Cyrus W. Field, His Life and Work [1819-1892]

CHAPTER XIV

Chapter 1611,998 wordsPublic domain

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS--RAPID TRANSIT

(1870-1880)

The journey to England in December, 1869, was taken in order, if possible, to effect the consolidation of the Anglo-American and the Atlantic Cable companies; this was done, the latter losing its name and being absorbed in the other. Mr. Field also made a working arrangement between the Anglo-American Telegraph Company, the French Cable Company, and the New York, Newfoundland, and London Company, and a division of revenue was arranged between the three companies.

He returned to his home in February, and he was in Washington in March, and while there had a talk with Mr. Sumner on the settlement of the _Alabama_ claims.

The New York _Herald_ of March 22d says:

"Mr. Field proposes that the United States shall name three eminent persons, crowned heads, as arbitrators, from whom Great Britain shall select one, and his decision of the case shall be binding on both parties. Or that Great Britain shall name the arbitrators, and that the United States shall make the selection of the fated individuals. Mr. Field had a long conference yesterday with Mr. Sumner upon the subject. The latter does not favor the proposition. With all his respect for royalty, he does not think the United States will get a fair show from any of the crowned heads of Europe. He is opposed to all sorts of arbitration in this matter, because he considers it beneath the dignity of our government to submit to anything of the kind."

Fourteen months later a treaty had been made and was before the Senate of the United States.

On the evening of May 23, 1871, Mr. Field gave a dinner to Her Britannic Majesty's High Commissioners. The Marquis of Ripon said in his speech:

"It is sufficient for me to say that I believe--aye, I think that I may say that I know--that it is an honest treaty, that it has been the result of an honest endeavor to meet the just claims of both countries. I do not doubt that if this treaty had been written exclusively in London or exclusively in Washington it would have contained different provisions from those now found in it. The treaties which are not compromises, which represent only one side, can be dictated only under the shadow of a victorious army. These are not the treaties, these are not the conventions, that are made between free and equal people."

Before the evening closed the Marquis of Ripon said that he wished to propose the health of the host of the evening, and then added:

"He trusted that both branches of the late commission had done their share ... but far greater credit was due to the little wire which tied the two nations so close together."

He had written to Mr. Field two weeks before from Washington:

"I am delighted to hear that you are inclined to look with favor upon our work. I believe the treaty to be equally fair and honorable to both countries; and if it is to be confirmed by the Senate it will, I trust, lay the foundation of a firm and lasting friendship between the two nations."

On May 18th Professor Goldwin Smith wrote:

"No doubt you rejoice, as I do, in the treaty. I suppose it is safe."

Thirteen years later the Marquis of Ripon wrote, expressing regret that he would not be able to dine with his host of 1871, and added:

"Also because I might thus have had an opportunity of bearing my testimony to the very important part which the telegraph cable played in the negotiations for the treaty of Washington. If it had not been for the existence of the cable, those negotiations must have been protracted in a manner which might have been very injurious to their success."

And at the same time Lord Iddesleigh, who as Sir Stafford Northcote had served as a member of the commission, wrote of the use of the Atlantic cable during the Washington negotiations:

"There can be no doubt that it was a main agent in the matter. We usually met our American colleagues at midday, and we were by that time in possession of the views of our home government as adopted by their Cabinet in the afternoon of the same day."

At a dinner given by Mr. Field in London on Thanksgiving Day, November 28, 1872, Mr. Gladstone said:

"The union of the two countries means, after all, the union of the men by whom they are inhabited; and among the men by whom they are inhabited there are some whose happy lot it has been to contribute more than others to the accomplishment of what I will venture to call that sacred work. And who is there, gentlemen, of them all that has been more marked, either by energetic motion or by happy success in that great undertaking, than your chairman, who has gathered us round his hospitable board to-night? His business has been to unite these two countries by a telegraphic wire; but, gentlemen, he is almost a telegraphic wire himself. With the exception of the telegraphic wire, there is not, I believe, any one who has so frequently passed anything between the two countries. I am quite certain there is no man who, often as he has crossed the ocean, has more weightily been charged upon every voyage with sentiments of kindness and good-will, of which he has been the messenger between the one and the other people."

