them. The powers will, therefore, favor a revolution, in the hope that better men may be called to the management of Turkish affairs. This is not a definite solution, but it will give the powers time to settle the question among themselves. It will be easy to depose the Sultan, as he is neither popular with the army or navy nor with his Mohammedan subjects.— Translated for THe Literary DIGEST.

SKETCHES OF ARMENIAN CHARACTER.

and morality is not claimed by their best friends. But many writers doubt that the Osmanli deserve all the abuse which is being heaped upon them in these days. It is pointed out that the Turks, unlike the Spaniards and the Russians, omitted to force the nations whom they conquered to adopt their religion. It is further pointed out that Western civilization does not benefit all races. These views are broadly defended by a correspondent in the Kölnische Zeitung, Cologne, who describes himself as a "twenty-five-year resident in Turkey." He believes that the Turks benefit about as much by contact with Western civilization as the American Indians profited by the arrival of the European settlers. As for the Armenians, their conduct is regarded altogether unjustifiable by this writer. He says:

"The Armenians can not be said to have an historical right to demand independence. Long before the Turks came, Armenia had been ruled over by foreign races. Under Persian and Roman rule they were slaves and serfs. The Osmanli freed them from this worst of degradation, and allowed them to settle in Constantinople, hoping that the Armenians, freed from Byzantine oppression, would become faithful friends of their new patrons. The Armenians have been petted for ages, they have amassed great riches, and many high positions are to this day filled by them. The bitterness with which the Mussulmans regard Armenian revolts is therefore easily explained. That the Armenians suffer under the corruption which rules supreme in Turkey can not be denied, but they suffer no more than their Mohammedan fellow subjects, who, in addition to all other ills, have to bear the burden of military service, from which the Christians are freed. Turkish officials have to spend money to obtain their positions, and as these positions are not permanent, they must endeavor to reimburse themselves as speedily as possible.

"Much responsibility rests with the Anglo-Armenian committees, who work upon the easily roused humanitarian principles of the English, and instigate revolt and bloodshed in the hope of getting official positions in Armenia if that country is ever made independent. Much harm, also, is done by the American missionaries. Ostensibly they devote their lives to the education of the young; in reality they seek to make converts, and promulgate modern views among a people entirely unfit to receive them. As the Turks do not support any missions in America, it is not easy to see why Turkey should grant hospitality to people who so ill requite it. The reports of English and American missionaries are very much overdrawn. The Consular Commission, sent to investigate the horrors of the Sassoon district, has never published its report. The English declare that the consular report would Touse public indignation in England to a fever heat, but the Turks claim that no proof of the alleged Turkish excesses can be obtained. The importance of the Constantinople riots has also been greatly overrated. The Turkish police and the Turkish troops behaved in the most exemplary manner. No law-abiding Armenian suffered any inconvenience, and the theatrical flight of some Armenians who sought refuge in their churches was entirely unnecessary. While the papers spoke of Constantinople as being in a state of anarchy, foreign ladies and gentlemen on a tour of pleasure visited places of interest without the slightest

obstruction."

Prof. Arnim Vambery, the daring Hungarian Orientalist and perhaps the best living authority on these matters, also believes that the Armenians provoked the conflict unnecessarily, and regards the stories of Turkish cruelty as much exaggerated. Thus in the Sassoon district where, according to newspaper reports, over 5,000 Christians were murdered, the population never was

as follows:

"The power and influence of the Armenians is due neither to their revolutionary committee nor to the English, but to their industry and progress. The influence of revolutionaries and of the English may be overcome, but the real forces behind the Armenians will always stay. The Armenian question is not political, it is economical. Twenty-five or thirty years ago the Armenians began to found commercial houses in the great centers of Europe, America, and India, and their students began to frequent European and American universities. Neither the Kurds, nor the Georgians, nor the Tartars have followed suit, hence they must go to the wall. Some members of the latter nations have been educated by order of the Government, but these, of course, do not count. The Armenians work on their own initiative. Mussulmans of the Caucasus who wish to sell their silk at Moscow or Lyons are forced to contract through Armenian houses. The Mussulmans who sell English calicoes in their little shops in Eastern Turkey are dependent upon Armenian wholesalers. At Bakuin in the Caucasus, there are many more Mussulmans than Armenians, yet the latter furnish by far the largest contingent of students in the scientific and industrial schools of that city. They have the best private schools, and the libraries and bookshops are theirs. The benevolent societies are theirs. They support the theaters and subscribe to the Russian and foreign newspapers to increase their knowledge. Our own people préfer to listen to the story-tellers and dirge-singers. They look backward rather than forward. Both in Russia and in Turkey the Armenians have made themselves necessary to the welfare of the nation. The other races must emulate them. Nobody ever said to the Georgians and Tartars, 'Don't work, don't read!' And nobody ever commanded the Armenians to work or read. They go to work of themselves. If the Georgian neighbors of the Armenians do not work as they should, their vineyards, their wine-jars, and their stables will become the property of Armenians. If our Mussulmans do not work their mulberry groves, their caravansaries and their green pastures will, little by little, be bought up by the Armenians. The money will be spent, and the property will remain in the hands of the Armenians. There is no defense against this sort of thing but work and education. These, and not the friendship or enmity of England, will settle the Armenian question."— Translated and Condensed for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

