Buchanan had called Stanton to his cabinet in 1860. Stanton thought that Lincoln called him for the same purpose-to keep it from falling to pieces. In Stanton's makeup there was no grace of manner, little kindness of heart, no forbearance or mercy, and little that was lovely. He was a huge, rough giant, bent on his own way; obstinate, full of personal prejudice and intolerance. To control this untamed lion would take a master of men, and yet Lincoln undertook the task. Of him Lincoln said, "I have faith in affirmative men like these. They stand between a nation and perdition." Stanton had no tact, but Lincoln had tact enough for both of them. It would be very easy to prove by competent testimony that Stanton ruled Lincoln. Many and many a time he positively refused to obey the president's orders. On one occasion Lincoln said to a friend, "You must know I have very little influence with this administration. You must see Stanton." Stanton insulted congressmen and bullied applicants and on one occasion, when an applicant came with an order direct from the president, said that "if the president signed that order he was a damned fool." When the remark was reported to Lincoln, he only said, "If Stanton said I was a damned fool, then I must be one; for he is nearly always right, and generally says what he means." When asked why he did not put Stanton out, he said it would be difficult to find another to fill his place. Yet in spite of all these things, Lincoln ruled Stanton. He said the way to manage him was to "let him jump awhile." Lincoln used Stanton to do things he could not well do himself. Stanton found out that he was over-matched on one occasion when he refused to do what the president wanted done. Then the president, eyeing Stanton fixedly, calmly said, "Mr. Secretary, it will have to be done." These conflicts were not on general policies, but matters of detail. Lincoln needed Stanton and would not let him go. When urged to appoint him to the Supreme Court bench, he said, "If you will find me another secretary of war like him, I will gladly appoint him." This fierce old Teuton came to regard his master with feelings of affection. Of the group who stood around his dying bed the grief of none was keener than of this iron minister of war. As his soul passed away, the grim-visaged son of Mars said, "There lies the most perfect ruler of men the world has ever seen." And what was the secret of Lincoln's wonderful power over men? How was it that he could use men of various types and lead not the backwoodsmen only, but the learned and the wise? Among Lincoln's qualities were these. He was sincere. He kept his vision unclouded. He did not want to justify his case only. He wanted to see the truth. He could not argue for the side he believed to be wrong. He was religious in the sense that his conscience was his master and he served his country with devotion. Self he submerged. He had convictions of his own and he dared stand by them. The lesser end he surrendered that he might gain the greater. With a mental machinery like this, it is not to be wondered that as the new problems multiplied his mind became clearer, his heart purer, and his hand steadier. No man with passion and hatred could have gone through the four years of bitter strife and been the great captain he was. He did the four things that Dr. Van Dyke says a man "must learn to do if he would make his record true," namely: "To think without confusion clearly, To love his fellow-men sincerely, BOOK REVIEWS THE AMERICAN NATION: A HISTORY. Volume XI. The Federalist System, 1789-1801. By John Spencer Bassett. New York and London: Harper & Brothers, 1906,-xviii, 327 pp. Southern historical scholarship has not counted for much until recent years. In fact the segregation of Southerners after Jefferson's day, and finally the violence and turmoil of the Civil War closed the doors of the greater American public to all Southern literary effort. And to make certain their exclusion the best of Southern talent insisted quite naturally, until recent years, on appearing before the world on all possible occasions as special pleaders. During the last two decades a change has come and it begins to look as if the real nationalists, the men who can view all phases of our history sympathetically and give to all sections fair and discriminating criticism, are Southerners. That such is recognized at least to a large extent is shown in 'the selection of Professor Bassett to write the volume of the "American Nation" treating the critical and difficult theme "The Federalist System." The book as completed now before us is no disappointment. It contains no over-laudation of such great Federalists as Alexander Hamilton, and it does no injustice to the greatest opponent of Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, who sometimes took rather sharp advantages of his rival. Professor Bassett knows how to estimate the really important historical points in the careers of these bitter political enemies, without taking sides, without entering into the details of their feuds. Besides treating the political history of 1789 to 1801 the work in hand supplies excellent brief accounts of the social and economic forces then at work, pictures now and then of that half aristocratic court with which President and "Lady" Washington surrounded themselves in Philadelphia in the last decade of the eighteenth century. And it was no disparagement of the democratic ideals of the age that the first gentleman of his country and the most popular man of his time should not readily lay aside the little fancies and larger social distinctions current in the Old Dominion long after uncouth Jeffersonianism assumed sway in our national political life. The more interesting topics of this volume are the accounts of the organization of the Republican party, the quarrels with England and France, the difficulties of Washington's position as a non-partisan president, the imperialism of Hamilton and the sturdy good faith of John Adams. Of maps and diagrams there are a goodly number and, it must be said in passing, they are of the very best. The critical essay on the sources available is well worth the space it occupies and it may be turned to with confidence by all classes of readers. A word ought to be said about the author's treatment of the intrigues of 1796 to 1800, for the turn which these took had much to do with the epochal defeat of Adams and the election of Jefferson as his successor. Immediately after the choice of Adams in 1796 became known, Jefferson, the incoming vice-president and opponent, it must be remembered, of the administration about to begin work, took steps looking to the isolation of Hamilton in national affairs comparable to the attempt of Hamilton just before the election to defeat and isolate Adams. For a moment the astute Virginia Democrat seemed to have won to himself the blunt Massachusetts leader. The possibilities of such a good understanding could hardly be imagined. But the rapprochement failed and the vice-president remained the active head of the opposition. The next and less agreeable intrigue was that which kept the majority of Adams's cabinet under the thumb of Hamilton. Conscious of Hamilton's many infidelities to him the president continued to work in harness with his unwilling subordinates until the attempt to dictate the policy of the administration by Hamilton became patent to all. Probably the best example of this outside interference may be seen in Hamilton's game of 1798-99 when Washington was made use of as a pawn on the chess board. At last without taking counsel with any of his cabinet the president broke the fetters with which his administration had been held to the New Yorker's policy by sending in to the already dictatorial senate the nomination of Vans Murray to be a special envoy to France. To be sure, the opposition, guided by the president of the senate, whose eyes were never closed to the wrangles of the Federalists, profited most by these intrigues. Professor Bassett unravels the entangled skein and lets the truth vindicate whom it will. Certainly Hamilton does not appear to advantage though the author gives the most favorable account possible consistent with the evidence. Washington's rôle, it seems to the reviewer, was most to his discredit; it does not add to the dignity of the heroic figure of the Revolution to be used as clay in the potter's hand for several years by his astute former secretary. It is possible only to the student of unvarnished history to believe that the great ex-president was made to dictate to the president his most important appointments and that against the will of the latter. Washington even advised the usurpation by Hamilton, then inspector-general of the provisional army, of the functions of the secretary of war. The author does not comment on this remarkable conduct probably for lack of space, possibly because he, like Ranke, thinks that the sole duty of the historian consists in relating the facts. And this has been well and clearly done. "The Federalist System" must take its place among the best of the series to which it belongs, which is decided praise since the ablest of American historians are his co-workers. He has performed a difficult task well and all Southern scholars ought to take a pride in his success. Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, Va. Wм. E. DODD. THE LIFE Of John WeslEY. By C. T. Winchester. The Macmillan Company, 1906,—xiii, 301 pp. John Wesley, long idealized by one of the great denominations of the Christian church and looked upon as a somewhat fanatical and bigoted reformer by others, is now recognized as one of the great men of modern history-great in |