nate credulity. You must sort and sift and compare authorities, and thus out of much conflict of testimony arrive at a just conclusion. For example, take this story which we find in the Reminiscences of Ben Perley Poore:

"General Grant was very positive in demanding that all officers of the Confederate army should enjoy their liberty. Among those of them who had been imprisoned by order of the Secretary of War was General Clement C. Clay, an ex-United States Senator from Alabama. He was taken ill in prison with asthma, and his wife came to Washingto to solicit his release. She went to She went to President Johnson, and he gave her the necessary order, which she took to Secretary Stanton. Stanton read the order, and, looking her in the face, tore it up without a word and pitched it into his waste-basket. The lady arose and retired without speaking; nor did Stanton speak to her. She was filled with despair. She saw her husband, in whom her

life was wrapped up, dying in prison, and she was unable to help him.

"Soon afterward she was advised to call on General Grant, who ascertained by consulting his roster of the Confederate Army that her husband was a Brigadier-General, then wrote an order directing his release, under the Apomattox parole, on giving the required bond, and add ed: 'I shall see that this order is carried out.' Having signed the order, he gave it to Mrs. Clay, who the next day presented it to the Secretary of War. Mr. Stanton read it, then touched his bell, and when an officer appeared, handed him the order, saying: 'Have that man discharged.'"

dis

That sounds veracious, and the facts stated do faithfully illustrate the character of the persons concerned. But the story is not true. If you will read what Mrs. Clay herself says about it, in "A Belle of the Fifties," you will learn that the order of President Johnston was respected, and that she herself telegraphed the release to Fortress Monroe that night. General Clay was liberated even previous to the arrival of the formal order, and General Grant's powerful aid was not invoked at all. It is true that Stanton did urge the President to have Ex-President Davis and General Clay put to death, and he would not countersign the order of release, but he did not tear up the order.

Does history tell you anything about the manner in which the great Marlborough stood behind the chair of the petty Prussian King, acting as menial, and protesting that the honor of doing so was too great for him? No; history is too dignified to notice trifles like that; and yet this adroit flattery had a mighty influence upon the course of events. The Prussian King was so captivated by the humility of the English General that he granted the Englishman's plea for the use of Prussia's fine troops in the war against France!

Can you believe that the Duke of Wellington would be equally complacent to gain his point?

Read what Sir F. H. Doyle says in his "Reminiscences:"

"I recollect hearing from my father an anecdote told him by the Duke himself, in his own character

istic language, one day when he was dining at the Apsley House. We learn from it, with what contempt uous indifference this great man pushed aside all considerations of personal dignity-false personal dignity, as he thought it-if they stood in the way of his duty to England. After the battle of Talavera,' he said, 'I wanted the Spanish force to make a movement, and called upon Cuesta to take the necessary steps, but he demurred. He said, by way of answer, 'For the honor of the Spanish crown I cannot attend to the directions of the British General, unless the British General go upon his knees and entreat me to follow his advice.' 'Now,' proceeded the Duke, 'I wanted the thing done, while as to going down upon my knees I did not care a two-penny d-n, SO down I plumped.'"

You know all about Martin Luther, don't you? The histories are full of him and his great work, the Reformation.

But if you would know the mental state of Luther, and that of the leading men of his time, you should read his "Table Talk." One or two paragraphs will go far toward showing you the vast difference between the current beliefs among learned men of that day and ours:

"There was at Nieuburg a magician named Wildferer, who, one day, swallowed a countryman, with his horse and cart. A few hours afterwards, man, horse, and cart, were all found in the slough, some miles off. I heard, too, of a seeming monk who asked a wagoner that was taking some hay to market, how much

he would charge to let him eat his fill of hay? The man said, a kreutzer, whereupon the monk set to work and had nearly devoured the whole load, when the wagoner drove him off."

August 25, 1538, the conversation fell upon witches who spoil milk, eggs, and butter in farm-yards. Dr. Luther said: 'I should have compassion on these witches; I would burn all of them. We read in the old law that the priests threw the first stone at such malefactors. "Tis said this stolen butter turns rancid, and falls to the ground when anyone goes to eat it.'

"Dr. Luther discoursed at length concerning witchcraft and charms. He said that his mother had to undergo infinite annoyance from one of her neighbors, who was a witch, and whom she was fain to conciliate with all sorts of attentions; for this witch could throw a charm upon children, which made them cry themselves to death. A pastor having punished her for some knavery, she cast a spell upon him by means of some earth upon which he had walked, and which she bewitched. The poor man hereupon fell sick of a malady which no remedy could remove, and shortly afterward died."

Of course you have read Boswell's Johnson, or Macaulay's famous Essay, but here is an anecdote which illustrates the learned Doctor and his times so perfectly that it is worth preservation. It is found in Rae's "Wilkes, Sheridan and Fox."