OU

AS OTHERS SEE US.

ances.

are now quietly ignored, as it is impossible to carry them out in large cities and with the present development of technical appliThen he turns to the Sunday-closing question and says: "To find a solution to the problem is not easy, as the Sundayclosing question has to deal with different conditions in different cities. In Milwaukee, with its large percentage of educated Germans, and its beer gardens and musical entertainments where families may pass their Sunday afternoons in a proper manner, Sunday closing would be an unjustifiable infraction of personal liberty. This is not the case in New York, which is inhabited by a mixture of Americans, English, Irish, Germans, Scandinavians, French, Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians, Slavonians, negroes, Chinese, and what not. This mixture, wanting as it is in moral strength, and unwilling to pass its spare moments in an ennobling manner, is tempted to enter the worst place imaginable -the American saloon."

The writer then describes the saloon as a place so cheerless, so uncomfortable that the average European, who is used to regard his kneipe, estaminet, posada, or inn as something like a club, will hardly wish for the introduction of a place “in which liquor is gulped down standing before a long bar." The custom of "standing treat" is also highly censured, and looked upon as the principal cause of American drunkenness. The writer continues:

...

"Taverns into which one may take one's women are rare in New York. To take a lady into an American saloon is simply impossible, not only because such a place is uninviting, but also on account of the disgraceful scenes enacted there. The American is a victim of extremes, and if he becomes a drunkard, the vice takes hold of him much more strongly than of members of other nations. If he goes on a spree,' he keeps on for days, even weeks, and does not come home until his last cent is gone, and the danger of a 'spree' always exists as long as 'treating' is not abolished. Nearly all large cities in America are wanting in places where a poor man can comfortably pass his Sunday afternoons and evenings. Hence, if the saloons were opened, the result would be a regular 'Witches' Sabbath.' The lower orders, drunken Irish, Hungarians, Slavonians, and Italians, would enact the most disgraceful scenes, in which fights, murder, and manslaughter would not be at all rare. Until genuine places of recreation are substituted for the saloon, a free Sunday must be regarded as a dangerous experiment. A solution could easily be found in laws by which the existence of disreputable drinking-places is rendered difficult and precarious. But such laws require an honest police to enforce them, and such a police does not exist in many places in the United States."

Tammany Hall passes as the pattern of corruption, and we have been unable to discover anything written in defense of this organization. The association is, however, greatly admired on account of its strict discipline. The following description, which we take from the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, Berlin, and which is based upon a carefully written paper in the Paris Revue des Deux Mondes, will, no doubt, be read with as much interest as it creates in European circles:

'This association, or rather its executive committee and its chief, have now ruled over the real capital of the Union with almost absolute power for some decades. Tammany has great influence in the New York Legislature, and as the votes of this most populous of all the States are of great importance in Congressional and Presidential elections, Tammany often decides these. The power of Tammany is based upon its admirable organization and its almost military discipline. The assocation has about 5,000 active members. Five hundred are necessary for a quorum in the monthly meetings. The management of all affairs is in the hands of a committee of 60, but as the discipline is very strict, the Grand Sachem, or 'Boss,' rules as absolute monarch, and is feared and respected as such. The orders of the Central Committee are executed by the 400 district captains, one for each election district of the city. This position of captain is much sought after, as it confers great power, influence, and the chance to amass a fortune. The captains are generally saloon-keepers. They keep on hand a great number of those 'catilinary existences'-professional politicians of humble rank-who play such an important part in the political life of the United States. These fellows in

fluence the voters in political meetings, are banner and torchbearers in parades, form a bodyguard around the candidate, etc. The captains are made responsible for the result of the elections in their districts, and, as a matter of fact, they do control the elections, in spite of the supposed secresy of the ballot.

