, as that of a great advocate.The very wand that enchants us is magical. Its effects can befelt; it influences our actions; it controls and possesses us; butto define it, or tell what it is, or how it produces these effects,is as far beyond our power as to imprison the sunbeam. In thepresence of such majestic power we can only stand awed and silent."

There was much of romance, and somewhat of mystery, that gathered aboutthe life of Judge Arrington. Born of humble parentage in the pineforests of North Carolina, with no advantages other than thosecommon in the remoter parts of our country a century ago, from thebeginning he apparently dwelt apart from the conditions surroundinghim. At an early age he removed with his father's family to thethen wilds of the Southwest.

There, upon the very border line of civilization, his associatesfor a time were the advance guard, the adventurers and soldiers offortune that in a large measure constituted the civilization ofthe southwestern frontier during the early years of the last century.With his early environment, his subsequent career seems a marvel.It can only be explained upon the supposition that through withthem, he was not of them.

"His soul was like a star, and dwelt apart."

His companions were his books. Denied the advantages of earlyscholastic training, he was, from the beginning, an omnivorousreader. He cared little for the allurements and excitement ofsociety. At the age of seventeen, he joined the Methodist EpiscopalChurch, and was soon after licensed to preach. For four yearshe rode the circuit, enduring all the discomforts and dangers thenand there incident to his calling. His field may be called theUltima Thule, bordering upon the Rio Grande and inhabited byIndians. Untutored audiences were stirred to the depths by hisfervid appeals. Church buildings were yet in the future; thecongregations assembled in God's first temples, and listenedwith rapt attention to the fiery eloquence of the delicate, youthfulmessenger, whose soul seemed on fire.

A gentleman who had heard Arrington writes:

"He was then young, delicate, as brilliant as a comet, and almost aserratic. Without research or mental discipline, he could electrifyan audience beyond all living men, and arouse in the minds of thosewho heard him the wildest enthusiasm."

For some cause, possibly never to be explained, he suddenly abandonedthe ministry, began the study of the law, and when a little pastthe age of twenty-one, was admitted to the bar. After some years ofsuccessful practice in the rude frontier courts of Arkansas, heremoved to Texas, where he was soon appointed a judge, and assignedto the Rio Grande circuit. In addition to his judicial labors, henow wrote and published some graphic and interesting sketches ofborder life, vivid pictures of conditions then existing in theSouthwest among a people the like of which we shall not see agin,a people upon whom the restraints and amenities of civilized life satbut lightly, who were in large degree a law unto themselves, andwith whom revenge was virtue.

One of his publications, "Paul Denton," still has a place in many ofour libraries. It is, in part, a narrative of the thrillingexperiences of an early Methodist circuit-rider—presumably himself—upon the southwest border. In this will be found his marvellousapostrophe to water, which, as was said by Judge Dent, "was sofamiliar to the lecture-going public of the last generation owing toits frequent declamation from the rostrum by the temperance lecturer,Gough."

The hero of the book, Paul Denton, had been announced to preach ata famous Spring, where "plenty of good liquor" was promised to allwho would attend. During the sermon, a desperado demanded:"Mr. Denton, where is the liquor you promised?"

"There!" answered the preacher in tones of thunder, and pointinghis motionless finger at a spring gushing up in two strong columnsfrom the bosom of the earth with a sound like a shout of joy."There," he repeated, "there is the liquor which God the Eternalbrews for all his children. Not in the simmering still over thesmoky fires choked with poisonous gases, surrounded with stench ofsickening odors and corruptions, doth your Father in heaven preparethe precious essence of life—pure cold water; but in the greenglade and grassy dell, where the red-deer wanders and the childloves to play, there God brews it; and down, low down, in thedeepest valleys, where the fountains murmur, and the rills sigh, andhigh upon the mountain-tops where the naked granite glitterslike gold in the sun, where the storm-cloud broods and thethunder-storms crash; and far out on the wide, wild sea, where thehurricane howls music and the big waves roll the chorus, sweeping themarch of God—there he brews it, the beverage of life, health-givingwater.

"And everywhere it is a thing of life and beauty—gleaming inthe dew-drop; singing in the summer rain; shining in the ice gemtill the trees all seem turned to living jewels; spreading a goldenveil over the sun or a white gauze around the midnight moon; sportingin the glacier; folding its bright snow-curtain softly about thewintry world; and weaving the many-colored bow whose warp is therain-drops of earth, whose woof is the sunbeam of heaven, allcheckered over with the mystic hand of refraction.

"Still it is beautiful, that blessed life-water! No poisonousbubbles are on its brink; its foam brings not murder and madness;no blood stains its liquid glass; pale widows and starving orphansweep not burning tears into its depths; no drunkard's shriekingghost from the grave curses it in the world of eternal despair.Beautiful, pure, blessed, and glorious. Speak out, my friends,would you exchange it for the demon's drink, alcohol?"

In Calvary Cemetery, Chicago, rests all that is mortal of Judge
Arrington.

"Tread lightly on his ashes, ye men of genius, for
he was your kinsman!
Weed clean his grave, ye men of goodness, for
he was your brother!"

XXIHIGH DEBATE IN THE MOUNTAINS

COLONEL WOOLFORD, A HERO UNDER GENERAL ZACHARY TAYLOR—HIS MANNER OFFIGHTING—HIS DEFENCE OF A YOUTH CHARGED WITH MURDER—HE MAKES ASPEECH THAT INFURIATES GENERAL FRY.

One of the men not easily forgotten was the Hon. Frank Woolford,a member of Congress from the mountains of Kentucky nearly a quarterof a century ago. He was without reservation a typical mountaineer.He practised law in the local courts, and was prominent in thepolitics of his State. His style of oratory bore little resemblanceto that of the British House of Lords. He had been a soldier in twowars, and his dauntless courage and inexhaustible good humor made himthe idol of his comrades. He had been of the heroic band of"Old Rough and Ready" that repelled the charge of twenty thousand lancersunder Santa Ana at Buena Vista. He was as brave as Marshal Ney,and it was said of him that the battle-field was his home as theupper air was that of the eagle.

He promptly espoused the cause of the Union at the outbreak of theCivil War and was chosen Colonel of a mounted regiment gatheredfrom his own and adjacent counties. He knew how to fight, butof the science of war as taught in the schools he was as ignorant asthe grave. It was said that his entire tactics were embraced intwo commands: "Huddle and fight," and "Scatter." When thefirst was heard his men "huddled and fit"; and when retreat was theonly possible salvation, the command to "scatter" was obeyedwith equal alacrity. Each man was now for himself, and "devil takethe hindmost" for a time, but the sound of Woolford's buglenever failed to secure prompt falling into line at the auspicious moment."Woolford's cavalry" was the synonym for daring, even at thetime when the recital of the deeds of brave men filled the world'sgreat ear.

Woolford and his troopers were in the thickest of the fight at MillSpring, where Zollicoffer fell; later, they hung upon the flanksof Bragg on his retreat southward from the bloody field of Perryville.More than once during those troublous times our hero was a "foemanworthy the steel" of John Morgan, Forrest, and the gallant JoeWheeler of world renown.

At the close of the war, Colonel Woolford returned to his mountainhome and was in due time elected a Representative in Congress.Years later, with life well rounded out, he met the only foe towhom he ever surrendered, and lamented by all, passed to the beyond.

Some faint idea of Colonel Woolford's style of eloquence at thebar may possibly be gathered from the following. He was retained todefend a half-grown, illiterate youth under indictment for murder.The crime was committed near "Jimtown," but by a change of venuethe trial took place at Danville, in the neighboring county ofBoyle. Danville, it must be remembered, was the Athens of Kentucky.It was the seat of Centre College, of a Presbyterian theologicalSeminary, and of more than one of the public institutions of theState. It was the home of men of prominence and wealth, and forthree generations had been renowned for the high character,attainments, and culture of its people.

In his speech to the jury in behalf of his unfortunate client, theColonel insisted that the poor boy at the bar of justice, born andreared in the mountains, without any of the advantages of churchesand schools, was not to be held in the same degree responsibleas if his lot had been cast in Danville. In his argument he said:

"Here you have your schools, your Centre College, your TheologicalSeminary, your churches. Every third man you meet on the streets isa minister of the Gospel, and the others are all teachers in theSunday school. Here you have your great preachers, Young,Green, Humphreys, Yerkes, Robertson, Breckenridge—in fact,Presbyterianism to your hearts' content in the very air. But thispoor boy has known nothing of these things. O gentlemen, whatmight not this poor boy have been, and what might not poor Jimtownhave been, with all these advantages?"

Throwing up his arms, in tragic tones he exclaimed:

"Oh, Jimtown! Jimtown! Had the mighty things that have been donein Danville been done in thee, thou wouldst long since have repentedin sackcloth and ashes!"

The incident which I shall now relate was told me by my kinsman,General S. S. Fry of Danville. He and Colonel Woolford were friendsfrom boyhood, and comrades in the Mexican and Civil wars. Theirparty affiliations, however, were different, General Fry being aRepublican, and Colonel Woolford a Democrat.

During the reconstruction period, soon after the close of the Civilwar, a barbecue was given to the Colonel, then a candidate forCongress, in one of the mountain counties of his district. As amatter of course, the Colonel was to be the orator of the occasion.

In order, if possible, to counteract the evil effect of his speech,the Republican State Committee requested General Fry to attend thebarbecue, and engage Colonel Woolford in public debate. In compliancewith this request, General Fry, after a horseback ride of manyhours, put in an appearance at the appointed time and place.The attendance was general; the people of the entire county, ofboth sexes and of all ages and conditions, were there. The barbecuewas well under way when General Fry arrived. A table of roughboards and of sufficient length had been constructed, and wasliterally covered with savory shote and mutton just from the pitwhere barbecued. These viands were abundantly supplemented withfried chicken, salt-rising bread, beaten biscuit, "corn dodgers," andcucumber pickles. To this add several representatives of the highlyrespectable pie family, and possibly an occasional pound cake, andthe typical barbecue is before you.

General Fry, upon his arrival, was warmly greeted by ColonelWoolford, whose hearty invitation to partake was not limitedto the viands mentioned. The feast being at length happily concluded,and the crowd assembled around the speaker's stand, Colonel Woolfordsaid to his old-time comrade; "Now, General Fry, you just go aheadand speak just as long as you want to. The boys have all heard metime and again, and I have nothing new to tell them, but they willbe glad to hear you. When you get through, of course, if there isa little time left, I may say 'howdy' to the boys, and talk a littlewhile, but you just go ahead."

After formal introduction by the Colonel, General Fry did "goahead," and discuss the financial question, the tariff, reconstruction,and dwelt earnestly and at length upon the magnanimity of theRepublican party toward the men lately in rebellion against theGovernment. Since the surrender at Appomattox, no life had beentaken, no one punished, no man ever put on his trial. It waswithout a parallel in history, and as a matter of simple gratitude,the Republican party was entitled to the support of the entireSouthern people for such magnanimity.

The speech at length concluded, Colonel Woolford arose and withouteven the formality of saying "howdy," or honoring finance or tariffwith the briefest mention, proceeded:

"General Fry has dwelt long and loud upon the magnanimity of theRepublican party. He has told you that when the war was overand the last rebel had laid down his arms, a hand-shaking tookplace all around, everybody was forgiven, and the peace of heaven camedown like a dove upon the whole Southern people. Yes—a hell ofa magnanimity it was! How did they show the magnanimity thatGeneral Fry talks so much about? You all remember Stonewall Jackson,one of the grandest men God ever made. This same magnanimousRepublican party took him prisoner, tried him by a drumheadcourt-martial, and shot him down like a mad dog after he hadsurrendered up his sword."

At which Colonel Fry interposed:

"Why, Colonel Woolford, you ought not to make such a statementas that. Stonewall Jackson was accidentally shot by one of hisown men in battle, and his memory is honored by all the peopleNorth and South."

To this the Colonel replied:

"Don't try to deceive these people. We don't put on style and wearstore clothes like you big folks down about Danville, but we live inour plain way, wear our home-spun and eat our hog and hominy; but ifthere is anything on earth that these people do love, it is thetruth. What did this same magnanimous Republican party thatGeneral Fry had told you so much about do with General Robert E.Lee? I knew General Lee, I served with him in Mexico, and althoughwe fought on different sides in the last war, I always respectedhim as a brave soldier. Well, after he had surrendered at Appomattox,and his men had all laid down their arms, what did this samemagnanimous party that General Fry talked so much about do withGeneral Lee? Why, they tried him by a drumhead court-martial andshot and quartered him right on the spot!"

Again interrupting, General Fry indignantly exclaimed:

"It is an outrage, Colonel Woolford, to attempt to deceive thesepeople by such statements. General Lee was never even imprisoned,and is still alive, the president of a college in Virginia, andhighly esteemed by everybody."

The Colonel answered:

"Now, General Fry, you have been treated like a gentleman eversince you came to these mountains; we gave you the best we hadto eat, gave you the last drop out of the bottle, and listenedquietly to you just as long as you wanted to speak. We don't wearSunday clothes, General Fry, like you do down in Danville, but justlive in our plain way in our log cabins, and eat our hoe-cake, andsay our prayers, but if there is anything on God's earth that wedo love, it is the truth. It is wrong for you, General Fry,to try and fool these people. Yes, this same magnanimous partythat General Fry has been telling you about, what did they do withpoor old Jeff Davis after he was captured? Now, I never was fond ofold Jeff myself, and I fought four years against him in the lastwar. But I was on the same side with him in Mexico, I saw him headthe charge of the Mississippi rifles, and drive back the Mexicanlancers after McKee and Clay and Hardin had been killed at BuenaVista, and I know he was no coward. Well, after he was in prison andas helpless as a child, what did they do with him? Why, they justtook him out, and without even giving him a drumhead trial, tiedhim up and burned him to ashes at a stake!"

Fry sprang to his feet, exclaiming:

"Great God! Jeff Davis is still alive, at his home in Mississippi,and has never even been tried; it is damnable to make such statementsto these people, Colonel Woolford!"

The Colonel thereupon, with a deeply injured air, said:

"General Fry, you and I have been friends a life-time. Wehooked watermelons, hunted coons, and attended all the frolicstogether when we were boys. We slept under the same blanket,belonged to the same mess, and fought side by side at Palo Altoand Cerro Gordo; we shed our blood on the same battlefields whenfighting to save this glorious Union. I have loved you, GeneralFry, like a brother, but this is too much, it is putting friendshipto a turrible test; it is a little more than flesh and blood canstand."

Pausing for a moment, he apparently recovered himself from the deepemotion he had just shown, then quietly resuming, he said, "WhatI have said about the way they treated old Jeff is true, and here ismy witness." He called out, "Bill, tell the General what yousaw them do with old Jeff."

Bill, a tall, lank, one-gallowsed mountaineer, leaning against asapling near by, promptly deposed that he was present at the time,saw old Jeff led out, tied to a stake and finally disappear in apuff of smoke. At this, General Fry, without the formality of afarewell, immediately shook the mountain dust from his feet, mountedhis horse, and, looking neither to the right nor to the left,retraced his steps to Danville, and without delay informed theState Committee that if they wanted any further joint debates withold Frank Woolford, they would have to send some one else.

Years after, seated at my desk in the Postoffice Department inWashington, after I had appointed a few cross-road postmasters forCongressman Woolford, I ventured to inquire of him whether hehad ever had a joint debate with General Fry. With a suppressedchuckle, and a quaint gleam of his remaining eye, he significantlyreplied, "It won't do, Colonel, to believe everything you hear!"

XXIITHE SAGE OF THE BAR

WITTY SAYINGS OF MR. EVARTS—HE DEFENDS PRESIDENT JOHNSON BEFORETHE COURT OF IMPEACHMENT—DIFFERENT OPINIONS AS TO THE REAL CHARACTEROF THAT TRIBUNAL—MR. BOUTWELL'S ATTEMPT TO INDICATE THE PUNISHMENTMERITED BY THE PRESIDENT—MR. EVARTS'S REPLY—EXCHANGE OF COURTESIESBY MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE.

The late William M. Evarts, at one time the head of the Americanbar, said many things in his lighter moments worthy of remembrance.

Upon his retirement from the bar to accept the position of Secretaryof State, a farewell dinner was given him by prominent lawyersof New York. The appointments, viands, etc., it is needless toobserve were all after the most approved style. Somewhat out ofwont, however, a magnificent goose with all its appurtenancesand suitably dished was placed immediately in front of the guestof honor.

The grosser part of the feast concluded, the toast was proposed:"The Sage of the Bar." Slowly arising, Mr. Evarts surveyed fora moment the dish before him, and began: "What a wonderfultransition! An hour ago you beheld a goose stuffed with sage; younow behold a sage stuffed with goose!"

It is not entirely forgotten that during the administration ofwhich Mr. Evarts was a part, total abstinence was faithfully enforcedin the great dining-room of the Executive Mansion upon all occasions.To those who knew the Secretary of State, it is hardly necessaryto say that he had little sympathy with this arrangement, thatto him it was a custom "more honored in the breach than theobservance."

Now it so happened that at a state dinner, upon a time, a mildpunch in thimbleful instalments was served to the guests in lieuof more generous beverages. Raising the tiny vessel and bowing tothe Austrian Ambassador at his side, Mr. Evarts in undertone significantlyobserved, "Life-saving station!"

To a "candid friend"—from whom God preserve us—who once took himto task for his lengthy and somewhat involved sentences, Evartsreplied, "Oh, you are not the first man I ever encountered whoobjected to a long sentence."

During his official term above mentioned, Mr. Evarts accompanieda prominent member of the British Parliament to Mount Vernon.Standing in front of the old mansion, so dear to all Americanhearts, the distinguished visitor, looking across to the opposite shore,remarked: "I read in a history that when Washington was a boyhe threw a dollar across the Potomac; remarkable indeed that hecould have thrown a dollar so far, a mile away across the Potomac;very remarkable indeed, I declare." "Yes," replied Evarts, "but youmust remember that a dollar would go a great deal farther thenthan it does now."

This incident being told to a member of Congress of Hibernianantecedents, he immediately replied: "Yes, he might have told theBritisher that when Washington was a boy he sure enough threw adollar across the Potomac, and when he got to be a grown-up man,he threw a sovereign across the Atlantic."

Mr. Evarts was counsel for President Johnson in his famous arraignmentbefore the Senate, sitting as a High Court of Impeachment. Hisspeech, lasting many hours, was an able and exhaustive discussion ofthe salient questions involved in the trial. The leading managersupon the part of the House of Representatives were Benjamin F.Butler, George S. Boutwell, and John A. Bingham. The retortcourteous was freely indulged in many times by the managers andcounsel from the beginning to the close of the long-drawn-outprosecution.

It is a singular fact, and to this generation renders the entireproceeding measurably farcical, that the managers upon the part ofthe House, and the counsel for the impeached President, were atcross-purposes from the beginning as to the real character ofthe tribunal before which they were appearing. The latter regardedit as a court, and constantly addressed its presiding officer, theChief Justice of the United States, as "Your Honor"; while theformer insisted that it was only the Senate, and continuallyaddressed the Chief Justice as "Mr. President."

The issues involved were likewise argued by the opposing counselfrom wholly different standpoints. The contention of the defence asstated by counsel was:

"We are then in a court. What are you to try? You are to try thecharges contained in these articles of impeachment, and nothingelse. Upon what are you to try them? Not upon common fame; notupon the price of gold in New York, or upon any question of finance;not upon newspaper rumor; not upon any views of party policy;you are to try them upon the evidence offered here and nothingelse, by the obligation of your oaths."

The contrary contention as stated by one of the managers was asfollows:

"We define, therefore, an impeachable high crime or misdemeanor,to be one in its nature or consequences subversive of some fundamentalor essential principle of government, or highly prejudicial to thepublic interest; and this may consist of a violation of theConstitution, of law, or of duty by an act committed or omitted,or without violating positive law, by the abuse of discretionarypowers from improper motives, or for any improper purpose."

With gulf as broad between managers and counsel as that separatingDives and Lazarus, not only as to the issues to be tried, but asto the nature of the functions and designation of the tribunalbefore which they were appearing, and with the decision of theChief Justice upon questions of law arising continually over-ruledby the majority of the Senators, it may reasonably be supposed thatthere was much in the way of "travelling out of the record" in theheated discussion which followed.

The associates of Mr. Evarts—Stanberry, Curtis, Groesbeck, andNelson—were the most solemn of men, and whatever there was "brightwith the radiance of utterance" to lessen the tension of theprotracted struggle, came from his own lips.

Near the close of his speech, Manager Boutwell, in attempting toindicate the punishment merited by the accused, said:

"Travellers and astronomers inform us that in the southern heavensnear the Southern Cross there is a vast space which the uneducatedcall a hole in the sky, where the eye of man, with the aid ofthe telescope, has been unable to discover nebula, or asteroid,planet, comet, star or sun. In that dreary, cold, dark regionof space, which is only known to be less than infinite by theevidences of creations elsewhere, the Great Author of celestialmechanism has left the chaos which was in the beginning. Ifthis earth were capable of the sentiments and emotions of justice andvirtue which in human mortal beings are the evidences and the pledgeof our divine origin and immortal destiny, it would heave and throwwith the energy of the elemental forces of nature, and project thisenemy of two races of men into that vast region, there foreverto exist in a solitude eternal as life, or as the absence of life,emblematical of, it not really, that outer darkness of which theSaviour of Man spoke in warning to those who are the enemies ofthemselves, of their race, and of their God."

To the above Mr. Evarts replied:

"I may as conveniently at this point of the argument as at anyother pay some attention to the astronomical punishment whichthe learned and honorable manager, Mr. Boutwell, thinks would beapplied to this novel case of impeachment of the President. Cicero,I think it is, who says that a lawyer should know everything,for sooner or later there is no fact in history, in science, or ofhuman knowledge, that will not come into play in his argument.Painfully sensible of my ignorance, being devoted to a profession whichsharpens and does not enlarge the mind, I yet can admit withoutenvy the superior knowledge evinced by the honorable manager.Indeed, upon my soul, I believe he is aware of an astronomical factof which many professors of that science are wholly ignorant.Nevertheless, while some of his honorable colleagues were payingattention to an unoccupied and unappropriated island on the surfaceof the seas, Mr. Manager Boutwell, more ambitious, had discovered anuntenanted and unappropriated region in the skies reserved, hewould have us think, in the final counsels of the Almighty asthe place of punishment for convicted and deposed AmericanPresidents. At first I thought that his mind had become so enlargedthat it was not sharp enough to discover that the Constitution hadlimited the punishment, but on reflection I saw that he was aslegal and logical as he was ambitious and astronomical, for theConstitution has said 'removal from office,' and has put no distanceto the limit of removal, so that it may be, without shedding a dropof his blood, or taking a penny of his property, or confininghis limbs, instant removal from office, and transportation tothe skies. Truly this is a great undertaking and if the learnedmanager can only get over the obstacles of the laws of nature, theConstitution will not stand in his way. He can contrive no methodbut that of a convulsion of the earth, that shall project thedeposed President to this infinitely distant space; but a shock ofnature of so vast energy and for so great a result on him, mightunsettle even the footing of the firm members of Congress. Wecertainly need not resort to so perilous a method as that. Howshall we accomplish it? Why, in the first place, nobody knowswhere that space is but the learned manager himself, and he isthe necessary deputy to execute the judgment of the court."

Two of the managers, Butler and Bingham, were at sword's points,and had but recently assailed each other with great bitternessin the House. How all this was turned to account by the counselwill now appear. In vindicating the President against the charge ofundignified utterances and impropriety of speech in recentpublic addresses, Mr. Evarts candidly admits that the Executive,whose early educational advantages had been meagre indeed, and whowas confessedly untaught of the schools, "had gotten into trouble byundertaking to be logical with a metaphor."

He insisted, however, that the President should be bound by nohigher standard of propriety of speech than that set by the House ofwhich the Honorable Managers were members. The rule governing theHouse in such matters will readily appear from a recent exchangeof courtesies between the two distinguished members referred toabove, Mr. Bingham and Mr. Butler. The former said:

"I desire to say, Mr. Speaker, that it does not become a gentlemanwho recorded his vote fifty times for Jefferson Davis as his candidatefor President of the United States, to undertake to damage thiscause by attempting to cast an imputation either upon my integrityor my honor. I repel with scorn and contempt any utterance of thatsort from any man, whether he be the hero of Fort Fisher, nottaken, or of Fort Fisher, taken!"

To which Mr. Butler replied:

"But if during the war, the gentleman from Ohio did as much as Idid in that direction, I shall be glad to recognize that much done.But the only victim of the gentleman's prowess that I know of was aninnocent woman on the scaffold, one Mrs. Surratt. I can sustainthe memory of Fort Fisher if he and his present associates cansustain him in shedding the blood of a woman tried by a militarycommission and convicted, in my judgment, without sufficientevidence!"

To which Mr. Bingham replied: "I challenge the gentleman, I dare himanywhere, in this tribunal or any tribunal, to assert that Ispoliated or mutilated any book. Why, sir, such a charge without onetittle of evidence is only fit to come from a man who lives ina bottle, and is fed with a spoon!"

"Now, what under heavens that means," protested Evarts, "I donot know, but it is within the common law of courtesy in the judgmentof the House of Representatives."

XXIII"THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSISSIPPI"

JOHN ALLEN, MEMBER OF CONGRESS—HE PAYS A COMPLIMENT TO GENERALWHEELER—HIS MODEST LUNCH—A SOUTHERNER'S VIEW OF PREDESTINATION—A SKULKER'S OBJECTION TO BE SHOT BY A "LOW-DOWN YANKEE"—JOHNALLEN'S TILT WITH COLONEL FELLOWS.

The subject of this brief sketch is still in life, very much so;and that he

"Shall live the lease of nature, pay his breath
To time and mortal custom"

is the prayer of friends and political foes alike. Who does notknow or has not heard of "Private John Allen," the sometime memberof Congress from Mississippi? A more charming gentleman or delightfulcompanion for the hours of recreation and gladness has rarelyappeared in this old world. He was, while in his teens, a privatesoldier in the Confederate army, later was a practising lawyer,and in time "reluctantly yielding to the earnest solicitationsof his friends," generously consented to serve a few terms inCongress. From his first entrance into the House, he was wellknown to all its members. No one needed an introduction—they allknew John Allen.

Upon the conclusion of his first speech, which possibly referredto the improvement of the Tombigbee River, he modestly remarked:"Now I am through my speech for this time, Mr. Speaker, andwill immediately retire to the cloak-room to receive the congratulationsof my friends."

Speaker Reed, with whom he was a great favorite, never failed to"recognize" John, and in fact by common consent he was alwaysentitled to the floor. This fact will shed some light upon thefollowing incident. During the roll-call of the House upon a motionto adjourn at a late hour of a night session, Mr. Allen passed downthe aisle, with hat and overcoat upon his arm, and, stoppingimmediately in front of the Clerk's desk, said "Mr. Speaker, ——"

"For what purpose," said Reed, "does the gentleman from Mississippiinterrupt the roll-call?"

"Mr. Speaker," continued Allen, "I rise to a parliamentary inquiry.I want to know how General Wheeler voted on this motion." To this"parliamentary inquiry" the Speaker after ascertaining the factreplied that the gentleman from Alabama had voted "aye."

"Well, then, Mr. Speaker," said John, "just put me down the sameway with General Wheeler; I followed him four years, and he neverled me into danger yet."

Seated one day in the Senate restaurant, I observed Mr. Allenstanding at the entrance. Upon my invitation, he took a seat atmy table. "What will you have, John?" said I. With an abstractedair, and the appearance of being extremely embarrassed by hissurroundings, he replied, "It makes mighty little difference aboutme anyway," and turning to a waiter he slowly drawled out, "Bring mesome terrapin and champagne." Then, in an apologetic tone hequietly observed, "I got used to that durin' the Wah."

After a moment's pause, he continued, "By the way, did you everhear the expression 'before the Wah'?" I intimated that theexpression had not wholly escaped me.

"I heard it once under rather peculiar circumstances," said John."Down in the outskirts of my deestrict, there is an old-timereligious sect known as the 'hard-shell' or 'iron-jacket' Baptists;mighty good, honest people, of course, but old-fashioned in their waysand everlastingly opposed to all new-fangled notions, such as havingTemperance societies, Missionary societies, and Sunday schools.They would, however, die in their tracks before they would everlet up on the good old church doctrines, especially predestination.Oh, I tell you they were predestinarians from away back. JohnCalvin with his vapory views upon that question would not have beenadmitted even on probation. Sometimes the preacher during hissermon, turning to the Amen corner would inquire: 'When were you,my brother, predestinated to eternal salvation, or eternaldamnation?'

"Well, the answer that had come down from the ages always was,
'From the foundation of the world.'

"When I was making my first race for Congress, I spoke in thatneighborhood one Saturday, and stayed all night with one of theelders, and on Sunday of course I went to church. During thesermon, the preacher while holding forth as usual on hisfavorite doctrine, suddenly turning to a stranger who had somehow gotcrowded into the Amen corner, said: 'My brother, when were youpredestinated to eternal salvation or eternal damnation?' To whichstartling inquiry the stranger, terribly embarrassed, hesitatinglyanswered: 'I don't adzactly remember, Parson, but I think it wasbefo' the Wah.'"

A comrade of John in Company G was a tow-headed, lantern-jawedfellow who never failed somehow to get to the rear and to a place ofcomparative safety at the first intimation of approaching battle.He was proof alike against the gibes of his comrades and the threatsof his officers. Upon one occasion the approach of the enemywas heralded by a few shells bursting suggestively near the spotwhere Company G was stationed. The tow-headed veteran immediatelybegan preparations to retire. With threatening mien, levelledrevolver, and oaths that would have done no discredit to "our armyin Flanders," the Captain ordered the skulker back into line, uponpain of instant death. Leaning upon his musket, and with familiargaze upon his irate superior, the culprit slowly drawled: "I don'tmine bein' muddered by a high-tone Southern gentleman like you,Cappen, but dam if I'm gwyen to eternally disgrace my family bylettin' one of them low-down Yankees shoot me!"

Allen was no exception to the rule that men gifted like himselfare subject to occasional seasons of gloom, but his greeting usuallycame as a benediction. At the banquet table, when dull care waslaid aside and he was surrounded by genial companions,—"for'tis meet that noble minds keep ever with their likes"—his starwas at its zenith. Then indeed, all rules were suspended; no pointof order suggested—"The man and the hour had met." His marvellousnarratives of quaint incidents and startling experiences, hisbrilliant repartee, sallies of wit, banter, and badinage have rarelybeen heard since the days of the Round Table or the passing of "theStar and Garter."

Once, however, John Allen confessedly met his match in the person ofthe Hon. John R. Fellows, who had been Colonel of an Arkansasregiment in the Confederate service; later a prominent leader ofTammany Hall, and was at the time mentioned, a Representative inCongress from New York. He was the "Prince Rupert of Debate," andwas gifted with eloquence rarely equalled. At a banquet givenin his honor upon his retirement from Congress, a hundred or more ofhis associates were guests, including, of course, the subject ofthis sketch. Men high in councils of State, leaders of both parties,and of both Houses, had gathered around the board, and good-fellowshipand mirth reached the high-water mark. By common consent Fellows andAllen were in undisputed possession of the floor. Such passages-at-armsno pen can describe. Even "John Chamberlain's" in its palmiest dayshas never known the like.

Near the close Allen said:

"There is one thing I would like to have Colonel Fellows explain.He was captured the first year of the war, and never exchanged,but held as a prisoner by the Federals until the war was over.I was taken prisoner five times, and always promptly exchanged.I would like Colonel Fellows to explain how it was that he was keptin a place of safety, while I was always at the front?"

When the applause which followed had subsided, Colonel Fellowsarose and said:

"I am grateful to my friend from Mississippi for giving me anopportunity to explain that part of my military record which Iapprehend has never been sufficiently clear. It is true. I wastaken prisoner the first year of the war, and the enemy, wellknowing the danger of my being at large, persistently refused torelease me until peace was restored. Had I been promptly exchanged,the result of that war might have been different! But why itwas, that my friend from Mississippi was so repeatedly and promptlyexchanged is a question that until yesterday I have never been ableto understand. It has given me deep concern. I have pondered overit during the silent watches of the night. Yesterday, however, mymind was completely set at rest upon that question by readingthe correspondence—to be found in Volume 748, page 421 of the'Record of the War of the Rebellion'—between President Lincolnand President Davis relating to the exchange of Private John Allenof Company G, Fourteenth Mississippi Volunteers. The correspondencecovers many pages of this valuable publication, but I will readonly the closing communication."

And while John with a new supply of terrapin before him was listeningintently, Fellows carefully adjusting his eye-glasses and takinga letter from his pocket, continued:

"The letter I will read from President Lincoln concluded thecorrespondence, and is as follows: 'Dear Jeff: With this Ireturn you Private John Allen of Company G, Fourteenth Mississippi.I require no prisoner in exchange. The Lord's truth is, Jeff,I had rather fight John than feed him!'"

XXIVAN OLD-TIME COUNTRY DOCTOR

THE WRITER AT HIS INN, THE TRAVELLER'S HOME—DOCTOR JOHN, ONE OFHIS EARLIEST ACQUAINTANCES—THE DOCTOR'S LIBERALITY IN ADMINISTERINGMEDICINE—A DISAPPOINTMENT IN EARLY LIFE—THE DOCTOR'S IGNORANCE OFTHE "SOLAR SYSTEM"—A DIFFICULTY WITH THE LANDLADY—A QUESTIONOF ORTHOGRAPHY—THE DOCTOR AS A MEMBER OF A TOTAL-ABSTINENCESOCIETY.

Upon my admission to the bar in 1858, I located at Metamora, avillage of five hundred inhabitants, about forty miles northwestof Bloomington. It was beautifully and quietly situated,eight miles from the railroad, and was at the time the county-seatof Woodford County, one of the finest agricultural portions ofIllinois.

Metamora contained many delightful families, and a cordial welcomewas accorded me. The old tavern, "Traveller's Home," was mine inn,and as a hostelry it possessed rare advantages. The one thatchiefly recommended it to me was its extremely moderate charges.Two dollars and a half per week for board and lodging, "washingand mending" included, were the inviting terms held out to allcomers and goers. There was much, however, in the surroundings,appointments, etc., of this ancient inn, little calculated toreconcile delicately toned mortals to things of sense. It wasof this place of entertainment that Colonel Ingersoll spoke when, inhis description of the tapestry of Windsor Castle, he said that itreminded him of a Metamora table-cloth the second week of court.

The dear old tavern has fallen a victim to the remorseless toothof time, but, in the palmy days of Metamora, when it was thecounty-seat, and the Spring and Fall terms of court were as regularin their coming as the seasons themselves, the old tavern was inits glory, and for all "transients" and "regulars" it was the chiefobjective point. For a decade or more its walls gave shelter toJudge Treat, Judge Davis, Mr. Lincoln, General Gridley, JudgePurple, and more than once to General Shields and Stephen A. Douglas.At a later date it was upon like occasion the stopping place ofColonel Ingersoll, John Burns, Judge Shaw, James S. Ewing, Robert E.Williams, Judge Richmond, and other well-known members of the bar.

One of my earliest acquaintances in Metamora, and one not soonto be forgotten, was Doctor John—familiarly called "Doc," except uponstate occasions. As I write, the vision of the Doctor arises beforeme out of the mists of the shadowy past. His personal appearance wasindeed remarkable. Standing six feet six in his number elevens,without an ounce of superfluous flesh, a neck somewhat elongatedand set off to great advantage by an immense "Adam's apple," whichappeared to be constantly on duty, head large and features a trifleexaggerated, and with iron gray locks hanging gracefully overhis slightly stooped shoulders, the Doctor would have given pause tothe McGregor, even with foot upon his native heather. He firstsaw the light of day in the "Panhandle" of the Old Dominion; thepart thereof afterwards detached for the formation of the new State.How this all came about was to the Doctor as inexplicable as theriddle of the Sphinx; but he scouted the thought that he hadever ceased to be a son of "the real old Virginny." He claimed tobe a descendant of one of "the first families," and there lingeredabout him in very truth much of the chivalric bearing of the oldcavalier stock. No man living could possibly have invited agentleman "to partake of some spirits" or "to participate in aglass of beer," in a loftier manner than did the Doctor. Nothimself a member of the visible church, nor even an occasionalattendant upon its service, the heart of the Doctor nevertheless,like that of the renowned Cave Burton, responded feelingly to everyearnest supplication "for the preservation of the kindly fruits ofthe earth to be enjoyed in due season." And with the Doctor, aswith Cave, the question of the quantity of the kindly fruits thuspreserved was of far greater moment than any mere matter of sentimentas to their quality.

