Bay State Monthly, Vol. II, No. 1, October, 1884 by Various

V >> Various >> Bay State Monthly, Vol. II, No. 1, October, 1884

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

WASHINGTON, December 20, 1880.

_My dear Garfield_,--Your generous invitation to enter your Cabinet
as secretary of state has been under consideration for more than three
weeks. The thought had really never occurred to my mind until, at our
late conference, you presented it with such cogent arguments in its
favor, and with such warmth of personal friendship in aid of your kind
offer. I know that an early answer is desirable, and I have waited only
long enough to consider the subject in all its bearings, and to make up
my mind, definitely and conclusively. I now say to you, in the same
cordial spirit in which you have invited me, that I accept the position.
It is no affectation for me to add that I make this decision, not for
the honor of the promotion it gives me in the public service, but
because I think I can be useful to the country and to the party; useful
to you as the responsible leader of the party and the great head of the
government. I am influenced somewhat, perhaps, by the shower of letters
I have received urging me to accept, written to me in consequence of the
mere unauthorized newspaper report that you had been pleased to offer me
the place. While I have received these letters from all sections of the
Union, I have been especially pleased, and even surprised, at the
cordial and widely extended feeling in my favor throughout New England,
where I had expected to encounter local jealousy and, perhaps, rival
aspiration.

In our new relation I shall give all that I am and all that I can hope
to be, freely and joyfully, to your service. You need no pledge of my
loyalty in heart and in act. I should be false to myself did I not prove
true both to the great trust you confide to me and to your own personal
and political fortunes in the present and in the future. Your
administration must be made brilliantly successful and strong in the
confidence and pride of the people, not at all directing its energies
for re-election, and yet compelling that result by the logic of events
and by the imperious necessities of the situation. To that most
desirable consummation I feel that, next to yourself, I can possibly
contribute as much influence as any other one man. I say this not from
egotism or vainglory, but merely as a deduction from a plain analysis of
the political forces which have been at work in the country for five
years past, and which have been significantly shown in two great
national conventions. I accept it as one of the happiest circumstances
connected with this affair that in allying my political fortunes with
yours--or, rather, for the time merging mine in yours--my heart goes
with my head, and that I carry to you not only political support, but
personal and devoted friendship. I can but regard it as somewhat
remarkable that two men of the same age, entering Congress at the same
time, influenced by the same aims and cherishing the same ambitions,
should never, for a single moment in eighteen years of close intimacy,
have had a misunderstanding or a coolness, and that our friendship has
steadily grown with our growth and strengthened with our strength. It is
this fact which has led me to the conclusion embodied in this letter;
for however much, my dear Garfield, I might admire you as a statesman, I
would not enter your Cabinet if I did not believe in you as a man and
love you as a friend. Always faithfully yours,

JAMES G. BLAINE.

Mr. Blaine's diplomatic career began with his appointment as secretary
of state on March 5, 1881, and ended with his resignation on December
19, three months after President Garfield's death. The two principal
objects of his foreign policy, as defined by himself on September 1,
1882, were these: "First, to bring about peace, and prevent future wars
in North and South America; second, to cultivate such friendly
commercial relations with all American countries as would lead to a
large increase in the export trade of the United States, by supplying
those fabrics in which we are abundantly able to compete with the
manufacturing nations of Europe." President Garfield, in his inaugural
address, had repeated the declaration of his predecessor that it was
"the right and duty of the United States to assert and maintain such
supervision and authority over any interoceanic canal across the isthmus
that connects North and South America as will protect our national
interests." This policy, which had received the direct approval of
Congress, was vigorously upheld by Secretary Blaine. The Colombian
Republic had proposed to the European powers to join in a guaranty of
the neutrality of the proposed Panama Canal. One of President Garfield's
first acts under the advice of Secretary Blaine was to remind the
European governments of the exclusive rights which the United States had
secured with the country to be traversed by the interoceanic waterway.
These exclusive rights rendered the prior guaranty of the United States
government indispensable, and the powers were informed that any foreign
guaranty would be not only an unnecessary but unfriendly act. As the
United States had made, in the Clayton-Bulwer treaty of 1850, a special
agreement with Great Britain on this subject, Secretary Blaine
supplemented his memorandum to the powers by a formal proposal for the
abrogation of all provisions of that convention which were not in accord
with the guaranties and privileges covenanted for in the compact with
the Colombian Republic. In this state paper, the most elaborate of the
series receiving his signature as secretary of state, Mr. Blaine
contended that the operation of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty practically
conceded to Great Britain the control of any canal which might be
constructed in the isthmus, as that power was required, by its insular
position and colonial possessions, to maintain a naval establishment
with which the United States could not compete. As the American
government had bound itself by its engagements in the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty not to fight in the isthmus, nor to fortify the mouths of any
waterway that might be constructed, the secretary argued that if any
struggle for the control of the canal were to arise England would have
an advantage at the outset which would prove decisive. "The treaty," he
remarked, "commands this government not to use a single regiment of
troops to protect its interests in connection with the interoceanic
canal, but to surrender the transit to the guardianship and control of
the British navy." The logic of this paper was unanswerable from an
American point of view.

