Reminiscences of Sixty Years in Public Affairs Volume I Part 8

In knowledge of parliamentary law and in ability to administer that law it may be claimed justly that General Banks had no rival in his generation. As a speaker he approached the rank of an orator, if he did not attain to it. His presence was stately and attractive, his voice was agreeable, far reaching and commanding, and his control of an audience was absolute, for the time being. That his auditors may at times have differed from his conclusions but only when the speech was ended, and the spell was broken, is evidence of his power as a speaker.

That he came into public life as the a.s.sociate and rival of Sumner, Wilson, and Burlingame, and that in his whole career as a public man he kept his equal place to the end, and that in Congress he suffered nothing when compared with the able men who occupied seats in the lower House between the year 1850 and the year 1870, give him rank as one of the foremost statesmen of his time. If it be said that his name is not identified with any important measure of the government the same may be said of Mr. Sumner, of Mr. Wilson, of Mr. Conkling, and others, whose speeches and opinions have had large influence upon the policy of the country. A great measure is the result of many causes and in its promulgation it may bear the name of a person whose contribution has been insignificant relatively.

General Banks had apt.i.tude for public affairs--an apt.i.tude which approached genius. His mind dwelt upon great projects, and never upon petty schemes, nor upon intrigues as a means of success. His warfare was a bold one, and in the open field. In politics he was deficient in organizing qualities, but he had unbounded confidence in his own ability and in the ability of his a.s.sociates and friends to command and to retain popular support. As to himself, that confidence rested upon an adequate basis. In the last fifty years there has been no other man in Ma.s.sachusetts who was as generously supported, and by people of all cla.s.ses. For the ma.s.ses, who saw him and who knew him, only as he appeared on the platform, there was an inspiration in his presence and in his speeches, and for his a.s.sociates and friends there was a generous companions.h.i.+p which none could resist--which none wished to resist. In his private life there was no malice in his intercourse with men; in the strife of war there was no vindictiveness in spirit nor in the means of prosecuting war.

A patriotic man, who trusted the people, and a man whom the people trusted; a brave soldier, who retained the confidence of his troops, and of his superiors in all the vicissitudes of war; a friend whose friends.h.i.+p was not changed nor tempered by the changing events of life.

Such was General Banks to many and to myself, his companion, and often co-worker, and always friend through a lengthened half century.

Mr. Dawes was not a leader in the Ma.s.sachusetts House of Representatives and no one could then have predicted his success in public life. Something of what the world calls fortune has attended him. He possessed the quality or faculty of industry, but his studies did not extend beyond the current demands of the situation. As a lawyer he was not distinguished. He had none of the qualities of an orator, indeed it was not always a pleasure to listen to his speeches.

His manners were not attractive, and of genial wit he was wholly innocent. He had a power of sarcasm, and in his speeches he presented himself in the phase of umpire often, although at times he appeared in the aspect of a contestant. Indeed, this was in his nature. He was a thorough partisan who seemed unwilling to own the fact. His friends could not claim for him any of the qualities for which successful men are commonly distinguished, and yet he has been one of the most successful men that the State has produced. Such success must rest on a substantial basis of merit.

For a single term, between 1846 and 1850 Benjamin R. Curtis was a member of the House. He had already acquired fame as a jurist. His speeches in the house were the speeches that he made to courts and juries. He was dest.i.tute of genius, and his speeches exhibited no variety of talent. They were adapted to the argument of questions of law before a court; hence he was not successful as a jury lawyer, and his speeches in the house were usually convincing, although they were never attractive. Judge Curtis' intellectual faculties matured early.

Mr. Wilde, for many years the clerk of the court of Suffolk, expressed to me the opinion that Judge Curtis' first argument was as good as his last argument. There can be no doubt, however, that his legal arguments were unrivalled in recent times. He was equipped with all the legal learning that could be required in any case. He had the capacity to see the points on which a case must turn, and he had the courage to pa.s.s over the immaterial facts, and points in which other men often lay stress to the injury of their arguments, and to the annoyance of the courts. In his arguments in the impeachment case of President Johnson, he furnished the only ground on which the Senate could stand in rendering a verdict of not guilty.

