States. A passport system, limiting and embarrassing both

travel and traffic, has been enforced with rigor. The censorship of the press not only controls the transmission of news, but curtails even the expression of opinion within restrictions heretofore unimaginable.

Arbitrary imprisonment by premiers of the cabinet, banishments summarily notified, exactions levied at discretion, fines assessed by military commissions, trials postponed indefinitely in short, all the panoply of the most rigid European absolutism has been imported into our midst. It is not to complain that these things are recited; for, so far as necessary, they will be, as they have been, cheerfully borne with; but to show how tragic is the attitude of this nation and yet how brave.

The President of the United States, to-day, holds a civil and military power more untrammelled than ever did Cromwell; and, in addition thereto, has enrolled by the volunteer agencies of the people themselves, a million of armed men, obedient to his command. Nay, did I Nay, did I say the President was absolute as Cromwell? In truth I might add that of his officials intrusted with administering military instead of civil law every deputy provost marshal seems to be feeling his face to see if he too has not the warts of the Great Protector. If this were the occasion for stale flatteries of the constitu tion and the Union, it might well be asked just here, where in that much lauded parchment and league is the warrant for these things specifically? But I carp not at such technicalities. Give him rather more power if necessary - give him any trust and every appliance, only let it be not without avail.

And yet with all this sacrifice, with all this effort, with quick response to every demand for men and money, what

do we see? A beleaguered capital, only saved by abandoning a year of conquest and long lines of occupation; the confidence of the whole nation shaken to its very foundations by accumulated disasters and halting policies; and the grave inquiry, mooted in no whispered voice by men who have never known fear in any peril, can this country survive its rulers? I do not say the doubt is justified; but I do say that it exists in many minds that have been prone heretofore to confidence. We have seen fifty thousand soldiers, the élite of the nation, sacrificed, and six hundred millions of treasure, the coin wealth of the people, expended. We have reached the stage of assignats and conscriptions, and are now summoning the militia of the loyal States to repel invasion. And can any one cognizant of our actual condition, and not misled by false bulletins, or varnished glories, stand forth and say with truth and honor, we are any nearer a solution in this hour of the great crisis in which we are involved than we were a year ago? I challenge a response. Or will any delude you long with the belief that a great victory will accomplish the ending? I do not believe it.

In the presence, therefore, of such thick coming danger, and having borne itself so continently and so well, has not this nation now the right to demand of President and of cabinet, and generals, that there shall be an end of policies that have only multiplied disasters and disrupted armies, and a substitution of civil policies that shall recognize liberty as the corner-stone of our Republic, and write "Freedom" on the flag.

In conclusion let me say, that the time has passed when such a demand could be denounced, even by the most servile follower of administrations, as a fanaticism, for the chief of the Republic has himself recognized his right to do so, if the

occasion shall require, in virtue of being charged with the preservation of the government. He has furthermore be come so far impressed with the urgency that manifests itself, that he has ordered immediate execution to be given to the act of the last Congress, prescribing a measure of confiscation and emancipation.

This day, too, is the anniversary of its enforcement, as it is the anniversary of the adoption of the original constitution of the United States. Let us, then, in parting, take hope from the cheering coincidence. The act of Congress, it is true, is but an initial measure, embarrassed by many clauses, and may be much limited by hostile interpretation. Still it can be made an avatar of liberty to thousands who shall in; voke its protection, and the instrument of condign punishment to those who have sought the destruction of all free government. And more than all else, its rigid enforcement and true interpretation will give earnest to the nation of that which must speedily ensue - direct and immediate emancipation by the military arm, as a measure of safety, a measure of justice, and a measure of peace.

HOAR

G

EORGE FRISBIE HOAR, United States senator from Massachusetts, was born at Concord, Massachusetts, August 29, 1826. He was educated at Concord Academy and at Harvard University, where he was graduated in 1846. He studied law, and upon graduating from the Harvard Law School began practice in Worcester, Massachusetts. During twenty years at the bar he won high position in the legal profession. Senator Hoar's first appearance in the political field was as chairman of the committee of the Free-Soil party in 1849. In 1852 he became a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and of the State Senate in 1857. He was an early advocate of woman suffrage, making his first address on that subject in 1868. His service in the legislature of his native State was followed by his election, as a Republican, to four successive Congresses, serving from March, 1869, to March, 1877. In 1877 he became a United States senator. He is still in the Senate, being the senior member from Massachusetts. The senator was a delegate to the Republican national conventions of 1876, 1880, and 1884, and he was chairman of the convention which nominated James A. Garfield for the presidency. He was one of the managers, on the part of the House of Representatives, of the Belknap impeachment trial in 1876, and in the same year was a member of the electoral commission. In the administration of President Hayes he was offered the post of ambassador to Great Britain, but declined it. From 1874 to 1880 Senator Hoar was an overseer of Harvard University and in 1880 he became a regent of the Smithsonian Institution. In 1887 he was elected president of the American Antiquarian Society. He was one of the corporators of Clark University, is a trustee of the Peabody Museum of Archæology and a member of the Massachusetts Historical Society. He has received the degree of LL. D. from William and Mary, Harvard, Yale, and Amherst. Senator Hoar is a humanitarian as well as a statesman and a scholar. In 1897 he wrote and placed on file at the Massachusetts State House a petition against the use of birds and feathers as ornaments for hats, which purported to be signed by thirtyfive undomesticated song birds. The senator is a supporter of bimetallism and an ardent anti-expansionist. In his long career he has frequently been in opposition to public sentiment, and the South was particularly indignant at his action in the matter of the Force Bill. While Senator Hoar is independent in thought and action, the purity and honesty of his motives have never been doubted. His keen wit, scholarship, and great readiness in extempore debate have made him one of the most prominent figures in national politics. His success in securing the return of the Governor Bradford manuscript to this country was not the least of his services.

ADDRESS AT THE BANQUET OF THE NEW ENGLAND SOCIETY

DELIVERED DECEMBER 22, 1898, AT CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA

I

NEED not assure this brilliant company how deeply I

am impressed by the significance of this occasion. I

am not vain enough to find in it anything of personal compliment. I like better to believe that the ties of common history, of common faith, of common citizenship, and inseparable destiny, are drawing our two sister States together again. If cordial friendship, if warm affection (to use no stronger term), can ever exist between two communities they should exist between Massachusetts and South Carolina. They were both of the "Old Thirteen." They were alike in the circumstances of their origin. Both were settled by those noble fugitives who brought the torch of liberty across the sea, when liberty was without other refuge on the face of the earth. The English Pilgrims and Puritans founded Massachusetts, to be followed soon after by the Huguenot exiles who fled from the tyranny of King Louis XIV, after the revocation of the edict of Nantes. Scotch Presbyterianism founded Carolina, to be followed soon after by the French exiles fleeing from the same oppression. Everywhere in New England are traces of the footsteps of this gentle, delightful, and chivalrous race. All over our six States to-day many an honored grave, many a stirring tradition bear witness to the kinship between our early settlers and the settlers of South Carolina. Faneuil Hall, in Boston, which we love to call the "Cradle of Liberty," attests the munificence and bears the name of an illustrious Huguenot.