« PreviousContinue »
subject; secondly, because I recognized him to be an absolutely fair-minded man, who would not fail to pay due attention to the various controversies which had been excited in England by certain statements contained in his boyish and immature work; and, finally, because I desired to show Americans and British alike how little real difference it makes, provided the narrator be well informed and fair-minded, whether the story of their unfortunate quarrels be written by an American of the Americans or by the most patriotic of Englishmen, such as Edward Pelham Brenton. As soon as I had heard from him in reply, I was sure I had done rightly. He wrote:
“'I want to bring out as strikingly as possible the enormous damage inflicted on the United States by the sea power of England, the absolute paralysis it brought to American trade, and the suffering it caused the people; and to show that the single-ship victories, though very important from the point of view of moral, had not the slightest effect in breaking the British grip on the American throat; always excepting the fighting on the lakes.. . Let me ask you . : . to give what space you can to the biography of Captain Manners, of the Reindeer: he has always seemed to me to be a very real hero, though a beaten one.'”
We observe, in the list of the books written by the President, this: "The Naval War of 1812, or, The History of the United States Navy during the Last War with Great Britain; to which is appended an account of the Battle of New Orleans." The Battle of New Orleans was not a part of naval history, though the call of the British fleet at Havana on the way home would be worth articulation. It is true that our Atlantic Coast interests suffered very much from the overbearing power of the British fleets. Henry Clay's ten frigates were splendid, and they gave a brilliant account of themselves; but we were not able to sweep the seas, and did not conquer Canada. However, we abolished "impressment," and held the mouth of the Mississippi, Andrew Jackson confirming our title to the expansion of territory to the Pacific Coast; and the last comfort of Napoleon in the hundred days, was in examining the American rifles sent him to show the weapons that saved New Orleans, the purchase of land for which we had paid fifteen million dollars to the Corsican.
Mr. Clowes' period of surrounding President Roosevelt with articulate friendliness was when, as the record is stated, “Roosevelt was still at the Police Department,” and wrote to Mr. Clowes: “I have enjoyed my year, for all the bother, and have accomplished a certain amount.” It can not be said there was a boastfulness in this. Mr. Clowes proceeds with the expression of his very able and just views, which almost amount to a guarantee. In his mature judge ment, Mr. Roosevelt "is not the stamp of man that feels that his own country has a monopoly of all the virtues. He knows the world and mankind far too well for that. He likes life in England, and he has many English friends; and, other things being equal, he would rather work with Great Britain than against her. Nor is he the kind of man who refuses to see both sides of a question that affects himself and his country. Here are the opening lines of his contribution to my forthcoming volume:
“'It is often difficult to realize that, in a clash between two peoples, not only may each side deem itself right, but each side may really be right from its own standpoint. A healthy and vigorous nation must obey the law of selfpreservation. When it is engaged in a life and death grapple with a powerful foe, it can not too closely scan the damage it is incidentally forced to do neutral nations. On the other hand, it is just as little to be expected that one of these neutral nations, when wronged, will refrain from retaliation merely because the injuries are inflicted by the aggressor as a regrettable but necessary incident of a conflict with someone else.''
After giving us the advantage of an extract from a forthcoming volume, Mr. Clowes pronounces the language he selected "just and reasonable ;" and we agree to that, and heartily concur in this also as reassuring any disposed to be in a panic.
"I think that it represents exactly the attitude of mind which Colonel Roosevelt may be expected always to preserve in international affairs. He has seen war, and he is no lover of it.”
The remarkable resemblance that Mr. Clowes points out as existing between the Emperor of Germany and the President of the United States, is more than confirmed by Mr. Poultney Bigelow, who speaks from his knowledge of the present Emperor William as a school-boy friend, and as an expert in Emperors, drew for the British Contemporary this historical and biographic parallel:
"Theodore Roosevelt was born towards the close of 1858 and William II. in the first month of 1859. There are about one hundred days difference in their ages—and almost as many points of resemblance. Both have been likened to political firebrands; both have lived down the reputation prematurely thrust upon them by those who pretended to know their psychological makeup. William II. is anything but a typical German ruler. Roosevelt is far from being an orthodox Presidential candidate. The Hohenzollern is a many-minded human paradox, full of interest for every tool in the machine shop of humanity -a master in many trades, at any of which he could earn his living creditably should a revolution afford him the opportunity of retiring to private life. Roosevelt stands out violently from past American Presidents, owing to the fact that he did not in early life split rails for a living, or drive mules on the tow-path, or acquire his academic rudiments by the light of a pine torch in a log cabin on the edge of the wilderness. Theodore and William were both born in comparatively easy circumstances, and provided with good tutors respectively in Harvard and Potsdam. Of the two, perhaps Roosevelt has a trifle the advantage, for he, in his youth, enjoyed far more pocket money and liberty than his fellow ruler of Germany. Of the two homes, that of Roosevelt was decidedly more luxurious than that in the Neuss Palais at Potsdam—or at least when both were boys."
