mantle provinces, and even involve continental areas in vast loss and ruin. Famine is chronic in India and China. In the latter empire only three years ago 1,500,000 people were homeless or starving from the overflow of a single great river. Would an exclusive tax on land values be the only appropriate source of revenue for the provinces thus desolated? It is only a few years since several counties of a Western State, on the eve of a promising harvest, were visited by the red-legged grasshopper and swept as clean of vegetation as the pavements of a city. Would the doctrine of the unearned increment have been a solace to those stricken farmers? Would a single tax on city lots have been a convenience and a boon to the people of New Ulm and Rochester and Sauk Rapids after they had been swept by the tornado? States, like men, do wisely not to carry all their eggs in one basket. It is a principle of taxing systems to distribute the burden so that no one class, nor any one kind of property or industry, shall be ruined in case of disaster. There is no safety-valve to the single-tax boiler. perience teaches that they will surely and rapidly es tablish themselves as the ruling class in the state. In this day of large production, when the fashion of large farms worked by machinery is coming so widely into vogue, we should not have long to wait before a landed aristocracy showed its powerful grip upon our legis. lative departments, placed its best man in the executive chair, and filled the bench of our supreme tribunal with judges whom it could depend upon. Mr. George himself suggests the best reason of all for expecting this result. On page 384 of “ Progress and Poverty" he says: "The tax on land values is the only tax of any importance that does not distribute itself. It falls upon the owners of the land, and there is no way in which they can shift the burden upon any one else.” He was thinking at the moment as an economist, not as a politician. Lay the taxes on landlords and you may trust the real-estate lawyers to find them a political way of escape from the burdens. It is with difficulty that the people now submit to direct taxation in amounts sufficient to support the inPassing by a group of other assumptions of interest to stitutions which modern states must needs maintain. economists, such as that land is the only form of wealth The public schools are ill equipped, the teachers poorly which increases in value as population swells, that paid. Would things be bettered if the fortunes of the value and utility are interchangeable terms, and that state were placed in the hands of the land-holding class? value is a result of production and not an outcome of That class would name the assessors, dictate the rates exchange, we reach the fundamental postulate of the and valuations and the purposes to which revenue single-tax optimists, which is that all land belongs to should be applied, or human nature will have undereverybody. This statement is only the exaggeration and gone a new creation. caricature of a doctrine that is true, but only true within reasonable limitations, and as understood by reasonable persons, who know the inadequacy of language to express all that is in the minds of men. We assert the equality of all men, and we understand that word in a certain reasonable way. We say, for example, that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and the statement is true, but only true in a reasonable sense. The words do not import that any individual or clique or party may withdraw consent, refuse to pay taxes or to serve on juries, nor that resident aliens, minors, paupers, and idiots may vote. The state in a certain true sense owns all its territory, but that truth does not conflict with the right of citizens also to own lands. The doctrine that the land of the world belongs to God's children is a harmless truism of no practical efficacy; "void," as lawyers phrase it, "for uncertainty." Property is an institution, an inheritance, not a theory. Rights, practical, reasonable, legal rights, do not descend from the clouds; they have grown up out of human experience and the nature of things. Finally (under this head), these amiable proselytes neglect to take any account of the probable political consequences of their scheme, provided it were possible to clear the way for it. It is a common experience of nations that changes in their economic institutions are followed by totally unexpected consequences: so short is the sight of the wisest men. But there is one consequence of the scheme under discussion which experience may warn us from pursuing. Put all your taxes on any one class of persons and you at once consolidate the members of it into a compact body, ready either to embarrass and to oppose the government or to take possession of the powers of the state and to dictate the laws. If the class selected be the land-holding people,― and that class embraces a large majority of the voters,—all ex THIRD. Finally, the single-tax plan is not a plan of taxation at all in the proper and