siring to be free, and capable of conducting a government of their own, would have been totally at variance with all of Mr. Calhoun's ideas of justice and right, I feel perfectly assured. At the beginning of this article, I referred to the fact that Mr. Calhoun was of ScotchIrish extraction, and that the qualities which he accordingly inherited had a great deal to do with his success in life. We find that his Irish blood,.especially, was advantageous to him politically also. There is an old maxim, more forceful than elegant, that a man should not go back on his raising. Mr. Calhoun never repudiated his Irish lineage, and, as a consequence, his fellow-citizens of Irish descent stood manfully by him. In Pennsylvania, particularly, where that ele ment was strong, he was exceedingly popu lar, and it was largely owing to their efforts that his name was brought forward for the presidency and for a while vigorously pressed for that position. It is a circumstance worth mentioning that Mr. Davis and Mr. Lincoln, the two presidents who were so bitterly arrayed against each other, received their inspiration and took their models from the lives and characters of Mr. Calhoun and Mr. Clay, respectively. Mr. Blaine, too, admired Mr. Clay more than he did any other of the great men of the country and he is said to have patterned his life largely after him. That Mr. Calhoun was Mr. Davis's model, we are not left to conjecture, for the latter tells us so himself: " Mr. Calhoun was to me the guiding star in the political firma ment and I was honored by him with such confidence as made our intercourse not only instructive, but of enduring love." But, even in the absence of his statement, we would have known it any way. The resemblance between them is very striking. Both of them were tall, commanding, dignified gen tlemen. Both of them were men of high character and of remarkably pure personal life. Both of them were good speakers and

were fond of public life. Both of them were metaphysical rather than practical in their mental make-up, and were logicians of the first order. And, what is remarkable, this resemblance was not confined to their man ner and character, but it is to be found in their lives also. Both of them started out in life with unusually brilliant prospects, both of them at an early period in their careers won the confidence of the people and became exceedingly popular; both of them were thoroughly informed on politics and statesmanship, both of them held Cabi net positions and filled them with great ac ceptance. Both of them loved the South and devoted their lives to its service, both of them were greatly admired and cordially hated, and both of them left a name and a memory which have been revered on the one hand and reproached on the other. That the tendency of Mr. Calhoun's mind was metaphysical and theoretical rather than practical was a charge brought against him in his lifetime by such men as Clay and Webster, and, though he smarted under it, yet, in his cooler moments, his own friends must have told him that that was legitimate criticism which he must make up his mind to bear. That the charge was not only within the sphere of proper criticism, but as a matter of fact was true, I think is gradually getting to be pretty generally conceded, and I have said as much elsewhere. We do not mean, however, that he was deficient in what we term common sense — far from it — nor do we mean that he was a visionary dreamer, a mere theorizer, a man who would prove a failure in the practical affairs of life. His success as a farmer, his safe, conserva tive ideas, his successful conduct of the two great offices which he held as a member of the Cabinet, the good sense which he dis played in his speeches and writings, the wise course which he usually advocated while he was in public life, all of these abundantly refute and contradict any such charge. What we do mean, however, is