1
10
20
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/19133a9da86dc4700a44550ee4715e9c.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=PqwAmoiw4EHHCmpmdzI6gp1EZDOQKtCjFTLx6qP85wkUC-9t8ERujnKapyxzOOPXA%7ExAGNPpHcd17-d24meg2V36ph1w9U6b63A9LCkRgodgVnTrkjcs99lZJdKJR3cYsvit-V1j9bsmYrafYtYIraJ7LY3dMwp0MF-8h9IWLRHAyJouuUhMH7wRSN6lVRdfsPG0Kjg%7EpT7EZMAF3lPJ7ZY9gtOUOKvJHlpn5%7EWL2yXmW481Y9ocujOs52F2joSK9YzRTweO8nrFablogRxMx6tnRYsiJ7aSrzkMRAkE%7EEeW94vN%7E-H5Bod-XR6ygaS27bb0PVGKkIJjvJRGhTIgnQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4d01fe0c71b3657e307e4c293f70bc4b
PDF Text
Text
MR. REYERDY JOHNSON:
The Alabama Negotiations;
AND THEIR JUST REPUDIATION BY
THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
BY GEORGE BEMIS.
BAKER
&
NEW YORK:
GODWIN, PRINTERS,
PRINTING-HOUSE SQUARE.
1869.
��MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
The extraordinary avowal of Mr. Reverdy Johnson in vindication
of his rejected “ Alabama ” convention, that the United States 1‘ob
tained, by the convention in question, all that we have ever asked ”—an
avowal contained in a dispatch to Mr. Secretary Seward on the 17th
of February last, but which has but recently found its way into circu
lation on this side of the water—is one so calculated to embarrass the
country in its further negotiations with England, and to disparage
American reputation abroad for fair dealing in diplomacy, that I feel
called upon, as an advocate*©^ American rights and American honor,
to expose its groundlessness, and to uphold the perfect fairness and
propriety of the Senate’s repudiating alike Mr. Johnson’s words and
his works.
It is bad enough to have such ^compromising assertion as this of
the late Minister to England, [paught up and echoed by our English
opponents and European ill-wishers, generally; but to have it started
by our own diplomatic representative in the first instance, and that
out of apparent pique, because the country had not approved of his
doings, constitutes an offense against official propriety and national
loyalty such as I believe has never before been witnessed on the part
of an American Minister. I trust that the expose which 1 am about
to attempt of the justice of Mr. Johnson’s extraordinary avow’al, will
be so conclusive, that the most charitable deduction to be made in his
favor, after reading it, will be, that either his mind and memory had
failed him, or that his ignorance of the subject which he was treating,
may have left room for his honestly believing in the truth of what he
was so rashly and unwarrantedly asserting.
�4
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
The letter or dispatch of the 17th of February, referred to, con
tains various other obnoxious assertions of Mr. Johnson’s, upon]
which I may have occasion to comment in the course of my remarks,
such as, “ at no time during the war, or since, has any branch of the.
Government [of the United States] proposed to hold Her Majesty’s
Government responsible, except to the value of the property de
stroyed ” by the “ Alabama ” and similar vessels; “ the Government [of
the United States] never exacted anything on its own account”'—“to
demand more now * * * would be an entire departure from our
previous course, and would, I am sure, not be listened to by this Gov
ernment [the British], or countenanced by other nations,” etc., etc.;
and I would gladly reprint the whole of it, except for its length, and
Q for the reason that the lettei' itself has, doubtless, already had a
wide circulation through the American press—at least in the United
States. The whole dispatch, I venture to predict, will be a memora
ble one in our diplomatic annals, and will hereafter set the seal of
history, as I must think, upon the character of Mr. Reverdy John
son’s “Alabama” negotiations.
For the information of those of my readers who may not have
happened to see it, I would say that it is to be found (at least) in the
New York Herald of July 3, where it first met my eye, and where
some editorial introduction shows that it had been recently furnished
to that journal—apparently by Mr. Johnson himself—to meet, what
was said to have been, “ a garbled extract ” from it published in some
other New York newspaper. The whole letter, itself, would seem to
have been laid before the Senate, in secret session and confidentially,
prior to its action on the “ Alabama ” Convention ; and I gather from
other American journals (other than the Herald'), which have hap
pened to come within my observation here, that Mr. Johnson, before
publishing it, asked the President’s permission so to do. Whether
President Grant actually gave that permission, or whether he could
have constitutionally authorized the publication of a Senate confiden
tial document at all, supposing him to have been indulgently inclined
to grant the ex-minister’s request, is more than I have ascertained ;
but I am confident that Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s worst enemy could
not have persuaded him to a more injurious step, for his own reputa
tion, than that of thus giving this letter an unnecessary, and perhaps
unjustified publicity.
Before entering upon my criticism of this extraordinary dispatch
of the 17th of February, I must first premise a word of comment
upon the circumstances attending Mr. Johnson’s appointment as Min
�’THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
5
ister to England, and also call the reader’s attention to the dates of the
two conventions which he afterward negotiated in that capacity.
As to the appointment itself, which was made and confirmed in
the early part of the month of July, 1868, I believe that even Mr.
Reverdy Johnson’s own friends will hardly contend that the English
mission was offered to him on any other footing than as a graceful
compliment for previous political services (probably, on the part of
the President, for having so warmly befriended him during the Im
peachment trial), or that his unanimous confirmation by the Senate
afterward, was due to anything so rrijuch as to a feeling of kindly per
sonal regard toward him on the part of his fellow-Senators, coupled
with the belief that his functions wouffh mainly nominal and honor
ary. At any rate, as I shall presentlySave Occasion to show, his origi
nal instructions, after he was so ^onfirriaed, gave him no latitude to do
more than “ sound Lord Stanley upon the subject ” of the “ Alabama”
claims, and, as Mr. Seward addsw»yy‘ after the two more urgent
controversies previously mentioned [the ‘ Naturalization ’ and ‘ San
Juan’ questions] can have been put wider process of adjustment.”
Mr. Johnson, thus confirmed and thus instructed, negotiated two
conventions (or treaties, as they am more popularly called), viz.: one
signed by Lord Stanley and himselQ.'ated November 10, 1868, which
was “unanimously” repudiated byg^srv member of Andrew’ John
son’s cabinet; and a second, with Lord ClargWon, dated January 14,
1869, which was the one acted upoafbyg^ United States Senate,
April 13th following, and rejected by a vote of fifty-four to one.
Now, in answer to Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s assertion, that we ob
tained by his conventions—one or both—“ all that we ever asked,” I
hope to show by official documents—some of them being Mr. John
son’s own dispatches—
1. That he himself was not originally authorized “ to ask ” for
anything; instead of which he propose®!, at one of his earliest inter
views with Lord Stanley, “ the payment of a lump sum of money,” or
“ some cession of territory,” in settlement oRbe Alabama claims.
2. That starting thus with asking money or territory, he dropped
all mention of both in his conveilfion of November 10th, which
amounted to such a total abandonment of the American claims, na
tional and individual, that even “ President Johnson and his colleagues ”
(to quote Mr. Thornton’s account of the reception of the treaty at
Washington) “were unanimously of the opinion that in its present
form the convention would not’ receive the sanction of the Senate,” and
“ its contents were not in accordance with the instructions which had
been given to Mr. Reverdy Johnson.”
�6
Q
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON :
3. That Mr. Reverdy Johnson and Mr. Seward united in agreeing
to the convention of January 14th following, in total oblivion or ig
noring of Mr. Seward’s long record of complaints about belligerent
recognition and the national injury which hadj resulted therefrom, and
when both of the negotiators were well aware that any convention to
which they might put their names, or give their approval, was subject
to the final sanction of that Senate which had come within one vote of
deposing with disgrace the President under whom both of them at that
moment held their commissions.
4. That, while the consideration of the convention of January 14th
was pending before the Senate, and after the administration of Andrew
Johnson had given way to that of President Grant, and at a time when
Mr. Reverdy Johnson knew that the new President was about recalling
him, and had given him no shadow of authority for the proceeding—
viz., under date of March 25,1869—Mr. Reverdy Johnson, of his own
head, “ officially ” proposed to Lord Clarendon to amend the conven
tion then pending before the Senate by adding to its terms a consid
eration of the national claims which the United States as a Govern
ment might have against the Government of Great Britain—the very
claims which he himself has undertaken to decry in this lately pub
lished letter of February 17th, as such “ as would not, I am sure, be
listened to by this Government [the British], or countenanced by
other nations.”
5. And that, finally, when Lord Clarendon begins to be distrust
ful of Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s attempt to represent or misrepresent
the United States, and demands of him by what authority he under
takes to ask for so material an alteration of his previous arrangement,
Mr. Johnson replies to him that he makes the proposal “ under the
ample authority conferred upon me when I came to this country and
since ; an authority which has never been revoked or in any particular
modified thus distinctly affirming that he had ample authority to
negotiate for the settlement of those very national claims, which he
would now make it appear had never been put forward, “ during the
, war or since, by any branch of the Government.”
From such a muddle of mistakes or misrecollections on the part
of the American Minister as seems to be involved in the foregoing
statement, which I promise presently to duly verify by official docu-s
ments, the reader will doubtless be glad to be delivered, so far as may
be, by a sight of Mr. Johnson’s original instructions themselves. Ac
cordingly I hasten to lay them before him, so far as they touch upon
the negotiation of the Alabama question, with which alone I am now
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS
7
dealing. I quote from what I believe to be an accurate reprint of
them, contained in an elaborate and careful summary of the documents
laid before the United States Senate at the time of acting upon the
commission of January 14tb, as recently published in the New York
Times of July 6, 1869 :
Department of State,
)
Washington, July 20, 1868. t
»
Sir :
*
*
*
W
*
*
*
*
[I here omit a long exposition confined exclusively to the “Naturalization” and
“ San Juan ” questions. I shall also take the liberty to italicise the concluding
lines of the extract following, as I intend to? do in ^reference to future extracts
throughout, where I think the use of italics will help the busy readei* to more
readily apprehend my points.]
Thirdly, If you shall find reason to expect that the British Government will be
prepared to adjust the two questions already mentioned in some such manner as
has been proposed, and satisfactory to both parties, you will then be expected to
advert to the subject of mutual claims of citizensand subjects of the two countries
against the Governments of each other respectively.
The difficulty in this respect has arisen out of our claims which are known and
described in general terms as the Alabama elainia In the first place, Her Majes
ty’s Government not only denied all national obligation to indemnify citizens of
the United States for these claims, but even refused to entertain them for discus
sion. Subsequently Her Majesty’s Government, upon reconsideration, proposed to
entertain them for the purpose of referring them to arbitration!, but insisted upon
making them the subject of special reference, excluding from the arbitrator’s con
sideration certain grounds which the United States deem material to a just and
fair determination of the merits of the claims. The United States declined this
special exception and exclusion, and thus the proposed arbitration has failed.
It seems to the President that an adjustment might now be reached without
formally reviewing former discussions. A joint commission might be agreed upon
for the adjustment of all claims of citizens of the United States against the British
Government, and of all claims of subjects of Great Britain against the United
States, upon the model of the joint commission of February 8, 1853, which com
mission was conducted with so much fairness* and settled so satisfactorily all the
controversies which had arisen between the United States and Great Britain, from
the peace of Ghent, 1814, until the date of the Sitting of the convention.
While you are not authorized to commit this Government distinctly by such a
proposition, you may sound Lord Stanley upon the subject, after you shall have ob
tained satisfactory assurances that the two more^urgent controversies previously men
tioned can be put under process of adjustment in the manner which I have indi
cated.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
Reverdy Johnson, Esq., &c., &c.
The last sentence of the foregoing dispatch settles the question of
the extent of ministerial powers conferred by “ the original instruc
tions of July Wthf upon which we shall presently see that Mr. John
son is continually dwelling. An authority “ to sound ” cannot certainly
be equivalent to a power to settle. It may be best, however, once for
all, to run through the American Minister’s entire diplomatic career,
so far as the matter of official discretion is concerned, in order to be
�8
MB. REVERDY JOHNSON J
convinced of his total misappreciation of the functions with which he
was charged. I doubt if such another exhibit of misrecollection or mis
understanding of his official powers (perhaps of excess of them) by a
diplomatic envoy, can anywhere be found. Being originally invested, as
the above extract shows, with no higher discretion than to “ sound Lord
Stanley,” and that, too, only upon the contingency of “ the two other
more urgent controversies having first been put under process of adjust
ment,” Mr. Johnson, after some further correspondence and sundry telegraphic communications from the State Department, which we shall
presently have occasion to notice, but of which he apparently makes ho
account, negotiates and signs with Lord Stanley the convention of No
vember 10th, and sends it home with an explanatory dispatch dated the
same day. In the course of this dispatch, after setting forth the tenor and
effect of his treaty, he adds the following remarkable explanation of
his doings, as if he anticipated being called to account for exceeding
his instructions. I quote again from the New York Times' reprint of
the official correspondence, the letter Johnson to Seward, of November
10,1868:
3/y authority for agreeing to this [that is, the leaving to arbitration the “Alaba,
ma ” claims in the shape which his convention had arranged for] is found in your
original instructions of the %S)th of July last, and is indeed to be found in the cor
respondence between yourself and my predecessor regarding these claims.
Was ever a more extraordinary avowal made by a diplomatic
agent than this ?—that, under a power “ to sound ” a foreign govern
ment, he considers himself duly authorized to sign a lasting treaty
with that Government (by force of the technical term “convention,”
to last to all time), and, if he has not sufficient authority of himself,
he has it as successor to a predecessor who had power enough for any
thing I Pray, has Mr. Reverdy Johnson, in his great practice as a
lawyer, ever learned that in the law of Agency, A. B. can consider
himself empowered to do whatever C. D. could have done, because
both A. B. and C. D. happen to represent a common principal ? Yet
I have no earthly doubt that the New York Times' reprint of Mr.
Johnson’s language, as above, is accurate to the letter.
But this is by no means the worst muddle or misunderstanding
made by the American envoy in the course of these negotiations, over
which I am arguing the question of the Senate’s duty to reconsider
and reject his work.
Being sharply reminded by Mr. Seward, by an ocean telegram,
that he had gone too fast and too far in negotiating this convention
just referred to, Mr, Johnson rejoins, that he was “ not only author
in
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
ized,” but “ bound ” to do what he had done.
language:
9
I quote again his exact
\Johnson to Seward, Nov. 28, 1868.]
Why you are of the opinion that the [Alabama] Claims Convention is “ useless
unless amended ” you do not state, and I am unable to conjecture. I have just had
an interview at the Foreign Office with Lord Stanley, who readme a dispatch from
Her Majesty’s Minister at Washington, which stated that it was understood that
all the Cabinet disapprove of it, and had said that it was contrary to instructions.
This latter statement puzzles me yet more. If I understand your original, and all
the subsequent instructions, whether by telegraph or otherwise, the convention
conforms substantially with them. By thoseof the 20th of July, I considered myself
authorized, if this Government would adjust? as desired, the Naturalization and San
Juan controversies, to settle the claims’ controversy by at convention on the model of that
of February 8, 1853. And as the two former were satisfactorily arranged, I deemed
myself not only authorized, but bound to adopt the course that I did in relation to
the latter.—N. Y. Times, ut sup.
Now, taking Mr. Johnson’s own statement of his case, what can
he mean by stating that the instructions of July 20, which merely sug
gested “ a sounding,” not only “ authorized, M bound him to adopt
the course that he had taken in relation to the latter ” [these same
Alabama Claims] ? Has not Mr. Johnson failed in mind and memory;
and must it not have been perceptible to his English official opponents ?
But there remains a worse confusioi^if possible, of powers and
authority in connection with th^Minister^{attempt to reconcile his
treaty of January 14th to Senatorial acceptance. The ratification of the
convention having been kept in abeyanc^by the Senate till after the
accession of General Grant J^the Presidency, and word having reached
Mr. Johnson, in England, that the treatykvas not likely to be accept
able at home, on account of its omission of any mention of national
claims, he sets about amending it of his own motion in the manner
already suggested. Under date of March 25th, long after he must have
been painfully aware of the unpopularity of his course with the coun
try at large, and long after he had, doubtless, expected his recall by
the newly-installed Executive,, he writes to the British Foreign Secre
tary, Lord Clarendon, as follows. (I quote now from the British Par
liamentary Blue Book for 1869, North America,! No. 1, p. 46):
* * *
therefore, now officially propose to your lordship that we sign a
supplemental convention, which shall only sofar-alter the one of the 14th of January
as to provide that the claims which either Government may have upon the other shall
be included within it, and be settled in the same way.
Lord Clarendon, by this time having, doubtless, become persuaded
of the American envoy’s disposition to amplify his office, demanded,
in reply, whether he had the necessary authority for agreeing to so
important a modification of the original treaty. To this Mr. Johnson
replies in the following extraordinary letter, which, it seems to me,
2
�10
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON I
caps the climax of his ministerial mistakes or muddles,
from the British Blue Book, as before, p. 47) ;
(I quote again
U. S. Legation, London, March 29, 1869.
My Lord :
I have the honor to receive youT note of the 27th instant, and shall look with
solicitude to the determination of your Government upon the proposition contained
in my official note to you of the 25th.
That proposition was not made in pursuance of any express instructions of
my Government, but under the ample authority conferred upon me when I came to
this country, and since ; an authority which has never been revoked, or, in any par
ticular, modified.
Repeating my opinion, that the acceptance of the proposition would result in
the ratification by the Senate of the Claims Convention of the 14th of January
last,
I have, <fcc.,
(Signed)
REVERDY JOHNSON.
What hallucination can have seized Mr. Johnson about the extent
of his original powers ? Had he never read his instructions, or had
he forgotten to what degree they must have been modified in order to
enable his negotiation of the convention of January 14th ? And yet he
takes pains to assert that they have “ never been revoked, or [nor], in
any particular, modified.” If it be suggested that his intended mean
ing may, in some degree, be obscured by the unfortunate grammatical
expressions which he uses, and that he intends to say that he is enjoy
ing just as much diplomatic authority on the 29th of March, under
President Grant’s administration, as on the 14th of January, under
Andrew Johnson’s, when he joined Lord Clarendon in signing the
convention of that date; then what shall be said of his capacity to
understand his functions when, with no new authorization, he under
takes to interpolate so important a clause into a State paper which
had long since passed out of the sphere of his control ? Especially
when, as he himself avows in the continuation of the correspondence
(in a letter to Lord Clarendon of April 9th, on the same subject,—Blue
Book, as before, p. 49):
That I did not suggest in the negotiations which led to the convention of Jan
uary the including within it any Governmental claims, was because my instructions
only referred to the individual claims of citizens and subjects.
What was Lord Clarendon to do with an envoy who had such a
strange power of stretching out his instructions, and then, when
brought to the test, letting them fly back again like a piece of Indiarubber—but to finally say to him, as Lord Clarendon reports to his
own envoy at Washington (Blue Book, p. 49, Clarendon to Thornton,
April 9, 1869), he did *?
Mr. Johnson, [as] I said [to him] was, no doubt, acting on his instructions; but
they were the instructions given to him by the last Government, and Her Majesty* s Gov
ernment could not consider a communication not made by the authority of the presets
Government,
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
11
I think this brief epitome of Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s constructive
expansion and contraction of his ministerial functions must have satis
fied the reader that, if Mr. Johnson is no better a judge of the merits
of his country’s claims against England for her unneutral conduct
during the late civil war, than he is of his own powers to treat with
that Government for the settlement of those claims, his aspersion that,
we have obtained by his convention all that we have ever asked, and
that the Government of the United States had, in effect, no case to
begin with, is already well-nigh disposed of.
Before dropping this branch of ■ my subject, however, I must
remark in passing, that Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s transgression of his
instructions cannot for a moment be urged against us by the British
Government in any future negotiation^ upon the same subject, be
cause, by the very terms of the two conventions which the British
Foreign Secretaries signed with him, that«bvernment expressly ad
mitted its obligation to inform itself of the extent of the envoy’s
powers. Thus, it makes a part of the recitals of both of the con
ventions of November 10th and January 14th, as well as of several
other preliminary drafts between the negotiators, that “ the Pleni
potentiaries having communicated to each other their respective full
powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows.”
So, besides the holding back by Lord Clarendon on the subject
of interpolating ‘‘Governmental claimsfWinto the treaty, through
caution of Mr. Johnson’s defective powepkt’o agree to that change, as
already referred to, it is noticeable thailLord Stanley, after signing
the convention of November 10th with Mr: Johnson, expressed to the
British Minister at Washington his misgivings of Mr. Johnson’s au
thority to bind his Government. Writing to Mr. Thornton after that
convention had been repudiated by President Johnston’s cabinet, and
for the purpose, as he states, of putting upon record his own doings
as Foreign Secretary in that particular, he says:
[/SZanZey to Thornton, December ft. Blue Book ut sup., p. 19.]
“ Matters remained in this state until the Receipt of your telegram of the
27th of November, up to which time I was under the impression, which was
also shared in by Mr. Johnson, that the Convention which had been signed,
being in accordance with his instructions as construed by him, would meet with
the approval of the United States Government.”
Is not this significant phrase “as construed by him? a full admis
sion that the British Government took their chance of Mr. Johnson’s
work being disowned, as his first convention was, for disregard
of instructions 1 Does it not also lead one to think that both the
British Foreign Secretaries—Lord Stanley, first, and Lord Clarendon,
�12
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON !
afterward—must have had their eyes opened to Mr. Johnson’s dis
torted conception of his ministerial capacity, before concluding any
of the negotiations which they respectively arranged with him ? In
fact, can there be much doubt that, when the late Minister’s whole
proceedings are taken into account, our English friends must have
understood Mr. Reverdy Johnson much better than he did himself?
But I pass from Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s incapacity to understand
his official functions, to consider the truth of his reflection upon his
country’s cause, that his diplomacy had gained for his Government all
that it had ever asked, and that it never had a claim of its own to
present.
Here I must again call Minister Johnson as a witness against
himself. Lord Stanley, who kept a record of his dealings with the
American envoy, as before alluded to, thus sets down the particulars
of one of his earliest interviews with him :
In a conversation which took place at the Foreign Office on the 25th of
September, Mr. Johnson, after discussing with me the subject of Naturalization,
passed to that of the so-called “ Alabama” claims. In this conversation, of
which a memorandum is inclosed, extracted from my notes of the interview,
Mr. Johnson first suggested, as a means of settlement, the payment of a lump sum
op money, or a cession of territory by Great Britain, both of which plans I con
sidered inadmissible, so long as the question of the liability of Great Britain was
denied by us, and remained undecided.—(Pari. Blue Book, ut sup., p. 17.)
The memorandum referred to is given on p. 19 of the Blue Book,
and is substantially to the same effect:
The conversation then turned on the “ Alabama ” claims. Mr. Johnson ad
verted generally, though not in the form of distinct proposals, to various methods
by which this question might be settled. His first suggestion was the payment of a
lump sum of money. Lord Stanley at once declared this to be inadmissible, so
long as the question of our being liable at all was denied by us and undecided by
any mode of reference. AZr. Johnson then talked of some cession of territory, an
idea which Lord Stanley did not think more promising.
I think Mr. Johnson can hardly contend that his two conventions
either stipulated for the payment of “ a lump sum of money,” or
“ the cession of territory.” How, then, can the United States be said
“ to have obtained by them all that we have ever asked ” ? Had not
the American Minister heard from some source or other, before
starting on his mission, that one or the other of these modes of settle
ment was expected? Or, was the suggestion entirely spontaneous,
and (may it not be added) unauthorized, with himself? Then, does
not “ cession of territory ” imply the satisfaction of a national demand?
Or, was Mr. Johnson imagining all the while, that each one of the
sufferers by the “ Alabama ” or the “ Florida ” was to take a town
ship in Canada as an indemnity for the loss of his ship? The same
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
13
idea of cession of territory in satisfaction of these claims crops out
elsewhere in the course of this correspondence. Thus, Mr. Thornton,
writing to Lord Clarendon, under date of April 19th (lb., p. 53),
says, [this] “ mode of settlement [that is, by cession of territory]
has frequently been hinted at to me.”
Whether such a form of indemnity is a desirable or expedient
one for the United States, or whether indeed the cession of territory
has any legitimate connection with the solution of the Alabama ques
tion at all, it is-quite superfluous for the writer to undertake to settle.
But, that the agitation of such a demand, and*, by Mr. Johnson him
self, when freshly arrived in England, quite Contradicts his assertions,
that “ we have obtained all that we ever asked,land that “ the Govern
ment [of the United States] never exacted anything on its own ac
count,” seems to the writer too plain for further Comment.
I hasten to the more substantial matter of the total abandonment
by Mr. Johnson, and (I must add) by Mr. Seward, of the national
ground of complaint against Great Britain, connected with the matter
of the Belligerent Recognition of the Rebel Confederacy, and of
which all tangible notice is omitted jn both of the Conventions of
November 10th and January|l4th. Here I think every American who
has gone to the bottom of the AlabamaBontroversy will agree with
me, that the United States Senate were fully justified in repudiating
Messrs. Seward’s and Johnson’f diplomatic doings in to to.
How stands this point of Belligerenl Recognitionjas left in the
latest convention, and as dwelt upon in preceding negotiations which
led to it ? I fear that I shall havf p|tax the reader’s patience with
some explanatory details on this head ; yet I believe it unavoidable
to a just understanding ^f the merits of the discussion.
Doubtless he will have observed no allusion to Belligerent Re
cognition in Mr. Seward’s original] instructions to Mr. Johnson of
July 20th, which I have already quoted: nor, I may add, am I aware
that Mr. Seward ever afterward po much ^alludes to the subject
throughout the whole correspondence, as published in the blue books
of either country. This is significant, at the outset. Yet it is the
same Mr. Seward who during theJcourse of the civil war had made
no less than six formal demands as American Secretary of State upon
the Governments of England and France for the recall of that ob
noxious measure; and the same Mr. Seward who had a hundred times
at least denounced to those Governments their hasty and unfriendly
recognition of the rebels as a belligerent power, as the fountain and
source of all our foreign woes. Was it intentionally kept out of
�14
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON *
sight, or virtually ignored, in these Johnson-Stanley and JohnsonClarendon conventions, in order to effect some arrangement which
should have the eclat of disposing of a great international contro
versy ?
In reply to this question, and at the same time to meet Mr. John
son’s thrust that we should have got by his convention all that we
ever asked for, 1 beg the reader to go no further back with me into
the record of Mr. Seward’s complaints about the national reparation
expected from England for her hasty recognition of the rebels as bel
ligerents, than six months prior to Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s confirma
tion as Minister. Here is what the American Secretary of State au
thorized Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, Mr. Adams, to say to the British
Government in January, 1868. I only quote an extract:
Department of State,
)
Washington, Jan. 13, 1868. )
Sir: Your dispatch of the 24th of December, No. 1,503, has been received.
You were quite right in saying to Lord Stanley that the negotiation in regard to
the so-called Alabama claims is now considered by this Government to have been
closed without a prospect of its being reopened. With reference to the conversa
tion, which occurred between yourself and his lordship on the subject of a recent
dispatch of Mr. Ford [British Secretary of Legation at Washington], in which
Mr. Ford gave an account of a conversation which he had with me, it would per
haps be sufficient to say that Mr. Ford submitted no report of that conversation,
nor did he inform me what he proposed to write to Lord Stanley. I may add that
either Mr. Ford or Lord Stanley, or both, have misapprehended the full scope of
what is reported by Mr. Ford as a suggestion on my part.
Both of these gentlemen seem to have understood me as referring only to mu
tual pecuniary war claims of citizens and subjects of the two countries which have
lately been extensively discussed. Lord Stanley seegis to have resolved that the
so-called Alabama claims shall be treated so exclusively as a pecuniary commercial
claim, as to insist on altogether excluding the proceedings of Her Majesty’s Government
in regard to the war from consideration, in the arbitration which he proposed.
On the other hand, I have been singularly unfortunate in my correspondence,
if I have not given it to be clearly understood, that a violation of neutrality by the
Queen!s proclamation, and kindred proceedings of the British Government, is regarded
as a national wrong and injury to the United Stales; and that the lowest form of sat
isfaction for that national injury that the United States could accept, woidd be found
in an indemnity, without reservation or compromise, by the British Government to
those citizens of the United States who had suffered individual injury and damages by
the vessels of war unlawfully built, equipped, manned, fitted out, or entertained and
protected in the British ports and harbors, in consequence of a failure of the British
Government to preserve its neutrality.
WM. H. SEWARD.
0. F. Adams, Esq., <tc., <fcc.
This, I venture to think, is a very moderate and just statement of
the American claim, and one which will never be substantially de
parted from by the country in any settlement of the question hereafter
to be arranged. Had Mr. Reverdy Johnson never heard of it? Does
either of his conventions recognize il a national wrong and injuryor I
provide for its “indemnity without reservation or compromise” “to
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS,
15
those who have suffered individual injury”? Let us look a little
more closely at Mr. Johnson’s dealings with Belligerent Recognition,
since, as we have seen, Mr. Seward keeps an ominous silence in re
gard to it.
So far as I can find, the only mention at any time of the subject
just named, on Mr. Johnson’s part, occurred in one of his early inter
views with Lord Stanley, prior to the signing of the 'convention of
November 10th, and is thus reported by Lord Stanley in a dispatch
to Mr. Thornton, under date of October 21st. The negotiation of the
first convention, it would seem from one of Mr. Johnson’s own letters,
was about this time just being entered upon:
In this conversation little was said as to the point on which the former nego
tiations broke off, viz.: the claim made by*the United States Government to raise be
fore the arbiter the question of the alleged premature recognition by Her Majesty’s
Government of the Confederates as belligerents* Ifstated/rt^lMr. Reverdy Johnson that
we could not, on this point, depart from the position which we had taken up; but 1 saw
no impossibility in so framing the reference, and that by mutual consent, either tacit or
express, the difficulty might be avoided.—Blue Book, ut sup, p. 10.
As the subject is dropped from this tifee forth by the American
envoy, so far as can be learned from the published correspondence of
either Government, are we to conclude thatfjbe British proposition
was at once submitted to, and that that Government, being no longer
importuned to depart from its. ppsiti^g it was henceforth mutually
agreed between the two negotiator! to concert “how not to do it”?
Whethei’ such an agreement, yas Owl® ever entered into by them
or not, it is plain that it was most effectively carried out, so far as the
American Minister was concernedly the convention of November
10th, the terms of which, so fai* as this point is concerned, I am about
to cite. Meanwhile, I must not deprive the reader of Mr. Johnson’s
report of his own doings on thaf head to the Department of State,
showing that Lord Stanley’s ingenious.-devicewas^at least, not un
favorably entertained by him. Says Mr.Johnson, writing home to
Mr. Seward, under date of the verg day of signing the first conven
tion (November 10th), and expressing his own gratification at what
he had achieved :
It is proper that I should give, as briefly as may be necessary, my reasons for
assenting to the convention, or rather to some of its provisions: 1. You have here
tofore refused to enter into an agreement to arbitrate the '•Alabama claims unless this
Government would agree that the question of its right to acknowledge as belligerents
the late so-called Southern Confederacy be also included within the arbitration. You
will see by the terms of the first and the fourth articles, that that question, as well as
every other which the United States may think is involved in such claims, is to be be
fore the commissioners or the arbitrator. This is done by the use of general terms,
and the omission of any specification of the questions to be decided. And my authorlily for agreeing to this is found in your original instructions of the 20th of July last,
Kind is indeed to be found in the correspondence between yourself and my predecessor
regarding these claims.—N. Y. Times, ut sup.
�16
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON !
I have already quoted the last paragraph, as above, in another con
nection. It deserves a repetition, however, as showing that while Mr,
Johnson professed to have read and to be familiar with the instruct
tions given to his predecessor, Mr. Adams (among which was this re
cent letter of January 13, 1868, instructing Mr. A. that the United
States claimed a national as well as a pecuniary indemnity), Mr. John
son believes that he can find in those instructions an authority (I) for
dexterously declining to insist upon the very same demand. I pray
the reader’s special attention to Mr. Johnson’s devise for giving the
go-by to the very point which he reminds Mr. Seward that he (Mr.
Seward) had always made a sine qua non in arbitration.
“ You will see by the terms of the first and fourth articles, that
that question [Belligerent Recognition] * * * * is to be before the
commissioners or the arbitrator. This is done by the use of general
terms and the omission of any specification of the questions to be de
cided” Rather a novel mode of getting a point before an arbitrator
—is it not ?—“ to omit all specification of the question to be decided ! ”
Could a better exemplification be found of the maxim, that“ language
is not intended to express men’s ideas, but to conceal them ? ”
And yet, will it be believed of this brave exponent of American
rights—this successful delineator of Hamlet with the part of Hamlet
left out—that, writing home to the Secretary of State, in that same
obnoxious letter of February 17th, from which I have so often quoted,
Mr, Reverdy Johnson—after his work is all done—after he “has met
the enemy and is theirs,” and is giving his version of how it happened
—could have expressed himself about the importance of Belligerent
Recognition to the American case, as follows ?
Supposing, then, that the [Blockade] proclamation of the President was known
to this Government [the British] when they declared the insurgents to be bel
ligerents—a question of fact which I do not propose to examine—it furnished no
justification for the action of this Government; and if it was not jusified, as I confi
dently believe was the case, the act is one which bears materially upon the question
whether the Government is not bound to indemnify for the losses occasioned by the
Alabama and other vessels, for then that vessel and the others could not have been con
structed or received in British ports, as they would have been in the estimation of En
glish law, as well as the laic of nations, piratical vessels. They never, therefore,
would have been on the ocean, and the vessels and the cargoes belonging to Ameri
can citizens destroyed by them would have been in safety. Upon this ground,
then, independent of the question of proper diligence, the obligation of Great Britain
to meet the losses seems to me to be most apparent.
Weighty and just words those ! and which it is to be hoped will
be remembered by our English friends when they are quoting the rest
of Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s record against us ! But what a pity that
they had not been uttered to the British Foreign Office before the two
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
IT
conventions of November 10th and January 14th were signed ! And
still more, what a pity that they had not found a formal expression in
those national compacts, instead of the ingenious device of “omitting
any specification of the question to be decided ” !
But I am detaining the reader too long from the text of the Con
vention of November 10th. Here are its three important articles, so
far as they touch the “Alabama” controversy—the only reference to
the claims throughout the document. Indeed, buKfor these it would
not appear that the existence of an “ Alabama,” or an “ Alabama ”
grievance, had even so much as -.been Jieard of before by the parties
signitary.
Article IV.
The commissioners shall have power to adjudicate upon the class of claims re
ferred to in the official correspondence between theEtwo»^?overnments as the “ Ala
bama ” claims; but before any of such claims is taken into consideration by them,
the two high contracting parties shall fix upon some«sovereign or head of a friendly
State as an arbitrator in respect of such claims, to whom such class of claims shall
be referred in case the commissioners shall be unable to come to an unanimous
decision upon the same.
Article
V
In the event of a decision on any of the claims mWtioned in the next preced
ing article being arrived at by the arbitrators-involving a question of compensa
tion to be paid, the amount of such compensation shall be referred back to the
commissioners for adjudication; or, in*the eyent*®&-their nbMoeing able to come
to a decision, it shall then be decided by the arbitrator appointed by them, or who
shall have been determined by lot according’’fgfrthe provisions of Article I.
Article
VI.
With regard to the before-mentioned “Alabama” class of claims, neither Gov
ernment shall make out a case in support of its position, nor shall any person be
heard for or against any such claim. The official correspondence which has al
ready taken place between the two Governments, respecting the questions at issue,
shall alone be laid before the commissioners; and (in the-event of their not coming
to an unanimous decision, as provided in Article IV.), then before the arbitrator,
without argument, written or verbal, and without the production of any further
evidence.
The commissioners unanimously, or the arbitrator, shall, however, be at liberty
to call for argument or further evidence, if they or he shall deem it necessary.
The reader will have taken notice of the phrase used in the first
line of Article IV., “ the commissioners shall have power to adjudicate,”
which I have taken the liberty to dtllicise. While in the previous
articles it is stipulated that all other claims embraced in the arbitra
tion are to be laid unreservedly before the commissioners or arbitrator,
and it is made their business to hear them, the so-called “Alabama”
claims are only to be permitted an auditing, as it were, by special
grace. While blockade-breakers and Confederate bondholders may
8
�18
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
claim the commissioners’ ear and enforce the most unlimited audience,
the sufferers by the “ Alabama” may think themselves fortunate if
they get a hearing at all. Rather a descent—must not one call this ?—
on the 10th of November, from the American envoy’s demand on the
25th of September, “ of the payment of a lump sum of money,” or
“ a cession of territory,” as “ a means of settlement.”
And then, if the commissioners see fit to give the “ Alabama ”
claimants a hearing at all, what sort of a hearing is this which is se
cured for them ? “ Neither government shall make out a case in sup
port of its position, nor shall any person he heard for or against any
such claim. The official correspondence * * * shall alone he laid
before the commissioners, and, in the event of their not coming to an
unanimous decision, * * * then before the arbitrator, without
argument, written or verhcd, and without the production of any further
evidence."
“ The commissioners, unanimously, or the arbitrator, shall, however,
be at liberty to call for argument or further evidence, if they or he shall
deem it necessary.” Must it not have been a bad subject enough which
did not bear a discussion beyond limits as narrow as these? Neither
party to go to the bottom of their case, neither testimony nor argu
ment to be heard in support of it, and an unanimous decision, or else
the whole matter to be left to lot! One would think that with such
a hearing as this, it was quite unnecessary to stipulate beforehand for
“the omission of the specification of any question to be decided” by
the arbitrator. Indeed, the leading thought uppermost in the negoti
ator’s mind must have been, literally, that the least heard of the
“Alabama” claims the better.
What possible excuse can Mr. Johnson give for such a one-sided
and delusive treatment of a serious question as this, unless he was in
dulging the idea that he had achieved a master-stroke of policy in
getting the “ official correspondence of the two governments ” before
the eyes of the umpire ? If this was to be the great equivalent, I beg
to ask if the American envoy was not at all aware that the greater
part of the American case, national and individual—as one might
also say—is not contained, or not developed, in that correspondence ?
That, so far as public or private damage is concerned, the case of the
“ Florida,” for instance, is hardly touched upon by it ? That the facts
connected with the final escape of the “Alabama” from Liverpool,
through the negligence or treachery of the custom-house officials of
Liverpool during the last thirty-six hours of her stay in British
waters, and before finally quiting the Welsh coast—one of the strong
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
19
est features in the American case, as I venture to think—are scarcely
so much as alluded to in either Mr. Seward’s or Mr. Adams’ dis
patches ? And, that that correspondence is altogether silent upon the
great point of the wrong inflicted upon the country, by the original
concession and continued persistence in the recognition of a belliger
ent status to the Rebel Confederacy, when that confederacy had never
once complied with the condition precedent upon which alone Lord
Russell declared, on the 6th of May, 1861, it was granted, viz.: that
the newly-acknowledged belligerents should have prize ports and prize
courts? Was not Mr. Johnson, aware, further,that.this same official
correspondence, whose efficacy he is perhapsRpdn tiding in, altogether
overlooks the pertinency of the repeated admission by the British
Government, during the war, of the validity and efficiency of the
American blockade long before the “Alabama”—certainly long be
fore the “ Shenandoah ”—was coaled, provisioned, and manned in a
British outport, under the guise of a legitimate ship-of-war of a dulyrecognized belligerent power ?
These are but a few of the omissions siich as I would ask if the
American Minister was ignorant of yhen he'was possibly laying such
stress upon the efficacy of the United States’ official correspondence.
I certainly adduce them in no spirit ^fault-finding with the able and
faithful exponents of bur foreign rel'^^f during the late war. All
things are not possible to men so bwffiurdened with national cares as
were those gentlemen, and I heartily jo® in the meed of praise which
a grateful country has so justly conceded'them for their patriotic
services at that trying period. Yet on the review df the whole work of
the civil war, now that time has been given for the deliberate examination
of its records, is it to be presumed thataomissions like the above, and
others of equal or greater importance shbuld have^scaped the atten
tion of the American representative, wh<®wa^ intrusted with the man
agement of the national case against England?* ■ If such a presump
tion is not admissible, then Mr. Johnsoggirtuallyabandoned his cause
in letting the official correspondence stand alike fdiTevidence and argu
ment—law and fact—justice and discretion—in the decision of these
claims. If, on the other hand, hi was ignorant of. the glaring defects
embraced in that presentation of our case,“hen his submission of it to
arbitration, upon that evidence alone, was worse than asking for an
award upon a point not specified.
I have thus dwelt at greater length upon the Convention of No
vember 10th, than may have seemed expedient, because, as it was
mainly Mr. Johnson’s work (Mr. Seward, I believe, in ignorance of
�20
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
its real tenor, only stipulating for the change of the seat of arbitration
from London to Washington), it serves to show how little reliance is
to be placed upon the American Minister’s assertion, when he is turn
ing against his country, and declaring that, as a Government, it never
had any case to begin with.
The text of Mr. Johnson’s Convention of November 10th reached
Washington in due course of mail in about a fortnight. Shortly after
its arrival, and while it was under consideration by the President and
his cabinet, Mr. Johnson telegraphed to Mr. Seward for permission to
go on and complete further negotiations on the “San Juan” question.
The following is Mr. Seward’s reply to Mr. Johnson’s telegram, show
ing the first impression of the Secretary of State of Mr. Johnson’s
“ Alabama ” labors :
Washington, November 26, 1868,
Reverdy Johnson, Esq., <fcc., <fco.:
Let San Juan rest. Claims Convention [that is, Alabama Claims Convention],
unless amended, is useless. Wait for dispatches, Friday or Saturday.
WM. H. SEWARD.
*
Mr. Seward followed this up with a letter of the next day, con
taining a detailed statement of objections to the treaty, and coupled
with a memorandum of alterations which he deemed necessary. As
I have not room for giving these documents entire, I must content my
readers with the summary of them, presented a day or two after, by
Mr. Thornton, to the Foreign Office, and published in the Blue Book,
already quoted, p. 22.
Says Mr. Thornton, writing to Lord Stanley, November 30th:
Mr. Seward received, on the 24th instant, the Convention upon Claims, signed
by your Lordship and Mr. Reverdy Johnson on the 10th instant.
On the 26th, Mr. Seward called upon me and informed me that the contents of
the convention were not in accordance with the instructions which had been given to
Mr. Reverdy Johnson ; that the President and his colleagues could not approve of
certain of the stipulations comprised therein ; and that they were unanimously of
opinion that, in its present form, the convention would not receive the sanction of the
Senate. Upon the latter po nt I could not but concur. Mr. Seward confessed
that it was possible that some excuse might be made for Mr. Johnson’s not having
kept more closely to his instructions, because as some of these were given by
telegrams in answer to Mr. Johnson’s questions sent by the same channel, Mr.
Seward may have misunderstood the former, and Mr. Johnson may not have fully
comprehended the instructions sent in reply. *
*
* Mr. Seward has
pointed out to Mr. Reverdy Johnson that he had always intended, and so instructed
him, that a protocol, not a convention, should be signed with regard to the “ Ala
bama” and war claims, in the same manner, and with the same condition, as that
upon the “ San Juan ” question. I have certainly always understood this to be the
case, and I believe that my correspondence with your Lordship has given indica
tions of this conviction on my part. *
*
* The United States Govern
ment likewise object to the unanimous decision required by Article IV. for the
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
21
" Alabama ” claims, whereas the other claims may be decided by a majority of the
commissioners. This they consider unjust, and are even more sensitive about it
than upon the subject of the umpire. *
*
* No instructions had been pre
viously given to Mr. Johnson to make any positive declaration with regard to the “Ala
bama” claims, so as to distinguish them from the others.
If Article IV. were canceled, Article V. would naturally have the same fate.
The United States Government strongly object to Article VI., because it does
not allow either Government to make out a ease in support of its position, nor any
person to be heard for or against the “Alabama” claims; whereas both these steps
are allowed with regard to other claims, and they do not see why a prejudicial
distinction should be stipulated in the convention against the “Alabama” claims,
which would render the sanction of the Senate more doubtful, although they ac
knowledge that little could be added to what is contained in the official correspond
ence. [A point upon which the writer has ventured to express his entire dissent
as above.] They also object, for the reasons already mentioned, to the decision
being necessarily unanimous, both with regard to the claims themselves, or to the
[not?] calling for argument or further evidence. They, therefore, ask that
Article VI. may be canceled, or that it may be substituted by the following
words:
“ In case of every claim, the official correspondence which has already taken
flace between the two Governments respecting the question at issue, shall be laid
efore the commissioners ; and in the event of their not coming to a decision there
upon, then before the arbitrator; either Government may also submit further evi
dence and further argument thereupon, written or verbal.” *
*.
*
*
*
* Should your Lordship be able to agree to these modifications,
Mr. Seward has repeatedly assured me that the Senate are committed to the ac
ceptance of the convention so modified, and that he is convinced they will sanc
tion it,
I have taken pains to cite so much from Mr. Thornton in expla
nation of the points of disagreement between Mr. Johnson’s first con
vention and Mr. Seward, because, as these points were nearly all
eventually conceded by the British Government in the second conven
tion of January 14th, it puts the reader essentially in possession of the
terms of that convention, and, at the same time, shows how little Mr.
Johnson had conformed, in his first convention, either to the instruc
tions or to the wishes of his own Government. This report of Mr.
Thornton’s, however, gives Mr. Johnson the benefit of his additional
instructions by telegraph, which he may have misunderstood, as Mr.
Seward charitably suggests, but of which Mr. Johnson himself, as we
have seen, seems disposed to make but little account. This report of
Mr. Thornton’s suggests, further, another unpleasant feature in Mr.
Seward’s diplomacy, which the American brochure of diplomatic cor
respondence referred to does not disclose, I believe, viz., that the
Secretary of State was undertaking to speak for, and to pledge before
hand, the concurrence of the United States Senate in his negotiations.
What business, I would ask (if Mr. Thornton’s report is accurate on
this point), had the American Secretary of State to make any such
compromising assurance as this for a branch of the Government en
tirely independent of his own ? What did he mean by saying that
�99
I
0
-
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
the Senate were committed to the ratification of the doings of the I
Executive, when he knew that a few short months before a large ma
jority of the members of that body had voted for the removal of the
President for high crimes and misdemeanors, and many of the Sen
ators still believed his continuance in office a violation of the Consti-J
tution ?
But 1 must hasten on to the terms of the second convention. The
reader is, doubtless, familiar with Senator Sumner’s vehement and
effective denunciation of its shortcomings ; its failure to provide for
the settlement of the national grievance; its huddling-up blockade
running and Confederate bond-holding claims in the same category
with unneutral and unfriendly raids upon the peaceful commerce
of a friendly nation ; its leaving to lot whether any indemnity, even
of a pecuniary nature, should be granted to the individual sufferers;
and its total disregard of the settlement of the principles of the law
of nations involved in the controversy. Without troubling the reader
with a repetition of the energetic and convincing statements of that
now highly-famous speech on these heads, and, still more, without
undertaking to enter into the general merits of some other of its
much-controverted positions, I cannot forbear attempting to add a few
criticisms upon the terms of the treaty, and the negotiations attending
it, which seem to me to materially aid the Senator’s primary and chief
contention, viz., that it was equally the duty, as it was the constitu
tional prerogative, of the United States Senate, emphatically to re
pudiate the “ Claims” convention of January 14th.
In the first place, I beg the reader’s attention to its insufficient
setting-forth of the subject-matter of the controversy. We have al
ready seen with what bare toleration Mr. Reverdy Johnson secured
any mention at all of the Alabama claims in his first treaty of Novem
ber 10th.
Passing now to his second—which, it should be said in his favor,
was negotiated with the full concurrence of the Secretary of State,
and for which Mr. Seward took pains, in a letter dated J anuary 20th, to
express to him “ the President’s high satisfaction with the manner in
which you have conducted these important negotiations ”—it will be
found that Mr. Johnson hardly stipulates for a more respectful cog
nizance of the same claims by the commissioners in the later than in
the earlier treaty. The term “ Alabama ” occurs but once in the
whole document, and then in a parenthetical kind of way, as if the
American negotiator had been afraid to bring his bantling upon the
carpet at all. While other—the most trifling or the most truculent—
�THE ALABAMA. NEGOTIATIONS.
23
claims, running back to 1853, boldly raise their heads and challenge a
hearing, it is only in a secondary and subordinate capacity, introduced
by the phrase, which most writers would have been likely to enclose
in brackets, e. g. (“ including the so-called 1 Alabama’ claims”), that
the American grievance is permitted to present itself at all for arbi
tration. I believe the reader will not regret an opportunity of seeing
this for himself in the actual document, though at the cost of a few
moments’ delay. I shall not hav® occasion, by any means, to cite the
entire instrument.
The preamble to the conventi®. runsi as follows : [I quote from
the parliamentary copy, p. 36.]
Whereas claims have at various times since the exchange of the ratifications
of the Convention between Great Britain and thex-United States of America,
signed at London on the Sth of February, 1853, bee® made upon the Government
of Her Britannic Majesty on the part of citizens of the United States, and upon
the Government of the United States on the part of subjects on Her Britannic
Majesty; and whereas some of such claims are still pending, and remain un
settled, Her Majesty, the Queen, <&c., and the President, <fcc^: being of opinion
that a speedy and equitable settlement of all such claims will contribute much, to
the maintenance of the friendly feelings which subsist between the two countries,
have resolved to make arrangements for that purpose by means of a Convention,
and have named as their plenipotentiaries to confer and agree thereupon, viz.;
[The Earl of Clarendon on the part of Great Britain, and Reverdy Johnson, Esq.,
on the part of the United States.] Who, after having communicated to each other
their respective full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows:
[Then follows Article L, from which I need wlynsite a few lines
to make good my purpose.]
Article I.—The high contracting parties agreflj that all claims on the part
of subjects of Her Britannic Majesty upon the Government of the United States,
and all claims on the part of citizens of the»'4United States upon the Government
of Her Britannic Majesty, including the so-called “Alabama” claims, which may
have been presented to either Government for its interposition with the other,
since the 26th of July, 1853, the day of the exchange of the ratifications of the
Convention, concluded between Great Britain and the United States of America,
at London, on the 8th of February, 1853, and which yet remain unsettled.; as
well as any other such claims which may be presented within the time specified
in Article III. of this Convention [that is, two years from the first sitting of the
Commissioners], whether or not arising out of the late civil war in the United
States, shall be referred to four Commissioners to be appointed in the following
manner, &c.
This is all the introduction to the Commissioners’ notice which
the “Alabama” claims could secure throughout the document, at
Messrs. Johnson and Seward’s hands; and I leave it to the candid
reader’s judgment, whether such a mention by the way-side and in a
parenthesis, as it were, of reclamations so important to the individual
Isufferers, and to the American people at large, looks either manly or
Bstatesmanly. I say nothing about defining what “ so-called ‘■Alabama'
�24
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON:
claims ” is intended to embrace; whether, for instance, it takes in
devastations by the 44 Florida,” the “ Shenandoah,” and other similar
vessels; though one would think that if it is so intended, it should not
have been left to the generosity of our opponents to concede it, at
the hearing. But what a shuffling evasion and shame faced dodging
of the main issue to be tried, thus to treat it as if it were a matter
not to be named; or, rather, naming it the “so-called 'Alabama’
claims.” Were not the grievances sustained by the United States and
its citizens during the four long years’ practice of British Neutrality
and Rebel Equality worth but four words in the treaty of final settle
ment ? Or, shall we call this another case of 44 wisely omitting any
specification of the question to be decided ” ?
So far as Mr. Reverdy Johnson had any agency in providing for
this lame and impotent statement of the American grievance, I think
the spirit which inspired his diplomacy is well illustrated by a short
extract from one of his dispatches to the Secretary of State, written
after Mr. Johnson had entered upon the negotiation of the second
convention with Lord Clarendon. The dispatch bears date December
24, 1868, and was dictated at a time when the Minister had digested
his irritation at Mr. Seward’s telegraphic repudiation of his first
treaty, and when he had begun to indulge in hopeful visions of suc
cessfully negotiating a second. I quote only a short extract, which,
however, will fairly bear separation from the context:
[Johnson to Seward, December 24, N. Y. Times, ut swp.J
I am perfectly satisfied that every member of the Cabinet is most anxious to
bring the controversy in regard to the “ Alabama ” claims to a satisfactory termi
nation, and I trust, therefore, that you will be able to concur substantially in the
propositions which will be made in the dispatch to Mr. Thornton.
I can get the “ Alabama ” claims specifically mentioned as among the claims
to be submitted to the Commissioners; and this I think most important.
Wonderful! The representative of his country’s rights can even
get the American claims 44 wzenft'onerf ” in that submission which he is
about to make in perpetual foreclosure of their further prosecution !
And li this he thinks most important.” He does not purpose on this
occasion to 44 altogether omit any specification of the question to be
decided
but he is so fortunate as to hope for a mention of his case
in the Commissioners’ hearing. Fortunate Minister ! Could ambas
sadorial courage dare more! Could diplomatic finesse achieve a
greater triumph!
More seriously, did Mr. Reverdy Johnson believe the “so-called
4 Alabama ’ claims ” a sham and a humbug ? Or was he attempting
to cajole his countrymen by taking such official care of their interests,
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
25
as the above, and then proclaiming to the world, in his numerous
after-dinner speeches, that the “Alabama” question was settled once
for all, and the good understanding of the two countries henceforth
irrevocably secured ?
In the second place—to continue my comments on Mr. Johnson’s
second convention—if the critic of this convention looks- for any re
cognition in it, much more for any satisfaction likely to grow out of
it, of that “ national wrong and injury to the United States,” resulting
from “ the violation of neutrality by the Queen’s proclamation and
kindred proceedings of the British Governments’ which we have seen
was insisted upon by Mr. Seward, as late as January 13, 1868, he will
find himself equally disappointed as in regard to the earlier conven
tion of November 10th. If Mr. Johnson had never so much as heard
that the United States “ exacted anything on its own account ”—to
quote again his'own language in the letter of the 17th of February—
(which it should be said, again, in 'his favor, Mr. Seward calls “ an
able and elaborate paper ”)—how could he be expected to do other
wise than keep silence upon this head? To be sure, he says in this
very same letter, that if it [the Recognition of Rebel Belligerence]
was not justified, as I confidently believe was the case, the act is one
which bears materially upon the question, whether the Government
is not bound to indemnify for the losses occasioned by the “Alabama,”
[and] “ upon this ground, independent of the question of proper
diligence, the obligation of Great Britain to meet the losses seems to
me to be most apparent! If so very apparent, would it not have been
worth at least a casual mention—sajS|for instance, as good as the
parenthetical allusion to the “ so-called {Alabama! claims ”—in a treaty
which was to discharge the two countries of all shadow of animosity
against each other forever ?
But since Mr. Johnson is so confident that the Government of the
United States “never exacted any thing on itl own account,” and, as
he says elsewhere in his letter of February 17th, “ the^depredations of
the Alabama were of property in which our nation had no direct pe
cuniary interest,” I should like to be informed if he never heard that
one of the ships sunk by the Alabama was the United States ship of
war the Hatteras—a gunboat of considerable size, seventeen of whose
officers and crew were killed and drowned, and a hundred and upward
of whom were made prisoners. Pray, has the United States no inter
est, pecuniary or national, in that act of war or piracy? Did it not
cost a naval engagement also with the “ Kearsarge,” and the wounding
of several of our seamen, to finally give the quietus to the “ Alaba4
�26
MB. EEVEBDY JOHNSON:
ma’s” depredations ? And, if the question is of direct pecuniary dam
age nationally, did not the chase of that marauding sea-rover and her
kindred consorts cost the United States millions of dollars of expense,
without reckoning the more remote destruction of that private com
merce whose value Mr. Reverdy Johnson finds it so difficult to esti
mate ?
Whether it is below the dignity of a great nation to make a
reclamation for its governmental losses, such as those just named, sus
tained by the United States in its national capacity, is one thing; but
that a substantial national claim on that score exists pecuniarily,
should it once be thought worth while by the United States to enforce
it, is as certain as that some of those destructive corsairs were negli
gently allowed to escape in violation of British municipal law, and that
all of them were afterward treated with unneutral hospitality in Brit
ish outports, in violation of the public law of nations.
But returning to Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s masterly inactivity in
negotiating, or rather in not negotiating, for a hearing of the points of
belligerent recognition and national indemnity, I must not overlook
an extraordinary admission of his, connected with his attempt to get
them included in the second treaty, by way of a supplementary com
mission, as already referred to, which is reported by Lord Clarendon
to the British Minister at Washington. In a dispatch to Mr. Thorn
ton, dated March 22d (Blue Book, ut sup., p. 45), Lord Clarendon
writes as follows:
Mr. Reverdy Johnson called upon me to-day to propose that an amendment, of
which I inclose a copy, should be made to Article I. of the convention, as he
thought it would satisfactorily meet the objections entertained by the Senate to
the convention, and would secure its ratification by that body.
I remarked to Mr. Johnson that his proposal would introduce an entirely new
feature into the convention, which was for the settlement of claims between the
subjects and citizens of Great Britain and the United States; but that the two
Governments not having put forward any claims on each other, I could only sup
pose that his object was to favor the introduction of some claim by the Government
of the United States for injury sustained on account of the policy pursued by Her
Majesty’s Government.
Mr. Reverdy Johnson did not object to this interpretation of this amendment,
but said that if claims to compensation on account of the recognition by the British
Government of the belligerent rights of the Confederates were brought forward by the
Government of the United States, the British Government might, on its part, bring
forward claims to compensation for damages done to British subjects by American
blockades, which, if the Confederates were not belligerents, were illegally enforced
against them.
That is to say—■“ If you, Lord Clarendon, will be so good as to let
governmental claims into the scope of the treaty, to satisfy those un
reasonable United States Senators, I, Reverdy Johnson, minister ple
nipotentiary and envoy extraordinary of the United States of America,
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
27
will give my consent that the British Governiftent may come upon
the United States for damages for an illegal blockade of the Southern
ports, in case the Confederates were not made lawful belligerents by
President Lincoln’s two blockade proclamations.”
The same proposition, in effect, was more formally repeated by
Mr. Johnson to Lord Clarendon, three days later, in writing. (Par
liamentary Blue Book, ut sup., p. 46, Johnson to Clarendon, March
25.)
Pray, what could the American Minister have been thinking of in
thus suggesting arguments against his Government ? Had he forgot
ten which nation he represented ? and was he all the while supposing
himself a British envoy ? Or shall we say that such conduct is quite
in keeping with his retorting against his Government, by way of re
taliation for undervaluing his services, that it never had any case to
begin with, and that it had. obtained all that it had ever asked for?
Is not the latest suggestion—that made to Lord Clarendon—the worst
of the two ? For while the former might in some degree have been
palliated by wounded vanity, the latter seems a gratuitous going out
of his way to furnish weapons against the nation whose interests it
was his duty to protect.
And yet can the reader credit it, that when Lord Clarendon, a fort
night later,- was inquiring with particularity into Mr. Johnson’s au
thority to amend the convention, as we have already had occasion to
notice in another connection, Mr. Johnson could have said about this
proposition of his (which of course drew after it the apologetic sug
gestion of the United States being thereby made liable for all the con
sequences of an illegal blockade) as he did ?—“ I felt myself entirely
justified in making it by my instructions from the late Administration
of my Government” (Johnson to Clarendon, April 9,1869, Blue Book,
ut sup., p. 48.)
As one of Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s American constituents, I chalLnge the production of a single line of instructions for any'such un
called-for concession as this, even from the administration of Andrew
Johnson itself. That he cannot bring forward so much as a syllable
to that effect from President Grant’s administration, which alone he
undertook to speak for on the 22d and 25th of March last, I venture
to affirm with all possible positiveness short of actual knowledge;
and until the American Minister can justify himself by some such
authorization from the Executive then in office, what else can be said
of his extraordinary “official” communication to the British Govern
ment, except that he had lost his head, or was intentionally abusing
�28
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON I
his trust ? I believe the former the most rational as well as the most
charitable conclusion of the two, and I trust that’I have said enough
to persuade my reader of the same opinion.
But I pass from Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s individual sayings and
doings, and from the topic of Belligerent Recognition as inexcusably
omitted by him (or by him and Mr. Seward jointly) from the conven
tion of January 14th—inexcusably, at least, on their own showing—•
to briefly notice, in the third place, the equally important omission
from the same State-paper of all statement of principle or recognition
of national ground of indemnity to be effected by means of any award
which the Commissioners or Arbitrator might afterward make under
it in favor of the American private claimants.
Here I must take my text again from Mr. Seward’s dictum of Jan
uary 13, 1868, already quoted. I believe the matter will well bear
a moment’s further attention. Says Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, just
a year before the signing of the Johnson-Clarendon Convention, “ the
lowest form of satisfaction for that national injury that the United
States could accept, would be found in an indemnity [I leave out the
words “ without reservation or compromise,” for present purposes]
by the British Government to those citizens of the United States who
had suffered individual injury,” etc.
Now, what satisfaction could it be of the “ national wrong and
injury,” felt by the people of the United States, for British unfriendly
neutrality during the civil war, that any sum of money, however
large, should have accrued by a fortunate cast of the Commissioners’
dice to the “ Alabama ” claimants, individually, so long as the Com
missioners did not attempt, and in fact were not authorized, to ad
judicate damages upon principle ?
Granting that the fortunate
recipients of the indemnity would be willing to accept their money
without asking whence or how it came (though most of them, I
believe, would imitate Mr. George B. Upton in being willing to post
pone their private remedy to the paramount claim of the public
wrong), what step forward would have been accomplished by the pro
cess toward conciliating international good-will, or, still more, toward
securing that future co-operation in an amended code of maritime law,
which the experience of the late war has shown to be so necessary to
the future peace of the two countries ? Upon both of these points,
but especially the latter, shall I not have the concurrence of our En
glish friends in the propriety of the rejection of the late treaty-? Are
they not desirous that their money, when paid, if an Alabama indem
nity is ever to be rendered (as I trust, in the interests of public law
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
29
and an advanced civilization, one shortly will be), that it shall be paid
and accepted as a pledge of international satisfaction, and not as a
mere recompense for private loss ?
Thus, if a million of dollars is to be paid because of a defective
observance of neutral precaution in not preventing the original escape
of the “Alabama,” or the “ Florida,” from Liverpool, or of the “ Flor
ida” from Nassau; another million because of the burning of Amer
ican ships by British-built Confederate cruisers, without adjudication,
contrary to that code of maritime warfare which Lord Russell an
nounced on behalf of the British Government, at the outbreak of the
Rebellion, would be insisted on from the newly-created belligerents ;
another million because of the admission of unneutrally-equipped pri
vateers, or so-called public ships of war, into the ports of that neutral
power which had negligently tolerated their original outfit within its
own territory; and other millions or thousands, because of the viola
tion of’this or that just doctrine of international law;—if, I say, these
sums of money are awarded on these respective specific grounds, and
the United States as a Government accepts the money on behalf of its
citizens, thereby virtually giving a receipt in acknowledgment of the
moneys being paid upon such and such a principle—is not the transac
tion an infinitely more satisfactory one to the British taxpayer, than
as if neither tenet of public law nor conciliation of the wounded sen
sibilities of a great maritime competitor had once been taken into
account in the matter ?
For myself, speaking as a humble member of the great American
Republic, I cannot look upon the acceptance by the United States of
any “ Alabama ” indemnity, even in the shape of pecuniary redress
to individual sufferers, in any other light than as a pledge given by
the country to Great Britain—perhaps to the world—that it is itself
bound to make reparation on the same principles and to the same ex
tent, to other nations, for any similar injury, national or private, which
shall hereafter be brought home to its charge. In this sense, it seems
to me that the adequacy of any satisfaction to be exacted and recov
ered by the United States, certainly on national account, is to be esti
mated rather by the responsibility which its acceptance draws after it,
than by its absolute apparent magnitude in the first instance.
Thus, supposing the American Government were to exact and
recover that enormous demand for remote and consequential damages
for English intervention in the late war, which has been construed into
rather than out of Senator Sumner’s late speech—say to the extent of
half the expenses of the war—I cannot doubt that the acceptance of
SB.
�30
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON I
any such sum (provided it could once be collected of Great Britain by
threat of war or otherwise) would pledge the former country to a
responsibility which it would be altogether unwise and inexpedient to
enter into. At least, if the United States are hereafter to be called
into judgment upon the same principles, I do not well see how they
could long avoid becoming nationally bankrupt; certainly so unless
their foreign relations are hereafter to be conducted upon a system of
more scrupulous precaution than has been sometimes seen to prevail.
On the other hand, if the British Government, in making any “Ala
bama” redress—whether unsolicited, or in compliance with an arbi
trator’s award—are content to adapt their indemnity to a low grade of
Q neutral obligation, then, so far as its acceptance draws after it the corre
sponding obligation which I have imagined, the United States may con
sider themselves fortunate that they are thereby exonerated in future
from this or that principle of neutral restraint which Great Britain
has impliedly waived. As a lover of peace and well-wisher to civil
ization, I can only hope that that indemnity may cover as many prin
ciples as possible, and be large enough to fix those principles in the
perpetual remembrance of both countries.
Without attempting further exposition of Mr. Seward’s text of
“ the lowest form of satisfaction for the national injury that the United
States could accept,” I cannot dismiss Mr. Johnson’s charge, that we
have obtained all that we ever asked for, without adding my caveat
against the United States being impliedly estopped from hereafter
stating its case for national reparation in any different way, or to any
different extent, from that which has heretofore been put forward in
its official “ Alabama ” correspondence. Thus, supposing our late
Minister’s allegation to be altogether well founded, by what act or
declaration have the American Government cut themselves off from
demanding a just and adequate indemnity in reparation of public as
well as private injuries, if such reparation is ever to be made ? If,
for instance, the arming and equipment of the “ Florida ” was not
made in the first instance in the port of Mobile, as our diplomatists
have tacitly conceded, but, on the contrary, in Liverpool, or, at any
rate, within British jurisdiction in the Bahamas ; if the equipment of
the Alabama with a crew who were known to be “ going down ” in
the steam-tug Hercules “ to join the gunboat ” in Beaumaris Bay
near Liverpool (amounting to what Lord Russell has himself called
“ going to another port in Her Majesty’s dominion to ship a portion of
her crew ”), has never been sufficiently dwelt upon; if the non-compli
ance by the rebels with the British programme of Belligerent Recogj
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
31
nition at any time during the war, and especially after the American
blockade had been rendered incontrovertibly complete (a period long
prior to the launching of the Alabama, the Georgia, and, much more,
the Shenandoah, as British official concessions establish), has not been as
yet made a part of the American grievance ; if, still more, the deliberate
refusal of the rebels to comply with that programme as manifestoed in
Secretary Benjamin’s “ Instructions to Confederate Cruisers,” published
in the English Confederate official organ in London, in November or De
cember of 1864, several weeks before the “ Shenandoah ” was supplied,
as a regular ship of war, with the forty-five men, the two hundred tons
of coal, and the extra provisions at Melbourne, which were the very
means by which she afterward destroyed our whaling fleet in the
North Pacific Ocean, has never yet been connected with the statement
of the “Shenandoah” claims
if, I say, these and numerous other
points, of perhaps equal or even greater magnitude, have heretofore
failed of their due setting forth on the national behalf, will it be con
tended by any one, even Mr. Johnson himself, that they may not now
be justly advanced by the United States, and “ listened to by the Brit
ish Government, or countenanced by other nations ” ?
For my own part, I think that the argument might as well be
made that no’ claim can be raised for any injury done to the United
States or its citizens by the depredations of the Alabama since Octo
ber 23, 1863 (nine months before she ended her career), because Mr.
Adams on that day proposed to Lord Russell, under Mr. Seward’s
instructions, “ that there was no fair and equitable form of conven
tional arbitrament or reference to which the United States will not be
willing to submit” the question of British responsibility for the
doings of that vessel. It has been British option thus far, until the
late negotiations were so rashly hurried through, to keep this “ Ala
bama ” controversy open; and if the American claim justly grows
the more it is examined and the longer its settlement is deferred, (I
will not say so much the worse for England, but; as I verily believe)
so much the better for civilization, and the establishment of a better
code of international law. Only, for the present, let it be acknowl
edged that the country is to sustain no prejudice for fair dealing
because of these abortive John son-Stanley, Johnson-Clarendon nego
tiations.
And this leads me to say a word, before concluding my already
too extended communication, upon a topic which, as much as anything
else, prompted the making of the communication at all. I mean the
point last suggested, that the United States may possibly have been
�32
Q
MB. REVERDY JOHNSON!
wanting, in some degree, in good faith toward England, in repudiating,
through the action of its Senate, a treaty which had been regularly en
tered into by its Minister at London, and then approved of by its
Executive at Washington. This is a suggestion which is naturally
brought to the notice of every American traveler in Europe, and
which forces itself all the more painfully upon his attention, when he
is informed that the Minister of his own Government has declared
that the treaty in question concedes all that the United States has ever
asked for.
The answer to this suggestion is so simple and conclusive, founded
on the constitutional right and duty of the United States Senate to
reject any treaty inconsistent with their views of its expediency for
the interests of the country, however strongly it may have been ap
proved of by the Executive, or agreed to by the foreign Minister, that
I can promise to be very brief in making it.
Of course it would be quite superfluous to remind any intelligent
American of the co-ordinate and independent power of the Senate of
the United States to reject any treaty submitted to them for ratifica
tion by the President. That the President, or, much more, the Secre
tary of State, or any diplomatic agent abroad, cannot undertake to
pledge beforehand the decision of the Senate in such a case, without
being thereby guilty of the heinous official impropriety, if not of an
impeachable offense, is also too well understood on the American side
of the water to need a moment’s elucidation. But to most Europeans,
and to many Englishmen who have been accustomed only to a
monarchical or imperial form of government, the idea of the treaty
making power not being exclusively vested in the Executive head of
the Government, presents an anomaly such as has hardly ever before
been considered.
To such, therefore, of my readers (if I shall be so fortunate as to
have any), I beg to commend the following short extract from Whea
ton’s Commentaries on the Law of Nations, which states the case as
to the Constitution of the United States in this particular so clearly as
to dispose of the point at once. I would only premise that the
American publicist wrote the passage more than twenty years ago,
for the text of both the French and English editions of his treatise,
and that, therefore, by this time, it ought to be within the knowledge
of Europeans generally.
, The municipal constitution of every particular State determines in whom re
sides the authority to ratify treaties negotiated and concluded with foreign pow
ers, so as to render them obligatory upon the nation. In absolute monarchies it is
the prerogative of the sovereign himself to confirm the act of his plenipotentiary
�THE ALABAMA. NEGOTIATIONS.
33
by his final sanction. In certain limited or constitutional monarchies, the consent
of the legislative power of the nation is in some cases required for that purpose.
In some republics, as in that of the United States of America, the advice and, consent
of the Senate are essential, to enable the Chief Executive Magistrate to pledge the na
tional faith in this form. In all these cases, it is, consequently, an implied condi
tion in negotiating with foreign powers, that the treaties concluded by the executive gov
ernment shall be subject to ratification in the manner prescribed by the fundamental
laws of the State.
Did not the two respective British Foreign Secretaries, who suc
cessively negotiated with Mr. Reverdy Johnson, know of this im
plied condition ” in the due ratification of any American treaty, of
which Mr. Wheaton speaks ? Not only were they apprised of it in
due season, but, as we have seen in the limited abstract of the official
correspondence which we have had occasion to make, both Messrs.
Seward and Johnson were constantly calling it to the notice of the
two Foreign Secretaries, by suggesting that this or that provision
must be adopted in order to secure the Senatorial sanction. It has
even appeared that the American Secretary of State notified the
British Minister at Washington, as one of the reasons foi’ rejecting the
first convention, that in the opinion of the President and cabinet, its
terms would not be satisfactory to the Senate. Whether this were
according to strict official etiquette or not, can there be any doubt that
the British Government were forced to give attention to this constitu
tional requisite in treating with the United States before entering into
the second convention ?
But last and most conclusive of all arguments, can any English
man suggest any shadow of unfairness toward his country in this
action of the United States Senate, in rejecting the second convention
of January 14th, when in the very instrument itself, as well as in every
other draft of a convention to which Mr. Johnson put his name on
behalf of the United States, these words were made a part of the
treaty: “ The present treaty shall be ratified by the President of the
United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate there
of” %
But notwithstanding all this, 1 think I hear some of our English
liberal friends still objecting : “ Perhaps this may be so, legally and
formally, but we do not see how the American Senate could equitably
and fairly accredit Mr. Reverdy Johnson to us by a unanimous vote,
and then, when we strike hands with him, reject the treaty with an
almost equal unanimity. It seems to us that they should have put us
on our guard against giving him our confidence, and not have led us
to think that they thought so differently of him from his namesake,
the President, who had appointed him.”
5
♦
�34
MR. REVERDY JOHNSON :
To which I reply : But how did the Senate know that Minister
Johnson was going to run such a career as he did ? Did they suppose
that when he was instructed only to sound the British Government, he
was about to take upon himself to settle the greatest foreign compli
cation on the national docket ? Did they suppose that Mr. Seward
was going to abdicate his functions, and let the new envoy carry off
the glory of composing a controversy which the Secretary of State
had made it his chief study to manage for six years ? Is it probable
that they imagined that any settlement of the “Alabama” would be
attempted by Mr. Seward himself in the dying hours of the Andrew
Johnson Administration, when that administration had so recently
come within one vote of being summarily deposed? Had not the
British Ministei* at Washington attended the Impeachment proceed
ing? And were not his Government at home duly warned, before en
tering into either convention with Mr. Reverdy Johnson, that that
Minister represented the most obnoxious Executive ever known to
the American Republic ?
If these questions are not enough to silence our murmuring Eng
lish friends, I beg to ask three more:
First. Could the unanimous confirmation of Mr. Reverdy John
son’s nomination, by the United States Senate in July, have encour
aged any false confidences, which were not sufficiently removed by
the equally unanimous repudiation of his doings, in November, by
the very administration which had originally proposed his nomina
tion? ■
Secondly. If Mr. Thornton’s report of the unanimous rejection by
President Johnson and his cabinet of Minister Johnson’s first treaty
had not sufficiently opened Lord Clarendon’s eyes in November, to
the overweening confidence of the American envoy in the success of
his mission, had not the Foreign Secretary’s vision been made suffi
ciently clear on that point as early as April 5th—ten days before the
Senate acted on the second treaty—when he notified the Minister,
that “ Her Majesty’s Government could not consider a communication
[from him] not made by the authority of the present [American]
Government?
And lastly. Are the United States Senate any more to be blamed
for repudiating Mr. Reverdy Johnson and his diplomacy, than was
Andrew Johnson’s Administration—which repudiation as we have
seen was overlooked and deemed satisfactory by the British Govern
ment—or than was the British Foreign Secretary, who it seems re
pudiated both the one and the other, ten days sooner than the Ameri
can Senate itself?
�THE ALABAMA NEGOTIATIONS.
35
If the reader, in being kind enough to answer these questions for
himself, will also kindly add, as I hope he will, that he will not trouble
me for further justification of American fairness, either equitable or
technical, in the matter of rejecting Mr. Reverdy Johnson’s second
treaty, I will relieve his much-taxed patience by only asking his
favorable verdict upon the following points, which embody the chief
-conclusions to which my argument has tended:
(1.) That our English opponents in the Johnson-Stanley, John
son-Clarendon negotiations were well aware, from the outset of those
negotiations, that no convention, however, strongly assented to by
the American Minister in London, or approved of by the American
Executive at home, could become a binding treaty upon the United
States, till it had been duly ratified by the consent of the American
Senate.
*
(2.) That there was nothing in the circumstances leading to the
negotiation of the second convention of January 14th, or in the tenor
of that convention itself, which even impliedly forbade the exercise
by the Senate of its ordinary constitutional function of rejecting any
treaty deemed unsatisfactory for the national good.
(3.) That the British Government, in dealing with the Administra
tion of Andrew Johnson—especially after November 3, 1868, when
the election of General Grant to the Presidency had set the seal of
popular approval upon Impeachment proceedings, or at least of con
demnation upon that Administration—were sufficiently put upon
notice, that any important treaty concluded with that obnoxious Exec
utive was more than ordinarily liable to Senatorial criticism and con
demnation.
(4 ) That the convention of January 14th was rightly rejected, on
its merits, by the United States Senate, as an entirely inadequate and
insufficient submission to arbitration of the American grounds of
claim in the “ Alabama ” controversy, either public or private, col
lective or individual.
(5.) That the United States Senate, in rejecting that treaty, ren
dered a favor to the British Government, itself, in preventing the
further prosecution of a scheme of settlement so defective in its
statement of the subject-matter of the dispute, and so totally devoid
of any recognition of principle upon which satisfaction might there
after be awarded or accepted.
(6.) That no discredit ought to attach to the United States from the
extraordinary and unfounded reflections of its late Minister respecting
the rejection of that treaty; because, as we have seen, he scarcely ever
�36
THE ALABAMA. NEGOTIATIONS.
at any time comprehended the nature and extent of his own powers,,
or if he did, rarely complied with them ; because, having his first
convention set aside for a violation of instructions, he sought to amend
his second by an interpolation which was, if possible, a greater breach
of official propriety, and which had to be repudiated by the British
Government itself; because he accompanied that attempt to save his
own work from disgrace with a concession which was at once unworthy
of the suggestion of an American Minister, and at the same time, so
far as appears, purely of his own invention ; because he convicts him
self, by his own showing, of having intentionally agreed to leave out
a most important part of the American claim, under the device of
"a omitting any specification of the point to be decided; because he con
sidered himself fortunate in getting any mention at all of the claim
he represented introduced into the terms of the treaty; and, finally,
because his whole ministerial treatment of the American case was
no better than “ a mush of concession” and such as it is most char
itable to believe resulted rather from ignorance or misapprecia
tion of its merits, or from failing faculties, than from a deliberate pur
pose to sacrifice the great interests, national and international, which
he undertook to represent.
