•Indeed, we have so far passed it over that men begin to consider him a very useful man, full of benevolent deeds, who did his best to help others, and finally ended in injuring himself. Few recall poor James Fisk with hatred. Even Tweed, in his cell at Blackwell's Island, was more pitied than despised. Recollect, I am stating facts, not giving opinions.

A political defeat, like a political victory, is soon forgotten. It is true, nothing pleases the American people more than a great victory, military or civil, except the power of being able to overcome and bring back those they have conquered. This is a peculiar American quality. Every party in this country is led by the sometime leaders of the other side. The Republican party of to-day is in a considerable degree marshalled by old Democrats. The Democratic party of the present day is, in a considerable degree, marshalled by old Whigs. We had Morton, Carpenter, Hamlin, and Boutwell in the Senate; and Grant and Sherman and Sheridan, old Democrats, in the Administration; while, on the other side, we had old Whigs, like William B. Reed, who died in New York; Samuel J. Randall and John C. Bullitt, of Pennsylvania; William E. Preston, of Kentucky; and Caleb Cushing, of Massachusetts, leading the Democratic party.

The tendency of all such struggles as that through which we have passed is to create an independent spirit among public men; to teach them to prefer integrity to office, and to encourage hostility to fraud of all kinds. Unless this can be done, there is danger, especially in great cities, of the complete overthrow of our liberties. But no such spirit can be aroused or crystallized without sacrifices. To fight in a minority, to work for honest victory, to bear all manner of abuse and loss-these are the prices which must be paid if there is to be any rescue from existing evils.

Henry Clay never was half so great as when he lost the Presidency. Webster was never really himself save when he fought

in a minority. The proud, brave spirit is restive under fetters." It revolts from obedience to party rules. No independent man holds an office without feeling that he is manacled by a chain. Of the men who obey without question, and those who object conscientiously, the latter are the most useful to society and government.

NEWSPAPER EDITORS AND

XXXIII.

CORRESPONDENTS, PRESENT AND

PAST.-SECRETS OF THE SANCTUM.

An editor's sanctum is a sort of exchange. He must read, to know what to write about; but his best books are men. Therefore every genuine journalist is a man of society. There is no exception to this rule. The Washington correspondents and editors are so now, as they have always been. Donn Piatt, the Edmond About of The Capitol; George Alfred Townsend, of the Chicago Tribune, whose prodigious labors resemble the variety and vitality of Gustave Doré; George De B. Keim, of The Press; Smalley and White, of The Tribune; L. L. Crounse, of the New York Times; Ben Perley Poore, of the Boston Journal; George W. Adams, of the New York World; H. V. Boynton, of the Cincinnati Gazette; D. W. Bartlette, of the New York Independent; W. P. Copeland, of the New York Journal of Commerce; J. J. McElhone, of The Congressional Globe; L. A. Gobright, M. W. Barr, and D. R. McKee, of the Associated Press; H. A. Preston, of the New York Herald; Frederick Douglass, of the Washington New Era; U. H. Painter, of the Philadelphia Inquirer; W. W. Warden, of the Boston Post; W. B. Shaw, of the Boston Transcript; L. Q. Washington, of the Louisville Courier-Journal; James R.Young, of the Philadelphia Evening Star; James Harlan, of the Daily Chronicle; W. J. Murtagh, of The Republican; C. S. Noyes, of The Star; Florence, of The Sunday

Gazette; J. N. Burritt, of The Sunday Herald-like the ladies, Mrs. E. E. Briggs (the sparkling "Olivia"); Grace Greenwood, of the New York Tribune; Gail Hamilton, Mary Clemmer Ames, Mrs. H. W. Barnard, Mrs. Mary E. Nealy, of the New York Home Journal; Miss M. A. Snead, of the New York World-are generally seen at the many receptions and parties, or in their own neat and hospitable homes, where they gathered the ample harvest of gossip and gleaned the shaven fields of fashion.