accepted sense of the word, and it was not originally proposed as a plan of taxation proper. There are two ideas inherent in the word tax, or rather two phases of one idea. The word, at bottom, means to apportion by cutting, and we have the principle on the one hand that taxes must be proportioned to the public needs, and on the other, apportioned equitably among the people who are to pay. These principles are reasonable, of universal acceptance, and of immemorial usage. No free people will for a moment consent that their agency, the government, may assess and collect taxes ad libitum and without regard to the purposes and duties of government. Nor will a wise people, by imposing the burdens of the state on any one class, lay the foundation for a claim by that class to rule the state. Exactions of money, goods, or services not proportioned to public uses, and not apportioned to private ability and interest, are not, in any just sense of the word, taxes. The proposed single tax is but a piece of remedial social policy. Its advocates hold that under exist ing conditions human progress is and must continue to be accompanied by poverty-deepening, widening, irremediable poverty. They refuse to admit that such means as better government, better education, better habits, coöperation, and so on, can have the least effect in counteracting this tendency, whose cause they find in the private ownership of land. Private property in land they declare to be a “ bold, bare, enormous wrong, like chattel slavery"; for this alleged wrong they see but one remedy the utter abolition of private property in land. Mr. George is of opinion that it would be socially just and economically advantageous to abolish all private titles by a single stroke of legislation, but thinks it better to accomplish the same thing in a simpler, William W. Folwell. easier, and quieter way "In "Progress and Poverty," to enter upon any defense of the institution of property on page 364, he says," It is not necessary to confiscate in land, nor to apologize either for defects in our existland; it is only necessary to confiscate rent." Here we ing land laws or for acknowledged evils in our present have the core and essence of the single-tax philosophy system of taxation for revenue. -confiscation, frankly and for the moment boldly, confiscation: confiscation of rent, because that will lead to virtual confiscation of land. Thus without jar or shock land would "be really common property." How genial the suggestion of doing things in a simple, easy, and quiet way, instead of resorting to the honest but rough-and-ready plan of universal eviction! Mr. George is indeed so mild-mannered a mutineer that he will not scare his fellow citizens with a naughty word. He hastens to replace that malodorous term with another which may hold up its head in any respectable circle. These comfortable words may be read on the page just quoted: "What I therefore propose as the simple yet sovereign remedy which will elevate morals, and taste, and intelligence, carry civilization to yet nobler heights, is to appropriate rent by taxation." Is this honest? Is it candid to say "appropriate rent by taxation" when confiscation of land is meant? Confiscation and taxation are not synonymous and interchangeable terms. They are diverse and irreconcilable terms. Taxation implies apportionment to public needs and private ability. Confiscation means seizure to the public treasury in an arbitrary way. In this case it is specifically insisted that the collection of rental value is not to be gauged by the regular and usual demands of the state. The whole or "nearly" the whole rental is to be extorted; for if not, the object in view, which is not revenue, but virtual confiscation of land, will not be effected. If more than a scintilla of rent remains in the hands of the landlords, they will have the advantage of society. It is admitted that the rental value of land "in well-developed countries" is now more than enough to support the government, and will increase with the progress of society. Confiscation, however, is to go on, and the swelling surplus is to be disposed of by the establishment of public baths, libraries, gardens, lecture-rooms, music and dancing-halls, theaters, universities, technical schools, shooting-galleries, play. grounds, gymnasiums, etc." The end of the socialist is to be reached without alarm or violence. In a matter involving a revolution in government, the reconstruction of society, and the abandonment of immemorial institutions, the idea of effecting the object by indirections and the use of smooth words is amusing, not to say nauseous. No one will be deceived. The four millions of farmers in the United States, before they cast their ballots for "appropriating rent by taxation," will understand just as well as the most ardent apostle of the single tax that "this simple device of placing all taxes on the value of land" will "be in effect putting up the land at auction to whoever" will "pay the highest rent to the state." The object of this paper