The war between Chili and Peru had virtually ended with the capture of
Lima on January 17, 1881. The state department made strenuous exertions
to bring about the conclusion of an early peace between Chili and the
two prostrate states which had been crushed in war. The influence of the
government was brought to bear upon victorious Chili in the interest of
peace and magnanimity; but, owing to an unfortunate misapprehension of
Mr. Blaine's instructions, the United States ministers did not promote
the ends of peace. Special envoys were accordingly sent to South
America, accredited to the three governments, with general instructions
which should enable them to bring those belligerent powers into friendly
relations. After they had set out from New York Mr. Blaine resigned, and
Mr. Frelinghuysen reversed the diplomatic policy with such precipitate
haste that the envoys on arriving at their destination were informed by
the Chilian minister of foreign affairs that their instructions had been
countermanded, and that their mission was an idle farce. By this
reversal of diplomatic methods and purposes the influence of the United
States government on the South American coast was reduced to so low a
point as to become insignificant. Mr. Blaine's policy had been at once
strong and pacific. It was followed by a period of no policy, which
enabled Chili to make a conqueror's terms with the conquered and to
seize as much territory as pleased her rapacious generals.

The most conspicuous act of Mr. Blaine's administration of the state
department was his invitation to the peace congress. The proposition was
to invite all the independent governments of North and South America to
meet in a peace congress at Washington on March 15, 1882. The
representatives of all the minor governments on this continent were to
agree, if possible, upon some comprehensive plan for averting war by
means of arbitration, and for resisting the intrigues of European
diplomacy. Invitations were sent on November 22, with the limitations
and restrictions originally designed. Mr. Frelinghuysen lost no time in
undermining this diplomatic congress, and the meeting never took place.

On the morning of Saturday, July 2, President Garfield was to start from
Washington by the morning limited express for New York, en route for New
England and a reunion with his old college mates at the Williams College
commencement. His secretary of state accompanied him to the train, and
has recorded the great, almost boyish, delight with which the President
anticipated his holiday. They entered the waiting-room at the station,
and a moment later Guiteau's revolver had done its work. The country
still vividly remembers the devotion with which the head of the Cabinet
watched at the President's bedside, and the calm dignity with which,
during those long weeks of suspense, he discharged the painful duties of
his position. On September 6 the President was removed from Washington
to Elberon, whither he was followed the same day by Mr. Blaine and the
rest of the Cabinet. The apparent improvement in the President's
condition warranted the belief that he would continue to gain, and Mr.
Blaine went for a short rest to his home in Augusta. He was on his way
back to Elberon when the fatal moment came, and reached there the next
morning. It is the universal testimony of the press and people that,
during the weary weeks which intervened between the President's injury
and death, Mr. Blaine's every action and constant demeanor were
absolutely faultless. Selected by Congress to pronounce a formal eulogy
upon President Garfield, Mr. Blaine, on February 19, 1882, before
President Arthur and his Cabinet, both Houses of Congress, the Supreme
Court, the foreign legations, and an audience of ladies and gentlemen
which crowded the Hall of Representatives, delivered a most just,
comprehensive, and admirable address upon the martyr's great career and
character.

