II.

Near the close of 1853 Mr. Sherman had made plans for removing from Mansfield to Cleveland, but at this point there intervened the summons from the political field which was to permanently change the course of his life. He had, in 1842, been roused to great political enthusiasm by hearing the celebrated Tom Corwin, of whom he tells the following story:

Tom Corwin's

ure.

"Mr. Corwin was cerAdvice tainly the greatest popular orator of his time. His face was eloquent, changeable at his will. With a look he would cause a laugh or a tear. He would move his audience at his pleasI vividly remember the impression he made upon me, though I cannot recall anything he said. At the close of the At the close of the meeting I was requested by the committee in charge to take Mr. Corwin in a buggy to Bucyrus. This I cheerfully did. I noticed that Mr. Corwin was very glum and silent, and, to cheer him up, I spoke of his speech and of the meeting. He turned upon me, and, with some show of feeling, said that the people who heard him would remember only his jokes, and warned me to keep out of politics and attend to my law. He told me that he knew my father, and was present at his death at Lebanon, where he (Mr. Corwin) lived. And then, brightening up, he gave me an interesting account of the early settlement of Ohio, and of the bar and bench, and of his early life as a wagonboy in Harrison's army. His sudden fit of gloom had passed away. I do not recall any circumstances that created deeper impression on my mind than this interview with Mr. Corwin."

First

a

Mr. Sherman's political Political Ideas ideas at this time were limited to hearty belief in protection and energetic hostility to the Democratic party, with its disposition to favor the extension of slavery and to acquire new regions, such as Texas, with a view to benefiting slavery. The contests which grew out of the repeal of the Missouri compromise May 30, 1854, led Mr. Sherman to study and to take a hand in politics. He was an ardent Whig, when the overwhelming defeat of General Scott in 1852, and the election to the presidency of Franklin Pierce, practically annihilated the Whigs. It was in the action of the

Democratic leaders of the Thirty-third Congress, which met December 6, 1853, that sectionalism openly and flagrantly violated the pledges of compromise and set in motion "a contest that was only closed by the most destructive civil war of modern times, and by the abolition of slavery." "This legislation," says Mr. Sherman, "brought me into political life"; and with this statement he proceeds to review the relations of slavery to the constitution and laws of the United States previous to 1854. The act of May 30, 1854, for the admission of Kansas and Nebraska into the Union, "repealed in express terms the Missouri compromise of 1820, and falsely stated the terms of the measure of 1850," with an effect upon popular opinion in the Northern states, and notably in Ohio, which brought about, in the summer of 1855, the organization of a new party, known at she Republican.

The war-cry of the elements gathering under this new banner was, Slavery shall gain no advantage over freedom by violating compromises.' Mr. Sherman brings out with extreme clearness the fact that the republicanism which he throughout represented had been and remained honestly and thoroughly loyal to the principle of not interfering with slavery in the states in which it existed, and that the battle, which set in at this moment, was one of aggression on behalf of slavery to bring it into free territory, and of defense against that aggression by the champions of perpetual freedom within such territory.

It was on this basis that Mr. Sherman bécame, in the summer of 1854, a candidate for Congress, and was, in October, elected, the entire twenty-one members for the state, who shared his views, easily defeating all the Democratic candidates.

by resolutions, March 19, 1856, appointing a committee of representatives to thoroughly investigate the troubles in Kansas; and of this committee Mr. Sherman was a member. A summary of the facts, gathered by an investigation which lasted from April 12th to June 17th, presents the reasons which led Mr. Sherman, after the report of the committee had been made, to declare, in a speech of July 31, 1856:

"The worst evil that could befall our country is civil war, but the outrages in Kansas cannot be continued much longer without producing it. To our Southern brethren I especially appeal. In the name of Southern rights, crimes have been committed, and are being committed, which I know you cannot and do not approve. . . . You are setting an example which, in its ultimate consequences, may trample your rights under foot. Until these wrongs are righted you must expect Northern men to unite to redress them. It may not be this year; but, as sure as there is a God in heaven, such a union will be effected, and you will gain nothing by sustaining Northern agitators in violating thecompromise of your fathers."

The frankness and vigor of this declaration, made by a member who had just entered upon active participation in national politics, disclose a mind as fully prepared then, as at any later time, for great leadership.