During his service in the House he introduced an extraordinary bill which received little or no support from the members. By that bill it was made a misdemeanor to flow the land of another for any purpose whatsoever, thus changing the ancient Mill Act of the State; provided, however, that it should not apply to any citizen of Ma.s.sachusetts. It was said that Curtis had a client whose land had been flowed by a Rhode Island man, and not being willing to pursue him in the courts of the United States, he framed the bill in question. Of course the bill failed. Again in 1851 he gave an opinion that Sumner, Wilson, myself and perhaps some others, could be indicted for the coalition by which the Whig Party was driven from power in Ma.s.sachusetts. The opinion was printed secretly and read in the Whig caucus, where it received so little support that it was suppressed. When the parties had disappeared, I read a copy that had been preserved in the office of the Boston _Journal._

Judge Curtis was a jurist, and that only. He had no literary taste in the true sense, although the statement has been made that he was a constant reader of novels. However that may have been, his speeches were seldom if ever adorned or burdened by ill.u.s.trations or references outside of the books of the profession.

George T. Curtis, a brother of Benjamin R., was a member of the House for several years, between 1840 and 1850. With the overthrow of the Whig Party in 1851, he disappeared from the politics of the State, and at about the same time he removed to New York. As a writer he is clear and methodical, but from choice or fortune many of his subjects have not been acceptable, and his treatment of his subjects has been counter usually to the general opinion of the country. As the son-in-law of Judge Story and the brother of Judge Curtis, there was a general expectation that his career would be distinguished. That expectation was not realized. His self-conceit was unbounded. That defect made him unpopular with his professional brethren, and at last it alienated his clients. Even Mr. Choate, the gentlest of men, could not endure Mr. Curtis. Of him he said, "Some men we hate for cause, but George T. Curtis we hate peremptorily."

Charles P. Curtis was also a member of the House for many years. He was a more genial man than either the Judge or George T. The three const.i.tuted the fraternity known as _the Curtii._ Chief Justice Shaw, who had married a Curtis, was also included in the brotherhood.

XV Ma.s.sACHUSETTS POLITICS AND Ma.s.sACHUSETTS POLITICIANS 1850-51 AND 1852

The defeat of General Ca.s.s in 1848 changed the policy of the leaders of the Democratic Party in Ma.s.sachusetts. These leaders were David Henshaw, Charles G. Greene, and as an a.s.sistant Benjamin F. Hallett.

The first two had controlled the patronage of the general government very largely during the administrations of Jackson, Van Buren and Polk.

They looked to the election of General Ca.s.s as a continuation of that policy. These leaders considered the control of Ma.s.sachusetts as hopeless, and not unlikely they considered the national patronage as more valuable than the offices of the State. Hence they were ready to endorse whatever the Was.h.i.+ngton authorities demanded. Consequently our platforms tended to alienate voters rather than to attract them.

This policy was very disagreeable to the younger members of the party, but they were unable to resist it. The Boston _Post,_ owned by Colonel Greene, was the leading Democratic paper in the State. Many of the country papers followed its lead. The Worcester _Palladium_ was an exception, but its influence was limited.

Greene and Hallett attributed the defeat of General Ca.s.s to the defection of the South and for the time they were disposed to sanction or to permit a policy of retaliation. Consequently the State Convention of 1849 was disposed to utter the sentiments of the party in regard to slavery. For many years Hallett had been the chairman of the Committee on Resolutions. He was designated for that position in 1849. The Free-soil Party had already become a power in the State.

It was led by men who had been prominent in the Whig Party in its last days. Hallett reported a resolution in which was this expression: "We are opposed to slavery throughout all G.o.d's heritage." When the Democratic Party regained power in 1853 this declaration threatened to impede Hallett in his plans for office and influence. Pierce made allowances for the circ.u.mstances and rewarded Hallett with the office of district attorney. The resolutions, however, tended to conciliate the anti-slavery element of the State and in many towns and in some of the counties the Democrats and Free-soilers coalesced and elected a formidable minority of the Legislature. The result of the coalition demonstrated the possibility of a combination which could control the State. The Convention gave me the nomination, and without any serious opposition. Stephen C. Phillips of Salem, was the candidate of the Free-soil Party. Together we had a majority of the popular vote, and Governor Briggs was elected Governor by the Legislature. The plurality rule had not then been adopted.

In 1850 each of the three parties nominated the same candidates and the coalition in the towns, cities and counties was much more complete.

The victory was decisive. When the Legislature a.s.sembled, Henry Wilson, Free-soiler, was chosen president of the Senate and General Banks, Democrat, was chosen speaker of the House. The candidates of the Democratic Party were elected to the office of Governor and Lieutenant Governor. The council was divided between the parties. The selection of a candidate for the Senate was left for the Free-soil Party. The choice fell upon Mr. Sumner, although there was a large public sentiment, especially in the Democratic Party, in favor of Mr.

