Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1881-09-22
LINCOLN AND GARFIELD.

victims of the assassin, there was
strong resemblance in some respect
and in others great dissimiIarity
Both came up from poverty, and boil
realized the Importance of the struggle
to be made before success could be at
tanned. The rail-splitting boy by the
hardest Of study, for Lincoln was not Of
the Upright boy" order, became great
constitutional lawyer at bar where
Stephen A. Douglas, David Davis
Thomas Drummond, John NJ. Douglas,
and other celebrated Illinois lawyers
won reputation as interpreters and eX-
Founders Of legal lore. But Lincoln
lacked the culture acquired only by
early moulding from competent in
structors, and the disadvantages Incl
dent to the poverty in his case were
shown through all of his after life.
His arguments before the Supreme Court
of the United States, where law itself
is more considered than the beauties Of
rhetoric, have received high praise
from the able jurists to whom such ar
guments were addressed. His political
speeches were full Of the vigor ola gigan-
team mind land his logic, frequently reach
ed through words by no means carefully
or happily selected, strengthened con-
viction with his friends and gave con-
sternation to his political enemies. In
the so-called FreepOrt discussion with
Stephen A. Douglas, which was liter
ally battle of giants, Lincoln proved
himself one of the greatest debaters
Of the world, and yet his speeches on
that occasion contrast unfavorably with
those of his opponent in the finish or
polish of the scholar. Garfield had his
severe struggle with poverty, but his
were better opportunities than Lincoln |
had, for the former graduated at one of
the first colleges in the country at the |
age of twenty-five, at which period in
Lincoln's life he had barely mastered
education. Another difference: Gar
field ha0 assistance from proud and
hopeful father, while Lincoln had but
his strong will and Drawn to rely upon.
The political papers, public speeches,
essays, even the postprandial talks of
Garfield show the thoroughly cultured
scholar. His statement of common
place proposition is clothed in language
that gives a freshness to an old idea.
Lincoln and Garfield beth became
prominent figures in party dominant
in this country for more than twenty
years. party originally constructed
on the principle of opposition to the ex-
tension of slavery-and yet neither of
these great men was the originator of
the successful idea. Lincoln, consci-
opposed to sla very in any
form, was of course in full sympathy
with his party, but he was more of a
close follower of Republicanism than a
leader of it. Garfield was too young to
have contested for the leadership with
such men as Phillips, Stephens, Wade,
Or Chandler. Lincoln was an un willing
politician, SO to speak, preferring the
bar to the hastings. Garfield liked
politics, and perhaps would have G
reached higher plane as lawyer had
ne been less of politician. Both
Lincoln and Garfield were grand illus
rations of what the humblest in life
nay attain in this country by properly
directed effort. While the two great i
men differed in some things, in the !
main they were alike, following the same /
principles, guided by the same love of l
country, filling nearly the same official G
positions. In the coming years, when {
he student of American history looks
Jack through the dim aisles of the past, F
he names of Lincoln and Garfield will n
,e so closely associated that the inter- S
'al between their tragic going out will n
'e but as day instead of nearly the +
fifth of century. il
J. d. Pollard, says the Reno Journal, r
led ON Monday evening at his home