Jackson, except in Pennsylvania. On the 4th of March, 1833, both were sworn into office, Mr. Van Buren becoming presiding officer over the Senate which the year before had rejected his nomination as minister to England—a triumph, although it did not seem to affect him, which was keenly felt by those engaged in the movement to crush him. He was a most dignified and impartial presiding officer, and commanded the respect of all who preserved their own self-respect, and a proper regard for the Senate.

The people were not satisfied with the rebuke they had administered for the wrong done Mr. Van Buren. In 1836 he was nominated for the office of President, and was elected. The nullifiers at the South, and the abolitionists at the North, made common cause with the Whigs against him, although professing conflicting political opinions. Richard M. Johnson, of Kentucky, who ran with Mr. Van Buren for Vice-President, lacking one vote of a majority, was elected Vice-President by the Senate. Both were sworn in on the 4th of March, 1837.

On assuming the duties of the office of President, Mr. Van Buren exhibited qualities fitting him for the high position that few supposed he possessed. He was prompt in the discharge of all his duties, and soon satisfied every one about him that he was President in fact as well as in name. He made calls upon his Cabinet for information, and assigned its members duties to perform, so that B. F. Butler said it reminded him of former days in Mr. Van Buren's law-office in Albany. Every duty devolving upon him as President was performed promptly, and all necessary responsibility was cheerfully borne. On the other hand, he held all about him responsible for what the law, or duty, devolved upon them. He never interfered with the rights and privileges of the members of his Cabinet, or any one else. When asked for a clerkship in one of the departments, his reply was, that he had not the power to appoint one, and both his inclination and duty. forbade his interfering with matters that did not belong to him.

As a business man Mr. Van Buren had no superior. He transacted business without any apparent effort or labor, and it never accumulated on his hands. When office hours were over

he usually found time for a horseback-ride before dinner. The dignity, proprieties, and hospitalities of the Executive mansion were sustained on all occasions with the greatest propriety. He was attentive to those friends who were sick, looking after their wants, and giving them rides in the country when able to bear them. Contrary to the custom of some Presidents, he visited the families of the members of his Cabinet. In his every-day living he preserved his early taste and relish for the Dutch dishes which his mother had made for her family, and they were very often on his table.

In another place we have given most of the leading events of his administration, and cannot repeat them. He failed in his reelection, not because he was in any respect in the wrong, but owing to a combination of circumstances which prevented a right appreciation of what he had done. His reply to the address of his friends inviting him to a public dinner on his return to the city of New York will ever remain a proud monument of his dignity and superiority as a man, and of his unbounded confidence in the people, and especially in their sober second thought.

In the Baltimore Convention of 1844 Mr. Van Buren received a majority of the votes, but, owing to the adoption of the twothirds rule, failed of a nomination.

In 1848 he consented to be governed by the judgment and wishes of certain of his friends, and, yielding his own inclinations, reluctantly consented to run for President when there was no hope of an election. This error of his friends was visited upon him, and defeated all future chances of success. But it had no effect upon his political principles, which remained uniformly and firmly Democratic to the end of his life. On retiring from the presidency, Mr. Van Buren returned to his native town, and became a cultivator of the soil until his death, July 24, 1862. His last years were spent most pleasantly among those ancient Dutch families in Columbia County, who, like him, continued to speak their native tongue on all convenient occasions. Mr. Van Buren was an eloquent as well as a forcible speaker. In an address to the jury, at Hudson, in a seduction case, he is said to have drawn tears from every eye in the court-house. His conversation had a peculiar fascination and charm about it, which was

more easily felt than described. His attachment to his friends was strong and lasting. Like Jefferson, he never spoke evil of any one, and disliked to hear others do it. He believed in democratic principles, and could not help it, and he supposed those who took opposite ground did so because they could not believe otherwise. He therefore never allowed differences of opinion on political subjects to disturb personal and neighborhood friendships. At a public reception at Ogdensburg in 1840, the writer, as a chairman of a committee of citizens, said to him, among other things: "It affords us pleasure to reflect that your whole life has been distinguished by an entire absence of those bitter and exasperated feelings which so often characterize the acts of those engaged in political controversies. Personal animosities materially disqualify the mind for judging accurately-they destroy those fraternal and national feelings which are so essential in judging accurately, and, without which, our efforts to harmonize are doubtful, and disputed questions in our public affairs will prove entirely unavailing."