"The Board of Aldermen is generally composed of the creatures of Tammany, as is also a part of the State legislature. Tammany owns the police and the rest of the municipal departments, and the whole city has to pay tribute to this organization. Companies and trusts pay what is asked without presuming to resist. Every official must pay a contribution; this, however, is also the case with the United States officials, who are compelled to contribute to the funds of the party to which they belong. Candidates supported by Tammany must, of course, pay very liberally. One of the greatest sources of income to Tammany is the toleration of disreputable saloons, houses of ill-fame, gambling resorts, and the like. Their number is computed at 3,000 in New York, with 30,000 employees. But respectable business men also must pay, for a refusal would call forth revenge. Thus the owner of a hotel who refused to pay was harried to such an extent by the building inspectors that he soon submitted.

"There is a frightful number of police regulations-filling two folios of 900 pages each-often in direct contradiction to each other, and these are a veritable arsenal of chicanery to be used against the citizens. Another popular way to obtain money for Tammany is the introduction of bills in the legislature, by which the existence of some business or industry is endangered. The threatened persons pay up, and the bill is quietly dropped."

D

RUSSIA AN ASIATIC POWER.

URING the summer months, when political life is at a standstill and there is no Parliamentary session to furnish material for discussion, the reading public is occasionally startled by an article in which the destruction of European civilization by some semi-barbarous race is predicted. When such horoscopes are cast in a daily paper, they are seldom noticed outside of that paper's immediate clientèle. But often these predictions are jotted down by brilliant writers and published in leading magazines. Thus we get our Chinese scare, our Japanese scare, our Russian scare. Referring to the last-named power, a leading Danish publication declares that Europe has nothing to fear. Russia, thinks the Politiken, Copenhagen, has played an important part in European history. But her influence is irrevocably on the decline, and she must henceforth be regarded as an Asiatic power. As it is generally assumed that the Danes regard Russia in some measure as guardians of their independence, this article acquires additional interest. The writer says:

"Alexander III., in his foreign policy, did his very best to escape warlike complications in Europe, and there can be no doubt that the present Czar will follow faithfully in his father's footsteps. The time when Russia played a dominant rôle in European politics is past. It is not difficult to come to this conclusion when we remember that her political position has been very much weakened during the last few decades. It is only necessary to review what has happened since the days of Nicholas I.

"During the time of Emperor Nicholas Russia's influence was at its height, both in Berlin and in Vienna. Frederick William IV. of Prussia acted somewhat like a vassal of Russia, and did nothing of importance without instructions from the Czar. Nor did the Vienna Cabinet, as a rule, dare to act without advice from Russia, especially since Russian troops had done their part in quelling the Hungarian revolution. From 1849 to 1853 Russian influence ruled supreme in the states of Central Europe. Emperor Nicholas regarded it as his special mission to give absolutism as much play as possible, hence absolutism found itself backed up by Russia, and it is not too much to say that it was Emperor

Nicholas who closed the gate to freedom in Germany, Austria, and Italy. He prevented all progressive development. The nations of Europe were rid of Metternich, but the Autocrat of all the Russias remained to protect reactionary systems. A change, however, came when Emperor Nicholas attempted to carry out the famous 'testament of Peter the Great,' at the cost of Turkey's complete dismemberment. In 1853 the Czar regarded his power as almost unlimited, and did not expect to meet with any difficulties. England, he thought, should have Egypt and Crete, the rest of Turkey to go to Russia. But as England refused to come to terms, the Czar thought himself strong enough to carry out the project alone. He overrated Russia's military power, and forgot that his influence, predominant in Prussia and Austria, did not extend to the other side of the Rhine.

