ass_ 
 
 ^4^7 
 
 P)()()k 
 
 9 
 
 i'Rr;sivNTi:D dy 
 
 A^Iii- 
 
>, 
 
SPEECH i,^. 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. BENJAMIN F. TRACY, 
 
 BEFOEE THE 
 
 nl^i^Me0eI Club of Boeton, 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 LINCOLN'S BIRTHDAY, February 12th, 1898. 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. BENJAMIN F. TRACY, 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 fIDibMeecx Club of iBoston, 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 LENCOLN'S BIRTHDAY, February 12tli, 1898. 
 
t /^-b- 
 
 ^l(o 
 
 Q-ift 
 H. C. Lodge 
 
 12 Ja. -06 
 
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Middlesex 
 Club: This day is consecrated by the Nation to the 
 memory of our martyred President, Abraham 
 Lincoln. 
 
 On each recurring anniversary of his birth, the 
 strife and bustle of business ceases, while seventy 
 millions of people, with reverent hearts, pay their 
 tribute of love and respect to that matchless leader 
 and patriot who guided the nation successfully 
 through four years of civil war, preserved the 
 Union and restored it to prosperity and peace. 
 
 He was the offspring of the Republic, the product 
 of free institutions. In no other country could 
 such a career as his have been possible. 
 
 I shall not attempt here to trace at length the 
 marvellous life of one who, born and reared in 
 extreme poverty, without any advantages of early 
 education, by sheer force of character and intellect, 
 in twenty five years raised himself from the humble 
 position of a laborer working for monthly wages to 
 the chief magistracy of a Nation of thirty millions 
 of free and independent people. 
 
 Born in Kentucky, his boyhood was passed in a 
 severe struggle for existence against the adverse con- 
 ditions of frontier life. Beyond learning to read 
 and write and the simple rules of arithmatic 
 he had no early education. His occupa- 
 tions during early manhood were of the 
 hiimblest kind — now a llatboatman on the river, 
 now keeping a country store, then occasion- 
 ally working as a surveyor. In his speech at New 
 Haven in 1860, he said: "I am not ashamed to 
 confess that twenty-five years ago I was a hired 
 laborer mauling rails and at work on a flatboat." 
 
When twenty-five years old, Lincoln entered the 
 Legislature and took up the study of the law, still 
 supporting himself by manual labor. Two years 
 later he entered upon the practice of his profession 
 at Springfield. Thus began, all things considered, 
 the most marvellous career of modern times. 
 
 In 1846 he was elected to Congress, for one term, 
 but we hear little of him politically until the repeal 
 of the Missouri Compromise act in 1854. The passage 
 of the Kansas-Nebraska Act aroused the people of 
 the North and filled them w^ith apprehension and 
 alarm. Lincoln recognized the gravity of the crisis 
 and at once assumed the leadership of his party in 
 Illinois He was its candidate in 1855 for the 
 United States Senate but, lacking a few votes of a 
 majority, he directed his friends to vote for 
 Trumbull, an anti-Nebraska Democrat. 
 
 Three years afterwards, in 1858, he was again the 
 candidate of his party for the Senate, this time 
 against Senator Douglas himself. Then came the 
 battle royal. The two candidates spoke from the 
 same platform at a series of meetings held in differ- 
 ent parts of the State. It was the most important 
 political debate that ever occurred in this country. 
 Douglas had achieved a reputation as one of the 
 most powerful debaters in the Senate, and was the 
 admitted leader of his party in what was then 
 known as the Northwest. He was believed to be 
 its coming candidate for the Presidency. 
 
 The repeal of the Missouri Compromise, the con- 
 test between freedom and slavery for the possession 
 of Kansas, amounting at times almost to a condition 
 of civil war, and the open threat of the South to 
 dissolve the Union in case it should be denied the 
 privilege of extending slavery made the discussion 
 of the slave question sharp and bitter. The presi- 
 dential campaign of 1856 had given the Rei^ublicans 
 high hopes of success in 1860. Under these circum- 
 