Phillips. Such was my own opinion at the time, but the result showed the wisdom or good fortune of the selection that was made. Mr.

Phillips was a man of education, a merchant by profession, and a gentleman who enjoyed the confidence of the public. He was an Anti- Slavery man upon principle, but his intellectual movements were slow, and his power as a forensic speaker was moderate only.

In January, 1851, when these events were occurring, the prospects of the National Democratic Party had improved. The Henshaw wing of the party in Ma.s.sachusetts were antic.i.p.ating a success in 1852. Mr.

Webster had made his famous and fatal speech on the 7th of March, 1850.

President Taylor had died, and Mr. Fillmore was President. He had reorganized the Cabinet and endorsed the Compromise Measures, and finally the Whig Party was divided, hopelessly. In this condition of affairs, Greene and Hallett entered upon a vigorous opposition to the election of Sumner. The Boston _Post_ called upon the Democratic members of the House to oppose his election. About twenty-eight members known as "old hunkers" followed the lead of the _Post._ After a long contest Mr. Sumner was elected by a single vote. As far as I know, Mr. Sumner was not a party to any arrangement as to a division of the offices, and I am sure that I was never consulted upon the subject.

As far as arrangements were made, they were made by members of the Legislature. The members had been elected by a coalition among the people and they executed the will of the people. The vacant places were filled by representative men from each of the parties. While the struggle over the election of Senator was going on, the Legislature proceeded to elect a Senator for the term that was to expire the 4th of March, 1851. It was the seat that Mr. Webster had vacated to take the office of Secretary of State under Mr. Fillmore. Governor Briggs had appointed Robert C. Winthrop to the vacancy.

The Legislature elected Robert Rantoul, Jr., to the vacancy. Mr.

Rantoul was then in the West, and his address was not known to any one.

Mr. Ezra Lincoln, a friend to Mr. Winthrop, came to me and said that Mr. Winthrop wished to have Mr. Rantoul's credentials sent to him, as he should feel unpleasant if they were sent to any one else.

Accordingly they were so sent. In a few days Mr. Lincoln called and said that Mr. Winthrop wished to know whether he should present the credentials at once, or hold them until Mr. Rantoul appeared. I said in reply that I was the agent of the Legislature for the transmission of the certificate, and that I did not feel at liberty to give instructions. Thereupon Mr. Winthrop presented the credentials of Mr.

Rantoul, and retired from the Senate. This act was followed by attacks upon me, by Senators and by newspapers, the charge being that I had driven Mr. Winthrop from the Senate and at a time when an important question relating to the tariff was pending. Neither Mr. Winthrop nor any of his friends made any explanation. Mr. Lincoln came to me and expressed his regrets that the attacks had been made, and he volunteered to use his influence with the _Daily Advertiser,_ and induce it to suspend its attacks. This he did, I presume, as that paper made no further allusion to the subject. As for myself, I remained silent, following a rule that I had formed early in life, to avoid public controversy concerning my own acts. This rule, however, was not an inflexible one.

Mr. Winthrop was then a candidate for the Senate against Mr. Sumner.

He was sensitive, no doubt, and he may have felt that it was his duty to present Mr. Rantoul's credentials without delay. That was the proper course, probably, and the question whether his term in the Senate was continued a few days was of no public or personal consequences whatsoever. Up to that point Mr. Winthrop's career had been one of uninterrupted success. He was the favorite of Boston, and he belonged to an old and venerated family. His talents were of a high order, his education the best that the times afforded, his character without a blemish, and there was no reason arising from personal conditions why he should not have become the representative man of the State. With the event mentioned, his public life ended. Mr. Sumner was elected to the Senate. The next year the Whig Party nominated Mr.

Winthrop and I was brought into direct compet.i.tion with him. Again he failed.

When, in 1855, the Republican Party was organized, a committee waited upon Mr. Winthrop, and invited him to join the movement. His public record was satisfactory upon the slavery question, that is, it was better than that of many others who became Republicans. He declined to take a position, and gave as a reason that he was unwilling to act with the men who were leading the movement. He named Sumner, and Wilson.

If his decision had been otherwise, it is quite doubtful if his nerve would have been equal to the contests through which the Republican Party was destined to pa.s.s. Mr. Winthrop had in him nothing of the revolutionary spirit. In England, in the times of Cromwell he would have followed the fortunes of the Stuarts, and it is difficult to imagine him as the a.s.sociate of Samuel Adams, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson, in Revolutionary days.

