would not deny the justice of the claim presented to us in this respect upon its merits. We are asked to do to the British nation just what we have always insisted all nations ought to do to us. . . . I prefer to express my satisfaction that, by the adjustment of the present case upon principles confessedly American, and yet, as I trust, mutually satisfactory to both of the nations concerned, a question is finally and rightly settled between them, which heretofore exhausted not only all forms of peaceful discussion, but also the arbitrament of war itself; for more than half a century alienated the two countries from each other, and perplexed with fears and apprehensions all other nations. The four persons in question are now held in military custody at Fort Warren, in the State of Massachusetts. They will be cheerfully liberated. Your Lordship will please indicate a time and place for receiving them."

Lord Lyons replied to Mr. Seward on the 27th December, saying he would, without delay, send a copy of his "important communication" to Earl Russell, and would confer with him (Mr. Seward) on the arrangements for the delivery of the "four gentlemen" to him (Lord Lyons). The rest is soon told. On December 30, Lord Lyons wrote to Commander Hewett of the Rinaldo, an English sloop-ofwar, to proceed with his vessel to Provincetown, Massachusetts, and receive the released prisoners, adding: “It is hardly necessary that I should remind you that these gentlemen have no official character. It will be right for you to receive them with all courtesy and respect as gentlemen of distinction; but it would be improper to pay them any of those honors which are paid to official persons;" and their transfer should be "effected unostentatiously."

Being conveyed from Fort Warren to Provincetown by the tugboat Starlight, the "four gentlemen," with their luggage, were quietly transferred to the Rinaldo on the evening of January 1, 1862, remarking that their "only wish was to proceed to Europe;" and that vessel at once set sail for St.

Thomas, whence these emissaries of treason pursued their weary way to their original respective destinations, cowed and humiliated in no slight degree. Doubtless they knew that only a cool reception awaited them.

The London Star said: "When Mason and Slidell have been surrendered to us, it will surely be time to declare in what capacity we, as a nation, are to receive them-whether as the envoys of Mr. Jefferson Davis, or as inoffensive visitors to a country where the rebel slave-owner and fugitive negro are welcome alike to the protection of the law." The London Times exulted over what it called "a great victory," but said: "Mason and Slidell are about the most worthless booty it would be possible to exact from the jaws of the American lion. The four American gentlemen who have got us into our late trouble, and cost us probably a million. apiece, will soon be in one of our ports. What they and their secretaries are to do here passes our conjecture. They are personally nothing to us."

Not the least wonderful thing in this extraordinary affair was the sudden acquiescence in and approbation of the act of our Government in surrendering the "Confederate ambassadors," on the part of the people and press of the United States, as soon as Mr. Seward's masterly state paper was published. Nor were our people alone in their satisfaction at so happy a settlement of a vexed question which alarmed and threatened to disturb all the maritime nations of the world.

CHAPTER II.

PRESIDENT LINCOLN AT GETTYSBURG.

Conflicting Accounts of his Speech at the Cemetery Dedication-ExGovernor Curtin's Statement to the Writer-A Wonderful EffortMr. Everett's Peroration-The Dirge by B. B. French.

THERE have been so many conflicting statements about President Lincoln's Gettysburg speech that I have taken pains to bring some of them together with a view to see if there is any way to get at the truth. In the first place, as to the manner of its writing and delivery.

The reporter of the New York Times, as quoted by the Springfield Republican, says Mr. Lincoln spoke from manuscript, referring to it as often as once for each sentence; that he spoke in a loud voice and was loudly applauded. He says that when the President had finished, it is related that Mr. Everett, the orator of the day, who had spoken before him, grasped Mr. Lincoln's hand warmly and said, in substance, "What I have said here will be forgotten, but your words will live."

Mr. John Russell Young, who, as reporter for the Philadelphia Press, was also present, states that Mr. Lincoln "took the single sheet of foolscap, held it almost to his nose, and, in his high tenor voice, without the least attempt for effect, delivered that most extraordinary address. There were four or five thousand people present. Very few heard what Mr. Lincoln said, and it is a curious thing that his remarkable words should have made no particular impression at the time."