They are the elaborated growth of an earlier school. Joseph Gales and William Winston Seaton, with their refined and warm-hearted ladies; Francis Preston Blair, with his energetic and wonderful wife, and sons and daughters, and sons-in-law and daughters-in-law; John C. Rives and his interesting family; Thomas Ritchie and his galaxy of handsome daughters and sons; Roger A. Pryor, George S. Gideon, Alexander C. Bullitt, William Overton, Charles Eames, A. G. Allen, John Savage, Alexander Dimitry, J. S. Pike, Albert Pike, James E. Harvey, Father Kingman, W. D. Wallach, Francis J. Grund, and all the host of the dead and living, shone in Washington society like stars. I can hardly recall a newspaper writer that has not enjoyed the attractions of that political centre. Elsewhere it is the same. Charles Gordon Greene, of the Boston Post; James Watson Webb, of the New York Courier and Enquirer; Whitelaw Reid and William Winter, of The Tribune; George Jones and Edward Jennings of The Times; James Gordon Bennett, father and son, of The Herald; Manton Marble, of The World; with N. P. Willis, George P. Morris, and Lewis Gaylord Clark, were and are all known for their social tastes in the world of fashion or in their own homes. And so of that rapid, keen, and whole-hearted genius Henry Watterson, of the Louisville Courier-Journal; the brothers Knapp, of the St. Louis Republican; McCrellish, of The Alta California; Faran and Wash McLean, of the Cincinnati Enquirer; the

fearless and independent Murat Halstead, of the Cincinnati Commercial; the men of the Boston Advertiser; Anthony, of the Providence Journal; Sam Bowles, of the Springfield Republican; Francis, of the Troy (N. Y.) Times; W. H. Welsh, of the Baltimore Gazette, and the brothers Fulton, of the Baltimore American; every one of them in his time was full of the sparkle, dash, pluck, and life around them.

I have known, and know, most of these gentlemen; have served with and against them; have returned and long ago forgotten their bitter sayings; and as I look over the past, I freely challenge comparison with any other class for generosity, frankness, and general manliness.

What scenes have passed in their editorial dens! What scenes are passing there now! They are the centres of attraction. The world lies before them like a map. Its echoes are all around them. All professions speak to them. Every interest and prejudice passes before them in procession. They think rapidly, write forcibly, and speak boldly. They cannot long be the slaves of power in such an atmosphere. And that is why there is such a defiant and searching spirit in American newspapers. They find profit in disregard of party. Office has no charms to men who have better offices in their printinghouses. Politicians are tolerable only as they are competent. Editors realize at last that the people are the best paymasters. A good newspaper is like a race-horse, or a first-class patent, or a coal-bed; and one like The Ledger, in Philadelphia, or The Herald, in New York, or the Boston Journal, is a gold-mine.

My own little room at the corner of Seventh and Chestnut streets, Philadelphia, has a history of its own, and none of my associates, past and present, have had a generally more agreeable experience. I do much of my work in a crowd, and that is as varied and free in sentiment as if the place were not private. On election nights we have a telegraph-battery, and get the news from all parts of the State or Union. When Grant

was chosen in November of 1868, the wires flashed the returns from almost every town in the nation ; and, between despatches and speeches and the hoarse, glad shouts of the waiting thousands outside, we met the small hours of the next morning about as happy a set of fellows as if every one were winning a royal prize. The Press next day had thirty or forty columns of "specials," and paid expenses by the sale of extra copies. This scene was repeated when we carried the new constitution on the 16th of December, 1873. I need not say it was not repeated on the 17th of February, 1874, when we lost Philadelphia. Such a thing as a dispute or a controversy is rare; plenty of discussion, of course, but good-humor always, whether in victory or defeat.

As I write, I remember with gratitude an event in my little sanctum about a year after I started The Press. This was in June of 1858, when we were in the midst of the great fight against Mr. Buchanan's Administration on the Lecompton question. It was a dark hour. I had, much against my will, floated into the conflict with my party by adhering to the pledges in regard to Kansas, made in 1856, by the Democratic candidate for President. I made every effort for peace. I solicited toleration for an honest difference of opinion. It was peremptorily refused. The party decree had gone forth. We must consent to deny the pledges made by Mr. Buchanan, and consent to the policy of forcing slavery into the new Territory, or stand excommunicated. Together with Judge Douglas, Robert J. Walker, John Hickman, the late Dr. George W. Nebinger, of Philadelphia, one of the purest spirits of any age; James L. Reynolds, of Lancaster; John Luther Ringwalt, now of the Railway World; Thomas Webster, George M. Lauman, of Berks; Hon. John B. Haskin, of New York; Thomas L. Harris, of Illinois, and other Democrats, we resisted the insolent order.

Instantly the whole Government power was organized against