being simply to expose the true nature and original purpose of the so-called single tax, it is not necessary A British Consul's Confidence in the Union Cause. THE following despatch (for a copy of which, made from the original in the British Foreign Office, THE CENTURY is indebted to Lady Archibald) was written by Sir Edward Archibald, Consul-General at New York, to Lord John Russell," Her Majesty's principal Secretary of State," eleven days after the fall of Fort Sumter and three months before the first battle of Bull Run. It is remarkable for its estimate of the temper and resources of the North, for its prediction of the ultimate failure of secession, and for its advice to the British Government that from motives both of humanity and policy it should ally its influence and sympa. thies with the Union cause. BRITISH CONSULATE, NEW YORK, April 24, 1861. MY LORD: I have the honour to report to Your Lordship that there has been no communication by mail or telegraph to or from Washington since Friday afternoon. During the last two days we have had rumours that the authorities of the State of Maryland had undertaken to restore the railroad communication through Baltimore, and reestablish telegraphic communication with the national Capital; but thus far nothing appears to have been done in this respect, and as, in the sadly disturbed state of the country, the special messenger with Lord Lyons's despatches for this packet may possibly fail to arrive before her departure, it may perhaps be needful that I should give Your Lordship a brief review of the startling events of the past few days, and a report of the existing condition of public affairs in this country. Your Lordship will have learnt from Lord Lyons of the bombardment of Fort Sumter by the forces of the Confederate States, and of its evacuation on Sunday the 14th instant. A full knowledge of the whole of this affair leaves no shadow of doubt that Major Anderson, and the very slim garrison under his command, displayed great courage and gallantry, and succumbed only when deprived of the capability of further resistance. Why the naval exFort did not cooperate with its defenders or send them aspedition sent from this port for the reinforcement of the sistance has not yet been satisfactorily explained. On Monday the 15th President Lincoln issued his proclamation calling out a militia force of 75,000 men to aid in executing the laws, and ordering the combinations of lawless men in the seceded States to disperse within twenty days, and at the same time summoning Congress to meet on the 4th July next in special session. The ambiguity of the President's inaugural address, the subsequent vacillating and apparently objectless policy of his Government, and the useless efforts of the Peace Conference at Washington and of the Virginian Convention to establish a satisfactory basis of reconstruction of the Union, had combined to produce a state of apathy and indifference in the public mind, which seemed almost introductory to a recognition of the Southern Confederacy public affairs. as the readiest solution of the complicated condition of But the attack upon and capture of Fort Sumter, followed by the President's proclamation, caused a sudden and complete transformation of public sentiment. The ulterior revolutionary designs of the Confederate leaders, and the sedulous preparation they had made to accomplish them, were now fully comprehended; and the stinging insult which had been inflicted on the national flag by the merciless bombardment of Fort Sumter and its starving garrison roused such a feeling of intense indignation throughout the entire North and West that the thusiasm for which he himself could not have been prePresident's proclamation was responded to with an enpared, and which it is hardly possible adequately to describe. The whole population of the free States, as it were one man, sprang to its feet on the instant, determined to sustain the Government, vindicate the honour of the national flag, and effectually quell the rebellion. Political differences of every kind were at once hushed, and there was but one heart, and one voice, in the unmistakable declaration that not only should the Government be upheld, but the Union be preserved, at whatever cost of blood or treasure. During the whole of the last week, and up to the time I now write, the most vigorous and energetic efforts have been made to push forward troops for the defense of the national Capital and other assailable points. The enrolment of volunteers has gone on without ceasing. The question is not who shall join the army, but rather who shall remain at home? The most liberal contributions of money and means of all kinds have been made by public bodies and by private individuals. This city has been, for the time, converted into a military camp. Business of every kind has given place to the needful military preparations. The clergy, the bench, the bar, all classes, men, women, and children, are fired with a patriotic ardour which the newspapers, filled as they are with