(This file was produced from images generously made
available by Cornell University Digital Collections)







THE

CONTINENTAL MONTHLY:

DEVOTED TO

LITERATURE AND NATIONAL POLICY:

VOL. VI.--AUGUST, 1864.--No. II.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Transcriber's note: Obvious printer errors have been corrected. All |
|other inconsistencies are as in the original.                       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+




AMERICAN CIVILIZATION.

SECOND PAPER.


As a nation we are fast losing that reverence for the powers that be
which is enjoined by Holy Writ, and without which no form of government
can be lasting, no political system can take a firm hold upon the
affections of the people. The opposition press teems with vituperation
and personal abuse of those whom the people themselves have chosen to
control the public policy and administer the public affairs. The
incumbent of the Presidential chair, so far from receiving that respect
and deference to which his position entitles him, becomes the victim of
slander and vilification, from one portion of the country to another, on
the part of those who chance to differ with him in political sentiments.
Even beardless boys, taking their cue from those who, being older,
should know better, are unsparing in the use of such terms as
'scoundrel,' 'fool,' 'tyrant,' as applied to those whom the people have
delighted to honor, either unconscious or utterly heedless of the
disgust with which their language inspires the older and more
thoughtful. And thus it has become a recognized fact that no man's
reputation can withstand the trial of a four years' term of service in
the Presidential office. While this is in a great measure the reaction
from the king worship of the Old World, it is nevertheless a blot upon
our civilization, a departure from those lofty and noble sentiments
which characterize every advanced stage of human intellect, in which the
supremacy and inviolability of the law is acknowledged, and in which the
ruler is reverenced as the representative and impersonation of the law.
And as, in such a stage, respect for the magistrate and the law mutually
react upon each other, so in the present state of affairs the tendency
is, in the course of time, to reach from the ruler to the edict which he
administers, and thus to beget a disrespect and disregard of law itself,
paving the way to that violence and mob rule which, in the present state
of humanity, must inevitably attend the establishment of the democratic
principle.

The remedy is to be found in reform in the education of our youth,
whereby the utmost respect for the law and for those by whom it is
administered shall be inculcated as the groundwork of all patriotism and
national progress, while at the same time cultivating a loftier
appreciation of the blessings of social order and harmony, and of
well-regulated liberty of thought, speech, and action, and a purer
standard of right. Yet even this will be of little avail except in
connection with the abatement, through the strong good sense of a
thinking and upright people, of that national nuisance of bitter and
unmerciful political partisanship of which we have spoken, all of whose
tendencies are to evil, and so removing from the eyes of our youth a
low, unworthy, and degrading example, which they are too prone to
follow. The child will tread, to a great degree, in the steps of the
father, and the whole course of his intellectual life be governed, more
or less, by the principles and prejudices which he is accustomed every
day to hear from the lips of a parent, who is necessarily the teacher
and, in a great measure, the moulder of his infant mind. How careful,
then, ought every parent to be of the principles which he inculcates and
the examples which he sets in his conversation, especially when that
conversation is directed to a condemnation of the motives or the acts of
the ruling powers!--lest the child be some time inclined to enlarge upon
his views, and carry his deductions farther than he himself ever
dreamed, till he shall finally be led into a contempt of the
institutions as well as of the rulers of his native land, through a
father's teaching, and so grow up an embryo traitor, ready at the first
signal to embark in any revolutionary scheme or wild enterprise of
visionary reform, such as have been and are still the disturbers of our
national prosperity. For an example of such a result in our day we have
but to look at the youth of the Southern States, whose fiery treason,
far exceeding that of their elders, is nothing more than the outgrowth,
the legitimate extension and development of that bitter denunciation of
rulers who chanced to be unpopular with their fathers, of that
unrestrained license of speech which left nothing untouched, however
sacred, however holy it might be, which chanced to stand in the way of
gross and sordid interest. The ideas of the hot-blooded, fire-eating
Southern youth of to-day, the recklessness and the treason, the
denationalizing spirit of revolution and blood which so readily
manifests itself in contempt of the old flag, and the direst hatred of
all that their fathers held sacred and laid down their lives to
sustain--all this is but the idea, intensified and developed, of the
Southerner of a bygone generation; it is but the natural deduction from
his conversation and life, pondered over by the child, fixed deeply in
his heart as the teaching of a revered tutor, and carried out, by a
natural course of reasoning, to its extreme in the parricidal rebellion
of to-day. And yet that idea was, in its inception, apparently harmless
enough, being nothing more than that denunciation and vituperation of
the political leaders and the ruling powers which chanced to be in the
opposition, whereby the child was in due course of time weaned from his
country, and taught to look lightly upon and speak lightly of that which
of old time was only mentioned with love and reverent awe.

Nor is this the only reform which is needed in the education of our
youth. The phrase 'completing one's education' is used to-day with utter
looseness, and applied to that period when the youth leaves the school
or college for the busy walks of life. How much of error is contained in
such an application of the term he well knows who, after some years of
world life, can look back upon his college days and see what a mere
smattering of knowledge he gained within the 'classic shades,' and how
poorly _educated_ he was, in any and every sense of the word, how ill
fitted for the realities of work-day life, when first he emerged in
self-sufficient pride from the sacred walls, and launched boldly out
upon the world. At the time when, according to the popular acceptation
of the term, the education is completed, it is in truth but just begun;
and he who, upon the slender capital of college lore, should set himself
up for a finished man, one competent to take upon himself the duties,
responsibilities, and labors of active life, would soon find to his
sorrow that he was yet but a babe in wisdom, and yet needed a long and
severe discipline ere he could be considered one of the world's workers.
In the few years devoted, in our country, to the education of youth,
little more can be done than to teach them the value of knowledge and
the proper method and system of its acquisition, leaving to the
exertions of the after years that education of the mind and development
of the intellectual powers which constitute the finished man. And this
should be the object of all our schools, for females as well as for
males, to inculcate the truth that the true education begins where the
schools leave off, and depends entirely upon the scholar himself, aided
only by that groundwork of preparation, that systematizing of effort,
imparted by the tutor in the tender years. This end should be ever
before the teacher's eyes, and the whole course of study adjusted with a
view thereto. And the instruction imparted should be of such a character
as most thoroughly to fit the student for future study, giving him a
firm foothold upon the most essential branches of knowledge, from which
he may advance steadily and securely when left to himself; frequently
warning him that this is but the beginning of great things, and that the
abstrusities of wisdom, wherein is all its aesthetic beauty and its
holiness--all its moral good--lies far beyond, where it can only be
reached by the most patient, persevering, and unremitting toil; not
forgetting, at the same time, to point out the glorious reward which
awaits the seeker of truth. The effect of such a system would soon be
felt, not only in our national life, but in our very civilization. For
thus would be thrown out upon our society, year after year, a class of
thinkers, of earnest, working, strong-minded men and women, searchers
after truth and disciples of the highest good, instead of the crowd of
half-fledged intellectual idlers who yearly emerge from our schools with
the conceited idea that the course of study is finished, the paths of
investigation fully explored, and that life is henceforth a holiday from
study. Under such a giant impulse our society could not but advance with
enormous strides in all that pertains to true civilization, since
thinkers would then be the rule instead of the exception, and talent
almost universal, which is now, like angels' visits, comparatively 'few
and far between.' This is no Utopian vision: it is a reality within the
scope of human exertion and the capacity of our people of to-day, if men
would but exert themselves to such an end, and properly apply the energy
and labor which is now too often excited upon unworthy and trifling
objects. The realm of knowledge is so boundless that a lifetime is
little enough and short enough to give to mortals even a smattering of
that sea of wisdom which swells around the universe, and he alone can
claim to be a seer who devotes the whole of a long existence to the
investigation of truth; and only when this fact is impressed upon the
minds of youth can they be made to appreciate their true position in
existence, and made efficient workers in the great cause of humanity.

Yet all education is vain, all intellectual development is of little
benefit, all civilization hollow in its nature and ephemeral in its
duration which lacks the moral element. And by the word _moral_ in this
connection is intended to be understood not only what is usually
conveyed in the term morality, but also all religion. It is a
well-established fact, more particularly exemplified in our own history,
that all political parties founded upon an ephemeral issue, inevitably
disappear with the final adjustment of the questions upon which they are
based, having nothing left to rest upon, so it is in the affairs of
nations. In the weakness of human nature and the fallibility of all
human prescience, no system or theory can be devised which shall endure
through all time, which shall not become effete, useless, and even
erroneous in the progress of human development, and in the ever-shifting
condition of human society. Hence any government and society founded
upon a system of merely human devising, must, in the progress of events,
fall to pieces, and give place to the results of a new and younger
development. The law of God, as contained in Divine revelation, is alone
unchangeable, unmodifiable. It is adapted to meet the requirements of
all lands and all ages, to answer all the necessities of which human
nature is capable, even to its extremest verge of development. Hence all
political systems are durable only in proportion as they, in their
organization, conform to the precepts of Divine law.

We have used the term 'moral element' as necessarily comprehending all
religion, for the reason that upon religion is necessarily based all
true morality. There is nothing in the physical, and more especially in
the intellectual world, without a final cause; and that so-called
morality which exists entirely separate and distinct from religion, can
be based upon nothing other than self-interest, which, under different
conditions and circumstances, would as unhesitatingly lead to evil. The
'moral man' without religion could as easily be evil minded and
dissolute in a community purely evil as he is upright and honorable in a
civilized and enlightened community of to-day, for the reason that his
morality is nothing more than deference to a certain standard of
honor--in other words, to the _tone_ of the society by which he is
surrounded, bringing with it all the benefits of high public estimation
and a lofty position in society, which tone it must follow, be it good
or bad: it is founded and built up in self-interest. Yet this very tone
of society, and all these standards of honor and uprightness, when
traced to their origin, are found to arise from the precepts of
revelly and intellectually, the creatures of
circumstance. Experience moulds and develops the intellect. Our moral
natures are not innate, but solely and entirely the result of the
influences by which we are surrounded. There is in the soul no absolute
standard of right; if there were, uprightness would be the same the
world over. But the right of the heathen is a different thing from that
of the Christian; the right of the Chinese or the Japanese is a
different thing from that of more enlightened nations; the right of one
Christian community is different from that of another; and this because
right, considered distinct from religion, is relative, and subject to
all the modifications of different conditions of society. The 'Evil, be
thou my good' of Milton's Satan is a delicate recognition of this fact.
But absolute right is a thing unknown to human _nature_; it can never be
innate, but comes from without. It can only be apprehended by the
intellect as a thing of God, a part of His nature, given to us as a law,
a rule of action, which we can accept or not, taking upon ourselves the
consequences of its rejection. There can be no standard of absolute
right other than the law of God; there can be no other invariable and
eternal rule of human action.

And if this position be true of individuals, most assuredly is it true
of nations, which are but individuals in the concrete, subject to the
same vicissitudes, governed by the same laws, physical and moral, and
following the same path of development. Only that form of government
which recognizes the Supreme Being as the chief of rulers, and His law
as the source and model of all human law, can be sure of truth and
justice on its side, both in its dealings with other nations and in its
regulation of its own internal affairs. Only such a form can work
steadily for the advancement of its people, both by leading them forward
and by smoothing the rugged path to perfection, and removing every
obstacle which impedes the national progress. However near the
principles of our Government may approach to those of the Divine law,
there is still room and urgent necessity for reform. Yet, in the
universal disfavor into which theocracies have fallen, and in the
intense desire which pervades our people to avoid the complicated evils
of a union between church and state, every attempt to unite religious
principles with those of government is looked upon with positive alarm;
and justly so, since the experience of past centuries proves that both
thrive best in separate spheres, however near they may approach each
other in the abstract, and that when united, the one is apt to prove a
hamper on the other, through the introduction of error and corruption;
while, separated, they act as a mutual restraint, each tending to
control the abnormal development of the other. For these reasons reform
in this particular must move from the people to the government, not from
the government to the people.

And here we come to the root of the whole matter, to the field where
reform is most needed, that is, in the moral condition of our society.
While there are few nations in which there is such a diversity of
religious views and multiplicity of religious sects, there are few
peoples which are so proverbially irreligious as our own. Yet our
condition in this respect is rather a neutral one than otherwise, for
while we are without any positive immorality which should make us
preëminent above other nations for vice, there is, nevertheless, in our
midst, little of that simple, trusting, unquestioning faith, which is
the 'substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not
seen'--little of that all-pervading and all-powerful reverence for
sacred things, that deep religious feeling which forms a portion of the
very life of most of the nations of the Old World. This is nothing more
than the reaction of the stern Puritan tenets of the colonial times. It
is the logical result of those dark and gloomy theories which aimed to
make religion not only unpalatable but absolutely repelling to the young
and the ardent, causing them to fly to the opposite extreme of throwing
aside religion to 'a more convenient season,' when the pleasures of life
should have lost their charm, and they themselves should be drawing near
the close of their pilgrimage. That theory which made a deadly sin of
that which was at worst but a pardonable misdemeanor and perhaps wholly
innocent in its nature, could not fail in time to react violently, first
through the process of disgust, then through that of inquiry, and
finally to the carrying of speculation to extremes, and practically
pronouncing harmless and innocent that which was really vice. The
popular mind, rebounding from the Puritan ideas, did not pause to
discriminate between the truth and error which were so intimately
mingled in their system, but, sweepingly denouncing all the theories
whose most prominent characteristics were revolting, involved in the
denunciation and rejection much of pure and simple truth, and ran
rapidly along the path of revolution, heedless of every warning,
unchecked by the obstacles which Truth threw in its way, down to the
present time of almost universal looseness.

Another effect of this rebellion of the national mind against the
Puritan theories is seen in the almost yearly inauguration of some new
sect in religion, in a land which is already so crowded with diverse and
antagonistic religious organizations that it might be termed the land of
sects. However right or wrong in a religious point of view, the Puritans
committed the great _social_ mistake of establishing a new church,
instead of working earnestly to reform the old in those respects in
which it seemed to them to have fallen into error, thereby destroying
the unity of the Christian world. Had the movement stopped here, less
harm would have been done; but it was not of the nature of things that
it should be so. The establishment of the principle that purity of
worship and of belief was to be sought, and diversity of religious
opinion to be gratified in separation and the erection of new
organizations, rather than in the endeavor to purify the old and
established form, at once threw wide open the door of schism, and with
it, in the end, that of scepticism. The movement once begun could
neither be checked nor controlled by any human effort. Others claimed
the right which they themselves had exercised, and the result was soon
seen in the separation of one after another denomination from the
Puritan Church, each, in its turn, to be divided into a score of sects,
according as circumstances should alter religious views. Were the
principles of true religion in themselves progressive, were the
teachings, of the gospel inadequate to or unfitting for all possible
stages of human progress, or were they capable of development, the world
might then have been the gainer. Or, again, were reason infallible, the
separation of the churches would be an incalculable blessing, by
securing to all minds a free investigation upon religious subjects. But
infidelity desires no more powerful coadjutor than human reason in its
freest exercise, because it is so liable to be led away by sophistry,
and its invariable tendency is to reject as myths and fables all things
which it cannot comprehend or for which it cannot see a material cause.
Perfect reason is the twin brother and strongest supporter of faith; but
reason as it exists in the present development of humanity is its most
deadly antagonist. The age of reason has fallen upon us, and its result
is seen in a practical scepticism pervading the whole of our society,
which in its extent and its injurious effects put to the blush the
wildest speculations of the most radical German metaphysicians. Every
day we see around us men of no religious profession, and little if any
religious feeling, calmly facing death without a tremor, without a
thought of the awful beyond. And though the application of the term
infidel to such a man would not fail to arouse his fiercest indignation,
his indifference to the events and the fate of the great hereafter can
arise from nothing else than an utter disbelief in the teachings of Holy
Writ, in the truths of Christianity. Such men are but types of a class,
and that class a very large portion of our population.

The evils of religious divisions are plain to be seen, even if they
consisted in nothing more than the division and consequent weakening of
Christian effort. The church of God, torn by internal dissensions,
becomes almost powerless for the spread of the gospel, the greater
portion of its strength and energy being exhausted in bolstering up its
different branches as against each other, and in proselytizing within
itself. Where, if united, a small portion of its wealth and energy would
suffice to support in a nourishing condition the worship of a great
people, leaving an immense surplus to be directed to the evangelization
of the heathen world, now, in its divided state, its power and immense
material resources are squandered in the support of innumerable
fragments, each one of which costs as much in labor and in means as
would suffice to sustain the religion of the whole country if united.

Worse than even this, the incessant bickerings of the Christian world
tend to invalidate, in the minds of the unbelievers, not only among the
heathen, but among ourselves, the teachings of that Word which is its
professed guide. The 'See how these Christians hate each other!' is to
reflecting minds outside the church's pale, an almost unconquerable
argument against that religion which professes to be founded upon love.
Hence arises a great portion of that practical infidelity of which we
have spoken, and which is the bane of our civilization. No nation can be
truly great or noble or progressive without religion, and by as much as
we are departing, in our every-day life, from the pure teachings of the
gospel, by so much are we tending to our inevitable downfall. The people
must have some high standard of moral excellence, something to elevate
and purify the tone of society, to lead their aspirations upward away
from the petty toils and cares and vexations, from the sordid desires
and the animal propensities of life, in order to prevent them from
falling into that decay which is inevitably the result of corruption,
following hard upon a devotion to mere self-interest. We are, in a great
measure, a nation of materialists, too much devoted to the pursuit of
selfish and so-called practical aims, too little to the spiritual and
the ethereal. Reform must come, else the soul will become gross and
grovelling, and the nobler part of our natures, the more delicate and
refined sympathies of the heart, the finer faculties of the intellect,
will rust away with disuse, and the whole race become sensual, and
finally effete, however brilliant may be its individual exceptions. From
what direction the needed reform is to come it is not for us to say.
That Almighty Providence which overrules an erring world will doubtless
provide a way for the regeneration of His people. The first great step
is to awaken the people to a sense of the necessity of such a change,
and some more powerful means must be employed to the accomplishment of
that end than have ever yet been applied to our civilization. And the
apostle who, in the hands of God, shall be the means of arousing the
slumbering faith of our people, of awakening them to a full sense of the
danger, and of imparting new energy to the recuperative powers of the
race, will win for himself a loftier position in the world's
appreciation than has yet been conceded to any mere mortal.

Another great and manifest evil in our society, and one closely
connected with that of which we have just spoken, is the inordinate love
of wealth, and the elevation of the money god to the highest seat in our
temple of worship. Human nature craves distinction. The divisions and
castes in the society of the Old World, from the present day back to the
remotest ages, is not only an evidence, but a practical exemplification
of this fact. The abolition of all these distinctions consequent upon
the establishment of our republican government upon the ground of
political equality, swept away from our ancestors almost the only means
of gratifying this innate propensity. A hard-working, practical,
agricultural people, with no literature, and little if any cultivation
of the fine arts, there was but one road to distinction open to the mass
of the population, and that lay through the avenues of wealth. Hence it
was but natural that affluence should take the place of the hereditary
honors of the olden times, and that the people should bow to the only
distinction, however spurious it might be, which elevated any portion of
themselves above their fellows. With all the evils connected with a
hereditary aristocracy, the distinction which attends upon a nobility is
in a great measure an ideal one. It is not either its wealth or power
which constitutes its charm, but a certain nameless something pertaining
to the ideal, which affects not only the tenants and retainers, but even
our republican selves. It may well be questioned whether we have been
the gainers by substituting for such distinctions a gross and material
one, affecting the bodily senses alone--the animal part of our
nature--and which contains little either to expand the mind or exalt the
aspirations. With us but comparatively few can become distinguished in
the ranks of literature or of art, or, indeed, in any of the higher or
intellectual branches of human attainment; hence for the great mass
there is but one road to distinction, one object to claim every
exertion--the pursuit of wealth. And as a natural consequence, we see
every art, every profession hinging upon this motive. Most of the evils
connected with the administration of our public affairs, the fraud and
corruption which are so prominent, the quadrennial scramble for place,
with its consequent degrading of those positions which should be those
of the highest honor, may be traced to this one source. More than this,
we find the so-called aristocracy of our great cities--a moneyed one
purely--excluding from its ranks those who earn their livelihood in the
pursuit of literature and art, and who, if true to their professions,
are entitled to the very highest rank in society. There are of course
exceptions, but not more than sufficient to prove the rule. A striking
exemplification of the power of wealth among us is seen in these days of
shoddy, when those who have hitherto moved in the humblest circles
suddenly take their positions among the 'upper ten thousand,' and are
treated with a deference to which they have all their lives been
strangers, by virtue of a successful contract or a towering speculation.
The effect of such a state of things upon our civilization is easy to be
seen. A low motive is sure to bring down its followers to its own level.
A people without a lofty and ennobling object is sure to fall into
decay. The grasping spirit which everywhere pervades our society is fast
lowering our people to the level of a race of mercenary jobbers. Truth,
justice, honor, purity, and even religion, are in a great measure lost
sight of in the general scramble for gold, until the strictest
integrity, the most self-sacrificing honesty, are beginning to be looked
upon as marvels, and we have won for ourselves among the nations of the
world the unenviable title of worshippers of the 'almighty dollar.'
Religion itself is twisted and distorted into every imaginable shape to
bring it into harmony with our all-absorbing pursuit: all our ideas of
public policy and of social progress are made to depend upon and
modified by this unworthy motive. We mean not to include those
individuals who, with loftier motives and a true appreciation of man's
spiritual capabilities, are prominent among us, battling earnestly in
the cause of true progress; we are speaking of the mass of our
population. Those few are the goodly leaven who are yet to prove the
regeneration of our race. Bad as is the state of affairs in this
respect, it will, if left to itself, become infinitely worse as each
succeeding year rolls around, for the spirit of greed is progressive in
its nature, growing fatter and fatter upon its success.

Yet, in another point of view, this same strife for wealth is one great
secret of American prosperity and progress. It is the motive power to
that energy which has peopled the wilderness, erected as if by magic a
mighty republic among the savage wilds, and, above all, spread American
ideas, and with them the germ of human liberty, over the whole broad
earth. To this spirit of greed upon our shores the Old World owes much
of its advancement and most of those useful inventions which are fast
revolutionizing humanity itself. But we are not considering it in this
light; we are viewing it in its moral aspect, that respect in which it
most strongly affects true civilization, which must soon fall away and
lapse into the condition of the ages long past, if it be not sustained
by an enduring moral and religious element. The moral advancement must
keep pace with the intellectual, else the latter will some day reach
that point where extremes meet, and have its weary journey to commence
again.

It is to be hoped that this evil is already on the wane. It is to be
hoped that the present stirring up of our society from its uttermost
depths, with its consequent exploding of worn-out theories, which have
hitherto held their places only through our national lethargy--with its
sweeping away of old-time prejudices, and mingling together of elements
which have hitherto existed distinct and aloof from each other, will
result in bringing true merit to the surface, in awakening our people to
a loftier appreciation of the good and the true, thereby establishing a
higher moral standard among us; that purer motives will henceforth
actuate our society. The fears which are entertained by some that the
present war will prove a severe shock to our civilization, are not
sustained by the facts which are everywhere appearing around us. The
frequent demands upon the generosity and forbearance of a great people,
the constant calls for the exercise of the noblest qualities, the most
self-sacrificing devotion, and that too in support of a great principle
rather than of any present material interest, the very necessity for an
exalted civilization and intellectual development on the part of the
masses, which shall enable them to see in that principle the groundwork
of all their future well-being, both as regards material prosperity and
political position, are constantly bringing before the people, in a
clearer light than ever before, the blessings of honor and uprightness,
the necessity of national purity, and developing a moral element in our
midst, whose good effects will far outbalance the ephemeral and
spasmodic immorality and vice which a state of war usually engenders.
Our people are _becoming acquainted_ with those blessings of individual
well-doing and those principles of philanthropy to which they have for
so long been comparative strangers. And it is this, together with the
unveiling, through the present convulsion, of those errors, both in our
political system and in our society, which have so nearly proved our
ruin, which will make this war in very truth the greatest blessing that
has ever befallen us. And if this moral progress shall be such and so
great as to throw down the golden calf from his throne and make the
place of honor the reward of true merit alone, then shall we have cause,
for the remotest generations, to thank God for this seeming calamity
which has fallen upon us.

And these same facts, standing out as shining lights in the darkness,
tend to show that we are, after all, not quite so sordid as we seem;
that, with all our worship of the money god, there is yet, away down in
the great American heart, a wealth of strong, true, generous feeling,
ready at the first call of sorrow and of suffering to spring forth and
scatter its golden blessings even beyond the seas. It is not alone that,
years ago, when we were at peace and at the height of prosperity, many
ships left our shores laden down with food, the voluntary contributions
of the American citizen to his starving brethren of the Emerald Isle;
though this of itself was enough to place our civilization on a level
with that of the most polished nation of the Old World. But even now,
when we are struggling for our very existence, when every energy and
every material resource is being exerted to stem the tide of internal
dissensions and crush out the hydra of internal treason; at a time when
the mother country has gone to every length short of open war to aid and
assist those who are striving for our downfall, and her press is
exhausting every epithet of vituperation and scurrilous abuse of us, who
are battling so earnestly in our own defence, and who are entitled by
every truth of human nature to her warmest sympathy--a press which,
adopting the phraseology of its Secession friends and allies, scruples
not to place the civilization of the slaveholding States far in advance
of that of the 'Northern mudsills'--even now, when the cry of the
starving operatives of the English mills comes to us across the water,
forgetting for the time all the abuse and maltreatment we have received,
all the enmity and bitter hostility which the traitorous perfidy of
England has engendered, more than one full-freighted vessel has left our
ports bearing grain to those whom their own proud aristocracy is either
powerless or too niggardly to sustain. Is this not evidence of a
civilization considerably advanced beyond any which history has yet
recorded?--a civilization based upon the golden rule of Christianity,
and upon that still more precious command: 'Love those that hate you,
and do good to those that persecute you.' For it is in its moral aspect
that every civilization must in the end be judged; and that society
which develops such noble principles and feelings as these, which
manifests itself in this higher region of spiritual excellence, in the
exercise of these finer feelings of the heart, is certainly nearest to
perfection, in that it follows most closely the law of God, the truths
of divine revelation. When instances such as these occur on the part of
any of the older nations of the world, it will do for them to boast of a
civilization superior to ours; but until their faith is shown by their
works, suffering humanity the world over will accord to us the palm. Nor
will it answer to ascribe to us an unworthy motive in this matter--a
desire to win credit in the eyes of the world. An individual might, with
some degree of plausibility, fall under such an imputation, but a great
people does not move spontaneously and unitedly in one direction from
such a motive, since none but a pure and just principle can produce
unity in the masses. Such an unworthy and degrading motive is the
property of individuals, not of nations, even if it were possible for
such an idea to be conceived at one and the same time by a multitude of
minds. No! it was the spontaneous expression of a deep and pervading
principle of American society--of American humanity--a free outpouring
of the American heart; and as such it will stand upon the page of
history as the evidence of a civilization behind none of its age.

Nor is this the only mark of the moral awakening of our people.
Instances are every day appearing in our midst of this truest of
charity, not the least of which are the 'wood processions' of the
Western cities and towns; those long lines of wagons laden with fuel and
provisions for the families of the absent soldiers, whose sole object
and motive is the comfort of those whose protectors and supporters are
sustaining the country's honor in the field; evidences more striking
than the founding of charitable institutions or benevolent societies,
since the latter may, and too often does, arise from the most selfish
and vainglorious motive, while in the former the individual is lost in
the many who press eagerly to bear their part in a noble work, in this
spontaneous outpouring of true and heartfelt benevolence. From this same
spirit arises the wonderful success which attends the efforts of
sanitary commissions and soldiers' aid associations in alleviating the
sufferings and softening the privations of our soldiers in the field.
With such evidences constantly appearing before our eyes of the deep and
noble feelings of the American heart, who can doubt that our
civilization is a progressive one, our enlightenment equal? Who can
doubt the capacity of the American people for good, or look with
foreboding upon our future?

Another important sign of the times, as evincing our advancing
civilization, is the revival of art in our midst. In the midst of all
our bustle and toil and eager strife for gain, there has ever been a
something wanting to the completeness of our life, a something to fill
and satisfy that yearning of the soul for æsthetic beauty, which is at
once an evidence of its progress and its capacity for diviner things.
Too long have we been absorbed by the desires of our animal nature, in
whose pursuit there is little gratification to that finer portion of our
inner selves which will not be silenced by anything short of the deepest
degradation. The people--the great people--need something--something
higher, more ennobling, more tender--to fill the vacant spot in their
hearts and homes, to preserve the balance between the animal and the
spiritual part of their lives, and to clothe their surroundings with a
higher and holier significance than can arise from the events and
associations of the work-day life. In art the missing link is found, and
whether it be the simple ballad in the evening circle or the modest
print that graces the humble cottage walls--and the humbler the
habitation the deeper the manifestation, because the more touching--it
is but the expression of the people's appreciation of the needs, the
capacities, and the holier aspirations of the better part of humanity.
Hence the revival of art has a deep significance; it is something more
than a forced, an exotic, and hence ephemeral growth; it is the
manifestation of the awakening of the people to the æsthetic sentiment;
it is the actual result of the intellectual and moral needs of society;
it is in itself the striving of a great people for the beautiful and
true. And as such it has a broad and deep foundation in the godlike in
human nature, which shall insure not only its permanence but its
progress as long as the good and the true have any influence whatever
upon our society. That we have had, until a comparatively late period,
no art among us, is the result not of a lack of capacity to comprehend
the beautiful, but of the intense and all-absorbing passion for gain
which has so nearly proved the bane of our society by shutting out the
consideration of better things: that art has so suddenly revived in our
midst is a proof that, so far from having our humanity, our political
position, our very civilization itself swallowed up in the love of the
almighty dollar, as has been predicted of us by foreign wiseacres, we
have been aroused to our danger and to a true appreciation of the better
part of existence; which is itself an evidence of the elasticity and the
recuperative energy of our social system.

In literature our progress is not so flattering. In its effects upon
civilization a literature can only be judged by that portion of it which
touches the popular heart, which descends to the humblest fireside, and
is most eagerly sought after by the ploughboy and the operative. All
other, however brilliant it may be--and the more brilliant or profound
the farther it is generally removed from the minds of the masses--is to
them but as the stars of a winter night, cold and distant, radiating
little warmth to the longing soul, too far away to awaken more than a
faintly reflected admiration. He who said, 'Give me to write the songs
of a people, and I care not who makes their laws,' touched the tender
spot in the great heart of humanity; he was a sage in that truest of
philosophy, the study of human nature. Though we have our princes in
every branch of literature, who are the result of and an honor to our
civilization, yet for their own results in moulding the tastes, the
habits, and the intellects of the common people, in contributing to
their advancement, they fall far below the efforts of the veriest
penny-a-liner. It is a lamentable fact of our society that while the
more solid literature scarcely pays, the flashiest of so-called 'flash
literature' brings down the golden shower. The writer of the lowest
possible order of literary productions is enriched, and his name is
familiar in the remotest corners of the land, while our monarchs of
literature are oftentimes poverty stricken and comparatively obscure;
and that because the latter is confined to a comparatively small
audience and patronage, while the former speaks to and for the masses;
and, as a natural consequence, the former controls the tastes of the
greater portion of the reading community, and that too for anything but
good, since he reaps his golden harvest by pandering to the basest of
appetites, the lowest of sensibilities and sympathies; thus retarding
rather than accelerating the intellectual advancement of the people,
this being his material interest.

And how great is the responsibility of those who thus speak to the ear
of the simple and the unlearned! how terrible the retribution they are
heaping up for themselves in the great hereafter, for thus prostituting
talent which might be made eminently useful in leading the minds of the
common people to the highest and noblest of truths; in making purer and
better in every sense of the word! The idea that the province of
literature, even of fiction, is simply to amuse, is exploded in the
light of advancing civilization. Every writer has a higher mission, and
accordingly as he discharges the duty which his faculty lays upon him,
is he true or false to the true end of his existence, a success or a
failure in the world of intellect and morality. The mission of all
literature is to make mankind both wiser and _better_, and the writer
who fails to appreciate and act upon this truth is worse than a useless
cumberer of society; he is a curse to his age, and, however great his
present fame, will most assuredly be forgotten with the passing away of
his generation. For does not _all_ human effort resolve itself into this
one thing? Is there any work which we call good or great, or even
important, which is not intended in some way to benefit mankind? Else we
were but butterflies, and our works but mists. In the past ages the
world has not seen and appreciated this fact; but the world of to-day
does appreciate it, and will certainly set every worker upon his proper
pedestal, high or low, according as his efforts have conduced or not to
the welfare of humanity.

Present reform in this particular is not to be looked for; it must be
external rather than internal. Could the whole mass of light literature
be at once and forever swept out of existence, the people would soon
acquire a love of solid reading as ardent as that which now pervades the
lower stratum of our society for 'yellow-covered' trash. For the love of
knowledge is innate, and the people would necessarily seek for and find
amusement in such reading as could not fail to instruct and educate, to
revive this love of knowledge, and fan it into an ardent flame. But this
cannot be done. The people will ever seek that reading which is most
congenial to their present tastes and habits, and there will ever be
found a legion of those who are eager to supply this sort of mental
pabulum--if it can be so called--for the sake of the golden equivalent.
For these reasons, the literature of the common people must ever follow,
not lead, their civilization; it must continue to be the outward and
visible sign of their progress, instead of the inward and spiritual
grace by which it is pervaded and sustained; and reform must be
inaugurated and consummated in those other influences which tend to
mould the moral man, and which must be so guided as to destroy all these
low and grovelling tastes, by lifting the man into a higher plane of
being, in which the animal shall be wholly subservient to the spiritual.
Hence the province of the true philanthropist lies in those other paths
which we have pointed out, rather than in this, since in them lies the
prospect of success whose _fruits_ will in this most clearly appear.

It is a significant fact that the foreign view points to but two blots
upon our society, and that foreign detractors harp continually upon
these, and these alone, as evidences of the backwardness of our
civilization--the institution of slavery and the riots which
occasionally disgrace our large cities. For in the light of the facts
and experience of to-day, such a position is simply a yielding of the
whole question. When it is considered that the few riots with which we
are afflicted--few in comparison with those which so often convulse
European society--are almost invariably incited and sustained by our
foreign population, and that portion of it, too, latest arrived upon our
shores, it will be seen with what injustice the evil is laid at the door
of American society. It is, in fact, nothing else than the outbreak of
the long-accumulated and long-suppressed discontent and misery of
European lands, which, for the first time for centuries, finds vent upon
the shores of a land of political and social liberty--a reaction of the
springs long held down by the iron hand of tyranny--a violent
restoration of that natural elasticity which had so nearly been
destroyed by ages of social degradation. The mob law, the frequent
resort to the pistol and the bowie knife, and the universal social
recklessness of our own citizens of the Southern States, is the effect
of the institution of slavery, and falls within the discussion of that
question, with the disappearance of which they must inevitably depart.

Were African slavery a permanent feature in our midst, the argument
against our civilization would be unanswerable. But it has maintained
its ground in spite of, rather than as the result of or in connection
with the spirit of our institutions. It has hitherto been suffered to
exist as an acknowledged evil, solely because the disastrous results
attending its sudden abolition have been justly feared as greater than
any which could at present arise from its continuance. Yet at no period
has the American people ceased to look forward to some future time when
it might safely be rooted out. Our faith has ever been strong, and our
confidence in the ultimate triumph of the right unshaken. That time has
come. The present war, from whose inauguration the question of slavery
abolition was--on our part, at least--entirely absent, has given the
opportunity which our people have not failed to seize. To crush out the
rebellion without meddling with the institutions of the South was at
first the main spring of the war; _fiat justitia, ruat coelum_, is now
the voice of the whole people; and the very fact that the nation has so
earnestly taken hold of the work, so sternly determined to sacrifice
everything but its existence to the demolition of this bloody god, is of
itself an evidence of the purity of our civilization. We have not been
dead to the principles of truth and justice involved in this question;
we have been but biding our time, plainly seeing and carefully noting
the direful effects of slavery upon our social organization, and
'heaping up wrath against the day of wrath.' And now, with the blessing
of God upon our efforts, the present war will not cease until the death
blow is given to the accursed institution with all its attendant evils.
We, as a people, are fully aroused and sternly determined henceforth to
let nothing stand in the way of our social advancement, however
time-honored and cherished may have been the obstacle. And when these
evils have all been swept away, as they assuredly will be, we shall
stand forth among the nations in all the glory of a pure and enlightened
civilization, and challenge the world to produce a nobler record, to
point out a happier, more prosperous, more truly progressive people.

With the close of the present war will arise another important question,
bearing not less strongly than that of slavery upon our ultimate
civilization. The slaveholding States are to be, in a measure,
repeopled. The tide of immigration which has so long and so steadily
streamed toward the West will be for some time diverted to the fertile
plantations of the South. Not only the soldiers of the North, to whom
the war has opened what has hitherto been to them almost a _terra
incognita_, will seek new homes within the sunny climes; but the flood
of foreign immigration, which, upon the vindication of our national
integrity and power, will quickly double itself in comparison with that
of former years, and sweep toward this new and inviting field; and the
distinctive feature of Southern society--of so-called 'Southern
chivalry'--will soon be swallowed up in the torrent. And what then shall
we have to fill its place? The crude ideas of foreign tyros in the
school of freedom, the conflicting religious, social, and political
theories of European revolutionists, the antagonistic policies of a
hundred different nationalities. All this, in connection with the
difficulties arising from the freeing of so large an African population,
will prove a severe trial to our national civilization, and call for the
exercise of the profoundest wisdom, the most careful discrimination, and
the most patient forbearance on the part of our rulers and statesmen.
And most assuredly the times will themselves produce the men most fitted
for the care of such interests and the decision of such questions.
Though there is need of the firm hand, the utmost watchfulness, and the
strongest exertion on the part of every citizen as well as statesman, it
is not to be feared that the result will in the end be disastrous to our
progress. For the genius of the American people was never yet at fault.
We have handled similar questions before; we are handling a more
important one now, and our capabilities and our power of development are
such that we need not fear but that we shall be enabled to cope with the
exigencies of the future. That genius which has built up a powerful
nation here in the wilderness, which has developed to such a degree the
resources of the laud and the capacities of the people, which has
conceived and executed in so short a time such a social and moral
revolution, has in it too much of the godlike to suffer the work to fall
through from any incapacity to deal with the legitimate consequences of
its action. The power to inaugurate and carry through the work
necessarily implies the capacity to establish and render permanent its
results, to guide the ship when the storm is past. It will find the ways
and means; the times themselves will develop new truths, which will make
the task less difficult than it seems to us of to-day. Such is the
feeling of the people; and this same noble faith and confidence in our
own capacities, this turning a deaf ear to all the possibilities of
failure, and looking with a never-failing trust, a soul-felt faith, to
the triumph of our cause and of our civilization, is our greatest
strength, while it is, at the same time, a conclusive evidence that we
are on the high road of true progress, that our civilization is not a
thing of yesterday, to-day, or to-morrow, but of the eternal ages.




APHORISM.--NO. X.


'It is a frequent result of poverty to make men rich--a common curse of
wealth to make them poor.' Poverty, making us feel our dependence upon
God, almost compels us to an acquaintance with Him--this leads us to
accept Him as the one Infinite Benefactor; and so gives us wealth that
can never fail: but riches, by encouraging our natural love of
independence, is too apt to keep us away from our Heavenly Father, and
thus plunge us into such poverty as admits of no actual relief. In this
view there is something to hope for in the present distresses of our
country. Rarely have so many people felt that their dependence must be
upon the mercy of God; and rarely, if ever, have so many, with such
earnestness, appealed to the Father of all on the occasion of a
widespread calamity. This must result in a closer union with the
Infinite Giver, and thus in a great increase of true riches.




THE ENGLISH PRESS.

V.


How had _The Times_ been getting on all these years? Slowly but surely.
At first, as has been already stated, feeling its way with difficulty
amid a host of obstacles, long-established and successful rivals,
Government prosecutions abroad, and personal crotchets and peculiarities
at home. John Walter, its founder, retired from the management of the
paper in 1803, and died in 1812, having lived to see his literary
offspring grow up into a strong young giant, with thews and sinews
growing fuller and firmer every day, tossing his weighty arms in every
direction, but never aimlessly; and with his vigorous feet firmly
planted, expanded chest, and head boldly erect, fearlessly standing
forward in the very first rank of the champions of freedom. Mr. Walter's
son John succeeded him in the management in 1803; and, under his abler
and more enlightened administration, the paper rapidly increased in
importance. He opened his columns to all comers, and whenever any
communication appeared to possess more than average ability he
endeavored to engage the writer of it as a regular contributor. He
perfected the system of reporting, and the reports in _The Times_ soon
began to be fuller and more exact perhaps even than Perry's in _The
Chronicle_. He especially turned his attention to the foreign department
of his journal, and no trouble or expense was spared in obtaining
intelligence from abroad. This had been one of the strong points with
the elder Walter, and he had always striven to be the first to
communicate important foreign news to the world--thus, for instance,
_The Times_ was the first newspaper which announced the execution of
Marie Antoinette. This element was now greatly strengthened and
developed, correspondents were engaged in all the chief cities of
Europe, and, as time progressed, in other quarters of the world as well,
letters from whom appeared as regularly and as early as the post-office
authorities would allow; and a regular system of expresses from the
Continent was organized. But the Government, who saw and felt the
growing greatness of _The Times_, placed every possible hinderance in
the way--it was not then the custom for the Premier to invite the editor
to dinner--and the letters and foreign packages were delayed in every
possible manner--the machinery of the custom house being even employed
for that purpose--in order that the Government organs might at least get
the start. But fair means and foul alike failed to win over the young
journalistic athlete to the ministerial side, and this illiberal and
selfish policy was at length compelled to give in, beaten at all points.
But there was one thing which was destined to give _The Times_
supremacy, at which the younger Walter began to work soon after the
reins of power fell into his hands--and that was steam. Great strides
had been made in the art of printing. The first metal types ever cast in
England were those of Caxton, in 1720. Stereotype printing had been
first suggested by William Ged, of Edinburgh, in 1735, and was perfected
and brought into general use by Tillock, in 1779. The printing machine
had been originated by Nicholson, in 1790, and an improved form of it,
made of iron, the invention of Earl Stanhope, was in general use in
1806. Thomas Martyn, a compositor of _The Times_, invented some further
modifications, and was aided by the younger Walter. Owing, however, to
the violent opposition of his fellow workmen, the experiments were
carried on under the greatest secrecy; but the elder Walter could not be
induced to countenance them, and consequently nothing came of them. In
1814, Koenig and Bauer, two German printers, conceived the idea of
printing by steam, and the younger Walter, now by his father's death
permitted to do as he liked, entered warmly into their project. The
greatest silence and mystery was observed, but the employés of _The
Times_ somehow or other obtained an inkling of what was going on, and,
foreseeing a reduction in their numbers, vowed the most terrible
vengeance upon everybody connected with the newfangled invention. Spite
of their threats, however, the necessary machinery was quietly prepared
and erected, and one morning, before day had broken, Mr. Walter called
his printers together, and informed them that that day's issue was
struck off by steam. This ever-memorable day in the history of
journalism was Monday, the 28th of November, 1814. Loud murmurs and
threats were heard among the workmen, and burning down the whole affair
was the least thing suggested; but Mr. Walter had taken precautions,
and, showing his work people that he was prepared to meet any outbreak
on their part, no violence was attempted. Since then _The Times_ has
been regularly printed by steam. Various improvements in steam machinery
have from time to time been patented, and Hoe's gigantic machines--the
production of that country the most prolific of all the world in useful
inventions, America--seemed to show that the limit of the application of
steam to printing had been reached. But a machine still more
wonderful--a machine that possessed all the skill of human intelligence
and ten times the quickness of human fingers--a machine for composing by
steam, was shown at the International Exhibition in London, in 1862.
Printing by steam at once raised the circulation of _The Times_
enormously, as was but natural, from the facilities which it afforded of
a rapid multiplication of copies; and under the editorship of Thomas
Barnes it soon reached the first place in journalism. But Walter himself
was not idle, and was always on the lookout for fresh and rising talent.
On one occasion, being at a church in the neighborhood of his country
seat in Berkshire, he was very much struck by the sermon which was
preached by a new curate. After the service he went into the vestry, and
had a long conversation with the preacher, the result of which was that
he told him that a curacy was not a very enviable position, and that he
would do much better to go to London, and write for _The Times_ at a
salary of £1,000 a year. It is needless to add that the offer was not
declined.

In 1817, _The Literary Gazette_ was brought out by William Jordan, as an
organ of literature and the fine arts, and, until The _Athenæum_ was
established, it was without a rival of any consequence. But its
circulation declined, and, after Jordan's death, dwindled down to a very
small number. In 1862 its name was changed to _The Parthenon_, or
rather, to speak more correctly, _The Parthenon_ arose as a new
publication from the ashes of _The Literary Gazette_. But change of name
did not produce change of circumstances, and, before many numbers had
appeared, _The Parthenon_ was privately offered for sale at the low sum
of £100, but, failing to meet with a purchaser, it gave up the ghost
early in 1863. In 1817, Lord Sidmouth made a terrific onslaught upon the
press. He issued a circular to the different lord lieutenants of the
counties, to the effect that any justice of the peace might issue a
warrant for the apprehension of any person charged with printing a
libel. One result of this circular and the vigorous prosecutions which
ensued was that William Cobbett for a while gave up printing his
_Political Register_, and went away to America, from whence he did not
return for two years. He stated his reasons for adopting this course in
his paper, as follows:

     'I do not retire from a combat with the attorney-general, but from
     a combat with a dungeon, deprived of pen, ink, and paper. A combat
     with the attorney-general is quite unequal enough; that, however, I
     would have encountered. I know too well what a trial by special
     jury is; yet that or any sort of trial I would have stayed to face.
     But against the absolute power of imprisonment, without even a
     hearing, for time unlimited'--an act had been passed which gave the
     secretary of state power to suspend the _habeas corpus_ act--'in
     any jail in the kingdom, without the use of pen, ink, and paper,
     and without communication with any soul but the keepers--against
     such a power it would have been worse than madness to attempt to
     strive.'