Let us next hear what Colonel Ward H. Lamon, one of Mr. Lincoln's most intimate associates before as well as after his election, says, in the Philadelphia Times, October 4, 1887:

"A day or two before the dedication, Mr. Lincoln told me he would be expected to make a speech on the occasion; that he was extremely busy, with no time for preparation, and that he greatly feared he would not be able to acquit himself with credit, much less to fill the measure of public expectation. From his hat (the usual receptacle of his private notes and memoranda) he drew a page of foolscap, closely written, which he read to me, first remarking that it was a memorandum of what he intended to say. It proved to be in substance, and, I think, in hæc verba, what was printed as his Gettysburg speech. After its delivery, he expressed deep regret that he had not prepared it with greater care. He said to me on the stand, immediately after concluding the speech, 'Lamon, that speech won't scour. It is a flat failure, and the people are disappointed.'. On the platform from which Mr. Lincoln made his address, and only a moment after its conclusion, Mr. Seward turned to Mr. Everett and asked him what he thought of the President's speech. Mr. Everett replied, 'It was not what I expected from him: I am disappointed.' In his turn, Mr. Everett asked, 'What do you think of it, Mr. Seward?' The response was: 'He has made a failure, and I am sorry for it. His speech is not equal to him.' Mr. Seward then turned to me and asked, 'Mr. Marshal, what do you think of it?' I answered, 'I am sorry to say it does not impress me as one of his great speeches.' In the face of these facts it has been repeatedly published that this speech was received with great éclat by the audience; that, amid the tears, sobs, and cheers it produced in the excited throng, the orator of the day, Mr. Everett, turned impulsively to Mr. Lincoln, grasped his hand, and exclaimed, 'I congratulate you on your success!' adding, in a transport of heated enthusiasm, 'Ah, Mr. President, how gladly would I give all my hundred pages to be the author of your twenty lines!' All this unworthy gush, it is needless to say, is purely apocryphal. Nothing of the kind occurred. . . . As a matter of fact, Mr. Lincoln's great Gettysburg speech fell on the vast audience like a wet blanket. . . . It was then [after Mr. Lincoln's death] that we began to realize that it was indeed a masterpiece, and it then dawned upon many minds that we had entertained an angel unawares, who had left us unappreciated."

Now listen to what Andrew G. Curtin, the distinguished war Governor and statesman of Pennsylvania, says. Remembering to have heard him relate the story of the writing and delivery of Mr. Lincoln's extraordinary address, which now "belongs to the classics of literature"it was in May, 1885, while riding with him and others over the battle-field, and when he pointed out to me the house

of Mr. Willis, in the village, where, he says, he saw Mr. Lincoln engaged in writing it—I called on him at his hotel in this city a few days ago, and, with pencil in hand to make sure of his exact words, asked him to repeat the account. He said:

“I saw Mr. Lincoln writing his address in Mr. (now Judge) Willis's house, on a long yellow envelope. He may have written some of it before. He said, 'I will go and show it to Seward,' who stopped at another house, which he did, and then returned and copied his speech on a foolscap sheet. The people outside were calling now on Mr. Lincoln for a speech, and he got me to go and speak for him. Mr. Lincoln rode on horseback to the field, where a temporary stand had been erected. After the oration of Mr. Everett and the singing of a dirge by the Baltimore Glee Club, Mr. Lincoln proceeded to speak. He rose and presented himself in a most dignified manner, becoming a President of the United States. He pronounced that speech in a voice that all the multitude heard. The crowd was hushed into silence because the President stood before them. But at intervals there were roars of applause. My God! it was so impressive! It was the common remark of everybody. Such a speech, as they said it was! Everett and all went and congratulated the President, shaking him by the hand."

Governor Curtin, on the former as well as on the present occasion, expressed extreme regret that he had not secured that envelope on which he most positively declares he saw Mr. Lincoln writing his address, as above described.

Finally, I am happy to be able to add one more item, not less interesting, touching this controverted subject. I have the statement from General Joseph Holt direct, that a day or two after Mr. Lincoln's return from Gettysburg, while signing some papers which he (General H.), as Judge-Advocate-General, had brought for his signature, the President looked up with lively satisfaction and remarked, "I have just received a letter from Mr. Everett, in which he says that I had said more in my little speech than he had said in his whole oration.”

Having presented the above rather conflicting testimony, I believe I will submit the case "to the jury"-my readers