vince them that it is nevertheless just. All we deem necessary for the majority is to remind them of the more prominent facts. This is all the more agreeable to us because we have no taste for dilating on hackneyed themes; it is not our habit to busy ourselves in elaborately telling our readers what the most thoughtless of them must know already. And who is ignorant of the gift-taking, nay, gift-seeking propensities of General Grant? Who needs to be told that he has made high public functionaries of some of the most stupid and most worthless of his relatives?

Has any one made so little use of his eyes and ears as to need to be informed that General Grant has infringed in various ways on the liberties of the people? Is the memory of our people so defective that they need to be reminded of the course of General Grant towards St. Domingo? What sort of company should the president of the United States be expected to keep? Is it meet that his most familiar companions should be disreputable speculators, gamblers, quack doctors, etc.? Can it be denied that Fisk and Helmbold once occupied the first rank among his favorites? Then, is it necessary to recall his habits?

The newspapers, as faithful chroniclers, have long since answered all these queries. The replies to them have found their way, though only in distorted forms, into the president's own organs. We have just read Mr. Sumner's speech; we have also read some of the denunciations which that speech has elicited both from editors and senators. Yet it embraces not one charge that is new; not an allegation which was not preferred and substantiated, too, long since. Mr. Sumner's arraignment of the president is merely a résumé of facts already familiar to all who are capable of reading the newspapers intelligently. It is undoubtedly able, eloquent, and manly; but it adds nothing to the stock of knowledge previously within the reach even of those least disposed to indulge in research.

Indeed, the boundary line between what the public knew

before Mr. Sumner's speech was delivered and what the senator adds, is so well defined that we see it at a glance, and when we do, we find nothing substantial in it—nothing which might not have been entirely omitted without in the least diminishing the just severity of the castigation. Thus, for example, we cannot but regard the senator's quotations from Shakspeare and the Bible as very much like those of the first arguments of the good-natured old gentleman in the fable, who found the rude boy stealing his apples. Still more inappropriate, we think, is the comparison of President Grant's rings to the rings of Saturn. The Saturnian rings serve the planet as so many lamps to show it light on its long journey, but charge nothing for their services. Still less do they enter into any collusion with Saturn by making him presents, or bribing him in any other way, in order that he may allow them to rob his people. Again, both Saturn and his rings exist and perform their respective functions in accordance with principles much more stable and more beneficent than those which placed General Grant in the White House and surrounded him with the rings described by the

senator.

Still, it is but justice to Mr. Sumner to admit that there is one point of resemblance. What this is will be sufficiently understood from the fact that the ring nearest to Saturn is dusky, dark lantern-like, instead of being bright or luminous. Then, as the ring nearest to Grant is the Dent or family ring, which is composed of all sorts of persons whose intellectual and moral training has been neglected in their youth, we are reminded that if there be any chance of its head being re-elected, Congress could make no better use of so much of the public money than to appropriate a million or two for the education of the whole tribe. And should there be any overplus, it might be devoted to the employment of competent teachers of political economy, moral philosophy, statesmanship, English grammar, modern history, etc., for the heads of the Treasury and State departments.

But one word more in regard to the senator who so well represents the culture, intelligence, manliness, and honesty of Massachusetts, and who contrasts so strikingly in all these respects with the gentleman who manages, or rather grossly mismanages, the Treasury department.* In concentrating his indignation, and scorn, and warning his countrymen against the worst kind of Cæsarism,-the Cæsarism of ignorance, stolidity, greed, and avarice,—a Cæsarism which is a libel on the illustrious founder of the Roman empire, the author of one of the greatest and most eloquent speeches ever delivered in the Roman senate,t and the author of the noblest eommentaries ever written,‡-Mr. Sumner draws a picture which so fully accords with our own views, that it affords us pleasure to place it on record in our pages :

"I protest against him as radically unfit for the presidential office, being essentially military in nature, without experience in civil life, without aptitude for civil duties, and without knowledge of republican institutions, all of which is perfectly apparent, unless we are ready to assume that the matters and things set forth to-day are of no account, and then declare, in further support of the candidate, boldly, that nepotism in a president is nothing; that gift-taking with repayment in official patronage is nothing; that violations of the

*That this is no new discovery on our part, most of our readers will remember. In order to satisfy those whose memory may be defective, we extract a passage from our criticism of the first annual report of the present head of the treasury ring, only premising that in December last, when the financial credit of the country seemed in danger in Europe, we allowed one of our contributors to draw a veil over certain things, which, if exhibited to the world in their naked deformity, might have compromised the honor of the nation :