Paris, August 20.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Mr. Beverdy Johnson: the Alabama negotiations, and their just repudiation by the Senate of the United States
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bemis, George
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: New York
Collation: 36 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The Alabama Claims were a series of demands for damages sought by the government of the United States from the United Kingdom in 1869, for the attacks upon Union merchant ships by Confederate Navy commerce raiders built in British shipyards during the American Civil War. [From Wikipedia, September 2017].
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Baker & Godwin
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1869
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5238
Subject
The topic of the resource
American Civil War
International relations
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Mr. Beverdy Johnson: the Alabama negotiations, and their just repudiation by the Senate of the United States), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Alabama Claims
Conway Tracts
Great Britain-Foreign relations-United States
United States-Foreign relations-1861-1865
United States-Foreign relations-Great Britain
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/c269f71a244bf6935aed614dd0784f8c.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=nadBrQwrGiKqaC6c69tcr9qEdJDG3X%7EoaAYMgRt4nk04yxQJtp29dlYzzVP-qbOW9jJ6dLFml5NAPtkE-fM19i7nPVhLbfoUOl-b3TSRmuSZDFatcFTd9GSVWSAG4YezwDVBICnMzvmyGpO5Eg77sKs5lnnWbB-BWY8%7EYARw-daqplysh4uJIekxDfAXVu1KlsCEX3z%7Ep4Vu9kDrENjixG5QVNVJPFC89Lcu4Jb8iRBKDBEpfCRJyxgQffyM8qaT3qGut4EhHlKSFbm1lBsTwxjkv8%7EhT04H-3LBffNexaQbwTjgEd98l1E8%7EflT6kgm6svGwZTYYb%7Ef1MNC%7Ek2PLA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ed8734cdb93444e9f5b77f116bf06354
PDF Text
Text
THE RECEPTION AND ENTERTAINMENT
OF
The Chinese Embassy,
BY THE
CITY OF BOSTON.
1868.
BOSTON:
ALFRED MUDGE & SON, CITY PRINTERS, 34 SCHOOL STREET.
1868.
�.HQITSISOSH Hilt
oii-i
<>’• ¥'■
CBg£?iil)
v‘o
'>:"';':^<?T*;. fci ■
-4ff 7~.>•'•■ ■
�THE RECEPTION.
The visit of an Embassy from the Chinese Empire to the
United States Government, for the purpose of promoting the
interests of the two countries by facilitating the intercourse be
tween them — an event of the highest significance in itself—
was regarded by the citizens of Boston with peculiar satisfaction,
from the fact that the chief personage in the Embassy from this
ancient empire had long been a resident in their immediate vi
cinity, and had, during several terms, represented a portion of
the city in the National Congress. It was in harmony, therefore,
with the unanimous wishes of the citizens, that the City Council,
on the twenty-ninth of May, 1868,— soon after the arrival of the
Embassy from the Pacific Coast, — passed an order for the ap
pointment of a joint committee to tender the hospitalities of this
city to the distinguished visitors.
The Committee, consisting of Aidermen Samuel C. Cobb and
Benjamin James; Councilmen Charles H. Allen, (the President,)
Henry W. Pickering, George P. Denny and S. T. Snow, pro
ceeded to New York on the thirtieth day of May, and invited
the Honorable Anson Burlingame, Envoy Extraordinary and
Minister Plenipotentiary, and his associates, Chih Ta-jin and
Sun Ta-jin to visit Boston, at an early day, with the members of
their suite, and partake of its hospitalities. In accepting the
invitation, Mr. Burlingame expressed his gratification at this
mark of confidence and esteem from his former fellow-citizens,
who, he said, were the first to extend an official welcome to
his mission.
�suit
io storriaoas
odd la noiisoDltoi odd lo too gniwoi*^ ‘yslsb odT
odd doidw fasdsdR f>oMuU odd fins $xnriD xxoowtod
<sta toijj osiBgxrilisd /j:M botoova*xq ^otordojtoxi od boiowoQtno oiaw
A Io tox9>^too,sfd 'orfi iitoxx xxodaoS gnifeiv m'o*il Bodsioosaa
YpfU siorfw tipjaooipW to.be^rrw^aafidxiiH add dtoitoowd odd xiO
iXQflxroQ. ^diQ- add io oodditoxHol) adb lo o°i.go odd iabiua tbaxusxapi
W?w|8 & .ifoolo'o oain xA .gpinioxs gniwoHol e.dd ^to.u ?so5boSI lo
saf-e iiatooU o*U.,io taoh,uotoiiopfi8 odd
bobivoif| a^w .tiurjj
."•>> j/.'e aifiasg e\dia odd Ba^vw.' dahfv
yx:;/z''..
<■'? ••.•■-;.On'OvA ••■C'7 -,<$ 4; '-<•.:.»•?? ’?*•
�RECEPTION OF THE
4
The delay growing out of the ratification of the supplementary
treaty between China and the United States, which the Embassy
were empowered to negotiate, prevented Mr.. Burlingame and his
(^associates from visiting Boston until the -twenty fipsfr of August.
/&' On the twentieth-the Embassy arrived at Worcester, where they
/
remained, under the care of the Committee of the City Council
of Boston, untj| the following morning. At nine o’clock a special
train was provided by the Superintendent of the Boston and
Albany Railroad, which conveyed the city’s guests and the
Committee to the Western Avenue Crossing, where they arrived
at half past ten o’clock a. m., and where preparations had been
made to receive them.
Mr. Cobb, the Chairman of the Committee, then presented
Mr. Burlingame and his associates to the Honorable Nathaniel
B. Shurtleff, Mayor of Boston. The Mayor welcomed the Em
bassy in the following words:
Mr. Ambassador,—The City Council of Boston has
already, through a committee, formally tendered to you
the civilities that are your due, both as the accredited
representative of the illustrious sovereign of the Chi
nese empire, and also, as one, who, in times past, emi
nently enjoyed the confidence and esteem of the citizens
of this community. My duties on this occasion are,
therefore, so far simplified as to afford me only the
pleasure of expressing, in a few words, the welcome of
this municipality to you, and to your distinguished
associates, upon your entering the capital of the com
monwealth, which in former days you yourself have
personally represented in the high councils of the
nation.
To us it is a cause of much regret that your coming
hither has been deferred until the time of our general
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
5
vacation, when the authorities and many of the citizens
with their families are absent from their homes, and our
halls of counsel and legislation, our schools and institu
tions of science, learning and the arts, are temporarily
closed, and our family hearthstones almost deserted:
For it is the earnest desire of our citizens to give you a
reception fully commensurate with their respect for the
ancient empire of China, and with their own ability to
bestow. Nevertheless, you and the personages com
prising your suite are heartily welcome to the freedom
and hospitalities of this our city; and I trust that your
sojourn with us, though of short duration, may be
agreeable to you, and that the strangers who, for the
first time, visit our peaceful abodes may find somewhat
in our peculiar institutions, of sufficient excellence and
interest to be deemed worthy of notice now, and of
remembrance hereafter on their return to their far dis
tant home.
In the name of my fellow-citizens, I extend to you all
a sincere and most cordial welcome to Boston.
In reply Mr. Burlingame said:
Mr. Mayor., — On behalf of myself and my associates
I thank you for this tender of the hospitalities of the
renowned city of Boston. Hitherto we have avoided
all public demonstrations, not because we desired to
repulse that good will which has followed us from our
first arrival in this country down to the present hour,
but because we felt it to be our duty to postpone our
personal gratifications to the demands of our diplomatic
��RECEPTION OF THE
6
affairs. We have made this single exception for the
reason that Boston was the first to establish relations
with China, — because it was my old home, — because,
sir, it has presented its public schools, and its institu
tions of learning as its highest points of interest. Edu
cation is the foundation of all preferment in China, and
is the basis of those institutions which have outlasted
all others. It was natural, therefore, that my associates
should have desired to make themselves acquainted
with the systems of learning in the West. They will
feel profound grief that it will be impossible for them
to see your public schools in all their perfection. But I
have no doubt that they will see much to admire when
here, and much to remember when far away. Thank
ing you for this welcome, deeply grateful ’to you for
your personal acquaintance, we now present ourselves
to your hospitality with confidence and pleasure.
The company then entered the carriages assigned to them,
and a procession was formed by Colonel John Kurtz, Chief
Marshal, in the following order:—
The Chief Marshal.
Aids — Police Captains R. H. Wilkins and S. G. Adams.
Mounted Police Officers, under the command of Capt. Paul J.
Vinal.
Cavalry Band.
Major Lucius Slade and Staff.
Company B, First Battalion Light Dragoons, Capt. Albert
Freeman.
Company A, First Battalion Light Dragoons, Capt. Barney Hull.
His Honor the Mayor and the Honorable Anson Burlingame, in
a barouche drawn by four horses.
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
7
The Chairman of the Committee, Chih Ta-jin and Mr. Brown
(First Secretary), in a barouche drawn by four horses.
Aiderman Benjamin James, Sun Ta-jin and M. Dechamps (Second
Secretary), in a barouche.
The President of the Common Council, Councilman Pickering,
Fung Laou-Yeh and Tah Laou-Yeh, interpreters, in a barouche.
Councilmen Denny and Snow, Teh Laou-Yeh and Kway LaouYeh, interpreters, in a barouche.
Mandarin Ting, Mandarin Lien, and two scribes, in a barouche.
Carriages containing reporters for the daily, papers
and the servants of the Embassy.
Company C, First Battalion Light Dragoons, Captain Freeman
C. Gilman.
Company D, First Battalion of Light Dragoons, Captain George
Curtis.
•
The route of the procession was as follows: Through Western
Avenue, Heath, Centre, Marcella and Highland streets, Eliot
Square, Dudley, Warren and Washington streets, Chester Square,
Tremont and Worcester streets, Harrison Avenue, Newton and
Washington streets, Union Square, Tremont, Boylston and Ar
lington streets, Commonwealth Avenue, Berkeley, Beacon, Park,
Tremont, Winter, Summer, .Devonshire and Franklin streets,
counter-marching around the flag-staff, through Devonshire, Milk,
India, State, Washington and School streets, to the Parker
House, where the guests were given up.
The customary salutes in honor of a Foreign Minister were
fired from Washington Square, at the Highlands, and from
Boston Common, by a detachment of the Second Light Bat
tery, M. V. M.
In the evening, Mr. Burlingame and his associates gave a re
ception to the members of the City Government in the large
dining-hall on the second floor of the Parker House.
On Friday, at 12 o’clock, a public reception was given by the
��RECEPTION OF THE CHINESE EMBASSY.
8
Embassy in Faneuil Hall, which was handsomely decorated.
The galleries were occupied by ladies; and the body of the hall
was filled by gentlemen, who received Mr. Burlingame and his
associates, on their entrance, with great enthusiasm. The recep
tion continued until one o’clock, when the guests, who were
much fatigued, withdrew from the hall and returned to the
Parker House.
sf
��THE BANQUET.
��THE BANQUET.
t
On Friday, the twenty-first of August, the City Council enter
tained the Embassy with a banquet at the St. James Hotel.
About two hundred and twenty-five gentlemen, including the
members of the City Government, were present.
The company entered the dining hall at seven o’clock.
The Honorable Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, Mayor, presided. On
his right were seated the Honorable Anson Burlingame, Chief of
the Embassy; His Excellency Alexander H. Bullock, Governor
of the Commonwealth; Teh Laou-ych, English Interpreter at
tached to the Embassy; the Honorable Charles Sumner, Chair
man of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States
Senate; the Honorable Caleb Cushing; Major General Irwin
McDowell, United States Army; Commodore John Rodgers,
United States Navy; Charles G. Nazro, Esquire, President of
the Board of Trade. On the left of the Mayor were seated
Chih Ta-jin, associate minister; Mr. McLeary Brown, Secretary
to the Embassy; Sun Ta-jin, associate minister; M. Emile De
champs, Secretary to the Embassy; Fung Laou-yeh, English
Interpreter; Ralph Waldo Emerson, LL.D.; Reverend George
Putnam, D. D.; Mr. Edwin P. Whipple.
Among the other distinguished guests present were Dr. Oliver
Wendell Holmes; the Honorable Nathaniel P. Banks, the Hon
orable George S. Boutwell, and the Honorable Ginery Twichell,
members of Congress; the Reverend Thomas Hill, D. D., Presi
dent of Harvard College; the Honorable George S. Hillard,
United States District Attorney; the Honorable George 0. Bras*
�---------------
-----
- flHk
A_____ 1
�RECEPTION OF THE CHINESE EMBASSY.
11
tow, President of the Senate; the Honorable Harvey Jewell,
Speaker of the House of Representatives; Brevet Major General
H. W. Benham, and Brevet Major General J. G. Foster, U. S.
Engineer Corps; Major General James H. Carleton, U. S. A.;
Brevet Brigadier General Henry H. Prince, Paymaster U. S. A.;
Major General James A. Cunningham, Adjutant General; the
Honorable Henry J. Gardner, Ex-Governor of the Common
wealth, the Honorable Josiah Quincy; the Honorable Frederic
W. Lincoln, Jr.; Dr. Peter Parker, formerly Commissioner to
China; the Honorable Isaac Livermore; Sr. Frederico Granados,
Spanish Consul; Mr. G. M. Finotti, Italian Consul; Mr. Joseph
Iasigi, Turkish Consul; the Honorable Marshall P. Wilder,
President of the Board of Agriculture; N. G. Clark, D. D.,
Secretary of the Board of Foreign Missions; and many of the
leading merchants and professional men of Boston.
When the guests had taken the places assigned to them, the
Mayor said:
Gentlemen of the City Council, — At your bidding I
most heartily welcome to the pleasures of the present
occasion all who are here to participate in the hospital
ities of the city, in honor of the distinguished visitors
from the oldest and most populous empire of the world.
In accordance with our custom, we will now give atten
tion while an invocation for the Divine blessing is pro
nounced by the Reverend Dr. Putnam.
A blessing was then asked by the Rev. Dr. Putnam.
When the company had dined, the Mayor requested their
attention, and made the following remarks:
THE mayor’s REMARKS.
: —We are met this evening to testify
our respect to the illustrious embassy which is now
Gentlemen
��RECEPTION OF THE
12
honoring our city with its presence. One of our per
sonal friends, who has been absent for a time for the
accomplishment of much good for all nations and all
people, has returned to the scenes of bygone days to meet
his old associates, and to take hand by hand the friends
of his early manhood. * lie has returned more weightily
laden with official honors than his own country, and
those with which it has heretofore held close alliance,
could bestow upon him; and with him he has many
personages of a remote land, equally distinguished for
their important official rank, and for the intellectual,
moral, and social positions which they hold among their
countrymen. We all welcome him and them most cor
dially to our municipality, deeming this honorable and
much desired visitation to our country as a harbinger of
the glorious future, when the' greatest, the most popu
lous, and the most ancient of all the nations of the
world shall open most widely and most freely her
hitherto closed portals to all people of all lands and of
all complexions and tongues.
Especially pleased are we, Mr. Ambassador, that
you, the chief personage of this illustrious embassy, are
flesh of our flesh, and blood of our blood — that your lan
guage is our language, your sentiments and feelings the
same as ours — that our home has once been your home
—and that you have equally the personal respect and high
regards of those who are now your fellow-countrymen, as
of us who have also enjoyed that privilege. Your pres
ence, sir, with us this evening, in your present capacity,
and with these surroundings, gives us, I assure you,
great pleasure and satisfaction, and will be remembered
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
13
most agreeably when you shall have successfully com
pleted your important missions, and when friendly
breezes shall have wafted your trusty vessels with their
precious burden, over the wide expanded ocean, and
returned you in safety and in health to your far distant
homes, to the affections of your friends, the plaudits of
your countrymen, and the approbation of your govern
ment. It is not an empty compliment that you have paid
to our country, in that the first negotiation on your very
remarkable errand should have been made with the United
States: Nor are we of Boston in the least degree insensi
ble to the distinction which you have accorded to our
city, in having made to us the first, and perhaps the only,
formal visit of your embassy to any of the large munici
palities of the land. The strong tie that once so firmly
bound you in friendship to our community has not been
broken; and we are joyfully permitted to hail your indi
vidual presence once more among us, as one of the
felicities of the advent of the friendly mission to our
shores. Time may wear on, events of the greatest
portent may transpire; but ancient friendships should
never cease, nor the pleasant memories of the past be
forgotten. We greet you, sir, most warmly as an old
friend, and we re‘cognize these your associates as new
friends. May these relations never have an end! But
may the bonds which you and our beloved country have
now made, prove of adamantine hardness, and of eternal
duration! May the results of your labors be of mutual
benefit to all countries ! In the days that are to come,
when the doings of the present time shall be regarded
as of the ancient of days, may the grand treaties of this
�WJ
*
sht
*20 wiwsasa
He isBol
sahlA to S°wq Il^ma s to sfeA tos oqoto/I
— noifisoqqua £ dans oi tool btoow. Ji to aiaoiJriiaaaL
tsaiO odJ ’to anoimmob tofon&sdi oJ □toai .^Iiw oxB toxi'j
■bmshsvG snoitoi ^d gsw (jnihiO won). ^sdtoO to nds21
tooO to oep’J oto tonoxs ssa vd agsaa/iq adt iol Jawd
’eiD to Jxj|tfc ixwTg adT Jtoiovoaaili naswj ton tod
to sabji. &ib cd ocnoo Janj toil odw ..esdnisjIaQ to -’.-r Tf.” ■
-d .-.ton WfRA toil id anw ..ditoG cto 1": v3bbiy>7■J,.i}«i;
.. .a ,'XUOJ.
v.'
1.1 ,yG .
r fr,;'v-^.<:-. > .
�RECEPTION THE OF
14
your embassy be remembered as the Maximae Chartae of
international union for the promotion and security of
political and religious liberty, of learning and intelligence,
of law and harmony, and of perpetual mutual respect
and amity.
It may not be out of place for me to mention in this
presence, that representatives of the oldest constituted
government on the globe, dating back through more dy
nasties of potentates than any other nations can of rulers,
have broken through the reserve of power, wealth, dignity
and pride of ancient rank to tender to the whole civilized
world an interchange of all that can be of any benefit
or profit to individuals or collections of people; while
we, so young in national age, and differing so much
from them in all our customs, manners, laws and
government, are the first to open our arms to wel
come the offer, and to ratify treaties of the most
incalculable good for their country and for ours. The
Chinese Empire may date back to the fabulous era
of Puankoo, and its history may be traced through the
mythological times of Fohy, Shin-noong and their suc
cessors, and down in historical annals more centuries
before the Christian era than have transpired since
the advent of the Messiah; and yet no period of the
existence of that great empire, not even the days of the
great Confucius, can compare in importance with the
present era of her history, which will ever be noted as
the greatest for giving and receiving that the world has
ever known, either from recorded pages or even from
the traditions of the past. The embassy has done wise
ly : For although the institutions of the Chinese, as we 1
�.'pfe^S tefeveq Q.ftJ
,<-’4 Wvp:.;te®.
:r«#
tefw .iii anahk&q
f-.W.-V
r yjmiteiti
fc-Tjvag xj-jq
Jrea.x<ft& - *il
. O
yroI’oq.Ssg'
4R£ xi$ bcr*«■? D* \ir? 7C’T>J
yypiS jfo£&:{te'ai& ’fe .uawra:-;'"
io^'Si^xri ■^./. y ■ . ,si/3./; :y—•
,a«>jld.;r-
i i’is.l:-s. '■ ‘' - '
... ^W -
9
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
15
as their habits and customs, may differ from ours, a great
similarity nevertheless exists in the peculiar situation of
our several territories. Their empire and our republic,
although in different hemispheres, and the inhabitants
antipodes, have somewhat similar positions in what have
been known as the old and the new worlds. Both
countries are north of the northern tropic, and centrally
in the same temperate zone. The national capitals of
both are, as near as chance could place them, on the
same parallel of latitude ; and the United States and
China proper cover about the same amount of territory,
enjoy very nearly the same climate, and are bounded
largely by the great navigable seas and oceans. The
states and territories of the one correspond very closely
with the provinces of the other. But what a vast differ
ence in population! Where we have one inhabitant the
Chinese have ten. They count more living souls than
do all the nations of Europe and both Americas. Indeed
were the Emperor of China, in our republican way of
doing things, to submit to the hard duty of shaking hands
with his subjects, it would take more years to accomplish
the civility, on the eight hour system, than were accorded
to the venerable Parr—who, as you all have heard, lived to
the remarkable age of one hundred and fifty-two years
— and this too without keeping up with the births that
would occur during the time. Indeed, were he gifted
with eternal life he never would complete this intermi
nable undertaking.
Perhaps I may be pardoned, gentlemen, in saying,
that before the discovery of America by Columbus, the
earth was seemingly flat, and contained little else than
�HHT '£0 KOJT'IBJgS
boyoyj«d 4^w, oafo
•oSP’. eWaayaa
•;{.
--. ,/Z'
sdliw
t3no&ixr< ad Ihw no'^ fugg
ewid .o3 .Btoiiisivwo xuT §r&aeWm od
.S?.iW>.Q.f&. JjQSffWOTCO fe’iH
1 M.3 .&id3 /-O-J
R^WVod3
pm ^.-.•.<\
£[
shls IflQ$ iftfc
. pjr£jrco
r$
jod4‘
Q
v%
'
i-
f .'?•;.$ .-a y^t.-vwezb-XOu *wwj^|
’f'^ '
.»■£-:■
JXI
"■' , 'V '.
Mfr-’*--
F** ***0’|IX ?>?*<'.'.'
|*!>:\
.■■?.£. .
..
�RECEPTION OF THE
16
Europe and Asia and a small part of Africa—at least all
descriptions of it would lead to such a supposition — and
that the only route to the ancient dominions of the Great
Kahn of Cathay (now, China) was by tedious overland
travel, for the passage by sea around the Cape of Good
Hope had not been discovered. The grand object of the
voyage of Columbus, who had just come to the idea of
the sphericity of the earth, was to find a new route to
Cathay ^and Cipango by a westerly course; and it is
a remarkable fact that the Genoese adventurer, before
starting on his grand voyage, actually provided him
self with letters to the great powers of those almost
unknown places from the fortunate Ferdinand and
Isabella, then the sovereigns of • Spain.
Sailing
with a belief that where the ocean terminated land
would have a beginning, the great discoverer of this
western hemisphere, on the twenty-first day of October,
1492, first-of Europeans, set foot on ground, which in
his belief was the desired land of his search: But in
stead he had found another continent; and the passage
so much needed, was subsequently, and but five years
later, discovered in another direction, and the route, by
doubling the Cape of Good Hope, was established, and
the laborious journeys to the east through inhospitable
wildernesses and dreary deserts ceased forever.
But, gentlemen, if I say much more about ancient
China, I shall leave no room for the present of that great
empire : And I need not now tell you of the great mechanrcal effort of more than twenty centuries ago — the
building of the great Chinese Wall, surpassing those of
Babylon; nor of the great canal, the longest in the
�t'fW.«aB’dnfwioO ’«p
p^ol'€?p J/oi'ifl|0<6.^'
.bfaow
•^.••nrp* pvB asasijiO piit ’{d Bpaiterq ^fiBirhq-iloafdlO
' J^r8^
ic
ip
oi.olod aaWQ|i
jpb’^p^xuf^ io uoisHovui adt.lp iojb ; fcg s.dj to
'AGOP^H/isgoM 'Ig .S3^b,T9iii.-eip£pfJ wr^'ixoo awi
p4§..&eiifc.hoqfed ffoidw
©4i to; isw;»f odt to
^4Sf::..-'
-p^gasg- oxB'-pzg1'o4 ggof ioir’jiv^izGseahx.1y-K».€ij!oC''7-lT.;’p wo woSxi'.CG-^zwrl v
(.
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
17
world, and completed before the birth of Columbus; nor
of block-printing, practised by the Chinese five hundred
years before Faust, or Guttemberg, or Schoefler ever
dreamed of the art; nor of the invention of gunpowder,
known centuries before the days of Roger Bacon; nor
of the power of the loadstone, which helped direct the
Chinese navigator long before the passage to Cathay
was sought by Europeans, or our own country discovered
through its instrumentality. Each of these themes would
exhaust all the time, and more too, that is allotted to
me. But all these have their significance, and all have
had, and will continue to have, their influence for good.
I may, however, without fear of complaint, say to
our stranger friends, that we whom they are now visit
ing are a peculiar people; that we all love liberty,
and desire that others shall enjoy it with us; that
our small band of forefathers, about the time that
the present dynasty commenced in China, peaceably
sought these shores, driven from their' transatlantic
homes by vexations and persecutions, and here planted
themselves and their principles; and that we have
grown up from such beginnings to what they now find
us. From the first we opened our doors freely to all men;
no wayfarer, of any clime or tongue, was ever denied a
welcome here. We had room for ourselves, and we
had spare room for others. With the great Chinese
sage, we have ever practised the Golden Rule of our own
ancestors, but better expressed by him, “ Do not unto
othemwhat you would not have others do unto you;”
and I verily believe that in the wise sayings of some
learned aphorist of the Orientals, we may be able to
3
�’to
bd ^Sa£d££f9 TBX:7
nodomoiq o4i lol'Zfchnr t.Rfn->hft^ar
; JwgrlcM bns gmTnsoiW^Wlf anbi^daihm; I^ddloq
?!^'i»T Imnffl 13£^aqj@q *fe 'SLs t^xd Ims Wl >
■"■■.■
■■
?yMwW^.
ScJ om iol esj^ -fe &yo sd^on^psfJT
b-1^’K‘'’--Mf^ jaoJdo odi 1©‘
’ VmJ-' " .--•«
ibhr'-'^S .^r;d ’ &:f "Sd ■>• - -. ’
�RECEPTION OF THE
18
find another of our good sayings, “ Be virtuous and you
will be happy,” also much improved by reversal, “ Be
happy and you will be virtuous.”
It may ‘be interesting for our visitors to know,
that from this community first commenced the China
trade of this country ; that from this and a neighbor
ing port sailed, till recently, all the merchant vessels
that traversed the oceans between America and China;
and that much of the wealth of the old families of Bos
ton was obtained in the China and East India trade.
But hereafter all trade with China will be attended with
less difficulty than it was heretofore, — thanks to the
present peaceable mission. * The dawn has already ap
peared. China and the United States will hereafter
exchange productions without let or hindrance, and
the arts of peace and civilization will equally and
reciprocally flourish in both.
Religion — the boon
most dearly esteemed by all men — will be liberally
enjoyed in both nations, and by all people. The day
will soon come when we shall be the east and China
the west; when all travel between these mighty nations
shall be over the justly-named Pacific Ocean, (for dis
tance from our east to our west will soon * be annihila
ted,) and the western passage — the long-lost hope and
desire of the ancient navigators — shall be accom
plished.
Gentlemen, let us rejoice in the event that has
brought us together this evening; and while we give
welcome to those who visit us for the first time, may we
be sufficiently grateful for the benefits which must in
course result from their benevolent and wise mission!
�'.'/YisM
e?s«r(Ksi'-C- \d-3*&ij*F’ id?LA
”.-Vr#i#6 lr. *'»<• J <?»?: -io itr-jf:
*
.
Jl'u.
.efTF '
•
•• A ViU'H
*
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
19
After music by Gilmore’s Band, the Mayor announced as the
first regular toast:
“ The President of the United States.”
The Band performed the American national air.
The Mayor then announced as the second regular toast :
“The Emperor of China.”
The Band performed the Chinese national air.
The third regular toast,
“ The Chinese Embassy,”
was received with much enthusiasm. When the Mayor intro
duced Mr. Burlingame to respond, the company rose and gave
nine cheers.
SPEECH OF HON. ANSON BURLINGAME.
Mr. Mayor: In rising to respond to what you have
said, and to this cordial greeting, I feel how utterly
inadequate are any words of mine to meet the require
ments of this occasion. Events are more eloquent than
words. The presence here ofcTny associates, with the
sunshine of the Orient upon their faces, and the
warmth of its fires in their hearts, arouses more emo
tions than the most eloquent tongue can express. The
land of Washington has greeted the land of Confucius.
The great thoughts of the one have been wedded to
the great deeds of the other. Nothing can be more
impressive than the facts themselves. The Imperial
and the Republican seals have been placed side by
side upon a great bond of friendship forever. In the
�'off TO wmscwi
•
h
aMj lo QTOdfflOffl.
4arjq oliso^m -sidi lb
oarrolie ind ; tolls od bits isoroi bs% ad throw noiashn
owsa clsiiom to! isoi on si oiodj bnA .owsif Jon Itiw irov(
ffivrnoX
otolis’oili enodi ^nnfeaifi .o^rig adi ni
Mros oi (.dbsl'q Isrft odi ni cofn ihnrog fwoIIs ion
■adt tsdi p*a nop biodw eMwino^- pi boaaoiqro
hoA'apiq o.di oto 6MiJ ar asMO io wffib.ao’>
b
�RECEPTION OF THE
20
♦
presence of this majestic past, the members of this
mission would be glad to rest and be silent; but silence
you will not have. And there is no rest for mortals save
in the grave. Breaking, then, the silence which you will
not allow, permit me, in the first place, to seize a
thought expressed by yourself, where you say that the
physical condition of China is like unto the physical
condition of the United States. That is true. China
lies along the Pacific, as the United States lie along
the Atlantic. It has, as you say, the same area; it has
the same isothermal lines ; it has a like system of rivers
and mountains. The great river Yangtse Kiang empties
to a bucket-ful the same volume of water as the Missis
sippi; the distant plains of Mongolia answer to the
great prairies of the northwest.
But they are not only like to each other in their
physical aspects, they have relations to each other in
other respects. They have moral and political relations
of a similar character with ours. China is divided into
provinces as this country is divided into States. The
Chinese hold to the great doctrine that the people are
the source of power. You vote by ballot; in China
they vote by competitive examination. You shout
when your fellow-citizen is elected; they shout when
their scholar has received his degree They are scorn
ful of caste, and so are you. You tolerate every faith,
and so do they. You proceed to make a law by peti
tion; they proceed by memorial. This memorial is
recorded; it is passed to the Great Council; it is
approved by the Government; it is handed over to the
Great Secretariat; and if it shall be found to be accord-
�infki c8$tJ oxli fes wiiHx&st odi
J
.Jjfcow &rft <# tieltoMdirq at£"^iw
sv/rtW fciH $ aiJi-*^ c«wra^38*.) io Irud js’j^o: 4
■M itf ’ iRdwOflW &b UtiLM. a$( . cXKJ ‘A‘Jl) ,-X.k f*'*
AM
vjxj ^&i(T .
.WJah •
kMJ&l ■ lo sor'ko ’odi Mod v^dT ■ .uioGihr- il-xd ■ -Ji' Ww:
M®
udl' * tWi.c.w <• .11 .rd
•;«.■.>t
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
21
tug to the tradition and the laws, that Secretariat is
charged with its publication to the world. So that
China is not a land of caprices, -—it is a land of laws.
So, also, they are like unto us somewhat in their
school system. It is voluntary. They pay great atten
tion to their schools. They hold the office of teacher
to be the highest in the world. The great man in the
Tsungle Yamen to-day, one of the greatest, perhaps the
greatest scholar there, Tung Ta-jin, who presided over
the translation of Wheaton’s International Law, took
from Mr. Wade, the British Secretary of Legation, a
translation which he made of our own Longfellow’s
Psalm of Life, the first secular poem ever trans
lated into the Chinese language, and placed it
upon a fan, which he sent by my hand to our great
poet, that gift leading to a correspondence between
these illustrious men. I say Tung Ta-jin makes it ever
his boast, in the Tsungle Yamen, that he was once a
poor school-teacher.
But, however great may be the physical resemblances,
however many resemblances may be found in other
respects between them and the nations of the West,
it is certain that we have much to learn from them, and
they have much‘to learn from us. We have to learn
from them to respect old age; we have to learn from
them sobriety; we have to learn from them good
manners; we have to learn from them habits of schol
arship ; we have to learn from them how to cultivate
fish; we have to learn from them much in relation to
agriculture, much of the effect of heat and cold, and
light and shade upon plants; how to irrigate, how to
�s '9cf I4pow M
; .Barf s^^^nxifs
.’>wW. ^s >weq ^uiv'^id'O lo xv.on ohios w
'lgxg vdj ■ Lioirn
xu/LlU w og ck»
oftkUi'Jos
aiote vaxa. aaagffi) oxfT
u43 ■(JiLs -{..hvf io ?;«oiLhv a.bb ob ^oxft ^4w tftoaawt giD
,-.
;lhU ■ d^oii? JajiB bpH throw ad Jud ^vd.Lj
aL^< .i. .^_0,> xj. sk
r
.,.• jGJi’li: S'.
.’d
•£
J r _GJ;
. J ,-d ;
4*J.”.,.o |pR^
Q
• ' ' ..
n
3 03 4
'
•
• .
- ,;
‘ Li .J\!H jy -
�RECEPTION OF THE
22
manure the land. Indeed, it would be a most profitable
employment for some man of observing powers, some
scientific man, to go to China and record the facts he
finds there. The Chinese may not be able to give him
the reasons why they do this thing, or why they do that
thing, but he would find that, through long ages of
experience, they had at last ascertained the right way.
I do not know of so wide an unreaped field for a scientific
man, and I trust that the greatest living naturalist, Prof.
Agassiz, will next year make an expedition to the Chi
nese Empire.
But not* to follow your suggestion too far, I say, we
have much to learn from them. We have many wise
maxims to acquire from them. They have much, also,
to learn from us. They have all the modern sciences,—
they have all those things to learn from us, which are
the result of our necessities. We lived far apart, and
we invented the steamboat, the railroad, the telegraph,
to bring us nearer and nearer together.
But without pursuing this line of thought further,
permit me to give you something more nearly relating
to the present. I leave everything that may be said
about the ancient sages of China who lived before Soc
rates, to the distinguished gentleman on my left, [Mr.
Ralph Waldo Emerson,] who knows much more of
them than I do ; and I come now to consider, for a mo
ment, the treaty which has just been concluded between
the United States and China. And I shall not, I assure
you, trespass upon your time to enter into any elaborate
exposition of that treaty. No, sir, I leave the exposi
tion of that treaty to the distinguished Senator on my
�.yasAffws aaasciH#
oilvr I>rb cstMw8r sib rd nohpmda a?i sbw odw ,'hip.E'
eV58 ofconr aimt/I .o^oy auoftrijisair b ii iol bouroor^
■cd jihab .Gift id nigh© eii fwd
JbjO stedt
ot (roldaoqq© ar Jloaiad ctf BiridO lo loxfcKb ©di ©vr%
6cw Wifi jioif dr ©jfet blmw ifohfw ihiqa ©yiaabrggB
vp/-:.;tn obrn oadoj bsm -teozoifai lo o&hcpis -adi oJ M ©y.qd
.'< >s.j.ij.j'-jBX'uJiii.} "ioQud dzO id ivEghc* gj; JmmI O ' .©l'iuI lie
iw/id .:: mjst 1»1 Oftb.’.’JvM
’ILn bi-djidd'- jfet.d
Q-
♦
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
23
right, who was its champion in the Senate, and who
procured for it a unanimous vote. Permit me to say,
briefly, that that treaty had its origin in the desire to
give the control of China to herself, in opposition to
that aggressive spirit which would take it from her and
give it to the caprice of interest and to the rude energy
of force. It had its origin in the belief that institutions
which had withstood all the mutations of time, have
something in them worthy of consideration ; in the be
lief that institutions, cherished unanimously by one-third
of the human race, may possibly be the best institutions
for the people of China, and that at least they are enti
tled to hold on to them until they shall be changed by
fair argument. That treaty had its origin in, and in fact
is the outgrowth of, that co-operative policy which was
agreed to by the representatives of the Western pow
ers recently assembled at Peking; that policy substituted
for the old doctrine of violence one of fair diplomatic
action; so that if a Consul and the Taoutai could not
agree, before war should ensue, the question at issue
should be referred to Peking, and thence to the home
governments. That policy was in brief an agreement,
upon the part of the representatives of the treaty
powers, that they would not interfere in the internal
aifairs of China; that they would give to the treaties
a fair and Christian construction; that they would
abandon the so-called concession doctrine, and that
they never would menace the territorial integrity of
China. On these principles rests the security of China.
They were warmly approved by the Government of
China which naturally desired that they should find
�M'
sht
ip
fL3.dc fiTTol FfDToJ.OB OIOIH <B IU fip-IggOTOXG
* O'.^siac^-oa 8H& io oojttdhivo oHT .orcd) fcoaoiq o.cB
oJj m (.anorhG^.oI
lo aovidoxs odJ xd Bfdaji ^oiloq
>9ii .n Loxfe odvf €03h*iS ^aiiaboiU xi81o sorfoteqa.jb hsoTg’
cjs.iXK10 j&ii
I JtaS prfi ai ^osiaolqib aoqa oxteirf
barrisyfo ef9lqjanoq oaodi io o^teavb® eifi
'
Jj^rrul Hwdoa 'jT3ffl.oiai Fmvrrdi -bamso bd bbj^.do ^aili
vd W b%i§s an /A;nd vodJ v5v
�RECEPTION OF THE
24
expression in a more solemn form than they were in at
the present time. The evidence of this co-djierative ♦
policy rested in the archives of distant legations, in the
great despatches of Sir Frederick Bruce, who shed a new
lustre upon diplomacy in the East. I say that China,
feeling the advantage of these principles, desired that
they should be carried forward into more solemn forms.
Accordingly they have, as agreed to by the great treaty
powers of the West, passed into the unbending text of
the treaty recently made at Washington.
Now, in a word, what is that treaty? In the first
place, it declares the neutrality of the Chinese waters
in opposition to the pretensions of the ex-territoriality
doctrine, that inasmuch as the persons and the property
of the people of the foreign powers were under the ju
risdiction of those powers, therefore it was the right of
parties contending with each other to attack each other
in the Chinese waters, thus making those waters the
place of their conflict. This treaty traverses all such
absurd pretensions. It strikes down the so-called con
cession doctrines, under which the citizens of different
countries, located upon spots of land in the treaty ports,
had come to believe that they could take jurisdiction
there, not only of their own citizens, not only of the
persons and property of ,their own people, but of the
Chinese and the people of other countries. When this
question was brought under discussion and referred to
the home governments, not by the Chinese, originally,
but by those foreign nations who felt that their treaty
rights were being abridged by these concession doctrines,
the distant foreign countries could not stand the discus-
�/TagASMH 38SPHE0
-woq.
’pavo Jniii toys I bnA Jitomom i? 10I noio
onioa xl^noxli ?8onrU3ob xtoiagoonco adi Bonobnsds and to
ods-hoLim sriiilO iii oinH inoaoiq odd is elsjfoifto xiodi lo
.oi jOaoniiO odd doqxa oi odsdiobnij - — di xol Lnaiuoo oi
d^rodi as oaonidC). odd ioojoxq oi eoaoiddO odd dosdis
.imr:nnavo^ oaonidO odd oi ^dedod ic-xr bib ^’xoiraoi nd?
- ftuintob toniim iu4 boaobnsdfe tovoh L3J - snb.f *
<»,> aoiin;;,>ahij{ xod
dnnd ao
x-■/ ’■
’’; f ‘do v
xbff, -11’iW
:* ws Wxt r bn o.;
Q
:
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
*
25
sion for a moment. And I aver that every treaty pow
er has abandoned the concession doctrines, though some
of their officials at the present time in China undertake
to contend for it —- undertake to expel the Chinese, to
attack the Chinese, to protect the Chinese as though
the territory did not belong to the Chinese government.
China has never abandoned her eminent domain —
never abandoned on that territory her jurisdiction doc
trine ; and I trust she never will. This treaty strikes
down all the pretensions about concessions of terri
tory.
Again, this treaty recognizes China as an equal among
the nations, in opposition to the old doctrine that be
cause she was not a Christian nation she could not be
placed in the roll of nations. But I will not discuss
that question. There is the greatest living authority
upon Eastern questions here to-night. He has stated
that position more fully than anybody else, while his
heart has leaned ever to the side of the Chinese. I say
China has been put on terms of equality. Her subjects
have been put upon a footing with those of the most
favored nations, so that now the Chinaman stands with
the Briton or the Frenchman, the Russian, the Prussian,
or the subjects of any of the great powers. And not
only so, but by a Consular clause in that treaty they
are given a diplomatic status by which those privileges
can be defended. That treaty also strikes down all dis
abilities on account of religious faith. It recalls the
great doctrine of the constitution which gives to a man
the right to hold any faith which his conscience may
dictate to him. Under that treaty the Chinese may
�•tut
• >
Jkkj'tav anM odi
>
Moimpaa
olrfwa wib I^oiqs
J.;ir:>Vkd sllawb xfaiidv? JrxKja Oifi
YGfff luts
- Lvfjjq xuu lu
'ydxiniol'g oxfJ aiwqo* vhjfrrt
.siitdO lc ataehirte adj oi anoB
04ft si
teaijg oJj ash^ajre If .cKn:U
<■■■:
ty|B aM
# • • .
r rT •
//.■„:;.T.%7 cbfaf WJ
,f ,eo
' ’i^v.’.’-U:.- x;
».r?-d(*<h'.sM
^Gcnj 3BJ.1’
■/
‘^^^'’■•'r?'L’d; c*^1
•%,b4^«
•
r *• r •
<J
a: - g tJ: ,,
ry?-’«li|> ajMt
Q
.
.
'/
�RECEPTION OF THE
26
spread their marble altars to the blue vault of heaven,
and may worship the spirit which dwells beyond. That
treaty opens the gleaming gates of our public institu
tions to the students of China. That treaty strikes down
or reprobates — that is the word — the infamous Coolie
trade. It sustains the great law of 1862, drafted by
Mr. Eliot of Massachusetts, and pledges the nation for
ever to hold that trade criminal. While it does this, it
recognizes the great doctrine that a man may change
his home and his allegiance. While it strikes at the
root of the Coolie trade, it invites free immigration
into the country of those sober and industrious
people by whose quiet labor we have been enabled
to push the Pacific Bailroad over the summit of the
Sierra Nevada. Woolen mills have been enabled to
run on account of this labor with profit. And the great
crops of California, more valuable than all her gold,
have been gathered by them. I am glad the United
States had the courage to apply their great principles of
equality. I am glad that while they apply their doc
trines to the swarming millions of Europe, they are not
afraid to apply them to the tawny race of Tamerlane
and of Genghis Khan.
There is, also, another article which is important to
China. It has been the habit of the foreigners in China
to lecture the Chinese and to say what they should do and
what they should not do ; to dictate, and say when they
should build railroads, .when they should build tele
graphs ; and, in fact, there has been an attempt to take
entire possession of their affairs. This treaty denounces
all such pretensions. It says, particularly, that it is for
�•
3/0’
aovlw'ffadj .omcd^O .£kL
&Hfi BJr • - d lih?' -(si!J 4wi^«—esfeg;^ox Mnteii
■ 3 &Y»*£TxJa f'd) 0Tj3
Jilh'.rJ cJ QBJH9I Uiw
■.; ?'L-j'..3 ^Mnin oj
-‘!vl si si .k-rO t sils^s-kwo'.
■‘bJhw
’vzO T^c.^Ll^ at os -1MB feirditabjy‘fr:
bk»< > j-C'V£.I edj Lxb 3c'1jk:z;
lc
' n*
1
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
27
the Chinese themselves to fix the time when they will
initiate reforms,— when they will build and when they
will refuse to build,— that they are the masters of their
own affairs; that it is for them to make commercial
regulations, and to do whatever they will, which is not
in violation of existing treaties and the laws of nations,
within their own territory. I am glad that that is in
the treaty; and while the treaty expresses the opinion
of the United States in favor of giving to China the
control of her own affairs, it assumes that China is to
progress, and it offers to her all the resources of
Western science, and asks other nations to do the
same.
The United States have asked nothing for themselves.
I am proud of it. I am proud that this country has
made a treaty which is, every line of it, in the present
interests of China, though in the resulting interests of
all mankind. I am glad that the country has risen up
to a level with the great occasion. I am glad that she
has not asked any mean advantages, such as weaken
one people and do not exalt another. By leaving China
free in all these respects, she feels secure, or will feel
secure when these principles are adopted. When she
feels that the railroad and the telegraph are not to be
instruments by which she is to be disrupted or destroyed
then she will come out of her seclusion and enter upon
a course of trade, the importance of which, and the
amount of which, no man can compute. The first thing
for her to have is security; and this treaty gives her
security. It places her broadly under international law.
I know this treaty will be attacked. You will wonder
�sht
ic
bio oxD lo Jhiqa JodJ ^d fxnfac&B od Iliw jJ 4i fa
; osoxl$ strndln ilehMI bsaoqqo tfoidw esilkrl nt eiotaJA]
JaoW odj nx aohjigloxinniH Loacqgo as doi?8 vd hurt
nrxriqo bio odj lo
od$ ^*d boiaisoi od Ilivz Ji jaoiljiil
-od 1 ,alU H« ^libHJdBxbivrJon Jird jjnidO rd ic-I^vrm*
j!fxv-r
ladJ Jo aol'jioidiq odi io ..vtxxoiJ lc:U ovd'
am•” cd Lotoftd at Ji fwxsood .bhow odtlo ircJ ofd
f
7
�RECEPTION OF THE
28
at it. It will be attacked by that spirit of the old indigo
planters in India, which opposed British reforms there;
and by such as opposed Emancipation in the West
Indies; it will be resisted by the spirit of the old opium
smuggler in China. But notwithstanding all this, I be
lieve that treaty, or the principles of that treaty, will
make the tour of the world, because it is founded in jus
tice. This mission, feeling confidence in the rectitude of
their intentions, confidence in the merits of the policy
which they propose, do not ask what reception they
shall have in the countries to which they shall go, but
trust themselves fairly and fully to the spirit of West
ern civilization.
And now, having detained you too long, permit me to
thank you all for the kind manner in which you have
listened to what I have had to say. I thank you, Sir,
for your personal allusions. I thank dear old Boston
for her grand demonstrations of good will. I thank the
American Government that it has placed a great ques
tion beyond the reach of individual misfortune. And
now, having said this, the mission will press along the
line of its diplomatic duty to other fields of effort.
The Mayor then announced as the fourth regular toast, —
“The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”
He called upon His Excellency, Alexander H. Bullock, to
respond.
SPEECH OF GOVERNOR BULLOCK.
Mr. Mayor: The impressive ceremony and the cor
dial reception of the evening have been conducted so
far and so well that no duty remains for me save offi-
�■ ’3 A3 Mil
-gji RL1SG
LltwJ f lu'lt siojg lodanr^cB^Lb wg oinaau
j AJ/roGO/? aicnuii M# flu xfl felicpO Ml flliw Mar
■■■£,-r': k < ni Mt gw aoilmjiiliwg Ml iwi cLisA .aroJI
■ rL.x'f/oit. ;.?i5A'i.tlj-vn;ll-)i aw ivo al ejaoalw ahlt
•J -jr. a; /!.'-< va 1
l&ifgisU ttu io.buod Ml 3U ok bl
d$
ir^
oi beMunr-q
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
29
cially to assure our distinguished guests that I heartily
unite with the Capital in all the honors accorded to
them. Aside from the gratification we feel in extending
this welcome to our own fellow-citizen, now returned
to us as the head of an august mission, I surely may be
permitted to express your sentiments as well as my
own in recalling, with some satisfaction, the part which
our Commonwealth has borne on the large field of
American diplomacy in the recent historical period.
With Mr. Adams at the British Court, Mr. Motley on
the Continent, Mr. Burlingame in the great empire of
the East, our senior Senator, (Mr. Sumner,) at the head
of foreign affairs in the Senate, — the fortress of our
diplomatic security, — and Governor Banks in a like
position in the House of Representatives, — the people
of Massachusetts have had reason to be satisfied with
the share committed to them in the civic responsibilities
of our time. It is not to the present point that I shotdd
say that each of these gentlemen has performed his duty ■
so well that we cannot readily see how it could have
been done better; for the world knows that already.
But it is permissible that I should say, in view of those
broad relations which these citizens of our own have
sustained* on the three continents of civilization, that
the future historian of the Commonwealth must record
that her fame never shone brighter, more conspicuous,
or more beneficent than during this period. I may,
therefore, be permitted, both as magistrate and as citi
zen, to allow my local pride to culminate this evening,
as it blends with your patriotic pleasure, in paying
honors to those who have proved such good masters of
international rights and courtesies.
�<
.: J.iiM 1U
■
;u-xb
7£& am*;
*
J
�RECEPTION OF THE
•
30
As an American I rejoice in the recent events which
have developed into something almost like an alliance
for the welfare of the world, the imperial powers of the
East and the West. After all that has occurred in the
last seven years, what patriotic citizen of the United
States does not welcome the friendly hand reached out
to us from Russia and China; — co-terminous countries,
covering one-fifth part of the habitable globe, having
institutions in many respects altogether unlike our own,
but in some particulars quite in sympathy with ours,
eager to join their histories and destinies with ours in a
spirit of conciliation and unity which may hereafter
become the protectorate of the peace of all the nations.
From the former of these two, at a time when we failed
to receive from countries nearer to us that encouragement of our nationality which we had a right to ex
pect, there came for us no voice or wish, expressed or
suppressed, that did not give aid and comfort to every
heart which was in allegiance to our government. In
my remembrance of this, all political names of govern
ments have lost their power. There is a chord of
sympathy that sounds the name of Russia pleasantest of
them all in my ears. The purchase of Alaska becomes
doubly agreeable. I thank Mr. Seward and Congress
for making the trade.
And now, after the war, just when we are to spread
sail on a fresh career of prosperity at home and consid
eration abroad, let us be happy to receive, in advance
of all the governments of Europe, His Excellency Mr.
* Burlingame and his Associate Envoys from China. The
specific provisions of their recent treaty with us may or
�AHMa .SSdKIH'O
•'7hX jdj ;:w pjiol^3W4i 'OffL'I-hJa ^'fw
jqa. w®
/• — •*oj eaz&iiq ifovTti ton ob J .Mi# <4 aA.
aroffl \ Mi .iM^rioW
jog gJ gn’ipj &9&I
o.s: ^ii?!K£gr /(«a .Hw I e<«fw ?pMa
T(d ^ia-adw tfkiT
Uin gilxszoH L;;b aunqjfeioo b‘Asiw
’J-.oioJ?fog «b9 WOXifYUnnoo izwo ~jjo .doFJw aaia»
- • ~-; ’• ■V -’■■•^ J& r<*
ls> ofsra hi-fi
H 7z-W-_ ...;.f.f ^r; Ot iff’.:! bo'^Lci/‘I I.
>^o/,
■e;
’*
■•
’.‘
hY.-.'.<\-
■.
■’
< . •/
, :.
■
i
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
31
may not comprise any striking innovations on the past.
As to that I do not much profess to know. I have
been trying to get some information from my friend
Teh, who sits by my side, who, I will say, speaks the
English language with a compass and flexibility and
force which our own countrymen can seldom surpass,
and some of them can hardly equal, after this hour in
the evening. I introduced him to my late comrade in
the legislative halls, Mr. Cushing, who was the pioneer
in American diplomacy towards China, and who went
out as Commissioner to China (if that was the title of
his office) in 1842 or ’43, and, to my surprise, I found,
when I sought to make some comparisons between that
time and the present, that my young friend Teh was
born three years after Mr. Cushing returned, and that
Mr. Cushing and I were much older than my Chinese
friend. But, however that may be, the tone, the tem
per, the spirit in which this Embassy comes to us —
that is a great deal — that inaugurates a new era in the
relations of two powerful peoples. It is enough for
me to know that it is in the interest of justice to the
individual man of both nations; that it is in recognition
of the obligations of all the reciprocities of humanity;
that it is in aid and promotion of international com
merce, which is the handmaid of Equity and Christi
anity. So that, henceforth, the pledged honor of Ameri
cans and Chinamen shall be more potent for all the
purposes of travel and trade and religion and civiliza
tion, than a thousand British cannon bellowing against
the gates of the Celestial Empire, — gates which shall
open in all time to come more easily to the force of fra-
�SUIT
HCIT'ISM
isMJ >;hjwls ^dW ogfrri£ lo ooiol ord oi nndJ ^*r . .
' btoA; <£w todbn ami ana Jsdi :col balafzpfn ad to f’j
^Htol lorf dirw to? aimtMsxt iod ci gmSio^^to
: ahihcq lad xfocjo wlcb^xl h^motXs £K)73 <3juh£ bus
u^d^q odv3in c3
i&if sto»a adg todt
®®dW>«d to kdl$£) wg^ fe gyb
Mfel
todoO adj ^cjotbip' 1c -w«d -x2 &
;
^••‘-6. a.v
,toadfcfcO
<a
n
0
�RECEPTION OF THE
32
temity than to the force of arms. Why should not
China be respected for that she has resisted with plucki
ness, according to her traditions and with her hearts
and arms, every attempt to blow open her portals ; —
for that she sends her Envoys to-day to make public
tender at the doors of our Capitol of her desire to
establish, as the law of nations, the Golden Rule,
whether it comes to her from Confucius, or to us from
authority infinitely higher.
Let us respect the authority of existing and ancient
nations. One is especially before us now that has
lengthened and enduring annals. As the oldest civi
lized community of the United States, we of Massachu
setts trace our record backward over only two centuries
and a half. And that, we are apt to think, furnishes
ample and dignified work of research for several histori
cal, antiquarian and genealogical societies, in examin
ing ancient mounds, exhuming corroded tomahawks,
and bringing to the light of our day the virtues and the
frailties of some eight or nine generations of men. How,
then, can we not respect a people of a record of five
thousand years'? You may call them rude; but you
have sought their commerce, and have scattered among
all your homes the products of their luxury, their art,
and their labor. You may call them barbarians; but
with their own sense of right they can call you the
same. You may doubt their elemental principles of
government; but they have existed having a govern
ment ages before you were known, and more recently
when you were not sure that you could maintain and
transmit a government. You may question the claim
�■aeA/ :>&s
M &rd
?;:':? nor.'ATXs oi flftgjgT'iffl "■[
rfA'/hr Aicaoi
JJ^'radi o:Ii
arryd' S^hx si;. f- -h n >
b.da
<su.bC)
-Un/ sqr ¥ -ihs
-Gotjsb II £<?-’ CVi?
.swjdmA iml wi £ic?xi2io
w-rfiiw- oiod aamo®
^ht^xb 1c -aodq
& biwwfe o
u lo oxn^pofo onTrQiw ^Towe/w oda Les ' ? asr
\U.-o y.yih'j’Io oonoo s.da J?fft /frojoH
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
33
of their literature to common respect; but it ante-dates
all that is known by us of the thought and record which
we call sacred. You may ask, if you will, why China
comes here with an American citizen for her Ambassa
dor, to demand a high place of dignity among the
countries; and she answers, with the eloquence of a
long and masterly history, that she comes offering only
terms of international equality as one of the peoples and
governments of the world of to-day; compacted and
ribbed by the vicissitudes of fifty centuries; self-subsist
ing against all efforts to assail or invade her; but willing,
anxious now, to welcome the sails of your commerce
into her ports, the voices of your missionaries into her
interior, and the rights of your citizens within her juris
diction. In that spirit, and in that cause, I welcome
Mr. Burlingame and his associates, and bid them God
speed on their way to the other countries.
The Mayor then announced as the fifth regular toast,—
“The Supplementary Treaty with China;” —
and called upon the Honorable Charles Sumner, Chairman of
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States •
Senate, to respond.
HON. CHARLES SUMNER’S SPEECH.
Mr. Mayor: I cannot speak on this interesting oc
casion without first declaring the happiness I enjoy at
meeting my friend of many years in the exalted posi
tion which he now holds. Besides being my personal
friend, he was also an honored associate in representing
the good people of this community, and in advancing a
��RECEPTION OF THE
34
great cause, which he championed with memorable elo
quence and fidelity. Such are no common ties. Permit
me to say that this splendid welcome, now offered by the
municipal authorities of Boston, is only a natural ex
pression of the sentiments which must prevail in this
community. Here his labors and triumphs began.
Here, in your early applause and approving voices, he
first tasted of that honor which is now his in such am
ple measure. He is one of us, who, going forth into a
strange country, has come back with its highest trusts
and dignities. Once the representative of a single Con
gressional district, he now represents the most populous
nation of the globe. Once the representative of little
more than a third part of Boston, he is now the repre
sentative of more than a third part of the human race.
The population of the globe is estimated at twelve hund
red millions ; that of China at more than four hundred
millions, and sometimes even at five hundred millions.
If, in this position, there be much to excite wonder,
there is still more for gratitude in the unparalleled op
portunity which it affords. What we all ask is oppor
tunity. Here is opportunity on a surpassing scale — to
be employed, I am sure, so as to advance the best inter
ests of the Human Family; and, if these are ad
vanced, no nation can suffer. Each is contained in all.
With justice and generosity as the reciprocal rule, and
nothing else can be the aim of this great Embassy, there
can be no limits to the immeasurable consequences.
For myself, I am less solicitous with regard to con
cessions or privileges, than with regard to that spirit
of friendship and good neighborhood, which embraces
�r
Jftto'tMr -*;!.(
: .: -,.-;.r '.4 .■>.: ? tf 7
|
1
__ ____ —
' ’h'
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
35
alike the distant and the near, and, when once estab
lished, renders all else easy.
The necessary result of the present experiment in
diplomacy will be to make the countries which it visits
better known to the Chinese, and also to make the
Chinese better known to them. Each will know the
other better and will better comprehend that condition
of mutual dependence which is the law of humanity.
*In the relations among nations, as in common life, this
is of infinite value. Thus far, I fear that the Chinese
are poorly informed with regard to usi I am sure that
we are poorly informed with regard to them. We know
them through the porcelain on our tables with its law
less perspective, and the tea chest with its unintelligible
hieroglyphics. There are two pictures of them in the
literature of our language, which cannot fail to leave an
impression. The first is in Paradise Lost, where Milton,
always learned eveif in his poetry, represents Satan as
descending in his flight,
------ on the barren plains
Of Sericana, where Chineses drive,
With sails and wind their cany wagons light.
The other is that admirable address on the study of the
law of nature and nations, where Sir James Mackintosh,
in words of singular felicity, alludes to iC the tame but
ancient and immovable civilization of China.” It will
be for us now to enlarge these pictures and to fill the
canvas with life.
I do not know if it has occurred to our honored guest,
that he is not the first stranger who, after sojourning in
��RECEPTION OF THE
36
this distant unknown land, has come back loaded with
its honors, and with messages to the Christian powers.
He is not without a predecessor in his mission. There is
another career as marvellous as his own. I refer to the
Venetian Marco Polo, whose reports, once discredited as
the fables of a traveller, are now recognized among the
sources of history, and especially of geographical knowl
edge. Nobody can read them without feeling their
verity. It was in the latter part of the far away 13th
century, that this enterprising Venetian, in company
with his father and uncle, all of them merchants, jour
neyed from Venice, by the way of Constantinople,
Trebizond on the Black Sea and Central Asia, until they
reached first the land of Prester John, and then that
golden country, known as Cathay, where the great ruler,
Kublai Khan, treated them with gracious consideration,
and employed young Polo as his ambassador. This
was none other than China, and the great ruler, called
the Grand Khan, was none other than the first of its
Mongolian dynasty having his imperial residence in the
immense city of Kambalu, or Peking. After many years
of illustrious service, the Venetian, with his compan
ions, was dismissed with splendor and riches, charged
with letters for European sovereigns, as our Bostonian
is charged with similar letters now. There were let
ters for the Pope, the King of France, the King of
Spain, and other Christian princes. It does not appear
that England was expressly designated. Her name, so
great now, was not at that time on the visiting list of
the distant Emperor. Such are the contrasts in national
life. Marco Polo with his companions, reached Venice
�U7
*
41
_______________________ ____ _
taMMh
I
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
37
on his return in 1295, at the very time when Dante in
Florence was meditating his divine poem, and when
Roger Bacon, in England, was astonishing the age with
his knowledge. These were two of his greatest con
temporaries.
The return of the Venetian to his native city was
attended by incidents which have not occurred among
us. Bronzed by long residence under the sun of the
East, — wearing the dress of a Tartar, — and speaking
his native language with difficulty, it was some time be
fore he could persuade his friends of his identity. Hap
pily there is no question on the identity of our returned
fellow-citizen; and surely it cannot be said that he
speaks his native language with difficulty. There was
a dinner given at Venice as now at Boston, and the
Venetian dinner, after the lapse of nearly five hundred
years, still lives in glowing description. On this occa
sion Marco Polo, with his companions, appeared first in
long robes of crimson satin reaching to the floor, which,
after the guests had washed their hands, were changed
for other robes of crimson damask, and then again,
after the first course of the dinner, for other robes of
crimson velvet, and at the conclusion of the banquet, for
the ordinary dress worn by the rest of the company.
Meanwhile the other costly garments were distributed
in succession among the attendants at the table. In all
your magnificence to-night, Mr. Mayor, I have seen no
such largess. Then was brought forward the coarse
threadbare clothes in which they had travelled, when,
on ripping the lining and patches with a knife, costly
jewels, in sparkling showers, leaped forth before the
��RECEPTION OF THE
38
eyes of the company, who for a time were motionless
with wonder. Then at last, says the Italian chronicler,
every doubt was banished, and all were satisfied that
these were the valiant and honorable gentlemen of the
house of Polo. I do not relate this history in order to
suggest any such operation on the dress of our returned
fellow-citizen. No such evidence is needed to assure us
of his identity.
The success of Marco Polo is amply attested. From
his habit of speaking of millions of people and millions
of money, he was known as millioni, or the millionaire,
being the earliest instance in history of a designation
so common in our prosperous age. But better than
“ millions ” was the knowledge he imparted, and the
impulse that he gave to that science, which teaches the
configuration of the globe, and the place of nations on
' its face. His travels, as dictated by him, were repro
duced in various languages, and, after the invention of
printing, the book was multiplied in more than fifty
editions. Unquestionably it prepared the way for the
two greatest geographical discoveries of modern times,
that of the Cape of Good Hope, by Vasco de Gama,
and the New World, by Christopher Columbus. One
of his admirers, a learned German, does not hesitate to
say that, when, in the long series of ages, we seek the
three men, who, by the influence of their discoveries,
have most contributed to the progress of geography and
the knowledge of the globe, the modest name of the
Venetian finds a place in the same line with Alexander
the Great and Christopher Columbus. It is well known
that the imagination of the Genoese navigator was fired
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
39
by the revelations of the Venetian, and that, in his
mind, all the countries embraced by his transcendent
discovery were none other than the famed Cathay, with
its various dependencies. In his report to the Spanish
Sovereigns, Cuba was nothing else than Zimpangu, or
Japan, as described by the Venetian, and he thought
himself near a grand Khan, meaning, as he says, a king
of kings. Columbus was mistaken. He had not
reached Cathay or the grand Khan; but he had discov
ered a new world, destined in the history of civilization
to be more than Cathay, and, in the lapse of time, to
welcome the Ambassador of the grand Khan.
The Venetian, on his return home, journeyed out of
the East, westward. Our Marco Polo on his return
home, journeyed out of the West, eastward; and yet
they both came from the same region. Their com
mon starting-point was Peking. This change is typical
of that transcendent revolution under whose influence
the Orient will become the Occident. Journeying
westward, the first welcome is from the nations of
Europe. Journeying eastward, the first welcome is
from our Republic. It only remains that this wel
come should be extended until it opens a pathway
for the mightiest commerce of the world, and embraces
within the sphere of American activity that ancient
ancestral empire, where population, industry and edu
cation, on an unprecedented scale, create resources
and necessities on an unprecedented scale also. See
to it, merchants of the United' States, and you, mer
chants of Boston, that this opportunity is not lost.
And this brings me, Mr. Mayor, to the Treaty, which
�f.
�RECEPTION OF THE
40
you invited me to discuss. But I will not now enter
upon this topic. If you did not call me to order for
speaking too long, I fear I should be called to order in
another place for undertaking to speaking of a Treaty
which has not yet been proclaimed by the President.
One remark I will make and take the consequences.
The treaty does not propose much; but it is an excel
lent beginning, and, I trust, through the good offices of
our fellow-citizen, the honored plenipotentiary, will un
lock those great Chinese gates which have been bolted
and barred for long centuries. The Embassy is more
than the treaty, because it will prepare the way for
further intercourse and will help that new order of
things which is among the promises of the Future.
The Mayor then introduced Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes, who
recited the following poem:
POEM BY OLIVER, WENDELL HOLMES.
Brothers, whom we may not reach
Through the veil of alien speech,
Welcome I welcome I eyes can tell
What the lips in vain would spell;
Words that hearts can understand,
Brothers from the Flowery Land 1
We, the evening’s latest born,
Hail the children of the mornI
__
*
•
We, the new creation’s birth,
Greet the lords of ancient earth
From their storied walls and towers
Wandering to these tents of ours I
Land of wonders, fair Cathay,
Who long hast shunned the staring day,
�i
__________
_______ .
d
._
A.
_
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
Hid in mists of poets’ dreams
By thy blue and yellow streams;
Let us thy shadowed form behold;
Teach us as thou didst of old.
Knowledge dwells with length of days;
Wisdom walks in ancient ways;
Thine the compass that could guide
A nation o’er the stormy tide
Scourged by passions, doubts and fears,
Safe through thrice a thousand years!
Looking from thy turrets gray
Thou hast seen the world’s decay;
Egypt drowning in her sands;
Athens rent by robbers’ hands;
Rome, the wild barbarian’s prey,
Like a storm-cloud swept away:
Looking from thy turrets gray
Still we see thee. Where are they?
And lo! a new-born nation waits,
Sitting at the golden gates
That glitter by the sunset sea —
Waits with outspread arms for theeI
*
'
Open wide, ye gates of gold,
To the Dragon’s banner-fold!
Builders of the mighty wall,
Bid your mountain barriers fall!
So may the girdle of the sun
Bind the East and West in one,
Till Nevada’s breezes fan
The snowy peaks of Ta-Sieue-Shan
Till Erie blends its waters blue
With the waves of Tung-Ting-Hu —
Till deep Missouri lends its flow
To swell the rushing Hoang-Ho I
6
41
��RECEPTION OF THE
42
Dr. Holmes’s poem was heartily applauded. At the con
clusion the Mayor announced, as the sixth regular toast —
“ Diplomacy,”
and called upon the Honorable Caleb Cushing, formerly United
States Commissioner to China, to respond.
Mr. Pickering, a member of the Committee of Arrangements,
said: “I propose nine cheers for the only minister to China
who bears a Chinese name—‘ Coo-Shing.' ”
The cheers were given with much enthusiasm.
HON. CALEB CUSHING’S SPEECH.
I rise to discharge the duty assigned me on this
occasion, with sincere satisfaction, as affording an op
portunity to express my respect for yourself, and the
city over whose administration you preside, as well as
for your eminent guests. I rejoice to see that they re
ceive peculiar attention here. It especially becomes
this State, so many of whose merchant princes have
been, and are, the merchant princes of China also, to
welcome the ambassadors of China. It is fitting that
the representatives of a country where education,
science, literature, the cultivation of the spiritual as
distinguished from the material man, are held in the
highest estimation, should meet with sympathetic ac
claim in the State of Massachusetts. And here, above
all, should welcome, acclaim and applause be awarded
to an embassy, which, while representing the power
and the wisdom of the Ta Tsing Empire in the person
of these, the native subjects of the great Yellow Khan,
has at its head a statesman who attained distinction in
�■
�CHINESE EMBASSY.
43
the first instance as a representative of Massachusetts
in the Congress of the United States.
To him (Mr. Burlingame), therefore, at the outset, be
all honor rendered. I, as the humble pioneer in that
new region of diplomacy which he has explored to
such great results, can well judge of the magnitude of
the events he personifies, and presume to say that
no imagination of oriental romance could conceive
for its hero a career of usefulness and glory more mar
vellous than that which is exhibited by the Minister of
the United States in China becoming its Minister to thePowers of Europe and America.
And yet, on reflecting on this incident, it ceases to as
tonish me. I take pleasure in saying here, in the hear
ing of all the members of the Embassy, and especially
of the two eminent Ta-jins and their countrymen, what
I have never failed to say on other proper occasions, that
the Manchu and Chinese statesmen, with whom it was
my fortune to come in official contact in China, were men
of the highest cultivation and accomplishment, versed
in the direction of the largest public affairs, possessed of
thorough comprehension of political and international
questions, and worthy in all respects to be ranked with
the most accomplished statesmen and diplomatists of
Christendom. Such men were capable of rising to the
height of any exigency which the progress of time and
events might require the Chinese Empire to adopt,
Thus it happened that my embassy to China was
rather a brief pleasure trip than a diplomatic labor:
For the intelligence and the frankness of Commis
sioner Keying soon removed all difficulties out of my
��RECEPTION OF THE
44
path. And we see ample attestation in the commission
entrusted to Mr. Burlingame of the high character of
the men now at the head of affairs in China.
My name, susceptible as it is of adoption in Chinese
writing and speech, — to which a gentleman just now
kindly alluded, — had its inconveniences as well as
conveniences ; for the sound represents that expression
which, in China, is applied to personages who, in the
ordinary transactions of the missionaries, are called
“ venerable sages ” or “ venerable saints.” In a word,
to those persons in the history of China, of whom Con
fucius is the representative man> and when made
aware of this fact, I was compelled to enter into a most
confidential conference with my own conscience as to
.what name I ought to bear. I did feel somewhat “ ven
erable ” then, I confess,—much more so than I do now:
For now I have become disillusioned and disabused of
many things; and there is but little left for me which
seems entitled to respect. Hardly more than two things
have ceased to be subjects of illusion, — woman’s vir
tue and man’s honor. The changes of time have left
little else upon which the presumptions of the press,
of the bar, and of the senate, [turning to Mr. Sumner,
amid the laughter of the company] have not placed
their profaning hands. And so, also, upon the ques
tion of sanctity. I really did not feel justified in pre
suming to attribute to myself any such qualities ; and,
with the aid of skilful friends, I was enabled to discover
that it was easy to change the sign from “ venerable ”
to “ venerator,” and thus I became' a very respectable
personage, as Coo-Shing — the venerator of the sages
and saints. Beyond that I did not aspire.
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
45
My embassy to China was but the humble beginning
of what we now behold, — of this great change in the
relations of China to Europe and America.
We have listened with admiration this evening to the
clear and instructive exposition given by Mr. Burlin
game of the treaty which he and the American Secre
tary of State (Mr. Seward), have just completed, and
the prompt dispatch of which has been equally hon
orable to our Executive and our Senate. Of that initia
tory treaty it is impossible to exaggerate -the probable
consequences. In order in the least degree to appre
ciate the fact, we must recollect the history and remem
ber the cbndition of China.
The distinguished Senator of Massachusetts on my
left (Mr. Sumner), has referred to the fact that Marco
Polo, after his return from China, was called “ Messer
Million!.” I think that title was applied to him in
derision. I think his countrymen distrusted his tales of
the millions of the population of China, — the millions of
its revenue, and the millions of its cultivated scholars ; for
we may remember that long after his day, and even so
late as the time of the Stuarts, Congreve said, in exhib
iting a personation of mendacity, “ Ferdinand Mendez
Pinto was but a type of thee, thou liar of the first mag
nitude.” Why did Pinto become the symbol of mendac
ity 1 We know now that every word he uttered was
true ; that he was one of those many brilliant voyagers
of Spain and Portugal of whom Vasco de Gama and
Christopher Columbus, as mentioned this evening, were
but higher examples; many of whom left interesting
narrations of their voyages, and that Pinto’s truthful
�---- —---------
----- -- ------------------------------------------- IMlKfe. ■
£
•-* •'-■ *■■!*
�RECEPTION OF THE
46
■Felations of the grandeur of China, of its population, of
its wealth, of its advancement in civilization, of its
agriculture, of its manufactures, seemed so portentous,
so incredible, that no man believed what he uttered,
and attributed it all to the invention of a fertile but
unscrupulous imagination. I say, we now know it was
all true; and that neither Polo nor Pinto unfolded to
us a tithe of the wonders of China.
We know that there is in farther Asia an Empire
which has subsisted for thousands of years, with an un
changed identity of civilization; with a people, at a
period anterior to all our records of history, sacred or
profane, highly cultivated, intellectual, literary, scienti
fic ; with arts of agriculture and manufacture, and with
a commerce, such as we now see.
We know that as they are now, such they were when
our forefathers were but. half naked savages in the wilds
of Britain or Germany. Their astronomical records
carry us far beyond all the science of the Chaldees and
the Brahmans. Whether in the arts of immortality, like
printing, or those of mortality, like gunpowder, they
are our masters. They are the only people of ancient
or modern times, with whom moral and intellectual cul
ture outrank all other things, and constitute the sole
avenue to civil station and power, and they are a people
without parallel in the durability and the vastness of
the adaptability of their institutions. What living
language can count with the Chinese its thousands of
ages of life ? What nation but China showed itself in
the times of Homer the same as at this day ? 'Where,
save in China, has the world ever seen a homogeneous
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
47
people, equal in numbers to the whole of Europe,
constituting a single self-sustaining nation ?
While the magnificent empire of the Assyrians has
passed away like a troubled vision, and left no trace but
a few mounds of earth on the banks of the Euphrates
or the Tigris; while, also, the populous and powerful
kingdom of Egypt is now manifest only by its massive
tombs, temples and pyramids half buried in the sands of
the desert; while Greece and Rome have also all but dis
appeared, and are no longer potential except in the
traditions they have transmitted to us, — at an epoch
anterior to the rise of all these nations, the Chinese
Empire was great, powerful, populous, — civilized in
every possible conception of the word civilized. There
is no definition of civilization, as applied to Athens
or to Rome, there is no definition as applied to Mem
phis or to Babylon, which does not apply with equal
verity to China long before either Babylon or Mem
phis existed.
And possessing a marvellous tenacity of existence,
there China stands, sublime in the greatness alike and
the unity of her civilization, unchanged by the tempests
of five thousand years. Foreign war has in vain
assailed her. Domestic insurrection has torn her asun
der, and the wounds have been healed with a recuper
ative vitality which seems to presage an immortality
of empire. I say, there China stands, with her four
hundred millions of human beings, exhibiting the only
spectacle the human race ever did exhibit of such an
immense mass of people, holding to the faith of their
fathers, holding to their peculiar science, literature and
��RECEPTION OF THE
48
art, holding, also, to their government, — maintaining
what no European nation has ever had the statemanship
or art to do, supreme power over a region of earth larger
than Europe, and over a population larger than the
population of Europe.
Contrast that with our own petty states of christen
dom. My friend (Mr. Burlingame), will warrant me in
saying, that there are more provinces of the Chinese
Empire, each one of them equalling in population, in
wealth, in power, in the results of civilization, in agri
cultural commodities, in manufactures, in the mechanic
arts, — each one of them, I say, equalling in every
one of these incidents of civilization the proudest
of the kingdoms of Europe. How is it to-day with
Europe ? There we see England, France, Prussia,
Austria, Russia, each engaged in destroying itself by the
vast armies they maintain, exhausting the resources of
their people, wasting labor, wasting life, wasting all the
means of usefulness which this divine creation of govern
ment rightly used can give to man; wasting them by
their intestine wars or by their perpetual apprehension
of wars ; while in China, a larger mass of human beings
is ruled by the sceptre of one sovereign, presiding over
his millions of subjects in his palace at Peking.
I repeat, there is no parallel for it in the history of
the human race; and therefore it is, that this occasion
seems to me to possess claims upon our sympathy, upon
our respect, upon our confidence, beyond any other cor
responding event in our lives. Who among us here
present will ever forget this scene ? Who can fail to
remember that one of our own fellow-citiaens comes
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
49
back from that vast Empire, the representative of its
power and of its millions of human beings, invested
with the sacred, the sublime, the divine mission, to
place them in harmonious correspondence, diplomatic,
political and commercial, with the nations of Christen
dom ?
No longer is China to be a sealed book to the world.
No longer is her policy to be that of exclusion and non
intercourse. No longer is she to look with jealousy
upon foreign powers. She has weighed and measured
these foreign powers. She has statesmen enough of her
own to know and to judge. Wildly is he deceived who
imagines that these men are ignorant men, and unin
formed of the affairs of the world. I would that our
own statesmen presented the same average of intelli
gence and accomplishment that I know is possessed by
the statesmen of China. I say, they have weighed
the statesmen of Christendom. They now appre
ciate their relation to one another, and their rela
tion to her; and they feel that isolation has not only
ceased to be for her interest, but that isolation does not
become her. Is it for her, the inheritor of five thous
and years of civilization, and with her immense popu
lation and resources, to shrink from contact with
these relatively petty states of Christendom ? By no
means. She knows that she has but to advance, as
she now does advance, to take her appropriate place
in the great Republic of States — a place in which she
is to exercise prodigious influence over the commercial
as well as the intellectual condition of the human race.
Her advance is the more noble in that it is peaceful.
�■
I
▼
■
w
�RECEPTION OF THE
50
What if the successor of Genghis Khan, from his throne
of Cathay, should again send forth his millions of armed
men like a deluge over Asia and Europe ? I shudder
at the thought.
We cannot over-estimate, we can scarcely compre
hend, all the beneficent effects of that treaty of which
we have heard so interesting an account this evening
from Mr. Burlingame. It is the initiation of measures,
by a treaty between China and that one of the Christian
powers in whose relative neutrality, so to speak, she
may and does impose implicit confidence, that one
of the Christian powers which she feels that she may
and can make the agent, the intermediary, as it were,
between herself and the other powers of the world,—
it is, I say, the initiation of a series of measures which
are to place her on a footing of amicable relationship to
the other great Powers. We have sounded the key
note; we have initiated — unchecked by jealousies,
unaffected by any minor considerations, with the sole
thought how a great and grand thing shall be done
greatly and grandly — that series of negotiations which,
I venture to say, must and will pass the circuit of the
globe as resistless, as triumphant, as the march of the
sun in heaven.