Fremont the Mr. Sherman points out Wrong Man the blunder that was made by the earliest Republican national convention held at Philadelphia, June 17, 1856, in nominating John C. Fremont, when either Seward or Chase was the natural candidate of the new party, and even McLean, of the Supreme Court, would have commanded support impossible to Fremont. Buchanan's nomination was one, he says, made with remarkable sagacity. In October, 1856, Mr. Sherman was re-elected to Congress. Buchanan defeated Fremont, very much to the advantage, Mr. Sherman says, of the developments which were to come and on which the destinies of the country would turn. The conclusion of Pierce's administration, and the administration of Buchanan, permitted and promoted a growth of national conviction, without which the inevitable conflict could not have been clearly defined and effectively carried

through. It permitted also the coming. of Lincoln, competent to an unexampled presidency, in place of the incompetent leader which Fremont would have been. During the last days of the Pierce administration Mr. Sherman, December 8, 1856, reiterated, in reply to a message from the president, the purpose of republicanism-resistance to the extension, but not the abolition, of slavery.

The Slavery Conflict

With the coming in of Buchanan's administration, the Dred Scott decision by Chief Justice Taney, two days after Buchanan's inauguration, gave to the aggressive favorers of slavery a basis for the contention that no territory within the Union could be held to be free in the sense of not permitting slavery to be taken into it. The notorious Lecompton constitution scheme in Kansas was carried through December 21, 1857. January 28, 1858, in the elaborate speech attacking that scheme, Mr. Sherman used these words of prophetic warning:

Allow me to impress the South with two important warnings she has received in her struggle for Kausas. One is, that while the sturdy integrity of the Northern masses stands in her way, she can gain no practical advantage by her welllaid schemes. The other is, that she must not come in contact with that cool, determined courage and resolution which form the striking characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon race. In such a contest her hasty and impetuous violence may succeed for a time, but the victory will be short-lived and transient, and leave nothing but bitterness behind."

The final event of the Kansas struggle was a constitution making the exclusion of slavery absolute, and the admission of Kansas into the Union as a free state. "This memorable result," says Mr. Sherman, was the turning point of the slavery controversy. The people of the South hastened preparations for a dissolution of the Union and a civil war. The Confederate Congress, meeting four days later, on February 9th, elected Jefferson Davis as its president, he having resigned as United States Senator January 21, 1861, eight days before Kansas was admitted to the Union. I have given much space to this controversy, to impress upon the readers of this volume that the war was not caused by agitation for the ab

olition of slavery, but by aggressive measures for the extension of slavery over free territory."

National

Finances

III.

The financial stringency of 1857 was the immediate occasion of Mr. Sherman's entering upon conspicuous and effective attention to the finances of the National Government. His first effort in this direction was a speech in Congress, May 27, 1858, which made a great impression, and led to his being placed in the next Congress on the Committee of Ways and Means. The criticism made by him in this speech bore fruit in the extensive correction of abuses then habitual in the executive departments,-abuses against the recurrence of which proper restrictive legislation was provided.

As a member of the Committee on Naval Affairs, in the Thirty-fifth Congress, Mr. Sherman had, on behalf of the minority of the committee, reported, February 3, 1858, supporting the action of Commodore Paulding in arresting the notorious William Walker, engaged in the invasion of Nicaragua in the interest of plans for making Central America an annex to the slave-holding communities of the South. The incident was one of great significance, in the same line as the Southern attempt upon Kansas, and the excitement created by it was intense. As in the case of Kansas, the effort to undo the act of Paulding utterly failed.

Mr. Sherman undertook, by resolutions introduced by him January 18, 1859, and as chairman of a committee appointed under these resolutions, to secure an investigation of scandalous abuses, to which the Secretary of the Navy and his subordinates were lending themselves. Although no action was taken in this matter before the conclusion of that session of Congress, resolutions of censure, reported by Mr. Sherman, were adopted by a strong vote in the succeeding Congress, and radical reforms secured in the administration of the Navy Department.

Mr. and Mrs. Sherman went abroad in the spring of 1859. They visited England, Scotland, the Rhine and Paris, Switzerland and Italy.

