Nor does any intelligent person doubt that the straightforward, manly course pursued by the Chief-Justice has influenced the issue of the trial. Had a narrow-minded fanatic or partisan been in his place, it is certain that the President would have been convicted, and this would have produced much more serious results than even the impeachers had calculated upon. As it is, no harm has been done, but really much good. The most ambitious and violent partisans will learn a useful lesson from the acquittal of the President. None of that genus will be so ready in future to make frivolous charges, however anxious they may be to crush their opponents in order to serve their own interests; whereas, future presidents, upon the other hand, will be careful not to leave themselves in the power of unprincipled demagogues.

For these reasons, if we had five hundred votes tomorrow, and that Chief-Justice Chase were a candidate for the Presidency, we would unhesitatingly give all to him. We think that all who have the welfare of the country at heart should be actuated by the same feeling. Nor is it by way of rewarding the Chief-Justice we would pursue this course; we should wish to see him President for the country's sake, not for his-because we think that he is eminently qualified for the position, and that his administration would command the respect of all intelligent, impartial men at home and abroad.

We do not make this remark through any hostility to General Grant; for we entertain no such feeling. As long as there was a single battalion in the field against the Union, none were more in favour of prosecuting the war than we; none set a higher value on the splendid victories of General Grant; and we have always maintained that he deserved the warmest gratitude of the country for having saved the Republic in spite of the persistent efforts of one of the greatest generals of the age, and the bravest armies. If the rebel armies were not superior to the Union armies, it was because the latter could not be surpassed; and if Lee was not superior to Grant as a general, it was because the latter had no superior in the world, in our opinion, in the particular kind of warfare which it was necessary to adopt in the extensive woods and morasses of the South.

Such has been our estimate of General Grant since he gained his three first victories; nevertheless we have always thought that there are at least a hundred men in the United States who are much better qual

ified for the Presidency than he. But, with the sole exception of Chief-Justice Chase, none of those yet prominently mentioned as likely to be his opponents, are among the number. We would certainly vote for him rather than for any of the rest, whether they call themselves Republicans or Democrats; but we should decidedly prefer the Chief-Justice to the General, for, although the sword is an excellent thing in time of war, political sagacity and statesmanship are much more useful in time of peace; and they are much more likely to maintain peace when once established. Even his enemies. freely admitted that Wellington was a great general. No public man has ever been more idolized than the "Iron Duke" has been by the British people of all classes; it is certain that no general ever possessed in a higher degree the gratitude of a whole nation; yet there were many men to whom England preferred to commit the reins of government, although he was always willing enough, if not anxious, to be Premier. Even when he was nominally at the head of the ministry, Sir Robert Peel, who could not command a corporal's guard, and who scarcely knew the difference between a carbine and a howitzer, was the acting man. The duke was nearly as much out of place in the cabinet when any important business had to be transacted, as Sir Robert would have been in the British camp when "the guards" were attacked with characteristic impetuosity by Napoleon's cuirassiers.

But we fear that General Grant would be still more out of place in the cabinet; and it is not a military chieftain the country needs just now, but a statesman. No one pretends that General Grant is a statesman; at least we are not aware that any such claim has been made on his behalf, even by his most enthusiastic admirers; whereas none deny the statesmanlike abilities of Mr. Chase.

It is urged that, if we are at peace with the world now, we may be at war with one or more of the most powerful nations before the term of the next president shall have expired. This is not at all likely; and still less likely is it that we shall have any great rebellion to put down. But assuming the contrary, was Mr. Lincoln, under whose auspices the greatest and most formidable rebellion of modern times was put down, a military chieftain? Not one of all our presidents knew less about military science, or had less disposition to take the field; yet it is universally admitted by the very men who have

nominated General Grant that not one, save Washington alone, has deserved more of his country than Mr. Lincoln.

One of the good results of the Impeachment trial was to have brought Mr. Chase thus prominently before the public, by proving him superior to partisanship. But has any thing proved that General Grant is not a partisan? Nay, have not many things proved rather conclusively that he is? His course towards the President in relation to the War Department was certainly not straightforward; even according to his own account he acted the part of a partisan. Does any one believe that if he could have presided at the impeachment trial, he would have been as impartial as Mr. Chase?

Most

As to the politics of one or the other, we are not, we repeat, in the least influenced by them. We like a Republican quite as much as a Democrat, and a Democrat as much as a Republican. If self-interest would induce us to favour one more than the other, the Republicans would certainly have the best claim upon us. assuredly we have more friends amongst them than amongst the Democrats. We have denounced the Radicals for their vindictive policy towards the South, and for their still more vindictive persecution of the President, although we have in general found them, also, much better friends than the Democrats. Even when we wanted a ticket of admission to the High Court of Impeachment, we called on no Democrat for it; but on a Republican and Radical; nor could any one have responded to us more politely than Senator Morgan, who very gracefully and kindly presented us a ticket which he had addressed to a personal friend, while, to our own knowledge, he had to refuse many Radicals for the same privilege.