It is appropriate here to introduce a note from Mr. Beecher of May 7, 1870:

"_My dear Mr. Field_,--On Friday noon, as I sat writing in the _Christian Union_ office, about twelve of the clock, it suddenly flashed across me that I had engaged to breakfast with you at nine of the morning, alas! and have only to say in excuse that I forgot.

"Ordinarily that would be an aggravation, for it would argue indifference; but in a man who forgets, he is grieved to say, funerals, weddings, and social engagements; who forgets what he reads, what he knows, it ought not to be considered as a specific sin so much as a generic infirmity. I pray you forgive me, and _invite_ me again! Then see if I forget.

"I am very truly yours, "HENRY WARD BEECHER."

It was about this time that Mr. Field's thoughts were turned to the possibility of laying a cable across the Pacific, and in that way carrying out his favorite project of completing the circuit of the globe.

In writing on April 22, 1870, he says:

"I enclose a memorial and bill before Congress in regard to a submarine cable from California to China and Japan."

On April 23d:

"If I obtain (as I hope) my telegraph bill, I propose that the Pacific Submarine Telegraph Company make an agreement, offensive and defensive, with the submarine lines from England to China _via_ India. Our cable would give an alternate route from China to England, and I would suggest that we have a joint office in China, and that parties there have the option of sending by either line; and in case one line should be down, messages should be immediately forwarded by the other."

"_August 20, 1870._

"At the request of prominent members of the United States government we have decided to adopt the following route for the Pacific cable:

San Francisco to Sandwich Islands 2,080 miles. Sandwich Islands to Medway Island 1,140 " Medway Island to Yokohama 2,260 " Yokohama to Shang-Hai 1,035 " ------ 6,515 "

"Medway Island is the new coaling station of the steamers between California and Japan."

He writes to Captain Sherard Osborn in August, 1870:

"In your letter of 10th June you state the total length required for the Pacific cable as 7842 nautical miles, and give the price for the whole, complete, as £2,900,000 sterling. This is at the rate of over £382 9_s._ per nautical mile."

From a letter written on January 21, 1871:

"It is uncertain what Congress will do with regard to the Pacific telegraph."

On the 13th of June, 1871, he sailed from New York as one of the deputation from the American branch of the Evangelical Alliance, commissioned to wait on His Majesty the Emperor of Russia in behalf of religious liberty for all his subjects.

It was upon his return to England that he wrote the following letter to the Grand Duke Constantine, and the one of September 19th on his return to New York:

"LONDON, _11th August, 1871_.

"To His Imperial Highness the Grand Duke CONSTANTINE:

"_Sir_,--With this I have the honor to enclose a memorial addressed to His Majesty the Emperor of Russia respecting the establishment of a submarine telegraph communication between the west coast of America and the eastern shores of Russia, China, etc.

"I shall esteem it a great favor if your Imperial Highness will be so good as to forward the memorial to His Majesty, with any observations on the subject which may be thought desirable.

"With respect to the gentlemen mentioned in the memorial as prepared to join me in the enterprise, I may explain that they are among the very first merchants and capitalists of the United States.... As I am leaving for the United States this evening, my address will be Gramercy Park, New York. I would express my sincere thanks for the great kindness shown to myself by your Imperial Highness, and for the interest you have taken in the subject I have so much at heart.

"I beg to subscribe myself, "With great respect, "Your most obedient servant, "CYRUS W. FIELD.

"'_To His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia_:

"'The memorial of Cyrus West Field, a citizen of the United States of America, respect fully thereto,

"'That having taken an active part in the establishment of electric telegraph communication across the Atlantic Ocean between America and Europe, and having been also interested in the laying of the existing submarine telegraph lines between Europe and the East, he is now desirous of submitting to your Majesty a project for completing the electric telegraph circle round the globe by uniting by submarine cables the western coast of America with the eastern shores of your Majesty's dominions, and with China or Japan, or both, as may be found most expedient.