Mr. Rantoul appeared in the Senate after a few days, and his term lasted about twenty days, giving him an opportunity to make one speech.

He was afterwards elected to the House of Representatives from the Ess.e.x District, and died while a member at the age of forty-seven years. His death was a serious loss to the anti-slavery Democrats of Ma.s.sachusetts and the country. He was one of the three distinguished men that the county of Ess.e.x has produced in his century: Choate, Cus.h.i.+ng and Rantoul. In oratorical power he could not be compared to Choate. In learning he was of the three the least well equipped. In logic he was superior to Cus.h.i.+ng, and he was more direct, and more easily comprehended than either Cus.h.i.+ng or Choate. He had not much imagination, and his ill.u.s.trations were simple and rather commonplace.

As a debater he has had but few equals in our State. He was a radical, a reformer by nature. He was opposed to capital punishment, an advocate of temperance, of prison reform, and a zealous free trader.

He made war upon the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 contending that the Const.i.tution imposed upon the States the duty of returning fugitives from labor. This theory seemed to me at the time, as the result of a violent construction of the Const.i.tution, and so it seems to me now.

Nevertheless it satisfied many who wised to oppose the Fugitive Slave Law, and sustain the Const.i.tution at the same time.

During the Senatorial contest I was urged by the supporters of Sumner to aid his election, and by the "hunker" wing of the Democratic Party --I was urged to bring the influence of the administration to bear against Mr. Sumner. To all I made the same reply. I said: "I am not pledged to elect Mr. Sumner, I am not pledged to defeat him. The subject is in the control of the Legislature." I did, however, delay making removals and appointments and upon the ground that the election or defeat of Mr. Sumner would affect the appointments to office in the State.

Mr. Cus.h.i.+ng had a violent prejudice against shoemakers. Under the coalition, Wilson became president of the Senate, Amasa Walker, Secretary of the Commonwealth, John B. Alley, a Senator, and member of the Council, all shoemakers, or interested in the shoe and leather trade. In addition to these there were many persons of prominence and influence in the party who were in the same business. The "shoe towns"

generally supported the Free-soil Party. One morning I received a call from Mr. Cus.h.i.+ng, before I had taken my breakfast. Evidently he had had a conference with the leading "hunkers" who had deputed him to state their case to me. After considerable conversation, which perhaps was not satisfactory to Mr. Cus.h.i.+ng, he put this question to me, and with great emphasis: "What I wish to know, Governor, is whether this State is to be 'shoemakerized' or not?" With a laugh I said, "General, I cannot tell, whether it is to be 'shoemakerized' or not." Upon this the general left. When he had had interviews with Greene and Hallett, he became anxious for Sumner's defeat; when he was with the coalitionists he would become, in a measure, reconciled to his election. The truth was, Cus.h.i.+ng was dest.i.tute of convictions. By his residence in the east he had lost faith in our religion, in our civilization, and, in a degree, in our political system. However, he had no stronger faith in any other system. His purposes were not bad, and his disposition to aid others was a charming feature of his character. He would oblige an a.s.sociate whenever he could do so. As a legislator he would perfect bills that he did not approve, and his stores of knowledge were at the service of any one who chose to make requests of him. Indeed he often volunteered information and suggestions. His reading was so vast and his experience so great, that his professional arguments were often over-loaded. As a jurist his influence with courts was limited. He did not aid the judicial mind. It was seldom necessary for the court to either accept or answer his arguments. On one occasion, he commenced an argument to the Supreme Court of Ma.s.sachusetts with the obscure philosophical observation: "An impossibility is the greatest possible fact."

General Cus.h.i.+ng was learned in many ways, but his faculties were not practical, and he was too much inclined to adhere to the existing powers, and consequently he was ready to change whenever a new party or a new set of men attained authority. As an official, he would obey instructions, and as an a.s.sistant in legal, historical, or diplomatic researches, he had no rival. He attained to high positions, and yet he was never fully trusted by any administration or party. His personal habits were peculiar. In later years, his economy degenerated into parsimony. This may have been due in part to his lack of financial skill. First and last he was led into many unprofitable undertakings, and as a results, his patrimony, which was something, and his professional earnings which were considerable, were consumed. He was in debt usually, and he limited his expenses that he might meet his liabilities. He was eccentric. I have met him at evening entertainments arrayed in a dress suit with a bright red ribbon for a necktie.

