, 1866-01-18
MODERN sTATEsn1ANsHrP.


It is tashion today, and has In all ages
been the style Of class, to sueer ut the states.
manshlp Of the present and contrast it with
that Of former times. There is in every age a
tendency to look on characters, a. VIC do on
Landscapes, desplsing the rude barrcnness or
Fumpy familiarity OF that which is near, and
OF suulighh over nil that distance sof1cns and
prc7arcs for the poets pen aud
palttcr's pencil. To culosfze the
stasomen who led our country through
lis recent conflict in the terms which
will b. fa1niliarly applied TO them By our
childrcn, would seem like adulation to three
3ourths ctthc American people to-day. Not
that they are perfect the world does not
bcstow greatness on that class, II any such
there arc. The foiblcs thnt marred the dig
nifty OF Washington, and the slanders
against the purity Of Franllln and
Adams, are forgotten, as those which
have bcen uttered against Lincoln, Seward,
Stanton and Garrison will be, half =
century hence. But because those men were
strung, 1rm and true 10 principle when
principles were dangerous because thereby
the burden Of great struggle IVES rolled
upon them md they bore it 1nanfully; because
they came out OF the smoke and fire Of the
conflict successful, postc1ity have idollzed
them and fame has raised their statues to her
tapnost niche. But As the struggle OF The
past I've years 1u~Ds-~a nneations more 3ntri-
cate, passions more Intense, Issues more I'M
portant, md forces more gigantic, but
especially as It has resulted In q revolution
more democratic and thorough, ii must cecil
py larger place In history, and achieve for
It's leaders wider immortality. We hesitare
not to say harthe names Of Hamilton, Nor
ris and Sherman will cease to be known as
Gnanclcrs when those Of Chase, Fessenden and
McCulloch are accepted MS familiar authori-
tics. No one will Tor moment compare ans
former Nnr minister With the name Of Edwin
NJ. Stanton, nor any f3rncr Secretary Of State
with Mr.. Seward. The name Of Abraham
Lincoln is already on a par with TINT of
Washington Ia the purity and universally Of
its fnme. Postcrity will say Of Calhoun,
Clay, Webster, Corwin, Cass, Benton, Van
Durcn-thcy were ct times eloquent ard
subtle dcbatcrs, but what have they left Us :
Did they do anythinE more than discuss,
analyzc, dfsscct and enlogize the work OF
their predecessors? Where nre the great
wrongs which they rcdrcssed, the errors
which they overturned. the reforms In
our Constitution and laws which
they introduced, the frecmen whom
they emancipatcd or the liberties
which they established. Was John
Randolph more sarcastic than Wendell Phil
lips. Was Henry Clay more polished than
Seward, or Webster, more stead
fast 10 principle than Sumner? Wns Benton
more inrctuously powerful than Stevens, or
was Calhoun in any respect superior TO JelI.
erson Dayiss These men OF words have LEFT
US mere legacy Of rcrbiagc, while those
who preceded them, and again those who fol-
lowed, have given us decda- Tie events in
which they took part have given us indepca-
dence aud liberty, new constitutions, great
rcformatlons and practical benefits. Let
those who Will, decry the stat ates1nansh1p which
under Providence has guided us through the
past five years. Slowly and surely public opin-
ion will rise to do 1t justice.