other important
committees, and took an active and leading part in all the debates
during this long period. He was a man of genial, pleasing address,
rather too much given to flights of oratory, but always a favorite
with his colleagues and associates. He was subsequently appointed
United States minister to Japan, where he remained for many years.
He still lives at a ripe old age at Cadiz, Ohio.

During the existence of the 36th Congress, I do not recall any
political divisions in the committee of ways and means, unless the
tariff is considered a political measure. It was not so treated
by the committee. The common purpose was to secure sufficient
revenue for the support of the government. The incidental effect
of all duties was to encourage home manufactures, but, as the rule
adopted was applied impartially to all productions, whether of the
farm, mine, or the workshop, there was no controversy except as to
the amount or rate of the duty. The recent dogma that raw materials
should not have the benefit of protection did not enter the mind
of anyone. The necessity of economy limited the amount of
appropriations, but if the war had not changed all conditions, the
revenues accruing would have been sufficient for an economical
administration of the government.

In a retrospect of my six years as a Member of the House of
Representatives, I can see, and will freely admit, that my chief
fault was my intense partisanship. This grew out of a conscientious
feeling that the repeal of the Missouri Compromise was an act of
dishonor, committed by a dominating party controlled by slaveholders
and yielded to by leading northern Democrats, headed by Douglas,
with a view on his part to promote his intense ambition to be
President of the United States. I felt that this insult to the
north should be resented by the renewed exclusion, by act of
Congress, of slavery north of the line of latitude 36 degrees 30
minutes. This feeling was intensified by my experience in Kansas
during the investigation of its affairs. The recital by the Free
State men of their story, and the appearance and conduct of the
"border ruffians," led me to support extreme measures. The political
feebleness of Mr. Buchanan, and the infamy of the Dred Scott
decision, appeared to me conclusive evidence of the subserviency
of the President and the Supreme Court to the slave power. The
gross injustice to me personally, and the irritating language of
souther