"If Massachusetts does not feel humiliated, on reading the document before us, it is because she has never recognized Mr. Boutwell as anything more than one of her fourthrate politicians. O shades of Webster, Everett, and Choate! But, certainly Massachu setts has sufficient intellectual culture and statesmanship to day to represent her respectably in the national cabinet. Nor need she go beyond the radical party to choose one possessed of those qualifications; we do not, however, mean the silver-spoon gentleman, although he, too, has a hundred-fold more ability than Mr. Boutwell. We do not, indeed, admire all that is said and done by Mr. Sumner. But he would do vastly more honor, both to Massachusetts and the nation, at the head of the treasury department. than the author of the report before us. That it is not on political grounds we criticise our present secretary of the treasury, is sufficiently obvious from the fact that we should be entirely satisfied with Mr. Sumner in that position, because, however much he may err in some respects, he has undeniable claims to the character of a statesman and political economist. He would represent the refinement, as well as the talent, of Massachusetts; whereas the characteristics of that enlightened state represented at present are its petty thrift, its fussy smartness, its little cunning, its narrow prejudices-in a word, its Yankee notions.' We do not say that all this is apparent in Mr. Bontwell's report, but it is as much like the author as any composition of the kind could be said to resemble its manufacturer."N. Q. R., No. xxix, Dec., 1869, p. 180.

+ Vide Sallust, Bell. Cat. c.

De Bello Gallico.

constitution and law, international and municipal, are nothing; that quarrel with political associates is nothing; and that all his presidential pretensions in their motley aggregation, being a new Cæsarism, or personal government, are nothing. But if these are all nothing, then is the Republican party nothing, nor is there any safeguard for republican institutions. In every direction is muddle. Muddle with Spain, muddle with Cuba, muddle with the Black Republic, muddle with distant Corea, muddle with Venezuela, muddle with Russia, muddle with England; on all sides one diversified muddle. To this condition are we reduced. Are these the laurels of a presidential candidate?"

Although we have abstained, as we have said, on many occasions, from making criticisms, being unwilling to have the finger of scorn pointed at the highest functionaries of the republic, we can recall some hints which we have given from time to time, to show that our opinion as to General Grant's utter unfitness is of no recent formation. Thus, for example, although we do not mention his name in the article entitled "Our Millionaires and their Influence," published before he was one year in office, it was his conduct suggested the subject. This may be easily seen from an extract or two :

*

"They (the millionaires) may then live on the most intimate terms with the highest of our rulers. If they wish to become great public functionaries such as high chamberlains, ambassadors to foreign courts, etc., or even to make such of their hired eulogists or private secretaries, they have only to make a few liberal presents, and if they are not very hard to be pleased, the whole affair will be arranged in due time to their entire satisfaction."

Comparing the past with the present, we remarked, in the same article:

"It would not do at this time (antiquity) for the ambitious candidate, even though a millionaire, to set somebody to prepare a biography of him, who would represent that he was familiar with ancient languages, the letters of whose alphabets he could hardly distinguish from each other. . . . Especially did all this prove a failure if the millionaire candidate belonged to that class who not only covet every good piece of land, or every handsome, convenient house that hap

* Dec., 1869. No. xxxix.

pens to be within the range of their vision, but unhesitatingly offer to buy it from the owner, and if the owner declines, become indignant and spiteful. Yet such were sometimes successful even inclassic times. We have a very interesting instance of this in the works of Plato. Socrates and some of his friends are discussing public matters, as usual; referring to the people of Syracuse, one of the interlocutors proceeds to say: 'And they have just now sent ambassadors, intending, as it seems to me, to deceive, in some way, the state. During our conversation, the ambassadors from Syracuse happened to pass by; when, pointing to one of them, Erasistratus observed: "That person, Socrates," said he, "is the most wealthy of the Siceliotes and Italiotes; and how should he not be?"' etc. Erasistratus here proceeds to point out the different sources of the ambassador's wealth; having satisfactorily proved that he is a millionaire, Socrates asks, as it were, incidentally, 'What kind of person, Erasistratus, does this man seem to be in Sicily?' "This man,' said he, both seems to be and is one of the most knavish of all the Siceliotes and Italiotes, by how much is he the wealthiest; so that should you be willing to ask any Siceliotes whom he thought to be the greatest knave, not one of them would mention any other person than him."" *

Need we say that this was in allusion to one of General Grant's first performances as president of the United States? And whether that performance was the result of pure friendship or generous patriotism might perhaps be inferred from the magnificent offer made by the gentleman sought to be honored-probably the highest bid ever made in ancient or modern times for an office. The same circumstances have caused not a few to inquire what the gentleman paid who was fully installed? what the treasury official paid? etc. That our opinion of General Grant's government was no better six months later, after we had crossed and re-crossed the Atlantic, the following passage will show :

"For the rest, it is idle to disguise the fact, that we were not a little pained, to be told in every country we visited, that while the government of no enlightened country has treated the press with less favor than the present national government of the United States, no government has to depend so much on the press to save it from

* Plato's Works, vol. vi, Eryxias, c. 1, 2.