General Cus.h.i.+ng had great qualities, but he was not a great man. He had immense capacity that he could use in aid of others, but he lacked ability to mark out a course for himself, or he lacked tenacity or purpose in pursuing it. His ambition had no limits, and he would swerve from his personal obligations in the pursuit of place. In my administration he was made a judge of the Supreme Court of the State, and upon an understanding that he would retain the place. During the few months that he was upon the bench, he gave promise of success, but upon the election of President Pierce, he could not resist the offer of a seat in his Cabinet. As Attorney-General he did not add materially to his reputation, but his opinions are distinguished for research and for learning. The nomination of Pierce was promoted by the officers who had served in Mexico. Previous to the Democratic Convention of 1852, Gideon J. Pillow came to Boston, and he and General Cus.h.i.+ng visited Pierce in New Hamps.h.i.+re. They also called upon me and laid open a scheme in which they invited me to take a part. It was in fact a project for an organization inside the Democratic Party, by which the action of the party should be controlled. First, a central organization composed of a few men self-const.i.tuted; next a small number of a.s.sistants in each State who were to organize through confidential agents in the counties, cities and large towns. All these agencies through newspapers and by other expedient means would be able, it was thought, to control the party nominations, and the party policy.

I had then declined a renomination to the office of Governor, and I was able to say with truth, that I intended to retire from active partic.i.p.ation in politics. I declined to consider the subject further.

Whether or not the scheme was matured, I have no knowledge.

That campaign and his transfer to Pierce's Cabinet led Cus.h.i.+ng to adopt the views of southern men upon the slavery question, and his unwise speeches and letters interrupted his success, finally, and at a moment when success was most important to him. In the autumn or early in December, 1860, he made a succession of speeches at Newburyport which were calculated to promote the views of the Secessionists. At about the same time he wrote a letter which was read before the Republican Senatorial Caucus, when his name was before the Senate for confirmation as Chief Justice of the United States. That letter compelled President Grant to withdraw the nomination. At a period during the war General Cus.h.i.+ng was disposed to enter the army, and there was a movement in favor of his appointment as Brigadier-General. Andrew, Sumner, and some others, appeared in opposition, and the appointment was not made.

While I held the office of Secretary of the Treasury, General Cus.h.i.+ng gave to a friend of mine, and to myself, an invitation to drive out to his farm, the Van Ness place, about six miles from Was.h.i.+ngton, on the Virginia heights, and take tea with him. After business we drove to his farm. I took a seat with Cus.h.i.+ng in his buggy-wagon, and my friend followed in another vehicle. As we were pa.s.sing through Georgetown, we stopped at a shop where Cus.h.i.+ng obtained a loaf of bread. Upon reaching his place we were taken over the land. Its quality was inferior and it showed the neglect of former owners, and there were indications that the present owner had done little or nothing for its improvement. The foreman was a Virginian, with but little knowledge of farming. The house-keeping was crude. The table was a coa.r.s.e one. There was neither tablecloth nor napkins. The repast consisted of tea, the bread purchased on the way, soft b.u.t.ter, cold corned beef, and blackberries. When we entered the room Mr.

Cus.h.i.+ng went to a bureau, and took from a drawer a package which contained steel knives and forks, such as I had been accustomed to sell when a boy in a country store. From the appearance the cutlery had never been used, but its antiquity was marked by spots of rust.

This incident shows the democratic side of Mr. Cus.h.i.+ng's character. He had also an aristocratic side. During General Grant's administration, a Mr. Kennedy, who had been a merchant at Troy, New York, came to Was.h.i.+ngton and distinguished himself by his somewhat ostentatious entertainments to diplomats and other notable persons. This proceeding annoyed Mr. Cus.h.i.+ng, and he gave voice to his feelings in this manner: --"Mr. Kennedy, an ironmonger, comes here from Troy and sets himself up as a personage. He is not a personage at all, sir: not at all, sir."

When I became Governor in January, 1851, there were a large number of offices at the disposal of the Governor and Council. Of these there were sheriffs, district attorneys, registers of probate, clerks of courts, and registers of deeds. There were also individual places that were subject to executive control. As a general fact, and I do not recall an exception, all the officers were filled with Whigs. We entered upon a policy of removing the inc.u.mbents and appointing members of the Democratic and Free-soil parties.

I made one notable exception. John H. Clifford was Attorney-General.