But the Government met with a notable check in the case of William Howe,
the bookseller. Howe was thrice tried for libel, and, despite the
exertions of Lord Ellenborough, who descended from the judicial bench to
the barrister's table, was thrice acquitted. Persecution after this
languished for a while, but in 1819 were passed those stringent measures
which are known as the Six Acts. One of these gave the judges the power,
upon the conviction of any person a second time of the publication of a
seditious libel, to punish him with fine, imprisonment, banishment, or
transportation. But such monstrous enactments were not suffered to pass
unchallenged, and the result of several animated debates was that the
obnoxious words banishment--a novelty in English jurisprudence--and
transportation were withdrawn, but the remaining provisions of the Six
Acts were carried in all their rigor. But amid much harm, some good was
doubtless effected, for certain provisions were introduced into the act
which declared certain inferior newspapers, which had hitherto evaded
the stamp act, by calling themselves pamphlets and not newspapers,
because they only commented upon the news of the day, to be henceforth
liable to the stamp duties. This really did good service to the better
class of journals, by sweeping away a swarm of newspapers which, by the
quibble above mentioned, were enabled to undersell them.

_John Bull_ was started in 1820, with the avowed object of espousing the
King's side, and covering the Queen and her friends with obloquy.
Theodore Hook was the editor, but very few persons were in the secret.
Every man or woman who was conspicuous as a friend of the Queen was duly
gibbeted, and any tittle-tattle gossip or scandal that could be ferreted
out against them was boldly printed in the most unmistakable terms.
Trial for libel failed to discover the real proprietors, editor, and
writers, and the men who stood their trial as printer, publisher,
proprietor, etc., were manifestly mere shams, men who would swear to
anything and undergo any amount of imprisonment for the consideration of
the smallest coin of the realm. The scandalous details in _John Bull_
attracted the public at once, and by the time it reached its sixth
number, the circulation had risen to ten thousand, while the first five
numbers were reprinted over and over again, and the first and second
were actually stereotyped. But it began to be whispered about that Hook
was the editor, whereupon he printed and signed a letter denying the
rumor in the most indignant terms. This letter was supplemented by an
editorial, from which the following is an extract:

     'The conceit of some people is amusing, and it has not unfrequently
     been remarked that conceit is in abundance where talent is most
     scarce. Our readers will see that we have received a letter from
     Mr. Hook, disowning and disavowing all connection with this
     paper.... We are free to confess that two things surprise us in
     this business. The first, that anything which we have thought
     worthy of giving to the public should have been mistaken for Mr.
     Hook's; and secondly, that such a person as Mr. Hook should think
     himself disgraced by a connection with _John Bull_.'

After the death of the Queen, Hook devoted himself to the demolition of
the Whigs and Radicals. Joseph Hume was his especial target, and was
dished up week after week with a decidedly original Latin garnish: '_Ex
humili potens_--From a surgeon to a member of Parliament;' '_Humili modi
loqui_--To talk Scotch like Hume;' '_Nequis humasse velit_--Let no one
call Hume an ass,' etc., etc. _John Bull_ sustained a great many
convictions for libel, and its dummies were frequently imprisoned, but
they never betrayed Hook, who retained the editorship until his death in
1841. Somewhere about this time _The Britannia_, a Conservative journal,
of a few years' standing, was incorporated with it. It had meanwhile
considerably moderated its tone, and at the present day enjoys a fair
circulation among steady-going people--chiefly country gentlemen, old
ladies, and parsons--who obstinately cling to Tory principles.

_John Bull_ was not the only newspaper which was prolific in libels, and
perhaps at no time were scandalous attacks upon public and private
persons more common. Mr. Freemantle, writing to the Marquis of
Buckingham, in 1820, says:

     'The press is completely open to treason, sedition, blasphemy, and
     falsehood, with impunity.... I do not know whether you see
     Cobbett's _Independent Whig_, and many other papers now circulating
     most extensively, and which are dangerous much beyond anything I
     can describe.'

This is a sweeping censure, but, allowing for a little personal
irritation, natural enough under the circumstances--he had been
lampooned himself--is true of a great portion of the press. The supply
was regulated by the demand, and the character of the wares purveyed
depended upon the wants of the market. Editors found that scandal was
eagerly devoured by their subscribers, and they did not therefore
hesitate or scruple to gratify the prevailing tastes of the day. But the
better class of papers were not able to keep clear of the law of libel,
even though they did not condescend to pander to the vitiated tastes of
the multitude. Many of them had to sustain actions for merely reporting
proceedings before the police magistrates and in the law courts, and
many a rascal solaced himself for the disagreeables attending a
preliminary examination at the police court for a criminal offence, by a
verdict in his behalf in a civil action against any newspaper that had
been bold enough to print a report of the proceedings. This kind of
action originated from a ruling of Lord Ellenborough, that it was
'libellous to publish the preliminary examination before a magistrate
previously to committing a man for trial or holding him to bail for any
offence with which he is charged, the tendency of such a publication
being to prejudice the minds of the jurymen against the accused, and to
deprive him of a fair trial.' This monstrous and at the same time absurd
doctrine remained in force for many years, but is now happily no longer
the law of the land.

_The Times_ had now reached the pinnacle of prosperity, and its claims
to be considered the foremost of journals were no longer disputed. The
circulation of _The Morning Chronicle_ had dwindled during the latter
years of Perry's life, and after his death did not revive very much
under Black, his successor. Brougham, Talfourd, and Alderson were among
the writers in _The Times_, and Captain Sterling, whose vigorous,
slashing articles first gained for _The Times_ the title of the
'Thunderer,' was regularly engaged upon the staff at a salary of £2,000
a year and a small share in the profits. But the Government still
steadily set its face against it, and in 1821 Mr. Hume loudly inveighed
against the ministry in the House of Commons for not sending Government
advertisements to _The Times_, instead of to other journals, which did
not enjoy a tithe of its circulation. The arrangements of the post
office were a great hinderance to the diffusion of newspapers, since the
charge for the carriage of a daily journal was £12 14_s._, and for a
weekly £2 4_s._ a year. The number, therefore, that was sent abroad by
this channel, either to the Continent or our own colonies, was very
small. In 1810 the whole number thus despatched was but three hundred
and eighty-three, and in 1817 it had fallen to two hundred and
seventy-one, owing to the increase in the charges demanded by the
post-office authorities, who were actually allowed to put the money in
their own pockets; and in 1821 it was only two hundred and six. The
circulation through the kingdom of Great Britain itself was not entirely
free, inasmuch as every newspaper sent through the post office was
charged for by weight, at an exorbitant rate, unless it was franked by a
member of Parliament. This regulation continued in force until 1825,
when an act was passed which provided that newspapers should be sent
through the post free, on condition that they were open at both ends,
and had no other writing upon the cover than the necessary address. At
the same time the ridiculous acts which limited the size of newspapers
were done away with, and every printer was henceforth permitted to print
his journal upon any sized sheet he pleased. Two important concessions
were also made to the press at this date, one in the House of Commons,
and the other in the House of Lords. In the former, a portion of the
strangers' gallery was set apart for the exclusive use of the reporters;
and in the latter, reporters were permitted to be present for the first
time. Previously to this, if any one had been rash enough to attempt to
take any notes, an official would pounce upon him, and, with an air of
offended dignity well befitting that august assembly, strike the
offending pencil from his grasp!

In 1825, Joseph Hume attempted to get the stamp duty reduced on
newspapers to twopence, and the advertisement duty to one shilling; and
in 1827 he tried to gain an exemption from the stamp act for political
pamphlets; but he was defeated on each occasion. In 1827, _The Standard_
was started as a Tory organ, under the auspices of a knot of able
writers, the chief of whom were Dr. Giffard, the editor, Alaric Attila
Watts, and Dr. Maginn. It has always possessed a good connection among
the Conservative party, but has never been a very profitable concern.
After the abolition of the stamp duty its price was reduced to twopence,
and in 1858 to one penny, and it was the first of the daily journals to
offer a double sheet at that price. In recent times the Letters of
'Manhattan' have given an impulse to its circulation, from their novelty
of style--an impulse which was probably further aided by the ridiculous
but widely believed assertion that those letters had never crossed the
Atlantic, but were penned beneath the shadow of St. Paul's.

The following statistics of newspapers in the chief countries of Europe
in 1827, will probably prove interesting: France, with a population
of--in round numbers--thirty-two millions, possessed 490 journals; the
Germanic Confederation, with a population of thirteen millions, 305;
Prussia, with a population of twelve millions, 288; Bavaria, with a
population of four millions, 48; the Netherlands, with a population of
six millions, 150; Sweden and Norway, with a population of four
millions, 82; and Denmark, with a population of two millions, 80. Great
Britain, with a population of twenty-three millions, far outstripped
them all, for she boasted 483 newspapers; but was yet compelled to yield
the palm to her Transatlantic kinsmen, for the United States, at the
same date, with a population of twelve millions, circulated the
unequalled number of 800. In looking at these figures, one cannot help
being struck with the enormous disproportion between the journals of
Roman Catholic and Protestant countries--a disproportion which is so
significant that comment upon it is unnecessary. But the difference is
still more plainly shown if we take two capitals. Rome, with a
population of one hundred and fifty-four thousand, possessed only 3
newspapers, while Copenhagen, with a population of one hundred and nine
thousand, enjoyed the advantage of having 53. The London papers were
100, the English provincial papers 225, the Irish papers 85, the Scotch
63, and the Welsh 10. The number of stamps issued was more than
twenty-seven millions, of which London alone consumed more than fifteen
millions; the number of advertisements was seven hundred and seventy
thousand, of which London supplied nearly a half; and the amount of
advertisement duty was £56,000, of which London contributed £22,000.

The year 1829 is remarkable for the first appearance of _The Times_ with
a double sheet, consisting of eight pages, or forty-eight columns. This
great step in advance must have quite answered the expectations of its
spirited proprietor, for in 1830 _The Times_ paid to Government for
stamps and advertisement duty no less than £70,000. The day of perfect
freedom was beginning to dawn upon the press, although it took a quarter
of a century to remove the last fetter, the stamp, and still longer, if
we take into consideration the paper duty, which was removed in 1862.
First came the abolition of the most oppressive portion of Lord
Castlereagh's Six Acts, next the advertisement duties, and finally the
stamp. The high price of the stamp, fourpence, kept the better journals
at sevenpence, but a numerous class of unstamped journals at twopence
sprang up in defiance of the law, and were allowed for a time to go on
unchecked. They had a large circulation, one of them, _The London
Dispatch_, attaining to twenty-five thousand a week. Growing bolder with
their impunity, they indulged in the most abominable trash and the most
frantic sedition and treason. They were of course prosecuted and
punished, but they were never finally destroyed until the reduction of
the stamp duty. They did good indirectly, for they formed one of the
strongest arguments in favor of the abolition of that obnoxious impost.

In 1833 a battle royal raged between Daniel O'Connell and the press;
but, as might have been expected, Dan was no match for the hydra-headed
antagonist he had been rash enough to provoke. The quarrel originated in
a complaint made by the Liberator of a misrepresentation of a speech of
his, and he did this in so intemperate a manner that the reporters
published a letter in _The Times_, in which they expressed their
determination never again to report a speech of O'Connell's until he had
apologized for the insults he had levelled at them. O'Connell vainly
attempted to put the machinery of the House of Commons in motion against
them, but, after repeated efforts, was obliged to give in. His attacks
were principally levelled at _The Times_--which then counted among its
contributors the brilliant names of Macaulay, Thackeray, and
Disraeli--for he and John Walter were bitter foes. But he evoked several
powerful defenders of the press, first and foremost among whom was Sir
Robert Peel.

In 1834 the system of condensing the speeches in Parliament, and placing
the summary before the leading articles, was first introduced into _The
Times_ by Horace Twiss. At this date there occurred a great schism
between the proprietors and writers of _The Sun_, some of whom seceded,
and brought out _The True Sun_, in opposition to that eccentric planet
which always rises in the evening despite the general conviction of
mankind that the sun is the luminary of the day. Douglas Jerrold, Laman
Blanchard, and, greatest of all, Charles Dickens, commenced their
apprenticeship to literature in this journal, which enjoyed, however,
but a fleeting existence. Jerrold afterward started a paper of his own,
which failed, and then became editor of Lloyd's _Weekly London
Newspaper_, a post which he retained until his death, and which has
since been ably filled by his son Blanchard Jerrold. Laman Blanchard
became the editor of _The Courier_, but resigned it when it became a
Tory organ, and was one of the original writers in and proprietors of
_Punch_. Dickens transferred his services to _The Morning Chronicle_, in
the columns of which the Sketches by Boz first appeared. Several acts of
Parliament relating to newspapers were passed at this period. In 1833
the advertisement duty was reduced from three shillings and sixpence to
one shilling and sixpence in England, and one shilling in Ireland. In
1834 an act was passed by which the newspapers of those foreign
countries in which English journals were admitted free of postage, were
allowed to enter Great Britain on the same terms. In 1835 a bill was
passed to relieve the press from the action of common informers, and
placed them under the jurisdiction of the attorney-general alone; and
another, which forbade newspapers to publish lectures delivered at
literary and scientific institutions, without the permission of the
lecturer.

The time was now fast approaching for the reduction of the stamp duty.
Government was getting wearied of the war with the hydra-headed
unstamped monster, and at last adopted the only expedient likely to be
successful in putting it down, which was to place the higher-class
journals in a position to rival them. From 1831 to 1835 there had been
no less than seven hundred and twenty-eight prosecutions, of which the
year 1835 alone had produced two hundred and nineteen. This fact, joined
to the influential agitation which was now being made for the repeal,
caused the Government to decide upon bringing in a measure of relief. It
took six months and an immense deal of speechifying to bring this
measure to maturity; but at last, in 1836, the stamp duty was reduced
from fourpence to one penny, being one halfpenny less than it had been
originally fixed at in 1760. The Tories were the great friends of this
reduction, and Lord Lyndhurst, who had been instrumental in abolishing
many of the most oppressive enactments with which the measure had been
clogged, wished to do away with the duty altogether. There was of course
a loss to the revenue at first. In the first half year of the new duty,
the number of stamps issued was 21,362,148, realizing £88,502. In the
corresponding previous half year, under the old scale, the number of
stamps had been 14,874,652, and the amount paid, £196,909, so that in
six months the number of stamped newspapers had increased by about one
half.

In 1837, _The Economist_ was started by John Wilson, and attracted great
attention by its statistical and politico-economical articles, Wilson
afterward became secretary of the treasury, and, having been sent to
India, died there, to add one more to the many illustrious victims that
our Indian empire has exacted. In 1838 a most amusing hoax was
perpetrated upon _The Morning Post_ and _Morning Chronicle_, which
announced the death of Lord Brougham, and published a most elaborate
biography of him. But the next day there came a letter from Lord
Brougham, declaring that he was still alive and hearty. The joke,
however, did not end here--for people were ill natured enough to assert
that he had been the author of the rumor himself, in order to learn what
the world would say about him; and so widespread had this second rumor
become, that Lord Brougham was compelled to write another letter
contradicting it.

The next great event in the history of journalism is the commercial
libel case, Boyle _versus_ Lawson, the printer of _The Times_. Barnes
had died, and had been succeeded by John T. Delane, a nephew of Mr.
Walter, as editor, who still continues to occupy that responsible post.
The matter originated thus: In May, 1841, _The Times_ published a letter
from the Paris correspondent, containing the particulars of an organized
system of forgery on a gigantic scale, which had been agreed on by
certain persons, whose names were published in full. The plan was to
present simultaneously at the chief Continental cities letters of credit
purporting to emanate from Glynn & Co., the London bankers. The
confederates had fixed the sum they meant to realize at one million, and
had actually secured more than £10,000 before the plot was discovered.
One of them was Boyle, a banker, of good position, at Florence, and he
brought an action for libel and defamation. He pressed on the trial, but
_The Times_ maintained its ground, and at an enormous expense despatched
agents all over the Continent to collect evidence. _The Times_
triumphantly succeeded in proving the truth of what it--_The Times_ is
always spoken and written of as an individual--had printed; but as the
old law--the greater the truth the greater the libel--still existed, the
jury were compelled to find a verdict for the plaintiff, which they did,
with one farthing damages, and the judge clinched the matter by refusing
the plaintiff his costs. Universal joy was expressed at the result of
the trial, and public meetings were called together in London and the
chief Continental cities for the purpose of making a subscription to
defray the expenses of _The Times_ in defending the action. The
proprietors, however, declined this, but said that, at the same time,
they should feel much gratified if a sum of money were raised for some
public object in commemoration of the event. Accordingly it was decided
to found two scholarships in perpetuity for Christ's Hospital and the
City of London School at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, to be
called the Times' Scholarships, and the nomination to them to be placed
in the hands of the proprietors of _The Times_ in perpetuity. Two marble
tablets were also voted, at the cost of a hundred and fifty guineas
each, with commemorative inscriptions, one to be placed in _The Times_
office and the other in the Royal Exchange. Two somewhat similar tablets
were also placed in Christ's Hospital and the City of London School. For
these purposes the sum of £2,700 was very quickly subscribed, the lord
mayor leading off with ten guineas. If anything had been wanting to
place _The Times_ upon the pinnacle of preëminence among journals, this
famous trial firmly established it there, and ever since it has been
looked up to as an oracle of the commercial world. But _The Times_ was
not contented to rest quietly on its oars. It was ambitious, and looked
farther afield. In 1845, its vigor, enterprise, and disregard of expense
were exemplified in a remarkable manner. _The Times_ had been in the
habit of sending a special courier to Marseilles, to bring its Indian
despatches, and thus anticipate the regular course of the mail. The
French Government threw every possible obstacle in the courier's way,
and _The Times_ took Lieutenant Waghorn, the originator of the Overland
Route, into its pay. In October, 1845, a special messenger met the mail
on its arrival at Suez on the 19th. Mounted on a dromedary, he made his
way, without stopping, to Alexandria, where Waghorn awaited him with a
steamer. Waghorn came _viâ_ Trieste--special post horses and steamers
and trains being ready for him at the various points of the route--and
he reached London on the morning of the 31st, in time for his despatches
to appear in the morning's issue of the paper. The result of this was
that _The Times_ reached Paris with the Indian news from London before
the regular mail had reached that city from Marseilles. The next
noticeable enterprise of _The Times_ was the sending out commissioners
to investigate the condition of the poor and laboring population of
London in 1847, an enterprise which was crowned with the moat
satisfactory results. _The Times_ has always been the firm friend of the
poor, and its columns are always open to the tale of distress. No case
is advocated until it has been thoroughly investigated; but when once it
has been mentioned in _The Times_, subscriptions pour in on all sides.
At the commencement of each year especially, _The Times_ publishes
gratuitously appeals from public charities, and during last January the
sums received through those appeals reached the large amount of £12,000.
The last great exploit of _The Times_ was the sending forth a special
correspondent with the English army to the Crimea, a precedent which it
has followed up since in China, India, Italy, America, and
Schleswig-Holstein. But this was not the first occasion that reporters
had accompanied our armies, for Canning despatched reporters with the
troops sent to Portugal in 1826. The tactics of _The Times_ are very
generally misunderstood and misrepresented. Whatever objections
cavillers and opponents may urge, and with truth too--for the course
taken by _The Times_ is not to be praised on all occasions--it cannot be
denied that _The Times_ is the first journal in the world, a position
which it has reached by its enterprise, vigor, and ability. It has
frequently proved its disinterestedness, and during the great railway
mania of 1845, while it was receiving no less a sum than £6,000 weekly
for advertisements, constantly cautioned its readers against the
prevailing madness, and persistently predicted the crash that was
certain to follow. _The Times_, while it appears to lead, in reality
waits upon public opinion, and hence the accusations of inconsistency
and tergiversation so freely lavished upon it. _The Times_ is the
printed breath of public opinion. It throws out a feeler, perhaps,
though not quite at first, accompanied by some decided expression of
opinion, and carefully watches the effect upon the public mind. Should
that effect be different to what was expected, _The Times_ knows how to
veer round with the _popularis aura_. This is not always, however, done
so skilfully but that the act is apparent. It is not the most dignified
course that a journal which aspires to be--and which is--the leading
journal of Europe ought to pursue; but _The Times_ knows human nature,
and knows, too, that were it to adopt any other course, it would fall
from its high estate, and become a mere party organ. Moreover, _The
Times_ possesses an enormous prestige--deservedly won, as this article
has endeavored to show--and that, in a conservative country like
England, is considerably more than half the battle.

In 1842 appeared the first pictorial newspaper, _The Illustrated London
News_. It was started by Herbert Ingram, who began life as a provincial
newsboy, and died, in the vigor of his age, member of Parliament for his
native town. It was a success from the first, so great that numerous
competitors sprang up and endeavored to undersell it. But these were all
vastly inferior, and one by one withered away, the most persistent of
them at last passing into the hands of _The Illustrated London News_,
which now enjoys a larger circulation than any other weekly newspaper,
amounting to about six millions a year!

There was a satirical paper at this time, called _The Age_, which, being
of a strongly libellous character, was continually feeling the weight of
the law. It did not improve in character as it grew older, and its
editor, Tommy Holt, was proved upon a trial to have received bribes to
suppress a slander that he had threatened should appear in his paper.
This same Tommy Holt was very successful in inventing 'sensation'
headings for his columns, and by no means either delicate or scrupulous
in so doing. There was another rascally paper of the same description,
called _The Satirist_, which was at last finally crushed by the Duke of
Brunswick, the result of several actions for libel. Among other new
literary oddities at this time may be mentioned _The Fonetic Nuz_,
the organ of those enthusiastic reformers who were endeavoring to
accomplish a revolution in our orthography. It lasted, however, but a
very short time.

The year 1850 saw the initiation of the final campaign directed against
the only remaining burdens of the press. Mr. Ewart and Mr. Milner Gibson
brought forward a motion for the repeal of the advertisement duty, but
were defeated by two hundred and eight votes to thirty-nine. But they
were not cast down by their want of success, but manfully returned to
the charge. In 1851, they procured the appointment of a committee to
inquire into the question, and in 1852, gathering strength, like William
of Orange, from each successive defeat, they brought forward a triple
set of resolutions, one for the abolition of the advertisement duty,
another levelled at the stamp, and the third for the repeal of the paper
duties. They carried the first, but lost the others. In 1854, Mr. Gibson
made a fresh motion concerning the laws affecting the press, and
received a promise that the subject should receive the early attention
of the House; and in 1855, Sir G.C. Lewis, then chancellor of the
exchequer, who had hitherto opposed the repeal of the duty, brought in a
bill for its abolition. After a struggle in both Houses the measure
passed, and received the royal assent on the 15th of June.

In following up this final struggle, we have passed over one important
period, the railway mania in 1845, which gave birth to no less than
twenty-nine newspapers, entirely occupied with railway intelligence, in
London, besides many others in the provinces. Only two of these have
survived, for the other two railway newspapers which still exist were
established before that memorable madness fell upon the nation. Of
these, Herapath's _Journal_ is the oldest and best, and is the oracle of
the Stock Exchange on railway matters. There are some slight symptoms of
the madness returning in the present year, as far at least as the
metropolis is concerned, and one new railway journal has just been
started in consequence. There are many amusing anecdotes told of
newspapers at this epoch, of which we will quote one. One of these
railway organs had published and paid for, from time to time, lengthy
and elaborate reports of the meetings of a certain company, supplied by
one of the staff of reporters. At length the editor told the reporter
that he thought it was high time for the company to give the paper an
advertisement, after all the favorable notices that bad been given to
the undertaking in question. The reporter acquiesced, and promised to
get the order for an advertisement, but putting it off from time to
time, the editor was induced to make inquiries for himself; whereupon he
had the extreme satisfaction of learning that no such company had ever
existed, and that the elaborate reports of meetings, speeches, etc., had
been entirely fabricated by his ingenious employé! An endeavor was made
last year to resuscitate one of these defunct daily journals, _The Iron
Times_, and Tommy Holt was the editor. It lingered for some weeks, and
then smashed utterly. The editor called the contributors together, and
told them that there was nothing to pay them with--nothing in fact
remained but the office furniture. 'Take that, my boys,' said he, 'and
divide it among you.' This was accordingly done, and one man marched off
with a table, another with a chair, a third with a desk, a fourth with
an inkstand, and so on!

When the stamp duty was abolished as a tax, it remained optional with
the publishers to have any number of their issue stamped they pleased
for transmission through the poet. The number of stamps thus issued in
the first six months after the repeal was 21,646,688, whereas the number
in the corresponding period of 1854, when the tax still existed, was
55,732,499. The number of stamps issued in the year 1854 to the
principal newspapers was as follows: _Times_, 15,975,739; _Morning
Advertiser_, 2,392,780; _Daily News_, 1,485,099; _Morning Herald_,
1,158,000; _Morning Chronicle_, 873,500; _The Globe_, 850,000; and _The
Morning Post_, 832,500. Of the weeklies, _The Illustrated London News_
was then the second, 5,627,866; _The News of the World_, a Liberal,
unillustrated journal, started in 1843, standing first, with 5,673,525
(the price of this paper is now reduced to twopence, and it is an
admirably conducted journal); Lloyd's _Weekly Newspaper_, 5,572,897;
_The Weekly Times_, price one penny, 3,902,169; Reynolds's _Weekly
Newspaper_, also a penny journal, which is best described by the epithet
'rabid,' 2,496,256; _The Weekly Dispatch_, price fivepence, an advanced
Liberal journal, which is emphatically the workingman's newspaper, and
originally started in 1801, 1,982,933; Bell's _Life in London_,
1,161,000. Of the provincial newspapers, _The Manchester Guardian_ heads
the list with 1,066,575, followed by _The Liverpool Mercury_, with
912,000, and _The Leeds Mercury_, with 735,000. Foremost among the
Scotch newspapers stands _The North British Advertiser_, with 808,002;
and the Irish paper with the largest circulation was _The Telegraph_,
with 959,000. Of the London literary papers the chief was _The
Examiner_, with 248,560. With one or two exceptions, the circulation of
these journals may be considered to have increased enormously. There are
now published in Great Britain 1,350 different newspapers, of which 240
are London papers, 20 being dailies, 776 English provincial papers, 143
Irish, 140 Scotch, 37 Welsh, and 14 are published in the British Isles.
Many of these enjoy but a limited circulation, as naturally follows from
the narrow limit they assign to themselves. Thus several trades have
their special organs, as for instance, the grocers, the bakers, and even
the hairdressers among others.

Before concluding this article it will be well to notice a few of the
leading journals which have not been mentioned. _The Daily Telegraph_
was originally started at twopence, in 1855, by Colonel Sleigh, but he,
getting behindhand with his printers to the amount of £1,000, sold them
the paper for another £1,000, and in their hands it has since remained.
The price was reduced to a penny, and, under the new management, its
circulation rapidly increased. _The Standard_ dealt a heavy blow at it
in 1858, by coming out suddenly one morning, without any previous
warning, as a double sheet. This first number was given away in the
streets, in vast quantities, thrown into omnibuses and cabs, pitched
into shops and public houses, and so on. The sale of _The Telegraph_ so
decreased that it was found necessary to enlarge it to the same size as
_The Standard_, when its circulation rose again immediately. It has now
the largest circulation in the world, more than 100,000 daily, a much
larger London circulation than _The Times_, though a smaller provincial
and foreign sale; and its clear profits are variously stated by persons
who profess to be well informed, at different sums, the least of which
is £20,000 a year. The chief causes of its success are its independent
and uncompromising tone, the great pains it takes to gain early
intelligence--it has frequently anticipated _The Times_ itself in
foreign news--and the vigorous and able social articles of Mr. George
Augustus Sala. _The Daily News_ was started as a Liberal and Reform
journal in 1846. An enormous sum of money was sunk in establishing it,
for it was not at first successful. Charles Dickens was the first
editor, but politics were not much in the line of the genial and
unrivalled novelist, and he was soon succeeded by John Forster and
Charles Wentworth Dilke, whose connection with the South Kensington
Museum and the great Exhibition has made him a knight, a C. B., and a
very important personage. _The Daily News_ is now one of the ablest and
most successful of London journals, and has had and still enjoys the
assistance of the best writers of the day in every department. The line
which this journal has always maintained toward America will forever
earn it the admiration and gratitude of the United States. Another firm
friend of the great republic is _The Morning Star_, the organ of Mr.
Bright and the Manchester school, started in 1856. In addition to its
political claims, it has a great hold upon the public as a family
newspaper, by the careful manner in which everything objectionable is
excluded from its columns. Its twin sister, born at the same time, is
called _The Evening Star_. _Bell's Life in London_, a weekly journal,
was originally brought out in 1820, and, although it has more than one
successful rival to contend against, it still maintains its preëminence
as the first English sporting paper. It is very carefully edited, each
department being placed under a separate editor, and is the great oracle
in all matters relating to sports and games. The history of one of the
ablest contributors to this journal, who wrote some most charming
articles on fly-fishing and other kindred topics, under the signature of
'Ephemera'--though he was said never to have thrown a fly in his
life--is a very sad one. His name was Fitzgerald, a man of good family
and connections, married to a lady with £1,200 a year, and living in a
good house at the West End. But the alcoholic demon had got hold of him.
He would disappear for days together, and then suddenly present himself
at the office of the paper with nothing on but a shirt and trousers. He
would then sit down and write an article, receive his pay, go away and
purchase decent clothes, return home, and live quietly perhaps for a
month, when he would--to use a prison phrase--break out again as before.
He was last seen, in the streets of London, in a state of complete
intoxication, being carried upon a stretcher by two policemen to the
police cell, where he died the same night.

At the head of the Sunday papers stands _The Observer_, founded in 1792.
Like _The Globe_, it is extremely well informed upon all political
matters, for very good reasons. It spares no expense in obtaining early
news, and is an especial favorite with the clubs. _The Era_ is the great
organ of the theatrical world, but joins to that _specialité_ the
general attributes of an ordinary weekly journal. It was established in
1837. _The Field_, which calls itself the country gentleman's newspaper,
is all that it professes to be, and a most admirable publication,
treating of games, sports, natural history, and rural matters generally.
It was started by Mr. Benjamin Webster, the accomplished actor manager,
in 1853. But to particularize the principal papers, even in a short
separate notice of a few lines, would far transgress the limits at our
disposal. All the professions are well supplied with journals devoted to
their interests, and it is impossible here to dwell upon them or those
which represent literature and the fine arts. With regard to religious
papers, their name is legion, and they would require a separate article
to be fairly and honestly considered. _Punch_, too, and his rivals, dead
and living, are in the same category, and must, however reluctantly, be
passed over. Two curiosities, however, of the press must be mentioned.
_Public Opinion_ was started about two years and a half ago. It
consisted of weekly extracts from the leading articles of English and
foreign journals, and scraps of news, and other odds and ends. It has
succeeded mainly from its cost of production being so slight, owing to
its paste-and-scissors character, and also because it freely opens its
columns to correspondents _de rebus omnibus_, who are willing to buy any
number of copies for the pleasure of seeing themselves in print. _The
Literary Times_, in addition to reviews of books, professed to criticize
the leading articles in the various papers, but, after an existence of
some six months or so, one Saturday morning _The Literary Times_ was
_non est inventus_.

In concluding this series of articles, which has run to a much greater
length than he originally intended, the writer is conscious of many
shortcomings and omissions, which he trusts will be pardoned and
overlooked when his principal object is borne in mind. That object has
been to give a general outline of the history of the press, and
especially of its struggles against 'the powers which be;' and, though
tempted now and again--he fears too often for the patience of his
readers--to wander away into particularities, he has always endeavored
to keep that object in view. Above all, he hopes he has at least been
successful in showing the truth of that sentiment which was first
publicly expressed as a toast at a Whig dinner, at the Crown and Anchor
tavern, in 1795: 'The liberty of the press--it is like the air we
breathe--if we have it not, we die!'




OUR MARTYRS.


  Lightly the river runs between
  Hanging cliffs and meadows green.

  Blackly the prison, looking down,
  Frowns at its shadow's answering frown.

  Shut from life in his life's fresh morn,
  Crouches a soldier, wounded and worn.

  Chained and starved in the dungeon grim,
  Day and night are alike to him;

  Save that the murmurous twilight air
  Stings his soul with a deeper despair.

  Day by day, as the taunting breeze
  Wafts him the breath of orange trees,

  He fancies in meadows far away
  The level lines of odorous hay;

  And sees the scythes of the mowers run
  In and out of the steady sun.

  Night by night, as the mounting moon
  Climbs from his eager gaze too soon,

  The gleams that across the gratings fall,
  Broken and bright, on the prison wall,

  Seem the tangles of Northern rills,
  Like threads of silver winding the hills.

  When, sinking into the western skies,
  The sun aslant on the window lies;

  And motes that hovered dusty and dim,
  Golden-winged through the glory swim:

  He drops his head on his fettered hands,
  And thinks of the fruitful Northern lands.

  Between his fingers' wasted lines,
  Tear after tear into sunlight shines,

  As, wandering in a dream, he treads
  The ripened honey of clover heads;

  Or watches the sea of yellow grain
  Break into waves on the windy plain;

  Or sees the orchard's grassy gloom
  Spotted with globes of rosy bloom.

  Through the shimmer of shadowy haze
  Redden the hills with their autumn blaze.

  The oxen stand in the loaded teams;
  The cider bubbles in amber streams;

  And child-like laughter and girlish song
  Float with the reaper's shout along.

  He stirs his hands, and the jealous chain
  Wakes him once more to his tyrant pain--

  To festered wounds, and to dungeon taint,
  And hunger's agony, fierce and faint.

  The sunset vision fades and flits,
  And alone in his dark'ning cell he sits:

  Alone with only the jailers grim,
  Hunger and Pain, that clutch at him;

  And, tight'ning his fetters, link by link,
  Drag him near to a ghastly brink;

  Where, in the blackness that yawns beneath,
  Stalks the skeleton form of Death.

  Starved, and tortured, and worn with strife;
  Robbed of the hopes of his fresh, young life;--

  Shall one pang of his martyr pain
  Cry to a sleepless God in vain?




ÆNONE:

A TALE OF SLAVE LIFE IN ROME.


CHAPTER X.

But though Ænone's sanguinely conceived plan for Cleotos's happiness had
so cruelly failed, it was not in her heart to yield to his passionate,
unreflecting demand, and send him away from her, even to a kinder home
than he would have found at the house of the captain Polidorus. It would
but increase his ill fortune, by enforcing still greater isolation from
every fount of human sympathy. Though the affection of the wily Leta had
been withdrawn from him, her own secret friendship yet remained, and
could be a protection to him as long as he was at her side; and in many
ways she could yet extend her care and favor to him, until such time as
an outward-bound vessel might be found in which to restore him to his
native country.

Whether there was any instinct at the bottom of her heart, telling her
that in the possibility of trying events to come his friendship might be
equally serviceable to her, and that, even in the mere distant
companionship of a slave with his mistress, she might feel a certain
protecting influence, she did not stop to ask. Neither did she inquire
whether she wished to retain him for his own benefit alone, and without
thought of any happiness or comfort to be derived by her from his
presence. Had she been accustomed closely to analyze her feelings, she
might have perceived, perhaps, that, in her growing isolation, it was no
unpleasant thing to look upon the features and listen to the tones which
carried her memory back to her early days of poverty, when, except for a
short interval, her life had been at its happiest. But had she known and
acknowledged all this, it would not have startled her, for she would
have felt that, in her heart, there was not the slightest accompanying
shade of disloyalty. Her nature was not one to admit of sudden transfers
of allegiance. It was rather one in which a real love would last
forever. When the first romantic liking for Cleotos had consumed itself,
from the ashes there had sprung no new passion for him, but merely the
flowers of earnest, true-hearted friendship. And it was her misfortune,
perhaps, that the real love for another which had succeeded would not in
turn consume itself, but would continue to flourish green and perennial,
though now seemingly fated to bask no longer in the sunshine of kindly
words and actions, but only to cower beneath the chill of harsh and
wanton neglect.

Cleotos therefore remained--at first passing weary days of bitter,
heartbreaking despondency. His lost liberty he had borne without much
complaint, for it was merely the fortune of war, and hundreds of his
countrymen were sharing the same fate with him. But to lose that love
upon which he had believed all the happiness of his life depended, was a
blow to which, for a time, no philosophy could reconcile him--the more
particularly as the manner in which that loss had been forced upon him
seemed, to his sensitive nature, to be marked by peculiar severity. To
have had her torn from him in any ordinary way--to part with her in some
quarrel in which either side might be partially right, and thenceforth
never to see her again--or to be obliged to yield her up to the superior
claims of an open, generous rivalry--any of these things would, in
itself, have been sufficient affliction. But it was far worse than all
this to be obliged to meet her at every turn, holding out her hand to
him in pleasant greeting, and uttering words of welcoming import; and
all with an unblushing appearance of friendly interest, as though his
relations with her had never been other than those of a fraternal
character, and as though, upon being allowed her mere friendship, there
could be nothing of which he had a right to complain.

At first, in the agony of his heart, he had no strength to rise above
the weight which crushed him, and to obey the counsels of his pride so
far as to play before her a part of equally assumed indifference. To her
smiling greetings he could return only looks of bitter despair or
passionate entreaty--vainly hoping that he might thereby arouse her
better nature, and bring her in repentance back to him. And at first
sight it seemed not impossible that such a thing might take place; for,
in the midst of all her change of conduct and wilful avoidance of
allusion to the past, she felt no dislike of him. It was merely her love
for him that she had suppressed, and in its place there still remained a
warm regard. If he could have been content with her friendship alone,
she would have granted it all, and would have rejoiced, for the sake of
olden times, to use her influence with others in aid of his upward
progress. Perhaps there were even times when, as she looked upon his
misery and thought of the days not so very far back, in which he had
been all in all to her, her heart may have been melted into something of
its former affection. But if so, it was only for a moment, nor did she
ever allow the weakness to be seen. Her path had been taken, and nothing
now could make her swerve from it. Before her enraptured fancy gleamed
the state and rank belonging to a patrician's wife; and as she wove her
toils with all the resources of her cunning, the prize seemed to
approach her nearer and nearer. Now having advanced so far, she must not
allow a momentary weakness to imperil all. And therefore unwaveringly
she daily met her former lover with the open smile of friendly greeting,
inviting confidence, mingled with the same indescribable glance,
forbidding any renewal of love.

And so days passed by, and Cleotos, arousing from his apathetic despair,
felt more strongly that, if the lapse of love into mere friendship is a
misfortune, the offer of friendship as a substitute for promised love is
a mockery and an insult: his soul rebelled at being made a passive party
to such a bargain; and he began himself to play the retaliatory part
which a wronged nature naturally suggests to itself. Like Leta, he
learned to hold out the limpid hand in careless greeting, or to mutter
meaningless and cold compliments, and, in any communication with her, to
assume all the appearances of indifferent acquaintanceship. At first,
indeed, it was with an aching heart struggling in his breast, and an
agony of wounded spirit tempting him to cast away all such studied
pretences, and to throw himself upon her mercy, and meanly beg for even
the slightest return of her former affection. But gradually, as he
perceived how vain would be such self-abasement, and how its display
would rather tend to add contempt to her indifference, his pride came to
rescue him from such a course; and he began more and more to tune the
temper of his mind to his actions, and to feel something of the same
coldness which he outwardly displayed.

Not but that for a while such a disposition was forced and unnatural;
and however steadily composed he felt, and strongly fortified in his
stubborn pride, a look or a word from her would have brought him again a
willing slave to her feet. But that look or word was not given. Perhaps,
in her eager struggle after the glittering prize which she had held out
before herself, she disdained the love which had once delighted her;
perhaps, actuated by a purer and less selfish motive, her friendship
for Cleotos forbade her, in mere wanton pride, to keep open the wound
which she had made. Whatever the reason, the withdrawal of the
fascinations which had once attracted him, gave his mind leisure and
opportunity to reason with itself in more quietude and composure than
could have been expected. And, as he more and more began to realize how
closely she was wrapped up in her ambition, to the exclusion of any
gentler feeling, and how, under the stimulant of her infatuated hopes,
she was allowing herself each day to act with less guarded resolution,
there were times when he found himself asking whether she had indeed
changed from what she had been, or whether, on the contrary, she had not
always, at heart, been the same as now, and his conception, of her true
character been at fault.

But, in proportion as the veil of error seemed lifted from his soul,
letting calm content once more shine in upon him, so, on the other hand,
did a night of despair slowly settle upon Ænone. By no reasoning could
she longer urge upon herself the belief that the neglect with which her
lord treated her could be traced to any inoffensive cause. Claims of
court--urgency of military duties--exactions of business might easily
account for transitory slights, but not for long-sustained periods of
indifference, unbroken by a single word of kindness. And as days passed
by and this indifference continued, until at times seeming ready to give
place to openly expressed dislike, and her ears became more and more
accustomed to words of hasty petulance, and Sergius grew still deeper
absorbed in the infatuation which possessed him, and less careful to
conceal its influences from her, and the Greek girl glided hither and
thither, ever less anxious, as she believed her triumph more nearly
assured, to maintain the humble guise which she had at first assumed,
Ænone felt that there had indeed come upon her a sorrow from which there
could be no escape. There were a hundred methods of relief from it which
hourly occurred to her agitated mind, but one after another was in turn
laid aside, as she felt that it would but aggravate the evil, or as the
opportunity to employ it was not given her. To make open complaint of
her wrongs and try to drive Leta from the house--to humble herself
before her, and thereby strive to move her pity--to reproach Sergius for
his neglect, and demand that, since he no longer loved her, he would
send her back to her native place, away from the hollow world of
Rome--to assume toward him, by a strong effort of will, a like
indifference--to watch until she could find some season when his better
nature appeared more impressible, and then to throw herself before him,
as she had once before done, and plead for a return of his love--these
and like expedients fruitlessly passed in review before her. All in turn
failed in promise of relief; and at times it seemed as though the only
course left to her was to lie down in her sorrow and die.

It was no uncommon thing then, as now, for the husband to neglect his
wife. All Rome rang with the frequent story of marital wrong. But those
were days in which the matron did not generally accept her desertion
with meekness. Brought up in a fevered, unscrupulous society, she had
her own retaliatory resources; and if no efforts were sufficient to
bring back the wandering affection, she could recompense herself
elsewhere for its loss, secure that her wrongs would be held as a
justification, and that her associates, equally aggrieved and avenged,
would applaud her course. But with Ænone, brought up in a provincial
town, under the shelter of her own native purity and innocence, no such
idea could find countenance. Even the thought which sometimes dimly
presented itself, that by some harmless coquetry she might perhaps
excite her husband's jealousy, and thereby chance to win back his love,
was one which she always stifled in its beginning as weak and unworthy.

But the recompenses of friendship were still left to her, and it was
surely doing no wrong to accept them. Therefore the more she realized
that her source of real happiness was becoming estranged from her, so
much the more did she feel naturally drawn toward the society of
Cleotos. To her, of course, he was not a mere slave, but rather a person
of equal birth with herself, who had been beaten down by the same fate
which had elevated her. And in conversation with him, it was easy to
carry her mind back to her early home, and for a little while forget her
present misery. And he, in turn, having been repulsed where he had
placed his highest hopes of happiness, and imbittered with the
disappointment, was not at all loth to transfer, in all innocence, his
devotion to one who extended such kindly condescension toward him. It
therefore happened that the two were naturally drawn much together, and,
for a time, without attracting invidious notice. Those were days in
which the association between master and slave was often of an intimate
character. To the lower class of slaves, indeed, there could be no
familiar approach. It was sufficient for them that at times they could
look upon the faces of their owners from a distance. But above these,
were converging circles, each rising in rank and responsibility, until
there were those who stood at their owners' right hands, more in the
position of friends and confidants than of menials. Of these was
Cleotos, whose winning face and graceful mien, joined to his natural
abilities and his valued accomplishments, would have insured him a
higher position than that of most captives, even if he had not been
assisted by the partiality of his mistress.

It was his duty to announce her guests, to trim the lamps at which she
read, to read to her when she felt indisposed to do so for herself; to
indite her correspondence--and generally to superintend all those little
elegancies and demands of social life which require grace or mental
ability in their execution. These offices naturally kept him near her
during much of each day--and when Ænone and he were alone, and no task
was before him requiring immediate completion, it was but to be expected
that a mingling of curiosity and friendly interest should lead her to
question him upon his past life, his home, his associates, even his
thoughts. And often it as naturally happened that, while he spoke, the
music of his voice lulled her into forgetfulness of all but the past,
and she would find herself unconsciously relaxing from the somewhat
frigid dignity which she felt called upon to assume, until her features
must have glowed with some expression of her former familiar kindness.
For she would be suddenly startled back into her forced propriety by a
strange and troubled look of puzzled thought flitting across his face--a
look which she could read and analyze better than he could; for it told
her that, without any real suspicion of the truth, he was wondering at
the likeness of that beaming face which bent over him to something which
he had seen elsewhere in the past.