The intellectual attainments of the Doctor, it must be admitted,were not of the highest order. He was a student of men rather thanof books. He had journeyed but little along the flowery pathsof literature. He never gave "local habitation or name" to theparticular Medical College which had honored him with its degree.He was, as he often asserted, of the "epleptic" school of medicine.In reply to my inquiry as to what that really was, he solemnlyasservated that it was the only school which permitted itspractitioners to accept all that was good, and reject all that wasbad, of all the other schools. In his practice he had a supremecontempt for what he called "written proscriptions," and oftenboasted that he never allowed one of them to go out of his office.He infinitely preferred to compound his own medicines, which, withthe aid of mortar and pestle, he did in unstinted measure in hisoffice. On rainy days and during extremely healthy seasons, hisstock was thereby largely augmented. In administering his "doses"his generous spirit manifested itself as clearly as along otherlines. No "pent-up Utica" contracted his powers. It has been manytimes asserted, and with apparent confidence, that no patient ofhis ever complained of not having received full measure. There wereno Oliver Twists among his patients. It was a singular fact inall the professional experience of this eminent practitioner, thathis patients, regardless of age or sex, were all afflicted witha like malady. Many a time as he returned from a professionalvisit, mounted on his old roan, with his bushel measure medicinebag thrown across his saddle, in answer to my casual inquiry as tothe ailment of his patient, he gave in oracular tones, the oneall-sufficient reply, "only a slight derangement of the nervoussystem."

He never quite forgave Mr. Lincoln the reply he once made to anill-advised interruption of the Doctor during a political speech."Well, well, Doctor," replied Mr. Lincoln, good-humoredly, "I willtake anything from you except your medicines."

The Doctor was a bachelor, and his "May of life" had fallen intothe sear and yellow leaf at the time of which we write. He wasstill, however, as he more than once assured me, an ardent admirerof "the opposing sect."

In one of his most confidential moods, he disclosed to me thestartling fact that he had in early life been the victim of amisplaced confidence. In an unguarded moment he entrusted the idolof his heart to the safe keeping of a friend, in the whitenessof whose soul he trusted as in a mother's love, while he, theconfiding Doctor, journeyed westward to seek a home.

"He knew not the doctrine of ill-doing,
Nor dreamed that any did."

Alas for human frailty, "the badge of all our race." Upon hisreturn after an absence of several moons, he found to his unspeakabledismay that that same "friend" had taken to wife the idol whoseimage had so long found lodgment in the Doctor's own sad heart.Too late he realized, as wiser men have done before and since, that

"Friendship is constant in all other things
Save in the office and affairs of love."

The Doctor was much given at times to what he denominated "low downtalks" such as are wont when kindred souls hold close converse.Seated in my office on one occasion, at the hour when churchyards yawn,and being as he candidly admitted in a somewhat "reminiscent" mood,he unwittingly gave expression to thoughts beyond the reaches ofour souls, when I made earnest inquiry, "Doctor, what in yourjudgment as a medical man is to be the final destination of thehuman soul?" The solemn hour of midnight, together with the noless solemn inquiry, at once plunged the Doctor into deep thought.First carefully changing his quid from the right to the left jaw, heslowly and as if thoughtfully measuring his words, replied: "BrotherStevenson, the solar system are one of which I have given verylittle reflection."

It is a sad fact that in this world the best of men are not whollyexempt from human frailties. Even in the noble calling of medicinethere have been at times slight outcroppings of a spirit ofprofessional jealousy. That the subject of these brief chronicleswas no exception to this infirmity will appear from a remark heonce made in regard to a professional contemporary whose practice hadgradually encroached upon the Doctor's beat. Said he: "They talk agood deal about this Doc Wilson's practice; but I'll 'low thatmy books will show a greater degree of mortality than what hisnwill."

The Doctor was one of the regular boarders at the historic innalready mentioned. By long and faithful service he had won thehonored position of chief boarder, and his place by common consentwas at the head of the table. No one who ever sat at that delightfulboard could forget the dignified manner in which the Doctor would takehis accustomed seat, and without unnecessary delay proceed toappropriate whatever viands might be within his reach. As a matterof especial grace upon the part of the good landlady, anold-fashioned corn pone and a pitcher of sweet milk appearedoccasionally upon the supper table of this most excellent inn. Suchvisitations were truly regarded, even by the veterans, as veryoases in the desert of life. Now, it so happened, that upon a coldDecember evening, between the first and second tolling of the supperbell, the boarders in anxious expectancy were awaiting the finalsummons, in a small chamber hard by the dining-room. To thisassembly the writer hereof remarked: "It seems to me, gentlemen, thatit has been a long time since we have been favored with pone breadand sweet milk. I therefore move that Doctor John be appointeda committee of one to request Mrs. Sparks to have these delicaciesfor supper to-morrow night."

A hearty second was immediately given by Whig Ewing, Esq., at alater day distinguished both as an orator and a Judge. Withoutshadow of opposition the resolution was adopted, and upon summons theboarders were almost immediately thereafter in their accustomedplaces at the table. Turning to the landlady as she slowly approachedwith a platter of cold biscuits, the Doctor in most conciliatorytones said: "Mrs. Sparks, at a regular meeting of the borders heldthis evening I was appointed a committee of one to invite you tohave corn pone and sweet milk to-morrow evening." A deep frown atonce encircled the fair brow of our hostess. Unlike that of thelate Mrs. Tam O'Shanter, her wrath needed no nursing to keep itwarm. Advancing a step, and with apparent effort suppressingher emotion, she slowly articulated "What did you say, Doctor?"Presaging danger in the very air, the Doctor repeated in huskytones, "At a regular meeting of the boarders held this evening,I was appointed a committee of one to invite you to have corn breadfor supper to-morrow evening." At the repetition the frown uponthe brow of the fair one darkened and deepened. Advancing astep nearer the object of her wrath, she said, "If you or any ofthe other boarders are dissatisfied with my house, you can leave,and leave now!"

With the thermometer at zero and Peoria seventeen miles away,and the Illinois out of its banks, there was little that wascomforting in her words. The stillness of the grave was upon thatlittle assembly. At length, to relieve the strain of the situation,if possible, the writer inquired, "What was your remark, DoctorJohn?" to which the Doctor, in a tome somewhat hopeful but by nomeans confident, replied, "I was just remarking to our belovedlandlady, brother Stevenson, that at a regular meeting of theboarders held this evening I was appointed a committee to inviteher to have corn bread for supper to-morrow night." To which Imodestly replied, "Well, if any such meeting as that was ever held,it is very strange that I heard nothing about it." This kindlyobservation only deepened the gloom, and perceptibly lessened thedistance between the irate hostess and the chief boarder. Thelatter in sheer desperation at length appealed for succor to Ewing,who until this moment, strangely enough, had been an attentivelistener. Thus appealed to, the latter, with Prince Albert buttonedto the very top, and with the statesman's true pose, said:

"I beg to assure you, Mrs. Sparks, that I am profoundly ignorantof any such meeting of the boarders as has been indicated. HadI been apprised that such meeting was contemplated I would haveattended and used by utmost endeavor to secure the defeat of itsill-timed resolution. Let me say further, madam, that I am notfond of corn bread. The biscuits with which we are nourished fromday to day are exactly to my taste, and even if they were a fewdegrees colder I would cherish them still the more fondly. In theyears gone by, madam, I have been a guest at the Astor, the Galt, theSt. Charles, and at the best hotels in London and upon the continentof Europe. None of them in my humble judgment are comparable tothis. I assure you solemnly, madam, that I have lingered inthis village month after month only because of my reluctance totear myself away from your most excellent hotel."

With finger raised, step advanced, and eye fixed uncharitably uponthe offending physician, the gentle hostess in voice little above awhisper, said, "Doc, I think you made that up out of whole cloth."The crisis was reached; flesh and blood could endure no more. TheDoctor rose, and waiving all formalities and farewells, "stood notupon the order of his going."

For reasons unnecessary to explain, I did not seek the Doctor thatevening nor the following day. Morning and noon came and went,but the chief boarder did not appear. The vacant chair was tothose who lingered a pathetic reminder of the sad departure. When,upon the following evening, the surviving boarders gathered totheir accustomed places, they beheld in wonderment a splendid pone,savory and hot, flanked upon its left by the old yellow pitcherfilled to its brim with rich, sweet milk.

A moment later, and all eyes were turned to the open door through whicha once familiar figure moved to his seat. Suddenly stretching botharms to the middle of the table, with one hand the good Doctorgrasped the pone, and with the other the pitcher, and holding bothaloft as he gazed upon each boarder in turn, exclaimed, "I understandthe boarders are not fond of corn bread." In the twinkling ofan eye, the Doctor, the pitcher, the pone had all disappeared fromthe dining-room, and the latter two were ne'er heard of more.The poetic justice of the situation, however, was so complete, thatno word of complaint was ever uttered.

Some weeks after the events last narrated, I heard the sound ofmany voices accompanied by peals of laughter coming from the officeof Doctor John. Stopping at his door, I soon learned that thetumult was occasioned by a discussion as to whether the Doctorcould spell "sugar" correctly. The faction adverse to the physicianwas led by one William Hawkins, a country schoolmaster. The latterand his allies bantered and badgered the old Doctor to their hearts'content. Rendered desperate at length by their merciless gibes,the Doctor, taking from his vest pocket a five-dollar bill—oneI had loaned him an hour before with which to pay a couple of weeks'boards—he offered to bet the full amount that he could spellthe word correctly. A like amount being at length raised by theadverse faction, the question at once arose as to who should bethe arbiter. Observing me for the first time as I stood at thedoor, the Doctor declared his willingness to accept me as "empire."It may here be remarked that the honorable office to which I wasthus nominated is sometimes called "umpire." Webster, Worcester, andpossibly other lexicographers give the latter pronunciation thepreference. But the Doctor being "an old settler" and much betteracquainted in that locality than either of the other authorities, hispreference will be recognized, and "empire" it will be to the end ofthis chapter. At all events my nomination—for the first and onlytime—was unanimously concurred in. Stepping at once into theoffice and confronting the leaders of the opposing faction, I statedcandidly that while I highly appreciated the distinction tendered,still I was unwilling to accept the responsible position of "empire"save upon the explicit agreement that, whatever the decision,there should be no complaint or grumbling upon the part of thedisaffected or disgruntled hereafter; that "empires" after all wereonly men and liable to the mistakes and errors incident to our poorhumanity. To the end, therefore, that an "empire" act with properindependence, it was all important that his decision pass unchallenged.These reasonable requirement being readily acquiesced in, the officewas accepted and the money hazarded by each faction carefullydeposited in the "empire's" vest pocket. The arbiter now solemnlyaddressing the principal actor said: "Doctor, the word is, 'sugar';proceed to spell."

The Doctor immediately stood up. The psychological question, ifit be such, is here presented whether standing is the more eligibleposition for the severe mental effort indicated above. Waivingall discussion upon this interesting point, the fact is herefaithfully chronicled that the Doctor stood up. Looking neitherto the right nor to the left, but standing majestically in themiddle of the room, and presenting in some of its characteristics thebeauty and symmetry of an inverted L, the Doctor began, "S-h-o-o-g——" whereupon the little schoolmaster burst into loud laughing.Solemnly warning him against the repetition of such conduct, thearbiter reminded him that such manifestations in the very presenceof the "empire," were in some countries punished with immediatedeath, and again significantly warned him against its recurrence.At the same time the Doctor was reminded that he had not yetcompleted the spelling of the word. The Doctor replied, "If it isall the same to you, Mr. Empire, I believe I will begin all overagain." Permission being granted, the spelling was resumed:"S-h-o-o-g-o-r." To this the arbiter responded, "You have spelledthe word correctly, Doctor," and immediately handed him thestakes.

One of the interesting events occurring during my residence inMetamora, was a noted temperance revival under the auspices of "theGrand Worthy Deputy" of a well-known temperance organization. Alodge was duly organized, and a profound interest aroused in thegood work. During the visit of the excellent lady who bore withbecoming modesty the somewhat formidable title above given, theinterest deepened, meetings were of nightly occurrence, andlarge numbers were gathered into the fold. For many days ordinarypursuits were suspended, and the grand cause was the only andall-absorbing topic of conversation.

Chief among the initiated was our old friend Doctor John. Hisconversion created a profound sensation, and it veritably seemedfor a time as though a permanent breach had been effected in theramparts of Satan. It was even boasted that the Presbyterianclergyman, one saloon keeper, and the writer of these truthfulannals were, as Judge Tipton would say, "substantially" the onlyadherents remaining to His Satanic Majesty. The pressure was,however, soon irresistible, and the writer, deserting his sometimeassociates, at length passed over to the _un_silent majority.

The Doctor was the bearer of my petition, and in due time and asthe sequel will show, for only a short time, I was in good andregular standing. As explanatory of the sudden termination of whatmight under happier auspices have proved an eminently useful career,it may be casually mentioned that upon the writer's first introductioninto the lodge, in answer to the official inquiry solemnly propounded,"Why do you seek admission into our honorable order?" he unwittinglyreplied, "Because Doctor John joined."

This was for the moment permitted to pass, and the exercises ofthe session reached the high-water mark of entertainment. At sometime during the evening, by way of "exemplifying the work," DoctorJohn had for the second time taken the solemn vow henceforth andforever to abstain from the use of all fluids of alcoholic, vinous,or fermented character.

The hour for separation at length drew nigh. Thus far all had gonemerry as a marriage bell. All signs betokened fair weather.Barring the temporary commotion occasioned by the uncanonical replyof the writer above given, not a ripple had appeared upon thesurface. It was at length announced that this was the last eveningthat the Grand Worthy Deputy could be with us, as she was to leavefor her distant home by the stage coach in the early morning.Splendidly set off in her great robes of office, her farewell wordsof instruction, encouragement, and admonition, were then mosttenderly spoken. Before pronouncing the final farewell—"that wordwhich makes us linger"—she calmly remarked that this would be herlast opportunity to expound any constitutional question that mighthereafter arise pertaining to the well-being of the order, and thatshe would gladly answer any inquiry that any brother or sisterabout the lodge might propose. Her seat was then resumed, andsilence for the time reigned supreme. At length, amid stillnessthat could no longer be endured, she arose and advancing to thefront of the platform, repeated, in manner more solemn than before,the invitation above given. Still there was no response. Itall seemed formidable and afar off. In the hope that he mightin some measure dispel the embarrassment, the unworthy chronicler ofthese important events, from his humble place in the northwestcorner of the lodge, for the first and last time addressed thechair. Permission being graciously given him to proceed, he candidlyadmitted that he had no constitutional question himself to propound,but that Brother John was in grave doubt touching a questionupon which he would be glad to have the opinion of the chair.

"I understand," continued the speaker, "from the nature of thepledge that if any brother, or sister even for that matter, shouldpartake of liquors alcoholic, vinous, or fermented, he or she wouldbe liable to expulsion from the order. Am I correct?"

"That is certainly correct, Brother Stevenson," was the promptreply in no uncertain tone.

"I so understand it," continued the speaker, "and so does Brother John.What he seeks to know is this: If in an unguarded moment he shouldhearken to the voice of the tempter, and so far forget his solemn vowsas to partake of alcoholic, vinous, or fermented liquors, and beexpelled therefor, would he thereby be wholly beyond the pale ofthe lodge, or would he by virtue of his second obligation takenthis night, have another chance, and still retain his membership inthe order?"

The official answer, in tone no less uncertain than before, wasinstantly given.

"No, sir, if Brother John or you either, should drink one dropof the liquors mentioned and be expelled therefor, you would both behelplessly beyond the pale of the lodge, even though you had bothtaken the obligation a thousand times!"

As the ominous applause which followed died away, Brother John,half arising in his seat, vehemently exclaimed,

"Mrs. Worshipful Master, I never told him to ask no such damn foolquestion!"

XXVA QUESTION OF AVAILABILITY

A POLITICAL BANQUET IN ATLANTA, GA.—GENERAL GORDON PROPOSED"THE DEMOCRACY OF ILLINOIS"—THE WRITER'S RESPONSE—A DESIRE INILLINOIS TO NOMINATE THE HON. DAVID DAVIS FOR PRESIDENT.

About the year of grace 1889, a number of distinguished statesmen wereinvited to attend a political banquet to be given by the localDemocratic Association of the splendid city of Atlanta, Georgia.Among the guests were Representative Flower of New York and GeneralCollins of Massachusetts; the chief guest of the occasion was theHon. David B. Hill, then the Governor of New York. The banquetwas under the immediate auspices of the lamented Gordon, and ofGrady of glorious memory. The board literally groaned under therarest viands, and Southern hospitality was at its zenith. It was,all in all, an occasion to live in memory. I was not one of theinvited guests of the committee, but being in a neighboring citywas invited by Mr. Grady to be present.

At the conclusion of the feast, a toast was proposed to "The GallantDemocracy of New York." Glasses were touched and the enthusiasmwas unbounded. The toast was of course responded to by thedistinguished Governor of the Empire State. He was at his best.His speech, splendid in thought and diction, was heard withbreathless interest.

The keynote was struck, and speech after speech followed in theproper vein. There was no discordant note, the burden of everyspeech being the gallant Democracy and splendid statesmanship ofthe great State of New York.

When the distinguished guests had all spoken, the master ofceremonies, General Gordon, proposed a toast to "The Democracyof Illinois," and called upon me to respond. I confessed that Iwas only an average Democrat from Illinois; that way out therewe were content to be of the rank and file, and of course to followthe splendid leadership and the gallant Democracy of which wehad heard so much. To vote for a New York candidate had by longusage become a fixed habit with us, in fact, we would hardly know howto go about voting for a candidate from any other State; and I thenrelated an incident on the question of supporting the ticket, whichI thought might be to the point.

In 1872, in the portion of Illinois in which I live, there wasan earnest desire on the part of conservative Democrats and liberalRepublicans, to elect the Hon. David Davis to the Presidency.He had been a Whig in early life, brought up in the school ofWebster and Clay, and was later the devoted personal and politicalfriend of Mr. Lincoln. An earnest Union man during the war, hehad at its close favored the prompt restoration to the Southernpeople of all their rights under the Constitution. As a judgeof the Supreme Court, he had rendered a decision in which humanlife was involved, in which he had declared the supremacy of theFederal Constitution in war as well as in peace. Believing thathe would prove an acceptable candidate, I had gladly joined themovement to secure his nomination at the now historic conventionwhich met at Cincinnati in May, 1872. For many weeks prior to themeeting of that convention, there was little talked of incentral Illinois but the nomination of Judge Davis for President.Morning, noon, and night, "Davis, Davis, Davis," was the burden ofour song.

He did not, as is well known, receive the nomination, that honor, ofcourse, passing to a distinguished Democratic statesman of New York.

Two or three days before I was to leave my home for the Cincinnaticonvention, an old Democratic friend from an adjoining county cameinto my office. He was an old-timer in very truth. He was bornin Tennessee, had when a mere boy fought under Jackson at Talladega,Tallapoosa, and New Orleans, had voted for him three times forthe Presidency, and expected to join him when he died. He hadlived in Illinois since the "big snow," and his party loyalty wasa proverb.

As I shook hands with him when he came into my office, he laidaside his saddle-bags, stood his rifle in the corner, took off hisblanket overcoat, and seating himself by the fire, inquired how my"folks" all were. The answer being satisfactory, and the factascertained by me that his own "folks" were well, he asked.

"Mr. Stevenson, who are you fur fur President?"

Unhesitatingly and earnestly I replied, "Davis."

A shade, as of disappointment, appeared for a moment upon hiscountenance, but instantly recovering himself, he said, "Well,if they nominate him, we will give him the usual majority in ourprecinct, but don't you think, Mr. Stevenson, it is a leetle airlyto bring old Jeff out?"

XXVIA STATESMAN OF A PAST ERA

ZEBULON B. VANCE, THE IDOLIZED GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA—HISLEARNING AND HIS HUMOR—HE RECALLS MEN AND MATTERS OF THE OLDENTIME—HE SUITS HIS CREED TO HIS AUDIENCE—HIS SPEECH IN FAVOR OFHORACE GREELEY.

A name to conjure with in the old North State is Zeb Vance. What Leewas to Virginia, Hendricks to Indiana, Clay to Kentucky, and Lincolnto Illinois, Zebulon B. Vance was for a lifetime to North Carolina.He was seldom spoken of as Governor, or Senator, but alike in pinywoods and in the mountains, he was familiarly called "Zeb Vance."He was the idol of all classes and conditions. A decade hasgone since he passed to the grave, but his memory is still green.A grateful people have erected a monument to commemorate his publicservices, while from the French Broad to the Atlantic, alike inhumble cabin and stately home, his name is a household word.

"He had kept the whiteness of his soul,
And thus men o'er him wept."

The expression "rare," as given to Ben Jonson, might with equalpropriety be applied to Senator Vance. Deeply read in classiclore, a profound lawyer, and an indefatigable student from thebeginning in all that pertained to human government, he was thefit associate of the most cultured in the drawing-room or theSenate. None the less, with the homely topics of everyday lifefor discussion, he was equally at home, and ever a welcome guestat the hearthstone of the humblest dweller in pine forest andmountain glen of his native State.

Of all the men I have ever known, Vance was par excellence thepossessor of the wondrous gift of humor. It was ingrained; literallya part of his very being. He once told me that he thought his famefor one generation, at least, was secure, inasmuch as one-halfof the freckled-faced boys and two-thirds of the "yaller" dogsin North Carolina had been named in his honor.

Upon one occasion in the Senate, a bill he had introduced wasbitterly antagonized by a member who took occasion in his speech, whilequestioning the sincerity of Vance, to extol his own honesty ofpurpose. In replying to the vaunt of superior honesty by hisopponent, Vance quoted the old Southland doggerel:

"De darky in de ole camp ground
Dat loudest sing and shout
Am gwine to rob a hen-roost
Befo' de week am out."

The summer home of Senator Vance during the later years of his lifewas in his native county of Buncombe, about twenty miles fromAsheville, where for some days I was his guest, many years ago.Leaving the cars at the nearest station and following the trailfor a dozen miles, I found the Senator snugly ensconced in hiscomfortable home at the top of the mountain. He was alone, hisfamily being "down in the settlements," as he told me. An oldnegro man to whom Vance once belonged, as he assured me, washousekeeper, cook, and butler, besides being the incumbent ofvarious other offices of usefulness and dignity.

The first inquiry from Vance as, drenched with rain, I entered hisabode and approached a blazing fire, was, "Are you dry?" Itwould only gratify an idle curiosity to tell how the first momentsof this memorable visit passed. Suffice it to say that old-timeSouthern hospitality was at its best, and so continued till themorning of the fifth day, when I descended in company with my hostto the accustomed haunts of busy men.

The days and evenings passed with Vance at the cheerful firesideof his mountain home still live in my memory. He literally "unfoldedhimself," and it was indeed worth while to listen to his descriptionof the quaint times and customs with which he was familiar inthe long ago, to hear of the men he had known and of the stormyevents of which he had been a part.

His public life reached back to a time anterior to the war. Hewas in Congress when its Representatives assembled in the Old Hall,now the "Valhalla" of the nation. Events once of deep significancewere recalled from the mists of a long past; men who had strutted theirbrief hour upon the stage and then gone out with the tide were madeto live again. Incidents once fraught with deep consequence butnow relegated to the by-paths of history, were again in visiblepresence, as if touched by the enchanter's wand.

The scenes, of which he was the sad and silent witness, attendant uponthe withdrawal of his colleagues and associates from both chambersof the Capitol, and the appeal to the sword—precursors of thechapter of blood yet to be written—were never more graphicallydepicted by mortal tongue.

I distinctly recall, even at this lapse of time, some of theincidents he related. When first he was a candidate for Congress,far back in the fifties, his district embraced a large portionof the territory of the entire western part of his State. Fullyto appreciate what follows, it must be remembered that at that timethere was in the backwoods country, and in the out-of-the-wayplaces, far off from the great highways, much of antagonism betweenthe various religious denominations. At times much of the sermonsof the rural preachers consisted of denunciations of other churches.By a perusal of the autobiography of the Rev. Peter Cartwright, itwill be seen that western North Carolina was only in line withother portions of the great moral vineyard. The doctrines peculiarto the particular denomination were preached generally withgreat earnestness and power. "Blest be the tie that binds ourhearts in Christian love," was too seldom heard in the ruralcongregations. In too many, indeed, Christian charity, even ina modified form, was an unknown quantity.

Under the conditions mentioned, to say that seekers of public placeobeyed the Apostolic injunction to be "all things to all men" isonly to say that they were—candidates.

It so fell out that our candidate for Congress at the time mentionedwas quietly threading his way on horseback to meet his appointment.Far out from the county seat, in a wild and sparsely populatedlocality, at a sudden turn in the road he found himself in theimmediate presence of a worshipping congregation in God's firsttemple. It was what is known in mountain parlance as a "protractedmeeting." The hour was noon, and the little flock had just beencalled from labor to refreshment. The cloth was spread in theshade of a large tree, and liberally supplied with ham, friedchicken, salt-rising bread, corn dodgers, cucumber pickles, andother wholesome edibles. When Vance appeared upon the scene,the leader of the little flock at once greeted him with cordialinvitation to "light and take a bite with us." The candidateaccepted the invitation, and fastening his horse to a convenienttree, approached the assembled worshippers, introducing himself as"Zeb Vance, Whig candidate for Congress." The thought uppermostin his soul as he shook hands all around and accepted the profferedhospitality was, "What denomination is this? Methodist? Baptist?What?" As soon as this inquiry could be satisfactorily answered,he was, of course, ready to join; his "letter" was ready to behanded in. But as he quickly scanned the faces about him, he couldget no gleam of light upon the all-important question. Suddenlyhis meditations were ended, the abstract giving way to the concrete,by the aforementioned leader abruptly inquiring, "Mr. Vance,what persuasion are you of?"

The hour had struck. The dreaded inquiry must be answeredsatisfactorily and at once. That Vance was equal to the emergencywill be seen from the sequel.

Promptly laying down the chicken leg, the chunk of salt-risingbread, and cucumber pickle with which he had been abundantly suppliedby one of the dear old sisters, and assuming an appropriate oratoricalpose, with his eyes intent upon his interrogator, he began:

"My sainted grandfather was, during the later years of his longand useful life, a ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church."The gathering brow and shaking head of the local shepherd wouldeven to a less observing man than the candidate have been sufficientwarning that he was on the wrong trail. "But," continued thespeaker, "my father during long years of faithful service in theMaster's cause was an equally devout member of the MethodistEpiscopalian Church."

The sombre aspect of the shepherd, with the no less significantshake of the head, was unmistakable intimation to our candidatethat danger was in the very air. Rallying himself, however, forthe last charge, with but one remaining shot in his locker, theorator earnestly resumed: "But, when I came to the years ofmaturity, and was able, after prayer and meditation, to read andunderstand that blessed book myself, I came to the conclusion thatthe old Baptist Church was right."

"Bless God!" exclaimed the old preacher, seizing Vance by the hand."He is all right, brethren! Oh, you'll get all the votes in theseparts, Brother Vance!"

Talking along religious lines at the time of the visit mentioned, heillustrated the difference between profession and practice. "Now,there is my brother Bob," referring to General Robert B. Vance;"he is, you know, a Methodist, and believes in falling from grace,but he never falls, while I am a Presbyterian, and don't believein falling from grace, but I am always falling!"

The first wife of Senator Vance was a Presbyterian. Some yearsafter her death, he was married to an excellent lady, a devotedmember of the Roman Catholic Church. Soon thereafter, he was takento task by an old Presbyterian neighbor, who expressed great surprisethat he should marry a Catholic. "Well," replied the Senator withimperturbably good humor, "the fact is, Uncle John, as I had triedRum, and tried Rebellion, I just thought I would try Romanism too!"

Many years ago, near the western border of Buncombe County, lived anold negro who had in early life been a member of the family of thefather of Senator Vance. In a little cabin at the foot of themountain, "Uncle Ephraim," as the old negro was familiarly called,was, as he had been for two or three decades, "living on borrowed time."How old he was no man could tell. When in confidential mood, hewould sometimes tell of the troubles he and his old master used tohave with the Tories during the Revolutionary War.

Mr. Vance, in his first race for Congress, having finished hisspeech at the cross-roads near by, visited the old man, from whom,of course, he received a warm welcome. In reply to the inquiry ofhis visitor as to how he was getting along, the old negro slowlyreplied:

"Mighty po'ly, mighty po'ly, Mause Zeb, mighty po'ly forninstthe things of dis world, but it's all right over yander, overyander."

"What church do you belong to, Uncle Ephraim?" said Vance.

"Well, Mause Zeb, I's a Presbyterian."

"Uncle Ephraim," said Vance with great solemnity, "do you believe inthe doctrine of election?"

After a pause and with equal solemnity, the old man responded:"Mause Zeb, I don't pertend to understand fully the ins and outsof dat doctrine, but 'cordin' to my understandin', it's de doctrineof de Bible, and I bleebes it."

"Uncle Ephraim," said Vance, "do you think I have been elected?"

"Mause Zeb," said the old man in pathetic tone, "ef it's jest desame to you, I would a leetle ruther you would wifdraw dat question.I's poorty ole and gittn' a little too near de grabe to tell a lie,but de fac am, I bin livin' round in dese parts nigh onto a hundredyears and knowed a heap of de big mens dat's dead and gone, andI neber yet knowed nor hear tell of no man bein' 'lected, whatwan't a candidate."

Like many other orators of his party, Senator Vance found theposition of champion of the Democratic nominee for President in1872 one of extreme embarrassment. A story he occasionallytold, however, relieved the situation greatly. He said: "Myfellow-citizens, I am somewhat in the position of an old-timeilliterate backwoods preacher, who was with great difficulty able toread off, after a fashion, one favorite hymn at which his bookalways opened at the opportune moment. One Sunday morning, justbefore the beginning of the services, some mischievous boys, nothaving the fear of the Lord before their eyes, got hold of the bookand pasted 'Old Grimes' over the favorite hymn. At the auspiciousmoment the book opened at the accustomed place, and the old preacher,after properly adjusting his glasses, slowly began: 'Old Grimesis dead, that good old man.' Amazed beyond description, the preacherinstantly suspended the reading, carefully wiped off his glasses, lookedappealingly to the congregation, and again solemnly and slowlybegan: 'Old Grimes is dead, that good old man.' The congregationnow equally astonished with himself, the aged pastor suspended thereading, carefully removed his glasses, and laying down thebook, solemnly observed: 'My beloved friends, I have been a-readin'and a-singin' outen this blessed book for nigh onto forty year,and I never seed this hymn in thar before; but it's in thar,brethren, and we'll sing it through if it smashes up this meetin!'

"Now," continued Vance, "my beloved brethren, I have been a-readin'and a-votin' of the Democrat ticket nigh onto forty year, and Inever seed the name of old Horace Greeley on a Democrat ticketbefore; but it's on thar, brethren, and we'll vote it through ifit kills us—and it does come devilish near killing the most ofus!"

XXVIINOT GUILTY OF PREACHING THE GOSPEL

THE "DRAKE CONSTITUTION" IN MISSOURI—THE CRIME OF PREACHING THEGOSPEL—A PROVISION OF THIS CONSTITUTION FOUND TO BE A VIOLATIONOF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES—MINISTERS OF VARIOUSSECTS TRIED FOR PREACHING WITHOUT FIRST TAKING AN OATH TO SUPPORTTHE "DRAKE CONSTITUTION"—THE JUDGE FINDS THAT NOT ONE OF THEM HASPREACHED THE GOSPEL.

The "holding" of a nisi prius judge upon one of the westerncircuits of Missouri, near the close of the Civil War, is without aprecedent, and it is quite probable that no occasion will everarise for citing it as an authority. It will remain, however, acase in point of how a "horse-sense" judge can protect the innocentagainst unusual and unjust prosecution.

What is known in Missouri history as the "Drake Constitution"had then but recently supplanted the organic law under which theState had for a long time had its being. No counterpart of theConstitution mentioned has ever been framed in any of the AmericanStates. It could have been only the product of the evil days when"judgment had fled to brutish beasts, and men had lost their reason."Possibly at no time or place in our history has there been moreemphatic verification of the axiom, "In the midst of arms, the lawsare silent."

The "Drake Constitution" was formulated at a time when fiercepassion was at its height, when the sad consequences of civilwar were felt at every fireside, when neighbor was arrayed againstneighbor, the hand of brother uplifted against brother, and "aman's foes were they of his own household." As is well known,certain provisions of this Constitution were, at a later day—upona writ of error—set aside by the Supreme Court of the United Statesas being in violation of the Federal Constitution. One of thethirty distinct affirmations or tests of the Drake Constitution wasto the effect that, if any minister or priest should be guilty ofthe crime of preaching the Gospel, or of solemnizing the rite ofmarriage, without first having taken an oath to support saidConstitution, he should, upon conviction, be subjected to a fineof not less than five hundred dollars, imprisonment for six monthsin the common jail, or both.

Under the provision indicated, a Catholic priest was convictedin one of the circuit courts of Missouri, and duly sentenced tofine and imprisonment. Upon his appeal, the Supreme Court ofthe United States reversed the decision of the lower court, andvirtually abrogated the provision of the Constitution under which theaccused had been convicted. The great court of last resort decidedthe test oath, imposed as above mentioned, to be a violation ofthat provision of the Constitution of the United States whichdeclares, "No State shall pass any bill of attainder, or expost facto law." It held a bill of attainder to be "a legislativeact which inflicts punishment without a judicial trial"; and anex post facto law "one which imposes a punishment for an actwhich was not punishable at the time it was committed; or imposesadditional punishment to that then prescribed." The court said:"The oath thus required is, for its severity, without any precedentthat we can discover. In the first place, it is retrospective; itembraces all the past from this day; and if taken years hence,it will also cover all the intervening period. . . . It allows nodistinction between acts springing from malignant enmity, and actswhich may have been prompted by charity, or affection, or relationship.. . . The clauses in question subvert the presumption of innocence,and alter the rules of evidence which heretofore, under theuniversally recognized principles of the common law, have beensupposed to be fundamental and unchangeable. They assume that theparties are guilty; they call upon the parties to establishtheir innocence; and declare that such innocence can only be shownin one way—by an inquisition in the form of an expurgatory oathinto the consciences of the parties." And then, as preliminary tothe discharge of the priest from long imprisonment, the courtconcluded its opinion with a pertinent question from the writings ofAlexander Hamilton: "It substitutes for the established and legalmode of investigating crimes and inflicting forfeitures, one that isunknown to the Constitution, and repugnant to the genius of ourlaw."*

[*Footnote: Fourth Wallace Reports.]

During the period extending from the promulgation of the DrakeConstitution to the setting aside of some of its obnoxious provisionsas heretofore mentioned, an old-time judge still held court on oneof the Missouri circuits. He had somehow been overlooked in thepolitical upheaval to which the State had been subjected. Hehad come down from a former generation, and, unabashed by the clashof arms, still served sturdily on his wonted way. The rife spiritthat boded destruction to ancient landmarks had passed him by;Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights were to him abiding verities.

Now it so fell out that during the period mentioned, while presidingin one of the border counties of his circuit, he was greatlyastonished, at the opening of his court upon a certain morning, tofind half a dozen ministers of the Gospel, all of whom were personallyknown to him, snugly seated in the prisoners' box.

