distinction in the Mexican War and a Member of both the
Senate and House of Representatives. He was a leading lawyer in
his state. His messages to Congress, considered in a literary
view, were able state papers, clearly and strongly expressed. It
was his great misfortune to have to deal with a controversy that
he did not commence, but he did not shrink from the responsibility.
He believed in the policy of non-intervention in the territories,
and so did not prevent the "border ruffians" of Missouri crossing
the line and voting at every election in Kansas, setting up a bogus
legislature, adopting the laws of Missouri as the laws of Kansas,
and establishing negro slavery in that territory. Fortunately a
more numerous, courageous and intelligent population reversed all
this, and led, not only to the exclusion of slavery in Kansas, but
also to its abolition in the United States.
With the kindly biography of President Pierce, written by his
friend, Nathaniel Hawthorne, before me, I can appreciate his ability,
integrity and agreeable social qualities, and only regret that he
was President of the United States at a time when the sagacity of
a Jefferson, the determined courage of a Jackson, or the shrewdness
and wisdom of a Lincoln, were needed to meet the difficulties and
dangers which he had to encounter.
There is but one more personal incident of the 34th Congress I care
to mention. Mr. Banks designated me as a member of the committee
on foreign affairs. Mr. Alexander C. M. Pennington, as chairman
of that committee, handed me the voluminous papers in reference to
the French Spoilation Claims. They covered an interesting period
of American history, embracing all that between 1793 and 1801, in
which were involved important negotiations both in England and
France, and outrages committed upon our, then, infant government
by the government of France and Great Britain. I had all the
feeling of natural indignation against those great powers who sought
to draw the United States into their controversies, and practice
upon us enormities and outrages that we would not submit to for a
moment in our day. Yet, after a full and careful examination of
all the papers in the case, I became thoroughly satisfied that
these claimants, whatever might be said as to their claims against
the French government, had absolutely no foundation for a claim
against the United States.
I wrote an adverse report, but it was suppressed in the co
|