There was one morning that he sat before her by a little table where he
had been writing a letter at her dictation. The letter was folded and
sealed, and then ensued one of those vacant intervals when each, having
no pressing task at hand, remains for a few moments listlessly thinking
what shall be done next. At that instant Leta passed through the
room--bowing low as she moved before her mistress, and throwing out
toward Cleotos from the corner of her dark eye one of those aggravating
looks in which friendly interest in him and pleasure at his sight were
mingled with a certain cruel warning against any renewal of past
memories. Cleotos retorted with a similar careless greeting, expressive
of simple friendliness, unconscious of any warmer emotion. But he had
not yet perfectly learned his part; for, as Leta passed out of the room,
the quiver of his lip showed how difficult had been the task of
mastering his forced smile even for that moment.

'Poor boy!' said, Ænone, as she witnessed the effort. 'You have not yet
learned not to love her.'

'Not yet, indeed, my mistress,' he responded. 'But it seems as though I
knew the task better than last week, and would know it still better a
week hence. What can I say? It is not to be thought that I should lapse
in a moment into real indifference, even though I may find out that she
is unworthy of love. There cannot but be an interval during which the
heart will struggle against the judgment, and lead to foolish longings
after what has passed.'

'True, indeed,' said Ænone.

'And still, in my heart, I sometimes almost think that I have never
loved her,' he continued in a reflective, dreamy tone; 'that I have been
under a spell--have been made the slave of certain outward fascinations,
which have fettered my judgment. Can it be that one will think he loves
and yet does not?'

'It is indeed hard to answer, I suppose.'

'It must be hard; for wherein, after all, is the difference between
being and thinking to be? But yet it seems as though there were times,
even long past and before this captivity, when, being in our own land,
and with nothing to disturb us or make us doubtful of the future, I
looked upon her with a strange kind of fear--wondering whether, though I
loved her with so strong a passion, it might not rather be the passion
of an unlasting, unsatisfying slavery of thought, than of a calm,
lifelong trustfulness. And now it seems to me that if I ever had this
feeling--for I cannot certainly tell whether I ever had or only now
imagine it--it seems to me as though it were an inner instinct warning
me against evil; for day by day I see more clearly that there has been
some veil over my soul, hiding it from a clear perception of what was
suitable for it.'

'And you begin to dislike her?' inquired Ænone.

'Not so,' he said. 'Nor do I know whether I ought to do so, if I could.
I believe now that she does not, and perhaps never has loved me, but I
must forgive her for all that. She may have tried to do so, and for a
time have thought that she did, and the true blame may all the while
have rested with me alone. With her strong, unbending temperament,
fearless of correction, and jealous of all control, how, indeed, could
she long cling to one of such a tranquil and yielding nature as myself?
That she loved me not, proves not that she could love no one; and though
she now seems so coldly heartless and so rashly heedless of her fame,
yet who knows what she might have been if fettered by the love of a
spirit more imperious than her own? Who can tell how the great good that
is within her might then have conquered the evil, and her soul have
spurned its present headstrong course, and gloriously aroused itself to
its sole great duty of love and innocent trustfulness?'

'These, indeed, are very far from being words of dislike,' said Ænone;
'and they only prove that you still love her, or you would not so
readily excuse her.'

'Neither have I denied that I love her yet,' he said. 'But it is not
with as blind an affection as before. Her touch, her words, her
smile--if given with real love--would still please me as of old; and yet
I should feel that there was something gone from me forever. Even if we
were restored to our own isle, with no enemy near or rival to interrupt
us, I could not but henceforth feel that destiny had not meant her for
me, so much would her stronger nature be ill assorted with my own. And
sometimes--'

'Well?'

'Sometimes--now that this thraldom of my spirit is passing off--there
comes back to me the memory of another face, a gentle, loving
face--which, if it were possible ever to see it again, I have too long
forgotten, but which, if I may not see it more, I should, for my own
sake, have forgotten long ago. But all this, honored mistress, can be of
no interest to you, and therefore it were foolish to mention it.'

'Nay, speak to me of it,' murmured Ænone; and, struggle as she would,
the telltale blood began to flow up into her face. 'Is there any woman
who does not care to listen to a love story?' she added, as though in
excuse for her curiosity.

'It is but a common love tale,' he said, 'and the more so that nothing
came of it. A few stolen interviews--a few promises exchanged--and then
a parting forever. That is all.'

'But where and when was this?'

'Six years ago, at Ostia. For, though a Greek, I have been in this land
before now. I was a sailor then, and in that port I met her. Met her and
loved her, and promised to return again. And for a while I meant to do
so; but on our passage back our ship was wrecked. I could not at once
find place upon another, and so took employment on the shore--none the
less, however, intending some day to come back and claim her. What shall
I say? It is the old story. The sea is wide, and I could interchange no
tidings with her. Ill success followed me, and I could not return to
Ostia. Then, little by little, as the months drifted past, and I
believed her lost to me, her image began to fade from my memory. And
then I saw Leta; and under the spell of that new charm, it seemed to me
as though the other one had lost all grasp upon my mind. Not altogether,
though, for even at the height of my later love, I have always borne
about me the last keepsake that she had given me.'

'Let me see it, what it is like,' said Ænone, faintly; and in obedience
to her command, and perhaps wondering a little that she should take such
interest in so simple a story, Cleotos drew from beneath his tunic a
thread with a coin dangling at the end.

The tears struggled into Ænone's eyes as she gazed upon the token. It
was a poor little silver coin of the time of the first Cæsars--one of
the few curiosities of her father's family--and which she had given to
her lover as the most precious thing belonging to her. She remembered
that when, in that last stroll by the shore, she had hung it about his
neck with her own hands, and had made him promise always to keep it, she
had received from him a similar token--a bright silver piece of
Vespasian, and had placed it near her heart, while murmuring similar
vows. He had kept his word, and she had not kept hers. For the moment,
she felt even guilty of bad faith, forgetting that when she afterward
gave her more mature affection to Sergius, it was only her duty to lay
aside all that even whispered of past promises.

'I could not bear to part with it,' he said; 'for it still spoke to me
of her friendship, if not of her love. And a superstitions thought came
into my mind that I might some day see her again, and that, though we
should not meet as lovers, yet she might, perhaps, be pleased to learn
that I had not entirely forgotten her. Would she not, noble lady, do you
think?'

'She does--that is, it surely should so move her,' said Ænone.

'So have I still worn it,' he continued. 'And somehow each day brings
back the recollection of her more faithfully to me. Whether it is
because this other absorbing love is passing from my heart, and leaving
to me greater freedom of thought--or whether it is that Ostia is now so
near to me that I daily hear of it and see its costumes in the streets,
and thus my recollection of the place is kindled anew--or whether it
is--'

'Is what?' said Ænone, encouragingly.

'I know not how to dare say it,' he stammered. 'It is a presumption,
indeed, but I mean it not for such. I would say that there is something
in your face, most noble mistress--a look--a flash of thought--a glance
of the eye--a something I know not what, which reminds me of her whom I
knew so many years ago. So that sometimes, were it not for the
difference of dress and all else around you, so much at variance with
what had been her state, I could almost forget the lapse of years, and
imagine that--Pardon, most noble lady! I meant not to offend!'

For she had arisen; and now, drawn to her full height, was looking down
upon him with all the coldness of patrician dignity that she could
summon to her aid. He, too, arose, and stood trembling opposite her. For
a moment they remained gazing upon each other; he aghast at the apparent
consequences of his remark, reproaching himself for having so
inconsiderately raised her anger by daring to compare, even in feature,
a lowly country girl with her, and despairingly asking himself what he
should do to restore himself to her favor--she more and more wrapping
herself in a disguise of outward pride and haughty bearing, lest by some
chance his unsuspecting eyes might detect the truth, and yet inwardly
bleeding at the heart to think that she could not reveal herself to him
and promise him her friendship, in full confidence that his love for her
would not return and bring new distress upon them. Then suddenly, while
each stood wondering what course to take, a light step was heard in the
outer hall, and the poet Emilius entered.


CHAPTER XI.

At the interruption, Ænone hastily reseated herself; while Cleotos, in
obedience to a quick and significant motion of her finger, remained in
the room, and, resuming his position at the table, prepared to continue
his writing. The poet Emilius could not, of course, fail to notice this
somewhat confused alteration of posture, but no suspicion of having
intruded upon an embarrassing scene crossed his mind. He merely saw a
proudly erect mistress and a cowering slave; and it was no unusual thing
to interrupt a Roman lady in the act of giving even corporeal correction
to her attendant, nor did the stranger's entrance always cause the
punishment to cease.

'Has the caitiff been insolent?' he exclaimed, in gallant tone, as he
approached and seated himself before her. 'Has he dared to look too
rebelliously upon so charming a mistress? If so, permit that I may
chastise him for you. It is not fit that such fair hands should be
obliged to wield the rod.'

'Nay, it is nothing,' she said. 'Nothing, indeed, needing much reproof;
and it is all past now. And wherefore have we lately seen so little of
you?'

'Commands of court--the claims of Parnassus--all these, fair lady, have
withheld me from heretofore giving to beauty its proper meed of
admiration and worship. To speak more plainly, I have undertaken, by
order of our emperor, the not ungrateful task of weaving a few poetical
sentiments to be recited at the opening of our new amphitheatre. And in
order that the results of my labor might not lessen my already acquired
fame, I judged it most prudent to seclude myself for the past few days
from the gayeties of the world, and give myself up to study and
meditation. Though, after all, I could not deny, if closely questioned,
that my seclusion was but little productive of results; for, upon being
tempted out one evening, sorely against my judgment, to a feast at the
house of the comedian Bassus, the true poetic inspiration overtook me
at the end of my third goblet, and, calling for parchment, I there
accomplished, in one short hour, the greater portion of my task.'

'Then, I presume that your ode, unlike your other works, will be of a
cheerful and lively character, more especially as it is written for such
a festive occasion.'

'Scarcely, perhaps, what the world would call altogether lively, though
here and there a thread of playful thought may gleam upon the more sober
texture of the basis. I have rather judged it proper that, for the due
celebration of an event of such wondrous magnificence, I should give
utterance to deeper and more lasting sentiments, so as to fit the minds
of the spectators for a higher comprehension of its true significance.
But, if you wish, I will read aloud a few of my thoughts; and be assured
that so far no eye has seen the scroll, not even the august eye of the
emperor Titus himself.'

Ænone inclined her head in assent, and he drew from the breast of his
tunic a small roll of parchment, carefully wrapped in a covering of
embroidered silk.

'I commence, of course, by an address to the emperor, whom I call the
most illustrious of all the Cæsars, and liken unto Jove. I then
congratulate the spectators not only upon living in his time, but also
upon being there to bask in the effulgence of his majesty; his
countenance being the sight most to be desired, and the games and
combats being merely accessory thereto. After which, I speak to the
gladiators and captives; and prove to them how grateful they should be
to the gods for allowing them the privilege of dying in such an august
presence.'

'Is it such a privilege, do you think?' inquired Ænone.

'Perhaps not a privilege, but certainly no great hardship. The trained
gladiators surely cannot complain, for they have voluntarily assumed the
risks; and as for the captives, the most of them will some day die a
violent death of some kind or another, and, therefore, why not now,
attended by the decent observances of the games and the applause of all
the Roman people? But to proceed. From thence I speak of death--its
pleasures and its recompenses; showing that, if there be a future life,
the gods have done wisely to withhold its exact nature from us, and
that, whatever uncertainties may exist in other respects, nothing can be
more true than that those who now die in the arena will, in another
world, find their highest felicity in the privilege of looking up from a
distance at the loved emperor in whose honor they perished, and
beholding him enjoying, through adoption, the society of the inhabitants
of Olympus. I then--but it is useless to detail all the argument. I will
read the poem itself; or rather, if you so permit, I will let this
scribe of yours read it for me. Perhaps, upon hearing it from another's
mouth, I may be led to make still further corrections.'

Handing the manuscript with all care to Cleotos, the poet leaned back
with eyes closed in delicious revery, now and then arousing himself to
correct some defective emphasis or unsatisfactory intonation, the
tolerance of which, he imagined, would mar the proper effect of the
production, or, with persistent desire for praise, momentarily calling
closer attention to such passages as appeared to him deserving of
especial commendation--and generally omitting no opportunity of exacting
that entire admiration to which he believed his genius entitled him.
Apart from a somewhat extravagant display of high-strained metaphor, the
poem had merit, being bold in scope, sonorous and well rounded in tone,
and here and there gracefully decked with original and pleasing
thoughts. Throughout the whole, however, the singular propensity of the
author for indulgence in morbid and gloomy reflection found its usual
development, while every line was laden with lofty maxims of moral
philosophy, mingled with urgent incentives to the adoption of a virtuous
career;--all, in themselves, both unexceptionable and praiseworthy, but,
nevertheless, having a strange sound in the ears of those who recognized
them as the utterances of one whose conversation was always flippant and
puerile, and whose daily life, in the enormity and uninterrupted
persistency of its profligacy, rendered him the acknowledged leader of
all that was most disreputable and contaminating in Roman society.

At length, the reading having been fully completed, and the listener's
powers of flattery exhausted, the author carefully rewrapped his poem in
its silken cover and carried it away, to read it, in turn, to other
noble ladies, with the same transparent pretence of giving exclusive
hearing of it to each. For a few moments Ænone remained in thoughtful
silence, with her head bowed upon her hand; recalling the scattered
fragments of the sonorous verses, and wondering why it was that, when
each line had seemed so perfect in itself, and every thought so pure and
noble in its purport and conception, the whole should have left upon her
mind such an undefinable impress of dissatisfaction.

Cleotos, with unobtrusive scrutiny, seemed to read her thoughts, for, at
the first intimation of her perplexity, he said:

'It is because the author of those verses has not sincerely felt the
full meaning of what he has there written. For, with whatsoever display
of ingenious and artistic skill fair sounding maxims of morality may be
expressed, yet, if they come not from the heart, their utterance must
seem hollow and unreal. I do not know this author--how or where he
lives. It may be that in his daily life he is outwardly all that could
be desired. But I know this--that he has written about virtue and death,
not because he loves the one and fears not the other, but simply
because, by a display of well-toned periods, he may more surely hope to
gain the applause of the arena and the smiles of the court.'

'But why should not these sentiments, though called into being by
personal ambition alone, give equal pleasure as if springing directly
from the heart? Are they not, after all, as true?'

'Nay, honored mistress, neither are they true. This is again where they
fail to please; for in your soul there is an instinct, though you may
not know of it, which forbids that such cold and unsatisfactory
reasoning should bring you comfort. He speaks of death: is it cheering
to be told that, though the gods have appointed death to every person,
they have given it, not as a veiled mercy, but rather as a dreadful
fate--that there is no certainty about our future condition, but that,
if we are destined to live again, it may be with the same evils
encompassing us which bind us now--and that the slave may then still be
a slave, destined forever to look up to and worship the high and mighty
ones who trampled on him here?'

'That is, in truth, no comfort,' said Ænone. And she bowed her head upon
her hands, and sadly thought how worthless to her would be the gift of
eternal life, if her present sorrows were to follow her. 'But what can
we do? If it were possible to discover and believe in some other fate,
telling us that death, instead of being a dreaded pang, is a boon and
relief to the sick and weary and oppressed--'

'There is a book,' said Cleotos--and for a moment he hesitated, as
though fearful of proceeding--'there is a book which I have read, and
which tells us all this. It says that death is not merely a fate, but is
a source of blessing; since it leads to a world where the sufferings of
this life shall be recompensed with abundant joy, not to the rich
merely, but more especially to the poor and lowly.'

'Where is that book?' cried Ænone, with sudden energy, as the wondrous
depth and power of the sentiment flashed upon her. 'Where can I see and
read it? He who can talk like that, must surely have said still more?'

'I have not that book,' answered Cleotos. 'I have only this little copy
of a small portion of it;' and he hesitatingly drew from beneath his
tunic a single small leaf of discolored parchment, closely filled with
Greek characters. 'But being at Corinth, a year ago, I was permitted to
see the book itself, and to hear portions of it read. It was written to
a Christian church there, by one Paul, a leader of that sect.'

At the word 'Christian' the first impulse of Ænone was to shrink back,
not knowing but that even the presence of one who had ever come into
contact with any of that despised sect might be injurious to her. For at
once she began to recall many of the tales which she had heard to its
discredit--its members hiding as outcasts in the caves and dens of the
earth--their repeated insults to the gods--their proud and unaccountable
worship of a malefactor--their sacrifice of infants--and other
exaggerations and calumnies, begotten in malice or ignorance, and thence
widely spread, making it not hard to believe that the only fate fit for
those to whom they related was a life of persecution and a cruel death
in the arena.

But only for a moment did this instinctive horror control her. The
single doctrine which she had just heard advanced already began to bear
its fruits. It seemed, indeed, not unlikely that one who could write
such truths, and those, his disciples, who could so gratefully treasure
them up, might not, after all, be wantonly wicked, but, at the worst,
might be merely victims of mistaken zeal. And then, in turn, she thought
of much that had been related to her in their favor. During her life at
Rome, indeed, she had heard no mention of the Christian sect, unless
accompanied with sneers or contempt. But she remembered how that in
Ostia, while she was yet a very young girl, she had heard it sometimes
whispered that the Christians were kind and loving to all the world, and
free from many sins in which other men openly exulted, and that, through
their great love for their founder, they organized charities which had
never before been even thought of--and how that once, when she had been
very sick, a strange woman had nursed her into health and refused all
payment for it, alleging that her religion bade her give herself up to
such tasks--and how that she had once seen pass by, one who was pointed
out to her as a holy man among the sect--whose name indeed she could not
remember, but whose mild and serene expression yet lived in her
recollection. It was hardly possible that one whose face was so radiant
with universal love and benevolence as to impress itself thus lastingly
upon the heart of a young child could have been very wicked. Nor did it
seem likely that Cleotos, whose greatest weakness was that his life had
been almost too innocent and trusting, could speak well of a sect which
worthily ought to be persecuted. And then again she thought upon that
little book to the sect at Corinth, and she bade Cleotos to read a verse
or two. He did so. At another time she might have listened as she had
listened to the moral maxims of the poet Emilius--judging well of it,
perhaps, for the beauty of its words, but, beyond that, regarding it
simply as some new and more original expression of long-accepted
philosophy. But now, in her trouble, she felt that there was something
in it beyond all known philosophy--a new development of faith, appealing
to the heart, and speaking comfort to all who were in misery. It surely
could not be that such words were the emanations of an evil influence.

'Art thou--answer me, Cleotos--art thou one of the sect of Christians?'
she inquired.

'How can I tell?' he responded. 'I have so often asked that question of
my heart, and yet have not been able to understand what it has said to
me. There are times when I think that I must pray only to the gods of
Olympus, and that all I have heard or read about other gods must be
untrue. And again, when I read this little parchment of mine, and
remember other like things that have been told to me, and see how they
all speak of death as a relief to the sorrowing, and of another life in
which the down trodden and the captive shall be recompensed for what
they have suffered here, and know that I am one of those who need such
recompense--then I think that perhaps the only true God is the God of
the Christians. But I can learn so little about it all, that I cannot,
from my own judgment, determine which must be right.'

'Perhaps,' thoughtfully responded Ænone, 'it may be that if you tell me
all you know about it, I may be able to assist your conclusions. Who
knows what light I myself need, or how much of good we may borrow from
this new religion? It cannot be wrong to examine for one's self, and the
gods will not be angry if we gain good doctrine even from wrong sources,
so long as it may make us better. To-morrow, therefore, let us begin.'

Upon the morrow, therefore, and for many succeeding days, the mistress
and the slave spent stolen moments in groping after the truth of that
faith which makes the high and the low equal. It was a blind search, for
neither of them had any definite comprehension of the history and
doctrine upon which the new religion had been founded. Cleotos had
enjoyed the best opportunities of acquainting himself with it, having
naturally, in his wanderings about the East, and in his contact with the
poor and enslaved of many lands, heard much respecting the Christian
churches and their belief; but having had no instructor, a great portion
of what he had thus received came to him in but distorted and puzzling
array. And Ænone could not comprehend how, when the gods ruled Rome, and
Rome had scattered the Jews, one whom the Jews had had the power to slay
could be greater than all. But between them, for their study, lay the
leaf of parchment, closely covered with writing, beside which the
proudest and choicest philosophy of Rome seemed mockery; and though they
could not understand its full meaning, they knew that it spoke such good
words that, at the least, though it may have come from erring men, it
was no less worthy to have come from a God. Whatever the real nature of
the faith itself, here was certainly a proof that among its attributes
were mercy and peace and brotherly love toward all.

What might have been the consequences if Ænone had been free to pursue
the investigation as far as she wished--to send for other books to aid
her--to consult more learned teachers, who, though perhaps hiding in
secret shelter, were yet attainable with proper search, cannot be known.
It is not improbable that, in the end, one more might have been added to
the list of those few Roman women of high degree who even then gave up
all their rank and state in order to share the persecutions of the
Nazarenes. But it was otherwise ordered. Already indications, each
slight in itself, but altogether of important bearing, began to present
themselves before her, warning her that jealous eyes were watching her,
and that, if she would avoid the consequences of misconstruction, she
must bring her feeble investigations to a close.

Until now, Leta, in her struggle to alienate the husband from the wife,
had been actuated simply by the exigencies of her ambitious policy.
Bearing in her heart no especial hatred toward her mistress, she would
willingly have spared her, had not the circumstances of the case seemed
to require the ruin of the one preliminary to the exaltation of the
other. But now, other incentives to her efforts were added. First in her
mind came jealousy of Cleotos; for though she had cast him off, and bade
him stifle the yearnings of his heart, and, by the cool exercise of
intellect and craft alone, seek a better fortune for himself, it was
hardly natural that she should feel pleased to have him so soon appear
to take her at her word. She would have better liked to see him display
more prolonged sorrow for her loss. Then came jealousy of Ænone, who had
apparently been able to console him so early. And mingled with all this,
there began to press upon her a startling thought--one which she at
first contemned as unlikely and absurd--but which, though continually
driven away, so obstinately returned and commended itself to her
attention with newer plausibility, that at last she began to give bitter
and anxious heed to it. What if this constant communication between
Ænone and Cleotos were to result in a mutual love? It was no uncommon
thing in those days for the high-born lady to cast her eyes upon the
slave. How mortifying to herself, then, if, while she had been exerting
all her powers of fascination, taxing the utmost resources of her
intellect, and making of her whole existence one labored study for the
purpose of gaining an undue influence over the lord, Cleotos, without
art or disguise or apparent effort, or any advantage other than that
afforded by his simple-hearted, trusting nature, should have quietly won
from the other side of the house a victory of almost equal importance?
And further than this--what if the lord were to perish in some brawl or
by the hired assassin of a rival house; and Ænone, released from her
thraldom, and despising conventional scruples--as again was not uncommon
among the Roman ladies of that day--were to exalt her favorite with
legal honors, and thus make herself, Leta, his slave? This, to be sure,
was an improbable chance; but a mind as active as her own did not
disdain to foresee and provide against all contingencies.

Then, in addition to everything else, she became absorbed in the one
overwhelming and bitter reflection, that after all her sacrifice and
labor, the anticipated success might be escaping her. It is true that,
thanks to her efforts, the distance between Sergius and Ænone had
widened, until it seemed that there could never be a perfect reunion;
but all this, if the state of partial neglect which had existed in the
beginning could be relied upon as an indication, was a consequence which
might easily, in time, have come of itself. It is true that Sergius had
yielded himself a willing victim to the unlawful fascinations thrown
around him; but yet Leta could not avoid seeing that he regarded her not
with the deep, earnest love which she had hoped to inspire, but rather
with the trifling carelessness of one giving himself up to the plaything
of the hour. Not having, from the very first, been chary of the sidelong
glance and the winning smile, and whatever grace of style or manner
could tempt him to pursuit, as an illusive appearance of success seemed
to beckon her onward, her heart at times grew desperate with the
apprehension that all had been in vain. For Sergius, content that the
wife whom he neglected did not disturb his repose with idle complaints,
had no thought of inflicting any deeper injury upon her, being well
satisfied to have her remain and confer honor upon him by the grace with
which she maintained the dignity of his house. And though well pleased
to sun himself in Leta's smile, there never came to him the thought that
the slave could be worthy of any exaltation, or that her highest
ambition could prompt her to desire more than a continuance of the
companionship with which he honored her. All this Leta began to dimly
see; and there were times when, strive to hide it from her heart as she
would, it seemed as though he might be even growing weary of her.

Thus tormented with doubt and jealousy and the constantly increasing
suspicion of baffled ambition, how was she to act? To accept her
situation as a decree of fate, to fawn upon the mistress like a patient
slave, and, if the lord were to tire of her in the end and give himself
up to other captivations, to submit unmurmuringly to the unavoidable
necessity? All this some might consent to do; but surely not one like
herself, gifted with indomitable will, and stung to desperation with the
sense of great and irreparable sacrifices. To her there could be but one
course. She must abandon her slow and cautious policy, and seek the
earliest opportunity to urge the matter to its crisis. If, by sparing no
watchfulness or ingenuity, or by the exercise of bold and vigorous
manoeuvring, she could produce a quarrel and final separation between
Sergius and his wife, it might not be impossible for her to impress upon
him how much she was necessary to his happiness, and thereby elevate
herself into the vacant place. And if unsuccessful, at the least she
would be but sharing a ruin which would fall like an avalanche upon all
alike.




THE FIRST CHRISTIAN EMPEROR.


The last great imperial persecution of the Christians under Diocletian
and Galerius, which was aimed at the entire uprooting of the new
religion, ended with the edict of toleration of 311 and the tragical
ruin of the persecutors. Galerius died soon after of a disgusting and
terrible disease (_morbus pedicularis_), described with great minuteness
by Eusebius and Lactantius. 'His body,' says Gibbon, 'swelled by an
intemperate course of life to an unwieldy corpulence, was covered with
ulcers and devoured by innumerable swarms of those insects which have
given their name to a most loathsome disease.' Diocletian had withdrawn
from the throne in 305, and in 313 put an end to his imbittered life by
suicide. In his retirement he found more pleasure in raising cabbage
than he had found in ruling the empire; a confession we may readily
believe. (President Lincoln, of the United States, during the dark days
of the civil war, in December, 1862, declared that he would gladly
exchange his position with any common soldier in the tented field.)
Maximin, who kept up the persecution in the East, even after the
toleration edict, as long as he could, died likewise a violent death by
poison, in 313. In this tragical end of their last three imperial
persecutors the Christians saw a palpable judgment of God. The edict of
toleration was an involuntary and irresistible concession of the
incurable impotence of heathenism and the indestructible power of
Christianity. It left but a step to the downfall of the one and the
supremacy of the other in the empire of the Cæsars.

This great epoch is marked by the reign of Constantine I. He understood
the signs of the time, and acted accordingly. He was the man for the
times, as the times were prepared for him by that Providence which
controls both and fits them for each other. He placed himself at the
head of true progress, while his nephew, Julian the Apostate, opposed
it, and was left behind. He was the chief instrument for raising the
church from the low estate of oppression and persecution to
well-deserved honor and power. For this service a thankful posterity has
given him the surname of the Great, to which he was entitled, though not
by his moral character, yet doubtless by his military and administrative
ability, his judicious policy, his appreciation and protection of
Christianity, and the far-reaching consequences of his reign. His
greatness was not indeed of the first, but of the second order, and is
to be measured more by what he _did_ than by what he _was_. To the Greek
Church, which honors him even as a canonized saint, he has the same
significance as Charlemagne to the Latin.

Constantine, the first Christian Cæsar, the founder of Constantinople
and the Byzantine empire, and one of the most gifted, energetic, and
successful of the Roman emperors, was the first representative of the
imposing idea of a Christian theocracy, or of that system of policy
which assumes all subjects to be Christians, connects civil and
religious rights, and regards church and state as the two arms of one
and the same divine government on earth. This was more fully developed
by his successors, it animated the whole Middle Age, and is yet working
under various forms in these latest times; though it has never been
fully realized, whether in the Byzantine, the German, or the Russian
empire, the Roman church-state, the Calvinistic republic of Geneva, or
the early Puritanic colonies of New England. At the same time, however,
Constantine stands also as the type of an undiscriminating and harmful
conjunction of Christianity with politics, of the holy symbol of peace
with the horrors of war, of the spiritual interests of the kingdom of
heaven with the earthly interests of the state.

In judging of this remarkable man and his reign, we must by all means
keep to the great historical principle, that all representative
characters act consciously or unconsciously as the free and responsible
organs of the spirit of their age, which moulds them first before they
can mould it in turn, and that the spirit of the age itself, whether
good or bad or mixed, is but an instrument in the hands of Divine
Providence, which rules and overrules all the actions and motives of
men.

Through a history of three centuries Christianity had already overcome
the world, and thus rendered such an outward revolution, as has attached
itself to the name of this prince, both possible and unavoidable. It
were extremely superficial to refer so thorough and momentous a change
to the personal motives of an individual, be they motives of policy, of
piety, or of superstition. But unquestionably every age produces and
shapes its own organs, as its own purposes require. So in the case of
Constantine. He was distinguished by that genuine political wisdom,
which, putting itself at the head of the age, clearly saw that idolatry
had outlived itself in the Roman empire, and that Christianity alone
could breathe new vigor into it and furnish its moral support.
Especially on the point of the external catholic unity, his monarchical
politics accorded with the hierarchical episcopacy of the church. Hence
from the year 313 he placed himself in close connection with the
bishops, made peace and harmony his first object in the Donatist and
Arian controversies, and gave the predicate 'catholic' to the church in
all official documents. And as his predecessors were supreme pontiffs of
the heathen religion of the empire, so he desired to be looked upon as a
sort of bishop, as universal bishop of the eternal affairs of the
church. All this by no means from mere self-interest, but for the good
of the empire, which, now shaken to its foundations and threatened by
barbarians on every side, could only by some new bond of unity be
consolidated and upheld until at least the seeds of Christianity and
civilization should be planted among the barbarians themselves, the
representatives of the future. His personal policy thus coincided with
the interests of the state. Christianity appeared to him, as it proved
in fact, the only efficient power for a political reformation of the
empire, from which the ancient spirit of Rome was fast departing, while
internal civil and religious dissensions and the outward pressure of the
barbarians threatened a gradual dissolution of society.

But with the political he united also a religious motive, not clear and
deep, indeed, yet honest, and strongly infused with the superstitious
disposition to judge of a religion by its outward success, and to
ascribe a magical virtue to signs and ceremonies. His whole family was
swayed by religious sentiment, which manifested itself in very different
forms, in the devout pilgrimages of his Helena, the fanatical Arianism
of Constantia and Constantius, and the fanatical paganism of Julian.
Constantine adopted Christianity first as a superstition, and put it by
the side of his heathen superstition, till finally in his conviction the
Christian vanquished the pagan, though without itself developing into a
pure and enlightened faith.

At first Constantine, like his father, in the spirit of the Neo-Platonic
syncretism of dying heathendom, reverenced all the gods as mysterious
powers; especially Apollo, the god of the sun, to whom in the year 308
he presented munificent gifts. Nay, so late as the year 321 he enjoined
regular consultation of the soothsayers in public misfortunes, according
to ancient heathen usage; even later, he placed his new residence,
Byzantium, under the protection of the God of the Martyrs and the
heathen goddess of Fortune; and down to the end of his life he retained
the title and the dignity of a _Pontifex Maximus_, or high priest of the
heathen hierarchy. His coins bore on the one side the letters of the
name of Christ, on the other the figure of the sun-god, and the
inscription _Sol invictus_. Of course these inconsistencies may be
referred also to policy and accommodation to the toleration edict of
313. Nor is it difficult to adduce parallels of persons who in passing
from Judaism to Christianity, or from Romanism to Protestantism, have
honestly so wavered between their old and their new position, that they
might be claimed by both. With his every victory over his pagan rivals,
Galerius, Maxentius, and Licinius, his personal leaning to Christianity
and his confidence in the magic power of the sign of the cross
increased; yet he did not formally renounce heathenism, and did not
receive baptism until, in 337, he was laid upon the bed of death.

He had an imposing and winning person, and was compared by flatterers
with Apollo. He was tall, broad shouldered, handsome, and of a
remarkably vigorous and healthy constitution, but given to excessive
vanity in his dress and outward demeanor, always wearing an oriental
diadem, a helmet studded with jewels, and a purple mantle of silk richly
embroidered with pearls and flowers worked in gold. His mind was not
highly cultivated, but naturally clear, strong, and shrewd, and seldom
thrown off its guard. He is said to have combined a cynical contempt of
mankind with an inordinate love of praise. He possessed a good knowledge
of human nature and administrative energy and tact.

His moral character was not without noble traits, among which a chastity
rare for the time, and a liberality and beneficence bordering on
wastefulness were prominent. Many of his laws and regulations breathed
the spirit of Christian justice and humanity, promoted the elevation of
the female sex, improved the condition of slaves and of unfortunates,
and gave free play to the efficiency of the church throughout the whole
empire. Altogether he was one of the best, the most fortunate, and the
most influential of the Roman emperors, Christian and pagan.

Yet he had great faults. He was far from being so pure and so venerable
as Eusebius, blinded by his favor to the church, depicts him, in his
bombastic and almost dishonestly eulogistic biography, with the evident
intention of setting him up as a model for all future Christian princes.
It must, with all regret, be conceded, that his progress in the
knowledge of Christianity was not a progress in the practice of its
virtues. His love of display and his prodigality, his suspiciousness and
his despotism, increased with his power.

The very brightest period of his reign is stained with gross crimes,
which even the spirit of the age and the policy of an absolute monarch
cannot excuse. After having reached, upon the bloody path of war, the
goal of his ambition, the sole possession of the empire, yea, in the
very year in which he summoned the great council of Nicæa, he ordered
the execution of his conquered rival and brother-in-law, Licinius, in
breach of a solemn promise of mercy (324). Not satisfied with this, he
caused soon afterward, from political suspicion, the death of the young
Licinius, his nephew, a boy of hardly eleven years. But the worst of all
is the murder of his eldest son, Crispus, in 326, who had incurred
suspicion of political conspiracy, and of adulterous and incestuous
purposes toward his stepmother Fausta, but is generally regarded as
innocent. This domestic and political tragedy emerged from a vortex of
mutual suspicion and rivalry, and calls to mind the conduct of Philip
II. toward Don Carlos, of Peter the Great toward his son Alexis, and of
Soliman the Great toward his son Mustapha. Later authors assert, though
gratuitously, that the emperor, like David, bitterly repented of this
sin. He has been frequently charged besides, though it would seem
altogether unjustly, with the death of his second wife Fausta (326?),
who, after twenty years of happy wedlock, is said to have been convicted
of slandering her stepson Crispus, and of adultery with a slave or one
of the imperial guards, and then to have been suffocated in the vapor of
an overheated bath. But the accounts of the cause and manner of her
death are so late and discordant as to make Constantine's part in it at
least very doubtful.

At all events Christianity did not produce in Constantine a thorough
moral transformation. He was concerned more to advance the outward
social position of the Christian religion, than to further its inward
mission. He was praised and censured in turn by the Christians and
pagans, the orthodox and the Arians, as they successively experienced
his favor or dislike. He bears some resemblance to Peter the Great, both
in his public acts and his private character, by combining great virtues
and merits with monstrous crimes, and he probably died with the same
consolation as Peter, whose last words were: 'I trust that in respect of
the good I have striven to do my people (the church), God will pardon my
sins.' It is quite characteristic of his piety that he turned the sacred
nails of the Saviour's cross, which Helena brought from Jerusalem, the
one into the bit of his war horse, the other into an ornament of his
helmet. Not a decided, pure, and consistent character, he stands on the
line of transition between two ages and two religions; and his life
bears plain marks of both. When at last on his deathbed he submitted to
baptism, with the remark, 'Now let us cast away all _duplicity_,' he
honestly admitted the conflict of two antagonistic principles which
swayed his private character and public life.

From these general remarks we turn to the leading features of
Constantine's life and reign, so far as they bear upon the history of
the church. We shall consider in order his youth and training, the
vision of the cross, the edict of toleration, his legislation in favor
of Christianity, his baptism and death.

Constantine, son of the co-emperor Constantius Chlorus, who reigned over
Gaul, Spain, and Britain till his death in 306, was born probably in the
year 272, either in Britain or at Naissus (now called Nissa), a town of
Dardania, in Illyricum. His mother was Helena, daughter of an innkeeper,
the first wife of Constantius, afterward divorced, when Constantius, for
political reasons, married a daughter of Maximian. She is described by
Christian writers as a discreet and devout woman, and has been honored
with a place in the catalogue of saints. Her name is identified with the
discovery of the cross and the pious superstitions of the holy places.
She lived to a very advanced age, and died in the year 326 or 327, in or
near the city of Rome. Rising by her beauty and good fortune from
obscurity to the splendor of the court, then meeting the fate of
Josephine, but restored to imperial dignity by her son, and ending as a
saint of the Catholic church: Helena would form an interesting subject
for a historical novel illustrating the leading events of the Nicene age
and the triumph of Christianity in the Roman empire.

Constantine first distinguished himself in the service of Diocletian in
the Egyptian and Persian wars; went afterward to Gaul and Britain, and
in the Prætorium at York was proclaimed emperor by his dying father and
by the Roman troops. His father before him held a favorable opinion of
the Christians as peaceable and honorable citizens, and protected them
in the West during the Diocletian persecution in the East. This
respectful, tolerant regard descended to Constantine, and the good
effects of it, compared with the evil results of the opposite course of
his antagonist Galerius, could but encourage him to pursue it. He
reasoned, as Eusebius reports from his own mouth, in the following
manner: 'My father revered the Christian God, and uniformly prospered,
while the emperors who worshipped the heathen gods, died a miserable
death; therefore, that I may enjoy a happy life and reign, I will
imitate the example of my father and join myself to the cause of the
Christians, who are growing daily, while the heathen are diminishing.'
This low utilitarian consideration weighed heavily in the mind of an
ambitious captain, who looked forward to the highest seat of power
within the gift of his age. Whether his mother, whom he always revered,
and who made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in her eightieth year (A. D.
325), planted the germ of the Christian faith in her son, as Theodoret
supposes, or herself became a Christian through his influence, as
Eusebius asserts, must remain undecided. According to the heathen
Zosimus, whose statement is unquestionably false and malicious, an
Egyptian, who came out of Spain (probably the bishop Hosius of Cordova,
a native of Egypt, is intended), persuaded him, after the murder of
Crispus (which did not occur before 326), that by converting to
Christianity he might obtain forgiveness of his sins.

The first public evidence of a positive leaning toward the Christian
religion he gave in his contest with the pagan Maxentius, who had
usurped the government of Italy and Africa, and is universally
represented as a cruel, dissolute tyrant, hated by heathens and
Christians alike. Called by the Roman people to their aid, Constantine
marched from Gaul across the Alps with an army of ninety-eight thousand
soldiers of every nationality, and defeated Maxentius in three battles;
the last in October, 312, at the Milvian bridge, near Rome, where
Maxentius found a disgraceful death in the waters of the Tiber.

Here belongs the familiar story of the miraculous cross. The precise day
and place cannot be fixed, but the event must have occurred shortly
before the final victory over Maxentius in the neighborhood of Rome. As
this vision is one of the most noted miracles in church history, and has
a representative significance, it deserves a closer examination. It
marks for us on the one hand the victory of Christianity over paganism
in the Roman empire, and on the other the ominous admixture of foreign,
political, and military interests with it. We need not be surprised that
in the Nicene age so great a revolution and transition should have been
clothed with a supernatural character.

The occurrence is variously described, and is not without serious
difficulties. Lactantius, the earliest witness, some three years after
the battle, speaks only of a dream by night, in which the emperor was
directed (it is not stated by whom, whether by Christ, or by an angel)
to stamp on the shields of his soldiers 'the heavenly sign of God,' that
is, the cross with the name of Christ, and thus to go forth against his
enemy. Eusebius, on the contrary, gives a more minute account, on the
authority of a subsequent private communication of the aged Constantine
himself under oath--not, however, till the year 338, a year after the
death of the emperor, his only witness, and twenty-six years after the
event. On his march from Gaul to Italy (the spot and date are not
specified), the emperor, while earnestly praying to the true God for
light and help at this critical time, saw, together with his army, in
clear daylight toward evening, a shining cross in the heavens above the
sun, with the inscription: '_By this conquer;_' and in the following
night Christ himself appeared to him while he slept, and directed him to
have a standard prepared in the form of this sign of the cross, and with
that to proceed against Maxentius and all other enemies. This account of
Eusebius, or rather of Constantine himself, adds to the night dream of
Lactantius the preceding vision of the day, and the direction concerning
the standard, while Lactantius speaks of the inscription of the initial
letters of Christ's name on the shields of the soldiers. According to
Rufinus, a later historian, who elsewhere depends entirely on Eusebius,
and can therefore not be regarded as a proper witness in the case, the
sign of the cross appeared to Constantine in a dream (which agrees with
the account of Lactantius), and upon his awaking in terror, an angel
(not Christ) exclaimed to him: '_Hoc vince._' Lactantius, Eusebius, and
Rufinus are the only Christian writers of the fourth century, who
mention the apparition. But we have besides one or two heathen
testimonies, which, though vague and obscure, still serve to strengthen
the evidence in favor of some actual occurrence. The contemporaneous
orator Nazarius, in a panegyric upon the emperor, pronounced March 1,
321, apparently at Rome, speaks of an army of divine warriors and a
divine assistance which Constantine received in the engagement with
Maxentius; but he converts it to the service of heathenism by recurring
to old prodigies, such as the appearance of Castor and Pollux.

This famous tradition may be explained either as a real miracle implying
a personal appearance of Christ, or as a pious fraud, or as a natural
phenomenon in the clouds and an optical illusion, or finally as a
prophetic dream.

The propriety of a miracle, parallel to the signs in heaven which
preceded the destruction of Jerusalem, might be justified by the
significance of the victory as marking a great epoch in history, namely,
the downfall of paganism and the establishment of Christianity in the
empire. But even if we waive the purely critical objections to the
Eusebian narrative, the assumed connection, in this case, of the gentle
Prince of peace with the god of battle, and the subserviency of the
sacred symbol of redemption to military ambition, is repugnant to the
genius of the gospel and to sound Christian feeling, unless we stretch
the theory of divine accommodation to the spirit of the age and the
passions and interests of individuals beyond the ordinary limits. We
should suppose, moreover, that Christ, if he had really appeared to
Constantine either in person (according to Eusebius) or through angels
(as Rufinus and Sozomen modify it), would have exhorted him to repent
and be baptized rather than to construct a military ensign for a bloody
battle. In no case can we ascribe to this occurrence, with Eusebius,
Theodoret, and older writers, the character of a sudden and genuine
conversion, as to Paul's vision of Christ on the way to Damascus; for,
on the one hand, Constantine was never hostile to Christianity, but most
probably friendly to it from his early youth, according to the example
of his father, and, on the other, he put off his baptism quite five and
twenty years, almost to the hour of his death.

The opposite hypothesis of a mere military stratagem or intentional
fraud is still more objectionable, and would compel us either to impute
to the first Christian emperor, at a venerable age, the double crime of
falsehood and perjury, or, if Eusebius invented the story, to deny to
the 'father of church history' all claim to credibility and common
respectability. Besides, it should be remembered that the older
testimony of Lactantius, or whoever was the author of the work on the
Deaths of Persecutors, is quite independent of that of Eusebius, and
derives additional force from the vague heathen rumors of the time.
Finally the _Hoc vince_, which has passed into proverbial significance
as a most appropriate motto of the invincible religion of the cross, is
too good to be traced to sheer falsehood. Some actual fact, therefore,
must be supposed to underlie the tradition, and the question only is
this, whether it was an external, viable phenomenon or an internal
experience.

The hypothesis of a natural formation of the clouds, which Constantine
by an optical illusion mistook for a supernatural sign of the cross,
besides smacking of the exploded rationalistic explanation of the New
Testament miracles, and deriving an important event from a mere
accident, leaves the figure of Christ and the Greek or Latin
inscription, '_By this sign thou shalt conquer!_' altogether
unexplained.

We are shut up, therefore, to the theory of a dream or vision, and an
experience within the mind of Constantine. This is supported by the
oldest testimony of Lactantius, as well as by the report of Rufinus and
Sozomen, and we do not hesitate to regard the Eusebian cross in the
skies as originally a part of the dream, which only subsequently assumed
the character of an outward objective apparition, either in the
imagination of Constantine or by a mistake of the memory of the
historian, but in either case without intentional fraud. That the vision
was traced to supernatural origin, especially after the happy success,
is quite natural and in perfect keeping with the prevailing ideas of the
age. Tertullian and other ante-Nicene and Nicene fathers attributed many
conversions to nocturnal dreams and visions. Constantine and his friends
referred the most important facts of his life, as the knowledge of the
approach of hostile armies, the discovery of the holy sepulchre, the
founding of Constantinople, to divine revelation through visions and
dreams. Nor are we disposed in the least to deny the connection of the
vision of the cross with the agency of Divine Providence, which
controlled this remarkable turning point of history. We may go farther
and admit a special providence, or what the old divines call a
_providentia specialissima_; but this does not necessarily imply a
violation of the order of nature or an actual miracle in the shape of an
objective personal appearance of the Saviour. We may refer to a somewhat
similar, though far less important, vision in the life of the pious
English Colonel James Gardiner. The Bible itself sanctions the general
theory of providential or prophetic dreams and nocturnal visions through
which divine revelations and admonitions are communicated to men.