"'Having regard to the complete success, both scientific and practical, of the submarine telegraph cables now working, which are in the aggregate about 40,000 miles in length, your memorialist deems it wholly unnecessary to enlarge on the perfection attained in the manufacture of telegraph cables, or the facility and certainty with which they are laid in all parts of the world.

"'Experience has proved that submarine telegraph cables can readily be recovered and repaired in case of accident, so that there is practically no limit to the length of line which may be employed or the depth of the water in which they may with perfect safety be submerged.

"'Memorialist is aware of the strong desire existing in the United States of America for the establishment of a telegraph cable across the Pacific Ocean in order to the furtherance of commercial interests and to the strengthening of the friendly relations which have for so many years existed between the United States and your Imperial Majesty's government.

"'From communications which memorialist has had with the government of the United States and with many leading members of Congress, he is able to say with confidence that both the government and the legislature take a deep interest in the subject, and that, as memorialist believes, they will readily join with your Majesty in making such arrangements as may be found necessary to carry out the enterprise.

"'Memorialist has made diligent inquiry from the persons best able to advise with respect to the practicability of uniting the two great continents by telegraphic cable, and he has received most satisfactory assurances on the subject.

"'The proposed line would be about 6000 miles in length, and would be made in at least two lengths, landing at one or more of the islands of the Pacific Ocean.

"'From this point the line would extend on the one hand to Russian territory, where it would be connected with the imperial system of land lines, and on the other hand it would run to the western coast of the United States, joining there the American wires, and thus give direct communication between Russia and the whole continent of America, and, by means of the cables now laid, with every important telegraph line in the world.

"'Your Majesty will not fail to appreciate the importance and value of such a communication to Russia as well as to the United States of America.

"'It would be an act of presumption on the part of memorialist to affect to point out to your Majesty the advantages of the line in its international and political aspect. The cost of the line cannot be ascertained until the route is definitely settled, but it will be manifest that for such an undertaking the very best description of cable must be used.

"'From the best information which could be obtained, and from the experience of existing lines, memorialist is led to believe that for some years such a line would not in itself be remunerative as a commercial speculation, although there would doubtless be a large amount of business passing through it; and, further, that having regard to the risks necessarily incident to so great a work, it is and will be impossible to raise the capital required for establishing the line without material aid from the governments directly interested.

"'Memorialist is therefore led to look to your Majesty and the United States government for assistance in carrying out this great undertaking, and, having taken counsel of his associates in former telegraphic enterprises as to the best means of effecting the desired object in the shortest time, he respectfully submits to your Majesty the following project:

"'1. That the proposed Pacific telegraph line should be established by a company formed by responsible persons experienced in telegraphic business, under the sanction and supervision of your Majesty's government and the government of the United States of America.

"'2. That the respective governments should each appoint a permanent director of the company.

"'3. That the course of the line, its termini and stations, and other needful arrangements be determined under the joint approval of the official directors representing the two governments.

"'4. That each government should guarantee for twenty-five years interest at three per cent. per annum on the cost of the line, the net receipts for each year (after providing for maintenance and repairs) being applied pro rata in relief of the guarantees.

"'5. That one-half net profits above six per cent. per annum be set apart as a sinking fund for return of capital, and the balance divided equally between the stockholders and the government.

"'6. That at the end of twenty-five years of guarantee the company shall retain the cable and other property, but without any exclusive right.

"'Memorialist believes that with such assistance as is indicated above the cables could be made and laid within three years.

"'The following eminent citizens of the United States have expressed their willingness to join memorialist in this important enterprise:

"'Peter Cooper, Moses Taylor, Marshall O. Roberts, Wilson G. Hunt, Prof. S. F. B. Morse, Dudley Field, Wm. H. Webb, Darius Ogden Mills.

"'Memorialist now humbly seeks your Majesty's approval of the above project, believing that if so approved the government of the United States will give their concurrence, and that the work will be speedily accomplished.

