and kept open house for all his friends, although he was choice in his acquaintance. His library was the best in that part of the country, and was much consulted by scholars, especially the clergy. His large and substantial house was hung with beautiful paintings and costly mirrors. His cellar was filled with rare old wines, not to mention the highly prized New-England rum, that had been mellowed by its voyage to the Indies and back. His park was stocked with deer; he kept a coach-and-six, and also had a splendid barge, manned by six slaves in uniform.

In March, 1751, Sir William and Lady Pepperrell met with a severe affliction in the death of their son Andrew, who died from the effects of a severe cold contracted while crossing the Piscataqua River late one night, after attending a party at Portsmouth. He was a young man of much promise. They had three other children; namely, Elizabeth, William, and Margery, but the latter two died in infancy. Andrew was born Jan. 4, 1726, and, after a careful preparatory course, graduated at Harvard College in 1743. He of course had the best social advantages that Boston afforded, and was very much of a favorite in society. He never married.

The name of Pepperrell, that was a power in the eighteenth century, is now extinct; and but one or two of his descendants, if any, are living. There are, however, several collateral relatives of the baronet in New England.

Having seen something of Sir William in his official capacity, let us now look at him for a moment in his higher character, that of a man. Perhaps

the best thing that can be said of him is that he had deep religious convictions, and always followed the Golden Rule. His benefactions were many and large. Among other public gifts was that of a four-acre lot to the town of Saco, for a church. He also gave a bell to the town of Pepperrell in Massachusetts.

He owned immense tracts of land in Maine: and it is said that he could travel from Portsmouth to Saco River, a distance of thirty miles, all the way on his own soil. All these vast estates were confiscated during the Revolution.

Still another honor awaited him; for he received a commission of lieutenantgeneral in the royal army, bearing date Feb. 20, 1759, giving him the command of all the forces engaged against the French and their savage allies. But the old veteran could not take the field, for his health was failing; and he died on the 6th of July, 1759, in the sixtythird year of his age. His remains were placed in the family tomb on his estate at Kittery Point. There he sleeps in a quiet spot overlooking the restless, changing sea, - fit burial-place for his ambitious soul. The same winds play over his tomb that brought his argosies from foreign lands. The waves still break upon the shore. But his tide had ebbed into the great sea. He was brought up to believe that his duty consisted in being a loyal subject of the British Crown. Had he lived until the stormy days of the Revolution, would he have led the colonists, or would he have been a royalist, and manfully supported his king, who had so trusted and honored him?

It was customary for many years among politicians to charge that Mr. Henry Clay was defrauded of the nomination for the presidency at the Harrisburg convention, by the devices of certain personal opponents, and that his election in the following year would have been as certain as any future event can be that depends upon the contingencies of politics. This was the language of political declaration; and the quiet, discerning men among the Whigs, who knew better, were generally silenced by the concurring averments of Mr. Clay's adherents. On both these points the opinion of Mr. Clay amounted to conviction; and he went to his grave with the sincere conviction and belief that he was defeated at Harrisburg by unworthy trickery, and that his electoral majority would have fully equalled that of Gen. Harrison. That impression prevailed generally throughout the country for many years; and I am inclined to think that it is still entertained by those who are old enough to remember the circumstances attending the presidential election of 1840, and the political condition of the country during the three or four preceding years.

It is due to the memory of those men who composed the Harrisburg convention, that certain facts and circumstances, tending to show that the public mind has been greatly abused on this subject, should be recalled, and the considerations which led to the nomination of Gen. Harrison fairly stated; and as preliminary to this, and in order to a correct understanding of the situation,

it is necessary to glance hastily at the political condition of the country during the presidency of Mr. Van Buren. The financial revulsion of 1837 had led to the overthrow of the Democratic party in several large States, where its ascendency had been almost perpetual, and notably in New York, Ohio, Indiana, Maine, and several other States; and it had come to be generally supposed that the Whigs would be able to carry the election in 1840. There seemed to be no doubt that Mr. Clay would be the candidate; and under that expectation the Democrats had regained the power in Ohio, Indiana, Maine, and several other States, and the party had gained largely in New York; and then there was the unexpectedly large vote for Gen. Harrison in 1836, when he was brought forward irregularly and partially, with no effective organization of his supporters, and no hope of his election. These things conspired to direct the attention of sagacious Whigs to the question of the expediency of nominating him as a stronger man with the people than Mr. Clay.