The facts, therefore, may have been these: Before the battle,
Constantine, leaning already toward Christianity as probably the beat
and most hopeful of the various religions, seriously sought in prayer,
as he related to Eusebius, the assistance of the God of the Christians,
while his heathen antagonist, Maxentius, according to Zosimus, was
consulting the sibylline books and offering sacrifice to the idols.
Filled with mingled fears and hopes about the issue of the conflict, he
fell asleep, and saw in a dream the sign of the cross of Christ with a
significant inscription and promise of victory. Being already familiar
with the general use of this sign among the numerous Christians of the
empire, many of whom no doubt were in his own army, he constructed the
_labarum_,[A] afterward so called, that is, the sacred standard of the
Christian cross with the Greek monogram of Christ,[B] which he had also
put upon the shields of the soldiers. To this cross-standard, which now
took the place of the Roman eagles, he attributed the decisive victory
over the heathen Maxentius.

Accordingly, after his triumphal entrance into Rome, he had his statue
erected upon the forum with the labarum in his right hand, and the
inscription beneath: 'By this saving sign, the true token of bravery, I
have delivered your city from the yoke of the tyrant.' Three years
afterward the senate erected to him a triumphal arch of marble, which to
this day, within sight of the sublime ruins of the pagan Colosseum,
indicates at once the decay of ancient art and the downfall of
heathenism; as the neighboring arch of Titus commemorates the downfall
of Judaism and the destruction of the temple. The inscription on this
arch of Constantine, however, ascribes his victory over the hated
tyrant, not only to his master mind, but indefinitely also to the
impulse of Deity; by which a Christian would naturally understand the
true God, while a heathen, like the orator Nazarius, in his eulogy on
Constantine, might take it for the celestial guardian power of the _urbs
æterna_.

At all events the victory of Constantine over Maxentius was a military
and political victory of Christianity over heathenism; the intellectual
and moral victory having been already accomplished by the literature and
life of the church in the preceding period. The emblem of ignominy and
oppression[C] became thenceforward the badge of honor and dominion, and
was invested in the emperor's view, according to the spirit of the
church of his day, with a magic virtue. It now took the place of the
eagle and other field badges, under which the heathen Romans had
conquered the world. It was stamped on the imperial coin, and on the
standards, helmets, and shields of the soldiers. Above all military
representations of the cross the original imperial labarum shone in the
richest decorations of gold and gems; was intrusted to the truest and
bravest fifty of the body guard; filled the Christians with the spirit
of victory, and spread fear and terror among their enemies; until, under
the weak successors of Theodosius II., it fell out of use, and was
lodged as a venerable relic in the imperial palace at Constantinople.

Before this victory at Rome (which occurred October 27, 312), either in
the spring or summer of 312, Constantine, in conjunction with his
Eastern colleague, Licinius, had published an edict of religious
toleration, now not extant, but probably a step beyond the edict of the
still anti-Christian Galerius in 311, which was likewise subscribed by
Constantine and Licinius as co-regents. Soon after, in January, 313, the
two emperors issued from Milan a new edict (the third) on religion,
still extant both in Latin and Greek, in which, in the spirit of
religious eclecticism, they granted full freedom to all existing forms
of worship, with special reference to the Christian. This religion the
edict not only recognized in its existing limits, but also--what neither
the first nor perhaps the second edict had done--allowed every heathen
subject to adopt it with impunity. At the same time the church buildings
and property confiscated in the Diocletian persecution were ordered to
be restored, and private property-owners to be indemnified from the
imperial treasury.

In this notable edict, however, we should look in vain for the modern
Protestant and Anglo-American theory of religious liberty as one of the
universal and inalienable rights of man. Sundry voices, it is true, in
the Christian church itself, at that time and even before, declared
firmly against all compulsion in religion. But the spirit of the Roman
empire was too absolutistic to abandon the prerogative of a supervision
of public worship. The Constantinian toleration was a temporary measure
of state policy, which, as indeed the edict expressly states the motive,
promised the greatest security to the public peace and the protection of
all divine and heavenly powers, for emperor and empire. It was, as the
result teaches, but the necessary transition step to a new order of
things. It opened the door to the elevation of Christianity, and
specifically of Catholic hierarchical Christianity, with its
exclusiveness toward heretical and schismatic sects, to be the religion
of the state. For, once put on an equal footing with heathenism, it must
soon, in spite of numerical minority, bear away the victory from a
religion which had already inwardly outlived itself.

From this time Constantine decidedly favored the church, though without
persecuting or forbidding the pagan religions. He always mentions the
Christian church with reverence in his imperial edicts, and uniformly
applies to it, as we have already observed, the predicate of catholic.
For only as a catholic, thoroughly organized, firmly compacted, and
conservative institution did it meet his rigid monarchical interest, and
afford the splendid state and court dress he wished for his empire. So
early as the year 313 we find the bishop Hosius of Cordova among his
counsellors, and heathen writers ascribe to the bishop even a magical
influence over the emperor. Lactantius, also, and Eusebius of Cæsarea
belonged to his confidential circle. He exempted the Christian clergy
from military and municipal duty (March, 313); abolished various customs
and ordinances offensive to the Christians (315); facilitated the
emancipation of Christian slaves (before 316); legalized bequests to
catholic churches (321); enjoined the civil observance of Sunday, though
not as _dies Domini_, but as _dies Solis_, in conformity to his worship
of Apollo, and in company with an ordinance for the regular consulting
of the haruspex (321); contributed liberally to the building of churches
and the support of the clergy; erased the heathen symbols of Jupiter and
Apollo, Mars and Hercules from the imperial coins (323); and gave his
sons a Christian education. This mighty example was followed, as might
be expected, by a general transition of those subjects who were more
influenced in their conduct by outward circumstances than by inward
conviction and principle. The story, that in one year (324) twelve
thousand men, with women and children in proportion, were baptized in
Rome, and that the emperor had promised to each convert a white garment
and twenty pieces of gold, is at least in accordance with the spirit of
that reign, though the fact itself, in all probability, is greatly
exaggerated.

Constantine came out with still greater decision, when, by his victory
over his Eastern colleague and brother-in-law, Licinius, he became sole
head of the whole Roman empire. To strengthen his position, Licinius had
gradually placed himself at the head of the heathen party, still very
numerous, and had vexed the Christians first with wanton ridicule, then
with exclusion from civil and military office, with banishment, and in
some instances perhaps even with bloody persecution. This gave the
political strife for the monarchy between himself and Constantine the
character also of a war of religions; and the defeat of Licinius in the
battle of Adrianople, in July, 321, and at Chalcedon, in September, was
a new triumph of the standard of the cross over the sacrifices of the
gods; save that Constantine dishonored himself and his cause by the
execution of Licinius and his son.

The emperor now issued a general exhortation to his subjects to embrace
the Christian religion, still leaving them, however, to their own free
conviction. In the year 325, as patron of the church, he summoned the
council of Nice, and himself attended it; banished the Arians, though he
afterward recalled them; and, in his monarchical spirit of uniformity,
showed great zeal for the settlement of all theological disputes, while
he was blind to their deep significance. He first introduced the
practice of subscription to the articles of a written creed and of the
infliction of civil punishments for non-conformity. In the years
325-329, in connection with his mother, Helena, he erected magnificent
churches on the sacred spots in Jerusalem.

As heathenism had still the preponderance in Rome, where it was hallowed
by its great traditions, Constantine, by divine command as he supposed,
in the year 330, transferred the seat of his government to Byzantium,
and thus fixed the policy, already initiated by Domitian, or
orientalizing and dividing the empire. In the selection of the
unrivalled locality he showed more taste and genius than the founders of
Madrid, Vienna, Berlin, St. Petersburg, or Washington. With incredible
rapidity, and by all the means within reach of an absolute monarch, he
turned this nobly situated town, connecting two seas and two continents,
into a splendid residence and a new Christian Rome, 'for which now,' as
Gregory of Nazianzen expresses it, 'sea and land emulate each other, to
load it with their treasures, and crown it queen of cities.' Here,
instead of idol temples and altars, churches and crucifixes rose; though
among them the statues of patron deities from all over Greece, mutilated
by all sorts of tasteless adaptations, were also gathered in the new
metropolis. The main hall in the palace was adorned with representations
of the crucifixion and other Biblical scenes. The gladiatorial shows, so
popular in Rome, were forbidden here, though theatres, amphitheatres,
and hippodromes kept their place. It could nowhere be mistaken, that the
new imperial residence was, as to all outward appearance, a Christian
city. The smoke of heathen sacrifices never rose from the seven hills of
New Rome, except during the short reign of Julian the Apostate. It
became the residence of a bishop, who not only claimed the authority of
the apostolic see of neighboring Ephesus, but soon outshone the
patriarchate of Alexandria, and rivalled for centuries the papal power
in ancient Rome.

The emperor diligently attended divine worship, and is portrayed upon
medals in the posture of prayer. He kept the Easter vigils with great
devotion. He would stand during the longest sermons of his bishops, who
always surrounded him, and unfortunately flattered him only too much.
And he even himself composed and delivered discourses to his court, in
the Latin language, from which they were translated into Greek by
interpreters appointed for the purpose. General invitations were issued,
and the citizens flocked in great crowds to the palace to hear the
imperial preacher, who would in vain try to prevent their loud applause
by pointing to heaven as the source of his wisdom. He dwelt mainly on
the truth of Christianity, the folly of idolatry, the unity and
providence of God, the coming of Christ, and the judgment. At times he
would severely rebuke the avarice and rapacity of his courtiers, who
would loudly applaud him with their mouths and belie his exhortations by
their works. One of these productions is still extant, in which he
recommends Christianity in a characteristic strain, and in proof of its
divine origin cites especially the fulfilment of prophecy, including the
sibylline books and the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil, with the contrast
between his own happy and brilliant reign and the tragical fate of his
persecuting predecessors and colleagues.

Nevertheless he continued in his later years true, upon the whole, to
the toleration principles of the edict of 313, protected the pagan
priests and temples in their privileges, and wisely abstained from all
violent measures against heathenism, in the persuasion that it would in
time die out. He retained many heathens at court and in public office,
although he loved to promote Christians to honorable positions. In
several cases, however, he prohibited idolatry, where it sanctioned
scandalous immorality, as in the obscene worship of Venus in Phenicia;
or in places which were especially sacred to the Christians, as the
sepulchre of Christ and the grove of Mamre; and he caused a number of
deserted temples and images to be destroyed or turned into Christian
churches. Eusebius relates several such instances with evident
approbation, and praises also his later edicts against various heretics
and schismatics, but without mentioning the Arians. In his later years
he seems, indeed, to have issued a general prohibition of idolatrous
sacrifice; Eusebius speaks of it, and his sons in 341 refer to an edict
to that effect; but the repetition of it by his successors proves that,
if issued, it was not carried into general execution under his reign.

With this shrewd, cautious, and moderate policy of Constantine, which
contrasts well with the violent fanaticism of his sons, accords the
postponement of his own baptism to his last sickness. For this he had
the further motives of a superstitious desire, which he himself
expresses, to be baptized in the Jordan, whose waters had been
sanctified by the Saviour's baptism, and no doubt also a fear that he
might by relapse forfeit the sacramental remission of sins. He wished to
secure all the benefit of baptism as a complete expiation of past sins,
with as little risk as possible, and thus to make the best of both
worlds. Deathbed baptisms then were to half Christians of that age what
deathbed conversions and deathbed communions are now. But he presumed to
preach the gospel, he called himself the bishop of bishops, he convened
the first general council, and made Christianity the religion of the
empire, long before his baptism! Strange as this inconsistency appears
to us, what shall we think of the court bishops who, from false
prudence, relaxed in his favor the otherwise strict discipline of the
church, and admitted him, at least tacitly, to the enjoyment of nearly
all the privileges of believers, before he had taken upon himself even a
single obligation of a catechumen?

When, after a life of almost uninterrupted health, he felt the approach
of death, he was received into the number of catechumens by laying on of
hands, and then formally admitted by baptism into the full communion of
the church in the year 337, the sixty-fifth year of his age, by the
Arian (or properly Semi-Arian) bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, whom he had
shortly before recalled from exile together with Arius! His dying
testimony then was, as to form, in favor of heretical rather than
orthodox Christianity, but merely from accident, not from intention. He
meant the Christian as against the heathen religion, and whatever of
Arianism may have polluted his baptism, was for the Greek Church fully
neutralized by the orthodox canonization. After the solemn ceremony, he
promised to live thenceforth worthily of a disciple of Jesus; refused to
wear again the imperial mantle of cunningly woven silk, richly
ornamented with gold; retained the white baptismal robe; and died a few
days after, on Pentecost, May 32, 337, trusting in the mercy of God, and
leaving a long, a fortunate, and a brilliant reign, such as none but
Augustus, of all his predecessors, had enjoyed. 'So passed away the
first Christian emperor, the first defender of the faith, the first
imperial patron of the papal see, and of the whole Eastern Church, the
first founder of the holy places, pagan and Christian, orthodox and
heretical, liberal and fanatical, not to be imitated or admired, but
much to be remembered, and deeply to be studied.'

His remains were removed in a golden coffin by a procession of
distinguished civilians and the whole army, from Nicomedia to
Constantinople, and deposited, with the highest Christian honors, in the
Church of the Apostles, while the Roman senate, after its ancient
custom, proudly ignoring the great religious revolution of the age,
enrolled him among the gods of the heathen Olympus. Soon after his
death, Eusebius set him above the greatest princes of all times; from
the fifth century he began to be recognized in the East as a saint; and
the Greek and Russian Church to this day celebrates his memory under the
extravagant title of _Isapostolos_, the 'Equal of the Apostles.' The
Latin Church, on the contrary, with truer tact, has never placed him
among the saints, but has been content with naming him 'the Great,' in
just and grateful remembrance of his services to the cause of
Christianity and civilization.

Constantine marks the beginning of the downfall of ancient and classical
paganism. Still it dragged out a sickly old age for about two hundred
years longer, until at last it died of incurable consumption, without
the hope of a resurrection.

The final dissolution of heathenism in the Eastern empire may be dated
from the middle of the fifth century. In the year 435, Theodosius II.
commanded the temples to be destroyed or turned into churches. There
still appear some heathens in civil office and at court so late as the
beginning of the reign of Justinian I. (527-567). But this despotic
emperor prohibited heathenism as a form of worship in the empire on pain
of death, and in 529 abolished the last intellectual seminary of it, the
philosophical school of Athens, which had stood nine hundred years. At
that time just seven philosophers were teaching in that school, the
shades of the ancient seven sages of Greece--a striking play of history,
like the name of the last West-Roman emperor, Romulus Augustus, or, in
contemptuous diminutive, Augustulus, combining the names of the founder
of the city and the founder of the empire.

In the West, heathenism maintained itself until near the middle of the
sixth century, and even later, partly as a private religious conviction
among many cultivated and aristocratic families in Rome, partly even in
the full form of worship in the remote provinces and on the mountains of
Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica, and partly in heathen customs and popular
usages, like the gladiatorial shows still extant in Rome in 404, and the
wanton Lupercalia, a sort of heathen carnival, the feast of Lupercus,
the god of herds, still celebrated with all its excesses in February,
495. But, in general, it may be said that the Græco-Roman heathenism, as
a system of worship, was buried under the ruins of the Western empire,
which sank under the storms of the great migration. It is remarkable
that the northern barbarians labored with the same zeal in the
destruction of idolatry as in the destruction of the empire, and really
promoted the victory of the Christian religion. The Gothic king Alaric,
on entering Rome, expressly ordered that the churches of the apostles
Peter and Paul should be spared, as inviolable sanctuaries; and he
showed a humanity, which Augustin justly attributes to the influence of
Christianity (even perverted Arian Christianity) on these barbarous
people. The Christian name, he says, which the heathens blaspheme, has
effected not the destruction, but the salvation of the city. Odoacer,
who put an end to the Western Roman empire in 476, was incited to his
expedition into Italy by St. Severin, and, though himself an Arian,
showed great regard to the catholic bishops. The same is true of his
conqueror and successor, Theodoric the Ostrogoth, who was recognized by
the East-Roman emperor Anastasius as king of Italy (A.D. 500), and was
likewise an Arian. Thus between the barbarians and the Romans, as
between the Romans and the Greeks, and in a measure also the Jews, the
conquered gave laws to the conquerors. Christianity triumphed over both.

This is the end of Græco-Roman heathenism, with its power, wisdom, and
beauty. It fell a victim to a slow but steady process of incurable
consumption. Its downfall is a sublime tragedy which, with all our
abhorrence of idolatry, we cannot witness without a certain sadness. At
the first appearance of Christianity it comprised all the wisdom,
literature, art, and political power of the civilized world, and led all
into the field against the weaponless religion of the crucified
Nazarene. After a conflict of four or five centuries it lay prostrate in
the dust without hope of resurrection. With the outward protection of
the state, it lost all power, and had not even the courage of martyrdom;
while the Christian church showed countless hosts of confessors and
blood-witnesses, and Judaism lives to-day in spite of all persecution.
The expectation that Christianity would fall about the year 398, after
an existence of three hundred and sixty-five years, turned out in the
fulfilment to relate to heathenism itself.

The last glimmer of life in the old religion was its pitiable prayer
for toleration and its lamentation over the ruin of the empire. Its best
elements took refuge in the church, and became converted, or at least
took Christian names. Now the gods were dethroned, oracles and prodigies
ceased, sibylline books were burned, temples were destroyed, or
transformed into churches, or still stand as memorials of the victory of
Christianity.

But although ancient Greece and Rome have fallen forever, the spirit of
Græco-Roman paganism is not extinct. It still lives in the natural heart
of man, which at this day as much as ever needs regeneration by the
spirit of God. It lives also in many idolatrous and superstitious usages
of the Greek and Roman Churches, against which the pure spirit of
Christianity has instinctively protested from the beginning, and will
protest, till all remains of gross and refined idolatry shall be
outwardly as well as inwardly overcome, and baptized and sanctified not
only with water, but also with the spirit and fire of the gospel.

Finally, the better genius of ancient Greece and Rome still lives in the
immortal productions of their poets, philosophers, historians, and
orators--yet no longer an enemy, but a friend and servant of Christ.
What is truly great and noble and beautiful can never perish. The
classic literature had prepared the way for the gospel, in the sphere of
natural culture, and was to be turned thenceforth into a weapon for its
defence. It passed, like the Old Testament, as a rightful inheritance,
into the possession of the Christian church, which saved those precious
works of genius through the ravages of the migration of nations and the
darkness of the Middle Ages, and used them as material in the rearing of
the temple of modern civilization. The word of the great apostle of the
Gentiles was here fulfilled: 'All things are yours.' The ancient
classics, delivered from the dæmoniacal possession of idolatry, have
come into the service of the only true and living God, once 'unknown' to
them, but now everywhere revealed, and are thus enabled to fulfil their
true mission as the preparatory tutors of youth for Christian learning
and culture. This is the noblest, the most worthy, and most complete
victory of Christianity, transforming the enemy into friend and ally.

FOOTNOTES:

[A] [Greek: Labôron], also [Greek: labouron]; derived, not from _labor_,
nor from [Greek: laphuron], i.e., _præda_, nor from [Greek: labein], but
probably from a barbarian root, otherwise unknown, and introduced into
the Roman terminology, even before Constantine, by the Celtic or
Germanic recruits. Comp. Du Cange, Glossar., and Suicer, Thesaur. s.h.v.
The labarum, as described by Eusebius, who saw it himself (Vita Const.
i. 30), consisted of a long spear overlaid with gold, and a cross piece
of wood, from which hung a square flag of purple cloth, embroidered and
covered with precious stones. On the top of the shaft was a crown
composed of gold and precious stones, and containing the monogram of
Christ (see next note), and just under this crown was a likeness of the
emperor and his sons in gold. The emperor told Eusebius (I. ii. c. 7)
some incredible things about this labarum, _e.g._ that none of its
bearers was ever hurt by the darts of the enemy.

[B] X and P, the first two letters of the name of Christ,
so written upon one another as to make the form of the cross:
[Illustration] (_i.e._ Christos--Alpha and Omega, the beginning and
the end), and similar forms, of which Münter (Sinnbilder der Alten
Christen, p. 36 sqq.) has collected from ancient coins, vessels, and
tombstones more than twenty. The monogram, as well as the sign of the
cross, was in use among the Christians long before Constantine, probably
as early as the Antonines and Hadrian. Yea, the standards and trophies
of victory generally had the appearance of a cross, as Minucius Felix,
Tertullian, Justin, and other apologists of the second century told the
heathens. According to Killen (Ancient Church, p. 317, note), who quotes
Aringhus (Roma Subterranea, II. p. 567) as his authority, the famous
monogram (of course in a different sense) is found even before Christ on
coins of the Ptolemies. The only thing new, therefore, was the _union_
of this symbol in its _Christian_ sense and application with the Roman
_military standard_.

[C] Cicero says, pro Raberio, c. 5: 'Nomen ipsum _crucis_ absit non modo
a corpore civium Romanorum, sed etiam a cogitatione, oculis, auribus.'
With other ancient heathens, however, the Egyptians, the Buddhists, and
even the aborigines of Mexico, the cross seems to have been in use as a
religious symbol. Socrates relates (H.E. v. 17) that at the destruction
of the temple of Serapis, among the hieroglyphic inscriptions, forms of
crosses were found which pagans and Christians alike referred to their
respective religions. Some of the heathen converts, conversant with
hieroglyphic characters, interpreted the form of the cross to mean _the
Life to come_. According to Prescott (Conquest of Mexico, iii. 338-340)
the Spaniards found the cross among the objects of worship in the idol
temples of Anahnac.




CAUSES OF THE MINNESOTA MASSACRE.


If great public phenomena do not come by chance, then there were causes
for the Minnesota massacres, by the Sioux, in 1862-'3, quite apart from
the aboriginal cruelty and ferocity of the Indian nature. We all know
that the carnal Indian man is a bad enough fellow at the best, and
capable of dreadful crimes and misdemeanors, if only to gratify his whim
or the caprice of the moment. And when he is bent upon satiating his
revenge for some real or imaginary wrong, I would back him in the
horrible ingenuity of his devices for torture, in the unrelenting malice
of his vengeance, against any--the most fierce and diabolical--of all
the potentates in the kingdoms of eternal and immutable evil!

But the white man has always had the advantage of the red man. He was
his superior in knowledge, power, and intellect; and came, for the most
part, of that lordly race, the issue of whose loins already occupy all
the chief countries within the zones of civilization. He knew,
therefore, when he first began to deal with the Indian, what manner of
man he was, what his enlightenment was, and how far it reached out into
the darkness where all is night! He knew that this wild, savage,
untamable redskin could not be approached, reconciled, traded with, or
stolen, from, by adopting, in his case, the usages and courtesies of
civil life, as we understand them, but that his own peculiar laws,
customs, and manners must be studied and conformed to, if any headway
were to be made in his regard and confidence.

At no time, from the beginning to the present day and hour, has any
white man been so fuddled in his wits as to suppose that the Indian
could either act or talk like a clergyman of any recognized Christian
denomination. It was too much, therefore, to expect from him that he
should exhibit any of the fine charities and warm affections which
distinguish the Christian character. He was a redskin, implacable in his
hate, not altogether trustworthy even in his friendships, and jealous of
his reputation and the traditions of his race. Nor was he without
manhood either. A brave, bloody, mocking and defiant manhood! capable of
the endurances of the martyr, exhibiting sometimes the sublimest
self-sacrifice and courage.

Whether out of these wild and savage materials there lay anywhere, at
any time, the human or divine power to mould a civilized community, does
not appear upon the record. It is certain, however, that after all the
far-too-late attempts to transfigure these savages into the likeness of
a down-East Yankee, or, better still, into the similitude of a Western
farmer, no permanent good results are likely to ensue.

The red man and the white are separated indeed by the prodigious
distances (ethnologically speaking) not only of race and language, but
of noble tradition and glorious history. They could never amalgamate in
blood, or in the so-called natural sympathies of man. They seem to be
born enemies! as their feelings and their instincts apparently reach
them when they come into contact with each other. They cannot exist side
by side. A mightier than they holds the destinies of both in His hands.
He has tried the redskins. He has given them a good chance upon the
earth, and they have failed to do anything but kill buffalo and breed
like rats--often burrowing like rats--refusing to dig and plant the
teeming, beneficent earth which had been committed to their charge; and
preferring, generally, the life of a vagabond loafer to that of a
thrifty, careful husbandman.

I do not blame them. They are as God made them, and man left them; for,
I suppose, their forebears--somewhere afar off in Asia, perhaps, in the
dim, immemorial ages--had all passed through the various phases of the
civilization of their time, and that they did not grow out of the tail
of any gorilla. It is not for profane man to inquire what possible
reason there could be for the perpetuation--let alone the creation--of
such a useless, bootless race. There they are, occupiers of the soil for
unknown centuries--before the white man ever saw their faces--many
thousands of them still squatting there, cleaving, like bereaved
Autochthons, to the bosom of the dear old mother who had whelped and so
long nurtured them; and trying to make themselves believe that they are
still masters of the continent.

What they were made for at all, I do not pretend to divine. The
Divine Maker of all knows best, and what He does is its own
justification--satisfying the wellnigh insatiable cry of the universe
for universal justice. They are the saurians of humanity; and it is
remarkable that the idea of 'progressive development'--if I may be
pardoned for making use of a term in modern philosophy about which there
has been so much assumption and canting--it is remarkable that this
idea, which the name of _saurian_ suggests, should run through all
nature, and be embodied in her finest forms and intelligences. There is
a considerable distance between the saurian and good Master Adam, the
gardener of Eden; but it seems to me, after all, that this brutal, foul,
obscene monster of the prime, was only Adam in the making. He came after
him, a long way, at all events; and if geology had been fashionable in
his time, and he a _savant_, he might have chalked out for himself a
very fine pedigree.

For this strange, eccentric Nature, who meant _man_ from the beginning,
and failed to realize her ideal because of those horrible nightmare
dreams of which these saurians, mastodons, mammoths were the visible
representatives, did, nevertheless, make, in every succeeding world (for
every crust of this planet is the crust of a dead world), higher and
higher organizations--until, at last, she gave to man his _inscrutable_
birth!

That was, no doubt, a great triumph of power and genius! Man is a noble
animal, the finest of all living fellows! _et cetera! et cetera!_ But
what sort of a fellow was he when he came, in his spindles and
shacklebones, from the womb of the All-mother? Was he a Caucasian, or a
Mongolian, a Negro, a Malay, or a Bosjesman?--this last being an effigy
of man so abominable that no race that I have heard of will include him
even as a lodger in the parish settlements!

Mark! what a sameness, and yet what an infinite variety, there is in all
the operations and purposes of Nature! She does not grow us _men_ out of
our mothers, but babes--helpless, pitiably, tearfully helpless
_babes_!--ignorant; who must _grow_ into the perfect stature and the
mature mind of men. Is not this babe also a saurian in its little way?
Does a wider gap separate the saurian from the man, than that which
separates the tiny babe from some Bacon or Raleigh? The law of nature is
progress. It is often, nay, always, a very slow thing--but how sure! how
inevitable! how beneficent in its results! She never makes worse after
bad--and those weird opium monsters of the foreworlds were unspeakably
bad!--but always she makes of bad better; and of better she has made her
best, at present. In the light of this law, _were any one mad enough to
grope_, he might come to the conclusion that the first man (or race of
men) was anything but a grandee in mind, person, or estate; and that our
seemingly puzzled but at last most wonder-working mother, ycleped
Nature, made some very ugly attempts at man before she reached the
climax of her imagination and her power as it obtains in the man
Caucasian!

I regard all the colored races--and with no malice or evil of any sort
in my heart toward them--as first experiments in the gamut of human
creation. Neither ethnology nor any other ology will pull out of my
consciousness--let alone my active intellect--the belief that these were
the oldest, the primordial races, or the descendants of such, and that
the white Caucasian man, with his noble brain and heart, his matchless
person, was an afterthought, the brightest since her birth-thought of
the earth's creation. Look into the face of any upgrown modern Indian!
It is an _old_ face, as if the accumulated wrinkles of, not 'forty,' but
a hundred 'centuries' had ploughed their marks there. They seem to
belong to the dawn of time; while our Caucasian man is ever young and
beautiful, the born master of all things.

We must deal with races according to their faculty, and credit them
according to their faculty. If we fail, we fail in wisdom--and in
prudence, which is a valuable attribute of wisdom. Expect not grapes
from thistles! Expect no virtue--unless it relates to his own
selfishness or his own tribe--from an Indian, or from very many other
men!

It must not be forgotten, however, that Indians are people who, to say
the least of them, are fashioned in the likeness of men. Here, as
elsewhere, Nature sticks to her old plan, and will not budge an inch. In
the chart of the Indian's nature are mapped out the same feelings,
instincts, passions, the same organs and dimensions as belong to the
highest race, or the highest race of the mixed races. She will have no
nonsense about her red children, nor about her black. There they are, as
she (for purposes of her own, not particularly clear) intended them to
be--men, alive, oh!--not descendants of Monboddo's ape, nor of Du
Chaillu's gorilla, but men proper and absolute! with their duties,
responsibilities, and destinies.

Seeing, therefore, that the Indian (our American Indian, with whom we
have now to do) has all the faculties--however defaced and blurred by
long centuries of bloody crimes, which they regard _not_ as crimes, but
as virtues--seeing that these red, thriftless, bloody-minded Indians
have all the human faculties intact--although, it may be, not so bright
as those of some of our own people who call themselves Americans--is it
not possible that by fair and manly dealing with them, by a just trade,
and conscientious regard for the sanctity of treaty rights and
obligations--that you, whom it may more particularly concern, might so
win their good will as to make them friends instead of enemies? The
devil that lies at the bottom of all savage natures is easily roused,
not at all so easily laid again, and as easily kept in his own place.
Indians are not incapable of friendship, nor of good faith, although the
best require a great deal of looking after--and close looking, too! But
what I want to urge is this: that if you always appeal to the worst
passions of the redskin, rob him of his rights and property, cheat him
by false promises, deceive him at all hands, and then mock him when he
knocks at your door for credit or charity, that he and his may live, you
cannot much wonder if, obeying his traditions, his religion, and the
dictates of his savage nature--now maddened into fury and reckless of
consequences--he indulges in the frightful havoc, the relentless murders
and burnings, which have so lately marked his trail in Minnesota.

Let no one suppose for a moment, from what I have now said, that I
design to offer any apology, any excuse for the nameless and
unpunishable crimes which these miscreants have perpetrated. I have no
pity and no compassion for them, and surely no word either which I
desire should be construed, in this respect, to their favor. I go with
the old Scotch judge--a rigid Antinomian! who, having tried and
convicted a Calvinist as rigid as himself, asked him what he had to say
why the sentence of the law should not be pronounced against him.

'My lord,' said the prisoner, 'it's a bad job; but I was predestined to
do it!'

Whereupon his lordship replied: 'Ay! ay! my cannie laddie! an' I was
predestined to hang ye for't.'

So while I set forth the necessary, evil nature of the Indian, and the
consequent necessity of his bloody deeds, I also insist upon the
necessity of hanging him for it.

I plead not for the Indian of Minnesota, after these most shocking, most
appalling butcheries. I love my own race; and not a man, woman, or
child, who was sacrificed by these monsters, but their wounds were my
wounds, and their agonies tore my heart to the very core. Henceforth I
shall never see an Indian but I shall feel the 'goose flesh' of loathing
and horror steal over my Adam's buff! But you, my beloved friends of
Minnesota! you who have suffered so much in your families and homes
during the massacre, are you sure that you did all you could do as
citizens and rulers in this land to see even-handed justice dealt out
between the corrupt Government agencies and storekeepers, and the
helpless Indians? Had these last no just and reasonable ground of
complaint? complaint of the General Government, complaint of the delays
in their payment, complaint of the swindling of the storekeepers and
traders?

They had sold their lands, and gone away to their reservations. But the
money for their lands--promised so faithfully at such a time--where was
that money? _Non est!_ The Indians depended on it, trusted to the
certainty of its coming as the saint trusts in the promises. They came
for it--often, in their history, in the depth of winter, for hundred of
miles, through an inhospitable forest; their wives, children, and braves
starving--many of them left behind in the wilderness to die; their only
weapon made of coarse nails, lashed with wire, and this they called a
gun barrel, and with this they killed what game was killed by the way.

This did not happen in Minnesota, it is true; but events as horrible and
sickening as this did happen, and brought with them consequences more
horrible still, which will never be forgotten while the State exists or
the language lasts. Scenes were enacted at that 'Lower Agency' which
were disgraceful to human nature, and the victims were invariably the
redskins. Once when Red Iron came there, at the summons, or rather after
the repeated summons of Governor Ramsay, it turned out that nearly four
hundred thousand dollars of the cash payment due to the Sioux, under the
treaties of 1851-'2, were paid to the traders on old indebtedness! How
much of this enormous sum was really due to the traders it is bootless
now to inquire; although it is pretty certain, from what we know of
similar transactions, that not a twentieth part of it was due to them.
Mr. Isaac V. D. Heard, who has written a 'History of the Sioux War and
Massacres of 1862 and 1863,' who is an old resident of Minnesota of
twelve years' standing, acted with General Sibley in his expedition
against the savages in 1862, and was recorder of the military commission
which tried some four hundred of the participants in the outbreak--has
not been deterred by the just hatred which the Minnesota people nurture
against the Indians, and which they will keep hot until their rifles
have exterminated the whole brood of them, from saying a brave word
respecting the iniquities perpetrated by rascal peddlers and official
prigs against the Indians which were the immediate causes of the
massacre and the subsequent wars.

The Indian was subjected to all sorts of frauds, little and big--the
smaller thieves thinking that they also must live, no matter at whose
expense, although I demur to the proposition. Why should they stop at
stealing a thousand or two, more or less, while that four hundred
thousand swindle leered at them so wickedly over the left shoulder,
mocking at all law and justice, and scot free from all punishment? These
'traders' could charge what sums they liked against the Indian, and get
them too; for there was no one to defeat or check their rapacity. Mr.
Heard tells us that no less a sum than fifty-five thousand dollars was
claimed by one Hugh Tyler, as due to him by the Indians, when the great
swindle just alluded to was committed; and that he was paid out of the
accruing funds. This man was a stranger in the country, an adventurer,
who went out into the wilderness 'for to seek his fortune;' and it is
curious to read the items of which his little bill, fifty-five thousand,
is composed. Here they are: For getting the treaties through the Senate;
for '_necessary disbursements_' in securing the assent of the chiefs.
Very curious and instructive items they are, to all who consider them.
To say nothing of the corruption of the Senate which the first item
signifies, if it has any meaning at all, there is the guilty record of
the 'necessary disbursements,' or, in other words, _bribes_, paid to
chiefs for betraying their country and their race. This was a part of
the regular machinery of the Agencies. All their plans were cut and
dried, and they had men to carry them out. They could not stir a peg
without the assent of the chiefs; and when they found a man too noble to
be a traitor, they got the Governor to break him as a chief, and invest
a more pliable, accommodating redskin with his rank and title. Through
the influence of bad men, and by the forging of lying documents, which
the Indians could not read, and which were never interpreted to them
except to cheat them as to their contents and meaning, they have always
managed to get their treaties signed; after which the newly made chiefs
could not so much as take the liberty to beg a pipe of tobacco of them.

As a sample of their infamous dealings, we take the following excerpt
from Mr. Heard's book, page 41:

     'In 1857, a trader, pretending that he was getting them to sign a
     power of attorney to get back the money which had gone to the
     traders under the treaty of 1851 and 1852, obtained their
     signatures to vouchers, by which he swindled them out of $12,000.
     Shortly after, this trader secured the payment of $4,500 for goods
     which he claimed (falsely, it is said) to have been stolen. About
     the same time a man in Sioux City was allowed a claim of $5,000 for
     horses, which he also alleged to have been stolen.

     'In 1858, the chiefs were taken to Washington, and agreed to
     treaties for the cession of all their reservations north of the
     Minnesota, for which, as ratified by the Senate, they were to have
     $166,000; but of this amount they never received a penny until four
     years afterward, when $15,000, in goods, were sent to the Lower
     Sioux, and these were deducted out of what was due them under
     former treaties. The Indians, discovering the fraud, refused to
     receive them for several weeks, and only consented to take them
     after the Government had agreed to rectify the matter. _Most of the
     large amount due under these treaties, went into the pockets of
     traders, Government officials, and swindlers generally._

     'The Indians were grievously disappointed with their bargains, and
     from that time the control of affairs passed from the chiefs--who,
     it was believed, had been bribed--to the young men. They had now
     nearly disposed of all their lands, and received scarcely anything
     for them. They were six thousand two hundred in number, and their
     annuities, when paid in full, were hardly fifteen dollars apiece.

     'Their sufferings,' continues Mr. Heard, 'were often severe,
     especially during the winter and spring previous to the massacres.'

Their crops failed them; a heavy fall of snow, late in the season, came
to increase their miseries, and delayed the spring hunts. The Sissetons,
of Lac Traverse, had to eat their horses and dogs--and at least fifteen
hundred of the old men, women, and children had to be supported by the
Government at an extra expense; and this was so inadequately done that
some died of starvation.

The history of these iniquities is no new thing in Indian affairs. It
is, from first to last, a record of the most shameless lying and fraud.
The Agency seems to have been established there as a sort of Jonathan
Wild's shop, for the purpose of carrying on the trade of thieving. What
did these storekeepers--who credited the Indians for tobacco and rum,
for bread and beef, for clothing, and such other luxuries as they had
come to regard as necessaries--care for the winter prospects of the
wretched Indians, after they had lined their pockets with that four
hundred thousand dollars? Not a dime! And when subsequently it was found
that only half the regular Government payment would be handed over to
the Indians during the next year, these storekeepers--on the 'Wild'
plan--not only refused to give them credit for articles indispensable to
life in the wilderness, but insulted them to boot; and this so
exasperated the proud, revengeful nature of the Indian, that he
remembered it afterward in many a bloody murder which he committed, and
the innocent suffered for the guilty!

Mr. Heard acquits the Agency, and all connected with it, of being in
any way the causes of this outbreak. But his own statements of their
dealing with the Indians hardly bear him out in his judgment. I do not
mean to say that the people of the Lower Agency were a whit worse in
such dealings than those of the Upper, or any other similar Agency. It
is an understood thing, and mercilessly practised, that the Indian shall
be fleeced whenever the white man has a chance to fleece him. It is the
law and the gospel of these Agencies; and we must not allow ourselves to
be hoodwinked in this matter by the mistaken humanity of Mr. Heard.

And yet, if we think of it, there could not have been devised a more
evil scheme, either against the natives or the settlers, than these
wellnigh irresponsible Agencies. From all parts of the Union, from every
country of the Old World, emigrants had come to settle in the beautiful
Minnesota State; they had built themselves good, substantial houses,
ploughed, fenced, and planted their rich and prosperous farms, conquered
the savage wilderness into blooming cornfields, orchards, and
gardens--and here was their true El Dorado! where they hoped to live in
peace, plenty, and security. They were not afraid of the savages, but
their wont was to make friends of them, and to be their friends,
entertaining them at their homes when they visited the settlements, and
doing all they could--with some exceptions--to perpetuate among them a
good feeling and an intelligent understanding.

To a certain extent, and in some cases, they succeeded in this
straight-forward diplomacy. But the predisposition of the reds to
enmity with the whites was still there, slumbering only, not eradicated;
nor could all the kindness and generosity of the whole Caucasian heart,
heaped upon them in the most lavish profusion, ever root it out. Nature
put it there--I wish she hadn't--for reasons of her own, just as she put
murder into the cruel heart and brain of the tiger in the jungle.

There was this 'original sin,' therefore, to contend against always,
without reference to any tangible causes or provocations. All knew this.
All knew, from the youngest to the oldest, that the true policy of the
whites was to conciliate the Indians. They knew his inextinguishable
memory of wrongs, his dreadful vengeance, his power, and his constant
opportunity to do irreparable mischief. And, as I said, the settlers
were, for the most part, anxious to smoke the pipe of peace and
friendship with him.

But what was the good of all this? What, think you, did it avail in the
councils of the savages, when they sat over their fires discussing their
wrongs and prospects? What the good-hearted settlers did in the way of
reconciliation and good will was undone a thousandfold at the Agency. It
is true that the Agency had become necessary to the subsistence of the
Indian, and that this fact made him bear much which, under other
circumstances, he would instantly have resented and punished. But they
well knew how they were robbed; and when did a wrong of that, or any
sort, pass muster upon the Indian's roll of vengeance? Every fraud
against an Indian, every lie told him, every broken promise, every
worthless article sold to him at the Agency, was more than a set-off to
any act of kindness shown to him by the settlers. Add to these local
crimes, the great error of the Government in unduly withholding the
Indian payment for their lands--and you have the Indian's _casus belli_,
the grounds, or some of them, on which he justified himself to his own
bloody and remorseless conscience, for his inhuman deeds! For the Indian
beeps a conscience, such as it is; but of a truth, better no conscience
than an Indian's conscience! It is like an appeal to hell, one's appeal
to this! all the accursed passions imprisoned there coming up from their
limbos, their eyes glaring with the malice of ineradicable hate, and
bloodshot with murder, to support the conscience, and strengthen its
resolution for an unspeakable vengeance.

But, after all, this poor devil is really to be pitied for his ignorance
and brutality, and as really to be killed without mercy. He is in the
way of civilization, and must go to the wall. I find that Nature herself
is utterly pitiless; that she cares neither for white nor red, nor for
any other color or person, but, like a horrible, crashing car of
Juggernaut, she rolls steadily forward, astride the inevitable
machinery, crushing all who oppose her.

But this digression is no apology, in the matter of its argument, for
the Indian Agents, who must have been aware, long before the outbreak
took place, that their frauds were fast culminating in the Indian mind,
and that every fresh wrong they did to them was only bringing nearer by
a step the indiscriminate massacre of the settlers.

There were other causes, however, besides these, to enrage and madden
them, which must not be lost sight of. Our Government had prohibited
their sanguinary wars upon the Chippewas, and they regarded this as an
act of wanton tyranny. They were bred in the faith that war is the true
condition of an Indian man, and that peace was made for women and
children. War was the only outlet for their power, the only field in
which they could distinguish themselves and win immortal renown. All the
great kingdoms of knowledge and literature were shut against them as
with walls of brass. They could not read or write, and their leisure was
passed in idle gossip, or in deliberations on infernal schemes against
the white man to revenge themselves for their wrongs.

It was not a wise thing to do, I think; although, no doubt, it was
humane enough, as we understand humanity. Did not the 'dragons of the
prime tear other in their slime,' and so thin out the horrible race,
until Nature herself put the final claws of annihilation upon them? Why,
in mercy, then, do we try to prevent the inevitable? War is a great
clearer of the atmosphere; and one of our poets, Coleridge, I believe,
says that 'Carnage is God's daughter'! a bold figure of rhetoric, not
without its apparently sufficient apologies. Why not let the Sioux and
Chippewas, or any other of the wild, irreclaimable brood, fight their
bloodiest, and do their prettiest to help Nature, who seems bent on the
extermination of all inferior races? They have got to die, any
way!--that is a great consolation!--and if the philanthropists at
Washington had only left them to themselves, they would have died by
mutual slaughter--great numbers of them--long ago, and saved said
philanthropists from the crime of killing them, which they are now
doing, by inches!--a far more cruel way of dying.

I was much pleased, when last summer they were upbraided for doing a
little war against the Chips, in spite of Washington, with the sarcastic
reply of a chief, who said: 'Our Great Father, we know, has always told
us it was wrong to make war; yet now he himself is making war, and
killing a great many. Will you explain this to us? We do not understand
it!' This was a hit, a palpable hit, let who will reconcile it.

Mr. Heard gives us the following brief statement of the manner in which
treaties are made with the Indians; and I earnestly call the attention
of the Government and all just citizens to its statements. He says:

     'The traders, knowing for years before, that the whites will
     purchase lands, sell the Indians goods on credit, expecting to
     realize their pay from the consideration to be paid by the
     Government. They thus become interested instruments to obtain the
     consent of the Indians to the treaty. And by reason of their
     familiarity with the language, and the associations of half-breed
     relatives, are possessed of great facilities to accomplish their
     object. The persons deputed by the Government to effect a treaty
     are compelled to procure their cooperation, and this they do by
     providing that their debts shall be paid. The traders obtain the
     concurrence of the Indians by refusing to give them further credit,
     and by representing to them that they will receive an immense
     amount of money if they sell their lands, and thenceforth will live
     at ease, with plenty to eat, and plenty to wear, and plenty of
     powder and lead, and of whatever else they may request. After the
     treaty is agreed to, the amount of ready money is absorbed by the
     _exorbitant demands of the traders_, and _the expenses of the
     removal of the Indians to their reservations_!

