"Ordered, That the resolves contained in Doc.u.ment No. 128, and the Address to the People signed by the president and secretaries, be printed in connection with the copies of the Revised Const.i.tution ordered to be printed for distribution; and that thirty-five thousand additional copies of said Const.i.tution, with the Resolves and Address, be printed for distribution, in accordance with the orders already adopted." The Convention adjourned at ten minutes before two o"clock on the morning of August 2. The work as a whole was rejected by the voters of the State, but the mind and purpose of the Convention have been expressed during the forty-four years now ended, in the many amendments that have been engrafted upon the Const.i.tution of 1780.
My intimate acquaintance with Mr. Choate began in this Convention.
I had known him as early as 1842, when he came to Groton and made a speech in defence of the Whig Party. He was then a member of the Senate and in the fullness of his powers both intellectual and physical. In 1853 his physical system was impaired, but his intellect was as supreme as it had ever been. When I held the office of Governor I made a visit to Mr. Choate at his house. My a.s.sociate was Ellis Ames of Canton. The circ.u.mstances were these. The contest with Rhode Island in regard to the boundary line had reached a crisis. When I came to office I found upon the Statute Book a resolution directing the Governor to inst.i.tute legal proceedings for the purpose of fixing the boundary unless Rhode Island should agree to proceed by a new commission. As Rhode Island had remained silent, I directed the Attorney-General to execute the statute. After some time he informed me that the preparation of the bill involved a good deal of labor and that some a.s.sistance should be had. He suggested Ellis Ames who had a reputation as an equity lawyer. Mr. Ames was employed. When the bill was prepared and submitted to me, I found that a claim was made to five towns that were originally in the Plymouth Colony, but which by a decree of the King in Council had been set over to Rhode Island in 1746. I objected to the presentation of this claim and said that we should only ask that the true line should be run agreeably to that decree. Soon after the Revolution the State of Rhode Island ran the line _ex parte_ and encroached upon the territory of Ma.s.sachusetts one-fourth to three-fourths of a mile.
From that time both parties had a.s.serted and exercised jurisdiction which had resulted in a number of controversies in the local courts.
The Attorney-General lived at New Bedford near the line. The people were constantly excited, and Mr. Clifford was unwilling to accept my proposed amendment. After some delay he suggested an interview with Mr. Choate, who had been counsel for the Town of Fall River in some one or more of the controversies involving the boundary. I a.s.sented to the suggestion, and an evening was fixed for a call upon Mr. Choate by Mr.
Ames and myself. The evening was a stormy one, but we made our way to Mr. Choate"s house. He was in his library in the second story. It consisted of two rooms that had been connected by making an arch in the part.i.tion. The shelves were filled, and the floor was covered with books. Ames said:
"Why, Mr. Choate, what a quant.i.ty of books you have!"
"Yes," said Mr. Choate, "I have a good many books, more than I have paid for, but that is the book-seller"s business, not mine."
After some time had been spent in general conversation Ames introduced the subject for which we had met, and stated the question of the claim to the five towns, to which Choate said:
"The best way is to go for enough and get what we can."
I made no remark, and the business part of the interview ended. Before we left Mr. Choate ordered a bottle of wine and made the remark:
"I keep a little wine in my house, but as for myself, I don"t drink a gla.s.s once in a thousand years."
One"s first impressions of Mr. Choate were never disturbed by intimate acquaintance. Many distinguished persons become insignificant upon close inspection. With Mr. Choate those who knew him best, estimated him most highly. He had no malice in his nature, and there was a genial quality in his sharpest sallies of wit.
In the Convention we had end seats. Mr. Choate occupied the seat immediately in front of me. Thus I had an opportunity for two months to observe his ways, and to enjoy his conversation. Great as were his speeches, they did not transcend his exhibitions of power in private conversation. His great speech in the Convention was upon the Judiciary System, and his description of a good judge is one of the finest paragraphs in oratory, ancient or modern. His second, or perhaps his first great work in art is his sketch of Demosthenes in his lecture on the Eloquence of Revolutionary Periods. As a specimen of essay writing it is not surpa.s.sed by any pa.s.sage to be found in Macaulay.