"'CYRUS W. FIELD, "'of New York.'"

"GRAMERCY PARK, "NEW YORK, _19th September, 1871_.

"_Sir_,--Referring to my personal interviews with you, and to my letter of 11th ultimo, in which I enclosed a memorial to His Majesty the Emperor of Russia respecting the establishment of a submarine telegraph cable between Russia and the United States of America, I now beg respectfully to submit to your Imperial Highness the following modifications of the propositions contained in that memorial, which I think will commend themselves to your good judgment:

"1. The proposed guarantee of three per cent. _not_ to commence until the day the cable is completed and in successful working order.

"2. The amount of capital guaranteed _not_ to exceed £3,000,000.

"3. The company to bind itself not to kill seals, nor to deal in furs on any portion of Russian territory.

"4. The cable not to be landed on the island of Saghalien.

"5. In the event of any dispute arising between the cable company and any subject of His Imperial Majesty, the question to be referred to the Russian courts. In disputes between the cable company and American citizens, the courts of the United States to have sole jurisdiction.

"May I respectfully solicit your Imperial Highness to take these proposed modifications into your consideration, and, should they meet with your approval, I would beg the favor of your laying them before His Majesty the Emperor, with such suggestions as may seem to you advisable.

"It is important that I should know the views of His Imperial Majesty's government at the earliest moment, as the Congress of the United States meets on the first Monday in December.

"I beg again to express my sincere thanks for the great kindness shown to myself by your Imperial Highness, and for the interest you have taken in the subject I have so much at heart.

"I have the honor to subscribe myself, "With great respect, "Your Imperial Highness's most obedient servant, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

In January, 1872, he was again in Russia, but after that time there appears to be no mention made of that government's taking any interest in a Pacific cable, and it is only possible to give bits of correspondence in connection with this project, to which he gave so much of his time and thought.

On the 27th of November, 1876, he wrote:

"I strongly advise that the Pacific cable be landed a few miles south of San Francisco, at a spot which I selected two years ago. There is a most excellent sandy beach, and the cable could be easily connected with the existing telegraph lines across the continent."

"_July 11, 1878_.

"When the Hawaiian government fulfil their promise to me in regard to landing cables on their shores, the question of a Pacific submarine telegraph may be entertained by me. Until then I certainly shall do nothing towards the accomplishment of the enterprise _via_ the Sandwich Islands."

"HAWAIIAN LEGATION, _March 10, 1879_.

"_Sir_,--The twenty-fifth anniversary of the formation of the company for laying the Atlantic cable seems an appropriate occasion for giving an impulse to the great work of extending a cable across the Pacific.

"I am sure that you will not be satisfied with anything less than a cable round the world.

"The Hawaiian Islands have a very central position for the navigation of the North Pacific. They are a great resort for the naval and mercantile marine of the commercial countries.

"His Majesty the King has long realized the great importance of a submarine cable to his kingdom, as well as to all nations whose vessels and citizens visit there, and has authorized me, by advice of his Cabinet, to grant you, your associates and assigns, the exclusive privilege of landing a submarine cable or cables on any of the Hawaiian Islands, and for using the same for connection with the United States, or any other country, and crossing any or all of the islands, and this for the period of twenty-five years.

"Any land which you may find necessary to have for any of these purposes will be furnished by the government free of expense to you, not intended to include land for offices or houses.

"It is to be understood that if you do not within five years begin the construction of the cable necessary to connect the islands with the United States, and establish the connection within ten years, this grant is to cease.

"The King and Cabinet, having the greatest confidence in your ability and energy, anticipate the completion of the cable to the islands at an early day.

"I have the honor to be, sir, "With great respect, "Your obedient servant, "ELISHA H. ALLEN,

"His Hawaiian Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary."

It was on the evening of the 10th of March, 1879, that he said:

"One thing only remains which I still hope to be spared to see, and in which to take a part: the laying of a cable from San Francisco to the Sandwich Islands ... and from thence to Japan, by which the island groups of the Pacific may be brought into communication with the continents on either side--Asia and America--thus completing the circuit of the globe."