With characteristic brusqueness, the judge at once demanded of theattorney for the Commonwealth why these men were under arrest.The not unexpected reply was, that they had been indicted forpreaching without first taking an oath to support the Constitutionof the State of Missouri.

"Ah, Mr. Prosecutor, a very serious offence, a very serious offenceindeed. The makers of our fundamental law have wisely providedthat no man shall be permitted to preach the Gospel until he hasfirst taken an oath to support the Constitution of the State ofMissouri. It is the duty of this court to see to it that thiswholesome provision of our Constitution is duly enforced."

Addressing himself now to the prisoner nearest him, His Honorinquired: "Is it possible, sir, that you have been guilty ofthe crime of preaching the Gospel without having first taken anoath to support the Constitution of the State of Missouri?" Theprisoner, a tall, venerable-appearing gentleman, in typical black,quietly replied that he could not conscientiously take the requiredoath, but had only continued in the pastoral work in which hehad been for a lifetime engaged.

"A mere subterfuge, a mere subterfuge, Mr. Prosecutor," observedthe judge, as with apparent fierceness his eyes were fixed uponthe offender. "This prisoner cannot be permitted, sir, to interposehis conscience as a barrier against the enforcement of this salutaryprovision of our most excellent Constitution. He must be punished,sir, he must be punished."

After reading aloud the penalty imposed for the commission ofthe offence mentioned, and with pen in hand as if about to makethe appropriate entry upon the docket, His Honor again turned tothe prisoner and inquired:

"Of what church are you a minister?" The steady reply, as ofone prepared for the worst, was,

"I am a Presbyterian, Your Honor."

"Presbyterian! Presbyterian!" quickly observed the sage interpreterof the law. "Oh, you preach the tenets and doctrines of thePresbyterian Church, do you?" An affirmative reply was modestlygiven.

"You preach," continued His Honor in apparent amazement, "thedoctrine of infant baptism, and of the final perseverance of thesaints, do you?" An answer like the last being given, the judgeremarked:

"You appear to be a man of intelligence, but don't you know,sir, that that isn't the Gospel? He has not been guilty ofpreaching the Gospel, Mr. Prosecutor, and will have to be discharged.You can go, sir, but if this court ever hears that you have beenactually guilty of preaching the Gospel, you will be punished tothe full extent of the law."

Addressing himself now to the comparatively youthful occupant ofthe lately vacated seat, His Honor inquired:

"What is your church, sir?"

In a manner by no means aggressive, and with tones the counterpartof the humblest that ever came from an Amen corner, the reply was,

"I am a Methodist, may it please the Court."

Eying the prisoner keenly, and with a manner expressive of surpriseto which all that had gone before seemed indifference itself,his Honor, with apparent difficulty, at length ejaculated:

"A Methodist, a Methodist, Mr. Prosecutor. Oh, you preach thedoctrine of the Methodist Church, do you?—infant baptism, andfalling from grace?" To these hurried interrogatories, an affirmativewas meekly but distinctly given.

"Well, don't you know that that isn't the Gospel? He is notguilty of preaching the Gospel, Mr. Prosecutor, and will have tobe discharged. You can go, sir, but if this Court ever learns thatyou have been really guilty of preaching the Gospel withoutfirst taking an oath to support the Constitution of the State ofMissouri, you will have to be punished, sir; the Court will seethat there is no evasion of this salutary provision of our mostexcellent Constitution. Go, sir."

A clean-shaven, benevolent-looking gentleman of middle age was nextin evidence. He had but recently assumed his present pastorateand was a deeply interested and attentive observer of all that washappening. In reply to the inquiry from the bench, he answeredthat he was a Universalist.

"A Universalist!" replied the judge, almost astounded beyond thepower of expression. Recovering himself, he at length inquired:

"You preach the doctrine of universal salvation, do you?"

A slight bow indicated such to be the fact.

"You preach," continued his Honor, with warmth well suited tothe subject-matter, "that there is no hell?"

A bow, much more emphatic, was unmistakable evidence that its authorwas a man who had the courage of his convictions.

"He doesn't believe that there is any hell, Mr. Prosecutor,"thundered the judge, "he will have to be discharged; it is noviolation of the Constitution of the State of Missouri to preachsuch infernal nonsense as that."

The official admonition, "Depart, sir," was promptly obeyed, andthe apostle of the broad highway followed quickly in the wake ofthe aforementioned disciples of Calvin and Wesley, in the "narrow path"which led straightway out of the crowded court-room.

In rapid succession the two remaining prisoners on the front benchwere questioned, and each in turn found "not guilty" of preaching theGospel. An avowal of his belief in the tenet of "the Apostolicsuccession" instantly resulted in the acquittal of the first, whilethe second was with equal promptness found "not guilty" upon hisadmission that he preached the doctrine of "regeneration by ——"There was much confusion in the court-room at this moment, andthe reporter failed to catch the concluding words of the confession.Finding himself, moreover, getting into deep water, he thoughtfullyleft on record that both the Episcopalian and the Christian pastorleft the court-room with the admonition ringing in their ears, thatif they were ever actually found guilty of preaching the Gospelthey should be duly punished.

A lone prisoner remained in the dock. The days of the years ofhis pilgrimage were not few, and quite probably, except in afigurative sense, not evil. He was of sturdy build, quiet manners,and his countenance was indicative of great sincerity. In a voiceextremely deferential he stated that he had once ministered to adying Confederate, and it was impossible for him to take the requiredoath that he had never expressed any sympathy for any person whohad ever been engaged in the Rebellion.

"Of what church are you a minister?" interrupted the judge.

"The Baptist Church," was the answer.

"The Baptist Church," instantly repeated the judge, and lookingvery earnestly at the accused, he asked;

"Do you preach the doctrines of the Baptist Church?"

An affirmative answer having been given, His Honor said:

"Upon his own confession he is guilty, Mr. Prosecutor: theCourt holds the Baptist to be the true church, and this defendanthas been guilty of preaching the Gospel without first taking theoath to support the Constitution of the State of Missouri. He willhave to be punished."

Addressing the prisoner, he said: "You will have to be punished, sir;this Court can permit no excuse or evasion."

The graveyard stillness that now fell upon the little assemblagewas at length broken by His Honor reading aloud the prescribedpunishment for preaching the Gospel without first having taken therequired oath.

"Yes, a fine of five hundred dollars or six months in the commonjail, or both. A clear case, Mr. Prosecutor, this prisoner mustbe made an example of; hand me the docket, Mr. Clerk. Yes, thefull penalty."

Then, before making the fatal entry, suddenly turning to theprisoner, he demanded:

"How long have you been preaching the Gospel?"

In hardly audible accents, the answer tremblingly given was,

"I have been trying to preach the Gospel ——"

"Only trying to preach the Gospel, only trying to preach theGospel!" exclaimed the judge. "There is no law, Mr. Prosecutor,against merely trying to preach the Gospel. You can go, sir;but if this Court ever hears that you have succeeded in actuallypreaching the Gospel, you will be punished, sir!"

XXVIIIAMONG THE ACTORS

THE GIVING OF PLEASURE THE ACTOR'S AIM—PRAISE OF NOTABLE ACTORS
—BARRETT, FORREST, McCULLOUGH, EDWIN BOOTH, WILKES BOOTH, JEFFERSON,
IRVING—MACBETH'S PRAISE OF SLEEP.

On the evening of October 27, 1908, a meeting was held in the GrandOpera House, Chicago, Illinois, in the interest of the Democraticcandidates in the campaign then pending. The meeting began a fewminutes after midnight, and the immense audience consisted, in alarge measure, of actors and actresses and their attendants fromthe various theatres of the city.

After an eloquent political speech of the Hon. Samuel Alschulerand a stirring recitation by one of the actors, I was introduced, andspoke as follows:

"I am grateful for the opportunity under such happy auspices, tobid you good-morning. I would count myself fortunate, indeed,could I contribute even the smallest mite to the enjoyment of thosewho have in such unstinted measure dispensed pleasure to so manyof the human family, to the representatives of a profession which,struggling up through the centuries, has at last found honored andabiding place in a broader civilization, a calling whose sublimemission it is to give surcease to harassing care, to smooth outthe wrinkles from the brow, bring gladness to the eye, to teach that

'Behind the clouds is the sun still smiling';

in a word, to add to the sum of human happiness.

"It has been my good fortune, in the happy years gone by, to have hadthe personal acquaintance of some of the most eminent of yourprofession. Under the witchery of this inspiring presence, 'thegraves of memory render up their dead.' Again I hear from the lipsof Barrett: 'Take away the sword; States can be saved without it!''How love, like death, levels all ranks, and lays the shepherd'scrook beside the sceptre!'

"Who that ever saw Forrest 'sitting as if in judgment upon kings' couldforget that superb presence? In the silent watches, even yet,steal upon us in ominous accents the words, 'Put out the light,and then put out the light!' Complimented upon the manner in whichhe played Lear, he angrily exclaimed: 'Played Lear, played Lear?I play Hamlet, I play Macbeth, I play Othello; but I amLear!' Possibly the art of the tragedian has known no loftiertriumph than in Forrest's rendition of Lear's curse upon theunnatural daughter:

'Let it stamp wrinkles in her brow of youth;
With cadent tears fret channels in her cheeks;
Turn all her mother's pains and benefits
To laughter and contempt!'

"A third of a century ago, I made the acquaintance of John McCullough,then at the very zenith of his fame. In even measure as was theelder Booth Richard the Third, Forrest, King Lear, or Edwin Booth,Hamlet, so was McCullough the born Macbeth. When I first sawhim emerge with dishevelled hair and bloody hands from the apartmentof the murdered king, I was, I confess, in mortal dread of thedarkness. I have heard another since of even greater repute inthat masterful impersonation, but with me to the last, John McCulloughwill remain the veritable Macbeth. His are the words that linger:

'I go, and it is done; the bell invites me,
Hear it not, Duncan; for it is the knell
That summons thee to heaven or to hell.'

"Edwin Booth has stepped from the stage of living men, and when inthe tide of time will such a Hamlet again appear? To him Naturehad been prodigal of her choicest blessings. Every gift thegods could bestow to the full equipment of the interpreter, theactor, the master, was his.

'He was a man, take him for all in all,
We shall not look upon his like again.'

Many moons will wax and wane before from other lips, as fromhis, will fall:

'Or that the Everlasting had not fixed
His canon 'gainst self-slaughter.'

or, giving expression to thoughts from the very depths, which havein all the ages held back from such dread ending:

'To die, to sleep;
To sleep! perchance to dream; aye, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause.'

"The ever-abiding memory that his brother was the real actor ina tragic scene that gave pause to the world, burdened the heartand mellowed the tone of Edwin Booth, and no doubt linked him incloser touch with what has, as by the enchanter's wand, beenportrayed of the 'melancholy Dane.'

"Two years before the assassination of President Lincoln I heardWilkes Booth as Romeo at the old McVicker. The passing years havenot wholly dimmed his

'Night's candles are burnt out, and jocund day
Stands tiptoe on the misty mountain-tops,'

and then, as if forecasting a scene to strike horror even in 'Statesunborn and in accents yet unknown,' the exclamation:

'I must be gone and live,
Or stay and die!'

"High on the list of the world's benefactors write the name of JoeJefferson, as one who loved his fellow-men. Whatever betide,his fame is secure. 'Age cannot wither'; it was in very truth highprivilege to have known him; to have met him face to face.

"There come moments to all when we gladly put aside the masterpiecesof the great bard, and find solace in simpler lays; such as, itmay be, appear of kinship with the happenings of daily life.The mighty thoughts of the former unceasingly suggest life's endlesstoil and endeavor.

"In words that have touched many hearts our own poet suggests:

'Read from some humbler poet,
Whose songs gushed from his heart;
. . . . . . .
Such songs have power to quiet
The restless pulse of care.'

"And so, there are times when the stately rendition of themasterpieces, even with the greatest tragedians in the role, wearyus, and we give glad welcome to Bob Acres with 'his courage oozingout at his finger ends,' or to dear old Rip and 'Here's to yourselfand to your family. Jus' one more; this one won't count!'

"The superb acting of Irving in Louis the Eleventh; the grandeurof Forrest with 'Othello's occupation gone'; of McCullough inMacbeth, 'supped full with horrors'; even of Booth with theever-recurring 'To be, or not to be,' the eternal question, allpass with the occasion. But who can forget the gladsome hoursof mingled pathos and mirth with glorious Joe Jefferson, the star!His life was hourly the illustration of the sublime truth:

'There is nothing so kingly as kindness.'

"Upon his tablet might truly be written:

'He never made a brow look dark,
Nor caused a tear but when he died.'

"It is ever an ungracious task to speak in terms of disparagement ofa lady. There is one, however, of whom, even in this graciouspresence, I am constrained to speak without restraint. To thesplendid assemblage before me she was unknown; possibly, however, someveteran upon this platform may have enjoyed her personalacquaintance. I refer to the late Mrs. Macbeth. I would not bemisunderstood. My criticism of the conduct of this lady has noreference to her share in the 'taking off' of the venerable Duncan.Even barring her gentle interposition, he would long ere this have'paid his breath to time and mortal custom.' My cause of complaintis more serious and far-reaching. It will be remembered thather high-placed husband upon a time was the victim of insomnia.In his wakeful hours, as he tossed upon his couch, he even madethe confession, now of record, that

'Glamis hath murdered sleep.'

"He apparently drew no comfort from the reflection that his latebenefactor, the murdered king,

'After life's fitful fever he sleeps well.'

"Burdened with thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls, thesometimes Thane of Cawdor indulged in an apostrophe to 'the dullgod' which has enduring place in all language:

'Sleep, that knits up the ravell'd sleave of care
The death of each day's life, sore labour's bath,
Balm of hurt minds, great nature's second course,
Chief nourisher in Life's feast, ——'

"At this crucial moment, came the untimely interruption of Mrs.
Macbeth, demanding of her husband, 'What do you mean?'

"The spell was broken, and for all time the sublime apostropheto sleep unfinished. What he might next have said, whose lips cantell? Words possibly to be spoken by every tongue, to be crystallizedinto every language. Her ill-fated interruption can never beforgiven. The practical lesson to be drawn, one for all the ages,is the peril involved in a wife's untimely interruption of thewise observations and sage reflections of her husband.

"This coming together to-night may justify the remark that satire uponthe proverbial caution of candidates in expressing an opinion uponany subject was perhaps never better illustrated than in theincident now to be related. Upon a time many years ago, whenapproaching the Capitol from Pennsylvania Avenue in company withmy friend Proctor Knott, a tall, solemn-appearing individualaddressed the latter as follows; 'Mr. Knott, I would like to haveyour opinion as to which is the best play, "Hamlet" or "Macbeth."'With a characteristic expression of countenance, Knott, withdeprecatory gesture, slowly replied:

"'My friend, don't ask me that question; I am a politician, acandidate for Congress, and my district is about equally divided; Hamlethas his friends down there, and Macbeth has his, and I will take nopart between them.'

"This observation recalls an incident of recent occurrence in aneighboring city. A friend of mine, a minister of the Gospel—youwill bear in mind that my friends are not all actors—and thisrecalls the dilemma of a candidate who, upon inquiry as to thecomparative merits of heaven and its antipode, cautiously declinedto express an opinion, on the ground that he had friends inboth places—this minister, upon being installed in a new pastorate,was almost immediately requested to preach at the funeral of aprominent member of his congregation. Unacquainted as he was withthe life of the deceased, he made inquiry as to his last utterances.

"He recalled the last words of Webster, 'I am content'; of JohnQuincy Adams, 'This is the last of earth'; and even the cheerlessexclamation of Mirabeau, 'Let my ears be filled with martial music,crown me with flowers, and thus shall I enter on my eternal sleep.'Charged with these reflections, and hoping to find the nucleus of afuneral sermon, the minister made inquiry of the son of the deceasedparishioner, 'What were the last words of your father?' The unexpectedreply was 'Pap he didn't have no last words; mother she just stayedby him till he died.'

"And now, my friends, as the curtain falls, my last words to you:

'Say not Good-night,
But in some brighter clime
Bid me Good-morning!'"

XXIXTHE LOST ART OF ORATORY

DANIEL WEBSTER'S SPEECHES—HIS PATRIOTIC SERVICE IN FORMULATINGTHE ASHBURTON TREATY—PRENTISS'S DEFENCE OF THE RIGHT OF MISSISSIPPITO REPRESENTATION—THE EFFECT OF HIS ELOQUENCE ON A MURDERER—HISPLEA FOR MERCY TO A CLIENT—WEBSTER WINS AN APPARENTLY HOPELESSCASE—INGERSOLL'S REVIEW OF THE CAREER OF NAPOLEON—HON. ISAACN. PHILLIPS'S EULOGY UPON ABRAHAM LINCOLN—SENATOR INGALLS'S TRIBUTETO A COLLEAGUE—A SINGLE ELOQUENT SENTENCE FROM EDWARD EVERETT—SPEECH OF NOMINATION FOR WILLIAM J. BRYAN—MR. BRYAN'S ELOQUENCE—CLOSING SENTENCES OF HIS "PRINCE OF PEACE."

One of the must cultured and entertaining gentlemen I have everknown was the late Gardner Hubbard. His last years were spentquietly in Washington, but earlier in life he was an active memberof the Massachusetts bar.

In my conversations with him he related many interesting incidentsof Daniel Webster, with whom he was well acquainted. In the earlyprofessional life of Hubbard, Mr. Webster was still at the bar;his speech for the prosecution in the memorable Knapp murder trialhas been read with profound interest by three generations of lawyers.As a powerful and eloquent discussion of circumstantial evidence, inall its phases, it scarcely has a parallel; quotations from it havefound their way into all languages. How startling his descriptionof the stealthy tread of the assassin upon his victim! We seem tostand in the very presence of murder itself:

"Deep sleep had fallen on the destined victim and on all beneathhis roof. A healthful old man, to whom sleep was sweet, and thefirst sound slumbers of the night held him in their soft but strongembrace. The assassin enters through the window, already prepared,into an unoccupied apartment. With noiseless foot he paces thelonely hall, half lighted by the moon; he winds up the ascent ofthe stairs, and reaches to door of the chamber …. The face ofthe innocent sleeper is turned from the murderer, and the beams ofthe moon, resting on the gray locks of his aged temple, show himwhere to strike. The fatal blow is given, and the victimpasses, without a struggle, from the repose of sleep to the reposeof death. The deed is done. He retreats, retraces his steps tothe window, passes out through it as he came in, and escapes.He has done the murder. No eye has seen him, no ear has heard him.The secret is his own, and it is safe."

The speech throughout shows Webster to have been the perfect masterof the human heart,—of its manifold and mysterious workings. Whatpicture could be more vivid than this?

"Such a secret can be safe nowhere. The whole creation of God hasneither nook nor corner where the guilty can bestow it and sayit is safe. Not to speak of that eye which pierces through alldisguises and beholds everything as in the splendor of noon,such secrets of guilt are never safe from detection even by men.True it is, generally speaking, that murder will out. True it is,that Providence hath so ordained, and doth so govern things,that those who break the great law of Heaven by shedding man'sblood seldom succeed in avoiding discovery. Meantime the guiltysoul cannot keep its own secret. It is false to itself; or rather,it feels an irresistible impulse of conscience to be true to itself.It labors under its guilty possession, and knows not what to dowith it. The human heart was not made for the residence of suchan inhabitant."

The closing sentences of the speech—which resulted in the convictionand execution of the prisoner—will endure in our literatureunsurpassed as an inspiration to duty:

"There is no evil that we cannot either face or fly from but theconsciousness of duty disregarded. A sense of duty pursues usever. It is omnipresent like the Deity. If we take to ourselves thewings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of thesea, duty performed, or duty violated, is still with us, for ourhappiness or our misery. If we say, 'the darkness shall cover us,'in the darkness as in the light our obligations are yet with us.We cannot escape their power, nor fly from their presence. Theyare with us in this life, will be with us at its close; and in thatscene of inconceivable solemnity which lies yet farther onward, weshall still find ourselves surrounded by the consciousness of duty,to pain us wherever it has been violated, and to console us so faras God may have given us grace to perform it."

Upon one occasion, when in Boston, Mr. Hubbard and I visited togetherFaneuil Hall. He pointed out the exact place upon the platformwhere he saw Mr. Webster stand when he delivered his speech invindication of his course in remaining in the Cabinet of PresidentTyler after all his Whig colleagues had resigned. The schism inthe Whig ranks, occasioned by the veto of party measures, paramountin the Presidential contest of 1840, and the bitter antagonismthereby engendered between Henry Clay and President Tyler, willreadily be recalled. The rupture mentioned occasioned the retirementof the entire Cabinet appointed by the late President Harrison,except Mr. Webster, the Secretary of State. His reasons forremaining were in the highest degree patriotic, and his speechin Faneuil Hall a triumphant vindication. The enduring publicservice he rendered while in a Cabinet with which he had not partisanaffiliation was formulating, in conjunction with the BritishMinister, the Ashburton treaty. If Mr. Webster had rendered noother public service, this alone would have entitled him to thegratitude of the country. This treaty, advantageous from somany points of view to the United States, adjusted amicably theprotracted and perilous controversy—unsettled by the conventionat Ghent—of our northeastern boundary, and possibly prevented athird war between the two great English-speaking nations. Thewords once uttered of Burke could never with truth be spoken ofWebster: "He gave to party that which was intended for hiscountry."

Mr. Hubbard insisted that the speech mentioned stood unrivalled inthe realm of sublime oratory. He declared that the interveningyears had not dimmed his recollection of the appearance of "theGod-like Webster" when he exclaimed "The Whig party die! The Whigparty die! Then, Mr. President, where shall I go?"

Some years before, I heard Wendell Phillips allude to the abovespeech in his celebrated lecture upon Daniel O'Connell. He said, whenthe startling words, "Then, Mr. President, where shall I go?" fellfrom the lips of the mighty orator, a feeling of awe pervadedthe vast assemblage; something akin to an awful foreboding thatthe world would surely come to an end when there was no place init for Daniel Webster.

This seems a fitting place to allude to possibly the highest tributeever paid by one great orator to another—in the loftiest sense,a tribute of genius to genius. Mr. Hubbard told me he was oneof the immense audience gathered in Faneuil Hall to ratify thenomination of Harrison and Tyler soon after the adjournment of theWhig National Convention in 1840. Edward Everett presided; andamong the speakers were Winthrop, Choate, Webster, and the giftedSargent S. Prentiss of Mississippi. The eloquence of the lastnamed was a proverb in his day. He had but recently delivered aspeech in the House, vindicating his right to his seat as aRepresentative from Mississippi, which cast a spell over all whoheard it, and which has come down to the present generation as oneof the masterpieces of oratory. The closing sentence of thiswondrous speech—a thousand times quoted—was: "Deny her representationupon this floor; then, Mr. Speaker, strike from yonder escutcheon thestar that glitters to the name of Mississippi—and leave onlythe stripe, fit emblem of her degradation!"

Upon the conclusion of Prentiss's Faneuil Hall speech, just mentioned,amidst a tumult of applause such as even Faneuil Hall had rarelywitnessed, Mr. Everett, turning to Mr. Webster, inquired: "Didyou ever hear the equal of that speech?" "Never but once," wasthe deep-toned reply, "and then from Prentiss himself."

Judge Baldwin, his long-time associate at the bar of Mississippi, hasgiven a vivid description of the effect of the power of Mr. Prentissbefore the jury in the prosecution of a noted highwayman and murdererin that State:

"Phelps was one of the most daring and desperate of ruffians.He fronted his prosecutor and the court not only with composure,but with scornful and malignant defiance. When Prentiss aroseto speak, and for some time afterwards, the criminal scowled upon hima look of hate and insolence. But when the orator, kindling with hissubject, turned upon him and poured down a stream of burninginvective like lava upon his head; when he depicted the villainyand barbarity of his bold atrocities; when he pictured, in darkand dismal colors, the fate which awaited him, and the awful judgmentto be pronounced at another Bar upon his crimes when his soul beconfronted with his innocent victims; when he fixed his gaze ofconcentrated power upon him, the strong man's face relaxed; hiseyes faltered and fell; until, at length, unable to bear upunder self-conviction, he hid his head beneath the bar, and exhibiteda picture of ruffianly audacity cowed beneath the spell of truecourage and triumphant genius."

In his early practice in Mississippi, in closing a touching andeloquent appeal to the jury on behalf of a client whose life wastrembling in the balance, Prentiss said:

"I have somewhere read that when God in His eternal councilsconceived the thought of man's creation, he called to him the threeministers who wait constantly upon the throne, Justice, Truth, andMercy, and thus addressed them:

"'Shall we make man?'

"Then said Justice, 'O God, make him not, for he will trample upon
Thy laws.'

"Truth made answer also, 'O God, make him not, for he will pollute
Thy sanctuaries.'

"Then Mercy, dropping upon her knees and looking up through hertears, exclaimed, 'O God, make him. I will watch over him throughall the dark paths he may have to tread.'

"Then God made man and said to him: 'Thou art the child of Mercy;go and deal in mercy with thy brother.'"

In speaking of Mr. Webster's marvellous power over a jury, Mr.Hubbard told me that he was present during the trial of a oncecelebrated divorce case in one of the courts of Boston. The husbandwas the complainant, and the alleged ground the one of recognizedsufficiency in all countries. Mr. Webster was the counsel for thehusband; Rufus Choate for the wife. As an advocate, the latter has hadfew equals, no superiors, at the American bar. In the case mentioned,with a distressed woman for a client, what was dearer than life, herreputation, in the balance, it may well be believed that the wondrouspowers of the advocate were in requisition to the utmost.

At the conclusion of Choate's speech, as Mr. Hubbard assured me,the case of the injured husband appeared hopeless. It seemedimpossible that such a speech could be successfully answered.

The opening sentence, in deep and measured tones, of Webster inreply, the prelude to an unrivalled argument and to victory, was:

"Saint Paul in the twenty-fourth verse of the seventh chapter ofhis wondrous Epistle to the Romans says: 'O wretched man that Iam! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?' You alone,gentlemen, can deliver this wretched man from the body of thisdead woman!"

What in word-painting can exceed the following from an addressby Robert G. Ingersoll?

"A little while ago, I stood by the grave of the old Napoleon—amagnificent tomb of gilt and gold, almost fit for a dead deity—and gazed upon the sarcophagus of black Egyptian marble where restthe ashes of that restless man. I leaned over the balustradeand thought about the career of the greatest soldier of the modernworld.

"I saw him walking upon the banks of the Seine contemplating suicide.I saw him at Toulon; I saw him putting down the mob in the streetsof Paris; I saw him at the head of the army in Italy; I saw himcrossing the bridge at Lodi with the tricolor in his hand; I sawhim in Egypt in the shadow of the Pyramids; I saw him conquerthe Alps and mingle the eagles of France with the eagles of thecrags; I saw him at Marengo, at Ulm, and at Austerlitz; I saw him inRussia, where the infantry of the snow and the cavalry of the wildblast scattered his legions like winter's withered leaves; I sawhim at Leipsic in defeat and disaster—driven by a million bayonetsback upon Paris—clutched like a wild beast—banished to Elba.I saw him escape and retake an empire by the force of his genius.I saw him upon the frightful field of Waterloo, where Chance andFortune combined to wreck the fortunes of their former king, andI saw him at St. Helena, with his hands crossed behind him, gazingout upon the sad and solemn sea.

"I thought of the orphans and widows he had made, of the tears thathad been shed for his glory, and of the only woman who ever loved him,pushed from his heart by the cold hand of ambition; and I said Iwould rather have been a French peasant and worn wooden shoes; Iwould rather have lived in a hut with a vine growing over the door,and the grapes growing purple in the rays of the autumn sun; Iwould rather have been that poor peasant with my loving wife by myside, knitting as the day died out of the sky, with my childrenabout my knee and their arms about me; I would rather have beenthat man and gone down to the tongueless silence of the dreamless dust,than have been that imperial impersonation of force and murder."

In his eloquent eulogy upon Abraham Lincoln, my neighbor and friend,
Hon. Isaac N. Phillips, said:

"He lived with Nature and learned of her. He toiled, but his toilwas never hopeless and degrading. His feet were upon the earthbut the stars shining in perennial beauty were ever above him toinspire contemplation. He heard the song of the thrush, and thecarol of the lark. He watched the sun in its course. He knew thedim paths of the forest, and his soul was awed by the power of thestorm."

The closing sentences of Senator Ingalls's tribute to a departedcolleague were sombre indeed:

"In the democracy of Death all men are equal. There is neitherrank, nor station, nor prerogative, in the republic of the grave.At that fatal threshold the philosopher ceases to be wise, and thesong of the poet is silent. There Dives relinquished his richesand Lazarus his rags; the creditor loses his usury, and the debtoris acquitted of his obligation; the proud man surrenders his dignity,the politician his honors, the worldling his pleasures. Herethe invalid needs no physician, and the laborer rests from unrequitedtoil. Here at last is Nature's final decree of equity. The wrongsof time are redressed, and injustice is expiated. The unequaldistribution of wealth and honor, capacity, pleasure, and opportunity,which makes life so cruel and inexplicable a tragedy, ceases inthe realms of Death. The strongest has there no supremacy, andthe weakest needs no defence. The mightiest captain succumbs tothe invincible adversary who disarms alike the victor and thevanquished."

In his day Edward Everett was the most gifted of American orators.His style, however, to readers in "these piping times of peace,"seems a trifle stilted. What orator of the twentieth century wouldattempt such a sentence as the following from Everett's celebratedeulogy upon Washington:

"Let us make a national festival and holiday of his birthday;and ever, as the twenty-second of February returns, let us rememberthat, while with these solemn and joyous rites of observance wecelebrate the great anniversary, our fellow-citizens on the Hudson,on the Potomac, from the Southern plains to the Western lakes, areengaged in the same offices of gratitude and love. Nor we, northey alone; beyond the Ohio, beyond the Mississippi, along thatstupendous trail of immigration from the East to the West,which, bursting into States as it moves westward, is alreadythreading the Western prairies, swarming through the portals ofthe Rocky Mountains and winding down their slopes, the name andthe memory of Washington on that gracious night will travel withthe silver queen of heaven through sixty degrees of longitude, norpart company with her till she walks in her brightness through theGolden Gate of California, and passes serenely to hold midnightcourt with her Australian stars. There and there only in barbarousarchipelagos, as yet untrodden by civilized man, the name ofWashington is unknown; and there, too, when they swarm withenlightened millions, new honors shall be paid with ours to hismemory."

In my judgment the greatest living orator is William J. Bryan.I have never known a more gifted man. A thorough scholar—having likeLord Bacon taken all knowledge for his province—a fearless championof what he deems the right, he is in the loftiest sense "withoutfear and without reproach."

In introducing him to an immense audience in Bloomington when hewas first a candidate for the Presidency, I said:

"The National Democracy in the Chicago convention selected for thePresidency a distinguished statesman of the great Northwest.For the first time in more than one hundred years of our history, acandidate for the great office has been taken from a State lyingwest of the Mississippi.

"In the nomination of our standard-bearer, the convention builded betterthan it knew. Each passing hour has but emphasized the wisdomof its choice. Truly it has been said: 'When the times demandthe man, the man appears.' The times demanded a great leader—thegreat leader has appeared! His campaign is the marvel of the age.From the Atlantic seaboard, two thousand miles to the westward,his eloquent words have cheered the despondent, given new hopes andaspirations to the people, touched the hearts of millions of hiscountrymen. In advocating his election we have kept the faith.We have not departed from the teachings of our fathers. We sacredlypreserve the ancient landmarks—the landmarks of all previousDemocratic conventions."

Rarely has a speech been uttered so effective in its immediateresults as that of Mr. Bryan in the Democratic National Conventionof 1896. The occasion was one never to be forgotten. When Mr.Bryan began his speech he had not been mentioned as a candidatefor the Presidency; at its close there was no other candidate.The closing sentences of the memorable speech were:

"Our ancestors, when but three millions in number, had the courageto declare their political independence of every other nation;shall we, their descendants, when we have grown to seventy millions,declare that we are less independent than our forefathers? No, myfriends, that will never be the verdict of our people. Therefore,we care not upon what lines the battle is fought. If they saybimetallism is good, but that we cannot have it until other nationshelp us, we reply that, instead of having a gold standardbecause England has, we will restore bimetallism, and then letEngland have bimetallism because the United States has it. If theydare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard asa good thing, we will fight them to the uttermost. Having behind usthe productive masses of this nation and the world, supported by thecommercial interests, the laboring interests, and the toilerseverywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard bysaying to them: 'You shall not press down upon the brow of labor thiscrown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross ofgold.'"

The closing sentences of his "Prince of Peace" have been read inall languages:

"But this Prince of Peace promises not only peace but strength.Some have thought His teachings fit only for the weak and the timidand unsuited to men of vigor, energy, and ambition. Nothing couldbe farther from the truth. Only the man of faith can be courageous.Confident that he fights on the side of Jehovah, he doubts not thesuccess of his cause. What matters it whether he shares in theshouts of triumph? If every word spoken in behalf of truth hasits influence and every deed done for the right weighs in the finalaccount, it is immaterial to the Christian whether his eyes beholdvictory or whether he dies in the midst of the conflict.

'Yea, though thou lie upon the dust,
When they who helped thee flee in fear,
Die full of hope and manly trust,
Like those who fell in battle here.
Another hand thy sword shall wield,
Another hand the standard wave,
Till from the trumpet's mouth is pealed
The blast of triumph o'er thy grave.'

"Only those who believe attempt the seemingly impossible and, byattempting, prove that one with God can chase a thousand and twocan put ten thousand to flight. I can imagine that the earlyChristians who were carried into the arena to make a spectacle forthose more savage than the beasts, were entreated by their doubtingcompanions not to endanger their lives. But, kneeling in the centreof the arena, they prayed and sang until they were devoured.How helpless they seemed and, measured by every human rule, howhopeless was their cause! And yet within a few decades thepower which they invoked proved mightier than the legions of theemperor, and the faith in which they died was triumphant o'erall that land. It is said that those who went to mock at theirsufferings returned asking themselves, 'What is it that can enter intothe heart of man and make him die as these die?' They were greaterconquerors in their death than they could have been had theypurchased life by a surrender of their faith.

"What would have been the fate of the Church if the early Christianshad had as little faith as many of our Christians now have? And, onthe other hand, if the Christians of to-day had the faith of themartyrs, how long would it be before the fulfilment of the prophecythat every knee shall bow and every tongue confess?

"Our faith should be even stronger than the faith of those wholived two thousand years ago, for we see our religion spreadingand supplanting the philosophies and creeds of the Orient.

"As the Christian grows older he appreciates more and more thecompleteness with which Christ fills the requirements of the heartand, grateful for the peace which he enjoys and for the strengthwhich he has received, he repeats the words of the great scholar, SirWilliam Jones:

'Before thy mystic altar, heavenly truth,
I kneel in manhood, as I knelt in youth.
Thus let me kneel, till this dull form decay,
And life's last shade be brightened by thy ray.'"

XXXTHE COLONELS

A CONVIVIAL MEETING OF LAWYERS—HILARITY SMOTHERED BY THE MAINELAW—A FAINTING WAYFARER IS REFUSED A DRINK IN A MAINE VILLAGE—THE APOTHECARY DEMANDS A PHYSICIAN'S PRESCRIPTION—SNAKE-BITESIN GREAT DEMAND.

Some years ago, I spent a few weeks of inclement weather in abeautiful village in southern Georgia. Upon calling at his officeto renew my acquaintance with a well-known lawyer, he soon invitedin the remaining members of the local bar. Everything was propitious,and the conversation never for a moment flagged, many experiencesof the legal practitioners of the South and of the North beingrelated with happy effect.

I at length remarked that since my arrival, I had, somewhat tomy surprise, learned that "local option" had been adopted in theircounty. An aged brother, in a tone by no means exultant, assured methat such was the fact. I then observed that I was not a harddrinker, but being a total stranger and liable to sudden sickness,I asked what I would do under such circumstances.