I conclude, therefore, by expressing, in common
with the gentlemen who have preceded me, the
thought which I am sure is welling up in every
bosom here present, and which stands half expressed
upon every lip, — I say, I conclude by expressing my
sense of pride, of gratification, of satisfied patriotism,
in seeing that to the lot of one of our own fellow-citi-
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
51
zens has fallen that most holy and sublime mission of
unsurpassed honor now, and of imperishable glory
among all the nations, as well of Europe as of Amer
ica. And to us it should be the subject of special gratulation that this high duty has devolved not only upon
one of our own fellow-citizens, but upon our own
beloved country, and that in honoring him we do honor
to the United States,
The Mayor announced as the seventh regular toast:
“The union of the farthest East and the farthest West.”
He introduced Mr. Ralph Waldo Emerson to respond.
s
mr. emerson’s
speech.
Mr. Mayor : I suppose we are all of one opinion on
this remarkable occasion of meeting the Embassy sent
from the oldest Empire in the world to the youngest
Republic. All share the surprise and pleasure when
the venerable oriental dynasty,—hitherto a romantic
legend to most of us,—suddenly steps into the fellow
ship of nations. This auspicious event, considered in
connection with the late innovations in Japan, marks a
new era, and is an irresistible result of the science which
has given us the power of steam and the electric tele
graph. It is the more welcome for the surprise. We
had said of China, as the old prophet said of Egypt,
“ Her strength is to sit still.” Her people had such
elemental conservatism, that by some wonderful force of
race and national manners, the wars and revolutions
that occur in her annals have proved but momentary
swells or surges on the Pacific ocean of her history,
��RECEPTION OF THE
52
leaving no trace. But in its immovability this race has
claims. China is old not in time only, but in wisdom,
which is gray hair to a nation, — or rather, truly seen,
is eternal youth. As we know, China had the magnet
centuries before Europe; and block-printing or stereo
type, and lithography, and gunpowder, and vaccination,
and canals ; had anticipated Linnaeus’s nomenclature of
plants ; had codes, journals, clubs, hackney coaches,
and, thirty centuries before New York, had the custom
of New-Year’s calls of comity and reconciliation. I
need not mention its useful arts, — its pottery indispen
sable to the world, the luxury of silks, and its tea, the
cordial of nations. But I must remember that she has
respectable remains of astronomic science, and his
toric records of forgotten time, that have supplied
important gaps in the ancient history of the western
nations. Then she has philosophers who cannot be
spared. Confucius has not yet gathered all his fame.
When Socrates heard that the oracle declared that he
was the wisest of men, he said, it must mean that other
men held that they were wise, but that he knew that he
knew nothing. Confucius had already affirmed this of
himself: and what we call the Golden Rule of Jesus,
Confucius had uttered in the same terms, five hundred
years before. His morals, though addressed to a state
of society utterly unlike ours, we read with profit to-day.
His rare perception appears in his Golden Mean, his
doctrine of Reciprocity, his unerring insight, — putting
always the blame of our misfortunes on ourselves ; as
when to the governor who complained of thieves, he
said, “ If you, sir, were not covetous, though you should
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
53
reward them for it, they would not steal.” His ideal of
greatness predicts Marcus Antoninus. At the same
time, he abstained from paradox, and met the ingrained
prudence of his nation by saying always, “ Bend one
cubit to straighten eight.”
China interests us at this moment in a point of poli
tics. I am sure that gentlemen around me bear in
mind the bill which Hon. Mr. Jenckes, of Rhode Island,
has twice attempted to carry through Congress, requir
ing that candidates for public offices shall first pass
examination on their literary qualifications for the same.
Well, China has preceded us, as well as England and
France, in this essential correction of a reckless usage ;
and the like high esteem of education appears in China
in social life, to whose distinctions it is made an indis
pensable passport.
It is gratifying to know that the advantages of the
new intercourse between the two countries are daily
manifest on the Pacific coast. The immigrants from
Asia come in crowds. Their power of continuous labor,
their versatility in adapting themselves to new condi
tions, their stoical economy, are unlooked-for virtues.
They send back to their friends, in China, money, new
products of art, new tools, machinery, new foods, etc.,
and are thus establishing a commerce without limit. I
cannot help adding, after what I have heard to-night,
that I have read in the journals a statement from an
English source, that Sir Frederic Bruce attributed to
Mr. Burlingame the merit of the happy reform in the
relations of foreign governments to China. I am quite
sure that I heard from Mr. Burlingame in New York,
�J
�RECEPTION OF THE
54
in his last visit to America, that the whole merit of it
belonged to Sir Frederic Bruce. It appears that the
ambassadors were emulous in their magnanimity. It is
certainly the best guaranty for the interests of China
and of humanity.
The Mayor then introduced the Honorable Nathaniel P.
Banks, as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of
the House of Representatives.
SPEECH OF HON. N. P. BANKS.
w
Mr. Mayor: I am sure it is not my fault that I am
led to trespass upon the attention of gentlemen at this
late hour of the evening. I have learned a little wisdom
from a short acquaintance with our Chinese friends. I
have learned that there is medicine for sickness, but not
for fate; and that When a man comes to a banquet in
Boston he ought to be ready for the destiny that awaits
him.
It gives me, sir, great pleasure to participate in this
most wise and just celebration of the passage of the
treaty to which reference has been made, and the advent
of the distinguished Embassy from China. After what
has been said by other gentlemen, I can do little more
than return to you, Mr. Mayor, and your associates, my
thanks for the honor conferred upon me by your invita
tion, and to the gentlemen present for the kind recep
tion they have given to the mention of my name by you.
I am happy to confirm what has been said by so many
gentlemen in regard to the great advantages which the
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
55
connection, consummated by this treaty is likely to bring
to the United States of America. But I go a little
further than any yet have gone; and I claim for the
distinguished head of this Embassy, whom we have
known so long and so well, more of the gratitude that
is due for the successful initiation and completion of
this great movement than has yet been accorded to him.
It is my belief, sir, — and I speak from long and inti
mate personal knowledge of him — that it is not only to
his sagacity and his experience, but especially by the
profound kindness of heart and generosity of nature,
that he has won the confidence of the Chinese nation;
and that out of this kindness of heart and this generosity
of nature he returns to us with the high commission
which he bears, and shows to us in the future the great
advantages which the two nations are to win from the
consummation of the closer connection which has been
initiated.
There are one or two points of resemblance between
the Chinese nation and the people of the United States
which ought not to pass without observation on such an
occasion as this. The distinguished gentleman on my
right <(Mr. Emerson), has alluded, as other gentlemen
have done, to the fact, that one is the oldest nation of
history and the other the newest republic of the world.
But there are other important resemblances. The
Chinese nation is a government without force. The
United States is a government with no power except
the consent of the people who are governed, All other
nations differ in this respect. Every government, in
every age and in every clime, has sustained, and now
��RECEPTION OF THE
56
sustains, its authority by physical force, while the gov
ernments of China and of the United States alone
trust for their authority to the recognition and the con
sent of the people whom they govern.
Much has been said of the civilization which that
great and ancient nation has attained, and much more
might be said, resting upon human authority, to confirm
the statement; but, in my judgment, there is one proof*
greater, stronger and clearer than any that has yet been
offered, and it exists in this fact — that a nation of four
hundred millions, which has maintained itself for five
thousand years, and, as has been already said, is likely
to perpetuate its power to the end of time, and which
governs its people without other force than their con
sent, must have greater qualities than any other nation
that has yet existed. There is a lesson for Americans
and for Europeans, for civilized nations or for barba
rians. In any government that has this moral power to
control these hundreds of millions of citizens for these
thousands of years, there must be a degree of wisdom
on the part of the people, and a capacity on the part of
the rulers, for which human history elsewhere and at
other times has made no note or record ; and I welcome
the association and connection which they offer us as an
opportunity of attaining information in the science of
government, which we have not yet been able to derive
from any other family or any other example among the
nations of the earth.
There is a single other resemblance to which I will
call your attention, and then relieve you from further
trespass upon your time. The Chinese nation asks the
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
57
maintenance of the integrity of its empire. The Chi
nese nation asserts by its Ambassadors, if not by its
philosophy, the great doctrine of non-intervention,
upon the assertion of which the Government of the
United States was founded. They come now, as has
been said, not merely to ask admission upon the rolf of
civilized States, but to assert a doctrine grander than
any that has yet been proclaimed by men or by nations;
a higher than any of American civilization, or than Eu
ropean civilization has ever been able to announce. We
claim great merit to ourselves, Mr. Mayor and gentle
men, because, in the establishment of our theories of
government, we recognized the doctrine of the frater
nity and equality of man.
The liberties of all men is the great lesson that we
have taught the world, and in our day and our time, it
is, perhaps, as much as might have been expected of us.
We are only two hundred years old. That is all that
we have learned, and that is all that we have taught the
nations of the earth. But there is a grander doctrine
than this, never yet announced in authoritative form to
the nations of the earth, and never yet read upon the
pages of human history. The State is the creation of
God. The individual man is necessary to a state of po
litical society. The creation of the State is necessary to
the progress of man and the civilization of the human
race. The State, therefore, is the grander creation of
the two, and though man be the immediate creation of
Divine Providence, the State is not less the creation of
that power, and its eminence and its power are not less
necessary to work out the destiny and purposes of Prov8
�i
II
!
�RECEPTION OF THE
58
idence. The State, sir, hitherto, has been regarded as
the work of man. Governments have claimed the right
to make and to destroy, and the strongest in the course
of human history, has been ready and willing, and
claimed the right, to destroy those who were not less
able to defend themselves.
*
But here come the representatives of this ancient na
tion, that we have been accustomed to class among bar
barian States, with the great doctrine, not merely of the
brotherhood of man, but the higher and nobler result
of civilization, which is the fraternity of nations ; and
if in their mission, whether it springs from necessity or
from wisdom, it shall be their destiny to accomplish the
recognition of this principle of the fraternity of nations,
as the American people have consummated the doctrine
of the fraternity of men, there is little more left for man
to do in the way of perfecting the human race in mat
ters of government, or of extending the beneficient ad
vantages of human civilization. That they will do this,
sir, I can have no doubt whatever. Although in differ
ent parts of the world their theories may be resisted, and
the States of Europe may insist, now and hereafter, as
heretofore, upon the right of intervention, we must re
member that they resisted also our doctrine which has
been consummated, of the equality and fraternity of man;
and so much clearer and stronger is the recognition of
the grander doctrine of the fraternity of nations, that
the reason and justice of the philosophy alone will
carry it onward, as has been said by the distinguished
Senator who has preceded me, as triumphant as the
march of the sun in heaven.
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
59
I read this morning, in one of the city journals, the
letter of a Massachusetts man from the southern part of
Europe, where, in speaking of many important matters
that had fallen under his observation, he alludes to one
which cannot be mentioned without touching the heart
of an American, especially of a Massachasetts man,
particularly .the heart of a citizen of Boston — that the
commercial flag of the United States had been swept
from the seas of the world. Here, sir, where we re
member that, within our own times, within the time of
the youngest among us, the Grays, the Lymans, the
Sturgis’s, and many others of the merchant princes of
Boston, who were the fathers and founders of American
commerce — who gave this city its prestige, its prosper
ity, its power, its wealth ; where we saw that infant com
merce, founded by the fathers of our own neighborhood,
grow to such a power, equalling, if not surpassing, that
of the most successful nations of the earth — we can but
grieve, ay, sir, deeply grieve, that any one travelling
over any portion of the earth should be compelled to
say that the commercial flag of the United States had
been swept from the seas and was to be seen no more.
But, sir, I see in the mission of my friend, Mr. Burlin
game, and his associate ministers, the recovery of that
commercial prestige and power which we have lost. I
need not allude to the sad events which have led to
this change in the commercial power of the United
States. They are too well known, too deeply engraved
upon the hearts of all present, to need any reference
whatever. It was upon the Atlantic, sir, that we had
achieved our power, and where our commerce had sway,
��RECEPTION OF THE
60
and when the maritime nations of the old world, either
out of distrust of our own purposes, or jealous of our
power, seized a fitting opportunity for them, and an
unfortunate one for us, to sweep the American flag from
the seas, it seemed as if it were impossible for us ever
to recover our power. I don’t know that it is to be
expected, or that we shall ever regain our power there.
But the Atlantic Ocean is only a tenth part of the
surface of the globe, land and water. On the other
side of our continent, which we reach in a few days by
our railroads, we stand in view of the Pacific Ocean,
that covers one-third of the surface of the globe, land
and water ; that is controlled on the east by six or seven
or eight hundred millions of people, with a sufficient
number on this side, I think, to keep up our end of the
matter in our little portion, and with the friendly na
tions of Russia, China, Japan, and ultimately, perhaps,
of the Indies, we shall reinstate the commercial flag of
the United States and raise our power, prestige and
prosperity in that line of human enterprise to an ele
vation which the mind of man has never yet been able
to conceive. We may, sir, return the compliment which
has been paid to us by the European nations. And when
our fleets are fixed, and our flag planted upon the Pa
cific Ocean, sharing in the industry and the commerce
of these hundreds of millions of people, we may return
the compliment paid to us by our European friends, and,
as Grant did in Virginia, as Sherman did at Atlanta,
flank the enemy, and take possession of the field. And
this, sir, we do with the aid of this Embassy and that of
the great, intelligent and just people that it represents.
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
61
I remember, sir, reading in that most delicate, beau
tiful, and too short biography of Mr. Sheil, the Irish
barrister, an account of his tutor, of the Jesuit profes
sion, who, by the goodness of his nature, and ^the wis
dom of his intellect, had won the affections of this youth
ful student in the monasteries of Ireland. He says, (and
there is significance in the remark he makes,) that his
tutor was taken away from him without an instant’s pre
paration or notice. This Jesuit was ordered to Siberia,
with instructions to work his way into China by any
means in his power, for the purpose of giving to the
governments he represented the benefit of his discover
ies in that far-distant and little known land. This
shows what effort, what care, what pains have been
taken by the European nations to make themselves ac
quainted with the Chinese people. We, sir, have been
careless of these things; and that Providence which has
taken care of us in so many great trials has opened the
way to us for a greater advantage than the European
nations have ever yet acquired. These men, the Chi
nese — the representatives of four hundred millions of
people—come to us and offer to us their interest, their in
dustry and the profits of their commerce. They ask
nothing from us but the kindness and friendship which
we are ready to show to every nation. And I trust, sir,
that the American people and the American Govern
ment will not be unwilling to do whatever is necessary
to sustain the proffer of friendship which they have
made; that we shall be willing to say to the Chinese,
that, so far as moral influence goes, the integrity of their
nation shall be maintained, as we say to ourselves that
��RECEPTION OF THE
62
the integrity of our nation shall be maintained. Whether
it be against domestic or foreign foes, we will maintain
our power till this continent shall be all American and
our flag known, as heretofore, upon every sea.
Mr. Mayor and fellow citizens, not to trespass upon
your attention any farther, I will close with a sentiment,
which I could wish to have embodied in my speech, a
sentiment that reflects my own feelings, I trust may also
reflect your own judgment.
The Ministers and Associate Officers of the Chinese
Embassy of 1868. The representatives of the political
society of widely different periods of history, and politi
cal powers of opposite parts of the globe ; the agents of
a civilization whose mission it is to prevent the isola
tion and intervention of States, and establish the frater
nity of nations.t May God give them health, strength
and wisdom, and success commensurate with the masrnitude and justice of the great cause they represent.
The eighth regular toast.
“The Commercial Relations between China and the United States”
was responded to by Charles G. Nazro, Esq., President
of the Boston Board of Trade.
SPEECH OF CHARLES G. NAZRO, ESQUIRE.
Mr. Mayor: The topic upon which you have called
me to speak, is one which not only commends itself to
every merchant and every business man, but also finds a
response in the heart of every citizen of our land. We
have arrived, sir, at a new epoch in the affairs of the
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
63
world. Old prejudices are being overcome, and en
lightened minds are beginning to have control, where
heretofore, darkness has prevailed. The discoveries,
through modern science, of the forces of nature, have
rendered achievements practicable at the present day,
which, in times past, have been considered utterly im
possible. The power of steam and of electricity; the
improvement in machinery, and the increased facilities
and speed of transportation and of locomotion, .have
brought the distant countries of the world in close prox
imity ; and nations which before were separated by an
impassible wall of partition, are now brought together
as friends and neighbors. And this is only the first act
in the great drama, and we, who are upon the stage at
the present time, are only a small portion of the actors
who are to take a part in it.
Sir, there is more in this than appears upon the sur
face ; there is a depth of meaning which it is well for
us to ponder and understand. Who, sir, is competent
to foretell the future, who has imagination sufficiently
vivid to depict the effect of these new movements upon
the human race even for the next fifty years ? Already
do we see the great Empire of China, abounding as she
does in wealth, and containing one-third of the popula
tion of the globe, emerging from that state of isolation
in which she has been kept, and reciprocating with us,
and the other nations of the western world, overtures of
kind and friendly relations ; — and to-night we have as
guests her honored representatives; and soon will all
the nations of the earth be bound in the indissoluble
ties of friendship, Christian sympathy and love.
��RECEPTION OF THE
64
What then, sir, are the lessons we are to draw from
these events'? First, and naturally as a commercial
nation, we see enlargement of our commerce ; more ex
tended commercial relations with those distant empires ;
greater profit in trade and large pecuniary gain. And
I think, sir, at the present moment we can hardly esti
mate the great importance of this aspect of the subject.
But while all the world will be benefited, it“appears to
me that our own country will derive peculiar advan
tage. If we are true to ourselves, we shall take our
place in the front r^nk of nations. From our geograph
ical position, our Continent forms, as it were, a direct
highway between the nations of the east and those of
the west. We have youth, energy, natural advantages,
a virgin soil, mineral wealth, inland seas and rivers for
transportation, and every thing that goes to make up a
great country. But we must be true to ourselves. The
flag which we so much venerate and beneath whose folds
we feel so entirely secure from the assaults of foes from
abroad or traitsrs at home, must float without a spot or
blemish. Its azure field must be as pure as the etherial
heavens, of which it is the emblem ; its stars must be
as bright as the celestial luminaries which they repre
sent, and not a foul spot be allowed upon our escutcheon.
If our government in time of peril pledges its word in
good faith for the payment of money, that pledge must
be redeemed when the danger is passed — not in the
letter only, but in the spirit. Better, sir, pay the na
tional debt twice over, than by any mean subterfuge seek
to filch a single dollar from any one who has trusted to
the national honor; nor let us sanction in our govern-
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
65
ment acts, which, if performed by individuals, would
# expose them to the contempt of all honorable men.
If, then, we thus perform our duty to ourselves and
to the world, we may expect great advantages from
these commercial alliances. But, Mr. Mayor, important
as is this view of the subject — and we can hardly over
estimate it — there is a higher and nobler plane from
which to view it. We learn by it, that an unseen hand
is molding and guiding our destiny — and that we are
merely instruments in working out the great problem in
the divine government. We see that the nations of the
earth, drawn and directed by that Providence, are
seeking a closer and more friendly alliance with each
other, and that soon the sword will cease to be the
arbiter through which the national questions will be
« determined, but that mutual forbearance and Christian
courtesy will take its place; we see in it civilization
with all its ennobling and elevating influences spreading
further and wider; and we see that, following in the
track of our commerce, the Christian religion will flow in
copious streams; and that while we send our ships to
those shores laden with the rich products of our land,
they will also be freighted with the glorious gospel of
our blessed Redeemer; and notwithstanding unchristian
and wicked acts may have been done to the people of
those countries (although, so far as my knowledge
extends, our own country has not been guilty in this
particular), we may thus atone for the wrong, and be
instrumental in guiding them into the way of eternal
life.
Then, Mr. Mayor, if these views be correct, and if
9**
��RECEPTION OF THE
66
these results are to follow the present movement, should
we not thank God for it, not only as merchants, but as
philanthropists and Christians, and do all in our power
to promote it? I think, it is a matter of no small
significance that the present representative of the great
Empire of China is not a foreigner, who does not
understand our institutions, but one of own esteemed
fellow citizens ; and that while we receive him most
cordially in his official capacity, we also receive him as
a friend and neighbor, and bid him a warm welcome to
his home; and although the gentlemen associated with
him in the Embassy cannot be expected so fully to
appreciate- us as one of our own citizens, yet their
intelligence will compensate the want of experience;
and we trust, that when they return to their home, they
will bear with them kind remembrances of us, -and we
wish them God speed in their important mission.
Mr. Mayor, permit me, in closing, to offer as a
sentiment:
“ The friendly intercourse of nations. The aid to in
dustry, the promoter of civilization, and the handmaid
of religion.”
The Mayor then introduced Mr. Edwin P. Whipple to
respond to the ninth regular toast,—
“The Press.”
mr. whipple’s speech.
One cannot attempt, Mr. Mayor, to resp d here for
the press, without being reminded that the press and
��I
CHINESE EMBASSY.
67
the Chinese Embassy have been on singularly good
terms from the start. To record the progress, applaud
the object, extend the influence, and cordially eulogize
the members of that Embassy, have been for months no
inconsiderable part of the business of all newspapers ;
and if China anticipated us, by some five hundred
years, in the invention of printing, our Chinese guests
will still admit that, in the minute account we have
given both of what they have, and of what* they
have not, said and done, since they arrived in the coun
try, we have carried the invention to a perfection of
♦which they never dreamed — having not only invented
printing, but invented a great deal of what we print.
But, apart from the rich material they have furnished
the press in the way of news, there is something
strangely alluring and inspiring to the editorial imagi
nation in the comprehensive purpose which has prompt
ed their mission to the civilized nations of the West.
That purpose is doubly peaceful,^for it includes a two
fold commerce of material products and of immaterial
ideas. Probably the vastest conception which ever en
tered into the mind of a conqueror was that which was
profoundly meditated, and, in its initial steps, practical
ly carried out, by Alexander the Great. He was en
gaged in a clearly-defined project of assimilating the pop
ulations of Europe and Asia, when, at the early age of
thirty-three, he was killed — I tremble to state it here —
by a too eager indulgence in an altogether too munifi
cent public dinner ! Alexander’s weapon was force,
but it was at least the force of genius, and it was ex
erted in the service of a magnificent idea. His sue-
��RECEPTION OF THE
68
cessors in modern times have but too often availed
themselves of force divested of all ideas, except the
idea of bullying or outwitting the Asiatics in a trade.
As to China, this conduct roused an insurrection of
Chinese conceit against European conceit. The Chi
nese were guilty of the offence of calling the represent
atives of the proudest and most supercilious of all civil
izations, “ outside barbarians ” —illustrating in this that
too common conservative weakness of human nature,
of holding fixedly to an opinion long after the facts
which justified it have changed or passed away- It
certainly cannot be questioned that at a period which,
when compared with the long date of Chinese annals,
may be called recent, we were outside barbarians as con
trasted with that highly civilized and ingenious people.
At the time when our European ancestors were squalid,
swinish, wolfish savages, digging with their hands into
the earth for roots to allay the pangs of hunger, with
out arts, letters, or written speech., China rejoiced in an
old, refined, complicated civilization — was rich, popu
lous, enlightened, cultivated, humane — was fertile in
savans, poets, moralists, metaphysicians, saints — had in
vented printing, gunpowder, the mariner’s compass, the
sage’s rule of life — had, in one of her. three State re
ligions, that of Confucius, presented a code of morals
which, being as immortal as the human conscience, can
never become obsolete — and had, in another of her
State religions, that of Buddha, solemnly professed her
allegiance to that doctrine of the equality of men,
which Buddha taught twenty-four hundred years before
our Jefferson was born, and had at the same time vig-
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
69
orously grappled with that problem of existence which
our Emerson finds as insolvable now as it was then.
Well, sir, after all this had relatively changed, after
the . Western nations had made their marvellous ad
vances in civilization, they were too apt to exhibit to
China only their barbaric side — that is, their ravenous
cupidity backed by their insolent strength. We judge
for example, of England by the poetry of Shakespeare,
the science of Newton, the ethics of Butler, the religion
of Taylor, the philanthropy of Wilberforce; but wThat
poetry, science, ethics, religion or philanthropy wras she
accustomed to show in her intercourse with China?
Did not John Bull, in his rough methods with the Ce
lestial Empire, sometimes literally act “ like a bull in a
China shop ? ” You remember, sir, that “ intelligent
contraband ” who, .when asked his opinion of an
offending white brother, delicately hinted his distrust
by replying: “ Sar, if I was a chicken, and that man
was about, I should take care to roost high.” Well, all
that we can say of China is, that for a long time she
“ roosted high ” —withdrew suspiciously into her own
civilization to escape the rough contact with the harsh
er side of ours.
But, by a sudden inspiration of almost miraculous
confidence, springing from a faith in the nobler qualities
of our Caucasian civilization, she has changed her pol
icy. She has learned that in the language, and on the
lips, and in the hearts of most members of the English
race, there is such a word as equity, and at the magic
of that word she has eagerly emerged from her isolation.
And, sir, what we see here to-day reminds me that, some
��RECEPTION OF THE
70
thirty years ago, Boston confined one of her citizens in
a lunatic asylum, for the offence of being possessed by a
too intensified Boston “ notion.” He had discovered a
new and expeditious way of getting to China. “ All
agree,” he said, “ that the earth revolves daily on its own
axis. If you desire,” he therefore contended, “to go to
China, all you have to do is to go up in a balloon, wait
till China comes round, then let off the gas, and drop
softly down.” Now I will put it to you, Mr. Mayoi, if
you are not bound to release that philosopher from con
finement, for has not his conception been: realized ? —
has not China, to-day, unmistakably come round to us ?
And now, sir, a word as to the distinguished gen
tleman at the head of the Embassy — a gentleman spec
ially dear to the press. Judging from the eagerness
with which the position is sought, I am lead to believe
that the loftiest compliment which can be paid to a hu
man being is, that he has once represented Boston in
the national House of Representatives. After such a
distinction as that, all other distinctions, however great,
must still show a sensible decline from political grace.
But I trust that you will all admit, that next to the hon
or of representing Boston in the House of Representa
tives comes the honor of representing the vast Empire
of China in “ The Parliament of man, the Federation of
the World.” Having enjoyed both distinctions, Mr.
Burlingame may be better qualified than we are to dis
criminate between the exultant feelings which each
is caculated to excite in the human breast. But we
must remember that the population, all brought up on a
system of universal education, of the empire he repre-
��CHINESE EMBASSY.
71
scnts, is greater than the combined population of all the
nations to which he is accredited. Most Bostonians have,
or think they have, a “ mission but certainly no other
Bostonian ever had such a“ mission ” as he ; for it extends
all round the planet; makes him the most universal Ambassador and Minister Plenipotentiary the world ever
saw; is, in fact, a “ mission” from everybody to every
body, and one by which it is proposed that everybody
shall be benefited. To doubt its success would be to
doubt themoral soundness of Christian civilization. It
implies that Christian doctrines will find no opponents
provided that Christian nations set a decent example of
Christian. Its virtue heralds the peaceful triumph of
reason over prejudice of justice over force, of humanity,
over the hatreds of class and race, of the good of all
over the selfish blindness of each, of the “ fraternity ”
of the great Commonwealth of Nations over the insolent
“ liberty ” of any one of them to despise, oppress, and
rob the rest.
Letters were received from a number of distinguished gentle
men whose engagements prevented their attendance at the ban
quet. Among others, from the Hon. Charles Francis Adams,
late Minister to the Court of St. James; the Hon. J. Lothrop
Motley, late Minister to the Court of Vienna; Prof. Louis
Agassiz, the Hon. Hugh McCulloch, the Hon. Wm. M. Evarts,
Bishop Eastburn, Bishop Williams, the Hon. Richard H. Dana,
Jr., the Hon. Henry Wilson, and the Hon. Wm. Claflin.
��OTHER ENTERTAINMENTS.
On Saturday, the twenty-second of August, the City Council
entertained the Embassy with an excursion in Boston Harbor,
in the United States Revenue Cutter “McCulloch.” At Fort
Warren the guests were received with a salute, and were con
ducted through the Fortress by Major A. A. Gibson, 3d U. S.
Artillery, commanding the post. The company afterwards vis
ited Deer Island, and inspected the City Institutions. After
partaking of a collation at that place they returned to the city.
On Monday following, Mr. Burlingame and his associates
were formally received and entertained by the Municipal au
thorities of Cambridge.
On Tuesday, the Embassy visited Lawrence, with the Boston
Committee of Arrangements, for the purpose of inspecting the
great manufacturing establishments in that city. A special train
was furnished by the President of the Boston & Maine Rail
road Corporation, which started at 10 o’clock, A. M. The
guests were shown through the Washington Woollen Mills and
the Pacific Cotton Mills. After partaking of a collation at the
Pacific Mills they returned to Boston.
On Wednesday, the Embassy were formally received by His
Excellency, the Governor, at the State House. The Indepen
dent Corps of Cadets, under the command of Lieut.-Colonel
John Jeffries, Jr., were drawn up in front of the building, and
saluted the distinguished visitors as they entered.
The Sergeant-at-Arms escorted them to the Council Chamber,
•
��RECEPTION OF THE CHINESE EMBASSY.
73
where the Governor welcomed the Embassy in the following
words: •
Your Excellencies : I welcome you to Massachusetts.
The objects of the mission which brings you hither find
a ready response in this Commonwealth, whose com
mercial relations with the country you represent have
been constant and friendly. Cushing, Parker and Bur
lingame went from our schools to their high and peace
ful work in ChinaI am glad that, coming from one of the ancient em
pires of the East, you are tarrying among us long
enough to observe something of the spirit and mode of
the civilization of the West. The traditions and cus
toms of the old world can take no harm from contact
with the active and aggressive life of the new. Your
nationality and ours ought to become assimilated in
fraternal feeling for the part they may bear in the future
of history.
Your chief, Mr. Burlingame, is no stranger in this
capital where his public life and distinction began. I
offer to him a special and personal greeting among the
friends of former days, of which die memory is stdl
fresh and pleasant to us alL
Mr. E-Lrizgase
as follows:
F^tr Ex'fMexqj: Permit me to thank you for dm
warm wekome, to thank you for the bes utiful language
m whxh it is expressed, to thank you for the high
in winch it m
This good-will we
ukt to be the driivn of the highest
k die
it
*
��li
RECEPTION OE THE CHINESE EMBASSY.
world in behalf of the mission on which we are here.
Massachusetts was the first to send out messengers of
peace, and to establish relations with China. May the
spirit in which she first established those relations con
tinue to the end! and I invoke the aid of all here to unite
in the effort we are making to realize the unification of
all the people. Thanking you, feeling deeply touched
by your personal allusions, I will bring my remarks to
a close, trusting that you may have all prosperity, and
that the Commonwealth over which you preside may be
prosperous also.
Mr. Burlingame then advanced, and taking the Governor’s
hand, said:
✓
I now grasp your hand in friendship, and I trust that
to you and to the people who are here, this grasp of
friendship will be continued to all ages.
*
The Embassy remained in Boston until the 2d of September,
and were entertained in an informal way by the Committee of
Arrangements, and by private individuals. They visited the
City Hall, the Institute of Technology, the Public Library, the
City Hospital and the Waltham Watch Factory. They were
also entertained by the Municipality of Chelsea.
On Wednesday morning, at 8| o’clock, they left Boston for
New York, in a special car attached to the regular train on the
Boston and Albany Railroad.
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The reception and entertainment of the Chinese Embassy by the City of Boston
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Boston (Mass.) City Council
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Boston
Collation: 74 leaves ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Alfred Mudge & Sons
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1868
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5242
Subject
The topic of the resource
International relations
China
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The reception and entertainment of the Chinese Embassy by the City of Boston), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
China-Foreign Relations-United States
Conway Tracts
United States-Foreign Relations-China
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/bcad92d069ddb5a14aeab252d0023608.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ap11htDmXUS8RoCCg9ODKUBtDfttGxOfR80A1a0ilZZsphyf%7EOGwN3Cb96Oj9NxfSTtObITO5BUTDAI-Rcc9MtA1yzcPVlar-dSYst6OoC5QsRPILX8hdDzwf2%7ENX%7EOucahQdWS24sFEgtwdGUafk39b0JfZK29-JXVYo%7EvEN9iPSbU%7EmCt1HnK5hVoEN0TGhwUn7eiCD1%7EHD-WIEFFBco2EmK8CdqWztl7FPJz0YR-gZqhC5pFHs5IUVP1rs8TqbkM7G1F7K5t6eeSvGtSgwH0qlOufU5du9xJSZRX%7Ebwpgthh5BpmAkCEu8tLyIbRjdnSnfYc0vGdc0D8YbacTfA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5b06b86b506c63906067ad43bfe4dc60
PDF Text
Text
�����
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The tragedy at Mohawk Station
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Clifford, Josephine
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [California]
Collation: 203-207 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publication information from KVK. Marks from adhesive tape on p.3.
Please note that this pamphlet contains language and ideas that may be upsetting to readers. These reflect the time in which the pamphlet was written and the ideologies of the author.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1870
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5734
Subject
The topic of the resource
Literature
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The tragedy at Mohawk Station), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
United States-History
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d69bde3551c04ef141ef0415adebe641.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=RlOgfiixPJ4vIoCaOEZLcMFJQg4ZpFsW5Q%7EDL77ZKKhlX0lml6aTl%7EIQtIQ2H3ddMqbHE6RQR0C2tuhsU7GcAbp%7E8%7E36qzDkFmfWE03YsBrG8PZ85eGNH0cC5t-nvAjYpq-wbZ11%7E9Noq80rSs2QIlEt9uGfBeb-bzjDYxeXjEiA4%7Ez1FRPv9JQ5skFXtR%7EXx2ML6p00yLEn6PRpuVAHAm9UBu4O89aIB9%7EpV6U8CfLndVuMLEUwS4wtjrDIitctcEtTfdd8ktOQvbajpj6LwS3rv9DK1hZYMk58YeNJEJYgqbgv%7EspYQ7dNXKm%7EknFYZmZ1MFxnt-4vXpJXmMp1fw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
de68338dfa8c1e783d8667b9a48f94f6
PDF Text
Text
A NEW YEAR’S LETTER
FROM
JONATHAN TO JOHN.
Cassius. You love me not.
Brutus.
I do not like your faults.
Cassius. A friendly eye could never see such faults.
Brutus. A flatterer’s would not, though they do appear
As huge as high Olympus.
Julius Ceesar.
LONDON:
CHAPMAN AND HALL, 193, PICCADILLY.
1868.
��A NEW YEAR’S LETTER
♦
FROM
JONATHAN TO JOHN.
Dear John,—-I hope I need make no apology for
addressing you, in these critical times, on matters pro
foundly concerning us both. The wine-makers have a
belief that in the season of the blossoming of vines the
wine in its bottles ferments anew in sympathy, and then
chiefly breaks its bottles. Blood, John, is thicker
and more fiery than wine. Ours long ago flowed
from your heart, and it has never failed to be
stirred when your periods of change and agitation have
arrived. It was not by accident that our fathers
named their bleak home on these shores New England.
When your people were sending King James the
Second adrift to sea, the happy tidings thereof found
our ancestors at Boston doing precisely the same for
that monarch’s sub-king in New England. The stamp
of Cromwell’s foot, when he cried, “Take away that
�4
bauble !” was echoed along our coasts ; and when
Charles came back, and gave Whitehall its ghastly
coronet of skulls, there were few in this land who did
not hear above the ocean’s roar the groan of Bunyan in
his prison, and of Milton in his hiding-place. Then we
took to growing our own wine, and, somehow, it has
been imported by your people, and ever since you have
been visibly affected by our flowering season. Nature
makes very little of our lands and seas. The earthquake
at Lisbon toppled down a hundred chimneys in our
Boston. The revolution of America for independence
shook down a throne and an aristocracy in France, and
it formed a democratic party in England which has
been slowly and steadily revolutionising your society
and government from that day to this. We may as
well face the facts, John: we are one and the same
people; twenty millions of us have English blood in
our veins; our history is English history. We never
more plainly showed ourselves chips of the old block
than when we rebelled against the old block. And, on
the other hand, we cannot fail to perceive that, under
whatever disguises your internal troubles come, each,
when unmasked, is sure to turn out American. Trades’Unionism, Beales-ism, Fenianism—they are all, best and
worst, Americans. Abu Taleb wrote:
“ He who has one enemy shall meet him everywhere.”
You feel, and I know, that every step of the English
people away from feudal forms is the later Mayflower
�5
struggling through storms to its New England. The
voices of the Robinsons and Standishes in your Par
liament are unmistakable; their Plymouth Rock is
ahead. And, in the converse, your instinct is equally
clear as to your feudal friends in this country. Old
England was planted here, in the South, alongside
of New England in the North; it battled stoutly
for two hundred and fifty years, until, in its final
struggle — notwithstanding your instinctive sympathy
and aid—it perished. We understood your sympathy
well enough. There are a dozen chapters of our history
through which the story of the Alabama runs. No
one man or generation is to blame for this antagonism.
We are in the hands of fate, which has its own remorse
less methods of providing that the New World shall not
be a mere duplicate of the Old. “ Perhaps,” said our
chief philosopher, on his return from England—“perhaps
the ocean serves as a galvanic battery to distribute acids
at one pole and alkalis at the other. So England tends
to accumulate her Liberals in America, and her Con
servatives at London.” All this involves the repulsion
of positive and negative; but it should mean only the
awakening of certain talents that have slept in our En
glish race, which is a magazine of the powers of many
races. And, in fact, John, whilst in our workshops
and telegraphs we make a good thing out of action and
reaction, positive and negative, I fear that, politically,
the new year finds us both, not the masters, but
the fools of fate. I have heard Mr. Seward and Lord
�6
Lyons speak to each other across a dinner-table in a
humanlike way; but in the Alabama correspondence
there is snarling and the show of teeth. Eighteen
hundred and sixty-eight finds us with a great cable
binding us together for good ends by means of positive
and negative poles; but when I read our Blue-Books, I
have to turn and see if they were not printed a hundred
years ago, when we were getting ready to fight. Are
we never to reach a new year which shall ring out
those sad years of the seventeenth century, when the
farms of our poor settlers were given away to English
noblemen ; when the English Church pursued over the
ocean and tried to crush the religion it had banished;
when the Charters of American Colonies were taken
away; when all that our fathers could wring from the
rock on which they had settled was taxed to carry on
wars and sustain projects which they detested ?
The appearance of your greatest novelist on our
shores at present reminds us that, above our feudal, or
monarchical, or democratic forms of society and govern
ment, there is a great commonwealth of thought which
owns loyal citizens in every civilised land. Fortunately
for us both, we are a reading people; and, fortunately
for all but your authors, we Americans have appro
priate your library to an extent that will, I trust, cause
astonishment and contrition in our coming generation.
We have crammed ourselves and our childreu with Mill,
Spencer, Grote, and Arnold; Thackeray, Dickens, and
George Eliot and Hughes have woven your country
�7
seats and your city dens into romance for us; Tennyson
has for some time filled up the poets’ corners of all our
papers; our babies lisp Carlylese; the other day I found
our soldiers, by their camp-fire on the Mississippi,
gathered around a fellow who was reciting to them, with
appropriate gesture, “ How they brought the good news
from Ghent to Aix,” as related by Robert Browning.
You produced these fine spirits; we welcome and love
them. With this friendly cloud of witnesses around,
let us sit down, this New Year’s Day, and look over our
unsettled accounts. The common heart and brain of
•our respective countries shall be our court of arbitra
tion.
And, first of all, John, let me say that I have, after
much severe experience, discovered that an ounce
balances an ounce. The assertion may seem to you
paradoxical, but I am quite serious in making it.
Lately, I read in one of your weekly journals the
question, “Why is it that with America France may
steal a horse, where England must not look over the
hedge ?” The question is most pregnant, and is answer
able thus: France’s theft comes at the end of two and
a half centuries of benefits; England’s look comes at
the end of two and a half centuries of unfriendliness.
The usurper in Mexico had behind him the help ren
dered by the French in Canada to the pinched and
freezing pilgrims of Plymouth, the free-trade between.
Nouvelle France and Boston, the sword of Lafayette,
the earliest recognition of American independence.
�8
This was the accumulated capital in the American heart
which he had to trade upon. England did not earlier
recognise, nor her rulers more sympathise with, those
who lately tried to destroy the United States; she did
not do anything half so offensive to the American
people as he who tried to establish the throne of a
Hapsburg in Mexico; but what she said and did was
added to a column of historical oppressions, unbalanced
by any entries of generosity. Do not turn red and
deny this, John; it is true. There are, indeed, long
neutral years in which you did us no wrong; you had
no occasion in them to do us any wrong; but neither all
this while has it occurred to you that there is a balance
against you among us. The traditional policy of Eng
land toward America required to be distinctly reversed.
I know how your living generation speaks of these
old days—how it repudiates the persecutions which,
having driven the Pilgrims from England’s side, still
pursued them, which robbed them of manufactures
and stifled them with Navigation Acts, and the hard
days of taxation which ended in the revolution; and
how it protests against having these sins of their
fathers visited upon the Englishmen of to-day. But
you cannot cancel your national debt, John, because it
was contracted by your dead ancestors. I observe that
your present family is comfortable and satisfied. I
looked in on your Pan-Anglicans the other day, and
was impressed by the unctuous way in which your
rotund Bishops, addressing Heaven, said, “ We have
�9
done those things that we ought to have done, and have
left undone those things that we ought to have left
undone, and are in a thoroughly soun.d condition.” I
was not trained in “ the Church,” and may not quote
the words exactly, but am quite sure that I give their
tone and spirit correctly. And I must say that I can
trace the same comfortable assurance in the way your
people have of throwing off their consciences the wrongs
they have inherited, while lifting no finger for their re
moval. A generation adopts every wrong it inherits,
and does not its best to redress. But if this is so,
what shall be said of a generation that steadily follows
instead of reversing the bad precedents of the past ? It
was not you, the contemporaneous John, who stoned
the Puritans, taxed our colonies, imprisoned our
sailors at Dartmoor, and burned our capital; but in
taunting the defenders of our Union, and helping those
who were seeking to establish a vast Slave-empire on the
ruins of our Republic, did you not prove yourself the
legitimate child of those who stoned our ancestors ?
The present cannot escape being interpreted in the
light of the past. Your people of the lower orders
sympathised with us in our dark hour—that is to say,
the unemigrated America in Europe sympathised with
its pioneer wing on this side of the Atlantic. And no
wonder, for our defeat would have moved back the
shadow on their dial many, many years. But their
interest in us is the other side of your instinctive dislike
of us and oppression of them.
�10
The fact is, John, the more we scrutinise your part
in our recent struggle the darker it appears. When
the rebellion broke out, you said you were with us, and
we believed it; we were grappling Slavery under the
watchwords of your own great emancipators—men
whom you bitterly persecuted, it is true, while they
were alive, but whose sons you have made baronets.
At last, we said, the Anglo-Saxon heart is one; pro
gressive America and Conservative England will be
hereafter right and left hands, working harmoniously
for great human ends. A mere accident was the spear
touch that revealed the hypocrisy of your sympathy.
An American officer seized two Confederate envoys on
one of your ships; instantly all England (rather impe
riously) demanded their restoration, and they were
restored; but under cover of the popular unanimity
against that act, your old and real hatred of America
grasped the sceptre again, and, in the face of former
declarations, maintained and wielded it to the end with
an enthusiasm, beside which your early Federal sym
pathy was ice. The newspapers with their ante-Trent
and post-Trent articles are no doubt on file at the
British Museum ; you will find them instructive read
ing. The former are stammering, the latter easy and
eloquent.
Thus, then, after eight generations, for each of which
your government had left some scar upon mine, the
ninth began with a kiss and a stab. You were defeated,
John; the Southern Confederacy was not more severely
defeated in our civil war than you were; and I do
�11
believe that you are sorry you were found on the
losing side. But it is the honest way to let you know
the full extent of the dangers that have been brought
upon us both by the course you then took. If
you could not free yourself from eight generations
of antipathy to a Republic which your persecu
tions established and made strong, neither can we
escape from the accumulated illustrations of the spirit
of feudal society etched in the shadow of every chapter
of our history, and every institution of our country.
Quisque suos patimur manes. You have managed to
make England the dark background of our Forefathers’
Days, our Thanksgiving Days, our Independence Days;
and every child is inevitably trained to associate his
holidays with, and fire his crackers at, English oppres
sion. (Ah, had you given us the right to say : “ Child,
that was the England of the far past: the England of
to-day does not tax Dissenters, nor burthen its colonies
(witness Jamaica), for the advantage of a class; it sees
how both parties won in our Revolution, and rejoices in
American Independence, not simply endures it, much
less welcomes its dangers!”
Consider the ingenuity by which the freest firstclass power of the Old World has become to the
United States the agent of all the annoyance that
despotism can inflict upon liberty! It is only about
seventy-five years since people were suffering in English
prisons for selling works which rehearsed the A B C of
the United States Government, and their author—poor
Tom Paine—fled from a State trial to France and to
�12
America. So into our diary it goes: In England
assertion of the “ Rights of Man” = imprisonment or
exile. Ben Franklin, welcomed in France, is snubbed
in England. Thomas Jefferson is slighted at Court.
These men gave Washington City its traditions, and
the Honourable Messrs. Chandler, Robinson, and others
are at this day, in their speeches against England, quite
unconsciously, avenging slights put by George III.
upon the representatives of a government he had been
forced to treat with, but never forgave.
Lately I was reading with peculiar interest, in
Howell’s State Trials, an account of the proceedings
against Henry Redgrave Yorke, James Montgomery,
and Joseph Gales, for some alleged seditious proceedings
and speeches at Sheffield, toward the close of the last cen
tury. This Mr. Joseph Gales, a man of great ability,
fled with his wife and child (seven years of age) to
Hamburg, and thence to America, and so escaped
the term in York Castle awarded to “ Citizen Yorke,”
to Montgomery “ the Christian poet,” and others. He
(Gales) was nearly penniless when he arrived at Phila
delphia, where the Congress of the United States then
sat. But he was soon editing the leading newspaper of
the city, a paper which afterwards migrated with Con
gress to Washington. There it became the chief journal
in America, and was, as the National Intelligencer, for
over forty years edited by the son who had fled from
England with his parents. The same refugee esta
blished a newspaper in North Carolina. American
�13
journalism was at its beginning more influenced by
these men, father and son, hunted out of Hallamshire,
than by all others. What is that influence, so far as it
affected American feeling toward England, likely to
have been ? When you burned our capitol in 1812,
one other house you thought worth burning, and did
burn—the office of Mr. Gales.
I tell you, John, there remain in our cities old
men who witnessed some of the events that have
left skeletons in your closets; men who have seen the
insides of your prisons ; who saw that recruiting officer
plunge with his horse among men, women, and children
at Castle Hill, Sheffield, cutting them down with his
sword; still more who heard those shrieks at Peterloo
which have never died out of the air. These men may be
poor and vulgar; but they are strong-headed men, who
have tongues touched with some of that flame which shot
out on your walls in the songs of the Corn Law Rhymer.
Thus you have been ever careful to keep our ancient
memories green. Many Mayflower ships, with fleeing
pilgrims aboard, have followed the track of the first;
and we all know that, when your troops were driven
hence, it was still against America they were let
loose, whether in France or England. There were
not wanting those among us who maintained that
a certain class in England was quite ready to treat our
people as rebellious subjects, if they got a chance;
that the spirit was willing, though the arm was weak.
Well, a kind of opportunity came ; and is it wonderful
�14
that the blood of ’76 stirred in our veins when we saw
the Alabama sailing from an English port by acknow
ledged connivance of English officials, with the boast of
its owner in Parliament, and, despite the affected
deprecations of ministers, entertained by your represen
tatives in every English port of the world, and cheered
on her voyage of destruction ?
A pound will only be balanced by a pound, John;
and—think me not transcendental—the rule holds when
it comes to tons.
The Alabama was no common ship. There was a
soul in it, breathed out of two and a half centuries. Its
hull sank to the bottom, but its ghost still sails the
seas, and I fear will haunt them for some time yet.
It is this “ Flying Englishman” that is now the spectre
ship. At this particular moment it has the Fenian flag
nailed to its mast.
We both know, John, that if you had not longed for
the overthrow of this Republic, the Alabama would
never have sailed from Liverpool; and, in our hearts, we
both know that if the Alabama had not sailed Fenianism
would never have been permitted to plot against you
openly in our cities. “ Its proper power to hurt each
creature feels.” You showed a marvellous alacrity in
discovering our vulnerable point, and we would not be
your genuine scion if we had not discovered yours. It
is surprising how much of this kind of thing can be
done within the precincts of municipal law—how much
war can be waged with the weapons of peace!
It so happens that there is but one nation on earth
�15
that can suppress Fenianism; and that nation is not
yours, John!
Do not throw down my letter at this point; I have
good reason to know your feelings on this matter, and
hasten to declare at once that I am no Fenian. If there
is anything that runs dead against the average native
American’s faith about his own country, it is the whole
Fenian theory. What America means to say to the
whole world is—“Your free Germany, your liberated
Ireland, your Tae-ping China, are here; all your
utopias are provided for here !” The mere fact that
the Fenians are making a tremendous ado about a
bit of Old World land, not by a tenth so big or fruitful
as the lands we are offering them for nothing out
West, is enough to settle the matter with our lower
classes. But we all have an inborn contempt for people
who foster interests and enthusiasms of clan or race,
separate from the aggregate of us, or who think it
nobler to be Irish than to be American, that is, of the
fraternity of races. The other day a wealthy citizen of
New York, being applied to for a subscription to help
some Fenian expedition to Ireland, took down his
check-book and said to the deputation, “ I will give you
one thousand dollars, provided no Fenian that goes shall
ever come back again !” I assure you he spoke our
average sentiment. With all our combing and washing
we have never been able to make a decent American of
the Irishman. On our most important questions he
seems to be utterly without principle, and votes with
.this or that party, according to its declarations about
�16
the internal politics of Great Britain! Fancy our Ger
mans testing us with Bismark or the mysterious hyphen
between Sleswick and Holstein! The worst of it is
that the Irish are so numerous that they are able to
bribe parties and demoralise our national politics.
There is something in all this, no doubt, more un
pleasant to you than if I should say we sympathised
with Fenianism and its objects; you detect that the
part we have in this ugly business — the part of a
masterly limitation of ourselves to the letter of our
restrictive laws—is one of simple unfriendliness to your
Government. It is even so. Were there a conspiracy
here to crush Garibaldi, we should certainly prevent it.
There is no feeling in America which can be depended
upon to sustain any officer who should go one hair’sbreadth beyond the law-line, or who should be very
officious even there, for the sake of England.
That is a sentence I have written with heaviness of
spirit, John I I pause upon it. And let it stand. Be
tween us be truth! We like your people personally:
we admire and try to imitate your beautiful homes: we
worship your poets, scholars, thinkers. But your Govern
ment seems to us a great apotheosis of Jesuitism, a hard
systematised selfishness, and we hate it. The utter abo
lition of the English Constitution from the face of the
earth would not evoke a sigh from a hundred of our
people; whilst tens of thousands would weep at the
death of certain of your poets and thinkers. No one of
us believes that anything but powerfully organised
�17
selfishness would give greater privilege and power
to a titled idiot than to an untitled Carlyle. None
among us imagine that it is anything but that ineradi
cable virus of Jesuitism, with which Europe has been
fatally inoculated, that taxes a man for a religion he
abjures, or admits a chimpanzee to the highest scho
lastic advantages, can he chatter the Thirty-Nine Ar
ticles, whilst excluding Martineaus and Mills. We
inherit your great history, and are proud of it; but
all of its bright epochs are to us those in which your
Government was defeated by some small untiring
band of reformers. With what groans you abolished
slavery! How you consoled the master with money,
without thought of the helpless negro! And when
opportunity offers, how eagerly do you take to the old
sport of negro-hunting you were forced to give up! No,
John, we never think of your Government as doing
a noble or humane thing except under the compulsion
of fear. We see you just now preparing to do some
thing for Ireland, and we understand it. It is the
old story. “ Because this widow troubleth me.”
Nevertheless, little as we love your Government,
it might, but for our late quarrel, have depended
upon a determined defence of its rights of national
amity in this country. Were France, or Switzer
land, or Italy, or Prussia, the object of a conspiracy
in the United States, our laws would harden into ada
mant before the conspirators. The whole theory of
foreign politics with America is summed up in “ Nonc
�18
intervention” and the 11 Monroe Doctrine,” which are
obverse and reverse of the same determination to avoid
all complications with the Old World, and to prevent the
repetition of its regime and its balance-of-power struggles
in the New World. So we have always been bin died
against any attempt to organise here movements against
foreign countries, even when advocated by the elo
quence of Kossuth, and at this very moment Mazzini
and Garibaldi are appealing to our strongest sympathies
in vain, so far as any material aid beyond private con
tributions of money is concerned. I do not contend
that this vehement antipathy to all intervention in
foreign affairs is right; but it exists, and Fenianism is
the only case in which it has not animated the law.
Fenianism passed eastward through rents in our fence
made by the prow of the Alabama when sailing west
ward. (How would those laws of yours have bristled
along the Mersey had the Alabama been starting out to
destroy Belgian or Danish commerce !)
While I am no Fenian, John, and while there is no
comeliness in Paddy that I should desire him, I do not
wish to vindicate myself from a suspicion of pity for
him. I feel a dull pain as I see him carted out West
to be manure for my seeds of civilisation, or as often as
I drive my coach over roads paved with his brains. (I
understand that you are drawing a metaphysical dis
tinction between Paddy and the Fenian; but you will
get nothing by that—there is a potential Fenian in
every Irish man and Irish woman.) I have before me
�19
at this moment the last cartoon of the Fenian in
Punch: it represents a huge monster of an Irishman
astride a barrel of gunpowder, to which he has applied
a fusee, whilst prattling children play around him, and
a mother nurses her babe behind him. I recognise the
portrait; it is the same ugly foreheadless fellow who
has repeatedly burnt the homes of poor negroes in
our large cities, slaying some and driving others into
the streets. He once dragged my foremost reformer
through the streets of Boston with a rope around his
neck, and hurled a huge stone at the head of my finest
orator, which would have killed had it struck him.
His shillelagh has here succeeded the tomahawk. Yes,
I recognise this Fenian on his, barrel; but when the
cartoon arrived in America there was just behind him
the figure of a man with round, full paunch and heavy
watch-seals, erecting a gallows, and of this latter the
Fenian was plainly the shadow! Who was it, John,
that, through long ages, pressed down that forehead
and weighted that brutal jaw? Who was it that shotted
those eyes with blood, and sank those gaunt, hungry
cheeks? You see no alternative but hanging your
Manchester and Clerkenwell prisoners; yet is it not sad
that you have assiduously reared children with one
hand for whom you must now rear a gallows with the
other ? I will not dwell on the ancient cruelty of British
rule in Ireland, or the law that men treated like savages
have a tendency to become such in reality; I am more
likely to be understood when I remind you that your
C2
�20
course has not been business-like. Your country is
now swarming with special constables; you have had
to refit your old castles and replenish your armaments,
as if suddenly relapsed into feudal ages; any Yankee
would have been ’cute enough to show you how the
money these things cost you might have been better
invested. With it and your church endowments in
Ireland you might even have transplanted Ireland,
might have given to every poor family a free transit
across the ocean, a snug farm on their arrival upon
your unutilised lands in Canada, planting in each
a kindly feeling toward England, in place of hate.
The swallows, it is said, shove their young out of the
nest to die when there are no flies with which to
feed them ; but men and women are of more value,
John, than many swallows; and the swallow-plan is
hardly a good model for English statesmanship. Your
nest is small—especially considering the room demanded
by your aristocracy—and there are more swallows than
flies; but your fledglings are of a kind that will not
die quietly, and, unprovided with another nest, propose,
at Cork, Sheffield, and elsewhere, to fight you for yours.
They will not get it for a century or so yet, I think;
but it will be many a long year before you and Mrs.
Bull will be able to rest quietly in your well-lined nest
with these exasperated, hungry home-exiles fluttering
and screaming around you. For I do not think so
hardly of you as to suppose that you can find any
deep repose under these circumstances. I have not
failed to observe the crumbs you have occasionally
�21
thrown out for the starvelings. But it evidently never
occurs to them that your gifts have higher motives than
your own desire for quiet and comfort; and the cla
morous demands have increased with their successes.
And, alas!—I cannot help reverting with pain to
what might have been—the only hand that could
have supplemented yours and satisfied them you have
estranged!
Nevertheless, to that estranged hand some millions of
them have appealed; and—despite your taxation in one
age and Alabama depredations in another—that hand
has been full enough to feed them, occasionally, on both
sides of the ocean. Having fed, it might have soothed
them, had you not paralysed it. As it is, all the
strength they have gained here has been converted into
animosity toward you ; and this, by slow accumulation,
has gathered to the dark and angry cloud which your
New Year’s sun of 1868 tries vainly to surmount.
You can hardly be in earnest in hoping that such
stupid blunders as that Clerkenwell explosion can have
any material effect in putting an end to Fenian ism.
It will no more perish from such stigmas , than the
British Government from the firing of Sepoys from
mortars, the burning of Kagosima, the butchery of
negroes in Jamaica. Nay, the immediate danger to
your and my relations in the future arises from that
crime which for the time is a blunder For you are now
plainly seized with fear, and fear is cruel. Your reta
liation promises to be not only severe, but blind; and
such retaliation will be followed by retaliation; for the
�22
men you fight with will, if you try to hide your own
cruelties under it, see at Clerkenwell only a more swift
and concentrated specimen of disasters chronic in their
own country: for every dying child or woman at
Clerkenwell they will recall one, or perhaps more, at
home. But when their retaliation becomes as furious as
it is likely to be—striking high—you may recur under
some form or other to your old weapon, martial law.
Now, it is just here, John, that it becomes my duty
to warn you that there is danger ahead. It is hardly
possible that you can take that weapon down without
using it upon Americans; and it is utterly impossible
that it can, however disguised, be used upon Americans
without firing the train which, in the way I have
shown, has been ingeniously laid between your Capitol
and mine.
The indignant appeals of Irish-American criminals
to the United States for protection as American citizens,
recently uttered in your court-rooms, reached our shores
at a peculiar political juncture. The old Democratic
party, long excluded from power, had just seen the
tide turn in its favour at local elections, and was
gathering its forces for the great national campaigns
of 1868. But it was in want of a new “ platform,”
and a taking party cry. For many reasons its former
watchword—“ States’ Rights”—is not yet a safe one;
on the question of Protection parties are divided and
confused; but what better could there be than the
cry coming from English prisons—“ Protection to
�23
American citizens”? It was at once caught up, and
the Democrats called a great meeting in New York to
proclaim it through the land. But the Republicans
were too shrewd not to see that a monopoly of such
a telling cry must not be permitted to its opponents;
and so when the great meeting was held the leaders
of both parties were present—Horace Greeley sat
beside Fernando Wood—and then ensued a grand com
petition in enthusiasm for the new watchword. Similar
meetings, marked by the same unanimity and enthu
siasm of all parties, followed in the largest cities of
the Union. When Congress assembled, it at once re
solved itself into a similar meeting, and no sooner had
the theme been started by the Democratic Mr. Robin
son, of New York, than he was distanced by the fulminations of the Republican Mr. Judd, from the West.
In short, at this moment it seems probable that we
are about to enter on a presidential campaign, wherein
the contest shall be which party shall get hoarsest with
shouting: A Truce for Domestic Strifes, and Pro
tection to Americans everywhere, or fight !
Now it were a serious error, John, to regard this as
one of the many bubbles that appear and disappear on
the surface of American politics. It is because of a
wide and deep popular feeling on this subject that
these politicians and parties are competing for the
representation of it. It is not a new subject between
us; and, since our struggle of 1812, our position on it
has been becoming what it is now—compulsory. When
�24
0
the Fenian prisoners called to us for protection, there
were two reasons why we could not take up their cause;
first, because formally they were criminals; second,
because our code of citizenship is the same with yours.
As a “ nation,” originally meant those born (nati) in a
country, we in America, inheriting the ideas and laws
of citizenship corresponding to that principle, were
satisfied with maintaining so much. But the great
tide of emigration, which has within this half-century
trebled the population and the power of the United
States, has deposited here a new kind of nationality
altogether. When the laws and principles of alienation
are to be decided by a nation of the alienated, the
result may be anticipated. One-third of the American
people are patriotic expatriates. The other thirds are
the descendents of those who were. The doctrine of
once a citizen always a citizen is one that is for us
excluded by a more unalterable constitution than any
that can be contained in precedents or written on paper.
There are sufficient reasons why only now we have
discovered that the right of a man to be protected in
the transfer of his allegiance is to us a vital one. The
first thought of the immigrant was to accumulate some
money, and get the habit and feeling of an independent
man; but having now accomplished that, it seems that
his next thought is to try and visit his old home and
early friends, and to enjoy some of the pleasures which
he remembers keenly, because they were longed for,
but never reached. The German yearns to visit his
�25
Fatherland, and the Irishman dreams of walking, in
proud independence, the streets that once knew him
only as a pauper. That these on their several wan
derings should be liable to interference, to conscrip
tion, and the like, the United States, of course, cannot
permit. A century ago you, John, were struggling
with Spain for the free right and security of an Eng
lish ship in any and all waters, even those solemnly
donated by the Pope to other powers. You did not
recognise any confirmation by the Universe of such
donations. The inducements of the naturalised, and the
disposition of the native, American to roam through
other lands, make each to his country somewhat the
same as her ship was to England in those days. But
I need hardly quote the past; a nation which has an
army defending the immunity of Englishmen from
wrong amid the perils of Abyssinian deserts, will not
require much apology for the hereditary sensitiveness of
Americans on a similar point; nor is there need that
either of us shall be blinded to the true nature of the
flame newly kindled in this country by the partisan
smoke mingled with it.
When we first began to look into this matter, two or
three years ago, we saw at once that there were but two
foreign nations with whom it could bring us into any
serious collision—England and Germany. No other
countries had a sufficient number of their former sub
jects naturalised in America, to induce them to take
any determined stand on the letter of the common law
�26
of nations in this matter. About two years ago some
American-Germans were claimed whilst visiting Prussia
for the ordinary military service, due from the subjects
of that power; but they were released after a careful
consultation between our governments, and the ques
tion has been probably postponed between us. Count
Bismark saw that our position was a necessary one,
and that all Prussia could gain by pressing us to defend
it was thirty millions of enemies, for which a half dozen
impressed and reluctant soldiers would be but a poor
compensation.
The question, then, for the moment, practically re
mains open only between England and America. We
have always demanded of every citizen naturalised in
this country a solemn abjuration of his allegiance to all
other countries; and that we shall now proclaim our in
tention of protecting such in all countries from any
claims arising out of former allegiance is absolutely cer
tain. In ordinary times, and as affecting ordinary
questions, I should have no apprehension of any im
portant disagreement between us about a modification
which America is forced to demand in laws made before
its discovery. Your own Canning showed us the neces
sity of our “Monroe doctrine,” and our new movement
does but contemplate an environment of every indi
vidual American with a Monroe doctrine. Your com
mon sense will suggest that laws good for the times that
produced them may be as useless as ruined castles for
other times. In ancient times the right of alienation
�27
would have been paramount to the right of desertion.
But now, whilst emigration is as useful to your over
crowded islands as immigration to our untilled lands,
you must see that the feudal law can never bring you a
shilling, a subject, or a soldier whom you would not be
safer and stronger without. What a farce were it, for
example, to hold as British subjects, for any national
purpose or trust whatever, your Fenian visitors, whom
you would rejoice to know were all in Walrussia! And
behind these particular aspects of the question lies the
general fact, that the principle of inalienable citizenship
is referable to a period of European history when no such
ideas of personal independence as now prevail existed;
when also steam and exploration had not yet distri
buted through the world those great centres of com
merce and civilisation, whose amity is secured by
their equality, and which really form a commonwealth
transcending national divisions.
All this, I say, might ordinarily, notwithstanding cer
tain difficulties of detail, be trusted to reach a natural
adjustment before the tribunal of our common reason.
But it may happen, I fear, John, that the very occa
sion for our strenuous determination to affirm the new
principle at this moment will constitute the obstacle to
your complete concession of it. For that principle would
not suffer us to stand aloof and see American citizens
punished under any kind of martial law. If they were
punished, it would have to be under laws and formulas
common (substantially) to England and America, and
�28
to all civilised countries. I fear we could not appreciate
your emergencies, nor agree, in our present mood, to
the necessity of extra-judicial trials for wandering Ame
ricans. You could not, you will remember, see the jus
tice of our taking from the Trent envoys journeying for
the avowed object of destroying the American Union.
The excitement produced here, even by the arrest of
that charlatan Train—whom you have made the hap
piest man in your dominions—justifies a fear that these
insurrectionists may succeed, after years of effort in that
direction, in dragging us into some kind of collision.
But be assured of this, John : if the Devil is to have
another triumph of that kind on this planet, it will not
be more than incidentally due to Fenianism, nor to any
real difference between us on the question of citizen
ship; nor will it be due to the Alabama depredations
in themselves; it will be beneath all ascribable to a
general feeling in America that you hate us — consti
tutionally, instinctively, bitterly hate us—and to a
suspicion, that will then have ripened to conviction, that
the peaceful development of our Republic is incompati
ble with your continued naval and commercial supre
macy. We are made up here of all the races of the
world, and in such questions are very apt to identify our
commonwealth with that of humanity; and there is a
question arising whether, on the whole, England is
using her supremacy and power for the welfare of man
kind, or the reverse.
Is it true, John ? Are you really our natural
�29
enemy? It were dreadful if our conceit and your
pride should trick us into thinking we are mortal
enemies, if at bottom we are allies or even friends.
We cannot get out of our ears those ringing shouts
with which your Parliament greeted every disaster to
the army of the Union; nor the sneers about the North
fighting for Empire, and the founding of a great nation
—coming as they did from your “Liberal” leaders.
They think differently now; yes, the mouse having dis
appeared, the cat is woman again; but we cannot forget
what was revealed in those terrible moments, and no
one of those men will ever again be looked upon as
other than a foe of the United States so long as they are
too meanly proud, too cowardly before party taunts, to
confess the wrong, despite the wounds it has inflicted,
or the evils to which it may lead.
On the other hand, the news has come to us that
your Parliament, at the end of its said hilarities, has, at
your suggestion, committed hari-kari before you. It has
under compulsion decided that it is a body which has
shown itself unrepresentative of you, and is now passing
out of existence. The direction from which the new
Parliament is coming seems for us to be signified by
the proposal of a Tory minister to concede us that
arbitration which a Liberal minister had denied. If
this is done in the dry leaf, what will be done in
the green ? I am already becoming suspicious of
my first hasty conclusions about your natural enmity
to us, John! There must be a great, friendly, and just
�30
people where such men as your Mill, Bright, Hughes,
Forster, Taylor, Stansfeld, Fawcett are produced, and
that sturdy crop of Radicals, Frederic Harrison, Goldwin Smith, Beasley, Morley, and the rest, whose rising
glow is visible across the ocean. There is a cry from
Chelsea, too—a cry sharp with the summed-up sorrows
of all your brakesmen, from Strafford to Robert Lowe—
suggestive of something else than the “republican bubble”
bursting. I see, too, that instead of getting slower, as you
get older, you are gathering momentum. It was but
yesterday, when the life of a nation is considered, that the
gentle officers of the first gentleman in Europe charged
upon that crowd of men, women, and children, in St.
Peter’s-field, at Manchester, with the, cry “ Strike down
their banners!” and struck them down with their
mottoes which demanded “ Extension of franchise,”
“Abolition of Corn Laws,” and the like: now I see
nearly every one of those banners, risen from their bap
tism of blood, floating in triumph on the old walls of
Westminster!
After due reflection, John, I mean to wait. I know
well, that in the end we are to be firm friends or
warring enemies; and remembering that one of your
philosophers says that hatred is inverted love, and
another that the unforeseen always comes to pass, I
mean to wait.
So I mean; but I must candidly say that I have still
fears that my intent may be thwarted. That Fenian,
sword, whetted on your stony past, is in the hand of
�31
a madman, and he cares little whether it is wielded
against feudal or democratic England. Our politics are
threatened here just now with another equinoctial storm,
wherein the balances of the elements may be held by
the race whose hatred of you has become their one
motive of existence. And my helm of State is in
the hand of a trickster who has taken a fancy that
|he phantom cruiser shall still be kept afloat. While
the majority of us mean peace, there is a strong and
subtle party here that means war.
Do you with me recoil from that poisoned weapon,
and from all imaginable laurels to be won by it ? Then
hold your pride in abeyance for a little; ascribe my
frankness to something better than Yankee insolence.
Own for a moment that there may be something more
important than u understanding the feelings of English
men ” even ; and give heed to counsel which is offered
in the sacred interest of Peace.
First of all, John, checkmate my ingenious Secretary
at Washington by paying the Alabama claims. I will
not urge that you can do it without perceiving that the
amount has gone out of your heavy purse; I will not hint
that it will cost you more to let the bill run on gathering
political interest. But it is of importance to maintain,
as I do, that you can do it without servility or loss of
dignity. The Minister under whom that infernal ship
got out has declared in Parliament that its escape is a
reproach and scandal to British law, and was effected
through the treachery of British officials. That is
�32
Q
ground enough on which to pay for its devastations.
Cash payment may commit you less than arbitration.
You can still hold your own views about the techni
calities of the matter; you have a perfect right to say
that you do it in the interest of peace; you are strong
enough and rich enough to be beyond the suspicion of
having any dishonourable motive; there is nothing mean
in saying, “ I think I am right, but, at any rate, I will be
rid of a bore ! ” This seems to me the wise plan, John ;
but if your chrysalid Government is not up to doing in
the large way what is so likely to be done in some way,
large or small, I do not see that it would be a humilia
tion to you to agree even to that stupid demand of Mr.
Seward that the recognition of the Confederacy as a
belligerent should also be submitted to arbitration.
“That is,” you said, “inadmissible;” but why? You
had good reasons for such recognition; in it you were
simultaneous with France, and a little later than Pre
sident Lincoln. You could not have lost on such a
question, and you would have given Mr. Seward a
severer fall than he has yet had — he, more than
all men living, being responsible for the early and re*
peated recognition by this Government of the belli
gerency of the South. You cannot, you may say,
admit the principle of submitting to foreign judgment
the internal policy and political course of Great Britain.,
But you have admitted that principle in offering to
submit the Alabama claims at all; they involve the
adequacy of your municipal laws and the policy of your
public servants. Still, I think your safest and most
�33
honourable course is to pay the money, and reserve
your position in your own terms. My fine Secretary
would certainly try to dodge this also; but the American
people are not fools nor heartless, John; and the day
when you pay or offer that money without external
compulsion will lay something stronger than a cable
between your shores and mine!
From that day the other side looms into view. You
cease to be in debt to us; and if we owe any debt to
you, that must begin to press. Let the beam lie level
between us once more, and at least the hand that seeks
to disturb it will bear its own responsibility. And if the
base shall attribute base motives, will it not be compen
sation enough that you have drawn around you, for all
emergencies, the undivided sympathy of your own
people ? Your working men, and their friends in Par
liament, have decided against your rulers in this
matter, John, and reduced you to petition for the arbi
tration you denied. What can you gain by allowing
tricksters to trade on this thing ? Will men say you
act from fear ? There is nothing dishonourable in fear
ing a calamity to mankind; still less in fearing to bear
the responsibility of causing one. Your history and
security enable your people to despise a charge of
cowardice; that, at least, America can never make.
The next thing, John, for you to do is to search your
Irish trouble to the bottom, and to do it at once.
Those executions at Manchester show, I fear, that you
are very far off the right track. The men ought to
have been set to break stones in the streets. The fear
D
�34
of death preponderates with all human beings—Irish
men excepted: to the average Fenian mind your gallows
in Manchester did but suddenly carry three poor men
from their Curraghs to Paradise—did but transform
three obscure men into Emmets, into martyrs and
heroes. Have you heard of John Brown ? He made
an armed attack on slavery a few years ago; he and
those of his comrades who had not perished in the
attack were executed; but we now know that what his
raid could not effect, his execution did much toward—
the abolition of slavery. It never pays to execute on
the gallows men who have not in them the malignity
and selfish passions for which the gallows was reared.
Your Manchester victims were not of the stuff of
murderers. You committed a blunder in hanging
them that might have proved more serious had it
not been for the offset given by the Fenians at
Clerkenwell. You will be wise now to present
your Manchester gallows to the British Museum,
and turn your energies to secure the fair thing for
Ireland. If your existence as a first-class Power is
is necessary, your retention of Ireland is necessary.
But the retention of Ireland as a chronic insurrection
no retention at all. There is a story of a man who
went about all his life with a serpent inside of him;
when it was hungry he must feed it, or it would start
into his throat and threaten to suffocate him, as it did,
I believe, at last. The world sees you, John, as the
man with a snake in his bosom; it sees that your
legislation for Ireland for many years has been food
�35
given for your own exigency, which has only strength
ened the snake. It has grown at length to be Fenianism,
and your question now is, Cannot the fearful thing be
disgorged? I do not hope for you that it will be an
easy matter, for it is plain to me that the grievances of
Ireland are profoundly involved in your entire govern
mental system. The principle of the Irish Church and of
the English Church is the same, only the prevalence of
Roman Catholicism in Ireland makes it there a heavier
burden and insult, because a Protestant Church is as
odious to them as an Atheistic Society would be to
English Dissenters. What would your English Metho
dists and Presbyterians say if they were made to support
a National Comtist Establishment? The Catholic be
lieves your Church as soul-destroying as Atheism; it is,
to him, a lie planted on the ruins of Truth. Similarly,
your British land laws and privileged class happen to
bear more heavily on agricultural Ireland than on manu
facturing and shopkeeping England; but it is all one
system, and it bears heavily on the working people every
where. It is only a question of time, of the increase of
population, when your English people will cut up your
estates and parks, and compel your lands to support
men and women instead of rabbits and pheasants.
So, I fear that, having taken hold of this Irish
trouble, and found how profoundly it is entangled with
institutions resting on social superstitions—how in
evitably the English Church must follow the Irish
Church, and the English land monopoly that of Ireland—you will betake yourself to your old habit of ad
�36
Q
,
ministering opiates. The Irish difficulty, if thoroughly
traced, must lead you to the very heart of your heri
tage of wrong. Are you, after your Christian centuries,
equal to losing your life that you may find it ? At any
rate, John, disgorge that Irish viper, whatever may
have to be disgorged with it.
Your endowments ? Throw them into the sea—any
thing—rather than let them longer send this stench
through the world. Were Paul alive, he would surely
find another Church to which he must say, “ The name
of God is blasphemed through you!” Here at least in
America the Jesuit sharpens his most effectual arrows
on that miserable wrong in Ireland. “You speak of the
cruelties of the Church of Rome in the past; read in
the history of the establishment in Ireland how Pro
testantism has improved upon Popes ! Or would you
illustrate Romish oppression of conscience ? Compare
it with the liberty which Protestant England allows
the poor Catholics of Ireland — how much is their
humiliation of to-day better than that which denied
them citizenship in the past!” In both Ireland and
America Romanism has at present no other bulwark so
strong as your Irish Church, Protestantism no darker
disgrace, and Christianity no deeper shame !
Away with that, John, and then let your living gene
ration address itself to retrace the inglorious victories
by which preceding generations have forced it into an
attitude of despotism towards Ireland, whose natural
sceptre is the gallows, whose kindest provision is the
right of self-exile. All that through centuries you
�37
sought and in the end happily failed to do with America,
you have, by many disastrous successes, had the misfor
tune to accomplish in Ireland: down the fatal necessary
grooves of injustice your conquest came, confiscating the
lands, destroying the manufactures, making penal the
worship of Ireland. The continuous effort to do exactly
the same by Puritan New England trained America to
be a nation. Ireland is not yet a nation; but what
ever elements of nationality it has have been distilled
from traditions of common sorrows and vainly resisted
wrongs
Through sad six hundred years of hostile sway,
From Strongbow fierce to cunning Castlereagh !
If these shall not at length crystallise into nationality
it will not be your fault, unless indeed you discover that
beating a child in order to make it love you, little likely
as it is to secure the object aimed at, is apt—if the child
have any fire in him—to quicken it to independent life.
There is enough land in Ireland to employ and feed
all the Irish that remain to you, John; there are the
sinews, there the soil; if you cannot in some way end
their unnatural divorce, the gods themselves cannot
save you I Your landlords? Make those men look
you in the eye, John ! Not one of them could trace
his land-title, but he would find it was once a trust
for his king and country, perverted by some self-seeker
to the advantage of himself and family; not one fee
or feu, but was originally a fides, or trust for the advan
tage of Great Britain; by no means for any absolute
advantage of Lord Holdfast, who is now making of
his trust a danger to the State, sowing in it dragons’
�38
teeth, to spring up as armed enemies instead of the
valiant retainers which it was given his ancestor to
furnish! It has been for some time becoming apparent
that your land-aristocracy are trying to outwit the laws
of the universe. Let them try to shut up the sunlight
in their mansions, and amid the darkness that ensues
they may meditate on the fact that when humanity at
large really requires their land it will be as impossible
for any one man to maintain it for private ends as to
appropriate the sun for his gaslight. If you will stand
by old principles, John, let them be the oldest. No
landlord is to be regarded as fulfilling the conditions of
the deed whereby your Queen gives him land, who
proposes to maintain an interest in it separate from, or
antagonistic to, the general welfare of his country. He
may not burn his house, nor turn it to a powder-mill,
ad libitum; nor may he turn it, as many of the Irish
landlords do, into a manufactory of explosive Fenians.