stances, the open contest for the Senate between 
 Douglas and Lincoln before the people of the State of 
 Illinois was Invested with national importance, and 
 aroused the deepest interest throughout the country. 
 It was not believed that Lincoln was the equal of 
 Douglas in such a series of debates, and the Eastern 
 Republicans feared that Douglas would achieve a 
 great personal triumph. Their first meeting upon a 
 public platform served to change this impression. 
 Lincoln's friends were everywhere surprised and 
 delighted, and even the Democrats were compelled 
 to admit that Douglas had at last found in his own 
 State a foeman worthy of his steel. Every 
 succeeding speech increased Lincoln's reputation. 
 He drove his opponent to assume positions which 
 alienated from him the support of the South 
 as a presidential candidate in 1860, and 
 made the union of the Democratic party upon a 
 single candidate for the presidency impossible. At 
 the close of the contest, although defeated for the 
 Senate, Lincoln had won the Presidency, and had 
 opened for himself a career which was to place his 
 name forever beside that of Washington. Washing- 
 ton and Lincoln— two names to be henceforth 
 inseparable in American history. 
 
 Lincoln at once became the recognized candidate 
 of his State for the Republican nomination. 
 Popular in the West, he had never been heard in 
 the East. In February, I860, three months before 
 the meeting of the Chicago convention, it was 
 determined by his friends that he should visit the 
 East and make a political address in New York. 
 This was his famous Cooper Institute speech. It 
 was a revelation to the people of the East of 
 Lincoln's powers of reasoning and oratory. The 
 New YorTc Trihune declared that "No man ever 
 before made such an impression on his first appeal 
 to a New York audience." There is no doubt 
 that this speech and his later addresses in New 
 England cities contributed largely to Lincoln's 
 nomination for the Presidency. 
 
6 
 
 In connection with this speech there is a story of 
 Mr. Lincoln touching its preparation, which I am 
 now permitted to tell. Mr. Joseph Medill, then 
 the young associate editor of the Chicago Tribune 
 was a friend of Lincoln and had been his companion 
 during the Douglas debates. Shortly before his 
 visit to New York, Lincoln brought his proposed 
 speech to the Tribune office and asked Dr. Ray, 
 the editor, and Medill to read it. "Boys," he 
 said, "I have prepared the speech that I intend to 
 deliver in New York and have brought the manu- 
 script along with me from Springfield. I would 
 like to have you examine it and note down such 
 changes of words as you think will improve it, 
 without materially altering the ideas or arguments. ' ' 
 Lincoln left the manuscript with them, promising 
 to call for it the next day, and Ray and Medill 
 laid aside their work and devoted themselves to the 
 delicate task. One read slowly while the other 
 listened attentively and the reading was frequently 
 interrupted to consider and discuss suggested 
 improvements of diction. It was well past mid- 
 night before their work was completed, and they 
 returned to the office early the next morning to 
 re-examine the revised and improved manuscript. 
 "When Mr. Lincoln came in they handed him their 
 numerous notes, with references carefully marked 
 on the margin, with the satisfied feeling that by 
 their efforts the speech had been brought to a high 
 degree of perfection. He thanked them cordially 
 for their trouble and took his leave, carrying with 
 him both the manuscript and their notes. A few 
 days later the news reached Chicago that Mr. 
 Lincoln had made his speech and that it had been a 
 triumphant success. In due course the New York 
 papers arrived in Chicago Avith the text of the 
 address and comments praising its loftiness of 
 tone, the cogency of its reasoning and the vigor of 
 its expression. Ray and Medill seized copies 
 
of the papers and plunged eagerly into the report, 
 congratulating themselves on the successful efifect 
 of the polish they had applied to the address. 
 They had not read far before Ray said:."Medill, 
 he does not seem to have made much use of our 
 notes." Reading on further, he said again: 
 "Medill, I believe old Abe must have mislaid our 
 manuscript." Medill replied: "More likely he 
 threw it out of the car window." Ray tried to 
 laugh and said: "This must have been meant for 
 one of his waggish jokes." "Perhaps so," replied 
 Medill, "but we must keep this joke to ourselves, 
 for if the boys find it out they will never get 
 through telling it at our expense." The speech 
 had been delivered as originally written. No 
 allusion was ever made to this incident by Mr. 
 Lincoln, and it is now told publicly for the first 
 time, nearly forty years after the oc(Uirrence. 
 
 As had been anticipated, at the next national con- 
 vention the Democratic party divided between 
 Douglas and Breckinridge, thus making Lincoln's 
 election certain from the beginning. 
 