An equally venerable brother, who bore the unique title of "Colonel,"slowly responded, "Have to do without, sir, have to do without; nota drop to be had in the county, absolutely not a drop, sir."

The brief silence which followed this announcement was broken bythe corroborative testimony of a more youthful associate of similarofficial distinction, and a genial and hospitable expression ofcountenance, somehow suggesting memories of old cognac.

"Yes, sir, the use of spirituous liquors is now only a traditionwith us; but I have heard my father say, that before the war,the indulgence in such hospitality was not uncommon amonggentlemen."

At the conclusion of still further cumulative testimony of the sametenor, I remarked that something about the general situation remindedme of an incident that occurred in a State far to the north while the"Maine Law" was in operation.

A dilapidated-looking pedestrian, with a pack on his back, earlyone afternoon of a hot July day pulled up in front of the post-officein a small village in the interior of Maine. Humbly addressinga citizen who was just coming out with his copy of the WeeklyTribune in hand, he inquired,

"Where can I get a drink?"

"The Maine Law is in force," was the reply, "and it is impossible foryou to get a drink in the State."

The heart of the wayfarer sank within him.

"Would you let a man die right here on your streets, for lack ofa drink?"

The "better angel" of the citizen being touched thereat, he replied,

"My friend, I am very sorry for you, but no liquor is ever soldhere, except by the apothecary, and then only as a medicine."

Upon further inquiry, the important fact was disclosed that theshop of the apothecary was three-quarters of a mile away, on theleft-hand side of the road. With an alacrity indicating somethingof hope, the pedestrian immediately gathered up his pack, andthrough the dust and heat at length reached the designated place.Sinking apparently exhausted upon the door-step, he feebly requestedthe man behind the counter to let him have something to drink. Theimmediate reply of the apothecary was that the Maine Law was inforce, and no spirituous liquors could be sold except upon theprescription of a physician. After earnest inquiry, it wasascertained that the nearest doctor's office was one mile away,and the man with the pack again betook himself to the weary highway.Returning an hour later, in tone more pitiful than before, he beggedthe apothecary, as he hoped for mercy himself, to let him have adrink. Upon inquiry as to whether he had procured the requiredcertificate, he said, "No, the doctor wouldn't give me any."

The assurance of the apothecary that the case appeared hopelessonly added to the distress of the poor man, whose sands seemed nowindeed to be running low.

Stirred to the depths by the agony of his visitor, the apothecary atlength said,

"My friend, I would be glad to help you, but it is impossible for meto let you have a drink of spirituous liquor unless you have adoctor's certificate or have been snake-bit."

At the last-mentioned suggestion, the face of the man ofrepeated disappointments measurably brightened, and he eagerlyinquired where he could find a snake. The now sympathetic manof bottles told him to follow the main road three miles to theforks, and then a few hundred yards to the west, and he would finda small grove of decayed tress, where there still lingered a fewsnakes, and by the exercise of a reasonable degree of diligence hemight manage to get bit, and thereby lay the foundation forthe desired relief. With bundle again in place, and evincing abuoyancy of manner to which he had been a stranger for many hours,the traveller resumed the quest.

Hours later, when the shadows had lengthened, and the fire-flieswere glistening in the distance,

"With a look so piteous in purport,
As if he had been loosed out of hell
To speak of horrors,"

he re-entered the apothecary's shop, threw down his bundle, and intones suggestive of the agony of lost souls, again begged for adrink.

"Did you get snake-bit?" was the feeling inquiry of the man at thehelm.

"No," was the heart-rending reply, "every snake I met had engagementssix months ahead, for all the bites he could furnish!"

XXXIREMINISCENCES

A BARBECUE AT THE BLUE SPRING, KY.—NOTABLE NATIVES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD—THE SCHOOLHOUSE CHURCH—SOME OF THE PREACHERS—THE TEACHER OFSINGING—HOW THE SCHOOLMASTER WAS PAID—MANNERS AND DISCIPLINE—THEDEBATING SOCIETY—THE WRITER'S SPEECH TO HIS OLD NEIGHBORS—SOMEBOYHOOD FRIENDS.

Soon after my nomination for the Vice-Presidency, in 1892, I attendeda barbecue at the Blue Spring, a stone's throw from my father'sold home in Kentucky. This was in the county of Christian, in thesouthwestern part of the State. It is a large and wealthy county,its tobacco product probably exceeding that of any other county inthe United States.

Christian County was the early home of men distinguished in thefield, at the bar, and in the State and National councils.Hopkinsville, the county-seat, had been the home of Stites, thelearned Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals; of Jackson, who fellwhile gallantly leading his command at the battle of Perryville;of Morehead, an early and distinguished Governor of the Commonwealth;of Sharp, whose legal acumen would have secured him distinction atany bar; of McKenzie, whose wit and eloquence made him the long-timeidol and the Representative in Congress, of the famed "Pennyrile"district; of Bristow, the accomplished Secretary of the Treasuryduring the administration of President Grant; of the Henry brothers,three of whom, from different States, were at a later day Representativesin Congress, and one the Whig candidate against Andrew Johnson forGovernor of Tennessee.

Hon. Gustavus A. Henry, well known as the "Eagle Orator of Tennessee,"was the Whig candidate for Governor of the State in oppositionto Andrew Johnson, at a later day President of the United States.The latter was at the time an old-fashioned, steady-going mountainorator with none of the brilliancy of his gifted antagonist. Atthe close of a series of joint debates Johnson said: "This speechterminates our joint debates. I have now encountered the 'EagleOrator' upon every stump in the State, and come out of the contestwith no flesh of mine in his claws—no blood of mine upon his beak."To which Henry instantly replied: "The eagle—the proud bird offreedom—never wars upon a corpse!"

A few miles from the Blue Spring, in the same county, were theearly homes of Senator Roger Q. Mills of Texas, Governor John M.Palmer of Illinois, and Jefferson Davis of the Southern Confederacy.Less than a score of miles to the southward, upon the banks of theCumberland in Tennessee, stood historic Fort Donelson; while a fewhours' journey to the northward stands the monument which marksthe birthplace of Abraham Lincoln.

Following the earliest westward trail from Iredell County, NorthCarolina, across the Blue Ridge Mountains, for a great distancealong the banks of the romantic French Broad my grandfathers,"Scotch-Irish Presbyterians," James Stevenson and Adlai Ewing, withtheir immediate families and others of their kindred, had in theearly days of the century, after a long and perilous journey,finally reached the famous Spring already mentioned. Near by,their tents were pitched, and in time permanent homes established inthe then wilderness of southwestern Kentucky.

The first public building constructed was of logs, with puncheonfloor, and set apart to the double purpose of school-house andchurch for the use of all denominations. Its site was near thespot where the speaker's stand was now erected for the barbecuewhich I have mentioned.

From the pulpit of this rude building, the early settlers had more
than once listened spell-bound to the eloquence of Peter Cartwright,
Henry B. Bascom, Nathan L. Rice, Finis Ewing, and Alexander
Campbell.

In this old church the time-honored custom was for some one of itsofficers to line out the hymn, two lines at a time, and then lead thesinging, in which the congregation joined. Among my earliestrecollections is that of my uncle, Squire McKenzie, one of the bestof men, standing immediately in front of the pulpit, and faithfullydischarging this important duty after the hymn had been read infull by the minister. I distinctly recall the solemn tones inwhich, upon communion occasions, he lined out, in measured andmellow cadence, the good old hymn beginning:

"'T was on that dark, that doleful night,
When powers of earth and hell arose."

Mr. Sawyer, too, the old-time singing-school teacher, has honored placein my memory. Once a month, in the old church, the singing-schoolclass of which we were all members regularly assembled. The schoolwas in four divisions, Bass, Tenor, Counter, and Treble; each memberwas provided with a copy of the "Missouri Harmony," with "fa,""sol," "la," "mi," appearing in mysterious characters upon everypage; the master, magnifying his office, as with tuning-fork inhand he stood proudly in the midst, raised the tune, and as itprogressed smiled or deeply frowned upon each of the divisionsas occasion seemed to require. His voice has long been hushed,but I seem again to hear his cheery command, "Attention, class!Utopia, page one hundred!"

Looking back through the long vista of years, it is my honest beliefthat such singing as his, at home or abroad, I have never heard.Upon his tablet might appropriately have been inscribed:

"Sleep undisturbed within this sacred shrine,
Till angels wake thee with notes like thine."

To this old field school came in the early time the "scholars" formany miles around. It was in very truth the only Alma Mater,for that generation, of almost the entire southern portion ofthe county. My father in his boyhood attended this school, as didhis kinsmen, John W. and Fielding N. Ewing; the last named of whomwas, at a much later period, the pastor of the First Presbyterian Churchof Bloomington, Illinois, and his elder brother was the Mayor ofthat city.

At that early day, and later when I attended the same school, therewere no salaries provided for the teachers, The schoolmastervisited the families within reasonable distance of the schoolhousewith his subscription paper, and the school was duly opened whena sufficient number of pupils had subscribed.

The ways of the old field school and the methods of the old-timeteachers belong now to the past. Once experienced, however,they have an abiding place in the memory. The master, upon hisaccustomed perch near the spacious fire-place, with his ever-presentsymbol of authority, the rod—which even Solomon would have consideredfully up to the orthodox standard—in alarming proximity; the boys"making their manners" by scraping the right foot upon the floorand bowing low as they entered the school-room; the girls upon likeoccasions equally faithful in the practice of a bewitchinglittle "curtsey" which only added to their charms; the "studyingaloud," the hum of the school-room being thereby easily heard amile or two away; the timid approach to the dreaded master withthe humble request that he would "mend a pen," "parse a verb,"or "do a sum."

An hour, called recess, was given for the dinner from thebaskets brought from home, and then the glorious old games, marbles,town-ball, and "bull pen," to the heart's content! At the soundof the ominous command, "Books!" each scholar promptly resumed hisseat, the merry shout of the playground at once giving way tothe serious business of "saying lessons." In those good old days,the slightest act of omission or commission upon the part of thepupil was confronted with a terrible condition instead of a harmlesstheory. In very truth the uncomfortable effect of the punishmentunfailingly administered—"doing his duty to your parents," as the pettyschool-room tyrant was wont to observe—was in small degree lessenedby the comforting assurance that the victim "would thank him forit the longest day he lived!"

Then, to crown all, came the debating society, with the schoolmasterpresiding, and the entire neighborhood, sweethearts and all, inattendance, and the boys for the first time testing their oratoricalpowers. Vigilant preparations having been made for the discussionof such momentous questions as: "Which deserves the mostcredit, Columbus for discovering America, or Washington for defendingit?" or "Which brings the greatest happiness to mankind, pursuitor possession?"

In "Georgia Scenes" is an amusing account of a debate in a backwoods"Academy" nearly a century ago. The two brightest boys, afteranxious preparation, succeeded in formulating for debate a questionutterly meaningless, but which appeared upon hurried reading totouch the very bed-rock of human government. The "conspirators"mentioned were the respective leaders in the debate which closed thepublic exercises of the annual "Exhibition" of the Academy. Theleaders had made careful preparation for the contest, and appearedfully to understand the question, and each in turn highly complimentedthe able argument of his rival. Much amusement was caused bythe remaining speakers, when called in order, who candidly admittedthat they didn't understand the question, and patiently submittedto the fine imposed by the rules of the Society. That a boy of butmediocre talents should have failed to participate in the debate, willnot be considered remarkable when the question is stated: "Whether,in public elections, the vote of faction should prevail by internalsuggestions, or the bias of jurisprudence?"

The late General Gordon related to me the above incident, and addedthat the leaders mentioned were at a later day well known to thecountry, one the learned Bishop Longstreet of Georgia, the otherthe eloquent Senator McDuffie of South Carolina.

Events almost forgotten, forms long since vanished, were vividlyrecalled as, after long absence, I revisited the spot inseparably blendedwith the joyous associations of childhood. The platform from whichI was to speak had been erected near the ruins of the old churchabove mentioned, of which my grandfather had been a ruling elder, myfather, mother, and other kindred the earliest members.

Upon my introduction to the vast assemblage—the good thingssuggested by "barbecue" having meanwhile given to all an abundant feelingof contentment—I began by brief reference to the pleasure Iexperienced in again visiting, after the passing of the years whichseparated childhood from middle age, scenes once so familiar,and meeting face to face so many of my early associates and friends,and remarked, that in the early days in Illinois the not unusualreply of the Kentucky emigrant, when asked what part of the OldCommonwealth he came from was, "From the Blue Grass," or "From nearLexington," but that my invariable answer to that inquiry had evenbeen, "From the Pennyrile!"

Some mention I made of Mr. Caskie, the dreaded school-master ofthe long ago, caused a momentary commotion in the audience, andimmediately a man of white hairs and bowed by the weight of morethan fourscore years, was lifted to the front of the platform.With arm about my neck, he earnestly inquired: "Adlai, I cametwenty miles to hear you speak; don't you remember me?" The audienceapparently appreciated the instant reply: "Yes, Mr. Caskie, Istill have a few marks left to remember you by!"

The venerable and long ago forgiven schoolmaster was fearfullydeaf, and to prevent the possibility of a single word escaping him,he stood close beside me, and with his hand behind his ear and theother resting tenderly on my shoulder, faithfully followed me inmy journeyings to and fro across the stage during the two-hours'speech which followed.

My speech at length concluded, I was warmly greeted by scores ofold neighbors and friends. Just forty years had passed since myfather had removed his family to Illinois, and it may well bebelieved that it was difficult to recall promptly all the namesand faces of those I had known in childhood. Even a candidate has,at such times, "some rights under the Constitution"; one of which,I honestly believe, is total exemption from the tormentinginquiries: "Do you know me? Well, what is my name?" The laurels,even of Job, had he ever been a candidate, would probably haveturned to willows.

I am here reminded of an experience of one of my early competitorsfor Congress. It was his happy forte to remember instantly allhis old acquaintances; not only that, but to know their full names.To call out in friendly and familiar tone, in and out of season,"Bill," "Dick," "Sam," "Bob," a hundred times a day, was as naturalto him as to breathe.

Upon one occasion, however, the fates seemed slightly untoward.At the close of one of our joint debates, in the southern partof the district, he was greeted by a demure-looking individual withthe salutation, "How are you, Judge?"

"My dear sir," exclaimed the regular candidate, grasping theinterrogator warmly by the hand, "how are you, and how is theold lady?"

"I am not married, Judge," was the deliberate response, as ofone assuming the entire responsibility.

"Certainly not, certainly not, my dear sir; I meant you mother.
How is that excellent old lady?"

"My mother has been dead twenty years, Judge," was the mournfulreply.

A trifle embarrassed, but not entirely off his base, the judgelooked earnestly into the face of the bereaved, and said:

"My friend, excuse me, your countenance is perfectly familiar tome, but I do not at this moment remember exactly who you are."

The response was, "Judge, I am an evangelist."

To which the candidate for Congress, now upon a firm footing, tappedthe man of the sacred office familiarly upon the shoulder andcheerfully exclaimed, "Why, damn it, Van, I thought I ought toknow you!"

Returning now for brief sojourn to the afore-mentioned barbecue,with a faithful kinsman as monitor, aided by a slight moiety oftact to be credited to personal account, I managed passably wellto get through the trying ordeal. "The old gentleman with the longwhite beard, coming toward us," observed my monitor, "is Uncle JakeAnderson. He has a hat bet that you will know him." Thus advised,I was ready for trial, and warmly grasping the hand extended me,I earnestly inquired, "Uncle Jake, how are you?" "Do you knowme, boy?" was the immediate response. "Know you?" I replied. "Youand my father were near neighbors for years; how could I helpknowing you?" "Yes, of course," he said, "but you being gone solong, and now running for President, I didn't know but what youhad forgotten all about the old neighbors down on the Lick."Assuring him that I had forgotten none of them, and congratulatinghim upon the hat he had won, I passed on to the next.

The interview described was repeated with slight variations,many times, when my attendant remarked:

"That man leaning against the tree is John Dunloe; do you rememberhim?"

"Certainly," I replied, "I went to school with him."

Immediately approaching my early classmate I took him by the hand andsaid, "How are you, John?"

"Why, Adlai, do you know me?" was the prompt response.

"Know you," said I, "didn't we go to school together to Mr. Caskieright here at Blue Water, when we were boys?"

"Yas, of course we did," slowly answered by sometime school-fellow,"but you been 'sociatin' with them big fellows down about Washingtonso long, that I didn't know but what you had forgot us poor fellowsdown in the Pennyrile."

Assuring him that I never forgot my old friends, I inquired, "John,where is your brother Bill?"

"He's here," was the instant reply. "Me and Bill started beforedaylight to get to this barbecue in time. Bill 'lowed he'd ruthergo forty miles on foot to hear you make a speech, than go to ahangin'."

XXXIIA TRIBUTE TO IRELAND*

[*Footnote: Speech delivered by Mr. Stevenson at a banquet ofthe United Irish Societies of Chicago, September, 1900.]

THE WRITER'S VISIT TO NOTABLE PLACES IN IRELAND—HIS TRIBUTE OFPRAISE TO HER GREAT MEN—AMERICA'S OBLIGATION TO IRISH SOLDIERSAND STATESMEN.

I accepted with pleasure the invitation to meet with you. For thecourtesy so generously extended me I am profoundly grateful.

Within late years it has been my privilege to visit Ireland; andI can truly say that no country in Europe possessed for me a deeperinterest than the little island about whose name clusters so much ofromance and of enchantment. I saw Ireland in its beauty and itsgloom; in its glory and in its desolation. I stood upon the Giant'sCauseway, one of the grand masterpieces of the Almighty; I visitedthe historic parks and deserted legislative halls of veneratedDublin; threaded the streets and byways of the quaint old cityof Cork; listened the bells of Shandon; sailed over the beautifullakes of Killarney, and gazed upon the old castles of Muckross andof Blarney, whose ivy-covered ruins tell of the far-away centuries.What a wonderful island! The birthplace of wits, of warriors,of statesmen, of poets, and of orators. Of its people it has beentruly said: "They have fought successfully the battles of everycountry but their own."

Upon occasion such as this, the Irishman—to whatever spot in thiswide world he may have wandered—lives in the shadow of the past.In imagination he is once more under the ancestral roof; thevine-clad cottage is again a thing of reality. Again he wears theshamrock; again he hears the songs of his native land, while hisheart is stirred by memories of her wrongs and of her glory.

What a splendid contribution Ireland has made to the world's galaxyof great men! In the realm of poetry, Goldsmith and Tom Moore; oforatory, Sheridan, Emmett, Grattan, O'Connell, Burke, and in lateryears Charles Stewart Parnell, whose thrilling words I heard athird of a century ago, pleading the cause of his oppressedcountrymen.

The obligation of America to Ireland for men who have aided infighting her battles and framing her laws cannot be measured bywords. In the British possessions to the northward, in the oldcity of Quebec, there is one spot dear to the American heart—thatwhere fell the brave Montgomery, fighting the battles of his adoptedcountry. What schoolboy is not familiar with the story of gallantPhil Sheridan and "Winchester twenty miles away?" Illinoisans willnever forget Shields, the hero of two wars, the senator from threeStates. It was an Irish-American poet of a neighboring Statewho wrote of our fallen soldiers words that will live while we havea country and a language:

"The muffled drum's sad roll has beat
The soldier's last tattoo;
No more of life's parade shall meet
That brave and fallen few."

The achievements of representatives of this race along every pathwayof useful and honorable endeavor are a part of our own history.We honor to-day the far-away island, the deeds and sacrifices ofwhose sons have added so brilliant a chapter to American history.From the assembling of the First Continental Congress to the presenthour, in every legislative hall the Irishman has been a factor.His bones have whitened every American battlefield from the firstconflict with British regulars to the closing hour of our strugglewith Spain.

The love of liberty is deeply ingrained into the very life ofthe Irishman. The history of his country is that of a gallantpeople struggling for a larger measure of freedom. His most preciousheritage is the record of his countrymen, who upon the battlefieldand upon the scaffold have sealed their devotion to liberty withtheir blood. With such men it was a living faith that—

"Whether on the scaffold high
Or in the battle's van
The fittest place for man to die
Is where he dies for man."

With a history reaching into the far past, every page of whichtells of the struggle for liberty, it is not strange that thesympathies of the Irishman are with the oppressed everywhere onGod's footstool. Irishmen, in common with liberty-loving meneverywhere, looked with abhorrence upon the attempt of a greatEuropean power to establish monarchy upon the ruins of republics.

May we not confidently abide in the hope that brighter days are inwaiting for the beautiful island and her gallant people? I close withthe words: "God bless old Ireland!"

XXXIIITHE BLIND CHAPLAIN

DR. MILBURN'S SOLEMNITY IN PRAYER—HIS VENERABLE APPEARANCE—HISCONVERSATIONAL POWERS—HIS CUSTOM OF PRAYING FOR SICK MEMBERS.

No Senator who ever sat under the ministrations of Dr. Milburn,the blind chaplain, can ever forget his earnest and solemn invocation.When rolling from his tongue, each word of the Lord's Prayer seemedto weigh a pound. His venerable appearance and sightless eyes gavea tinge of pathetic emphasis to his every utterance. He was a manof rare gifts; in early life, before the entire failure of hissight, he had known much of active service in his sacred callingupon the Western circuits. He had been the fellow-laborer ofCartwright, Bascom, and other eminent Methodist ministers of theearly times.

Dr. Milburn was the Chaplain of the House during the Mexican War, andoften a guest at the Executive Mansion when Mr. Polk was President.He knew well many of the leading statesmen of that period. Hepossessed rare conversational powers; and notwithstanding hisblindness, poverty, and utter loneliness, he remained the pleasing,entertaining gentleman to the last.

It was the custom of the good Chaplain, with the aid of a faithfulmonitor, to keep thoroughly advised as to the health of the senatorsand their families. The bare mention, in the morning paper, ofany ill having befallen any statesman of whom he was, for the time,the official spiritual shepherd, was the unfailing precursor ofspecial and affectionate mention at the next convening of theSenate. Moreover, in the discharge of this sacred duty, hisinvariable habit was to designate the object of his special invocationas "the Senior Senator" or "Junior Senator," carefully givingthe name of his State. It is within the realm of probability thatsince the first humble petition was breathed, there has never beenan apparently more prompt answer to prayer than that now to berelated.

The Morning Post contained an item to the effect that SenatorVoorhees was ill. During the accustomed invocation which precededthe opening of the session, an earnest petition ascended for"the Senior Senator from Indiana," that he might "soon be restoredto his wonted health, and permitted to return to the seat so long andso honorably occupied."

A moment later, the touching invocation being ended, and the Senateduly in session, the stately form of "the Senior Senator fromIndiana" promptly emerged from the cloak-room, and quietly resumedthe seat he had "so long and so honorably occupied."

XXXIVA MEMORABLE CENTENNIAL

GEORGE WASHINGTON LAYING THE CORNER-STONE OF THE CAPITOL—PROGRESSOF THE REPUBLIC DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY—NOTABLE MEN WHO WERECONSPICUOUS AT THE NATION'S BIRTH—CONGRESS HELD AT VARIOUS PLACESBEFORE 1800—THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FORMED—NECESSITY FOR ENLARGINGTHE CAPITOL AT WASHINGTON—A DOCUMENT BY WEBSTER DEPOSITED BENEATHTHE CORNER-STONE OF THE ADDITIONS—HIGH DEBATES HELD IN THE UNITEDSTATES SENATE—PRESENT LOCATION OF THE SENATE CHAMBER—GREAT INCREASEOF POPULATION, TERRITORY, AND COMMERCE—THE TWO DIVISIONS OFCONGRESS.

On the eighteenth day of September, 1893, the first centennialof the laying of the corner-stone of the national Capitol wascelebrated by appropriate ceremonies in Washington City.

President Cleveland presided, and seated upon the platform werethe members of his Cabinet, the Senate, the House of Representatives,the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Foreign Ambassadors.

The oration was delivered by the Hon. William Wirt Henry, ofRichmond, Virginia, grandson of Patrick Henry. The addresses whichfollowed were by myself, representing the Senate; Speaker Crisp,representing the House; and Justice Brown, the Supreme Court. Ispoke as follows:

"This day and this hour mark the close of a century of our nationalhistory. No ordinary event has called us together. Standing inthe presence of this august assemblage of the people, upon the spotwhere Washington stood, we solemnly commemorate the one-hundredthanniversary of the laying of the corner-stone of the nation's Capitol.

"It is well that this day has been set apart as a national holiday,that all public business has been suspended, and that the Presidentand his Cabinet, the members of the great Court, and of the Congress,unite with their countrymen in doing honor to the memory of themen who, one hundred years ago, at this hour, and upon this spot, putin place the corner-stone of the Capitol of the American Republic.The century rolls back, and we stand in the presence of the grandestand most imposing figure known to any age or country. Washington,as Grand Master of Free and Accepted Masons, clothed in the symbolicgarments of that venerable Order, wearing the apron and the sashwrought by the hands of the wife of the beloved Lafayette, impressivelyand in accordance with the time-honored usages of that Order, islaying his hands upon the corner-stone of the future and permanentCapitol of his country. The solemn ceremonies of the hour wereconducted by Washington, not only in his office of Grand Master ofFree Masons, but in his yet more august office of President of theUnited States. Assisting him in the fitting observance of theseimpressive rites, were representatives of the Masonic Lodges ofVirginia and Maryland, while around him stood men whose honorednames live with his in history—the men who, on field and in council,had aided first in achieving independence, and then in the yet moredifficult task of garnering, by wise legislation, the fruits ofvictory. Truly, the centennial of an event so fraught with interestshould not pass unnoticed.

"History furnishes no parallel to the century whose close we nowcommemorate. Among all the centuries it stands alone. With heartsfilled with gratitude to the God of our fathers, it is well thatwe recall something of the progress of the young Republic, sincethe masterful hour when Washington laid his hands upon thefoundation-stone of yonder Capitol.

"The seven years of colonial struggle for liberty had terminatedin glorious victory. Independence had been achieved. The Articlesof Confederation, binding the Colonies together in a mere leagueof friendship, had given place to the Constitution of the UnitedStates—that wonderful instrument, so aptly declared by Mr. Gladstoneto be 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time bythe brain and purpose of man.'

"Without a dissenting voice in the Electoral Colleges, Washington hadbeen chosen President. At his council-table sat Jefferson, theauthor of the Declaration of Independence; Hamilton, of whom ithas been said, 'He smote the rock of the national resources, andabundant streams of revenue gushed forth. He touched the deadcorpse of the public credit, and it sprung upon its feet'; Knox, thebrave and trusted friend of his chief during the colonial struggle;and Edmund Randolph, the impress of whose genius has been indeliblyleft upon the Federal Constitution. Vermont and Kentucky, assovereign States—coequal with the original thirteen—had beenadmitted into the Union. The Supreme Court, consisting of sixmembers, had been constituted, with the learned jurist John Jayas its Chief Justice. The popular branch of the Congress consistedof but one hundred and five members. Thirty members constitutedthe Senate, over whose deliberations presided the patriot statesman,John Adams. The population of the entire country was less thanfour millions. The village of Washington, the capital—and I trustfor all coming ages the capital—contained but a few hundredinhabitants.

"After peace had been concluded with Great Britain, and while wewere yet under the Articles of Confederation, the sessions ofthe Congress were held successively at Princeton, Annapolis, Trenton,and New York. In the presence of both houses of Congress, onthe thirtieth day of April, 1789, in the city of New York, Washingtonhad been inaugurated President. From that hour—the beginningof our Government under the Constitution—the Congress was held inNew York, until 1790, then in Philadelphia until 1800, when, onNovember 17, it first convened in Washington. The necessity ofselecting a suitable and central place for the permanent location ofthe seat of Government early engaged the thoughtful consideration ofour fathers. It cannot be supposed that the question reached afinal determination without great embarrassment, earnest discussion,and the manifestation of sectional jealousies. But, as has beenwell said, the good genius of our system finally prevailed, 'anda district of territory on the River Potomac, at some place betweenthe mouths of the Eastern branch and the Conococheague,' was, byAct of Congress of June 28, 1790, 'accepted for the permanent seatof the Government of the United States.' From the seventeenth dayof November, 1800, this city has been the capital. When thatday came, Washington had gone to his grave, John Adams was President,and Jefferson the presiding officer of the Senate. It may be wellto recall that upon the occasion of the assembling for the firsttime of the Congress in the Capitol, President Adams appeared beforethe Senate and the House, in joint session, and said:

"'It would be unbecoming the representatives of this nation toassemble for the first time in this solemn temple, without lookingup to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and imploring His blessing.You will consider it as the capital of a great nation, advancingwith unexampled rapidity in arts, in commerce, in wealth, andpopulation, and possessing within itself those resources which, ifnot thrown away or lamentably misdirected, will secure it a longcourse of prosperity and self-government.'

"To this address of President Adams the Senate made reply:

"'We meet you, sir, and the other branch of the national Legislature,in the city which is honored by the name of our late hero and sage,the illustrious Washington, with sensations and emotions whichexceed our power of description.'

"From the date last given until the burning of the Capitol bythe British, in 1814, in the room now occupied by the Supreme CourtLibrary, in the north wing, were held the sessions of the Senate.That now almost forgotten apartment witnessed the assembling ofSenators who, at an earlier period of our history, had been theassociates of Washington and Franklin, and had themselves playedno mean part in crystallizing into the great organic law, thedeathless principles of the Declaration of Independence. From thischamber went forth the second Declaration of War against GreatBritain; and here, before the Senate as a court of impeachment,was arraigned a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,to answer the charge of alleged high crimes and misdemeanors.

"With the rolling years and the rapid growth of the Republic, camethe imperative necessity for enlarging its Capitol. The debatesupon this subject culminated in the Act of Congress of September30, 1850, providing for the erection of the north and south wings ofthe Capitol. Thomas U. Walter was the architect to whose hand wascommitted the great work. Yonder noble structure will stand forages the silent witness of the fidelity with which the importanttrust was discharged.

"The corner-stone of the additions was laid by President Fillmore,on the fourth day of July, 1851. In honor of that event, and byrequest of the President, Mr. Webster pronounced an oration, andwhile we have a country and a language his words will touch aresponsive chord in patriotic hearts. Beneath the corner-stonewas then deposited a paper, in the handwriting of Mr. Webster,containing the following words:

"'If it shall be, hereafter, the will of God, that this structureshall fall from its base, that its foundation be upturned and thisdeposit brought to the eyes of men, be it then known that on this daythe Union of the United States of America stands firm, thattheir Constitution still exists unimpaired, with all itsoriginal usefulness and glory, growing every day stronger andstronger in the affections of the great body of the American people,and attracting more and more the attention of the world. And allhere assembled, whether belonging to public life or to privatelife, with hearts devoutly thankful to Almighty God for thepreservation of the liberty and happiness of the country, unite insincere and fervent prayers that this deposit, and the walls andarches, the domes and towers, the columns and entablatures nowto be erected over it, may endure forever.'

"From the sixth day of December, 1819, until January 4, 1859, aperiod of thirty-nine years, the sessions of the Senate were heldin the present Supreme Court room. This was, indeed, the arena ofhigh debate. When, in any age, or in any country, has therebeen gathered, within so small compass, so much of human greatness?Even to suggest the great questions here discussed and determined,would be to write a history of that eventful period. It was,indeed, the coming together of the master spirits of the secondgeneration of American statesmen. Here were Macon and Crawford,Benton, Randolph, Cass, Bell, Houston, Preston, Buchanan, Seward, Chase,Crittenden, Sumner, Choate, Everett, Breese, Trumbull, Fessenden, Douglas,Clay, Calhoun, Webster, and others scarcely less illustrious.Within the walls of that little chamber was heard the wondrousdebate between Hayne and Webster. There began the fierce conflictof antagonistic ideas touching the respective powers of the State andof the Nation—a conflict which, transferred to a different theatre,found final solution only in the bloody arbitrament of arms.

"For more than a third of a century the sessions of the Senate havebeen held in the magnificent chamber of the north wing of theCapitol. Of the procession of sixty-two Senators that, precededby the Vice-President, Mr. Breckenridge, entered the Chamber forthe first time, on the fourth day of January, 1859, but four survive;not one remains in public life. It is, indeed, now a procession ofshadows.

"When the foundation-stone of this Capitol was laid, our Republic wasin its infancy, and self-government yet an untried experiment. Itis a proud reflection to-day that time has proved the true arbiter,and that the capacity of a free and intelligent people to governthemselves by written constitution and laws, of their own making, isno longer an experiment. The crucial test of a century ofunparalleled material prosperity has been safely endured.

"In 1793 there was no city west of the Alleghanies. To-day a singlecity on Lake Michigan contains a population of a little lessthan one-half of the Republic at the time of the first inaugurationof Washington. States have been carved out of the wilderness, andour great rivers, whose silence met no break on their pathway tothe sea, are now the arteries of our interior trade, and bear upontheir bosoms a commerce which surpasses a hundred-fold that of theentire country a century ago.

"From fifteen States and four millions of people, we have grown tofifty States and Territories, and sixty-seven millions of people; froman area of eight hundred and five thousand, to an area of threemillion, six hundred thousand square miles; from a narrow stripalong the Atlantic seaboard, to an unbroken possession from ocean toocean. How marvellous the increase in our national wealth! In1793, our imports amounted to thirty-one million, and our exports totwenty-six million dollars. Now our imports are eight hundred andforty-seven million, and our exports one billion and thirty milliondollars. Thirty-three million tons of freight are carried onour Great Lakes, whose only burden then was the Indian's canoe.Then our national wealth was inconsiderable; now our assessedvaluation amounts to the enormous sum of twenty-four billion,six hundred and fifty million dollars. Then trade and travel weredependent upon beasts of burden and on sailing vessels; now steam andelectricity do our bidding, railroads cover the land, boats burdenthe waters, the telegraph reaches every city and hamlet; distanceis annihilated, and

"'Civilization, on her luminous wings,
Soars, Phoenix-like, to Jove.'

"In the presence of this wondrous fulfillment of predicted greatness,prophecy looks out upon the future and stands dumb.

"When this corner-stone was laid, France, then in the throes ofa revolution, had just declared war against Great Britain—a warin which all Europe eventually became involved. Within a century ofthat hour, in the capital of France, there convened an internationalcourt, its presiding officer an eminent citizen of the FrenchRepublic, its members representatives of sovereign European States,its object the peaceable adjustment of controversies between GreatBritain and the United States.

"Was it Richelieu who said, 'Take away the sword; States can besaved without it'?

"In no part of our mechanism of government was the wisdom of ourfathers more strikingly displayed than in the division of powerinto the three great departments—legislative, executive, andjudicial. In an equal degree was that wisdom manifested by thedivision of Congress into a Senate and a House of Representatives.Upon the Senate the Constitution has devolved important functions otherthan those of a merely legislative character. Coequal with theHouse in matters of legislation, it is, in addition, the advisorybody of the President in appointments to office, and in treatingwith foreign nations. The mode of election, together with the longterm of service, unquestionably fosters a spirit of conservatismin the Senate. Always organized, it is the continuing body of ournational legislature. Its members change, but the Senate continues—the same now as at the first hour of the Republic. Before nohuman tribunal come for determination issues of weightier moment.It were idle to doubt that problems yet lie in our pathway as anation, as difficult of solution as any that in times past havetried the courage or tested the wisdom of our fathers. Yet, maywe not confidently abide in the faith that in the keeping of thosewho succeed the illustrious sages I have named, the dearest interestof our country will be faithfully conserved, and in the words ofan eminent predecessor, 'though these marble walls moulder intoruin, the Senate, in another age, may bear into a new and largechamber the Constitution, vigorous and inviolate, and that the lastgeneration of posterity shall witness the deliberations of therepresentatives of American States, still united, prosperous,and free'?

"And may our fathers' God, 'from out of whose hand the centuriesfall like grains of sand,' continue to the American people, throughoutall the ages, the prosperity and blessings which He has given tous in the past."