"The Russian statesmen understood that their influence in Europe was at an end, and the Czar's conquests were henceforth made in Asia. There, indeed, a long period of war gave the Empire a tremendous territorial expansion, but this very increase in Asia led to a further decline of Russian influence in Europe. Russian statesmen lost sight of European affairs, and Russia developed into a purely Asiatic power. The war of 1877-78 and the Berlin Congress was another strong reminder that Russia must cease to meddle with European affairs, and the hint has certainly been taken. For the last sixteen years Russia has taken care to refrain from aggressive politics in questions relating to the Balkan peninsula. Nor is it likely that this will change in the near future. Russian interests increase in Russia, while she is getting weaker day by day in the West. During Nicholas I.'s times Germany was divided, and unable to put a strong force into the field. To-day she is not only the most ready for war, but has her former enemy, Austria, for an ally. This alliance has forced Russia to enter into a defensive agreement with republican France, and forces her to act a peaceful part in all questions of European importance."-Translated for THE LITERARY Digest.

AN ALLEGED CHANGE IN FRENCH

FRAN

HABITS.

`RANCE is generally adjudged to be the richest country in the world. No other has such wonderful climatic advantages, such rich soil, such wealth of those minerals which are most necessary to civilized man. Nor do the people of France fail to make a proper use of their wealth. For a long time the French bourgeois, content to retire from business with a small competence honestly earned, has been held up as a pattern to the Englishman, who is inclined to spend all he earns, and the American, who knows no limit to money-making. It would seem, however, that a change has come over the average Frenchman. Leroy Beaulieu complains in the Journal des Débats that the French people are not only less able, but also less willing, to save than formerly. The Basler Nachrichten, Basle, contains an article in which an explanation is offered for this change of habits. The writer believes that the fault lies with the overwhelming number of middlemen, and the increase of luxury.

He says:

"The late great swindle trials such as the Panama case, the Southern Railway case, and others, show that great industrial undertakings are entrusted to contractors who do not busy themselves with the matter at all, but simply turn it over to another contractor, after having deducted a rich percentage as profit. The second contractor is no better. He is satisfied with a somewhat narrower margin of profit, but cares no more about the work than the first. Next come the contractors who divide the job among sub-contractors, and so on almost ad infinitum. At the last instance we find a few laborers, working from ten to eleven hours per day at starvation wages, a few mechanics, not much better off, and some manufacturers who sell materials at a price which barely leaves them a profit. Above these actual workers stands the endless chain of decorated 'gentlemen,' who do nothing but grab the profits. Two or three years ago the transactions of the Paris fish-markets were subjected to an investigation. It was found that a kilogram fish, sold in the market for 2 francs, and charged by the cook to her employer at the rate of 2 francs 50 centimes, was bought the day before, at Dieppe321⁄2 hours by rail from Paris-for 5 or 6 centimes. The transpor

tation expenses and the octroi duties are altogether insignificant; nearly the whole of this enormous difference sticks to the hands of the eight-just fancy, eight-middlemen. These and the 'honest' cook throw the fish to each other like a play-ball. But don't think that these middlemen ever touch the fish or set eyes on it. The fish finds its way, so to speak, quite alone from the coast to the table, but the papers representing it wander through eight different offices, where they are taxed by eight men who do no work, yet swallow the fish and its buyer."

The writer claims that what applies to the fish applies equally to every other necessity. Everywhere the middlemen increase the cost of an article unnecessarily. He continues:

"The highest aim of a French family is to get its sons into a government office; if that is impossible, to make them middlemen. Their ideal is to become parasites of the budget or to pocket 'commissions.' There is, however, another cause of the terrible increase in the expenses of French families, and that is the insincerity of their public lives. Good society was formerly better organized, and in narrower circles. It was divided into a certain number of little worlds, each of which was ruled by its own public opinion. Everybody within such a set knew everybody else, and a member of one set rarely cared to worm himself into another. His income was pretty well known to his friends, and he could afford to live within his income. Now these wholesome restrictions have been removed, everybody wants to belong to the highest circles. It has become difficult to judge the incomes of one's acquaintances, and outward show of wealth has become the only means by which that wealth can be judged. Suppose you wish to form an opinion about a family into which you have been introduced. You hear that the head of the family is an official, cr a business man, or perhaps an artist-all of which are very vague terms. But he pays 3,500 francs rent. That's better. He keeps a man-servant and two girls. That's excellent. see him now and then in a box at the opera. Hm, hm, he must be a trustworthy person. He gives six dinners a year, with six courses and five different wines. No doubt of it, he is a prime fellow !

You

"Forty years ago it was possible to live respected and honored in Paris even if one led a simple life. To-day those who possess much are forced to spend much, and those who are in financial trouble must spend still more-to throw sand into the eyes of their acquaintances."