If in times of danger the charters of liberty can be sus
pended, surely those of property may be also. Ah!
could you enter upon your Irish task, asking only what
is right for all—emancipated from your superstitions
about class and about land, you could make of Ireland
England’s prairie-land, you could so establish prosperity
there that whatever unassimilable Celtdom survived
must betake itself (and by your aid would speedily
betake itself) to these eupeptic regions which are able
gradually to digest even Irishmen.
Fenianism, then, has two causes. One of these is the
general weakness of your system, John, predisposing
�39
you to the disease; the other, and incidental, cause is
that the general unfriendliness to you in America has
made us wink at its practical projects, that is, has
paused us to deal with the conspiracy according to the
letter, but not the spirit, of the law. In other words,
America and Ireland, with very different aims, have
to some extent made common cause about their griev
ances ; about as much, we think, as you made with
the Southern Confederacy. These two sources of
the evil will grow by neglect, a recognised Fenian
belligerency with its cruisers being not at all un
imaginable. There are a great many mean and
selfish men, John, in your country and mine, and our
squabbles play into their vile hands sadly. But let
England remember our long dreary past of wrong with
which she is associated; let her attest her repudiation
of that past by a deed reversing it, all the better if it
be one beyond arbitrated justice, a deed of magna
nimity; let her make of America an ally; then one
brave session of Parliament can lay the axe to the
root of the tree which poisons your air. Our national
disgust at the whole theory of Fenianism; our hatred
of intervention in Old-World quarrels ; the indifference
to clan-interests and race - antipathies which steadily
grows into something sterner than indifference in a
union of races; our impatience as a people with all fuss
about purely visionary and impracticable schemes; the
English history, speech, and literature we have inherited
and still cherish; all these, veiled for the moment by the
shadow you have thrown athwart our politics, would
�40
-
resume their •'vigour. Nothing entirely unpopular can
live in this country; and I know of no other thing
which, in a normal condition of American feeling, has
so many of the elements of unpopularity in it as Fenianism. I do not defend our coquetting with it; I
wish we had been mature enough to repel such help;
but we are very crude in many respects, John, and we
have not had the best paternal examples of magnani
mity to guide us. It takes us both a sadly long time
to get the civility of our homes into our legislatures,
our fleets, and our international dealings. Had it only
been that Earl Russell’s dog had bitten Mr. Adams’s leg,
what scented notes and inquiries had passed! If any
one had stolen Sir Frederick Bruce’s hat, Mr. Seward
had deputed the American army, if need be, to find it!.
But.it is a navy destroying our commerce; it is treason
aiming at your life ; so fang and claw are claiming their
right to settle the question. Cannot our sixty or seventy
millions manage together to show mankind that there
may be rays of humanity carried into the dismal swamp
of diplomacy ? May we not startle the world by show
ing that, while the Pope is canonising the Chassepot
Rifle, England and America can raise the Golden Rule
to be International Law ?
That the New Year may bring that sorrow for devils,
and triumph for angels, is, John, the honest desire of
Jonathan.
the
END.
• . . ’ -I
LONDON:
PRINTED BY C. WHITING, BEAUFORT HOUSE, STRAND.
Y
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A new year's letter from Jonathan to John
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway, Moncure Daniel, 1832-1907
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 40 p. ; 22 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Attribution from Virginia Clark's catalogue based on the content (Anglo-British relations) and a comparison to another 'Jonathan to John' letter, titled 'Lunatics', attributed to Conway by the 'Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals'. Printed by C. Whiting, London.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Chapman and Hall
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1868
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5623
Subject
The topic of the resource
International relations
USA
UK
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A new year's letter from Jonathan to John), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Great Britain-Foreign Relations-United States of America
United States-Foreign Relations
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/c0a78d32c32a678a4a95958fffb1b142.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=e7jaPfEvtVzmBESBqdGQoqKJSU%7EnfdMIN4xvFN2g7H-G7wnHpXZATS0%7EWinSFBbx9PI%7EZWTxtLCT-znZSAav5NQnI1xMIoMzyw8%7E9xIgEOyk9GCjRUANDGEbzHEfCLUDl-6v9IVKdNQS%7E-SrsUQjpMnIj0Bhkhe8tnEkVO35EJ1OWXl8iCHMl2ddBdytJ5MMFNeppICIC0NqdKKb4MUlIuNnIxn713%7EMJk8fQ6LGWzhLS90%7ER--3RlyYzq24MieriG8QZGkDMvCQ0wVWnzyh01vtD8Bgv5VgohRJcS1HEkU9uIWUwSAz0KxhN9CPddHlWB7Y2WLY0IzUUG8ibPhQHw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f708ad88e05469109d8fb1d630bd4c2c
PDF Text
Text
I
.fEW J'lt & ■»""-U*1
JW<-
LITTELL’S LIVING AGE.-NO. 1134.-24 FEBRUARY, 1866.
From the Fortnightly Review.
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
concerned would be in certain expectation
of it, were it not for the general belief that
M. Taine speaks of certain conditions there are in America paramount domestic
under which society becomes nothing more reasons against the adoption of such a polithan tm commerce d’affronts. Whilst .there cy. Such a course would increase the
is reason to hope that the relations be financial burdens, already very heavy, un
tween man and man, or class and class, in der which the country is now struggling;
any society of the, present day, cannot be Msvould indefinitely postpone that return to
properly characterised as an interchange of a settled and normal condition of things
insults, it is to be feared that the phrase is, which trade always craves, and especially
to a sad degree, expressive of the relations after the losses consequent upon war; it
subsisting between nations; Here the skies would call again from their homes the sol
seem always angry, and the volleys of can diers who, after the wear and tear of four
non alternate only with the hurtling of years of hardship and danger, are desirous
recriminations. The historian who shall of rest; it would cost more than any prob
live when there is a community of nations, able result of a foreign war could repay;
will probably, in reading the Blue Books of it would involve the possibility of defeat,
these years, think of Saurian growings which would imply a humiliating downfall
and gnashings in primaeval swamps. It is from the position and prestige which the
therefore with a natural anxiety that one of United States has gained by the thorough
the leading nations is seen holding a brand, suppression of the gigantic rebellion that
and hesitating whether, and whither, to threatened its existence. Nevertheless, con
throw it. It is undeniable that the United vinced as the writer himself is, by these and
States stands in this attitude at the pres higher considerations, that it would be
ent moment, and that the world has reason wrong for the United States to enter upon
to await with profound solicitude the deci a war with any foreign power, he is equally
sions of the present Congress as to the foreign' convinced that there are other considera
policy to be adopted by that nation. I tions calculated to tempt the present Gov
cannot conceive, of a, legislative assembly ernment at Washington to an opposite
gathered under more solemn circumstances course, some of which may be briefly stated
than those which surround this Congress, or here.
of one holding in itself more important
It is an old idea with rulers that, in cer
issues.
tain conditions, a foreign war is conducive
Formation, material expansion, centrali to the health of a nation, — an idea which
sation, and an ambition to lead in the, old countries have outgrown, but one that
affairs of the world, may be traced in his is sure to have powerful advocates in a
tory as the successive embryonic phases young_one. A civil war, says Lord Bacon,
through which nations pass. Unfortunately is like the heat of a fever; a foreign one,, is
history attests also many “ arrests ” on this like the heat of exercise. It need be no
line of development. America, however, longer a secret that, in the few months suc
has thus far advanced well, and has now ceeding the bombardment of Fort Sumter,
reached the last form that precedes a set and preceding the actual determination,
tled nationality. Her foreign policy, hith to coerce the South into the Union by
erto relatively of the least, now becomes of military power, there was a powerful influ
the first importance; for while it seems inev ence at Washington seeking to superinduce
itable that she should now be tempted to a war with England, with the object of
aspire to a leading position in the world, uniting the discordant parties and sections
the temptation is reinforced by some pro by a direct appeal to the patriotism of both.
vocations from without, and by certain This concession to the anti-English senti
strong inducements from within. The con ment— which, for reasons, to be hereafter
ditions for a war policy are so obvious that stated, was hitherto confined to the South
I have little doubt the nations immediately and its ally, the Northern Democratic party
THIRD 3ERIES. LIVING AGE. VOL. XXXL
1475.
�546 ,
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
— seemed a fine card to play at that junc
ture ; and if the Trent affair could have
occurred sooner than it did, that card might
have been played. That it was not, at any
rate, is due to the moral character of Mr.
Lincoln, and to the strong friendship for
England of the Chairman of the Senatorial
Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Hon.
Charles Sumner. It was plain, too, that
New England, the centre of friendship for
England at that time, would permit no war
to be undertaken on such immoral grounds,
and at the same time that she was deter
mined to make the crisis that had come an
occasion for settling the slavery question
for ever. Thus the foreign war project for
evading the national emergency was smoth
ered. It was essentially a pro-slavery plan
— though it might have encountered a pow
erful opposition from those Confederates of
Virginia and the Carolinas who cared more
for separation than for slavery — and had
it succeeded in uniting the North and
South, slavery would to-day be entering
upon a new lease of existence instead of
being abolished.
Just now the same temptation recurs.
The status of the negro in the South is a
.-subject for agitations and divisions nearly
as .fierce as those which preceded and re
sulted in the civil war. The South and its
old ally, the Democratic party in the North,
are demanding the return of the Southern
States with their governments still commit
ted exclusively to the whites : the Northern
Republicans bitterly oppose this, maintain
ing that.the humiliated slaveholders cannot
be trusted to legislate justly for the blacks,
without whose aid (in the declared opinion
of President Lincoln) the rebellion could
not have been suppressed. The issue is
most important; for, once restored to the
position of equal States, - the Southern
legislatures . could — providing only that
they did not contravene technically the
law against chattel slavery — enact a sys
tem of serfdom, and retain the “ Black
Codes,” which prohibit the education and
Srevent the elevation;of the negroes, the
forth being powerless to interfere unless
another war should arise to arm it with the
abnormal right, which it. now has, to con
trol the section it has ;just conquered.
The security proposed by the Northern Re
publicans is to give the negroes votes, which
the . Southerners and the. Democrats furi
ously oppose. It will ,be seen at once that
.this political situation necessitates the con
tinuance of a bitter sectional strife. The
. arguments of the Southern party about the
constitutional rights of States to regulate
their own suffrage naturally provoke taunts
concerning their four years’ effort to over
throw the constitution; their talk about the
inferiority of the negro leads their antago
nists to place the barbarities of Anderson
ville prison by the side of the long patience
of the negro ; the alleged “ unfitness of the
negro to vote ” is replied to with the tu
quoque based on the disloyalty of the
whites; and so long as this issue is before
the country, the Northern press naturally
parades every current instance of inhuman
ity to the negro, and every expression of
hatred to the Yankees, of which its corre
spondents easily find enough in the South.
All this of course wakes an angry and de
fiant spirit there ; and thus the country is
relegated to the dissension and agitation
about the negro which had prevailed with
out intermission for more than a generation
before the war.
There is no doubt that the late President
Lincoln foresaw this issue, and he has left
on record, in a letter recently published,
his determination to have ended the negro
agitation for ever by demanding equal
rights in the seceded States for the ne
gro. But President Johnson is a very
different man. For more than thirty years
a Southern slave-holder, a Democratic poli
tician, and a steady voter in the Congress
against all New England ideas, he never
theless— simply from a pride in the old
flag — opposed his own section. He vigor
ously resisted the rebellion, though it can
scarcely be said that he clung to the North.
The North rewarded his constancy by elect
ing him to the Vice-Presidency. But,now
that the convulsion is over, he and the
country are discovering that sudden chan
ges are rarely 'thorough. So, in the present
controversy on negro-suffrage, President
Johnson takes the side that might be expect
ed of a Tennessean Democrat, and opposes
the party which elected him. Of course
his cabinet are with him. Nevertheless
President Johnson and his cabinet see that
either by conceding the last hope of slave
ry — “a white man’s government ” — or by
some other means, this controversy must ter
minate, at least for the present, in order
that reconstruction, clamorously demanded
by the national exchequer and by trade,
may take place.
If it has been determined that negro-suf
frage shall not be conceded, what “ other
means ” remain ? Suppose some great and
overpowering national emergency were to
occur— one involving the national pride or
interest — would it not at once divert at
tention from the sectional issue ? If the
�JjjaHfrffii' jwiiuiriiiwij
»
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
I
547
Northern and the Southern man should fight mise of the negro questibn; and if their Gov
side by side for a common cause, against a ernment should attempt to bring on a for
common foe, for some years—the longer eign war for the purpose of suppressing the
the better — would not old differences be agitation of that question, there would not
healed ? And if to carry on such a war be wanting clear-headed men to repeat
Southern States as well as Northern must throughout the country the story of how
furnish quotas of men and money, and raise the original colonies compromised on the
crops for food, then Southern States must be negro question in ord er that they might form
at once reconstituted; and to effect this at a Union “for the common defence,” — that
once, must not the country be persuaded to ■ is, present an unbroken front to George III.
compromise on the negro-suffrage question ? should he seek to subjugate them,—and
The influence at Washington—I need how that compromise has proved to have
not mention names — which four years ago been pregnant with wrongs and agonies
*
urged these considerations to prevent utter which make the tea-tax of our fathers ridic
rupture between North and South, survives ulous. To keep off King George they
to suggest them as furnishing a possible es bowed to King Slavery: their posterity, still
cape from the dilemma of the administra groaning under the terrible results of that
tion which is hardly strong enough to en “policy,” will be very unlikely to extempor
counter the present Congress—the most ise a King George for the purpose of re
radical one that has ever assembled • in peating the blunder. When, however, the
America. And to this influence is now add restoration of the Southern people and lead
ed another, urging a new classof considera ers, and the re-pledging them to the Union,
tions in favour of a foreign war .; chiefly are added to the first consideration, the
this: there are a number of able leading men North-West, to whose prosperity the loyalty
in the South, each influential in his com of the Mississippi river and of both its banks
munity, who are now in disgrace, and who, to the Gulf is esseMQl may not prove to be
if the country settles down to peace, have (^inflexible virtue.
A third reason why a foreign war might
nothing left but to live on in obscurity, una
ble to hold office, and without anything to not be unwelcQme to the Washington Gov
mitigate the deep sense of humiliation or the ernment is, that it has now a large army al
wounds of pride. The flag at which Lee, ready collected and to a certain extent
Beauregard, Johnstone, Mosby, and many drilled, which it is deemed inexpedient, for
others struck, can float only to bring a shad reasous connected with the internal condi
ow upon them. The greatest of them has tion of the country, to dissolve at once, and
already hidden himself in a fourth-class col which is likely to be demoralized if it has
lege. Already the North asks, Which shall nothing to do. Nor would the people of
we prefer, the negro who defended, or the America be willing to support a large army
white who trampled upon, our flag ? A and navy in idleness. And in this connec
foreign war would be the rehabilitation of tion it may be said that whilst the rank and
these Southern men. Indeed, emigration file of the Americm military force would be
seems to be almost the only alternative glad to remain, for a loDg time certainly, in
which would enable them to emerge from their homes, a war would be more welcome to
their disgrace with the American people, the vast number of officers whom the late con
recover position, and claim rights as defend flict raised from obscurity, and for the most
ers of the nation. Moreover, it is not at all part created, and to the large majority of
certain but that they mi"ht— particularly- whom peace is sure to bring the obscurity
in the case of a war with England — be able which it brought them six years ago. The
, ■ to cast a part of the cloud under which they prominent generals of the United States
now sit upon the people and leaders of New were before the war railroad-presidents, sur
' England, who have never applauded the veyors, lawyers, &c.; hardly one of them,
motto, “ Our country, right or wrong,” and excepting Fremont, had a national reputa
• who assuredly could not be brought to fight tion. It need not be a matter of wonder
with anything like the earnestness lately dis-1 that so many among them, General Grant
played in their war with slavery, in an un- ; being of the number, are already widely
necessary or a doubtful war — not at all in ; and justly quoted as favourable to a foreign I
one whose political objects would be precise war policy.
As crowning all these considerations it
ly those which are most repulsive to the
strong moral sense of that section.
must not be forgotten that the old undying
My belief is that New England and the dream of continental occupation, of which
North-West may be relied upon to oppose the “ Monroe doctrine ” is the familiar but
any undisguised postponement by compro- , inexact label, is at present producing more
�548
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
exasperations and is under fewer restraints
than ever before. The Romulus of the
United States, whoever he may have been,
did not surround the country with any fur
row, and the Remuses had not in the first
years even to leap, so long as their filibus
tering expeditions respected those bounda
ries which the average American regards as
the natural ones of his country —i.e. the
Pacific Ocean on the west, the Atlantic on
the east, the Isthmus of Panama on the south,
and the North Pole on the north. Since the
Mexican war, and in recoil from the mean
ness and criminality which led to and at
tended the seizure of Texas, there has been
in the United States a moral sentiment able
to hold in check the disposition to encroach
upon its neighbours, as those representa
tives of a Democratic administration who
met at Ostend a few years ago and pro
posed to obtain Cuba by fair means or foul,
discovered to their cost. But the moral sen
timent which would have continued to shel
ter Mexico would not find a single American to plead its applicability to Maximilian,
unless in the reverse of the obvious sense.
And since it is understood, that the exci
sion of Maximilian by the power of the Unit
ed States means the grateful self-annexation
of Mexico (in some way) to the Union, it
will be at once seen that the passion for ex
pansion and the moral sentiment of the
country jump together in a way that they
never did before. On the other hand,
whilst the desire for Canada is much feebler
than that for Mexico, the restraint of inter
national morality which would have protect
ed it has been removed by the general sense
of wrongs received at the hands of England,
and the representatives of England in Cana
da, and by a current belief that annexation
to the Union is desired by nearly all of the
French Canadians and the Irish.
Whilst these considerations are being
urged at Washington, those who are most
strongly opposed to a foreign war, and were
among the most trusted advisers of Presi
dent Lincoln — as, for example, the Chair
man of the Committee on Foreign Affairs,
before alluded to — are now without the ear
of the President, and range in hostility.to
his plan of reconstruction. Of all the rea
sons that have been mentioned, the consid
eration which will weigh most strongly with
the President and his Cabinet will be the
hope of starving off the negro-agitation, and
of securing the ret urn of the Southern States
without negro-suffrage. If negro-equality
were to be placed beyond question by the
present Congress, every cloud of war would
clear away tor the present, and the Mexican
Empire would be the only thing concerning
which one could anticipate, even at a distant
period, any collision between the United
States and any nation of the Old World.
Hence the friends of peace in America are
as anxiously hoping for the settlement of the
negro question on the only basis which can
be final, and that will not remit the country
to the bitter animosities and agitations of
the past, as the friends of war are indiffer
ent to or anxious to' evade such settlement.
The particular danger is that the Congress
will decide to keep out the Southern States
without imposing negro-suffrage as a condi
tion of their return, in which case the Presi
dent might be induced to try and alter the
conditions under which the question would
come before another Congress, by seeking,
as above indicated, to weld the two sections,
and purge the South of the stain upon its
loyalty, with the fires of a foreign war. I
confess that the probabilities affecting the
question of war or peace between Ameri
ca and France or England seem to me
slightly inclining to the side of war; and I
am sure that the internal considerations
enumerated, much more than the claim
against England, or the Monroe doctrine —
whose importance in the case I am far from
undervaluing — will be the mainspring of
the war policy, if it be adopted.
The next question of interest is whether
a hostile movement, if determined upon, will
be directed against France or against Eng
land.
~
There is in America a traditional friend
liness towards France. At a celebration of
the national American Thanksgiving-day,
by Americans in Paris, December 7, the
heartiest applause was awarded to a toast
proposed by General Schofield in these
words: — “The old friendship between
France and the United States; may it be
strengthened and perpetuated ! ” At the
same festival the Hon. John Jay, the chair
man, alluded to some of the associations
which are stirred in every American’s mind
when France is mentioned. “ Our patriotic
assemblage,” he said, “ in this beautiful Capi
tol, amid the splendours of French art and
the triumphs of French science, recalls the
infancy of our country, and the various
threads of association that are so frequently
intertwined in the historic memories of
America and France. The French element
was early and widely blended with our
transatlantic blood, and it is a fact that two
of the five commissioners wdio in this city
signed the Treaty of Paris in 1783 —that
treaty by which England closed the war and
recognised the American Republic — were
�<
AMERICA, FRANCj
AND ENGLAND.
\
549
of Huguenot descent. In the war now ever, his perception of a growing feeling for
closed, as in that of our Revolution, French territorial expansion among the Americans.
and American officers fought side by side, But an element of .even paramount import
and side by side in our House of Representa ance in this feeling was a dread that the
tives hang — and will continue to hang, as a American Republic might have to struggle
perpetual memento of the early friendship with powerful and hostile forms of govern
between the countries — the portraits of ment. The Monroe doctrine was really
Washington and Lafayette. The territory that for which few Europeans would give it
. of Orleans, including that vast and fertile credit — a conservative policy. Explicitly
valley extending from the gulf to the limits respecting powers already planted on that
of Missouri, was ceded to us by the First continent, it affirmed the limits of the right
Napoleon almost for a song, and there are of intervention for itself, as well as for lorstill perpetuated in its names, habits, and eign powers. It was meant to be, and was,
traditions, pleasant memories of France.” an especial check upon the westward ag
Mr. Jay did not, in Catholic France, hint gressions of American filibusters, by imwhy the Huguenots happened to be in plying that only their unjust encroachments
America; he did not bring to any rude test from aBtid could justify interference with
■of historic criticism the part played, literal- other nations. It recommended <tself to
. ly, by the Marquis de Lafayette in the first, the most thoughtful men of the last genera
or by the young French chevaliers, who en tion in the United SffieB as the means of
joyed their cigars and champagne with keeping for ever out of the Western hemi
McClellan whilst the soldiers of the Union sphere that grim political idol to which the
were being massacred before Richmond, in peace of the old world had been so often
the second revolution; neither did he in sacrificed — the “ balance of power.” It as
quire whether at that time the Emperor of sumed, indeed, the Predominance of the
the French was making proposals to Eng United States on that continent, but then
land to join him in an inte wention favoura the United States open® its arms, its lands,
ble to the South, nor remenfter the Jiisses its honours to the people of all nations.
and cries in the French Assembly which The Monroe doctrine was, then, conserva
drowned M. Pelletan’s voice when he an tive, in that it put a defiq^M check upon the
nounced the downfall of Richmond (which idea of absorbing surrounding countries, and
M. Pelletan declared — mistakenly, it would limited the United States wtheidea of pre
appear — were so loud, tha®they would be dominance. Even this may seem arrogant,
heard across the Atlantic). But, in ignor but it is difficult to see by what other means
ing such questions and crowning his address the New World could have been saved from
with tue toast “ The Empgror of the becoming the mere duplicate of the Old.
French,” Mr. Jay undoubtedly represented To permit the occupation of countries,
the general determination of his country ■ which the United States has restrained her
men to put the best construction possible self from occupying, by foreign governupon everything that France does, and their, nlents of formstessentially hostile, necessi
instinctive disposition to wink at her plain tates an injurious modification of her own.
est offences. This disposition must be con Any such Power, once admitted and estab
sidered prominently in our calculations of lished, must be Watpied; and to watch it
the probable action of the United States implies Expensive fortifications of long fron
upon the Mexican Empire. There can be tiers, standing armies, and young men sup
no doubt that if any other nation than plying them — things utterly opposed to
France had established that Empire, the end the spirit in which the American Republic
of the rebellion in -America would have been was founded. A few ships might prevent
swiftly followed by the march of Federal the landing on those shores of a Power
troops across the Rio Grande.
which, once fixed there, would require that
The Monroe doctrine was of gradual and the Union should become a centralized and
natural development. The earliest ex military nation. Thus there is no principle
pression of the sentiment out of which it that would protect California, or Texas, or
grew was given by the First Napoleon, Louisiana from French encroachment, that
when he assigned as a chief reason for dis would not haye equally have protected
posing of the territory of Orleans — the Mexico. The south-western states have
greater part of the Mississippi Valley — on only to be weak to become food for the fur
the easy terms in which President Jefferson ther growth of “the Latin race/’and the
obtained it, that it was the manifest destiny glory of its new Cmsar. Hence garrisons,
of that territory to become a portion of the .under General Weitzel, and others, are al- ■
United States. . He did but express, how- ready on the south-western border, where
�550
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
x they must stay so long as the representative
of French power stays. The best men in
America, are persuaded that it would be
more favourable to the peace of the world
if such garrisons should cease to exist,
through the removal of the occasion for
them.
‘
.
The traditional friendship of the United
States with France has undoubtedly, been
strained to the utmost by this invasion of
Mexico, and by the circumstances under
which it occurred. The subversion of the
Mexican Republic was consummated in the
face of three unequivocal declarations to
the American Minister at Paris, that the
Government then existing in Mexico should
not be altered by the invasion; it was. ac
complished at a time when, the United
States was prevented from having any voice
in the matter by the gigantic war which
tied her hands; it was for the avowed pur
pose of building up a rival power on the
North American continent; and it selected
as the representative of that flagrant de
fiance of the principle which in America
has a sanctity corresponding to that of .the
“ balance of power ” in Europe, a prince
belonging to a House more unpopular
among Americans, and more associated with
the oppression of weaker peoples, than any
that has reigned on the continent of Eu
rope.
'
If it should ultimately appear that only
by war can the empire thus attempted be
expelled, war will surely come. But there
are reasons why the United States will
strain every nerve to secure that object by
negotiation before resorting to armed force.
The friendly feeling towards France already
adverted to, the equally strong feeling
among the Irish and the Roman Catholics
generally, and the especial affection and
gratitude to France of the Southerners —
whom the foreign war, if undertaken, is ex
pected to rehabilitate —• would all make
the conflict one for which the American
people tiould have little heart. It would
require repeated refusals of any other set
tlement on the part of Louis Napoleon to
generate the amount of popular exaspera
tion requisite for the war. At the same
time I doubt not but that General Scho
field and others will sufficiently convince
the Emperor of the French that the Ameri
can Government and people will never con
sent to the permanent existence of a for
eign monarchy in Mexico. The willingness
to postpone positive action in the matter is
enhanced by the consideration that non-re
cognition and hesitation on the part of the
United States, encouraging as they do the
Juarists to continue their resistance, in
juriously affecting the Mexican loan, and
accumulating the expenditure of France,
constitute in themselves almost a forcible
attack upon Maximilian. There is also
something like a superstitious belief among
the people that no government will stand
long in Mexico until it is consigned by des
tiny to the United States; and I venture to
predict that in that direction the United
States will pursue the Micawber policy of
waiting for something to turn up, and that
this policy will be presently justified by the
evacuation of Mexico by French troops,
with Maximilian close upon their heels.
Much as I regret to say it, I cannot deny
to myself that a war with England — were
there any pretext for it, or anything to be
gained by it — would unite all sections and
classes in America more effectually than one
with any other Power. The reasons for a
war, so far as they are external, weigh
against France; the feeling., against Eng
land. The traditional feeling in America
toward England has been the reverse of
what it has been toward .France. The ori
gin of this anti-English feeling is not won
derful. NextMo those portraits of Wash
ington and Lafayette, mentioned by Mr.
Jay as hanging side by side in the Hall of
Representatives at Washington, may be
found several pictures of the American gen
erals and English generals standing in less
gentle relations to each other. But the
resuscitation and increase of the ill-feeling
toward England are due to causes which it
may be well to explain, for there have been
strong commercial and other reasons why
all animosities between the countries should
Jong ago have passed away. The jealousies
which existed after the separation of 1782,
were such as are often witnessed between
parties just near enough to each other to
make differences irritating—as the right
and left wings, or old and new schools of
Churches — but these tend to subside as the
parties become more and more set and se
cure in their respective’positions. As a
matter of fact these jealousies had almost
disappeared, and but few traces of them can
be found in the generation that preceded this.
The cause of the animosity between the
Northern and Southern States was the cause
also of the revival of an anti-English feeling
in America—Slavery. English Quakers
were among the first agitators for emancipa
tion in the Union. The first abolitionist in
America — Benjamin Lundy — had. by his
side Fanny Wright, who established in Ten. nessee a colony of liberated negroes with
the intent of proving that they were fit for
�AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
551
freedom. The Anti-Slavery Society, which to his immediate withdrawal from that city,
sprang up in the North, was materially as and a determination to proceed no farther
sisted by the English societies ; its watch into the Slave States. But meanwhile this
words were taken from the great anti-slave feeling had a strong reinforcement. The
ry leaders of England, and the utterances Irish were thronging to America by thou
of Sharpe, Clarkson, Wilberforce, and oth sands, and the Irish vote had become the
ers, were hurled with tremendous effect deciding power in every general election.
against the Southern institution. The It is a dreary fact that the Irish elected
*
Methodists were made to remember that every America^ President from 1844 to
Wesley had pronounced slavery to be “the 1860. To win that Irish vote a political
sum of all villanies ; ” and everywhere it party had simply to take the ground of
was held up as a token of the superiority violent antagonism to England: that sure
of England that her air was “ too pure for card the Democratic party had always been
a slave to breathe.” When the “ pro willing to play, and the Irish, almost with
slavery re-action,” as it is termed, set in — out exception, voted for it and its protege,
that is, when the invention of the cotton- Slavery. The denouncers oft England in
gin (about the first part of this century) the North were notoriously the leading
had gradually quadrupled the value of Democrats, who, for party purposes, fanned
slaves, and the Southern politicians began the hatred of this country which every Irish
to reverse the verdict of Washington, Jeff man was sure to bring with him to the Unit
erson, and Henry against slavery per se — ed States. I have no idea that these dema
mutterings against “ English Abolitionists” gogues really felt any sympathy with the
began to be heard. The anti-slavery ggsits, Irish, or that they knew anything whatever
in later times, of William Forster, Joseph about Ireland or its relations to England^
Sturge, George Thompson, and other distin whilst pouring out their invectives against
guished abolitionists, led to a fierce outcry “British Tyranny.” The Fenians have,
in the South that her rights and institutions perhaps, by this time learned (if a Fenian
were threatened by “ British abolitionists,” can learn anything) how much reality there
“ British emissaries,” and “ British gold.” was in this profuse Democratic sympathy
The writer can remember when every po for Ireland ; but when it is considered that
litical gathering in Virginia, his native there are five million Irish haters of Eng
State, was lashed into fury by the use of land in America, and that to obtain this
these phrases. President Jackson, in a great electoral power the Democratic party
Message to Congress, denounced the inter has committed itself to every anti-English
ference of “foreign emissaries” with the policy, it will be seen how vast an. addition
institution of slavery. Boston, because of to the hatred of the enraged pro slavery
its anti-slavery character, was scornfully men has thus been made in these later years.
called “ that English city.” The pro-slave-S In all this time the only section of Ameri
ry re-action gained a complete sway of the ca that could be called friendly to England
Union about twenty years ago ; since which was New England, such friendliness having
time, until 1860, slavery elected every Presi been frequently made the occasion for
dent, and was represented by large though denouncing thatByoup of States. The
gradually diminishing majorities in Con leading men of New England — Emerson,
gress. ,The commercial classes of the North Channing, Phillips, Sumner, Garrison, Low
were its violent adherents on account of ell — had been guests in the best English
the immense value of the Southern trade; homes, and had entertained English gen
and if any merchant became tarnished by a tlemen. The youth of the colleges and
suspici on of his pro-slavery soundness, the universities of New England were kindling
New York Herald published his name—a with enthusiasm for Carlyle, Tennyson,
proceeding which withdrew all dealings Mill, and the Brownings. Along with her
from him, and threatened him with ruin. anti-slavery influence there, went forth also
Thus a vast majority, North and South, from. New England editions of English
came to nourish a deep hostility toward books and English modes of thought; and as
England, for her policy of emancipation in the country at large was, in the years im
her own colonies, and for her alleged inter mediately preceding the war, gradually won
ference with slavery in America. How to an anti-slavery positions^ England be
furious the South was toward England was came, if not generally liked, at least the
shown in those disgraceful scenes — not to most respected of foreign nations. The
be reported here — which are said to have virtues of Queen Victoria were especially
attended the attempt of the Prince of a subject of frequent eulogium throughout
Wales to visit Richmond, Virginia, and led the North; and everything bade fair tO’
�552
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
bring about a reaction in the feeling to
wards the people over whom she ruled.
Indeed the welcome given to the Prince of
Wales at the time of which I now write,
bore witness to the existence of a friendlier
spirit regarding “ the mother country ” than
any one would have ventured to predict
a few years before. The gradual repres' sion of the anti-English prejudice cost the
' Republicans of the North a long period of
political weakness (for they too might have
bid for the Irish vote) ; it was the result of
the laborious diffusion of English literature,
and I know that it was esteemed by the
reflecting Americans to be a victory for
mankind.
The reasons why this friendliness has
been of late replaced by indignation and an
ger, in New England as well as elsewhere,
are too well known to require much elucida
tion here. I am quite sure that if England
had known as much about the United States
five years ago as she knows now, the pres
ent unhappy relations between the two coun
tries could not be subsisting. England
sneered at those who had been her friends,
who were fighting the last battles of a con
flict begun by herself, and gave her sympa
thies to those who had denounced her for
her love of freedom. Not going far enough
to do more than repress for a moment the
traditional animosity of the South, she
went far enough to fill the North with in
dignant surprise, and has left in both sec
tions a sentiment which might easily find
vent in war, if any sufficient object to be
gained thereby should present itself. If it
were England that had occupied Mexico,
war would have been declared against her
ere now; hitherto, as I have intimated,
whilst the war-interest has pointed to
France, the war feeling in America has
been toward England. The feeling of an
ger towards this country is so universal in
the United States that I believe it would
be impossible to find amongst its public
men, or even its literary men, a single ex
ception from it, — unless it be among a few
who, having constant personal intercourse
with England, know how little any quick
generalisations concerning this country, its
character, or its feeling, are likely to be
correct. A few protests against the very
general denunciation of England may have
been uttered there, or sent there by Ameri
cans resident here; but they have been lost
like chips in the rapids of Niagara. I
write these things with profound regret;
but I think the facts should be known.
There have been many instances in his
tory where such a condition of popular
feeling has required the merest pretext to
initiate war. In the present case there is
something which is already regarded in
America as a sufficient occasion for war
(were war desirable), and may be presently
regarded as an adequate cause for it. The
United States has, although so young as a
nation, presented more than a score of
“ claims ” against other nations; and in
every case, I believe, these claims have
been ultmately adjusted to its satisfaction,
though now and then refused at first. The
late claim upon the English Government
for damages committed by the Alabama —■
for those alone would probably have been
insisted upon-—meant much more than
a pecuniary matter to the Americans. As
*
foi the merchants who had suffered losses
by Confederate cruisers they were gener
ally men who a few years ago were so pa
tient and resigned when slavery was scut
tling human hearts and homes, that many
of us smiled with a grim satisfaction at their '
pathetic emotions when some defenceless
sloop with its innocent family of bags and
barrels was sent to the bottom. But withal
the Alabama was regarded as the palpable
symbol of that anti-American sentiment
which had appeared at the outbreak of the
war — a symbol which not the Kearsage,
but England alone, could sink; and the
claim for the losses by hei’ ' signified also a
reclamation for wounds rankling in every
American heart.
I have no intention of discussing here
the case of the A liibama; but the legal case
as it stands in the correspondence between
Earl Russel and Mr. Adams is so different
from the moral case which is at this moment
powerfully agitating the American mind,
that it seems to me important to mention
a few points recently laid by Mr. George
Bemis, the eminent jurist of Boston, before
his countrymen, which are more likely to
poison the future relations between the two
countries than any question raised in the
diplomatic discussion referred to. This
hitherto unwritten, or rather uncollected,
chapter in the history of the Alabama is
derived from the English Blue Boole, and
refers to the last two days’ stay of that
cruiser in British waters, after the Govern
ment had decided upon her detention, and
after the alleged telegraphic order for her
seizure had been sent to the officials of
Liverpool.
.
The Alabama left Laird’s dock in Liver
pool in July, 1862, under pretence of tak
ing out a pleasure party, and went to sea
without ever returning to that port again.
The American Minister having called upon
�I
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
553
Earl Russell for an explanation of this, be well to remind the reader here that, so
wrote home the following as the statement early as July 4th, the British Government
he received at that interview : —
"had promised Mr. Adams that the Custom
House officials at Liverpool should keep a
“ His lordship first took up the case of the strict watch on the movements of the ex
‘290’ [the name by which the Alabama was pected Alabama, and report any further in
first known], and remarked that a delay in de formation that could be collected concern
termining upon it had most unexpectedly ing her.) The Hercules proceeds to fulfil
been caused by the sudden development of her errand, but has not completed her ship
a malady of the Queen’s Advocate, Sir John
D? Harding, totally incapacitating him for the ping of men and warlike equipment until
transaction of business. This made it neces sometime during the morning of the 30th.
sary to call in other parties, whose opinion had During the forenoon, some hours before the
been at last given for the detention of the gunboat, Hercules starts, the AmcMn Consul has
but before the order got down to Liverpool the vessel placed the following note under the eye of
was gone.” *
the head of the Custom House : —
In the debate on the escape of the Ala
“U. S. Consulate, Liverpool,
bama, which occurred in the House of
July 30, 1862.
Lords, Aprd 29, 1864, Earl Russell gave f“Sir,—Referring to myaPMions communi
cation to you on the subject of the gunboat
.' this further explanation : —
■‘No. 290fl|fitted out by Mr. LaiM at Birken
“ The United States Government had no head, I beg now to inform you that she left
reason to complain of us in that respect [in the Birkenhead dock on Monday night [the
ves^mHmorningMrthe 29th] left
regard to the escape of the Alabama], because 28thl
we took all the precaution we could. We col M^M^^^ycomi^wed by the steilm-tug Hercu
les. The Hercules returned last evening, and
lected evidence, but it was not till it was com
was cruising off
plete that we felt ourselves justified in giving the her master stated
orders for the seizure of the vessel. These orders, Port Iypias, that she had six guns on board
however, were evaded. I can tell your lord ship concealed below, and was taking powder from
from a trustworthy source how theyiwere evaded!?’ another vessel.
The Hercules is now alongside the Wood_[Eaii Russell then proceeded to quote a pass
age from Fullam’s ‘ Cruise in the Confederate side landing-stage, taking on board men (forty
States War Steamer Alabama ’ (p. 5), of which or fifty), beams, evidently for guiMcarriages,
and other things, to convey down to the gunthe last paragraph ran as iollows] : —
“Our unceremonious departure [from Liver bo® A quantity of cutlasses was taken on
pool] was owing to the fact of news being receiv board on Friday last.
These circumstances all go to confirm the
ed to the effect that the customs authorities had
orders to board and detain us that morning.” representations heretofore made to you about
this vessel, in the face of which I cannot but
[Upon which Earl Russell adds] : —
“ That was the fact. However the owner regret she lias been permitted to leave the port,
,and I report them to youH^M you may take
came to be informed of it, it is impossible for
me to say. There certainly seems to have been such steps as you may deem necessary to pre
treachery on the part of some one furnishing the vent this flagrant violation of neutrality.
Respectfully, I am your obedient servant,
information.”
“ Thomas H. Dudley, Consul.
On the morning of July 29th, 1862, the “ The Collector of Customs, Liwrpool.”
Alabama put out from the Liverpool docks,
In response to this urgent appeal, Mr. E.
having on board several ladies,and gentle
men of the family of Mr. John Laird, M. P., Morgan, Surveyor of the Port, seems to
and enough of other invited guests to make have been sent to visit the Hercules. The
a show of a pleasure party, and was towed following is the record of his labours: —
by a steam-tug, the Hercules, to a point
Copy of a Letter from Mr. E. Morgan, Sur
fourteen miles from Liverpool. There the
party was transferred to the Hercules, and veyor, to the Collector, Liverpool.
“ Surveyor’s Office, 30 July, 1862.
the Commander of the Alabama made an
“Sir, — Referring to the steamer built by
appointment with the Hercules to return to
the
Liverpool and bring a large portion of hjs boat Messrs. Laird, which is suspected to be a gun
intendedfor some foreign government, —
crew to Beaumaris Bayljabout forty miles ■ “ I beg to state that since the date of my
distant from ’ the town.
The Hercules last report concerning her she has been lying
reached Liverpool on the evening of the in the Birkenhead docks fitting for sea, and
29th, and anchored for the night. (It may receiving on board coals and provisions for her
*The itaZzes here and elsewhere, in paragraphs crew.
“ She left the dock on the evening of the
quoted from the Blue Book,.are, of course, not in
the originals.
28th instant, anchored for the night in the
i
�554 .
AMERICA, FRANCE, AND ENGLAND.
Mersey, abreast the Canning Dock, and pro
ceeded out of the river on the following morn
ing, ostensibly on a trial trip, from which she
has not returned.
X “ I visited the tug Hercules this morning, as
she lay at the landing-stage at Woodside, and
strictly examined her holds, and other parts of
the vessel. She had nothing of a suspicious
character onboard —no guns, no ammunition,
or anything appertaining thereto. A consider
able number of persons, male and female, were
on deck, some of whom admitted to me
THAT THEY WERE A PORTION OF THE CREW,
AND WERE GOING TO JOIN THE ‘GUNBOAT.’
“ I have oniy to add that your directions to
keep a strict watch on the said vessel have been
carried out, and I write in the fullest confidence
that she left this port without any part of her
armament on board; she had not as much as a
single gun or musket.
“ It is said that she cruised off Point Lyna,9
1st night, which, as you are aware, is some fifty
miles from this port.
“Very respectfully,
(Signed)
“ E. Morgan, Surveyor.
The Foreign Enlistment Act says very
plainly, that every ship “ having on board,
conveying, carrying, or transporting ” any
person or persons “ enlisted, or who have
agreed or been procured to enlist, or who
shall be departing from his Majesty’s domin
ions for the purpose or with the intent of
enlisting,” “ shall and may be seized by
the Collector,” &c., (Stat. 59 George III. c.
69, s. 6). Mr. Morgan says some of the men
on the Hercules admitted to him “ that they
were a portion of the crew, and were going
to join the gunboat;” he knows that it is
a gunboat, and that it has gone off “ osten
sibly on a trial trip
and yet we find the
following letter sent to the Commissioners
of Customs in London: —
“ Custom House, Liverpool,
30th July, 1862.
“Honourable Sirs,—Immmediately on re
ceipt of the aforegoing communication [not
given, or perhaps Consul Dudley’s, qu. ?], Mr.
Morgan, Surveyor, proceeded on board the
Hercules, and I beg to enclose his report, ob
serving that he perceived no beams, such as are
alluded to by the American Consul, nor any
thing on bourd that would justify further action on
my part.
“ Respectfully,
. (Signed)
“ S. Price Edwards.”
The following • telegram was laid before
The Lords Commissioners of her Majesty’s
Treasury on the morning of July 29 : —
“Liverpool, 29th July, 1862.
“ ‘ No. 290.’
“Sir, — We telegraphed you this morning
that the above vessel was leaving Liverpool.
She came out of dock last night, and steamed
down the river between 10 and 11 a. m.
“ We have reason to believe she has gone to
Queenstown.
“ Yours obediently,
“Duncan, Squarey, & Blackmore.”
Lastly, here is the record of how, when
the horse was stolen, the stable-door was
locked: —
I
“ Thirty-first July, 1862, at about |
half-past seven, p. m.
“ Telegrams were sent to the Collectors at Liver
pool and CorL [at above date] pursuant to
Treasury Order, dated 31st July, to seize the gun
boat (290) should she be within either of those ports. • ,
-- “ Similar telegrams to the officers at Beaumaris
and Holyhead were sent on the morning of the 1stAugust. They were not sent on the 3ist July,
the telegraph offices to those districts being
closed. '
“ And on the 2d August a letter was also
sent to the Collector at Cork, to detain the ves
sel should she arrive at Queenstown.”
It is noticeable that only on the evening
of the 31st of July was any word sent to
Queenstown, where, according to the tele
gram of the 29th, the American agents in
Liverpool “ have reason to believe she (the
Alabama) has gone ! ” And why was no
telegram sent to Point Lynas on the night
of the 30th ? Three days were lost when
all depended upon hours. Nay, there have
been cases when England, feeling herself
aggrieved by such ships, has — as those who
remember the cases of the Terceira and the
Heligoland know — pursued and destroyed
them even in foreign waters. The feeling
was of another kind in this case: the Ala
bama .was followed through English and
other waters, but with plaudits.
Now all this is far lrom pleasant read
ing to an American. Earl Russell him
self, as quoted above, has said that there
seems to have been “ treachery ” in the
proceeding. Nay, in “ Hansard ” for Feb
ruary 16, 1864, he will be found to have
classified it as a “ belligerent operation,”
and as “ a scandal and in some degree a re
proach to British law.” Is it wonderful
then that the United States should prefer a
claim, accompanied by a suggestion of ar
bitration, for the losses by this cruiser,
which for a time swept American ships from
the seas ? Is it wonderful that it should in
terpret the refusal to admit the claim or the
suggestion as a moral confession of judg
ment ? Is it wonderful that, irrespective of
the legal points of the case, Americans
should perceive in the above facts the ex
�janet’s
555
questions.
pression of a hostile animus toward her, as
yet unlaid, so far as any official act is con
cerned, and that they, should, with their
deep sense of wrong, be eager to seize an oc
casion for retaliation ?
The liberation of John Mitchell, at the
request of the Fenians, by President John
son, after he (Mitchell) had rendered himself
so especially odious to the people of the
United States by his treason, was attended
with no popular outcry. ' It could never
have been done had there not been a gen
eral feeling of resentment toward England.
It is a straw only, but it shows the wind to
be setting from a tempestuous quarter.
It may be supposedEhat the very causes
which have operated to alienate the
Northern States from England would im
ply a friendship for her in the South; but
besides the old animosity of the South
toward England, on account of her influence
against slavery, she feels bitterly the sym
pathy of the English masses for the North,
the cold shoulder given to her agents at the
English Court, the repeated refusals of the
British Government to join France in an in
tervention, and its refusal of any aid to
prevent the South being crushed. Thus
every class and section in America has a
grievance against England.
There are, indeed, men in that country
whose thoughts reach beyond the vexations
and passions of the moment, who may be
counted on to do what they can to prevent
such a dire calamity as a war between the
two great branches of the Anglo-Saxon
race would be.
But the fact may not
be concealed that by the refusal to submit
the case of the Alabama to arbitration, in
the present state of American feeling, the
wildest Irishman who would fire a hemi
sphere to boil his potatoes is made stronger
than the most thoughtful statesman. To a
point of ministerial dignity — for the dignity
of a nation cannot depend upon shielding
the blunders of a Cabinet or the “ treachery”
of its subordinates — it must be ascribed,
that the entrance into Parliament of such
friends of the United States as Mill, Hughes,
and Fawcett, and of Forster into the Gov
ernment does not mark the meginning of
an era of good-will between the two na
tions; that the sunken AZaframa leaves
a brood of her kind to be hatched out by
the heat of the next English war, and to
resuscitate a semi-baiMSrs mode of war
fare which had seemed about to pass away;
and that even this ugly programme is the
least disastrous alternative to which the
friends of peace can look forward.
Moncuke D. Conway.
/
!
X
JANET’S QUESTIONS.
Janet ! my little Janet!
You think me wise I know;
And that when you sit and question,
With your eager face aglow,
I can tell you all you ask me :
My child, it is not so.
I can tell my little Janet
Some things she well may prize;
I could tell her some whose wisdom
Would be foolish in her eyes;
There are things I would not tell, her,
They are too sadly wise.
I can tell her of noble treasures
Of wisdom stored of old;
To the chests where they are holden
I can give her keys of gold ;
And as much as she can carry
She may take away untold.
But till her heart is opened,
Like the book upon her knee,
What is written in its pages
She cannot read nor see :
Nor tell till the rose has blossomed
If red or white Twill be.
And till life’s book is opened,
And read through every age,
Come questions, without answers, ■
Alike from child and sage :
Yet God himself is teaching
His children page by page.
I still am asking questions
With each new leaf I see ;
To your new eyes, my Janet,
Yet more revealed may be.
You must ask of God the questions
I fail to answer thee.
— Good Words.
�556
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
From the Quarterly Review.
A History of Caricature and Grotesque in
Literature and Art. By Thomas Wright,
Esq.; with Illustrations from various sour-,
ces, drawn and engraved by E. W. Fair
holt, Esq.
Among the many contributions which
Mr. Thomas Wright has made towards Eng
lish antiquarian research, and, in particular,
towards the familiar delineation of the man
ners and customs of our ancestors, none is,
perhaps, so popular or so well known as his
two volumes entitled ‘ England under the
House of Hanover, illustrated from the Car
icatures and Satires of the day.’ The very
spirited woodcuts with which this book is
adorned by Mr. Fairholt might alone have
sufficed to make its fortune. Published
only in 1848, it is already difficult to pro
cure a copy. Encouraged by his success in
this line, Mr. Wright has now attempted
the wider enterprise announced in this title
page. Wd fear that in'doing so he has been
somewhat over ambitious. A history of the
‘ caricature and grotesque in literature and
art,’ extending over all countries and all
time, comprising not only pictorial represen
tations, but poetry, satire, the drama, and
buffoonery of all descriptions, is a subject
which, if it be attempted at all in a single
octavo volume, could only be so in the form
of a compact and well-reasoned essay, to
which Mr. Wright’s entertaining fragmen
tary sketches bear little resemblance. The
‘immeasurable laughter’ of nations, ancient
and modern, cannot be reduced within so
small a compass. We must therefore con
tent ourselves with thanking Mr. Wright
for his desultory but agreeable attempts for
our enlightenment. And we propose, on
the present occasion, to confine ourselves
entirely to the artistic portion of them: en
livened, as it is, by a new series of Mr. Fair
holt’s excellent illustrations. Our inability
to transfer these to our own pages places
us, as we feel, at a great disadvantage:
many words are required to explain to the
reader the contents of a picture, which
a few outlines by an able hand impress
at once visibly on the recollection. De
prived of this advantage, we must confine
ourselves as well as we can to the points on
which caricature touches the history of
social and political life, rather than those by
which it borders on the great domain of
Art, properly so called.
GROTESQUE
course, an Italian word, derived from the verb
caricare, to charge or load; and therefore it
means a picture which is charged or exaggerat
ed. [“Kitratto ridicolo,” says Baretti s Dic
tionary, “in cui fiensi grandemente accresciuti
i difetti.” The old French dictionaries say.
“ c’est la meme chose que charge en peinture.”]
The word appears not to have come into use in
Italy until the latter half of the seventeenth cen
tury, and the earliest instance I know of its em
ployment by an English writer is that quoted
by Johnson from the ‘ Christian Morals ’ of Sir
Thomas Brown, who died in 1682, but it was
one of his latest writings, and was not printed
till long after his death: “ Expose not thyself
by fourfooted manners unto monstrous draughts
(i. e. drawings) and caricatura representations.”
This very quaint writer, who had passed some
time in Italy, evidently uses it as an exotic
word. We find it next employed by the writer
of the Essay, No. 537, of the ‘ Spectator,’ who,
speaking of the way in which different people
are led by feelings of jealousy and prejudice to
detract from the characters of others, goes on to
say “From all these hands we have such
draughts of mankind as are represented in those
burlesque pictures which the Italians call cari
catures, where the art consists in preserving
amidst distorted proportions" and aggravated
features, some distinguishing likeness of the
person, but in such a manner as to transform
the most agreeable beauty into the most odious
•monster.” The word was not fully established
in oqr language in its English form of carica
ture until late in the last century.’ — p. 415.
This, no doubt, is a serviceable, artistic
definition of the word; but • its popular
meaning is, perhaps, a little more limited.
It would be difficult accurately to distin
guish ‘caricature ’in composition, accord
ing to the above description, from what we
simply term ‘ grotesque ; ’ exaggeration,
that is, of natural effects for the mere
purpose of the ludicrous. In using the word
caricature, we generally add to this notion
that of satire; and the best definition for
our purpose, as well as to suit ordinary ap
prehension, though not at all originating in
the primary meaning of the word, will
be, that ‘ caricature ’ implies the use of the
grotesque for the purpose of satire : satire,
of course, of many kinds, individual, moral,
political, as the case may be.
Looking at our subject from this point of
view, we must never eliminate from it all
those amusing details respecting classical
‘ caricature,’ to which Mr. Wright has de
voted the first part of his work, and which
a clever French writer, M. Champfleury,
hasjust illustrated inalittle book, superficial,
‘ The word caricature is not found in the dic entertaining, and ‘ cock-sure of everything,’
tionaries, I believe, until the appearance of that as the manner of his nation- is, entitled
of Dr. Johnson, in 1755. Caricature is, of ‘ Histoire de la Caricature Antique.’ The
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
557
ancients were passionately fond of the gro erical creatures.’ In others, the desired
tesque : the Greeks intermingled it strange effect is produced, not by these mere fabri
ly, but gracefully, with their inimitable cre cations, but by grouping men and animals
ations of beauty: the Romans, after their together in fanciful or ridiculous conjunc
nature, made it coarse and sensual, where tions. And these — conceived and execut
not merely imitative of the Hellenic.
ed with a prodigality of imagination
_ ‘ The discourses of Socrates resemble the amounting in many instances to genius —
pictures of the painter Pauson.’ Some one constitute, perhaps, the favourite, though
had ordered of Pauson the picture of a by no means the only, style of comic art
horse rolling on the ground. Pauson paint familiar to the classical ancients; one of
ed him running. The customer complained which the known examples have of late
that the condition of his order had not been years greatly multiplied, owing to the disfulfilled. ‘ Turn the picture upside down,’ cowries of ancient paintings at Pompeii and
said the artist, ‘ and the horse will seem to elsewhere. There is a pretty description
roll on the ground.’ From this moderately of a picture of this sort in» the ‘ leones ’ of
facetious anecdote of Lucian Mlom a pas Philostratus. It represents a ‘number of
sage of Aristotle, in which it is said that BQpids riding races on swans: one is tight
‘ Polygnotus painted men better thanBjley ening his golden rein, another loosening"it;
are; Pauson;. worse than they are; PionHSisI one dexterously wheeling round the goal:
such as they are ; ’ and, lastly, from a few you might fancy that you could hell them
lines of Aristophanes, in which some Pau encouraging their birds, and threatening
son or other is jeered at for his poverty, as and qtSffilling with one another, as their
sumed to be the lot of Bohemian artists in very faces represent: one is trying to throw
general; M. Champfleury has arrived at the down his neighbour j another has just thrown
rapid conclusion, that Pauson was the doyen down his; another is slipping off his steed,
of all caricaturists. And he vindicates him, in order to bathe himself in the basin of the
eloquently, from the aspersions of the Sta- hippodrome.’ *
gyrite. ‘ Aristotle,’ says he, ‘ preoccupied
But, to revert to our original distinction,
with the idea of absolute beauty, has not ancient art. though rich in the grotesque,
expounded the scope of caricature, and its does not produce on us the effect of carica
importance in society. This thinker, plun ture ; either it has no definite satirical aim,
ged in philosophical abstractions, despised orDM® has such, the satire is lost .upon our
as futile an act which nevertheless consoles ignorance. The attempts of antiquaries to
the people in its sorrows, avenges it on explain its productions byraWig them a
its tyrants, and reproduces, with a satirical supposed libellous meaning are among the
pencil, the thoughts of the multitude.’
most comical efforts of modern pedantry.
Pliny the elder, after mentioning the seri A laughable scene on an Etruscan vase, repous compositions of the painter Antiphilus, resenting a lover. climbing |l ladder to his
informs us that ‘ idem (Antiphilus) jocoso. mistress’s casement,' figures, we are told,
nomine Gryllum deridiculi habitus pinxit. Jupiter and Alcmena. The capital travesUndb hoc genus picturse Gryll^voeabantur. tie of fEneas and Anchises as monkeys
The meaning of this obscure passage — (PQm») is meant tolMBfee the imitative
whether Grylluswas a ridiculous personage style of Virgil! The well-known and amus
who had the misfortune to descend to posteri ing seejSeifn a paMs studio (tW.) is ‘ an
ty in some too faithful portrait byAntiphibus,' allusion to the deMkiM of art.’ A pigmy
or whether Grvllus was a serious person a.jgl and a fox (GreoorBn Museum) are a phi
perhaps the son of Xenophon and hero of losopher and flatterer. An owl cutting off
Mantinea, whose portrait was placed by the the head of a cock is Clytemnestra mur
Athenians in the Ceramicus, whom Anti dering AgameAon;
a^shopper
philus had the audacity to caricature — driving a parrot in a car (Herculaneum) is
has exercised. the wits of plenty of anti
quaries, and will no doubt give occupation
The ‘ leones. of Flavius Philostratus, a
to many more. However, it seems to be of*the age of the’ Flavian Emperors, contain writer
a rhe
from this anecdote of Pliny that grotesque torical description of a series of pictures which he
figures engraved on ancient gems have re saw, or feigns himself to have seen, in, a ‘ stoa,’ or
colonnaded
four or
ceived the name of ‘ Grylli ’ among the ated ‘in a building® ofthe city live stories,’situ
suburb of
Neapolis.’ The
curious in modern times. This title has subjects described are partly mythological, partly
landscape. Someof them are identical with those
been particularlyKapplied to those which of frescoes of Pompeii, overwhelmed at the same
represent figures ‘ composed of the heads period; and the general description of the style of
and bodies of different animals capriciously treatment such as to remind the reader closely of
united, so as to form monstrous and chim- | those beautiful and singular Specimens of the art
of a world gone by.
�558
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE
Seneca conducting Nero! Such are a few I tians, they still found pagan emblems and figamong the solemn interpretations which I ures in their models, and still went on imitat
modern sagacity has put on these ‘ capricci, ing them, sometimes merely copying, and
rather than caricatures,’ as M: Champfleury at others turning them to caricat ure or burlesque.
long that, a
truly calls them, with which the spirit of And this tendency continued sostill existedatre
much later date, where there
Greek antiquity, as playful as it was daring, mains of Roman buildings, the mediaeval archi
loved to decorate the chamber and engrave tects adopted them as models, and did not hesi
the gem.
tate to copy the sculpture, although it might
It is painful, and in some degree humiliat be evidently pagan in character. The accom
ing, to note the transition from the light and panying cut represents a bracket in the church
comparatively graceful character of ancient of Mont Majour, near Nismes, built in the tenth
art, even in its comic forms, to the excessive century. The subject is a monstrous head eat
grossness, meanness, and profanity, which ing a child, and we can hardly doubt that it
characterised the corresponding branch of it was really intended for a caricature on Saturn
in the middle ages in Western Europe. No devouring one of his children.’ — pp. 40-49.
doubt this change was partly a continuation
For our own parts, we should doubt
of that which took place when the brief im
portation of Grecian models into the West greatly whether the sculptor in question had
had ceased, and the coarser Roman style Saturn in his mind at all, any more than
Dante had when he imagined Satan devour
succeeded it.
ing a sinner with each of his three mouths:
‘ The transition from antiquity to what we the illustrations of which passage, in early
usually understand by the name of the middle illuminations and woodcuts, are exactly
ages,’ says Mr. Wright, ‘ was long and slow : like the copy in Mr. Wright’s work of this
it was a period during which much of the tex Mont Majour sculpture. And generally, we
ture of the old society was destroyed, while, at doubt whether Mr. Wright does not attri
the same time, a new life was gradually given bute to classical recollections .too large a
to that which remained. We know very little share in the production of that monstrous
of the comic literature of this period of transi style of art which furnishes our next re
tion ; its literary remains consist chiefly of a markable chapter in the history of carica
miss of heavy theology or of lives of Saints.
. . . The period between antiquity and the ture — the Ecclesiastical Grotesque, such
middle ages was one of such great and general as it exhibited itself especially in France,
destruction, that the gulf between ancient and England, and Germany. It has to our
mediaeval art seem to us greater and more ab minds very distinctive marks of a rougher
rupt than it really was. The want of monu Northern original. However this may be,
ments, no doubt, prevents our seeing the gradu there is something humiliating, as we have
al change of the ooe into the other; but enough, said, in the degradation of skill and esthet
nevertheless, of facts remain to convince us ic perception which is evinced by these rel
that it was not a sudden change. It is now, ics of generations to which we so often as
indeed, generally understood that the knowledge cribe a peculiarly reverential character.
and practice of the arts and manufactures of
the Romans were handed onward from master No doubt its elements, so to speak, may be
to pupil after the empire had fallen ; and this traced in part to some very ordinary pro
took place especially in the towns, so that the pensities of the human mind. It has been
workmanship, which had been declining in said, probably with some truth, that when
character during the later periods of the em the most prevailing of all common motives
pire, only continued in the course of degrada was an intense fear of hell and of evil
tion afterwards. Thus, in the first Christian spirits, the most natural mode of relief, by
edifices, the builders who were employed, or at reaction, was that of turning them into
least many of them, must have been pagans; ridicule. And however impossible it may
and they would fodow their old models of or
namentation, introducing the same grotesque be, to intellects cultivated after the modern
figures, the same masks and monstrous faces, fashion, to reconcile these propensities with
and even sometimes the same subjects from the a strong sense of the majestic and the beau
old mythology, to which they had been accus tiful, yet we cannot doubt the fact that they
tomed. It is to be observed, a so, that this kind were so reconciled. As. Dante could inter
of iconographical ornamentation had been en mingle his unique conceptions of supernatu
croaching more and more upon the old archi ral grandeur with minute descriptions of
tectural purity during the latter ages of the the farcical proceedings of the vulgarest
Empire, and that it was employed more pfo- possible fiends with their pitchforks, so the
•fusely in the later works, fro n which this task same artists who produced, or at least orna
was transferred to the ecclesiasical and to the
domestic architecture of the middle ages. Af mented, our cathedrals, with those glorious
ter the architects themselves had become Chris- | expressions of thought sublimed at once by
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
559
the love of beauty and the love of heaven, I pride, envy; in fact, all the deadly sins comcould furnish them out with the strangest, I bined in one diabolical whole? — p. 74.
meanest, often filthiest images which a de
The goat-like countenance of the arch
based imagination might suggest. Fortu
nately, age has done so much to veil these fiend is a common mediaeval, as well as mod
debauches of skill with sober indistinctness, ern German, type; but whoever wishes to
that they seldom strike the eye of a casual tracq backward the conception of Retsch’s
observer, in a sacred edifice, very offen Mepnistopheles, should look in particular at
sively. But they lurk everywhere, and in an ivory carving, in the Maskell collection
' disgusting multitudes; in the elaborate at the British Museum, of exquisite work
stonework of ceilings, windows, and' col manship, styled the Temptation of Christ, by
umns ; in battlements, bosses, and corbeils ; Christoph Angermair, 1616.
One more instance, and a very striking
in the wood-carving of stalls, misereres,
and often on the lower surface of folding one, may be mentioned by way of exception
subsellia; while they are equally to be found, to the ordinary meanness and vulgarity
strangest of all, where the Donna Inez of which characterise the mediaeval representa
Lord Byron’s ‘ Don Juan ’ found them, in tions of the supernatural. It is noticed and
the illuminated pages of missals, destined for engraved by Malcolm, in his ‘ History of
purposes of daily devotion. So long as Caricature? The missal of King Richard
these were confined to mere burlesque, no II., preserved in the BrMRi Museum, is full
great harm was done, and certainly non,e of grotesque illustrSions ofEhe ordinary
cast, though beautifully executed.
But
intended.
among them is one of a higher and stranger
turn of invention, the exact meaning of
‘ The number and variety of such grotesque which is unknown. It Represents the choir
faces/ says Mr. Wright, ‘which we find scat of a solemn Gothic chapel. A white monk
tered over the architectural decoration of our old is celebrating mass at the altar; another lies
ecclesiastical buildings, are so great that I will prostrate before it; ten of
order, seated
not attempt to give any more particular classifi in iSir stalls, sing the service. Above these
cation of them. All this church decoration was
intended especially to produce its effect upon the appearEeated in a higher range of stalls,
middle and lower classes, and mediaeval art was, five figures dimly drawn, which on examina
perhaps more than anything else, suited to nga tion appear to be robed skeletons — two
diaeval society, for it belonged to the mass and with the Papal tiara, two with coronets, one
not to the individual. The man who could enjoy with a cardinal’s hat. The effect of the
a match at grinning through horse collars, must whole is very terrific, after the fashion of
have been charmed by the grotesque works of the the ghostliest conceptions of Jean Paul
meidteval stone-sculptor and wood-carver; and, Richter, and otheiEGerman masters of the
we may add, that these display, though often spectral and calling back to
mind, at
rather rude, a very high degree of skill in art, a the same: time,(the coincidence the the lines
of
great power of producing striking imagery? —
which Shakspeare has put into the mouth of
p. 1.48.
‘ In all the delineations of demons we have the same monarch —
yet seen,’ he says elsewhere, ‘ the ludicrous is
the spirit which chiefly predominates; and in no ‘For within the hollow crown
one instance have we had a figure which is real That wreathes the mortal temples of a King,
ly demoniacal. The devils are droll, but not Keeps Deith his court: and there the antic sits,
frightful; they provoke laughter, or at least ex Scoffing his state, and grinning at his pomp?
cite a smile, but they create no horror. Indeed,
But when the prevailing and violent quar
they torment their victims so good-humouredly
that we hardly feel for them. There is, howev rels between different classes of religious
er, one well-known instance in which the me persons in the Church perverted the same
diaeval artist has shown himself thoroughly suc tendency into a taste for licentious ribaldry
cessful in representing the features of the spirit — when it was no longer the Devil who was
of evil. On the parapet of the external gallery piously laughed at in these compositions,
of the cathedral church of Notre Dame in Par but monks, nuns, hermits, and so forth, who
is, there is a figure in stone, of the ordinary were introduced as symbols of everything
stature of a man, representing the demon, ap
parently looking wi;h satisfaction upon the in degrading — when grotesque, assuming the
habitants of the city as they were everywhere in attitude of satire, turned, according to our
dulging in sin and wickedness. The unmixed suggested distinction, into caricature prop
evil — horrible in its expression in this coun erly so called — then the practice in ques
tenance — is marvellously portrayed. It is an tion assumed a much darker complexion.
absolute Mephistopheles, carrying in his features The foulest of these representations, and
a strange mixture of hateful qualities — malice, they are only too numerous, can be barely
�560
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
alluded to in a work like Mr. Wright’s. Au
older publication, already noticed, Mal
colm’s very imperfect ‘ History of Carica
ture,’ goes into more details respecting them.
We will only say that those who enter on
the subject had better not carry into the in
quiry exaggerated notions respecting the
decorum or the piety of the so-called ‘Ages
of Faith,’ lest they should be too abruptly
dispelled.
Gradually, and with the progress of en
lightenment, a somewhat more serious,
though still familiar, mode of dealing with
subjects of this description became general;
but the change was not so early as has been
sometimes supposed, since the stalls of Hen
ry VII.’s chapel at Westminster exhibit
some of the very worst of this class of offen
ces against taste and religious feeling. But
in the fifteenth century, under the hands of
its artists, the supernatural, though still
tainted with the grotesque, germinated into
the awful. The union of the two may still
be traced in that marvellous but perishing
series of representations, ranging over all
the known and conjectured regions of life
and eternity, which decorates the Campo
Santo of Pisa—that ‘‘Antechamber of
Death,’ as the Italians call it. From the
same sources of thought arose the profuse
crop of ‘ Danses Macabres,’ dances of death,
coarsely painted on thousands of cemetery
walls, and drawn and engraved by number
less artists, with more or less of spirit; phan
tasmagorias, in which the love of the horri
ble was repulsively mixed with that of the
ludicrous, but still far less ignoble in taste
and character than those early grotesques of
ecclesiastical sculpture, to which our atten
tion has been hitherto drawn.
It is refreshing, however, to turn from this
disagreeable class of subjects to the few
specimens of a freer and healthier turn for
the ludicrous, unmixed with profanity, which
mediaaval art has left us. Probably one of
the earliest specimens of English caricature
drawing, as distinguished from mere gro
tesque, is that described by Mr. Wright, as
follows: — ‘It belongs to the Treasury of
the Exchequer, and consists of two volumes
of vellum, called Liber A and Liber B, form
ing a register of treaties, marriages, and sim-,
ilar documents of the reign of Edward I.
The clerk who was employed in writing it
seems to have been, like many of these of
ficial clerks, somewhat of a wag, and he has
amused himself by drawing in the margin
figures of the inhabitants of the provinces
of Edward’s crown, to which the documents
referred. Some of these are plainly designed for caricature.’ Two of themare evi
GROTESQUE
dently Irishmen, their costume and weapon,
the broad axe, exactly answering to the de
scription given of them by Giraldus Cambrensis. Two are Welchmen — ludicrous
figures enough, whose dress is equally in ac
cordance with contemporary description,
except in one curious particular, which
writers have not noticed. The right legs
are naked, like those of the German hackbutteers in the ‘ Lay of the Last Minstrel ’:—
‘ Each better knee was bared, tr aid
The warrior in the escalade.’
‘ When the official clerk who wrote this tran
script came to documents relating to Gascony,
his thoughts wandered naturally enough to its
rich vineyards and the wine they supplied so
plentifully, and to which, according to old re
ports, clerks seldom showed any dislike; and
accordingly, in the next sketch, we have a Gas
con occupied diligently in pruning his vine
tree.’
From the sculptured and illuminated re
ligious-grotesque of the Middle Ages to the
German and Dutch woodcut-literature of
the period of the Reformation, the transition
is not a very wide one. The style is pretty
similar, the profanity much the same, only
a fiercer element has been added by contro
versial bitterness. Perhaps this class of
works may be justly cited, in chronological
series, as affording the real commencement
of the art of modern political caricature,
properly so called. On both sides of the
question this method of ridiculing antago
nists was most profusely resorted to. The
jovial, popular figure of Martin Luther, in
particular, formed, as it well might, a very
favourite piece de resistance for pictorial sa
tirists in the old interest to work upon. One
cut, preserved by Mr. Wright, ‘ taken from
a contemporary engraving in wood, presents
a rather fantastic figure of the demon play
ing on the bagpipes. The instrument is
formed of Luther’s head, the pipe through
which the devil blows entering his ear, and
that through which the music is produced
forming an elongation of the reformer’s
nose. It was a broad intimation that Lu
ther was a mere tool of the evil one, created
for the purpose of bringing mischief into
the world.’ — p. 251. But, continues Mr.
Wright, the reformers were more than a
match for their opponents in this sort of
warfare. Doctor Martin had been identi
fied, for various cogent reasons, with Anti
christ : —
.
•
‘ But the reformers had resolved, on what ap
peared to be much more conclusive evidence,
�/!
.
561
IN LITERATURE AND ART.-
that Antichrist was only emblematical of the [ he chose, to rank among the most original
papacy : that under this form he had been long | as well as powerful of modern artists — the
dominant on earth, and that the end of his reign I famous Jacques Callot, born at the end of
was then approaching. A remarkable pamph I the century, in 1592 — a man, as Mr.
let, designed to bring this idea pictorially before i Wright truly observes, who was destined
the world, was produced from the pencil of
Luther’s friend, the celebrated painter Lucas j not only to give a new character to the
Cranach, and appeared in the year 1521, under ! then recent art of engraving on copper,
the title of “ The Passionale of Christ and An | but also to bring in a new style of ludic
tichrist.” It is a small quarto, each page of rous and fanciful composition. Inimita
which is nearly filled by a woodcut, having a ble, however, as Callot’s works are, they
few lines of explanation in German below. The belong rathesl to the class of ‘ caprices,’
cut to the left represents some incident in the or ‘ ex-travaganzas,’ than of caricature in
life of Christ, while that facing it to the right the sense in which we have used it; for his
gives a contrasting fact in the history of Papal genius had not the satirical turn, properly
tyranny. Thus, the first cut on the left repre speaking: and the same may be said of his
sents Jesus in His humility, refusing earthly
dignities and power, while on the adjoining page most successful copyisfflDella Bella, a clever )
we see the Pope, with his cardinals and bishops, artist, but who never succeeded in equalling
. supported by his hosts of warriors, his cannon his origin IM The works of Romain de
and fortifications, in his temporal dominion over Hooghe, who, brought up in the merely exsecular princes. On another we have Christ travagant school of Callot, was extensively
washing the feet of his disciples, and in con employed in producing ^satirical and em
trast the Pope compelling the Emperor to kiss blematic representations of English political
his toe. And so on, through a number of illus events after the Restoration, perhaps serve
trations, until at last we come to Christ’s ascen
sion into heaven, in contrast with which a troop as the connecting link between the old
of demons, of the most varied and singular ‘ caprice ’ and the modern political carica
forms, have seized upon the Papal Antichrist, ture.
The need for pictorial representations to
and are casting him down into the flames of
hell, where some of his own monks wait to re stimulate the political feelings of the public,
in times when literature was comparatively
ceive him.’— p. 254.
scanty, had been of course as keenly felt in
This style of pictorial satire, as the ad England as in c®Br errantries $ but it was
*
vancing art of wood-engraving began more kept in check, through the public contests >
and more to multiply specimens, attained, of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
as we have said, much popularity in the six by the great inferioritjalof our artists, and
teenth century in Germany, and extended particularly our engravers, to those of the
itself from religious to political and purely Continent. Here and there we meet with
social subjects. Its latest employment in ’striking exceptions. The vwodcuts to the
those regions on a large and popular scale first edition of ‘Fox’s Martyrs’ contain,
was perhaps during the Thirty Years’ War ; among the fearful scenes which they gener
but the extremity to which that country was ally representkjcaricature likenesses of Gar
reduced by that dreary contest seems to diner, Bonner, and other well-known per
have extinguished its very life. The works sonages of the time, and are singularly pow
of this class, disseminated through broad erful in execution. But the like of these
sides, printed sheets, large illustrated folios are very few. One odd illustration, per
and popular duodecimos, are frequently ex haps, of the need felt for these pictorial rep
ecuted with considerable spirit as well as resentations, and the defectiveness of the
humour. But often, and especially towards ordinary means for supplying it, is to be
the latter portion of the period, they exhibit found in the peculiar taste of that age for
a strong tendency to become pedantic and employing elaborate devices on banners
allegorical. When the art of caricature, borne in procession or carried in the field,
becoming over-learned, addresses itself to in order to stimulate the ardour of partisans.
particular classes only, and requires a spe It will be remembered how the Scottish
cial education in order to make its products Protestant lords took the field against
understood, it may be-safely pronounced in Queen Mary with (among others) a great
a declining condition.
standard, on which the catastrophe of the
Perhaps the most successful result of the Kirk of Field was represented, with the fig
early wood cut-grotesque was, that it led the ure of Darnley lying on the ground, and.
way for greater achievements in art; and the words ‘ Judge and revenge my cause, O
its influence may be especially traced in the Lord.’ In the Great Rebellion such stand
designs of one who deserves, notwithstand ards were abundantly used, chiefly on the
ing the inferiority of the department which Royalist side, with devices both serious and
THIRD SERIES. LIVING AGE. VOL. XXXII.
1476.
V
$
t
�562
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
GROTE.SQUE
of the caricature order. Here is an ex
English specimens of art, at first few and
ample of the latter, taken by the Round far between, began to make their way into
heads at Marston Moor, described by Rush favour among these foreign importations;
worth : —
and it is just at this period (the reign of
George I.) that we find them first exhibiting
‘ A yellow coronet: in its middle a lion couch the well-known advertisements,4 Printed for
ant, and behind him a mastiff seeming to Carington Bowles, next the Chapter House
snatch at him, and in a label from his mouth
written, Kimboltoq: at his feet little beagles, in St. Paul’s Church Yard, London,’—a
and before their mouths written, Pym, Pym, house famous in the same line for full a cen
Pym : and out of the lion’s mouth these words tury afterwards.
4 It was a defect of the earlier publica
proceeding, Quousque tandem abutere patientions of this class,’ says Mr. Wright in his
tia nostra ? ’
earlier work, 4 that they partook more of
Another curious vehicle of political cari an emblematical character than of what we
cature in England, in the seventeenth cen now understand by the term 44 caricature.”
tury, generally of very inferior order, was Even Hogarth, when he turned his hand to
that of playing-cards. 4 The earliest of politics, could not shake off his old preju
these packs of cards known,’ says Mr. dice on this subject; and it would be diffi
Wright, is one which appears to have been cult to point out worse examples than the
published at the very moment of the restora two celebrated publications which drew
tion of Charles II., and which was perhaps upon him so much popular odium,44 The
engraved in Holland. It contains a series Times.” ’ The reader will easily under
of caricatures on the principal acts of the stand the distinction, though^it cannot of
commonwealth, and on the parliamentary course be traced out with absolute accuracy
leaders.’ The ace of diamonds, for instance, in comparing different pieces. A design,
: represents 4 The High Court of Justice, or for example, in which political characters
Oliver’s Slaughterhouse.’ Among other are represented under the guise of various
packs of a" similar character which have animals, is generally emblematic or sym
been preserved, one relates to the Popish bolical in character. This is a simple in
Plot, another to the Ryehouse Conspiracy stance ; but the symbolism is often compli
(published in Holland), another to the cated, and not easy of • comprehension.
South Sea Bubble.
Hence a necessity for long letterpress ex
Romain de Hooghe, already mentioned planations in the form of labels issuing
as a follower of Callot, became, together from the mouths of the characters, or other
with others of his countrymen, as we have wise — a device showing inferiority of skill.
seen, the great exponent of English political The most effective caricature explains it
satires during the events of the last Stuart self, and exhibits point instead of allegory.