The Convention of 1853 was the ablest body of men that ever met in Ma.s.sachusetts. The Convention of 1820 included Mr. Webster, an abler man than any of the members of the Convention of 1853, but the Convention as a whole was an inferior body of men. Mr. Choate was the first man in the Convention of 1853, and he must ever remain one of the great characters of Ma.s.sachusetts.
Simon Greenleaf, the author of the work on Evidence, was a member of the Convention, and his influence was considerable. He was a dry, hard-headed lawyer. His influence was due to his reputation rather than to his power as a debater. Had he come to the Convention as an unknown person, his standing would have been in the second or third cla.s.s.
Richard H. Dana, Jr., added to his reputation by his speeches in the Convention. His style was free from exaggeration, and he addressed himself to the question at issue and always with effect. My intimate acquaintance with Mr. Dana began during the session of the Convention.
In 1854 and 1855 I visited him and his father, the poet, at their home in Manchester-by-the-Sea. Mr. Dana, Sr., was a genial man, but reserved, and not much given to conversation. My friendship with Mr.
Dana continued until General Butler became a candidate for Congress in the Ess.e.x district, and Mr. Dana became the nominee of the dissenting Republicans. That year I placed myself in the hands of the State Committee for a limited number of speeches, and by direction of the Committee, I spoke twice in the Ess.e.x district in aid of General Butler, who was the regular nominee of the party. From that time Mr.
Dana avoided me, and when we met he addressed me with the coldest formality. At a meeting in this canva.s.s held in Gloucester, I combated the charge of the Democrats that there had been many and great defalcations under Republican rule, and among other things I said the greatest defalcation was by a man who had been identified with the Democratic Party. A man in the gallery said: "Name him." I answered: --"His name is ----." "Oh," said my questioner, "I don"t care anything about that! I didn"t know but it was General Butler."
When General Grant nominated Mr. Dana for the English mission, I was in the Senate, and I endeavored to secure his confirmation. General Butler appeared as his opponent. The case at first turned upon his manners and his responsibility in the matter of his edition of Wheaton"s International Law. In the suit inst.i.tuted by Beach Lawrence, the Court had found that Dana had violated the copyright of Mr.
Lawrence. I made a careful study of the case, and I flattered myself that I had satisfied the Senate that Mr. Dana"s offence was merely technical, and that it ought not to interfere with his confirmation.
At that moment there appeared a letter from Mr. Dana which contained an attack upon General Cameron, then a member of the Senate, and Mr.
Dana"s case was rendered hopeless. He secured his own defeat when his enemies were powerless to accomplish it. He was, however, very grateful to me for my effort in his behalf. The result was a heavy blow to his ambition and he resolved to prepare a new work on International Law. For that purpose he took his residence in Europe, but death came too soon for the realization of his purpose.
Mr. Dana will be remembered by his tale of the sea, "Two Years Before the Mast." He was a learned lawyer, an aristocrat by nature, and a man of eminent power. He scorned the opinions of inferior men, and therein was the cause of his failure. By a hair"s breadth he failed of success in all the public undertakings of his life, excepting only his tale of the sea.
Mr. Burlingame was then an enthusiastic young man. He had had some experience in public affairs, but it could not have been predicted that he would attain the distinction which he achieved subsequently, in the field of diplomacy. He made speeches in the Convention, but they produced little or no effect upon the opinions of others. When, on an occasion, he had made an elaborate speech, his father-in-law, Mr. Isaac Livermore, said he was glad it was delivered, as Anson had trodden down all the roses in the garden while reciting it to himself. His speeches were committed, and delivered without notes.