Similar abuses are said to prevail in other European countries, tho nowhere to such alarming extent.- Translated for THE LITERARY DIGEST.

FOREIGN NOTES.

THE British opium interest has again proved too strong for China, says The Bombay Guardian. China will not get her proposed war-tax as planned by putting a further levy on the retail sale of opium. The opium-inspired Calcutta papers are very jubilant over this further triumph of the might of Great Britain against the right of China to some of the spoils by which her people are being ruined. Thus the game goes on and Britain continues to lay up a future store of retribution for herself and her children. The plea. is no longer the mild one that if we do not engage in this unrighteous business some one else will, but the British lion crouches over the spoil and dares China to touch it!

QUEENS often find themselves in a dilemma when they have to receive repugnant persons. Queen Margherita of Italy is a devout Catholic, and holds very strict views on marriage. When Crispi came to power, his first wife was still alive, as was also the first husband of his second wife. At first the Queen stoutly refused to admit Donna Lina to court, and a tremendous storm ensued. Her Majesty, however, had to give way, and her words on the occasion were: "All right! tell Signor Crispi I will receive his wife; but I will receive only one of them, and I insist it must always be the same one."

DIRECTOR BÖDIKER of the Prussian Labor Bureau has submitted the draft of a law by which compulsory insurance is to be extended to all German workmen, agricultural as well as industrial. An old-age pension of not less than $3 and not more than $12 per month is to be granted to all who can prove that they have been regularly employed at least three years before they became incapable. Working women are to receive $2.25 to $9 per month. Of the many plans which have been submitted, Director Bödiker's appears to find greatest favor with members of the Parliament. In spite of all official denials, Dalziel's agency asserts that Germany is to receive an island from China in which she can establish a naval station equal to Hongkong. Quemoy, near the port of Amboy, is generally mentioned as the island on which the Germans are to establish themselves in opposition to England.

NEARLY every army has now a bicycle corps. In Germany six men of every regiment are mounted on wheels to act as scouts.

MISCELLANEOUS.

JOHN SHERMAN'S "RECOLLECTIONS."

THE

HE bare announcement of an autobiography by Sherman would have been sufficient, even without the abundant newspaper advertising secured for it in advance, to put the public in an attitude of eager expectancy. Mr. Sherman's service in Congress and in the Cabinet covers a period of forty years. He is the Nestor of the Senate, his term of service exceeding that of Thomas Benton. His name is closely associated with every important piece of Federal legislation during and since the war, and he is one of the chief authors of the present financial system of the United States. No man in public life can speak with so much authority on the inner history of almost half a century of Congressional legislation and Federal finance.

Mr. Sherman was born at Lancaster, Ohio, May 10, 1823, the eighth child in a family of eleven. His father, Charles Robert, became a judge of the Supreme Court of Ohio, one of his brothers, William Tecumseh, became head of the United States army, and another brother, Charles Taylor, became a district judge of the United States for the northern district of Ohio. Sherman traces his ancestry back to Samuel Sherman, who emigrated from Dedham, Essex county, England, in 1634, and later became one of the founders of Woodbury, Conn. William M. Evarts, George F. Hoar, and Chauncy M. Depew are descendants of Samuel Sherman's cousin. Sherman's father died when Sherman was about six years old, leaving his widow with eleven children (the oldest being eighteen) and an income of $400 a year. The family were obliged to separate; but friends were numerous and their offerings generous.

John Sherman lived four years with his father's cousin of the same name at Mt. Vernon, Ohio, studied two years at a preparatory school at Lancaster, worked a couple of years as a junior rodman under the chief engineer of the Muskingum River improvements, studied law with his brother Charles, and in 1844, at the age of twenty-one, was admitted to the bar, being taken into partnership by his brother. In the absence of a more systematic education, it is interesting to note what Mr. Sherman has to say of his mother:

"Of my mother I can scarcely write without emotion, tho she died more than forty years ago. . . My mother was carefully educated at the then famous female seminary at Poughkeepsie, N. Y. I remember the many embroidered pictures, made with the needle and silk thread by the handicraft of my mother, as a schoolgirl, carefully framed, that decorated the old house in Lancaster. The women of that day were trained more for the culture and ornament of the house, more to knit stockings and weave homespun than to make speeches on woman's rights. Soon after her graduation she married Charles Robert Sherman, as before stated, and their lives were blended. She sometimes rode with him on the circuit, and always on horseback. It was an adage in the family, even to her grandchildren, that she was always ready for a visit. I never knew her to scold, much less to strike her children."