I retained him while I held the office of Governor, and he became my successor. A part of his capital was in the circ.u.mstance that I had shown confidence in him. He was a good officer and an upright man, but he lacked the quality which enables a man to reach conclusions. This peculiarity made him useful to me. He would investigate a subject, give me the authorities, and precedents, and leave the conclusions to me. Next, there was no one in the administration party whom I wished to appoint. Mr. Hallett was the candidate most generally supported.

He was full of prejudices and he was not well instructed as a lawyer.

In these respects Clifford was his opposite. I chose, therefore, to retain Clifford and submit to the criticisms of my party supporters.

Among the persons removed was Mr. Fiske, register of probate for the county of Middles.e.x. In 1854 the citizens of Fitchburg and the adjoining town pet.i.tioned the Legislature for an act authorizing a new county to be formed of towns from the counties of Middles.e.x and Worcester. Mr. Choate appeared for the pet.i.tioners. Emory Washburn appeared for the county of Worcester and I was retained for the county of Middles.e.x. One point in our defence was to show that the Middles.e.x towns were not subject to any inconvenience. In the list of witnesses furnished by the county commissioners was the name of Mr. Fiske. When I read his name I had a feeling that he might give me some trouble, as I knew that he was very bitter in his feelings. When he came upon the stand I approached him gently. After the customary questions, I said: --"Mr. Fiske, have you held office in the county of Middles.e.x?" "Yes, sir. I was register of probate from 1823 to 1851, when I was removed by Governor Boutwell,--the meanest act but one, that I ever knew."

Being so far in, and subject to considerable laughter from the audience, I thought it safe to go farther, and I said:--"Will you be kind enough to mention the meaner act that you have in mind?" "That I was not reappointed by Governor Clifford when he had the power."

Having thus unburdened his mind, the ex-register gave very satisfactory testimony.

One of the important events that occurred during my administration was the ceremony in honor of the opening of railway communication with Canada. Distinguished persons were present. President Fillmore; Mr.

Webster; Mr. Stuart and Mr. Conrad of his Cabinet; Lord Elgin, Governor-General of Canada; Sir Francis Hincks, Attorney-General of Canada, and afterwards Governor-General of Jamaica; Joseph Howe, Provincial Secretary of Nova Scotia; the Governors of several New England States, and others whose names I do not recall. The time was September, 1851. Mr. Webster arrived in Boston a few days in advance of the President and took rooms at the Revere House. I called to see him. In the course of the interview he said that whenever the State appeared he would be ready to take part if invited to do so, but as to the city he should have nothing to do with it. This resolution was due to the circ.u.mstance that the city government in the preceding year had refused the use of Faneuil Hall that he might speak in explanation and vindication of his speech of the 7th of March, 1850. John P. Bigelow was Mayor of the city in 1850, and he was also Mayor in 1851. Mr.

Webster also said that when the State authorities made their formal call upon the President, he should be glad to introduce the members of the government. Upon the arrival of the President, the officers of the State government, to the number of about twenty, called at the Revere House, where we were received by J. Thomas Stevenson, a personal and political friend of Mr. Webster. He informed Mr. Webster of our presence, and Mr. Webster soon appeared. He was dressed in what was known as his court dress. A blue coat with bright b.u.t.tons, buff vest, black trousers, and patent leather shoes. His white cravat was high and thick, over which was turned a wide collar. After the gentlemen had been presented, he took me by the arm and we proceeded to the reception room of the President. At the moment of our arrival Mayor Bigelow was presenting the members of the city government. At once Mr. Webster became excited, and advancing to the President, he took possession of the ground, treating the Mayor as though he were a dog under his feet. He introduced us in a loud voice, and at the end he seemed to regret that the State government was not a more numerous body.

The day following had been designated for the public reception of the President and the members of his Cabinet in the Hall of the House of Representatives. It followed that it was my official duty to deliver an address of welcome. I prepared my address in which I made an allusion to the members of the Cabinet from other States, but strange, as it now appears, I made no allusion to Mr. Webster. I gave the address to the newspapers and it was not until eleven o'clock that I awoke to the fact of my neglect. I prepared a paragraph and sent it to the papers in season for the afternoon edition. Mr. Webster sat on my left. The President and the other members of the Cabinet were on my right. The President arose when I did and remained standing.

When I alluded to Stuart and Conrad they gave no indication of their presence, but when I referred to Mr. Webster he rose at once and the Hall resounded with the cheers of the audience. Speeches in reply were made by the President, by Mr. Webster, Mr. Stuart, and Mr. Conrad.