Since his withdrawal from President Arthur's Cabinet and his retirement
to private life at Augusta, Mr. Blaine has busied himself with his
history, entitled Twenty Years of Congress, the first volume of which
was given to the public last April. When finished, this work will cover
the period from Lincoln to Garfield, with a review of the events which
led to the political revolution of 1860. The story he tells in his first
volume is given with the simplicity and compactness of a trained
journalist, and yet with sufficient fulness to make the picture distinct
and clear in almost every detail. The book is as easy to read as a
well-written novel; it is clear and interesting, and commands the
attention throughout, the more for the absence of anything like
oratorical display or forensic combativeness. In literary polish it is
not beyond criticism, though occasional infelicities of expression and
instances of carelessness do not outweigh the general clearness and
force of style. It is not at all points unerring in portraiture, nor
infallible in judgment, though the writer's impartiality of spirit and
desire to be just are conspicuous, and he gives cogent reasons for
opinions expressed. But in broad and comprehensive appreciation of the
forces by which the development of public opinion has been affected, the
work is one of great merit. It seems to be entirely free from those
personal qualities which have characterized Mr. Blaine in politics. It
is very remarkable that a man so prominent as a partisan in political
affairs could have written a book so free from partisanship.

Mr. Blaine is now in his fifty-fifth year. Although above medium height,
he is so compactly and powerfully built that he scarcely seems tall. His
features are large and expressive; he is slightly bald and his neatly
trimmed beard is prematurely gray; his brows are lowering--his eyes
keen. On the floor of Congress he manifested marvelous power and nerve.
His voice is rich and melodious; his delivery is fluent and vigorous;
his gestures are full of grace and force; his self-possession is never
lost. He has appeared on the stump in almost every Northern State, and
is an exceedingly popular and effective campaign speaker. But it is not
when on the platform, speaking alone, that he has shown his greatest
strength. He is strongest when hard pressed by opponents in
parliamentary debate. He is a thorough believer in the organization of
men who think alike for advancing their views. He believes that in order
to carry out any great project it is necessary to have a party
organization, not for the purpose of advancing individual interests, but
to push ahead a great line of policy. He is a positive with the courage
of his convictions, and believes in aggressive politics. As a
consequence of this he has always had both very strong friends and very
bitter enemies. It is probable that no man in this country has had a
stronger personal following since the days of Harry Clay.

Blaine is a man of great physical capacities. He has great powers of
application. His mind works quickly. He is as restless as the ocean and
has the power of accomplishing an immense amount of work. Another
quality which he possesses--rare but invaluable to a public man--is that
of remembering names and faces, of remembering men and all about them.
This ability is partly natural, partly the result of his training. He
has made it a study to get acquainted with men.

His knowledge of facts, dates, events, men in our history, is not only
remarkable, but almost unprecedented. It would be difficult to find a
man in the United States who can, on the instant, without reference to
book or note, give so many facts and statistics relating to the social
and political history of our country. This has been the study of his
life, and his memory is truly encyclopaedic.

Mr. Blaine was not a poor man when he entered Congress in 1863, and he
is not a millionaire now. For twenty years he has owned a valuable coal
tract of several hundred acres near Pittsburgh. This yielded him a
handsome income before he entered Congress, and the investment has been
a profitable one during his public life. He is said to have speculated
more or less, and to have made and lost millions. Yet in general his
business affairs have been managed with prudence and shrewdness, and he
now has a handsome fortune. His home in Augusta, near the State House,
is a plain two-story house. Several institutions in the State have
received benefactions from him, and his charity and generosity are
appreciated at home. He is a member of the Congregational Church in
Augusta, and constant attendance at divine service is a practice that he
has always inculcated upon his family. He has constantly refused to take
religious matters into politics, but his respect for his mother's belief
has made him tolerant and charitable toward all sects. In his own house
he is a man of culture and refinement, a genial host, a courteous
gentlemen. No man in public life is more fortunate in his domestic
relations. He is the companion and confidant of every one of his six
children, and they fear him no more than they fear one of their own
number. Mrs. Blaine is a model wife and mother. The eldest son, Walker
Blaine, is a graduate of Yale College and of the Law School of Columbia
College. He is a member of the bar of several States, and has been
creditably engaged in public life in Washington. The second son, Emmons
Blaine, is a graduate of Harvard College and the Cambridge Law School.
The third is James G. Blaine, Jr., who was graduated from Exeter Academy
last year. The three daughters are named Alice, Margaret, and Harriet.
The eldest was married more than a year ago to Brevet-Colonel J.J.
Coppinger, U.S.A.