details, still imperfectly describe. On Saturday a public meeting in support of the Government was held in this city at which not fewer than 100,000 persons were present, presided over by the leading and influential members of the community, and at which complete unanimity prevailed. A report of the proceedings and resolutions will be found in the newspapers which I transmit herewith. Day after day has only added to the excitement and to the earnestness of the movement. To revert to the order of events, the President's proclamation was followed by one from General Davis inviting applications for letters of marque and reprisal against Northern commerce. This in its turn was followed by a proclamation of President Lincoln, dated the 19th instant, establishing a blockade of all the ports of the seceded States; and instructions have now been issued to the collectors of customs forbidding the clearance of any vessels for ports in the seceded States. On or about Wednesday the 17th instant, the Convention of Virginia in secret session resolved to secede without submitting any ordinance for ratification by the people, as required by the Convention itself; and the leaders of the revolution in that State at once proceeded vigorously to cooperate with their more southern allies by organizing a large force, and seizing on Federal property. A body of some 2500 men despatched to seize the important United States Arsenal at Harper's Ferry, on the line of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, was defeated in its purpose only by the burning and blowing up of the arsenal by the detachment in charge of it, which then with difficulty effected its retreat. Meantime Fort Pickens at Pensacola has been closely invested by the Confederate forces, augmented by some of those released from Charleston. This fort was without doubt reinforced more than a week since by troops sent in the United States ship Brooklyn, and is said to be capable of effectively resisting the efforts of its besiegers. No intelligence whatever has been received from that quarter for several days, but it is believed the bombardment of the fort is now being prosecuted, and, whether successfully or not, it will be attended with great loss of life. Rumours prevail this morning that the fort has actually been captured. On the other hand, most serious apprehensions have been, and still are, entertained for the safety of Washington. The rapid advance of such a force as was known to be at the command of General Davis, with the active coöperation of the Virginians, it was fully feared might overpower the small body of troops defending that city under the command of General Scott. That this was the chief stroke of policy in the plans of the Confederate leaders is now well understood. The possession of the national Capital, and the belief of the existence of an extensive sympathy throughout the North with the Secessionists, or, at all events, of an indisposition to act coercively against them, were relied on to secure for the Confederate leaders such an ascendancy as would enable them to dictate the terms of the reconstruction of the Union. I send inclosed a slip or two from the papers of to-day giving the latest reports from Baltimore and Washington. From these it appears that the Capital is yet in a critical condition. I have also addressed to the Foreign Office the New York morning papers for the last four days. In the absence of any positive intelligence of the movements of the disunionists, owing to the interruption of the telegraphs and mails, it remains at this moment uncertain whether they may not make, and possibly succeed in, an attack on the Capital. It is believed, however, that their delay before Forts Sumter and Pickens, the indecision of the Virginian Convention, and, above all, their entire miscalculation of the sentiments of the people of the North, have somewhat marred their plans; and it is hoped that by the forces already at the command of the President they may be kept in check until the overpowering numbers fast hurrying to the Capital can be mustered there. The unexpected outbreak of the war had found the North and West, though abounding in men, money, and a spirit of hearty loyalty to the Constitution, still greatly unprepared in armament and equipment. Among the plans of the Secessionist leaders long since preconcerted and executed, and now openly boasted of in the South, was the removal from the free States of arms and munitions of war. Already there is discovered an alarming deficiency of even small arms for the militia and volunteers. The first movement of troops on the call of the President was from Massachusetts, followed by large levies from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and this State. On Friday last, while passing through Baltimore, a portion of a Boston regiment was attacked by a very numerous mob of sympathizers with secession, when the troops were enabled to force their way through the city only after a riot and a combat in which two soldiers and eleven citizens were killed, and