Two months later this note was sent:

"NEW YORK, _May 17, 1879_.

"_Dear Judge Allen_,--I sail for Europe on Wednesday next, the 21st instant, and shall be absent five weeks from this city. During my visit there I shall confer with my friends in regard to the Pacific cable, and I am willing to head a subscription list with my own subscription of one hundred thousand dollars.

"I shall be happy to confer with you on my return to this country.

"I have had a bill introduced into Congress granting permission to land and operate cables in the United States, which I hope will pass during this session.

"With great respect, "I remain, dear Judge Allen, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

To follow his steps more closely, it is best to turn back to the fall of 1871. It was on October 10th that he cabled to London:

"A great fire has been raging in Chicago for the last two days, and more than 100,000 persons are homeless and destitute of food, shelter, and clothing. Five square miles in heart of Chicago utterly destroyed. Loss between two and three hundred millions. All principal business houses, banks, and hotels destroyed. Could not you, Captain Hamilton, and Mr. Rate call upon the large banking-houses connected with America, such as Morgan, Baring, Jay Cooke, Morton, Brown, Shipley, and others, and endeavor to organize a relief committee for the purpose of rendering the assistance that is so much needed? The large cities of the United States are acting nobly in this fearful calamity that has befallen Chicago, and the citizens subscribe liberally."

The cablegrams that he received and forwarded on this occasion were numberless. Those that follow were sent by Mr. Mason, the Mayor of Chicago:

"We are sorely afflicted, but our spirit is not broken."

"God bless the noble people of London."

"Receive our warmest blessing for your most noble response to our stricken city. It was received by our committee in tears."

"Your generosity defies space, as these wonderful gifts have been flashed to us from all parts of the earth. We are lifted from our desolation. The arm of the civilized world is thrown around us. Heaven bless you for this needed help and for the language of encouragement and deep love which it speaks to an afflicted people."

"Our people, lifted from despair by this regal aid, are to-day in the work of restoration, full of hope. We read in these gifts the determination of the universal world that we shall go forward."

Mr. Field received an official invitation from the Italian government, and he was also the representative of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, to attend the Triennial Telegraphic Convention of representatives from the various governments and telegraph companies of the world appointed to meet in Rome in December, 1871.

On the 4th of that month Professor Morse wrote:

"I have wished for a few calm moments to put on paper some thoughts respecting the doings of the great telegraphic convention to which you are a delegate.

"The telegraph has now assumed such a marvellous position in human affairs throughout the world, its influences are so great and important in all the varied concerns of nations, that its efficient protection from injury has become a necessity. It is a powerful advocate for universal peace. Not that, of itself, it can command a 'Peace, be still' to the angry waves of human passions, but that, by its rapid interchange of thought and opinion, it gives the opportunity of explanations to acts and to laws which, in their ordinary wording, often create doubt and suspicion.

"Were there no means of quick explanation it is readily seen that doubt and suspicion, working on the susceptibilities of the public mind, would engender misconception, hatred, and strife. How important, then, that in the intercourse of nations there should be the ready means at hand for prompt correction and explanation!

"Could there not be passed in the great international convention some resolution to the effect that, in whatever condition, whether of peace or war between nations, the telegraph should be deemed a sacred thing, to be by common consent effectually protected both on the land and beneath the waters?

"In the interest of human happiness, of the 'Peace on earth' which, in announcing the advent of the Saviour, the angels proclaimed with 'good will to men,' I hope that the convention will not adjourn without adopting a resolution asking of the nations their united, effective protection to this great agent of civilization."

This telegram was sent from Rome on December 28th:

"Telegraphic conference to-day, after a long debate, by a unanimous vote, adopted Mr. Cyrus Field's proposition to recommend the different governments represented at the conference to enter into a treaty to protect submarine wires in war as well as peace, and recommended that no government should grant any right to connect its country with another without the joint consent of the countries proposed to be connected."