     'After that the trader no longer looks to the Indian for his pay;
     he gets it from their annuities. He, therefore, does not use the
     same means to conciliate their good will that he did when he was
     dependent upon their honesty. Claims for depredations upon white
     settlers are also deducted out of their moneys before they leave
     Washington, on _insufficient testimony_; and these are always, when
     based on fact, _double the actual loss_; for the Indian Department
     is notoriously corrupt, and the hand manipulating the machinery
     _must be crossed with gold_! The 'expenses' of obtaining a claim
     enter into the amount demanded and allowed. The demand is not only
     generally unjust, but, instead of its being deducted from the
     moneys of the wrong doer, _it is taken from the annuities of all_!
     This course punishes the innocent and rewards the guilty, because
     the property taken by the depredator is of more value than the
     slight percentage he loses.

     'Many of the stipulations as to establishing schools and furnishing
     them with farming utensils, are never carried out. Building and
     supply contracts are entered into without investigation at
     outrageous prices, and goods belonging to the Indians are put into
     the traders' stores, and _sold to their owners_, and the moneys
     realized _shared by the trader and the Agent_!'

Bishop Whipple, of Minnesota, in his appeal for the red man, confirms
this statement beyond doubt or question:

     'There is not a man in America,' he says,'who ever gave an hour's
     calm reflection to this subject, who does not know that our Indian
     system is an organized system of robbery, and has been for years a
     disgrace to the nation. It has left savage men without Governmental
     control; it has looked on unconcerned at every crime against the
     laws of God and man; it has fostered savage life by wasting
     thousands of dollars in the purchase of paint, beads, scalping
     knives, and tomahawks; it has fostered a system of trade which
     robbed the thrifty and virtuous to pay the debts of the indolent
     and vicious; it has squandered the funds for civilization and
     schools; it has connived at theft; it has winked at murder; and at
     last, after dragging the savage down to a brutishness unknown to
     his fathers, it has brought a harvest of blood to our door!'

The Bishop continues:

     'It was under this Indian system that the fierce, warlike Sioux
     were fitted and trained to be the actors in this bloody drama, _and
     the same causes are to-day, slowly but surely, preparing the way
     for a Chippewa war_. There is not, to-day, an old citizen of
     Minnesota who will not shrug his shoulders as he speaks of the
     dishonesty which accompanied the purchase of the lands of the
     Sioux. It left in savage minds a deep sense of injustice. Then,
     followed ten years of savage life, unchecked by law, uninfluenced
     by good example. They were taught by white men that lying was no
     disgrace, adultery no sin, and theft no crime. Their hunting
     grounds were gone; the onward march of civilization crowded them on
     every side. Their only possible hope of being saved from starvation
     was the fidelity with which a great nation fulfilled its plighted
     faith, which before God and man it had pledged to its heathen
     wards. _The people here, on the border, and the rulers at
     Washington, know how that faith has been broken._

     'The constant irritations of such a system would, in time, have
     secured an Indian massacre. It was hastened and precipitated by the
     sale of nearly eight hundred thousand acres of land, for _which
     they never received one farthing_; for it was all absorbed in
     claims! Then came the story (and it was true) that half of their
     annuity money had also been taken for claims. They waited two
     months, mad, exasperated, hungry--the Agent utterly powerless to
     undo the wrong committed at Washington--and they resolved on savage
     vengeance. For every dollar of which they have been defrauded we
     shall pay ten dollars in the cost of the war. It has been so for
     fifty years; it will be so again. _God's retributive justice always
     has compelled a people to reap exactly what they have permitted to
     be sown!_'

These extracts from the Bishop's Plea confirm what I have stated in the
preceding paragraphs; and the last sentence--which I have marked in
italics--is well worth the while of every reader to ponder well.

Mr. Heard dates the commencement of the massacre to the breaking of a
stray nest of hen's eggs on the prairie, and what came of the
transaction; but the date lies farther back than that, so far as the
resolution to seize the first favorable opportunity for slaughtering the
whites is concerned--and belongs to the era of the great crimes of our
Government against them, as shown in the forcible seizure of their lands
without their receiving any payment, even 'a farthing' for them; the
hucksters, under the connivance of the Government agents, getting the
whole of it, and, in the instance alluded to a while ago, keeping back
from them, as payment for old debts, about three hundred boxes of the
money upon which they had depended to keep themselves alive during the
winter and the following year.

Such enormous crimes were sure to reap a bloody harvest. The Indian is
no fool, although he can't do addition and subtraction. He knows when he
is _about_ fairly dealt with, and he knows when he is mightily plucked.
In this case of the 'old debt payment' he knew that he was robbed
wholesale, and through the mouth of Red Iron he proclaimed the fact to
Governor Ramsey, in council assembled. Alluding to this robbery, he
said:

'We don't think we owe them so much. We want to pay all our debts. We
want our Great Father to send three good men here, to tell us how much
we do owe; and whatever they say, we will pay; and (pointing to the
Indians) that's what all these braves say; our chiefs and all our people
say this!'

At which all the Indians present responded:

'Ho! ho!'

This Red Iron was the principal chief of the Sissetons, and his
indignation at the wrongs done to his race made him so 'boisterous' that
Governor Ramsey was imprudent enough to break him of his chieftainship.
The scene and its results were by no means creditable to the Governor.
This latter personage had summoned Red Iron to meet him at a council,
held December, 1852, and he did not turn up as expected. So, I suppose,
he was sent for, and brought in by the soldiers. He is described by one
who was present, as about forty years old, tall and athletic; six feet
high in his moccasons, with a large, well-developed head, aquiline nose,
thin, compressed lips, and physiognomy beaming with intelligence and
resolution. He was clad in the half military, half Indian costume of the
Dacotah chiefs, as he sat in the council room; and no one greeted or
noticed him. A very poor piece of revenge! In a few minutes the
Governor, turning to the chief in the midst of a breathless silence, by
the aid of an interpreter, opened council. The Governor asked the chief
what excuse he had for not coming to the council when he sent for him.

Whereupon Red Iron rose to his feet, 'with native grace and dignity,'
says Mr. Heard, his blanket falling from his shoulders, and, purposely
dropping the pipe of peace, he stood erect before the Governor, with his
arms folded and his right hand pressed upon the sheath of his scalping
knife. With the utmost coolness and self-possession, a defiant smile
playing upon his thin lips, and his eyes sternly fixed upon his
excellency, the Indian, with a firm voice, replied:

'I started to come, but your braves drove me back.'

GOVERNOR. 'What excuse have you for not coming the second time
when I sent for you?'

RED IRON. 'No other excuse than I have given you.'

GOVERNOR. 'At the treaty, I thought you a good man; but since,
you have acted badly, and I am disposed to break you. I _do_ break you.'

Red Iron looked at the Governor for a moment with a look of withering
contempt and scorn, and then burst out in a voice full of derisive
mockery.

RED IRON. '_You break me!_ My people made me a chief. My people
love me. I will still be their chief. I have done nothing wrong.'

GOVERNOR. 'Red Iron, why did you get your braves together, and
march around here for the purpose of intimidating other chiefs, and
prevent their coming to council?'

RED IRON. 'I did not get my braves together; they got
themselves together, to prevent _boys_ going to council to be made
_chiefs_ to sign papers, and to prevent single chiefs going to council
at night, to be _bribed_ to sign papers for _money_ we have never got.'
And then the inexorable fellow continued, without any regard to his
excellency's nerves or conscience: 'We have heard how the M'Dewakantons
were served at Mendota; that by secret councils you got their names on
paper, and took away their money. We don't want to be served so. My
braves wanted to come to council in the _daytime_, when the sun shines;
and we want no councils in the dark. We want all our people to go to
council together, so that we can all know what is done.'

The Governor is nothing abashed at these damaging charges, but returns
once more to the assault.

GOVERNOR. 'Why did you attempt to come to council with your
braves, when I had forbidden your braves coming to council?'

To which Red Iron, with the same masterful, defiant smile upon his 'thin
lips,' answers:

RED IRON. 'You invited the chiefs only, and would not let the
braves come too. This is not the way we have been treated before; this
is not according to our customs; for among Dacotahs, chiefs and braves
go to council together. When you first sent for us there were two or
three chiefs here, and we waited, and we wanted to wait till the rest
would come, that we might all be in council together, and know what was
done, and so that we might all understand the papers, and know what we
were signing. When we signed the treaty, the _traders threw a blanket
over our faces, and darkened our eyes; and made us sign papers which we
did not understand, and which were not explained or read to us_. We want
our Great Father at Washington to know what has been done.'

This last speech--whose words hit like bullets--made the Governor wince,
and he replied, with more sharpness than wit:

GOVERNOR. 'Your Great Father has sent me to represent him; and
what I say, he says. He wants you to pay your old debts, in accordance
with the papers you signed when the treaty was made' ['which we did not
understand; which were never read nor explained to us; which we were
forced to sign,' as Red Iron had just told the Governor!]. 'You must
leave that money in my hands to pay those debts. If you refuse to do
that, I will take the money back.'

The Governor was getting deeper and deeper into the pit which he had dug
for the Indian. This last speech was most unhappy and impolitic for the
side he was advocating. It put dreadful weapons into the hands of Red
Iron, which the crafty 'old man eloquent' did not fail to use against
his antagonist.

He makes this manly answer, not at all abashed in the presence of the
chief magistrate:

RED IRON. 'You can take back your money! We sold our land to
you, and you promised to pay us. If you don't give us the money, I will
be glad, and all our people will be glad; for we will have our land back
if you don't give us the money. That paper was not interpreted or
explained to us. We are told it gives about three hundred boxes
($300,000) of our money to some of the traders! We don't think we owe
them so much. We want to pay all our debts. We want our Great Father to
send three good men here to tell us how much we do owe, and whatever
they say, we will pay; and (pointing to the Indians) that's what all
these braves say. Our chiefs and all our people say this.'

And the Indians responded with the usual 'Ho! ho!' of acquiescence.

But the Governor don't see it. A poor devil of an Indian, according to
his Christian conviction, ought to be content to pay unaudited, untaxed
bills, wherein the margin is broad enough for any scoundrel to do his
robberies by tens of thousands. So his excellency told Red Iron:

GOVERNOR. 'That can't be done!' [Nay, more confounding and
appalling still, he added:] 'You owe more than your money will pay, and
I am ready now to pay your annuity, and no more; and when you are ready
to receive it, the Agent will pay it.'

Red Iron replies in a speech full of pathos:

RED IRON. 'We will receive our annuity, but we will sign no
papers for anything else.' [You've swindled us enough, lied to us deep
enough already, and we have no belief in your words or agreements.] 'The
snow is on the ground, and we have been waiting a long time to get our
money. We are poor; you have plenty. Your fires are warm; your _tepees_
(wigwams, tents) keep out the cold. We have nothing to eat. We have been
waiting a long time for our moneys. Our hunting season is past. A great
many of our people are sick for being hungry. We must die because you
won't pay us. We may die! but if we do' [hold on, reader! no curses on
the white men are coming next, as one might naturally expect, either
from Christian or heathen orator, under the circumstances!]--'but if we
do,' he continues, 'we will leave our bones on the ground, that our
Great Father may see where his Dacotah children died!' [He has seen many
such shambles, O thou eloquent Indian! eloquent to ears of flint and
hearts of granite! and I never heard that the 'Great Father' ever shed a
single tear over them.] He goes on: 'We are very poor. We have sold our
hunting grounds, and with them the graves of our fathers. We have sold
our own graves.' [Out of all those hundreds of thousands of acres, not
six feet of earth, which they could call their own, left for any one of
them!] 'We have no place to bury our dead, and you will not pay us the
money for our lands.'

I give this interview, and what transpired there, as a sample of the
treatment which the Indians were in the habit of receiving at the hands
both of the General Government and the State authorities. Not the wisest
kind of treatment, one would think, this which Red Iron received, taking
all the circumstances into account. The reader will be surprised,
however, that Governor Ramsey, not content with 'breaking' the chief, as
he called it--the greatest dishonor which he could inflict upon an
Indian of rank--sent him, when the council broke up, to the guard house,
under an escort of soldiers! This impolitic official ought to have
remembered that the fire was even then ready for the kindling, which
finally burst out in such fearful devastation over his devoted State;
that it was enough to have cheated the Indians, without thus inflaming
their already excited passions, by heaping so great an indignity upon
the person of their chief. But he was regardless of everything except
the display of his own power and authority. No doubt he thought he was
acting for the best, and that the dirty redskins needed to be held with
a high hand. But it was bad thinking and doing, nevertheless; a most
shortsighted and foolish policy, which came wellnigh, as it was, to an
Indian outbreak.

The braves of Red Iron retired under the leadership of Lean Bear, a
crafty fellow, eloquent in his way, and now irreconcilably mad against
the whites; and when he had led them about a quarter of a mile from the
council house, they set up a simultaneous yell, the gathering signal of
the Dacotah. Ere the echoes died away, Indians were hurrying from their
_tepees_ toward them, prepared for battle. They proceeded to an eminence
near the camp, where mouldered the bones of many warriors. It was the
memorable battle ground where their ancestors had fought, in a Waterloo
conflict, the warlike Sacs and Foxes, thereby preserving their lands and
nationality.

A more favorable occasion, a more fitting locality for the display of
eloquence which should kindle the blood of the Indian into raging fire,
and persuade him to any the most monstrous and inhuman deeds, could not
have been chosen even by Indian sagacity. An old battle ground, where
the Sioux had been victorious over their enemies; the whitened bones of
the ghastly skeletons of their ancestors who fought the battle,
bleaching on the turf, or calling to them from their graves below to
take God's vengeance in their own hands; the memory of the old and new
wrongs inflicted upon them by the whites; the infuriating insult just
offered to their favorite chief--all conspired with the orator's cunning
to give edge to his eloquence and obedience to his commands.

Governor Ramsey has a good deal to thank God for, that, stimulated by
Lean Bear's rhetoric, the Sioux did not that night attack the whites,
and make an indiscriminate slaughter of the population, as they would
have done, if it had not been for the friendly Indians and half breeds.
Perhaps he thought he was strong enough, for the hour, to defeat them in
any attempt at an outbreak. But it is not strength so much as strategy
which is needed in Indian warfare. To whip the Indians, we must become
Indians in our plan and conduct of battle. The civilization and
mathematics of war, as practised by cultivated people, are useless in
the wilderness, and all our proud and boasted tactics are mere foolish
toying and trifling--a waste of time, strength, and opportunity. No one
doubts that if our troops could meet the Indians in open field, they
would slaughter them like rats; but they know better than to be caught
on the open field, except they are pretty sure of an advantage. They
steal upon you like thieves, shod with moccasons which have no sound;
they think it equally brave to shoot a man from behind a tree as to
sabre him in a hand-to-hand encounter.

It is dreadful to contemplate what an incarnate fiend we have roused in
this cheated, wronged, and despised Indian. I tremble to think of it. I
tremble when I remember also what Bishop Whipple says in the 'Plea,'
from which I have already quoted; they are words which ought to be
thundered continually into the ears of the 'Great Father,' until he
compels a total revolution in our Indian affairs--words which all
settlers in those regions should keep forever present in their minds;
and, with the Minnesota massacres still fresh in their memory, they
should be taught by them never for a moment to trust an Indian, and
never knowingly to give him just cause for complaint; to go always
armed; to organize, in towns, districts, and counties, the yeomen of the
soil, who must be ready at any moment, by night or day, to meet the
treacherous, ubiquitous enemy. These last will be found of more value
than the 'thundering' suggestion contained in the first of these
precautionary propositions. For it is upon themselves that they must
chiefly rely for defence, these hapless settlers! and upon no
Government, and no soldiers.

Think of it, our 'Great Father' at Washington! and you, his unruly
children, you Senators and Congressmen! One of your most loyal citizens
in the State of Minnesota, a Christian bishop, well acquainted with all
the facts, the dodges, lies, frauds, and all the ins and outs of your
Indian administration, declares, with the fullest solemnity which his
office and functions can give to words, and with the voice, not of
prophecy, but of logical deduction, that the same causes which brought
about the Sioux massacre, 'ARE TO-DAY, SLOWLY BUT SURELY, PREPARING
THE WAY FOR A CHIPPEWA WAR!' What a Chippewa war means, those who
did not know in 1861, found out through the Sioux in 1862 and 1863, to
their perpetual sorrow. Like the Bourbons, however, our Government
either cannot or will not learn lessons from experience. If they were
compelled to bear the penalties of their neglect and wanton
maladministration of affairs in the Indian districts, the loss would be
small and the retribution just. But they sit at ease, far away from the
scene of carnage, and 'get' nothing but the 'news,' which they read as
they would any other record of human passion and depravity. It is the
innocent settlers who pay the penalty for the guilt and transgressions
of their rulers.

It is time somebody, or some vast numbers, banded as one man, began to
think upon this threatening question, and to act upon it. It concerns
the faith and honor of this great republic before all the world, that
the wrongs alluded to should be speedily righted. We are not, in
reality, what our Indian legislation would almost seem to accuse and
convict us of, a nation of man-catchers, baiting our trap with fine
farms, and free government, and happy homes, and abundant prosperity of
all sorts, that so we may inveigle the simple minded, and then hand them
over to the tender mercies of the Indians! God forbid that such crimes
should be ours! But there is a coloring of truth about the whole
programme. We invite settlers to populate our vast and wellnigh
boundless wilderness, promising them protection from enemies abroad and
a happy peace at home; and in the same breath we cheat the savages, and
stir them up to hatred and violence against every white man, woman, and
child in the country. This is like preaching security and peace while
your lighted match is applied to the powder barrel. It is a logic which
confutes itself, and needs no _sillygism_ to prove its lying.

Why should we not bravely and manfully, with all the wisdom we possess,
confront and reform the evils and iniquities of this system? It is a
part and parcel of the work committed to our charge, that we shall
wisely deal with this people, until God, by His own mysterious means and
agencies, removes them finally from the continent and the planet. There
is no room for the red man where the white man comes. He _must_ give
way. It is destiny, and there is no help for it. He knows this as well
as we do; and he gnaws the grim fact with the teeth of the hopeless
damned. But why imbitter him needlessly against us, against the
Government, against the people among whom he resides, and over whose
dear lives and properties he holds suspended the scalping knife and the
flaming pine brand? We are unworthy of the sovereign possessions
reserved for us from before the foundations of the world--making the
title deeds, therefore, unusually sound and wellnigh unquestionable--if
we cannot deal like rational men with the hordes of savages, whose lands
we have robbed them of, whom we have reduced to mere pensioners upon
our caprice--not bounty--and so satisfy them and their claims that the
business of human life may be carried on safely in their vicinity and
actual presence. 'Who art thou that saith 'there is a lion in the way'?
Rise, sluggard, and slay the lion! The road has to be travelled.'

We are certainly not afraid of any lion, whether he be red or black;
and, until lately, _both_ these monstrous red and black animals lay in
the direct path of the nation, on which it must travel or perish. We
have pretty well mauled and knuckled the black animal, and wellnigh
settled with his keepers, one and all! but this red lion is of a
different sort, and requires altogether another kind of treatment. We
shall yet save the bruised and bleeding black to the service of
civilization and humanity. He never was half a bad fellow at the bottom
of his leonine bowels, and he already takes to white civility and
customs, like an educated, intelligent, and trusty dog of the 'poor dog
Tray' sort! And I, for one, have more than a sneaking affection for his
old black mug, and a world of hope in his future behavior, if we don't
spoil him for the field and for watch and guard at home, by our infernal
'culture,' as the thing is called.

Is this red lion a more terrible devil to combat, or harder to trick
into civility, or more impervious to the injunctions of the Ten
Commandments? I suppose it will be said that he is; that the black
fellow bolted the whole code at a gobble, and wagged his tail, as if the
feat must surely please his new masters; that he had long had the
benefit of civilized cooking, and knew a gentleman by his toggery; that,
moreover, he was of a teachable, plastic nature, and was meant to lie
down in due time upon the hearth rug before the fire, in any gentleman's
sitting room in the land. It may be true. I believe all this myself, and
a good deal more, about him; and I take renewed hope also for this great
republic--which is the hope of the world!--that it has thus, at last,
tamed him, and fitted him for exhibition upon a nobler theatre than that
of Barnum.

But the red lion, you say, is untamable--cannot be dealt with
successfully by the wit of white men; and that it is best, therefore, to
rob him of the golden apples which he guards, and which are his only
food, and so starve him out. But you can't deal that way with the Indian
lion, my friend, without feeling the taste of his claws. You have tried
it long enough. Bishop Whipple says, 'for fifty years'! And I ask you
how much nearer are you to the taming of him now, than you were those
'fifty years' ago? Echo answers: 'That's an impudent question!' and I
reply, so be it! but you can't shuffle it off in that way. I have tried
my hand at suggesting how imminent dangers, calamities, and horrors may
even yet be averted from the Western settlements; and if those who urge
that justice shall be done to them, equal to that which we here render,
or try or pretend to render to each other--if those who urge this are
not listened to now, their plea will be remembered when it is all too
late, and thousands of innocent people are again murdered, and their
homes laid waste and desolate.

I again say, let no one think by these statements that I am making a
special pleading for the Indians, or that I sanction their butcheries.
God knows how far all this is from my thought or feeling! I am a white
man right through all the inmost fibres of my being: too white, I often
fear; for I find my love of race, and pride of blood and ancestry, often
encroach too far upon the proper regions of my humanity, and threaten to
blear my eyesight to the fair claims of the inferior races.

But I have to do with a thoughtful, reflective, and, at the bottom, just
and humane people; and knowing this, I felt safe, or nearly so, against
all misconstruction, in this my attempt to show that the late Indian
massacres were not instigated merely and solely by the passion of the
Indian for blood, but that they had deeper, broader, more tangible
causes than this, some of which I have briefly hinted at. Woe to them by
whom these butcheries came! Woe also to them who, knowing what must
inevitably result from their foul dealings, continued to deal foully
with the Indian--until the doomsday came!

I have not put in a single tithe of the evidence which I might adduce to
prove my case. It is of no use appealing to the higher powers for
redress. 'I am sick at heart,' says the good Bishop Whipple; 'I fear the
words of one of our statesmen to me were true: 'Bishop, every word you
say of this Indian system is true; the nation knows it. It is useless;
you will not be heard. Your faith is only like that of the man that
stood on the bank of the river, waiting for the water to run by, that he
might cross over dryshod!'' And then he continues, with solemn emphasis
and pity: 'All I have to say is this, that if a nation, trembling on the
brink of anarchy and ruin, is so dead that it will not hear a plea to
redress wrongs which the whole people admit call for reform, God in
mercy pity us and our children!'




BURIED ALIVE.

A Dirge.

                    "There may be thought,
  Though nothing sure, yet much unhappily."

  "A document in madness, thoughts and remembrance fitted."


   Deep, deep in the tender heart
     Make a grave for the joys of the Past!
   Let never a tear fall hot on their bier,
     But hurry them in as fast
 As we bury the Beautiful out of our sight,
 Ere corruption and horror have saddened our light.

   Deep, deep in the sinking heart
     Make a grave for the dreams of the Past!
   Let the shrill cries of pain still assail thee in vain,
     Though they follow so wild and so fast:
 Through the fibres and sinews, and hot, bloody dew
 Let the sharp strokes fall piercing, unceasing, and true.

   Call, call on the feverish brain
     To bring aid to the gasping heart!
   To sustain its quick throbs, to suppress its fierce sobs,
     As it must with its idols part:
 While the ruthless spade in the grave it has made
 Hurries forever the beautiful Dead!

 Call, call on the tortured soul
     To stand close by the sinking heart,
   While the nervous mesh of the writhing flesh,
     Shuddering and shivering in every part,
 Its strange anguish renews as the hot, bloody dews
 Follow the track of the rude spade through.

     Call, call on the gifted brain
     To send on in the funeral train
 Her fair children enwrought from the tissue of thought--
     Though their wailing will all be in vain--
   Yet shrouded in robes of funereal woe
   Let them move on to monotones, solemn and slow!

   Rouse, rouse the immortal soul
     With its hopes and its visions so bright,
   To send them in the train with the thoughts of the brain,
     Though their vesture seemed woven of light,
 To sigh, wail, and weep o'er the pulse-rhythmed sleep
       Of the Dead in their living urn!

     Heave, heave the weird sculptured stone;
       Press it deep on the throbbing grave!
     With a wildering moan leave the Buried alone
       In their tomb in the quivering heart:
 While it pours its wild blood in a hot lava flood
 Round its beautiful sepulchred Dead.

       But my God, they are _not_ at rest!
       Can they neither live nor die?
   See, they writhe in their throbbing grave!
 While the nervous mesh of the quivering flesh
 Its strange anguish renews as the hot, bloody dews
     Follow the track of my Beautiful back
       As they rush into life again,
       Bringing nought but a sense of pain!

             We may bury deep the Past--
             Vain is all our bitter task!
 It is throbbing, living still, for beyond all power to kill,
 It can never find a rest in a woman's stormful breast,
 It can never, never sleep rocked by anguish wild and deep,
 It can never quiet lie with shrill sobs for lullaby;
 And since woman cannot part from the idols of her heart,
 And as severed life is Hell for the souls that love too well,
   Better far the tender form whose lorn life is only storm,
         With the coffined dead should seek
         To lie down in a dreamless sleep--
       And find rest in the dust with the worm.

 Dig a quiet, lowly grave
             In the earth where willows wave!
 Round the burning anguish deep wrap the cooling winding sheet,
 Shroud the children of the brain, and the soul's high-visioned train:
     Ah, o'er the snowy sleep let no pitying mortal weep,
         For the _weary seek repose_ with the worm!

             Creeping pines and mosses grow
             O'er the fragile form below!
   Violets, bright-eyed pansies wave o'er the lowly, harmless grave;
       Let the butterfly and bee all the summer flutter free,
 O'er the flowers grown from a heart which no wrongs could ever part,
       Nor torture e'er remove from the creatures of its love;
 With the wild and feverish brain, and thought's bright but blighted train,
 With strong heart, but anguished soul, and pain's weird and heavy dole--
       Let the weary, tired form, whose lost life was only storm,
                    In the shroud's pure snow
                    Find release from woe,
         Nor hope, nor joy, nor love it e'er again would know!




NEGRO TROOPS.


There was a time not long since when the serious consideration of a
question like this would have met with little favor. We remember seeing,
in this city of New York, one genial October day, not very many years
ago, a small company of negro soldiers. They were marching in Canal
street, not in Broadway, and seemed to fear molestation even there. The
writer was a schoolboy then, cadet in a military school (one of the
first established of those excellent institutions), and had, of course,
a particular interest in all military matters. So he stopped to look
upon these black soldiers--marching with all the more pride (as it
seemed to him) because they marched under the floating folds of the
stars and stripes. His boy's heart was stirred by the spectacle, and
full of a big emotion; but the fashion of the times overpowered the
generous impulse, and he treated the negro soldiers with contempt.

This was in the palmy days of the old _régime_. The stifling of that
generous impulse was one of the glories of the old _régime_. Not a
decade of years went by, and the writer stood again in the streets of
New York city, and saw another sight of negro soldiers. It was, indeed,
and in all respects, another sight. This time the black men marched in
Broadway; this time they feared no molestation. It was a balmy day in
spring, and God's sunshine glistened gladly from the bright bayonets of
United States black soldiers. What a spectacle it was! There marched the
retributive justice of the nation--'carrying the flag and keeping step
to the music of the Union.' That march was a march of triumph, and its
sublime watchword was: 'LIBERTY AND UNION, NOW AND FOREVER, ONE AND
INSEPARABLE!'

What a marvellous change in public opinion! Now, negro companies are
treated with respect, negro regiments are honored; because we honor the
defenders of our national ensign, which is the representative and symbol
of our national life. The men who joined so gallantly in the assault on
Port Hudson; who fell so nobly at Milliken's Bend, in repelling the
attack of men whose blackness was not, like theirs, of the outside skin,
but of a blacker, deeper dye, the blackness of treason in their inner
hearts; the men whose blood drenched the sands of Morris Island, and
made South Carolina more a sacred soil than it had ever been before,
because it was blood poured out in defence of the nation's honor, and to
wash out the stain of Carolina's dishonor; these men cannot be contemned
now. They have shown themselves noble men. They have made for themselves
a place in American history, along with their fathers at New Orleans,
and their grandfathers under Washington. And the rebel epitaph of the
brave Colonel Shaw, who led them unflinchingly against the iron hail of
Wagner, is no reproach, but a badge of honor: 'We have buried him under
his niggers.'

Since that memorable assault, another State has witnessed the patriotic
gallantry of these despised 'niggers;' and in the first Virginia
campaign of Lieutenant-General Grant, negroes have borne an honorable
part. There is a division of them attached to the old ninth corps, under
Burnside, in the present organization of the Army of the Potomac. While
that noble army was fighting the battles of the Wilderness, this
division was holding the fords of the Rapid Ann. When Grant swung his
base away from the river, after the disaster to his right wing, and
moved upon Lee's flank, the ninth corps, with its negro division, held
an honorable post in the marching column; and at Spottsylvania Court
House the correspondents tell us how, with the war cry of Fort Pillow in
their mouths, these 'niggers' rushed valiantly to the assault, and
elicited the highest praise for their steadiness and courage. Not less
honorable is the record of the negro troops attached to the coöperating
Army of the Peninsula. The three extracts from official despatches,
which follow, show what the record is.

May 5th, General Butler telegraphs to Secretary Stanton: 'We have seized
Wilson's Wharf Landing. A brigade of Wild's colored troops are there. At
Powhatan Landing two regiments of the same brigade have landed.'

May 9th, General Butler telegraphs from Bermuda Landing: 'Our operations
may be summed up in a few words. With seventeen hundred cavalry we have
advanced up the Peninsula, forced the Chickahominy, and have safely
brought them to our present position. These are colored cavalry, and are
now holding position as our advance toward Richmond.'

May 25th, the War Department announced, in a bulletin, that 'General
Butler, in a despatch dated at headquarters in the field, at seven
o'clock this morning, reports that Major-General Fitzhugh Lee, lately
promoted, made, with cavalry, infantry, and artillery, an attack upon my
post at Wilson's Wharf, north side of James River, below Fort Powhatan,
garrisoned by two regiments, all negro troops, Brigadier-General Wild
commanding, and was handsomely repulsed. Before the attack, Lee sent a
flag, stating that he had force enough to take the place, demanding its
surrender, and in that case the garrison should be turned over to the
authorities at Richmond as prisoners of war(!); but if this proposition
was rejected, he would not be answerable for the consequences when he
took the place. General Wild replied: 'We will try that.' Reinforcements
were at once sent, but the fight was over before their arrival.'

It has been not unfrequently said that negroes were cowards and would
not fight. The best answer that can be made to that charge is the
official order, hereto annexed, of General 'Baldy' Smith. It will be
remembered that Grant had just accomplished the transfer of his army
from the swamps of the Chickahominy to the south side of the James
River, and had immediately thereupon attacked the earthworks in front of
Petersburg. The time was June--a month later than the official
despatches from Butler already quoted:

     '_To the Eighteenth Army Corps_:

     'The General commanding desires to express to his command his
     appreciation of the soldierly qualities which have been displayed
     during the campaign of the last seventeen days. Within that time
     they have been constantly called upon to undergo all the hardships
     of the soldier's life, and be exposed to all of its dangers.

     'Marches under a hot sun have ended in severe battles, and, after
     the battle, watchful nights in the trenches gallantly taken from
     the enemy.

     'But the crowning point of the honor they are entitled to has been
     won since the morning of the 15th instant, when a series of
     earthworks on most commanding positions and of formidable strength
     have been carried, with all the guns and materials of war of the
     enemy, including prisoners and colors. The works have all been
     held, and the trophies remain in our hands.

     'This victory is all the more important to us as the troops never
     have been regularly organized in camps where time has been given
     them to learn the discipline necessary to a well-organized _corps
     d'armée_, but they had been hastily concentrated and suddenly
     summoned to take part in the trying campaign of our country's
     being. Such honor as they have won will remain imperishable.

     '_To the colored troops comprising the division of General Hinks,
     the General commanding would call the attention of his command_.
     With the veterans of the Eighteenth Corps they have stormed the
     works of the enemy and carried them, taking guns and prisoners, and
     _in the whole affair they have displayed all the qualities of good
     soldiers_.

     'By command of
         'W. F. SMITH, Major-General.

     'WM. RUSSELL, JR.,
         'Assistant Adjt.-General.

     'Official: SOLON A. CARTER,
         'Captain and A. A. A.-G.'


It may be added that 'Baldy' Smith has never been known as being
particularly partial to the use of negro troops. He is reported to have
said, after the assault on Petersburg, that the war was virtually ended,
because the negroes had now shown that they could fight, and so it was
only a question of time.

The man is not to be envied who can contemptuously disregard this
record. And while we give unstinted honor to the heroes whose valor has
made the Army of the Potomac immortal in history, and made its campaign
of the Wilderness and Spottsylvania a campaign of glory, let us not
forget that negro troops in that army, and in other armies in the same
campaign, have borne their part faithfully, and deserve well of the
republic. Nor let us forget the damning atrocities at Fort Pillow, where
black men in United States uniform were massacred in cold blood, because
they were willing rather to die freemen with their white comrades of the
United States army, than live slaves to rebel masters:[D] thus
vindicating their claim to freedom, and reflecting upon our country's
flag the especial honor which such determined bravery has ever been
awarded among men--reminding us of the Three Hundred at Thermopylæ, and
the Old Guard at Waterloo, disdaining to surrender.

So strange are the events of history! So mysterious is the plan of
Providence, choosing now, as in the days of the apostle Paul, 'base
things of the world, and things which are despised, yea, and things
which are not, to bring to nought things that are!' What a stinging
example of time's revenges, to be sure, that negroes should have a part
in bringing to nought the rebellion of negro-holders! that they should
be found fighting for the very Government whose power had aided to keep
them in bondage to these negro-holders! In face of such facts, will any
one impiously declare that fate, or blind chance, rules the affairs of
men!

We might well pause at this point to consider the philosophy of
revolutions. It would be an interesting study to investigate the
efficient or radical causes of these singular phenomena of God's
providence--these crises in history, when 'the fountains of the great
deep are broken up,' and the experience of centuries is crowded into the
limits of a single year, and we see the old landmarks all swept away
before the overwhelming tides of a new era. Then it is that precedents
avail us nothing, and we are driven to lay hold of those principles of
justice and right which are alone eternal. For in the storm and wreck of
revolution those principles are our sure beacon lights, shining on, like
the stars, forever. Thus philosophizing, the question would be: Have
revolutions a fixed law? Is there a recurring sequence in the mighty
'logic of events,' that will enable us to define a formula for the
revolutions of systems in society? So science has demonstrated a law for
the revolutions and changes of systems of worlds in infinite space. Or,
are the revolutions of history, like the volcanic disturbances of our
planet earth, in a sort, abnormal? They seem to come, like the _deus ex
machina_ of the Roman poet, to cut the Gordian knots that perplex
statesmen and bewilder nations. The affairs of men get so tangled up
sometimes, that to prevent anarchy and chaos, God sends revolutions,
which sweep away the effete institutions and old, worn-out systems, to
replace them with new and living systems. And thus there is a perpetual
genesis, or new creation, of the world. Let any one read Carlyle's vivid
description of the badness of the eighteenth century, 'bad in that bad
way as never century before was, till the French Revolution came and put
an end to it,' and he will understand something of this question of
revolutions. It suggests the old scholastic dispute of the free agency
of man, and looks as though, granting that freedom, it were, after all,
too great a gift for us. For history seems to teach, as its one grand
lesson, confirming, as always, the revelation in Christ, that men cannot
take care of themselves; and that God leaves them to their own ways long
enough to satisfy them that human agency is inadequate to solve the
question of reform, and then, when the times are ripe, He takes the
reins into His own hand, and starts society anew. It is the patient
process of education by centuries, or by ages--only to be made perfect
in the millennial age. So it is that the world moves. It moves by the
free agency of man, kept in its balance by the guiding hand of God.


I. THE VEXED QUESTION OF THE NEGRO.

Thus it is that the second American revolution is settling for us the
vexed question of the negro. What should be done with him, or for him,
or to him, had been the disturbing element in our political system ever
since the African slave trade expired by limitation of the Constitution
in 1808. The devices of human ingenuity (inspired, as we fervently
believe, by the purest patriotism) to stave off the inevitable final
settlement of this account, innumerable as they were, and only limited
by the predestined decree of Supreme Benevolence (which is Supreme
Justice), were, at last, exhausted. The statesmanship of '50 had been
outgrown. The giants of those days had gone, one by one, to their reward
ere yet the first breaths of the revolution that has opened the decade
of '60. Nought remained to their lesser associates, who still survived,
but to bow reverently before the storm, 'as seeing in it Him who is
invisible.' Such recognition, indeed, is the measure of men's patriotism
to-day. The man who so perverts his mind and reason as to shut out the
evidence of the stars and his own consciousness (the German
metaphysician's proof of Deity), and deny that God is, is simply a fool;
and every reflecting mind is ready to sanction and adopt the Psalmist's
word: 'The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.' Equally a fool
is he who shuts his eyes to the overwhelming facts of the last two
years, refusing to be taught by the Providence behind them. Such and so
vast is the revolution by which God has intervened in our history. Such
is the Providence that still guides and guards the nation ordained by
Him to be. Such is the revolution that has swept away the slave system,
and opened for us a new path, and given us a new power of progress.

Now, these views need not make one a negro-enthusiast. Because the
system of slavery has been swept away, it is not necessary to assert, as
some do, the negro's equality with the white man in those things wherein
he is plainly not his equal. Yet there is an equality that cannot be
denied. The negro is certainly a man, and not a brute animal; although
so demoralized and corrupt had grown to be the tone of society that we
have actually heard the opinion avowed, in all seriousness, that the
negro had no soul. Shylock, in 'The Merchant of Venice,' pleads for
himself and his Jewish brethren, in one of the most pathetic passages of
even Shakspeare's genius, as though the Hebrew race were considered less
than men. And such, indeed, was nearly the case in Shylock's time. On
the other hand, the Moor of Venice disdains to plead as to his
superiors. His conscious equality in presence of the 'grave and reverend
signiors,' gives to his renowned address a consummate dignity, unknown
elsewhere in literature. He felt, indeed, that his victories under the
flag of the republic entitled him not only to equality, but especial
honor. Is it not singular that in this nineteenth century there should
be found men who gladly accord to the Jew, the descendant of Shem, that
of which they refuse even the possibility to the dark descendant of Ham?
Surely the republic of Venice was not so far behind our boasted
civilization. Our civilization still clings to the idea of privilege.
The privilege of caste is only exchanged for the privilege of color.

Nor need we commit ourselves to the doctrine of some, who would appear
to think that the negro is to be the dominant race of the future; if not
in himself, yet in virtue of his supplementing the composite Anglo-Saxon
race, and thus giving to it a completeness it is assumed not to have at
present. Such we understand to be the doctrine of what styles itself
Miscegenation. It would be pertinent, and, perhaps, conclusive, to cite
on this point the Latin maxim, _De gustibus non disputandum_.

There are those who admire a certain new style of music, of which the
melody is chiefly hidden from the appreciation of common folk, and which
has received the title, 'Music of the Future;' looking forward to a time
when, perhaps, men's senses will be preternaturally quickened to
comprehend its discordant harmonies. It is something akin to that vagary
of religious sentiment, which, whatever may be its merits, whatever its
satisfaction for a spiritually illuminated chosen few, is, nevertheless,
beyond the present ken and comprehension and spiritual compass of most
mortals, and may be called the Religion of the Future. The fatal defect
of all these theories is that they serve no purpose of utility.
Considered as creations of ideal beauty, they may charm the fancy and
quicken the imagination, and even exalt the mental habitudes, of a few
devotees. Or, allowing that they are a sort of morning twilight vision,
they _may_, we cannot dogmatically deny, hereafter develop into a
splendid fulness, in the perfect day. All this may be. But they do not
meet the practical needs of our working life, the wants of weary men and
weary women.

So, what we want for the negro is not a metaphysical theory of his
perfect equality with the white man. Nor, on the other hand, are we at
liberty to say that he is, by virtue of any physical conformation and
structure, something inferior to the white man. Neither of these
positions can be sustained. The one plainly contradicts our observation
and experience; the other needs the proof of science that inferiority is
determined by physical structure. We must face the fact of the negro's
present degraded condition; and we must accept the equal fact of his
being a man, with a soul as precious, in the sight of God, as the soul
of his white brother. For the day when the sublime exordium of the
Declaration of Independence could be stigmatized as a 'glittering
generality,' is gone by. The basis of our American system of government,
it is no longer doubted, is the equality of all men before the law, as
the basis of our Christian faith is the equality of all men before God.
Accepting, then, the two undeniable facts above named, the question is,
What shall we do now with the negro?


II. THE NEGRO SLAVE AS A SOLDIER.

Without attempting to discuss this interesting question in all its
various aspects, we may briefly advert to some of the problems in the
discussion which would seem to be fairly solved in the employment of the
negro as a United States soldier.

Thus much is certainly true of the American negro, and herein he is
doubtless superior to the white man; namely, that he is docile, patient,
buoyant of spirit, full of affection, and endowed with a marvellous
apprehension of things spiritual. His _patience_ is shown by his long
bondage, borne without serious murmuring; awaiting the day of
deliverance, confident that the year of jubilee was to come. This point
is lucidly elaborated in a late article, of great interest, in _The
Edinburgh Review_, said to have been written by a negro escaped from
slavery. The negro's _docility_ appears in his aptitude to catch quickly
the tone of his master's mind, and guide himself by it; in the readiness
with which he yields to superior authority--which may or may not be due
to his spirit-crushing bondage, but which certainly has in it little of
the stupidity we should expect to find if such were the case. The
_buoyancy of his spirit_ overflows in the perpetual music of his laugh
and song amid the hard fortunes of his race. The fulness of his
_capacity of affection_ is attested by his remarkable devotion to master
or mistress, surviving strong amid all vicissitudes, and rising above
the iniquitous injustice that holds him in bonds into that exalted
triumph of the apostle's doctrine: 'Be not overcome of evil, but
overcome evil with good.' As for his _readiness to apprehend spiritual
things_, the experience of every person who has lived at the South
furnishes abundant proof. Who that has stood on the banks of a Southern
river, when a negro was baptized, and heard the loud chorus of joy of
his brethren and sisters when the sign of the Church was put upon him,
and seen the sympathy of eye and hand that welcomed him to the blessed
company, has not felt that for this poor, despised race there are riches
laid up in that kingdom 'where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and
where thieves do not break through nor steal'? Who that has stood in a
Southern forest on some Sunday afternoon, in the early Southern spring,
when the woods are resonant with the songs of birds, and heard a negro
congregation of believers in their meeting-house near by, joining with
all the fervor of their tropical temperament in this glad hymn of
nature, in the immortal verse of Wesley and Whitfield, has not felt that
to the negro the vision of the New Jerusalem is more of a reality than
has yet been granted to his worldly favored white brother and master?
Ah, no one who has witnessed such scenes all the years of his childhood
and youth, can deny that among the disciples of Christ are to be
reckoned especially the negro race; who bear His blessed cross in our
day, amid the jeers of a sceptical world, just as in His own day upon
earth the negro Simon of Cyrene bore to the Mount of Calvary the cross
on which the Saviour died.

What these things prove is just this: the negro's capacity for freedom;
his capacity to know what is the 'perfect law of liberty,' keeping
irresponsible license in check; his absolute freedom from the
bloodthirstiness that seems to horrify so many unthinking persons, who
affect to fear the consequences of putting a musket in a negro's hand.
The incontestable points above enumerated show the groundlessness of
such an alleged fear. It needs only to consider them candidly to be
disabused on that score. No one who has seen and knows the tenderness of
the negro toward the children of his master, and his never-failing
respect toward his mistress, dares say he fears the negro's savageness.
No one who knows the negro's religious sensibility and his unshaken
faith in Christ, dares say he fears. No. Only those fear who know
nothing at all about the negro. They fear whose creed is given them by
men thirsting for the negro's blood, that it may be coined into ungodly
gold.

Thus much will suffice for objections to negro troops, on the ground of
their incapacity. It is seen that the negro is capable to comprehend the
limitations of liberty; that his nature is not essentially savage, or,
if so, has been softened and tempered into a gentle docility under the
benign influences of civilized society; that, above all, his Christian
education has elevated him to a dignity that despises mean revenge. If
further proof is necessary, the regiments of negro slaves recruited in
Louisiana and the Carolinas, acquiring a discipline that has stood them
in good stead at Olustee (day of gloom) and elsewhere on their native
soil, may be cited in evidence of their capacity.

But what about our rights in the matter? For we are considering now the
case of the slaves, not the free negro? The proper and sufficient answer
to that question is, What about the rights of slave-holders? What rights
of theirs are we bound to respect now? They have taken the law into
their own hands, and if they cannot enforce it, is it any part of our
business to aid them? Certainly and undoubtedly not. It is part of the
penalty of treason; part of the price they are paying for their ignoble
thrust at the nation's life; and a very light penalty, and cheap price
it is, that they lose their right to hold slaves. Such rights as they
possessed they held under the Constitution. We have been willing, for
the sake of peace (bearing in mind the apostle's injunction, 'If it be
possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men'), to
protect, under the sacred covenant of the nation, what they called their
rights to property; albeit not willing ourselves to touch the 'accursed
thing.' The history of the country is a witness to our good faith. But
plainly the injunction of the apostle becomes impossible of obedience
when men transform themselves into fiends, and hang up in their railway
cars, as trophies, the ghastly skulls of such of us as have been slain
in defence of the national covenant.[E] By their own acts the
slave-holders have cancelled our obligations as to such permissive
rights under the Constitution. We shall not probably hasten to incur any
more such obligations. They say that slavery is the strength of their
society. Doubtless it is. Then, Samson-like, they have pulled down upon
themselves the pillars of their whole fabric, and they cannot complain
if they and all their rights, immunities, and titles are buried in the
ruins. In other words, they have appealed from the Constitution, or the
law civil, to the sword, or the law military; and they must abide the
result of that appeal. Such is a brief statement of the question of
negro troops, as affecting the slaves of the South and their traitor
masters.