. reigns. Their productions must have been The favourite plates of the first part of the
widely circulated in England ; and, in fact, Georgian era, which appeared periodically,
, superseded in public estimation the very about 1740, styled 4 The Series of Euro
. inferior articles of domestic manufacture. pean State Jockies,’ and so forth, were
This period of Dutch supremacy among us compositions of many figures, as hiero
may be said to have continued down to the glyphical as the frontispiece to a prophetical
• date of the South Sea Bubble aforesaid ■— almanac. The gradual way in which Eng
‘ the time,’ says Mr. Wright, 4 in which lish comic art became emancipated from
■ caricatures began to be common in Eng this somewhat pedantic mould may be illus
land ; lor they had been before published at trated by a later instance, out of Gillray’s
rare intervals, and "partook so much of the works. Charles Fox was represented by
character of emblems that they are not the caricaturists of his youth with a fox’s
easily understood.’ The earliest of these, head, as his father, Lord Holland, had al
and the best, were of Dutch manufacture, most invariably been before him. And so
yet these were negligently executed. 4 So he is in one or two of Gillray’s first prints.
little point is there often in these carica But Gillray almost immediately abandoned
tures, and so great appears to have been the the old usage, and gave the patriot his own
call for them in Holland, that people seem burly physiognomy. The gradual passage
to have looked up old engravings destined from the emblematic to the simply satirical
■ originally for a totally different purpose, completes the establishment of the modern
. and, adding new inscriptions and new ex- English school of caricature.
The nature of the change cannot be bet
j planations, they were published as carical tures on the Bubble.’ *
ter exemplified than by reference to a piece
which had prodigious vogue in its day, and
* House of Hanover, i, 71.
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
/
x
,
■
• i
■
<
■
563
is repeatedly mentioned with interest by described in the .verses accompanying the
Horace Walpole and other contemporaries. print, which are wittier than the print
Copies of it are still common in collections : itself. Its great success, however, was
we have seen it even jconverted into the evinced by the numerous rival works of art
mounting of a lady’s fan. This is headed of both political colours which it called,
‘ The Motion, 1741/ and commemorates the forth, ‘ the Reason, ‘ the Motive/ ‘ the
failure of a famous attempt to upset Sir Grounds,’ &c. It may perhaps be said with
Robert Walpole’s government. The back truth to be the prototype of that whole
ground represents Whitehall, the Treasury, class of pictorial satires, great favourites
and the adjoining buildings as they then | with Englishmen, in which the small revo
stood. (The spectator is looking down lutions of ministries and oppositions are
Whitehall from a point nearly opposite travestied as scenes of popular life.
the modern Admiralty : to his left is a dead
We need not delay over the other innu
wall along the east side of the street, be- merable caricatures of the same reign; •
hind it private buildings, Scotland Yard, they are generally very ignoble ones; but
&c., extending as far as the Banqueting ghe comparative novelty of the fashion in
House; in front, the gateway over the en England rendered them extremely popular,
trance of what is now Parliament Street, and there was a kind of frank jollity pre
with the inscription ‘ Treasury.’)
dominant in the English body corporate
*>
just at that epoch — the epoch, as Hallam
‘Lord Carteret, in the coach, is driven to satisfied himself, of the maximum of physi
ward the Treasury by the Duke of Argyll as cal well-being to be traced in our history
coachman, with the Earl of Chesterfield as among the mass of the people — which
postilion, who, in their haste, are overturning peculiarly suited this development of broad
the vehicle; and Lord Carteret cries “ Let me
get out!” The Duke brandishes a wavy national humour. One or two specimens
sword, instead of a whip; and between his may detain for a moment the eyes of those
legs the heartless changeling, Bubb Dodington, who turn them over, rare as they have now
sits in the form of a spaniel. . i. . ' Lord generally become, in the collection at the
Cobham holds firmly by the straps behind, as British Museum, or in that far more valua
footman; while Lord Lyttelton follows on ble one amassed in many a year of busy
horseback, characterised equally by his own collectorship by Mr. Hawkins, formerly of
lean form, and that of the animal on which that establishment. There is a wild force
he strides. ... In front, Pulteney, drawl in the very rough execution of the print on
ing his partisans by the noses, and wheeling a
barrow laden with the writings of the Opposi the original broadside of Glover’s famous
tion, the Champion, the Craftsman, Common ballad, ‘ Hosier’s Ghost,’ in which the spirits
Sense, &c., exclaims, “ Zounds, they’re of ‘ English captains brave,areally form a
ours ! ’” *
very spectral crew. Another may be noted
for the quiet savageness of its insult to
This once famous squib affords, as we Lord George Sackville: it is entitled, ‘ A
have said, a good exemplification of the Design for a Monument to General Wolfe
passage from the old and formal to the (1760), or, a Living Dog better than a Dead
modern style of political caricature. It Lion.’ The dead lion reclines below a bust
bears strongly the type of Dutch origin, of this hero : the living dog at his side is a
but without the carefulness of Dutch ex greyhound, and on his collar is the word
ecution. The idea is clever and suggestive, ‘ Minden.’ And, lastly, one more, for the
but the workmanship at once artificial and very oddity of the conception : ‘ Our late
feeble.
The likenesses were no doubt Prime Minister,’ 1743. It is simply the jolly
sufficiently good to amuse the public of that face of Sir Robert Walpole, without any
day; Horace Walpole calls them 1 admira accessories whatever, thrown back as against
ble ; ’ but they are inexpressive. The wavy a pillow, and the jaws relaxed into a most
sword, a relic of the emblematic school, is contagious yawn, with the words, ‘ Lo,
a clumsy piece of allegory, spoiling the what are all your schemes come to ? ’ and
realism of the piece; and so is the figure the lines from the Dunciad : —
of Pulteney, leading the Tory squires by
cords passed through their noses. The ‘ Ev’n Palinurus nodded at the helm
only fun in the composition is to be found The vapour mild o’er each Committee crept,
in the figures of Bubb Dodington as a Unfinished treaties in each office slept,
spaniel, and Lord Lyttelton on horseback And chiefless armies dozed out the campaign,
— ‘ so long, so lean, so lank, so bony,’ as And navies yawned for orders on the main.’
* House of Hanover, i. 179.
i
We cannot, however, pass over the period
�564
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
of George II. without noticing that it seems
to us to be the first in which that much
enduring animal, the British lion, figures
extensively as a popular character. As
yet, people’s eyes were not open to his
ludicrous side, and artists accordingly made
free with him in every variety of emblema
tic action. We have him roaring with in
dignation at the misdeeds of various Minis
ters ; ‘ hocussed ’ apparently, and with the
Spaniard paring his claws, in allusion to
the matter of Jenkins’s ears: frightening
the Gallic cock, defending the Austrian
eagle, led passive in a leash by the Duke of
Newcastle; and, lastly, ‘ embracing George
II.’ (1745), to the discomfiture of the Pope
and Pretender, who exclaim: ‘ We shall
never be a match for George while that
lion stands by him I ’
Some of the names of the hack carica
turists of this epoch are preserved by Mr.
Wright; most of them of as little notoriety
as merit. Among them< however, are some
amateurs of social position ; and one dame
of quality—a Countess of Burlington.
‘ She was the lady of the Earl who built
Burlington House in Piccadilly; was the
leader of one of the factions in the Opera
disputes at the close of the reign of George
I.; and is understood to have designed the
well-known caricature upon Cuzzoni, Fari
nelli, and Heidegger, which was etched by
Guppy, whom she patronised.’
Such were the very undistinguished
characteristics and history of English art
in the grotesque and comic line, when the
appearance of Hogarth on the stage marked
an entirely new epoch in its history. It
would be superfluous here to recapitulate
the details of the life or achievements of
our great domestic painter; the more so,
as his powers in the line of caricature, pro
perly so called, though very great, were
subordinate to his far higher merits as a
painter of ‘ genre,’ as the French phrase it,1
a delineator of popular scenes and incidents
into which the humorous only entered as an
ingredient, although a very important one.
As a political caricaturist poor Hogarth
made a fatal mistake: he took the wrong
side:—
..
4|<
tjUlW
‘It appears evident,’ says Mr. Wright, ‘that
before this time (October, 1760) Hogarth had
gained the favour of Lord Bute, who, by his
interest with the Princess of Wales, was all
powerful in the household of the young Prince.
The painter had hitherto kept tolerably clear
of politics in his prints, but now, unluckily
for himself, he suddenly rushed into the arena
of political caricature. It was generally said
that Hogarth’s object was, by displaying his;
GROTESQUE
1,4
zeal in the cause of his patron, to obtain an in
crease of his pension; and he acknowledges
himself that his object was gain. “ This,” he
says, “being a period when war abroad and
contention at home engrossed everyone’s mind,
prints were thrown in the background; and the
stagnation rendered it necessary that I should
do some timed thing to recover my lost time,
and stop a gap in my income.” Accordingly
he determined to attack the great minister
Pitt, who had recently been compelled to re
sign his office, and had gone over to the oppo
sition. It is said that John Wilkes, who had
previously been Hogarth’s friend, having been
privately informed of his design, went to the
painter, expostulated with him, and, as he con
tinued obstinate, threatened retaliation.’
‘ The Times, No. 1,’ was the first fruit of
Hogarth’s unlucky fit of loyalty ; a labour
ed emblematic print, after the. older fash
ion, to the glory of Lord Bute and discredit
of Pitt. Wilkes attacked the artist in the
‘ North Briton; ’ Hogarth retorted — only
too successfully—in this admirable print
of Wilkes with the cap of liberty: ‘ eventu
que impalluit ipse secundo,’ for Wilkes,
with all his apparent firn and bonhomie,
was a deadly enemy. The nettled patriot
brought his friend Churchill, and a host
more of libellers in letterpress and in cop
perplate, on the back of his unfortunate as
sailant : —
‘ Parodies on his own works, sneers at his
personal appearance and manners, reflections
upon his character, were all embodied in prints
which bore such names as Hogg-ass, Hoggart,
O’Garth, &c. . . . The article by Wilkes
in the “ North Briton,” and Churchill’s metri
cal epistle, irritated Hogarth more than the
hostile caricatures, and were generally believed
to have broken his heart. He died on the 26 th
of October, 1764, little more than a year after
the appearance of the attack by Wilkes, and
with the taunts of his political as well as his
professional enemies still ringing in his ears.’
— pp. 446-449.
Hogarth left no school of followers; his
genius was of too independent and peculiar
an order to admit of this. Perhaps the
nearest to him was Paul Sandby; described
by Mr. Wright as ‘ one of those rising artists
who were offended by the sneering terms in
which Hogarth spoke of all artists but him
self, and foremost among those who turned
their satire against him.’ Sanby was one
of the original members of the Royal Ac ardemy, and is best known as a topographical
draughtsman; but Mr. Wright terms him
the father of water-colour art in England.
As a caricaturist he led the attack against
Lord Bute and the Princess Dowager, as
�I' * >
IN LITERATURE AND ART.
well as against Hogarth ; his sketch of the
two Scotchmen travelling to London on a
witch’s broomstick, with the inscription,
‘ the land before them is as the Garden of
Eden, and behind them a desolate wilder
ness,’ is one of the best of the witticisms
provoked by the miso-Caledonian movement
of that day.
We cannot quite dgree with Mr. Wright
when he says that, ‘ with the overthrow of
Bute’s Ministry (1763) we may consider the
English school of caricaturists as completely
formed and fully established.’ On the con
trary, it seems to us, from such collections as
we have examined, that the political branch
of the art was at a particularly low standard
for nearly twenty years after that event. The
American war produced very little amuse
ment of this kind; it was an affair into
which the nation entered with a dogged and
reluctant seriousness: and Washington and
Franklin, Silas Deane and John Adams,
afforded but drab-eoloured subjects for the
facetious limner. Social topics were just then
much more in vogue ; the extravagances in
dress of the Macaronies and high-flying la
dies'of the day (the acme of absurdity, in
modern costume, was certainly reached in
the years 1770-1780), the humours of Vauxhall,.and Mrs. Cornely’s masquerades, di
verted men’s minds from the bitter disap
pointment of a contest in which nothing
was to be gained either by persevering or
giving way.
*
Perhaps the best specimen
of the pictorial humour of that time was to
be found, not in the shop window prints!
but in the pages of the numerous magazines;
some of these never appeared without an
illustration or two of the jocose order, like
the comic newspapers of our time. But
when the incubus of the American war was
removed, and domestic faction reappeared
on the stage in all its pristine vivacity, the
simultaneous appearance of the ‘ Rolliad ’
and its fellow satires in literature, and of
Gillray and his fellow-workmen in art,
heralded the advent of a new era.
We must hasten to him whom Mr. Wright
terms, with perfect justice in our opinion,
1 the greatest of English caricaturists, and
perhaps of all caricaturists of modern times
whose works are known — James Gillray.’
His father was an out-pensioner of Chel* In one of the caricatures of this period (repro
duced by Mr. Wright in his former work) Lord
Sandwich is represented with a bat in his hand, in
allusion, we are told, to his fondness for cricket;
but it is a curved piece of wood, much more resem
bling that with which golf is played. And the same
peculiarly shaped instrument is put into the hand
of a cricket-loving lady in a.print of 1778 (Miss
Wicket and Miss Trigger).' What is the date of the
bat now used ?
.
‘ 565
sea Hospital, and sexton of the Moravian
burial-ground at Chelsea, where the carica
turist was born in 1757. Belonging by his
origin, and still more by his loose and Bohe
mian habits, to a very ordinary sphere of
life, it is certainly singular that he should
have acquired such a close observation and
intimate knowledge of events as they oc
curred, not only in the political, but in the
fashionable world. His great sources of
information were, no doubt, the newspa
pers ; but occasionally he seems even to have
anticipated the newspapers; more than one
court scandal and state intrigue seems to
have been blazoned first to public notice
in the well-known shop windows of Hum
phreys or of Fores, always crowded with
loiterers as soon as one of Gillray’s novel
ties appeared. It is no doubt true, and af
fords a curious subject of speculation to any
one who may think the inquiry worth pur
suing, that, when Gillray’s fame was estab
lished, many an amateur of the higher cir
cles seems to have assisted him, not merely
in furnishing hints, but also sketches, which
Gillray etched and sold for his own profit.
Some of his best caricatures, if we are not
mistaken J are from outlines supplied by
Bunbury, others were composed by Brown '
low North. But these are exceptions only,
and do-not invalidate the general proposi
tion as to the singularity of the circum
stance that this drunken son of a sexton was
for many years the pictorial Aristophanes
of his day, and aided, at least, by those who
were behind the sceMs. of much which
took place in the inner recesses of high
life.
His fame as a political caricaturist was
first established by his burlesque prints on
Rodney’s victory (1782). The rueful figure
of the unlucky French admiral De Grasse,
in one of them, is among the most charac
teristic of his performances. As we have
said, it was some time before he thoroughly
emancipated himself from the allegorical
style ; and another peculiarity of inferior ar
tists haunted him a long' time, the fashion,
namely, of overloading his compositions
with quantities of letter-press, oratorical or
jocose, proceeding from the mouths of his
characters, as if his pencil had not been fully
powerful enough to speak for itself. He
rushed with an energy all his own into the
war of squibs which succeeded the Fox and
North coalition, and then conceived those
ideals of the leading patriot, and of his
friend Burke, which he afterwards rendered
popular in every corner of the kingdom by
a thousand repetitions. A very admirable
series of sketches, however, of these two
�566
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE
and Lord North, as ‘War, Peace, and
Neither War nor Peace,’ portraits scarcely
touched with grotesque, though in skilfully
exaggerated attitudes, commonly inserted
in the bound volumes of Gillray’s works, is,
we are satisfied, not his; it bears much
more the appearance of Sayer’s workman
ship. Fox and his personal following were
peculiarly the objects of Gillray’s aversion ;
and, not many years later than this, the
unhappy circumstances of the Prince of
Wales’s matrimonial career provoked him
into a series of the most popular, daring,
and spirited of all his works; some of which,
however, it is not easy in our decent age to
indicate even by reference, though they
seem to have been exposed without scandal
in the most frequented thoroughfares of Lon
don. Gillray, however, was ‘ not a hired
libeller,’says Mr. Wright,‘like Sayer and
some other of the lower caricaturists of that
time: he evidently chose his subjects in
some degree independently, as those which
offered him the best mark for ridicule; and
he had so little respect for the ministers or
the court, that they all felt his satire in
turn.’ After exhausting his power of picto
rial invention against the heir apparent,
he found a still more congenial subject of
1 satire in the peculiarities of his Majesty
George III. himself. Here, however, per
sonal spite is said to have given the induce
ment.
‘ According to a story which seems to be
authentic, Gillray’s dislike of the King was em
bittered bv an incident somewhat similar to
that by which George II. had provoked the
anger of Hogarth. Gillray had visited France,
Flanders, >and Holland, and he had made
sketches, a few of which he had engraved. He
accompanied the painter Loutherbourg, who
had left his native city of Strasburg to settle
in England, and became the King’s favourite
artist, to assist him in making groups for his
great painting of the ‘ Siege of Valenciennes,’
Gillray sketching groups of figures while
.Loutherbourg drew the landscapes and build
ings. After their return, the King expressed a
desire to see these sketches, and they were
placed before him. Louthesbourg’s landscapes
and buildings were plain drawings, and easy to
understand, and the King expressed himself
greatly pleased with them. But the King’s
mind was already predjudiced against Gillray
for his satirical prints : and when he saw his
hasty and rough, though spirited sketches of
the French soldjers, he threw them aside con
temptuously with the remark, “ I don’t under
stand these caricature fellows.” Perhaps the
„ very word he used was intended as a sneer
upon Gillray, who, we are told, felt the affront
deeply, and he proceeded to retort by a carica
ture which struck at once at one of the
King’s vanities, and at his political predjudices.
George III. imagined himself a great connois
seur in the Fine Arts, and the caricature was
entitled “ a connoisseur examining a Cooper’.”'
It represented the King looking at the celebrat
ed miniature of Oliver Cromwell, by the Eng
lish painter, Samuel Cooper. When Gillray
had completed this print, he is said to have ex
claimed, “I wonder if the Royal connoisseur
will understand this!” It was published on
the 18th of June, 1792, and cannot have failed
to produce sensation at that period of revolu
tions. The King is made to exhibit a strange
mixture of alarm with astonishment hi contem
plating the features of this great overthrower
of kingly power, at a moment when all kingly
power was threatened. It will he remarked,
too, that the satirist has not overlooked the
royal character for domestic economy; the
King is looking at the picture by the light of a
candle end stuck on a save-all.’
If there is any truth in the story, certainly
never was artist’s revenge more completeThe homely features of the poor old king
— his prominent eyes, light eyebrows, pro
truding lips, his shambling walk, his gaze of
eager yet vacant curiosity — are even now
better known to us through Gillray’s carica
tures than through anything which theMuses of painting and sculpture, in their
serious moods, could effect for him or
against him. Gillray’s etchings, and Peter
Pindar’s verses, were for years among the
minor plagues of royalty. Not, indeed, in
the estimation of the stout-hearted monarch
himself, as impervious to ridicule as to
argument whenever he thought himself in
the right; no man in his dominions laughed
more regularly at each hew caricature of
Gillray than he ; and a whole set, inscribed
‘ for the king,’ forwarded to him as they
came out, is said to be preserved at Wind
sor. But they were more keenly felt by
his little knot of attached courtiers, and
also by sober-minded people in general,
seriously apprehensive, in those inflammable
times, of anything which might throw ridi
cule on the Crown. One of the coarsest
and most powerful, and which is said to
have given especial offence at head-quarters,
is that which represents Queen Charlotte as
Milton’s Sin, between Pitt as Death and
Thurlow as the Devil. Others, of less
virulence, such as ‘ Affability,’ or the King
and the Ploughman ; the ‘ Lesson in Apple
Dumplings ; ’ the conjugal breakfast scene,
where George is toasting muffins, and Char
lotte frying sprats; the ‘ Anti-Saccharites,’
where the Royal pair are endeavouring to
coax the reluctant princesses (charming
figures) to take their tea without sugar, —
these, and numbers more, held up the Royal
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
567
peculiarities, especially the alleged stingi wild and extravagant now grew on him.
ness of the Court, in a manner in which the Doubtless it was sharpened by the effect on
usual coarseness of the execution rather his brain of constant potations, which grad
tended to heighten the exceeding force and ually brought on delirium tremens. His
latest art-debauches — if such we may term
humour of the satire.
But when this country became seriously them — have often a touch of phantasma
involved in hostilities with France, repub goric-pictorial nightmare, like those of Callot,
lican, and afterwards imperial, a change Teniers, and Hollenbreughel. His last draw
came over the spirit of Gillray’s satire. ing is preserved in the British Museum, exe
Thenceforth he gradually ceased his at cuted when he was quite out of his mind — a
tacks, not only on the Royal family, but on madman’s attempt at a portrait, said to be
domestic objects of raillery in general, and that of Mr. Humphreys, the printseller. He
applied himself almost exclusively to sharp died in 1815 ; and the inscription 4 Here lies
ening the national spirit of hostility against James Gillray, the caricaturist,’ marks, or
the foreign enemy. His caricatures against lately marked, the spot of his interment in
the French are those by which he is best the Broadway, Westminster. His works,
known, especially abroad, and occupy the once so popular, had fallen so much in
greatest space in his works. This was, no fashion a few years ago that the plates were
doubt, the popular line to take, and Gillray about to be sold for old copper, when they
worked for money; but it would be doing were rescued by Mr. J. H. Bohn, the pub
great injustice to the poor caricaturist’s lisher, who gave to the public those now
memory to suppose that money was his well-known re-impressions which have pro
main object. The son of the old pensioner cured for the artist a new' lease of fame.
Gillray was the Rubens of caricature, and
was full of the popular instincts of his class.
It was not the French revolution or con the comparison is really one which does no
quests that he opposed; it was the French injustice to the inspired Fleming. The life
themselves, whom he hated with all the ve like realism of the Englishman’s boldlyhemence of a Nelson or a Windham. rounded, muscular figures, and the strong
These later compositions of his are, indeed, expression communicated to them by a few
marvellous performances. But they are so strokes of the pencil, are such as Antwerp
rather from the intensity of imaginative fu in all her pride might not disdain. Any
ry with which they are animated, than from one who has studied some of Rubens’s
crowds of nude figures which approach
the ordinary qualities of the caricaturist.
They are comparatively destitute of his nearest to the order of caricature — his
old humour and fun. Not that he had out sketches of the4 Last Judgment,’for instance,
grown these. His few domestic caricatures in the Munich Gallery —■ will appreciate the
are still full of them; such are those on justice of the parallel. Gillray was undoubt
4 All the Talents ’ (1806), one of which, the edly coarse to excess, both in conception
4 Funeral of Baron Broadbottom,’ is among and execution ; so much so, as to render his
the most comic of all his productions. The last works mere objects of disgust to many ed
survivor of its procession of mourners, the ucated in the gentler modern school. But
late Marquis of Lansdowne, has now been there are also numbers of a taste more re
dead for some years ; the features of the re fined than catholic, who disclaim all admira
mainder are quite unfamiliar to this genera tion for Rubens on the very same grounds.
tion ; and yet it is scarcely possible to look And one quality Gillray possessed which
at it even now without a smile, such as we was apparently discordant from his ordinary
bestow on the efforts of our cotemporaries character. Many of his delineations of female
Leech or Doyle. But when Gillray tried beauty ■ are singularly successful, and he
his vein on a French subject, he passed at seems to have dwelt on them with special
once from the humourous to the grotesque, pleasure, for the sake of the contrast with
and thence to the hideous and terrible. his usual disfigurements of humanity. His
One of his eccentric powers, amounting heroines are certainly not sylphs, but they
certainly to genius, comes out strongly in often are, like the celestials of Rubens, un
these later caricatures ; that of bringing to commonly fine women. Let us refer to a
gether an enormous number of faces, dis few well-known instances only ; such as his
torted into every variety of grimace, and representations of Mrs. Fitzherbert at her
yet preserving a wonderfully human ex best time, notwithstanding the. prominence
pression. We would signalise particularly of the aquiline feature, which it was his
two, one almost tragical, thh 4 Apotheosis of business to enhance ; of George III.’s daugh
Hoche;’ one farcical, the ‘Westminster ters in the 4 Anti-Saccharites,’ and other
Election’ (1804). The tendency to the prints; the Duchess of Richmond as the
�..
568
1
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE
‘ Height of Fashion; ’ the charming seated
figure entitled ‘ Modern Elegance,’ 1795
(said to be Lady Charlotte Campbell, but
is it not an older person ?), in which, though
the costume is playfully exaggerated, the
features are finely drawn; the beauty (evi
dently a portrait also) who is reading Monk
Lewis’s ‘Tales of Wonder’ to a' bevy of
I very homely gossips (1802); and even the
I common ball-room figures, in ‘ A Broad
1
1'Hint of not meaning to Dance’ (1804), in
which, however, the design is Brownlow
North’s.
Still, we fear that Gillray must be gener
ally comprehended in the somewhat auda
cious assertion of M. Champfleury, that
‘satirists, from Moliere down to Prudhon,
only recognise two conditions for women —
those of courtezan and housewife.’ It will
be seen that several of our instances are
taken from what may be termed social,
in contradistinction to political, caricatures,
many of which are quite equally worthy of
the master, although not those on which his
popularity mainly rests. They are often of
a libellous boldness, inconceivable now-adays, and equally so in earlier times; for
the generation to which Gillray belonged
stood out in bad pre-eminence among all
others in English domestic history in respect
of this particular kind of coarseness — a
generation which could see exposed in the
shop-windows such shameless pictorial sa
tires as those directed against Lady Arch
er, and other dames of gambling celebrity;
or the representation of the dashing daugh,
ters of a countess as the ‘ Three Graces in
a High Wind; ’ or of a titled beauty nurs
ing her infant in a ball-dress, as the ‘ Fash
ionable Mamma; ’ or of Lady Cecilia John
ston, an inoffensive lady, of unobtrusive
style as well as character, against whom it
is said the artist had conceived some grudge,
which induced him spitefully to represent
her in all manner of ludicrous situations.
Others of this class, it may be added, related
to darker scandals behind the scenes, and
may not now be met with in the ordinary
collections of Gillray’s works, though they
excited little comment, and no disgust, in
his day. To pass again, for one moment
only, from Gillray’s merit as an artist,
to his specialty as a caricaturist; his strong
i power of seizing likenesses, and giving them
! a ludicrous expression, was, no doubt, the
1 chief element of his popularity. In this he
surpassed all his predecessors, though he has
been equalled by one or two of his succes
sors. But in one bye-quality we are in
clined to think him unrivalled: the faculty
of giving by a few touches a kind of double
expression to a countenance; cowardice
underlying bravado; impudence, affected,
modesty. See, as a specimen, the exceedingly comic representation of Addington
and Napoleon, sword in hand, daring each
other to cross the Channel which flows
between them. A single figure of Burke
as an ‘Uniform Whig’ (1791), admirably
drawn in other respects, conveys much
of this mingled meaning, though not quite
so easily decipherable. The sage is lean
ing against a statue of George III.; he
holds in one hand Burke’s ‘ Thoughts on
the Revolution,’ in the other a cap of liber
ty ; the motto, ‘ I preserve my consistency,
by varying my means to secure the unity of
my end.’ The caricaturist’s experience
had attained for once to ‘something like
prophetic strain.’ His facility of execution
was wonderful. It must, no doubt, be
added, as a natural qualification of such
praise, that his drawing is often incorrect
and careless in the extreme, even after
all allowance for what we have never seen
fully explained, the vast difference, in point
of excellence, between various copies of
what is apparently the same print. He
is said ‘to have .etched his ideas at once
upon £he copper, without making a previ
ous drawing, his only guides being sketches
of the distinguished characters he intended
to produce, made on small pieces of card,
which he always carried about with him.’
Of Rowlandson (born 1756, died 1827),
Mr. Wright speaks in high terms of praise,
saying that he ‘ doubtlessly stands second to ■
Gillray, and may, in some respects, be con
sidered as his equal.
. He was distin
guished by a remarkable versatility of tal
ent, by a great fecundity of imagination,
and by a skill in grouping quite equal to
that of Gillray, and with a singular ease in
forming his groups of a great variety of
figures. It has been remarked, too, that no
artist ever possessed the power of Rowland
son of expressing so much with so little ef
fort.’ We are sorry that we cannot, for our
own parts, subscribe to these eulogies. As
a political caricaturist — to which line he
resorted as a matter of trade, espousing the
Whig side as others did the Tory — he
seems to us dujl enough. In general sub
jects he succeeded better, yet appears to us
endowed with all Gillray’s coarseness, but
with little of his satirical power and none of
his artistic genius.
James Sayer, cotemporary with these
two as an artist, deserves mention as pos
sessed of a certain amount of original tai-'
ent, though not of a very high order. He
was ‘ a bad draughtsman,’ says Mr. Wright
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
—- surely too sweeping a criticism — ‘ and
his pictures are produced more by labour
than by skill in drawing, but they possess a
considerable amount of humour.’ His like
nesses, generally produced by a small num
ber of hard and carefully-executed lines,
seem to us of great merit as such, though
wanting in life and energy. He was almost exclusively a political caricaturist,
and, unlike the reckless ^but independent
Gillray, he turned his talents to good ac. count, devoting himself to the cause of Pitt,
who bestowed on him in return the ‘ not
, unlucrative offices of Marshal of the Court
of Exchequer, Receiver of the Sixpenny
Dues, and Cursitor.’ His most famous
production was the well-known ‘ Carlo
' Khan’s Triumphal Entry into Leadenhallstreet’ (on the occasion of Fox’s India Bill,
1783), still common in collections. Butthis
succeeded chiefly because it fell in with the
humour of the time; though the idea is
good, the execution is cold, and it is encum
bered with symbolical accessories, after the
older fashion which we have described.
Among his minor works, an unfinished proof
of Boswell, Mrs. Piozzi, and others of the
Johnsonian clique, with the ghost of the
Doctor himself scowling at them from
above, exhibits a good deal of his peculiar
laborious talent.
Our catalogue of cotemporaries would
hardly be complete without including in it
the clever and goodhumoured amateur
Henry Bunbury, though no dabbler in
State affairs, like jGillray and Sayer. Bunbury had (as Mr. Wright says) ‘ little taste
for political caricature, and seldom meddled
with it. He preferred scenes of social life
and humourous incidents of cotemporary
manners, fashionable or popular.’ It may
be added that he does not seem to have
often inserted portraits in his .pieces. He
was rather the forerunner of the modern
French ' school of grotesque artists ‘ de
genre,’ of whom we shall have a word to
say presently. His drawing, says Mr.
Wright, ‘ was often bold and good, but he
had little skill in etching.’ After some
early essays in that line, “ his designs were
engraved by various persons, and his own
style was sometimes modified in this pro
cess.’ We have ourselyes seen original
drawings by his hand, very superior both in
force and refinement to the coarse style of
the ordinary plates which bear his name.
z Perhaps the best known and most ludicrous
t of his compositions are his illustrations of
‘ Geoffry Gambado’s Art of Horsemanship.’
Bunbury was brother to the baronet who
married Lady Sarah Lennox, and himself
569
husband of one of Goldsmith’s’ favourite
Miss Hornecks. He died in 1811, the date
of his last work, ‘ A Barber’s Shop in Assize
Time,’ engraved by Gillray.
Passing over Isaac Cruikshank — a very
prolific artist of the same period with Gill
ray, of whom he was a pretty close imitator
— we arrive at his illustrious son George,
who still survives to connect our era with
the last. He is now almost forgotten as a
political caricaturist, in which line he em
barked, fifty years ago, under the auspices
of his father, but soon abandoned it to
achieve his peculiar andaunique celebrity as
an etcher of small figures, chiefly in the
way of illustrations to letterpress, in which
humour and the most exquisite appreciation
of the ludicrous alternate with beauty and
pathos of no common order. ‘ The ambi
tion of George Cruikshank,’ says Mr.
Wright, ‘ was to draw what Hogarth called
moral comedies, pictures of society through
a series of acts and scenes, always pointed
with some great moral; and it must be con
fessed that he has, through a long career,
succeeded admirably.’ Every one is aware
of the zeal with which the amiable artist
has devoted himself to promote the public
good by this employment of his brain, of
which an amusing illustration is furnished
by the current story — for the truth of
which, however, we will by no means vouch
— that he insisted on formally presenting
his ‘Drunkard’s Progress’ to her Majesty!
And yet, to our taste, George Cruikshank’s
most ambitious attempts in this line are
scarcely equal to the trifling productions
which he has now and then thrown off in
mere exuberance of genius and animal
spirits. The first edition of a little book,
entitled ‘ German Popular Stories,’ which
appeared in 1834 (the letterpress was by
the late Mr. Jardine), contains, on the mi
nutest possible scale, some of the most per-1feet gems, both of humour and gracefulness,
which are anywhere to be found. The
reader need only cast his eye on ‘ Cherry,
or the Frog-Bride ; ’ the ‘ Tailor and the
Bear-; ’ ‘ Rumpelstiltskin,’ and the inimi
table procession of country folks jumping
into the lake after the supposed flocks of
sheep in ‘ Pee-wit,’ to learn how much of fun,
and grotesque, and elegance of figures also,
and beauty of landscape, may be conveyed
in how few lines.
The history of English caricature of the
Georgian era would be incomplete without
a notice of the various printsellers who
supplied the material to the public, and
whose shop-windows furnished, not so many
years ago, favourite stages or stations, as it
�570
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
were, for the wandering Cockney, on his
peregrinations between East and West; and
with this Mr. Wright has accordingly fur
nished us. Perhaps the most celebrated
were Humphreys, of New Bond-street and
Piccadilly (whom, however, Mr. Wright
does not mention), and Fores.
‘ S. W. Fores dwelt first at No 3, Piccadilly,
but afterwards establishe i himself at No. 50, the
corner of Sackville Street, where the name still
remains. Fores seems to have been most fertile
in ingenious expedients for the extension of his
business. He formed a sort of library of cari
catures, and other prints, and charged for ad
mission to look at them; and he afterwards adopt
ed a system of lending them out in portfolios for
evening parties, at which these portfolios of car
icatures became a very fashionable amusement
in the latter part of the last century. At times
some remarkable curiosity was employed to add
to the attractions of his shop. Thus, on carica
tures published in 1790, we find the statement
that “ In Fores Caricature Museum is the completest collection in the kingdom. Also the
Head and Hand of Count Struenzee. Admit
tance, one shilling.” Caricatures against the
French revolutionists, published in 1793, bear
imprints stating that they were “ published by
S. W. Fores, No. 3 ,Piccadilly, where may be
seen a Complete Model of the Guillotine. Ad
mittance, one shilling.” In some this model is
said to be six feet high.’
Mr. Wright closes his list with George
Cruikshank, as the last representative of
the great school of caricaturists formed in
the reign of George HI. But there is anoth
er, still living among us, whose experience
as an artist goes very nearly back to that
reign, and who may be in the most literal
sense called the last of the political caricatu
rists as he is considered by many the best —
Mr. Doyle, the world-famous H.B. of the
past generation. Those who belonged to it
can well remember the height of popularity
which his lithographed sketches achieved,
the little blockades before the shop-windows
in St. James’s-street and the Flaymarket
whenever a new one appeared, and the con
venient topic of conversation which it was
sure to afford to men of the clubs, when meet
ing each other on the pavement. For it was
to critics of this class that H.B. particularly
addressed himself. His productions wanted
the popular vigour of those of Gillray and his
school. But it is to Mr. Doyle’s high honour
that they were also entirely free from the
scandalous coarseness of his predecessors, and
that he showed the English public how the
purposes of political satire could be fully se
cured without departing a hand’s breadth
from the dignity of the artist or the charac
GROTESQUE
ter of the gentleman. As a delineator of
figures, we cannot esteem him very success
ful. They run too much into the long and
lanky; portions of the outline, the extremities
in particular, are often almost effeminate in
their refinement: when he attempts a really
broad, bluff personage, he is apt to produce
the effect of a fine gentleman masquerading
as a Falstaff. But it was in the likeness of
his portraits, and their expression, that his
chief and singular merit consisted. And in
these, again, his success was extremely va
rious. His fortune, in a professional sense,
may be said to have been made by three
faces — those of the Duke of Wellington,
King William IV., and Lord Brougham.
The provoking, sly no-meaning, establishing
itself on the iron mask of the first; the goodhumoured, embarrassed expression of the
second; the infinite variety of grotesque
fancies conveyed in the contorted features
of the third ; these were reproduced, week
after week, for years, with a variety and
fertility perfectly astonishing. In other
cases he never could succeed in hitting off
even a tolerable likeness : of his hundred or
so representations of the late Sir Robert
Peel, we do not recollect one which conveys
to us any real remembrance of the original.
The Peel of caricaturists in general, not
only of H.B.,was a conventional person
age ; .as is, though in a less marked degree,
the Gladstone of our present popular artists.
Still more remarkable was the failure of
H.B., in common with his predecessors, in
catching the likeness of Gtsorge IV. In all
the countless burlesque representations of
that personage, from the handsome youth of
1780 to the puffy veteran of 1827, there are
scarcely any which present a tolerable re
semblance.
The courtly Lawrence suc
ceed in portraying him well enough ; the
caricaturists, usually so happy, never. H.
B.’s published sketches amount to some nine
hundred, and afford a capital key to the
cabinet and parliamentary history of Eng
land, from the Ministry of Wellington to
the end of Lord Melbourne’s. While num
bers of them *o credit to the artist’s politi
d
cal sagacity as well as his skill, we cannot
forbear to notice one which, to our present
notions, illustrates the ‘ nescia mens hominum fati sortisque futurse ’ — produced
when the Tories, to whom H.B. appertain
ed with all his heart, anticipated the tri
umphs of French over English diplomacy
under the conduct of our then Foreign Sec
retary : it is No. 171 in the series, ‘The
Lame leading the Blind: ’ Lord Palmers
ton, guided into a ditch by Talleyrand.
With the renowned H. B. the line of regu-
�IN LITERATURE AND ART.
lar British caricaturists closes. The taste of
the nation has sought another direction. But
do not let us be misunderstood. The spir
it of the' art survives, and will do so as long
as England is a free country and Englishmen
retain a sense of the ludicrous ; but its form
is so completely changed, by the substitu
tion of the cheap illustrated newspaper for
the comparatively expensive broad-sheet of
the last century, that a more convenient
moment could not be found, for closing the
old chapter in artistic history and beginning
a new one, than that in. which Doyle ceas
ed his labours and the ‘ Punch ’ school of
satirists began theirs. The very distinct
mode of treatment which the small size of
the modern comic newspaper, compared
with the old sheet, necessarily requires,
combines with other causes of difference to
render this new school something quite apart
from the old one. Its success must needs be
obtained more through skill in the delinea
tion of individual faces, and compactness of
wit in the 1 motive ’ of the composition, than
through breadth of treatment, or (generally
speaking) through talent for grouping. In
the delineation of faces, however, and es
pecially in portrait, which is the specialty
of political caricature, the designers with
whom we are now dealing have an immense
advantage over those of former times, in
being able to use the results of the art of
photography. Photographs of faces and fig
ures, always at hand, are a very superior
class of auxiliaries to those hasty ‘ drawings
on bits of card ’ with which Gillray was wont
to content himself. The popularity which
our present favourites have earned is prob
ably more real, certainly much more exten
sive, than that gained by their most success
ful predecessors, from Hogarth to Cruik-1
shank : with whose names that of Leech, so
lately lost to us, and of his living associates
and rivals, of whom we need only name
Doyle the younger and John Tenniel as
specimens, will assuredly find their places
in the future annals of art. But, arrived at
this turning point, we must take farewell of
our subject, devoting only a few pages more
to the cotemporary history of modern
French caricature, on which Mr. Wright
(to our regret) does not enter. We had
hoped to derive considerable assistance
for this purpose from a new publication
of our friend M. Champfleury, entitled
‘ Histoire de la Caricature Moderne,’ which
has just fallen into our hands ; but although
the title is thus comprehensive, the contents
reduce themselves to a few lively pages of
panegyric on two or three recent artists,
which seem to be diotated’in great measure
by personal feelings.
I
571
The general subject can be nowhere so
well studied in a summary way as in the two
volumes of M. Jaime (‘ Musee de la Carica
ture’), with very fairly executed illustra
tions, to which we can only apply the an
cient reproach, ‘ tantamne rem tarn negligenter; ’ for M. Jaime has but treated' the
matter in a perfunctory way, as if afraid
of dwelling too much on it. It has not,
however, the interest which attaches either
to the coarser but bolder style of art inaug
urated by the Germans in the sixteenth cen
tury, or to that which prevailed in the great
English age of political caricature. Callot
was indeed aJFrenchman, by race at least,
though born in Lorraine, then independ
ent ; but his associations were more with
the school of the Netherlands than that of
France. Nor had he any followers of note
in the latter country. The jealous wake
fulness of French government, and the cold
and measured style which French art de
rived from a close addiction to supposed
classical models, were both alike unfavoura
ble to the development of the artistic empire
of ‘ Laughter, holding both his sides.’
French artists of the eighteenth century for
the most part touched ludicrous subjects in
a decorous and timid way, as if ashamed of
them. As the literature of theEeountry is
said to abound in wit, while it is poor in hu
mour, so its pictorial talent found vent rath
er in the neat and effective K tableau de
genrejlthan in the irregularity of the gro
tesque ; or, to employ another simile, French
cbmic art was to English as the genteel
comedy to the screaming farce. And the
same was the case (to treat the subject
briefly) with that of other nations over
which France exercised predominant influ
ence. Chodowiecki was the popular Ger
man engraver of domesti(?fecenes in the last
century, and his copper-plates have great
delicacy of execution and considerable pow
er of expression. He was in high vogue
for the purpose of illustrating with cuts the
novels and the poetry of the great age of
German literature, and his productions are
extraordinarily numerous. But he habitu
ally shrank from the grotesque. His ad
mirers styled him the German Hogarth — a
comparison which he, we are told, rejected
with some indignation, and which Hogarth,
could he have known it, would certainly
have rejected likewise; for Chodowiecki,
with all his other merits, very seldom ap
proaches the ludicrous, and never soars to
the height or descends to the depth of cari
cature.
The unbounded licence of the first French
Revolution, and the strange mixture of the
burlesque with the terrible which attended
�572
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND
its progress, gave of course for some years
the most favourable opportunities possible
for the exercise of pictorial wit, so far as the
nation possessed it. There can be no great
er treat to one who loves to tread the by
ways of history, often the shortest cuts to
truth, than to turn over the series of those
magnificent volumes in the Imperial Libra
ry of Paris, in which the whole pictorial an
nals of the last century or so in France are
preserved; everything arranged as nearly
as may be in order of date, and not of sub
jects : portraits, festal shows and triumphs,
processions, battles, riots, great events, rep
resented under every form down to the
rough newspaper woodcut and street carica
ture, unrolling in one vast phantasmagoria
before the eye. We have much that is val
uable and useful in our Museum, but noth
ing, in the matter of historical art, compara
ble to this collection. An inadequate idea
of it only can be formed from the miscella
neous contents of the well-known three fo
lio volumes of prints, entitled ‘ Tableaux de
la Revolution Francaise.’ The earlier part
of the caricatures of that age are the most
humourous and also the best executed. As
the tragedy deepened, fun became more
and more out of place; and the satirists who
had seen its outbreak having most of them
lost their heads or fled the country, the
business fell into the hands of more vulgar
workmen. One of the first (1788) may be
mentioned, not so much for its execution,
which is tame enough, as because it is (as
far as we know) the real original of a piece
of wit which has since made its fortune in
every language, and been falsely attributed
to many facetious celebrities. Calonne, as a
monkey, has assembled his 1 notables,’ a flock.
of barn-door fowl. ‘ Mes chers administres,
je vous ai rassembles pour savoir a quelle
sauce vous voulez etre manges.’ ‘Maisnous
ne voulons pas etre manges du tout.’ ‘ Vous
vous ecartez de la question.’
But French art, as we have seen, refined
and softened into effeminacy under the class
civilization of the ancien regime, and ren
dered prudish also by its adherence to classi
cal models, had its decorum soon shocked by
too coarse intermixture of the grotesque. In
deed, the reason often given by Frenchmen
of the last generation for the acknowledged
inferiority of their caricatures to ours, was the
superiority of French taste, which could not
accommodate itselfto ‘ignoble’ exaggeration.
On the whole, therefore, those of the revo-<
lutionary series of which we have been
speaking are more interesting, historically,
and also from the keen wit of ten developed
in them, than from their execution. There
GROTESQUE
is no French Gillray or Rowlandson. Here
and there, however, among a multitude of
inferior performances, the eye is struck by
one really remarkable as a work of a higher
order than our English cotemporary series
could furnish. Such is the famous ‘ Arresta-'
tion du Roi d Varennes,’ 1791. The wellknown features of the Royal party, seated
at supper with lights, are brought out with
a force worthy of Rembrandt, and with
slight but marked caricature; while the
fierce, excited patriotic figures, closing in on
them from every side, have a vigour which
is really terrific. Another, in a different
style, is the ‘ Interieur d’un Comite Revolutionnaire,’ 1793. It is said, indeed, to have
been designed by a first-rate artist, Fragonai’S, one who doubtless wrought with a will,
for he had prostituted his very considerable
talents to please the luxurious profligacy of
the last days of the ancient regime, and the
stern Revolution had stopped his trade, an
nihilated his effeminate customers, and re
duced him to poverty. Fragonard’s powers
as a caricaturist are characterised by a wellknown anecdote. He was employed in
painting Mademoiselle Guimard, the famous
dancer, as Terpsichore; but the lady quar
relled with him, and engaged another to
complete the work. The irritated painter got
access to the picture, and with three or four
strokes of his brush turned the face of Terp
sichore into that of a fury. The print now
in question is a copper-plate, executed with
exceeding delicacy of touch. A dozen fig
ures of men of the people, in revolutionary
costume, are assembled round a long table in
a dilapidated hall of some public building.
A young ‘ ci-devant,’ his wife and child, are
introduced through an open door by an ush
er armed with a pike. If the artist’s inten
tion was to produce effect by the contrast of
these three graceful figures with the vulgar
types of the rest of the party, he has suc
ceeded admirably. They are humbly pre
senting their papers for examination ; but it
is pretty clear that the estimable commit
teeman, to whom the noble is handing his
passport, cannot read it. The cunning,
quiet, lawyer-like secretary of the commit
tee, pen in hand, is evidently doing all its
work. At the opposite end of the table an
excited member is addressing to the walls
what must be an harangue of high elo
quence ; but no one is listening to him, and
the two personages immediately behind him
are evidently determined to hear no noise
but their.own. But our favourite figure —
and one well worthy of Hogarth — is that of
the sentinel off duty: he is seated beside a
bottle, pike in hand, enjoying his long pipe,
�iwinM i^i i
IN LITERATURE AND ART.
573
and evidently, from the expression of his tember. It had a brief and feverish revi
face, far advanced from the excited into the val under the Republic of 1848 ; some of
meditative stage of convivial patriotism. A its productions in that period are worth a
placard on the door announces, somewhat moment’s notice, both from their execution
contradictorily as well as ungrammatically, and good humour: we remember two
‘ Ici on se tutoyent: fermez la porte s’il vous of the class of general interest; the 1 Ap
plait! ’ Altogether there is much more of parition du Serpent de Mer,’ a boat full of
the comic than the ferocious about the pa kings, startled by the appearance of the new
triots ; and one may hope that the trembling Republic as the problematical monster of
family, for whom it is impossible not to feel the deep ; and the ‘ Ecole de Natation,’ in
an interest, will this time be ‘ quittespourla which the various Kings and Emperors.of
peur.’
Europe are floundering in a ludicrous, variThe popular governments — Revolutiona ety of attitudes among the billows of revo
ry and of the First Empire — easily tamed lution, while the female rulers of Britain,
the spirit of caricature, as they did that of Spain, and Portugal are kept afloat by their
more dangerous enemies, and it only revived crinolines. But under the decorous rule of
when France was replaced under the. tyran the Empire, no such violation of the re
ny of legitimacy. There is a great deal of spect due to constituted authorities at home
merit in those on the Bonapartist side, of is any longer tolerate^, while ridicule,
1814 and 1815 ; many of them appear to be even of foreign potentates, is permitted
executed by some one clever artist, to us un only under polite restrictions. Debarred
known. We will only notice one of them,' from this mode of expressing itself, French
the ‘Voeu d’un Royaliste, ou la seconde en gaiety finds one of its principal outlets, in
tree triomphante.’ Louis XVIII. is mounted the more innocent shape of social carica
behind a Cossack — the horse and man are ture, which was never so popular, or culti
admirably drawn—while the poor King’s vated by artists of so much eminence, as
expression, between terror and a sense’ of within the last thirty years. And here we
the ludicrous of his position, is worthy of the must notice a singular change in French
best efforts of Gillray or Doyle.
workmanship, which appears to us to have
Caricature continued to be a keen party been occasioned chiefly or wholly by the
weapon in France through the period of introduction of lithography. We have al
the Restoration, and in the early years of ready observed how much difficulty its art
Louis Philippe. The latter monarch’s head ists found in departing from the rules of
especially, under the resemblance of a pear, classical outline and correct drawing, so
which Nature had rendered appropriate, long as the old-fashioned line engraving
was popularised in a thousand ludicrous or prevailed, and the consequent inferiority of
ignominious representations; his Gillray French to English caricature in breadth,
was Honore Daumier, a special friend and its superiority in congjlmess. The intro
favourite of M. Champfleury, but in whom duction and great popularity of lithography
we are unable ourselves to recognize more in'France seems to have altogether changed
than secondary merit. ‘ Entre tous, Dau the popular taste. Artists now dash off,
mier fut celui qui accommoda la poire aux rather than embody, their humorous con
sauces les plus diverses. Le roi avait une ceptions in the sketchiesLof all possible
honnete physionomie, large et etouffee. styles, and that which affords the greatest
La caricature, par l’exageration des lignes licence for grotesque distortions of figure \
du masque, par les differents sentimens and face. Boilly, a clever and fertile lithog
qu’elle preta a l’homme au toupet, le ren- rapher, was perhaps the first to bring
dit typique, et laissa un ineffa?able relief. this style of composition into vogue. But
Les adversaires sont utiles. En politique, to such an extent has the revolution now
un ennemi v.aut souvent mieux qu’un ami.’ gone, while we, on the other hand, have
The genius of Daumier had some analogy been pruning the luxuriance of the old
with that of the sculptor-caricaturist Dan- genius of caricature, that the positions of
tan.
the two countries seem to have become re
But, the liberty of art, like that of the versed, and England to be now the country
Tribune, degenerated into licence, and of classic, France of grotesque art; in the
France has never been able in her long age comic line of which any reader may judge
of State tempests to maintain the line be for himself, by comparing the style of the
tween the two. Political caricature was cuts in ‘ Punch,’, for instance, with those in
once more extinguished in the Orleans the ‘ Charivari.’ We cannot say that we
reign, with the applause of decent people find the change on the other side of the
in general, by the so-called laws of Sep- Channel an improvement, or that we have
�I
574
/
A HISTORY OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE.
been enabled to acquire a taste for the
hasty lithographed caricatures of popular
figures and scenes which encumber French
print-shops. The works of Bunbury, among
English artists of this kind of renown, per
haps most nearly approach them ; but these,
rough though they are, have, at all events,
a body and substance, and consequently a
vigour, which their Gallic successors appear
to us to lack, and which they endeavour too
often to supply by loose exaggeration.
However, it is idle to set up our own canons
of taste in opposition to that of a nation,
and a foreign nation into the bargain ; and
we may do our readers more service by
giving them a few short notices of the
leading artists who have risen to popular
ity in modern France by this style of com
position.
Nicolas Toussaint Charlet had an educa, tion and parentage somewhat like those of
our Gillray; born in 1792, the son of an
old dragoon of Sambre-et-Meuse, he began
his career in a not very noble occupation,
being employed in the office where military
recruits were registered and measured: and
it was in that function, possibly, that he
picked up and stored in his memory those
thousand types of grotesque young con
scripts and old grognards, ‘ enfants de
troupe,’ ‘ tourlourous,’ and ‘ gamins,’ with
which he filled the shop-windows while
amusing the multitude with their darling
‘ scenes populaires.’ He was not exactly a
caricaturist in the peculiar sense which we
have given to the word, but an artist‘de
genre; ’ in his own peculiar line few have
surpassed him. It must be noticed that his
sturdy Bonapartism evinced itself in some
ambitious attempts at more serious compo•sitions ; one of which, ‘ La Garde meurt et
ne se rend pas,’ established his fame in 1816,
while an ‘ Episode de la Campagne de
Russie ’ (1836) is ranked at the head of his
works by some of his admirers. But for
our part, we greatly prefer the exquisite
naivete, though without much of the Eng
lish vigour, which characterises some of his
popular scenes; such — to quote one among
a thousand — as that in which a peasant,
looking down with the utmost gravity on a
comrade who is lying in the road, helplessly
drunk, exclaims, ‘ Voilh pourtant comme je
serai dimanche ! ’ Charlet, who died in
1845, left some two thousand lithographed
designs, besides numerous water-colours and
etchings.
Paul Chevalier Gavarni, born in 1801,
ranks at the head of the living caricaturists
of France, unless the Vicomte Amedee de
Noe (under his nom de plume, or rather de
crayon, of ‘ Cham,’ Ham the son of Noah) be
supposed to contest with him that eminence.
The journal ‘ Les Gens du Monde ’ (1835),
and subsequently the ‘Charivari,’ owed to
him the greater part of tlaeir celebrity. If not
equal to Charlet in the ‘ naif’ and simply
popular style, Gavarni excels him in satiri
cal force and in variety. Twenty-five
years hence (says Theophile Gautier) ‘ it is
through Gavarni that the workhwill know
of the existence of Duchesses of the Rue
du Helder, of Lorettes, students, and so
forth.’ Gavarni visited England in 1849,
where, according to his biographer M. de
Lacaze (in the ‘ Nouvelle Biographie Ge
nerale ’), he took so profound a dislike to our
English aristocratic social system (it was
the year, be it remembered, in which the
doctrine ‘la propriete c’est- le vol,’ took
some short hold on Parisian spirits), that
he fell into a fit of‘le spleen,’ became
misanthrophic, and produced nothing fora
long time but sketches of ‘ gin-shop frequent
ers, thieves, street-sweepers, Irishmen, and
the beggars of St. Giles’s and Whitechapel;’
but we are happy to learn, from the same
authority, that he soon recovered his gaiety
in the less oppresive atmosphere of Paris.
His ‘ CEuvres Choisies’ were published as
long ago as 1845, in four volumes. ‘ Deja,’
says Champfleury, ‘ son oeuvre est curieuse
h consulter comme l’expression d’un peintre
de moeurs epris d’ideal elegant dans une
epoque bourgeoise.’
Completing these brief notices of modern
French caricaturists with the mere mention,
of the great artist Gustave Dore, who has
lately condescended to some clever extrava
gances allied to caricature, and of that ec
centric novelty Griset,.we must now con
*
clude our hasty retrospect of the art in
general. The institution of the ‘ comic
illustrated newspaper ’ has now made the
tour of the world ; the United States fur
nish abundant specimens; Germany and
Italy toil manfully in the wake of France and
England; we have even seen political carica
tures from Rio de Janeiro nearly as good as
the ordinary productions of either. But it
is impossible to follow a subject so greatly
widening in its dimensions; and as cheap
ness of execution, while it extends the
popularity of this class of compositions,
diminishes the labour expended on them,
we have not to expect for the future either
productions of so much interest, or artists
of such celebrity, as some of those dealt
with in this article.
�575
REST FOR THE WEARY.
I
,arest for the weary.
“ TRere remaineth therefore a rest to the people of
God/’— Heb. iv. 9.
Dear the storm-won calm of autumn
Brooding o’er the quiet lea;
Sweet the distant harp-like murmur
Trembling from the charmed sea.
Nestling breezes clog the branches;
Leaves lie swooning on the air;
Nature’s myriad hands are folding
O’er her gentle heart, for prayer.
Make the lean grave sleek with treasn
Whilst they, weary, take their rest.
Dead they are not; only sleeping,
Dull although their senses be,
Yet they for the summons listen,
Calling to eternity.
Brothers, sleeping in the Saviour,
Sound their dreamless sleep and ble
But we trust, when this is broken,
There remaineth still a rest !
New-born on the lap of silence,
Cradled on a hoary tomb,
Lo 1 babe evening craves a blessing
As the day forsakes the gloom;
As one lingering sunbeam flushes
The grey spire to golden red,
And the motto “ peace ” is blazoned
Glorious o’er the resting dead.
Peace be to the shapeless ashes,
Perfect once in valour’s mould;
Once on fire for truth and duty,
Now without a spark, and cold..
Smiting was the hero smitten,
Swordless hands now cross his breast;
Share we his mute supplication ;
Weary, may the soldier rest!
Peace to him who braved the tempest,
Polar ice, and tropic wave;
Long the homeless sea who traversed,
Then came home to find a grave !
In this calmest roadstead anchored,
May no more the sailor rove,
Till he lose himself for ever
“ In the ocean of God’s love! ”
Peace to him, the tried and saintly;
Wise to counsel, apt to cheer;
With a sober smile for gladness,
With a hope for every tear.
Earth lies lightly on his bosom,
Faith bedecks his priestly tomb
With the sacred flowers that symbol
Life, and light, and deathless bloom.
Peace to him who bears no legend
Carved above his lowly bed,
Save that he was found, unsheltered
From the storm and winter, dead.
Peace to him, that unknown brother,
Quit of want, and woe, and shame;
Trust we that the nameless stranger
Bears in heaven a filial name 1
From the four winds assembled,
Kindred in the fate to die ;
Eld and infant, alien, homebred,
Neighbours now, how calm they lie!
Valour, beauty, learning, goodness,
With the weight of life opprest,
THE BITTER AND THE SWEET.
Come, darling Effie,
Come, take the cup:
Effie must drink it all —
Drink it all up.x
/
Darling, I know it is
Bitter and bad;
But ’twill make Effie dear .
Rosy and glad.
Mother would take it all
For her wee elf— ,
But who would suffer then?
Effie herself.
If Effie drinks it,
Then, I can tell,
She will go out to play
Merry and well.
' Drink, and then, darling,
You shall have this, —
Sweet after bitter:
Now, first, a kiss.
Ah, darling Effie,
God also knows,
When cups of bitterness
His hand bestows,
1
How His poor children need
Urging to take
Merciful draughts of pain,
Mixed for their sake.
He, too, gives tenderly
Joy after pain,
Sweet after bitterness,
After loss gain.
— Sunday Magazine.
I,
�WERE WOLVES.
From the Spectator.
WERE *
WOLVES.
. A i >; i
In this remarkable little book, remarkable
for a power its external aspect does not
promise and an interest its name will not
create, Mr. Baring-Gould, an author known
hitherto chiefly by his researches in North
ern literature, investigates a belief, once
general in Europe, and even now enter
tained by the majority of the uneducated
class. In widely separated places, and
among races the most distinct, a belief has
been traced in the existence of beings who
combine the human and the animal char
acter, who are in fact men changed either
in form or in spirit into beasts of prey. The
belief, though strong still, was strongest in
the Middle Ages, when men were more un
restrained both in their acts and their cre
dulities. In the extreme North it was so
powerful that Norwegians and Icelanders
had a separate name for the transformation,
calling men gifted with the power or afflicted
with the curse men “ not of one skin.” Mr.
Baring-Gould pushes his theory far when
he connects the story of the Berserkir with
the theory of were wolves, the Berserkir be
ing extant to this day in Asia, calling them
selves Ghazis, and keeping up their fury as
the Berserkir probably did, with drugs ; but
all Scandinavia undoubtedly believed that
men had upon occasion changed into ani
mals, and exhibited animal bloodthirstiness
and power. So did the Livonians. So
down to the very end of the sixteenth cen
tury did all Southern Europe, where the
Holy Office made cases of metempsychosis
subject of inquiry and of punishment. The
very victims often believed in their own
guilt. One man in 1598, Jacques Roulet,
of Angers, stated in his confession that
though he did not take a wolf’s form he was
a wolf, and as a wolf committed murders,
chiefly of children. Even now the peasants
in Norway believe as firmly in persons who
can change themselves into wolves as the
peasants in Italy do in the evil eye, the
Danes think persons with joined eye brows
liable to the curse, the people of SchleswigHolstein keep a charm to cure it, the Slo
vaks, Greeks, and Russians have popular
words for the were wolf, and Mr. BaringGould was himself asked at Vienne to as
sist in hunting a loup garou, or wolf who
ought to have been a human being. In In
dia the belief is immovable, more particu
larly in Oude, where the mass of evidence
collected is so extraordinary that it shook
-for a moment the faith of a man so calm as
the Resident, Colonel Sleeman, and induced
him to give currency to a theory that
wolves might suckle and rear the children
of human beings, who thenceforward would
be wolves. Ultimately, we believe, he
abandoned that notion, but not before he
had puzzled all India with his collection of
exceptional facts, and riveted the supersti
tion of the people of Oude.
A belief so universal and so lasting sug
gests some Cause more real than a supersti
tious idea, and Mr. Baring-Gould believes
he has discovered one. He hold^that in
every human being there is some faint
trace of the wild-beast nature, the love of
destruction and of witnessing the endurance
of suffering. Else why do children display
cruelty so constantly, string flies on knitting
pins, and delight in the writhings of any
animal ? In the majority this disposition is
eradicated either by circumstances, by
training, or by the awakening of the great
influence we call sympathy. In a minority
the desire remains intact but latent, liable
to be called out only by extraordinary inci
dents or some upset of the ordinary balance
of their minds. In a few it becomes a pas
sion, a sovereign desire, or even a mania
entitled to be ranked as a form, and an ex
treme form, of mental disease. It was the
latter exhibition which gave rise to the be
lief in the were-wolves, who were, in Mr.
Baring-Gould’s opinion, simply raving mani
acs, whose wildness took the form either of
a desire to murder or of a belief in their own
power of becoming beasts of prey. So late
as 1848 an officer, of the garrison in Paris
was brought to trial on a charge of rifling
graves of their bodies and tearing them to
pieces, and the charge having been proved
on conclusive evidence, his own confession
included, was sentenced to one year’s im
prisonment. He was mad, but had he lived
before madness was understood he would
have been pronounced either a vampire or
a loup garou. Madness miscomprehended
was the cause of the facts which supported
, the monstrous belief, a theory almost de
monstrated by the history of the case of
Jacques Roulet. The extract is long, but
the story is complete:
“ In 1598, a year memorable in the annals of
lycanthropy, a trial took place in Angers, the
details of which are very terrible. In a wild
and unfrequented spot near Caude, some coun
trymen came one day upon the corpse of a boy
of fifteen, horridly mutilated and bespattered
with blood. As the men approached, two
* Were Wolves. By Sabine Baring-Gould. Lon wolves, which had been rending the body,
bounded away into the thicket. The men gave
don : Smith, Elder, and Co.
�7
\
WERE WOLVES.
577
chase immediately, following their bloody tracks
Jacques Roulet would have been found in
till they lost them; when suddenly crouching sane by any modern jury, and there is scarcely
among the bushes, his teeth chattering with in mediaaval literature a case of lycanthropy
fear, they found a man half naked, with long which cannot be explained upon this sim
/
hair and beard, and with his hands dyed in
blood. His nails were long as claws, and ple theory, — the one at last adopted, and
were clotted with fresh gore and shreds of hu in our judgment proved, by Colonel Sleeman flesh. This is one of the most puzzling man in Oude, but a more difficult question
and peculiar cases which come under our no remains behind. Is it quite certain that all
tice. The wretched man, whose name was cases of long-continued and outrageous cruel
Roulet, of his own accord stated that he had ty presuppose madness ? Is cruelty in fact
fallen upon the lad and had killed him by a natural quality, which can be cultivated,
smothering him, and that he had been prevent or an abnormal desire, the result of extreme
ed from devouring the body completely by the and gradual depravation of the passions
arrival of men on the spot. Roulet proved and the reason ? Take the well known case
on investigation to be a beggar from house to of Gilles de Uetz in 1440. If evidence
house, in the most abject state of poverty. His
companions in mendicity were his brother John can prove anything it is certain that this
and his cousin Julien. He had been given man, head of the mighty House of Laval,
lodging out of charity in a neighbouring vil lord of entire counties and of prodigious
lage, but before his apprehension he had been wealth, did throw up a great position in the
absent for eight days. Before the judges, public service to wander from town to
Roulet acknowledged that he was able to trans town and seat to seat kidnapping children,
form himself into a wolf by means of a salve whom he put slowly te death to delight
which his parents had given him. When ques himself with their agonies. He confessed
tioned about the two wolves which had been himself to eight hundred such murders, and
seen leaving the corpse, he said that he knew
perfectly well who they were, for they were his his evidence was confirmed by the relics
companions, Jean and Julien, who possessed found. He was betrayed by his own agents,
the same secret as himself. He was shown the and in the worst age of a cruel cycle his
clothes he had worn on the day of his seizure, crimes excited a burst of horror so profound
and he recognized them immediately; he de that he, a noble of the class which was be
scribed the boy whom he had murdered, gave yond the law, so powerful that he never at
the date correctly, indicated the precise spot tempted to escape, «vas burnt alive. Was he
where the deed had been done, and recognized mad, or only bad beyond all human ex
the father of the boy as the man who had first perience ? Mr. Baring-Gould inclines evi
run up when the screams of the lad had been dently to the former theory, and it is at all
heard. In prison, Roulet behaved like an idiot. events a pleasing one, but it is difficult for I
When seized, his belly was distended and hard;
in prison he drank one evening a whole pailful thinking men to forget that power has in oth
of water, and from that moment refused to eat er instances produced this capacity of cruelty,
or drink. His parents, on inquiry, proved to to refuse credence to all stories of the cruelty
be respectable and pious people, and they proved of Caesars, and Shahs, and West Indian slave
that his brother John and his cousin Julien holders. It is possible, and we hope true,
had been engaged at a distance on the day of that the genuine enjoyment of pain is rare
Roulet’s apprehension. ‘ What is your name, among the sane, though the Roman popu
and what your estate ? ’ asked the judge, Pierre
Herault. — ‘My name is Jacques Roulet, my lace felt something like it, and though we
age thirty-five; I am poor, and a mendicant/ are ever and anon startled by cases of wil
— ‘ What are you accused of having done ? ’ — ful cruelty to animals, but genuine indiffer
‘Of being a thief—of having offended God. ence to it is frequent, and granted the in
My parents gave me an ointment; I do not difference, any motive may give it an ac
know its composition.’—‘When rubbed with tive form. The thirst for domination is the
this ointment, do you become a wolf? ’ — ‘ No • most common impulse, but in well known
but for all that, I killed and ate the child Cor instances jealousy, fear, hatred, religious
nier : I was a wolf.’ — ‘ Were you dressed as a bigotry, and even vanity, have been equal
wolf?’ — ‘I was dressed as I am now. I had
events the passion
my hands and my face bloody, because I had ly efficacious. At all that it is restraina
been eating the flesh of the said child.’ — ‘ Do differs from madness in
your hands and feet become paws of a wolf ? ’_ ble. Hardly one genuine case on a great
‘ Yes, they do.’ — ‘ Does your head become like scale has been recorded in a civilized coun
that of a wolf — your mouth become larger ? ’ — try for many years, and it seems certain
‘ I do not know how my head was at the time; I that the restraints of order prevent it from
used my teeth; my head was as it is to-day. I acquiring its full sway, and that therefore it
have wounded and eaten many other little is rather the depravation of nature than na
children; I have also been to the sabbath.’ ”
ture itself which is its origin. Gilles de
THIRD SERIES. DIVING AGE. VOL. XXXII.
1477.
V
�578
SCIENCE AND MIRACLE.
,Retz is possible, if he were sane, only in a
class which can indulge every impulse with
impunity, and at a time when law is no
longer to be feared. It may be true that he
belonged to the were-wolf genus, the men
afflicted with homicidal mania, but he may
also have belonged to a class now almost as
exceptional, the men in whom unrestricted
power has developed that thirst for testing
it in its highest, its most frequent, and its
most visible form, the infliction of slow
death-agonies upon powerless human beings.
It was, we fear, the madness of a Ceesar
rather than of a were wolf which influenced
Gilles de Betz, and Mr. Baring-Gould
would, we think, have exemplified his theo
ry more perfectly had he excluded stories
which testify not so much to the instability
of human reason as to the depths of evil
lurking in the human heart. He argues in
deed that Gilles de Betz is the link between
the citizen and the were wolf, but then in so
doing he assumes one tremendous datum,
that madness always shows itself in the ex
treme development of the latent heart, and
not in its radical perversion. One of its
■ commonest forms nevertheless is intense
hatred of those whom the patient has most
genuinely and fondly loved, and the bal
ance of probability is that insanity as often
perverts as intensifies the secret instincts of
its victim. Mr. Baring-Gould has, we
■ think, demonstrated that madness misap
prehended was the root of the were-wolf
delusion, but not that homicidal mania is
the ultimate expression of an inherent ten• dency in universal human nature.
From the Spectator.
SCIENCE AND MIRACLE.
Professor huxley, in the remarkable
lecture on “ improving natural knowledge ”
delivered to the working classes at St. Mar
tin’s Hall, and since published in the Fort
nightly Review, states with a candour and
moderation worthy of all praise, certain
notions destructive of all worship, — ex
cept that very impossible kind of worship
recommended by Professor Huxley, worship
■ of the Unknown and Unknowable, — which
have been gaining more and more hold of
■ merely scientific men for many generations,
and which, we need not say, are absolutely
inconsistent with admitting the activity of
: any supernatural will in the Universe, and
.•.still more the actual occurrence of miracle.
Now it is a matter worth a little considera
tion how far men of pure science are trust
worthy on matters of this kind, how far
their evidence is what we should call on
other subjects the evidence of experts, or
not. On a medical subject, we should never.think of adopting absolutely any theory
rejected by a very large and, perhaps in
creasing, number of the most eminent men
in the medical profession. On a historical
subject, we should think it absurd to take
up with a view against which every fresh
historian of learning and eminence began
with clearer and clearer conviction to pro
test. How far, then, even if it be true, as
it possibly may be, that the tendency of
the highest and calmest scientific thought is
increasingly anti-supernatural, can we con
sider this the tendency of a class entitled
to special intellectual deference, or the re
verse ? Mr. Brooke Foss Westcott, in a
very thoughtful volume which he has just
published on the Gospel of the Resurrec
tion” * freely admits that “ a belief in
miracles decreases with the increase of
civilization,” but maintains, amidst other
weaker and less defensible positions, that
the accuracy of comprehensive views of
nature as a whole, is not only not secured,
but may be even specially endangered, by
too special and constant a study of given
parts of nature. “ The requirements,” he
says, “ of exact science bind' the attention
of each student to some one small field,
and this little fragment almost necessarily
becomes, for him the measure of the whole,
if indeed he has ever leisure to lift his eyes
to the whole at all.” And undoubtedly the
man who has been studying, say, for the
sake of a definite example, the chemical
effects of light all his life, and who knows
that every different substance when burnt
yields a different spectrum, so that you may
know by the number and situation of the
dark lines exactly what substance it is that
is burning, might be inclined to look at the
possibility of miracle, and at faith in the
supernatural will, from a narrow point of
view. He will say to himself, ‘If one of
these spectra were suddenly to change its
appearance, if such a dark line vanished,
and such others appeared, should I not
know with a certainty to me infallible, — a
certainty on the absoluteness of which I
should never hesitate to risk my own life
or that of my family, — that some other
element had been introduced into the burn
ing substance ? Could anything persuade
me that the change was due to divine
volition apart from the presence of a new
* Macmillan.
�SCIENCE AND MIRACLE.
'
'
j
■
579
element or new elements in the burning be equivalent to the positive alteration in
substance ? Must not the Almighty him the essence of a mighty whole, as really
self, if He chose to make the change, make astounding in itself as the change which
it by providing the characteristic element could made oxygen burn (that is, oxidize)
for the purpose,—just as if He chose to or two and two equal to five.
alter the moral traits of a human character,
Now this is, we take it, something less
He could only do it by a process that would than conjecture, — indeed demonstrable
alter the character itself, and not by mak scientific error, if science be taken to in
ing a stupid and ignorant man give out all clude anything more than the laws of physi
the characteristic signs of wisdom and cal phenomena. It is probably true indeed
learning, or a malignant and cruel man put that in some sense the physical forces of the
forth all the moral symptoms of warm be- Universe are an invariable quantity, which
nevolence and charity.’ Sb the scientific only alter their forms, and not their sum
man would argue, and we are disposed to total. If I move my arm, the motion, says
think would argue rightly. For, admitting the physiologist, is only the exact equiva
that the physical qualities of things are lent of a certain amount of heat which has
realities at all, we should say that to make disappeared and taken the form of that
the physical qualities of one thing inter motion. If I do not move it, the heat re
change with the physical qualities of an mains for use in some other way. In either
other, without interchanging the things, is, case the stock of force is unchanged. This
if it be logically and morally possible, as is the conviction of almost all scientific
the Transubstantiationists believe and most men, and is probably true. But whether
other men disbelieve, a piece of divine the stock of physical force is constant or
magic or conjuring, and not a miracle. But not, the certainty that human will can
then, do not many great scientific men like change its direction and application — can
Professor Huxley really infer from such transfer it from one channel to another —
trains of reasoning far more than they will is just the same. And what that really
warrant ? All that such reasonings do tend means, if Will be ever free and uncaused,
to show, is, that if you truly conceive the though of course not unconditioned,—
natural constitutions of things, there are which is, we take it, as ultimate arid scienti
changes which you cannot make without fic a certainty as any in the Universe, — is
destroying those very things altogether, no less than this, — that a strictly super
and substituting new ones. As a miracle natural power alters the order and constitu
which should make two and two five is tion of nature, — takes a stock of physical
intrinsically impossible (Mr. Mill and the force lying in a reservoir here and transfers
Saturday Review in anywise notwithstand it to a stream of effort there, — in short,
ing), so also (though less certainly) a mira that the supernatural can change the order
cle which should make oxygen a combusti and constitution of the natural, — in its
ble gas instead of a supporter of combus essence pure miracle, though miracle of hu
tion, and quite certainly a miracle which man, and not of divine origin. For ex
should make it right to do what is known ample, almost every physiologist will admit
to be wrong, or wrong to do what is known the enormous power that pure Will has
to be right, is intrinsically impossible. But over the nervous system, — that it can pro
the modern scientific inference goes much long consciousness and even life itself for
further than this, and immediately extends certain short spaces, by the mere exertion
the conception of these inherent constitu of vehement purpose. Physicians tell you
tions of certain things and qualities to the constantly that such and such a patient
whole Universe, — assuming, for instance, may no doubt, if it be sufficiently impor
that it is just as impossible, just as much tant, by a great effort command his mind
a breach in the inherent constitution of sufficiently to settle his affairs, but that it
some one or more things, for one who has will be at the expense of his animal force,
been dead to live again, for the phenomena — in short, that it will be a free transfer of
of decomposition to be arrested, the heart force from the digestive and so to say vege
once silent to begin to beat, as for oxygen tating part of his system, to that part of
itself to burn without ceasing to be oxygen. his physical constitution, his nervous system,
The way in which this view would *e de which lies closest, as it were, to the will.
b
fended would be that all matter and all its Nay, we have heard physicians say that
qualities are now almost proved to be modes patients, by a great effort of pure will,
of force, and all force indestructible, so have, as they believe, prolonged their own
that any kind of supernatural change in life for a short space, that is, have imparted,
the phenomena of matter would appear to we suppose, through the excitement pro
�580
SCIENCE AND MIRACLE.
duced by the will on the nervous system
and so downwards, a certain slight increase
of capacity to assimilate food to the failing
organic powers of the body. In other
words, we conclude, just as the organism is
failing to draw supplies of physical force
from the outward world, its power of doing
so may be slightly prolonged,—the out
ward world drained of a small amount of
force it would otherwise, have kept in stock,
and the organism compelled to absorb it —
by a pure volition. Can there be a clearer
case of action of the supernatural on the
natural, — even granting that the sum
total of physical force is not altered, but
only its application changed ?
What more do we want to conceive
clearly the room for Christian miracle, than
the application of precisely the same con
ception to God and Christ ? The students
of the Universe appear to us to be in pre
cisely the same condition with regard to
the Universe, as a scientific observing mind
secreted in some part of a human body
(not the mind moving that body, but some
other) would be in with relation to the
structural, chemical, mechanical laws of
that body. Suppose an atom of your
blood able to retain its identity constantly
in a human body, and to travel about it on
a tour of scientific observation. It would
very soon arrive at the conclusion that
there were great laws of circulation of the
blood and the fluids which supply it,—
such as we see in nature in the astronomi
cal laws, — great laws of force by which
the legs and arms are moved, like the forces
of tides or falling waters in the Universe,
— great structural laws, by which different
tissues, like the hair, the skin, nails, the
nervous and muscular tissues, grow up out
of the nourishment supplied them, just as
we notice the growth of trees and flowers
out of the earth, —and great though some
what uncertain laws of alternation between
activity and repose, — like the laws of night
and day; — and such a scientific particle
as we have supposed would undoubtedly
soon begin to say that the more deeply it
studied these things, the more the reign of
pure law seemed to be extended in the
universe of the body, so that all those un
certain and irregular phenomena (which
we, however, really know to be due to the
changes effected by our own free self-gov
erning power), must be ascribed, it would
say^ not to any supernatural influence, but
to its own imperfect knowledge of the
more complex phenomena at work. And
such a scientific particle would be perfectly
justified in its inferences; for we have sup
posed it only an intellectual observing ma
chine, not a free will with knowledge of its
own that there is a power which is not
caused, and which can effect real modificacations in the relation even of physical
forces which never vary in amount. But
nevertheless it would be wrong, and could
never know the truth, namely, that the
ordering of the succession in these physical
forces, — the interchanges between one and
the other, — the physical influences over
the body exerted by the command of the
appetites and passions, were all of them
really traceable in great part to super
natural power, though to supernatural pow
er which does not either add to or subtract
from the sum total of physical force present
in the Universe. And we maintain that
the men of pure science, as they are called,
—the men who study everything- but Will,
— fall into precisely the same blunder as
such a rationalizing particle of a human
body, and for the same reason. They are
quite right in their inferences from their
premises, but their premises are radically
defective.