 During the four years which followed his inaug- 
 uration this country was the scene of the greatest 
 civil war of history. More than two millions of 
 men gave their services to the Government to 
 maintain the Union and at the close of the war in 
 April, 1865, the army consisted of more than a 
 million men. Two hundred thousand lives were 
 sacrificed in the struggle. How magnificently 
 Lincoln bore himself throughout that memorable 
 contest is now a matter of history, universally 
 recognized by friend and foe alike. 
 
 Coming to the discharge of his Presidential 
 duties, with but slight knowledge of the public 
 men of the country upon whom he must rely for 
 counsel, without experienced officers to place in 
 important commands, he was compelled for two 
 years to grope his way largely in the dark. Em- 
 
barrassed by dissentions and rivalries in Ms Cabinet 
 and by opposing factions struggling for supremacy 
 in tlie party, driven to face disaster after disaster 
 in the field, the burden he was forced to bear would 
 have broken the hearts of most men. Still, he 
 fought on, hoped on. Call succeeded call for more 
 troops. As one general failed, a new trial was 
 made with another, but with no certain prospect 
 that the trial would prove a success. Meanwhile, 
 Lincoln was devoting all his energies to mastering 
 the details of administration, both civil and 
 military, which were essential to make one man the 
 master spirit who should control every important 
 movement in the struggle. Often disappointed and 
 deceived, but "with malice towards none and with 
 charity to all," he fought on with unfaltering 
 courage until, in July, 1863, the daylight broke at 
 last. On the fourth of that month, Gettysburg, 
 the decisive battle of the war, had been won; and 
 Vicksburg, the last stronghold of the Confederates 
 on the Mississippi, surrendered. The clouds had 
 rolled away. Two years of discouragement and 
 defeat had at length discovered the great captains 
 who could be safely entrusted with the charge of 
 military movements in the field. New assignments 
 of generals were made. Grant was brought East 
 and made Lieutenant -General; Meade the hero of 
 Gettysburg, retained under Grant the command of 
 the Army of the Potomac ; Sheridan was placed at 
 the head of the cavalry; while Sherman and 
 Thomas directed the armies in the West. From 
 that moment victory was assured. A concerted 
 movement of the armies of the nation upon Rich- 
 mond in the East and Atlanta in the South began 
 in April, 1864, and less than a year sufficed to 
 bring the war to a triumphant close. Lee was 
 driven from the banks of the Rappahannock and 
 shut up in Richmond, while Sherman moved on 
 Atlanta and his triumphant army swept through 
 
9 
 
 Georgia from Atlanta to Savannah, and thence along 
 the coast through the Carolinas, cutting off Lee's 
 communications in the rear. Finally Richmond 
 was captured, the armies of the Confederacy were 
 crushed, and the Union saved. 
 
 Looking back over the four years of this terrible 
 conflict we now see how largely the triumph was due 
 to the mental and moral characteristics of Lincoln. 
 His clear and strong intelligence, his sound judg- 
 ment of men and of affairs, his uncommon common- 
 sense, and his judicial quality of mind which was 
 never swayed by sophistries or calumnies from a 
 direct and logical course of reasoning, gave him a 
 grasp of the situation such as no one about him 
 possessed to an equal degree. His innate ux)right- 
 ness and truthfulness led him to meet all men and 
 all situations with a manly frankness and straight- 
 forwardness. He combined in a rare degree the 
 qualities essential to true greatness. He had a 
 powerful intellect, undaunted courage, a keen sense 
 of justice, and with it all a native kindness and 
 gentleness of heart, and a deep symj)athy with 
 human suffering. His patriotism was boundless. 
 "With him love of country was as strong as the 
 instinct of life itself. His marvellous buoyancy of 
 spirit, aided by a keen sense of humor, infused 
 hope into those around him in the darkest moments; 
 while his broad sympathies, combined with a rare 
 faculty of expression, enabled him to place great 
 truths before the masses of the people in a form 
 that appealed alike to the heart and to the under- 
 standing of of all. Thus by turns appealing and 
 encouraging, but always wisely leading, guiding, 
 directing, he was able to biing this great country 
 successfully through its appalling crisis. Lincoln 
 was the man for that crisis. He was a man raised 
 up by the Almighty to lead the Nation through the 
 bitter conflict for the abolition of slavery, a conflict 
 long foreseen to be inevitable — a noble work, nobly 
 
10 
 
 ^one — and the fame of him who achieved it is 
 immortal./ 
 
 The great benefit which flows from the public ob- 
 servance of each recurring anniversary of Lincoln's 
 birth is the love of country which his life and 
 services inspire in the you ng. Let us turn from that 
 life of marvellous achievement to consider briefly 
 the past and to contemplate the future of the 
 country which he so ably and so faithfully served. 
 
