of the House
in the Twenty-seventh Congress (under Harrison and Tyler). "Mr.
Fessenden at that time," said Mr. Davis, "was not only a young man of
eminent ability and attainments, but he was warm-hearted, frank,
honorable, eminently conscientious. His health was then good, and he
was always bright and genial: sometimes he showed the lambent play of
passion and of fire."

--His eulogies in both branches of Congress were many. Mr. Hamlin,
long his colleague, had been a student in his law office, and placed
him in the front rank of American senators. Mr. Trumbull presented
him as he was in 1855, when they first met in a Senate of sixty-two
members, of whom only fifteen were Republicans. Mr. Williams of Oregon
described him as "towering in mind among those around him, like Saul
in form among his countrymen." In the House, Mr. Lynch, from his own
city, gave the home estimate of Mr. Fessenden's character. Mr. Peters
eulogized him for his eminent professional rank; and Mr. Hale described
him as a man "who never kept himself before the people by eccentric
forces, and went in quest of no popularity that had to be bought by
time-serving." Words of tenderness and affection were spoken of him by
men whose temperament was as reserved and undemonstrative as his own.
--"A truer, kinder heart," said Henry B. Anthony, "beats in no living
breast than that which now lies cold and pulseless in the dead frame of
William Pitt Fessenden."

[(1) A few extracts from Mr. Bayard's speech of July 9, 1863, at Dover,
Del., will exhibit his spirit of disloyalty to the Union of the States.
Mr. Bayard said,--

"And is such a war necessary for the peace and happiness of the United
States? For half a century we have lived at peace with Great Britain,
with her Canadian possession upon our Northern border. Upon the South,
Mexico holds her government with no threats of trouble to us or our
citizens. _Why, then, may not two American confederacies exist side
by side without conflict, each emulating the other in the progress of
civilization?_ The coterminous kingdoms of Europe offer many examples
of similar peace and prosperity. _With such a sickening alternative as
civil war, why should not the experiment at least be made? It is this
question we are to pass upon to-day_." . . .

"If peace will restore and secure these blessings to the people of the
United States, even though a number of their former associates have
gone off under a new and