XXXVCOLUMBUS MONUMENT IN CENTRAL PARK

FITNESS OF NEW YORK AS THE SITE FOR THE STATUE—VAST IMPORTANCE OFTHE DISCOVERY OF AMERICA—COLUMBUS'S HUMILITY AND HIS TRUST IN GOD—THE STATUE UNVEILED—CONCLUDING WORDS OF MR. DEPEW'S ORATION.

Facing the statue of Shakespeare in Central Park, New York, is thatof Christopher Columbus. It was unveiled with appropriate ceremonies.General James Grant Wilson presided; Mrs. Julia Ward Howe read herbeautiful poem, "The Mariner's Dream," and the oration was deliveredby the Hon. Chauncey Depew. Upon this occasion I spoke as follows:

"This hour will live in history. Central Park, beautiful andmagnificent, is the fitting place for the statue of Columbus.It is well that to the City of New York, the metropolis of thecontinent, should have fallen the grateful task of portraying tothe millions of all the coming ages the features of the man who,despite obstacles and dangers, marked out the pathway to the NewWorld.

"The name and fame of Columbus belong exclusively to no age orcountry. They are the enduring heritage of all people. YourPresident has truly said: 'In all the transactions of history,there is no act which, for vastness and performance, can be comparedto the discovery of the continent of America.' In the modest wordsof the great navigator, he 'only opened the gates'; and lo! there camein the builders of a new and mighty nation.

"It is said that in Venice there is sacredly preserved a letterwritten by Columbus a few hours before he sailed from Palos. Withreverent expression of trust in God, humbly, but with unfaltering faith,he spoke of his proposed voyage to that famous land. He buildedbetter than he knew. His dream, while a suppliant in the outerchambers of kings, and while keeping lonely vigil on the deep, wasthe discovery of a new pathway to the Indies. Yet who can doubtthat to his prophetic soul was then foreshadowed something of thatfamous land with the warp and woof of whose history, tradition,and song, his name and fame are linked for all time? Was it Mr.Winthrop who said of Columbus and his compeers: 'They were thepioneers in the march to independence; the precursors in theonly progress of freedom which was to have no backward steps.'

"Is it too much to say of this man that among the world's benefactorsa greater than he hath not appeared? What page in our historytells of deeds so fraught with blessings to the generations of menas the discovery of America? Columbus added a continent to themap of the world.

"I will detain you no longer. Your eyes will now behold thissplendid work of art. It is well that its approaches are firm andbroad, for along this pathway, with the rolling centuries, willcome, as pilgrims to a shrine, the myriads of all lands to behold thisstatue of Columbus, this enduring monument of the gratitude of agreat city, of a great nation."

As the last words were spoken, I leaned over and grasped therope fastened to the flag that enveloped the statue. The flagparted on either side and was removed by the attendants. The statuestood revealed in all its beauty under the shade of the great elmsof the Mall.

Mr. Depew concluded his eloquent oration with the following words:

"We are here to erect this statue to his memory because of theunnumbered blessings to America and to the people of every raceand clime which have followed his discovery. His genius and faithgave succeeding generations the opportunity for life and liberty.We, the heirs of all the ages, in the plenitude of our enjoyments,and the prodigality of the favors showered upon us, hail Columbus ourbenefactor."

XXXVIA PLATFORM NOT DANGEROUS TO STAND UPON

A CITIZEN WHO LONGED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE MISSOURI LEGISLATURE—ACOMMITTEE APPOINTED BY A MEETING OF HIS FRIENDS—DIFFICULTY INARRANGING THE PLATFORM—THE RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

The builders of political platforms, which uniformly "point withpride" and "view with alarm," may possibly glean a valuable suggestionfrom the following incident related by Governor Knott. In thecounty in the good State of Missouri in which his fortune was castfor a while, there lived and flourished, in the ante-bellum days,one Solomon P. Rodes, whose earnest and long-continued yearningwas to be a member of the State Legislature. So intense, indeed, hadthis feeling become in the mind of Solomon, that he at length openlydeclared that he "would rather go to the Missouri Legislater, thanto be the Czar of Roosky." And in passing, it may here besafely admitted that even a wiser man than Solomon might make thisdeclaration in these early years of the twentieth century.

Following the example of greater men than himself when aspiring topublic office, Mr. Rodes called a meeting of his party friendsin his precinct, to the end that his modest "boom" might besuccessfully launched. After the accustomed organization had beeneffected, a committee of five, of which our aspirant was chairman,was duly appointed to prepare and present appropriate resolutions.The committee at once retired for consultation, to a log in therear of the schoolhouse, leaving the convention in session. Norattling orator being present to arouse the enthusiasm so essentialto patient waiting, the little assemblage, wearied by the delay,at length despatched a messenger to expedite, if possible, thelabors of the committee. The messenger found the committee in acondition far otherwise than encouraging. The resolutions hadfailed to materialize, and the chairman, seated upon the log, withpencil in hand, and gazing pensively upon a blank leaf before him,seemed the very picture of despair. Upon a second admonition fromthe unreasonably impatient meeting, that adjournment wouldimmediately take place unless the resolutions were reported, thecommittee hastily concluded its labors and, preceded by the chairmanwith document in hand, solemnly returned to the place of assembly.

The resolutions, two in number, and unanimously and with greatenthusiasm promptly adopted, were in words and figures as follows,to-wit:

"(1) Resolv that in the declaration of independence and likewisealso in the constitution of the united states, we recognize a ableand well ritten document, and that we are tetotually oppose tothe repeal of airy one of the aforesaid instruments of riting.Resolv:

"(2) that in our fellow-townsman, Solomon P. Rodes, we view a onestman and hereby annominate him for the legislater."

XXXVIIANECDOTES OF GOVERNOR OGLESBY

OGLESBY'S GREATNESS IN DISCUSSING QUESTIONS CONNECTED WITH THEREBELLION—HIS WORK IN THE MEXICAN AND CIVIL WARS—HE VISITS THEORIENT—FAILS TO FIND OUT WHO BUILT THE PYRAMIDS.

Few men have enjoyed a greater degree of popularity than did thelate Governor Oglesby of Illinois. He was whole-souled, genial,and at all times the most delightful of companions. He stood inthe front rank of campaign orators when slavery, rebellion, war, andreconstruction were the stirring questions of the hour. In thediscussion of these once vital issues, with the entire State foran audience, he was without a peer. But when they were relegated tothe domain of history and succeeded by tariff, finance, andother commonplace, everyday questions, the Governor felt greatlyhampered. In a large degree Othello's occupation was gone.Cold facts, statistics, figures running up into the millions, gavelittle opportunity for the play of his wonderful imagination.

In his second race for Governor, in a speech at Bloomington, hesaid, in a deprecatory tone: "These Democrats undertake to discussthe financial question. They oughtn't to do that. They can'tpossibly understand it. The Lord's truth is, fellow-citizens, itis about all we Republicans can do to understand that question!"

He was a gallant soldier in the Mexican and in the great Civil War,and in the latter achieved distinction as a commanding officer.With Weldon, Ewing, McNulta, Fifer, Rowell, and others as listeners,he once graphically described the first battle in which he wasengaged. Turning to his old-time comrade, McNulta, he said: "Thereis one supreme moment in the experience of a soldier that isabsolutely ecstatic!" "That," quickly replied McNulta, "is the verymoment when he gets into battle."

"No, damn it," said Oglesby, "it is the very moment he gets out!"

In his early manhood, Oglesby spent some years abroad. His pilgrimageextended even to Egypt, up the Nile, and to the Holy Land.

Few persons at the time having visited the Orient, Oglesby'sdescriptions of the wonders of the far-off countries were listenedto with the deepest interest. With both memory and imagination intheir prime, it can easily be believed that those wonders of theOrient lost nothing by his description. Soon after his returnhe lectured in Bloomington. The audience were delighted, especiallywith his description of the Pyramids.

None of us had ever before seen or heard a man who had actually,with his own eyes, beheld these wonders of the ages. Near theclose of his lecture, and just after he had suggested the probabilityof Abraham and Sarah having taken in the Pyramids on their weddingtrip, some one in the audience inquired;

"Who built the Pyramids?"

"Oh, damn it," quickly replied the orator, "I don't know who builtthem; I asked everybody I saw in Egypt and none of them knew!"

For much that is of interest in the career of Governor Oglesby Iam indebted to his honored successor in office, my neighbor andfriend, Hon. Joseph W. Fifer—than whom the country has had nobraver soldier and the State no abler Chief Executive.

XXXVIIITHE ONE ENEMY

CALEB CUSHING'S POLITICAL CAREER—HIS GREAT AMBITION A SEAT UPONTHE SUPREME BENCH—HIS APPOINTMENT THERETO—HIS ONE ENEMY DEFEATS HISCONFIRMATION.

"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare,And he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere."

The truth of the above couplet has rarely had more forcibleillustration than in the case of the late Caleb Cushing ofMassachusetts. In politics he was successively Whig, Democrat,and Republican. During his first political affiliation, he wasa Representative in Congress; in the second a member of Pierce'sCabinet; and in the third a Minister abroad. He was an eminentlawyer, and for a term ably discharged the duties of Attorney-Generalof the United States. His one ambition was a seat upon the SupremeBench.

This was at length gratified by his appointment as Chief Justiceof the Great Court. Unfortunately he had, years before, givenmortal offence to Aaron A. Sargent, then recently admitted tothe bar. The latter soon after moved to California, and became intime a Senator from that State.

When the appointment of Cushing came before the Senate forconfirmation, his one enemy was there. The appointee had longsince forgotten the young lawyer he had once treated so rudely,but he had not been forgotten. The hour of revenge had now come.After a protracted and bitter struggle, Sargent, of the samepolitical affiliation as Cushing, succeeded in defeating theconfirmation by a single vote. The political sensation of the hourwas the Senator's prompt message to his defeated enemy:

"Time at last sets all things even;
And if we do but watch the hour,
There never yet was human power
Which could evade, if unforgiven,
The patient search and vigil long,
Of him who treasures up a wrong."

XXXIXCONTRASTS OF TIMES

TRAVELLING IN 1845 COMPARED WITH THAT OF THE PRESENT DAY.

While I was Assistant Postmaster-General, Senator Whittihorne,of Tennessee, called at the Department to see me on officialbusiness. Seated at a window overlooking the Capitol, he remarkedthat the chords of memory were touched as he entered the room; thatwhen barely of age, he occupied for a time a desk as a clerk justwhere he was seated.

He then told me that at the time of the Presidential election in1844 he was a law student in the office of Mr. Polk, and by hisinvitation came on with him to Washington. The journey of thePresident-elect, from Nashville to Washington, was in February,1845, just prior to his inauguration. He was accompanied by themembers of his immediate family, his law student Mr. Whittihorne, andthe Hon. Cave Johnson, who was soon to hold a position in hisCabinet. The journey to Washington, as Senator Whittihorne toldme, was of two weeks' duration: first, by steamboat on the Cumberlandand the Ohio to Pittsburg; thence by stage coach to the nationalCapitol.

At the time mentioned, railroads scarcely had an existence southof the Ohio and west of the Alleghanies; and save the singlewire from Washington to Baltimore, no telegraph line had beenconstructed.

How striking the commentary, alike upon human accomplishment,and upon opportunity under our free institutions, is here presented!The wearisome and hazardous journey of half a month by steamboatand stage coach had been succeeded by one in palace car of a dayand a night of comparative ease and safety, and the clerk had risenfrom a humble place in the Department to that of Senator from one ofthe great States in the Union.

XLENDORSING THE ADMINISTRATION

DIFFICULTY EXPERIENCED BY DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS IN PROCURING APPOINTMENTSFOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS—A NEW MEMBER THREATENS TO FRAME RESOLUTIONSOF CONDEMNATION—HE DOES THE VERY OPPOSITE—AN EXPLANATORY ANECDOTE.

The Democratic members of the forty-ninth Congress who yet survivewill probably recall something of the difficulty they experienced inprocuring for aspiring constituents prompt appointments to positionsof honor, trust, and profit, under the then lately inauguratedadministration. An earnest desire was felt, and vehemently expressedat times, by those who had been long excluded from everything thatsavored of Federal recognition, for sweeping changes all along theline.

A new member of the House, from one of the border States, believingthat his grievances were far too heavy to be meekly borne, madeopen declaration of war, and asserted with great confidence andwith the free use of words nowhere to be found in "Little Helps toYouthful Beginners," that at the approaching Democratic conventionof his State, resolutions of condemnation of no uncertain soundwould be adopted. Some conciliatory observations, which I venturedto offer, were treated with scorn, and the irate member, stillbreathing out threatenings, hastily turned his footsteps homeward.

A few mornings later, I was agreeably surprised to find in ThePost a telegram to the effect that upon the assembling of theconvention aforementioned, the honorable gentleman above designated,securing prompt recognition from the chair, had, under a suspensionof the rules, secured the unanimous adoption of a resolutionenthusiastically and unconditionally endorsing every act, past,present, and to come, of the national Democratic administration.

Upon the return of the member to Washington, I expressed to him mysurprise at a conversion which, in suddenness and power, had possiblybut one parallel in either sacred or profane history. Closing hisnear eye, he said:

"Look here! I can illustrate my position about this matter byrelating a little incident I witnessed near the close of the war.Just as I was leaving an old ferry-boat in which I had crossed theTennessee River, my attention was attracted to a canoe near byin which were seated two fishermen, both negroes, one a very oldman and the other a small boy. Suddenly the canoe capsized andthey were both dumped in the deep water. The boy was an expertswimmer and was in no danger. Not so with the old man; he sankimmediately, and it certainly seemed that his fishing days wereover. The boy, however, with a pluck and skill that did him greatcredit, instantly dived to the bottom of the river, and with greatdifficulty and much personal peril finally succeeded in landingthe old man upon the shore.

"Approaching the heroic youth, as he was wringing the water fromhis own garments, I inquired,

"'Your father, is he?'

"'No, sir,' was the quick reply, 'he ain't my father.'

"'Your grandfather, then?'

"'No, sir, he ain't my grandfather nuther, he ain't no kin to me, Itell you.'

"'Earnestly expressing my surprise at his having imperilled hisown life to save a man who was no kin to him, the boy replied,'

"'You see, dis was de way of it boss; de ole man, he had de bait!"

XLIANECDOTES ABOUT LINCOLN

LINCOLN'S TROUBLE WITH THREE EMANCIPATION ENTHUSIASTS—A SCHOOLBOY'STROUBLE WITH SHADRACH, MESHACH, AND ABEDNEGO—PRETTY WELL OFF WITHA FORTUNE OF FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS—LINCOLN REBUKES SOME RICH MENWHO DEMAND A GUNBOAT FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW YORK.

The Hon. John B. Henderson, now of Washington City, but during thewar and the early reconstruction period a distinguished UnionSenator from Missouri, relates the following incident of Mr. Lincoln.During the gloomy period of 1862, late one Sunday afternoon hecalled upon the President and found his alone in his library.After some moments Mr. Lincoln, apparently much depressed, statedin substance: "They are making every effort, Henderson, to induceme to issue a Proclamation of Emancipation. Sumner and Wilson andStevens are constantly urging me, but I don't think it best now;do you think so, Henderson?" To which the latter promptly repliedthat he did not think so; that such a measure, under existingconditions, would, in his judgment, be ill-advised and possiblydisastrous. "Just what I think," said the President, "but theyare constantly coming and urging me, sometimes alone, sometimes incouples, and sometimes all three together, but constantly pressingme." With that he walked across the room to a window and lookedout upon the Avenue. Sure enough, Wilson, Stevens, and Sumner wereseen approaching the Executive Mansion. Calling his visitor tothe window and pointing to the approaching figures, in a toneexpressing something of that wondrous sense of humor that no burdenor disaster could wholly dispel, he said, "Henderson, did you everattend an old field school?" Henderson replied that he did.

"So did I," said the President; "what little education Iever got in early life was in that way. I attended an old fieldschool in Indiana, where our only reading-book was the Bible. Oneday we were standing up reading the account of the three Hebrewchildren in the fiery furnace. A little tow-headed fellow whostood beside me had the verse with the unpronounceable names; hemangled up Shadrach and Meshach woefully, and finally went allto pieces on Abednego. Smarting under the blows which, in accordancewith the old-time custom, promptly followed his delinquency, thelittle fellow sobbed aloud. The reading, however, went round, eachboy in the class reading his verse in turn. The sobbing at lengthceased, and the tow-headed boy gazed intently upon the verses ahead.

"Suddenly he gave a pitiful yell, at which the school-masterdemanded:

"'What is the matter with you now?'

"'Look there,' said the boy, pointing to the next verse, 'therecomes them same damn three fellows again!'"

As indicating the slight concern Mr. Lincoln had about money-making,as well as the significance of the expression "well-off" half acentury or so ago, the following conversation, related by JudgeWeldon, is in point.

At the opening of the De Witt Circuit Court in May, 1859, just ayear before his first nomination for the Presidency, Mr. Lincolnwas present, unattended for possibly the first time by his life-longfriend, Major John T. Stuart. Upon inquiry from Weldon as towhether Stuart was coming, Lincoln replied, "No, Stuart told methat he would not be here this term."

Weldon then remarked, "I suppose the Major has gotten to be prettywell off and doesn't have to attend all the courts in the Circuit."

"Yes," replied Lincoln, "Stuart is pretty well to do, pretty well todo."

"How much is the Major probably worth, Mr. Lincoln?" asked Mr.
Weldon.

"Well," replied the latter, after a moment's thought, "I don't knowexactly; Stuart is pretty well off; I suppose he must be worthabout fifteen thousand dollars."

Another incident characteristic of Mr. Lincoln, was related by hisfriend Judge Weldon.

During the gloomiest period of the war, and while our seaboardcities were in constant apprehension of attack, a delegation ofbusiness men from New York visited Washington for the purpose ofhaving a gunboat secured for the defence of their city. Attheir request, Judge Weldon accompanied them to the ExecutiveMansion and introduced them to the President. The spokesman ofthe delegation, after depicting at length and in somewhatpompous manner, the dangers that threatened the great metropolis, tookoccasion, in manner at once conclusive, to state that he spoke withauthority, that the gentlemen represented property aggregatingin value many hundreds of millions of dollars. At this, Mr. Lincolninterposing impatiently, and in a manner never to be forgotten,said:

"It seems to me, gentlemen, that if I were as rich as you sayyou are, and as badly scared as you appear to be, I would,in this hour of my country's distress, just buy that gunboatmyself!"

XLIITHE FIRST LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY IN AMERICA

FAR-REACHING EFFECTS OF THE FOUNDING OF THE VIRGINIA HOUSE OFBURGESSES—VIRGINIA'S GIFT OF TERRITORY TO THE GOVERNMENT—KASKASKIACAPTURED FROM THE BRITISH—JAMESTOWN THE SCENE OF THE FIRST BRITISHCOLONY—THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL SELF-GOVERNMENT—SALUTARYLAWS MADE—POCAHONTAS—GOVERNMENT BY CHARTER—DESPOTISM OF JAMESI—MACAULAY ON THE STUART DYNASTY—THE THIRTEEN ORIGINAL COLONIES—UNJUST TAXATION—PROGRESS OF REPUBLICAN PRINCIPLES—VIRGINIA NOTABLEFOR HER STATESMEN.

On the thirtieth of July, 1907, at the Jamestown Exposition, wascelebrated the anniversary of the assembling of the House ofBurgesses of Virginia, the first legislative body to assemble uponthe Western continent. The meeting was presided over by the presentSpeaker of the Virginia House of Burgesses, and by invitation of thePresident of the Exposition addresses were made by ex-speakersCarlisle, Keifer, and myself.

My address was as follows:

"We have assembled upon historic ground. We celebrate to-day amasterful historic event. Other anniversaries, sacredly observed,have their deep meaning; no one, however, is fraught with profoundersignificance than this.

"The management of the great Exposition did well to set apart thisthirtieth of July to commemorate the coming together at Jamestown ofthe first legislative assembly in the New World. The assemblingof the representatives of the people upon the eventful day twohundred and eighty-six years ago—of which this is the anniversary—marked an epoch which, in far-reaching consequences, scarcelyfinds a parallel in history. It was the initial step in the seriesof stupendous events which found their culmination in the Billof Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and the formulation ofthe Federal Constitution.

"From my home, a thousand miles to the westward, in the great valleyof the Mississippi, I come at your bidding to bear part in theexercises of this day. Not as a stranger, an alien to your blood,but as your countryman, your fellow-citizen, I gladly lift my voicein this great assemblage. And when were the words, 'fellow-citizens,'of deeper significance as suggestive of a more glorious pastthen to-day, as we gather upon this hallowed spot to commemorateone of the grandest events of which history has any record?

"The magical words, 'fellow-citizens,' never fail to touch aresponsive chord in the patriotic heart. Was it the gifted Prentisswho at a critical moment of our history exclaimed, 'For whetherupon the Sabine or the St. Johns; standing in the shadow of BunkerHill, or amid the ruins of Jamestown; near the great northern chainof lakes, or within the sound of the Father of Waters, flowingunvexed to the sea; in the crowded mart of the great metropolis,or upon the western verge of the continent, where the restless tideof emigration is stayed only by the ocean—everywhere upon thisbroad domain, thank God, I can still say, "fellow-citizens"'?

"And truly, an Illinoisan is no stranger within the confines of'the Old Dominion.' You have not forgotten, we cannot forget, thatthe territory now embraced in five magnificent commonwealthsbordering upon the Ohio and the Mississippi, was at a crucial periodof our history the generous gift of Virginia to the generalGovernment,—a gift that in splendid statesmanship and in far-reachingconsequence has no counterpart; one which at the pivotal moment madepossible the ratification of the Articles of Confederation—thesure forecast of 'the more perfect Union' yet to follow. Illinois,the greatest of the commonwealths to which I have alluded, cannever forget that it was a Virginian, George Rogers Clark, who, inthe darkest days of the Revolution, led the expedition—'worthy ofmention,' as was said by John Randolph, 'with that of Hannibalin Italy,'—by which the ancient capital, Kaskaskia, was captured,the British flag deposed, and Illinois taken possession of inthe name of the commonwealth whose Governor, Patrick Henry, hadauthorized the masterful conquest. Nor can it be forgotten thatthe deed of cession by which Illinois became part and parcel ofthe general Government, bears—as commissioners upon the part ofVirginia—the honored names of Arthur Lee, James Monroe, and ThomasJefferson. Is it to be wondered at, that a magnificent Illinoisbuilding adorns the grounds of the Jamestown Exposition,—and thatIllinois hearts everywhere beat in unison with yours in thecelebration of one of the epoch-marking days of all the ages?

"The time is propitious for setting history aright. This expositionwill not have been in vain if the fact be crystallized into historyyet to be written, that the first settlement by English-speakingpeople—just three centuries ago—upon this continent, was atJamestown. And that here self-government—in its crude form butnone the less self-government—had its historical beginning. Trulyhas it been said by an eminent writer of your own State, that priorto December, 1620, 'the colony of Virginia had become so firmlyestablished and self-government in precisely the same form whichexisted up to the Revolution throughout the English colonies hadtaken such firm root thereon, that it was beginning to affectnot only the people but the Government of Great Britain.' Inthe old church at Jamestown, on July 30, 1619, was held thefirst legislative assembly of the New World—the historical House ofBurgesses. It consisted of twenty-two members, and its constituencieswere the several plantations of the colony. A speaker was elected,the session opened with prayer, and the oath of supremacy dulytaken. The Governor and Council occupied the front seats, and themembers of the body, in accordance with the custom of theBritish Parliament, wore their hats during the session.

"This General Assembly convened in response to a summons issued bySir George Yeardley, the recently appointed Governor of the colony.Hitherto the colony had been governed by the London Council; thereal life of Virginia dates from the arrival of Yeardley, bringingwith him from England 'commissions and instructions for the betterestablishing of a commonwealth.'

"The centuries roll back, and before us, in solemn session, is thefirst assembly upon this continent of the chosen representativesof the people. It were impossible to overstate its deep import tothe struggling colony, or its far-reaching consequence to Statesyet unborn. In this little assemblage of twenty-two burgesses,the Legislatures of nearly fifty commonwealths to-day and of theCongress with its representatives from all the States of 'anindestructible union' find their historical beginning. The words ofBancroft in this connection are worthy of remembrance: 'A perpetualinterest attaches to this first elective body that ever assembledin the Western world, representing the people of Virginia and makinglaws for their government more than a year before the Mayflower withthe Pilgrims left the harbor of Southampton, and while Virginiawas still the only British colony on the continent of America.'

"It is to us to-day a matter of profound gratitude that thesethe earliest American lawgivers were eminently worthy their highvocation. While confounding, in some degree, the separate functionsof government, as abstractly defined at a later day by Montesquieu,and eventually put in concrete form in our fundamental laws, Stateand Federal—it is none the less true that these first legislatorsclearly discerned their inherent rights as a part of the English-speakingrace. More important still, a perusal of the brief records theyhave left, impresses the conviction that they were no strangers tothe underlying fact that the people are the true source of politicalpower, the evidence whereof is to be found in the scant records oftheir proceedings—a priceless heritage of all future generations.And first—and fundamental in all legislative assemblies—theyasserted the absolute right to determine as to the election andqualification of members. Grants of land were asked, not only forthe planters, but for their wives, 'as equally important partsof the colony.' It was wisely provided that of the natives 'themost towardly boys in wit and the graces' should be educated and setapart to the work of converting the Indians to the Christianreligion; stringent penalties were attached to idleness, gambling,and drunkenness; excess in apparel was prohibited by heavy taxation;encouragement was given to agriculture in all its known forms;while conceding 'the commission of privileges' brought over by thenew Governor as their fundamental law, yet with the liberty-guardinginstinct of their race they kept the way open for seeking redress,'in case they should find aught not perfectly squaring with thestate of the colony.' No less important were the enactmentsregulating the dealings of the colonists with the Indians. Yet tobe mentioned, and of transcendent importance, was the claim of theburgesses 'to allow or disallow,' at their own good pleasure,all orders of the court of the London Company. And deeply significantwas the declaration of these representatives of three centuriesago, that their enactments were instantly to be put in force,without waiting for their ratification in England. And not tobe forgotten is the stupendous fact that while the battle with theuntamed forces of nature was yet waging, and conflict with savage foeof constant recurrence, these legislators provided for the maintenanceof public worship, and took the initial steps for the establishmentof an institution of learning. It is not too much to say that thehour that witnessed these enactments witnessed the triumph ofthe popular over the court party; in no unimportant sense, thefirst triumph of the American colonists over kingly prerogative.Looking through the mists of the mighty past, Mr. Speaker, tothe House of Burgesses, over which your first predecessor presided,would it be out of place to apply to that assemblage thehistoric words spoken of one of a later period: 'Nobles by theright of an earlier creation, and priests by the imposition of amightier hand'?

"Did the occasion permit, it would be of wondrous interest to lingerfor a time with these, the earliest colonies in this, the cradleof American civilization; to know something of their daily life,their hopes and ambitions, their struggles and triumphs; somethingof their ceaseless vigil and of the perils that environed them; torecall stirring incidents and heroic achievements; to catch a gleamof a spirit of self-sacrifice and devotion which in all the annalsof men scarcely finds a parallel. It would be of curious interestto watch the parade and pomp of governors and councils of royalappointment in attempted representation of a pageantry familiar tothe Old World, but which was to have no permanent abiding place inthe New. Governors and their subordinates—though bearing theroyal commission, yet in rare instances to be classed only as bad orindifferent—pass in long procession before us into the dim shadows.But out of the mists of this long past, two figures emerge thathave for us an abiding interest, John Smith and Pocahontas—namesthat have place not alone in romance and song, but upon the pages ofveritable history.

"Colonial governors strutted their brief hour upon the stage andhave long passed to oblivion; but Smith, the intrepid soldier, theever-present friend and counsellor of the early colonists, theirstalwart protector—alike against the bullet of the savage and themandate of official power—will not pass from remembrance so long asheroic deeds are counted worthy of enduring record among men.

"With dark background of rude cabin and wigwam, of scantily appointedplantation, and of far-stretching forest—with its mysterious voicesand manifold perils—there passes before us the lovely form of thebeautiful Indian maiden, the daughter and pride of the renownednative chieftain. So long as courage and fidelity arouse sympathyand admiration, so long will the thrilling legend of Pocahontastouch responsive chords in human hearts. Its glamour is uponthe early pages of colonial history; her witchery lingers uponstream and forest, and the firm earth upon which we tread seems tohave been hallowed by her footsteps.

"A name that sheds lustre upon the earliest pages of our Colonial historyis that of Sir Edwin Sandys. Under his courageous leadership, whatwas known as the Virginia or Liberal party in the London Companyobtained a signal triumph over that of the court. The resultwas the formal grant to the colony guaranteeing free government bywritten charter. Its declared purpose was to secure 'the greatestcomfort and benefit to the people and the prevention of injustice,grievances, and oppression.' It provided for full legislativeauthority in the Assembly, and was with some modifications themodel of the systems subsequently introduced into the other Englishcolonies.

"By this charter, representative government and trial by jury becamerecognized rights in the New World. Upon this charter, as has beentruly said, 'Virginia erected the superstructure of her liberties.'

"The coming of this charter marked an epoch in the history ofthe Jamestown colony, and set the pace for English-speakingsettlements yet in the future.

"It was in very truth the first step in the direction of theestablishment of the great Republic which was to be the enduringbeacon-light of self-governing people in all future ages.

"To a full appreciation of the supreme significance of the mighty eventwe to-day celebrate and its results—now constituting so inspiringa chapter of history—some account must be taken of conditions thenexisting in the mother country. While obtaining the guarantee of alarge measure of self-government for the New World, Sir Edwin Sandysand his co-patriots were unable to secure that which even savored ofliberal administration in the Old. James—the first of the StuartDynasty—was upon the English throne. In narrow, selfish state-crafthis is possibly in the long list of sovereigns without a rival.The exercise and maintenance of royal prerogative was with him the'be all and end all' of government, and, abetted by the sycophantsabout him, he unwittingly laid the train of inexorable events thatwere to culminate in the execution of one and the banishment ofanother of his line. His claim was that of absolute power, andduring a reign of twenty-two years—extending from the death ofQueen Elizabeth to the year 1625—he was the unrelenting foe ofwhatever pertained to freedom in religion or in government. Hisapparent indifference to the execution of his mother—the ill-fatedMary, Queen of Scots—and his condemnation of the illustriousSir Walter Raleigh to the scaffold, are alone sufficient to renderthe memory of this monarch forever infamous. It is a marvel,indeed, that with James the First upon the throne, and popularfreedom in such a low state throughout his immediate realm, thatso large a measure of liberty should have been conceded to thedistant colony. The achievement is the enduring evidence ofunsurpassed courage in the men in whose immediate keeping were theearly fortunes of the Virginia colony, and sheds unfading lustreupon their memories.

"Nor can it be forgotten that from the masterful hour that witnessedthe assembling of the first House of Burgesses until the abdicationof James the Second, the welfare of the Virginia colony was inlarge measure in the iron grasp of stern antagonists to all thatpertained to liberty of conscience and to popular rule. Whatever therewas of progress during the seventy years—barring the brief periodof the Commonwealth—that immediately preceded the historic EnglishRevolution, and the crowning of William and Mary, was despitethe untiring hostility of the Stuart Dynasty. During this period thelives of Englishmen at home were as the dust in the balance. Itwitnessed the very heyday of the infamous Star Chamber. It was ofStrafford, the bloody instrument (though wearing judicial ermine) ofCharles the First, that Macaulay said: 'If justice, in the wholerange of its wide armory, contained one weapon which could pierce him,that weapon his pursuers were bound, before God and man, to employ.'

"And for all time, the Stuart Dynasty itself remains impaled bythe pen of the same master:

"'Then came those days never to be recalled without a blush—thedays of servitude without loyalty, and sensuality without love, ofdwarfish talents and gigantic vices, the paradise of cold heartsand narrow minds, the golden age of the coward, the bigot, and theslave. The principles of liberty were the scoff of every grinningcourtier, and the anathema maranatha of every fawning dean.In every high place worship was paid to Charles and James—Belial andMoloch,—and England propitiated those obscene and cruel idols withthe blood of her best and bravest children. Crime succeeded tocrime and disgrace to disgrace, until the race, accursed of Godand man, was a second time driven forth to wander on the face ofthe earth, and to be a byword and a shaking of the head to thenations.'

"It is our pleasing task to turn now from the dark annals of ourEnglish forebears to the stupendous events of which that we to-daycelebrate in the historical forecast. With the passing years, acontinuing tide of emigration was setting in from the Old to theNew World. Additional settlements had sprung into being, andthe Plantation in its distinctive sense had given way to the Colony,to be succeeded yet later by the State. The glory of Jamestownhad measurably departed, and to Williamsburg, and yet later to thenow splendid city upon the James, had been transferred the seat ofVirginia authority. New England, despite natural obstacles andconstant peril, was surely working out her large place in history.Puritan, Quaker, Dutchman, Cavalier, Scotch-Irish, and Huguenot—'building better than they knew'—had established permanenthabitations from Plymouth Rock to Savannah. Brave men from theearly fringe of settlements upon the Atlantic—regardless ofobstacle and danger—had pushed their way westward, and laid thesure foundations of future commonwealths. From New Hampshire toGeorgia, thirteen English-speaking colonies, with a populationaggregating near two millions, had attained to a large measureof the dignity of distinctive States. Their allegiance, meanwhile,to the mother country had been unfaltering, and in her fiercestruggle with France for the mastery of the continent, America hadsealed her loyalty with the best blood of her sons.

"The successors to the first House of Burgesses had learned wellthe lessons gleaned from the scant pages of their earliest history.Attempts to tax the unrepresented colonies soon encountered concertedhostility. 'No taxation without representation' became the universalslogan. The words spoken in the British Parliament by Barre—worthycomrade of the gallant Wolfe on the Heights of Abraham—near acentury and a half after the event we now celebrate, will quicken thepulse of all coming generations of American patriots. Said he:

"'Your oppressions planted them in America. They fled from yourtyranny to a then uncultivated, unhospitable country where theyexposed themselves to almost all the hardships to which human natureis liable, among others to the cruelties of a savage foe; they grewby your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care for them,that care was exercised in sending persons to rule them, to spyout their liberties, to misrepresent their actions and to prey uponthem; men whose behavior on many occasions has caused the blood ofthose sons of liberty to recoil within them; men promoted to thehighest seats of justice, some who, to my knowledge, were glad, bygoing to a foreign country, to escape being brought to the bar of acourt of justice in their own. The colonists have nobly takenup arms in your defence; have asserted a valor amid their constantand laborious industry for the defence of a country whose frontierwas drenched in blood. And, believe me—remember, I warn you—thesame spirit of freedom which actuated that people at first willaccompany them still.'

"And how prophetic now seem the words of Burke in the same greatdebate:

"'There is America, which at this day serves for little more than toamuse you with stories of savage men and uncouth manners, yet shall,before you taste of death, show itself equal to the whole ofthat commerce which now attracts the envy of the world.'

"Standing at his hour almost within hailing distance of the spotthat witnessed the surrender of Cornwallis and the terminationof the War of the Revolution, it would be passing strange if weshould fail to catch something of the inspiration of the impassionedwords of Barre and of Burke, and their wondrous associations.

"It is said that in Venice there is sacredly preserved a letterwritten by Columbus a few hours before he sailed from Palos. Withreverent expression of trust in God—humbly but with unfalteringfaith—he spoke of his past voyage to 'that famous land.' Hisdream while a suppliant in the outer chambers of kings, andwhile keeping lonely vigil upon the deep, was the discovery of anew pathway to the Indies. Yet who can doubt that to his propheticsoul was even then fore-shadowed something of 'that famous land'with the warp and woof of whose history, tradition, and song hisname and fame are linked for all time. Can it not truly be saidof the members of the first House of Burgesses, as was said ofColumbus and his compeers, 'They were pioneers in the march toindependence—precursors in the only progress of freedom which wasto have no backward steps?' They only 'opened the gates' andlo! there came in the builders of a new and mighty nation.