many wounded on both sides. The city from thenceforth hitherto has been entirely under the control of the Secessionists, and mob law rules. The railway bridges in the neighbourhood of the city have been burnt or cut down, the telegraph seized and interrupted, and all regular communication through Baltimore with Washington suspended. It appears to have been a preconcerted but not suspected plan of the Confederate leaders to prevent, at the proper moment, the sending of any reinforcements to Washington through Maryland, in which State the Union party is for the present overpowered and silenced. In proof of this plan a body of some three or four thousand Virginians passing round by Harper's Ferry are reported to have advanced into Maryland, to overawe and operate in that State, but which, at last accounts, had not yet approached Baltimore. This unruly city is now kept in terror of bombardment from Fort McHenry, which is in possession of an adequate force of Federal troops. A few days, however, will see the Baltimoreans brought to their senses, for (from what is manifest of the deep indignation of the North at this obstruction of their highway to the national Capital) a further persistence in such a course of proceedings would, I verily believe, lead to the bombardment and probable destruction of the city. Fort Monroe, commanding the mouth of the James River, one of the strongest forts of the country, and an important strategical position, has been fully garrisoned by Federal troops. The navy yard and stores at Norfolk, however, being incapable of defense, were the day before yesterday destroyed, and all the ships of war there were burnt to prevent their falling into the enemy's hands. At this port (New York) all vessels are prevented from proceeding to sea between sunset and sunrise, and guardboats are stationed at the outlets to see that no provisions or munitions of war are allowed to be sent to the enemy's ports. The ships at the navy yard at Brooklyn are being equipped for sea with all possible speed. These consist of the Wabash and Roanoke, screw steam frigates, and the Savannah. The Perry brig went to sea yesterday. Orders have been given to fit out a large number of gunboats of light draft; and the merchants of the Northern ports will supply numerous effective vessels to aid the blockade of Southern ports, and act in union with the Federal naval forces. But now that this war has been provoked by the leaders of the secession movement, it is, I think, quite certain that the North will not allow it to be terminated until they have completely crushed the rebellious uprising against the authority of the Government, and either coerce the seceded States back into the Union, or dictate the terms and conditions of their separation from it. Although the North has been taken at a disadvantage, has been by the wily plans and prearrangements of the Secessionists stripped of arms, of which they are now in great want for their volunteers, there cannot be a question that they will, nevertheless, effectually suppress the rebellion. They have, after long and patient forbearance, entered upon the struggle forced upon them with a determination never to bring it to a close until they shall have effectually prevented the possibility, for a long time to come, of the recurrence of any similar attempt to subvert the Constitution of the Republic. For my own part, in this view of the case, I believe that the most merciful course and, in the end, the most salutary results will depend on the Federal Government placing itself as speedily as possible in such a commanding attitude of power as to render further resistance to its authority utterly hopeless. I believe that the escape of the white population of the South from the horrors of servile insurrections (of the commencement of which there are already rumours) renders it necessary that the Federal Government should put out its whole strength, as it is preparing to do, at the earliest moment, and thus anticipate the useless wasting by the Southern States of the strength and means which they will now, more than ever, require to keep their slave population in subjection. The national honour vindicated, the Constitution upheld, and the Government established in its supremacy, I have no fears that the Southern States will be unfairly dealt with. Motives of nterest, no less than magnanimity, under such circumstances, will secure to the Southern States, whether they continue in the Union or a separation be agreed on, everything to which they have a just right or claim. A prolongation of the contest, I need hardly say, will be attended with most disastrous consequences to other nations, and especially to our own commercial interests. In view of this certainty, and under the consciousness of the vast importance of the crisis, pardon my presumption, My Lord, if I venture to suggest the consideration of the expediency of a prompt interposition by Her Majesty's Government by way, if not of a mediator (which perhaps would hardly now be accepted), then by affording to the