III. THE FREE NEGRO AS A SOLDIER.

There is another phase of the question, less difficult of solution than
the preceding, perhaps, but by no means less important. It is the case
of the free negro, and especially the free negro of the North. Here
again we need not stop to discuss abstract questions of equality, nor
declare our adherence to the philosophy of Miscegenation. We need not
stop to consider the nature, or justice, of the prejudice which prevails
against the negro at the North. It is undeniable that there is such a
prejudice. Accepting the undoubted fact, we see that it shuts nearly
every avenue of honest industry against the man with a black skin,
restricting him to the most menial offices; and that it is fostered in
many ways by the conventions and usages of our society, so as
practically to put him in a worse condition than his bonded brother at
the South--always except as to his God-given right to his liberty and
labor. Experience has shown that even this is not always fully assured
to the negro; and the July riots of New York indicate the uncertain
tenure of his liberty and life, even under the protection of equal laws.
What then? Shall we remand him to the servitude of the South? Shall we
enact for him a sort of Napoleonic law of general safety, to deprive him
of the poor liberty he has--however profitless the boon may seem to us
to be? Certainly not. Every instinct of humanity rises up against so
monstrous a suggestion. Yet something very like it has a place in the
legislation of some States in the American Union.

Then what a Providential solution of the question is offered in the
employment of the negro as a soldier! There cannot surely be any
well-founded objection to it. Such opposition as the plan has
encountered seems to spring from the same unreasoning prejudice that
keeps the black man out of all decent industries in our free North. It
is that very prejudice which this plan will overcome. For the first
thing to be done is to raise the negro from his degradation; and to do
this we must obviously begin with teaching him a proper self-respect.
This will bear its fruit in making him respected by others. No one will
say that it is well to foster a feeling which outlaws any single class
in the community from the respect of all. This would be to glorify the
slave system of the South, and lay a basis for possible revolutions.
Thus the employment of the negro as a soldier, while it must inspire the
bondman of the South with a truer sense of his worth and capacity, and
thus tend to weaken the foundation of the whole rebel fabric, will also
correct the unquestioned evil of a growing class of outlaws in the midst
of our society. And if we clothe the negro in the uniform of a soldier
of the United States, the respect of the nation for its brave defenders
will teach him self-respect; at the same time that it will teach the
nation to put a new value upon its idea of loyalty.

The epitaph commemorative of the Spartan valor that has made Thermopylæ
a name forever, serves to show the conclusion of our whole discussion:

  'Go, stranger, and at Lacedæmon tell,
  That here, obedient to her laws, we fell.'

For the man who is loyal to his flag will not quarrel with the color of
a comrade in arms who has shed blood, red like his own, in defending
that flag from dishonor; just as the man who is loyal to the altar feels
a fellowship for every one, however humble, who bears the name of their
common Master, and is made in the image of their common Father.

FOOTNOTES:

[D] Late Southern newspapers speak of the obstinacy of the garrison at
Fort Pillow, and assert that Forrest would have stopped the massacre at
any time after the capture, if our soldiers had manifested any
disposition to yield.

[E] The writer's father saw these skulls hanging in the cars on a
railway in Georgia, after first Bull Run, and saw them handed through
the cars amid the jeers of passengers.




COLORS AND THEIR MEANING.


In order to a due understanding of the signification of colors, it is
necessary we should commence at the foundation. Accordingly I shall
begin by saying that colors are primary, secondary, and tertiary.

Primary colors are three: red, yellow, and blue.

RED is the color of greatest heat.

YELLOW is the color of greatest light.

BLUE is the color of chemical change.

In accordance with this philosophical truth, we should naturally expect
to find a preponderance of blue rays from the sun in the spring time,
and so it is.

These rays preponderate at the time of ploughing, sowing, and
germination.

In the summer time, after the plant has started from the ground, and
requires vigorous leaves to bring it to perfection ere the cold winter
rolls around once more, we have the yellow rays. 'Light, more light,' is
then the cry of nature, and as not even length of days affords this
element in sufficient completeness, the sun darts his brightest beams in
'the leafy month of June.'

Later still in the year, after germination is past and growth perfected,
comes the necessity of heat rays to ripen fruit, vegetables, and grain,
and nature's behests are obeyed in the then preponderance of the red
rays. Much of this effect may be due to the _media_ through which the
sun's rays pass. A sensitized photographic paper is not colored as much
at an altitude of three miles in half an hour as is a similar paper upon
the earth's surface in one moment. At any season of the year, gardeners
can either stimulate or retard germination as they place a blue or
yellow glass over the nursling. That the growth of plants is not due
alone to the rays of the sun we can, without experiment, convince
ourselves, as even ordinary observers are well aware that upon some days
plants shoot up so rapidly as to grow almost visibly under their eyes,
and in other conditions of the atmosphere seemingly remain dormant for
days.

The germinating influence, let it be due either to peculiar rays alone,
or to atmospheric state, does not contain much coloring matter. The
first spring flowers are of a pale color; as summer advances we have
brighter hues, but not until the approach of fall do we see Flora in all
her gorgeousness of coloring. The paleness of mountain and arctic
flowers, and the brilliancy of those of the tropics, point to the same
cause which gives the temperate zones their brightest flowers when heat
rays preponderate.

As depth of color seems connected with the red or heat rays; so perfume
belongs rightfully to the summer blossoms; when light is the strongest,
then we have our pinks, and roses, and lilies.

There are also in the spectrum four secondary colors: orange, green,
indigo, and violet. The secondary colors are alternate with the primary
in the spectrum, and are formed by a mixture of the two primary nearest
them--as orange, formed by a union of red and yellow; green, by a
mixture of yellow and blue; indigo and violet, of blue and red. Thus:

Red,

_Orange_,

Yellow,

_Green_,

Blue,

_Indigo_,

_Violet_.

Tertiary colors are many more than both primary and secondary. They are
hues not found in the spectrum. They are nature's stepchildren rather
than children, and many of them might not inappropriately be called
children of art; yet although most of them are of inventions that man
has sought out, they are at best but shades, and must all look back to
the spectrum as their common parent.

Each of the primary colors forms a simple contrast to the other two;
thus blue is contrasted by yellow and by red, either of which forms a
simple contrast to it; but as it is a law of color that compound
contrasts are more effective than simple in the proportion of two to
one, it follows that a mixture of either two of the primitive colors is
the most powerful contrast possible with the other.

Red and yellow form orange, the greatest and the most harmonious
contrast to blue; red and blue form violet or purple, so much admired in
contrast with yellow in the pansy; yellow and blue form green, the
contrast to red, and the color needed to restore the tone of the optic
nerve when strained or fatigued by undue attention to red. This is the
most common and admirable contrast in the vegetable kingdom; the
brilliant red blossom or fruit, with green leaves, as instance the fiery
tulip, the crimson rose, the scarlet verbena, the burning dahlia, the
cherry and apple trees, the tomato or loveapple of my childhood, and the
scarlet maple and sumach of our American October.

There are two distinct harmonies of color: the harmony of contrast, and
the harmony of shading. The former is the harmony of striking
diversities found in nature, and the other a mellowing of colors, or
blending of similar hues, attributable to art.

From this little synopsis of the effects and uses of the prismatic
colors, we shall be enabled the better to understand both the ancient
and modern popular ideas as to colors as representatives and
correspondences. Colors have a mental, moral, and physical
significance--a good and a bad import. The one to which I shall first
direct your attention is that which most readily strikes the eye.


RED.

Which Thoreau called the 'color of colors,' in the Hebrew signified to
have dominion, and in early art was symbolical or emblematic of Divine
love, creative power, etc. The word Adam, we have been taught, signifies
red man; it does mean 'the blood,' which, of course, originated 'to be
red,' as a secondary signification. Lanci, the great interpreter of
Sacred Philology at the Vatican, deems 'The Blusher,' to be the true
meaning of the word Adam. God created man, male and female created He
them, and called their name Adam. A blush, so becoming on the
countenance of feminine beauty, is generally deemed a sign of weakness
when visible upon a man's face. But if the above interpretation be
correct, a blush is a man's birthright, which no sense of false shame
should prevent him from modestly claiming. Red, as signifying
perfection, dominion, fruition, was appropriately the name of our first
parents, whether we regard the account of the creation to be literally
understood, as the old theologians believe, or spiritually and
typically, as the modern ones insist.

Red is the color of what is intense, be it love or hatred, kindness or
cruelty. It denotes the fulness of strong emotions; alike the glowing of
conscious love or the blazing of fierce anger, the fiery ardor of daring
and valor, or the fierce cruelty of hatred and revenge. Of our own
star-spangled banner, we sing:

  'The red is the blood of the brave.'

The red garments of cardinals, and especially their red hats, are
supposed to betoken their readiness to spill their blood for Jesus
Christ.

Red is the color of undeveloped ideas. It is the hue which most quickly
attracts the attention of children and savages. All barbarous nations
admire red; many savages paint their faces vermilion before entering
battle, to which they look forward as the means of attaining enviable
position in their tribe; for with barbarians physical prowess is the
only superiority.

Some animals are excited to madness by the sight of this color. The bull
and the turkey take it as a signal of defiance, which they rush to meet.
'Come, if you dare,' they read it, and impetuously hasten to the onset.

When the bloody Jeffreys was in his bloodiest humor, he wore into court
a red cap, which was the sure death warrant of those about to be tried.

The death garment of Charlotte Corday was a red chemise--fit emblem of
the ungovernable instincts, the wild rioting in blood of that reign of
terror.

Christ was crucified in a scarlet robe, and in that color of love and
perfection, perfected his offering of love for mankind.


YELLOW.

Anciently symbolized the sun, the goodness of God, marriage, faith, and
fruitfulness. Old paintings of St. Peter represent him in a yellow
mantle. The Venuses were clothed in saffron-colored tunics; Roman brides
of an early day wore a veil of an orange tinge, called the _flameum_, a
flame--a flame which, kindled at Hymen's torch, it is to be hoped was
ever burning, never consuming. As every good has its antipodal evil, so
every color has its bad sense, which is contrary or opposite to its
first or good signification.

In a bad sense, yellow means inconstancy, and the æsthetic Greeks, fully
carrying out this meaning, compelled their public courtesans to
distinguish themselves by mantles of saffron color. The radical sense of
saffron is to fail, to be hollow, to be exhausted. In tracing customs,
it is easy to see the bias unknowingly received from natural
significations, significations which take their rise in the spiritual
world. The _San Benito_ or _auto-da-fe_ dress of the Spanish Inquisition
was yellow, blazoned with a flaming cross; and, as a mark of contempt
for the race, the Jews of Catholic Spain were condemned to wear a yellow
cap. Distinguishing colors in dress have ever been one of the most
common methods of expressing distinction of class and differences of
faith, until thence has arisen the imperative adage: 'Show your colors;'
and he who refuses to do so is despised as a hypocrite or changeling.

Yellow, as a color, finds but few admirers among modern enlightened
nations; it is recognized as the color of shams; but in China, that
country of contrarities, where printing, fish breeding, gas burning, and
artesian wells have been known and stationary for centuries, where
almond-shaped eyes, club feet, and long cues are types of beauty, where
old men laughingly fly kites, and little boys look gravely on, where
white is mourning, and everything is different from elsewhere--there
yellow is the most admired of colors, restricted to the use of royalty
alone under penalty of death.

Yellow is the most searching of colors, as indeed it should be from its
correspondence with light. It is gaudy, and does not inspire respect,
for it brings into view every imperfection. Every defect in form or
manner is rendered conspicuous by it, and we involuntarily scan the
whole person of the unfortunate and tasteless wearer of it.


BLUE.

In early art, represented truth, honor, and fidelity, and even at this
day we associate blue and truthfulness. Christ and the Virgin were
formerly painted with blue mantles, and blue is especially recognized as
the Virgin's color. We can never turn our eyes upward without seeing
truth's emblematical color. How appropriate that the heavens should be
blue! Of truthfulness and faithfulness it should be our constant
reminder.

Primary blue enters as a compound into three other colors of the
spectrum: green, indigo, and violet. As a primary color, it is much more
rarely seen in nature than either red or yellow. We have few blue birds,
few blue flowers, few blue fruits. As one of a compound, it is oftener
found than red. The grass, the leaves, everywhere proclaim the marriage
of good, as yellow anciently represented, and truth, as blue symbolized.
There is a deep significance in the change that has come over mankind's
view of the meaning of the first of these colors. With the loss of
faith, the tearing apart of truth and goodness, has come a change of
correspondence. Men have everywhere turned away from the light, though
still professing to strive for truth.

Each color possesses a character of its own, which proclaims to the
close observer the peculiar qualities of that to which it belongs. The
horticulturist reads the peculiarities of the fruit as readily by its
color as the phrenologist reads his by his 'bumps.' The red one, he will
tell you, is sour, the white one sweet, the pale one flat, and the green
one alkaline; that one is a good table apple, this one a superior cider
apple; and if you further ask the characteristics of a good cider apple,
he will tell you again it is known by its color, not only of the skin,
but also of the pulp, and that it can be foretold whether cider will be
weak, thin, and colorless, or possess strength, or richness, or color.

The botanist, too, regards color as indicative of quality, the yellow
flower having a bitter taste and a fixed, unfading hue, the black, a
poisonous, destructive property, etc., etc.

Truth, of which we have seen blue was the correspondent, is never
superficial, and, although apparent truths lie upon the surface, yet a
common adage locates truth at the bottom of a well. Seamen acknowledge
deep indigo blue of water to be indicative of profound depth. Of the
three or primitive colors, the red or heat color, which has been termed
light felt, the yellow or light color, which has been called heat seen,
and the blue, a color of chemical change, which is the color of growth,
these correspond in an unknown degree to the love, wisdom, and truth of
the Supreme One; heat to love, for love is heat; light to wisdom, for
wisdom is light; and germination and growth to truth, for by truth souls
grow into wisdom and love. The more we explore the arcana of nature the
more we will be enabled to discover the correspondence of the natural
with the spiritual world.


WHITE.

Is the emblem of light, every white ray of light containing all the
prismatic colors; and as it symbolizes innocence and purity, it is the
color must appropriate for clothing infants, brides, and the dead. We
think of the angels as clothed in white. At the transfiguration of our
Lord and Master, his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow, as
no fuller on earth can white them; and in one of the Evangelists his
raiment is described as at that time as white as the light, and so our
highest comparison of whiteness is 'as white as the light.'


BLACK.

Formed by a combination in equal proportions of the three primitive
colors in equal intensity, is the color of despair. As mourning, it is
only suitable for those who despair of the future of their friends; but
it is preëminently unsuitable to be worn for those who die in Christian
faith with a Christian hope. Despite its gloomy hue, it has almost
become a sacred color among Christian nations, being worn as the dress
of the priest in his ministerial office, and doubly hallowed from its
association with the dead.

Black, as an ornamental color, should be below all others, for artistic
effect. An artistic dressmaker places the dark or black plaids or
stripes beneath the others. This natural correspondence is almost
universally recognized among enlightened nations in clothing for the
feet. They not only look smaller and more tasteful in black shoes than
in colored, but economy also sanctions them as more useful. The
universal tendency of the nineteenth century is to utilitarianism; the
one question asked is: What is the use? and in use is beauty ever found.

Ethnological investigation shows that black or dark-colored races have
invariably preceded settlement by the whites. This is in accordance with
the law of color above laid down, viz., that, _artistically_, black is
below the other colors (and now, in order that I may not be
misunderstood, I explicitly say that because, _artistically_, black is
the lowest color, it by no means follows that I deem black or olive or
yellow races subjects for slavery, or unworthy of social and political
rights). In accordance with the above axiom, savage and half-civilized
races are found to be at the present day black haired and black eyed. I
will also venture the assertion that nine tenths of all the people in
the world have black hair.

The Hindoo legend of the eighth incarnation of Vishnu under the name of
Crishna, makes him then of a bluish-black color, which the name Crishna
signifies. His supposititious father, Wanda, said:

     'When I named him Crishna, on account of his color, the priest told
     me he must be the god who had taken different bodies, red, white,
     yellow, and black, in his various incarnations, and now he had
     assumed a black color again, since in black all colors are
     absorbed.'

Although among Caucasian nations, and especially in cosmopolitan
America, we do not adduce intellectual superiority from the shades or
degrees of whiteness, yet it is said of the Moors that the more the
color approaches the _black_, the handsomer and of more decisive
character are the men.

It is a physiological fact brought to light partially through the
census, that black-eyed races and black-eyed people are more subject to
blindness than others. It has also been shown that black-eyed men are
not as good marksmen as blue-eyed or light-eyed men.

Not only are different races of men subject to different diseases, but
statistics prove that among Caucasian nations, complexion and disease
are in some way connected, as for instance, consumption is more rife
among dark-haired and dark-eyed people than others, and more rapid with
those dark-haired and dark-eyed people who have very fair complexion. As
the difference between golden and black hair lies in that there is in
the one case an excess of sulphur and oxygen with a deficiency of
carbon, and in the other an excess of carbon and a deficiency of sulphur
and oxygen, it can easily be seen why such deficiency or excess, if
arising from idiosyncrasy of the system, should predispose to dissimilar
diseases. But here a wide field yet lies open for experimental and
physiological research.


GREEN.

There is scarcely a color but has been or is held sacred by some nation
or religion. With Mahommedans green is the sacred hue. The prophet
originally wore a turban of that dye, and the sultan shows due
preference for that color.

The tomb of David, which is in possession of the Mahommedans, and which
was at great hazard visited by a lady within the past few years, is
covered by a green satin tapestry, and over it hangs a satin canopy of
red, blue, yellow, and green stripes, the three primitive and the
sacred, compound color.

Green also seems to have been the sacred color in ancient Peru, virgins
of the sun wearing robes of that hue. The ancient Mexican priests also,
in the performance of their functions, wore crowns of green and yellow
feathers, and at their ears hung green jewels. Precious stones of a
green color were held in higher estimation by the Aztecs than any other.
When the Spaniards were first admitted to an audience with Montezuma, he
wore no other ornament on his head than a _panache_ of plumes of royal
green.

Green comes in the class of secondary colors, being a compound of yellow
and blue, and signifies pale, new, fresh, growing, flourishing (like a
green bay tree); and also unripe, when applied to either fruits or men,
which, as far as the human is concerned, is a term of reproach. A person
without experience, either in position, behavior, or use of anything, is
termed green, and laughed at. They are fresh, new, and, instead of the
admiring exclamation, How green it is! as applied to a plant, is the
reproachful one, How green he is!

At different seasons of the year, different colors are appropriate in
dress. Light green is the color of freshness, youth, and spring, and
more suitable to be worn in the spring of the year and by young persons,
than later in the season or by mature women. Dark green, like crimson
and orange, is a warmer, more intensified color, with less of liveliness
and freshness.


PURPLE.

Is the type of monarchical enlightenment. With Caucasian nations it has
been the symbolic color of royalty, until 'invest with the purple,' in
the course of ages, comes to mean kingdom, government, power, to rule.
Purple is formed by the union of blue and red, truth and valor. Happy
the people who are truly governed by truth and valor! The Tyrian purple
was famous in Homer's days, and our dreams of Tyre and its splendor are
all colored by this most gorgeous of dyes, the manufacture of which from
a species of shell fish gave this ancient city a celebrity which all its
other arts combined could not equal. This was one of the symbolic colors
with which the high priest's robe was wrought in figures of pomegranates
upon its skirt; and when Solomon sent to Hiram, king of Tyre, for a
cunning workman to assist in building the temple, he did not fail to
require he should be skilled in purple. During the time of the Roman
emperors, the Tyrian purple was valued so highly that a pound of cloth
twice dipped was sold for about one hundred and fifty dollars. Even a
purple border about a robe was a mark of dignity.


VIOLET.

Is a color that has often been worn by martyrs; formed of a union of red
and blue, it signifies love and truth, and their passion and suffering.
It is the court mourning color all over Europe, with the exception of
England. It is the softest of the prismatic colors, and its very name
carries us in thought to the modest sweet flower which is Flora's emblem
of humility.

       *       *       *       *       *

Of one of the colors of the spectrum I have failed to speak, because
there was so little to say. Orange is a bright, warm color, not quite as
intense as red, still one which the eye does not readily seek. Its
suitableness in dress is confined mainly to children. Upon them our eye
naturally seeks for bright, warm colors, and rests with a kind of
pleasure upon rich hues. There is nothing upon which the public taste
requires more education than upon the arrangement and modification of
colors. Gardeners need it in setting their plants and putting in their
seeds; florists, in the arrangement of their bouquets; furnishers, in
the decoration of apartments; and especially the fashion leaders, who
decide what colors or shades must or must not be worn together.
Sometimes hues are conjoined by them, that, no matter how loudly
proclaimed _au fait_, the height of style, or _à la mode_, are never
artistic, and no _dicta_ can make them so. A fashion framer should needs
be a natural philosopher, and hold the rudiments of all science in her
grasp. Botany, mineralogy, conchology should walk as handmaidens to
philosophy; optics should steer the rudder of color's bark when launched
upon the sea of taste.

If, when dressed, the aim is to present a light and graceful toilet,
light and delicate shades of color must be worn; no crimson, dark green,
purple, or indigo, but rose, light green, azure, or lavender, with a due
admixture of white, must be the hues chosen. White serves as an
admirable break, and prevents the appearance of violent transition. It
is none the less requisite in bouquets, where no two shades of the same
color should be allowed without either white or green as a separator.
Very handsome self-colored bouquets can be arranged by giving a finish
of the complementary shade. One of the most beautiful I ever remember to
have seen was scarlet verbenas with a base of rose-geranium leaves, the
whole set in a small antique green-and-gold vase.

Although the mature fall of the year clothes itself in gay colors, it is
deemed an evidence of immaturity for women in the fall time of life to
sport crimson and scarlet and orange. Sober grays (which mean old,
mature), quiet brown, and even sombre blacks, are rather what are looked
for. To dress young when people are old, deceives no one. There is a
beauty of age as well as a beauty of youth. Those who live to be old
have had their share of the former: why should they seek to deprive
themselves of the latter? Aside from the appropriateness of color as to
age, there are yet others as to size and complexion. Light-haired men
should always wear _very dark_ cravats, in order to give tone and
expression to the face. Large women should wear warm colors, if they
wish to create a pleasant impression. They cannot attain grace by any
aid of color, while they will lose the dignity they might naturally
claim if they confined themselves to warm, grave shades.

An unartistic arrangement of light or drapery in an apartment will
totally destroy the harmony of the most carefully prepared toilet. Rooms
can be toned warm or cold, but, unless some especial object is sought,
neutral tints should predominate, and violent contrasts should be
avoided.

Who has failed to notice the fantastic tricks played at times upon some
body of worshippers, where light to the church is admitted through
stained glass windows? A lambent red flame lighting up the hair of a
man's head, while at the same moment his beard is blue and luminous.
Over the shoulders of another, the purple mantle of royalty seems about
falling, investing him for a moment with regal splendors, while perhaps
the cadaverous hue of his next neighbor's face well fits him to be some
imagined victim of his new majesty's anger.

Color ranks as one of the earliest arts. No nation is so low but it
makes some attempt at decorative color, and we may be well assured it
was one of the earliest, if not the earliest method employed in
transmitting intelligence. When this country was first discovered, the
Peruvians were making use of small knotted cords of various colors,
termed _quippu_, as mediums of records and messages. Our own North
American savages employed wampum, made from various colored shells, for
a similar purpose. Color played its part in ancient Egyptian
hieroglyphics. It speaks to the eye sooner than form. A black flag
hoisted upon the battle field proclaims louder than words the demoniac
cruelty that reigns, while a white signifies that submission has been
decided upon. Joseph's coat of many colors proclaimed the father's
favoritism to his brothers, and worked a mighty change in the history of
the race to which he belonged. This very instance, if we possessed no
other, would prove to us the high estimation in which color was held,
and its symbolic meaning, in the most ancient times.

The ermine is an animal of such spotless purity it will tolerate no
stain on its fur, and by this symbolic name we designate the judge, who
should be stainless, unbiassed, and incorruptible.

The highest art of the florist is put forth to procure change of color.
Self tulips are valueless beside sports, and to induce this breaking
various methods are put in requisition, as there is no sporting of
colors from natural causes among flowers. A green rose, a blue verbena,
are hailed as triumphs, and secure the propagator an enviable name
either as an amateur or professional florist.

Perhaps the most curious thing connected with color is that some stars
give colored light; and in one instance, in a northern constellation, a
_double_ star gives forth blue rays from one and red from the other. How
our fancy might be permitted to soar away beyond the stars themselves in
wondering fancies as to the meaning of this--truth and love united in a
star, not as a compound color, but each retaining its own hue of blue
and red! What a happy abode of truthful, loving spirits we can imagine
this the dwelling place! And may there not here be a symbol of such a
union?

The art of color is yet in its infancy, and although Tyrian purple was
magnificent and famous, and the highly prized Turkey red unfading, yet
modern chemical discovery has opened a wide variety of hues unknown to
the ancients.

Colors obtained from vegetable substances have been the most numerous,
those from the animal kingdom the most brilliant, and from the mineral
the greatest variety from the same substance. A buff, a blue, and a
black, and again a red, a blue, a purple, and a violet, are produced
from the same metal.

The recent discovery of aniline colors, to be extracted from coal
refuse, has given art new, beautiful, and durable shades of red, blue,
purple, and violet. We know but by description what the lauded Tyrian
purple was, for monopoly caused the art to be lost; but for softness,
richness, and beauty of purple we have none to approach that extracted
from this refuse. Nature means nothing to be lost, and waste arises from
ignorance. She is a royal mistress when royally represented.

To the mineral kingdom we are indebted for most of the mordants which
fix the hues derived from other sources. That in union is strength is
taught by the most common art.

Much is yet to be learned in regard to color. Men have understood its
correspondence sufficiently to associate red and cruelty as its lowest
expression, so that the men of the bloody French Revolution received an
undying name from the red cap of the Carmagnole costume--and yellow with
shame, for a ruff of this color on the neck of a woman hanged drove this
fashion out of England--and white with purity, as the ermine of the
judge shows; although, thousands of years ago, the men of Tartary and
Thibet prized the wool of the Crimean sheep stained of a peculiar gray
by its feeding upon the _centarina myriocephala_, and although modern
gardeners deepen the hues of plants by feeding them judiciously, yet few
attach the requisite importance to color as history. Writers for the
most part pass silently by this great aid to a correct understanding of
past events. Color in costume is no less essential to a true description
or representation than form; in some instances it is more so.

The _color_ of the silken sails of Cleopatra's vessel, as she sailed
down the Cydnus, proclaimed her royalty as no other could have done.

A fairy could not be depicted without her green robe, or young Aurora
unless tinted with the hues of morn.

Here lies the great fault of all sun pictures. The distinctive hues of
complexion, hair, and eyes are not preserved. The flaxen, the auburn,
the brown hair alike take black. Light eyes and dark are
undistinguishable; the clearest complexion becomes muddy and full of
lines if the color of the dress is such as to throw the shade upon it.

A mixture of colors in dress in which either two of the primitives
predominate, is a token of barbarism, even if occurring among so-called
enlightened people.

Color is an exponent of the degree of civilization.

RED finds its fitness among savage races, and with undeveloped
natures.

YELLOW indicates transition from barbarism to civilization.

GREEN, advanced civilization.

PURPLE, monarchical enlightenment, which is will individualized
in but one.

Modification and harmony are only with people free to follow taste and
select for themselves. Among the most enlightened nations these five
states are all found. The highest type, shown by culture, discovery,
art, literature, science, equity, and government, exists with but a few.
The mass are civilized, and continue 'the mass.' It is the natural
tendency of enlightenment to individualize. In proportion to genius,
culture, and _perseverance_, is one set apart, becomes a leader of the
masses, and should be a teacher of the harmony and correspondence of
color, both by precept and example.

Strong contrasts are admissible in what is designed to illustrate
particular things, and especially if to be viewed from a distance. To me
no sight is ever more beautiful than the American flag, red, white, and
blue, as the breeze opens every fold and waves it abroad for the gaze of
men; the blue signifying a league and covenant against oppression, to be
maintained in truth, by valor and purity; the very color proclaiming to
despots and tyrannized man that in one land on the broad face of the
earth liberty of conscience prevails, and freedom of speech exists. We
shall not want to change it when this war is over. It is the symbol of
an idea which has never yet found its full utterance. When Liberty and
Union become one and indivisible, it will be the harmonious exponent of
those grand ideas rooted, budded, blossomed, and bearing fruit
forevermore.




BATTLE OF THE WILDERNESS.


  Oh, how our pulses leaped and thrilled, when, at the dead of night,
  We saw our legions mustering, and marching forth to fight!
  Line after line comes surging on with martial pomp and pride,
  And all the pageantries that gild the battle's crimson tide.
  A forest of bright bayonets, like stars at midnight, gleam;
  A hundred glittering standards flash above the silver stream.
  We plunged into the Wilderness, and morning's early dawn
  Disclosed our gallant army in line of battle drawn.
  An early zephyr fresh and sweet breathed through the forest shade;
  A thousand happy warblers, too, a pleasant music made;
  And modest blossoms bathed in dew the morning light revealed:
  Oh, who could deem those pleasant shades a savage foe concealed?
  With lagging pace the morning hours dragged heavily away,
  And yet we wait the coming strife, in battle's stern array.
  A solemn stillness reigns around--but hark! a savage yell,
  As if ten thousand angry fiends had burst the gates of hell,
  Now thrills upon our startled ears. By heaven! the traitors come!
  We see their gleaming banners, we hear the throbbing drum.
  In solid ranks, their countless hordes from the dense woods emerge,
  And roll upon our serried lines like ocean's angry surge.
  Our ranks are silent--on each face the light of battle glows:
  'Ready!' At once our polished tubes are levelled on our foes.
  Now leaps a livid lightning up--from rank to rank it flies--
  A fearful diapason rends the arches of the skies.
  The wooded hills seem reeling before that fierce recoil;
  With fire and smoke the valleys like Etna's craters boil:
  From red volcanoes bursting, hissing, hurtling in the sky,
  A thousand death-winged messengers like fiery meteors fly:
  Within that seething vortex their shattered cohorts reel.
  'Fix bayonets!' At once our lines bristle with burnished steel.
  'Charge!' And our gallant regiments burst through the _feu d'enfer_.
  Before their furious onset the rebel hosts give way;
  And, surging backward, hide again within the forest's shade,
  Whose mazes dark and intricate our charging columns stayed.

  Now sinks the fiery orb of day, half hidden from our sight
  Amid the sulphurous clouds of war dyed red in lurid light;
  And soon the smoking Wilderness with gloom and darkness fills;
  The dense, damp foliage on the sod a bloody dew distils.
  Sleepless we rest upon our arms. Dim lights flit through the shade:
  We hear the groans of dying men, the rattle of the spade.
  And when the morning dawns at last, resounding from afar
  We hear the crash of musketry, the rising din of war.
  O comrades, comrades, rally round, close up your ranks again;
  Weep not our brethren fallen upon the crimson plain;
  For unborn ages shall their tombs with freshest laurels twine;
  Their names in characters of light on history's page shall shine:
  We all must die; but few may win a deathless prize of life--
  Close up your ranks--again the foe renews the bloody strife.
  Two days we struggled fiercely against our stubborn foes--
  Two days from out the Wilderness the din of conflict rose.
  But when the third aurora bathed the eastern sky in gold,
  And to our soldiers' anxious gaze the field of death unrolled,
  Lo! all was silent in our front. The rebel hosts had fled,
  Abandoning in hasty flight their wounded and their dead.

  Come, friends of freedom, gather round, loud shouts of triumph give:
  The field of blood is won at last--let the republic live!
  Our country, O our country, our hearts throb wild and high;
  Your cause has triumphed. God be praised! Freedom shall never die.
  Our eagle proudly soars to-day, his talons bathed in gore,
  For treason's hydra head is crushed--its reign of terror o'er.
  Wake, wake your shouts of triumph all through our mighty land,
  From California's golden hills to proud Potomac's strand.
  Atlantic's waves exulting Pacific's billows call,
  And great Niagara's cataracts in louder thunders fall.
  We've stayed the tempest black as night that on our country lowers,
  And backward dashed its waves of blood. The victory is ours!

  A light shines from the Wilderness--far up time's pathway streams--
  Through death, and blood, and agony, on Calvary's cross it gleams;
  It lights with radiance divine Mount Vernon's humble tomb,
  And sparkles on Harmodius' sword bright flashing through the gloom.
  Ho! slaves of yesterday, arise, now will your chains be riven.
  Ho! tyrants, tremble, for behold a day of vengeance given.
  Gaze on our banners stained with blood--think of your brethren slain;
  Say, has not freedom, crushed to earth, sprung forth to life again?
  Freedom, high freedom, friend of man, sheath not thy crimson steel;
  Still let thy cannon thunder loud, still let thy trumpet peal;
  Stay not the justice of thy wrath, stay not thy vengeful hand,
  Till slavery and treason have been blotted from our land.




TARDY TRUTHS.


Under the heading of 'Tardy Truths' _The New Nation_, of May 7th,
republished a compendium of matter some time back given to the world by
M. Emile de Girardin, in his paper _La Presse_, and in pamphlet form.
This matter purports to have been written by a so-called _ex-commandant_
in the late Polish insurrection, a certain M. Fouquet, of Marseilles.

Poland has no reason to fear truth. On the contrary, the difficulty has
been to find means to set it forth, avenues to the public intelligence
and sense of justice, whereby those might be reached who forget the
Latin saying: _Audi et alteram partem_. The Poles are willing to hear
reproaches, if such as may be profited by, or if the self-constituted
judges be conscientious and unprejudiced.

But, may we not ask why it is that many of these _so-called_ truths,
professedly founded upon personal acquaintance with Polish localities,
men, and institutions, spring from sources in many respects similar to
that of the recent publication in _La Presse_, from individuals who
never were in Poland beyond a few hours spent in Warsaw--who have seen
nothing of the country, except as passing in a passenger car from Kracow
to Mohilew, a distance of about seven hundred miles, traversed in about
twenty-four hours--who never understood one word of Polish, of Rossian,
or of any of the cognate tongues--who have never conversed freely with
the inhabitants--who may have been entertained during a few hours by
Government employés or by cautious and distrustful patriots--who were in
a hurry to see St. Petersburg and its _elephant_, and who learned Polish
history in the Kremlin, in the saloons of some former prince from the
Altay or the Caucasus, or, at best, in the work of M. Koydanoff?

_La Presse_, in Paris, undertook the charge of saying things which her
franker sisters, _Le Nord_ and _La Nation_, the avowed organs of Rossian
czarism, did not venture to propound. M. de Girardin, whose paper has,
since a certain period, taken a liberalistic, even socialistic,
infection, is a living example of sundry anomalous eccentricities, such
as Alcibiades, Gracchus, Mirabeau, etc., who speak most liberally, and
act in a contrary manner. He seems to have been adopted by Rossian
diplomatists, and those sanguine of Rossian _destiny_, as a most
convenient defender of czarish ambition--the more so that they found in
him a revealer of things never thought of by the czar; as for instance,
liberality and even democracy in Great Rossia, on the plains of Okka and
Petschora.

We might compare M. Fouquet's account of Poland with Neumann's account
of Kosciusko, or Freneau's of Washington, but will content ourselves
with referring the reader to better European sources of knowledge, as
the _Breslau Zeitung_, _Ost Deutsche Zeitung_, _Czas_, _Wiek_, _La
Pologne_, etc.

Indeed, it would not be worth our while to pay any attention to M.
Fouquet's allegations, had not the Paris letter of April 4th appeared in
the above-mentioned paper, and were it not likely to mislead many
ignorant of the facts.

The writer tells us that he has 'experienced a great temptation to tell
what he has seen,' and to 'expose the result of experience acquired at
his own cost, with all attendant risk and danger.' Probably we do not
understand the fear of the author of 'Tardy Truths,' and wish to give no
extended explanation to his conclusion: 'A rare opportunity occurs at
_present_, and he profits by it.' We have been taught that we must
always have courage to speak the truth. Surely no great amount of that
noble quality is required to make accusations in a paper far from the
scene of action, and pronounce a verdict where there can be no adequate
defence, no judges, only the advantage of the fashion of the day, and
the craving for problematical benefits and friendship, to which we must
apply Moore's comparison:

  'Like Dead Sea fruits, that tempt the eye,
    But turn to ashes on the lips.'

Let us never be deceived: a free nation in the embrace of absolutism
must, sooner or later, fall a prey to the cajoler's hypocrisy and greed.

The correspondent reports that the Polish Committee in Paris declined to
give him information or furnish means, and even said that they did not
wish volunteers. All this may readily be explained by the consideration
that a man who thereafter proved to be so bitter an enemy was not
sufficiently diplomatic to deceive even the obtuse perceptions of so
undeserving a body as the author describes said committee. On the other
hand, it would have been more prudent for the writer to have said less
on this topic, as such hesitation in accepting his services might induce
the reader to think that the Poles were not so anxious for external aid
as he seemed to fancy. We also know that not only at present in Poland,
but in former ages, and in our own days, in the happiest of countries,
there can be no revolution, no war, which will not attract a host of men
covetous of rank or fortune. Lately, in Poland, by certain judicious
arrangements, this calamity has been prevented, to the great
dissatisfaction of many.

No one can doubt or deny that the interest of various Governments, and
the sense of justice among nations, gave the Poles a right to expect
foreign aid. The assurances of certain politicians and statesmen even
gave _reasonable expectation_ of such a result. Such aid would of course
neither be rejected nor treated with indifference. But the assertion
that the Poles relied _solely_ on such aid is (in the face of the
manifesto of January 22d and July 31st, 1863) either a proof of ill
will, or of entire ignorance of the resources upon which Poland was
bound to rely, and which could not be intrusted to the discretion of
every volunteer or pretended well-wisher to the Polish nation.

Continuing his imputations, the accuser says he only learned afterward
why seven thousand Parisian workmen, registered at M. d'Harcourt's
committee, 'were not sent forth.' The probable purport of this reproach
is: 'They were not sent for fear of the introduction of liberal
elements--and the _proletariat_--into Poland.' As to the latter, we may
at once confidently answer that, were Poland free to-day, the condition
of the laboring class in Western Europe need not be dreaded for a
hundred years to come. As to the liberal element, does the author indeed
think that Poland has had no Liberalists similar to Voltaire, La
Mennais, Victor Hugo, L. Blanc, Mazzini, or Hertzen? Does he fancy that
Modzewski (in the sixteenth century), Skarga (a Catholic preacher in the
seventeenth), Morsztyn, Jezierski, Andrew Zamoyski, Hugo Kollontay,
Loyko (in the eighteenth), Staszye, Lelewel, Mochnacki, Ostrowski,
Czynski, Mieroslawski, and a host of others, contented with the private
good they did, and forced to shun the jealous watchfulness of suspicious
rulers--does he, we say, fancy that all these needed to be inspired by
the liberality of Parisian workmen, or even that all the aforesaid
workmen would apply themselves to the dissemination of liberal opinions?
It is indeed a great disadvantage to Polish Liberalists, philosophers,
and poets, that they speak and write in a tongue unknown to the noble
philanthropists of the West. A greater amount of knowledge would have
saved hasty tourists, _veracious_ lecturers, and all-knowing
diplomatists many errors in statement and conception, and much aversion
toward a noble people, who, if vanquished, will not be crushed, and will
always reserve the _right_ of _protest_.

At all events, this last conclusion of our correspondent leads us to
suspect that he may perchance never have been in Poland--perhaps never
even in Paris--since this _non-sending_ forth of seven thousand
Parisians was better understood by every _gamin du faubourg_ than
apparently by the _sincere_ narrator of 'Tardy Truths.'

The writer says further, that he expected to find in Kracow 'activity
and infinite means.' Now, the author and the confidence of the Poles
must have been quite strangers to one another, or his imagination must
have misled him farther than was becoming in a man of knowledge and
reflection. He does not mention the date of his journey, but we know
about the period referred to. It is true that at that time Kracow had
not yet been declared in a state of siege by M. Pouilly de Mensdorf,
but, as a personal friend of the Czar, he had then held Galicia and
Kracow during the past year under a more uncertain condition than even
the declaration of a state of siege would have produced. Twenty thousand
chosen officers and soldiers, with discretionary and greatly enlarged
powers, and almost as many policemen and spies, with early fed and
increasing covetousness for rewards, promotions, and orders, kept
constant watch over the ancient capital of Poland, the last remnant of
Polish nationality which had been engulfed in the European peace of
1846.

We may then safely assert that our author has given us sketches from his
whims and fancies, rather than the mature results of his judgment, and
that he has also neglected to direct his researches into the history of
the past. It is doubtless true that he was not desired as a volunteer,
and that he found danger only, and not fortune, which, indeed, we think
his own sagacity might have taught him from the first.

We would be forced to doubt that any one understood the policy of the
Polish Committee in Warsaw who should apply the epithet 'mercenary' to
the Polish soldiers. We would not ask our author how much he gave per
diem to those under his own command: we have no wish to rival the wit of
a Russian proclamation which appeared last winter in Warsaw, in which
the Poles in general, including those who fought at Orsza, Wielikie
Luki, Kirchholm, Chocim, Smolensk, Vienna, Zurich, Hohenlinden,
Samocierros, Pultusk, Grochow, Iganie, Zyzyny, Opatow, etc., etc., were
stigmatized as poltroons and cowards!

It is certainly true that the battles of late have not represented a
file of twenty thousand men, but to call them on that account _frontier
demonstrations_, is to add subtle calumny to ungenerous irony; it is a
deviation even from the very 'tardy truths.' It is an assertion not made
in an impartial spirit, but calculated in favor of, and determinately
stated with the intention of sustaining those who are exerting
themselves to prove that Minsk, Grodno, Mohilew, Wolhynia, Podole,
Plock, Augustow, Lithuania, Samogitia, Liefland, etc., were ancient
dependencies of Russia, before she had herself an existence either in
name or fact! If the originator of the term _frontier demonstrations_
would take the trouble to study the map, he would not be able to cherish
the delusion that his intelligent readers could believe that battles
fought near Kowno, Oszmiana, Upita, Poniewiez, Lida, Ihumen, Dubno,
Pinsk, Mscislaw, etc., were really _frontier demonstrations_!

This declaration of the letter from Paris to America would not be of
much service to _The Journal of St. Petersburg_ or _The Invalid_, of
Moscow, or increase their exhilaration over the extermination of the
Polish race, the destruction of Polish principles. There is nothing more
natural than that a rebuke to the _Siècle, Opinion Nationale, Patrie_,
and perhaps even others, should follow such statements--their views
undoubtedly stand in complete opposition to those held by M. de
Girardin, and advocated in _La Presse_.

The assertion that the Polish National Government had no object in view
but to excite and await the intervention of France; that Galicia was the
principal focus of the rebellion, and that the unknown Government had no
actual existence, is, on the one hand, an unskilful attempt to justify
the Governments of Russia and Austria, and, on the other, by the
ignoring of all the reports of the Polish National Government--all its
obvious facts, its printed documents, its acts everywhere known and
seen, its seizures of papers and documents--and to portray it as a
fraud, a myth, a dream of the imagination, a wild hallucination of a
disordered brain, it suggests to us the thought that the _tardy_ and
present truths here given us of Poland may perhaps have the same origin
as that famous description in one of the St. Petersburg papers, of 'the
at last truly discovered leader of the Polish insurrection,' which was
but a portraiture of a certain, not mentioned but easily guessed,
personage in Paris.

We have no reply to make to this reproach (we can only wonder that under
the circumstances they should ever have been made) that the Polish
volunteers were badly armed and illy managed--possibly they might have
been better even in a partisan war. But as to the want of skill in the
officers, including such as Skarzynski, Bosak, Padlewski, we wonder that
the writer or his friend F. could not succeed in making their talents
known and valued, and become at least leaders among the blind. Of course
he had to contend with cross-eyed jealousy. Yet if, as a foreigner, and
a learned one too, he was, as he himself informs us, intimately admitted
into various chateaux, it seems almost impossible he should have had no
opportunity to become major, colonel, or even general, since it is well
known, and every foreigner will bear witness to the fact, that in these
_chateaux_ there has always been too much attention and too great
preference shown to foreigners--a preference, however, in which the
lower classes do not participate.

As to the easy chateau life led in Galicia, as in Russia, we have a
remark to offer. In a country exposed during five or six centuries to
incessant struggle against Asiatic craving for European allurements, or,
to speak more definitely, after ninety-four Mongolian incursions, in
which twenty millions of Polish people were carried off, and thousands
of towns, bourgs, and villages were destroyed; after numberless wars,
plunders, and devastations by Jazygs, Turks, Muscovites, Crusaders,
Wallachians, Transylvanians, Swedes, Brandenburgians, etc., etc.; after
a hundred years of the so-called _paternal_ spoliation of Russia,
Prussia, and Austria--there could have been no opportunity, even under
Graff Pouilly de Mensdorf, to build _comfortable_ chateaux on the
mouldering ruins, or for the accumulation of means for an easy life
under the oppressions of an Austrian tariff, which exacted that goods
manufactured in Lemberg should be sent for inspection to the Vienna
custom house before being exposed to sale. There are, however, a few
very splendid chateaux, like oases in the Desert of Sahara; they can be
counted readily on one's fingers; among them few patriots; no
conspirator, much less an insurgent or crippled invalid, ever called to
ask hospitality.

