The sun., 1873-05-10

racy of either statement. SO far rs MI.
LINCOLN was concerned, II j. certain that
he was the leader OF his own Cabinet IN all
its branches And we may say in passing,
that IL was not Mr.. SEWARD who settled
the Trent difficulty by deciding to surrcn-
der the captivcs, as is alleged by Mir
ADAMS. Mr.. LINCOLN himself did this, in
the single observation mado by him, cur
rent ut the time and current ever since,
that the country could not afford to have
moro than ono war on hand nt n time.
That was the key note OF that transaction,
and Mr.. SEWARD was left to make the
argument And without wishing i'm the
least TO dctract from that eminent mans
Just rcnown, we must say that he never
made "A worse one. He lost such an op-
portunity of striking IA blow in favor of
the rights of ncutrals as may not occur
again i'm century.
But II Is of Mr.. ADAMs's assertion in be-
half of Mr.. SEWARD, that he led the political
anti-slavcry movement that we now desire
particularly TO speak. IL anybody can
claim that distinction il is Mr.. CHASE. But
wc conceive that nobody can rghtfully
claim it. II is the glory of that movement
,n array of noble and earnest men, who
moved shoulder to shoulder in the van of
that holy enterprise. No ono OF them
could be fairly said to be in advance Of the
other, or 10 De in any sense the leader of
the movement. And the removal by death
OF d"scrtiOn of any ono, two, or three of
the foremost could not have destroyed or
even weakened the organization, or arrest
ed its impetus. Tho great wave rolled
onward 10y the force OF the mighty in
spring ideas that wcro its quicken
ing spirit. II was 10 the vitullziug
power of truth, and not to- the lead of any
man, that it, victory was owing. The
men were there who represented that
truth, but II they had fallen, others were
ready 10 take their place.. Among those
foremost mon was MIR. CINsr. lie was
there 10y choice. He was an anti-slavcry
man, pure ana simple, first and last. Mr..
SEWARD was Whg nrst AMI AN anti
slavery man aftcrwnrd. He never led the
! movement. IIc was carried onward
by It. lie believed in the Old
Whig party. lie was chosen Senator
10y 1t when IL was overwhelmingly strong
lie was averse 10 its destruction. lie
believed 10 could be educated go ns TO nc
coinplish every needed result. IIc was
thus opposed TO the formation of nov
party with resistance TO the spread Of
slavery ia its fundamental idea. Mr.
SpwAitD belonged 10 the party in which
such men rs llENRY CLAY, DASGFL w WEB-
! srTR, and MiIIARD FILLMORE were leaders (;
| ana th'y were wholly hostile TO the ideas
of the anti-alaycry men. Nr. SkwAi,p
! differed from them in this, that he wa-
| willing 10 ncorpOrlte the new idea into
the Whjg ~rocd, while they wcro not. But
he resisted the formation ~ tho new party Y
10 th" last, and only joined IL when he saw
that tho movement hud attained such
/ force and vitality that IL would 20 on
without him.
/ IN this time Mr.. CuAsr was urrirg with
ur,ru,tius energy the establishment OF
! theucW party under soma esiguilcantappcl-
| mtiru which woudtNpr,se ia. purpusc- Tie
/ suggested various nnm,~ for A. In the nu-
! mcrul- c.ufcr, nc"s of ~ friends Ut wash
! iulton during the winter of il. birth, tho
! titloa OF Free Democracy, Democratic Re-
! publican. AMI others were proposed Nv
| him. But under whatever namc or It'll"
| he cared not, 80 long ~ the party itself WINS
| crclt, Il aul christoncl. A. tho least OBJ
! i"ctounhle Of all, the name ol Rcpubu-
can was finally adopted.
This Wus the difference in the position Of
| these two subsequent leaders in the Re
publican party. 1t either led in this great
| initial step that ended in emancipation,
| il was not Mr.. SEWARD, but Mr.. CHASE.
And as IL was then, 80 was IL afterwarti
Mr. (NnAaR ri wi A.,t
mined front. Mr.. SEWARD often rclented
In his speeches ia the session Of 1860 81.
Mr.. SEWARD seemed ready to compromise :
| Mr.. CHAsE never manifested the slightest
! sign Of giving way before the terrific
events then an prospect, lie f"lt the
eternal justice Of his cause, and he wa
ready To brave tho consequences. He en-
tered Mr.. LIscoLS's Cabinet in this spirit
Mr.. SEwARD entered II also, but his record
cd acts and utteranccs show that he did
| not wish 10 face the crisis but was ready TO
make great sacrifices for the sake of peace.
We DO not say this with any view to dis
/ paragc Mr.. SEWARD. We utter 10 in the
| interest of historic truth. II illustute- the
contrast between the two men.
M CHASE feared nothing. lie was ~
! aVor-c 30 WAY ~ anybody. But ho aimed
/ at justice and Righteousness above all
! things. His moral courage was equal to
, every occasion. 10 wns huttrcssci all
! around hy every faculty ana quality OF his
nature. There wu4 never any other quce-
/ tinn with him but what was the right thug
10 do, not what was cXpcdicnt. Originally
n Democrat, he lcft the Democratic party
in the hcyday Of its power and its glory,
ON conviction thut il was wrong on the
slavery question. He cspousod the cause
of the slave when il was hopeless. Soli-
! tary and alone hc raised his flag and called
! for recruits when there were few 10 follow.
In All has administrative acts lac pursued
the same line Of action. lie did the same
in his comparatively brief Congressional
| career. He did not seek what was
popular but vigorously pursued his own
IDEAS, ana left the world IN follow or re-
fuse 10 follow ~ II might. IIis aim through
| life was TO shape events. This was particil-
| inrly tho case while he was in office. II
was the causo of numerous conflicts OF
a subordinate character with President
! LINCOLN while he was Secretary of the