To these remarks he replied: "It can scarcely be necessary to say how cordially I approve the opinion you have expressed, in regard to the spirit in which political controversies should be conducted everywhere, and particularly under institutions like ours; and I allow myself to hope that the sentiment which does you, and those you represent, so much credit, will soon become that of the whole country."

Mr. Van Buren lived up to these professions, and it would be fortunate for our people if they would follow his example. Every man who has political or religious principles, should be firm and consistent in their support, but this should not make him the personal enemy of those who entertain different sentiments. Men who honestly entertain opinions on such subjects cannot avoid doing so. It is as impossible for all men to think alike as it is to look alike. Faults show themselves when men will not strive to understand, and will not think, but will blindly follow without doing either. This may occasion want of respect, but is no cause for hatred and persecution, and those politicians who preach and practise the contrary doctrines are unworthy of being followed,

either as the leadears of a political party, or as teachers of the charitable doctrines of the Christian religion.

In person, Mr. Van Buren was of medium size, but became large in his old age. He was always neat and conformed in dress to the usages of the times. He was no speculator or miser, but relied upon his industry for the comforts and conveniences of life. He was not poor. A counsel-fee in wild land, which he desired to avoid taking, at a future day made his circumstances easy, owing to public improvements in the State. On all occasions he used

his earnings freely to sustain the dignity of the position he occupied. At the time of his death he was engaged in preparing memoirs of his own times, which he did not complete. An episode on political parties, which wanted the finish of his pen, has been published, and is highly interesting. His papers are in the hands of Charles II. Hunt, of New York, to be arranged and prepared for publication. Mr. Van Buren was charged by his adversaries with being a non-committal and managing man, but this charge had no foundation in fact. However wary he may have been in his intercourse with his opponents when not called upon to act, when business demanded an avowal, or duty required it, no man was ever more frank, open, and decided. The record of his life proves this to be true. His assumed management was simply this-he was a follower instead of a teacher of the people, and excelled his contemporaries in ascertaining the wishes and will of the people on new questions as they were arising, and shaped his movements accordingly. No man ever discovered more readily the channel in which the Democratic sentiment would flow. His pride was to go with the masses of the Democracy. It was never his policy to rule his party, but to go with it. He was sometimes in advance of the public mind in his actions, as in his efforts in favor of the canals, the abolition of imprisonment for debt, the repeal of the restraining laws which gave chartered banks a monopoly of the banking business, and in the establishment of an Independent Treasury. But the moment the disturbing causes which unsettled and misled the public mind were removed, the masses were found united and acting in concert, and sustaining him. Pointing out the acknowledged true path before the majority are pre

pared to walk in it, cannot be deemed management. It is simply early and superior foresight, in which none of his day excelled him.

82.-THE SUB-TREASURY.

It is not strange that a Government springing into existence in the midst of a Revolution, and utterly without means, should do no more than appoint a Treasurer. Michael Hillegas was quite equal to the task during the Revolution and for many years afterward, of receiving, keeping, and paying out all our revenues. When the first bank was chartered by Congress, in 1791, it claimed and enjoyed the profits derived from keeping any surplus, and its successor, chartered in 1816, did the same thing, with more ample powers. During the period between 1811, when the first bank charter expired, and 1816, when the second was established, we had neither surplus nor means for anybody to keep. Keeping our money in banks had grown like a parasitic plant, and seemed to form a necessary part of the system of collecting, keeping, and disbursing the public money. There was no absolute pressure upon the point of separating the banks from the Treasury, although highly objectionable, until the charter of the Bank of the United States was about to expire. State banks were tried, and, after withstanding the hostility of the old bank and opposition of a political party, failed and sunk under their own folly. Nothing was then left but for the Government to cut loose from all banks, and to authorize a sufficient number of assistant treasurers, located where the collection of the revenue should require it, which was recommended by Mr. Van Buren at the called session of 1837. The subject, in the Senate, went to the finance committee, of which Silas Wright was chairman, who reported a bill to carry the recommendation into effect. Although an Independent Treasury had been suggested in private circles, and among others by the writer, as early as 1834, as a measure' preferable to the State bank deposit system, which was legalized in 1836, which he opposed, still Mr. Wright's bill was the first practical step toward separating the public moneys from those of the banks, and keeping them in a Treasury belonging to and controlled by the Government. Out of