ion, and, if need be, of
strenuous endurance through a period of danger or of responsibility,
when the terrifying alternatives of war are vibrating in the balance,
that the power of a great captain mainly lies. It is in the courage to
apply knowledge under conditions of exceptional danger; not merely to
see the true direction for effort to take, but to dare to follow it,
accepting all the risks and all the chances inseparable from war, facing
all that defeat means in order thereby to secure victory if it may be
had. It was upon these inborn moral qualities that reposed the conduct
which led Farragut to fame. He had a clear eye for the true key of a
military situation, a quick and accurate perception of the right thing
to do at a critical moment, a firm grip upon the leading principles of
war; but he might have had all these and yet miserably failed. He was a
man of most determined will and character, ready to tread down or fight
through any obstacles which stood in the path he saw fit to follow. Of
this a conspicuous instance was given in the firmness with which he
withstood the secession clamor of Norfolk, his outspoken defense of the
unpopular Government measures, and the promptitude with which he left
the place, sundering so many associations at the call of duty; and to
this exhibition of strength of purpose, through the impression made upon
Mr. Fox, was largely due his selection for command in the Gulf.

One of the greatest of naval commanders, whose experience of men
extended through an unusually long and varied career--Earl St.
Vincent--has declared that the true test of a man's courage is his power
to bear responsibility; and Farragut's fearlessness of responsibility in
order to accomplish necessary ends, while yet captain of a single ship,
was the subject of admiring comment among his subordinates, who are not
usually prone to recognize that quality in their commanders. "I have as
much pleasure in running into port in a gale of wind," he wrote, "as
ever a boy did in a feat of skill." The same characteristic was markedly
shown under the weight of far greater issues in his determination to
pass the river forts, in spite of remonstrances from his most able
lieutenant, of cautious suggestions from other commanding officers, and
with only the ambiguous instructions of the Navy Department to justify
his action. It was not that the objections raised were trivial. They
were of the most weighty and valid character, and in