The election of October, 1858, gave Mr. Sherman his third term in Congress and launched him upon the period of his greatest efficiency and distinction as a

statesman. The reader of his modest narrative easily sees that his figure dominated the course of events above that of all other men participating in the developments which ended in civil war. His mind grasped the whole situation with a prophetic sagacity, a coolness of judgment and a clear-sighted courage, which not even Mr. Lincoln at first wholly shared. Mr. Lincoln had, in 1858, won extraordinary distinction by his debate with Douglas in Illinois,-a debate which had had, as Mr. Sherman points out, two results-first, to make clear that the controlling issue of the future must be the struggle between free and slave institutions; and, second, to raise Mr. Lincoln to the height of candidacy for the presidency in 1860. Other notable events had excited profound interest throughout the country. California was stirred to energetic republicanism by Terry's killing of Broderick, September 13, 1859. In Ohio the Republicans reared a fortress of strength by electing William Dennison governor. A few days later-October 17 -John Brown's heroic fanaticism at Harper's Ferry initiated the frenzy of alarm and resolution in the South, from which it was but a step to outbreak against the Union.

When Congress met, December 5, 1859, Mr. Sherman was the candidate of his party for speaker of the house. He had, not long before, given his name, through a friend, to Hinton R. Helper's "Impending Crisis of the South," and now found the fact used with some effect against him because of alleged or actual features of the book, which he would not have commended. The result was a prolonged contest, until February 1, 1860, when Mr. Sherman withdrew in favor of Mr. Pennington, who was immediately elected by a majority of one. The result was advantageous both to Mr. Sherman and to the country. He was made chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, of which he had not previously been a member-a position which made him the recognized leader of the House, practically controlling the order of its business and effectively influencing the main course of legislation.

nearly 100 members, it was passed in the House, May 10, Mr. Sherman's birthday, and passed the Senate in the next session, February 27, 1861, and became law. In the debate on this bill, the principles and details of which were, with slight exceptions, approved by him, Mr. Sherman made his first speech upon tariff matters, in connection with a motion, on the 7th of May, 1860, that debate on the bill should cease at 1 o'clock the next day. The next day saw the bill almost killed with amendments, and Mr. Morrill almost disposed to abandon it. In this critical moment Mr. Sherman executed a move which skillfully cleared away the jungle of amendments, brought the question back to the original bill, and secured its passage in the House.

The lucid explanations, which Mr. Sherman introduces in his narrative of the circumstances attending the passage of the Morrill bill, show an extraordinary mastery of this difficult branch of political economy. Tariff legislation, he insists, must always have a double objectREVENUE AND PROTECTION "a tariff or tax on imported goods sufficient in amount to meet the current expenditures of the government, and which, at the same time, will tend to encourage the protection in this country of all articles, whether of the farm, the mine, or the workshop, that can be readily and at reasonable cost produced in this country."

He continues:

"As a rule, it is better to fix the duty upon weight or measure, rather than upon value, for by the former mode the amount is easily ascertained by the scale or yardstick, while to base the duty upon value, changing from day to day, is to invite fraud and litigation.

"The main purpose is to secure the revenue from foreigners seeking our market to dispose of their products. The United States has the right, exercised by every nation, to determine upon what terms the productions of foreign nations shall be admitted into its markets, and those terms will be such as its interests may demand. Great Britain may admit nearly all commodities free of duty, but even that country is guided by her interests in all her commercial regulations. All other nations, classified as civilized, seek, like the United States, by tariff laws, not only to secure revenue, but to protect and foster domestic industry."

The real difficulty, Mr. Sherman says, is to avoid unequal and unjust discrimination in the objects of protection. The dogma that raw materials should be admitted free of duty, he declares to be far more dangerous to protection than the demand for free trade. He would give the farmer and the miner-coal, iron, wool, and other so-called raw materials— the benefit of protection along with machinery, textiles, etc., etc. Common labor he would favor not less than skilled labor. He demands for the miner, the laborer and the farmer protection not less than the great establishments, which represent "the hungry greed of selfish corporations." These great establishments, he says, involve two dangers-one the irrepressible conflict of labor with capital, and the other combinations to advance prices and prevent competition. This concentration of power in the hands of a few, he declares to be at this moment the disturbing element in many of our great industries. In conclusion he says:

"I have participated in framing many tariff bills, but have never succeeded in securing one that I entirely approved. The Morrill Tariff Bill came nearer than any other to meet the double requirements of providiug ample revenue for the support of the government and of rendering the proper protection to home industries.