In 1855 Sherman entered Congress as a Republican, without previous experience in public office. He retained his seat until 1861, when he was transferred to the Senate. He was a United States Senator from 1861 to 1877, was Secretary of the Treasury under Hayes from 1877 to 1881, and has since occupied a seat in the Senate. In 1848 he married Miss Margaret Cecilia Stewart, of Mansfield.

Sherman's Estimate of Andrew Johnson.-The following are his observations on the reconstruction policy and the character of Andrew Johnson. After speaking of the veto of the Wade-Davis bill by President Lincoln, Mr. Sherman continues:

"The next and closing session of that Congress (the 38th) neglected to provide for the reorganization of these States [the

.

States in rebellion], and, thus, when Mr. Johnson became President, there was no provision of law to guide him in the necessary process of reconstruction. Thus, by the disagreement between Congress and President Lincoln, which commenced two years before the close of the war, there was no law upon the statute book to guide either the President or the people of the Southern States in their effort to get back into the Union. It became imperative during the long period before the meeting of Congress that President Johnson should, in the absence of legislation, formulate some plan for the reconstruction of these States. He did adopt substantially the plan proposed and acted upon by Mr. Lincoln. After this long lapse of time I am convinced that Mr. Johnson's scheme of reorganization was wise and judicious. It was unfortunate that it had not the sanction of Congress and that events soon brought the President and Congress into hostility. . Johnson, before he was elected and while acting as military governor of Tennessee, executed the plan of Lincoln in that State and subsequently adopted the same plan for the reorganization of the rebel States. When Mr. Johnson came into power he found the rebellion substantially subdued. His first act was to retain in his confidence, and in his councils, every member of the Cabinet of Abraham Lincoln, and, so far as we know, every measure adopted by him had the approval and sanction of that Cabinet. Every act passed by Congress, with or without his assent, upon every subject whatever, connected with reconstruction, was fairly and fully executed. He adopted all the main features of the Wade-Davis bill-the only one passed by Congress. I believe that all the acts and proclamations of President Johnson before the meeting of Congress were wise and expedient, and that there would have been no difficulty between Congress and the President but for his personal conduct, and, especially, his treatment of Congress and leading Congressmen.

The defect of his character was his unreasoning pugnacity. He early became involved in a wordy warfare with Sumner, Wade, Stevens, and others. In his high position he could have disregarded criticism, but this was not the habit of Johnson. When assailed he fought, and could be as violent and insulting in language or acts as any one. Johnson, irritated by this antagonism, drifted away from the measures he had himself advocated, and soon after was in open opposition to the party that elected him.'

Charged with Corruption. In 1877 Mr. Sherman was ap pointed Secretary of the Treasury by President Hayes. In view of the experience of the Cleveland Administration, it may not be amiss to observe that Sherman did not escape charges of corruption in connection with the sale of bonds through the syndicate composed of N. M. Rothschild & Sons and other foreign and domestic banking-houses. The Senator writes:

"While I was congratulating myself upon accomplishing an important work for the people, I had aroused an animosity more bitter and violent than any I ever encountered before or since. I was charged, directly, by a correspondent of The National Republican published in Washington, with corruption, and that I was interested in and would make money through the syndicate. It was said that I came to the United States Senate several years ago a poor and perhaps an honest man. To-day he pays taxes on a computed property of over half a million, all made during his senatorial term, on a salary of $6,000 a year and perquisites.' My property at home and in Washington was discussed by this letter, and the inference was drawn that in some way, by corrupt methods, I had made what I possessed. It is true that I found many ready defenders, but I took no notice of these imputations, knowing that they were entirely unfounded, for I never, directly or indirectly, derived any advantage or profit from my public life except the salary."

