paring their causes, which would greatly lessen the labors of courts and juries.

In 1828, soon after his admission as an attorney, he was elected a member of the Assembly by the anti-Masons, and was twice reëlected. In 1832 he was elected to Congress as an antiJackson man, and served one term. After an interval of two years he was again elected, and twice reëlected. In Congress his talents, industry, and business capacity led to his occupying the highest places on committees. The reputation he won during his service in Congress led to his nomination and election as VicePresident. On the death of General Taylor he succeeded to the presidency.

Soon after becoming President, Mr. Fillmore formed a new Cabinet, all Whigs. Few great events occurred during his administration. But the seeds of disunion previously sown began to germinate, and they have since grown and produced fruit as deadly and fatal as the fabled upas-tree. These seeds were first sown on the purchase and on the admission of Louisiana and Missouri, in the movements of the abolitionists and nullifiers, in the proceedings in Congress concerning our Mexican acquisitions, and on the question of the extension of the Missouri Compromise. These matters became the subject of much feeling with a very considerable portion of the people, both North and South. The Free-Soil party sprang from them, and weakened and often dissevered party ties. Abolition and secession fed upon these difficulties, while the patriot mourned over them. Attempts were made in Congress to remedy existing difficulties. This produced a series of measures in 1850, called the Compromise. These consisted of acts concerning Texas and the organization of the Territory of New Mexico, the admission of California, establishing a territorial government in Utah, and to suppress the slave-trade in the District of Columbia, and the Fugitive-Slave Act. The latter Act was exceedingly distasteful to the abolitionists of the North, and the others contained provisions which were strongly objected to by the South. Each of these measures received the approval of Mr. Fillmore. Hopeful men believed that they constituted a lasting compromise, and that the

slavery agitation was finally ended. This hope proved a delu sion. The severity of the Fugitive-Slave Law, intentionally made worse by Southern manipulation to prevent its passing at all, provoked the abolitionists to renewed and greater exertions to arouse the public mind against slavery, and many States passed laws intended to cripple and defeat its execution. The South was not behind in the effort to arouse the public mind and prepare it for a conflict. The Kansas troubles followed, and the whole ended in the recent civil war and in the practical destruction of the Union, with a majority in both Houses of Congress claiming that ten States have been reduced to conquered colonies for which they are enacting laws to be enforced by the military with the bayonet.

We cannot affirm that Mr. Fillmore is responsible for any of the consequences which have flowed from these small beginnings, and clearly not if he had anticipated their magnitude. But the Whig party, of which he was the ostensible head, are unquestionably responsible. At the North they encouraged, courted, and fraternized with the abolitionists, and finally amalgamated with and were absorbed by them. From pure white, they became shaded and grew darker and darker, until they became of the abolition hue, and were found worshipping at the African shrine. At the South, the Whig party, first warmed at the secession fires, became more and more heated, then became friendly to secession, then loved, and then adored it, and finally exploded with it. There were noble exceptions both North and South, showing that, in the struggle for party ascendency, some have soared above the common motive, and entitled themselves to the appellation of constitutional patriots. But their numbers are limited.

Had the leaders of the Whig party continued their fidelity to the principles of that party and confined themselves to its usages, secession would never have arisen, nor the country been involved in civil war. There was scarcely a spot North where abolition by itself could carry an election for any thing, or in the South where a candidate ran as a secessionist. The contests were between Democrats and Whigs, and their common enemies seldom fought in their own name. Democratic principles were generally the most popular and best received, resulting in success a large por

tion of the time. Under these circumstances the Whig leaders became restive, and impatient for success. This could only be secured by bringing their party and the abolitionists at the North and secessionists at the South together as one party. The abolitionists and secessionists would not consent to be wiped-blotted —out, and hence the Whigs must abandon their organization and come to them. This was done, and the consequences are upon the country. The calamitous state of things which all good men deplore is the natural result of a want of fidelity to its principles by the Whig party. Probably no one more sincerely regrets the present state of things than Mr. Fillmore, who is undoubtedly truly patriotic and loves the Union, and feels for those who compose it. If any fault attaches to him, it is in not sufficiently resisting the effort of bad men to control the Whig party. He can hardly have forgotten that he was victimized and deprived of a nomination for the presidency in 1852 by this class of unprincipled men, one of whom was the most active in killing off the Whig party, and now stands next the throne faithful to nothing but his devotion to self-interest.

