And he has left this further record of his impressions of the great orator: "Daniel Webster was a most magnificent man physically, and of very impressive features. His countenance was more impressive than that of any other man. That everybody felt. There was no effort or affectation about him; he was utterly unconscious of his great physical impressiveness. He was like a rock or a mountain or a big tree, and his head was the crowning part of his appearance.'

In 1849 Mr. Johnson went abroad to study. In Düsseldorf, though a very young man, his reputation was immediately established, and there he made the acquaintance of the artists Louis Knaus and Otto Achenbach. A year and a half later he went to the Hague, and worked in Leutze's studio while that artist was painting the gigantic "Washington Crossing the Delaware." To insure the historical accuracy of the portrait of Washington, Mr. Johnson wrote to his father in America, who had tailors make an exact reproduction of the general's uniform. This uniform was shipped to Leutze, and it was worn by a young artist named Whittridge when he posed for the figure of Washington.

MR. JOHNSON PAINTING THE PORTRAIT OF PARKE GODWIN

artist, G. P. A. Healey, to the United States to paint the portraits of several distinguished Americans for the palace at Versailles. When Webster agreed to sit for Healey, he recalled his promise to Governor Winthrop, through whom Mr. Johnson was invited to make his sketches at the same sittings.

A room in the basement of the Capitol was therefore turned into a studio, and there Healey set up his easel, while the younger artist moved about the room making his sketches from several points of view. Two complete drawings were made, the first a large one for Governor Winthrop, a photograph of which in 1886 he presented to the Massachusetts Historical Society. The other was the small drawing reproduced herewith for the first time. Once during the sittings Mr. Webster went to sleep and the drawings proceeded during his slumbers. When he was awakened he laughed heartily at the joke on himself, remarking at the same time that there were a great many artists working at once, but that "it is just as well; the more artists the fewer sittings."

PORTRAIT OF EX-PRESIDENT GROVER CLEVELAND By Eastman Johnson

Mr. Johnson made a diminished copy of the painting, and had an offer for it from the crown prince of Holland-afterward King William III.-but had to refuse it because the contract for Leutze's original prohibited the sale of copies. In the Hague Mr. Johnson's reputation was quickly established-he was called "the American Rembrandt." After several years abroad he was recalled from Paris by a death in his family. He spent the remaining years of his life in America, mostly in New York.

One of Mr. Johnson's most interesting portraits was that of Bayard Taylor, made after the poet's death. Taylor had written high praise of Mr. Johnson's "Old Kentucky Home" in his "The Picture of St. John," published in 1866. He wrote:

"... the dusky race you quaintly dress
In art that gives the finer liberty,--

Made by your pencil, ere by battle, free!" Mr. Johnson often spent his summers at Nantucket, where he made the quaint fisherfolk the subjects of many of his genre pictures. One such portrait is especially noteworthy. It is of Robert Ratcliffe, an old sailor who had been a common seaman on the British vessel to which Napoleon was transferred from the Bellerophon for transport to St. Helena. Ratcliffe recalled two incidents of the voyage. Once Napoleon chucked him under the chin and asked if his superiors treated him well. The other occasion was the subjection of Napoleon to the rites of Neptune while crossing the Equator. The sailors did not dare to take all the usual liberties with him, but they did venture to make him mount a gun carriage, on which he was dragged about the deck.

It would be easy to multiply famous names and anecdotes about them, from the list of Mr. Johnson's portraits, but they would fill the magazine. Even divided into groups they make a great array-artists, authors, soldiers, lawyers, clergymen, college presidents, governors, senators, Presidents of the United States, bankers, business men, financiers, etc.

The "Two Men," often considered his best work-a portrait of Robert W. Rutherford, a brother-in-law of Mrs. Johnson, and S. W. Rouse, the artist-was bought by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The portrait of his only child, Mrs. Alfred R. Conkling, reproduced herewith, is an excellent example of his later style in feminine portraiture.