"Had it been given to the Virginia—the American—legislators whosememories we honor this day, 'to look into the seeds of time,' whatmighty events, with the rolling years and centuries, would havepassed before their visions. They would have seen the colony theyhad planted in the wilderness, day by day strengthening its cords,enlarging its borders, and with firm tread advancing steadily torecognized place among the nations. They would have beheld thesavage foe—giving way before the inexorable advance of the hated'pale face'—sadly retreating toward the ever-receding westernverge of civilization. It would have been theirs to witness thesymbols of French and Spanish authority disappear forever frommainland and island of the New World. Following the sun a thousandmiles toward his setting, their eyes would have been gladdenedby the great river flowing unvexed from northern lake to southern seathrough a mighty realm that knew no allegiance other than to thegovernment that here had its feeble beginning. They would—near acentury and a half later than the meeting of the first House ofBurgesses—have beheld their descendants listening in rapt attentionto the impassioned denunciation by Patrick Henry of the tyranny ofthe royal successor of James the First; the thirteen colonies armingfor the seven years' struggle with the most powerful of nations;the presentation, by a Virginian, in the wondrous assemblage atPhiladelphia of the Declaration of Independence; under the matchlessleadership of a Virginian yet more illustrious than Jefferson, theColonial army, with decimated ranks and tattered standards,would have passed in review—all past suffering, sacrifice,humiliation, and defeat forgotten in the hour of splendid triumph.Yet later, and in the great convention over which Washingtonpresided, and in which Madison was the chief factor, they wouldhave witnessed the deathless principles of the historic Declarationcrystallized into the Federal compact, which was destined forever tohold States and people in fraternal union. They would have seena gallant people of the Old World—catching inspiration from theNew—casting off the oppression of centuries and, through baptism ofblood, fashioning a Republic upon that whose liberties they had sosignally aided to establish. Yet later, and not France alone, butMexico and States extending far to the southward, substituting formonarchical rule that of the people under written Constitutionsmodeled after that of the great American Republic. And yet moremarvellous, in Great Britain the divine right of kings an explodeddogma; the royal successor to the Stuarts and George the Third onlya ceremonial figurehead in government; the House of Lords in itsdeath struggle; all real political power centred in the Commons,and England—though still under the guise of monarchy—essentiallya republic.

"And what a grand factor Virginia has been in all that pertains tohuman government in this Western world during the past threecenturies. From the pen of one of her illustrious sons, GeorgeMason, came the 'Bill of Rights'—now in its essentials embeddedby the early amendments into our Federal Constitution; from thatof another, not alone the great Declaration, but the statutessecuring for his own State religious freedom, and the abolition ofprimogeniture—the detested legacy of British ancestors. His swordreturned to its scabbard with the achievement of the independence ofthe colonies, and the mission of Washington was yet but halfaccomplished. To garner up the fruits of successful revolution byensuring stable government was the task demanding the loftieststatesmanship. The five years immediately succeeding our firsttreaty of peace with Great Britain have been truly defined, 'ourperiod of greatest peril.' It was fortunate, indeed, that Washingtonwas called to preside over the historic convention of '87, and thathis spirit—a yearning for an indissoluble union of the States—permeated all its deliberations. Fortunate, indeed, that in itscouncils was his colleague and friend, the constructive statesman,James Madison. Inseparably associated for all time with theformulation and interpretation of the great covenant are the namesof two illustrious Virginians—for all the ages illustrious Americans—Madison, the father, and Marshall, the expounder of theConstitution.

"It remained to another son of this first commonwealth, from thehigh place to which he had been chosen, to enunciate in trenchant words,at a crucial moment, a national policy which, under the designationof 'the Monroe doctrine,' has been the common faith of threegenerations of his countrymen and is to remain the enduring bar tothe establishment of monarchial government upon this westernhemisphere.

"Four decades later, at the striking of the hour that noted theinevitable 'breaking with the past,' it remained to stillanother illustrious successor of Jefferson—alike of Virginianancestry, and born within her original domain—by authoritativeproclamation to liberate a race, and thereby, for all time, to giveenlarged and grander meaning to our imperishable declaration ofhuman rights.

"My countrymen, the little settlement planted just three centuriesago near the spot upon which we have to-day assembled has underdivine guidance grown into a mighty nation. Eighty millions ofpeople, proud of local traditions and achievements, yet lookingbeyond the mere confines of their distinctive commonwealths,find their chief glory in being citizens of the great Republic.The mantle of peace is over our own land, and our accreditedrepresentatives in the world's conference, at this auspicious hour,are outlining a policy that looks to the establishment of enduringpeace among all the nations. To-day, inspired by the sublimelessons of the event we celebrate and with hearts of gratitudeto God for all he hath vouchsafed to our fathers and to us inthe past, let us take courage, and turn our faces hopefully,reverently, trustingly to the future."

XLIIIA NEW DAY ADDED TO THE CALENDAR

THE HIGH CHARACTER OF STERLING MORTON AS A MAN AND A PUBLIC SERVANT—HONORED BY CLEVELAND—ORIGINATOR OF ARBOR DAY.

I recall with pleasure years of close personal friendship withJ. Sterling Morton. He was a gentleman of lofty character andrecognized ability. Much of his life was given to the publicservice. As Secretary of Agriculture he was in close touch withPresident Cleveland during his last official term.

At the dedication of the monument erected to his memory at hishome, Nebraska City, October 28, 1905, I spoke as follows:

"I count it high privilege to speak a few words upon an occasionso fraught with interest to this State, and to the entire country.I gladly bear my humble tribute to the man whom I honored in life,and whose memory I cherish. A manlier man than Sterling Morton,one more thoughtful, kind, considerate, self-reliant, hopeful, Ihave not known. Truly—

'A man he seemed, of cheerful yesterdays,
And confident to-morrows.'

Of few men could it more truly be said, 'He took counsel ever ofhis courage—never of his fears.' With firm convictions uponpending vital issues, he did not shrink from the conflict. Hisantagonist he met in the open. In the words of Lord Brougham, 'Hisweapons were ever those of the warrior—never of the assassin.'

"This, is indeed no ordinary occasion. Here and now, we unveila monument erected in honor of the memory of one who, alike inprivate life and in public station, illustrated the noblestcharacteristics of the American citizen. Something of his lifeand achievements we have heard with profound interest from the lipsof the chosen orator of this great occasion, ex-President Cleveland—one indeed eminently fitted for the task. The orator was worthythe subject; the subject—honoring the memory of one of thebenefactors of his age—worthy the orator.

"In all the relations of life, the man whose memory we honor this daywas worthy the emulation of the young men who succeed him upon thestage of the world. With clear brain and clean hands he ablyand faithfully administered high public trusts. He was in theloftiest sense worthy the personal and official association of theeminent Chief Magistrate at whose Council Board he sat, andwhose confidence he fully shared.

"Fortune, indeed, came with both hands full to Nebraska, when J.Sterling Morton, in early manhood, selected this struggling frontierState for his home. How well, and with what large interest, herepaid Nebraska for a confidence that knew no abatement, this noblemonument is the enduring witness.

"Under his guiding hand, a new day was added to the calendar. Theglory is his of having called Arbor Day into being. Touched byhis magic wand, millions of trees now beautify and adorn thismagnificent State. It is no mere figure of speech to say that thewilderness—by transition almost miraculous—has become a garden, thedesolate places been made to blossom as the rose. 'Tree-plantingday' is now one of the sacred days of this commonwealth. Henceforth,upon its annual recurrence, ordinary avocations are to be suspended,and this day wholly set apart to pursuits which tend to beautifythe home, make glorious the landscape, and gladden the hearts ofall the people. Inseparably associated in all the coming yearswith this day and its memories will be the name of J. SterlingMorton. That he was its inspiration, is his abiding fame.

"In other times, monuments have been erected to men whose chiefdistinction was, that desolation and human slaughter had markedtheir pathways. The hour has struck, and a new era dawned. Themonument we now unveil is to one whose name brings no thoughtsof decimated ranks, or of desolated provinces, no memories ofbeleaguered cities, of starving peoples, or of orphans' tears. Inall the years, it will be associated with glorious peace. Peace, 'thathath her victories no less renowned than war'; peace, in whosetrain are happy homes, songs of rejoicing, the glad laughter ofchildren, the planting of trees, and the golden harvest.

'Soft peace she brings; wherever she arrives,
She builds our quiet as she forms our lives;
Lays the rough paths of peevish nature even,
And opens in each heart a little heaven.'"

XLIVA MOUNTAIN COLLEGE

SUCH INSTITUTIONS VALUABLE FOR MOULDING CHARACTER—MR. SCOTTBOTH HONORABLE AND PRUDENT IN BUSINESS—HIS GREATNESS AS ANAGRICULTURIST—HIS AVOIDANCE OF PUBLIC LIFE—HIS SOCIAL AND DOMESTICVIRTUES—DEPENDENCE OF THE NATION ON THE CHARACTER OF ITS LITERARYINSTITUTIONS.

In 1895, Mrs. Julia Green Scott, of Bloomington, Illinois, establisheda college in the mountains of Kentucky in honor of the memory ofher husband. He was a native of Kentucky, and the institutionbears his honored name.

Upon the occasion of the dedication I spoke as follows:

"The dedication of the Matthew T. Scott, Jr., Collegiate Institutemarks an important epoch in the history of central eastern Kentucky.It cannot be doubted that this institution will be potent for goodin moulding the character and fitting the youth of this and succeedinggenerations for the important duties that pertain to citizenshipin a great Republic. Is it too much to believe that this may bereckoned as one of the many agencies in this land, that in theoutstretched years will inspire our youth with yet higher ideals ofduties that await them in life? Would that the words I now repeatof one of England's great statesmen could be indelibly impressedupon the memory of all who may hereafter pass out from these walls:'Be inspired with the belief that life is a great and noble calling;not a mean and grovelling thing that we are to shuffle throughas we can, but an elevated and lofty destiny.'

"It is eminently fitting to this occasion, that I recall somethingof the man whose honored name has been appropriately given to thisinstitution. And yet, I am not unmindful of the fact that if inlife he would shrink from public mention of his name, or ofaught associated with it in the way of benefactions. He was anative of Kentucky—born in Fayette County, February 4, 1828. Hisfather, of the same name, was an honored citizen of Lexington, andfor many years the leading banker of the State. The son inheritedthe high sense of personal honor, and the splendid capacity forbusiness, that for a lifetime so eminently characterized his father.A graduate of Centre College at the age of eighteen, his fortuneswere soon cast in Central Illinois, where his remaining years werespent, and where his ashes now repose. During his early residencein Illinois Mr. Scott realized—as few men did fully at that day—the marvellous prosperity that surely awaited the development ofthe resources of that great State. It was the day of goldenopportunity for the man of wise forecast. His investments weretimely; his business methods all upon the highest plane. He becamein time a large landed proprietor, and stood in the van of theadvanced agriculturists of his day. He formulated enduring systemsof tilling the soil, and making sure the munificent reward of laborwisely bestowed upon this, the primal calling of man. His methodswere in large measure adopted by others, and have proved nounimportant factor in the development and prosperity of thegreat agricultural interests of the State.

"Mr. Scott was in the largest sense a man of affairs. He was everthe safe counsellor in the many business enterprises of which hewas the founder. It were scant praise to say he was possessedof the highest integrity. His was indeed an integrity that could knowno temptation. Faithful to every obligation, he was incapableof an ignoble act. He was eminently a just man, possessing in amarked degree the sturdy characteristics of his Scotch-Irishancestors. His principle in action was:

'For justice all place a temple,
And all season Summer.'

"He was in no sense a self-seeker. Deeply interested in publicaffairs, and having the courage of his convictions upon the excitingquestions of the day, he was never a candidate for public office.Declining the nomination tendered him by his party for Congress,he chose the quiet of home rather than the turmoil of public life.In the advocacy, however, of what he believed to be for the public weal,'he took counsel ever of his courage, never of his fears.' That hepossessed the ability to have acquitted himself with honor inresponsible positions of public trust, no one who knew him could doubt.

"Courteous to all with whom he came in contact, he was the highesttype of the old-school gentleman. He exemplified in his daily lifethe truth of the poet's words:

'That best portion of a good man's life,
His little, nameless, unremembered acts
Of kindness and of love.'

"No man ever had a loftier appreciation of what was due to woman.There was in very truth a relish of old-time chivalry in his bearingin the presence of ladies. He was never happier than when surroundedby children, by whom he was ever trusted and loved.

"No higher tribute could be paid him than by the words spoken withequal truth of another: 'With him the assured guardian of mychildren, I could have pillowed my head in peace.'

"Holding steadily, and without reservation, to the Presbyterianfaith of his fathers, he was none the less imbued with a truecatholic spirit, and gave where needed, liberally of his abundance.He was deeply touched by every tale of human sorrow,

'His hand open as day to melting charity.'

"I may be pardoned for adding that Mr. Scott was supremely happyin his domestic ties. Blessed in all who gathered about hishearthstone, his cup of happiness was full to overflowing. Allwho crossed his threshold felt that they were indeed in the sunshineof the perfect home. He sleeps in the beautiful cemetery near thecity he loved, his grave covered with flowers by those to whomin life he had been a benefactor and friend. To those to whom histoils and cares were given, to kindred and friends, his memory willever be a precious heritage. Truly,

'the just Keeps something of his glory, in his dust.'

"I know of no words more fitting with which to close this poortribute to the man I honored and loved, than those of Dr. Craig inhis beautiful eulogy upon the Rev. Dr. Lewis W. Green, father ofMrs. Julia G. Scott, the noble and gifted woman whose generosityhas made possible the founding of the Institution we now dedicate:

"'Society at large felt the impress of his noble character, hispolished breeding, and his widespread beneficence. His determinationto excel, and that by means of faithful diligence and laboriousapplications, should arouse our young men to like fidelity to theirincreasing opportunities. He was the most unselfish of men, themost affectionate of friends, the humblest of Christians. He owedmuch to the soil from which he sprang. He repaid that much, andwith large interest.'

"The Institution we now dedicate is just upon the threshold of whatwe trust will prove an abundantly useful and honorable career.And while we may not 'look into the seeds of time and say whichgrain will grow and which will not,' yet we may well believethat under judicious management, already assured, this will prove apotent agency in the great work of education.

"In this connection the words of a former President of TransylvaniaUniversity, and of Centre College, Dr. Green, possess to-day asdeep significance as when uttered almost a half-century ago:

"'But it may be truly said, that no domestic instruction, however wise,no political institution, however free, no social organization,however perfect, no discoveries of science, however rapid or sublime,no activity of the press—pouring forth with prolific abundanceits multitudinous publications—no accumulation of ancient learningin stately libraries, no one, nor all of these together, cansupersede the education of the school; nay, all of them derivetheir noblest elements and highest life from the instruction ofthe living teacher. The intelligence of families, the wisdom ofGovernments, the freedom of nations, the progress of science itself,and of all our useful arts, is measured by the condition andcharacter of our literary institutions. . . . It is from such asthese, that the world's great men have sprung. It is from thedeep, granite foundations of society that the materials are gatheredto rear a superstructure of massive grandeur and enduring strength.The God of nature has scattered broadcast over all our land andour mountain heights, in our secluded valleys, and in many a foresthome, the choicest elements of genius; invaluable means of intellectualwealth, the noblest treasures of the State.'

"The hour has struck, and the Matthew T. Scott, Jr., Collegiate
Institution enters now upon its sacred mission.

"May we not believe that here will be realized in full fruitionthe fond hopes of those who have given it being? that as the yearscome and go, there will pass out from its walls those who by diligentapplication are fitted for the responsible duties that await them inlife, well equipped, it may be, to acquit themselves with honor,in the high places of school, of church, or of State?"

XLVDEDICATION OF A NATIONAL PARK

CHICKAMAUGA NATIONAL PARK DEDICATED BY ACT OF CONGRESS—THE SURVIVORSOF THE GREAT BATTLE NOW BUT FEW—THE REAL CONSECRATION WAS ACCOMPLISHEDBY THE HEROES OF THE FIGHT.

The Chickamauga National Park was by act of Congress dedicatedSeptember 19, 1895. Senators Palmer, of Illinois, and Gordon,of Georgia, were the orators of the occasion. The immense audienceassembled included the Governors of twenty States and committeesof both Houses of Congress. I presided on the occasion, anddelivered the following address:

"I am honored by being called to preside over the ceremonies ofthis day. By solemn decree of the representatives of the Americanpeople, this magnificent Park, with its wondrous associationsand memories, is now to be dedicated for all time to nationaland patriotic purposes.

"This is the fitting hour for the august ceremonies we now inaugurate.To-day, by act of the Congress of the United States, the Chickamaugaand Chattanooga National Military Park is forever set apart fromall common uses, solemnly dedicated for all the ages to all theAmerican people.

"The day is auspicious. It notes the anniversary of one of thegreatest battles known to history. Here, in the dread tribunal oflast resort, valor contended against valor. Here brave men struggledand died for the right, 'as God gave them to see the right.'

"Thirty-two years have passed, and the few survivors of thatmasterful day—victors and vanquished alike—again meet uponthis memorable field. Alas, the splendid armies which rendezvousedthere are now little more than a procession of shadows.

"'On fame's eternal camping-ground,
Their silent tents are spread.'

"Our eyes now behold the sublime spectacle of the honored survivorsof the great battle coming together upon these heights once more.They meet, not in deadly conflict, but as brothers, under one flag,fellow-citizens of a common country, all grateful to God, thatin the supreme struggle, the Government of our fathers—our commonheritage—was triumphant, and that to all the coming generationsof our countrymen, it will remain 'an indivisible union ofindestructible States.'

"Our dedication to-day is but a ceremony. In the words of theimmortal Lincoln at Gettysburg: 'But in a larger sense, we cannotdedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. Thebrave men living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated itfar above our power to add or detract.'

"I will detain you no longer from listening to the eloquent words ofthose who were participants in the bloody struggle—the sharersalike in its danger and its glory."

XLVIA BAR MEETING STILL IN SESSION

APPOINTMENT OF A COMMITTEE TO FORMULATE RULES FOR COURT PROCEDURE—SOME MEMBERS AGREE TO VOTE DOWN THE MOTION TO ADJOURN—THEMOTION REJECTED THREE TIMES—INDIGNATION OF THE PRESIDENT.

A Bar meeting recalled by the mention of Mr. Ingersoll would beworth while if it could only be described as it actually occurred.

At the opening of the December term of the Circuit Court in Woodfordin the year of grace 'fifty-nine, John Clark, Esq., announced thata meeting of the Bar would be held at the courthouse at "earlycandle-lighting" on that very evening, for the purpose of formulatingrules to be presented to the Court for its government during theterm.

At the appointed hour, the lawyers, "home and foreign," beingpromptly in attendance and the court-room crowded, an organizationwas duly effected by the election of Colonel Shope, an able anddignified barrister of the old school, as President. As undisputedspokesman of the occasion, Mr. Clark, at once moved the appointmentof a committee of five to prepare the aforementioned rules. Themotion prevailing, nem. con., in accordance with the time-honoredusage, the mover of the resolution was duly appointed Chairman,with Ingersoll, Shaw, Ewing, and the chronicler of these importantevents as his coadjutors. Upon the retirement of the committee,the rules already prepared by Clark were read and promptly approved,and that gentleman instructed to present them to the Bar meeting—then in patient waiting.

As the recognized parliamentarian of the occasion—with the proposedrules in safe keeping—was in the van, upon the return to thecourt-room Ingersoll quietly proposed to his three untitled associatesthat, after the adoption of the resolutions, we should votedown Clark's motion to adjourn and thereby remain all night insession. In approved form, and with a dignity that would have doneno discredit to a high-church bishop, the rules were read off bythe Chairman and agreed to without a dissenting voice.

After a brief silence, Mr. Clark arose and said: "Mr. President,if there is no further business before this meeting, I move wedo now adjourn." The motion was duly seconded by Welcome P. Brown,who had been Probate Judge of McLean County far back in the thirties,and postmaster of the struggling village of Bloomington when Jacksonwas President. President Shope promptly arose and in the blandestpossible terms submitted: "Gentlemen of the Bar, all who are infavor of the motion to adjourn will please say, Aye." Clark, Brown,and a half-a-dozen others at once voted, "Aye." "Those opposed tothe motion to adjourn will please say, No," was the alternativethen submitted by the impartial presiding officer. Ingersoll, hisconfederates, and a sufficient contingent won over quietly voted, "No.""The motion is lost," observed the President, resuming his seat."What is the further pleasure of the meeting?" The silence of thegrave for a time prevailed. Ingersoll and his followers deportingthemselves with a solemnity well befitting an occasion for prayer.Again arising, the chairman of the committee—in a voice less rotundthan before—said: "Well, Mr. President, if there is no furtherbusiness before this meeting, I move we do now adjourn." Dulyseconded, the motion was again put, Clark and half a dozenothers voting as before. "Those opposed," remarked the President—in tones perceptibly less conciliatory than an hour earlier—"willsay, No." The scarcely audible, but none the less effective "no"prevailed, the leader meanwhile giving no sign and apparently raptas if unravelling the mysteries beyond the veil.

A silence that could be felt now in very truth fell upon the meetingin the old courthouse assembled. Even the bystanders seemedimpressed that something far out of the ordinary was happening.

Receiving little in the way of encouragement, the Chairman ofthe late committee, as he dubiously looked around upon the formsof the silent majority—each of whom sat apparently buried inthought that touched the very depths,—again and for the last timeaddressed the presiding officer:

"Mr. President, I move that we adjourn."

Conclusions being again tried in wonted parliamentary form betweenthe opposing forces, with like result as before, the venerablepresident,—by way of prelude first giving full vent to an exclamationnowhere to be found in the Methodist "book of discipline,"—at onceindignantly vacated the chair, and literally shook the dust of thecourt-room from his feet. The others "stood not upon the order oftheir going," and although fifty years have come and gone, thatidentical Bar meeting in the old courthouse at Metamora is still insession,—never having been officially adjourned even to this day.

XLVIITHE HAYNE-WEBSTER DEBATE RECALLED

THE PUBLIC CAREER OF LYMAN TRUMBULL—HE HEARS CALHOUN MAKE A MASTERLYSPEECH IN HIS OWN DEFENCE—TARIFF LAW THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION—MR. HAYNE'S REPLY.

Ex-Senator Lyman Trumbull called upon me at the Vice-President'sChamber a few months before his death. It was upon the occasionof his last visit to Washington. He pointed out to me with muchinterest the seat he had occupied for many years in the Senate.The Senators to whom I introduced him had all come in since hisday. His associates in that chamber, with three or four exceptions,had passed beyond the veil.

The public career of Mr. Trumbull began nearly two-thirds of acentury ago. He was distinguished as a judge, and later as an ableand active participant in exciting debates in the Senate, extendingfrom the repeal of the Missouri Compromise to the impeachment ofPresident Johnson. He was a member when the sessions of the Senatewere held in the old chamber, and Cass, Crittenden, Douglas, Tombs,and Jefferson Davis were among his early official associates.As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee he had reported theThirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of theUnited States.

In the course of my conversation with him upon the occasionfirst mentioned, I inquired whether he had ever met either Webster,Clay, or Calhoun. He replied that it was a matter of deep regret tohim that he had never seen either Clay or Webster, but that he hadin his early manhood heard a masterful speech from Mr. Calhoun.Mr. Trumbull had then just been graduated from an eastern college;and on his way to Greenville, Georgia, to take charge of a school,he spent a few days in Charleston, South Carolina. This was in1833, and the speech of Mr. Calhoun was in vindication of his coursein the Senate in voting for the Compromise Bill of Mr. Clay, whichprovided for the gradual reduction of the tariff. The allegedinjustice of the tariff law then in force had been the prime causeof the "nullification" excitement precipitated by South Carolinaat that eventful period. The proclamation of President Jackson,it will be remembered, proved the death-blow, and the nullificationexcitement soon thereafter subsided. Mr. Trumbull told me that hedistinctly recalled John C. Calhoun, his commanding presence andsplendid argument, as he addressed the large assemblage. As aclear-brained logician—whose statement alone was almost unanswerableargument—he thought Mr. Calhoun unsurpassed by any statesmanour country had known. Mr. Trumbull added that at the close ofMr. Calhoun's speech before mentioned, amid great enthusiasm,"Hayne! Hayne!" was heard from every part of the vast assemblage.For an hour or more he then listened spell-bound to Robert Y. Hayne,the formidable antagonist even of Webster in a debate now historic.Mr. Trumbull said that of the two generations of public men he hadheard, he had never listened to one more eloquent than Hayne.

XLVIIIIN THE HIGHLANDS

THE WRITER THE GUEST OF A GENTLEMAN IN THE SCOTTISH HIGHLANDS—DUNSTAFFNAGE CASTLE—IONA AND SAINT COLUMBA—SENATOR BECK ANDMR. SMITH BOTH DEVOTEES OF BURNS.

During a sojourn of some weeks on the western coast of Scotland,I was the guest for a time of Mr. Stewart, the head of what remainedof a once powerful clan in the Highlands. My host was a distinguishedmember of the London Bar, but spent his Summers at the home of hisancestors a few miles out from Alpin. Here, in as romantic alocality as is known even to the Highlands, with his kindred abouthim he enjoyed a full measure of repose from the distracting caresof the great metropolis. At the time of my visit his brother,an officer of the British army, just returned from India, was withhim. Both gentlemen wore kilts for the time; and all the appointmentsof the house were reminders of bygone centuries when border warfarewas in full flower, forays upon the Lowlands of constant occurrence,and the principle of the clans in action,

"Let him take who has the power
And let him hold who can."

At the bountifully furnished board of my Highland host there wasmuch "upon the plain highway of talk" I will not soon forget. Andthen, with the gathering shadows in the ancestral hall, with therude weapons of past generations hanging upon every wall, andthe stirring strains of the bagpipe coming from the distance, itwas worth while to listen to the Highland legends that had beenhanded down from sire to son.

Not far away was the old castle of Dunstaffnage, which in its primehad been the scene of innumerable tournaments and battles that haveadded many pages to Scottish annals. Within the enclosure ofthe old castle sleeps the dust of long ago kings—the veritablegrave of Macbeth being readily pointed out to inquiring travellers.

The conversation around the hearthstone of my host turned to thefamous island of the Inner Hebrides, Iona, with its wonderfulhistory reaching back to the sixth century. The ruins of theold monastery, built fourteen hundred years ago by the fugitiveSaint, Columba, are well worth visiting. The dust of the earlykings of Norway, Ireland, and Scotland rest within these ancientwalls, and it is gratifying to know that here even the ill-fatedDuncan

"After life's fitful fever sleeps well."

It would have been passing strange, with host and guests all ofScottish lineage, if there had been no mention of Robbie Burns,for in old Scotia, whether in palace or hovel, the one subject thatnever tires is the "ploughman poet of Ayr." A little incidentof slightly American relish which I related the evening of mydeparture needed no "surgical operation" to find appropriatelodgment.

Senator Beck of Kentucky was a Scotchman. He was in the highestsense a typical Scotchman—lacking nothing, either of the brawn,brain, or brogue, of the most gifted of that race. It is needlessto say he was a lover of Burns. From "Tam O'Shanter" to "Maryin Heaven," all were safely garnered in his memory—to be rolledout in rich, melodious measure at the opportune moment. The closefriend and associate of Senator Beck, when the cares of State werefor a time in abeyance, and the fishing season at its best, was"old Smith," superintendent of the Botanical Gardens, also aScotchman, and likewise in intense degree a devotee of Burns. Thebond of union between the man of flowers and the Kentucky statesmanwas complete.

Now, it so fell out that a newly elected member of the House, fromthe Green River district, one day called upon his distinguishedcolleague of the Senate, and requested a note of introduction tothe superintendent of the Botanical Gardens, as he wished to procuresome flowers to send a lady constituent then in the city. "Certainly,certainly," replied the ever-obliging statesman: "I will give youa line to old Smith." Just as the delighted member was departingwith the letter in hand, Senator Beck remarked, in his peculiarlysnappy Scotch accent, "Now, Tom, if you will only tell old Smiththat you are a great admirer of his countryman, Robbie Burns, hewill give you all the flowers in the conservatory." The member,who knew as little of Burns as he did of the "thirty-nine articles,"departed in high feather.

Almost immediately thereafter, presenting his letter, he was receivedwith great cordiality by the superintendent and assured that anyrequest of Senator Beck would be cheerfully granted. Just as hewas reaching out for the fragrant bouquet the superintendent wasgraciously presenting, the closing words of the Senator wereindistinctly recalled, and in a manner indicating no small measureof self-confidence, the member remarked, "By the way, Mr. Smith,I am a great admirer of your countryman, Jimmy Burns." "JimmyBurns! Jimmy Burns! Jimmy Burns!" exclaimed the overwhelminglyindignant Scotchman, "Jimmy Burns! Depart instantly, sir!"

The member from Green River district departed as bidden, taking nothought of the flowers; delighted—as he often asservated—to haveescaped even with his life.

XLIXANECDOTES OF LAWYERS

JUDGE BALDWIN'S BOOK, "THE FLUSH TIMES"—DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL ASKS ONEQUESTION TOO MANY—CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AGAINST A CARD-PLAYER—JOHN RANDOLPH'S REVENGE—HORACE GREELEY NOT A MINISTER OF THEGOSPEL—A CANDIDATE'S QUALIFICATIONS FOR SCHOOL-TEACHING—THE AUTHOROF "DON'T YOU REMEMBER SWEET ALICE, BEN BOLT?"—A CANDIDATE'SPOSITION WITH REGARD TO THE MAINE LAW—GOVERNOR TILDEN'S POPULARITY—MR. TRAVERS MISSES A PORTRAIT—A CANDIDATE FOR HOLY ORDERS TELLSA BIBLE STORY.

No better place can be found for studying that most interesting ofall subjects, Man, than in our courts of justice. Indeed, what areadable book that would be which related the best things whichhave occurred at the bar!

Judge Baldwin conferred an inestimable blessing upon our professionwhen he wrote "The Flush Times," a book that will hold a placein our literature as long as there is a lawyer left on earth.To two generations of our craft this book has furnished agreeable anddelightful entertainment. To the practitioner "shattered with thecontentions of the great hall," its pages have been as refreshing asthe oasis to the travel-stained pilgrim.

The late Justice Field, long his associate upon the supreme bench ofCalifornia, told me that Judge Baldwin was one of the most genial anddelightful men he had ever known, and certainly he must have been tohave written "Cave Burton," "My First Appearance at the Bar," "AHung Court," and "Ovid Bolus, Esq., Attorney-at-law and Solicitor inChancery."

Almost every Bar has some tradition or incident worth preserving—something in the way of brilliant witticisms or repartee thatshould not be wholly lost. Of the race of old-time lawyers—ofwhich Mr. Lincoln was the splendid type—but few remain. Of thesurvivors, I know of no better representative than Proctor Knottof Kentucky. The possessor of ability of the highest order, andof splendid attainments as well, he is of all men the best story-tellerthis country of ours has known. Among his delighted auditors inand out of Congress have been men from every section and of exaltedpublic station. For some of the incidents to be related I amindebted to Governor Knott. The obligation would be much greater ifthe stories could be retold in manner and form as in the days goneby, and upon occasions never to be forgotten when they fell fromhis own lips.

If, however, even fairly well I might garner up and hand down someof the experiences of the generation of lawyers now passing, Iwould feel that I had, in some humble measure, discharged thatobligation that Lord Bacon says, "every man owes to his profession."

ONE QUESTION TOO MANY

What lawyer has not, at some time, in the trial of a case askedjust one question too many? I know of nothing better along thatline of inquiry than the following related by Governor Knott.He was attending the Circuit Court in one of the Green River countiesin Kentucky, when the case of the "Commonwealth versus WilliamJenkins" was called for trial. The aforesaid William was underindictment for having bitten off the ear of the prosecuting witness.Fairly strong but by no means conclusive testimony against thedefendant had been given when the State "rested."

A lawyer of the old school, who still carried his green bag intoCourt, and who never wearied of telling of his conflicts at thebar with Grundy, Holt, and Ben Hardin, in their palmiest days, wasretained for the defence. His chief witness was Squire Barnhouse,who lived over on the "Rolling Fork." He was the magistrate forhis precinct, deacon in the church, and the recognized oraclefor the neighborhood. Upon direct examination, in the case atbar, he testified that "he knowed the defendant William Jenkins; hadknowed him thirty year or more; knowed his father and mother aforehim." Inquired of then as to the general reputation of the defendant,as to his being "a peaceable and law-abiding citizen," he was foundto be all that could be reasonably desired.

Squire Barnhouse was then asked whether he was present at the CaneyFork muster, where it was alleged that the defendant had bittenoff the ear of the prosecuting witness. It turned out that he waspresent. Further questioned as to whether he had paid particularattention to the fight, he replied that he did; that he "had neverseed Billy in a fout before, and he had a kind of family pride inseein' how he would handle himself." Further questioned as towhether he saw the defendant bite off the ear of the prosecutingwitness he replied, "No, sir, nothin' uv the kind, nothin' uv the kind."This was followed by the inquiry as to whether his opportunities weresuch that he would most probably have seen it, if it had occurred."In course I would, in course I would," was the emphatic reply.

The witness was here turned over to the Commonwealth's attorney,who declined to cross-examine, and Squire Barnhouse was in the actof leaving the stand when in an evil hour it occurred to defendant'scounsel to ask one question more.

"By the way, Squire, just one more question, just where you stand;now I understood you to say"—repeating the answers already given;"now just this question, did you see anything occur while the fightwas going on, or after it was over, that would lead you to believethat this defendant had bitten off the ear of the prosecutingwitness?"

The Squire, half down the witness stand, answered, "No, sir, nothinguv the kind," then, slowly and thoughtfully, "nothing uv the kind."A moment's pause. "Well, since you mention it, I do remember thatjust as Billy rizened up offen him the last time, I seed him spit outa piece of ear, but whose ear it was, I don't pertend to know."

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

In the good County of Scotland, in the State of Missouri, backin the ante-bellum days there lived one Solomon Davis, whose chronichorror was card-playing. The evils of this life were in his judgmentlargely to be attributed to this terrible habit. It was his beliefthat if the Grand Jury would only take hold of the matter in theright spirit, a stop could be put to the "nefarious habit ofcard-playing, which was ruining the morals of so many young men inScotland County." This was the burden of his discourse in and outof season. His ardent desire that he himself should be calledon the Grand Jury to the accomplishment of the end mentioned wasat length gratified. At a certain term of court he was not onlysummoned upon the Grand Jury, but duly appointed its foreman.

Upon the adjournment of court for dinner, immediately thereafter, oneBen Mason, the wit of the bar,—and not himself wholly unacquaintedwith the pastime that involved spades, kings, and even queens,—ardently congratulated the new foreman upon his appointment, assuringhim that now his opportunity had come to put to an end, by theomnipotent power of the Grand Jury, "to the nefarious habit ofcard-playing which was ruining the morals of so many young men inScotland County."

"And now, Squire," continued Ben, "I can give you the name of agentleman who doesn't play himself, but is always around whereplaying is going on, and he can tell you who plays, where theyplay, how much is bet, and all about it."

Delighted at this apparently providential revelation, the Squirehad a subpoena forthwith issued for the witness mentioned, oneRanzey Sniffle, a half-witted fellow who had never taken or expectedto take a part in the game himself, but whose cup of happiness wasfull to the brim when, in return for punching up the fires, mixingthe drinks, and snuffing the candle, he was permitted to seethe play actually going on.

Trembling with apprehension at the dread summons to appear before the"Grand Inquest"—if it had been three centuries earlier at Saragossait could scarcely have appeared more alarming—the witness wasushered into the immediate presence of the awful tribunal overwhich Squire Davis was now presiding. After taking the customary oath,and telling his name, age, and where he lived, Mr. Sniffle wasquestioned by the foreman as to his personal knowledge of any gameor games of cards being played for money, or any valuable thing,within one year last past, within the said County of Scotland, andsolemnly warned, if he had any such knowledge, to proceed in hisown way, and tell all about it; to tell when and where it was, whowere present, and what amount, if any, was bet.