In person, manners, and conversation, Mr. Fillmore is pleasing and amiable. In all he says, there is a vein of truthful sincerity which insures confidence. He is kind-hearted and generous, and most firm in the performance of what he believes to be his duty. He is in very easy circumstances, but he practises an exemplary economy. He dispenses a cheerful and generous hospitality, devoting much time to reading and study. At the age of sixtyeight he enjoys robust health, in the good city of Buffalo. We understand that he openly repudiates Republicanism, and joined with the Democrats in defence of the Constitution and in putting down those who are trampling it under foot-a glorious work for his ripe old age.

95.-JOHN BROWN AT HARPER'S FERRY.

In former times, when words were used to communicate the thoughts of men, a martyr was a person who suffered death or persecution on account of his belief; and a murderer was one who deliberately and intentionally took the life of a human being

without the authority of law. These definitions have never changed, and will serve to characterize the acts of John Brown which we give. He was a native of Connecticut, once a resident of New York, and in 1859 a citizen of Kansas, where he had been an abolition partisan leader, and where grave crimes were imputed to him. He resolved to exterminate slavery in the South, vainly expecting that the whole slave population would rise at his call, and accomplish his cherished objects. In 1858 he and his followers held a secret meeting in Canada, and formed a constitution, when he was appointed commander-in-chief, and Kagi secretary of war. Under this British-made constitution military commissions were issued by Brown. On the 16th of October, 1859, Brown, with twenty-two followers, seized the Government armory-buildings at Harper's Ferry, with twenty or thirty officers and workmen, together with some of the principal inhabitants of the village and neighborhood, all of whom they made prisoners. The next morning they killed a negro porter at the railroad for refusing to join them. Mr. Boerly, who attempted to defend himself against the assailants, was shot dead. Captain George Turner and Mr. Fontaine Beckham, the mayor, were also shot dead. Of a military company who came to protect the town, four were killed, and a fifth made prisoner. Brown and his men retired into the engine-house. When the railroad men attempted to take this building, seven of their number were wounded, and two of Brown's were killed. On the arrival of Colonel Robert E. Lee from Washington, with two pieces of artillery and one hundred marines, he demanded a surrender, which Brown refused, except upon condition of being allowed to cross the Potomac unpursued, to which Colonel Lee would not consent. In battering the door of the engine-house, one of Lee's men was killed. Brown fought to the last, and only yielded when badly wounded. Of the whole band of twenty-two men, ten whites and three negroes were killed, three whites and two negroes were taken prisoners, four escaped, but two were subsequently taken in Pennsylvania. Brown was indicted for treason and murder under the laws of Virginia, found guilty, and hanged on the 2d of December. His remaining companions, except Aaron L. Stevens, who

was handed over to the United States for trial, on charges of murder and treason, committed within their jurisdiction, were convicted and hung on the 16th of December.

Was Brown a martyr or a murderer? It is unquestionable that under Brown's direction five men were shot and killed. This was murder, unless the constitution and government formed in Canada were a protection, which no one, except perhaps a bewildered secessionist or abolitionist, will pretend. He clearly was not a martyr. He did not die because of his opinions, but was hanged for committing unquestioned murder. He designed to commit other murders, and was only restrained by enforcing a law, which is common to every State, as well as to England. He was not executed for his opinions, but for his acts, constituting murder in the first degree. It is painful to add, that the Republicans either secretly justified or openly sympathized with this murderer, who had no pretence of a justification under any government or law. When Mr. Mason moved for a committee of the Senate to investigate the matter, Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, sought to defeat it. John P. Hale, a Senator from New Hampshire, treated the motion with levity and ridicule. On the day he was hung efforts were made in each House of the Legislature in Massachusetts to adjourn out of respect to the occasion, but did not prevail. In many places prayers were offered up and churchbells tolled. He was treated as a martyr, and placed in the same category with Paul and Silas. Churches were draped in mourning. Why all these proceedings in behalf of a convicted murderer? The answer must be, that the Republican party approved of his murders, because he belonged to their party and designed to promote their ends. They had undoubtedly furnished the means that defrayed the expenses, and enabled him to do what he did.

96.-AZARIAH C. FLAGG.

Since the loss of his sight, a few years since, the name of Mr. Flagg has been little before the public. But during his active life few in New York were more distinguished or respected. was born November 28, 1790, at Orwell, Vermont. At the age

He