 Nearly a century and a quarter has passed into 
 history since the Declaration of Independence, and 
 we may truly say that this history is a history of 
 national i^rogress, not only towards material 
 prosperity, but towards a higher standard of public 
 virtue, truth and justice. The century now 
 drawing to a close has been eventful in putting at 
 rest great questions of foreign and domestic policy 
 upon which the security and the very existence of 
 the Nation deiDended. The slavery of three million 
 men and women is no longer tolerated, and liberty 
 and equality are by the fundamental law of the 
 land guaranteed alike to all. The germ of 
 secession and disintegration, hatched in the fertile 
 brain of Jefferson, which, under the slavery 
 agitation, developed into a malignant and cancerous 
 growth, has been extirpated by the sword. Never 
 again will the right of the nation to defend its own 
 existence by force of arms be questioned or denied. 
 In material prosperity our growth has been the 
 marvel of the century; our population has 
 increased from three millions to seventy-five 
 millions and, excluding Alaska, our area has been 
 more than doubled. 
 
 In this brief period in the life of a nation, we 
 have grown from one of the smallest and weakest 
 to be one of the largest, most populous, and, in all 
 that constitutes real strength and wealth, among 
 the richest and most powerful of the nations of the 
 earth. Wliile more than doubling our own area, 
 
11 
 
 we have for three-quarters of a century successfully 
 prevented any European nation from extending its 
 territory or dominion upon the Western Hemis- 
 I)here. 
 
 In the beginning of the present century the Miss- 
 issippi was our western boundary, while Louisiana 
 and Florida, owned respectively by France and 
 Spain, closed the mouth of the river to the free navi- 
 gation of our people, cutting us off from the waters 
 of the Gulf of Mexico. In 1803 Jefferson purchased 
 Louisiana from France, and by this single act we ac- 
 quired a continuous territory from the Atlantic to 
 the Pacific. It is difficult now to conceive that there 
 ever was a time when both banks of the Mississippi 
 were not ours, but it is still more difficult to realize 
 that there were those among us by whom the 
 f)urchase of Louisiana was strenuously opposed, 
 even to a threatened dissolution of the Union. The 
 act was denounced as unconstitutional and as a 
 rank usurpation of power. Jefferson, while insist- 
 ing upon the measure, admitted that he found no 
 warrant for it in the Constitution. His doubts 
 were born of his peculiar tlieorj; of the nature of 
 that instrument. He regarded the United States, 
 not as a nation, but as a mere league of independ- 
 ent States, associated only for certain purposes 
 s|)ecifically enumerated in the fundamental law. 
 But the opening of the Mississippi to the free 
 navigation of the people of the Union was a 
 national necessity, and with Jefferson this necessity 
 was its justification. The statesman triumphed 
 over the theorist. Then followed in succession the 
 purchase of Florida, the annexation of Texas, and 
 the acquisition of California, Arizona and New 
 Mexico, crowned by the purchase of Alaska. 
 Every one of these extensions met with vehe- 
 ment opposition, but who now doubts the pro- 
 found wisdom and statemanship that made them? 
 The Louisiana purchase is the most important 
 
12 
 
 event in the early history of the Republic — more 
 important almost than the preservation of the 
 Union, for without it Lincoln would have found no 
 Union to preserve. With the Mississippi as our 
 western boundary and closed to our free navigation 
 the Union would have distegrated and broken up 
 long bfore 1861. 
 