Indeed, were we influenced by partisan feeling-did we prefer a Democrat as such to a Republican, we should think that, after all, Grant is at heart more of a Democrat than Chase. But we do not care whether he is or not; we are convinced that our Chief-Justice is a better statesman than the commander of our armies; we are satisfied that the former is better qualified in every respect to be President of the United States than the latter; and, accordingly, we prefer him. But we would not prefer Pendleton; still less would we prefer Seymour; we would give General Grant our vote in preference to either; because he has served his country, whereas we believe that neither of the gentlemen just mentioned has

served anybody but himself, and, perhaps, "the party." Who can pretend that it is so with Mr. Chase? We think that it may well be doubted, whether he has not served his country as Secretary of the Treasury and Chief-Justice quite as much as General Grant, although the good he has done may not be so obvious.

It is a remarkable fact that some of the very people who justly laud our Chief-Justice for his impartial and manly conduct during the impeachment trial, call on the President to remove all his cabinet officers. There is nothing the Chief-Justice is more highly praised for than for his effort to shield from conviction one whom he believed did not deserve to be convicted. Certainly, nothing can be more meritorious, nothing more honourable to human nature than to protect the victim of persecution; especially when that persecution is the result of obvious conspiracy. But, with the sole exception of Mr. Seward, whose testimony in regard to the difficulty between the President and General Grant was not at all straightforward, all the cabinet officers remained faithful to their superior. When the President was impeached, the almost universal opinion among all parties and classes was that he would be convicted; not, indeed, because he was guilty but because those who sought his downfall were all-powerful. None doubted at the time that, had the cabinet officers consulted their own interest, they would leave the President to his fate. Nor can we believe that they entertained a different opinion on the subject themselves; but, with the exception already noticed, all stood manfully by the President.

The Secretaries of the Treasury and of the Navy distinguished themselves particularly by their manly and honourable fidelity. They took, what all believed at the time to be, the part of the weak against the strong; the part of the apparently doomed victim against his all-powerful enemies. Neither threats nor promises could induce them to swerve in the slightest degree from the course pointed out to them by truth, justice, and honour. They were willing to give their testimony before the High Court and the world in favour of the President, because they believed him innocent. Precisely because their fidelity was known to the Managers, because it was well understood that they would speak out boldly and honestly, they were not allowed to testify. Now, the President is called upon to remove those who thus continued faithful to him to the last! Were he capable of such base ingratitude, might

it not well be said that, after all, he deserved to be impeached?

But would not the nation also show its ingratitude did it sanction, much less recommend, any such course? While every enlightened nation that is friendly to the United States bestows the highest praise on our Secretary of the Treasury, for the able and statesman-like manner in which he has managed our financial system, are we ourselves to reward him only with reproaches? It would become us much better, as an intelligent and patriotic people, to bear in mind that precisely because he is an honest as well as an able man, because he is a faithful and fearless public servant, he has been persistently abused by certain parties-by parties who would have been the loudest in his praise had he only been less scrupulous in his care of the public money.

It is not strange that those who clamour for the removal of the ablest and most upright Secretary of the Treasury we have ever had, or are likely to have during the present generation, should also call for the removal of the Secretary of the Navy, for no better reason than that his hair is gray. It is not strange even that they sneer at him for being old, as if age were a disgrace; whereas the most illustrious statesmen, of ancient and modern times, have never served their country better than when they were much older and much less vigorous than Secretary Welles. Surely, one who was able to serve during the war, and under whose auspices our navy elicited the admiration of all Europe, and gained a prestige which it never had before, cannot be too old now to serve a few years longer in time of peace. Were he even superannuated, it would become us badly to treat him in this manner; but not one of our public functionaries, of any age, works harder, or is at his post earlier or later, than the same well-tried, uncompromising, indefatigable Secretary of the Navy.

We do not believe that the President would be guilty of the baseness to which he is thus prompted. The real state of the case is, that neither Mr. McCulloch nor Mr. Welles has any disposition to remain in office any longer. We should not be surprised to learn before the present number of our journal shall have been issued, that both had retired, not in compliance with the wish of the President, but against his will. Neither would withdraw from the Chief Magistrate of the Republic as long as he was in any danger; but now that justice has triumphed in his