The "Crime of 1873."-Concerning the demonetization of the silver dollar in 1873 Mr. Sherman says:

"To review the history of the act of 1873: It was framed in the Treasury department after a thorough examination by experts, transmitted to both Houses of Congress, thoroughly examined and debated during four consecutive sessions, with information called for by the House of Representatives, printed thirteen times by order and broadly circulated, and many amendments were proposed, but no material changes were made in the coinage clause from the beginning to the end of the controversy. It

added the French dollar for a time, but that was superseded by the trade-dollar, and neither was made a legal tender but for five dollars. It passed the Senate on the 10th of January, 1871-36 yeas and 14 nays-every Senator from the Pacific coast voting for it. It was introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Kelley, at the next session. It was debated, scrutinized, and passed unanimously, dropping the silver dollar, as directly stated by Mr. Hooper. It was reported, debated, amended, and passed by the Senate unanimously. In every stage of the bill, and every point, the dollar of 4121⁄2

. . . It was commonly called the Sherman silver law, tho I took but little part in framing the legislation until the bill got into conference. The sit

uation at that time was critical. A large majority of the Senate favored free silver, and it was feared that the small majority against it in the other House might yield and agree to it. The silence of the President on the matter gave rise to an apprehension that if a free coinage bill should pass both

Houses he would not feel at liberty to veto it. Some action had to be taken to prevent a return to free coinage, and the measure evolved was the best obtainable. I voted for it, but the day it became a law I was ready to repeal it, if repeal could be had without substituting in its place absolute free coinage. Long before the second election of Mr. Cleveland I advocated the repeal of what became known as the 'Sherman act,' and heartily supported and voted for the repeal he recommended."

...

Against Territorial Extension.-On this subject Mr., Sherman holds conservative views:

"The events of the future are beyond the vision of mankind, but I hope that our people will be content with internal growth, and avoid the complications of foreign acquisitions. Our family of States is already large enough to create embarrassment in the Senate, and a republic should not hold dependent provinces or possessions. Every new acquisition will create embarrassments.

Canada and Mexico as independent republics will be more valuable to the United States than if carved into additional States. The Union already embraces discordant elements enough without adding others. If my life is prolonged I will do all I can to add to the strength and prosperity of the United States, but nothing to extend its limits or to add new danger by acquisition of foreign territory." Presidential Aspirations. It is a notorious

ors.

"My

fact that long and conspicuous political service is a detriment rather than an advantage in the competition for Presidential honMr. Sherman refers to his own career as an illustration of this. strength and weakness," he says, "grew out of my. long service in the House, Senate, and Cabinet." In 1880 and 1888 his name was prominently before che Republican convention, and on both occasions he felt himself injured by the friends of the successful candidates. In the convention of 1880 Garfield was pledged to his support, and nominated him in a brilliant speech. But a dead-lock between the original candidates, of whom the strongest were Grant, Blaine, and Sherman, resulted in the nomination of Garfield as a new candidate. Mr. Sherman says:

Take the Tariff Out of Politics.-Mr. Sherman's suggestion for removing the tariff from politics is in line with the resolutions adopted a few months ago by the National Board of Trade:

"I believe that no judicious tariff can be framed by Congress alone, without the help of a commission of business men not personally interested in the subject-matter, and they should be aided by experienced officers in the revenue service. I have participated in a greater or less degree in the framing of every tariff law for forty years. I have spoken many times on the subject in the Senate and on the rostrum. . . . If I had my way I would convene such a tariff commission as I have discussed, give it ample time to hear and gain all information that could,aid it, and require it to report the rates of duty proposed in separate schedules so that the rate of each schedule or paragraph might be raised or lowered from time to time to meet the wants of the Treasury. If Congress would allow such a bill to become a law we could dismiss the tariff free from party politics and lay the foundation for a durable system of national taxation, upon which domestic industries may be founded without the hazard which they now encounter every year or two by 'tinkering with the tariff.'"

"It is probable that if I had received the united vote of the Ohio delegation I would have been nominated, as my relations with both General Grant and Mr. Blaine were of a friendly character. . . . The course of the Ohio delegation was the subject of severe comment, and perhaps of unfounded suspicions of perfidy on the part of some of the delegates.

"In time I became thoroughly advised of what occurred at the Chicago convention, and had become entirely reconciled to the result, tho frequently afterward I heard incidents and details which occasioned me great pain and which seemed to establish the want of sincerity on the part of some of the delegates, and tended to show that for some time before the meeting of the convention the nomination of General Garfield had been agreed upon. After its close I had numerous letters from delegates from other States complaining bitterly of the conduct of the Ohio delegation and giving this as a reason why they had not voted for me. I was assured that large portions of the Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, and other delegations, had notified Governor Foster that they were ready to vote for me whenever