Mr. Sumner was a conspicuous figure in the Convention of 1853, but his influence upon its business was very limited. Indeed, he seemed not to aspire to leadership. His faculties were not adapted to legislative business. He was not only not practical, he was unpractical and impracticable. Nor did experience in affairs give him an education in that particular. Of his long career in the Senate only his speeches remain. During the period of my acquaintance with him there, he introduced a large number of bills, several of them upon matters of finance, but none, as far as I can recall them, stood the test either of logic or experience. From his seat in the Senate he was able to affect and perhaps even to control the opinions of the country upon the slavery question, and thus indirectly he helped to shape the policy of the Republican Party. His knowledge of European diplomacy was far greater than that of any other Senator and greater, probably than that of any other American, excepting only Mr. Bancroft Davis. It was his good fortune to live and act in a revolutionary period. Had he fallen upon quiet times, when the ordinary affairs of men and states are the only topics of thought and discussion, his career as a public man, if such a career should have been opened to him, would have been brief and valueless alike to himself and to the public. In all his life, he was a victim to authority in affairs, and a slave to note- and common-place books.
Henry Wilson, Sumner"s future colleague in the Senate of the United States, had large influence in securing the adoption of measures, but his learning was inadequate to the preparation of specific provisions of a const.i.tution. Indeed, in his later years, he was unequal to the work of composing and writing with even a fair degree of accuracy. But his judgment of the popular feeling was unequalled, and he had capacity for shaping public opinion, whenever it was found to be hostile or uncertain, far superior to that of any of his contemporaries. He was not an orator, but his style of speaking was effective, and his speeches, as they appeared in the columns of the newspapers, would bear the test of ordinary criticism. He was a thorough politician who aimed to have things right, but who would not hesitate to use doubtful methods if thereby the right could be attained. In the year 1854 he joined the Know Nothing Party in secret, while openly he was acting with the Free-soil Party, that had placed him in nomination for the office of Governor. The result was the election of Henry J. Gardner, the candidate of the Know Nothings, as Governor, and the election of Henry Wilson to the Senate of the United States.
Of Mr. Wilson it cannot be said that he was false to friends or unfaithful to the slave. Whatever criticisms may be made upon his career in politics, he kept himself true to the one idea--the overthrow of slavery. He often vacillated in opinion upon pa.s.sing questions, but at the end his votes were sound usually. As a consequence, his votes and speeches were at times inconsistent. He had a long career in the Senate, but his great service to the country was performed among the people in the canva.s.ses. It may be said of him that at the time of his death he had spoken to more people than any one of his contemporaries or predecessors. His influence was large, although he did not often introduce any new view of a public question. He was direct in speech and he comprehended the popular taste and judgment.
He was regarded as a prophet in politics. He was accustomed to make predictions, and not infrequently his predictions were verified. At the end it is to be said that a satisfactory a.n.a.lysis of his character cannot be made. He was not learned, he was not eloquent, he was not logical in a high sense, he was not always consistent in his political actions, and yet he gained the confidence of the people, and he retained it to the end of his life. His success may have been due in part to the circ.u.mstance that he was not far removed from the ma.s.s of the people in the particulars named, and that he acted in a period when fidelity to the cause of freedom and activity in its promotion satisfied the public demand.
Francis W. Bird had been an active member of the Coalition on the Free-soil side, and an active supporter of the project for a Const.i.tutional Convention. It cannot be said of Mr. Bird that he did anything so well that one might say "n.o.body could have done better,"
but his zeal never flagged and hence he did much to secure results.