In speaking of this convention he said:

"It represented twenty-one countries, six hundred millions of people, and twenty six different languages."

The proposal of Professor Morse was so obviously in the interest of peace and humanity that it may seem that its adoption was a matter of course. In fact, however, the opposition to it was at first so strong and general that it would have been defeated but for the personal exertions of Mr. Field in its behalf, and his own narrative of how the adoption was brought about is so interesting as to deserve being given in full. In his report, dated Rome, January 14, 1872, to the directors of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, he said:

"The International Telegraph Conference adjourned this afternoon after a session of six weeks and three days....

"The conference opened on Friday morning, December 1st, but I did not arrive here till the 20th ultimo. On my arrival I was very sorry to learn that the representative from Norway had on the 4th of December proposed to the conference that they should recommend to their different governments to enter into a treaty to protect submarine cables in war as well as peace, and that his proposition had met with such opposition that he had withdrawn it, as he was sure it could not pass. As soon as I got all the facts, I determined my course. It was to get personally acquainted with every delegate and urge my views upon him before bringing them before the conference. Finally, on Thursday, the 28th ultimo, I presented my views in a carefully prepared argument to the conference. Every single member was in his seat, and finally, after a long discussion, in which there were forty-nine separate speeches, my propositions were carried without a dissenting voice. The representatives of nine governments, although personally in favor of it, were not willing to take the responsibility of voting without positive instructions from their governments, so they simply abstained from voting.

"The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy, Visconte Venosta, will prepare a circular and send it to the different governments, inviting them to enter into an international treaty to protect submarine cables in time of war.

"I shall leave here to-morrow morning for New York _via_ Vienna, St. Petersburg, Berlin, Paris, and London. In each of these cities I hope to persuade the American minister to help on this treaty, which I believe will add much to the security of submarine telegraph property."

Soon after he reached London he received this note from Mr. Gladstone; he refers, doubtless, to the letter already given in this memoir, setting forth the view he entertained, during the early part of the civil war, of the hopelessness of endeavoring to restore the Union by arms. It had not, however, been published in 1872, nor has it appeared until the publication of this volume.

"11 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, "_February 10, 1872_.

"_Dear Mr. Cyrus Field,_--Will you kindly refer me, if you can, to a letter of mine, I think addressed to you respecting my declaration in 1862 that the leaders of the South had made a nation--as to its date, and, if possible, without inconvenience, as to any publication in which I might find it, though probably the date will suffice?

"Believe me, "Very faithfully yours, "W. E. GLADSTONE."

Mr. Field was in London during the excitement caused by the claims for indirect damages which were to be put forward by the American agents at Geneva. These letters refer to that controversy:

"HOUSE OF COMMONS, "LONDON, _March 1, 1872_.

"_Dear Mr. Field,_--As I hear, with regret, that you are detained here by illness, I take the liberty, as an old acquaintance, of asking whether you cannot do something in your compulsory leisure to help our countries in this untoward business as to the case.

"If you, who are so well known here, believe your government to be in the right, and that they never did waive, or meant to waive, the claim for indirect damages, and if you will make this statement publicly here, in any manner you please, it would certainly go far to induce me, and I think most of the other public men who were strong Unionists during your civil war, to advocate the submission of the whole case as it stands to the Geneva board. On the other hand, if you cannot do this, I really think we may ask for your testimony on the other side.

"If you do not see your way to taking any action in the matter, pray excuse this note, for which my apology must be that this is no time for any of us who are likely to get a hearing to keep silence.

"I am always yours very truly, "THOMAS HUGHES."

He thanked Mr. Hughes for his "kind note," and at the same time gave to him the letter he had written to Mr. Colfax on February 24th, and this letter Mr. Hughes sent to the _Times_:

"LONDON, _24th February, 1872_.