Mr. Johnson originated a method of painting

portraits that became very popular-the "portrait interior." This method was to paint a family group assembled in their drawing room. The result was a charming effect of domes ticity, and adding to the portraits the back ground of a familiar setting. It is a difficult style to follow, as it adds to the task of drawing likenesses the obstacles of a complicated composition; yet many of Mr. Johnson's most interesting portraits were painted in this manner. One, of the late James A. Burden and family, is an especially good example of a successful use of this style.

But the accompanying engravings must suffice to convey an idea of the variety of his subjects and of the historical periods which they illus

trate.

Certain qualities of Mr. Johnson's character make his legacy of portraits peculiarly valuable. These qualities were a rugged independence, perfect sincerity, and a sound patriotism.. The first two were illustrated by his attitude toward his sitters. He frequently made several likenesses of one subject, and he was very accommodating about making any changes in pose or arrangement that did not conflict with his artistic conscience. But if a picture did not satisfy him as a faithful, unaffected portrait, he would not let the sitter have it for any consideration. He insisted on his right to be the sole judge of the artistic sincerity and adequacy of his work.

His patriotism was shown more in his genre work, for which he is as distinguished as for the portraits. He refused to treat the hackneyed Old-World subjects that many artists believed must be done by a painter who would be recognized. He declared that there was so much. beauty all around him in America that he had no time to paint anything else. Consequently all his work is peculiarly American in flavor. The types and scenes are unmistakably of the United States.

His work in American portraiture is, therefore, peculiarly faithful to the spirit of its subjects. He wrought with sincerity and strength to paint the things he saw and loved, and he achieved a worthy success. He did much to fulfil the spirit of the verse which he pasted on the door of his studio many years ago, and which is still there:

"If you have gentle words and looks

To share with me, and if you have a tear to shed
That I have suffered, keep them not, I pray,
Until I hear not, see not, being dead."

O

BY

NE of the most powerful enemies of death in the United States is the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, housed in a massive building high on an East River bluff in New York City. In this building, securely placed for light and air above the city and the river, the battles of science against discase are being fought out by skilful, carefully selected investigators aided by every device of the best laboratories. Scientists there, freed from all financial cares and from all interruptions, are at work with only one responsibility-that of dedicating their best talent and their time wholly to research into the nature of disease, and its prevention and cure.

In 1901, Mr. John D. Rockefeller founded the Institute for the purpose, as he defined it, of accomplishing "the most for humanity and science." Expounded more at length, these words mean that the Institute shall provide, for the first time in the United States, ample facilities for the scientific study of the causes and the course of diseases, and of methods for their prevention and cure. The investigators not only have the use of them free but they are also freed from all other cares, especially of the teaching or of the practice of medicine. In this last provision the Institute is unique. Other American laboratories have more recently been built, but none has an endowment for investigators so that their researches may be secure from every interruption.

When the first endowment was made and the organization of the work begun, the United States was years behind other progressive countries in the scientific study of medicine. England, France, Germany, Russia, even Japan, had laboratories of medical research. In these laboratories had been discovered the specific germs of rabies, of diphtheria, of Asiatic

cholera, of bubonic plague, of typhoid fever, and of tuberculosis. And for each of these diseases, excepting tuberculosis, either a specific cure or adequate methods of prevention had been found. The stupendous effect of these discoveries may be realized only by recalling the plagues that periodically devastated Europe, or the cholera plague that swept the United States in the 'fifties. And these discoveries were the fruit of only sixty years of active work in a few European laboratories, whose number, however, was constantly growing. In all this progress the United States had borne no part, except in some private investigations of yellow fever and malaria.

It was for the purpose of supplying this great need that Mr. Rockefeller proposed, in May, 1901, that seven physicians coöperate with him in founding an American Institute to match the Pasteur Institute in Paris, the Koch Institute in Berlin, and the Lister Institute in London. These physicians were Drs. William H. Welch, G. Mitchell Prudden, Christian A. Herter, Theobald Smith, Hermann M. Biggs, Simon Flexner, and L. Emmet Holt. Under their direction, the site at Sixty-sixth Street and East River was bought and the building completed early this year. One of their own number, Dr. Simon Flexner, was chosen to be Director of the Institute.