lawful Government of the United States such a consistent and effective demonstration of sympathy and aid as will have the merciful effect of shortening this most unnatural and horrid strife. It is unnecessary to waste a word on the many considerations which I believe would influence Her Majesty's Government to adopt such a line of policy in so far as it consistently may; but of this I feel assured, knowing what I do of the American people of the North and West, that, whether countenanced by England or not, they will never lay down arms until they have entirely subdued and extinguished this rebellion. The issue raised, in fact, is one which leaves them no alternative; while, on the other hand, I need not say how adverse and revolting to the spirit and feelings of the age and of our own nation would be the triumph of the principles on which the founders of the new Confederacy have based their government. Praying Your Lordship's pardon for these observations, which have run to greater length than I intended, I have, etc., E. M. ARCHIBALD. A Brotherhood of Christian Unity. On the evening of April 20 a meeting was held in Orange, New Jersey, to consider the subject of Christian Unity. I had become so impressed, or, I may say, oppressed, by the lack of united feeling and united effort among the churches that I asked some friends to join me in issuing a call for such a meeting. It was not largely attended, but an earnest spirit was evident in those who were present. In the essay which I had prepared for the occasion I suggested as a possible solution of the difficulty, or as an effort at least to attempt to translate sentiment into some form of action, the formation of a Brotherhood of Christian Unity. Dr. Lyman Abbott, hearing of my plan, asked me to present it in the columns of "The Christian Union." In the editorial department of the issue of June 11, containing the article, Dr. Abbott wrote as follows: Mr. Seward's article on another page affords another and a somewhat striking indication of that growing tendency towards the unity of faith which is characteristic of the present age. It is peculiar in that it distinctly recognizes and proposes to leave wholly undisturbed the difference in creed, ritual, and government which separates the denominations, and simply furnish a testimony to the unity of faith which is deeper than any creed. It is also peculiar in that it is based upon the principle that loyalty to Christ, not adhesion to a series of intellectual propositions, is the true and adequate basis of Christian Union. To what Mr. Seward's plan may grow it is not possible to foretell. It may be born before its time, and be only a percursor of a movement on similar principles, but possibly different in form, to follow hereafter. In any case the suggestion cannot be in vain, for it is never in vain for a prophet to familiarize the public mind with new ideas which it is not yet ready to receive. We commend Mr. Seward's simple pledge to the consideration of our readers as one step towards a realization of a fellowship which now has no symbol. Let them read his plan and then answer to themselves the question, Why not? The response of the public to the suggestion is truly remarkable. Letters of inquiry pour in from all directions and from people of every Christian sect and of no sect. It indicates that the feeling of dissatisfaction with the present bondage to creeds is widespread and deep. Those who write usually express the opinion that the plan of a Brotherhood of Christian Unity is a practical movement in the right direction without undertaking too much. As its title implies, it is a fraternization rather than an organization. It is not proposed, at least for the present, to have any constitution, officers, or funds. Its purpose is merely to enable individuals to place themselves more definitely under the law of love. It goes back of the ecclesiasticism of the past eighteen centuries and accepts the creed of Christ and of the first century-love to God and love to man. It gives an opportunity for members of the Christian Church in all its various branches to acknowledge one another as brethren of one family, and not as belonging to distinct factions. It also gives an opportunity for those who are out of the churches and out of sympathy with the church creeds to step upon a Christian platform. The only qualification of membership of the Brotherhood of Christian Unity is signing the following pledge: I hereby agree to accept the creed promulgated by the Founder of Christianity-love to God and love to man -as the rule of my life. I also agree to recognize as fellow Christians and members of the Brotherhood of Christian Unity all who accept this creed and Jesus Christ as their leader. I join the Brotherhood with the hope that such a voluntary association and fellowship with Christians of every faith will deepen my spiritual life and bring me into more helpful relations with my fellow men. that I intend to study his character with a desire to be Promising to accept Jesus Christ as my leader