In truth the room for miracle remains as
wide as ever. Admit all the discoveries
of science, and still they only prove a cer
tain constancy in the amount of physical
force, and a certain invisible law of suc
cession between the same phenomena. But
just as a man who puts forth a great effort
to retain his consciousness and reason or
even life for a short time longer than he
would otherwise do, may succeed, — suc
ceed, that is, in pumping up the failing
supply of physical force from the Universe
to his system for a few minutes or hours,
when without such an effort it would have
fled from his body and passed away ipto
other channels, — so miracle only assumes
that a supernatural power infinitely greater
than man’s will might, on sufficient reason,
— which every Christian believes to be far
more than sufficient, — do the same thing
infinitely more effectually, and for a far
longer time. Miracle is in essence only the
directing supernatural influence of free
mind over natural forces and substances,
whatever these may be. In man we do 'not
call this miracle, only because we are ac
customed to it, — and in nature scientific
men refuse to believe that any such direct
ing power exists at all. But nevertheless,
every accurate thinker will see at once,
that free will, Providence, and Miracle do
not differ in principle at all, but are only
less or more startling results of the same
fact, — which true reason shows to be fact,
— that above nature exist .free wills, pro-
�THE DURATION
OF OUR SUPPLY OF COAL.
shall readily understand that the vital ques
tions for the wealth, progress, and greatness
of our country are these : — “Is our supply1
of coal inexhaustible ? and if not, how
long will it last?” — Mr. Jevons enables
us to answer both these 'questions. It is
very far from being inexhaustible ; it is in
process of exhaustion ; and, if we go on
augmenting our consumption from year to
year at our present rate of increase, it will
not last a hundred years. Our geological
knowledge is now so great and certain, and
what we may term the underground survey
of our islands has been so complete that we
know with tolerable accuracy both the ex
tent, the thickness, and the accessibility
of our coal fields, and the quantity of coal
annually brought to the surface and used
up. The entire amount of coal remaining
in Great Britain, down to a depth of 4,000
feet, is estimated to be 80,000 millions of
tons. Our annual consumption was in 1860
about 80 millions. At that rate the avail
able coal would last for 1,000 years. But
our consumption is now steadily increasing
at the rate of
per cent, per annum, and
will in 1880 be, not 80 millions, but 160
millions ; and, if it continues thus to increase,
will have worked out the whole 80,000 mil
lions before the year 1960. Nay it would
reach this climax probably some time earlier ; for our calculation includes all the coal
down to 4,000 feet; and no coal mine has
yet been worked at a greater depth than
2,500 feet; and we do not believe that mines
can be worked profitably, and we have lit
tle reason to think they can be worked at
all, at such a depth as 4,000 feet.
Of course we know that, practically, our
coal-fields will not be worked out within this
period. Of course we are aware that our
present rate of annual augmentation cannot.
be maintained. Every year we have to go
deeper for our supply; and going deeper
means incurring greater and greater ex
pense for labour, for machinery, for ventila
tion, for pumping out the water, for acci
dents, &c. Going deeper, therefore, implies
an enhanced price for the coal raised, and
that enhancement of price will check con
sumption. But it is precisely this imminent '
enhancement of price, and not ultimate ex
haustion, that we have to dread; for it is this
enhancement which will limit our rate of
progress and deprive us of our special ad
vantages and our manufacturing supremacy.
Let us see a little in detail the modus ope
rands The difficulty of working and raid
ing coal increases rapidly as the mine grows
deeper, or as inferior mines have to be
worked ; the heat grows more insupporta
bably of all orders of power, which do not,
indeed, ever break the order of nature, but
’ can and do transform, — as regards man by
very small driblets,— but as regards higher
than human wills in degrees the extent of»,
which we cannot measure, — natural forces
from one phase of activity into another, so
as greatly to change the moral order and
significance of the Universe in which we
live.
?
k
THF DURATION
k’
From the Economist, 6 Jan.
OF OUR SUPPLY OF
COAL.
U$der the title of “ The Coal Question/
Mr. Jevons * has furnished the public with
a number of well-arranged and for the
most part indisputable facts, and with a
series of suggestive reflections, which every
one interested in the future progress and
greatness of his country will do well to pon
der seriously. Few of us need to be re
minded how completely cheap coal is at the
foundation of our prosperity and our com
mercial and manufacturing supremacy.
Coal and iron make England what she is ;
and her iron depends upon her coal. Other
countries have as much iron ore as we have,
and some have better ore ; but no country
(except America, which is yet unde
veloped) has abundant coal and ironstone
in the needed proximity." Except in
our supply of coal and iron we have no
natural suitabilities for the attainment
of industrial greatness; nearly all the
raw materials of our manufactures come to
us from afar ; we import much of our wool,
most of our flax, all our cotton and all our
silk. Our railroads and our steamboats are
made of iron and are worked by coal. So
are our great factories. So now is much of
our war navy. Iron is one of our chief arti
cles of export; all our machinery is made
of iron; it is especially in our machinery
that we surpass other nations ; it is our ma
chinery that produces our successful textile
fabrics; and the iron which constructs this
machinery is extracted, smelted, cast, ham
mered, wrought into tools, by coal and the
steam which coal generates. It is believed
that at least half the coal raised in Great
Britain is consumed by the various branches
of the iron trade.
With these facts present to our mind we
I
* The Coal Question. By W. Stanley Jevons, M.
A. Macmillan, 1865.
581
�582
THE DURATION OF OUR SUPPLY OF COAL.
ble, the shafts and passages longer, the dan
Nor does there seem any escape from
ger greater, the ventilation more costly, the these conclusions theoretically, nor any way
quantity of water to be kept out or got out of.modifying them practically. We may,
more unmanageable. A very short period it is said, economise in the use of coal.
may raise engine coal and smelting coal But, in the first place, the great economies
from 5s to 10s per ton. Now a cotton mill that can be reasonably looked for have been
of ordinary size will often use for its steam- already introduced. In smelting iron ore
power 80 tons of coal per week. This at 5sis we use two-thirds less coal than formerly,
l,000Z a year; at 10s per ton, it is 2,000/. and in working our steam engines one-half
But the cotton mill is full of machinery; less;. and, in the second place, it is only a
and one great element in the cost of this rise in the price of coal that will goad us
machinery is the coal used in smelting and into a more sparing use of it; and this
working the iron of which the machinery is very rise of price is the proof and the meas
made. The railroads which bring the cot ure of our danger. “ Export no more
ton to the mill and take the calico and yarn coal,” it is suggested, and so husband your
back to the place of exportation are made stores. But we could not adopt this expe
of iron and worked by coal: so are the dient, even if it were wise to do so, or con
steamboats which bring the cotton to our sistent with our commercial policy, without
shores and export the yarn to Germany; — throwing half our shipping trade into ton
the cost of carriage, therefore, which is a fusion by depriving them of their ballast
very large item in the contingent expenses trade; and even then the evil would be
of our factories, will be greatly increased scarcely more than mitigated ? “ Why,”
both directly and indirectly by a rise in the ask others, “ should we not, when our own
price of coal. An advance in that price stores of coal are exhausted, import coal
from 5s to 10s per ton, maybe estimated to from other countries which will still be rich
be equivalent to 2,000/ a year on the work in mineral fuel, and thus supply our need ?”
ing cost of a good-sized cotton mill. That Simply because of all articles of trade and
is,, as compared with the present state of industry coal is the most bulky in propor
things, and as compared with foreign coun tion to its value; and that it is the fact of
tries, every manufacturer wouid have a having it at hand, of having it in abundance,
burden of 2,000/ a year laid upon him, and of having it cheap, of having it without the
would have to raise the cost of his goods to cost of carriage, that has given us our manu
that extent. .How long could he continue facturing superiority. With coal brought
to compete with his rivals under this disad from America, with coal costing what coal
vantage, or (it would be more correct to then would cost, we could neither smelt our
say) with his present advantage taken away iron, work our engines, drive our locomo
from him ? And how long would coal con tives, sail our ships, spin our yarn, nor
tinue to be supplied even at 10s a ton ?
weave our broad cloths. Long before we
And, be it observed, the check to the had to import our fuel the game would be
consumption of coal— the retardation i. e. up.
in our progress towards ultimate and abso
Of 136 millions of tons now annually
lute exhaustion — can only come from in raised throughout the world, Great Britain
crease of price, and the moment that it does produces 80 millions and the United States
come, the decline of our relative manufac only 20. But this is only because we have
turing pre-eminence has begun. We shall had the first start, and because our popula
avoid the extinction of our coal in the short tion is far denser, and because our iron and
period of a century ; but we shall do so only our coal lie conveniently for each other and
by using less now; — and using less now conveniently for carriage. As soon as
means producing less iron, exporting less America is densely peopled, to America
calico and woollens, employing less ship must both our iron and our coal supremacy
ping, supporting a scantier population, — and all involved therein — be trans
ceasing our progress, receding from our rela ferred ; for the United States are in these
tive position. We may, it is true, make our respects immeasurably richer than even
coal last a thousand years instead of a hun- Great Britain. Their coal-fields are esti
dred, and reduce the inevitable increase in mated at 196,000 square miles in extent,
its price to a very inconsiderable rate; while ours are only 5,400. But this is not
but we can do so only by becoming stationary ; all: their coal is often better in quality and
and to become stationary implies letting incomparably more accessible than ours, es
other nations pass us in the race, exporting pecially in the Ohio valley. In some places
our whole annual increase of population, the cost at the pit’s mouth even now is 2sjper
growing relatively, if not positively, poorer ton in America, against 6s in England.
'
and feebler.
�HAIR-DRESSING IN EXCELSIS.
From the Spectator.
'583
a man’s hair is naturally as long as a woman’s
strikes them with a sense of surprise, and
have almost ceased to dress it. They use
It is not easy to understand the differen pomade still, or at least hairdressers say
ces in the popular appreciation of the mi so, and a few of them, unaware that a
nor trades. Why is a tailor considered rath mixture of cocoa-nut oil and thin spirit is
er contemptible, when no idea of ridicule in all ways the absolutely best unguent,
attaches to a bootmaker ?
Both make waste cash upon costly coloured oils, but
clothes, and in trade estimation the tailor, hairdressing for men is out of fashion. The
who must always be something of a capital average hairdresser contemptuously turns
ist, is the higher man of the two, but the over the male head to some beginner, who
popular verdict is against him. Nobody snips away till hair and tournure are got
calls a hosier the eighteenth part of a man, rid of with equal speed. Up to 1860, too,
yet strictly speaking his business is only a women wore their hair, even on occasions
minor branch of tailoring. No ridicule at demanding a grand toilette, after a very
taches to a hatter, notwithstanding the lu simple fashion, one which the majority of
natic proverb about his permanent mental them could manage very well for them
condition, but everybody laughs internally selves, and which required only careful
as he speaks of a -hairdresser. Is it because brushing. This fashion was not perhaps
.hairdressers were once popularly supposed altogether in perfect taste. Simplicity has
to be all Frenchmen, and therefore share charms, but still a custom which compelled
the contempt with which dancing-masters women with Greek profiles and complex
are regarded by people who, while they ex lions of one shade only and girls with cherry
press it, would not for the world fail to profit cheeks and turned-up noses equally to wear
by their instructions ? A singing-master is their hair like Madonnas, was open to some
allowed to be an artist, often one of the slight attack on artistic grounds. Madonnas
first class, but a dancing-master is consider should not have laughing blue eyes, or pout
ed a cross between an artist and a monkey. ing lips, or flaxen hair, or that look of esOr are hairdressers despised, like men mil pieglerie which accompanies a properly turn
liners, because their occupation, especially ed-up nose, — not a snub, that is abomina
in modern Europe, where men have aban ble, but just the nez retrousse which artists
doned wigs, long locks, and the careful ar detest and other men marry. The Second
rangement of the hair, is essentially femi Empire, however, does not approve simpli
nine ? That may be the explanation, for city, and gradually the art of dressing hail'
nobody despises the lady’s-maid more or has come again into use. The fashion of
less because if she is “ very superior ” she wearing hair a I’Imperatrice was the first
- can dress hair as well as any hairdresser. blow to the Madonna mania, and young
Or is the sufficient cause to be sought in women with no foreheads, and with pointed
their pretensions, in their constant but un foreheads, and with hair-covered foreheads,
successful claim to be considered artists, all pulled their unruly locks straight back
something a little lower than professionals, because an Empress with a magnificent
but a great deal higher than mere trades forehead chose to make the best of it. Any
men, a claim which induces them to indulge thing uglier than this fashion in all women
in highflown advertisements and the inven with unsuitable foreheads and all women
tion of preposterous names, usually .Greek, whatever with black hair it would be hard
but not unfrequently Persian, for totally to conceive, and the mania did not as a
useless unguents ? The claim is allowed in mania last very long. Then came the day
France, but in England, like the similar of invention, the use of false hair, the in
one of the cook and the confectioners, sertion of frisettes, the introduction of gold
it has always been rejected, a rejection en dyes, the re-entry of the vast combs prized
which excites the profession every now and by our great grandmothers, the admiration
then to somewhat violent and therefore ri of pins stolen from the Ionian and Pompe
diculous self-assertion. They perceive an ian head-gear, and a general attention to
opportunity just at present. For a good the head-dress which we can best describe
many years past the business of the coiffeur by quoting from the Manners and Customs
has been comparatively a very simple affair, of Ancient Greece a paragraph on the hair
rising scarcely to the dignity of a trade and dressing of Athenian women : — “ On noth
entirely outside the province of art.x Men ing was there so much care bestowed as.
all over Europe have adopted the fashion upon the hair. Auburn, the colour of Aph
of the much ridiculed Roundheads, cut their rodite’s tresses in Homer, being consider
hair habitually close, till the assertion that ed most beautiful, drugs were invented in
HAIRDRESSING IN EXCELSIS.
�584
HAIR-DRESSING IN EXCELSIS.
which the hair being dipped, and exposed incident in the annals of modern folly. Some
to the noon day sun, it acquired the covet thirty women had their hair dressed in pub
ed hue, and fell in golden curls over their lic by the, same number of men — not, we
shoulders. Others, contented with their,. are sorry to say, to the accompaniment of
own black hair, exhausted their ingenuity slow music,— an improvement we recom
in augmenting its rich gloss, steeping it in mend to Mr. Carter’s attention — and some
oils and essences, till all the fragrance of two hundred men and women looked on and
Arabia seemed to breathe around them. applauded the result. There was in the
Those waving ringlets which we admire in middle of the room a long table covered
their sculpture were often the creation of with a white cloth, as it were for some sort
art, being produced by curling-irons heated of experiment, but upon the table could be
in ashes ; after which, by the aid of jewel seen nothing but hand-mirrors, which look
led fillets and golden pins, they were ed indigestible. So long were other visitors
brought forward over the smooth white incoming that one visitor, who was con
forehead, which they sometimes shaded to scious of wan ting the scissors and of a total
the eyebrows, leaving a small ivory space absence of bear’s grease, was afraid that one
in the centre, while behind they floated in of the many gentlemen who in winning cos
shining profusion down the back. When tume, and faultless “ ’eads of air,” and un
decked in this manner, and dressed for the mistakable hairdressing propensities, hover
gunascitis in their light flowered sandals ed near the door, would insist upon his
and semi-transparent robes, they were having his hair cut and dressed forthwith,
scarcely farther removed from the state of merely to wile away the time. But fortu
nature than the Spartan maids themselves.” nately, just as a gentleman with a “ ’ead of
The grand triumph of the Ionic barbers, air” which would have done credit to any
the invention of a mode of plaiting which wax figure in any shop window, was ap
occupied many hours, and could therefore proaching with sinister looks, visitors, mas
be repeated only once a week, and requir culine and feminine began to pour in. Then
ed those who wore it to sleep on their backs there was diffused around the room an
with their necks resting on wooden trestles, odour of bear’s grease, and probably cost
hollowed out lest the bed should derange lier unguents, and from the look of the
the hair, has not indeed been repeated, ladies’ hair the writer was under the im
though under the fostering care of Mr. Car pression that he beheld the victims who
ter even that perfection may one
be had been immolated •upon the shrine of
attained. Still we have the auburn dyes, hairdressing, and who were to exhibit the
and the pins, and all the Athenian devices, effects of the sacrifice. But not so. Awhile,
and it is not quite certain that the “ chig and then there came in, each leaning upon
non,” the nasty mass of horsehair and hu the arm of the cavalier who was to “ dress
man hair which women have learnt to stick her,” about thirty-two ladies, from an age to
on the back of their heads, and which is ac which it would be ungallant to allude down
tually sold in Regent Street attached to to (one can hardly say “ bashful ”) fifteen.
bonnets, is not an additional triumph over Their hair was in some instances apparently
nature. We have a picture somewhere of just out of curl-papers, but for the most part
a chignon more than three thousand years hanging unconfined except at the back, where
old, but if we are not mistaken there are it was fastened close to the crown, and then
feathers on it as well as hair, the very idea hung down like a horse’s tail. Among the
which the President of the Hairdressers’ thirty were one or two magnificent cheveAcademy on Tuesday reinvented, and for lures, but we did not see one that quite
which he was so heartily applauded. Of realized the painter’s ideal, one which the
course, with the new rage for artificial ar wearer could have wrapped round her as
rangement, false hair, dyes, chignons, hair Titian’s model must have done, or one on
crepe, hair frise, and we know not what, the which the owner could have stood, as on a
hairdresser’s art is looking up, and the sen mat, as Hindoo women have been known to
sible tradesmen who practise it, sensible in do. Their comic appearance, and the clap
in all but their grandiloquence — which is, ping of hands which arose thereat, showed
we take it, half-comic, half a genuine effort one at once that they were the victims or
at self-assertion — are making the most of (if you please) the heroines. They sat at the
their opportunity.
white-cloth-covered table, and the cavaliers
The soire'e, or “ swarry,” as the doorkeep drew from black bags combs, arid puffs, and
er persisted in calling it, of the Hairdress hair-pins, and what looked like small roll
ers’ Academy, held in the Hanover Square ing-pins, and tapeworms, and bell-ropes,
Rooms on Tuesday, was really a noteworthy and cord off window-curtains, and muslin
�mmM-
/
’
'
•.
'
'
FRENCH AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONS.
>
585
and tissue-paper, and flowers and fruits of sheAvould entice oui’ “ golden youth ” (or
the earth imitated in green and gold. Then our golden age, for the matter of that) ?
the “ dressing ” began, and the spectator What manner of woman, then, would set
saw with awe and amazement what art can the fashion in hairdressing ?
And we
do for hair, then one repented of ever hav know what has been the consequence in
ing doubted the truth of ladies who at balls France (if we are not nearly as bad here)
say, with a significant glance at head-dresses, of following in small matters the lead of the
“ Why, how do you do, dear ? I really did demi-monde. On the other hand, two con
not know you.” Some people may think victions at all events we acquired from the
that hair, however plenteous or however spectacle. One is that modern hairdressing
scanty, looks better in its natural state than in its highest form is a branch of jewelling,
when it is made into a flower garden ; and the real art being shown not in the arrange
others may hold that no kind of hair is im ment of the hair, but in the addition of
proved by being interwoven with tape things which are not hair — combs, rib
worms or bell-ropes, or even the cord off bons, flowers, dewdrops, and gilt insects —
window-curtains. But it is certain that by the last a taste essentially inartistic and de
the use of muslin and other materials already praved. The other was that it is not safe
spoken of a result may be obtained which for any man to make a proposal in the
would justify a man in cutting his mother evening.
So utterly were some of the
(on the score of non-recognition, if on no “ subjects” changed by the act of the ope
other), and which would lead one to believe rators, that the possibility of not knowing
that so long as a lady has a couple of hand in the morning the betrothed of the even
fuls of hair left she may, with the help of ing seemed very real indeed, and the mis
art, hold her own against Berenice. When take would be an awkward one for both
all the ladies were “ dressed ” one of the parties.
“ dressers ” made an unexceptionable little
speech in unexceptionable English (for
which our experience of hairdressing had
not prepared us), concluding by saying
that the ladies in their “ dressed ” state
would walk round the table each leaning
From the Economist, 27 January.
on the arm of her “ dresser,” so that the
spectators might all have a full view. As THE ANALOGY BETWEEN THE FRENCH
he said, so did they; nay, they went fur
AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONS.
ther, and walked round twice, amidst the
applause of (he assembled witnesses. We
The Emperor of the French has said
were disappointed that no prize beyond many remarkable things, but few more
applause was given; we had thought that remarkable than the short sentence in
at least a small-tooths comb, after the fash which he hints that there is some analogy
ion of those said by Miss Emmeline Lott to between the Constitution of France and
be used in the Turkish harems, would have that of the United States. The statement
been bestowed. But perhaps it would have has been received in England with an
been dangerous to have given so decided a impatience which is. a little unjust, and
preference to the hair of one lady over that is caused by too exclusive an attention
of another, for after all it must be with some to surface differences. Those differences
difficulty that the subjects of the exhibition are of course patent to every one ; but the ■
are collected. After the b< swarry ” came a analogy is not the less real and striking.
ball, at which whosoever danced with the The key-note of the American Constitution
ladies who had their heads powdered was, is the existence of an Executive which dur
if he disliked dust, to be pitied. The com ing its term of office is irresponsible to the
pany seemed to be, for the most part, or at people, which acts by its own volition,
any rate to a considerable extent, connect which can pursue if necessary a policy dia
ed with the hairdressing interest, and that metrically opposed to the wishes of those
they should do all they could to bring their who elected it. That also is the key-note
craft to perfection is not only pardonable, of the system established by the Second
but commendable. Would it, however, be Empire. The President does as he pleases
well if society in general should patronize in all matters within his province just as
such exhibitions ? Opinions happily differ, the Emperor does, and like him is irrespon
but we cannot help thinking evil would come sible to the Legislature — need not, indeed,
of it. What manner of woman, is it that explain to the representatives of the people
must study such matters as hairdressing, if | his own official acts. His ministers are his
�586
FRENCH AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONS.
ministers or clerks, bound to obey his or
ders; not bound to pay any heed, and fre
quently not paying any heed, to votes
passed by the popular body. Of course,
in America as in France this absolute
disunion between the Executive and the
body which controls the purse is very
inconvenient, and it has in each country
been met in the same way. In France the
Minister without a portfolio explains to
the Corps Legislatif the plans of depart
ments which he does not control, and in
America a friend or connection or political
ally of the President performs the same
function, Mr. Raymond for example occupy
ing as nearly as possible that position in
Congress, which M. Rouher occupies in
the French Chamber. It is true the French
spokesman is a recognised official, and the
American spokesman is not, but the recog
nition does not diminish “ responsibility ” in
the English parliamentary sense, but rather
increases it. It is true Mr. Johnson cannot
effect through Congress what the Emperor
can effect through his Legislature, but that
is because he has not a majority and the
Emperor has. In theory the French Cham
ber has as much right to reject a bill pro
posed by the Imperial Government as Con
gress has, and were the Emperor less dread
ed it would frequently do so. At the pres
ent moment Mr. Johnson is trying to
“ make a majority ” to support his policy b^
means quite as strong as those used in
French elections. He has ordered that
no radical recommendation for office shall
be listened to, and has it is said threatened
that unless his opponents give way he will
dismiss every official throughout the Union
who owes his election to the recommenda
tion of an opponent, a measure which has
daunted his stoutest adversaries as fatal
to their re-election. They will be in fact,
as in France, struck out of the Government
list. Indeed the prerogative of the Presi
dent is in many ways greater than that
of the Emperor. Each is commander-inchief, but the President can deprive any
officer of his commission by decree, and
the Emperor cannot. A French officer’s
grade is his “property,” and though the
law has once or twice been violated, it
/could not be broken through except for
a State necessity. Emperor and President
are alike masters of the Civil Service, but
the President can and does dismiss at will,
and the bureaucracy of France is perma
nent. An order, such as Mr. Johnson is
said to have threatened to give, would in
France have aroused an unconquerable re
sistance. No doubt the Emperor of the
French can do things infinitely more highhanded than the President could attempt,
but that is not by virtue of the idea of
the French Constitution, but by reason
of his control over a system essentially and
radically despotic, which he did not make,
and which his predecessors also used, the
French police. Mr. Johnson has no such
organisation at his disposal, but when it ex
isted during the first two years of the war it
was used without much regard to anything
but the safety of the Federation. Without
the police aud the immense army, and with
a hostile majority in the Chamber, the Em
peror would be almost precisely in the po
sition of the President.
But the latter is subject to removal at
the expiration of his term ? No doubt Mr.
Johnson is, and has therefore a great temp
tation to make his policy accord with the
policy approved by the electors, and so has
the Emperor Napoleon, who follows opinion
quite as anxiously; but. that deference is no
part of the Constitution, which provides for
change in the individual, but not for change
in the absolute independence of the office.
In changing our Premier, we ensure a
Change of policy, because if the new man
disobeys, he also can be dismissed next day;
but in changing the President, America
merely places one independent and irre
movable official in place of another. The
theories of the Imperial and Republican sys
tems are identical, except in the illogical
peculiarity of the French Constitution, that
it introduces the hereditary element into the
Executive, whereas the right of election
logically includes a right of dismissal at
periods fixed by mutual agreement. But
the freedom of the Press, of speech, of asso
ciation ? Well, these things exist in Amer
ica and do not exist in France; but it is
not in consequence of the Constitution, but
of the popular will. Nothing prevents an
American President, with Congress at his
back, from subverting the freedom of the
Press, by means, for example, of remissible
taxes, if they think that policy sound. The
Emperor and his first Chamber did think it
sound, and so freedom in France ended, a
fact greatly no doubt to be regretted, but
in, no way proving that the principles of the
American and French Constitutions are not
analogous. One very remarkable power
indeed is possessed by the American Legis
lature which is not possessed by the French,
and that is the right of passing a law by a
two-third vote, in defiance of the President.
But the French Chamber is theoretically
just as strong, for it could insist on a certain
law being passed, under penalty of a rejec
�/
/
xico.
s
587
tion of the Budget, and the Emperor must by which alone a constitutional monarch
. either yield, or appeal to a plebiscitum, that can acquire great individual power. At all
is, strike a coup d’etat upsetting the Consti events, should circumstances ever compel
tution, which gives the Chamber such a the Emperor to relax the overstrictness
right of control. That the two sets of insti of his regime, it is to the American rather
tutions are worked in a different way, and than to the British form of freedom that
with a different spirit, is too obvious for re he appears likely to feel his way.
mark ; but that does not destroy the theo
retic analogy to which the Emperor points.
The truth is that apart from the operation
..of the State system, which with many faults
' still organises popular resistance, the Presi
dent of the United States is, during his
From the Saturday Review, Jan. 27.
term of office, an excessively powerful mon
MEXICO.
arch, and the fact, revealed only by the
war, has evidently struck forcibly on the
The position which the Government of
imagination of the Emperor of the French. the United States is prepared to take up
As he acknowleges in his speech he still dis with regard to Mexico is at last clearly and
likes Parliamentary Government, for which finally established, and it is one that is cal
he is himself singularly unfitted, and he culated to excite some apprehension for the
glances at the Union with a passing thought future peace of the world. During the au
that if he ever grants “ liberty,” it will be in tumn months of last year, Mr. Seward was
the American and not in the English form. continually urging on the Federal Govern
Should the thought ever become active, it ment the expediency of the speedy with
is astonishing how little he will have to do drawal of the French troops; and, with
to restore “liberty” after the American many sincere protestations of the most frienimodel as it would appear were the Union ly feeling towards France, he gave the Em
a republic one and indivisible. He would peror to understand that, if his troops were
have to introduce laws establishing the free to stay much longer where they were, a
dom of the press, and the right of associa rupture between the two countries was inev
tion, and the liability of all officials to pros itable. The Emperor would be only too
ecution for illegal acts done in their official glad to get his troops away if he could do so
capacities; and the exemption of all citizens without compromising his own honour, and
from arrest except on criminal charges, and that of France ; and it seemed to him that
the constitutional change would be theoret the best way of arranging the matter would
ically alinost complete. The remaining bethat the French troops. should go, and
changes which would be necessary — such that the United States should recognise the
as abstinence from interference in the elec Emperor Maximilian. • The Mexican Em
tions, recognition of the right of debate, pire, being thus placed on a friendly footing
and restoration of the legislative initiative with the only Power it has to dread, might
to individual members — are scarcely con hope to establish itself and prosper, if pros
stitutional. These changes once accom perity in Mexico is possible for it. France
plished, France would be in possession of a would have succeeded, or, at least, would
great amount of practical liberty, of the not have openly and conspicuously failed;
control of her own Legislature, and of an and all jealousy between Washington and
Executive terribly strong indeed, but not Paris would have been at an end. But Mr.
stronger than that of the American Union; Seward has distinctly and decisively re
rather less strong, because hampered by the jected this proposal. The United States
legal rights of the army, and the customary will not recognise the Emperor Maximil
rights of the civil bureaucracy. That is not ian, nor treat him on any but a hostile foot
a form of Government we admire, because ing. lathe eyes of the Americans, he is
it lacks the one strength of the Parliamen an intruder, and an enemy of an injured and
tary system, the absolute identity of the friendly Republic, and they can never be
Legislature and the Executive power; but content until his enterprise has wholly failed.
it is one which might suit France for a time, Congress, as Mr. Seward remarks, must
and would have the immense advantage of exercise its legitimate influence on the Gov
permitting free thought and its expression, ernment of the President ; and the Pres
and some activity of Parliamentary life ident has not only to announce his own de
without the previous dismissal of the Napo cision, but that of the American people and
leonic dynasty, which will never, we fear, its representatives; and the opinion of the
consent to that incessant intellectual conflict American people is violently against the
�588
MEXICO.
Mexican Empire. Of this there can be no withdrawn; but if this is not done, the time
doubt; for even if the accusations continu must come when they will insist on having
ally brought up in Congress against the Em their wishes fulfilled.
peror Maximilian were true, instead of
This uncompromising language of the
being, as for the most part they are, gross American Government has placed the Em
misrepresentations, still the vehemence and peror of the'French in a very difficult po
pertinacity with which they are urged show sition. He cannot seem to yield to threats;
clearly enough how deep is the animosity but still he knows that, if any way of with
that prompts them. If the whole question drawing his troops with honour can be found,
were simply one of the continuance of the he must use it. He has, therefore, set ear
Mexican Empire, it might be worth while nestly to work to disprove the view which
to discuss these accusations, and to show how the American Government has adopted.
very slight is the basis on which they have He denies altogether that he ever wished to
been reared ; but all matters of detail are set up a Monarchy in Mexico, or to crush a
swallowed up in the gravity of the declara Republic. But the Republican Govern
tion which the United States have now is ment had insulted and offended him, plun
sued. The view of the Government of the dered and murdered his subjects, gave no
United States is, that the French have vio compensation, and perhaps was too weak,
lated the Monroe doctrine in its proper poor, and anarchical to give any. He inter
and original sense. There was a Republic fered merely to get redress, but he did not
established in Mexico, holding its territory see how it was possible to hope for redress
unopposed, in harmony with the country, from, such a Government as then existed in
dear to the inhabitants, and in the most Mexico. Several leading Mexicans pro
friendly relations with the United States. posed to establish a Monarchy, and he con
The French came to pull down this Repub curred in the idea because he thought a Mon
lic, and to set up a Monarchy, and they per archy, which had long been a favourite no
sist in remaining in Mexico to force this tion of many Mexicans, offered the best
alien Empire on an unwilling Republican chance of getting a Government strong, du
people. This is the mode in which the rable, and enlightened enough to pay him
United States have determined, after full what he was owed. This is all. He no
deliberation, to regard the recent history of more wishes to put down a Republic in Mexi
Mexico; and they will not allow any com co than he does to put down a Republic at
promise by which their adherence to this Washington; he merely wished, and wishes,
view might seem to be weakened. So long to have an instrument ready to provide him
as France stays in Mexico, forcing an Em with the redress he asked. The Emperor
pire on the Republicans of a contiguous Maximilian and his Court, and his Orders
State, America will treat France exactly as of the Eagle and Gaudalupe, are only pret
she would expect France to treat her if ty bits of machinery for the recovery of
she sent a fleet, and landed troops, to set up money owing to Frenchmen; and it must
a Republic in Belgium. Much, it is ac be owned that, if this is all, they are about
knowledged, is to be borne from France, as expensive a pi^ce of machinery, in com
which would not be borne from any other parison with the object to be effected, as
country. It will be only in the last resort was ever invented. But then, as the Em
that the language of America would be peror said in his speech, this machinery
come hostile to a country endeared to her has answered, or very nearly answered.
by so many traditions, and bound to her by There is now in Mexico an enlightened
so many ties. The tone of Mr. Seward’s Government triumphant overall opposition,
letter is very conciliatory, and the Govern with a French commerce trebled in an in
ment of President Johnson has been reso credibly short space of time, plentifully sup
lute in preventing any indirect breaches of plied with troops, and quite ready to pay off
amity. The export of arms from California all that is due to France. A few more ar
has been prevented, and still more recently rangements have still to be made with the
a considerable portion of the troops in Tex Emperor Maximilian, so that the stipulat
as has been disbanded. France has nothing ed payments may be fully secured, and then
to complain of in small things; there is only the French troops will be finally and hon
the one great point of difference between her ourably withdrawn. The ecstatic visions of
and the United States, that she has violated M. Chevalier, and the ardent proclama
a doctrine to which the United States at tions of Marshal Forey, are forgotten, or
tach the greatest importance, and which utterly neglected. We hear no more of the
they are resolved to uphold. They now spread of French influence over the West
merely ask that the French troops shall be ern hemisphere, of the necessity of enabling
�MEXICO.
tv
*
589
the Latin race to confront the Anglo-Saxon his own resources. If the Emperor Maxi
race in the New World. The Americans milian would but announce that he was
are told that all that has been done in Mexi- now quite, sure of his throne, and that
. Co has been done simply to redress the French aid was no longer necessary to him,
wrongs and support the claims of French the French might undoubtedly retire with
men; the French’themselves are told that out dishonour. They could not retire at
this most desirable end has been accom once, but it may be presumed that the
plished, and that the troops who have ren Americans would be quite satisfied if a Con
dered its accomplishment possible may soon vention like the September Convention
be expected home. But it is scarcely neces with Italy were agreed on, and if it were
sary to say that neither the Americans nor arranged that all French troops should have
the French will be satisfied. The Ameri quitted Mexico by the end of the present
cans think, and think with perfect truth, year. If the French went, the Austrians
that the experiment of recovering French and Belgians must go too— not necessarily
debts by shooting Republicans until the at the very same time, but before very long;
Austrian Archduke was made Emperor as it is obvious that, if the French have been
would never have been tried unless it had guilty of coming to American soil to tram
been supposed that it could be tried with ple down a Republic and set up a Monarchy,
out the United States being able to inter so have they. The Emperor Maximilian
fere with it. The French know that at least would therefore have to decide whether he
twenty millions of French money have been could possibly hold his own with native
sunk in the experiment, and that if their troops against his domesticV’enemies; and
troops were withdrawn it would be a great secondly, whether, if he thought it possible
deal more difficult to"recover the new debt to succeed, he would also think it worth
than it was to recover the old one. The while to try. It may be assumed, perhaps, that
Emperor, by adopting the view that he is the Emperor of the French would be able
merely trying to get his just dues from Mexi to provide that Mexico should be left alone,
co, has done something to conciliate the and that, if he did not go there, neither
Americans; yet he has made it even harder would the Americans. But if all foreign
than before to justify to France the with troops were withdrawn, the Emperor
drawal of the troops. To throw away twen would have to fight Mexicans with Mexi
ty millions in the attempt to get back a cans. His Mexicans would feel no enthusi
tenth of that sum is as deplorable an invest asm for him, would regard him as a foreign
ment, and as conspicuous a failure, as he er, and would with difficulty be induced to
could well make. The last Mexican loan of believe that his cause was the winning one.
about six millions sterling was almost entire His adversaries would be ardent, stimulated
ly subscribed by the French poor, on the by the encouragement of the Americans,
direct solicitation of the local officials of the panting for revenge, and able to take ad
Government, and it would most seriously vantage of that general disposition to go
impair the confidence of the lower classes in against the existing Government, whatever
the Emperor’s policy if it ended in a loss it may be, which pervades all nations of
to them of money which they only sub Spanish descent. But even if the Emper
scribed because he seemed to ask for it him- or thought that, after a very long and pro
self.
tracted fight, he might possibly hold his own,
The Emperor must, therefore, risk some and retain a precarious possession of some
thing. He might risk either a war with of the richer parts of the Mexican territory,
America, or a blow to his prestige in France. he might very probably hesitate before he
His speech was very judiciously worded, and embarked on so dangerous an adventure,
he seemed to be preserving a firm attitude, and might begin to examine whetherit could
and consulting the dignity of his country, possibly answer to him to take the risk. If
while he prepared a mode of escape from his he stayed as long as the French stayed, and
Embarrassment by asserting that his work found that the pressure of the Americans
was done in Mexico, and that the Emperor was depriving him even of his Austrians 1
Maximilian was firmly established there. and Belgians, he would incur no- disgrace
It will now naturally be his first object to by resigning a position that he might fairly
get the Emperor Maximilian to share this consider untenable. But the French could
opinion ; and the story may be true that he .scarcely withdraw altogether if he went.
has sent over a special envoy to represent They could not acknowledge that their at
to the Emperor of Mexico that he must tempt to obtain redress had been entirely in
consent to the withdrawal of the French vain, and all their money wasted ; and they
troops, and tTy his chance of empire from would naturally seek to make some arrange-
�THE EMPERORS SPEECH.
From the Spectator, 27th January.
ment with the United States by which, if a
Government favoured by the United States
THE EMPEROR’S SPEECH.
was set up, a return to mere anarchy should
be prevented, and the right of the French
The Emperor of the French has opened
to enjoy some sort of guarantee for the settle the Session of his Chambers for the thir
ment of their claims should be recognized. teenth time, and for the thirteenth time his '
speech is the political fact in the European
history of the week. Its interest turns
mainly upon three paragraphs, those relating
[From another article in the same paper, we to Mexico, to Italy, and to his pledge of one
copy the French Emperor’s address.]
day “crowning the edifice” by conceding
liberty. Of course he says other things,
The French Emperor’s address to his but they are so vague or so formal that they
Legislature is generally an interesting study. add nothing to our knowledge either of his
It is feebler and less clever this year than purposes or his position. He will “ remain
usual, but still it is interesting/ The au a stranger” to the internal disputes of Ger
gust author of these compositions has the art many, “ provided French interests are not
of touching all great questions of European directly engaged,” but as he is the sole
concern in a tone of frankness and gener judge whether they are so or not, this
osity, and noble sentiments in a Royal or amounts only to a pledge that France will
Imperial speech are always pleasant and re not interfere with Prussia until her Em
freshing. What, for example, can be more peror chooses, an assertion which makes a
considerate or delicate than the manner in very small draft upon our political faith.
which he handles the Americans? They He promises to restore the right of associa
are reminded of a century of friendship, and tion for industrial purposes, but the liberty
it is politely suggested that Imperialism is thus regained is to be “ outside politics,”
only the Constitution of the United States and to be limited “ by the guarantees which
in a French Court dress. The Mexican ex public order requires ” i. e., by any guaran
pedition is explained in a manner that tee the Emperor thinks expedient. He an
ought to disarm the most suspicious Yankee, nounces a reduction of the Army, but it has
and it seems as if all had been a mistake been effected without a reduction of num
about the Latin race, as it was about the bers, and declares that a financial equili
proposed recognition of the South. Some brium has been secured by the surplus of
body did say something about the Latin revenue, for which surplus his Minister of
race, which has evidently been misconstrued Finance only just ventures to hope on con
a good deal; but the “ American people” dition that everything goes right for two
will now comprehend that “ the expedition, more years. He suggests that France is
in which we invited them to join, was not governed very much like the United States,
opposed to their interests.” France “prays” but does not attempt to explain wherein he
sincerely for the prosperity of the great Re finds the analogy between a Constitution
public, and, just as a French Emperor is only which changes its Executive every four
an American President in disguise, so Im years, and leaves the entire legislative power
perialism in Mexico has been founded “ on to the representatives of the people, and a
the will of the people.” Mr. Seward very Constitution which was intended to make
Hkely never swears. His talent lies chiefly the executive power hereditary, and which
in the line of making other people swear. intrusts the initiative of legislation entirely
But it is possible that some less courteous to the man who is to carry that legislation
Anglo-Saxons in Washington and in New out. On all these subjects, Germany, fi
York, who are anxious about the Monroe nance, co-operation, and the Constitution,
doctrine, after reading all these high-mind the Emperor’s utterance is suggestive, with
ed expressions, and especially the one about out clearly instructing either his subjects or
the French praying for them, will feel in the world. No one, for example, could tell
clined, in the language used in the School without knowing facts which the Emperor
for Scandal by the friends of Joseph Sur does not reveal whether his paragraph on
face, to observe, “ Damn your sentiments.” Germany is a hint to Count von Bismark to
However this may be, and whatever may be go on in his course and prosper, or a.men
the turn the Mexican difficulty is taking, ace that France would not bear a Union, of
one thing is clear, that the French Emper Northern Germany against which its in
terests are directly engaged.
or puts his sentiments neatly and well.
�THE EMPEROR ’S SPEECH.
591
Even on the three points we have excepted die course, and the object of this part of
the Emperor, as his wont is, gives the world his speech is simply to soothe Americans
a riddle to read. What, for instance, is the into waiting until he can retreat with hon
meaning of the sentence which says that our. He who three years ago spoke only of
France “ has reason to rely on the scrupulous strengthening a branch of the Latin race to
execution of the Treaty with Italy of the 15 th resist Anglo-Saxon aggression, now anxious
September, and on the indispensable main ly repudiates any idea of hostility to the
tenance of the power of the Holy Father ? ” Union. He recalls to the Americans “ a
Does it mean that Napoleon regards the noble page in the history of France,” her
temporal power as indispensable, or only assistance to the Republic in its great rebel
the spiritual; that he will put down internal lion, reminds them that he requested them to
revolt in Rome, or suffer Italy to garrison take a part in reclaiming Mexican debts,
the city, provided only the Pope is left spir and almost implores thein to recollect that
itually independent ? Is his dictum a threat “ two nations equally jealous of their inde
to the Revolution or a threat to the priests | pendence ought to avoid any step which
Reading it by the light of the Emperor’s would implicate their dignity and their
character, we should believe the sentence honour.” Is that an assurance or a menintended only to ward off opposition until 1 afte ? For a French Sovereign to speak
the evacuation of Rome was complete, but of possible contingencies as “ implicating
read by the facts in progress, blithe re French dignity and honour ” is a very
cruiting for Rome going on in France, and ^serious thing, but then why these unusual
the pressure employed in Florence to make professions of regard for the Union ? It is
Italy accept the Papal debt, we should be true in a preceding paragraph Napoleon
lieve it implied that while Napoleon will re has affirmed that he is arranging with the
tire, the Pope must remain independent Emperor Maximilian for the recall of his
King of Rome. The maintenance of the army, bumhen their return must be effect-'
Pope’s power is declared indispensable, but ed when it “will not compromise the in
nothing is said of the invisible means by terests which France went out to that dis
which it is to be maintained.
tant land to defend.” When is that ? Do
So with the Mexican declaration. The the interests to be defended include the re
Emperor, we admit, is upon this point placed invigoration of the Latin race ? Nothing is
in a most difficult position. He made the clear from the speech, and according to
singular blunder made by the Times and by the Yellow Book, which is always supposed
the majority of English politicians, but not to explain the speech, the French Army is
made by the people he rules. Careless of only to return from Mexico when the Presi
principle and forgetting precedent, reject dent of the Union has recognized the Mexi
ing the idea that freedom must conquer can Empire, an act which he has refused to
slavery, and overlooking his uncle’s adage do, and which Congress has specifically for
that twenty-five millions must beat fifteen if bidden him to perform. There is nothing in
they can once get at them, he convinced the speech inconsiste^; with that interpreta
himself that the South must break up the tion, and if it is correct the Americans will
Union. Consequently he invaded Mexico, simply contrast the compliments offered
and placed his nominee on its throne. As them in words with the impossible proposal
his subjects, with the strange instinct which submitted in fact, and be less content than
supplies to great populations the place of ever. All they obtain is a promise 'that at
wisdom, had from the first foreseen, he some time not specified, when a result they
erred in his first essential datum. The dislike has been accomplished, the Emperor
South did not break up the Union, but the will, if consistent with his honour, withdraw
Union broke up the South, and Napoleon the troops through whom he has been able
finds himself compelled either to withdraw to accomplish it — not a very definite or
from a great undertaking visibly baffled and very satisfactory pledge.
repulsed, or to accept a war with the oldest
It is on the “ crowning of the edifice ’
ally of France — a war in which, if defeat alone that the Emperor is partially explicit.
ed, he risks his throne, and if successful, can He will not grant a responsible Ministry.
gain nothing except financial embarrass That system of government, always abhor
ment. Neither alternatiye seems to him en rent to him, has not become more pleasant
durable — the former as fatal to the reputa of late years, and he declares for the tenth
tion for success which is essential to his per time that “ with one Chamber holding with
sonal power, the latter as bringing him into di in itself the fate of Ministers the Executive
rect conflict with the wishes of all his peo is without authority and without spirit,” the
ple. He strives therefore to find some mid- “ one ” being inserted either to avoid a di-
�592
BEAU-MONDE AND THE DEMI-MONDE IN PARIS.
ers by an anouncement for which, after
all, both should have been prepared. No
one who is at all conversant with the ordina
ry course of Parisian life — we do not say
familiar with its inner mysteries — ought to
have been astonished at hearing that cer
tain grandes dames of French society had
sought for invitations to a masqued ball
which was to be given by a distinguished
leader of the demi-monde. We have had, in
our own country, certain faint and partial
indications of the same curiosity, revealed
in an awkward and half-hesitating sort of
way. English great ladies once made an
off-night for themselves at Cremorne, in
order to catch a flying and furtive glance,
not of the normal idols of those gay gar
dens, but of the mere scenic accessories to
their attractions and triumphs. But as yet
we have never heard that the matrons of
English society have sought an introduction
to the Lais of Brompton or the Phryne of
May-fair, even under the decorous con
cealment of mask and domino. Nor has it
yet been formally advertised here that the
motive of so unusal a request was a desire
to learn the arts and tactics by which the
gilded youth — and, it might be added, the
gilded age — of the country is subjected to
the thrall of venal and meretricious beauty.
That such a rumour should be circulated
and believed in France is — to use the cur
rent slang — “highly suggestive.” It sug
gests a contrast of the strongest, though it is
far from a pleasing, kind between the
society of to-day and the society of other
days. It was long the special boast of the
French that with them women enjoyed an
influence which in no other part of the
world was accorded to their sex, and that
this influence was at least as much due to
their mental as to their physical charms.
The women of other nations may have been
more beautiful. To the Frenchwomen was
specially given the power of fascination ;
and it was the peculiar characteristic of her
fascination that its exercise involved no dis
credit to the sense or' the sensibility of the
men who yielded to it. A power which
showed itself as much in the brilliance of
bons mots and repartee as ip smiles and
glances, a grace of language and expression
which enhanced every grace of feature
and of attitude, a logic which played in
the form of epigram, and a self-respect
From the Saturday Review.
which was set off rather than concealed by
THE 1 BEAU-MONDE AND THE
DEMI the maintenance of the most uniform cour
tesy to others — such were the arts and
MONDE IN PARIS.
insignia of the empire which the most cele
The Paris journals lately surprised their brated Frenchwomen, from the days of
French, and startled their foreign, read Maintenon and De Sevigne to those of
rect sarcasm upon the English Constitution,
or from a sudden recollection of the part
played by the Prussian Chamber of Peers.
He believes that his system has worked well,
that France, tranquil at home, is respected
abroad, and, as he adds with singular au
dacity, is without political captives within or
exiles beyond her frontiers. Are, then, the
Due d’Aumale, M. Louis iBlanc, and the
author of Labienus at liberty to return
to France ? Consequently nothing will be
changed, but the Emperor, resolving to “ im
prove the conditions of labour,” will await
the time when all France, being educated,
shall abandon seductive theories, and all
who live by their daily toil, receiving in
creasing profits, “ shall be firm supporters
of a society which secures their well-being
and their dignity.” No one can complain
of any obscurity in that apology for the
Empire. Its central ideas are all expressed,
and all expressed with truthful lucidity.
The Emperor is to rule “ with authority and
spirit.” There is to be no political freedom,
no discussion even of “ theories of govern
ment, which France for eighty years has
sufficiently discussed.” Intelligence and cap
ital are still to remain disfranchised, but in
return the labourer’s condition is to be im
proved. “ Bread to the cottage, justice to
the palace,” was the promise of the Venetian
Ten, and Napoleon, if he changes the
second, adheres to the first condition. His
offer is also bread to the cottage, provided
only that there is silence in the palace. It
is for France to decide whether she accepts
an offer which is not a small one, which if
honestly made is capable of fulfillment, and
which would pledge her Government to the
best ad interim occupation it could possibly
pursue. Only we would just remind her
that education in the Emperor’s mouth has
hitherto meant only education through
priests, and improvement in the condition
of the labourer only a vast expenditure out
of taxes which the labourer pays, that the first
result of these works has been the reckless
over-crowding of all towns, and that of these
promises there is not one which liberty
could not also secure.
�BEAU-MONDE ANDTPHE DEMI-MONDE IN PARIS.
593
Madame Deffand and Madame Roland or of the roturier ; the conflicts of science and
those of Madame Recamier, exercised over theology — all these furnished materials for
the warriors, sages, and statesmen of France. the tongues of the clever women, materials
The homage paid by the men to the brilliant of which the clever women fully availed
women who charmed the society which they themselves. The final result was not, in
had helped to create may not always have deed, wholly satisfactory. How many a
been perfectly disinterested. The friend short sharp sarcasm, shot from the tongue
ship of the women for their illustrious ad of brilliant causeuses,‘rebounded on the gil
mirers may not always have been perfectly ded rooms wherein it first hurtled! How
Platonic. There may have been some im many a satire, sugared with compliment, at
propriety—or, as our more Puritan friends which rival beaux chuckled in delight,
would say, some sin — in the intercourse of came back with its uncovered venom to the
some of the most celebrated Frenchmen hearts of those whose admiration had first
and Frenchwomen. Yet even this could provoked it! How many a gibe of reckless
not have been predicated of all. Madame truth, aimed at courts and nobles, distilled
de Sevigne’s reputation comes out. clear through laquais and waiting-maids into the
and spotless even from the foulest assault of streets of Paris, to whet the after-wrath
wounded vanity and slighted love. We do of that fierce canaille! Many of those
not forget the comprehensive loves and the clever women had better been silent; many
deliberate inconstancy of Ninon. But Ni of those pungent epigrams had better been
non, corrupt, as she may have been, was unsaid. Still, while the spirited talk went
not venal. She did not ruin her lovers by her on, life was illumined by no common bril
covetousness, and then receive their wives liance ; and vice not only decked itself, but
and sisters in her salons. She was courted forgot _ itself, in the guise of intelligence
by elegant and virtuous women, because she and wit.
was the single and solitary instance as yet
But what a change is it now! There are
known of a woman possessing every grace drawing-rooms in Paris which are more
and every charm save the grace and charm brilliant and gorgeous than any that De
of virtue. Whatever may have been the Sevigne or Recamier ever satin
*
But their
relations between the sexes in those days, brilliance and splendour are not of such
it was at least free from grossness. The airy impalpabilities as genius or wit. They
charms which attracted men to the Maison are solid, substantial, tangible. They are
Rambouillet were not those of sense alone, the brilliance and the splendour, not of able
or in a special degree. They were those of men and clever women, but of the uphol
conversation at once spirited, graceful, sterer, the mechanician, and the decorator.
elegant, and vivacious. To an accom There is gold, there is marble, there is lapis
plished man there is perhaps no greater lazuli; there are pictures, statues, ormolu
social treat than to hear good French clocks; there are rich velvets and cloud
spoken by an educated and clever French like lace, and a blaze of amethysts, rubies,
woman. In her hands a language of which and diamonds. There are trains of Impe
both the excellences and the defects eminent rial dimensions and tiaras of Ijnperial bright
ly qualify it for the purposes of conversational ness. And in whose honour is all this grand
combat becomes a weapon of dazzling fence. display ? To whom is the court paid by
Those delicate turns of phrase which imply this mob of sombre-clad and neatly-gloved
so much more than they express fly like men of every age, from twenty to sixty ?
Parthian shafts, and the little commonplaces Who have taken the place of the great
which may mean nothing do what the female leaders of society whose names have
pawns do when manipulated by a clever added lustre to France ? Strange as it
chess-player — everything. And in the age may seem, their successors are secondwhen the empire of Frenchwomen rested rate or third-rate actresses, opera-dancers,
upon their grace and power in conversa and singers at public rooms and public gar
tion, there was ample matter to task their dens. We do not intend to undertake the
remarkable talents. It was an age of new superfluous task of penning a moral dia
ideas. Government, religion, and philoso tribe, or inveighing against the immorality
phy: the administration of the kingdom of the age. Sermons there are, and will
and the administration of the universe ; the be, in abundance on so prolific and provok
rights of kings to be obeyed by their people ing a theme. In every age actresses and
and the right of the Creator to the adora ballet-girls have had their admirers. In
tion of his creatures; the claims of privi every age, probably, they will continue to
lege and the claims of prerogative; the have admirers. But what is worthy of note
pretensions of rank and the pretensions is this. Formerly this admiration was of
THIRD SERIES. LIVING AGE. VOL. XXXI [.
1478.
�594
BEAU-MONDE AND THE DEMIMONDE IN PARIS.
an esoteric kind. The worshippers adored
their divinities in secret. The temples of
the goddesses were, at any rate, not obtrud
ed on the public eye, nor in possession of
the most open, public, and splendid streets.
The cult, too, was confined to a narrower
circle. But now all this is changed; the
fanes of the divinities ‘are splendid and in
the most splendid streets ; the cult is open,
avowed, public. The worshippers are of
every age, and are all equally indifferent to
secrecy. There is no restriction and no ex
clusion, save on two grounds — those of
poverty and intelligence. There is a kind
of intellect admitted into this gorgeous cote
rie, but it is intellect in livery. The dra
matic author and the dramatic critic are
now as much appendages to the dramatic
courtezan as her coachman and her femme de
chambre. Where professional reputation
depends on scenic effect, and scenic effect
depends upon the equivoque put into the
.actress’s mouth, and the applause with
Tvhich their delivery is received, the man
who concocts the equivoque and the man
•who criticises their delivery become equally
•objects of attention to the actress who is
looking ou^ for a clientele. Saving these
necessary exceptions, these assemblies are
• comprised of rich old men anxious to dissi;pate the money which they have made, and
•rich young men as anxious to dissipate the
•wealth which they have inherited. And
;now we hear that the wives and sisters of
these men seek admission to these Paphian
jhalls.
Jt is, indeed, not an unnatural, though it
iis far from a decent, curiosity which prompts
ladies entitled to the reputation of virtue
do examine something of the life and dounestic economy of those ladies whose very
• existence presupposes an entire repudiation
< of virtue. The married women naturally
•■desire to know something of the manners
and mein and language of the-rivals whose
■arts have diverted their own husbands’
■treasures into alien and obnoxious channels.
'When a wife hears that her husband has,
at one magnificent stroke on the Bourse,
(Carried off one or two millions of francs,
; she is curious to ascertain the process by
which no inconsiderable proportion of these
-winnings has been “ affected ” to the payiment of Madlle. Theodorine’s debts or to the
■purchase of Madlle. Valentine’s brougham.
.And the anxious mother, who has long
■dreamed of the ceremony which might
unite the fortunes of her dear Alcide with
"the dot of her opulent neighbour’s daughter,
Is tortured between the misery of frustrated
Slopes and curiosity to understand the mo
tives which impel Alcide to become the
daily visitor of Mdlle. Gabrielle in the Rue
d’Arcade, and her daily companion when
riding in the Bois de Boulogne. Certainly
the subject is a very curious one. But does
the solution of the problem quite justify
the means taken to solve it? Might not
enough be inferred from the antecedent
history of those who are the subjects of it
to dispense with the necessity of a nearer
examination? Take a number of women
of the lower classes from the different
provinces of France — with no refinement,
with a mere shred of education, and with
but small claim to what an English eye
would regard as beauty — but compensating
for lack of knowledge, education, and re
finement by a vivacity and a coquetry pe
culiarly French. Take these women up to
Paris, tutor them as stage supernumeraries,
and parade before them the example of the
arts of the more successful Eorettes. The
rest may be imagined. From these general
premises it is not difficult to conjecture the
product obtained; to conceive that manner
on which jeunes gens dote, a manner made
up of impudence and grimace ; that repar
tee which mainly consists of ,a new slang
hardly known two miles beyond the Made
line ; those doubles entendres of which per
haps memory is less the parent than instinct,
and that flattery which is always coarse and
always venal. It would be erroneous to say
that we have here given a complete picture
of the class which certain leaders of Paris
fashion wish to study. There are, in the
original, traits and features which we could
not describe, and which it is unnecessary
for us to attempt to describe, as they are por
trayed in the pages of the satirist who has im
mortalized the vices of the most corrupt city
at its most corrupt era. Juvenal will supply
what is wanting to our imperfect delinea
tion. English ladies may read him in the
vigorous paraphrases of Dryden and Gif
ford ; ’ while their French contemporaries
may arrive at a livelier conception of what
we dare not express, if only they stay till
the supper crowns the festal scene of the
masqued ball. If they outstay this, they
will have learned a lesson the value of
which we leave it for themselves to com
pute.
.
. .
It is idle to say that curiosity of this kind
is harmless because it is confined to a few.
Only a few, indeed, may have contemplated
the extreme step of being present at the
Saturnalia of the demi-monde. But how
many others have thought of them and
talked of them ? To how many leaders of
society are the doings of these women the
�THE COVERT.
subjects of daily curiosity and daily con
versation ? How many patrician. -— or, at
all events, noble — dames regular attend
ants at mass, arbiters of fashion, and orna
ments of the Church, honour with their in
quisitiveness, women of whose existence,
twenty years ago, no decent Frenchwoman
was presumed to have any knowledge ?
And do these noble ladies suppose that this
curiosity is disregarded by the adventur
esses from Arles or Strasburg, Bordeaux or
Rouen, whom successful prostitution has
dowered with lace, diamonds, carriages,
and opera-boxes ? Do they suppose that
the professed admiration of the young
Sardanapali for the ex-couturieres and bal
let-girls of Paris has not a more potent ef
fect when combined with the ill-concealed
interest of their mothers and sisters ? And
what that effect is on the men in one class,
and on the women in another, a very slight
knowledge of human nature is sufficient to
suggest. That girls of moderately good looks
will contentedly continue to ply the shuttle
at Lyons, or to drudge as household servants
in Brittany, or to trudge home to a supperless
chamber in Paris with the bare earnings of
a supernumerary or a coryphee at a small
theatre, when a mere sacrifice of chastity
may enable them not only to ruin young
dukes and counts, but to become the theme
and admiration of duchesses and countesses,
is a supposition which involves too high a
U 1 •-■! .
belief in human virtue; and the conditions
we have named are found to be fatal to the
virtue of the poorer Frenchwomen. And
as for the men, what must be the effect on
them ? Debarred from the stirring conflict
of politics; exiled, so to speak, from the
natural arena of patriotic ambition ; know
ing no literature save that of novels in
which courtezans are the heroines, and
caring for no society but that of which
courtezans are the leaders; diversifying the
excitement of the hazard-table and the
betting-room with the excitement of the
coulisses; learning from their habitual asso
ciations to lose that reverence for women
and that courteous attention to them which
are popularly supposed to have at one time
characterized the gentlemen of France —
they partially redeem the degradation which
they court by showing that even a mixture
of vapid frivolity, sensual indulgence, and
senseless extravagance is insufficient to cor
rupt a nation, unless also the female leaders
of society conspire to select for their notice
and admiration those creatures for whom
the law of the land would better have pro
vided the supervision of the police and
the certificate of professional prostitution.
When virtuous women of birth and position
rub shoulders with strumpets, protests are
useless and prophecies are superfluous; for
the taint which goes before destruction is
already poisoning the heart of the nation.
',fl. J
i.
••• • .
‘
bn .
••
' r
'
«
------ — W.’tWUS. •» .(<
‘i
{f, •
bill f>
too’t ito <I> ;!•>.. j vf'jqUiH wto
-w
. *' fl-r< —W
RO
aw; al p
to
’
sir
fi:
THE COVERT.
The eagle beats his way
Strong-winged through the burning blue:
All through the heat of the day
In the covert the wood-doves coo.
Take the wings of the dove, my soul!
Take the wings of the dove!
For the sun is not thy goal,
But the secret place of love. <
Close to the earth and near,
And hidden among the flowers,
By the brink of the brooklet clear,
The dove in her covert cowers.
>‘ni Wq XT
. .ih
Take the wings of the dove, my soul I
Take the wings of the dove!
For the sun is not thy goal,
But the secret place of love.
<•
--.ml.
Flee not afar, my soul
Flee not afar for rest 1
.
The tumult may round thee roll,
q
Yet the dove be in thy breast.
Take the wings of the dove, my soul!
Take the wings of the dove!
--X
For the sun is not thy goal,
But the resting place of love.
"ir Mw
U
yi iv
Good Words'
�596
ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
IN MEMORY OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN, THE in her inmost nature, she disenthralled re
MARTYR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED ligion from bondage to temporal power,
STATES.
that her worship might be worship only in
Oration of the Hon. George Bancroft,
at the request of both Houses of Congress,
in the Hall of the House of Representa*v lives of the United States, on Monday,
Feb. 12, 1866. !
Senators, Representatives, ofAmerica: —
GOD IN HISTORY.
That God rules in the affairs of men is
as certain as any truth of physical science.
On the great moving power which is from
the beginning hangs the world of the senses
and the world of thought and action. Eternal
wisdom marshals the great procession of the
nations, working in patient continuity
through the ages, never halting, and never
abrupt, encompassing all events in its over
sight, and ever affecting its will, though
mortals may slumber in apathy or oppose
with madness. Kings are lifted up or thrown
down, nations come and go, republics flour
ish and wither, dynasties pass away like a
tale that is told; but nothing is by chance,
though men in their ignorance of causes may
think so. The deeds of time are governed
as well as judged, by the decrees of eterni
ty. The caprice of fleeting existences bends
to the immovable omnipotence which plants
its foot on all the centuries, and has neither
change of purposes nor repose. Sometimes
like a messenger through the thick darkness
of night, it steps along mysterious ways ; but
when the hour strikes for a people, or for
mankind, to pass into a new form of being,
unseen hands draw the bolts from the gates
of futurity; an all-subduing influence pre
pares the mind of men for the coming revo
lution ; those who plan resistance find them
selves in conflict with the will of Provi
dence, rather than with human devices;
and all hearts and all understandings, most
of all the opinions and influences of the
unwilling, are wonderfully attracted and
compelled to bear forward the change which
becomes more an obedience to the law of
universal nature than submission to the ar
bitrament of man.
GROWTH OF THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC.
In the fulness of time a republic rose up
in the wilderness of America. Thousands
of years had passed away before this child
of the ages could be born. From whatever
there was of good in the systems of former
centuries she drew her nourishment: the
wrecks of the past were her warnings.
With the deepest sentiment of faith fixed
spirit and in truth. The wisdom which had
passed from India through Greece, with
what Greece had added of her own; the
jurisprudence of Rome; the mediaaval mu
nicipalities ; the Teutonic method of repre
sentation ; the political experience of Eng
land ; the benignant wisdom of the exposi
tors of the law of nature and of nations in
France and Holland, all shed on her their
selectest influence. She washed the gold
of political wisdom from the sands whereever it was found; she cleft it from the
rocks; she gleaned it among ruins. Out of
all the discoveries of statesmen and sages,
out of all the experience of past human life,
she compiled a perennial political philoso
phy, the primordinal principles of national
ethics. The wise men of Europe sought the
best government in a mixture of monarchy,
aristocracy, and democracy; and America
went behind t^ese names to extract from
them the vital elements of social forms, and
blend them harmoniously in the free Com
monwealth, which comes nearest to the illus
tration of the natural equality of all men.
She intrusted the guardianship of establish
ed rights to law; the movements of reform
to the Spirit of the people, and drew her
force from the happy reconciliation of both.
TERRITORIAL EXTENT OF THE REPULIC.
Republics had heretofore been limited to
small cantons or cities and their dependen
cies ; America, doing that of which the like
had not before been known upon the earth,
or believed by kings and statesmen to be
possible, extended her republic across a
continent. Under her auspices the vine of
liberty took deep root and filled the land;
the hills were covered with its shadow ; its
boughs were like the goodly cedars, and
reached unto both oceans. The fame of
this only daughter of freedom went out
into all the lands of the earth; from her
the human race drew hope.
PROPHECIES ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF
SLAVERY.
Neither hereditary monarchy nor heredi
tary aristocracy planted itself on our soil;
the only hereditary condition that fastened
itself upon us was servitude. Nature works
in sincerity, and is ever true to its law.
The bee hives honey, the. viper distils pois
on ; the vine stores its juices, and so do the
poppy and the upas. In like manner, every
thought and every action ripens its seed,
each in its kind. In the individual man,
�ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
. 597
and still more in a nation, a just idea gives position of Virginia and the South that the
life, and progress, and glory; a false j®pn- clause of Jefferson was restored, and the
ception portends disaster, shame, and death. whole Northwestern Territory — all the
A hundred and twenty years ago, a West' territory that then belonged to the nation
Jersey Quaker wrote : “ this trade of im — was reserved for the labor of freemen.
porting slaves is dark gloominess hanging
over the land; the consequences will be DESPAIR OK THE MEN OF THE REVO’‘£l
" lution.
grievous to posterity.”. At the North the
growth of slavery was arrested by natural
The hope prevailed in Virginia that the
causes; in the region nearest the tropics it abolition of the slave trade would bring
throve rankly, and worked itself into the with it the gradual abolition of slavery ; but
organism of the rising States. Virginia the expectation was doomed to disappoint
stood between the two; with soil, and cli ment. In supporting incipient measures
mate, resources demanding free labour, for emancipation, Jefferson encountered
and yet capable of the profitable employ difficulties greater than he could overcome;
ment of the slave. She was the land of and after vain wrestlings, the words that
great statesmen ; and they saw the danger broke from him, “ I tremble for my coun
of her being whelmed under the rising flood try, when I reflect that God is just, that his
in time to struggle against the delusions of justice cannot sleep forever,” were words
avarice and pride. Ninety-four years ago, of despair. It was the desire of Washing
the Legislature of Virginia addressed the ton’s heart that Virginia should remove
British king, saying that the trade in slaves slavery by a public act; and as the pros
was “ of great inhumanity,” was opposed to pect of a general emancipation grew more
the “ security and happiness ” of their con and more dim he, in utter hopelessness of
stituents, “ would in time have the most the action of the State, did all that he could
destructive influence,” and “ endanger their by bequeathing freedom to his own slaves.
very existence.” And the king answered Good and true men had, from the days of
them, that “ upon pain of-his highest dis 1776, thought of colonizing the negro in
pleasure, the importation of slaves should the home of his ancestors. But the idea of
not be in any respect obstructed. “ Phar colonization was thought to increase the dif
isaical Britain,” wrote Franklin in behalf of ficulty of emancipation; and in spite of
Virginia, “to pride thyself in setting free a strong support, while it accomplished much
single slave that happened to land on thy good for Africa, it. proved impracticable as
coasts, while thy laws continue a traffic a remedy at home. Madison, who in early
whereby so many hundreds of thousands are life disliked slavery so much that he wished
dragged into a slavery that is entailed on “ to depend as little as possible on the labor
their posterity.” “A serious view of this of slaves ; ” Madison, who held that where
subject,” said Patrick Henry in 1773, “ gives slavery exists “ the republican theory be
a gloomy prospect to future times.” In the comes fallaciotis; ” Madison, who in the
same year George Mason wrote to the Leg last years of his life would not consent to
islature of Virginia: “ The laws of impar the annexation of Texas, lest his country
tial Providence may avenge our injustice men should fill it with slaves ; Madison, who
upon our posterity.” In Virginia, and in said, “ slavery is the greatest evil under
the Continental Congress, Jefferson, with which the nation labors, a portentous evil,
the approval of Edmund Pendleton, brand an evil — moral, political and economical —ed the slave trade as piracy; and he fixed a sad blot on our free country,” went mourn
in the Declaration of Independence as the fully into old age with the cheerless words:
corner stone of America: “ All men are “ No satisfactory plan has yet been devised
created equal, with an unalienable right to for taking out the stain.”
liberty.” On the first organization of tem
NEW VIEWS OF SLAVERY.
porary governments for the continental do
main Jefferson, but for the default of New
The men of the Revolution passed away.
Jersey, would, in 1784, have consecrated A new generation sprang up, impatient that
every part of that territory to freedom. In an institution to which they clung should be
the formation of the National Constitution condemned as inhuman, unwise and unjust;
Virginia, opposed by a part of New Eng in the throes of discontent at the self-re
land vainly struggled to abolish the slave proach of their fathers, and blinded by the
trade at once and forever; and when the lustre of wealth to be acquired by the cul
ordinance of 1787 was introduced by Na ture of a new staple, they devised the theo
than Dane, without the clause prohibiting ry that slavery, which they would not abol
slavery, it was through the favourable dis ish, was not evil, but good. They turned
�598
ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
on the friends of colonization, and confi
dently demanded, “ Why take black men
from a civilized and Christian country, where
their labor is a source of immense gain and
a power to control the markets of the
world, and send them to a land of ignorance,
idolatry, and indolence, which was the home
of their forefathers, but not theirs ? Slav
ery is a blessing. Were they not in their
ancestral land naked, scarcely lifted above
brutes, ignorant of the course of the sun,
controlled by nature ? And in their new
abode, have they not been taught to know
the difference of the seasons, to plough, to
plant and reap, to drive oxen, to tame the
horse, to exchange their scanty dialect for
the richest of all the languages among men,
and the stupid adoration of follies for the
purest religion ? And since slavery is good
for the blacks, it is good for their masters,
bringing opulence and the opportunity of
educating a race. The slavery of the black
is good in itself; he shall serve the white
man forever.” And nature, which better
understood the quality of fleeting interest
and passion, laughed, as it caught the
echo: “ man ” and “ forever 1 ”
SLAVERY AT HOME.
A regular development of pretensions fol
lowed the new declaration with logical con
sistency. Under the old declaration every
one of the States had retained, each for itself,
the right of manumitting all slaves by an
ordinary act of legislation ; now, the power
of the people over servitude through their
legislatures was curtailed, and the privil
eged class was swift in imposing legal and
constitutional obstruction, on the people
themselves. The power of emancipation
was narrowed or taken away. The slave
might not be disquieted by education. There
remained an unconfessed consciousness that
the system of bondage was wrong, and a
restless memory that it was at variance
with the true American tradition, its safety
was therefore to be secured by political or
ganization. The generation that made the
Constitution took care for the predomi
nance of freedom in Congress, by the ordi
nance of Jefferson ; the new school aspired
to secure for slavery an equality of votes in
the Senate; and while it hinted at an or
ganic act that should concede to the collec
tive South a veto power on national legisla
tion, it assumed that each State separately
had the right to revise and nullify laws of
the United States, according to the discre
tion of its judgment.
SLAVERY AND FOREIGN RELATIONS.
The new theory hung as a bias on the for
eign relations of the country; there could be
no recognition of Hayti, nor even the Amer
ican colony of Liberia; and the world was
given to understand that the establishment
of free labor in Cuba would be a reason for
wresting that island from Spain. Territo
ries were annexed; Louisiana, Florida, Tex
as, half of Mexico; slavery must have its
share in them all, and it accepted for a time
a dividing line between the unquestioned
domain of free labor and that in which in
voluntary labor was to be tolerated. A few
years passed away, and the new school,
strong and arrogant, demanded and recived an apology for applying the Jefferson
proviso to Oregon.
SQUATTER SOVEREIGNTY.
The application of that proviso was inter
rupted for three administrations; but justice
moved steadily onward. In the news that the
men of California had chosen freedom, Cal
houn heard the knell of parting slavery7; and
on his deathbed he counselled secession.
Washington, and Jefferson, and Madison,
had died despairing of the abolition of slav
ery ; Calhoun died in despair at the growth
of freedom., His system rushed irresistibly
to its natural development. The death
struggle for California was followed by a
short truce; but the new school of politicians
who said that slavery was not evil, but good,
soon sought to recover the ground they had
lost, and confident of securing Texas, they
demanded that the established line in the
territories between freedom and slavery
should be blotted out. The country, believ
ing in the strength and enterprise and ex
pansive energy of freedom, made answer,
though reluctantly: “ Be it so ; let there be
no strife between brethren ; let freedom and
slavery compete for the territories on equal
terms, in a fair field under an impartial ad
ministration ; ” and on this theory, if on any,
the contest might have been left to the de
cision of time.
DEED SCOTT DECISION.
The South started back in appallment
from its victory; for it knew that a fair
competition foreboded its defeat. But where
could it now find an ally to save it from its
own mistake ? What I have next to say is
spoken with no emotion but regret. Our
meeting to-day is, as it were, at the grave,
in the presence of Eternity, and the truth
must be uttered in soberness and sincerity.
�ORATION OF THE. HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
In a great republic, as was observed more
than two thousand years ago, any attempt
to overturn the state owes its strength to aid
from some branch of the government. The
Chief Justice of the United States, without
any necessity or occasion, volunteered to
come to the rescue of the theory of slavery.
And from his court there lay no appeal but
to the bar of humanity and history. Against
the Constitution, against the memory of the
nation, against a previous decision, against
a series of enactments, he decided that the
slave is property, that slave property is en
titled to no less protection than any other
property, that the Constitution upholds it in
every territory against any act of a local
Legislature, and even against Congress it
self ; or, as the President tersely promulgat
ed the saying : “ Kansas is as much a slave
. State as South Carolina or Georgia ; slav
ery, by virtue of the Constitution, exists in
every territory.” The municipal character
of slavery being thus taken away, and slave
property decreed to be “ sacred,” the au
thority of the courts was invoked to intro
duce it by the comity of law into States
where slavery had been abolished; and in
one of the courts of the United States a
judge pronounced the African slave trade
legitimate, and numerous and powerful ad
vocates demanded its restoration.
TANEY AND SLAVE RACES.
Moreover, the Chief Justice, in his elabo
rate opinion, announced what had never
been heard from any magistrate of Greece
or Rome — what was unknown to civil law,
and canon law, and feudal law, and comm on
law, and constitutional law; unknown to
Jay, to Rutledge, Ellsworth and Marshall
— that there are “ slave races.” The spirit
of evil is intensely logical. Having the au
thority of this decision, five States swiftly
followed the earlier example of a sixth, and
opened the way for reducing the free negro
to bondage; the migrating free negro be
came a slave if he but touched the soil of a
seventh ; and an eighth, from its extent and
soil and mineral resources, destined to in
calculable greatness, closed its eyes on its
coming prosperity, and enacted — as by Ta
ney’s decision it had the right to do — that
every free black man who would live within
its limits must accept the condition of slav
ery for himself‘and his posterity.
SECESSION RESOLVED ON.
Only one step more remained to be taken.
Jefferson and the leading statesmen of his
day held fast to the idea that the enslave
ment of the African was socially, morally
599
and politically wrong. The new school was
founded exactly upon the opposite idea;
and they resolved first to distract the demo
cratic party for which the Supreme Court
had now furnished the means, and then to
establish a new government, with negro
slavery for its corner stone, as socially, mor
ally and politically right.
THE ELECTION.
As the presidential election drew on, one
of the old traditional parties did not make
its appearance; the other reeled as it sought
to preserve its old position; and the candi
date who most nearly represented its best
opinion, driven by patriotic zeal, roamed
the country from end to end to speak for
union, eager at least to confront its enemies,
yet not having hope that it would find its
deliverance through him. The storm rose
to a whirlwind ; who should allay its wrath ?
The most experienced statesmen of the
country had failed ; there was no hope from
those who were great after the flesh; could
relief come from one whose wisdom was like
the wisdom of little children ?
EARLY LIFE OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
The choice of America fell on a man born
west of the Alleghanies, in the cabin of poor
people of Hardin county, Kentucky — Abra
ham Lincoln.
His mother could read, but not write ; his
father could do neither ; but his parents sent
him, with an old spelling-book, to school,
and he learned in his childhood to do both.
When eight years old he floated down the
Ohio with his father on a raft which bore
the family and all their possessions to the
shore of Indiana; and, child as he was, he
gave help as they toiled through dense for
ests to the interior of Spencer county.
There in the land of free labor he grew up
in a log cabin, with the solemn solitude for
his teacher in his meditative hours.
Of
Asiatic literature he knew only the Bible;
of Greek, Latin, and medieval, no more
than the translation of 2Esop’s Fables; of
English, John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress.
The traditions of Georgfe Fox and William
Penn passed to him dimly along the lines .of'
two centuries through his ancestors, who
were Quakers.
HIS EDUCATION.
Otherwise his education was altogether
American. The Declaration of Independ
ence was his compendium of political wis
dom, the life of Washington his constant
study, and something of Jefferson and Madi
son reached him through Henry Clay, whom
�600
ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
he honoured from boyhood. For the re^t,
from day to day, he lived the life of the
American people; walked in its light; rea
soned with its reason, thought with its pow
er of thought; felt the beatings of its mighty
heart; and so was in every way a child of
nature—a child of the West—a child of
America.