 But there is a class of people who now say that 
 this policy of acquisition, by which we have grown 
 great and powerful, should cease, that the nation 
 is large enough, and that even the annexation 
 of the Hawaiian Islands, with their own consent 
 and with the consent of the whole world, would 
 mark a new departure in national policy, fraught 
 with infinite trouble and disaster. They admit, 
 for it is admitted by all, that in no event can the 
 United States permit any other great power to con- 
 trol these islands. That has been our settled 
 policy in support of which all political parties have 
 been united for more than fifty years. Even now 
 the opponents of annexation in the Senate have 
 introduced a resolution declaring that the exercise 
 of control over the Hawaiian Islands by any other 
 government would be deemed an act unfriendly to 
 the United States. This is extending the Monroe 
 doctrine to the Hawaiian Republic. It is a 
 declaration that those islands belong to this con- 
 tinent, and that their possession by a foreign power 
 would be dangerous to our peace and safety. If 
 this be true, and if the island republic is not 
 powerful enough to maintain itself against foreign 
 aggression, as it clearly is not, we must either 
 annex it or guarantee its independence. If we 
 are not prepared to do this, we must abandon the 
 Monroe doctrine as applied to the islands of the sea. 
 
 That the Hawaiian Islands are essential to 
 the defense of our western coast is obvious to all 
 who have given the subject the most casual con- 
 sideration. They are the key to the commerce of 
 
13 
 
 the Pacific. With these islands in the possession 
 of a great naval power, the commerce of any other 
 nation could be driven from that ocean. In time 
 of war the islands would, in the possession of an 
 enemy, furnish a base for a successful attack upon 
 our Western coast. With the islands in our posses- 
 sion, such an attack would be impossible. Coal is 
 the vital power of a modern navy. No fleet of ships 
 can wage a successful war upon a foreign coast 
 where it has to steam five thousand miles from its 
 base of supplies. The Hawaiian Islands can alone 
 afford this necessary base for an enemy. Their 
 possession by us is vital to the protection of our 
 coast in time of war, and to the growth of our com- 
 mercial interests in time of peace. 
 
 It is said that their annexation would make it 
 necessary for us to fortify and defend them. But 
 by fortifying in time of peace and holding this 
 single point in time of war, we fortify and defend 
 tvvo thousand miles of our western coast. 
 
 Again, it is said that the annexation of the 
 Hawaiian Islands will be the beginning of a general 
 scheme of colonization. This is the old cry that 
 the nation cannot trust itself. It is the same cry 
 that is raised by un-Americans domiciled here that 
 we must not have a navy, because if the nation 
 had a navy as a means of defense, it would use it 
 as a means of conquest. This cry of distrust is a 
 false and traitorous cry. It is a slander upon the 
 most peaceful and conservative nation known to 
 history. We have no ambition for war, either for 
 glory or for conquest. During the one hundred 
 and fifteen years since the treaty of peace acknowl- 
 edging our independence, we have had but two 
 foreign wars. Had we desired a war of conquest, 
 we would have had it in 1865. Never did a nation 
 have greater cause for war than we had against 
 England then, and never would the results of 
 victory have been greater. Our navy at the close 
 
14 
 
 of our civil war was the strongest and most 
 efficient navy in the world. We could then have 
 met England upon the sea on equal terms and could 
 have destroyed her commerce, as she had already 
 destroyed ours. Whatever else might have been the 
 issue of such a war, Canada would be ours, and 
 never again could the Great Lakes on our 
 norther Q frontier become the scene of a naval 
 conflict. The commerce of these lakes, greater 
 than that borne upon any other inland sea, 
 and the great cities which maintain it, from 
 Chicago to Oswego, could never be menaced 
 with destruction by a hostile fleet. The sight of 
 the united armies of Grant and Lee marching upon 
 Canada would have electrifled the world, and 
 would have done more in a day towards reconcil- 
 iation and the restoration of the Union tnan has 
 been accomplished in thirty years of peace. But 
 did we resort to war? No. The nation loved 
 peace more than it loved glory or revenge, and 
 we appealed not to war but to arbitration. 
 
 Again, consider the present situation in Cuba. 
 Here is one of the richest and most fertile islands 
 in the world, lying at our very door, the key to 
 the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of Mexico and the 
 Isthmus of Panama. We long since proclaimed to 
 the world that no nation other than Spain should be 
 permitted to obtain control of Cuba. For three 
 years its people have been engaged in an heroic 
 struggle to achieve their independence. For three 
 years one of the most cruel and barbarous wars of 
 modern times has been waged against a people de- 
 votedly struggling for liberty. The island is well- 
 nigh devastated, its people reduced to abject pov- 
 erty, and thousands and thousands of them to 
 absolute starvation. The story of their suffering 
 has shocked humanity. But in spite of our deep 
 interest in the prosperity of Cuba and our sym- 
 pathy for its struggling patriots, we have adhered 
 faithfully to our international obligations and have 
 rigorously abstained from intervention. 
 
