men almost, if not quite, the full amount expended during the war. Our banking system is said by financiers to be the best in the world.

Near the close of Mr. Lincoln's first administration, Secretary Chase resigned, and was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. This was a fitting tribute to his great services to the nation, and properly rounded to completeness a magnificent career. But it gave him less enjoyment than the more active duties of his former life.

An amusing and characteristic circumstance occurred in reference to his nomination. Mr. Chase had bitter enemies as well as warm friends, and on the very morning of his nomination, a self-appointed delegation of his bitterest opponents from Ohio, called on President Lincoln to protest against his nomination. They admitted his great talents and learning, but sought to influence the president by betraying to him letters written by Chase in which he had criticised the president.

Mr. Lincoln read them and in his characteristic vein of humor remarked that if Chase had written harsh things about him, he had said harsh things against Mr. Chase which squared the account. With his own hand he wrote the nomination and sent it to the senate. Whatever their estrangement may have been, Mr. Lincoln's high sense of justice led him to say, "Of all the great men I have ever known, Chase is worth about one and a half of the best of them."

The impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson occurred under circumstances that required the utmost calmness and judicial impartiality. As the presiding officer of a court, many of its members wanting in the candor and nice propriety supposed to characterize so high a tribunal, and already pre-judging the accused, it required no small amount of dignity and poise to carry forward such a trial with proper considerateness for the feelings of the nation, and yet with perfect justice and strict legal accuracy. Chief Justice Chase, relying upon the calmer verdict of the people when fears for the national safety should have died away, moved along in his usual serene, undisturbed manner, neither assuming unjust authority, nor allowing his rights to be over-ridden. Even Sumner in the heat and frenzy

of the time had said, "poor Chase." But he lived to say, "Mr. Chase's conduct during that trial is one of the noblest titles to fame."

As the vote of the presiding officer was not allowed except as a "casting vote," the Chief Justice was not called upon to decide the momentous question. But the case stands a monument to his judicial character.

Mr. Chase has been criticised as inconsistent in his legal tender decision, but his critics seem to have overlooked the fact that he never believed the legal tender law constitutional. Considering the emergency, he accepted it as a war measure and did not feel constrained to say more than was meet in regard to its passage, though he feared it might prove a menace of trouble for the future to adjust.

In the case of Hepburn v. Griswold it appeared on trial that the obligation was contracted prior to the passage of the legal tender act and that it also fell due before that became recognized as law, so that any decision on the case involving, as it did, a new currency, might be considered in a sense, ex post facto. It was however made a test case with regard to the legal tenders, and as such was carried up to the Supreme Court in 1867, and re-argued in December, 1868. It was very carefully considered, and after a year's delay was in 1869 decided against the constitutionality of the legal tender, Associate Justices Nelson, Clifford, Grier and Field, concurring with the Chief Justice; Swayne and Davis dissenting.

We have not space here to even consider the grounds of the first decision, nor the reversal by a subsequent court. But it must be borne in mind by those who accuse Mr. Chase of inconsistency, that in no report made by him to Congress, was the expedient of making the notes of the United States a legal tender suggested. To Thaddeus Stephens the measure should be accredited.

In the eulogy on Mr. Chase pronounced by Wm. M. Evarts at Dartmouth, alluding to his career as Chief Justice, he says, "When Mr. Chase was called to this station, he found the bench filled with men of mark and credit, and his accession made an exactly equal division of the court between the old

and the new politics. In these circumstances the proper maintenance of the traditional relation of the Chief Justice to the Court, was of much importance to its unbroken authority with the public. That it was so maintained was apparent to observation, and Mr. Justice Clifford, speaking for the Court, has shown it in a most amiable light.

"Throughout his judicial career he always maintained that dignity of carriage and that calm, noble and unostentatious presence that uniformly characterized his manners and deportment in the social circle; and, in his intercourse with his brethren, his suggestions were always couched in friendly terms, and were never marred by severity or harshness.'