HIS PROGRESS IN LIFE.
At nineteen, feeling impulses of ambition
to get on in the world, he engaged himself
to go down the Mississippi in a flat boat,
receiving ten dollars a month for his wages,
and afterwards he made the trip once more.
At twenty-one he drove his father’s cattle
as the family migrated to Illinois, and split
rails to fence in the new homestead in the
wild. At twenty-three he was a captain of
volunteers in the Black Hawk war. He
kept a shop ; he learned something of sur
veying ; but of English literature he added
to Bunyan nothing but Shakespeare’s plays.
At twenty-five he was elected to the Legis
lature of Illinois, where he served eight
years. At twenty-seven he was admitted
to the bar. In 1837 he chose his home at
Springfield, the beautiful centre of the
richest land in the State. In 1847 he was
a member of the national Congress, where
he voted about forty times in favour of the
principle of the Jefferson proviso. In 1854
he gave his influence to elect 'from Illinois
to the American Senate a democrat who
would certainly do justice to Kansas. In
1858, as the rival of Douglas, he went be
fore the people of the mighty Prairie State,
saying: “ This Union cannot permanently
endure, half slave and half free ; the Union
will not be dissolved, but the house will
cease to be divided.” And now, in 1861,
with no experience whatever as an exec
utive officer, while States were madly fly
ing from their orbit, and wise men knew
not where to find counsel, this descendant
of Quakers, this pupil of Bunyan, this
child of the great West was elected Presi
dent of America.
He measured the difficulty of the duty
that devolved on him, and was resolved to
fulfil it.
HE GOES TO WASHINGTON.
As on the eleventh of February, 1861, he
left Springfield, which for a quarter of a
century had been his happy home, to the
crowd of his friends and neighbours whom
he was never more to meet, he spoke a
solemn farewell: “ I know not how soon I
shall see you again. A duty has devolved
upon me, greater than that which has de
volved upon any other man since Washing
ton. He never would have succeeded, ex
cept for the aid of Divine Providence, upon
which he at all times relied. On the same
Almighty Being I place my reliance. Pray
that I may receive that Divine assistance,
without which I cannot succeed, but with
which success is certain.” To the men of
Indiana he said : > “ I am but an accidental,
temporary instrument; it is your business
to rise up and preserve the Union and lib
erty.” At the capital of Ohio he said:
“ Without a name, without a reason why I
should have a name, there has fallen upon
me a task such as did not rest even upon
the Father of his country.” At various
places in New York, especially at Albany
before the Legislature, which tendered him
the united support of the great Empire
State, he said: “ While I hold myself the
humblest of all the individuals who have
ever been elevated to the Presidency, I
have a more difficult task to perform than
any of them. I bring a true heart to the
work. I must rely upon the' people of the
whole country for support; and with their
sustaining aid even I, humble as I am, can
not fail to carry the ship of State safely
through the storm.” To the Assembly of
New Jersey, at Trenton, he explained: “ I
shall take the ground I deem .most just to
the North, the East, the West, the South,
and the whole country, in good temper,
certainly with no malice to any section. I
am devoted to peace, but it may. be neces
sary to put the foot down firmly.” In the
old Independence Hall of Philadelphia he
said: “ I have never had a feeling politi
cally that did not spring from the senti
ments embodied in the Declaration of In
dependence, which gave liberty, not alone
to the people of this country, but to the
world in all future time. If the country
cannot be- saved without giving up that
principle, I would rather be assassinated on
the spot than surrender it. I have said
nothing but what I am willing to live and
die by.
IN WHAT STATE HE FOUND THE
.COUNTRY.
Travelling in the dead of night to escape
assassination, Lincoln arrived at Washing
ton nine days before his inauguration. The
outgoing President, at the opening of the
session of Congress had still kept as the
majority of his advisers men engaged in
treason : had declared that in case of even
an “ imaginary ” apprehension of danger
from notions of freedom among the slaves,
“ disunion would become inevitable.” Lin-
�ORATION OF THE HOI . GEORGE BANCROFT.
601
coin and others had questioned the opinion of of th© South, or any decision of the Su
Taney; such impugning he ascribed to the preme Court; and, nevertheless, the seced
“ factious temper of the times.” The fa ing States formed at Montgomery a provi
vorite doctrine of the majority of the sional government, and pursued their re
democratic party on the power of a terri lentless purpose with such success that the
torial legislature over slavery he condemned Lieutenant-General feared the city of
as an attack on “ the sacred rights of pro Washington might find itself “ included in
perty.” The State Legislatures, he insist a foreign country,” and proposed, among
ed, must repeal what he called “their un the options for the consideration of Lincoln,
constitutional and obnoxious enactments,” to bid the seceded States “ depart in peace.”
and which, if such, were “ null and void,” The great republic seemed to have its em
or “ it would be impossible for any human blem in the vast unfinished capitol, at that
power to save the Union ! ” Nay 1 if these moment surrounded by masses of stone and
unimportant acts were not repealed, “ the prostrate columns never yet lifted into
injured States would be justified in revolu their places: seemingly the monument of
tionary resistance to the government of the high but delusive aspirations, the confused
Union.” He maintained that no State wreck of inchoate magnificence, sadder
might secede at its sovereign will and than any ruin of Egyptian Thebes or
pleasure; that the Union was meant for Athens.
perpetuity; and that Congress might at
tempt to preserve, but only by conciliation;
HIS INAUGURATION.
that “the sword was not placed in their
The fourth of March came. With inhands to preserve it by force; ” that “ the stincftve wisdom the new President, speak
last desperate remedy of a despairing peo ing to the people on taking the oath of
ple ” would be “ an explanatory amend office, put aside every question that divided
ment recognizing the decision of the Su the country, and gained a right to univer
preme Court of the United States.” The sal support, by planting himself on the
American Union he called “ a confederacy ” single idea of Union. That Union he de
of States, and he thought it a duty to make clared to be unbroken and perpetual; and
the appeal for amendment “ before any of he announced his determination to fulfil
these States should separate themselves “the simple duty of taking care that the
from the Union.” The views off the Lieu laws be faithfully executed in all the
tenant-General, containing some patriotic States.” Seven days later, the convention
advice, “ conceded the right of secession,” of confederate States unanimously adopted
pronounced a quadruple rupture of the a constitution of their own; and the new
Union “ a smaller evil than the reuniting of government was authoritatively announ
the fragments by the sword,” and “ eschew ced to be founded on the idea that slave
ed the idea of invading a seceded State. ry is the natural and normal condition
After changes in the Cabinet, the Presi of the negro race. The issue was made up
dent informed Congress that “ matters were whether the great republic was to main
still worse; ” that “ the South suffered se tain its providential place in the history of
rious grievances,” which should be redress mankind, or a rebellion founded on negro
ed “ in peace.” The day after this message slavery gain a recognition of its principle'
the flag of the Union was fired upon from throughout the civilized world. To the
Fort Moultrie, and the insult was not disaffected Lincoln had said: “ You have
revenged or noticed. Senators in Congress no conflict without being yourselves the ag
telegraphed to their constituents to seize gressors.” To fire the passions of the South
the national forts, and they were not ar ern portion of the people the confederate
rested. The finances of the country were government chose to become aggressors;
grievously embarrassed. Its little army and on the morning of the 12th of April
was not within reach — the part of it in began the bombardment of Fort Sumter,
Texas,' with all its stores, were made over and compelled its evacuation.
by its commander to the seceding insur
UPRISING OF THE PEOPLE
gents. One State after another voted in
convention to go out of the Union. A
It is the glory of the late President that
peace Congress, so-called, met at the re he had perfect faith in the perpetuity of
quest of Virginia, to concert the terms of the Union. Supported in advance by
capitulation for the continuance of the Douglas, who spoke as with the voice of a
Union. Congress in both branches sought million, he instantly called a meeting of
to devise conciliatory expedients ; the ter Congress, and summoned the people to
ritories of the country were organized in a come up and repossess the forts, places and
manner not to conflict with any pretensions property which had been seized from the
�602
ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
Union. The men of the North were trained
in schools; industrious and frugal; many
of them delicately bred, their minds teem
ing with ideas and fertile in plans of enter
prise ; given to the culture of the arts;
eager in the pursuit of wealth, yet employ
ing wealth less for ostentation than for de
veloping the resources of their country;
seeking happiness in the calm of domestic
life; and such lovers of peace that for gen
erations they have been reputed unwarlike.
Now, at the cry of their country in its dis
tress, they rose up with unappeasable patri
otism : not hirelings'— the purest and of the
best blood in the land; sons of a pious
ancestry, with a clear perception of duty,
unclouded faith and fixed resojve to succeed,
they thronged round the President to sup
port the wronged, the beautiful flag of the
nation. The halls of theological semi
naries sent forth their young men, whose
lips were touched with eloquence, whose
hearts kindled with devotion to serve in the
ranks, and make their way to command
only as they learned the art of war. Strip
lings in the colleges, as well as the most
gentle and the most studious; those of
sweetest temper and loveliest character and
brightest genius passed from their classes to
the camp. The lumbermen sprang forward
from the forest, the mechanics from their
benches, where they had been trained by
the exercise of political rights to share
the Hfe and hope of the Republic, to feel
their responsibility to their forefathers,
their posterity and mankind, went forth re
solved that their dignity as a constituent
part of this republic should not be impaired.
Farmers and sons of farmers left the land
but half ploughed, the grain but half plant
ed, and, taking up the musket, learned to
face without fear the presence of peril- and
the coming of death in the shocks of war,
while their hearts were still attracted to the
charms of their rural life, and all the tender
affections of home. Whatever there was of
truth and faith and public love in the com
mon heart broke out with one expression.
The mighty winds blew from every quarter
to fan the flame of the sacred and unquench
able fire.
in an eminent degree attained to freedom
of industry and the security of person and
property. Its middle class rose to greatness.
Out of that class sprung the noblest poets
and philosophers, whose words built up the
intellect of its people; skilful navigators,
to find out the many paths of the ocean;
discoverers in natural science, whose inven
tions guided its industry to wealth, till it
equalled any nation of the world in letters,
and excelled all in trade and commerce.
But its government was become a govern
ment of land, and not of men; every blade
of grass was represented, but only a small
minority of the people. In the transition
from the feudal forms, the heads of the so
cial organization freed themselves from the
military services which were the conditions
of their tenure, and throwing the burden on
the industrial classes, kept all the soil to
themselves. Vast estates that had been
managed by monasteries as endowments for
religion and charity were impropriated to
swell the wealth of courtiers and favorites;
and the commons, where the poor man once
had his right of pasture, were taken away,
and, under forms of law, enclosed distributively within their own domains. Although
no law forbade any inhabitant from pur
chasing land, the costliness of the transfer
constituted a prohibition; so that it was the
rule of that country that the plough should
not be in the hands of its owner. The
church was rested on a contradiction,
claiming to be an embodiment of absolute
truth, and yet was a creature of the statute
book.
HER SENTIMENTS.
The progress of time increased the terri
ble contrast between wealth and poverty;
in their years of strength, the laboring peo
ple, cut off from all share in governing the
State, derived a scanty support from the
severest toil, and had no hope for old age
but in public charity or death. A grasping
ambition had dotted the world with military
posts, kept watch over our borders on the
northeast, at the Bermudas, in the West
Indies, held the gates of the Pacific, of the
Southern and of the Indian Ocean, hover
ed on our northwest at Vancouver, held the
THE WAR A WORLD-WIDE WAR.
whole of the newest continent, and the en
For a time the war was thought to be trances to the old Mediterranean and Red
confined to our own domestic affairs; but Sea ; and garrisoned forts all the way from
it was soon seen that it involved the desti Madras to China.
That aristocracy had
nies of mankind, and its principles and gazed with terror on the growth of a com
causes shook the politics of Europe to the monwealth where freeholds existed by the
centre, and from Lisbon to Pekin, divided million, and religion was not in bondage to
the governments of the world.
the state ; and now they could not repress
GREAT BRITAIN.
their joy at its perils. They had not one
There was a kingdom whose people had I word of sympathy for the kind-hearted
�ORATION OF THE HON
poor man’s son whom America had chosen
for her chief; they jeered at his large hands,
and long feet, and ungainly stature; and
the British' secretary of state for foreign af
fairs made haste to send word through the
palaces of Europe that the great republic
was in its agony,, that the republic was no
more, that a head stone was all that remain
ed due by the law of nations to “ the late
Union.” But it is written: “ Let the dead
bury their dead ; ” they may not bury the
living. Let the dead bury their dead; let
a bill of reform remove the worn-out gov
ernment of a class, and infuse new life into
the British constitution by confiding right
fill power to the people.
HER POLICY.
GEORGE BANCROFT.
603
land. Thrice only in all its history has that
yearning been fairly met; in the days of
Hampden and Cromwell, again in the first
ministry of the elder Pitt, and once again in
the ministry of Shelburne. Not that there
have not at all times been just men among
the peers of Britain — like Halifax in the
days of James the Second, or a Granville, an
Argyll, or a Hdughton in ours ; and we can
not be indifferent to a country that produces
statesmen like Cobden and' Bright; but the
best bower anchor of peace was the working
class of England, who suffered most from
our civil war, but who, while they broke
their diminished bread in sorrow, always en
couraged us to persevere.
FRANCE AND THE MONROE DOCTRINE. ■
*
The act of recognizing the rebel belliger
But while the vitality of America is inde
structible, the British government hurried ents wagLconcerted with France ; France, so
to do what never before had been done by beloved in America, on which she had con
Christian powers, what was in direct con ferred th® greatest benefits that one people
flict with its own exposition of public law in ever conferred on another^ France, which
the time of our struggle for. independence. stands foremost on the continent of Europe
Though the insurgent States had not a ship for the solidity of her culture, as well as for
in an open harbor, it invested them with the bravery and ■ generous impulses of her
all the rights of a belligerent, even on the sons ; France, which for centuries had been
ocean; and this, too, when the rebellion moving steadily in its own way towards in
was not only directed against the gentlest tellectual and policial freewom. The poli
and most beneficent government on earth, cy regarding further^ponization of Ameri
without a shadow of justifiable cause, but ca by European power®!, known commonly
when the rebellion was directed against Ma as the doctrine of Mowoe, had its origin in
man nature itself for the perpetual enslave France; and if it takes any man’s name,
ment of a race. And the effect of this re should bear the name of Turgot. It was
cognition was that acts in themselves pirati adopted by Louis the Sixteenth, in the cabi
cal found shelter in British courts of law. net of which Vergennes was the most imThe resources of British capitalist^ their portant member. It is emphatically the poliworkshops, their armories, their private ar cy of France^ to which, with transient de
senals, their shipyards, were in league with viations, the Bourbons, the First Napoleon,
the insurgents, and every British harbor in the House of Orleans have ever adhered.
the wide world became a safe port for British
ships, manned by British sailors, and arrngfl THE EMPEROR NAPOLEON AND MEXICO.
The late President was perpetually har
with British guns, to prey on our peaceful
commerce ; even on our ships coming from assed by rumors that the Emperor Napoleon
British ports, freighted with British pro the Third desired formally to recognize the
ducts, or that had carried gifts of grain to States in rebellion as an independent power,
the English poor. The prime minister in and that England held him back by her re
the House of Commons, sustained by cheers, luctance, or France by her traditions of
scoffed at the thought that their laws could freedom, or he himself by his own better
be amended at our request, so as to pre judgment and clear perception of events.
serve real neutrality; and to remonstrances But the republic of Mexico, on our borders,
now owned to have been just, their secreta was, like ourselves, distracted by a rebellion,
ry answered that they could not change and from a similar cause. The monarchy
of England . had fastened upon us slavery
their laws ad-infinitum.
which did not disappear with independence;
RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND.
in like manner, the ecclesiastical policy es
The people of America then wished, as tablished by the Spanish council of the In
they always have wished, as they still wish, dies, in the days of Charles the Fifth and
friendly relations with England; and no Philip the Second, retained its vigor in the
man in Europe or America can desire it Mexican Republic. The fifty years of civil
' more strongly than I. This country has al war under which she had languished was
ways yearned for good relations with Eng- I due to the bigoted system which was the
�604
ORATION OF THE HOnJ GEORGE BANCROFT. '
legacy of monarchy, just as here the inheri
tance of slavery kept alive political strife,
and culminated in civil war. As with us
there could be no quiet but through the end
of slavery, so in Mexico there could be no
prosperity until the crushing tyranny of in
tolerance should cease. The party of slav
ery in the United States sent their emissa
ries to Europe to solicit aid; and so did the
party of the church in Mexico, as organized
by the old Spanish council of the Indies,
but with a different result. Just as the re
publican party had made an end of the re
bellion, and was establishing the best gov
ernment ever known in that region, and giv
ing promise to the nation of order, peace,
and prosperity, word was brought us, in the
moment of our deepest affliction, that the
*
French emperor, moved by a desire to erect
in North America a buttress for Imperial
ism, would transform the republic of Mexico
into a secundo-geniture for the house of
Hapsburgh. America might complain ; she
>could not then interpose, and delay seemed
justifiable. It was seen that Mexico could
not, with all its wealth of land, compete in
cereal products with' our northwest, nor, in
tropical products, with Cuba; nor could it,
under a disputed dynasty, attract capital, or
create public works, or develop mines, or
borrow money; so that the imperial system
of Mexico, which was forced at once to rec
ognize the wisdom of the policy of the repub
lic by adopting it, could prove only an un
remunerating drain on the French treasury
for the support of an Austrian adventurer.
THE PERPETUITY OF REPUBLICAN INSTI
TUTIONS.
Meantime, a new series of momentous
questions grows up, and forces themselves
on the consideration of the thoughtful. Re
publicanism has learned how to introduce
into its constitution every element of order,
as well as every element of freedom; but
thus far the continuity of its government has
seemed to depend on the continuity of elec
tions. It is now tobe considered how per
petuity is to be secured against foreign oc
cupation. The successor of Charles the
First of England dated his reign from the
death of his father; the Bourbons, coming
back after a long series of revolutions,
claimed that the Louis who became king was
the eighteenth of that name. The present
emperor of the French, disdaining a title
from election alone, is called the third of his
name. Shall a republic have less power of
continuance when invading armies prevent
a peaceful resort to the ballot box ? What
force shall it attach to intervening legisla
tion ? What validity to debts contracted
for its overthrow ? These momentous
questions are by the invasion of Mexico
thrown up for solution. A free State once
truly constituted should be as undying as its
people; the republic of Mexico must rise
again.
THE POPE OF ROME AND THE REBELLION.
It was the condition of affairs in Mexico
that involved the Pope of Rome in our dif
ficulties so far that he alone among temporal
sovereigns recognized the chief of the Con
federate States as a president, and his sup
porters as a people; and in letters to two
great prelates of the Catholic Church in the
United States gave counsels for peace at a
time when peace meant the victory of se
cession. Yet events move as they are or
dered. The blessing of the Pope at Rome
on the head of Duke Maximilian could not
revive in the nineteenth century the eccle
siastical policy of the sixteenth; and the re
sult is only a new proof that there can be no
prosperity in the State without religious
freedom.
THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA.
When it came home to the consciousness
of the Americans that the war which they
were waging was a war for the liberty of all
the nations of the world, for freedom itself,
they thanked God for the severity of the
trial to which he put their sincerity, and
nerved themselves for their duty with an
inexorable will. The President was led
along by the greatness of their self-sacrifi
cing example; and as a child, in a dark
night on a rugged way, catches hold of the
hand of its father for guidance and support,
he clung fast to the hand of the people, and
moved Calmly through the gloom. While
the statesmanship of Europe was scoffing
at the hopeless vanity of their efforts, they
put forth such miracles of energy as the
history of the world had never known.
The navy of the United States drawing into
the public service the willing militia of the
seas, doubled its tonnage in eight months,
and established an actual blockade from
Cape Hatteras to the Rio Grande. In the
course of the war it was increased five fold
in men and in tonnage, while the inventive
genius of the country devised more effec
tive kinds of ordnance, and new forms of
naval architecture in wood and iron. There
went into the field, for various terms of
service, about two million men; and in
March last the men in service exceeded a
million; that is to say, one of every two
able-bodied men took some part in the war;
and at one time every fourth able-bodied
I man was in the field. In one single month.
�ORATION OF THE HO-N.
GEORGE BANCROFT.1
605
one hundred and sixty-five thousand were Mississippi, which would not be divided,
recruited into service. Once, within four and the range of mountains which car
weeks, Ohio organized and placed in the ried the stronghold of the free through
field, forty-two regiments of infantry — Western Virginia and Kentucky and Ten
nearly thirty-six thouand men; and Ohio nessee to the highlands of Alabama. But
was like other States in the east and in the it invoked the still higher power of immor
west. The well-mounted cavalry numbered tal justice. In ancient Greece, where ser
eighty-four thousand ; of horses there were vitude was the universal custom, it was
bought, first and last, two thirds of a mil held that if a child were to strike its parent,
lion. In the movements of troops science the slave should defend the parent, and by
came in aid of patriotism ; so that, to choose that act recover his freedom. After vain
a single instance out of many, an army resistance, Lincoln, who had tried to solve
twenty-three thousand strong, with its ar the question by gradual emancipation, by
tillery, trains, baggage and animals, were colonization, and by compensation, at last
moved by rail from the Potomac to the Ten saw that slavery must be abolished, or the
nessee, twelve hundred miles in seven days. Republic must die; and on the 1st day of
In the long marches, wonders of military January, 1863, he wrote liberty on the ban
construction bridged the rivers; and where- ners of the armies. When this proclamaever an army halted, ample supplies await tion, which struck the fetters from three
ed them at their ever changing base. The millions of slaves reached Europe, Lord
vile thought that life is the greatest of Russell, a countryman of Milton and Wil
blessings did not rise up. In six hundred berforce, eagerly put himself forward to
and twenty-five battles, and severe skir speak of it in
name of mankind, saying:
mishes blood flowed like water. It streamed “ It is of a very strange nature ; ” “a meas
over the grassy plains ; it stained the rocks; ure of war of a very questionable kind; ”
the undergrowth of the forest was red an “ act of vengeance on the slave owner,”
with it; and the armies marched on with that does no more thanEErofess to emanci
majestic courage from one conflict to anoth pate slaves where the United States authorer, knowing that they were fighting for God ities cannot make emancipation a reality.”
and liberty. The organization of the medi Now there was no pa™ of the country emcal department met its infinitely multiplied braced in the proclamation where the United
duties with exactness and despatch. At the States could not and did hot make emanci. news of a battle, the best surgeons of our jfflffipn a reality. Those who saw Lincoln
cities hastened to the field, to offer the most frequently had nev^fibefore heard
zealous aid of the greatest experience and him speak with bitterness of any human
skill. The gentlest and most refined of being ; but he did not conceal how keenly
women left homes of luxury and, ease to he felt that he had been wronged by Lord
build hospital tents near the armies, and Russell. And he wrote, in reply to another
serve as nurses to the sick and dying. Be caviller: “ The emancipation policy, and
sides the large supply of religious teachers the use of colored troops/gvere the greatest
by the public, the congregations spared to blows yet dealt to the rebellion. The job was
their brothers in the field the ablest minis a great national one ; and let none be slight
ters.
The Christian Commission, which ed who bore an honorable part in it. I hope
expended five and a half millions, sent four peace will come soon, and come to stay;
thousand clergymen chosen out of the best, then there will be some black men who can
to keep un soiled the religious character of remember that they have helped mankind
the men, and made gifts of clothes and food to this great consummation.”
and medicine. The organization of private
RUSSIA AND CHINA.
charity assumed unheard of dimensions.
■The Sanitary Commission, which had seven
The proclamation accomplished its end,
thousand societies, distributed, under the for, during the war, our armies came into
direction of an unpaid board, spontaneous military possession of every State in rebel
contributions to the amount of fifteen mil lion. Then, too, was called forth the
lions, in supplies or money — a million and new power that comes from the simultane
a half in money from California alone — ous diffusion of thought and feeling among
and dotted the scene of war from Paducah the nations of mankind. The mysterious
to Port Royal, from Belle Plain, Virginia, sympathy of the millions throughout the •
to Browsnville, Texas, with homes and world was given spontaneously. The best
lodges.
writers of Europe waked the conscience
of the thoughtful, till the intelligent moral
THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION.
sentiment of the Old World was drawn
pi The country had for its allies "the River to the side of the unlettered statesman
�606
ORATION OF THE HONF GEORGE BANCROFT.
of the West. Russia, whose emperor had
just accomplished one of the grandest acts
in the course of time by raising twenty mil
lions of bondmen into' freeholders, and thus
assuring the growth and culture of a Rus
sian people, remained our unwavering
friend. From the oldest abode of civiliza
tion, which gave the first example of an im
perial government with equality among the
people, Prince Kung, the secretary of state
for foreign affairs, remembered the saying
of Confucius, that we should not do to
others what we would not that others should
do to us, and in the name of the Emperor
of China closed its ports against the war
ships and privateers of “ the seditious.”
CONTINUANCE OF THE WAR.
The war continued, with all the peoples
of the world for anxious spectators. Its
cares weighed heavily on Lincoln, and his
face was ploughed with the furrows of
thought and sadness. With malice towards
none, free from the spirit of revenge, victo
ry made him importunate for peace; and
his enemies never doubted his word, or
despaired of his abounding clemency. He
longed to utter pardon as the word for all,
but not unless the freedom of the negro
should be assured. The grand battles of
Mill Spring which gave us Nashville, of
Fort Donelson, Malvern Hill, Antietam,
Gettysburg, the Wilderness of Virginia,
Winchester, Nashville, the capture of New
Orleans, Vicksburg, Mobile, Fort Fisher,
the march from Atlanta and the capture of
Savannah and Charleston, all foretold the
issue. Still more, the self-regeneration of
Missouri, the heart of the continent; of Ma
ryland, whose sons never heard the mid
night bell chime so. sweetly as when they
rang out to earth and heaven that, by the
voice of her own people, she took her place
among the free ; of Tennessee, which passed
through fire and blood, through sorrows and
the shadow of death, to work out her own
deliverance, and by the faithfulness of her
own sons to renew her youth like the eagle
— proved that victory was deserved and
would be worth all that it cost. If words
of mercy uttered as they were by Lincoln
on the waters of Virginia, were defiantly
repelled, the armies of the country, moving
with one will, went as the arrow to its
mark, and without a. feeling of revenge
struck a deathblow at rebellion.
ing him to a second term of service. The
raging war that had divided the country
had lulled; and private grief was hushed
by the grandeur of its results. The nation
had its new birth of freedom, soon to be
secured forever by an amendment of the
Constitution. His persistent gentleness had
conquered for him a kindlier feeling on the
part of the South. His scoffers among the
grandees of Europe began to do him honor.
The laboring classes every where saw in his
advancement their own. All peoples sent
him their benedictions. And at the mo
ment of the height of his fame, to which his
humility and modesty added charms, he fell
by the hand of the assassin; and the only
triumph awarded him was tb,e march to the
grave.
THE GREATNESS OF MAN.
This is no time to say that human glory
is but dust and ashes, that we mortals are
no more than shadows in pursuit of shadows.
How mean a thing were man, if there were
not that within him which is higher than
himself—if he could not master the illu
sions of sense, and discern the connections
of events by a superior light which comes
from God. He so shares the divine impul
ses that he has power to subject interested
passions to love of country, and personal
ambition to the ennoblement of man. Not
in vain has Lincoln lived, for he has helped
to make this Republic an exatnple of jus
tice, with no caste but the caste of humani
ty. The heroes who led our armies and
ships into battle — Lyon, McPherson, Rey
nolds, Sedgwick, Wadsworth, Foote, Ward,
with their compeers — and fell in the ser
vice, did not die in vain ; they and the my
riads of nameless martyrs, and he, the chief
martyr, died willingly “ that government of
the people, by the people, and for the peo
ple, shall not perish from the earth.”
THE JUST DIED FOR THE UNJUST.
The assassination of Lincoln, who was so
free from malice, has from some mysterious
influence struck the country with solemn
awe, and hushed, instead of exciting, the
passion for revenge. It seemed as if the
just had died for the unjust. When I think
of the friends I have lost in this war — and
every one who hears me has, like myself,
lost those whom he most loved — there is
no consolation to be derivedftom victims on
the scaffold, or from any thing but the es
tablished union of the regenerated nation.
Lincoln’s assassination.
„ CHARACTER OF LINCOLN.
I
Where, in the history of nations, had a
Chief Magistrate possessed more sources of
In his character Lincoln was through and
consolation and joy, than Lincoln? His through an American. He is the first nacountrymen had shown their love by choos I tive of the region west of the Alleghanies to
�ORATION OF THE HON . GEORGE BANCROFT.
i
607
attain to the highest station; and how hap
Lincoln was one of the most unassuming
py it is- that the man who was brought for of men. In time of success, he gave credit
ward as the natural outgrowth and first for it to those whom he employed, to the
fruits of that region should have been of un people, and to the providence of God. He
blemished purity in private life, a good son, did not know what ostentation is; when he
a kind husband, a most affectionate father, became President he was rather saddened
and, as a man, so gentle to all. As to in than elated, and his conduct and manners
tegrity, Douglas, his rival, said of him, “ Lin showed more than ever his belief that all
coln is the honestest man I ever knew.”
men are born equal. He was no respecter
The habits of his mind were those of of persons ; and neither rank, nor reputa
meditation and inward thought, rather than tion, nor services overawed him. In judg
of action. He excelled in logical statement, ing of character he failed in discrimination,
more than in executive ability. He rea and his appointments were sometimes bad;
soned clearly, his reflective judgment was but he readily deferred to public opinion,
good, and his purposes were, fixed; but and in appointing tne head of the armies he
like the Hamlet of his only poet,, his will followed the manifest preference of Conwas tardy in action, and for this reason, and gressBu
A good President will secure unity to his
not from humility or tenderness of feeling,
he sometimes deplored that the duty which administration by his own supervision of
devolved on him had not fallen to the lot of the various departments. Lincoln, who acnever governed
another. He was skilful in analysis, dis cepted advice ^adily
cerned with precision the central idea, on by any member of his Caftnet, and could
which a question turned, and knew how to not be moved from a purpose deliberately
disengage it and present it by itself in a few formed; but his supervision of affairs was
homely, strong old English words that would unsteady and incomplete |Jand sometimes,
be intelligible to all. He delighted to ex by a sudden interference transcoding the
press his opinions by apothegm, illustrate usual forms, he rather confused than adthem by a parable, or drive them home by a vanced the public business. If he ever
story.
failed in the scrupulous regard due to the
Lincoln gained a name by discussing relative rights of Congress, it was so evi
questions which, of all others, most easily dently without design that no conflict
led to fanaticism; but he was never carried could ensue, or evil precefent be estabaway by enthusiastic zeal, never indulged lished. Truth he would receive from any
in extravagant language, never hurried to one ; but, when impressed by others, he did
support extreme measures, never allowed not use their opinions till by reflection he
himself to be controlled by sudden impulses. had made them thoroughly his own.
During the progress of the election at which
It was the nature of Lincoln to forgive.
he was chosen President, he expressed no When hostilities ceased w he who had al
opinion that, went beyond the Jefferson ways sent forth the flag with every one of its
proviso of 1784. Like Jefferson and Lafa stars in the field, was eager to receive back
yette, he had faith in the intuitions of the his returning count^men, and meditated
people, and read those intuitions with rare some new announcement to the South.”
sagacity. He knew how to bide his time, The amendment of the Constitution abolish
and was less apt to be in advance of public ing slavery had his most earnest and un
opinion than to lag behind. He never wearied support. During the rage of war
sought to electrify the public by taking we get a glimpse into his soul from his
an advanced position with a banner of privately suggesting to Louisiana that “ in
opinion; but rather studied to move for defining the franchise some of the colored
ward compactly, exposing no detachment people might be let in,” saying: “ They
in front or rear; so that the course of his would probably help, in some trying time
administration might have been explained to come, to keep the jewel of liberty in the
as the calculating policy of a shrewd and family of freedom.” In 1857 he avowed
watchful politician, had there not been seen himself “ not in favor of ” what he improp
behind it a fixedness of principle which erly called .“ negro citizenship: ” for the
from the first determined his purpose and Constitution discriminates between citizens
grew more intense with every year, consum and electors. Three days before his death
ing his life by,its energy. Yet his sensibili- he declared his preference that “ the elect
ties were not acute, he had no vividness of ive franchise were now conferred on the
imagination to picture to his mind the hor very intelligent of the colored men and on
rors of the battle-field or the sufferings in those of them who served our cause as
hospitals ; his conscience was more tender soldiers;” but he wished it done by the
than his feelings.
States themselves, and he never harbored
�608
ORATION OF THE HON. GEORGE BANCROFT.
the thought of ^exacting it from a new government as a condition of its recognition.
The last day of his life beamed with sun
shine, as he sent by the - speaker of this
House his friendly greetings to the men
of the Rocky Mountains and the Pa
cific slope; as he contemplated the return
of hundreds of thousands of soldiers to fruit
ful industry; as he welcomed in advance
hundreds of thousands of emigrants from
Europe; as his eye kindled with enthusi
asm at the coming wealth of the nation.
And'so, with these thoughts for his country,
he was removed from the toils and temp
tations of this life and was at peace.
PALMERSTON AND LINCOLN.
Hardly had the late President been con
signed to the grave, when the Prime Minis
ter of England died, full of years and hon
ours. Palmerston traced his lineage to the
time of the conqueror: Lincoln went back
only to his grandfather. Palmerston re
ceived his education from the best scholars
of Harrow, Edinburgh, and Cambridge;
Lincoln’s early teachers were the silent
forest, the prairie, the river, and the stars.
Palmerston was in public life for sixty
years ; Lincoln for but a tenth of that time.
Palmerston was a skilful guide of an estab
lished aristocracy; Lincoln a leader or rather
a companion of the people. Palmerston
was exclusively an Englishman, and made
his boast in the House of Commons that the
interest of England was his Shibboleth;
Lincoln thought always of mankind as well
as his own country, and served human na
ture itself. Palmerston from his narrowness
as an Englishman did not endear his coun
try to any one court or to any one people,
but rather caused uneasiness and dislike;
Lincoln left America more beloved than
ever by all the peoples of Europe. Palm
erston was self-possessed and adroit in
reconciling the conflicting claims of the fac
tions of the aristocracy; Lincoln, frank and
ingenuous, knew how to poise himself on the
conflicting opinions of the people. Palm
erston was capable of insolence towards the
weak, quick to the sense of honour, not
heedful of right; Lincoln rejected counsel
given only as a matter of policy, and was
not capable of being wilfully unjust. Palm
erston, essentially superficial, delighted in
banter, and knew how to divert grave op
position, by playful levity. Lincoln was a
man of infinite jest on his lips, with saddest
earnestness at his heart. Palmerston was a
fair representative of the aristocratic lib
erality of the day, choosing for his tribunal,
not the conscience of humanity, but the
House of Commons ; Lincoln took to heart
I the eternal truths of liberty, obeyed them
as the commands of Providence, and accept
*
ed the human race as the judge of his fidel
ity. Palmerston did nothing that will en
dure ; his great achievement, the separation
of Belgium, placed that little kingdom
where it must gravitate to France; Lincoln
finished a work which all time cannot over
throw. Palmerston is a shining example of
the ablest of a cultivated aristocracy; Lin
coln shows the genuine fruits of institutions
where the laboring man shares and assists to
form the great ideas and designs of his
country. Palmerston was buried in West
minster Abbey by the order of his Queen,
and was followed by the British aristocracy
to his grave, which after a few years will
hardly be noticed by the side of the graves
of Fox and Chatham; Lincoln was followed
by the sorrow of his country across the con
tinent to his resting-place in the heart of
the Mississippi valley, to be remembered
through all time by his countrymen, and by
all the peoples of the world.
CONCLUSION.
As the sum of all, the hand of Lincoln
raised the flag; the American people was
the hero of the war; and therefore the re
sult is a new era of republicanism. The dis
turbances in the country grew not out of any
thing republican, but out of slavery, which is
a part of the system of hereditary wrong,
and the expulsion of this domestic anomaly
opens to the renovated nation a career of
unthought of dignity and glory. Hence
forth our country has a moral unity as the
land of free labour. The party for slavery
and the party against slavery are no more,
and are merged in the party of Union and
freedom. The States which would have Ieff“*
us are not brought back as conquered States,
for then we should hold them only so long
as that conquest could be maintained ; they
come to their rightful place under the Consti
tution as original, necessary and inseparable
members of the State. We build monu
ments to the dead, but no monuments of
victory. We respect the example of the
Romans, who never, even in conquered
lands, raised emblems of triumph. And
our generals are not to be classed in the
herd of vulgar conquerors, but are of the
school of Timoleon and William of Orange'
and Washington. They have used the
sword only to give peace to their country
and restore her to her place in the great
assembly of the nations. Our meeting
closes in hope, now that a people begins to
live according to the laws of reason., and re
publicanism is intrenched in a continent.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
America, France and England
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway, Moncure Daniel, 1832-1907 [1832-1907]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [Boston, Mass.]
Collation: [545]-608 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From Littell's Living Age, vol. XXX11, third series, no. 1134, (24 February 1866): re-published from Fortnightly Review 3: 442-459 (January 1 1866). From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed in double columns. Includes comment and letters on the Alabama debate in the House of Commons.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[T.H. Carter & Co.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1866
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5438
Subject
The topic of the resource
International relations
France
England
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br />This work (America, France and England), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Foreign Relations
France
Great Britain
United States-Foreign Relations
United States-Politics and Government
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/fd8fb317c461200c4707d38b0e3d0646.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=BGytXZwHv90I8H0IISctItkmzkkpiPvWwasE4y1KWdFGn1VHp5VXLHnjwvmrbw1MYDUroI4R2KW9J2F1rnEIuGhRWEFQqDtEafI2Hr3mXTGJSgD4t1O7-84QSpXtKvVvmDtys2oc60OlWnRz1rofWDer378ProwFluhoHAlGGez5zwENSADzczIu%7EYjdbZz6Z9U9bEzCkCwlRCDkrEhWofJ3kxdqgnJgGuPvnHVYq0MydeyS02jeyUTRKQfowN7Qdmi4msdPOyXEZ8b%7EWeruRY2g0eRgvhBSviMugOSmKLG4Ea0O2qrBrNZwKGFHW64JmVxREqgbzC93LvwRcRc7DQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4d7fc74261fd397a434a570cb1038c4a
PDF Text
Text
REBUILDING THE TEMPLE.
BY SALEM DUTCHER.
T is proposed to offer some suggestions for the better government
of these United States.
I
The Money Power.—I. Under the present system the Senate
consists of 74 members and the House of 243. A majority in
either body, or 38 in the Senate and 122 in the House, constitute a
quorum; and a majority of a quorum, or 20 in the Senate and 62 in
the House, can pass any appropriation bill. It is suggested that the
rule should be a two-thirds vote, or, as the figures now stand, 50 in the
Senate and 162 in the House. This would forbid the slipping through
of appropriations “ on a thin house,” and impede, if not prevent, appro
priations for party purposes.
e .
II. The President has no option as to the items of an appropriation;
he must approve all or reject all, and to remedy the evil growing out
of this—called “sandwiching,” or the insertion of corrupt items in a
bill otherwise fair and right—it is suggested that he should have the
power to approve any appropriation and disapprove any other appro
priation in the same bill, returning the disapproved items as in the
case of any other veto.
.
III. A practice has grown up in Congress of appropriating the pub
lic lands, money, and credit to private railway companies, which com
panies while constructing their roads out of the property of the people
of the United States, yet charge said people for the use of said roads as
fully as if they had been built with the companies’ own private means.
The corruptions superinduced by this practice are even more signal
than the injustice it embodies of charging the people for the use of
their own property; and it is suggested that Congress should be strictly
inhibited from any loan or gift of the lands, money, or credit of the
United States to any person, association, or corporation for the pur
poses of internal improvement.
New States.—The Senate consists of two representatives—aptly
termed ambassadors—from each State, and by reason of this equality
all the States are governmentally upon a par. On any given bill the
one member in the House from Nevada may vote no, and the thirty-one
members from New York vote aye, thus— supposing the vote of the
House otherwise to be equally divided—carrying the measure by thirty
majority; but on reaching the Senate the two Nevada senators are
�182
REBUILDING
THE
TEMPLE.
equal in their votes to the two from New York, and so far as any
measure turns on the States in question, Nevada puts New York at a
dead-lock. The chain being no stronger than its weakest link, it thus
appears that the political superiority of a large State to a small one is
more fanciful than real, and in this view the immense importance of
admitting a State may be perceived. And yet, just as twenty-five per
cent of Congress may appropriate millions, the same small proportion
can bring in new States. The temptation so to do for the purpose of
retaining or enlarging party power is one that these few years past haye
shown to be irresistible, and it is therefore suggested that no new States
should be admitted save by a two-thirds vote of both houses, the Senate
voting by States.
The Presidency.—Under the present system the President is eligible
indefinitely, and experience has proven that no sooner is a man chosen
to the chief magistracy than he uses the powers of that office to secure
a re-election. It is suggested, therefore, that the President be not
re-eligible.
Office.—The practice of putting up the public employments of the
United States as a prize for the victorious party at each presidential
election is too notorious an evil to need exposition. An efficient, faith
ful, and necessary public officer should not be removed so long as his
services are necessary, trustworthy and competent, always excepting
members of the Cabinet and persons in the diplomatic service, the
nature of whose employ renders it proper that the executive should
have the power to remove them at pleasure. Saving these, it is sug
gested that all public officers should be removable by the appointing
power when their services are unnecessary, or for misconduct or ineffi
ciency, and not otherwise. On this as a basis a civil service, which is.
an institution of slow growth, might be reared.
The Treaty Power.—Under the present system, it is the preroga
tive of the President, “by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present
concur.” As this latter clause puts it in the power of two-thirds of a
quorum, or but a fraction over one-third of the whole number of sena
tors, to concur in the making of any treaty proposed by the executive,
it follows, as the law now stands, that the President and any 26 out of
the 74 senators may conclude a treaty which shall be as binding upon
the United States as the Constitution itself. By such treaty, further
more, the faith of the United States may be pledged to the payment of
any large amount of money—as witness the $7,000,000 in gold coin for
Alaska—without any consultation with, or consent by, the House,
which is supposed to be so peculiarly the guardian of the public wealth
that all bills for raising revenue must originate therein, and on such
pledge the House is reduced to the alternative either of repudiating
the same and thus staining the credit of the republic, or acceding to an
appropriation which it may not approve either in object or amount.
�REBUILDING
THE
183
TEMPLE.
To do away with the evils of so anomalous a disposition of powers, it is
suggested that in case a proposed treaty calls for money, the concur
rence of the House by a two-thirds vote thereof should be obtained as
to so much of said treaty as regards the contemplated expenditure, and
then that two-thirds of all the senators elected to the Senate concur in
the treaty as a whole; all treaties not calling for money beyond a cer
tain merely ministerial amount, say $50,000, to be concurred in by a
majority of all the senators elected.
Representation.—Coming to the House, which is supposed to repre
sent population, it appears that though the popular vote at the presi
dential election of 1868 was 2,985,031 Republicans to 2,648,830 Demo
crats, the representatives stand 164 Republicans to 70 Democrats, instead
of 129 Republicans to 114 Democrats, as it should have been on the
ratio of the popular vote. This disproportion is due much less to a
defect in, than to an interference with, the electoral system. But for
extraneous violence the elections of 1868 would have given the compo
sition of the House as 124 Republicans to 119 Democrats, which would
fairly enough have represented the popular vote as above given. As
regards the general result, therefore, it does not appear but that the
present electoral system, if respected, would give a representation in
the House consonant with the political ‘ complexion of the republic at
large; but, on coming to particulars, it is evident that the representa
tion of the several States is not always a fair reflex of party strength
within them. Thus, the actual and proportionate representation
respectively of Massachusetts and Kentucky as compared with the
strength of parties within those States, is as follows :
VOTE.
REPRESENTATIVES.
Proportionate.
Actual.
Hep.
Massachusetts, . . .
Kentucky, . . . .
Dem.
R.
D.
R.
D.
132,000
40,000
63,000
116,000
7
2
3
7
10
0
0
9
To provide against such nullification of the minority as this is the
aim of minority, or proportional, representation, of which, as the elec
tion of Representatives is purely a State matter and this paper regards
the Federal polity alone, nothing will be said save so far as respects the
effect of minority representation on the House. It is carefully to be
borne in mind that, while proportional representation may give the
minority more voice, it by no means follows that it necessarily gives
that minority more power. Somewheres the majority must rule, and
that place is the representative body. On the subject of representation,
it is suggested that, whatever good results may enure to particular
States from proportional representation, a correct reflex in the House of
the whole country can be best obtained by a removal of all present re
straints upon the electoral system set forth in the Federal Constitution
and a relegation of the people of the United States to their original un
fettered right of selecting as their representatives whom they please.
�184
REBUILDING
THE TEMPLE.
The best practical manner of carrying into effect the suggestions of
this paper need not now be touched. For the present it is sufficient to
commend them on their abstract merits to the public attention.
REMARKS BY EDITOR.
In giving place to Mr. Dutcher’s paper, I wish to say, that while I
heartily approve of all the suggestions he makes, I do not believe their
adoption would restore health to the body politic. The disease is moral,
not political ; the difficulty is not so much with the machinery as with
the driving power. All our legislative bodies, municipal, state and
national, are corrupt because the moral sense of the American people
has been debauched by a series of unfavorable influences. Among
these may be mentioned :
1. The decay of theology. The Protestant sects in their days of
vigor and virulence did supply a sort of moral sense to the community
which has been gradually weakening with the growth of liberalism and
the accumulation of proofs of the unsoundness, historically and scien
tifically, of the current theological dogmas. The belief in a hell was a
low motive to influence conduct, but it had its effect when men had a
real fear of eternal torments.
2. The anti-social and individualistic character of the philosophy
which underlies American institutions is beginning to bear its bitter
fruit. In the American conception, the individual is everything—he
is the centre of the universe; hence egotism, selfishness, the pursuit of
individual good without regard to the general welfare, The Human
Rights dogma, carried out logically, can have no other result than
social and political anarchy. The Transcendental Philosophy, so-called,
Liberal Christianity; the writings of Channing, Parker, Emerson,
Beecher and Frothingham, all help in this movement toward chaos and
the moral death of the nation.
3. The ease with which wealth is acquired in this age of invention
and machinery, and the universal belief in that most damnable of all
the doctrines of the political economists, that property is a personal
appendage and not an institution to satisfy social needs, is turning the
whole nation, women as well as men, into mere selfish money grubbers.
All Americans are on the “ make.”
The only hope is in the growth of a religion and a philosophy more
in accord with the higher instincts of humanity. These in time will
indicate a polity which will restore health and soundness to the state.
The outlook to the political philosopher is very gloomy, so far as the
immediate future is concerned. We have entered upon an era of cor-'
ruption; of public and private dishonesty appalling to contemplate.
Fraud will abound and violence, I fear, will accompany it. Let the
reader cut this out and paste in his common-place book to read ten
years from now.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rebuilding the temple
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Dutcher, Salem
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [New York]
Collation: [183]-184 p. ; 26 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed on blue paper. The article concludes with a page of editorial comment on the content from D. Goodman, the editor of Modern Thinker. From Modern Thinker, no. 1 1870.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[American News Company]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5428
Subject
The topic of the resource
Government
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Rebuilding the temple), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
United States-Politics and Government
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/52a4309cd87d381f1468954ca02302be.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ePMQETnJctqM9Q8MFM0pXrSAChqyZlA1Q8EfrBKcamPOVdbSXexw-TqFxCVAAWLxUBNPMqPci--krNAaSyePgMbv3jecmx540AUeDAdquMSgJyv7xbqvnvYtZxLGUXFXRLI0b7Mb7BIprLaED-Aq3uFN6VbWbTLoD4KAA275Lf0%7EvK9Tf3FbeKY1ggHNfsO-66EOiKPhlXfsIcQEXoTkopgU-3QqDf7SqB1AT496Aa0M0LsqHCfYoY0uR-lX1k-fpQ4R63fKhf%7EIJkCoA4eQu4hS0ugiujGmmw1WA7iqp%7EK9O0AE1v1kttLDHEh%7EIUm5Ul9e1rxgVFFEDe7LdofQtA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b9c34375ff2eb8f7bfe75c9ee952c53d
PDF Text
Text
KING WEALTH COMING.
BY D.
GOODMAN.
HE following article was published by the writer in the Gal
axy for November, 1869. It sets forth briefly what he believes
to be the solution of the political problem in this country.
We live in an industrial age, of which the natural leaders are
the bankers, manufacturers, and merchants. We all complain of the
demoralization and corruption of our political life; what we mean is
that wealth is becoming as powerful in politics as it is in industry.
The great corporations, or rather the wealthy men who control them,
are the real rulers, and not the characterless lawyers and politicians
whom universal suffrage sends to our legislative halls. There is not a
State in the Union through which runs a great railroad, but what is
practically in the power of the corporation which controls it. The
manufacturers could do what they please with any Congress that has
sat for the last eight years, and it is quite safe to predict that for the
next fifteen years the owners of the Pacific Railroad and the giant con
solidated roads which feed it, will be the real masters of the American
people. That is to say, no Congress can by any possibility be elected
which they will not be able to control.
To this state of affairs no complete Positivist objects. We submit
to the inevitable, and can only hope to modify it by a sound philoso
phy, and the wise, practical activity it enforces. What is needed is the
moralization of wealth, and to effect this it must become personal and
responsible.
But here is the article:
T
Nearly all the evils connected with our system of government ean oe traced to
one primary cause, to wit: the influence of wealthy corporations and individuals in
controlling legislation and executive action for purely selfish ends. In other words,
in modern civilization, wealth has become an enormous power, while in this coun
try at least, it has no recognized political responsibility or well-defined public
duties. The lobby notoriously controls legislation—wealth controls the lobby, but
what controls wealth ? Nothing but the purely selfish aims of its possessor.
How is this difficulty to be met ? Shall we organize against wealth ; bind it in
fetters, legislate it out of existence, or exile its influence to some sphere outside of
political action ? We are entering upon an era when all this will be attempted;
'but, however well meant, every scheme to limit the power of wealth will inevitably
fail, and, in the opinion of the writer, ought to fail.
For we must remember that the capitalist is the true king of the industrial era
�46
KING
WEALTH COMING
When war was the normal condition of the race, the great warrior was the ruler,
and all the honors in the State were based upon military merit ; but among the
advanced natives of Christendom, industry, and not war, is now the absorbing
business of the mass of the population, and hence the banker and the manufacturer
are destined to be—nay, are the real rulers of the people. This may seem to be a
preposterous statement, in this age of equal rights and the sovereignty of the
people ; but it is nevertheless true. Who to-day is supreme in the financial, com
mercial, and manufacturing world ? Who owns the telegraph, the railway, the
manufactory, the newspaper, the land ? The capitalist, of course. He is our boss
in the shop, our employer in the field, our landlord, out care-taker on the railroad
and steamship ; he keeps our money in his bank, and looks after our souls in his
churches ; for the church of to-day, of all denominations, is the church of the capi
talist. People are under the curious hallucination that the only power which con
trols them is that exercised by the State or the nation, whereas they touch us
scarcely at all in the most intimate relations of life.
But the capitalists, the owners of the wealth, are not content with all this recog
nized authority ; they desire to control also the political power of the State and
the nation. Well, they are right. They ought to have it. There will be a
struggle against it, and the most impassioned protests will be made when their
right to rule is formally recognized ; but recognized it will be in time. While the
struggle is going on, the capitalist will rule all the same. Our legislators are
nearly all lawyers ; now, the lawyer is a creature of the capitalist. He is trained
by him, and his wit and tongue are at the service of his employer in the court, and
his vote is at his command in the législative body. Wealth, as a power unrecog
nized, without responsibility or moral accountability, is simply another name for
hideous corruption. Hence the lobby, and the sickening legislative history of our
City, State and National Government for the last fifteen years.
Now wealth, and the enormous social and political power it wields by its very
existence, is one of those facts which cannot be ignored. We must accept it, and
see what can be done about it. To destroy wealth, or take away the power it
naturally gives its possessor, is impossible. If it could be done, civilization would
perish.
What, then, are we to do ?
Accept the inevitable. Capital has the power. Make it personal, responsible.
Put the capitalist in authority instead of his creatures, the lawyers and politicians,
and then—
What then ?
Hold him responsible. The next greatest power in modern civilization, after
wealth, is public opinion. As yet it is unmoralized, unorganized ; but its influence,
even now, is mighty. When this spiritual power has its. proper recognized organs,
which it will have under Positivism—then will we be able to control wealth.
Public opinion cannot be brought to bear upon corporate bodies ; “ They have
neither bodies to be kicked nor souls to be damned.” What does the ring or the
lobby care for public opinion ? Once install the individual who is the soul of the
lobby into some recognized public position, and he is sensitive enough. Abuse the
Erie Railroad Company, and who cares ? Attack Jim Fiske, Jr., and he is after you
with a sheriff’s posse or a libel suit.
Here, then, is the Positivist’s solution of our political and industrial problems.
Wealth, under the foul shapes of the ring or lobby, controls our legislation. We
say, Put the holders of this wealth in authority. Make this irresponsible power
responsible. You cannot get rid of the power ; it is one of the most enormous facts
of modern times. It exists, and will control, whether we like it or not, and hence
we must make the best of it.
The capitalist has his excuse for using the ring and the lobby. He says, “ What
else can I do? There are certain great industrial enterprises to be undertaken,
�KING
WEALTH COMING.
47
which cannot even be begun without legislative authority. The lawyers and small
politicians, who form the great bulk of the assemblies and senates, cannot rise to
the height of the great schemes which I have on foot; they oppose me ; but the
work must be done—the times demand it; and so I hire the lobby, who buy those
fellows up. I am in the habit of employing lawyers to do my business, and when
you can hire a man’s brains with money, his vote follows, as a matter of course.
Take the case of the great railway consolidations, which are so necessary: why, I
am compelled to buy the legislators outright, or these essential changes could not
be made.”
So there are two sides to the story. The capitalist has his excuse for making
our legislators scoundrels.
But how is this change to be brought about ?
The writer gives that conundrum up at once. He really does not see how it is
possible to change our republican representative system without a political con
vulsion. Hence he looks for years of grievous misrule ; of future legislative con
duct worse than any in the past. A possible solution of the trouble is a bold seizure
of the government by some representative of the capitalist class. The very men
who have made our legislative bodies dens of thieves, are just the ones to make
that corruption an excuse for seizing the government themselves ; for be it remem
bered, it is not the kings of the lobby who will be held responsible, but the politi
cians—the legislators whom they have debauched.
Our government, from natural and inevitable causes, has got to be one of exces
sive powers. The maladministration of the federal power under Adams or Jackson
was not of much account, so little were the people at large affected by its action;
but now it is very different. The authority of the central government has grown
so enormously large, that its action upon the business of the country has become
vital. Hence the necessity of a more scientific government than that we had before
the rebellion.
Let it be distinctly understood, then, that there is a class of thinkers in this
country who are profound disbelievers in the whole republican or democratic theory
of government. But we are not, therefore, either Imperialists or Monarchists. We
do not advocate going back to any obsolete political institutions. Progress is our
motto. There is something in the future as much better than republicanism as
republicanism is better than monarchy, and that is the rule of wealth controlled by
moral considerations; in other words, the capitalist in responsible authority, and he
under the dominion of a wise, all-powerful public opinion.
Our King has come. He rules already, but it is in such hideous shapes as the
Lobby—the Ring. Let us recognize, tame, ennoble him, so that he may serve the
highest interests of humanity.
�48
THE
SOCIAL
EVIL.
SERIES of articles on Prostitution in the Westminster Re
view have deservedly attracted a good deal of attention.
Without containing anything very new, they sum up the
results of past inquiries, and seemingly set at rest several
vexed social questions. Among the most important of the points
brought out by Dr. Chapman, the writer, are the following:
1. Each new crop of prostitutes does not die out in from four to
seven years, as is generally supposed. While it is true that the personnel
of that class is replaced in that time, the women do not, as a rule, die
of their riotous living, but are absorbed back into the community.
2. The amount of disease engendered by the illicit relation of the
sexes is appalling. This is one of the most serious perils of modern
civilization. While the danger to the women themselves in the matter
of longevity has been absurdly overrated, the damage done to the
health of the community by the prevalence of prostitution has scarcely
been suspected.
3. Governments from time to time have attempted to suppress and
limit prostitution, but have invariably failed. Every possible expedient
has been resorted to, but the history of legislation and government
action, though it extends over centuries, is a record not only of disap
pointment but disaster. Nor have they fared any better when recog
nizing and regulating prostitution. Notwithstanding the encomiums
which have been passed upon the French and continental systems, it
seems now to be tolerably well settled that recognition has led to wide
spread immorality, while as a check to the spread of disease, it has
bad less than no effect at all.
The remedy proposed by Dr. Chapman will hardly be deemed
satisfactory. He says the public should get rid of the notion of sin
or disgrace in connection with the illicit relations of the sexes or
the diseases they entail, and that those sick of syphilis should have the
same care and consideration as if the disease was typhus fever or dysen
tery. The best hospitals are now closed to persons afflicted with sexual
disorders, and the woman who would readily seek medical advice for
an ordinary illness, such as diarrhoea or rheumatism, is deterred from
doing so when the disorder is venereal. So she punishes society for its
non-recognition of the legitimacy of her business and its inhumanity
to her in her affliction by plying her wretched trade when diseased,
thus propagating to the innocent as well as to the guilty the most cruel
contagion known to our civilization.
It is all very well to say that society ought to recognize prostitu
tion as a legitimate because necessary business, and should treat the
strumpet with the same consideration it does the decent women, but
the difficulty is that society won’t do anything of the kind. The truth
is, prostitution is a part of the great sexual problem which science
must yet solve ; all we can do at present is to furnish the data for the
final settlement.—D. G.
A
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
King wealth coming
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Goodman, D.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [New York]
Collation: [45]-47 p. ; 26 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The article was first published in Galaxy, November, 1869 and later published in Modern Thinker, no. 1, 1870.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[American News Company]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5427
Subject
The topic of the resource
Industrialisation
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (King wealth coming), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Industrialization
United States of America
Wealth
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/3996d4047b360026bf50aa13c5df6f7c.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=HKxqb9vajd9TusAYM-kaimhEU9Dv445HN7WrsOO%7EcBiPTlu-MkhzrL5L8VUJl4ZhO3ioPc-G5ABvH2UycaytIjCAX1UjTUTyxIBCnV-UpNO7jCCIrzEzsNMSx%7E-2wwdYXpLJ9dnQrFcONlgrL%7ENUbBsxtpo6CzOQPV0MMsxozvBgcLf1fNzgWaGbQgOGVfBAlQIlvy9maK3b7gEcB1Giw8V1L6Pr3-2SJyUP4WlknF%7E56lHur2dklDcUIJ4U4-ItlO5Vpbe70jVnxcK0ZeV1c1WmK%7E-2JqgDU7a6%7EvpwGVOiL126S2Sv0JroLZDSpybDDPhr0OMZR%7El30CC2A4psHA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
19ff62c4a0a6c208d1e77dc82755754f
PDF Text
Text
THE CHICAGO RIOTS
THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES,
(A Reprint from “
BY
H. M. HYNDMAN.
LONDON:
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN, LOWREY & CO-,
PATERNOSTER SQUARE.
1886.
PRICE ONE PENNY.
��THE CHICAGO BIOTS AND THE CLASS WAR
IN THE UNITED STATES.
The recent fatal conflictjbetween the Anarchists and the police at
Chicago has served to direct public attention, for the moment, to
the growing social difficulties in the United States. It is unfor
tunate that American affairs are not more closely watched by
Englishmen of all classes. There is a great deal to be learnt in
many ways from the struggle which has begun in earnest between
labour and capital on the other side of the Atlantic; and it
is at least possible that careful consideration of the manifest
antagonism between different classes of men of our own race may
help us to a peaceful solution of our own still more complicated
and dangerous social problems here at home. Both countries
have reached the same stage of economical and social develop
ment ; in both the traditions of free speech and a free press have
been accepted as the most valuable legacy we have received from
our forefathers; alike there and here the system of government
by party has lasted for several generations, though now being
undermined; and, in the United States as in the United
Kingdom, conscription is unknown, and the military caste is held
in no special esteem. Nor are the contrasts less instructive than
the similarities. America is a Republic. England is a Monarchy.
Americans have no aristocracy, House of Lords, or Established
Church. Englishmen have the misfortune to possess, or be
possessed by, all three. Americans have universal suffrage, pay
ment of members, free education in many States, and a wide
Home Rule Federation. We are still behindhand in these
respects. The United States cover a vast and sparsely-peopled
territory; the United Kingdom is a small but densely-populated
group of islands. Lastly, the United States support protection;
the United Kingdom has for forty years accepted free trade.
But beneath the political forms and fiscal arrangements of the
two countries, notwithstanding the widely divergent conditions
of existence for the two peoples, all are now driven to admit that
the same class struggle is going on under the guise of nominal
peace and freedom. The bloody encounter in Haymarket Square,
like the far less serious rioting in Pall Mall, Piccadilly, and South
Audley Street, is a symptom of uneasiness and discontent below
�2
i
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
which the governing classes on both sides of the Atlantic must
take account of.
For this reason, if for no other, it is much to be regretted that
nearly the whole of the information which has been suffered to
reach the general public in England, with regard to the great
labour movement in America, has come from capitalist sources.
The cables themselves are in the hands of the very men against
whom the workers are combining and striking; the New York
newspapers, which are chiefly quoted here, belong, most of them,
to the same people, and are supported by the advertisements of
the class whose interests are attacked; the correspondents and
the telegraph agencies are also connected with, and dependent
upon, the dominant class. Thus, whatever the various labour
organisations may do against the capitalists, be their action legal
or illegal, peaceful or violent, their conduct, as well as the
opinions of their leaders, are liable to constant misrepresentation.
Men of the educated classes have been brought up to look at the
problems of society from a totally different point of view from
that at which the workers necessarily take their stand. Knights
of Labour, Trade Unionists, Social Democrats, and Anarchists,
however deep may be their differences among themselves, are
alike in this, that they have no hope of a good word from the
cable agencies. The movements in America have, therefore, been
presented to the people of England with about as much fairness as
if a shopkeeper in Piccadilly had cabled to New York his view of
the Social-Democratic Federation and its leaders last February.
Well-to-do Americans, until lately, have tried to shut their
eyes to the danger arising from the bitter class antagonism
growing up around them, and to persuade themselves that it
would all die down if let alone. This has been displayed even
with reference to the recent riots, in the anxiety to show that no
native-born Americans had anything to do with them. Person
ally, I am perhaps as strongly opposed to Anarchist tactics as
many of the capitalist class themselves, regarding as I do such
individual outrages and unorganised outbreaks as aids to reaction,
rather than helps to the great organised Social Revolution which
Social Democrats strive for. But no one can deny that Parsons
and Fielden, the two principal orators on the occasion, are not
possessed of German or Bohemian surnames. When, too, I
ventured to predict more than five years ago in the Fortnightly
Review that a conflict between labour and capital would certainly
occur in America which might attain to the dimensions of a civil
war, the New York Tribune, Mr. Jay Gould’s own paper,
extracted some passages and headed them with the remark,
“ England sends many fool travellers to the United States, but
never before such a fool as this one.” Yet it was even then quite
clear to an impartial observer that a very bitter feeling existed
between the two sections of the community, while drilling and
i
If
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
3
arming were going on vigorously on both sides in all the great
cities.
In the year 1880 Mr. Powderly, now the chief of the Knights
of Labour, thus expressed himself about strikes: “ I am anxious
that each of our lodges should be provided with powder and
shot, bullets and Winchester rifles, when we intend to strike. If
you strike the troops are called out to put you down. You
cannot fight with bare hands. You must consider the matter
very seriously, and if we anticipate strikes we must prepare to
fight and to use arms against the forces brought against us.”
This was, at any rate, very plain speaking, by a native-born
American citizen, just six years ago; and it is scarcely to be
wondered at that men of a hotter temper, such as these fanatics
of the Arbeiter Zeitung of Chicago and their American allies,
took Mr. Powderly at his word, and made ready for the coming
conflict, which he so clearly foreshadowed as one to be determined
by appeals to force.
The riot in Chicago itself was but the climax to a long series
of troubles which have been going on in that city. That the
Anarchists went beyond what is reasonable or even sane in their
proposals there is no doubt whatever. The journal named above,
of which the weekly edition, the Vorbote, has a wide circulation
outside Chicago, is an important, and in many respects welledited German newspaper; but it has recommended direct attacks
upon individual capitalists, and given directions in its columns
how to make dynamite bombs for personal use. It was, indeed,
not excluding Johann Most’s Freiheit, by far the largest and most
vigorous Anarchist paper in the world, advocating the propaganda
of deed as opposed to the Social-Democratic propaganda of theory
and education; and individual resort to force, or attack by groups
as against the collective political, or, failing political, forcible action.
There is, however, good reason why Chicago, even more than
New York or the other cities of the Atlantic coast, should be the
headquarters of a propaganda of this kind. Capitalists in America
are by no means the most considerate people in the world, as a
rule. When the late W. H. Vanderbilt said, “ The public be
d—d,” he but expressed the general sentiment of his “ order,” in
the same way that his father, the old Commodore, when remon
strated with for treating the passengers on his railways as if they
were hogs, answered, “ By G—, sir, I wish they was hogs;” No
where, I say, is this feeling of contempt for the general interest, as
well as for the mean white who has failed to make money, stronger
than in Chicago; in no American city is the division between the
working class and the capitalist class more marked, nor, it may
be added, does the press anywhere more furiously uphold, to the
extremest point, the rights of property. The Chicago Times and
the Chicago Tribune, differ as they may in other respects, agree
in maintaining the claims of the employers to the fullest extent.
�4
r
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
Nay, last winter, when the tramps throughout the States were more
numerous than usual, the former paper, I think it was, suggested,
in all seriousness,—it would have been a ghastly joke in any case,
—that the farmers who were pestered with those unfortunate and
sometimes desperate wayfarers, should poison them with strych
nine in the food provided them. Where this sort of talk is
indulged in by those who have the wealth and power, the oppo
site party soon begins to use strong language in turn.
Moreover, Chicago is, to put it mildly, not a moral city. That
even the most ardent admirers of its go-aheadedness would admit.
So notorious is the character of the rich there for good and evil
living, for gluttony and debauchery, that is, that when the city
was burnt down a few years ago the more sanctimonious, if
not more continent, persons dwelling in godly Boston and pious
Philadelphia declared, with one voice, that this plague of fire
was another judgment from on high upon a modern city of
the plain. However that may be, the conflagration did not in
this case influence for the better the morals of the inhabitants,
who took up their abode in their rapidly-rebuilt dwellings, and
continued their enjoyments as before. The wealthy did so, at
any rate ; and the great number of German workers who believed
more or less in Socialism, as well as the ordinary artisans and
labourers who can contrive to be bitterly discontented when
out of work and starving without, strange as it may seem, the
help of any guiding theory, had the satisfaction of seeing men
who, but yesterday, were even as they themselves, with no
superiority of education, refinement, or intelligence, revelling, as
they said, at their expense, in the most wanton debauchery and
excess—debauchery veiled by no decency, excess unvarnished
with any pretence to taste. Naturally enough, in such a winter
of hard times as that which Chicago has felt, like other industrial
centres in America and elsewhere, the workers who were thrown
out of employment, and had not even the workhouse to fly to, as
with us, listened only too readily to the furious incitements to an
immediate attack upon the well-to-do which were poured forth
by the Spies’ Parsons, and their friends.
The poverty-stricken .people paraded with their black flags
through the city, on many occasions, to no purpose; encounters
with the police became more frequent, temper rose on both sides.
While, also, the city authorities, headed by the mayor, though not
ready to organise relief works for the unemployed, were dis
inclined, for political reasons, to interfere with the extremists, the
police were by no means so considerate as the politicians. It is
safe to say that just as the wealthy classes of Chicago are the most
self-indulgent in America, so the police is the most brutal. I
have myself seen them behave, without provocation, in a manner
which in England would provoke a riot. No doubt they have
a rough and dangerous population to deal with, but they are
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
5
rough and dangerous too. Of the general reasons which tend to
make the class conflict in America so readily take the shape of
violence I shall speak later; but injustice to the misguided men
who are now awaiting their trial, for resisting the demand of the
police to disperse with dynamite and revolvers, it should be
remembered that in the strikes which had preceded the meeting
in Haymarket Square, the police had acted with great cruelty;
that in the deputation to M’Cormick’s factory and in the attack
which followed, they are accused of having clubbed, not only
grown men but young girls to death; and that the speech of
Fielden, which was the occasion of the arrival of the police and
the demand for dispersal, was not more violent in tone towards the
upper classes than many speeches which have been delivered in
this country of late to large audiences by politicians of recognised
standing and undeniable sobriety of conduct.
The mistake which the Anarchists of Chicago made is the same
which the Anarchists of every country have so far made. They
talk big about their power to do this, that, and the other by main
force, when they are really a mere handful of men, and then they
allow themselves to be taunted into open fighting by accusations
of cowardice. It was absurd to suppose that the insignificant
meeting of 1,500 men (the cable despatches said 15,000) could
stand against the forces of the State and Federal Government;
and still more absurd to imagine that the explosion of dynamite
bombs in the face of the advancing police would solve the
economical questions at issue. There can be little doubt, indeed,
that the tendency of this encounter has been to throw back, for
the time being, the general Socialist and Labour Movement in
America, by driving into the opposing camp the waverers who
would be glad enough to support the workers in an organised
and reasoned effort such as that for the Eight Hours Bill Just,
however, as the Anarchists in Germany brought on the anti
Socialist Law, so, in America, by their mad talk and madder
rashness, they have checked the advance of Social-Democracy
among many thinking men. So manifest is this, that it is
impossible not to see that by risking an encounter at that junc
ture, even supposing it were risked to protect the right of public
meeting and free speech, the Anarchist leaders endangered the
cause of the people.
But, whatever view may be taken of the Chicago proceedings,
and however difficult it may be for non-students of labour ques
tions to distinguish between Anarchists and Social Democrats,—
Most is kind enough to denounce the present writer whenever he
gets a chance,—it is beyond question that the organisation of
the labouring classes in the United States is advancing by leaps
and bounds. This is shown even by the latest intelligence which
has come across the Atlantic. In city after city the capitalists in
different trades have surrendered on the eight hour question.
�6
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
True, it has not been a complete victory for the workers; but as
the actual returns in the labour papers show, the proportion of
successes to failures has been most encouraging to them. More
over, the simultaneous movement in all parts of the country has
taught the workers the force of union, and has given them confi
dence in themselves which nothing but such experience could have
given. When the record of the first fortnight of the great Eight
Hours Labour movement comes to be written it will, I think, be
quite clear that, in spite of the deplorable occurrence at Chicago,
a great step was then taken in the organisation of the workers
for the peaceful attainment of an economical victory. The posters
issued by the Knights of Labour prior to the struggle, calling upon
the troops and the militia not to fire upon the people, showed that
this organisation, which has been growing at the rate of a thousand
a week during the present year, and which, with all its fanciful
trickeries and secrecy, is probably the most powerful working
class organisation in the world, is obliged to recognise that,
however peaceful its objects, force will be used by the dominant
class against the people, and this force they must either meet or
undermine.
But the most formidable weapon yet used by the workers has
been boycotting; and the mere fact that arrests should have been
made for adopting a method of class warfare which, under the
existing law of the United States, is perfectly legal, confirms the
reports of the success with which it has been used. That boy
cotting is liable to abuse is quite obvious, but, once admit the
right of combination for any purpose, and it is difficult to see how
boycotting itself can be stopped. The process, of course, could
not have been effectively carried out without a complete organi
sation, thorough discipline, and a certain amount of secrecy.
Strange to say, Mr. Powderly, the chief of the Knights of Labour,
has openly declared against boycotting, as he did against the
strike on Jay Gould’s railways, and against the Eight Hour move
ment. But the boycotting has been done by the Knights of
Labour all the same. As also it will probably be introduced here
as well as on the Continent of Europe, it may not be out of place
to describe the course taken, which differs a good deal from the
simpler variety of the same process in Ireland.
A capitalist, say an ironmaster, a tobacco manufacturer, a type
founder, or a cotton-spinner, has a dispute with his hands, and
refuses to come to terms with them. At once a " boycott ” is
ordained against him and his goods. First, all the Knights of
Labour and working-class organisations in his neighbourhood are
instructed to refuse to buy his goods, if they are of a kind which
the workers have need of, and to persuade the store-keepers with
whom they deal to give up taking them. Next, the newspapers
which advertise the goods are called upon, and their managers
are informed that if the advertisement is continued, the workers
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
7
will be enjoined no longer to buy, or in any way to support, that
newspaper. Then those who supply the manufacturer with raw
material are interviewed, and efforts are made to induce them to
stop dealing with him. In this way, by degrees, a complete
cordon is formed round the obnoxious individual or company, for
few can afford, especially in cities of the second rank, to offend
what is, on the whole, the largest spending class; and gradually
he or they are forced to surrender or be ruined.
So powerful has this boycott become, and so well understood
is it by the workers, even those who belong to no actual organi
sation, that the mere threat of its operation has, in numberless
instances, gained them the day. The case of the baking
establishment belonging to the so-called “Widow Gray,” who
has, however, another husband, a “ boss ” plumber, was quite
exceptional; and any one who knows, as I do, how the bakeries
in New York are managed, or how, for that matter, they are
managed here, will have very little sympathy left to spare for the
employer, after reflecting upon the fearful overwork of the men,
for a pitiful wage. At any rate, the boycott has, as a rule, been
successful, and it is very improbable that the Federal or State
Government will be able to check it by arrests, unless they go
much farther and attempt to suppress labour organisations
altogether,—a step which would simply force all champions of
the labouring classes into desperate secret conspiracies, and tend
eventually to as bloody a struggle as ever devastated a great
country.
Whichever way we look, in fact, we can see that the outbreak in
Chicago was but a sputter of the hot volcanic lava below. The
long, dangerous, bitter strike of the railway men in Missouri
against Jay Gould, leading to violence on both sides; the strikes
of the tram-car men in New York, and the open encounters with
the authorities there; the serious troubles in the Schuylkill and
Hocking Valley coal districts; the threatening attitude of the
workers in Cincinnati and Milwaukee; the great gatherings of
the unemployed in San Francisco and other cities; the armed
encounters with reference to the employment of Chinese labour
in Seattle and Portland, Oregon; the almost infinite number of
smaller strikes and boycotts in all parts of the country, recorded
only by the local prints and labour papers, but frequently leading
to violence; the open advertisement of Pinkerton’s Agency, that
its directors are ready to provide capitalists with armed men, in
organised bands, to put down strikes, at the rate of seven or eight
dollars a day, as well as detectives to get in among the hands—
all these and many more facts which I could point to prove
beyond dispute that the two sides to the struggle are ranging
themselves in battle order from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean;
and from the Canadian frontier to the Gulf of Mexico. Even in
a new state like Texas some of the bitterest feuds have been
�8
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
stirred up. To talk of this widespread trouble as due simply to
a few foreigners, who do not understand American institutions,
or to be stopped by checking immigration, is absurd. At Chicago,
St. Louis, Cincinnati, and New York the Germans have a good
deal of influence no doubt; but even in those cities it will be
found that Americans are now taking the lead in the agitation,
as turns out to be the case in Chicago. It is true also that few
native-born Americans are as yet avowed Socialists; but the
ideas of Socialism are in among the trade unions and Knights
of Labour to a much greater extent than here, and many of their
branches have already been captured by the more advanced party.
Passing, therefore, from the exciting incidents of the moment,
and disregarding whether the workers will or will not come
victorious in the main out of the present conflict, we may fairly
consider the permanent elements involved, and why it is that
in the great republic of the United States, where the Radical
ideal, as understood in this country, is almost completely realised,
the prospect of class warfare should be almost more threatening
chan in older countries where the danger has long been recognised.
I. The workers are, on the whole, much better educated in
America than in Europe, and more readily spend what money
they have upon “ reading matter.” Hence they are more easily
informed as to what is going on among their class, and, where
they have leisure, they take a more active interest in politics and
social matters. The habit of going to lectures and public meetings
is also in favour of the spread of an organised agitation. Nothing
has been more remarkable than the sudden appearance of labour
papers in all parts of the country of late years, where formerly
they were almost unknown, and in towns of a size in which in
this country they certainly could not be maintained.
*
All these
* Saginaw Valley Daily Star (K. of L.),
advanced.
Cleveland Chronicle (Labour; com
mercial speculation).
Labour Record, Louisville (organ Trades
Assembly).
Paterson Labour Standard (organ Trades
Assembly; commercial speculation).
Cincinnati Unionist (English and Ger
man ; K. of L.), advanced.
Baltimore Free Press (K. of L.), mode
rate.
Southern Industry, New Orleans (organ
Trades Assembly), moderate.
Labour Advocate, Lewistown (organ
Trades Assembly), moderate.
Houston Labour Echo. Advanced.
Craftsman, Washington (organ Typo
graphical Union), Advanced.
Palladium of Labour, Hamilton, Ontario
(K. of L.), Socialistic.
Alarm Chicago. English organ. I.W.P.A.
Socialistic and Anarchistic.
Labour Inquirer, Denver (Socialist).
John Swinton’s Paper, New York.
Workman’s Advocate (organ New
Haven Trades Assembly), Socialist.
Detroit Labour Leaf (Typographical
organ), Socialist.
Tocsin, Philadelphia (Typographical
organ), advanced.
Labour Union, New York (commercial
speculation), moderate.
Dayton Workman (K. of L), advanced.