This is entering into the marrow bones of history and extracting their rich secretions. We do not refrain from quoting another passage of extraordinary flavor :
"Aside from the fact that neither has had to worry regarding the next quarter's rent, both are self-made men-both have carved out their own position in the history of their country by the development of qualities wholly outside of the orthodox curriculum. When Dr. Hinzpeter was anxiously watching over the young Prince William, like a distracted hen marvelling at the precocity of a duckling brood, he little dreamed that he was the tutor of a lad who was destined to dismiss Bismarck-and replace him—with facility; of a monarch who was destined to give Germany peace and prosperity for a full dozen years, and all before he was forty-three years of age! This alone entitles William II. to a worthy place in history, and for such an achievement his country can forgive him much.”
And this articulation surpassed all that passed before:
“Roosevelt left the University in 1880, and prepared himself for the Bar by returning to his native city, New York, and attending the lectures in the law department of Columbia University (whose President, oddly enough, is at this moment urged to become Mayor of New York).
"At the law school, where we were fellow students, under Professor Dwight, I was struck by a quality in Roosevelt which I admired very much: He would never rest satisfied with any answer to one of his questions unless that answer was perfectly clear to him. Professor Dwight was a monument of sweet temper, with a handsome, white-haired, Socratic head, full of law and quaint flashes of humor, and a temperament like that of Hans Christian Andersen-one who delighted in simple narrative form. If this gentle nature had one earthly ambition it was to be reputed perfectly intelligible in the domain of Blackstone and Kent's Commentaries. But Roosevelt, like many another prospective conqueror, was slow of wit compared to the average lad (were not Blucher and Wellington poor things at school?) and he frequently held up the whole lecture room by insisting upon a detailed explanation of points that were obvious to the majority. Sometimes he excited discontent among his fellows by the delays he provoked, and once or twice I noticed even Professor Dwight struggling to preserve his serenity; but Roosevelt permitted himself to be diverted by no consideration save the solution of the immediate difficulty before him, and while he irritated his fellow students, and at times even his instructor, all admired his moral courage, particularly the number who shared his difficulties, but let the matter pass rather than risk the consequences of boring a room full of impatient students. William II. was likewise a poor fist at the school desk; he accomplished what he did like Roosevelt, by sheer hard work, spurred on by a strong sense of duty.”
Mr. Bigelow has classified himself as a reformer, and also objects to the way Roosevelt had of pursuing his studies, as he did not affect to understand anything that he had not comprehended. It was not his way to glide smoothly around or over the crooked and rough places in the road, but to straighten the line and put metal on it that would wear. It sometimes happens that collegians have the good fortune to be taught by distinguished educators, glad to see young men before them so much interested as to ask questions intelligently, and to go on with inquiries until satisfied. It is only genius that soars and sings, and never touches the earth or asks the way.
Dr. Shaw does not articulate according to his surroundings, because he does not care to appear to be other than a trusted friend whose confidences are not cheapened by increase of responsibility. That which he says is subject to no reduction or effacement so far as the President is concerned. He was, as the author of the excellent and educational volumes on Municipal Government advanced to, and sustained himself in, the same class with Roosevelt as a Municipal reformer. However, he is of a group of young men who have been sure they were strong enough to overthrow existing parties, and provide one that would just suit themselves, and so sweep the country; but if they aim too high in aspiration for public good, it does not follow that they should be cast down.
There is a great deal of significance in the passage of Dr. Shaw's article in the Contemporary Review relating to the fact, that in 1884, when Mr. Roosevelt was against Blaine's nomination, he supported it when it was made, as he yielded to the organization. Dr. Shaw says:
“Many of his friends refused to abide by the choice of the Convention, and joined in the famous 'Mugwump' or independent movement which gave its support to Mr. Cleveland, the Democratic candidate. Mr. Roosevelt preferred to remain with his party, and gave his support to Mr. Blaine. The great majority of the Republicans of the West, young and old, were at that time enthusiastic admirers of James G. Blaine, and the action of Mr. Roosevelt impressed them as sagacious and honorable.”
The strength of Roosevelt has been in abiding with his party, because he believed going into any other would harm the legitimate interests of wholesome reform, spoiling the reformations that were practicable. He was called upon at Denver, by the Governor of Colorado, to say whether he was for the gold standard according to the platform on which he was nominated for Vice