15 
 
 May God speed the day when peace with liberty 
 shall gladden the hearts of that brave and long 
 suffering people. 
 
 Against the charge of belligerent tendencies and 
 of a disposition to enter upon a career of bloodshed 
 and conquest, I put the fact, as stated by Presi- 
 dent Eliot, of Harvard University, that during the 
 brief period of our national life the United Statns 
 have been a party to forty-seven arbitrations — 
 being more than half of all that have taken place 
 in modern times and embracing subjects which 
 would have been deemed by other nations ample 
 cause for war. 
 
 The fear, therefore, that the annexation of 
 Hawaii will lead to the adoption of a new and 
 dangerous i)olicy on our part is unfounded and 
 absurd. To annex the islands is to avoid becoming 
 entangled with other nations on their account. I 
 am fur annexation to preserve peace and to avoid 
 war. 
 
 There is one other measure of vital moment to 
 the future prosperity and safety of this nation 
 which should be undertaken before the close of the 
 })resent century, and that is, the construction of 
 the Mcaraguan Canal. The vast consequences to 
 this nation that hang upon its successful accomplish- 
 ment cannot be overestimated. The canal should 
 be built and controlled by the United States alone. 
 In addition to the commercial advantages of the 
 canal, its construction is demanded as a measure of 
 national defense. To-day we are compelled to 
 maintain two virtually saparate and independent 
 navies. More than eight years ago, I toolv 
 occasion as Sscretary of the Navy, to say, in 
 speaking of the necessities of our naval force, that 
 our position demanded the immediate completion 
 of two fleets of battleships, a fleet of eight to be 
 assigned to the Pacific and one of twelve to the 
 Atlantic and the Gulf. This was lonff before 
 
Japan had become tlie great naval power that she 
 is now recognized to be. To-day we need the same 
 naval force in the Pacific as upon the Atlantic. 
 Instead of having twelve battleships upon the 
 Pacific we have only one. The Nicaraguan Canal 
 would unite the navies of the Atlantic and Pacific 
 and make them available on either coast as the 
 emergency might arise. We would then have one 
 strong and efiicient navy, instead of being com- 
 pelled to maintain two weaR and comj)aratively 
 inefficient ones. If the canal is built for one hun- 
 dred and fifty million dollars, the reduced expense 
 of the navy would pay the annual interest on its 
 total cost. 
 
 The annexation of the Hawaiian Islands and the 
 beginning of the Nicaraguan Canal should crowji 
 our achievements in the present century. What 
 destiny awaits the nation in the century that is to 
 come, it is not given to man to know. But, having 
 faith in the future of my country. I firmly believe 
 that the prophecy of that great Englishman, John 
 Bright, uttered during the most discouraging crisis 
 of our civil war will then be fulfilled. Replying 
 at Birmingham, in 1862, to the declaration of 
 Gladstone that the restoration of the Union was 
 impossible and that the cause of the North was 
 hopeless, he said: ''I cannot believe, for my x>art, 
 that such a fate will befall that fair land, stricken 
 though it now is with the ravages of war. I cannot 
 believe that civilization, in its journey with the sun, 
 will sink into endless night in order to gratify the 
 ambition of the leaders of this revolt. ... I have 
 another and a far brighter vision before my gaze. It 
 may be but a vision, but I will cherish it. I see 
 one vast confederation stretching from the frozen 
 North in unbroken line to the glowing South, and 
 from the wild billows of the Atlantic westward to 
 the calmer waters of the Pacific main, — and I see 
 one i)eople, and one language, and one law, and 
 one faith, and, over all that wide continent, the 
 
17 
 
 home of freedom, and a refuge for the oppressed of 
 every race and of every clime." 
 
 To the memory of John Bright, orator, statesman 
 and philanthropist, the friend of the United States 
 in its darkest hour, there should be erected in the 
 Capital of the nation a monument having inscribed 
 thereon the words which I have quoted. In the 
 history of the war for the preservation of the Union 
 the name of John Bright will ever be connected by 
 every patriotic American with that other name 
 immortal — Abraham Lincoln. 
 
i 
 
 •^