means imbued with his spirit, to imitate his example, and to be guided by his precepts. I have prepared a pamphlet treating the subject more fully, which will be sent with two copies of the pledge for ten cents (to cover expenses). One pledge is in certificate form, illuminated and printed on bond paper. The other is note-size, to be signed and returned as a means of recording the membership. EAST ORANGE, N. J. Theodore F. Seward. W. L. Dodge. WILLIAM LEFTwich Dodge, the painter of " David and Goliath," reproduced on page 665, is in his twen ty-fifth year, having been born in Virginia in the spring of 1867. His mother, herself an artist of talent, early discovered the boy's inclination towards art, and removed with him to Munich, and thence to Paris, where at the age of sixteen he entered the École des Beaux-Arts. During his school career he took several prizes, passed Number One in the competition for entrance to Gérôme's class, and six months after his admission won the third medal in the Concours d'Atelier. The next year he obtained an honorable mention and another medal, and in the third year (1888) the first prize, Prix d'Atelier. Mr. Dodge first became known to Americans by his picture "The Death of Minnehaha," painted during the third year of his student course, and when he was but nineteen years of age. This picture was exhibited at the Prize Fund Exhibition of The American Art Galleries in 1886, and was awarded a gold medal. "David and Goliath " was painted in the year in which the artist achieved his majority. It was exhibited in the Salon in the spring, and at Munich in the fall of 1888, and received a medal at the Paris Exposition of 1889. The next year Mr. Dodge exhibited the largest picture and most important composition he had undertaken (36 x 18 feet) "The Burial of the Minnisink "-in illustration of Longfellow's poem, together with a very clever study of the nude in sunlight, called "Waterlilies." He returned to this country in the autumn of 1889, and in 1890 gave at the American Art Galleries an exhibition which awoke much criticism. It is but fair to say, however, that most of it was of a friendly nature, the critics probably bearing in mind that it was hardly to be expected that a boy twenty-two years of age would handle compositions covering hundreds of square feet of canvas, and in some cases containing more than fifty figures, without laying himself open to some adverse criticism. While it is true that art knows neither age nor nation, the fact of this lad having successfully handled pictures of such a size is certainly remarkable. I think that Mr. Dodge is far from having reached the fullness of his development, and that, could he be given large wall spaces to work on, we should probably have in him an artist who would make his impression on the nation. He is versatile, and, although his facility of execution occasionally carries him away, is an excellent draftsman, ingenious in his arrangement of groups, and with a good eye for the discernment of character. W. Lewis Fraser. Greeley's Estimate of Lincoln. UPON looking over the table of contents of the July CENTURY, just received, my eye fell upon "Greeley's Estimate of Lincoln -- an unpublished address." I at once turned to it to see if it was the lecture I heard Mr. Greeley deliver in Washington a few years after the war. I looked first at the opening paragraph, for I had a distinct recollection of the pun on the words "attempts at the life of Abraham Lincoln." Sure enough, there it was, but with the foot-note doubting whether it was ever delivered. There is no doubt of it, and I presume you will receive other testimony to the same effect. JAS. M. HUDNUT. 348 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, July 1, 1891. MR. G. H. CRAWFORD writes to say that Mr. Greeley delivered the Lincoln lecture in New York, he thinks, about 1870. MR. ROBERT E. DEYO points out an error on pages 373 and 379 of the Greeley lecture in the July CenTURY, where the name of Congressman Daniel Gott is printed Galt. MR. SAMUEL SINCLAIR calls attention to a typographical error on page 375, in which the inauguration of Pierce is referred to the year 1856. Mr. Greeley properly wrote 1852. Erratum. THE picture on page 176 of the June CENTURY in Mrs. Harrison's article on "Colonel William Byrd of Westover, Virginia," was incorrectly entitled "The Hall at Westover," it being in reality a picture of the hall of the house of Dr. E. G. Booth, at the Grove, in James City County, Virginia. The mistake arose from its general resemblance to the hall at Westover. BRIC-À-BRAC. The cobweb 'neath thy chin that 's crossed Remains demurely put, EDITOR. While those are ever whirled and tossed That show thy saucy foot; That show the silver grayness of Thy stockings' silken sheen, And mesh of snowy skirts above The silver that is seen. How, as the spider, from his web, Do thy sweet measures' flow and ebb There are not more alluring snares Swing on! Sway on! With easy grace The love I dare not-to thy face I offer, at thy feet. W. D. Ellwanger. |