"_My dear Mr. Colfax,_--Having read this morning a brief telegraphic summary of the speech which you delivered at Brooklyn on Washington's Birthday, I feel constrained to address you on the subject upon which you have spoken with so much emphasis. I refer to the Treaty of Washington. I share your opinion that neither nation will dare, in the face of civilization, to destroy the treaty; but nevertheless the crisis is a grave one. It therefore behooves every one who can assist to bring about a better understanding on the points of difference between the two countries to make his contribution to that end. This is my apology for addressing you.

"The grave misunderstanding which has arisen between Great Britain and the United States is due to the widely different manner in which the Treaty of Washington has been from the outset interpreted by the two nations. I have not met a single person on this side of the Atlantic who expresses any desire "to back out" of the treaty, or refuse the fulfilment of any one of the obligations which it is believed to impose; nay, more, my conviction is that if the British people were satisfied that the principle of referring vague and indefinite claims to arbitration had somehow or other crept into the treaty, they yet would, while passing emphatic votes of censure on their representatives at Washington, at the same time never dream of calling back the pledge which Lord Ripon and his colleagues had given on their behalf.

"The excitement which followed the publication of the American case was occasioned by the belief--universal among all classes of the English people--that their own interpretation of the treaty was the right one, and that indeed no other interpretation had ever been or would be given to it. It is desirable that Americans should remember this fact--that until the publication of the American case nobody on this side of the water had the remotest idea that the Washington Treaty contemplated more than arbitration with reference to the direct losses inflicted by the _Alabama_ and other Confederate cruisers which escaped from British ports during our civil war. This is not a matter of surmise; it is demonstrable on the clearest evidence. I therefore contend that whether the public sentiment of England be well founded or not, its existence is so natural that even if we Americans are wholly in the right we ought to make every allowance for it--in fact, treat it with generous forbearance.

"So early as June 12th last, when Lord Russell, in moving a resolution for the rejection of the treaty, charged the Americans with having made no concessions, Lord Granville retorted by pointing to the abandonment of the claim for consequential damages. 'These were pretensions,' he said, 'which might have been carried out under the former arbitration, but they entirely disappear under the limited reference.' There could be no mistake as to his meaning, because in describing the aforesaid 'pretensions' he quoted the strong and explicit language which Mr. Fish had employed. We are bound to believe that Lord Granville spoke in perfect good faith, especially as the American minister was present during the debate, and sent the newspaper verbatim report of it to his own government by the ensuing mail. When the debate took place the ratification of the treaty had not been exchanged. If Lord Granville was in error, why did not General Schenck correct him?

"On the same occasion the Marquis of Ripon, also replying to Lord Russell's taunt, remarked that 'so far from our conduct being a constant course of concession, there were, as my noble friend behind me [Earl Granville] has said, numerous occasions on which it was our duty to say that the proposals made to us were such as it was impossible for us to think of entertaining.' This, also, was understood to refer to the indirect claims.

"Turning to the debate which took place in the House of Commons on the 4th of August, one searches in vain for any remark in the speeches of Mr. Gladstone, Sir Stafford Northcote, or Sir Roundell Palmer which indicated any suspicion that the _Alabama_ claims had assumed the portentous character which now attaches to them. The doubt which Lord Cairns at one time entertained had been set at rest by the ministerial explanations made at the time in the House of Lords, and not a single argument advanced in the Lower House, either in support of or in opposition to the treaty, touched upon the question of these claims. Even Mr. Baillie Cochrane, the well-known Conservative member, who denounced the treaty on all sorts of grounds, and whose avowed object was to pick as many holes in it as possible, was unable to allege that England had consented to an arbitration which might involve her in indefinite liabilities.

"Sir Stafford Northcote, in the course of his humorous speech--a speech instinct with good feeling towards the United States--said that 'a number of the claims under the convention which was not adopted [the Johnson-Clarendon Treaty] were so vague that it would have been possible for the Americans to have raised a number of questions which the commissioners were unwilling to submit to arbitration. They might have raised the question with regard to the recognition of belligerency, with regard to constructive damages arising out of the recognition of belligerency, and a number of other matters which this country could not admit. But if honorable gentlemen would look to the terms of the treaty actually contracted they would see that the commissioners followed the subjects very closely by making a reference only to a list growing out of the acts of particular vessels, and in so doing shut out a large number of claims which the Americans had previously insisted upon, but which the commissioners had prevented from being raised before the arbitrators.' All this points unmistakably to the definite and limited character of the claims which, in the judgment of the English negotiators, were alone to be submitted to arbitration.

