have been born, or of whatever race, or whether dwelling in our own borders or traveling abroad. The words which in his memorial address he applied to the lamented Garfield, with whom he had so many admirable qualities in common, might well be applied to the orator who spoke : "Himself a conspicuous illustration of what ability and ambition may do under republican institutions, he loved his country with a passion of patriotic devotion, and every waking thought was given to her advancement. He was an American in all his aspirations, and he looked to the destiny and influence of the United States with the philosophic composure of Jefferson, and the demonstrative confidence of John Adams." And again: "He believed that our continental relations, extensive and undeveloped as they are, involved responsibility, and could be cultivated into profitable friendship, or be abandoned to harmful indifference or lasting enmity. He believed, with equal confidence, that an essential forerunner to a new era of national progress must be a feeling of contentment in every section of the Union, and a generous belief that the benefits and burdens of government would be common to all." This active patriotism in Mr. Blaine's character explains many features of his career. He is not one to be satisfied with making mere lip-professions of devotion, or even being ready to defend his country when attacked. He wishes at all times to be doing something in her service, either to advance prosperity at home, or assert her proper position abroad, among the nations of the earth-two things which in this stage of the world's progress are indeed inseparable. Thus, in 1878, he braved the odium which then attached to the very name of subsidy, and advocated the establishment and maintenance of a line of mail steamers to Brazil, to which the Emperor Dom Pedro lately returned, full of enthusiasm, from his visit to the United States, had already extended aid conditional upon that from the United States. He showed that by this very policy Great Britain had crowded the American sailor off the seas, and he appealed to Congress to right this wrong, saying: "I maintain, Mr. President, that if the United States had not met with the incalculable obstacle that was thrown upon us by the war, and had been willing to uphold her shipping just as stiffly as Great Britain on all the lines of commerce, we should have outrun her. We had done it in sailing-vessels. We were ahead of her, or at least equal to her, in 1857. If I remember the figures aright, the tonnage stood about 5,700,000 tons for each country, and I grieve to say that it is eight million and odd for Great Britain, and only three million for America to-day. You may stand here and talk about the wrongfulness of subsidies, and the impolicy of granting them, until doomsday, and Great Britain will applaud every speech of that kind made in the American Congress, and will quietly subsidize her steamers and take possession of the commerce of the world. Great Britain to-day makes more money out of the commerce of the United States, vastly more, than is the interest on our public debt. She handles more, in the way of net profits, on the commerce which America gives her, than the interest on the vast national debt which we are burdened with to-day. I make that statement as a statistical fact, capable of being illustrated and proved." The aid was refused, and American trade is still cut off from Brazil, or goes only by way of Liverpool, in British steamers. Again, in 1881, he pleaded for the re-establishment of American shipping, opposing, at the same time, the proposition of Senator Beck to throw open our doors to the ship-builders of the Clyde. His watchword was still, "Everything American." He said: "Mr. President, the frank admission of the honorable Senator from Kentucky took away a large part of the argument which I thought I should have to make, and that was to prove that if the United States to-day is incompetent to compete with Great Britain in the manufacture of iron ships, and if you admit iron ships from Great Britain absolutely free of duty, you will be still more incompetent to do it next year. It takes, in the language of the trade, what is called a great 'plant' to build steamships; it takes a large investment of money; it takes large and powerful machinery; it requires the investment of millions to start with; and if, in addition to all that has been done abroad to build up English ship-yards, we pour into them all the patronage that can come from this country, I should like the honorable Senator from Kentucky, or any other Senator, to tell me exactly at what point of time it will come to pass that any feeble effort on this side will begin to compete with those great yards. If you abandon it this year because you are unable, you will be far more unable next year, you will be still less able the year ensuing, and every year will add to the monopoly of British power in that respect, and to the absolute weakness and prostration of American power in competition. But I will say that the frank admission of the honorable Senator from Kentucky, of the future and perpetual dependence upon England removes the necessity of arguing that point. He frankly admits it with all its damaging force." In 1879, Mr. Blaine said, in speaking of the expenses of the navy, which has no commerce to protect: "We carried five-sevenths of the American commerce when the war broke out. We do not carry one-quarter to-day, and if we come out of the deep abyss of humiliation that we are in, we will come out of it by vigorous and strong-nerved and daring legislation, if you please. I would open it to all the business of the country, but I would put the race between American skill and the skill of all the world, with the utmost possible confidence that, sustained by this Government in the race, we would win. It is in our people. With an equal chance we can beat them. But, with the present condition of things, a hope for the revival of American commerce is as idle a hope as ever entered the brain of an insane man. Our trade is falling off one or two per cent. per annum as we stand to-day. It was less this year than it was last. It was less last year than it was the year before. It will be less next year than this. * * * * "We want a navy, but we want something for it to do. We want a navy to protect the commerce, but we want a commerce in advance for the navy to protect, and we want a commerce that shall not be one of favoritism; a commerce that shall not benefit one section at the expense of another, but one that shall be equal and just and generous and profitable to all. You will never get it by making this nation a tributary to Great Britain. You will never get it by banishing the art of ship-building from among our people. You will never get it by discouraging all possible aspirations for maritime and commercial supremacy, by a public proclamation from Congress that after nearly a century of gallant struggle, in which more than three-quarters of the time we were |