drama of national life, and
vividly _realizes_ the scenes and personages of the past. But, if he
was not so brilliant in description as others, or in the majestic and
harmonious march of his story, or in keen scrutiny of character, he
unquestionably excelled in ample, direct, and truthful statement, so
that his narrative was not only transparent in the fulness of detail,
but the detail itself disclosed its philosophic lesson. No man can
charge him with hasty or capricious censure. He was always the careful
protector of human reputation, dealing with the unresisting and
undefending dead as their advocate as well as righteous judge;
reluctant to condemn by argument or inference, and never unless the
proved facts were irresistible. He studiously discarded all that might
either attract or detract by fancy or elaborate discussion; in a word,
he shunned ambitious rhetoric, so perilous to solid judgments, and so
often giving false color to historical portraits, for he knew the risk
of losing the reliable in the brilliant. In his style, he was an
artless artist, if there is truth in Thackeray's observation, that the
"true artist makes you think of a great deal more than the objects
before you." His extreme calmness may have, sometimes, made him cold;
yet, by conforming himself to plain forms of language, he always aimed
to convey the absolute truth, which he regarded as the coveted prize of
history. For history, to his mind, was a serious thing, not a
melodramatic tale, and he wrote it as he would have delivered testimony
in the presence of God. His desire was that the fact and not the form
should fascinate and teach; because the fact was permanent and
independent, the form flexible and voluntary. No one knew better or
more dreaded the risk of biasing opinion by over or under-statements
concerning the conspicuous persons of whom he wrote. If his theme was
not so large as Mr. Bancroft's, he still felt that both addressed the
American nation in words that were to last, concerning the founders of
our political system and the Chief who presided at the foundation. What
he recorded was to form the opinions of posterity, and thus, not merely
to influence but virtually to become a principle of action for his
countrymen in relation to the great things that concern patriots.
Enthusiastic, yet, never excited; patient, and devoid of partizanship;
he had the rare faculty of writing so fairly of men of a near period
that his books were satis