But however Mr. Blaine may have distinguished himself as an author, a
diplomatist, or a man of varied experience and knowledge, in the present
political campaign, in which he is destined to play so important a part,
he will necessarily be largely judged in a political sense, and as a
politician. What does the record show in these directions? Has he been
true or false to his political convictions? Assuredly no man, be he
friend or foe, can point to a single instance in Mr. Blaine's long and
varied political career, in which he has betrayed his political trust or
failed to respond to the demands of his political professions. Through
the anti-slavery period; during the trying years of the war; through the
boisterous struggle for reconstruction, and constantly since, Mr.
Blaine's voice has always been heard pleading for the cause of equality,
arguing for freedom, and combating all propositions that aimed to
restrict human rights or fetter human progress. That he has sometimes
been swayed by partisan rather than statesmanlike considerations is
highly probable, but even that can but prove his zeal and devotion to
party principles.

No one claims for him political infallibility, and his warmest admirer
will admit that he, like other men, has faults. But those who look upon
Mr. Blaine as an impetuous and rash politician have but to read his
letter of acceptance to see how unjust that judgment is. Calm,
dignified, and scholarly, it discusses with consummate ability the
issues that to-day are engaging the attention of the American people,
and whether it be the tariff question or our foreign policy, he shows a
familiarity with the subject that at once stamps him as a man of
remarkable versatility and rare accomplishments. As the standard-bearer
of the great Republican party, he will unquestionably inspire in his
followers great enthusiasm and determination, and, if elected to the
high office to which he has been nominated, there is every reason to
believe that he will make a Chief Magistrate of whom the entire people
will justly be proud.

* * * * *

THE BOUNDARY LINES OF OLD GROTON.--III.

By the Hon. Samuel Abbott Green.

The running of the Provincial line in 1741 cut off a large part of
Dunstable, and left it on the New Hampshire side of the boundary. It
separated even the meeting-house from that portion of the town still
remaining in Massachusetts, and this fact added not a little to the deep
animosity felt by the inhabitants when the disputed question was
settled. It is no exaggeration to say that, throughout the old township,
the feelings and sympathies of the inhabitants on both sides of the line
were entirely with Massachusetts. A short time before this period the
town of Nottingham had been incorporated by the General Court, and its
territory taken from Dunstable. It comprised all the lands of that town,
lying on the easterly side of the Merrimack River; and the difficulty of
attending public worship led to the division. When the Provincial line
was established, it affected Nottingham, like many other towns, most
unfavorably. It divided its territory and left a tract of land in
Massachusetts, too small for a separate township, but by its
associations belonging to Dunstable. This tract is to-day that part of
Tyngsborough lying east of the river.

The question of a new meeting-house was now agitating the inhabitants
of Dunstable. Their former building was in another Province, where
different laws prevailed respecting the qualifications and settlement of
ministers. It was clearly evident that another structure must be built,
and the customary dispute of small communities arose in regard to its
site. Some persons favored one locality, and others another; some wanted
the centre of territory, and others the centre of population. Akin to
this subject I give the words of the Reverend Joseph Emerson, of
Pepperell,--as quoted by Mr. Butler, in his History of Groton (page
306),--taken from a sermon delivered on March 8, 1770, at the dedication
of the second meeting-house in Pepperell: "It hath been observed that
some of the hottest contentions in this land hath been about settling of
ministers and building meeting-houses; and what is the reason? The devil
is a great enemy to settling ministers and building meeting-houses;
wherefore he sets on his own children to work and make difficulties, and
to the utmost of his power stirs up the corruptions of the children of
God in some way lo oppose or obstruct so good a work." This explanation
was considered highly satisfactory, as the hand of the evil one was
always seen in such disputes.

During this period of local excitement an effort was made to annex
Nottingham to Dunstable; and at the same time Joint Grass to Dunstable.
Joint Grass was a district in the northeastern part of Groton, settled
by a few families, and so named from a brook running through the
neighborhood. It is evident from the documents that the questions of
annexation and the site of the meeting-house were closely connected. The
petition in favor of annexation was granted by the General Court on
certain conditions, which were not fulfilled, and consequently the
attempt fell to the ground. Some of the papers relating to it are as
follows:

A Petition of sundry Inhabitants of the most northerly Part of the first
Parish in _Groton_, praying that they may be set off from said
_Groton_ to _Dunstable_, for the Reasons mentioned.