Recovering himself a little by this time, the witness began:

"The last time I seed them playin', Squire, was at Levi Myers'ssto'; they sot in about sundown last Saturday night, and neverloosened their grip until Monday mornin' about daylight."

"Now, Mr. Sniffle," interrupted the Squire with great dignity,"will you proceed in your own way, to give to the gentlemen of thisGrand Jury the names of the persons who were thus engaged notonly in violating the statute law of Missouri, but in violatingthe law of God by desecrating the holy Sabbath?"

"Well, Squire," continued the witness, slowly counting off onhis fingers, "thar was Levi Myers, Sammy Hocum, Moss Johnson, JosiahDavis,"—"Suspend, Mr. Sniffle, suspend," commanded the Squirewith great indignation, and turning to his official associates, hecontinued, "I am aware, gentlemen of the Grand Jury, that my sonJosiah is sometimes present when cards are being played, but heassures me on his honor as a gentleman, that he never takes part,and doesn't even know one card from another. Now, Mr. Witness, doyou undertake, under the solemn sanction of an oath, to say thatmy son Josiah was engaged in the game? By the way, Mr. Sniffle,do you understand the nature of an oath?"

"No, Squire," slowly replied the witness, "I dun know as I do."

"Don't you know what will become of you, Ranze, if you swear to alie?" quickly asked a juryman from a back seat.

"Yas, in course, if I swar to a lie, they'll send me to thepenitentiary, and then I'll go to hell afterwards," replied Mr.Sniffle.

The competency of the witness thus appearing, the foremanproceeded:

"Now, Mr. Sniffle, do you, under the solemn sanction of an oath,undertake to say that my son Josiah was engaged in that game?"

"I dun know as I adzackly understand the meanin' of bein' engaged inthe game; but I seed Josiah a-dealin' the papes, when his time cometo fling a card he flung it, and uv'ry now and then, he rechout and drug in the chicerokum. I dun know as I adzackly understand'bout bein' engaged in the game, but if that were bein' engaged,then Josiah were engaged!"

JOHN RANDOLPH OF ROANOKE

Seldom have more significant words been uttered than those of JohnRandolph of Roanoke, when told that a certain man had been denouncinghim. "Denouncing me," replied Randolph, with astonishment, "that isstrange, I never did him a favor."

The voice of but one John Randolph of Roanoke has mingled in thecontentions of the Great Hall. That was no cause for regret, asfor a lifetime he was the dread of political foes and friends alike.

A colleague from "the valley" probably remembered him well tothe last. That colleague, recently elected to fill a vacancy causedby the death of a member of long service, signalized his entrance intothe House by an unprovoked attack upon Mr. Randolph. The latter, fromhis seat near by, listened with apparent unconcern to the fiercepersonal assault. To the surprise of all, no immediate replywas made to the speech, and the new member flattered himself, nodoubt, that the "grim sage" was for once completely unhorsed.

A few days later, however, Randolph, while discussing a bill oflocal importance, casually remarked: "This bill, Mr. Speaker, lostits ablest advocate in the death of my lamented colleague, whose seatis still vacant!"

HORACE GREELEY

It will be remembered that the will of Stephen Girard of Philadelphia,after a splendid bequest for the establishment of the great Universitywhich bears his name, provided that no minister of the Gospel shouldever be permitted to enter the grounds of the institution.

It so happened upon a time, that Horace Greeley, wearing white hatand cravat, and with his ministerial cast of countenance well inevidence, sauntered up to the gate of the Girard institution andwas about to enter. He was instantly stopped by the keeper, whobluntly told him that he could not enter.

"What the hell is the reason I can't?" demanded Greeley.

"Oh! I beg your pardon," apologized the astonished gate-keeper,"walk right in, sir; you can."

PATRIOTIC TO THE CORE

Judge Allen of southern Illinois, a leading member of Congress ahalf-century ago, during a recent address to the old settlers ofMcLean County related an incident of early days on the Wabash.Population was sparse, and the common school was yet far in thefuture. The teacher who could read, write, and "cipher" to the"single rule of three" was well equipped for his noble calling.Lamentable failures upon the part of aspirants to attain eventhe modest standard indicated, were by no means of rare occurrence.

Back in the thirties, an individual of by no means prepossessingappearance presented himself to Judge Allen's father, the Magistrate,Ruling Elder, and ex-officio school director for his precinct,and asked permission "to keep school." Being interrogated as towhat branches he could teach, the three R's—readin', 'ritin', and'rithmetic—were, with apparent confidence, at once put innomination.

"Have you ever taught geography and English grammar?" was the nextinquiry.

With a much less confident tone, as he had probably never heard ofeither, he replied:

"I have teached geography some, but as for English grammar, I wouldn't'low one of 'em to come into my school-house. 'Merican grammaris good enough for me!"

"SWEET ALICE, BEN BOLT"

A touching scene occurred in the House of Representatives a numberof years ago, when an aged member from New Jersey arose, and forthe first time addressed the Speaker. All eyes were turned in hisdirection as he stood calmly awaiting recognition. He was tall,spare, and erect. His venerable appearance and kindly expression,coupled with most courteous manners, at once commanded attention.As in husky tones he again said, "Mr. Speaker!" there came from thefarthest end of the Great Hall in a whisper but distinctly heardby all, the word, "Sweet Alice, Ben Bolt." A moment later, andfrom the floor and gallery many voices blended in the familiarrefrain, "Don't you remember sweet Alice Ben Bolt?"

The ovation which immediately followed was such as is rarelywitnessed in the Great Hall. Business was suspended for the moment,and the hand of the new member warmly grasped by the chosenrepresentatives of all parties and sections. It was an inspiring tribute,one worthily bestowed. The member was Thomas Dunn English, authorof the little poem, sung in palace and cottage, which has foundits way into all languages, and touched all hearts.

THE MAINE LAW

The mention of the "Maine Law" recalls a little episode that occurredin the early days in the good county of McLean. One Duncan—nokinsman to him who had been

"So clear in his great office"—

was again a candidate for the Legislature. The temperance question,in some of its many phases, was then giving much trouble to aspirantsto public place. In the midst of his opening speech at the oldcourthouse, the candidate was interrupted by one of the inquisitivemen who always appear when least wanted, with the question:"Mr. Duncan, are you in favor of the Maine Law?" "Yes, yes,"quickly replied the candidate, "I am coming to that very soon."Shying off to the tariff, the improvement of Western rivers, andthe necessity of rigid economy in all public expenditures, ourcandidate was about to close when the same troublesome inquiry,"Mr. Duncan, are you in favor of the Maine Law?" again greeted hisunwilling ears. "Oh, yes," exclaimed the orator, in tone and mannerindicating much thankfulness. "I am glad you called my attention tohis subject; I was about to forget it. My fellow-citizens havea right to know my views upon all public questions, and I havenothing to conceal. I have no respect for candidates who attempt tododge any of these great questions. I have given you fully, myviews upon the tariff, upon a general system of internal improvements,and something of my own services in the past; and now thanking youfor your attention, will ——" "Mr. Duncan, are you in favor ofthe Maine Law?" were the words that again escaped the lips of theimportunate inquisitor.

Fully appreciating his dilemma—with constituents about equallydivided upon the dangerous question—the candidate at oncenerved himself for the answer upon which hung his hopes and fears andboldly replied; "Yes, sir, I am in favor of the law, but everlastinglyopposed to its enforcement!"

HOW HE GOT HIS MAJORITY

One of the candidates upon the ticket with Mr. Tilden when hewas elected Governor of New York, was the late William Dorshemer.Judge Maynard told me that he was present in the library of Mr.Tilden when Dorshemer called, immediately after the full election returnshad been received. Tilden's popularity at the time was very great—growing out of his successful prosecution of the noted Canalring,—and resulted in the triumph of the ticket of which he wasthe head. Mr. Dorshemer, the Lieutenant-Governor elect, was greatlydelighted that his own majority exceeded that of the more distinguishedcandidate for the Chief Executive office. During the conversation,Dorshemer remarked to Tilden: "Your majority is only fifty thousand,while mine is fifty-one thousand, five hundred." "Yes, yes,"quickly remarked Tilden; "you got the fifteen hundred; I gave youthe fifty thousand!"

WILLIAM R. TRAVERS

The generation now passing has known no man of keener wit than thelate William R. Travers, of New York. An impediment of speech notinfrequently gave zest and vim to his words, when they finallyfound utterance. He was for a lifetime steeped in affairs of greatconcern and among his associates were prominent factors in thecommercial and political world.

On his revisiting Baltimore some years after his removal to New
York, an old acquaintance remarked, "You seem to stutter more in
New York than you did here, Mr. Travers." To this the brief reply
at length came, "Have to—it's a bigger place."

Back in the days when Gould and Fisk were names to conjure with inthe mart and on the board; when railroads and gold mines werebut pawns upon the chessboard of "money changers and those who solddoves"; when "Black Friday" was still fresh in the memories ofthousands, this incident is said to have occurred.

To weightier belongings, Gould and Fisk had added by way of pastimea splendid steamer to ply between Fall River and New York. Uponits trial voyage, Travers was the guest of its owners. Theappointments of the vessel were gorgeous in the extreme, and inthe large saloon were suspended life-size portraits of Gould andof Fisk. After a promenade of an hour in company with the originals,Travers suddenly paused in front of the portraits, gazed earnestlyat each in turn, and then—with eyes fixed on the intervening space—slowly ejaculated: "Where's Christ?"

TOLD BY COLONEL W. D. HAYNIE

The following, told with happy effect by Colonel W. D. Haynie ofthe Chicago Bar, probably has no parallel in theological literature.A colored brother who felt called upon to preach, applied to theBishop of his church for license to exercise the sacred office.The Bishop, far from being favorably impressed by the appearanceof the candidate, earnestly inquired whether he had read the Bible,and was familiar with appropriate stories to relate, as occasionmight require, to his Sunday school and congregation. The answer was,"Boss, I has read dat book from led to led." In response to therequest of the good Bishop that he would repeat a Bible story, theapplicant for Holy Orders began:

"One time dar wus a wicked ole King, an' his name was Ahab; an' helive in Babylon; an' he wus a mighty warrior; an' one day he wuzmarchin' along at de head uv his army fru de streets of Babylon,an' he seed Bersheby standin' up on de house-top; an' he said tohis soldiers, 'Bring me Bersheby fur my wife'; an' day brung himBersheby fur his wife. An' ole Ahab he march a long ways off, andfit a big battle, an' tuk a hull lot of prisoners; an' cuma-marchin' back fru de streets of Babylon, wid de brass bansa-playin', and de stars an' stripes a-floatin'; an' Bersheby she wuza-standin' on de house-top, and she holler out,

"'How did you cum out wid' em, old Ahab?'

"An' it make him powerful mad you know, an he say to his soldiers,'Frow her down to me.' And dey frowd her down to him; and denhe say, 'Frow her down to me seven times'; and dey frowd her downseven times; and den he say, 'Frow her down to me seventy timesseven times!' and dey frowed her down to him seventy timesseven times; an' po' ole Bersheby, she crawl away and lay downat de rich man's gate, and de dogs come and lick her wouns, andwhen dey gevered he up, dar was 'leven basketfuls left, an' whosewife will she be in de resurrection?"

LOUR NOBLE CALLING

THE LEGAL PROFESSION—TAKEN BY SURPRISE—MISSING THE POINT OFTHE JOKE—A REMARKABLE INCIDENT—A JUDICIAL DECISION ON BAPTISM—ADOUBTFUL COMPLIMENT—STRONG PERSONAL ATTACHMENT—IRISH WIT—ENGLISHJOKES ABOUT LAWYERS—GREATNESS UNAPPRECIATED—ALL IN HIS WIFE'SNAME—A RETORT BY CURRAN—REMITTING A FINE—A CASE "ON ALL-FOURS"—"GOING OUT WITH THE TIDE."

As we well know, lawyers generally entertain an exceedingly exaltedopinion of their profession. Textbooks, opinions of courts,addresses innumerable to graduating students, all bear witnessto the fact that our noble profession is the most honorable ofhuman callings, the safeguard of society, the palladium of ourliberty.

True, some uncharitable layman has suggested: "Yes, all this, andmore, has been said a thousand times, but always by lawyers."

There are persons yet in life, who, practically at least, hold withAaron Burr, that "law is that which is boldly asserted and plausiblymaintained," and that lawyers, like the Roman augurs of old, alwayssmile when they meet one another on the street. The by no meansexalted opinion of two men as to "our noble profession" will appearfrom the following.

A few days after Knott was admitted to the bar, he was sittingalone in his office, waiting for clients, when a one-gallowsed,awkward-looking fellow from the "brush" walked in without ceremony,dropped into the only vacant chair, and inquired: "Air you alawyer, mister?" Assuming the manner of one of the regulars, Knottunhesitatingly answered that he was. "Well," said the visitor, "Ithought I would drap in and git you to fetch a few suits for me."Picking up his pen with the air of a man with whom suing peoplewas an everyday, matter-of-course sort of affair, Knott said: "Whodid you wish to sue?" To which—with a prolonged yawn—theprospective client drawled out: "I ain't particular, Mister, Ijest thought I'd get you to pick out a few skerry fellows thatwould complemise easy!"

The remaining incident is an experience of my own, when, at theage of twenty-two, I had hung out my sign in the then county-seat ofOld Woodford.

My first client had retained me to obtain a divorce because ofabandonment during the two years last past by the sometime partnerof his joys and sorrows. The bill for divorce was duly filed; buton "the coming in of the answer," a continuance of the suit, forcause shown, was granted to the defendant.

At an early hour on the morning thereafter, my client called, and Isoon discovered he was in a frame of mind by no means joyous. Thedisappointment he expressed at the continuance of his suit wasevidently sincere. My explanation of the impossibility of preventingit, and the confident hope I held out that he would certainlyget his divorce at the next term, evidently gave him little relief.He at length intimated a desire to have a confidential talk withme. I took him into my "private office" (that has a professionalsound, but as a matter of fact my office had but one room, and thatwas "open as day" to everybody) and assured him that whatever hesaid to me would be in the strictest confidence. Feeling that Iwas on safe ground, I now spoke in a lofty tone of the sacredrelation existing between counsel and client, and that anycommunication he desired to make would be as safe as within hisown bosom, "or words to that effect." Relieved, apparently, bythe atmosphere of profound secrecy that now enveloped us, he"unfolded himself" to the effect that some years before he had beendeeply in love with an excellent young lady in his neighborhood,but for some trifling cause he could now hardly explain, he had ina pique suddenly turned his attentions to another to whom he wassoon united in the holy bonds that he was now so anxious to havesundered by the strong arm of the law.

A deeply drawn sigh was here the prelude to the startling revelation,that since his present sea of troubles had encompassed him aboutthe old flame had been rekindled in his heart. I now candidlyinformed him that I was wholly inexperienced in such matters, but ashis counsel I would take the liberty to advise him of the monstrousimpropriety of any visible manifestation or expression of the newlyrevived attachment. This was followed by the comforting assuranceupon my part, however, that when divorced, he would be lawfullyentitled to re-enter the matrimonial lists in such direction, and atwhatever gait seemed to him best. The sigh to which the above wasthe prelude, hardly prepared me for the startling revelationthat another fellow was now actually keeping company with the younglady. My client's feelings here overcame him for a moment, and hecomplained bitterly of his hard fate in being "tied up," while thecoast was clear to his competitor. After a moment of deep study,he expressed the opinion in substance, that if his rival could onlybe held in check until the divorce was granted, he was confidentall would be well.

I here told him that this was all beyond my depth, and along a linewhere it would be impossible for me to render him any service.Hitching his chair up a little closer, and looking at me earnestlyhe said: "You are a good-looking young fellow, and rather aglib talker, and I will give you this hundred dollars if you will cutthat fellow out until I get my divorce!" Declining with some showof indignation, as well as surprise—for I was young then in thepractice—I assured him that his proposal was out of the domain ofprofessional service, and could not be thought of for a moment. Ina tone indicating deep astonishment, he said: "Why, I thought alawyer would do anything for money!"

"Yes," I replied, "most anything, but this is the exception; andbesides, if the young lady is as beautiful as you say she is,you would be in greater danger from me at the end of your probationthan from the other fellow." "Oh, Lord, I hadn't thought of that,"he exclaimed, as he pocketed his hundred dollars, picked up hishat, and left my office.

Near the close of the following term of court, as the decree wasbeing signed granting the divorce aforementioned, I approachedmy client as he sat solitary in the rear of the court-room, andearnestly congratulated him upon the fact that he was now free andat liberty to fight his own battles. "Yes," he replied, with agroan that touched the heart of the tipstaff near by, "but it'stoo late now; she married that other fellow last Thursday."

TAKEN BY SURPRISE

Upon a time, far back, Ballou, of happy memory, was Judge of theWoodford Circuit Court. A young lawyer, after diligent preparationand exhaustive argument, confidently submitted his first case tothe tender mercies of the Court. To his utter dismay, His Honorpromptly rendered a decision adverse to the contention of theyouthful barrister. Deeply humiliated by his defeat, the latterexclaimed: "I am astonished at such a decision!" The admonitionof a brother, to patience, failing to accomplish its charitablepurpose, the irate attorney asservated more excitedly than before,his astonishment at such a decision. Whereupon the judgeordered the clerk to enter up a fine of five dollars against theoffending attorney for contempt of court. Silence now reignedsupreme, and the victim of judicial wrath sank back into his seat,utterly dismayed. The strain of the situation was at lengthrelieved in part by an old lawyer from the opposite side of thetrial table, slowly arising and solemnly remarking: "Somethingmight be said, Your Honor, in extenuation of the conduct of myyoung friend. It is his first case, one in which he felt thedeepest interest, and upon the successful issue of which, he hadfounded his fondest hopes. I trust Your Honor, upon due reflection,will remit this fine. It is true, he has with much vehemenceexpressed his astonishment at the decision of the Court. Buthis youth and inexperience must surely be taken into account. Ah,Your Honor, when our young brother has practised before this courtas long as some of us have, he will not be surprised at any decisionYour Honor may make!"

THE POINT OF THE JOKE

Sydney Smith is credited with saying that it required a surgicaloperation to get a joke into a Scotchman's head. And not a badreply is that of the Scotchman: "Yes, an English joke."

It is unnecessary, however, to cross the Atlantic in order to finda few well authenticated cases where the surgical operation would havebeen required. The Hon. Samuel H. Treat, United States Judge ofSouthern Illinois, was one of the ablest and most upright of judges,and possibly—on or off the bench—the most solemn-appearing ofall of the sons of men.

This little incident was related by Judge Weldon. Soon afterthe close of the War, he one day told Judge Treat a story he hadheard upon a recent visit to Washington. McDougall, formerly ofIllinois, but at that time a Senator from California, had becomevery dissipated near the close of his term. At a late hour onenight a policeman on the Avenue found him in an utterly helplesscondition—literally in the gutter. As the officer was makingan ineffectual attempt to get the unfortunate statesman upon hisfeet, he inquired: "Who are you?" The reply was: "This morning Iwas Senator McDougall, but now I am Sewered!"

A few moments later Mr. Hay came into the office and Judge Treatsaid: "Hay, Weldon has just told me a good story about our oldfriend McDougall. Mac was in the gutter, and a policeman askedhim who he was, and Mac told him, 'This morning I was SenatorMcDougall, but now I am the Hon. William H. Seward!'"

AN INCIDENT

Upon the occasion of the celebration of the fiftieth anniversaryof the organization of the City of Bloomington, the oration wasdelivered by the Hon. James S. Ewing, late Minister to Belgium.In the course of his address, he related the following incident:

"In the early history of this county, two boys one day went intothe old courthouse to hear a lawsuit tried. There were assembled eightyoung lawyers, not all of them engaged in the trial, but givingstrict attention to the proceedings. It was not a suit of greatimportance.

"The Court was presided over by Samuel H. Treat, who afterwardsbecame a United States District Judge and one of the most distinguishedlawyers and jurists in the State.

"One of the lawyers was David Davis, first a noted lawyer, then
a circuit judge, then a judge of the Supreme Court of the United
States, then a United States Senator and acting President of the
Senate; a citizen of State and national fame whom the people of
Bloomington loved and delighted to honor.

"Another was John T. Stuart, a brilliant lawyer, several times amember of Congress, and one of the most lovable of men.

"Another one was David B. Campbell, then the prosecuting attorney andafterwards a prominent lawyer and citizen of Springfield.

"Another was Edward D. Baker, who was afterwards a United StateSenator from Oregon; a famous orator who immortalized himself byhis marvellous oration over Senator Broderick.

"Another was James A. McDougall, a brilliant Irishman, afterwards a
United States Senator from the State of California.

"And Abraham Lincoln, who has passed beyond the domain of humanpraise into the pantheon of universal history.

"I might add that one of those boys afterwards became the Vice-Presidentof the United States; and the other is your speaker.

"Speaking to any audience in America, I might say in the world,I doubt if such an incident could be truthfully related of anyother gathering."

A JUDICIAL DECISION ON BAPTISM

It is rarely the case that a Court is called upon to decide questionsof a purely theological character. Of necessity, however—propertyinterests being involved,—controversies, measurably of a religiouscharacter, sometimes arise for judicial determination.

The case to be mentioned is probably the only one where "baptism"—the true mode and manner thereof—has ever come squarely before anAmerican judge. A man under sentence of death for murder wasawaiting execution in the jail of one of the counties innorthern Kentucky. Under the ministrations of the pastor of theBaptist Church, the prisoner at length made "the good confession" anddesired to be baptized. To this end, the faithful pastor applied tothe circuit judge before whom the prisoner had been tried, forpermission to have the rite observed in the Kentucky River nearby. The judge—more deeply versed in "Blackstone" and "Ben Monroe"than in theological lore—declined to have the prisoner removedfrom the jail, but gave permission to have him baptized in thecell. The physical impossibility of the observance of the solemn ritein the prisoner's cell was at once explained. "Certainly," saidthe judge in reply, "I know there is no room in there to baptizehim that way; but take a bowl of water and sprinkle him right wherehe is confined." "But," earnestly interposed the man of the sacredoffice, "our church does not recognize sprinkling as valid baptism.We hold immersion to be the only Scriptural method." "Is itpossible?" exclaimed the judge, greatly surprised. "Well, thisCourt decides that sprinkling is valid baptism; and I tell youonce for all, that that infernal scoundrel will be sprinkled, or hewill be hung without being baptized at all!"

Inasmuch as this decision has never been overruled by a highercourt, it stands as the only judicial determination of thelong-controverted question.

A DOUBTFUL COMPLIMENT

Mr. Clark was the leader of the Metamora Bar when I located there—and so continued. My first case, and the compliment of somewhatdoubtful significance bestowed upon its termination, came about inthis wise. I was retained for the plaintiff before Squire Fairchildin a suit involving the ownership of a calf of the alleged valueof seven dollars. It being my first case, and having the aforementionedleader as my professional antagonist—and what was of far greaterconsequence, a contingent fee of two dollars and a half trembling inthe balance—it may well be supposed that no effort was spared uponmy part. I won the case, of course—what lawyer ever told about acase that he had not won?

The same evening a little group in the village store were discussingthe merits of the case, and comparing the forensic effort of thenew lawyer with that of the old-time leader already mentioned. Atlength one Tobias Wilson, as he slid down from his accustomed perchupon the counter, significantly observed, "Men, you may say whatyou please, but for my part, I had ruther hear Stevenson speaktwo minutes than to hear old Clark all day!"

STRONG PERSONAL ATTACHMENT

Mr. Clark—whose early advantages had been none of the best—wasonce counsel for the proponent in a closely contested will case.The testator, passing by the next of kin, had left his entire estateto a personal friend, a man not of his own blood.

In attempting to impress upon the jury the reasonableness ofthis disposition, Clark said: "This, gentlemen of the jury, isanother striking illustration of the power of human friendship.All history—sacred and profane—is full of instances of strongpersonal attachments. Who can ever forget the undying affectionof David and Jonathan, of Damon and Pythias, of Scylla andCharybdis?"

IRISH WIT

Judge Baldwin has left of record the witty reply of Jo Heyfron, anIrish lawyer, to a Mississippi judge. The judge, having rendered avery ridiculous decision in a cause in which Heyfron was engaged, thelatter slowly arose as if to address the Court. The judge,exceedingly pompous and a poor lawyer withal, in imperative tonesaid: "Take your seat, Mr. Heyfron; you have practised at thisbar long enough to know that when this Court renders a decision,its wisdom can only be called in question in a higher Court."

"If Your Honor plase," replied Jo in deprecatory tone, "far beit from me to impugn in the slightest degray the wisdom of YourHonor's decision. I only designed to rade a few lines from thebook I hold in my hand, in order that Your Honor might parsave howprofoundly aignorant Sir William Blackstone was upon this subject!"

It is difficult, at this day, to realize that such scenes couldever have been enacted in an English Court, as were not infrequentduring the era embracing the celebrated "State Trials." While oneof these was in progress, and Curran in the midst of his argument,the judge contemptuously turned his back upon the advocate, andbegan fondling a favorite dog at his side. The argument was at oncesuspended. "Proceed, sir," were the words which at length brokethe stillness that had fallen upon the vast assemblage. "Ah!"exclaimed Curran, "I was only waiting for Your Lordship to concludeyour consultation with your learned associate!"

ENGLISH JOKES ABOUT LAWYERS

Possibly the most solemn book in the world, not excepting Burton's
"Anatomy of Melancholy," or even "Fearne on Contingent Remainders,"
is an English publication of a half-century or so ago, entitled
"Jokes about Great Lawyers."

Of several hundred alleged jokes, two or three will beartransplanting.

"My Lord," began a somewhat pompous barrister, "it is writtenthe book of nature ——" "Be kind enough," interposed LordEllenborough, "to give me the page from which you quote."

To the opening remark of an equally pompous barrister:

"My Lord, the unfortunate client for whom I appear ——" "Proceedsir, proceed," hastily observed the judge, "so far the court iswith you!"

Ellenborough, when at the bar, after protracting his argument tothe hour of adjournment, said that he would conclude when it shouldsuit His Lordship's pleasure to hear him.

The immediate reply was: "The Court will hear you, sir, to-morrow;but as to the pleasure, that had long been out of the question."

GREATNESS UNAPPRECIATED

Gibbon has somewhere said, that one of the liveliest pleasureswhich the pride of man can enjoy is to reappear in a more splendidcondition among those who have known him in his obscurity.

A case in point is a lawyer of prominence in one of the WesternStates, who soon after his appointment to a seat in the Cabinetrevisited his early home. Meeting an acquaintance upon his arrivalat the railway station, the visitor, with emotions akin to thosedescribed by Gibbon, ventured to inquire what his old neighborssaid when they heard of him being appointed to a place in theCabinet.

The unexpected reply was: "Oh, they didn't say nothin'; theyjust laughed!"

ALL IN HIS WIFE'S NAME

The late Colonel Lynch was for many years the recognized wit ofthe Logan County Bar. His repeated efforts, upon a time, to collecta judgment against a somewhat slippery debtor, were unavailing;the claim of the wife of the debtor, to the property attached,in each instance proving successful. Immeasurably disgusted atthe "unsatisfied" return of the third writ, the Colonel indignantlyexclaimed: "Yes, and I suppose if he should get religion, he wouldhold that, too, in his wife's name!"

A RETORT BY CURRAN

The stinging retort of the Irish advocate Curran is recalled.At the close of his celebrated encounter with one of the mostoverbearing of English judges, the latter insultingly remarkedto the somewhat diminutive advocate: "I could put you in my pocket,sir." To which, with the quickness of a lightning flash, Curranretorted: "If you did, Your Lordship would have more law inyour pocket than you ever had in your head!"

Fiercely indignant, the judge replied: "Another word, and Iwill commit you, sir." To which Curran fearlessly retorted: "Do,and it will be the best thing Your Lordship has committed thisterm!"

REMITTING A FINE

About every courthouse in the "Blue Grass" still linger traditionsof the late Thomas F. Marshall. For him Nature did well her part.He was a genius if one ever walked this earth. Tall, erect,handsome, of commanding presence, and with intellectual endowment suchas is rarely vouchsafed to man, no place seemed beyond his reach.Having in addition the prestige of family, that counted for much, andbeing the possessor of inherited wealth, it indeed seemed thatto one man "fortune had come with both of her hands full." Thesuccessor of Clay and Crittenden as Representative for the AshlandDistrict, a peerless orator upon the hustings, at the bar, andin the Great Hall, his life went out in sorrow and disappointment.

"Of all sad words of tongue or pen
The saddest are these, 'It might have been!'"

His eulogy upon the gifted and lamented Menifee, the tribute ofgenius to genius, belongs to the realm of the loftiest eloquence, andseldom have words of deeper pathos been written than his own obituary—"Poor Tom's a-cold"—by George D. Prentice.

As to why that which seemed so full of promise "turned to ashesupon the lips," the following will explain. Meeting his kinsman, theRev. Dr. Breckenridge, he said: "Bob, when you and I graduated,you took to the pulpit and I to the bottle, and I have stuck tomy text a good deal closer than you have to yours!"

Not inaptly has hell been described as "disqualification in theface of opportunity."

Bearing in mind Marshall's invariable habit of not paying hisdebts, the point of the closing remark of the judge in the incidentto be related will appear. Marshall was engaged in the defence ofa man charged with murder in a county some distance from his ownhome. Failing repeatedly in his attempt to introduce certaintestimony excluded by the Court, he at length exclaimed:

"It was upon just such rulings as that that Jesus Christ wasconvicted."

"Mr. Clerk, enter up a fine of ten dollars against Mr. Marshallfor contempt of court," was the prompt response of the judge.

"Well," said Marshall, "this is the first time in a Christiancountry I have ever heard of a man being fined for abusing PontiusPilate!"

"Mr. Clerk," said the judge, with scarcely suppressed indignation,"enter up a fine of twenty-five dollars against Mr. Marshall forcontempt of court, and the further order that he be imprisonedin the common jail of the county until the fine and costs are paid."

The death-like stillness that fell upon the assemblage was at lengthbroken by Mr. Marshall arising and gravely addressing the Court.

"If Your Honor please, I am engaged in the trial of an importantcase, one where human life may depend upon my efforts. I have justbeen fined twenty-five dollars and ordered to be imprisoned until thefine is paid. Upon a careful examination of my pockets, I findthat I have not that amount nor any other amount about my person.I am more than one hundred miles from home and among strangers.In looking over this audience, I find but one familiar face, that ofYour Honor. I am therefore constrained to request Your Honor,as an old and cherished friend, to lend me the amount necessaryto discharge this fine."

Instantly the judge exclaimed: "Remit that fine, Mr. Clerk;the State is more able to lose it than I am."

A CASE "ON ALL-FOURS"

Near two-thirds of a century ago, one of the best-known lawyers inIllinois was Justin Butterfield. He was one of the most eloquent ofthe gifted Whig leaders of the State when the list included suchnames as Lincoln, Stuart, Hardin, Browning, Baker, and Linder. Hewas the earnest champion of General Zachary Taylor for the Presidencyin 1848, and his party devotion was rewarded by appointment to thecommissionership of the General Land Office. The only appointmentfor which Mr. Lincoln was ever an applicant was that given toButterfield soon after the inauguration of President Taylor.

Of few lawyers have brighter things ever been told than ofJustin Butterfield. During the fierce anti-Mormon excitement—which resulted in the destruction of the Nauvoo Temple and theexpulsion of the Mormons from the State—the "Prophet," JosephSmith, was placed upon trial for an alleged felony. The Hon.Nathaniel Pope was the presiding judge, and Butterfield counselfor Smith. A large audience, including many elegantly dressedladies, was in attendance.

When he arose to address the Court, Butterfield with great dignitybegan:

"I am profoundly impressed with the solemnity of the situation andthe awful responsibility resting upon me. I stand in the presenceof his Holiness the Pope, surrounded by angels, to speak in defenceof the Lord's anointed Prophet!"

While in active practice, Butterfield was upon one occasion opposingcounsel to the Hon. David A. Smith in the Supreme Court of theState. The latter had concluded his argument and with head restingupon the table in front, had fallen asleep while Butterfield wasspeaking. A gleam of sunlight which had found its way through thewindow opposite, had fallen upon the very bald head of Smith,causing it to shine with unwonted brilliancy. Suddenly pausingand with arm extended toward his sleeping antagonist, Butterfieldsolemnly observed:

"The light shineth upon the darkness and the darkness comprehendethit not!"

As the Old State Bank was about to expire by reason of limitation,the General Assembly passed a bill extending its corporate lifefifteen years. In litigation in which Butterfield was counsel,the legal effect of the Act mentioned being involved, the opposingcounsel insisted that the legal effect of said Act was the creationof a new bank. Butterfield in reply insisted that "a new bankhad not been created, but simply the life of the old one prolonged.A case in point, your Honor, precisely 'on all-fours' with this,is the well-authenticated one of the good Hezekiah when the Lordlengthened out his life fifteen years for meritorious conduct.Now, sir, did he thereby make a new Hezekiah, or did he leavehim just the same old Hezekiah?"

"GOING OUT WITH THE TIDE"

Soldier, lawyer, and wit was Colonel Phil Lee of Kentucky. Whenit is borne in mind that he was of exceedingly small stature thefollowing incident—one he often related—will be appreciated.

Immediately upon attaining his majority he was a candidate for theLegislature. On election day he was quietly seated on a barrel inthe room where the election for his precinct was being conducted, whenan old Deacon from the Tan Bark settlement came in to vote. Hischoice for the State officers and for Sheriff was called out aftersome little parleying as to who were the best men, and the voterwas about to retire, when one of the judges said,

"Deacon, ain't you going to vote for a candidate for the
Legislature?"

"Yas, of course, I like to forgot all about that; who is runningfor the Legislature?"

At which Phil, hopping down from the barrel, said, "Deacon, I ama candidate."

"Who, you?" inquired the Deacon—with half contemptuous gazeat the diminutive-looking aspirant; then turning to the judge hesaid, "Just put me down for the other fellow!"

Admitted to the bar at Shepherdsville in his native county ofBullitt, when barely of age, his first appearance was as attorney forthe plaintiff in a breach-of-promise case of much local celebrity.His speech held the jury and by-standers literally spellbound, andit was confidently asserted that the classic banks of Salt Riverwill probably never witness such flights of eloquence again. Atits close Phil was warmly congratulated by an old Squire fromthe "Rolling Fork."

"Phil, that was a mighty fine speech, a mighty fine speech, Phil, nowmind, I tell you. That speech reminded me of Henry Clay."

At the first mention of that name, the Squire was promptly invitedout to take a drink. The first round of hospitality happilyconcluded, Phil was in readiness for any additional observationsfrom the Squire.

"Yes, Phil, when you kinder rared back and throwed your right handstraight up, thinks I, Henry Clay, Henry Clay!"

Whereupon the Squire was without unnecessary delay invited to takeanother drink. This accomplished, the Squire still held the floor.

"Yes, Phil, yes, Phil, todes the last when you made that big swoopwith both arms and 'peared like you was gwyen right up to therafters, thinks I, Shore 'nough, Henry Clay come back from hisgrave!"

As flesh and blood could not stand everything, the old Squirewas promptly invited to take another drink. Number three beingproperty placed to his credit, the Squire continued:

"Yes, Phil, you peared to me to be Henry Clay right over againwith jist one leetle difference."

At this Mr. Lee, curious to know what could be the one possible littledifference, when there were so many points of resemblance between twosuch orators as himself and Henry Clay, ventured to inquire. "Ithink," said the Squire, "this, Phil,—you peared to kinder lack hisideas!"