With the exception of some of the adherents of Mr. Webster, the delegates were generally anxious to elect a president irrespective of any personal considerations. The feelings of jealousy and rivalry which had for some time subsisted between Messrs. Clay and Webster, and which culminated in an open rupture in 1841, were shared to some extent by their friends. But Mr. Webster was not a candidate before the convention, and therefore there was no

competition between them; but the more pronounced and zealous of his supporters were the persistent and efficient advocates of Gen. Harrison's nomination, and the result of the proceedings of the convention was owing in a large measure to their address, perseverance, and determination. Scott had a few earnest supporters in the convention, mostly from New York: but evidently they had no hope of nominating him, and were inspired chiefly by their dislike of Clay; and when he was defeated, they came readily and heartily into the support of Gen. Harrison.

It was ascertained before the convention was organized that a majority of the delegates had been chosen to support Mr. Clay; and it was easily seen that, if an informal per capita vote should be taken in advance, his nomination was inevitable. It was im portant, therefore, that this should be prevented; and Peleg Sprague, who had been a member of the Senate from Maine, having served from 1829 to 1835, and a warm partisan of Mr. Webster, before any other steps could be taken offered a plan for the action of the convention, which was adopted by a small majority against the earnest opposition of the friends of Mr. Clay. It was substantially as follows: That there should be no vote of preference taken in the convention, until the following questions should have been determined by the delegations of the several States, each sitting as a committee, to wit: First, Can the state be carried for the Whig candidate for the presidency? Second, If yes, who is the strongest man to nominate? Third, Can the vote of the State be given to Mr. Clay?

A very animated debate sprang upon the resolution, and it only prevailed by a small majority; where upon the convention adjourned for the day. As the delegates were leaving the hall, Benjamin W. Leigh of Virginia, who had been in the Senate from 1834 to 1837 from that State, and a persistent supporter of Henry Clay, remarked to John Tyler, who was one of the vice-presidents of the convention, "Clay is surely beaten. That sharp black-eyed Yankee has stolen a march upon us, and Harrison's nomination is certain." Mr. Tyler expressed his apprehensions about the result, but did not consider the game as wholly lost.

The deliberations of the delegations ran through several days, and every hour's delay darkened the prospects of Mr. Clay. Mr. Clay. Consultation and comparison of views ascertained the fact that Gen. Harrison was the strongest man with the people; and there was never a moment, after the adoption of Mr. Sprague's resolution, that the nomination of another candidate was at all probable.

The delegates generally were moved by a common feeling. The desire to break down the Van Buren dynasty was the all-important consideration, and personal feeling was compelled to give way before it.

Whether any other candidate could have been elected is a question; but there is every reason to suppose that, had Mr. Clay been nominated, he would have been defeated.

It is said that John Tyler cried when Harrison's nomination was announced to the convention, and Horace Greeley said that the whole Whig party had reason to cry when John Tyler became President.

THE October meeting of the Liberal Union Club was held at Young's Hotel, Saturday, Oct. 31, 1885, when Senator Morrill of Vermont made some very interesting remarks. In the course of his address he said, —

"I understand, gentlemen, that there are here Republicans and Democrats, protective tariff men and free-trade men, and, in the classic language of the newspapers, Mugwumps. If I am to say any thing at all to you to-night, I must speak my honest sentiments. I have been long suspected of being somewhat in favor of a protective tariff, and of being a pretty stanch Republican; and while it has been my effort heretofore to always speak what I believed, if it should run contrary to some of your views, it may be useful in creating a little effervescence in your stomachs not to be regretted.

"I ought, perhaps, to say that I feel almost as much love and admiration for Massachusetts as one to the manor born: for near here I found my wife, and she claims Massachusetts as the State of her birth; and here from 1824 to 1850 I found the great tariff authority was Daniel Webster, the authority not only in Massachusetts, where his name ought to be immortal, but throughout the country. It may have been my misfortune that I have not had the later guides and phi losophers of some of your learned institutions; but I must frankly confess, that, while I have some respect for standard English literature, I have none at all for the standard English political economy.

"Let me say that, that free-trade economy may be good enough for Great Britain, for England, but it don't do anywhere else. It won't do even for Ireland, and certainly not for America. It may be that some of your learned professors, who are sometimes politicians, are greater men than were Webster and Choate, or than are our Hoar and Dawes ; but, I beg your pardon, up in Vermont we don't think so.

"They say, however, that we must have revenue reform. Cui bono? For whose benefit? For they assent that if we should reduce the

tariff a good deal lower, we might collect the the same amount of revenue. Suppose that that were to be admitted, it is evident then that we should have to import a much larger amount of foreign merchandise, and also should have to furnish a market for a much less, a correspondingly less, amount of American productions. It strikes me that the statesmanship that only seeks to create a market for foreign productions is un-American, and in my judgment the advocates of that policy have a legitimate claim upon the British Parliament for their services.