The calumny so often repeated, so urgently insisted upon, that the aim
of the Polish insurrection was inconsistent, foolish, and wicked, might
not perhaps astonish the reader more than the report of the want of zeal
and faith in the convictions of the Poles, a fact first revealed to the
world in 'Tardy Truths.' This warning with regard to the true character
of the struggle on the shores of the Vistula might prove of service in
aiding the discrimination of the American people, and be useful in
confusing the judgment of the liberal men and newspapers, which, whether
in Germany, Belgium, France, or England, are not too much inclined to
favor the cause of Polish independence; nay, it would spare France the
useless demonstration in the Chambers, made in consequence of the speech
of November 5th. The late efforts of the Poles are also shown to have
been inspired and incited by, and carried on for the benefit of, the
Catholic clergy, stimulated by fanaticism against the liberal,
civilizing, enlightened, Rosso-Greek Church, a view which might and has
proved very useful to modern lecturers and letter writers. The warning
therein given might also serve to degrade the Polish revolution to the
level of some of the slave-holders' rebellion. Let us reflect but for
one single moment on the parallel attempted to be drawn, particularly in
the New York papers, after the unfortunate Mexican imbroglio and
subsequent visit of the Russian fleet, between things so utterly unlike.
The Poles fought for everything most dear to the heart of man, for every
right which he can justly claim, for independence, national existence,
the right to use his own language, for the integrity of his
country;--the States of the South had all these in full possession, nay,
even the right to pass the law binding the North. These things might be
shown to be essentially dissimilar in _every_ respect, but this short
statement is deemed sufficient to show the futility of the comparison.

Let us now proceed to say a few words with regard to the plausible
arguments so generally set forth for the glorification of the Czar, in
respect to the emancipation of the Polish serfs. The Czar gave in 1864
what had already been given by the Poles themselves in 1863; less the
soil, which indeed never belonged to him, but for which he exacts
payment. Besides, he has confiscated, without regulations or laws, the
income from forests, rents, fields, and fisheries, belonging to old men,
women, and children, whose only crime was that they had been born Poles,
or whom it pleased the hungry throng of unscrupulous, greedy, and
fanatical officials, unbounded in their zeal as in their power, to
denounce, accuse, or dislike. We could fully prove the fact that the
greater part of the peasants are now forced by bayonets to work for the
exacted pay, and most of them venture to doubt entirely the propriety of
the pretended Russian gift. This one circumstance makes this gift in the
greater part of Poland and even, of Russia more burdensome than the old
state of regulated labor; for how is a peasant to procure money in
provinces distant from markets, rivers, and towns? Under what conditions
would it be possible to obtain it? And even in cases where the peasant
may be able to make a sale, the value received for eight bushels of
potatoes will not be sufficient to buy him a common axe. How many
calves, cows, sheep, horses, and hogs are brought back from market from
the impossibility of finding purchasers, even at the lowest prices? Now,
by the decree of January 22d, the Polish National Government gave
freedom, and land relieved from all claims, thus executing what was in
accordance with the spirit and wishes of the Poles, without losing sight
of the difficulties to be encountered. It was their imperative duty to
satisfy and adjust the exigencies of the national political economy.
Fortunately, it was found possible to harmonize the requirements of the
country with the personal interests of the proprietors. The amount of
land held by them was in general so large, that even after endowing the
peasant with the allotted portion, considerable would still remain in
their hands. Diminished in extent and value during the transitional
phase, the remaining land would necessarily rise rapidly in value,
because the emancipated peasant _would_ now _have_ the right to own and
buy land. The calculation might be sustained that it would quintuple in
value in the course of fifty years. Small farms from their possessions
would soon be in the market, farms within the range of small purses and
limited means, and the proprietors did not fail to see the advantage
which would accrue to them in the almost unlimited increase of
purchasers which would soon be found among the enfranchised laborers.
The peasants gained freedom, land, and many advantages, nor were the
proprietors ruined in their advancement. Hence the National Government
effected what the Rossian never intended to do or ever will achieve:
gain and loss were equalized in the national duty of sustaining the
country in its progressive course, stimulating all to labor
simultaneously to support its public burdens, to aid in the general
advancement. The real freedom thus gained, in accordance with the
far-sighted policy of the Polish National Government, opened wide the
door to liberty, trade, commerce, and exchange; a policy which czarism,
even in its most liberal mood, can never admit, because it would condemn
itself, and give the death blow to its own existence. There is another
specialty peculiar to the Rossian Government, never forgotten by those
who live under its rule, viz.: the late emancipation was begun about
three years ago by an ukase of no very decided purport, which was
followed by many others of like uncertain character, according with the
varying views of those by whom they were dictated, by the partisans of
emancipation or by those standing in opposition to it. These ukases are
ranged in their appropriate numerical titles, and there are at least
five hundred thousand of them--whether imperial or senatorial, all
legally binding. What memory could stand such a burden, or what might
legal cavil not find therein?

It is an easy thing to 'speak for Buncombe,' as we say in America; it is
an easy thing to proclaim measures when we take no thought of how they
may be carried out; it is easy to excite the enthusiasm of the popular
lecturer, always in search of novelty with which to feed his hearers; it
may be pleasant to furnish venom to wounded self-esteem or disappointed
and petty ambition--but it will be found an exceedingly difficult task
to reconcile absolutism with freedom, czarism with liberalism, the
division of men into appointed castes and classes with the existence of
liberty and political equality. We are assured, not only by the writer
of the letter in question, but by the sages of New York, that the Polish
peasants were not willing to fight for Poland, that they called their
countrymen now in arms against Rossia 'dogs of nobles,' and 'that it was
really their duty to rise against and denounce their former _masters_ to
Rossia and Austria!'

If these assertions are true, who then filled the ranks of the Polish
insurgents? Who furnished food to those who lived for months in the
depths of forests, the haunts of mountain gorges? How was it possible
that without the connivance of the peasants the insurgents should pass
to and fro, or lie hidden in woods and fields? It was stated
authoritatively that the insurgents, were composed principally of
Hungarian refugees, about ten Frenchmen, a few strangers from other
nations, but of the number of the lesser nobility, men, in short, in
search of shelter and fortune. A strange fortune, a marvellous shelter
indeed to reward the greed of the ambitious--exile, death, and torture!
Were the testimony of such witnesses to be relied upon, we might well
exclaim: 'Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.' Yet how is it that we
find among the seven hundred patriots who were hung so many Poles, less
than a half of whom were Catholics, many of whom were Jews, Protestants,
and even Rosso-Greeks of various classes? Among the forty thousand known
deported, torn ruthlessly away from their native homes for centuries, we
find nearly five thousand Israelites, ten thousand peasants (known), and
from four to six thousand of Greek and other creeds. The two villages
near Lida, two in the government of Grodno, the hundreds of villages and
thousands of huts near Dwina, Rzezyca, Mohilew, Witebsk, burned, razed
to the ground by an excited and hired rabble of Muscovite Muziks, who
had sought and found hospitality in Poland for hundreds of
years--certainly all these villages and huts were not inhabited even by
the 'lesser nobility.' And it is also certain that the dwellers were not
so cruelly punished for denouncing the 'dogs of nobles'--an expression,
if we are not mistaken, taken from the vocabulary of the corporal or
subaltern officials, and which has never reached the fourteenth
class--from which the Rossian begins to reckon humanity.

The allegation of the existence of unrooted feudalism in Poland, because
such a system was known to the whole of Middle Europe, must be accounted
for by the evident ignorance of Polish history; and we assure both
teachers and readers, notwithstanding the evident wish to find it in
Poland, that it was unknown to her, nor could it subsist in the presence
of Polish institutions, habits, customs, and geography.

We can scarcely suppose it possible that our author means to insinuate
that thousands of noble families bought and transported arms for the
purpose of speculation. Notwithstanding the evidence he had of one such
bad business transaction for the purpose of sustaining and upholding the
insurrection, his frequent intimations of the incorrigible and unruly
character of the few Poles left, would almost authorize us in believing
that such was the intention of the writer when speaking of the aforesaid
arms.

Oh, in the name of common sense, for the sake of the men whose country
has been torn from them, who may not speak their mothers' tongue in the
land of their fathers, who are forbidden to worship in accordance with
the dictates of their conscience, whose sacred homes are desecrated by
the presence of privileged spies, who cannot sit down in peace in the
holy quiet of evening, because they know that the morrow may see them
dragged off to unknown and inaccessible dungeons, or summoned before
brutal judges without defenders, where they will find accusers, but will
be allowed to cite no witnesses; subjected to witness the horrible
anxiety endured every spring and fall by Polish fathers and mothers lest
the sons of their love should be unexpectedly seized in the night and
hurried off over the Caucasus, the Ural, or to the mouth of the Amour,
to serve in the army of the oppressor for life, or longer than home
memories in such young bosoms could be expected to last, with no
prospect of reward save such as may be reckoned in the number of
_palkis_ and _pletnis_ (whips and lashes); sons, whether rich or poor,
to be exposed to cavil, cunning, and vindictiveness, to the practices of
gambling judges and a profligate soldiery, to a venal police, to
fraudulent employés, themselves badly paid for service, but whose
extortions and abuses always meet with approval, a single complaint
against whom would expose the complainant to be sent through that
hopeless gate always open on the route to Siberia;--oh, for the sake of
common humanity, say not that men placed in such situations have, in
spite of their glorious history, no rights, no claims on human sympathy,
no cause to sacrifice life even when it has become a haunting horror!

Believe not that such complaints are inventions: the facts are known to
everybody who will look upon them. They are no slanderous stories, but
occurrences renewed with every morning, taking place under all
circumstances and with every transaction patent to the world. They were
appreciated and described in Prussia, and even in Austria verified, not
long before the last campaign. Under such circumstances, what must be
thought of the discoveries and conclusions of writers who assert that
'the Polish nation is a mere chimera'? As no individual, mighty as he
may be, can by a blasphemous word suppress the existence of the Eternal
Father, so neither passion nor love, favor nor animosity, interest nor
purpose of the most talented or ambitious, can erase at pleasure a
nationality which has a history of over a thousand years of existence, a
nationality proved by the last hundred years of incessant struggle for
independence with three giants. This nation has marked its boundaries
with graveyards toward the Dniester, Dnieper, Niemen, and Dwina, where
rest the beaten hordes of Batu or Nogays. Can the record be erased of
the power that broke the sword of the Osmanlis, and was it a _chimera_
that preserved Western Europe from such sights as Polowce and
Pietschiniegs, etc.? You may perhaps to-day designate as a _chimera_ the
Vienna saved in 1683, that very Vienna which in 1815 first conceived the
idea of sowing the seeds of distrust between Galicians and
Lodomerians--an idea soon after adopted, perfected, and publicly
propagated by Rossians, who applied the practice to Lithuanians,
Volhynians, Podolans, Polans, Radymicians, etc.--an idea now held in the
fierce grasp of Muraview, Anienkow, and probably at no very distant
period to be recalled to the mind of the originator.

The gentleman's knowledge of Russians (the true name is Rossians, the
other being assumed to effect a certain purpose in Western Europe),
Prussians, and Austrians, to the exclusion of Poles, proves only that
his geographic and ethnographic researches in Poland went no farther
than those of the 'reliable gentleman' who described the Bunker Hill
monument under President Lafayette.

In addition to the above, let us consult simply the sound of the names
of places, and we can form some idea of the extent of races and
nationalities. Nowgorod, Kaluga, Pskow--are _Rossian_; Telsze, Szawle,
Rosienie--_Lithuanian_; Winszpilis, Gielgawa, Libosie--_Courland_;
Lublin, Ostrolenka, Plock--_Polish_; Wlodrimirz, Zytomirz,
Berdyczev--_Volhynian_. In Austria, are the inhabitants of Venice,
Prague, and Buda, Austrian? The name of Prussia is an old one of
Slavonians living at the mouth of the Vistula, and has no etymology in
the Teutonic language. Those of Galicia and Lodomeria are unskilfully
disfigured from Halitsh (Halicz) and Wlodzimir. The name of Prussia was
assumed by Frederic II., margrave of Brandenburg, when he took the title
of king, at the same time giving solemn oaths never to pretend to the
sovereignty of Dantzick (Gdansk), Thorn (Torun), etc.

The present empire of Alexander is not of _Russia_, but of _Rossia_, and
the name of Russia is imposed on Polans near Kiow, on Radymicians near
Nowogrodek, on Drewlans south of the river Pripec, etc.; and we must
remember that Catharine II., in 1764, had solemnly declared by her
ambassadors, Kayserling and Repnin, that she had no right to Russias or
Ruthenias in Poland: 'Declaramus suam Imperatoriam Majestatem Dominam
nostram clementissimam ex usu _tituli totius Rossiæ_, nec sibi, nec
successoribus suis neque Imperio suo _jus ullum_ in ditiones et terræ
quæ _sub nomine Russiæ_ a Regno Poloniæ magnoque ducatu Lithuaniæ
possiduntur,' etc.

The prediction of the reëstablishment of serfdom as a result aimed at in
the present Polish struggle, is not only rash but preposterous, and has
no foundation except in a fixed purpose to direct all sympathy toward
Rossia.

The true bondage that tied man in Poland to the soil, began with the
introduction of police, passports, censors or _skaski_, recruiting,
conscription, and taxation, introduced by Prussia, Austria, and Rossia,
as so-called _improvements_. Poland had more free peasants, called
Ziemianin, Kmiec, Kozak, than there were in France during the _régime_
of the Gabeles or Leibeigenschaft in Germany. That they entirely
disappeared after the fall of Poland was surely not her fault. The
peasants on the estates attached to the clergy of all denominations, to
public schools, to the crown, and to the nation, were in a much better
condition, materially and morally, than are at present those in some
parts of Hainault and Thuringen. Individual abuses by an unconscientious
lord were to be seen as well in Connaught as near Debretschyn, near the
Saone as on the Necker. Times--contemporary with independent Poland, and
hence not very far back--beheld these sins against humanity committed on
a larger scale, and in lands in otherwise happier conditions. The phrase
_bonded labor_ is known under the best institutions. But this excuses no
one. Poland, without any compulsive cause, in 1764 and 1768, took these
questions into consideration; in 1791, was even more explicit; and in
1792, Kosciuszko distinctly settled the condition of the Polish peasant,
and that without opposition from the Polish nobility--a measure
immediately overruled and suppressed by Prussia and Rossia, both
accusing Poland of being a _dangerous_ nest of Jacobinism. In 1807, in
the grand duchy of Warsaw, after it was retaken from Prussia, the
condition of the peasantry was far more clear and protected than even
now promised by the Czar Alexander II., and was probably better
preserved than it can be under the crowd of employés and magistrates,
nominally elected by the peasants, but in fact imported from Saratow,
Kazan, Penza, etc., for the purpose of teaching liberty and Siberian
civilization in Warsaw and Wilna.

Common sense and the ordinary rules of logic force upon us the
conviction that writings of the above stamp are gotten up to produce
certain effects. Can any be found simple enough to believe that a whole
people would be aroused, armed, and taught to what end and how to use
the given arms, as was done by the manifesto of the Polish National
Government, January 22d, 1863, only to be deceived and in the end
deprived of that for which they had fought? By what right can bad faith
be imputed to land owners whom experience, a sense of justice, and even
interest, had already impelled to get rid of a useless and burdensome
relation? These land owners, even under the Rossian Government (in
1818), had solemnly begged the uncle of the present czar, Alexander I.,
to allow them to be freed from the onerous responsibilities caused by
serfdom under Rossian surveillance and severity.

The letter from Paris further states, on what authority we know not,
that the condition of the peasant or serf in Poland was dreadful until
the seventeenth century. This is going very far back, and probably at
that period, if facts could be found to sustain the writer's allegation,
the condition of bondmen--_vilains regardants_--boors, _Lebeigenschaft_,
_manans_, etc., was not better elsewhere. But here again we must differ
in opinion, and beg leave to state, not only to the author of the
letter, but to all other self-constituted authorities, whose knowledge
of Poland is derived from _The London Times_, _Chambers's Magazine_, M.
Hilperding, Kattow, or M. Morny, etc., that, with all due respect to
their social positions, we must deny them the title of well-informed
historians and profound judges of Poland and the Slavonic races. Up to
the seventeenth century, the peasantry (Kmiec, Ziemiamin) had its
_representatives in the diet_, and could find entrance into the ranks of
the nobility, which had no divisions into classes or titular
distinctions. Said nobility had the right to serve their country during
war, and a peasant providing himself with a horse and suitable arms, was
not excluded from that class. They could also take orders among the
clergy, and hence rise to high dignities in the church. Public schools
in Poland were never shut to the peasants, nor were any distinctions
therein authorized in favor of one or other class of pupils. In schools
then they enjoyed all privileges in common, and these were great--a
separate jurisdiction, and the facilities of reaching higher ranks.
Kromer, Janicki, Poniatowski, great names in Polish history, can show no
other origin than one nearer to the Ziemianin than to any other class.

If the current of fashion did not warp all judgments in favor of Rossia,
the writers of 'Tardy Truths' from Paris and elsewhere would have
reflected a little longer, and would soon have discovered that the
ignorance and poverty of the Polish peasantry were not due solely to the
Poles themselves. Polish schools were formerly all completely free, and
each school even had funds for the poor, called _purses_, foundations,
etc. Rossia, in the last fifty years, charged as high as $625 for
inscription alone in the higher classes, and about $25 for elementary
beginners. How could a poor family rise in prosperity if this school was
often the first cause of losing the favorite son; if they did send the
child to school they might lose him as a recruit for the army or navy,
as designated by the whim of the treacherous teacher and recruiting
officer; and this did not exempt from public burdens, as they were still
obliged to pay taxes for him during ten years, and contribute to all
public services, as stations (stoyki), wagons and teams (rozgony),
repairing and making public and private roads, extra post service,
besides innumerable services imposed for his own personal benefit by a
spravnik, straptschy, zasiedatel, sotnik, etc. Add to this the thwarting
of intercourse and commerce by every imaginable means under the system
of the famous M. Kankrin.

Could the peasant or the master become wealthy when a measure called _a
ton_, weighing about eight hundred and forty pounds, of wheat brought
the enormous sum of $4.25? a load of hay, drawn by one horse,
seventy-five cents when well paid, and _nothing_ when wanted by ulans or
hussars garrisoned in the neighborhood? A hen, with a dozen and a half
well-grown chickens, hardly brought enough to pay the value of the
commonest apron.

Such things as these were never known in ancient Poland, now so
unanimously accused and condemned by fashionable philanthropy. Even
eighty years ago such abuses would have been vainly looked for. We
remember, in our younger days, when conversing with an old sowietnik
(counsellor), to have heard him relate his bewildered astonishment at
the comfort and well-being in Poland when sent under an escort of
Cossacks to introduce Rossian _improvements_. 'What has become of them?'
we asked innocently. 'Ha!' was his naïve reply; 'St. Petersburg has
since then grown into a splendid city!'

Let us call the attention of Russo-maniacs to the fact that eighty years
ago, soon after the second partition of Poland, flax in Riga brought
eight hundred and seventy florins, while in 1845 it hardly brought two
hundred and forty florins; and the famous wheat of Sandomir sold, at the
first-named period, at sixty, while in 1856 it brought barely
thirty-five. Yet money now is cheaper than before 1800.

Did the Polish nobleman, selfish and wicked as now seems the fashion to
describe him, force the peasant of Samogitia to servile work, when the
latter had an opportunity of drawing a good profit from the results of
his labor in the neighboring marts of Memel, Liban, Riga, Mittau,
Venden, etc.? No, must we answer to our readers. _There_ might have been
seen a boor's wife dressed in sky blue lined with fox fur, and drawn to
church in a comfortable kolaska, by two excellent, plump, Samogitian
ponies; and neither did the father of the family exhaust his strength in
night watches or day labor, as he had twenty teams to dispose of, and
could offer to an unexpected visitor a broiled chicken with milk sauce,
and a couple of bottles of brown stout from Barclay, Perkins & Co., of
London. Such prosperity, although then declining, was still to be found
in 1830. Why does it not exist to-day? Let this question be answered by
civilizers and democrats from Tambow, Saratow, or Penza, and their
jealous apologists.

Our writer seems to think he has made a wonderful discovery when he
exultingly exclaims: 'How surprised these pretended _liberals_ would be
to see that their efforts only tend toward reconstituting a monarchical
Poland (was Poland really monarchical?--we may doubt) under the
protection of a _feudal_ and Catholic Church!' Such charges were also
made in the eighteenth century, and were suggested by similar motives. I
do not feel called upon to defend the Catholics of Poland. I would
simply retort upon the authors of such suggestions, by referring to
certain distinguished rabbis, as Heilprin, Meintzel, Jastrow, etc.; to
Protestants, as Konarski, Potworowski, Kasaius, Krolikowski, Czynski,
and hosts of others; and also to Mohammedans, as Baranowski, Mucha,
Bielak, etc. I cannot condemn a man because he is a Catholic, because I
have everywhere, and in every religious community, found both patriots
and traitors to their country, to their origin, to principle, and to
their religion. But this I must say, that of whatever denomination or
sect be the minister or priest, he has a right to be a faithful son to
his fatherland and race. It happened that in Poland the Catholic priest
stood opposed to the Rossian pope. If the latter can be a Rossian
patriot, why should a like sentiment render guilty a Polish priest? This
animosity in certain circles proceeds from a partiality to the
Rosso-Greek Church, which, some years ago, during the visit of the
emperor Nicholas to England, certain ignorant or du. By way of
parenthesis, we may add that the Rosso-Greek Church separated long ago
from the Eastern Greek Church, preserving, however, all its outward
forms. Peter I. abolished the patriarchate, introduced his own classes
and reforms, and made himself head of the church. He gave the name of
synod to a permanent council, nominated, appointed, dismissed,
controlled, rewarded, and punished by himself, according to his own
judgment, passion, or will. The Græco-Rossian Church is kept under the
same discipline as the army, and an offending pope is sent, with the
rank of private, to some remote regiment.

The author of the letter from Paris somewhat contradictorily asserts
that the women, being superior in Poland, govern the men, but are
themselves governed entirely by the priests. This scarcely tallies with
strict logic; but, for the sake of truth and of a just respect for our
mothers, who taught us to love our country and freedom, who gave us
strength in exile, and faith through persecution, and who instructed us
how to think, and inspired us with those noble sentiments, seemingly
denied to the mothers of the 'fashionable civilization' (of St.
Petersburg), among whom there is not one lady writer--we will thank this
writer for the refutation offered by him to an impudent slander,
emanating from a contributor to _Chambers' Magazine_, of January last.
We repeat that we thank him for his just tribute to Polish women,
however inimical he may be to the Polish cause, and however much he may
depreciate our sex. Yet it seems strange that, while accusing Polish
women of being entirely under the control of the priests, and hence to
have been chiefly instrumental in fomenting the last insurrection, the
author did not notice, or is purposely silent regarding, a fact which,
as he appears to have been longer in a Galician chateau than elsewhere,
must have fallen under his notice, namely, that in Galicia, the Polish
priest was the _most decided opponent_ to any insurrection. How, then,
could the active Polish women-patriots be instruments of the action
condemned by the apologists of the absolute government of Rossia?

The admonition to France, on the ground that, after the revolution of
1789, she is committing a contradictory error by showing sympathy toward
a revolution gotten up by priests, is but a consequence of the first
judgment, and we may leave to France and her sense of her own interests
to do what she may think right and profitable. We will simply mention
that, for French glory, and for this error, as the author calls it, two
hundred thousand Poles were slain in Egypt, Italy, San Domingo, Spain,
Germany, Holland, and on the plains of Mozajsk, Kraslaw, Boryssow,
Eylau, Friedland, etc. The monument seen from the balcony of the
Tuileries has the names upon it, which we scarcely can suppose to have
been inscribed for the sole purpose of filling space.

The friends of Poland believe that they serve the cause of progress by
aiding in the reëstablishment of the Polish nation. We presume there are
plenty of men in France who know that during the last thirty years
Rossia has spread her dominion in Asia over twice the area of Germany
and France together, that she is only eighty miles from Peking, and as
far from India as Vienna is from the Black Sea. Moreover, Asiatic
people, always dreaming of plunder in Europe, once armed with European
Minié rifles and rifled cannon, may repeat anew the incursions of
Attila, Tamerlane, Battu, etc. The end to be gained and the booty will
create the temptation, and offer superior inducements.

The effort to palliate Rossian cruelty, skilful as it is, by the alleged
necessities of war, by denials, or by asserting it to be mere revenge
for similar atrocities committed by Poles, must be appreciated according
to the sources whence it emanates. What the letter writer or similar
twelve-hour visitors saw in Poland, particularly in Kracow, of people
sharpening knives or preparing deadly poisons, need here be merely
referred to by saying that in times of general confusion we have no
means to foresee or to control personal revenge, and also that we will
not here cite the reports of Polish papers or accounts of Germans. We
will take our data from the Moscow _Invalid_, the czar's _Universal
Journal_ at Warsaw, and the _Journal de Petersbourg_. From these we find
it stated that the number of men hanged in three hundred and sixty-five
days of insurrection was eight hundred and fifty, besides many others
whose names were not given because it was simpler and more profitable to
ignore their origin, class, and religion.

From Kiow alone Anienkow sent away fourteen thousand men, chiefly of
Greek or other non-Roman-Catholic religion, over whom the Catholic
priest had neither control or influence. From Warsaw, every Saturday
during fifty-two weeks, an average of four hundred men, women, and
children were deported, all separated from their natural guides and
protectors. From Liefland, north of the Dwina, were sent off, in one
month, thirty-five hundred of the better educated and comfortable class
of people. A Government paper rejoices that Polish and Catholic
principles, growing there during five centuries, were in a fair way of
extinction, since, as it itself admits, forty-five thousand men had been
transferred to the governments of Samara, Orenburg, Kazan, and similar
localities. To burn the villages of Ibanie, Szarki, Hrodki, Smoloy,
Zabolocie, etc., to destroy the furniture, horses, cattle, and all other
property, to send the inhabitants on foot, only allowing for the aged
and young children a few small wagons, far away into a cold, strange,
savage country, without tools, means, etc.--was all this done merely as
a military necessity, and was it excusable, or, at most, merely
_blamable_?

Now, certain correspondents and lecturers, with other gentlemen, deny
the use of the lash or whip on the backs of women and ladies, because
the American people cannot countenance such barbarism. To say the least
of such a denial--it is gratuitous. Austria daily publishes similar
judgments as the result of police court trials. In Rossia, they are not
published, because the administration of lash, whip, and scourge is left
to the _paternal_ discretion of every sergeant, lieutenant, police
commissary, and district constable, and is enjoyed by them to their
hearts' content. It is the method employed for ages by Rossia, and
considered as an indispensable appendage to patriarchal czarism and its
lieutenants. We cannot wonder at such denials, for their authors have
ordinarily been brought up under a better state of things, and never
learned in their youth the possibility of resort to such practices: the
less also can we wonder when we know that they met only similar denials
in the higher Rossian society, and when we consider that such denials
came from a source one is naturally inclined to respect, when the man
denying seems respectable. How can we fancy a lie told by a gentleman in
golden uniform, or a lady in a lace dress? But if the defenders of the
civilization of Rossia and of the noble manners of its aristocracy knew
all the cruel judgments of Rossian masters, the lewdness, recklessness,
indecency, and shallowness often concealed beneath their artificial good
breeding and apparent courtesy, they would learn that laces may cover
coarse tissues, and gold hide corroded brass. The gaudy dress and
uniform serve but to permit more daring deeds; the more they glitter,
the more impunity they confer. Under every Government, and more
especially under a despotism, subaltern officers may be sure of impunity
to abuse, provided it is done under the guise of zeal and devotion.

During the past year we have heard and read in lectures, newspapers,
correspondences, etc., many flattering statements of the beauty of the
Rossian Government, and the czar's liberality--and as many accusations
and imputations detrimental to the Polish cause. Why the same views were
not held and advocated during the Crimean war we will not ask, but
merely hint at. These statements come from organs whose purpose is
readily divined. If we turn to the paper that has opened its columns to
the Paris letter, we find close at hand the advertisement and
recommendation of a programme for our own great country, and the
pointing out of a new Garibaldi for the American Union. Now, neither
said platform nor Garibaldi would be consistent with the condemnation,
irony, and ridicule flung upon the champions for one thousand years of
the growing progress, prosperity, and Christianity of Western Europe.

We of this generation are grown fixedly into our ancient habits of
thought, and now can make no change; but our successors, perchance, may
possibly be reduced to undersign the manifesto of Rossian Liberalism,
published about a year ago in Moscow, and, in return for false promises
and deceptions, consent to make common cause against Germany and the
whole of Western Europe. What _American_ liberties would gain by such an
eventuality, is not for us, nor for to-day, to say.




APHORISMS.--NO. XI.


'A man who has no wants has attained great freedom, and firmness, and
even dignity.'--BURKE.

'Mad wants and mean endeavors,' as Carlyle expresses it, 'are among the
signal characteristics and great follies of our nature.'

But how can we attain to the freedom, firmness, and dignity of having no
wants? Answer: By learning what our real necessities are, and limiting
our sense of want by such knowledge. Otherwise there is little hope for
us; for, as soon as we admit imaginary and factitious needs, we become
the slaves of mere fancy, the sport of mere human opinion, and devoid of
all true dignity.

How sublime, as compared with the ordinary condition of men, is the
possibility suggested by Burke! _Freedom_, instead of such slavery as
the love of pleasure occasions, or such as ambition entails upon men!
_Firmness_, such as he has who does not feel compelled to ask how his
conduct may affect the supply of his wants from day to day! _Dignity_,
such as we see in every man who studies the great interests of his
being, regardless of any harm that may thereby accrue to his earthly
estate! So free, and firm, and dignified may each be that will.

But no such good is possible for men who allow their sense of want to be
ruled by the common opinions of men. If the good at which we aim can be
secured only by the possession of this world's favors, as they are
dispensed by the wealthy or the powerful, or the suffrages of the
multitude (votes for office, and the like), then each one becomes the
servant of his fellow men--a servant just as really as if he were hired
to perform any menial office. The party politician, for example, is just
as fully bound by the will of others as a coachman or foot servant. For
him neither freedom, firmness, or dignity is possible. He can do only as
others bid him: he can resist no solicitations to evil on the part of
those whom he would make his constituents: he has no dignity above that
of a tool, in the hands, it may be, of a very unworthy master.

So in all cases where we allow ourselves to be dependent in such form
and measure that in order to compass our own ends we must look to the
will and behests of others.




AN ARMY: ITS ORGANIZATION AND MOVEMENTS.

_THIRD PAPER._


Cavalry! At this word whose mind does not involuntarily recall pictures
of mailed knights rushing upon each other with levelled lances, and of
the charging squadrons of Austerlitz, of Jena, of Marengo, of the
Peninsula, and of Waterloo? Whose blood is not stirred with a throng of
memories connected with the noble achievements of the war horse and his
rider? Who does not imagine a panorama of all that is gay and glorious
in warfare--prancing coursers, gilded trappings, burnished sabres,
waving pennons, and glittering helmets--rank after rank of gallant
riders--anon the blast of bugles, the drawing of sabres, the mighty
rushing of a thousand steeds, the clash of steel, the shout, the
victory? The chief romance of war attaches itself to the deeds
accomplished by the assistance of the power and endurance of man's
noblest servant. Every one has read so much poetry about valiant youths,
mounted on fiery yet docile steeds, doing deeds of miraculous prowess in
the ranks of their enemies--our literature is so full of tapestried
representations of knightly retinues and charging squadrons--the
towering form of Murat is so conspicuous in the narratives of the
Napoleonic wars--and history has so often repeated the deeds of those
horsemen who performed such illustrious feats in the combats of half a
century ago, that we associate with the cavalry only ideas of splendor
and glory, of wild freedom and dashing gallantry. But the cavalry
service is far different from such vague and fanciful imaginations.
Instead of ease, there is constant labor; instead of freedom, there is a
difficult system of discipline and tactics; and instead of frequent
opportunities for glorious charges, there is a constant routine of
toilsome duty in scouting and picketing, with rarely an opportunity for
assisting prominently in the decision of a great battle, or of winning
renown in overthrowing the ranks of an enemy by the impetuous rush of a
mass of horses against serried bayonets.

In many respects cavalry is the most difficult branch of military
service to maintain and to operate. It is exceedingly costly, on account
of the great loss of horses by the carelessness of the men, by overwork,
by disease, and by the fatalities of battle. The report of General
Halleck, for the year 1863, stated that from May to October there were
from ten thousand to fourteen thousand cavalry in the Army of the
Potomac, while the number of horses furnished them for the same period
was thirty-five thousand; adding to these the horses taken by capture
and used for mounting men, the number would be sufficient to give each
man a horse every _two months_. There were two hundred and twenty-three
regiments of cavalry in the service, which, at the same rate, would
require four hundred and thirty-five thousand horses. This is an immense
expenditure of animals, and is attributable in part to the peculiarities
of the volunteer service--such as the lack of care and knowledge on the
part of the officers, and the disposition of the men to break down their
horses by improper riding, and sometimes out of mere wantonness, for the
purpose of getting rid of animals they do not like, for the chance of
obtaining better. A measure has recently been adopted to remedy these
evils, by putting into the infantry cavalry officers and men who show
themselves incompetent to take proper care of their animals, and who
neglect other essentials of cavalry service. The provision and
transportation of forage for cavalry horses also constitute items of
great cost.

To attain proficiency and effectiveness, cavalry soldiers require much
longer instruction than those of any other arm. They must become expert
swordsmen, and acquire such skill in equitation that horse and rider
shall resemble the mythical centaurs of the ancients--shall be only one
individual in will. The horses should be as thoroughly trained as the
riders. In European armies this is accomplished in training schools. The
Governments keep constantly on hand large supplies of animals, partly
purchased and partly produced in public stables, and capable instructors
are continually employed in fitting both men and horses for their
duties.

To insure the provision of proper horses and to recuperate those which
are sent from the army disabled or sick, an immense cavalry depot has
been established at Giesboro', near Washington. Thousands of horses are
kept there ready for service, and as fast as men in the army are
dismounted by the loss of their animals, they are sent to this depot. It
is one of the most useful and best-arranged affairs connected with our
service, and has greatly assisted in diminishing the expense attending
the provision of animals, and in increasing the efficiency of our
cavalry.

We have had all the difficulties to contend with resulting from
inexperienced riders and untrained horses. No one who has not beheld the
scene, can imagine the awkward appearance of a troop of recruits mounted
on horses unaccustomed to the saddle. The sight is one of the most
laughable that can be witnessed. We have seen the attempt made to put
such a troop into a gallop across a field. Fifty horses and fifty men
instantly became actuated by a hundred different wills, and dispersed in
all directions--some of the riders hanging on to the pommels, with their
feet out of the stirrups, others tugging away at the bridles, and not a
few sprawling on the ground. After a few months' drills, however, a
different scene is presented, and an old troop horse becomes so
habituated to his exercises that not only will he perform all the
evolutions without guidance, but will even refuse to leave the ranks,
though under the most vigorous incitements of whip and spur. An officer
friend was once acting as cavalier to a party of ladies on horseback at
a review, when, unfortunately, the troop in which his horse belonged
happening to pass by, the animal bolted from the group of ladies, and
took his accustomed place in the ranks, nor could all the efforts of his
rider disengage him. Finally, our friend was obliged to dismount, and,
holding the horse by the bit, _back_ him out of the troop to his station
with the party of ladies--a feat performed amid much provoking laughter.

Cavalry can operate in masses only when circumstances are favorable--the
country open, and the ground free from obstructions. Yet it is in masses
alone that it can be effective, and it can triumph against infantry only
by a _shock_--from the precipitation of its weight upon the lines,
crushing them by the onset. Before the time of Frederic the Great, the
Prussian horsemen resembled those to be seen at a militia review--they
were a sort of picture soldiers, incapable of a vigorous charge. He
revolutionized the service by teaching that cavalry must achieve success
by a rapid onset, not stopping to fire themselves, and not regarding the
fire of their opponents. By practising these lessons, they were able to
overthrow the Austrian infantry. But if the force of a charge is
dissipated by obstructions on the ground, or is broken by the fire of
the assailed, the effectiveness of cavalry, as a participant in the
manoeuvres of a battle field, is entirely destroyed.

The question of the future of cavalry is at present one of great
interest among military investigators; for notwithstanding its
brilliant achievements during our civil war, the fact is apparent that
its sphere has been entirely changed, its old system has become
obsolete, and former possibilities no longer lie within its scope. Since
Waterloo there had not been, until our war commenced, any opportunity to
test the action of cavalry; for its operations in the Crimea and in
Italy were insignificant. The art of warfare had, meanwhile, in many
respects, become revolutionized by the introduction of rifled arms.
Military men waited, therefore, with interest, the experience of the war
in this country, to judge from it as to the part cavalry was to perform
in future warfare. That experience has shown that the day in which
cavalry can successfully charge squares of infantry has passed. When the
smooth-bore muskets alone were used by infantry, cavalry could be formed
in masses for charging at a distance of five hundred yards; now the
formations must be made at the distance of nearly a mile, and that
intervening space must be passed at speed under the constant fire of
cannon and rifles; when the squares are reached, the horses are
frightened and blown, the ranks have been disordered by the
impossibility of preserving a correct front during such a length of time
at rapid speed, and by the loss of men; the charge breaks weakly on the
wall of bayonets, and retires baffled. Infantry, before it learns its
own strength and the difficulty of forcing a horse against a bayonet--or
rather to trample down a man--has an absurd and unfounded fear of
cavalry. This feeling was in part the cause of the panic among our
troops at Bull Run--so much had been said about the Black Horse troop of
the rebels. The Waterloo achievements of the French were then thought
possible of repetition. Now adays it is hardly probable that the veteran
infantry of either army would take the trouble to form squares to resist
cavalry, but would expect to rout it by firing in line. Neither party in
our war has been able to make its mounted forces effective in a general
battle. Nothing has occurred to parallel, upon the battle field, those
exploits of the cavalry--French, Prussian, and English--in the great
wars of the last century, extending to Waterloo.

The enthusiastic admirers of cavalry still maintain that it is possible
to repeat those exploits, even in face of the improved firearms now in
use. All that is necessary, they say, is to have the cavalry
sufficiently drilled. The ground to be crossed under a positively
dangerous fire is only five hundred or six hundred yards, and once
taught to continue the charge through the bullets for this distance, and
then to throw themselves on the bayonets, horsemen will now, as
heretofore, break the lines of infantry. All very true, _if_ cavalry to
fulfil the conditions named can be obtained; but in _them_ lies the
difficulty. Occasional instances of splendid charges will undoubtedly
occur in future warfare; but it seems to be an established fact that the
day for the glory of cavalry has passed. Once the mailed knight, mounted
on his mailed charger, could overthrow by scores the poor, pusillanimous
pikemen and crossbow men who composed the infantry; he was invulnerable
in his iron armor, and could ride them down like reeds. But gunpowder
and the bayonet have changed this; and now the most confident and
domineering cavalryman will put spurs to his horse and fly at a gallop,
if he sees the muzzle of an infantryman's rifle, with its glittering
bayonet, pointed at him from the thicket.

Another revolution effected in the mounted service by the improvements
in arms and the consequent changes of tactics, is the diminution of
heavy and the increase of light cavalry--that is, the transfer of the
former into the latter. These two denominations really include all kinds
of cavalry, although the non-military reader may have been puzzled by
the numerous subordinate denominations to be found in the accounts of
European warfare--such as dragoons, cuirassiers, hussars, lancers,
chasseurs, hulans, etc.

Heavy cavalry is composed of the heavier men and horses, and is usually
divided into dragoons and cuirassiers. It is designed to act in masses,
and to break the lines of an enemy by the weight of its charge. Usually,
also, it has had some defensive armor, and is a direct descendant from
the knights of the Middle Ages. But the cuirasses, which were sufficient
to resist the balls from smooth-bore muskets, are easily penetrated by
rifles. Consequently the occupation of this kind of cavalry is gone, and
it is likely to disappear gradually from the service. In this country we
have never had anything except light cavalry--the only kind adapted for
use in our Indian warfare. This kind of cavalry is intended to
accomplish results by the celerity of its movements, and all its
equipments should therefore be as light as possible. The chief
difficulty is to prevent the cavalry soldier from overloading his horse,
as he has a propensity not only to carry a large wardrobe and a full
supply of kitchen utensils, but also to 'convey,' in the language of
Pistol, or, in army language, 'gobble up,' or, in plain English, steal
anything that is capable of being fastened to his saddle.

It is evident that the efficiency of a cavalry soldier depends as much
upon his horse as upon himself; and it is requisite, therefore, that the
weight upon the horse should be as light as possible. The limit has been
fixed at about two hundred pounds for light, and two hundred and fifty
for heavy cavalry; but both of these are too much. A cavalry soldier
ought not to weigh over one hundred and fifty to one hundred and sixty
pounds, and his accoutrements not over thirty pounds additional; but in
practice, scarcely any horse--except where the rider is a very light
weight--carries less than two hundred and twenty or two hundred and
thirty pounds. One great cause of the evils incident to our cavalry
service is the excessive weight imposed on the horses. The French take
particular pains in this respect; while in England the cavalry is almost
entirely 'heavy,' and, though well drilled, is clumsy. John Bull, with
his roast beef and plum pudding, makes a poor specimen of a light
cavalryman. English officers are now endeavoring to revolutionize their
mounted service, so as to diminish its weight and increase its celerity.

The _arms_ of cavalry have been various, but it is now well settled that
its true weapon is the sabre, as its true form of operation is the
charge. A great deal of ingenuity has been expended in devising the best
form of sabre. Different countries have different patterns, but the one
adopted in our army is very highly considered. It is pointed, so as to
be used in thrusting; sharp on one edge for cutting; curved, so as to
inflict a deeper wound; and the weight arranged, by a mathematical rule,
so that the centres of percussion and of gravity are placed where the
weapon may be most easily handled. The lance is a weapon very
appropriate to light mounted troops, and is still used by some of the
Cossacks and Arab horsemen. But to wield it effectively requires
protracted training. For a long time in Europe it was the chief weapon
for horsemen; with the knights it was held in exclusive honor, and
continued in use for a considerable period after firearms had destroyed
the prestige of the gentlemen of the golden spurs. Prince Maurice, of
Orange, when he raised mounted regiments to defend the Netherlands
against the Spanish, rejected it, and since his time it has become
obsolete except in some regiments especially drilled to it. Such a
regiment was raised in Philadelphia at the commencement of our war, but
after eighteen months' experience the lances were abandoned. Besides the
sabre, cavalry-men are armed with pistols or carbines--the men having
the latter being employed particularly in skirmishing, sometimes on
foot.

The proportion of mounted troops in an army varies according to the
nature of the country which is the theatre of military operations. In a
level country it should be about one fourth or one fifth, while in one
that is mountainous, it should not be greater than a tenth. As a general
rule, improvements in firearms have produced a decrease in the
proportion of cavalry and lessened its importance. When artillery was
introduced, the cavaliers, who composed the Middle Age armies
exclusively, commenced to disappear; knighthood passed out of existence,
being superseded by mercenary bands. Infantry gradually assumed
importance, which has constantly increased, until it has now attained
the vast predominance. This has not only caused a general diminution of
the proportion of cavalry, but has entailed on the Governments of Europe
the necessity of keeping their cavalry service always at its maximum, so
that the mounted troops may be perfect in their drill; whereas infantry
troops can acquire comparative proficiency in a few months.

We will give a brief description of the different classes of cavalry,
and close our subject by some remarks on the operation of this arm of
service in our civil war.

The regiments raised by Prince Maurice, of Orange, above referred to,
were the first known as _cuirassiers_, on account of the cuirasses which
they wore for defence. All defensive armor is now being laid aside.

_Dragoons_ originally were a class of soldiers who operated both on foot
and mounted. They are supposed to take their name from a kind of firearm
called a 'dragon.' In modern practice dragoons are almost entirely used
as cavalry, and rarely have recourse to any extended service on foot.
The denomination 'dragoons' has recently been abolished from our
service.

_Carabineers_ were at first some Basque and Gascon horsemen in the
French service, whose peculiarly distinguishing characteristic was a
skilful use in the saddle of a short firearm.

_Hussars_ originated in Hungary, taking their denomination from the word
_husz_, which signifies twenty, and _ar_, pay--every twentieth man being
required by the state to enter into service. From their origin they were
distinguished for the celerity of their movements and their devotion to
fine costumes.

The _hulans_ were a species of Polish light cavalry, bearing lances, and
taking their name from their commander--a nobleman named Huland.

_Chasseurs_ are French regiments, designed chiefly to act as scouts and
skirmishers. The _chasseurs d'Afrique_ are cavalry which have been
trained in Algeria, and have become exceedingly expert through conflicts
with the Arabs. The _spahis_ are Arab cavalry, in the French service,
and are such admirable riders that they will charge over all kinds of
ground, and dash upon a foe who judges himself secure amid rocks or
trees or ditches.