Like Mr. Wilson, he knew every member, and he never hesitated to set forth his views. He always had a following, and in those days it was safe to follow him. In 1872 he became alienated from General Grant and consequently from the Republican Party. His influence was potential with Mr. Sumner, and it is not an over estimate of that influence to a.s.sume that he was responsible in a large degree for the defection of Mr. Sumner. Following that election, Mr. Bird became a member of the Democratic Party, but upon what ground it is not easy to conjecture. His whole life had been a protest against that party, and much of his public career had been directed to its defeat. During the war and the period of reconstruction, he had been its earnest and even bitter antagonist. Mr. Bird was a public spirited man, and he was especially liberal towards men and causes in whose fortunes or fate he had become interested. Upon the close of the war there was a tendency in the public mind to advance the successful military men to posts of honor and power in civil life. Some were chosen to the Senate and the House, some were appointed to important diplomatic places, and General Grant was elected President. Many of the politicians were disturbed, and chief among them was Mr. Chase, who allowed the use of his name as a candidate for the Presidency in the Democratic Convention of 1868.
From that time many persons who had been conspicuous as anti-slavery men before the war, separated from the Republican Party and joined the Democracy. Mr. Bird was one of many such.
There were a small number of men who had been members of the Convention of 1820 who were members of the Convention of 1853. Of these Mr.
Robert Rantoul, of Beverly, was conspicuous, partly on account of his age, partly on account of his services and character, and partly as the father of Robert Rantoul, Jr. He was a noticeable figure in the Convention of 1853. Mr. Rantoul, Jr., had died at Washington the preceding year. His death was a public loss, and especially so to the anti-slavery wing of the Democratic Party to which he maintained his allegiance up to the time of his death. He had, however, taken issue with the party upon the Fugitive Slave Act, and for his hostility to that measure he was excluded from the Democratic Convention of 1852, although he had been duly elected by the Democrats of the county of Ess.e.x. There can be no doubt that he would have acted with the Republican Party had he lived to the period of its organization. He was one of the three distinguished persons who were born in the county of Ess.e.x early in the century--Cushing, Choate and Rantoul. In masterly ability Choate was the chief, unquestionably. In the profession, neither Cushing nor Rantoul could compare with Choate, although in learning Cushing may have been his rival. In knowledge of diplomacy and international law neither Choate nor Rantoul could be compared to Cushing. In the modern languages he was their superior also, although it is probable that in the knowledge of Latin and Greek he was inferior to Choate. In business matters they were alike defective. In Rantoul there was a lack of continuity of purpose. He was guided by his feelings and opinions. He had the temperament of a reformer. Indeed, he was a reformer. He abhorred slavery, he made war upon intemperance, he was an advocate of reform in prison discipline, and he championed the abolition of capital punishment. In neither of these movements did Cushing or Choate take an interest.
They thought slavery an evil, but they had no disposition to attack it.
Alike, they feared unpleasant consequences. Choate"s devotion to the Const.i.tution was akin to idolatry.
Cushing"s support of the Const.i.tution more nearly resembled professional duty. Indeed, that peculiarity could be discovered in much of his public conduct. In service to others he was liberal to a fault. In conversation, he would make suggestions to politicians and to lawyers in aid of their views or their causes with great freedom and without apparent concern as to the effect upon parties or men.
Rantoul was not able to fix his attention upon any one branch of labor.
He was first of all a politician with an interest in social questions.
The profession of the law was not his mistress. His arguments were clear and direct, but they lacked the quality that is near to genius.
This quality Choate possessed in a degree not elsewhere found in the life or history of the American Bar. Cushing"s arguments were loaded with learning and heavy with suggestions upon the general subject rather than upon the case. This of his law arguments. As I never saw him before a jury I cannot speak of his quality as a _nisi prius_ advocate; but I cannot imagine that he could have had eminent success, and certainly he could not have had success, in the later period of his career.
