dom that history so
exactly repeats itself; but the mention of the coincidence was not
designed as a criticism, much less a condemnation of the course of the
statesmen who wisely and bravely met their responsibilities in 1861.
It was simply a protest against the injustice that had been visited
upon Mr. Webster for a like patriotic course in 1850.

If the Southern agitators had resorted to secession and brought on
civil war in 1850 the efforts of Mr. Webster to avert the calamity
would have received unstinted praise from all classes in the North.
If no secession had been attempted and no civil war had followed in
1861, and the South remaining in the Union had resumed the old course
for the rights of Slavery in the Territories, Mr. Seward, Mr. Grow and
their associates would have received unlimited censure as "dough faces"
who had yielded to Southern threats and consented to organize three
Territories without an anti-slavery proviso. In each instance the
subsequent course of events determined the popularity of unpopularity
of similar acts performed with similar motives,--acts altogether
honorable, motives altogether patriotic in both cases.

OMISSION.

The names of the distinguished counsel on both sides who appeared
before the International Tribunal at Geneva in 1871, were accidentally
omitted from the foot-note on page 408, Volume II. Sir Roundell
Palmer, afterwards Lord Chancellor (known as Lord Selborne), was sole
counsel for the British cause, but was assisted throughout the
hearing by Professor Montague Bernard and by Mr. Cohen. The American
counsel, as eminent as could be selected from the American bar, were
William M. Evarts, Caleb Cushing, and Morrison R. Waite.

NOTE.--An error of statement occurs on page 72, Volume I., in regard
to the action of the Whig caucus for Speaker in December, 1847. Mr.
Winthrop was chosen after Mr. Vinton had declined, and was warmly
supported by Mr. Vinton. The error came from an incorrect account
of the caucus in a newspaper of that time.

The translation of the cipher telegrams sent and received by Democratic
committees in the Presidential campaign of 1876, is credited on page
500, Volume II., to Mr. William M. Grosvenor. Equal credit should be
given to Mr. J. R. G. Hassard. Both gentlemen belonged to the
editorial staff of the _New-York Tribune_. Their joint work cannot be
too highly praised.

ERRATA.
[Omitted: all from Vol. I]

THE APPENDICES.

APPEN