New-York tribune., 1880-10-01
HANCOCK IND A CHANGE.

| al
posed to be found in the campaign lives OF the
candidates. which form the next division OF the
volume. 1t is no objection to these biographies
that the author has obviously idealized his
subjects and made the most of the material at
his command. They are campaign biographies,
and this was what he was set to do. 1t was the
task of the writer to find in the lives of these
| two persons some reasons for changing the
policy of the past twenty years, in order to put
them in office. He finds it difficult, he says, to
| compress into the space allotted to thus sketch
| seven the leading facts of life so rich IN lncf-
| "dent and achievement as that of General Han
"cocK." Here is the campaign flavor at the
start. "a reasonably full narrative" he con-
! tinues of his great public services would hll
@yery large volume, every line of which would
be interesting and instructive Thus he
warns to his work in the second sentence, while
in the Third he expresses the reluctance with
which he undertakes to pick and Gull from
"such mass of inviting materials" since 1t Is
manifestly impossible to offer in this form
more than a brief outline of the brilliant
"career whose principal events are more or less
familiar in every American household"
This little burst of rapture prepares us for
|
about to invest his hero, and we observe with
some interest the process of picking and cullIng
for the colors of it. "The early life of Winfield
Scott Hancock is disposed of in paragraph
1t is little singular that the two things which
| Democrats seem most to dwell upon and llnger
| over are the Winfield Scott part of his name,
and that portion of his "carecr" devoted to
putting down the rebellion. General Hancock
was named after a soldier whom Democrats
always reyled and abused, and whom
they defeated in 1852 and his chief public
service was in fighting Democrats engaged
in rebellion. His services in the Mexican
war and on the frontier are dismissed in q
sentence or two, but 1t is noted that he was
Gin Kansas IN 1857 performing in becoming
"sllence the duty of a soldier, but looking
"upon the beginnings of the sectional war
" in that far-oif territory with the deepest
:" concern for the future of the country"
There was no question as to the duty OF
soldier in Kansas in 1857. The gentlemen
who have just nominated General Hancock
for President were then engaged III an at
tempt to force pro-slavery constitution upon
Kansas by the same means by which they are
now proposing to elect him. Republicans
demanded then, as now, "a full vote, free
ballot and fair count" and Governor r. j.
Walker called upon President Buchanan for
troops to protect the polls. That was an
emergency in which, if General Hancock
thought " the bayonet not fit instrument for
"collectlng the votes of freemeD,o he said
nothing about it, but "perfOrmed in becOm-
"ing silence the duty OF soldier"
The first solid reason given by this biOg-
rapher why the people want Hancock and
change is in the paragraph entitled Com
" bats Secession in California" In this it is
stated that Immediately on receipt of the news
of the struggle in Charleston larbOr" (nOt
the least interesting feature OF this work Is
the delicate handling the writer gives to
subjects connected with what was known at
the time of it as "thc Rebellion y, General
Hancock, being in California, threw himself
Into the work of saving California to the
Union" This, he says, was no chllds
"play." With great care not to give Of
fence to the majority of General Han
cocks present supporters by any word
of disapproval of their effort to take
California out of the Union, he says
"The State trembled on the verge Of seces
" sion 1t was largely settled by brave and in
telligent Southern men, whose sympathies
I" with scarcely an exception followed the new
flag which rose amid the smoke of Sumter
"apd was advancing rapidly to Washington
Jefferson Davis himself could not take offence
at that way of putting it, TIL b'oGrapher pro-
ceeds to say that /" but for the heroic conduct
and the wise measures adopted by Demo-
q" crats like Field and Hancock, sinking all
party differences and forming a coalition
composed of men of all factions to hold
California in her place in the family of
States, she would have been dragged out by
" the tremendous energy of the secession
.Deaders, and the whole character of the
subsequent struggle would have been |
changed L" Hancock" we are told was |
eoual to the civil as well as the military |
duty of the hour. His influence, guided and |
" directed by the rare political intelligence |
(which has distinguished his conduct when
"ever called upon to deal with civil |
"affairs. was cast on the right side and |
Gin way to be seriously felt" No |
doubt the words are well chosen which as
cribe to "rare political intelligence" the
decision of this army officer not to forswear
his allegiance and enter into rebellion against
the Government which had educated, fed and
clothed him. He had to " sink party differ
" ences,r to be sure but was this army officer
so much partisan that this was any sacri-
ficeP Was he politician. then, so long ago as
thatf
Our author fails to tell us precisely what
was the {" heroic conduct and what were tie
" wise measures" by which his hero saved
California to the Union when she " trembled /
" on the verge of secession" But he tells us
that Immediately on receipt OF the news of
the attack on Fort Sumter he forwarded
.' to Governor Curtin, of Pennsylvania, his
" applicat on for a command among the
" troops of his native State'; that the Gov
ernor not responding ." an application to the
q l. |