"The Lowells, the Appletons, the Lawrences, the Lymans, and the Bigelows, by planting manufactures on the sterile soil of Massachusetts, and they were the contemporaries of such men as Webster and Choate, and of honest John Davis, and of Winthrop, — and thus developing and multiplying the employments of your people, giving every man of your State an opportunity to do his best, have secured its growth, its prosperity, and its reputation the world over.

"Without this policy, the farms of Massachusetts to-day would not bring one-half of their present valuation. It is through this policy that the rich endowments of your colleges have taken place. It is by this policy that you have established broadcast your common schools. Without it, one-half, more than one-half, of the pulpits of your churches, and the church-going bells, would to-day be silent. Without this policy, your State to-day would not have one-fourth of the present magnitude of its population. And yet some of these men, if they could carry out their policy, if they could be successful, in my judg ment, in a very short time, would be nothing but tramps in the streets.

"The protective tariff is not a local question. Its beneficence touches the foot as well as the hand, the heart as well as the head. Its example, the example of Massachusetts, may be as safely followed in the South as in the North, in Virginia and Georgia as in Pennsylvania and New York, in the States beyond the Mississippi as well as in Illinois and Ohio. In fact, our great wheat-fields of the West, unless they can find a great and steadfast home market, will soon find that

But it is said that we must have revenue reform. And what is that? Why, it is a Mugwump gravitation downward toward freetrade. The effect of it will be, whether designed or not, to cheapen labor, and to deprive labor of some of its present comforts and ornaments. Its effect will be to send more of our children barefoot into the fields and into the workshops, and less to the common schools.

"I may say that the free-traders would emas. culate the Declaration of Independence; they would not leave us enough manhood to support any thing more than a government of the police, not enough to enable us to chose our own avocations. I trust, however, that we shall have enough of that ancient heroic independence to show that we intend now and forever, in peace or in war, to make our own coats and shirts (in homely phrase), to make our own dresses and blankets, to make our own shoes and stockings, to make our own dinner plates and knives and forks, above all to make our own ships and cannon; and finally that we shall have enough to demand a little Americanism in our colleges. It strikes me that it would be well, and I don't wish to boycott them, but life is too short for our young men men to learn and unlearn theories that have no root anywhere except upon aristocratic soil, upon the soil of England. And I think that I am in favor of an extension of civil service reform; and, while I won't do any thing to injure any educational institution, God forbid, yet if any vacancies should happen in their staffs, I would subject the candidates to a proper civil service examination as to their qualifications."

On the same occasion Hon. William D. Kelley of Pennsylvania made a strong appeal for high tariff. A few of his remarks are of especial interest to all.

"Now, as to foreign markets; for, as I say, I came not as a propagandist, not as a missionary, but because I had been invited, and was glad to come. On the subject of foreign markets, let me ask you where they are to be be found. Are you ready to enter Congo, the Congo country, the Congo Free

State? What could you sell there? What can our generation, or your generation, - for I have passed beyond it, — trade with in Congo? We cannot enter the British markets. British industry has never been more paralyzed. Manufacturers were never producing goods with less certainty of profits on the British Islands than now. You cannot hope to get into France. They simply confiscate raw goods; as, for instance, in the matter of cutlery, drugs: whatever is not free, or put at a fixed dutiable rate, is confiscated, and the party bringing it in is put under penalty. You cannot find markets there. You cannot beat the French people in producing that which is elegant. You cannot beat them in cheapness. You cannot beat the Swiss. There is nobody there to buy any thing. Where can you find a market in which you can compete successfully with Germany, with France, with Engand, with Switzerland, unless you bring your laboring people to live as unhappily as the British laboring people are now living, as I have shown you the Swiss people are living, as the German peasants are living? You can't do that. You can't maintain a republic with a starving laboring population. You can't promote the welfare and strength of the country, and the safety of capital and society, by degrading the laboring people, and making them feel that they are under the heel of oppressors instead of co-operating fraternally with their countrymen, and hopeful in seeing others of their countrymen rising from poverty to wealth as they pass from youth or young manhood to graver maturity. We require sympathetic action with our laboring people. . . .

"I live where manufacturers are concentrated in power and authority as they are, I think, in no other Congressional district in the country. My district is a set of homes. A larger per cent of the population of Philadelphia live in houses owned by the head of the family, or which have descended from him to his widow and heirs, than in any other community in the world. We have gone through a very severe pressure. But it does not come from either free trade or protection. The United States, protected as they are, have felt it. England, free trade as she is, has felt it on a higher, a broader, a keener degree. I think that the depression will continue, with little waves of apparent prosperity, so long as the nations struggle to show the Almighty that he was wrong in making two metals which might be used as money."