"The King's early aversion to Fox was intensified after the latter became the champion of Dissenters. In those days the intolerance of

Churchmen towards their fellowProtestants, who conscientiously differed from them in particular opinions, was alike extraordinary and discreditable. It was glorified in as a species of loyalty.. The forms under which it appeared were innumerable. This is one witnessed by Lord Eldon during a visit to Oxford: "I had a walk in New Inn Hall garden, with Dr. Johnson, Sir Robert Chambers, and some other gentlemen. Sir Robert was gathering snails, and throwing them over the wall into his neighbor's garden. The Doctor reproached him very roughly, and stated to him that this was unmannerly and unneighborly. 'Sir,' said Sir Robert, 'my neighbor is a Dissenter.' 'Oh,' said the Doctor, 'if so, Chambers, toss away, toss away as hard as you can.'

Sometimes when you would like to study a really great speech-you who see so many in print that are not great-turn to Henry Grattan's speech on Tithes. Few English orations equal this and none surpass it in the perfect mastering of the subject. Grattan was gifted with

a higher order of intellect, culture and oratory than any of the Irish tribunes, and in character he soared above them all. Unselfish, consecrated to his country, he was altogether a higher type than Curran and more heroic than O'Connell.

For many years he was prince of orators in the British Parliament, after having been the bright particular star of the Parliament of Ireland.

This much the histories will tell you; but if you would know how it all ended you must go down the lane to Memoirs.

"The old statesman lingered upon the stage too long, and one night when he rose in his place and addressed 'Mr. Speaker!' he rambled in his speech, grew tiresome, and lost the ear of the House. Members began to cough. In Parliament the tiresome orator is 'coughed down.'

"As the coughing grew in volume, old Grattan stopped. His face fell and his voice changed. He said to the Spkear, 'I believe, sir, they are right,' and sat down."

We find this touching incident in Crabbe Robinson's "Diary."

In 1892, there was a law establishing the free delivery of rural mail; but the P. O. Department construed this to mean towns and villages, out in the country. To men like John Wannamaker, who were reared in big cities, like Philadelphia and New York, a small town

of a couple of thousand inhabitants, looked "rural" enough to fulfill the requirement of the law in favor of "rural free delivery."

So it stood until I was sent to Congress. In the long session of 1892, I endeavored to amend the P. O. Appropriation bill by the in

Then the November elections came on. Livingston was re-elected: I was thrown out. We both went back to the short session, which expires by law on 4th of March. Livingston did not renew the fight for a truly rural R. F. D. I did, and with success.

The official Record, as quoted by the late Senator Senator Clay in the U. S. Senate, on Feb. 23, 1903, shows that, on Feb. 17, 1893, the following running discussion was taking place on the floor of the House, in consequence of my having offered the amendment to the P. O. Bill a second time:

"For free delivery service, including existing experimental free delivery offices, $11,254,943, of which sum $10,000 shall be applied, under the direction of the Postmaster-General, to experimental free delivery in rural communities other than towns and villages."

Mr. Holman: I reserve a point of order on that amendment.

254,943 for free delivery service. My amendment reduces the amount of that expenditure and simply directs that the Postmaster-General shall apply $10,000 of the appropriation to experimental free delivery in rural communities.

Mr. Loud: That is already provided for; the gentleman will accomplish nothing by his amendment.

Mr. Watson: It is not provided for in rural districts other than towns and villages. There is no experimental service in rural communities other than towns and villages.

Mr. Buchanan of New Jersey: You mean "truly rural."

Mr. Watson: Yes, sir; the real country.

Mr. Holman: I think there is some misapprehension as to the law on this subject. I would like to ask the gentleman from North Carolina in charge of this bill what the existing law is?

Mr. Henderson of North Carolina: There is no law on the subject providing for rural free delivery or experiments in that direction. There is a law which provides for experiments in small towns and villages, and forty-eight of these now have free delivery. That condition is preserved in this bill, but no provision is made for rural free delivery.

Mr. Watson: The present law provides for an experimental delivery in rural communities; but as I understand it-and the chairman

Mr. Watson: Mr. Chairman, the paragraph under consideration provides for the expenditure of $11,

from North Carolina (Mr. Henderson), makes the same statement to the House-the law has been construed to mean cities, towns, and

villages, and there are now in operation experimental free deliveries in certain towns and villages.

The law expressly provides for rural communities, and it seems to me where the general laws make such provision there is no hardship in taking a small amount from the appropriation, only $10,000, and appropriating it for experimental free delivery in absolutely rural communities; that is to say, in the country, pure and simple, amongst the farmers in those neighborhoods where they do not get their mail more than once in every two weeks, and where these deserving people have settled in communities one hundred years old and do not receive a newspaper that is not two weeks behind the times.

"The amendment was adopted by a vote of 79 ayes to 41 nays."

On the first vote, the amendment was voted down. I changed the resolution slightly, debated it further, secured another vote, and won.

Ex-Senator Marion Butler, who claims to be the "Father" of the present R. F. D. system, did not become a member of Congress until several years afterwards. It was the third appropriation for the R. F. D. that Butler passed through the Senate.

Your special attention is called to the fact that Chairman Henderson notified the House that there was no law which then required what my amendment was intended to have the Government undertake.

In short, my amendment was new legislation the small beginning of a great system which blesses millions of my countrymen.