Mr. Rantoul died at the age of forty-seven. Had he lived to take part in the affairs of the war and of reconstruction, there can be no doubt that he would have achieved great distinction. He had convictions in which Cushing was deficient. He had courage in civil affairs, which Mr. Choate did not possess. Of Choate it can be said, that he lived long enough to establish his claim to the first place at the American bar, if he be judged by what he said, and by what he did. Mr. Cushing had a long career. As to him, there is no room for conjecture. He had great power for acquisition. As an aid to others less well equipped his society and counsels were invaluable. He had a vast fund of knowledge in law, in history, in diplomacy, and in general literature. It was his misfortune that he early lost the public confidence, and it was a continuing misfortune that he never regained it. While it cannot be claimed that either of these three persons is ent.i.tled to a place in general history, it may be said with truth, that the birth of Cushing, Choate and Rantoul in a single county and in a single decade was an unusual circ.u.mstance in the affairs of the world.
Mr. Robert Rantoul, Sr., as the oldest member, called the Convention to order and presided until the election of Mr. Banks as president. His administration of the duties of the chair commanded the approval of the Convention, and that without regard to personal or party feeling.
The election of General Pierce to the Presidency in 1852 was fatal to the coalition in Ma.s.sachusetts. Upon his accession to the office, in March, 1853, General Cushing became Attorney-General of the United States, and in the summer or autumn of 1853 he wrote a letter to a gentleman in Worcester, which was interpreted as a declaration of hostility on the part of the administration against all Democrats who affiliated with Free-soil politicians. The election of 1852 had been favorable to the Whigs of Ma.s.sachusetts, but the contest was fatal to the Whig Party in a national point of view. That party disappeared in the country, and after two elections in Ma.s.sachusetts, that of 1852 and 1853, it ceased to have power in the State. For many years after, there were occasional attempts to revive it, but all such attempts were vain. It was led by intelligent and well-disposed men, but its principles were not accepted by the country, and it attempted to secure the recognition of its principles by a policy that was temporizing and expedient. It lacked the courage of the old Democratic Party.
Upon the defeat of the Const.i.tution, I turned my attention to the profession in the office of Mr. Joel Giles, with whom I had studied.
He had been a lecturer at Cambridge, a member of the House and the Senate, and of the Const.i.tutional Convention. He was a bachelor, economical in his expenditures, rigid in his opinions, just in every thing, and a most careful student and conscientious pract.i.tioner. He was a patent lawyer, and as lawyer and mechanic he was the superior of any other person that I have known. As an advocate his services were not valuable. He seemed timid, and his style was not adapted to jury trials nor to hearings by the court. However, in patent cases he could make himself understood by the court, and he had influence resting upon the belief that he was free from deception which was the fact.
Mr. Giles was then attorney for Elias Howe, the inventor of the sewing machine. He had been counsel for Howe from the first, when Howe was in extreme poverty and unable to pay fees. In the early stages of the contest Mr. Giles conducted the case without present compensation, and at the end, when Howe"s income was enormous for the period, Mr. Giles accepted only very moderate fees, and he was content therewith. Mr.
Howe was a peculiar character: odd in his ways, but generous with his income:--so generous that at his death his fortune was very small. In my long acquaintance with Mr. Giles I never knew that he made charges for services against any one or that he ever presented a bill, although he sometimes spoke of the indifference and neglect of his clients in the matter of money. Some paid and others did not. Mr. Howe paid all that Mr. Giles required, but that was very little compared with the service rendered. The litigation over the Howe patent was severe and the questions in a mechanical point of view were nice questions. Mr.
Giles began with the invention, and he became a master of the case.
Mr. Howe was indebted to Mr. Giles for the success of his litigation which established his claim to the invention, secured to him as the proceeds what might have been an enormous fortune, and placed his name in the list of the names of great inventors. The patent-law practice is the most exhausting branch of the legal profession, and the lawyers and experts suffer from brain diseases in excess of the average of sufferers in other branches of the profession.
XX THE YEAR 1854
At the session of the Legislature, January, 1854, the town of Fitchburg, aided by towns and citizens of the vicinity, pet.i.tioned for a new county to be composed of towns to be taken from the counties of Middles.e.x and Worcester and to be called the county of Webster. Mr.