As long ago as the first century, there were laboratories of investigation in physics and chemistry. But until the nineteenth century, there were no laboratories in which the purely scientific spirit was not confused with some idea of personal profit or of some other unscientific entanglement. But early in the last century, research in many branches of science was undertaken by men whose sole interest was to discover simply what is the truth about

each subject. This spirit grew until, in 1824, Purkinje established a laboratory in Breslau for the study of physiology. Others followed rapidly, as Liebig's, in Giessen, for chemistry; Lord Kelvin's, in Glasgow, for physics; Virchow's, in Berlin, for pathology; Pettenkofer's, in Bavaria, for hygiene; and, in 1886, the Pasteur Institute, for the treatment of rabies and for research into the specific causes of infectious diseases, and of the prevention and cure of such diseases.

Of these laboratories, the Pasteur Institute is the most important to the science of medicine, for it was founded as a result of the greatest revolution ever wrought in medical ideas and practice the discoveries of Louis Pasteur. The Pasteur Institute is, furthermore, the first of the modern laboratories for medical research, and upon its methods and equipment all later laboratories, such as the Rockefeller, are based. Before Pasteur, the treatment of infectious diseases, except smallpox, was based more or less upon vague traditional methods, guesswork, superstition, and ignorance. Pasteur's Pasteur's imperishable achievement was the perfecting of a method of research by which such diseases may always be studied with a reasonable hope of learning what causes them and how to deal with such causes.

In general terms, Pasteur's method was to study a disease wholly by experiment and observation. It is hard to realize that almost all medical doctrines sixty years ago were theoretical, and were not the result of observation. Scientists in those days did not go to Nature with an open mind, trying to learn the truth by careful investigation of natural phenomena and by rigorous analysis of their observations. Instead, they advanced theories, about which they reasoned with arguments based on ancient text-books or on supposedly correct general principles. The result was that the science of medicine was a maze of contradictory guesswork and controversy.

Pasteur changed all this. He went to Nature for the proof or disproof of every theory. And he went to her with no idea of proving or disproving any particular theory, but only with the purpose of making every experiment that might possibly throw any light on the subject in hand and of impartially weighing the evidence thus accumulated by his highlytrained observation.

It is profoundly significant, in considering Pasteur's method, to recall that the cure of

This

rabies, which was perhaps his highest achievement in medical science, was the direct, logical outcome of a series of investigations which he began in his youth into the physical structure of tartaric acid. These experiments proved that there were two kinds of tartaric acid, one of which fermented, the other of which did not ferment, under certain conditions. fact led him to study fermentations generally and long before his discoveries in antirabic vaccines, these tartaric acid experiments, relentlessly pursued, had inevitably led up to the following widely divergent discoveries: the present method of preserving wine against sourness by heating it in the bottle to a temperature of 50° C. to 60° C.; the cause and prevention of a silkworm disease that nearly destroyed the silk industry of Europe in the 'sixties; the nature of splenic fever in hogs, and its prevention; similar successes with chicken cholera and hydrophobia; and a method of preserving beer like that employed for wine. Early in his work he had made the discovery and proved its truth-that there are microscopic living bodies floating in the air, which he called germs, and which are the cause of all vegetable fermentations and of all putrefaction of animal tissues. Following this discovery, by patient investigation and experimentation, he observed that in the blood of every person or animal infected with a contagious disease, there are microscopic living bodies, which are now called germs or bacilli. He proved that each of several contagious diseases has its own specific bacillus, which is usually distinguishable from all others, under microscopic examination. By experiments with rabies in dogs, he discovered that these microbes, contained in drops of blood drawn from infected animals, gradually lost their power to harm after several days. Thus a virus two weeks old made from in fected blood could be injected into a healthy animal without harm, whereas virus a day old would immediately convey the disease and ultimately cause death.

Further experiments showed that the same healthy animal might be successively inoculated with stronger and stronger (not larger) doses of the virus until a virus less than twentyfour hours old could be used without harm. The animal treated in this way was thereby rendered immune against rabies infection, even from the bite of a "mad dog." "mad dog." A final series of experiments proved that the same treatment,