"As members of Congress, divided by party lines and crude platforms, must, in the main, care for and protect local interests, I do not believe any fair, impartial and business tariff can be framed by them. It would be better for Congress and the law-making power, after determining the amount to be raised, to sanction and adopt a careful tariff bill, framed by an impartial commission, large enough to represent all sections and parties, all employers and employés. Hitherto the tariffs framed by Congress have been rejected by the people. Each party, in its turn, has undertaken the task with like result. Let us try the experiment of a tariff framed, not by a party upon a party platform, but by the selected representatives of the commercial, industrial, farming and laboring classes. Let Congress place upon the statute book such a law, and the tariff question will cease to be the foot-ball of partisan legislation."

The position here taken comes nearer to the high line of ideal statesmanship,

statesmanship upon strictly scientific principles and untainted with partisanship, than anything which has found expression since the utterances of Washington. The public service has, in the author of these suggestions, a master and a prophet of almost unexampled distinction. Men of every party, sincerely interested in public welfare, and disposed to remove public affairs from the morasses of polit

ical contention to the mount of knowledge and judgment from which the national interests can be securely defended against all the perils of changing time, will not fail to study Mr. Sherman's pages with the profoundest interest and the deepest gratitude.

The Question

of the Union

IV.

A greater question than the tariff engaged public attention, and gave to Mr. Sherman an opportunity for conspicuous leadership during the years 1860 and 1861. Abraham Lincoln's memorable speech in New York was made February 27, 1860. The Charleston Democratic convention burst asunder in the midst, April 23, the larger half with Douglas as its presidential nominee; while the minor half, under Davis, in the name of six Southern states, met at Richmond, and nominated Breckinridge.

At Chicago, May 16, the now thoroughly instructed and resolute Republicans went straight to the mark in the unanimous nomination of Lincoln, who received in November 180 electoral votes, to Breckinridge 72, Bell 39, and Douglas 12.

Mr. Sherman records his experience in speaking, April 30, 1860, in New York, with a written address, and again, in Philadelphia, May 28, wholly without manuscript, and says that it taught him to never do again as he had done in New York.

After Congress adjourned, June 28, 1860, and when, July 17, he had been unanimously nominated for re-election to Congress, Mr. Sherman took a foremost part in the Lincoln canvass, in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Jersey, and Delaware. Lincoln he supported as "honest, faithful, courageous and capable," and as "the only candidate who could secure a majority of the electoral vote." Of the notable speech at Philadelphia, September 12, in which he care

fully argued the impossibility of a popular election of any candidate except Lincoln, Mr. Sherman now says:

"In view of the events that followed, I can say that every prophecy made, and every argument stated, has been verified and sustained by the march of events."

A document of the greatest historical significance, and one remarkably revealing the promptness, vigor, and courage of statesmanship of the highest order, is a letter written by Mr. Sherman, December 22, 1860, in reply to an invitation to a public dinner in Philadelphia. In that energetic epistle he said:

"We have seen a Secretary of the Treasury, charged with the financial credit of the government, offering for sale the bonds of the government, and at the same moment declaring that it will be overthrown, and that he would aid in overthrowing it.

"We see other high officers receiving pay for services to the government, and yet, at the same moment, plotting its destruction. We see the treasury robbed by subordinate officers amid the general ruin.

Stranger still, we see the President of the United States acknowledging his duty to execute the laws, but refusing to execute them. He admits that the constitution is the supreme law; that neither a state nor the citizens of a state can disregard it; and yet, armed as he is with all the executive power, he refuses even to protect the property of the United States against armed violence. He will not heed General Cass, the head of his cabinet. He will not heed General Scott, the head of the army. He has transferred to Southern states more than 100,000 arms, of the newest pattern and most effective caliber, to be turned against the gov

ernment.

"Treason sits in the councils, and timidity controls the executive power. The president listens to and is controlled by threats. He theorizes about coercing a state when he should be enforcing the laws against rebellious citizens. He admits that the states have surrendered the power to make treaties, coin money, and regulate commerce, and yet we will probably have the ridiculous farce of a negotiation between the president and a state, for the surrender of forts, and arsenals, and sovereignty.

"Disunion is war. God knows I do not threaten it, for I will seek to prevent it in every way possible. I speak but the logic of facts, which we should not conceal from each other. If war results, what a war it will be! Contemplate the North and South, in hostile array against each other. If these sections do not know each other now they will then.

"We are a nation of military men, naturally turbulent because we are free, accustomed to arms, ingenious, energetic, brave, and strong. The same qualities that have enabled a single generation of men to develop the resources of a continent, would enable us to destroy more rapidly than we have constructed.

"It is idle for individuals of either section