At the commencement of the war the rebel cavalry was superior to that
furnished by the North. For this there were many reasons. Southern
plantation life had accustomed the aristocratic youth to the saddle, and
great attention was bestowed on the training of horses. At the North the
number of skilled riders was comparatively few. Gradually, however,
Northern energy, endurance, and patient discipline began to tell, and
the time soon arrived when the Southern cavalry were invariably driven,
especially in sabre charges, to which Southerners have great aversion.
At present, on account of the scarcity of horses, the difficulty of
supplying forage, and the loss of so many gay youths of the chivalry,
the Southern, cavalry has dwindled into such a condition as to be no
longer formidable.

The service of the cavalry in both armies during the war has been
exclusively as light cavalry--scouting, picketing, raiding, etc. Its
combats have been with forces of its own arm. No commander has yet
succeeded in assisting to determine the issue of a pitched battle by the
charges of his mounted troops. Our cavalry have rendered, however,
brilliant and invaluable services in protecting the rear and flanks of
the armies, and by their magnificent raiding expeditions into the
enemy's country, destroying his supplies, injuring his communications,
diverting his forces, and liberating his slaves. No sufficient accounts
of such expeditions and of the numerous cavalry conflicts have been
published; yet they are very desirable. They would furnish most
interesting narratives, and be a valuable contribution not only to the
history of the times, but to the history of warfare; for the operations
of the cavalry in this war constitute a new era in the history of this
branch of military service. Unless care is exercised to procure such
narratives, our posterity will never know anything of many battle fields
where fought and fell brave troopers from every Northern State.

The chief duties of officers belonging to the _corps of engineers_, when
connected with an army acting in the field, are the supervision of
routes of communication, the laying of bridges, the selection of
positions for fortifications, and the indication of the proper character
of works to be constructed. Should a siege occur, a new and very
important class of duties devolves on them, relating to the trenches,
saps, batteries, etc.

Not only is there in Virginia a lack of good roads, but the numerous
streams have few or no bridges. In many cases where bridges have
existed, one or the other of the contending armies has destroyed them to
impede the march of its opponents. Streams which have an average depth
of three or four feet are, however, generally without bridges, except
where crossed by some turnpike, the common country roads mostly leading
to fords. The famous Bull Run is an example. There were but two or three
bridges over this stream in the space of country penetrated by the roads
generally pursued by our army in advancing or retreating, and these have
been several times destroyed and rebuilt. The stream varies from two to
six feet in depth--the fords being at places of favorable depth, and
where the bottom is gravelly and the banks sloping. Often such streams
as this, and indeed smaller ones, become immensely swelled in volume by
storms, so that a comparatively insignificant rivulet might greatly
delay the march of an army, if means for quickly crossing should not be
provided. The general depth of a ford which a large force, with its
appurtenances, can safely cross, is about three feet, and even then the
bottom should be good and the current gentle. With a greater depth of
water, the men are likely to wet their cartridge boxes, or be swept off
their feet. There is a small stream about three miles from Alexandria,
crossing the Little River turnpike, which has never been bridged, and
which was once so suddenly swollen by rain that all the artillery and
wagons of a corps were obliged to wait about twelve hours for its
subsidence. The mules of some wagons driven into it were swept away.
Fords, unless of the best bottom, are rendered impassable after a small
portion of the wagons and artillery of an army have crossed them--the
gravel being cut through into the underlying clay, and the banks
converted into sloughs by the dripping of water from the animals and
wheels.

A very amusing scene was presented at the crossing of Hazel River (a
branch of the Rappahannock) last fall, when the Army of the Potomac
first marched to Culpepper. The stream was at least three feet deep,
and at various places four--the current very rapid--the bottom filled
with large stones, and the banks steep, except where a narrow road had
been cut for the wagons. The men adopted various expedients for
crossing. Some went in boldly all accoutred; some took off shoes and
stockings, and carefully rolled up their trousers; others (and they were
the wisest) divested themselves of all their lower clothing. The long
column struggled as best it could through the water, and occasionally,
amid vociferous shouts, those who had been careful to roll up their
trousers would step into a hole up to the middle; others, who had taken
still more precautions, would stumble over a stone and pitch headlong
into the roaring waters, dropping their guns, and splashing vainly about
with their heavy knapsacks, in the endeavor to regain a footing, until
some of their comrades righted them; and others, after getting over
safely, would slip back from the sandy bank, and take an involuntary
immersion. Some clung to the rear of the wagons, but in the middle of
the stream the mules would become fractious, or the wagon would get
jammed against a stone, and the unfortunate passengers were compelled to
drop off and wade ashore, greeted by roars of derisive laughter. On such
occasions soldiers give full play to their humor. They accept the
hardships with good nature, and make the best of any ridiculous incident
that may happen. At the time referred to, many conscripts had just
joined the ranks, and cries resounded everywhere among the old soldiers:
'Hello, conscripts, how do you like this?' 'What d'ye think of sogering
now?' 'This is nothing. You'll have to go in up to yer neck next time.'

Generally, when the exigencies of the march will permit, bridges are
made over such streams, either by the engineers of the army, or
detachments from the various corps which are passing upon the roads.
They are simple 'corduroy bridges,' and can be laid very expeditiously.
Two or three piers of stones and logs are placed in the stream, string
pieces are stretched upon them, and cross pieces of small round logs
laid down for the flooring. The most extensive bridges of this kind used
by the Army of the Potomac were those over the Chickahominy in the
Peninsular campaign. 'Sumner's bridge,' by which reinforcements crossed
at the battle of Fair Oaks, was laid in this manner. Of course such
bridges are liable to be carried away and to be easily destroyed. Some
of the bridges over the Chickahominy were laid much more thoroughly.
'Cribs' of logs were piled in cob-house fashion, pinned together, and
sunk vertically in the stream. Then string pieces and the flooring were
laid, the whole covered with brush and dirt. Men worked at these bridges
up to the waist in water for many days in succession.

Military art has devised many expedients for bridging streams, and use
is made of any facilities that may be at hand for constructing the means
of passage; but the only organized bridge trains which move with the
army are those which carry the pontoons. Of these there are various
kinds, made of wood, of corrugated iron, and of india rubber stretched
over frames. But the wooden pontoon boats are most in use. They can be
placed in a river and the flooring laid upon them with great rapidity.
Several very fine bridges have been thus constructed--among them may be
mentioned the one at the mouth of the Chickahominy, across which General
McClellan's army marched in retreating from Harrison's Landing. It was
about a mile long, and was constructed in a few hours.

To cross a river under the fire of an enemy is one of the most difficult
operations in warfare. Yet it has been frequently accomplished by our
armies. The crossing of the Rappahannock by General Burnside's army,
previous to the great battle of Fredericksburg, in December, 1862, is
one of the most remarkable instances of the kind during the war. The
rebel rifle pits lined the southern bank, and the fire from them
prevented our engineers from approaching--the river being only about
seventy-five yards wide. For a long time our artillery failed to drive
the rebels away. About noon of the day on which the crossing was made,
General Burnside ordered a concentration of fire on Fredericksburg, in
the houses of which place the rebels had concealed their forces. A
hundred guns, hurling shot and shell into every building and street of
the city, soon riddled it; but the obstinate foes hid themselves in the
cellars till the storm was over, and then emerged defiantly. They were
only dislodged by sending over a battalion in boats to attack them in
flank, when they retreated, and the bridges were laid.

It is impossible to explain in articles of this character the mysteries
of intrenchment and fortification, so that they will be comprehensible.
A few notes, however, on some of the principal terms constantly
employed, may be found useful and interesting.

_Rifle pits_--as the term is now generally used--are small embankments,
made by throwing up dirt from an excavation _inside_. They can be
erected quickly, for it will be seen that those behind them have the
advantage, not only of the height of the embankment, but also of the
depth of the ditch. Thus an excavation of two feet would give a
protection of _four_ feet. This is the ordinary rifle pit, but when time
permits it receives many improvements.

_Breastworks_ are any erections of logs, dirt, etc., raised breast high,
to shelter the men behind them.

An _abatis_ consists of obstructions placed in front of a work to form
obstacles to a storming party. The most convenient method of forming it
is to cut down trees and allow them to lie helterskelter. When there is
time, the trees are laid with the butts toward the work, and the
branches outward--the small limbs being removed, and the ends of the
remainder sharpened.

[Illustration]

A _redan_ is a letter V, with the point toward the enemy, and is used
generally to cover the heads of bridges, etc.

[Illustration]

A _lunette_ is the redan with flanking wings.

[Illustration]

A _redoubt_ is an enclosed parallelogram.

[Illustration]

These works are very imperfect, because they have exposed points. The
angles are not protected by the fire from the sides. To remedy this
difficulty, the next most usual work is the _star fort_, made in the
form of a regular or irregular star. It will be perceived that the fire
from the sides covers the angles.

The next and still more improved form of work is the bastioned fort,
which consists of projecting bastions at the corners, the fire from
which enfilades the ditches.

The following is a diagram of a vertical section of the parapet and
ditch used in all fully constructed field works:

[Illustration:

     A B is the slope of the banquette.

     B C head of the banquette, or place where the men stand to deliver
     their fire.

     C D the interior slope of the parapet.

     D E superior slope of the same.

     F G the berme, or place left to prevent the parapet from washing
     down into the ditch.

     G H the scarp or interior wall of the ditch.

     H I the bottom of the ditch.

     I K the counterscarp.

     L M N the glacis, which, except the abatis near the ditch, is left
     free and open, so as to expose the assailants to the fire from the
     parapet.

     The proportions and angles of all the lines given are fixed
     according to mathematical rules.]

The operations of a siege present many incidents of great interest; but
we can do nothing more in this article than illustrate the methods in
which the approaches are made to the works the capture of which is
designed. When reconnoissances have established the conclusion that the
works of an enemy cannot be carried by assault, the lines of the
investing army are advanced as near to them as is compatible with
safety; advantage is then taken of the opportunities afforded by the
ground to cover working parties, which are thrown forward to the place
fixed for the first parallel; sometimes these parties can commence their
work only at night. The parallel is only a deep trench with the dirt
thrown toward the enemy; and after the excavation has progressed, the
trench is occupied by parties of troops to resist any sorties of the
enemy, and to prevent attempts against the batteries established behind
the parallel.

The first parallel being completed, zigzag excavations are made toward
the front to cover the passage of men who proceed to dig the second
parallel. Meanwhile the batteries have commenced to play, and riflemen
have been advanced in trenches at convenient places, whose fire annoys
the gunners of the enemy. The second parallel being made, the batteries
are moved up to it, and the third parallel is proceeded with in a manner
similar to that used for the second.


We give below a rough diagram of these operations:

[Illustration:

A B C D E is the work of the enemy to be besieged. The working parties
advance by the zigzag paths M N and O to the position chosen for the
first parallel, K L. At the proper time they proceed by the zigzag paths
to the second parallel, H I, and then to the third, F G. When this is
reached, the enemy's work can generally be carried by storm, unless
already evacuated, for _ceteris paribus_ the advantages generally lie
with the besieging party. The zigzags are called _boyaux_, and they are
dug in the form represented, so that the bank of earth thrown up may be
always in front of them. Were they in straight lines this could not be.

The above refers exclusively to the siege of a field work. The
principles for besieging a walled fort or a fortified town are the same,
but the operations are much more complicated.]




LITERARY NOTICES.


     Popular Edition. RESULTS OF EMANCIPATION. By AUGUSTIN
     COCHIN, Ex-Maire and Municipal Councillor of Paris. Work
     crowned by the Institute of France (Académie Française). Translated
     by MARY L. BOOTH, Translator of Count de Gasparin's work
     on America, etc. Fourth thousand. Boston: Walker, Wise & Co., 245
     Washington street. 1864.

A remarkable book, indicative of a new era in the discussion of social,
religious, political, and economical questions. Prejudice, misstatement,
and fanaticism are apparently so opposed to the clear, candid mind of
the author, that he has needed no effort to avoid them, and in their
stead give us simple truth, broad views of men and things, and the
highest conceptions of duty and charity, together with the nicest
consideration of the rights and material interests, even the local
prejudices and misconceptions, of our fellow mortals. He shows clearly
that a _moral_ wrong can never long tend to _material_ advantage, and
that the laws of _society_ cannot be made ultimately to triumph over the
laws of _nature_; neither, in general, can a wrong be righted without
some suffering by way of expiation.

Although filled with statistical details, the work cannot fail to be
intensely interesting to the general reader. Lofty, hopeful, rational,
and yet progressive in its tone, it is calculated to do great good, not
only through the useful information and instructive generalizations it
makes known, but also as a model of right feeling, and consequent good
breeding, in its peculiar sphere.

The chapters upon the sugar question are wonderfully lucid and
convincing. Their bearing upon mooted points of political economy
recommend them to the study of all interested in that intricate subject.
The distressing relations necessarily existing between slavery and
religious instruction are also plainly set forth, and the general
conclusion of the book (that 'emancipation' is not only possible, but
most expedient, and that, with certain care upon the part of the
Government and of slave owners, an immediate and simultaneous liberation
is likely to breed fewer disturbances and less evil than gradual
disenthralment) seems to be rapidly gaining ground in the convictions of
our own countrymen. The conscience, and prophetic dreams of priests,
women, and poets, have long given assurance of such results, but the
world, of course, required definite experience and practical essays
before instituting any extensive course of action in that direction.

     'A council held in the city of London in 1102, under the presidency
     of St. Anselm, interdicted trade in slaves. This was eight hundred
     years before the same object was debated in the same city before
     Parliament. In 1780, Thomas Clarkson proposed to abolish the slave
     trade. In 1787, Wilberforce renewed the proposition. Seven times
     presented from 1793 to 1799, the bill seven times failed.
     Successively laid over, it triumphed at length in 1806 and 1807.
     All the Christian nations followed this memorable example. At the
     Congress of Vienna, all the Powers pledged themselves to unite
     their efforts to obtain _the entire and final abolition of a
     traffic so odious and so loudly reproved by the laws of religion
     and nature_. The slave trade was abolished in 1808 by the American
     United States; in 1811, by Denmark, Portugal, and Chili; in 1813,
     by Sweden; in 1814 and 1815, by Holland; in 1815, by France; in
     1822, by Spain. In this same year, 1822, Wilberforce attacked
     slavery after the slave trade, and won over public opinion by
     appeals and repeated meetings, while his friend Mr. Buxton proposed
     emancipation in Parliament. The Emancipation Bill was presented in
     1833. On the 1st of August, 1834, slavery ceased to sully the soil
     of the English colonies. In 1846, Sweden, in 1847, Denmark,
     Uruguay, Wallachia, and Tunis, obeyed the same impulse, which
     France followed in 1848, Portugal in 1856, and which Holland
     promised to imitate in 1860. An earnest movement agitated Brazil.'

In Poland, the serfdom of the peasants was never sanctioned by law, but
existed in later times by reason of exception and abuse. Stanislas
Leszczynski, King of Poland, in 1720 raised his voice in favor of the
peasant population; the same principles were in 1768 defended, sword in
hand, by the Confederation of Bar, discussed in the diets of 1776, 1780,
1788, and finally adopted by the famous Constituent Assembly of 1791.
Thadeus Kosciuszko (May 7th, 1794), then Dictator of Poland, issued a
document giving entire personal liberty to all serfs; and on the 22d of
January, 1863, the members of the 'National Polish Government' decreed
that the peasants were not only free, but were entitled to a certain
portion of land, of which they should be the sole proprietors. In 1861,
Russia emancipated all serfs within her borders. In the United States,
the stern 'logic of events' seems to be rapidly bringing about similar
results, although indeed 'slavery' and 'serfdom' should never be
mentioned together, being so essentially different; the one the
possession of the _man_, the other merely the ownership of his _labor_
or of a _portion of its results_.

We cannot better conclude than by giving the following extract from the
Introduction of M. Cochin, who, by the way, is a man of good family and
ample fortune, an eminent publicist, and a Catholic of the school of
Lacordaire, Montalembert, Monseigneur d'Orleans, and the Prince de
Broglie:

     'It was once exclaimed, Perish the colonies, rather than a
     principle! The principle has not perished, the colonies have not
     perished.

     'It is not correct that interests should yield to principles;
     between legitimate interests and true principles, harmony is
     infallible; this is truth. Those who look only to interests are
     sooner or later deceived in their calculations; those who,
     exclusively occupied with principles, are generous without being
     practical, cease to be generous, for they lead the cause which they
     serve to certain destruction. It is the will of God that realities
     should mingle with ideas, and that material obstacles should compel
     the purchase of progress by toil.'

The publishers tell us that, a large demand for this work having arisen,
they have issued this 'popular edition,' wherein the figures in the
original are given as nearly as possible in the American currencies,
measures, etc.

     STUMBLING BLOCKS. By GAIL HAMILTON, Author of
     'Country Living and Country Thinking,' 'Gala Days,' etc. Boston:
     Ticknor & Fields, For sale by D. Appleton & Co., New York.

Gail Hamilton's religious position gives her vast advantages. She is
thoroughly orthodox, Calvinistic, and Congregational, and being neither
Unitarian nor Catholic, will not be regarded as one of the 'Suspect' by
the great community of the so-called evangelical Christians. But she is
a bold, independent thinker, and spurns the trammels of bigotry and
prescription. No party spirit blinds her clear vision, no sectarian
prejudice vitiates her statements of the creeds of others, or induces
her to veil the faults and follies of those worshipping in the same
church with herself. Ministers are by no means immaculate saints in her
eyes. Seating herself in the pews, she preaches better sermons to them
than they are in the habit of giving to their people; taking possession
of their pulpits, she shows them what might and ought to be done from
that throne of power. Petty vanities, subjective experiences recorded in
morbid journals, religious frames of mind frequently dwelt upon until
the tortured self-watcher is driven into insanity, fall under her
scathing rebuke.

This volume deals chiefly with the shortcomings of the orthodox
religious world. Its faults of temper, its repulsive manners, its custom
of making home unlovely, its distaste of innocent amusement, its habits
of censure, its self-sufficiency and pharisaical character, are touched
with a caustic but healing power. Only the hand of a friend could have
done this thing. No point of doctrine is questioned, no principle of
faith invaded, no charity wounded. She probes in love--her object is
cure. This book is fresh and vigorous, worth thousands of lifeless
sermons and unprofitable religious journals. No prejudice or falsehood
is spared, though it may have taken refuge in the very sanctuary. Her
every shaft is well directed, every arrow powerfully sent, every shot
strikes the bull's eye in its centre. Her words are hailstones rattling
fell and fast, but melt into and soften the heart on which they fall.
Delusions disappear, cant and want of courtesy become odious, shams grow
shameful, while all lovely things bloom lovelier in the light of truth
emanating from this large brain, and poured through this living heart.
We bask in its sunshine, growing strong and happy as we read. Christian
fervor and charity, love for Redeemer and redeemed, for saint and
sinner, cheer us through all these well-deserved denunciations. Her
style is clear and rapid, her matter of daily and urgent import, her
characterizations of classes and types of men worthy of La Bruyère
himself, her satire melts into humor, her humor into pathos. She has
been attacked by some of the religious papers, and has herein taken a
true Christian and magnanimous revenge. O Gail! the clergy should open
wide their hearts to take you in, their gifted child, the iconoclast
within the temple, the faithful disciple of Christ, the lover of purity
and truth!

We quote the following brave words from this remarkable book:

     'We sometimes see religious newspapers charging each other with
     acts which should exclude the perpetrators from the fraternity of
     _honest_ men; for, through the medium of religious newspapers, one
     church, or one fraction of a church, or one ecclesiastical body, or
     one member of it, accuses another of an act, or a course of action,
     which, in sober truth, amounts to nothing more or less than
     _obvious, persistent deception, dishonesty and trickery_.... Can
     such be correct transcripts of facts? Is it true that a church, or
     any body corporate, whose very existence as such is professedly to
     cultivate and disseminate the principles of sound morality and true
     religion, does fall so far short of the faith delivered to the
     saints--does so far forget its origin, and pervert its aims, as to
     violate common law and common honesty, and persist in its
     violation, deliberately, against repeated remonstrances, by sheer
     force? Yet we see no convulsion in the community. Nothing intimates
     that a great grief is fallen upon Israel. Everybody eats, drinks,
     and sleeps as usual. The pulpits still stand, and the law and the
     gospel are appealed to from that vantage ground. The sacramental
     cup is still raised to devout lips. The gray heads of the culprits
     still go in and out among the people with no diminishing of
     honor--no odium is attached to their persons; no stigmas to their
     names. What a state of things does this argue! A whole church
     plunges into darkness, and the

                     'Majestic heaven
       Shines not the less for that one vanished star.'

     'Can we wonder that the world will not let itself be converted? To
     what should it be converted, if it were willing? Would it be an
     advance for a community that sends its thieves to prison when it
     catches them to merge itself in a community that is content to
     print a few columns of _exposé_ on the subject? If the stream where
     you wish to drink is muddy, you will scarcely find clear waters by
     descending. You want to go up, not down; up on the high lands where
     threads of crystal cleave the gray old rocks, and gather purity
     from earth's deep bosom and the sky's clear blue.

     'If it is not so, if the acts only appear dishonest because we are
     looking at one side, why do we not say so, or why do we say
     anything about it? Every man is to be held innocent till he is
     proved guilty. If there is any standpoint from which we can view
     our opponent's position and find it not dishonest, we ought to
     mention it. We have no right to look at him from _a_ standpoint,
     and hold him up to view as a criminal, and ignore _another_, from
     which he may be seen as simply mistaken, or deceived, or blameless.
     Still less have we a right to take innocent facts and construct
     upon them a guilty hypothesis to suit our foregone conclusion. A
     _right_ to do it? _It is sin_. _It is more than murder_. It may rob
     a man of what is more precious to him than his life. It attempts to
     take away from a man what, taken, would leave him stripped of his
     manhood, and a man's manhood is worth more to him and his friends
     than his bone and muscle.'

Ah, Gail, thy keen aim has indeed struck the pupil of the bull's eye! If
false statements of varying dogmas were held 'as criminal as they
undoubtedly are,' if they were never viewed from 'foregone conclusions,'
sects would perish in the death of misconceptions, and warring
Christians would rush into each other's arms with the joy-cry,
'Brothers!' Through the misstatements of centuries, the good Protestant
minister regards the Catholic priest, ready as he may be to die for the
faith of his fathers, as a _wilful liar_, a _conscious deceiver_,
selling the souls of his flock for a Judas bribe; while the equally good
priest, in his turn, looks upon the conscientious minister as a despiser
of authority, an enemy of the Church of Christ, refusing to hear what he
believes to be its undoubted teachings, a blind man, leading the blind
into the pit of perdition. The men may be both right from the standpoint
of their 'foregone conclusions,' both wrong from the standpoint of fact.
And so it goes on, through all the lesser sectarian divisions.
Everywhere misstatement, misconception, and smouldering hatred. The
first step to reconciliation among the antagonistic members of Christ's
torn body, would be to put into instantaneous practice the wise, sound,
and just maxims of Gail Hamilton. Let us begin it, lovers of truth and
justice!

     THE MAINE WOODS. By HENRY D. THOREAU, Author of
     'A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers,' 'Walden,'
     'Excursions,' etc. Boston: Ticknor & Fields. For sale by D.
     Appleton & Co., New York.

The first of the papers contained in this book was published in 'The
Union Magazine;' the second, 'Chesuncook,' came out in the 'Atlantic
Monthly,' in 1858; the last is now for the first time printed. The
contents of the volume are as follows: Ktaadn, Chesuncook, The Allegash
and East Branch; in the Appendix we have Trees, Flowers, and Shrubs,
List of Plants, List of Birds, Quadrupeds, Outfit for an Excursion, and
a List of Indian Words. Henry D. Thoreau was an enthusiastic lover of
nature, but no blind adorer of her loveliness. He knew her in all her
moods, was familiar with all her caprices. He was a man of strong brain,
and of accurate knowledge in such fields as it pleased him to study. The
woods have never before had such an accurate biographer, such a true
painter. He saw them with the eye of the poet as well as that of the
naturalist. Scholarship and imagination roam with him in the primeval
forests. After the most accurate and detailed description of a moose
which had been killed by his Indian guide, this anti-sentimentalist, but
true forest lover says: 'Here, just at the head of the murmuring rapids,
Joe now proceeded to skin the moose with a pocket knife, while I looked
on; and a tragical business it was--to see that still warm and
palpitating body pierced with a knife, to see the warm milk stream from
the rent udder, and the ghastly naked red carcass appearing from within
its seemly robe, which was made to hide it.' There is no joy of the
hunter here! The words are as 'tragical' and tender as were those of the
melancholy Jaques. That 'warm milk and rent udder' seems to make the
stately creature half human. He proceeds:

     'But on more accounts than one, I had had enough of moose hunting.
     I had not come to the woods for this purpose, nor had I foreseen
     it, though I had been willing to learn how the Indian manoeuvred;
     but one moose killed was as good, if not as bad, as a dozen. The
     afternoon's tragedy and my share in it, as it affected the
     _innocence_, destroyed the _pleasure_ of my adventure. This hunting
     of the moose merely for the satisfaction of killing him--not even
     for the sake of his hide--without making any extraordinary exertion
     or running any risk yourself, is too much like going out by night
     to some woodside pasture and shooting your neighbor's horses. These
     are God's own horses, poor timid creatures, that will run fast
     enough as soon as they smell you, though they are _nine_ feet high
     (often eleven, with the antlers).... You strip off its hide,
     because that is the common trophy, and moreover you have heard it
     may be sold for mocassons--cut a steak from its body, and leave the
     huge carcass 'to smell to heaven' for you. It is no better, at
     least, than to assist at a slaughter house. This afternoon's
     experience suggested to me how base or coarse are the motives which
     commonly carry men into the wilderness. The explorers and lumberers
     generally are hirelings, paid so much a day for their labor, and as
     such they have no more love for wild nature than wood sawyers have
     for forests. Other white men and Indians who come here are for the
     most part hunters, whose object is to slay as many moose and other
     wild animals as possible. But pray, could not one spend some weeks
     or years in the solitude of this vast wilderness with other
     employments than these--employments perfectly sweet, innocent, and
     ennobling? For one that comes with a pencil to sketch or sing, a
     thousand come with an axe or rifle. What a coarse and imperfect use
     Indians and hunters make of nature! No wonder that their race is so
     soon exterminated. I already, and for weeks afterward, felt my
     nature the coarser for this part of my woodland experience, and was
     reminded that our life should be lived as tenderly and daintily as
     one would pluck a flower.'

Again:

     'As I sat before the fire on my fir-twig seat, without walls above
     or around me, I remembered how far on every hand that wilderness
     stretched, before you came to cleared or cultivated fields, and
     wondered if any bear or moose was watching the light of my fire;
     for nature looked sternly upon me on account of the _murder of the
     moose_.

     'Strange that so few ever come to the woods to see how the pine
     lives and grows and spires, lifting its ever-green arms to the
     light--to see its perfect success; but most are content to behold
     it in the shape of many broad boards brought to market, and deem
     _that_ its true success. But the pine is no more lumber than man
     is, and to be made into boards and houses is no more its true and
     highest use, than the truest use of a man is to be cut down and
     made into manure. There is a higher law affecting our relation to
     pines as well as to men. A pine cut down, a dead pine, is no more a
     pine than a dead human carcass is a man. Can he who has discovered
     only some of the values of whalebone and whale oil be said to have
     discovered the true use of the whale? Can he who slays the elephant
     for his ivory be said to have 'seen the elephant'? These are petty
     and accidental uses; just as if a stronger race were to kill us in
     order to make buttons and flageolets of our bones; for everything
     may serve a lower as well as a higher use. Every creature is better
     alive than dead, men and moose and pine trees, and he who
     understands it aright will rather preserve its life than destroy
     it.

     'Is it the lumberman, then, who is the friend and lover of the
     pine, stands nearest to it, and understands its nature best? Is it
     the tanner who has barked it, or he who has boxed it for
     turpentine, whom posterity will fable to have changed into a pine
     at last? No! no! it is the poet; he it is who makes the truest use
     of the pine--who does not fondle it with an axe, nor tickle it with
     a saw, nor stroke it with a plane--who knows whether its heart is
     false without cutting into it--who has not bought the stumpage of
     the town on which its stands. All the pines shudder and heave a
     sigh when _that_ man steps on the forest floor. No, it is the poet,
     who loves them as his own shadow in the air, and lets them stand. I
     have been into the lumber yard, the carpenter's shop, the tannery,
     the lamp-black factory, and the turpentine clearing; but when at
     length I saw the tops of the pines waving and reflecting the light
     at a distance over all the rest of the forest, I realized that the
     former were not the highest use of the pine. It is not their bones
     or hide or tallow that I love most. It is the living spirit of the
     tree, not its spirit of turpentine, with which I sympathize, and
     which heals my cuts. It is as immortal as I am, and, perchance, may
     go to as high a heaven, there to tower above me still.'

Reader, was not this man a nature lover, a nature limner, worthy to take
his place among our Giffords, Whittredges, McEntees, Bierstadts, and
Beards? Truly original, natural, and American, who among our descriptive
writers can surpass H. D. Thoreau?

     PRIMARY LESSONS FOR DEAF MUTES. By J. A. JACOBS,
     A. M., Principal of the Kentucky Institution for the Education of
     Deaf Mutes. New York: John F. Trow, Printer & Publisher, 50 Greene
     street, between Broome & Grand. 1864.

An excellent little work, intended to impart some of the rudimentary
branches of learning to that interesting class of our fellow beings who
can neither speak nor hear. Every effort made for their instruction
should be cordially welcomed, for sad indeed is their position, and very
difficult the discovery of means to reach and develop their often very
bright intelligence. These lessons can be used by parents, guardians, or
elder brothers and sisters, before the deaf-mute child is old enough to
send to a regular institution. They are divided into two parts, bound in
separate little volumes, and _filled_ with cuts illustrating the
text--or rather, the text, as is proper in such a work, illustrates the
cuts, which occupy the larger portion of the book. Teachers cannot but
find these aids of incalculable value.

     THE RELATIONS OF THE INDUSTRY OF CANADA WITH THE MOTHER COUNTRY
     AND THE UNITED STATES. Being a Speech by ISAAC
     BUCHANAN, Esq., M. P., as delivered at the late Demonstration
     to the Parliamentary Opposition at Toronto; together with a series
     of Articles in defence of the National Sentiments contained
     therein, which originally appeared in the columns of the _Hamilton
     Spectator_, from the pen of Mr. Buchanan; to which is added a
     Speech delivered by him at the Dinner given to the Pioneers of
     Upper Canada, at London, Canada West, 10th December, 1863. Now
     first published in complete and collected form, with copious Notes
     and Annotations, besides an extended Introductory Explanation, and
     an Appendix containing various valuable Documents. Edited by
     HENRY J. MORGAN, Corresponding Member of the New York
     Historical Society, and Author of 'Sketches of Celebrated
     Canadians.' Montreal: Printed by John Lovell, St. Nicholas. 1864.

We recommend this book to such of our readers as may be interested in
political economy, not as sound in theory, but as containing a vast
array of facts and giving considerable information with regard to the
internal affairs of our neighbor Canada. The Reciprocity Treaty comes in
for its share of consideration. Mr. Buchanan is a Protectionist, and
uses the arguments of his party with considerable ability. The question
of annexation is also incidentally touched upon. We do not know that we
can give our readers a better idea of the contents and policy of this
book than by placing the dedication before them.

     'To the leaders of the forthcoming Party of Order, I dedicate these
     pages, because I feel that the province is at the winning or the
     losing, and that we shall hereafter have to hail you as the honored
     instruments of our Political and Industrial salvation.

     'In Mr. Buchanan's Letter to the Editor of the Globe, assuring him
     publicly that Mr. Buchanan and all his friends, as in the Past, so
     in the Future, would be found opponents to the death of Annexation,
     and not its friends, as that journal basely insinuated, he states
     that he is of no party, though reluctantly compelled to be in
     opposition to the present ministry in consequence of their acts,
     Executive as well as Legislative; but that he is of a class far
     more numerous than the 'thick and thin' adherents of either of the
     present _soi-disant_ parties. Those alluded to by Mr. Buchanan will
     form a new party--the Party of Order, which will probably be called
     the 'Constitutional Party'--its platform being broad enough to hold
     all who value and respect the time-honored Constitution, whether
     they be original Reformers or Conservatives in name. The new Party
     of Order will comprise these elements:

     'First. Conservative Liberals, or old Reformers, who have been
     taught by experience, and are willing now to adopt the word
     'Conservative,' at least in its adjective sense.

     'Secondly. Liberal Conservatives, or old Tories, or their
     descendants, who have also been taught by experience, and are
     willing to adopt the word 'Liberal,' at least in its adjective
     sense.

     'Thirdly. Conservatives, and Conservative Liberals, who have
     unwittingly been mingled up with the incendiary party, composed of
     'Clear Grits' and 'Rouges.'

     'And that in your discussions on the great question of the
     Reciprocity Law, now about to agitate both Canada and the United
     States, these pages may be of some service, is the fond hope of
     your obedient servant,
                                                      'THE EDITOR.'

     FAMILY PRIDE. By the Author of 'Pique.' Philadelphia: T.
     B. Peterson & Brothers, 306 Chestnut street.

Family Pride is a novel of still greater interest than 'Pique.' The plot
is well conceived, the characters skilfully developed, and the attention
is fascinated even to the end. The moral is unexceptionable, the style
fresh and pure. We must however enter an earnest protest against the
manifest injustice of the closing sentence, where the talented author
has gone out of his way to find a blot for his book, the only stain upon
his fair pages. It reads thus: 'After a variety of vicissitudes, she had
embraced the Romish faith: that religion which relieves from all
personal responsibility in spiritual matters; and which teaches that
earthly penance and ascetic observances will open the gates of heaven to
the vilest of criminals.' We have studied Westminster, Episcopal, and
Catholic catechisms, the teachings in all three of which are that faith
in Christ and sorrow for and renunciation of sin alone can open the
gates of heaven. We regard it as the duty of a conscientious reviewer to
point out an erroneous statement wherever it occurs, whether in regard
to the faith of Protestants, Catholics, Hebrews, Mohammedans, Fire
Worshippers, or any other classes of men whatsoever. Misstatement has
caused an immense deal of bloodshed and bitterness among Christians. The
walls of Zion must be built of the stones of truth.

     THE TANNER BOY, AND HOW HE BECAME LIEUTENANT-GENERAL. By
     MAJOR PENNIMAN. 'The boy is father to the man.' Fifth
     thousand. Boston: Roberts Brothers, publishers, 143 Washington
     street. 1864.

A lively account of the boyhood and subsequent career of one likely to
be famous in American history. The nation's eyes are at this moment
turned hopefully upon the result of Gen. Grant's campaign in Virginia,
and all will be glad to learn that his previous life offers so fair and
pleasant a record. One observation, however, we feel called upon to make
to the entertaining Major: the youth of America should be taught to
love, to live for, and, if need be, to die for their country; but they
should also be taught to shun narrow exclusiveness and boastful vanity.
A government of a whole people should in this respect set a noble
example to all other nations.

The 'Tanner Boy' has already reached its 'fifth thousand,' and will no
doubt be eagerly read by all the patriotic boys and girls in the land.

     WAX FLOWERS. J. E. Tilton & Co., Boston. 1864.

This little book contains somewhat over a hundred pages, and is gotten
up in the attractive style for which the publications of this firm have
become noted. A prefatory chapter sets forth the object of the work, and
the claims of the art. The first part treats of Wax Fruit, giving the
methods of making moulds and casting therefrom, of preparing the wax, of
coloring the fruit and giving it the proper outward texture. The second
part describes all the articles and materials required for making even
the most elaborate of WAX FLOWERS; gives the way of preparing
the wax, including its formation into sheets of any required thickness,
with all the minutiæ relating to coloring, &c. The text is clearly and
simply written, and by the aid of ample illustrations everything is made
plain to the learner.

It is wonderful how exquisitely flowers may be imitated--making one wish
a device for the secreting of the appropriate perfumes.

  The wax once gathered by bees through many a bower,
  Glows again in the form of a beautiful flower.

The artist in wax enjoys the best of opportunities for learning Botany,
both analytically and synthetically. A series of models in wax would
make the ocular study of botany possible throughout the year. The taste
for wax flowers is becoming widely extended, and high prices are brought
by the finest specimens of the art. Humanity should heartily welcome an
employment which enables many to escape the suicide of the needle!

     DENISE. By the Author of 'Mademoiselle Mori.' In two vols.
     New York: James G. Gregory, 540 Broadway.

There is a strange charm about this book. The story is common enough,
the characters have nothing original in their conception, and yet we are
fascinated by the detailed truth of the portraiture from the first page
to the last. The scenes are laid in Farnoux, a town in the old Provençal
districts. The ancient views and manners are still retained, and
interest us by the force of contrast with our own. Mademoiselle Le
Marchand, an odd old maid, with a genius for painting, is really the
character of the book. Denise, the heroine, is quietly and faithfully
drawn. Various picturesque phases of the Catholic faith are artistically
managed, while the faith itself is not treated with much courtesy. As a
general thing we do not like theological novels written from foregone
conclusions. We can imagine however that such a subject might be made
intensely interesting. If a master mind of perfect impartiality would
give us the effect produced upon two minds of equal mental power, of
equal moral worth, by Protestantism or Catholicity--such a study would
both interest and instruct. All religious nicknames should be avoided,
as offensive both to charity and refined taste. Episcopalians do not
like to be called Anglicans; Friends, Quakers; Baptists, Hardshells;
Unitarians, Pantheists; nor Catholics, Romanists. Let us use courtesy to
all men, that so we may have more weight when we attack erroneous
principles.

By all means read Denise; its studies of the heart are close and
accurate.




EDITOR'S TABLE.


THE CAMPAIGN.

[_Furnished by a Friend of the Editor of_ THE CONTINENTAL.]

Three routes of operation are open to an army designing to proceed
against Richmond: first, along the Orange and Alexandria Railroad to
Charlottesville; second, along the railroad from Fredericksburg to
Hanover Court House; and third, by the way of Fortress Monroe. The first
has the disadvantage of presenting a long line of communication,
constantly exposed to inroads from guerillas, and for the purposes of
warfare may be considered as utterly impracticable. It would not, in
fact, be worth considering, had not some critics of Gen. Grant's
movements absurdly insisted that he ought to have adopted this route.
The second route is far more advantageous, and had Gen. Grant's purposes
been confined simply to putting his army before the rebel capital, and
lying there to seize such opportunities as the developments of the
campaign should afford, it might have been expedient to maintain by this
route communications with the Potomac. But the intentions of our
Lieutenant-General were of a much more comprehensive character. While,
therefore, following this route in his march, because it gave the most
direct and shortest line to Richmond, he did not use the railroad as a
means of communication. His aim was fixed on an ulterior object. He
designed to put his army in such a position that it should be constantly
assailing Richmond by its presence, although not a gun should be fired.
He, therefore, tried the strength of the rebel works, in passing, and
finding that time would be spent uselessly in attempting to overthrow
them either upon the north or the east, he proceeded to the new position
south of the James, and adopted the third route mentioned for his
communication with the North, having previously used it, also, for the
transportation to the ultimate scene of conflict of a part of his forces
under Gen. Butler.

Among military men, there have been, since the commencement of the war,
many advocates for an attack on Richmond from the position at
Petersburg. It has many advantages. The facilities for transporting
supplies are easy, it isolates the capital of the Southern government
from its southern and eastern connections, it interferes largely with
the internal trade of the confederacy, it confines the rebel army in a
narrow space, and it necessitates constant efforts on the part of the
confederate commanders to expel the Northern forces, thus constraining
them to leave their works and become assailants. In fine, the position
affords more opportunities for strategically investing Richmond than any
other which is accessible to our armies.

A clear perception of these advantages determined Gen. Grant to adopt
the position at Petersburg. He was aware that Richmond could not be
directly invested except with a very large army. He desired to
accomplish the results which such an investment would give. He sought to
cut off the city from its principal channels of communication--to
deprive it of its main resources. Have these purposes been effected? At
the time we write it is announced that the army occupies the railroad
leading to Weldon, thus breaking the communication with North Carolina;
that our cavalry has destroyed a portion of the road leading to
Lynchburg; that the forces operating under Gen. Hunter have also
destroyed portions of the Virginia Central and the road between
Gordonsville and Lynchburg; they have also damaged the James River
Canal. The only railroad communication now existing between Richmond and
the South is that by way of Danville. Before this reaches our readers we
trust that the effects of these efforts to isolate the capital of the
confederacy will become evident; that the rebel army will be forced to
leave its intrenchments and meet our brave soldiers in the field, and
that the conflict may have resulted in victory for the cause of the
country and of freedom.

The various steps of the process by which the army gained the position
at Petersburg are already well known. From the time the camps at
Culpepper Court House were broken up, until the lines were established
south of the James river, the series of movements consisted in masterly
marches by the left, compelling the enemy constantly to fall back from
his intrenched positions to points farther in his rear. Such movements
were not, however made until after trials of the enemy in the front,
some of which resulted in splendid partial successes. They were,
however, not conclusive. The flank movements of our army belong to that
class which are considered among the most difficult in warfare,
requiring great skill in commanders to arrange their details, and
endurance and discipline in the troops to effect them. It is no easy
matter to change position in the face of a wary and vigorous enemy,
ready to fall upon any exposed point in the long array of a marching
column. Yet, several times, the manoeuvre has been skilfully and
successfully performed, and each time the rebels have learned it too
late to profit by the chances offered for a surprise.

Hundreds of miles distant from the principal point of attraction in
Virginia, the other great army of the Union, under Gen. Sherman, has
also been performing similar feats--turning by well-directed marches,
one after another, the intrenched positions of the enemy in the
mountainous district of Georgia. Atlanta, the object of its toils, is a
great centre of railroad communication, and when our armies obtain
possession of it, the confederacy will experience another severing
stroke, almost as severe as that which cleft it in twain by the capture
of Vicksburg and the reopening of the Mississippi. By such strokes the
pretentious imposture of a Southern nation must be broken into
fragments, even should the armies supporting it remain for a time
organized and defiant; for, under the appliances of modern civilization
and commerce, the possession of a railroad or internal depot of trade is
almost equivalent to the destruction of an army.

The campaigns of 1863 produced great results, as well geographically as
in the capture of men and munitions from the rebels. At the commencement
of the year they held the Mississippi, they threatened Kentucky and the
borders of the Ohio, they were able to draw supplies from Tennessee,
Arkansas, and Texas. They were, moreover, arrogantly defiant toward the
North, and boasted of their ability to march to its great commercial
centres. At the close of the year they were driven to the confines of
Georgia, they were separated from the trans-Mississippi region, their
boasting had been brought to humility at Gettysburg. The objects to be
accomplished in the great campaign of 1864 are to drive in upon each
other the two armies which resist our progress in Virginia and Georgia,
and to compress the rebellion into the Southern Atlantic States. This
done, the existence of secession is practically at an end, though it may
brag as loudly as ever and keep on foot its armies. For without
Virginia, and without the connections of Atlanta, the existence of an
independent government in the South is impossible: sufficient country
would not remain to support so magnificent an affair. The loss of
Virginia in fact would be the fatal blow to the rebellion; for, however
South Carolina may exalt herself, and however the other States of the
South may aspire, yet it is Virginia which gives tone and respectability
to the Southern confederacy. It is for this, far more than because it is
the rebel capital, that the capture of Richmond is desirable.

But should it happen--which fortunately is not a reasonable
surmise--that the objects of this year's campaign should not be
attained, we consider that the Southern confederacy exists only in
pretence. Should its ports be to-day opened, should our armies fall back
to their primary bases of operation, should European Powers formally
declare that a slave republic exists, yet the new nation would be
practically a nonentity. Does any one suppose that the United States
would yield Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, New Orleans, and
the Mississippi; that the freemen of Western Virginia would be forsaken;
that Fortress Monroe and Port Royal would be abandoned? How long would a
nation so surrounded, so intersected, exist, or how could it achieve any
prosperity, character, and stability? Constant war, in the effort to
expand and perfect its borders, would be its necessity; but such a
necessity would be its destruction. There is no possibility of
compromise or arrangement in the contest in which we are engaged, except
with the parallel of the Potomac and the Ohio as the dividing border;
but such an arrangement is impossible; entire reconquest becomes the
imperative; it may be delayed, our present hopes may be disappointed,
but the march of our armies thus far has trodden out the life from the
Southern attempt at independence, and any future existence it may have
will be merely muscular paroxysms--not the steady, regular, automatic
movements of freedom and spontaneity.

Any notice of the operations of our armies would be incomplete without
tributes to the ability of commanders and the valor of our soldiers. In
no previous period of the war have these been more strikingly
exemplified. The capacity of man to endure and his ability to exert
himself continuously without exhausting his energy, are very wonderful.
The reader of military history is constantly struck with this, in
perusing accounts of sieges and marches and battles. War is always
accompanied with a host of terrors--exposures to heat, cold, and
tempests, marches through swamps and snows, suffering by hunger and
thirst and fatigue, lying with bleeding wounds for days and nights
between the lines of friends and foes, toil, danger, privation, pain, in
every form. But among the memorable campaigns in the history of war,
none is more marked for its incessant activity and the cheerful alacrity
with which every hardship was endured, than that in which our army
marched from the Rapidan to the James. From Georgia, too, we have
similar accounts of difficulties met only to be surmounted. Heaven bless
our gallant soldiers everywhere! A nation's hopes and prayers are with
them. May they know the soldier's dearest delight--victory!