And now comes the tragic ending of a brilliant career. Lee, whileCommonwealth's attorney, was in the last stages of that dreaddisease, consumption. A murder case was on trial in which he felta deep interest. The case was one of unusual atrocity, and theaccused—a man of some local prominence—had been exceedinglydefiant towards the wan and emaciated prosecuting attorney fromits beginning. With much difficulty Colonel Lee succeeded ingetting to the court-room in order to make the closing speech tothe jury. Utterly exhausted,—after depicting the horrible crime inall its enormity and demanding the extreme penalty of the law uponits perpetrator,—at its close, in tones that touched the heartsof all who heard him, he exclaimed:

"Gentlemen of the jury, I have prosecuted the pleas of thisCommonwealth until the blood has dried up in my veins, and theflesh has perished from my bones!"

These were his last words—and his life went out that same nightjust as the clock struck twelve. At the self-same hour the steps ofthe jury were heard slowly ascending to the court-room which hadwitnessed his last effort—their verdict, "Guilty, the penalty,death!"

LITHE "HOME-COMING" AT BLOOMINGTON

McLEAN COUNTY'S READINESS TO WELCOME HER CHILDREN—HONOR TO THE
EARLY SETTLERS—BEAUTY OF THE COUNTY—ITS PROGRESS—ITS ORGANIZATION
—PRAISE OF JOHN McLEAN—HIS CAREER IN CONGRESS, IN THE ILLINOIS
LEGISLATURE, AND IN THE SENATE—McLEAN COUNTY'S HEROISM—REMINISCENCES
OF THE OLD COURT-HOUSE—FRENCH EXPLORERS IN THE ILLINOIS COUNTRY
—MARQUETTE AND JOLIET EXPLORE THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI—LA SALLE
EXPLORES THE ST. LAWRENCE, THE OHIO, AND THE MISSISSIPPI TO ITS
MOUTH—EXTENT OF FRANCE'S POSSESSIONS IN AMERICA—THE STRUGGLE
BETWEEN FRANCE AND GREAT BRITAIN—GEORGE R. CLARK CAPTURES KASKASKIA
FROM THE BRITISH—VIRGINIA CEDES TERRITORY, INCLUDING ILLINOIS, TO
THE UNITED STATES—THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE—ILLINOIS ORGANIZED—
SUMMARY OF SUCCEEDING EVENTS IN THE HISTORY OF ILLINOIS.

The McLean County (Illinois) "Home-Coming" of June 15, 1907, wasan event of deep significance to all Central Illinois. On thatoccasion I delivered the welcoming address, as follows:

"These rare days in July mark an memorable epoch in the history ofthis good county. The authoritative proclamation has gone forththat her house has been put in order, that the latch-string is out—all things in readiness—and that McLean County would welcomethe return of all her children who have in days past gone out fromher borders.

"In the same joyous and generous spirit in which the welcome wasextended, it has been heeded, and from near and far, from the landof flowers and of frosts, from the valley of the Osage, the Colorado,and the Platte, from the golden shores of California, and 'whererolls the Oregon'—sons and daughters of this grand old county havegladly turned their footsteps homeward.

"'When they heart has grown weary and thy foot has grown sore,
Remember the pathway that leads to our door.'

"As in the ancient days all roads led to Rome, so in this yearof grace, and in this glorious month of June, all roads lead back tothe old home; to the hearthstones around which cling the tendermemories of childhood, and of loved ones gone—to the little moundswhere sleep the ashes of ancestral dead.

"The 'Home-coming' to which you have been invited will leave itslasting impress upon all your hearts. The kindly words thathave been spoken, the cordial grasp of the hand, the unbidden tear,the hospitality extended, have all given assurance that you arewelcome. Here, for the time, let dull care and the perplexitiesthat environ this mortal life be laid aside, let whatever would inthe slightest mar the delight of this joyous occasion be whollyforgotten; so that in the distant future, to those who return and tothose who stay, the recollection of these days will be one ofunalloyed pleasure; and so that, when in the years to come we tellover to our children of the return to the old home, this reunionwill live in our memories as one that, like the old sun-dial,'marked only the hours which shine.'

"No place so fitting for this home-coming could have been selectedas this beautiful park, where the springing grass, transparentlake, and magnificent grove—'God's first temple'—seem all to joinin welcoming your return. How, from a mere hamlet, a splendid cityhas sprung into being during the years of your absence! No longera frontier village, off the great highway of travel, with the mailreaching it semi-weekly by stage-coach or upon horseback,—as ourfathers and possibly some who now hear me may have known it,—itis now 'no mean city.' Its past is an inspiration; its futurebright with promise. It is in very truth a delightful dwelling-placefor mortals, and possibly not an unfit abiding-place for saints.Whoever has walked these streets, known kinship with this people, calledthis his home—wherever upon this old earth he may since havewandered—has in his better moments felt an unconquerable yearningthat no distance or lapse of time could dispel, to retrace hisfootsteps and stand once more within the sacred precincts of hisearly home. Truly has it been said: 'No man can ever get whollyaway from his ancestors.' Once a Bloomingtonian, and no art ofthe enchanter can dissolve the spell. 'Once in grace, always ingrace,' whatever else may betide! Eulogy is exhausted when Isay that this city is worthy to be the seat of justice of the grandold county of which it is a part.

"Upon occasion such as this, the spirit of the past comes overus with its mystic power. The years roll back, and splendid farms,stately homes, magnificent churches, and the marvellous appliancesof modern life are for the moment lost to view. The bloomingprairie, the log cabin nestling near the border-line of grove orforest, the old water-mill, the cross-roads store, the flintlockrifle, the mould-board plough, the dinner-horn,—with notes sweeterthan lute or harp ever knew,—are once more in visible presence.At such an hour little stretch of the imagination is needed torecall from the shadows forms long since vanished. And whattime more fitting can ever come in which to speak of those who havegone before,—of the early settlers of this good county?

"It was from the beginning the fit abode for men and women of God'shighest type—and such, indeed, were the pioneers. Their earlystruggles, their sacrifices, all they suffered and endured, cannever be fully disclosed. But to them this was truly 'the promisedland'—a land they might not only view, but possess. From NewEngland, Ohio, the 'Keystone,' and the 'Empire' State, from thebeautiful valley of the Shenandoah and the Commonwealths lyingwestward and to the south, came the men and women whose early homeswere near the banks of the little streams and nestled in the shadesof the majestic groves. Here they suffered the hardships andendured the privations that only the frontiersman might know. Herebeneath humble roofs, their children were born and reared, and herefrom hearts that knew no guile ascended the incense of thanksgivingand praise. The early settlers, the pioneers, the men who laidthe foundations of what our eyes now behold, builded wisely andwell. Their descendants to-day are in large measure the beneficiariesof all that they so wisely planned, so patiently endured. Thesenames and something of what they achieved will go down in our annalsto the after times. Peace to their ashes; to their memory allhonor! They were the advance guard—The builders—and faithfully andwell they served their race and time. Upon nobler men and womenthe sun in all his course hath nowhere looked down.

"And where upon God's footstool can domain more magnificent thanthis good county be found; one better adapted to the habitation ofcivilized man? The untrodden prairies of three-quarters of acentury ago, as if touched by the wand of magic, have become splendidfarms. And groves more beautiful the eye of man hath not seen.

"Containing a population of less than two thousand at the timeof its organization, there are more than seventy thousand soulswithin the bounds of this good county to-day. The log cabin hasgiven way to the comfortable home. The value of farm lands andtheir products have increased beyond human forecast or dream.As shown by the last Governmental report, McLean County containsfour thousand eight hundred and seventy-three farms, aggregatingseven hundred thirty-seven thousand five hundred and seventy-eightacres. The corn product for the year 1899 exceeded fifteen millionsof bushels, being near one-twentieth of that of the entire State.In the value of its agricultural products it is third upon the listof counties in the United States.

"The life of the farmer is no longer one of drudgery and isolation.Modern conveniences and appliances have in large measure supplantedthe hard labor of human hands, lessened the hours of daily toil,and brought the occupant of the farm into closer touch with theouter world. More than all this, our schoolhouses, universities,churches, and institutions for the relief of the unfortunate anddependent, all bear witness to the glad fact that in our materialdevelopment the claims of education, of religion, of charity, havenot been forgotten. It is our glory, that in all that tends to humanprogress, in all that ministers to human distress, in whatever appealsto and develops what is best in man, or brings contentment and happinessto the home—in a word, in the grand march of civilization—McLeanCounty moves in the van.

"Possibly no occasion more fitting can arise in which briefly tospeak of the organization of McLean County, and something ofimportant events of its history. At the session of the Legislatureat Vandalia in the winter of 1830-31, a petition—borne to theState capital by Thomas Orendorff and James Latta—was duly presented,praying for the organization of a new county to be taken fromTazewell and Vermilion. The territory embraced in the proposedcounty included the present limits of McLean and large portions ofneighboring counties organized at a later day. In accordance withthe petition, a bill was passed, and its approval by the Governor onthe twenty-fifth day of December, 1830, marks the beginning of thehistory of this good county.

"The name of 'McLean' was adopted upon the motion of the Hon.William Lee D. Ewing, some of whose kindred have for many yearsbeen residents of this city. Mr. Ewing had been the close friend ofthe man whose name he thus honored, and was himself in later yearsa distinguished Senator in Congress.

"By the terms of the bill mentioned, the seat of justice of saidcounty was to be 'called and known by the name of Bloomington.'It was further provided that until otherwise ordered the courts ofsaid county should be held at the house of James Allen. The firstterm of the Circuit Court was held in April, 1831, at the placeindicated, the historic 'Stipp House,' but recently standing, apathetic reminder of by-gone days. The presiding judge of thatcourt was the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, of Springfield—an able andeminent jurist of spotless record. By legislative enactment, fivetimes since its organization, valuable portions of McLean—aggregatingnearly four-sevenths of its original territory—have been carvedin the formation of the counties of Logan, Livingston, Piatt,De Witt, and Woodford. Notwithstanding all this, McLean County yetremains—and by constitutional inhibition and the wisdom of ourpeople will for all time remain—the largest county in the State.

"A word now of the man whose name was upon every invitation to thishome-coming, in honor of whom this county was named, John McLean, oneof the ablest and most distinguished of the first generation ofpublic men in Illinois. Born in North Carolina in 1791, his earlyyears were spent in Kentucky. In the last-named State he studied lawand was admitted to the Bar. He removed to Illinois in 1815 andlocated in Shawneetown upon the Ohio River for the practice of hisprofession. The county of Gallatin, his future home, was then oneof the most populous in the Illinois Territory. In fact, at thetime mentioned, and for some years after the organization of theState, there were few important settlements one hundred miles northof the Ohio River.

"In the largest degree Mr. McLean was gifted with the qualitiesessential to popular leadership in the new State. He was present atall public assemblages whether convened for business or pastime,and a leading spirit in all the amusements and sports of the hour.But 'men are as the time is.' At all events, if the testimonyof his contemporaries is to be taken, his popularity knew no bounds.The late General McClernand, his fellow-townsman, said of Mr.McLean:

"'His personality interested and impressed me. The image of itstill lingers in my memory. Physically, he was well developed,tall, strong, and stately. Socially, he was affable and genial,and his conversation sparkled with wit and humor.'

"The following words of another contemporary, Governor Reynolds,are of interest:

"'Mr. McLean was a man of gigantic mind, of noble and manly form, andof lofty, dignified bearing. His personality was large, and formedon that natural excellence which at all times attracted the attentionand admiration of all beholders. The vigor and compass of hisintellect was exceedingly great, and his eloquence flowed intorrents, deep, strong, and almost irresistible.'

"At the election immediately succeeding the adoption of theConstitution under which Illinois was admitted into the Union, Mr.McLean was chosen the Representative in Congress. Soon thereafter,he presented to the House of Representatives the State Constitutionthen recently adopted at Kaskaskia; and upon its formal acceptanceby that body, Mr. McLean was duly admitted to his seat as the firstRepresentative from Illinois in the Congress of the United States.He was defeated for re-election by the Hon. Daniel P. Cook, one ofthe most gifted men Illinois has known at any period of her history.

"Rarely have men of greater eloquence than Cook and McLean beenantagonists in debate either upon the hustings or in the hallsof legislation. With the people of the entire State for an audience,the exciting issues of that eventful period were argued with aneloquence seldom heard in forensic discussion. In very truth, eachwas the worthy antagonist of the other. It is not too much to saythat, with the single exception of the masterful intellectual combatmore than a third of a century later between Lincoln andDouglas, Illinois has been the theatre of no greater debate.

"Upon his retirement from Congress, Mr. McLean was elected tothe Lower House of the Illinois Legislature and subsequently chosenSpeaker of that body. The valuable service he there rendered isan important part of the early history of the State. He resigned thespeakership in order the more effectually to lead the oppositionto a bill chartering a State bank. His predictions as to the evilsto the state, of which the proposed legislation would be the sureforerunner, were more than verified by subsequent events. Morethan a decade had passed before the people were relieved of thefinancial ills which John McLean ineffectually sought to avert.No other evidence of his statesmanship is needed than his masterlyspeech in opposition to the ill-timed legislation I have indicated.

"Apart from the fact that his name is continually upon our lips,the career of Mr. McLean is well calculated to excite our profoundinterest. During the fifteen years of his residence in Illinois, heheld the high position of Representative in Congress, Speaker ofthe popular branch of the State Legislature, and was twice electedto the Senate of the United States. At his last election he receivedevery vote of the joint session of the General Assembly—an honor ofwhich few even of the most eminent of our statesmen have beenthe recipients.

"His personal integrity was beyond question, and it may truly besaid of him that he ably and faithfully discharged every publicduty. He died at the early age of thirty-nine, the period when,to most public men, a career of usefulness and distinction hasscarcely begun. Upon the occasion of the announcement of his deathto the Senate his colleague, Senator Kane, paid an eloquent tributeto his lofty character, his ability, and his worth, and deploredthe loss his State had sustained in his early death.

"He lies buried in the State that had so signally honored him, nearthe beautiful river upon whose banks he found a home when Illinoiswas yet a wilderness. Such, in brief, was the man McLean, whosehonored name this good county will hand down to the after times.No higher tribute need be paid to his memory than to say, his namewas worthy of this magnificent domain to which it was given.

"In no part of this broad land has there been more prompt responsethan in this to the authoritative call to arms. In the largestmeasure McLean County has met every requirement that patriotismcould demand. Full and to overflowing has been her contributionof means and men.

"In almost the last struggle with the savage foe, as he burned hiswigwam and disappeared before the inexorable advance of civilized men;in the War with Mexico, by which States were added to our nationaldomain; in that of the great Rebellion, where the life of the nationwas at stake, and in our recent conflict with Spain—four timesduring a history that spans but a single life, McLean County hassent her full quota of soldiers to the field. Few survive of thegallant band who stood with Bissell and Hardin at Buena Vista,or followed Shields and Baker through the burning sands from theGulf to the City of Mexico. And at each successive reunion ofcomrades in the great civil strife, there are fewer, and yet fewer,responses to the solemn roll-call.

"'On Fame's eternal camping-ground,
Their silent tents are spread.'

"And what a record is that of this glorious county during theeventful years of '61-'65! With a population of but forty per centof that of to-day, more than four thousand of her brave sons marchedgallantly to the front. They gathered from farm, from shop,from mart and hall—to die, if need be, that their country mightlive. On many fields now historic, where brave men struggledand died, soldiers from this grand county were steadily in line.Along every pathway of danger and of glory they were to be found.In every grade of rank were heroes as knightly as ever foughtbeneath a plume. Even to name the heroes that old McLean equippedfor the great conflict would be but to call over her muster rolls ofofficers and men.

"The chords of memory are touched as the vision of the Old Courthouserises before us. Its walls were the silent witnesses of eventsthat would make resplendent the pages of history. Here assembled lawyers,orators, statesmen, whose names have been given to the ages. Here,at a critical period in our history the great masters of debatediscussed vital questions of state—questions that took hold ofthe life of the republic. Here, at times, debate touched thesprings of political power. Here in the high place of authoritysat one destined later to wear the ermine of the greatest courtknown to men. During his membership of that court in the eventfulyears immediately following the great conflict, questions noveland far-reaching pressed for determination; questions no lessimportant than those which had in the infancy of the republicexhausted the learning of Marshall and its associates. It isour pride that our townsman, David Davis, was among the ablestof the great court, by whose adjudication renewed vigor was given tothe Constitution, and enduring safeguards established for nationallife and individual liberty.

"To the Old Courthouse in the early days came the talented andgenial James A. McDougall, then just upon the threshold of a brilliantcareer, which culminated in his election as a Senator from California;also John T. Stuart, the able lawyer and gentleman of the oldschool. He was a Representative in Congress more than two-thirds ofa century ago, when his district embraced all Central and NorthernIllinois—extending from a line fifty miles south of Springfield toChicago and Galena. In Congress he was the political associateand friend of Webster, of Crittenden, and of Clay. Many years ago,upon the occasion of Mr. Stuart's last visit to Bloomington, hetold me, as we stood by the old 'Stipp' home, that he there, in1831, witnessed the beginning of the judicial history of McLeanCounty, when Judge Lockwood opened its first court. With deepemotion he added that he was probably the last survivor of thosethen assembled, and that his own days were almost numbered. Hiswords were prophetic, as but a few months elapsed before he,too, had passed beyond the veil. There came also Edward D. Baker,Representative from Illinois and Senator from Oregon. To him Naturehad been lavish with her gifts. His eloquence cast a spell about allwho heard him. As was said of the gifted Prentiss: 'the empyreanheight into which he soared was his home, as the upper air theeagle's.' Our language contains few gems of eloquence comparable tothis wondrous eulogy on the lamented Broderick. His own tragicdeath in one of the early battles of the great war cast a gloom overthe nation.

"In his official capacity as prosecuting attorney came also to theOld Courthouse the youthful Stephen A. Douglas. A born leaderof men, with a courage and eloquence rarely equalled, he waswell equipped for the hurly-burly of our early political conflicts.Save only in his last great contest, he was a stranger to defeat.Public Prosecutor, Member of the Legislature, and at the age oftwenty-eight Judge of the Supreme Court of the State; later aRepresentative, and at the age of thirty-three a Senator in Congress.Amid storms of passion such as, please God, we may not see again,he there held high debate with Seward, Chase, and Sumner; andmeasured swords with Tombs, Benjamin, and Jefferson Davis uponvital issues which, transferred later from forum and from Senate, wereto find bloody arbitrament by arms. Beginning near the spot wherewe have to-day assembled, the career of Douglas was indeed marvellous.Defeated for the great office which had been the goal of hisambition; amid the war-clouds gathering over the nation, and theyet darker shadows falling about his couch, he aroused himselfto the last supreme effort, and in words that touched millions ofresponsive chords, adjured all who had followed his politicalfortunes to know only their country in its hour of peril. Withhis pathetic words yet lingering, and 'before manhood's morningtouched its noon,' Douglas passed to the great beyond.

"Out of the shadowy past another form is evoked, familiar onceto some who hear me now. Another name, greater than any yet spoken,is upon our lips. Of Abraham Lincoln the words of the great orator,Bossuet, when he pronounced his matchless elegy upon the Prince ofConde, might truly be spoken:

"'At the moment I open my lips to celebrate the immortal gloryof the Prince of Conde, I find myself equally overwhelmed by thegreatness of the theme and the needlessness of the task. What partof the habitable globe has not heard of the wonders of his life?Everywhere they are rehearsed. His own countrymen, in extollingthem, can give no information even to the stranger.'

"Of Lincoln no words can be uttered or withheld that could addto or detract from his imperishable fame. His name is thecommon heritage of all people and all times.

"When in the loom of time have such words been heard above the dinof fierce conflict as his sublime utterances but a brief time beforehis tragic death?

"'With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmnessin the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on tofinish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to carefor him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, andhis orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just andlasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.'

"The men who knew Abraham Lincoln, who saw him face to face, whomet him upon our streets, and heard his voice in our publicassemblages have, with few exceptions, passed to the grave. Anothergeneration is upon the busy stage. The book has forever closedupon the dread pageant of civil strife. Sectional animosities,thank God, belong now only to the past. The mantle of peace isover our entire land, and prosperity within all our borders.

"'Till the war-drum throbs no longer,
And the battle-flags are furled
In the parliament of man,
The federation of the world.'

"Through the instrumentality in no small measure of the man personallyknown to some who hear me, the man McLean County delighted to honor,no less as a private citizen than as President, this Government,untouched by the finger of time, has descended to us. Let it neverbe forgotten that the responsibility of its preservation andtransmission will rest upon the successive generations of hiscountrymen, as they shall come and go.

"Truly it has been said: 'To-day is the pupil of yesterday,'and also 'History is the great teacher of human nature by means ofobject-lessons drawn from the whole recorded life of human nature.'There is, then, no dead past. Every event is in a measure significant.The annals of the ambitions, the crimes, the miseries, the wrongs,the struggles, the achievements of men in the long past are fraughtwith lessons of deep import to all succeeding generations. Eachage is the heir to that which preceded. We make progress inproportion as we wisely ponder significant events.

"McLean County had its historical beginning as a dependent butdistinct political organization on the joyous Christmas Day of1830. Stretching backward from that date, its history is bound upsolely in that of Illinois, under its various organizations andnames. A brief time upon occasion such as this given to a hurriedreview of the masterful epochs in the history of the great Stateof which our own county is so important a part, cannot be whollymisspent.

"Bearing in mind that 'that which comes after ever conforms to thatwhich has gone before,' significant events of the past must beknown, to the end that we intelligently comprehend the present,and are enabled, even in scant measure, to forecast the future.

"No State of the American union has a history of more intenseinterest than our own. Its early chapters, indeed, savor of theromantic rather than of the real. I do not speak of the long-ago timewhen Illinois forest and prairie were the house and hunting-groundof the red men, and his frail bark the only craft known to itsrivers. That period belongs to the border-land age of traditionrather than of veritable history. It is of Illinois under thedomination of civilized men I would speak.

"For near a century preceding the Treaty of Paris in 1763, 'theIllinois country' was a part of the French domain. Inseparablylinked with that portion of its history are names that will livewith those of the Cabots and Columbus. The great navigator in hislonely search for a new pathway to the Indies was buoyed by acourage, a yearning for discovery, scarce greater than that which inthe heart of the new continent sustained the later voyagers anddiscoverers, Marquette, Joliet, Hennepin, and La Salle.

"America's obligation to France is enduring—for explorers inthe seventeenth century no less than for defenders in that whichimmediately followed. The historic page which tells of thelofty heroism of Lafayette has for us no deeper interest than thatwhich records the daring achievements of the early French pathfindersand voyagers. Two centuries and a half ago Marquette andJoliet, bearing the commission of the French Governor of Quebec,embarked upon their expedition for the discovery of new countries tothe southward. Animated by the earnest desire of extending theblessings of religion no less than that of adding to the domain oftheir imperial master, they set out upon an expedition which hasbecome historic. The bare recital of what befell them wouldfill volumes. Now meeting with the scattered tribes of Indians,bestowing presents and in turn sharing the hospitality offered;now speaking words of admonition and of instruction; now gatheringup the crude materials for history; now reverently setting upthe cross in the wilderness; again threading the pathless forests,or in frail barks sailing unknown waters, they pursued their perilousjourney.

"In time, after looking out upon the waters of Lake Michigan,crossing Lake Winnebago, visiting the ancient villages of theKickapoos, 'with joy indescribable,' as Marquette declared, theyfor the first time beheld the Mississippi. In June, 1673, uponthe east bank of the great river, they landed upon the soil of whatis now the State of Illinois. At the little village they firstvisited they received hospitable treatment. Its inmates are knownin our early history as 'the Illini'—a word signifying men.The euphonic termination added by the Frenchmen gives us thename Illinois. It is related that, upon the first appearance ofMarquette and Joliet at the door of the principal wigwam of thevillage, they were greeted by an aged native with the words: 'Thesun is beautiful, Frenchmen, when you come to visit us; youshall enter in peace into all our cabins; it is well, my brothers,you come.' In the light of the marvellous results of the visit,the words of the aged chieftain seem prophetic. We, too, may say itwas well they came.

"The glory of having discovered the upper Mississippi and the valleywhich bears its name belongs to Marquette and Joliet. It was theirsto add the vast domain under the name 'New France' to the empireof le Grand Monarque. In very truth a princely gift. But nohistory of the great valley and the majestic river would be completewhich failed to tell something of the priest and historian, Hennepin,and of the knightly adventures of the Chevalier La Salle.

"Much, indeed, that is romantic surrounds the entire career ofLa Salle. Severing his connection with a theological school inFrance, his fortunes were early cast in the New World. From Quebec,the ancient French capital of this continent, he projected anexpedition which was to add empire to his own country and to cast aglamour about his own name. It has been said that his dream wasof a western waterway to the Pacific Ocean. In 1669, with an outfitthat had cost him his entire fortune, with a small party he ascendedin canoes the St. Lawrence, and a few weeks later was upon the broadOntario. Out of the mists and shadows that enveloped much ofhis subsequent career, it were impossible at all times to gatherthat which is authentic. It is enough that, with Hennepin as one ofhis fellow-voyagers, he reached the Ohio and in due time navigatedthe Illinois, meantime visiting many of the ancient villages.

"But his great achievement—and that with which abides his imperishablefame—was his perilous descent of the Mississippi from the Fallsof St. Anthony to the Gulf of Mexico. On the sixth day of April, 1682,upon the east bank of the lower Mississippi, with due form andceremony and amid the solemn chanting of the Te Deum and theplaudits of his comrades, La Salle took formal possession of theLouisiana country in the name of his royal master, Louis theFourteenth of France.

"For the period of ninety-two years, beginning with the discoveriesof Marquette and Joliet, the Illinois country was a part of theFrench possessions. Sovereignty over the vast domain of whichit was a part was exercised by the French King through his commandantat Quebec. But as has been truly said, 'The French sought andclaimed more than they had the ability to hold or possess. Their lineof domain extended from the St. Lawrence around the Great Lakes andthrough the valley of the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, adistance of over three thousand miles.' Truly a magnificent domain,but one destined soon to pass forever from the possession of theFrench monarch and his line.

"The hour had struck, and upon the North American continent theancient struggle for supremacy between France and her traditional enemywas to find bloody arbitrament. Great Britain claimed as a partof her colonial possessions in the New World the territory borderingupon the Great Lakes and the rich lands of the Ohio and Mississippivalleys. As to the merits of the French and English contention asto superior right by discovery or conquest, it were idle now toargue. Our concern is with the marvellous results of the long-continuedstruggle which for all time determined the question of race supremacyupon this continent.

"Passing rapidly the minor incidents of the varying fortunes ofthe stupendous struggle which had been transferred for the timefrom the Old World to the New, we reach the hour which was to markan epoch in history. The time, the thirteenth of September, 1759;the place, the Heights of Abraham at Quebec. There and then wasfought out one of the pivotal battles of the ages. It was theclosing act in a great drama. The question to be determined:Whether the English-speaking race or its hereditary foe was tobe master of the continent. It was in reality a struggle for empire—the magnificent domain stretching from the St. Lawrence to theGulf of Mexico. The incidents of the battle need not now be told.Never were English or French soldiery led by more knightly captains.The passing years have not dispelled the romance or dimmed theglory that gathered about the name of Wolfe and Montcalm. Dyingat the self-same moment—one amid the victors, the other amid thevanquished—their names live together in history.

"By the treaty of Paris which followed, France surrendered toher successful rival all claim to the domain east of the MississippiRiver. In accordance with the terms of the treaty, Gage, thecommander of the British forces in America, took formal possessionof the recently conquered territory. Proclamation of this factwas made to the inhabitants of the Illinois country in 1764, anda garrison soon thereafter established at Kaskaskia. Here the ruleof the British was for the time undisputed. British domination inthe Mississippi Valley was, however, to be of short duration. Soonthe events were hastening, the forces gathering, which were in turnto wrest from the crown no small part of the splendid domain wonby Wolfe's brilliant victory at Quebec.

"In this hurried review I reach now an event of transcendent interestand one far-reaching in its consequences. While our RevolutionaryWar was in progress, and its glorious termination yet but dimlyforeshadowed, General George Rogers Clark planned an expeditionwhose successful termination has given his name to the list ofgreat conquerors. Bearing the commission of Patrick Henry, Governorof Virginia, the heroic Clark crossed the Ohio and began hisperilous march. After enduring untold hardships, the undauntedleader and his little band reached Kaskaskia. The British commanderand his garrison were surprised and quickly captured. The Britishflag was lowered, and on the fourth day of July, 1778, the Illinoiscountry was taken possession of in the name of the Commonwealthwhose Governor had authorized the expedition.

"Five years later occurred an event of mighty significance, and offar-reaching consequence—one that in very truth marks the genesisof Illinois history. I refer to the cession by Virginia of thevast area stretching to the Mississippi—of which the spot uponwhich we are now assembled is a part—to the general Government.To the deed of cession, by which Illinois became a part of theUnited States, as commissioners upon the part of Virginia, weresigned the now historic names of Arthur Lee, James Monroe, andThomas Jefferson.

"The next milestone of Illinois upon the pathway to statehoodwas what is so well known in our political history as the Ordinanceof 1787. Not inaptly has it been called 'the second Magna Charta,''a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night,' in the settlementand government of the Northwestern States. Two provisions ofthe great ordinance possessed a value that cannot be measured bywords: One, that the States to be formed out of said territorywere to remain forever parts of the United States of America;the other, that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shouldexist therein, otherwise than for crime whereof the party shouldhave been duly convicted.

"The value of the great Ordinance to millions who have since foundhomes within the limits of the vast area embraced within itsprovision cannot be overstated. Our eyes behold to-day the marvellousresults of the far-seeing statesmanship in which it was conceived.

"Momentous events now followed in rapid succession: the disastrousdefeat of General St. Clair, first Governor of the NorthwestTerritory, near the old Miami village; the appointment of General Wayne,hero of Stony Point, to the command of the Western army; his crushingdefeat of the Indian foe at the Maumee Rapids, and the treaty ofGreenville, which for the time gave protection to the frontiersmenagainst the savage; the attempt of the French minister, Genet,to create discord in the western country, and in fact to establisha Government in the Mississippi Valley, independent of that of theUnited States; and the threatened conflict with Spain regardingthe free navigation of the Mississippi—all possess an interest toIllinoisans which time cannot abate.

"All apprehension, however, was for the time removed by the treatybetween our Government and Spain, by which it was provided thatthe middle of the Mississippi should be our western border and thatthe navigation of the entire river to the Gulf should be free toall the people of the United States. Passing over the laterfaithless attempt of Spain to abrogate this salient provision ofthe treaty, it is enough that the question was forever put at restby the purchase by our Government in 1803, for fifteen millions ofdollars, from the great Napoleon, of the entire Louisiana country,stretching from the Gulf to the domain of Canada—out of which havebeen carved sixteen magnificent States, destined to abide and remainforever sovereign parts of our federal Union.

"And while Spain has sustained crushing and retributive defeat andher flag has disappeared forever from mainland and island of thewestern world, the great river, gathering its tributaries fromnorthern lake to southern sea, flows unvexed through a mighty realmthat knows no symbol of authority save only our own Stars andStripes.

"Illinois was represented for the first time in a legislativechamber in the general assembly of the Northwest Territory,which convened in Cincinnati in 1799. By act of Congress inMay, 1800, a new territorial organization was created, by whichthe territory now embraced in the States of Indiana and Illinoiswas formed, to be known as 'Indiana Territory,' and the capitallocated at Vincennes. In February, 1809, by act of Congress,the 'Territory of Illinois' was duly organized, its seat of governmentestablished at Kaskaskia. Nine years later—December, 1818—with apopulation scarcely one-half that of McLean County to-day, itwas duly admitted a State of the federal Union.

"Beginning with Illinois at the coming of Joliet and Marquettein the seventeenth century, we have rapidly followed its thread ofhistory for a century and a half, until it became a State of theAmerican Union. We have seen it under the rule of the Frenchman, theBriton, the Virginian, under its various territorial organizations,until eighty-nine years ago it reached the dignity of statehood.We have seen its seat of authority at Quebec, at New Orleans, atCincinnati, at Vincennes, and finally at Kaskaskia. We have notedsomething of its marvellous development, of its wonderful increasein population.

"Just one hundred and seven years ago, when by act of CongressIllinois became part of the Indiana Territory, it contained apopulation of less than two thousand white persons, only eighthundred of whom were of the English-speaking race. Less thantwo decades later, with a population of less then forty thousand, andan area greater, with a single exception, than any of the originalStates, we have witnessed its admission to the Union. How marvellousthe retrospect at this hour! And yet, 'the pendulum of historyswings in centuries in the slow but sure progress of the human raceto a higher and nobler civilization.'

"Events of thrilling interest and of scarce less consequencethan those already mentioned followed the admission of the Stateinto the Union. In brief summary: The unsuccessful attempt tointroduce slavery; the fatal duel between Stewart and Bennet andthe trial and execution of the survivor for murder, thereby placingthe ban of judicial condemnation upon the barbarous practice;the visit of Lafayette to Illinois and his brilliant entertainmentby the Governor and Legislature at the old executive mansion;the removal of the State capital from the ancient French villageof Kaskaskia to Vandalia, and near two decades later to Springfield;the memorable contest for Congress between Cook and McLean, eachpossessing in large measure the rare gift of eloquence, and bothdying lamented in early manhood; the organization of twosplendid counties that will keep the honored names of Cook andMcLean in the memories of men to the latest posterity; the BlackHawk War and the final treaty of peace which followed the defeatand capture of the renowned Sac chief; the riots at Alton andthe assassination of the heroic Lovejoy while defending the right offree speech and of a free press; the advent of the prophetJoseph Smith, the rapid growth of the Mormon Church, its power as apolitical factor in the State, the building of the million-dollar templeat Nauvoo, the murder of the Mormon prophet, and the final exodus ofhis adherents to the valley of the Wasatch and the Great Salt Lake;the construction of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, the precursorof grander material achievements soon to follow; the bravery ofthe Illinois troops during the war with Mexico; the wonderful tideof immigration flowing in from the older States and from Europe;the invaluable services of Senator Douglas in securing the celebratedland grant under which the Illinois Central Railroad wasconstructed, and Chicago brought into commercial touch with theRiver Ohio and the States to the southward; the dawn of the era ofstupendous agricultural development, and of marvellous activity onall lines and through all channels of trade; the wonderful growth ofChicago, springing with giant bound, within the span of a singlelife, from a mere hamlet to be the second city upon the continent;the unparalleled railroad construction, giving Illinois agreater mileage than any one of her sister States; the immensedevelopment of its untold mineral resources, and the advance byleaps and bounds along all lines of manufacturing; the impetusgiven to the higher conception and purpose of human life by thecreation of a splendid system of public schools and universities; theestablishment of institutions and asylums for the considerate careand relief of the unfortunate and afflicted of our kind; the buildingof homes 'for him who hath borne the battle and for his orphan';the masterful debates between Lincoln and Douglas, the preludeto events destined to give pause to the world, and to change thetrend of history. And, to crown all, how, when the nation's life wasin peril, Illinois, true to her covenant under the great Ordinancethat had given her being, gave one illustrious son to the chiefmagistracy of his country, another to the captaincy of its armies,and sent her soldier heroes by myriads along every pathway of dangerand of glory.

"As one standing, alas, 'upon the western slope,' let me adjurethe young men of this magnificent county—my home for more thanhalf a century—to study thoroughly the history of our own State, andof the grand republic of which it is a part. Illinois, in all thatconstitutes true grandeur in a people, knows no superior among thegreat sisterhood of States. Her pathway from the beginning hasbeen luminous with noble achievement. It is high privilege and highhonor to be a citizen of this grand republic. It is in very trutha government of the people, in an important sense a governmentstanding separate and apart; its foundations the morality, theintelligence, the patriotism of the people. Never forget thatcitizenship in such a government carries with it tremendousresponsibility, a responsibility that we cannot evade. Studythoroughly how our liberties were achieved, and the benefits ofstable government secured by the great compact which for more thana century, in peace and during the storm and stress of war, has heldStates and people in indissoluble union; and how, during the greatcivil conflict—the most stupendous the world has known—humanliberty, through baptism of blood, obtained a new and grandermeaning, and the Union established by our fathers was made, aswe humbly trust in God, enduring for all time."

INDEX[omitted]