Choate was retained for the new county, and I appeared for the county of Middles.e.x. The hearing by the committee occupied two weeks or more, for an hour or an hour and a half a day. The fees received seem now to have been very small. It was said that Mr. Choate received the sum of five hundred dollars, and my fee was two hundred and fifty dollars.
Mr. Choate obtained a favorable report from the committee, but the project failed in the Legislature. It was renewed the succeeding year, when Emory Washburn appeared for the county of Worcester. In those two contests, covering a month of time in all, I had an opportunity to study Mr. Choate in his characteristics as an advocate and as an examiner of witnesses, a branch of the profession in which he had great skill.
Various witnesses were called for the purpose of gathering facts as to the inconveniences of which complaints were made and also for the purpose of showing the advantage to be derived from the proposed change. A witness of importance and altogether friendly, was Stuart J. Park, of Groton. He was a Scotchman by birth, his father having been employed upon the Argyle estates. The father came to America while the son was a minor. They were by trade stone masons. Stuart J. Park was then nearly seventy years of age. He had represented the county in the State Senate and for many years he had been a person of note, although his education was limited. He had, however, an abundance of sound sense and an excess of will power, even for a Scotchman. In his business he had had a large and successful experience. He was the master builder of the Boston Mill Dam, of the Charlestown Dry Dock, of the State prison buildings in Ma.s.sachusetts and New Hampshire, of the track of the Lowell railway, which was laid originally on granite sleepers, and of many jails in New England.
Experience proved that granite sleepers were too firm and sleepers of wood were subst.i.tuted.
One of the county commissioners was John K. Going of Shirley. I had known him from my youth. He was my senior by about ten years. In my boyhood he called not infrequently at my father"s house, driving an old horse in a second-hand, well worn sulky. His business was trading in horses and watches, and gambling, as was reported, for small sums of money. To myself and my brothers he was held up by my mother as a warning. Before he was twenty-one years of age he had induced his father to mortgage his small homestead for four hundred dollars which John lost in unwise or unfortunate ventures. Upon that experience he began to recover his fortunes. He became a dealer in better horses, then in hops, then in real estate, and to some extent he became an operator in Boston markets. At the age of fifty he was worth, probably, two hundred thousand dollars. With the improvement of his fortunes, his character improved. He was always temperate and his agreements were carefully kept. He made ample provision for his parents, and for a sister; was a representative in the general court and for many years he was a capable and acceptable county commissioner.
He was one of a not numerous cla.s.s of persons who escape from evil early a.s.sociations and habits of life.
In 1854 the Know Nothing Party took possession of Ma.s.sachusetts. Its secrecy made it attractive to many persons. Moreover, the then existing parties were unsatisfactory to the people. The Whigs, who had been out of power in 1851 and "52, had regained power, but the vitality of the party had disappeared forever. Many of the leaders had joined the Free-soil Party, and others were indifferent to its fortunes. The Democratic Party was dissatisfied with the national administration, and the Free-soil Party was without hope. The coalition could not be repeated. In the spring or summer of 1854 General Banks asked me whether I intended to join the Know Nothings. I said No, that I had left politics and that I intended to practice law. He said in reply, "I am in politics and I must go on." The success of the Know Nothing Party was without precedent. They carried every city and town in the State, elected all the members of the Legislature, unless there may have been an accidental exception, unseated all the members of Congress, elected Henry J. Gardner Governor by an immense majority, and elected Henry Wilson to the Senate of the United States.
Mr. Gardner was re-elected in 1855 by the momentum of the party, although it had fallen into discredit which would have led to its ruin in the face of a vigorous opposition. The Whig Party had disappeared and the Republican Party had not reached a period when it could command its forces. In 1856 the Know Nothing Party was yielding to the Republican Party and Governor Gardner was accepted for a third term.
In the year 1854 I made a trip to the Adirondack woods and mountains.
The party was organized by Francis W. Bird, and it consisted of Mr.