Mr. Evarts continues, "I feel no fear of dissent from the profession in saying that those who practiced in the circuit.or in the Supreme Court while he presided, as well as the larger and widely diffused body of lawyers who give competent and responsible study to the reports, recognize the force of his reason, the clearness of his perceptions, the candor of his opinions, and the lucid rhetoric of his judgments, as assuring his rank with the eminent judges of our own and the mother country."

Among the generous deeds recorded of Mr. Chase is a benefaction of $10,000 to Wilberforce College near Zenia, Ohio, a worthy institution for the liberal education of colored youth, both male and female.

That Mr. Chase should, through his long and somewhat ambitious career have never departed from his early faith in the true intent of our government, to be one of securely guarantied freedom to all, marks the manliness and sincerity of his character. That he should have left the treasury of the nation poorer in purse than when he took up its responsibilities, handling billions without a penny sticking to his fingers, marks him a man of rare probity. That his judicial ermine was unstained through a trial the most remarkable our country has ever known, and amid political strifes most dangerous to the well being of the nation, exalts his reputation as a jurist beyond the bounds of ephemeral popularity, and renders his "One of the few, the immortal names, That were not born to die."

H. M. Tracy Cutler.

THE LABOR QUESTION.*

A few days since, the writer received through the mail a copy of an open letter addressed to the members of the Union League Club of Chicago. The document begins with a copious extract from the often quoted letter of Macauley, in which he paints in such sombre colors the future of the American Republic; and then proceeds to point out certain indications that the predictions of the British statesman, or something worse, are even now in process of fulfillment The paper is well written and was read through with great interest, in the hope that the writer would suggest some practical cure or palliative for the evils so vividly portrayed.

It was presented, in the final page; and what do you th it was? Patriotism-simply patriotisni-or more explicitly, a revival of American patriotism. Naturally enough the cynical definition of Dr Johnson occurs to the mind. Patriotism, the last resort of a rascal. Certainly no other cloak was ever so convenient for political tricksters and demagogues of all sorts and colors.

But suppose we could have a revival of the genuine sort, the simon pure article; would it save us the mere sentiment of love for country? That may take on any form of expression. Jay Gould loves his country, undoubtedly—as the shark loves the small fry that play around him. Why should ne not love it? Consider the amount of interest he has in it.

*Read before the Grant Club in Chicago, July 10, 1886, by Henry Booth, LL., D. By a resolution then adopted a copy was requested for publication. In compliance with that request the paper is now submitted to the public.

Is there any other country on earth affording so broad a field for the display of his peculiar genius? But is his patriotism likely to be of much service to the country at large? We have many similar patriots. Will they save us?

We want honesty, old fashioned honesty, methinks, a thousand fold more than patriotism. A revival of honesty, if you please, the honesty that will bear a steady even hand, and deal out justice with absolute impartiality to all classes and conditions; justice according to law, always, of course; but the the law must be according to justice. Such a revival would help us.

To make the law accord with justice in the first place, and next, to secure its impartial administration, are the things needed above all else. If there is honesty and intelligence enough for this, we are saved, otherwise, lost.

Among human institutions, and conditions there is no disturbing element that operates so persistently; and so perpetually, as a deeply seated sense of injustice. While it is the standing disgrace of human nature that injustice is constantly done both under the sanction of law and in violation thereof, it is equally to the credit of human nature that it will not, cannot rest when distinctly conscious of wrong and injustice, inflicted or suffered. We want no better illustration of this than the controversy in regard to slavery, with all the various compromises and schemes devised for its perpetuation. Does a question arise, disturbing the peace and quiet of the Commonwealth? Settle it on principles of eternal right and justice, and it will probably stay settled. Patch up a compromise on any other ground, and your work will prove a wretched makeshift, tumbling to pieces when subjected to the first strain.

No one will question that the industrial condition of the American people has been seriously disturbed during the early part of the present season; nor has this been the first time of recent date; nor is the feeling in business circles one of absolute quiet and confidence even now. Far from it. These experiences are comparatively novel. Heretofore, we have not been used to them. We have been accustomed to regard them as something distant, troubles indigenous to foreign soil, the fungus of old