Read and _Ordered_, That the Petitioners serve the Towns of
_Groton_ and _Dunstable_ with Copies of this Petition, that
they show Cause, if any they have, on the first Friday of the next
Sitting of this Court, why the Prayer thereof should not be granted.

Sent up for Concurrence.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 264), March 11, 1746.]

_Francis Foxcroft_, Esq; brought down the Petition of the northerly
Part of _Groton_, as entred the 11th of _March_ last, and refer'd.
Pass'd in Council, _viz._ In Council _May_ 29th 1747. Read again,
together with the Answers of the Towns of _Groton_ and _Dunstable_,
and _Ordered_, That _Joseph Wilder_ and _John Quincy_, Esqrs; together
with such as the honourable House shall join, be a Committee to take
under Consideration this Petition, together with the other Petitions and
Papers referring to the Affair within mentioned, and report what they
judge proper for this Court to do thereon. Sent down for Concurrence.

Read and concur'd, and Major _Jones_, Mr. _Fox_, and Col.
_Gerrish_, are joined in the Affair.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 11), May 29, 1747.]

_John Hill_, Esq; brought down the Petition of the Inhabitants of
_Groton_ and _Nottingham_, with the Report of a Committee of
both Houses thereon.

Signed _Joseph Wilder_, per Order.

Pass'd in Council, _viz._ In Council _June_ 5th 1747. The
within Report was read and accepted, and _Ordered_, That the
Petition of _John Swallow_ and others, Inhabitants of the northerly
Part of _Groton_ be so far granted, as that the Petitioners, with
their Estates petition'd for, be set off from _Groton_, and annexed
to the Town of _Dunstable_, agreable to _Groton_ Town Vote of
the 18th of _May_ last; and that the Petition of the Inhabitants of
_Nottingham_ be granted, and that that Part of _Nottingham_
left to the Province, with the Inhabitants theron, be annexed to said
_Dunstable,_ and that they thus Incorporated, do Duty and receive
Priviledges as other Towns within this Province do or by Law ought to
enjoy.

And it is further _Ordered_, That the House for publick Worship be
placed two Hundred and forty eight Rods distant from Mr. _John Tyng's_
North-East Corner, to run from said Corner North fifty two Degrees West,
or as near that Place as the Land will admit of.

Sent down for Concurrence.

Read and concur'd with the Amendment, _viz._ instead of those
Words, ... _And it is further Ordered, That the House for publick
Worship be_ ... insert the following Words ... _Provided that
within one Year a House for the publick Worship of_ GOD _be
erected, and_....

Sent up for Concurrence.

[Journal of the House of Repesentatives (page 26), June 6, 1747.]

To his Excellency William Shirley Esquire Captain General and Governour
in Chief in and over his Majestys Province of the Massachusetts Bay in
New England The Hon'ble: the Council and Hon'ble: House of
Representatives of the said Province in General Court Assembled at
Boston the 31'st. of May 1749.

The petition of the Inhabitants of the Town of Dunstable in the Province
of the Massachusetts Bay

Most Humbly Shew

That in the Year 1747, that part of Nottingham which lyes within this
Government and part of the Town of Groton Called Joint Grass preferred
two petitions to this Great and Hon'ble: Court praying that they might
be Annexed to the Town of Dunstable which petitions Your Excellency and
Honours were pleased to Grant upon Conditions that a meeting house for
the Publick Worship of God should be built two hundred and forty Eight
Rods 52 Deg's: West of the North from North East Corner of M. John Tyngs
land But the Inhabitants of the Town Apprehending Your Excellency and
Honours were not fully Acquainted with the Inconveniencys that would
Attend placeing the Meeting House there Soon after Convened in Publick
Town Meeting Legally Called to Conclude upon a place for fixing said
meeting house where it would best Accommodate all the Inhabitants at
which meeting proposals were made by some of the Inhabitants to take the
Advice and Assistance of three men of other Towns which proposal was
Accepted by the Town and they accordingly made Choice of The Hon'ble:
James Minot Esq'r. Maj'r: Lawrence and M'r. Brewer and then Adjourned
the Meeting.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8