Voice of Labour (K. of L.), moderate,
commercial speculation.
St. Joseph Leader (K. of L.), moderate.
Jersey Knight, Somerville,-------- .
Working Man’s Advocate, Creston (K.
of L.).
Pittsburg Labour Tribune,-------- .
Labour Union, Sedalia (Socialistic).
New Jersey Unionist (K. of L. and
organ Trades Assembly), advanced.
Workman, Durham, N.C.
Providence, People (K. of L.),advanced.
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
9
sheets, however they may begin, tend steadily towards Socialism
as they go on; and the English organs quote Justice with a per
sistence which has quite astonished those who, like myself,
thought it would take some time for our ideas to make way
among the individualist American workers.
II. The facts and figures relating to the trades and industries
of the United States are tabulated with very much greater
accuracy, and are much more easily accessible to the workers,
than they are here or in any European country. Hence the
artisans and labourers in any special branch can see clearly what
proportion of the total product goes to the labourers in that de
partment, and how much is taken as a return to capital. No
dispute as to whether wages are or are not rising, relatively to
the cost of living, could be carried on in America in the same
blind fashion as is too often the case here. The champions of
the working classes can see for themselves how they fare with
their employers, and neither side can delude the other as to the
main facts.
III. The evidence taken before the Committee of the Senate on
the condition of the wage-earning class in the United States
proved clearly that when the high rents and other points are
taken into the account the workers in America do not get wages
which command a standard of life in excess of what can be
Labour Lance. Tewk House (K. of L.),
moderate.
Co-operator, Seattle.
Memphis Weekly Record (organ Trades
Assembly and Typographical).
Ohio Valley Boycotter (Boycotting
specially).
Independent Citizen, Albany.
Petersburg Vice Exponent (K. of L.)
Journal of Industry, Quincey.
Truth, Rochester.
Buffalo Sunday Truth. Advanced com
mercial speculation.
Labourer, Haverhill.
Minersville Free Press.
Richmond (Va.) Herald.
Pittsburg Herald.
St. Paul’s (Miss.) Herald.
Louisville Labour Post.
St. Louis Champion.
Grand Rapid’s Workman. Moderate.
Labour Siftings, Fort Worth. Advanced.
Atlanta Working World.
Portland, Oregon, Ala. Revolutionary.
Topeka (Kan.) Citizen.
The following form the “ Associated
Labour Press” :—
Cleveland Chronicle.
Paterson Labour Standard.
Cincinnati Unionist.
Baltimore Free Press.
Southern Industry.
Leicester Labour Advocate.
Houston Labour Echo.
Washington Craftsman.
Palladium of Labour, Hamilton, Ont.
Denver Labour Inquirer.
John Swinton’s Paper.
Philadelphia Tocsin.
Ohio Valley Boycotter.
Independent Citizen, Albany.
Rochester Truth.
Buffalo Truth.
Haverhill Labourer.
Minersville Free Press.
Richmond (Va.) Herald.
Pittsburg Herald.
St. Paul’s (Mis.) Herald.
Louisville Labour Post.
St. Louis Champion.
German.
Baacker Zeitung, New York. (Organ of
Bakers’ Union.)
Arbeiter Zeitung.
New York Volkszeitung.
Der Sozialist. (Organ Socialist Labour
Party.)
Die Parole. (Organ I. W. P. A., St. Louis
Groups.)
L’Union Ouvri&re, Montreal.
Labour Paper..
French
�10
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
obtained in England. This was not what had been anticipated,
and the revelation produced a very great effect; for Americans
have always been led to believe, and did believe, that the labour
ing classes were far better paid, worked shorter hours, and
altogether had a " good time ” as compared with similar workers,
male and female, in the old country. The exposure of the bad
housing and “ sweating ” that were too common in all the great
cities gave the agitators many texts on which they could preach
with great effect, having official testimony behind them.
IV. The increasing difficulty for a man to rise out of the wage
earning class, which I have myself noticed in a casual way at
every visit since I landed in San Francisco at the end of 1870, is
felt as a distinct grievance by the workers. Men in America,
whether native-born or immigrants, all expect to " rise in the
world,” if they are industrious, thrifty, and sober. They are now
finding that this is a less and less easy matter, while the uncer
tainty of getting any employment at all, even by skilled artisans,
has become a great hardship. According to the North American
Review and trustworthy local statistics no fewer than 2,000,000
of people were out of work a few months ago.
V. There is no personal relation between employer and
employed, and the cold pecuniary bargaining appears even in a
more unpleasant shape than it does in Europe. Tramps also are
treated with great cruelty, and the laws against them in some
States are of a character which tends to foster outrages and drive
them to desperation.
VI. The capitalist class consists for the most part of men who
are merely rich, and who have risen above the level of the workers
by operations which are scarcely likely to win respect. They are
not absorbed into an old class whose wealth is hereditary, nor is
there a large professional or easy class, with their dependents, to
shade off the antagonism. Jay Gould, for instance, against whom
some of the more desperate of the recent strikes have been
aimed, is a man who has qualified for his present position as a
“ Napoleon of Finance ” by a series of transactions which even the
laxest moralists denounce as closely akin to fraud. Five-andtwenty years ago he was a needy punter in gold options ; to
day he controls railways, telegraphs, news-agencies, legislatures,
and the whole existence of the thousands of men who work on
his various lines. And he is only a sample of plenty of others
who act with the completest disregard to the welfare of the
workers, the - interests of the public, or the commonest rules of
human decency. The feeling against the great corporations and
their “bosses,” with regard to the wholesale manner in which
they have plundered the State of its lands, the trading com
munity of cheap transit in many cases, and the mass of the
people of honest representation, is shared by thousands who are
not actually wage-earners, and helps on the general movement.
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
11
No attempt is made by the capitalists, as already noted, to dis
guise their contempt for the human counters with which they
play their game.
VII. The contrast between the nominal social and political
equality and the real disparity which exists between the rich and
the poor man—the utter helplessness of the latter, though he is
told that he is all-powerful, when he sees himself juggled out of
any real influence—increases the bitterness in times of pressure.
There is a growing appreciation of the irony of the situation at
the very time when, owing to economical causes, the gap between
the extremely wealthy and the wretchedly poor is widening every
day. What is the use, men say, of being a citizen of the United
States, when I can barely keep body and soul together, while these
employers and capitalists control the whole machine ? The tone of
the political literature, from the Declaration of Independence down
wards, is one continuous satire upon the economical and social
conditions of to-day. Formerly, when all felt they had a chance,
this was not so much noticed; now it is felt and commented upon
daily.
VIII. The political issues themselves are really played out for
the most part. These used to serve in the United States, as they
still serve in older countries, to obscure the actual conflict of class
interest which underlies them all. That is now at an end. So
far as political matters go there is little to choose between the
Democratic and Republican parties; and the people begin to lose
their interest in the mere grabbing for place, which is thinly
veneered over, if veneered it is, by a pretence of patriotism. This,
among a nation so intensely political hitherto as the Americans,
is in itself a serious matter. The social question rises in an in
teresting if a threatening shape just as people at large have
become wearied of the “ bloody shirt,” and have wakened to the
hollowness of nine-tenths of the political discussions. That the
labouring classes are almost entirely unrepresented in the political
arena by no means lessens the significance of this point.
IX. Americans are far more ready to resort to arms than we
are. Just as it is said that a coward who goes west of the Rocky
Mountains comes back a brave man, so any one who goes to the
United States learns to look upon the probability of street fight
ing as by no means small, though perhaps he would find it
difficult to give reasons for this feeling. At any rate, now and for
some years past the possibility of such a collision has been felt
among the workers, and when once bloodshed has begun, as it has
in Chicago and St. Louis, it is very difficult to secure a peaceful
issue, where those who hold the power fail to recognise that the
class which is striving for better conditions of existence, has
powers of organisation and secret action which might be used
with fearful effect. There is no better preparation for a peaceful
settlement than the establishment of mutual respect. This does
�12
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
not exist between the two classes in America, and both are more
or less accustomed to the use of arms.
X. The corruption of the State Legislatures and the Munici
palities, the hopelessness of getting any matters attended to
which affect the welfare of great masses of men, but which
conflict with the interests of the great monopolists, are steadily
driving the intelligent workers to the conviction that, if the
present attitude is maintained, an appeal to downright force is
the only possible solution of the question. Time after time
reformers have seen their nominee or nominees bought, as it were,
over their heads, after having given the most thorough pledges at
the polls. Confidence is thus shaken among the people, not only
in this or that party, but in the whole machinery of government;
nor can I deny that this has had a tendency to strengthen the
Anarchists who declaim against the childishness of all political
action.
XI. The constitution of the United States is built up upon the
principles of the most complete individual liberty for all free men.
This, of course, has not been fully maintained in practice, but
these are the principles to which appeal is always made in cases
of difficulty. No provisions, however, were made or contemplated
against the tremendous power over others which this unlimited
freedom might give to individuals in the field of industry and
trade. Thus, though protection is kept up against foreign goods,
protection by the State, or organised community, of the native
workers seems unconstitutional as well as grandmotherly.
Twenty, thirty, fifty years ago the danger had scarcely arisen.
Now that it has Americans, who are essentially lawyers and
constitutionalists, find no precedents which will hold water for
direct interference. This at least has been urged as a reason for
non-intervention, and there seems a sound basis for the contention.
Nevertheless, as I observed five years ago:—“Full individual
freedom leads'in present economical conditions to monopoly; that
monopoly speedily develops into oppression and tryanny; and
then the common sense of society, as a whole, has to step in to
correct the:mischief which has been allowed to spring up.” It is
upon the capacity of American statesmen, politicians, and pub
licists to grasp this truth and to modify their political constitution
so that it may deal vigorously and firmly with social abuses, that
the probability of a peaceful solution of the class struggle rests in
the United States.
Happily signs are not wanting that, notwithstanding the raving
of the capitalist press against the workers and their organisations,
a change is taking place in the mind of influential men which may
have a great effect in the direction which all must hope for.
That the main question in the recent conflict should be the
reduction of the working day to eight hours—a concession which
the workers in our Australian Colonies have already secured—
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
13
gives a reasonable look to the demands of the labourers, seeing
that nobody can work a horse eight hours a day without killing
him very soon. The tone of President Cleveland’s message, in
which he attributes the difficulties of the situation to the grasping
rapacity of capitalists, rather than to the undue demands of the
labourers, is the more significant when we remember that as
Governor of the State of New York, Mr. Cleveland actually vetoed
a Bill, which had passed both Houses of the Legislature, in favour
of a great reduction of the hours of labour on tramways. Clearly
the facts brought before him since his election as President have
considerably modified his opinions, or pressure has been brought
to bear upon him—which is perhaps more likely, for he is not a
man of great ability or foresight—by stronger men than himself.
The position of the Democratic Party, whose man President
Cleveland is, with reference to the Labour question, is indeed
worthy of brief consideration.
The Republican Party is
essentially, and of its nature, the party of the bourgeoisie. The
Democratic Party has always claimed to be, though it must be
confessed with very little reason, the party of the people. Now
it has a chance of justifying its name and its claim, and the wiser
heads are anxious that an attempt should at once be made in
this direction. Hence the President’s favourable message just
before the Chicago outbreak. On the other hand, there are worse
influences! at work in the direction of the monopolists. Mr.
Whitney, the Secretary of the Navy, has, it is said, great weight
with. Mr. Cleveland, and he has married the only daughter of
Senator Payne, of Ohio, who is the head of the notorious Standard
Oil Company. It is to be noted, therefore, that Senator Payne
was the only Democratic Senator who voted in favour of the
increase of the United States army and its employment in the
suppression of strikes.
Personal considerations are, as a rule, hardly to be taken into
account in a matter of such wide importance as this, which will
long outlive Presidents and Cabinets, politicians and wire-pullers.
But Mr. Cleveland and the Democratic Party—of which, by the
way, Mr. Henry George is an active member—stand in a very
peculiar position with reference to the transition period which
America has entered upon. Having attained office after an
exclusion of a quarter of a century the Democrats are at once
brought face to face with an internal contest, in comparison with
which, unless great care is taken, the Civil War between North
and South may yet seem mere child’s play. It is scarcely too
much to say that, accordingly as the present executive shows
judgment and capacity, inasmuch as it sees that the interests of a
people should be considered before those of a class, just in so far
will the immediate future of the United States be a history of
beneficial development or anarchical disturbance. Hence the
influences which bend Mr. Cleveland in a capitalist direction are
�14
THE CHICAGO RIOTS AND
wholly harmful to the interests of the Great Republic at the
present juncture ; and the worst service of all the bad services
the Standard Oil Company has done the American community,
would be that its chief should indirectly twist the principal
officers of the Federal Government against the legitimate
demands of the working people.
The better class of Republicans also, men who but yesterday
were protesting against the corruption of their own party, and
were largely instrumental in bringing abeut Cleveland’s election,
are beginning to see that buying cheap and selling dear is not
the ideal of human existence. Mr. Henry Ward Beecher,
essentially a man of the times, has found it advisable to abandon
his old denunciations of the labouring classes, and to advocate
something better for the people than to remain at the absolute
disposal of owners of property. Mr. Newton, Professor Ely, the
Chaplain of the House of Assembly, and many more, have been
trying hard to reconcile Socialism and Christianity, rivalling
even the Social Democrats in their denunciations of the un
scrupulous money-getting, which has hitherto been the main
consideration of the well-to-do classes in the United States.
The agitation for Land Nationalisation, which Mr. Henry George
has carried on with so much vigour and self-sacrificing persist
ence, has necessarily spread ideas of collective management far
and wide; the growing determination to limit the power of the
railway kings and great corporations, has a direct tendency to
help on still wider proposals; while even the Free Trade discus
sion, like the Fair Trade agitation here, has drawn attention to
economical and social as distinguished from mere political
issues.
Till within the last two or three years, however, the reply of
sober Americans to all who called attention to the dangers arising
from the growing disaffection of the working class in the great
cities was to point to their great agricultural population, and the
increasing number of independent farmers as the backbone of the
nation certain to oppose all subversionary attempts. The figures
of the last census are indeed astonishing, showing, as they do, that
whereas in 1870 there were 5,922,471 persons engaged in agricul
ture in the United States, of whom 2,889,605 were dependents of
some sort; in 1880 there were 7,670,493 thus engaged—an in
crease of 1,700,000 in the ten years—and of these but 3,326,982
were dependents. Thus the independent farmers had increased
from 3,033,866 in 1870 to 4,343,511 in 1880, and the number
has grown since then considerably. Here then is what, in all
ordinary circumstances, would be a strongly conservative element,
opposing a dead resistance to the agitation of the great cities,
similar to, but even more formidable than, that offered by the
French small proprietors to the Radicals and Socialists of Paris,
Lyons, etc. But economical causes have stirred the agriculturists
�THE CLASS WAR IN THE UNITED STATES.
15
too, farmers and labourers together. The great fall in the price
of all agricultural produce, the impossibility, it may be said, of
disposing of their grain at a profit, has literally crushed many of
the farmers, while the foreclosure on mortgages, or the increase
of debt, has brought home the pressure of capitalism even to the
most industrious and thrifty. The outcry against the railways
by the employes finds, therefore, an echo among the farmers who
cry out for lower than the already low rates ; such combinations
as the “ Grangers ” denounce railway monopoly and landgrabbing
with almost the same vehemence as the more extreme men in the
cities. At the same time those dependent upon the farmers, find
more difficulty in getting work, and have to accept in many in
stances lower wages. Thus, though the agriculturists may take
a somewhat different line from the city workers, they also are at
the present time by no means as a whole in a contented frame
of mind, or likely to play the reactionary part which was but
now assigned to them.
Speaking generally, the tendency in the United States, as it is
here, is for the workers who are better educated, more apt to com
bine, more ready to see the antagonism between their interests
and that of the capitalists, to be asked to accept a lower standard
of life, just when they have made up their minds that they are
entitled to demand a higher. Can this be enforced ? I say most
distinctly, No. To see this it is not necessary to be a Social Demo
crat. Mr. Jefferson Davis, an old and presumably cool observer,
practically says “ No,” too. He notes, as all unprejudiced men must
note, that not only do’ the workers not share proportionately in
the relative improvement of society, due to the improved methods
of production of wealth, but that they are being educated to ask
why this should be. Yet, even as I write, an official report reaches
this country from the United States, which shows that the con
dition of the “ sweaters’ hacks,” and of others of the lower grades
of labour, is perhaps worse than it is in England with regard to
food, clothing, and lodging accommodation. I do not deny that
there is more general well-being in the United States than in
England, but I am also convinced that the relative superiority
now scarcely affects the working classes, and that the tendency
is ever downwards in their lot. This, while the big fortunes are
growing constantly bigger, and luxury is carried to a higher
pitch than ever before.
Thus then the Chicago Riots, the unprovoked shooting at St.
Louis, the other smaller outbreaks of which we hear little of, are
symptoms of a deep discontent throughout the United States,
which it will need the highest ability and coolness of her states
men to deal with. We are now apparently at the beginning of
a rising cycle of trade in that great country. Now, therefore, is
the time to act. To wait until “ bad times ” come again before
steps are taken to deal with the great social problem, means,
�16
r
' Sk
THE CHICAGO RIOTS.
sooner or later, civil war. The respect for law, which De
Tocqueville and other writers have remarked upon as so obvious
a trait in the American character, will not long survive a state of
society in which the law is used to protect a vast system of social
oppression. Moderate as are the demands of the Knights of
Labour, the Federated Trades, and similar organisations, the idea
of collective action is, as I have shown, already growing among
them; and Socialism has taken root to such an extent that it can
never again be neglected in any calculations as to the future
action of the workers in the United States. A great opportunity
lies before the men now in power. They can either bitterly
exacerbate, and therefore render dangerous to peace the natural
desire of the producing class for a rapid improvement of their
lot; or they can give it a gradual and beneficial outlet by an
organised endeavour to meet their demands in a calm and equit
able spirit. All men, even Anarchists, would prefer a peaceful
solution; sober observers know that violence is apt to breed
reaction. But in America, as in England and on the continent
of Europe, the question of the immediate future is, How are the
workers to obtain control over production without a cataclysm
which will sweep all before it ?
The seventh industrial crisis of the century is slowly passing
away on the other side of the Atlantic. Will the eighth find the
governing classes as incapable of grasping the causes or dealing
with the effects of these periods of social anarchy as they are
to-day ? Upon the answer to that question it is not too much to
say depends the future of the American Republic.
Note.—Since the above paper was in type, direct evidence has been
received that the great meeting and procession of Socialists and Anarchists
on May 1st, attended by fully 20,000 men, was perfectly quiet and orderly ;
that the numbers present on the occasion when the actual conflict took
place did not exceed 1,500 instead of 15,000 ; and that the police had no
legal right whatever, under the State Law, to call upon the people to
disperse. This, of course, does not justify the throwing of the dynamite
bomb; but, taken in connection with the clubbing of girls to death and
the shooting of men when the crowd went to M’Cormick’s factory, it puts
a very different complexion on the matter to that given it by the capitalist
press.
H. M. h.
May 24th,
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Chicago riots and the class war in the United States
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Hyndman, H. M. (Henry Mayers) [1842-1921.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: A reprint from 'Time'.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Swan Sonnenschein, Lowrey & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1886
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4972
Subject
The topic of the resource
Anarchism
Socialism
USA
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Chicago riots and the class war in the United States), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Anarchism
Chicago
Riots
Socialism
United States of America
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/db24c60c3cab575c232622438bf67356.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=uPE4uQKtNNrSMCylsDoV6X1M0S%7E3UUA7LjxnaFmsoNNcD6SyLdwnPhiNjMqRV2%7Ep6xC1mNfuZRYYJghCZQaXr0Ap86qeTu7JyT2%7EEryTFwy-ia1eC5ncRpJzmMR-wwPW3oV7dCORTtdiHKTjyUk724KzbhqSkZlDec3GKCO4FAH410X0b5wlSRP57qbN2AeuoHcV%7Ejyt9YPLHRSz7Ioo4SqZ4C4GoyJxq3OKpt9RdlrhBOqSpqOAzx%7ED3iIS5DIuyzFL1GxiGKqA0BRptr%7EaKEUPNibxqBuU5pEg4X9ZDKNx1I6WEJsshKilupjEGNylQSctsRfXEgfctYe20f9v2w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
1b60d76defd1e3f7805804184579a4d9
PDF Text
Text
SECOND EDITION. SIXTH THOUSAND.________
------ =—7—-
=
MR. CHAS. BRADLAUGH, referring to this Orat.icrth. ¿fy
says in the National Reformer of J uly 2nd, 1882 ¡-MJ». "L
“As a sample of eloquence it should be read by evRf^.. <4 •.
admirer of fine clear oratory.
*
<$
<0 ¿X. •
NATIONALSECtJLARSOCIETY
nJ
COL. INGERSOLL’S
LONDON:
Printed at the Paine Press, 8, Finsbury-street, e.c.
1882
Price One Penny.
i
�( 2 )
-Ht IJ'i’FRODUC’FISjV.
ECORATION DAY, the occasion upon which the following
Oration was delivered in June, 1882, is a national commemora
tion of the dead heroes of America, of the men who fought and died
for the great republic. It is observed throughout the country, and
the tombs of the departed great ones are decked with flowers and
other symbols of remembrance and respect. Col. Ingersoll, whose
fame as an orator is world-wide, was requested to deliver the com
memorative discourse. The Colonel accepted the honorable post, and
the oration given below was the result. The Academy of Music was
thronged on the evening of Decoration Day. The gay dresses of the
ladies and the bright uniforms of military men gave the audience a
brilliant appearance. The Academy was profusely decorated with
flags. Amidst thunders of applause, Colonel Ingersoll advanced to
the reading desk, and delivered the
ORATION.
'T'IIIS day is sacred to our heroes dead. Upon their tombs we hav
A lovingly laid the wealth of spring.
This is a day for memory and tears. A mighty nation bends above
its honored grave and pays to noble dust the tribute of its love.
Gratitude is the fairest flower that sheds its perfume in the heart.
To-day we tell the history of oui' country’s life—-recount the lofty
deeds, of vanished years—the toil and suffering, the defeats and
victories of heroic men—of men who made our nation great and free.
We see the first ships whose prows were gilded by the Western
sun. We feel the thrill of discovery when the new world was found.
We see the oppressed, the serf, the peasant, and the slavemen whose
flesh had known the chill of chains—the adventurous, the proud, the
brave, sailing an unknown sea, seeking homes in unknown lands.
We see the settlements, the little clearings, the block-house, and
the fort, the rude and lonely huts. Brave men, true women, builders
of homes, fellers of forests, founders of states !
Separated from the Old World—away from the heartless distinctions
of caste—away from sceptres, and titles, and crowns, they governed
themselves. They defended their homes, they earned them bread.
Each citizen had a voice, and the little villages became almost
republics.
Slowly the savage was driven, foot by foot, back in the dim forest.
The days and nights were filled with fear, and the slow years with
massacre and war, and cabins' earthen floors were wet with blood of
mothers and their babes.
But the savages of the New World were kinder than the kings and
nobles of the Old ; and so the human tide kept coming, and the
places of the dead were filled.
�( 3 )
Amid common dangers and common hopes, the prejudices and
feuds of Europe faded slowly from their hearts. From every land,
of every speech, driven by want and lured by hope, exiles and
emigrants sought the mysterious continent of the West.
Year after year the colonists fought and toiled, and suffered and
increased.
They began to talk about liberty—to reason of the rights of man.
They asked no help from distant kings, and they began to doubt the
use of paying tribute to the useless. They lost respects for dukes
and lords, and held in high esteem all honest men.
There was the dawn of a new day. They began to dream of in
dependence. They found that they could make and execute the laws.
They had tried the experiment of self-government. They had
succeeded. The Old World wished to dominate the New. In the
care and keeping of the colonists was the destiny of this continent—
of half the world.
On this day the story of the great struggle between colonists and
kings should be told. We should tell our children of the contest—
first for justice, then for freedom. We should tell them the history
of the Declaration of Independence—the chart and compass of all
human rights—that all men are equal, and have the right of life,
liberty, and joy.
This Declaration uncrowned kings, and wrested from the hands of
titled tyranny the sceptre of usurped and arbitrary power. It super
seded royal grants, and repealed the cruel statutes of a thousand
years. It gave the peasant a career; it knighted all the sons of toil;
it opened all the paths to fame, and put the star of hope above the
cradle of the poor man’s babe.
England was then the mightiest of nations—mistress of every sea—
and yet our fathers, poor and few, defied her power.
To-day we remember the defeats, the victories, the disasters, the
weary marches, the poverty, the hunger, the sufferings, the agonies,
and, above all, the glories of the Revolution. We remember all—
from Lexington to Valley Forge, and from that midnight of despair
to Yorktown's cloudless day.
We remember the soldiers and thinkers—the heroes of the sword
and pen. They had the brain and heart, the wisdom and the courage
to utter and defend these words, “Governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed.”
In defence of this sublime and self-evident truth the war was waged
and won.
To-day we remember all the heroes, all the generous and chivalric
men who came from other lands to make ours free.
Of the many thousands who shared the gloom and glory of the
seven sacred years, not one remains. The last has mingled with the
earth, and nearly all are sleeping now in unmarked graves, and some
beneath the leaning, crumbling stones, from which their names have
been effaced by Time’s irreverent and relentless hands.
But the nation they founded remains. The United States are still
free and independent. The “government derives its just powers
�( 4 )
from the consent of the governed,” and fifty millions of free people
remember with gratitude the heroes of the Revolution.
Let us be truthful; let us be kind. When peace came, when the
independence of a new nation was acknowledged, the great truth for
which our fathers fought was half denied, and the Constitution was
inconsistent with the Declaration. The war was waged for liberty,
and yet the victors forged new fetters for their fellow-men. The
chains our fathers broke were put by them upon the limbs of others.
Freedom for all was the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night,
through seven years of want and war. In peace the cloud was for
gotten and the pillar blazed unseen.
Let us be truthful; all of our fathers were not true to themselves.
In war, they had been generous, noble, and self-sacrificing ; with
peace came selfishness and greed. They were not great enough to
appreciate the grandeur of the principles for which they fought.
They ceased to regard the great truths as having universal applica
tion. “ Liberty for all ” included only themselves. They qualified
the Declaration. They interpolated the word “ white; ” they obliter
ated the world “all.”
Let us be kind. We will remember the ag-e in which they lived.
We will compare them with the citizens of other nations.
They made merchandise of men. They legalized a crime. They
sowed the seeds of war. But they founded this nation.
Let us gratefully remember.
Let us gratefully forget.
To-day we remember the heroes of the second war with England—
in which our fathers fought for the freedom of the seas, for the rights
of the American sailor.
We remember with pride the splendid victories of Erie and Champ
lain, and the wondrous achievements upon the sea—achievements
that covered our navy with glory that neither the victories nor defeats
of the future can dim.
We remember the heroic services and sufferings of those who
fought the merciless savage of the frontier. We see the midnight
massacre, and hear the war-cries of the allies of England. We see
the flames climb round the happy homes, and in the charred and
blackened ruins we see the mutilated bodies of wives and children.
Peace came at last, crowned with the victory of New Orleans—a
victory that “ did redeem all sorrows ” and all defeats.
The Revolution gave our fathers a free land—the war of 1812 a
free sea.
To-day we remember the gallant men who bore our flag in tri
umph from the Rio Grande to the heights of Chatultepec.
Leaving out of question the justice of our cause—the necessity for
war—we are yet compelled to applaud the marvellous courage of our
troops. A handful of men—brave, impetuous determined, irresist
ible—conquered a nation. Our history has no record of more daring
deeds.
Again peace came, and the nation hoped and thought that strife
was at an end.
oi
�( 5 )
We had grown too powerful to be attacked. Our resources were
boundless, ^and the future seemed secured. The hardy pioneers
moved to the great West. Beneath their ringing strokes the forests
disappeared, and on the prairies waved the billowed.seas of wheat
and corn. The great plains were crossed, the mountains were con
quered, and the foot of victorious adventure pressed the shore of the
Pacific.
In the great north, all the streams went singing to the sea, turning
wheels and spindles, and casting shuttles back and forth. Inventions
were springing like magic from a thousand brains. From laboi s
holy altars rose and leaped the smoke and flame, and from the count
less forges rang the chant of the rhythmic stroke.
But in the South the negro toiled unpaid, and mothers wept while
babes were sold, and at the auction black husbands and wives speech
lessly looked the last good-bye. Fugitives, lighted by the Northern
star, sought liberty on English soil, and were by northern men thrust
back to whip and chain.
The great statesmen, the successful politicians, announced that law
had compromised with crime, that justice had been bribed, and that
time had barred appeal. A race was left without a right, without a
hope. The future had no dawn, no star—nothing but ignorance and
fear, nothing but work and want. This was the conclusion of the
statesman, the philosophy of the politicians—of constitutional ex
pounders. This was decided by courts and ratified by the nation.
We had been successful in three wars. We had wrested thirteen
colonies from Great Britain. We had conquered our place upon the
high seas. We had added more than two millions of square miles to
the national domain. We had increased in population from three to
thirty-one millions. We were in the midst of plenty. We were rich
and free. Ours appeared to be the most prosperous of nations. •
But it was only appearance. The statesmen and the politicians
were deceived. Real victories can be won only for the right. .The
triumph of justice is the only peace. Such is the nature of things.
He who enslaves another cannot be free. He who attacks the right
assaults himself.
The mistake our fathers made had not been corrected. The found
ations of the republic were insecure. The great dome of the temple
was bathed in the light of prosperity, but the corner-stones were
crumbling. Four millions of human beings were enslaved. . Party
cries had been mistaken for principles—partisanship for patriotism,
success for justice.
But pity pointed to the scarred and bleeding backs of slaves;
mercy heard the sobs of mothers reft of babes, and justice held aloft
the scales, in which one drop of blood, shed by a master’s lash out
weighed a nation’s gold.
There were a few men, a few women, who had the courage to. at
tack this monstrous crime. They found it entrenched in constitu
tions, statutes, and decisions, barricaded and bastioned by every
department and by every party. Politicians were its servants, states
men its attorneys, judges its menials, presidents its puppets, and upon
�( 6 )
its cruel altar had been sacrificed our country’s honor.
It was the crime of the nation—of the whole country—North and
South responsible alike.
To-day we reverently thank the abolitionists. Earth has produced
no grander men, no nobler women. They were the real philanthrop
ists, the true patriots.
When the will defies fear, when the heart- applauds the brain, when
duty throws the gauntlet down to fate, when honor scorns to com
promise with death—this is heroism.
The abolitionists were heroes. He loves his country best who
strives to make it best. The bravest men are those who have the
greatest fear of doing wrong.
Mere politicians wish the country to do something for them, true
patriots desire to do something for their country.
Courage without conscience is a wild beast; patriotism without
principle is the prejudice of birth—the animal attachment to place.
These men, these women, had courage and conscience, patriotism
and principle, heart and brain.
The South relied upon the bond—upon a barbarous clause that
stained, disfigured, and defiled the Federal pact—and made the mon
strous claim that- slavery was the nation’s ward. The spot of shame
grew red in Northern cheeks, and Northern men declared that slavery
had poisoned, cursed, and blighted soul and soil enough, and that the
territories must be free.
The radicals of the South cried, “No Union without slavery!”
The radicals of the North replied, “No Union without- liberty!”
The Northern radicals were right. Upon the great issue of free
homes for free men a president was elected by the free states. The
South appealed to the sword, and raised the standard of revolt. For
the first time in history the oppressors rebelled.
But let us to-day be great enough to forget individuals—great
enough to know that slavery was treason, that slavery was rebellion,
that slavery fired upon our flag, and sought to wreck and strand the
mighty ship that bears the hope and fortune of this world.
The first shot liberated the North. Constitutions, statutes, and
decisions, compromises, platforms, and resolutions, made, passed, and
ratified in the interest of slavery, became mere legal lies, mean and
meaningless, base and baseless.
Parchment and paper could no longer stop or stay the onward
march of man. Tire North was free. Millions instantly resolved
that the nation should not die—that freedom should not perish, and
that slavery should not live. Millions of our brothers, our sons, our
fathers, our husbands, answered to the nation’s call.
The great armies have desolated the earth; the greatest soldiers
have been ambition’s dupes. They waged war for the sake of place
and pillage, pomp and power, for the ignorant applause of vulgar
millions, for the flattery of parasites, and t-he adulation of sycophants
and slaves.
Let us proudly remember that in our time the greatest, the
grandest, the noblest army of the world fought—not to enslave, but
�( 7 )
to free ; not to destroy, but to save ; not simply for themselves, but
for others; not for conquest, but for conscience ; not only for us, but
for every land and every race.
With courage, with enthusiasm, with devotion never excelled, with
an exaltation and purity of purpose never equalled, this grand army
fought the battles of the republic. For the preservation of this
nation, for the destruction of slavery, these soldiers, these sailors—on
land and sea-—disheartened by no defeat, discouraged by no obstacle,
appalled by no danger, neither paused nor swerved until a stainless
flag, without a rival, floated over all our wide domain, and until every
human being beneath its folds was absolutely free.
The great victory for human rights-—the greatest of all the years—
had been won ; won by the Union men of the North, by the Union
men of the South, and by those who had been slaves. Liberty was
national—slavery was dead.
The flag for which the heroes fought, for which they died, is the
symbol of all we are, of all we hope to be.
It is the emblem of equal rights.
It means free hands, free lips, self-government, and the sovereign
ty of the individual.
It means that this continent has been dedicated to freedom.
It means universal education—light for every mind, knowledge for
every child.
It means that the school-house is the fortress of liberty.
It means that “ governments derive their just powers from the con
sent of the governed ”—that each man is accountable to and for the
government—-that- responsibility goes hand in hand with liberty.
It means that it is the duty of every citizen to bear his share of the
public burden—to take part in the affairs of his town, his county, his
state, and his country.
It means that the ballot-box is the ark of the covenant—that the
source of authority must not be poisoned.
It means the perpetual right of peaceful revolution.
It means that every citizen of the republic—native or naturalised
—must be protected; at home, in every state ; abroad, in every land,
on every sea.
It means that all distinctions based on birth or blood have perished
from our laws—that our government shall stand between labor and
capital, between the weak and the strong, between the individual and
the corporation, between want and wealth—and give and guarantee
simple justice to each and all.
It means that there shall be a legal remedy for every wrong.
It means national hospitality—that we must welcome to our shores
the exiles of the world, and that we may not drive them back. Some
may be deformed by labor, dwarfed by hunger, broken in spirit, vic
tims of tyranny and caste, in whose sad faces may be read the touch
ing record of a weary life ; and yet their children, born of liberty and
love, will be symmetrical and fair, intelligent and free.
That flag is the emblem of a supreme will-—of a nation’s power.
Beneath its folds the weakest must be protected, and the strongest
must obey.
�It shields and canopies alike the loftiest mansion and the rudest
hut.
That flag was given to the air in the Revolution’s darkest days.
It represents the sufferings of the past, the glories yet to be ; and like
the bow of heaven, it is the child of storm and sun.
This day is sacred to the great heroic host who kept this flag above
our heads—sacred to the living and the dead—sacred to the scarred
and the maimed—sacred to the wives who gave their husbands, to the
mothers who gave their sons.
Here in this peaceful land of ours—here where the sun shmes,
where flowers grow, where children play, millions of armed men
battled for the right, and breasted on a thousand fields the iron storms
of war.
These brave, these incomparable men founded the first republic.
They fulfilled the prophecies; they brought to pass the dreams;
they realized the hopes that all the great and good and wise and just
have made and had since man was man.
But what of those who fell?
There is no language to express the debt we owe, the love we bear,
to all the dead who died for us. Words are but barren sounds. We
can but stand beside their graves, and, in the hush and silence, feel
what speech has never told.
They fought, they died, and for the first time since man has kept
a record of events the heavens bent above and domed a land without
a serf, a servant, or a slave.
NOTICE.
*
*
Read THE REPUBLICAN, Id. monthly, each number containing
Portrait and biography of some well-known reformer.
By G.
a^URT FLUNKEYS: Their “Work” and Wages.
W Standring. An exposure of aristocratic sinecures. Id. 4-. .. „
BiFE of C. BRADLAUGH, M.P., 12 pages, with Portrait &
* autograph. By G. Standring. Id.
LIFE of^tL. INGERSOLL, with Portrait, Autograph, and Extracts
froworks. In neat wrapper, Id.
By orderlhroug^uy nmAvnt; or by post from 8, Finsbury-st., London.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Col. Ingersoll's Decoration Day oration, June 1882
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 2nd ed.
Place of publication: London
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: "Printed at the Paine Press, 8 Finsbury-street, E.C." Stamp on front cover: Freethought Publishing Co., Printing Office, 68 Fleet Street, E.C., A. Bonner, Manager. Publisher's advertisements on back cover include The Republican [periodical] and other republican works. Not in Stein checklist, but cf his No. 155. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ingersoll, Robert Green [1833-1899]
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Paine Press
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1882
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N336
Subject
The topic of the resource
USA
Memorial Day
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Col. Ingersoll's Decoration Day oration, June 1882), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Memorial Addresses
NSS
United States-History
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b34d0544de239037aa7c3d912933884d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=lnMpzbR1Mz-K9xAHlVbFPiOSo%7EmnXxCeH2eG%7EotY7uINdwlw4A1R6Xwj5GiaLLiUkWnU9M9OLvypBy77IBV3K4orLdnbC3XVnlexp%7E7ZEhwhdGeQTqZ1DOfb4yTEetOHrYl3bSqYCLTRhiwad2P9cvQE4hKTdXuC0dBU2S-AHynBF35tX%7EsjEMdGWbPwcCoQHhDCo4nCKldcsNzEHW6VLFMmwB9dWs96ME-KYffLYvS%7EhhwNkxZEOIbJID-A7PE5J8TAU-7fqVDJb556RnG5tlEoAUQdrCCeJBNGecQ3ZH2YLTHVT%7ElGBnoQlsaMAWAe4gfWOe9e3RsYETGnpJf2AQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
060c030f8b49f49278ea2e7093583363
PDF Text
Text
^onalsecularsociety
ABRAHAM
LINCOLN
AN ORATION
BY
COLONEL R. G. INGERSOLL.
Price Threepence.
LONDON:
R. FORDER, 28 STONECUTTER STREET, E.O.
1893.
�LONDON .*
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY G. W. FOOTE,
AT 14 CLERKENWELL GREEN, E.C.
�N) 3
4
ORATION ON ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
EiGHTY-FOUR years ago to-day, two babes were born—
one in the woods of Kentucky, amid the hardships and
poverty of pioneers ; one in England, surrounded by
wealth and culture. One was educated in the University
of N ature, the other at Oxford.
One associated his name with the enfranchisement
of labor, with the emancipation of millions, with the
salvation of the Republic. He is known to us as
Abraham Lincoln.
The other broke the chains of superstition and filled
the world with intellectual light, and he is known as
Charles Darwin.
Because of these two men the nineteenth century is
illustrious.
A few men and women make a nation glorious—
Shakespeare made England immortal ; Voltaire civilised
and humanised France ; Goethe, Schiller, apd Hum
boldt lifted Germany into the light ; Angelo, Raphael,
Galileo, and Bruno crowned with fadeless laurel the
Italian brow ; and now the most precious treasure of
the Great Republic is the memory of Abraham Lincoln.
Every generation has its heroes, its iconoclasts, its
pioneers, its ideals. The people always have been and
still are divided, at least into two classes—the many,
who with their backs to the sunrise worship the past ;
and the few, who keep their faces towards the dawn—
the many, who are satisfied with the world as it is ;
the Jew, who labor and suffer for the future, for those
�( 4 )
to be, and who seek to rescue the oppressed, to destroy
the cruel distinctions of caste, and to civilise mankind.
Yet it sometimes happens that the liberator of one
age becomes the oppressor of the next. His reputation
becomes so great, he is so revered and worshipped»
that his followers, in his name, attack the hero who
endeavors to take another step in advance.
The heroes of the Revolution, forgetting the justice
for which they fought, put chains upon the limbs of
others, and in their names the lovers of liberty were
denounced as ingrates and traitors.
In our country there were for many years two great
political parties, and each of these parties had con
servatives and extremists. The extremists of the
Democratic party were in the rear and wished to go
back; the extremists of the Republican were in the
front and wished to go forward. The extreme Democrat
was willing to destroy the Union for the sake of
slavery, and the extreme Republican was willing to
destroy the Union for the sake of liberty.
Neither party could succeed without the votes of its
extremists.
This was the political situation in 1860.
The extreme Democrats would not vote for Douglas,
but the extreme Republicans did vote for Lincoln.
Lincoln occupied the middle ground, and was the
compromise candidate of his own party. He had
lived for many years in the intellectual territory of
compromise—in a part of our country settled by
Northern and Southern men—where Northern and
Southern ideas met, and the ideas of the two sections
were brought together and compared.
The sympathies of Lincoln, his ties of kindred, were
with the South. His convictions, his sense of justice,
and his ideals, were with the North. He knew the
horrors of slavery, and he felt the unspeakable
�(5 )
ecstacies and glories of freedom. He had the kind
ness, the gentleness, of true greatness, and he could not
have been a master; he had the manhood and
independence of true greatness, and he could not have
been a slave. He was just, and incapable of putting a
burden upon others that he himself would not
willingly bear.
He was merciful and profound, and it was not
necessary for him to read the history of the world to
know that liberty and slavery could not live in the
same nation, or in the same brain. Lincoln was a
statesman. And there is this difference between a
politician and a statesman. A politician schemes and
works in every way to make the people do something
for him. The statesman wishes to do something for
the people. With him place and power are means to
an end, and the end is the good of his country.
The Republic had reached a crisis.
The conflict between liberty and slavery could no
longer be delayed. For three-quarters of a century
the forces had been gathering for the battle.
After the Revolution, principle was sacrificed for the
sake of gain. The Constitution contradicted the
Declaration. Liberty as a principle was held in
contempt. Slavery took possession of the Government.
Slavery made the laws, corrupted courts, dominated
presidents and demoralised the people.
In 1840, when Harrison and Van Buren were candi
dates for the Presidency, the Whigs of Indiana issued
a circular giving reasons for the election of Harrison
and the defeat of Van Buren. The people of Indiana
were advised to vote against Van Buren because he,
when a member of the New York Legislature, had
voted to enfranchise colored men who had property to
the extent of two hundred and fifty dollars. This was
the crime of Van Buren.
�( 6)
The reason why the people should support Harrison
was that he had signed eleven petitions to make
Indiana a slave State.
Mr. Douglas voiced the feeling of the majority when
he declared that he did not care whether slavery was
voted up or down.
From the heights of philosophy—standing above the
contending hosts, above the prejudices, the senti
mentalities of the day—Lincoln was great enough and
brave enough and wise enough to utter these prophetic
words : “A house divided against itself cannot stand.
I believe this Government cannot permanently endure
half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union
to be dissolved ; I do not expect the house to fall; but
I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become
all the one thing or the other. Either the opponents
of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and
place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief
that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its
advocates will push it further until it becomes alike
lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as
well as South.”
This declaration was the standard around which
gathered the grandest political party the world has
ever seen, and this declaration made Lincoln the leader
of that vast host.
In this, the first great crisis, Lincoln uttered the
victorious truth that made him the foremost man in
the Republic.
The people decided at the polls that a house divided
against itself could not stand, and that slavery had
cursed soul and soil enough.
It is not a common thing to elect a really great man
to fill the highest official position. I do not say that
the great presidents have been chosen by accident.
�( 7 )
Probably it would be better to say that they were the
favorites of a happy chance.
The average man is afraid of genius. He feels as
an awkward man feels in the presence of a sleight-ofhand performer. He admires and suspects. Genius
appears to carry too much sail—lacks prudence,
has too much courage. The ballast of dullness inspires
confidence.
By a happy chance Lincoln was nominated and
elected in spite of his fitness—and the patient, gentle,
and just and loving man was called upon to bear as
great a burden as man has ever borne.
II.
Then came another crisis—the crisis of Secession,
and Civil War.
Again Lincoln spoke the deepest feeling and the
highest thought of the Nation. In his first message
he said : “ The central idea of secession is the essence
of anarchy.”
He also showed conclusively that the North and
South, in spite of secession, must remain face to face
—that physically they could not separate—that they
must have more or less commerce, and that this com
merce must be carried on, either between the two
sections as friends, or as aliens.
This situation and its consequences he pointed out
to absolute perfection in these words : “ Can aliens
make treaties easier than friends can make laws ? Can
treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens
than laws among other friends ?”
After having stated fully and fairly the philosophy
of the conflict, after having said enough to satisfy any
calm and thoughtful mind, he addressed himself to the
hearts of America. Probably there are few finer
passages in literature than the close of Lincoln’s
inaugural address : “ I am loth to close. We are not
�(«)
enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.
Though passion may have strained, it must not break,
our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory
stretching from every battle-field and patriotic grave
to every loving heart and hearthstone all over this
broad land, will swell the chorus of the Union when
again touched, as surely they will be, by the better
angels of our nature.”
These noble, these touching, these pathetic words,
were delivered in the presence of rebellion, in the
midst of spies and conspirators—surrounded by but
few friends, most of whom were unknown, and some
of whom were wavering in their fidelity—at a time
when secession was arrogant and organised, when
patriotism was silent, and when, to quote the expres
sive words of Lincoln himself, “ Sinners were calling
the righteous to repentance.”
When Lincoln became President, he was held in
contempt by the South—underrated by the North and
East—not appreciated even by his cabinet—and yet he
was not only one of the wisest, but one of the shrewdest
of mankind. Knowing that he had the right to enforce
the laws of the United States and Territories—knowing,
as he did, that the secessionists were in the wrong, he
also knew that they had sympathisers not only in the
North but in other lands.
Consequently he felt that it was of the utmost
importance that the South should fire the first shot,
should do some act that would solidify the North and
gain for us the justification of the civilised world. He
so managed affairs that while he was attempting simply
to give food to our soldiers, the South commenced hos
tilities and fired on Sumter.
This course was pursued by Lincoln in spite of the
advice of many friends, and yet a wiser thing was
never done.
�( 9 )
At that time Lincoln appreciated the scope and con
sequences of the impending conflict. Above all other
thoughts in his mind was this : “ This conflict will
settle the question, at least for centuries to come,
whether man is capable of governing himself, and con
sequently is of greater importance to the free than to
the enslaved.’*
He knew what depended on the issue and he said :
“ We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last, best
hope of earth.”
III.
Then came a crisis in the North.
It became clearer and clearer to Lincoln’s mind, day
by day, that the rebellion was slavery, and that it was
necessary to keep the border States on the side of the
Union. For this purpose he proposed a scheme of
emancipation and colonisation—a scheme by which the
owners of slaves should be paid the full value of what
they called their “ property.” He called attention to
the fact that he had adhered to the Act of Congress to
confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes
—that the Union must be preserved, and that, there
fore, all indispensable means must be employed to
that end.
If, in war, a nation has the right to take the property
of its citizens—of its friends—certainly it has the
right to take the property of those it has the right to
kill.
He knew that if the border States agreed to gradual
emancipation, and received compensation for their
slaves, they would be for ever lost to the Confederacy,
whether secession succeeded or not. It was objected
at the time, by some, that the scheme was far too
expensive ; but Lincoln, wiser than his advisers—far
wiser than his enemies—demonstrated that from an
economical point of view, his course was best.
�( 10 )
He proposed that 400 dols. be paid for slaves,
including men, women, and children. This was a
large price, and yet he showed how much cheaper it
was to purchase than to carry on the war.
At that time, at the price mentioned, there were
about 750,000 dols. worth of slaves in Delaware. The
cost of carrying on the war was at least two millions
of dollars a day, and for one-third of one day’s expenses
all the slaves in Delaware could be purchased. He
also showed that all the slaves in Delaware, Kentucky,
and Missouri could be bought at the same price for
less than the expense of carrying on the war for eighty
seven days.
This was the wisest thing that could have been pro
posed, and yet such was the madness of the South,
such the indignation of the North, that the advice was
unheeded.
Again, in July, 1862, he urged on the Representa
tives of the border States a scheme of gradual com
pensated emancipation ; but the Representatives were
too deaf to hear, too blind to see.
Lincoln always hated slavery, and yet he felt the
obligations and duties of his position. In his first
message he assured the South that the laws, including
the most odious of all—the law for the return of
fugitive slaves—would be enforced. The South would
not hear. Afterwards he proposed to purchase the
slaves of the border States ; but the proposition was
hardly discussed, hardly heard. Events came thick
and fast; theories gave way to facts, and everything
was left to force.
The extreme Democrat of the North was fearful that
slavery might be destroyed, that the Constitution
might be broken, and that Lincoln, after all, could not
be trusted; and at the same time the radical Repub-
�(11)
lican feared that Lincoln loved the Union more than
he did liberty.
The fact is that he tried to discharge the obligations
of his great office, knowing from the first that slavery
must perish. The course pursued by Lincoln was so
gentle, so kind and persistent, so wise and logical, that
millions of Northern Democrats sprang to the defence,
not only of the Union, but of his administration.
Lincoln refused to be led or hurried by Fremont or
Hunter, by Greeley or Sumner. From first to last he
was the real leader, and he kept step with events.
IV.
On July 22, 1862, Lincoln called together his cabinet
for the purpose of showing the draft of a Proclamation
of Emancipation, stating to them|that he did not wish
their advice, as he had made up his mind.
After the Proclamation was signed Lincoln held it,
waiting for some great victory before giving it to the
world, so that it might appear to be the child of
strength.
This was on July 22, 1862. On August 22 of the
same year Lincoln wrote his celebrated letter to Horace
Greeley, in which he stated that his object was to save
the Union ; that he would save it with slavery if he
could; that if it was necessary to destroy slavery in
order to save the Union, he would; in other words, he
would do what was necessary to save the Union.
This letter disheartened, to a great degree, thousands
and millions of the friends of freedom. They felt
that Mr. Lincoln had not attained the moral height
upon which they supposed he stood. And yet, when
this letter was written, the Emancipation Proclamation
was in his hands, and had been for thirty days,
waiting only an opportunity to give it to the world.
Some two weeks after the letter to Greeley, Lincoln
was waited on by a committee of clergymen, and was
�( 12 )
by them informed that it was God’s will that he should
issue a Proclamation of Emancipation. He replied to
them, in substance, that the day of miracles had passed.
He also mildly and kindly suggested that if it were
God’s will this Proclamation should be issued, certainly
God would have made known that will to him—to the
person whose duty it was to issue it.
On September 22, 1862, the most glorious date in
the history of the Republic, the Proclamation of
Emancipation was issued.
Lincoln had reached the generalisation of all argu
ments upon the question of slavery and freedom—a
generalisation that never has been, and probably never
will be, excelled : In giving freedom to the slave, we
assure freedom to the free.
This is absolutely true. Liberty can be retained,
can be enjoyed, only by giving it to others. The
spendthrift saves, the miser is prodigal. In the realm
of Freedom, waste is husbandry. He who puts chains
upon the body of another shackles his own soul. The
moment the Proclamation was issued, the cause of the
Republic became sacred.
From that moment the
North fought for the human race. From that moment
the North stood under the blue and stars, the flag of
Nature—sublime and free.
In 1831 Lincoln saw in New Orleans a colored girl
sold at auction. The scene filled his soul with
ndignation and horror.
Turning to his companion, he said, “ Boys, if I ever
get a chance to hit slavery, by God I’ll hit it hard I ”
The helpless girl, unconsciously, had planted in a
great heart the seeds of the Proclamation.
Thirty-one years afterwards the chance came, the
oath was kept, and to four millions of slaves, of men,
women, and children, was restored liberty, the jewel
of the soul.
�( 13 )
In the history, in the fiction of the world, there
is nothing more intensely dramatic than this.
Lincoln held within his brain the grandest truths,
and he held them as unconsciously, as easily, as
naturally as a waveless pool holds within its stainless
breast a thousand stars.
Let us think for one moment of the distance
travelled from the first ordinance of secession to the
Proclamation of Emancipation.
In 1861 a thirteenth amendment to the Constitution
was offered to the South. By this proposed amend
ment slavery was to be made perpetual. This com
promise was refused, and in its stead came the
Proclamation. Let us take another step.
In 1865 the thirteenth^ amendment was adopted.
The one proposed made slavery perpetual. The one
adopted in 1865 abolished slavery and made the great
Republic free forever.
The first state to ratify this amendment was Illinois.
v.
We were surrounded by enemies. Many of the
so-called great in Europe and England were against us.
They hated the Republic, despised our institutions,
and sought in many ways to aid the South.
Mr. Gladstone announced that Jefferson Davis had
made a nation and he did not believe the restoration of
the American Union by force attainable.
From the Vatican came words of encourgement for
the South.
It was declared that the North was fighting for
empire and the South for independence.
The Marquis of Salisbury said : “ The people of the
South are the natural allies of England. The North
keeps an opposition shop in the same department of
trade as ourselves.”
�( 14 )
Some of their statesmen declared that the subjuga
tion of the South by the North would be a calamity to
the world.
Louis Napoleon was another enemy, and he endea
vored to establish a monarchy in Mexico to the end
that the great North might be destroyed. But the
patience, the uncommon common sense, the statesman
ship of Lincoln—in spite of foreign hate and Northern
division—triumphed over all. And now we forgive
all foes. Victory makes forgiveness easy.
Lincoln was, by nature, a diplomat. He knew the
art of sailing against the wind. He had as much
shrewdness as is consistent with honesty. He under
stood, not only the rights of individuals, but of nations.
In all his correspodence with other governments he
neither wrote nor sanctioned a line which afterwards
was used to tie his hands. In the use of perfect
English he easily rose above his advisers and all his
fellows.
No one claims that Lincoln did all. He could have
done nothing without the great and splendid generals
in the field ; and the generals could have done
nothing without their armies. The praise is due
to all—to the private as much as to the officer ; to the
lowest who did his duty, as much as to the highest.
My heart goes out to the brave private as much as
to the leader of the host.
But Lincoln stood at the centre and with infinite
patience, with consummate skill, with the genius of
goodness directed, cheered, consoled, and conquered.
VI.
Slavery was the cause of the war, and slavery was
the perpetual stumbling-block. As the war went on
question after question arose—questions that could not
be answered by theories. Should we hand back the
�( 15 )
slave to his master, when the master was using his
slave to destroy the Union? If the South was right
slaves were property, and by the laws of war anything
that might be used to the advantage of the enemy
might be confiscated by us. Events did not wait for
discussion. General Butler denominated the negro as
a “ contraband.” Congress provided that the property
of the rebels might be confiscated.
Lincoln moved along this line.
Each step was delayed by Northern division, but
every step was taken in the same direction.
First, Lincoln offered to execute every law, including
the most infamous of all ; second, to buy the slaves of
the border states ; third, to confiscate the property of
rebels ; fourth, to treat slaves as contraband of war ;
fifth, to use slaves for the purpose of putting down the
rebellion ; sixth, to arm these slaves and clothe them
in the uniform of the Republic ; seventh, to make them
citizens, and allow them to stand on an equality with
their white brethren under the flag of the Republic.
During all these years, Lincoln moved with the
people—with the masses, and every step he took has
been justified by the considerate judgment of mankind.
VII.
Lincoln not only watched the war, but kept his hand
on the political pulse. In 1863 a tide set in against the
administration. A Republican meeting was to be held
in Springfield, Illinois, and Lincoln wrote a letter to
be read at this convention. It was in his happiest vein.
It was a perfect defence of his administration, including
the Proclamation of Emancipation. Among other
things he said: “ But the proclamation, as law, either
is valid or it is not valid. If it is not valid it needs no
retraction, but if it is valid it cannot be retracted, any
more than the dead can be brought to life.”
�( 16 )
To the Northern Democrats who said they would not
fight for negroes, Lincoln replied: “ Some of them
seem willing to fight for you—but no matter.”
Of negro soldiers : “ But negroes, like other people,
act upon motives. Why should they do anything for
us if we will do nothing for them? If they stake
their lives for us they must be prompted by the
strongest motive—even by the promise of freedom.
And the promise, being made, must be kept.”
There is one line in this letter that will give it
immortality: “The Father of waters again goes un
vexed to the sea.” This line is worthy of Shakespeare.
Another: “ Among freemen there can be no suc
cessful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.”
He draws a comparison between the white men
against us and the black men for'Us : “And then there
will be some black men who can remember that with
silent tongue and clenched teeth and steady eye and
well-poised bayonet they have helped mankind on to
this great consummation ; while I fear there will be
some white ones unable to forget that with malignant
heart and deceitful speech they strove to hinder it.”
Under the influence of this letter, the love of
country, of the Union, and above all the love of liberty,
took possession of the heroic North.
The Republican party became the noblest organisa
tion the world has ever seen.
There was the greatest moral exaltation ever known.
The spirit of liberty took possession of the people.
The masses became sublime.
To fight for yourself is good.
To fight for others is grand.
To fight for your country is noble.
To fight for the human race, for the liberty of land
and brain, is nobler still.
�( 17 )
As a matter of fact, the defenders of slavery had
sown the seeds of their own defeat. They dug the pit
in which they fell. Clay and Webster and thousands
of others had by their eloquence made the Union
almost sacred. The Union was the very tree of life,
the source and stream and sea of liberty and law.
For the sake of slavery millions stood by the Union,
for the sake of liberty millions knelt at the altar of the
Union ; and this love of the Union is what, at last,
overwhelmed the Confederate hosts.
It does not seem possible that only a few years ago
our Constitution, our laws, our Courts, the Pulpit and
the Press defended and upheld the institution of
slavery—that it was a- crime to feed the hungry, to give
water to the lips of thirst, shelter to a woman flying
from the whip and chain !
The old flag still flies, the stars are there—the stains
have gone.
VIII.
Lincoln always saw the end. He was unmoved by
the storms and currents of the times. He advanced
too rapidly for the conservative politicians, too slowly
for the radical enthusiasts. He occupied the line of
safety, and held by his personality—by the force of
his great character, by his charming candor—the
masses on his side.
The soldiers thought of him as a father.
All who had lost their sons in battle felt that they
had his sympathy—felt that his face was as sad as
theirs. They knew that Lincoln was actuated by one
motive, and that his energies were bent to the attain
ment of one end—the salvation of the Republic.
Success produces envy, and envy often ends in
conspiracy.
In 1864 many politicians united against him. It is
not for me to criticise their motive or their actions®
�.
( 18 )
It is enough to say that the magnanimity of Lincoln
towards those who had deserted and endeavored to
destroy him, is without parallel in the political history
of the world. This magnanimity made his success not
only possible, but certain.
During all the years of war Lincoln stood, the
embodiment of mercy, between discipline and death.
He pitied the imprisoned and condemned. He took
the unfortunate in his arms, and was the friend even
of the convict. He knew temptation’s strength—the
weakness of the will—and how in fury’s sudden flame
the judgment drops the scales, and passion—blind and
deaf—usurps the throne.
Through all the years Lincoln will be known as
Lincoln the Loving, Lincoln the Merciful.
Lincoln had the keenest sense of humor, and always
saw the laughable side even of disaster. In his humor
there was logic and the best of sense. No matter how
complicated the question, or how embarrassing the
situation, his humor furnished an answer, and a door
of escape.
Vallandingham was a friend of the South, and did
what he could to sow the seeds of failure. In his
opinion everything, except rebellion, was unconstitu
tional.
He was arrested, convicted by a court martial, and
sentenced to imprisonment in Fort Warren.
There was doubt about the legality of the trial, and
thousands in the North denounced the whole proceed
ings as tyrannical and infamous. At the same time
millions demanded that Vallandingham should be
punished.
Lincoln’s humor came to the rescue. He disapproved
of the findings of the court, changed the punishment,
and ordered that Mr. Vallandingham should be sent to
his friends in the South.
�( 19 )
Those who regarded the act as unconstitutional
almost forgave it for the sake of its humor.
Horace Greeley always had the idea that he was
greatly superior to Lincoln, and for a long time he
insisted that the people of the North and the people of
the South desired peace. He took it upon himself to
lecture Lincoln, and felt that he in some way was
responsible for the conduct of the war. Lincoln, with
that wonderful sense of humor, united with shrewd
ness and profound wisdom, told Greeley that, if the
South really wanted peace, he (Lincoln) desired the
same thing, and was doing all he could to bring it
about. Greeley insisted that a commissioner should
be appointed, with authority to negotiate with the
representatives of the Confederacy. This was Lincoln’s
opportunity. He authorised Greeley to act as such
commissioner. The great editor felt that he was
caught. For a time he hesitated, but finally went, and
found that the Southern commissioners were willing
to take into consideration any offers of peace that
Lincoln might make. The failure of Greeley was
humiliating, and the position in which he was left
absurd.
Again the humor of Lincoln had triumphed.
Lincoln always tried to do things in the easiest way.
He did not waste his strength. He was not particular
about moving along straight lines. He did not tunnel
the mountains. He was willing to go around, and he
reached the end desired as a river reaches the sea.
IX.
One of the most wonderful things ever done by
Lincoln was the promotion of General Hooker. After
the battle of Fredericksburg, General Burnside found
great fault with Hooker, and wished to have him
removed from the Army of the Potomac. Lincoln
disapproved of Burnside’s order, and gave Hooker the
�( 20 )
command of the Army of the Potomac. He then wrote
Hooker this memorable letter : “ I have placed you at
the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course I
have done this upon what appears to me to be sufficient
reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that
there are some things in regard to which I am not quite
and ^175
L0U*
1 b61ieVe
t0 b* a brave
and skilful soldier—which, of course, I like. I
a so. believe you do not mix politics with your profession-m which you are right. You have confidence
which is a valuable, if not an indispensable, quality.
You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds
does good rather than harm; but I think that during
General Burnside’s command of the army you have
taken counsel of your ambition to thwart him as much
as you could in which you did a great wrong to the
country and to a most meritorious and honorable
brother, officer. I have heard, in such a way as to
believe
of your recently saying that both the army
and the Government needed a dictator. Of course it
was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given
you command. Only those generals who gain
successes can set up dictators. What I now ask of you
is military successes, and I will risk the dictatorship.
The Government will support you to the best of its
ability, which is neither more nor less than it has done
and will do for all commanders. I much fear that the
spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army
of criticising their commander and withholding con
fidence in him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist
you, so far as I can, to put it down. Neither you, nor
Napoleon, if he were alive, can get any good out of
an army while such a spirit prevails in it. And now
beware of rashness. Beware of rashness, but with
energy and sleepless vigilence go forward and give us
victories.”
�( 21 )
This letter has—in my judgment, no parallel. The
mistaken magnanimity is almost equal to the pro
phecy t “ I much fear that the spirit which you have
aided to infuse into the army of criticising their com
mander and withholding confidence in him, will now
turn upon you.”
Chancellorsville was the fulfilment.
Mr. Lincoln was a statesman.
The great stumbling-block—the great obstruction
in Lincoln’s way, and in the way of thousands, was
the old doctrine of States Rights.
This doctrine was first established to protect slavery.
It was clung to to protect the iner-State slave trade.
It became sacred in connection with the Fugitive
Slave Law, and it was finally used as the corner-stone
of Secession.
This doctrine was never appealed to m defence of
the right—always in support of the wrong. For many
years politicians upon both sides of these questions
endeavored to express the exact relations existing
between the Federal Government and the States, and I
know of no one who succeeded, except Lincoln. In
his message of 1861, delivered on July 4, the definition
is given, and it is perfect: “Whatever concerns the
whole should be confined to the whole—to the General
Government. Whatever concerns only the State should
be left exclusively to the State.”
When that definition is realised in practice, this
country becomes a Nation. Then we shall know
that the first allegiance of the citizen is not to hi&
State, but to the Republic, and that the first duty of
the Republic is to protect the citizen, not only when in
other lands, but at home, and that this duty cannot be
discharged by delegating it to the States.
�( 22 )
„ Lincoln believed in the sovereignty of the people_
in the supremacy of the nation—in the territorial
integrity of the Republic.
XI.
A great actor can be known only when he has
assumed the principal character in a great drama,
ossibly the greatest actors have never appeared, and
it may be that the greatest soldiers have lived the lives
of perfect peace. Lincoln assumed the leading part
m the greatest drama ever acted upon the stage of a
continent.
His criticism of military movements, his correspon
dence with his generals and others on the conduct of
the war, show that he was at all times master of the
situation—that he was a natural strategist, that he
appreciated the difficulties and advantages of every
kind, and that in “ the still and mental ” field of
war he stood the peer of any man beneath the flag.
Had McClellan followed his advice, he would have
taken Richmond.
# Had Hooker acted in accordance with his sugges
tions, Chancellorsville would have been a victory for
the Nation.
Lincoln’s political prophecies were all fulfilled.
We know now that he not only stood at the top,
but that he occupied the centre, from the first to the
last, and that he did this by reason of his intelli
gence, his humor, his philosophy, his courage, and
his patriotism.
In passion s storm he stood unmoved, patient, just
and candid. In his brain there was no cloud, and
in his heart no hate. He longed to save the South
as well as the North, to see the Nation one and
free.
He lived until the end was known.
�( 23 )
He lived until the Confederacy was dead until
Lee surrendered, until Davis fled, until the doors of
Libby Prison were opened, until the Republic was
supreme.
A
He lived until Lincoln and Liberty were united
for ever.
n
.
He lived to cross the desert—to reach the palms
of victory—to hear the murmured music of the wel
come waves.
He lived until all loyal hearts were his—until the
history of his deeds made music in the soul of men
—until he knew that on Columbia’s Calendar of
worth and fame his name stood first.
He lived until there remained nothing for him to
to do as great as he had done.
What he did was worth living for, worth dying
for.
.
He lived until he stood in the midst of universa
Joy, beneath the outstretched wings of Peace the
foremost man in all the world.
And then the horror came. Night fell on noon. The
Savior of the Republic, the breaker of chains, the
liberator of millions, he who had “ assured freedom to
the free,” was dead.
Upon his brow Fame placed the immortal wreath.
For the first time in the history of the world a Nation
bowed and wept.
The memory of Lincoln is the strongest, tenderest
tie that binds all hearts together now, and holds all
States beneath a Nation’s flag.
XII.
Strange mingling of mirth and tears, of the tragic
and grotesque, of cap and crown, of Socrates and
Democritus, of ^Esop and Marcus Aurelius, of all that
is gentle and just, humorous and honest, merciful,
�( 24 )
wise, laughable, lovable and divine, and all consecrated
to the use of man ; while through all, and over all
were an overwhelming sense of obligation, of chivalric
loyalty to truth, and upon all, the shadow of the tragic
Nearly all the great historic characters are impossible
monsters disproportioned by flattery, or by calumny
deformed. We know nothing of their peculiarities, or
nothing but their peculiarities. About these oaks there
clings none of the earth of humanity.
Washington is now only a steel engraving. About
the real man who lived and loved and hated and
schemed, we know but little. The glass through which
we look at him is of such high magnifying power that
the features are exceedingly indistinct.
Hundreds of people are now engaged in smoothing
out the lines of Lincoln’s face—forcing all features to
the common mould-so that he may be known, not as
he really was, but, according to their poor standard, as
he should have been.
Lincoln was not a type. He stands alone-no
ancestors, no fellows, and no successors.
He had the advantage of living in a new country of
social equality, of personal freedom, of seeing in the
horizon of his future the perpetual star of hope He
preserved his individuality and his self-respect* He
knew and mingled with men of every kind ; and, after
all, men are the best books. He became acquainted
with the ambitions and hopes of the heart, the means
used to accomplish ends, the springs of action and the
seeds of thought. He was familiar with nature, with
actual. things, with common facts. He loved and
appreciated the poem of the year, the drama of the
seasons.
In a new country a man must possess at least three
virtues—honesty, courage, and generosity. In culti-
�( 25 )
vated society, cultivation is often more important than
soil. A well-executed counterfeit passes more readily
than a blurred genuine. It is necessary only to observe
the unwritten laws of society—to be honest enough to
keep out of prison, and generous enough to subscribe
in public—where the subscription can be defended as
an investment.
In a new country, character is essential : in the old,
reputation is sufficient. In the new they find what a
man really is ; in the old, he generally passes for what
he resembles. People separated only by distance are
much nearer together than those divided by the walls
of caste.
It is no advantage to live in a great city, where
poverty degrades and failure brings despair. The
fields are lovelier than paved streets, and the great
forests than walls of brick. Oaks and elms are more
poetic than steeples and chimneys.
In the country is the idea of home. There you see
the rising and setting sun; you 1 become acquainted
with the stars and clouds. The constellations are your
friends. You hear the rain on the roof and listen to
the rhythmic sighing of the winds. You are thrilled
by the resurrection called Spring, touched and sad
dened by Autumn—the grace and poetry of death.
Every field is a picture, a landscape ; every landscape
a poem ; every flower a tender thought, and every
forest a fairyland. In the country you preserve your
identity—your personality. There you are an aggre
gation of atoms ; but in the city you are only an atom
of an aggregation.
In the country you keep your cheek close to the
breast of Nature. You are calmed and ennobled by
the space, the amplitude and scope of earth and sky—
by the constancy of the stars.
�(
)
Lincoln never finished his education. To the night
■of his death he was a pupil, a learner, an inquirer,
a seeker after knowledge. You have no idea how
many men are spoiled by what is called education.
For the most part, colleges are places where pebbles
are polished and diamonds are dimmed. If Shake
speare had graduated at Oxford, he might have been a
quibbling attorney, or a hypocritical parson.
Lincoln was a great lawyer. There is nothing
shrewder in the world than intelligent honesty.
Perfect candor is sword and shield.
He understood the nature of man. As a lawyer
he endeavored to get at the truth, at the very heart of a
case. He was not willing even to deceive himself.
No matter what his interest said, what his passion
demanded, he was great enough to find the truth and
strong enough to pronounce judgment against his own
desires.
Lincoln was a many-sided man, acquainted with
smiles and tears, complex in brain, single in heart,
direct as light; and his words, candid as mirrors^ gave
the perfect image of his thought. He was never
afraid to ask—never too dignified to admit that he did
not know. No man had keener wit, or kinder humor,
It may be that humor is the pilot of reason. People
without humor drift unconsciously into absurdity.
Humor sees the other side—stands in the mind like a
spectator, a good-natured critic, and gives its opinion
before judgment is reached. Humor goes with good
nature, and good nature is the climate of reason.
In anger, reason abdicates and malice extinguishes the
torch. Such was the humor of Lincoln that he could
tell even unpleasant truths as charmingly as most men
can tell the things we wish to hear.
He was not solemn. Solemnity is a mask worn by
�( 27 )
ignorance and hypocrisy—is is the preface, prologue,
and index to the cunning or the stupid.
He was natural in his life and thought—master
of the story-teller’s art, in illustration apt, in application
perfect, liberal in speech, shocking Pharisees and
prudes, using any word that wit could disinfect.
He was a logician. His logic shed light. In its
presence the obscure became luminous, and the most
complex and intricate political and metaphysical knots
seemed to untie themselves. Logic is the necessary
product of intelligence and sincerity. It cannot be
learned. It is the child of a clear head and a good
heart.
Lincoln was candid, and with candor often deceived
the deceitful. He had intellect without arrogance,
genius without pride, and religion without cant—that
is to say, without bigotry and without deceit.
He was an orator—clear, sincere, natural. He did
not pretend. He did not say what he thought others
thought, but what he thought.
If you wish to be sublime you must be natural—you
must keep close to the grass. You must sit by the
fireside of the heart : above the clouds it is too cold.
You must be simple in your speech : too much polish
suggests insincerity.
The great orator idealises the real, transfigures the
common, makes even the inanimate throb and thrill,
fills the gallery of the imagination with statues and
pictures perfect in form and color, brings to light the
gold hoarded by memory the miser, shows the glittering
coin to the spendthrift hope, enriches the brain,
ennobles the heart, and quickens the conscience.
Between his lips words bud and blossom.
If you wish to know the difference between an
orator and an elocutionist—between what is felt and
what is said—between what the heart and brain can
�( 28 )
do together and what the brain can do alone—read
Lincoln’s wondrous speech at Gettysburg, and then the
speech of Edward Everett.
The oration of Lincoln will never be forgotten. It
will live until languages are dead and lips are dust.
The speech of Everett will never be read.
The elocutionists believe in the virtue of voice, the
sublimity of syntax, the majesty of long sentences,
and the genius of gesture.
The orator loves the real, the simple, the natural.
He places the thought above all. He knows that the
greatest ideas should be expressed in shortest words_
that the greatest statues need the least drapery.
Lincoln was an immense personality—firm but not
obstinate. Obstinacy is egotism—firmness, heroism.
He influenced others without effort, unconsciously;
and they submitted to him as men submit to nature—
unconsciously. He was severe with himself, and for
that reason lenient with others.
He appeared to apologise for being kinder than his
fellows.
He did merciful things as stealthily as others com
mitted crimes.
Almost ashamed of tenderness, he said and did the
noblest words and deeds with that charming con
usion, that awkwardness, that is the perfect grace of
fmodesty.
As a noble man wishing to pay a small debt to a
poor neighbor, reluctantly offers a hundred dollar bill
and asks for change, fearing that he may be suspected
either of making a display of wealth or a pretence of
payment, so Lincoln hesitated to show his wealth of
goodness, even to the best he knew.
A great man stooping, not wishing to make his
fellows feel that they were small or mean.
�( 29 )
By his candor, by his kindness, by his perfect free
dom from restraint, by saying what he thought, and
saying it absolutely in his own way, he made it not
only possible, but popular, to be natural. He was the
■enemy of mock solemnity, of the stupidly respectable,
of the cold and formal.
He wore no official robes either on his body or his
soul. He never pretended to be more or less, or other,
or different, from what he really was.
He had the unconscious naturalness of Nature's self.
He built upon the rock. The foundation was secure
and broad. The structure was a pyramid, narrowing
as it rose. Through days and nights of sorrow, through
years of grief and pain, with unswerving purpose,
‘ with malice towards none, with charity for all,” with
infinite patience, with unclouded vision, he hoped and
toiled. Stone after stone was laid, until at last the
Proclamation found its place. On that the goddess
stands.
He knew others, because perfectly acquainted with
himself. He cared nothing for place, but everything
for principle ; nothing for money, but everything for
independence. Where no principle was involved,
easily swayed ; willing to go slowly, if in the right
direction ; sometimes willing to stop ; but he would not
go back, and he would not go wrong.
He was willing to wait ; he knew that the event was
not waiting, and that fate was not the fool of chance.
He knew that slavery had defenders, but no defence,
and that they who attack the right must wound them
selves.
He was neither tyrant nor slave ; he neither knelt
nor scorned.
With him, men were neither great nor small—they
were right or wrong.
�( 30 )
Through manners, clothes, titles, rags and race he
saw the real—that which is. Beyond accident, policy,
compromise and war he saw the end.
He was patient as Destiny, whose undecipherable
hieroglyphs were so deeply graven’on his sad and
tragic fate.
Nothing discloses real character like the use of
power. It is easy for the weak to be gentle. Most
people can bear adversity. But if you wish to know
what a man really is, give him power. This is the
supreme test. It is the glory of Lincoln that, having
almost absolute power, he never abused it, except on
the side of mercy.
Wealth could not purchase, power could not awe
this divine, this loving man.
He knew no fear except the fear of doing wrong.
Hating slavery, pitying the master—seeking to conquer,
not persons, but prejudices—he was the embodiment of
the self-denial, the courage, the hope, and the nobility
of a Nation.
He spoke not to inflame, not to upbraid, but tn
convince.
He raised his hands, not to strike, but in benediction.
He longed to pardon.
He loved to see the pearls of joy on the cheeks of a
wife whose husband he had rescued from death.
Lincoln was the grandest figure of the fiercest civil
war. He is the gentlest memory of oui* world.
��WROKS BY COL. R. G. INGERSOLL.
s. d.
MISTAKES OF MOSES
1 0
Superior edition, in cloth
1 6
DEFENCE OF FREETHOUGHT
0 6
Five Hours’ Speech at the Triai of C. B.
Reynolds for Blasphemy.
REPLY TO GLADSTONE. With a Biography by
J. M. Wheeler
0 4
ROME OR REASON ? Reply to Cardinal Manning 0 4
CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS
0 3
AN ORATION ON WALT WHITMAN d
0 3
ORATION ON VOLTAIRE
..
0 3
THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS
0 2
TRUE RELIGION ...
0 2
FAITH AND FACT. Reply to Rev. Dr. Field
0 2
GOD AND MAN. Second Reply to Dr Field
0 2
THE HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH
...
0 2
LOVE THE REDEEMER. Reply to Count Tolstoi 0 2
THE LIMITS OF TOLERATION
0 2
A Discussion with Hon. F. D. Ooudert and
Gov. S. L. Woodford
THE DYING CREED
0 2
DO I BLASPHEME ?
0 2
THE CLERGY AND COMMON SENSE "
0 2
SOCIAL SALVATION
0 2
MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE ...
0 2
GOD AND THE STATE
0 2
WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
0 2
WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC? Part II”'
0 2
ART AND MORALITY
0 2
CREEDS AND SPIRITUALITY
0 1
CHRIST AND MIRACLES
0 1
THE GREAT MISTAKE
0 1
LIVE TOPICS
0 1
MYTH AND MIRACLE
0 1
REAL BLASPHEMY
0 1
REPAIRING THE IDOLS
0 1
Read THE FREETHINKER, edited by G.W. Foote.
Sixteen Pages.
Price One Penny.
Published every Thursday.
R. Forder, 28 Stonecutter-street, London, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Abraham Lincoln : an oration
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ingersoll, Robert Green [1833-1899]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 30 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: "Wroks [sic] by Col. R.G. Ingersoll" listed on back cover. No. 3a in Stein checklist. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
R. Forder
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1893
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N323
Subject
The topic of the resource
USA
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Abraham Lincoln : an oration), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Abraham Lincoln
NSS
United States-History