"It seems to me that Judge Williams, in the speech he made at the banquet I had the honor to give to the British High Commissioners in New York, expressed sentiments which can only be similarly construed. 'Many persons,' he said, 'no doubt, will be dissatisfied with their [the Joint High Commissioners'] labors; but to deal with questions so complicated, involving so many conflicting interests, so as to please everybody, is a plain impossibility; but in view of the irritation which the course of Great Britain produced in this country during our late rebellion, and in view of the one-sided and generally exaggerated statements of our case made to the people, the American commissioners consider themselves quite fortunate that what they have done has met with so much public favor in all parts of the country and among men of all political parties.'

"That true friend of America, the Duke of Argyll, speaking in the Upper House, was equally emphatic. 'The great boon we have secured by this treaty,' he said, 'is this: that for the future the law of nations, as between the two greatest maritime states in the world, is settled in regard to this matter, and that for this great boon we have literally sacrificed nothing except the admission that we are willing to apply to the case of the _Alabama_ and that of other vessels those rules, I do not say of international law, but of international comity, which we have ourselves over and over again admitted.' It is impossible that the duke would have expressed himself in language so hopeful and so contented if behind 'the case of the _Alabama_ and that of other vessels' he had seen looming up the colossal demands which were originally embodied in Senator Sumner's memorable oration.

"The views thus put forward sank deep into the public mind, and the treaty was accepted and ratified by popular opinion on this basis. General Schenck, several months after the delivery of the above speeches, in addressing a Lord Mayor's banquet at the Guildhall, bade the English ministry and Lord Ripon 'congratulate themselves upon the success with which they have endeavored to bring about friendly relations between the United States and Great Britain.'

"People here ask how he could congratulate the British government if he knew all the while that their construction of the treaty, which was to cement the friendship of the two countries, fatally differed from the construction put upon it by the government at Washington.

"I have not given my own but the English view of the matter. When such momentous issues are at stake--when a false move on the diplomatic board may endanger the peace of two kindred nations--it is absolutely necessary that our people should know what is the English side in this controversy. The first duty of a loyal American citizen is to ascertain the whole truth, and not by ignorance or obstinacy to commit himself to a wrong course.

"Many hard words have been lately spoken and written about Mr. Gladstone. I therefore feel it incumbent upon me to bear my testimony to the large and statesmanlike view of American affairs which he has taken for several years past, and to the cordial good feeling he has shown towards our country since he has been at the head of the present government. In spite of temporary misunderstanding, I will continue to hope that the Treaty of Washington will bear the fruit which he anticipated; that, to quote his own eloquent words in the House of Commons on the 4th of August, that treaty will do much 'towards the accomplishment of the great work of uniting the two countries in the ties of affection where they are already bound by the ties of interest, of kindred, of race, and of language, thereby promoting that strong and lasting union between them which is in itself one of the main guarantees for the peace of the civilized world.'

"With great respect I remain, "My dear Mr. Colfax, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

Mr. Bright wrote to him at this time:

"This trouble about the treaty is very unfortunate. I think your letter admirable, and I hope it will do good in the States, where, I presume, it will be published. I confess I am greatly surprised at the 'case' to be submitted to the Geneva tribunal. There is too much of what we call 'attorneyship' in it, and too little of 'statesmanship.' It is rather like a passionate speech than a thoughtful state document. And what a folly to offer to a tribunal claims which cannot be proved. No facts and no figures can show that the war was prolonged by the mischief of the pirate ships; and surely what cannot be proved by distinct evidence cannot be made the subject of an award. This country will not go into a court to ask for an award which, if against it, it will never accept. An award against it in the matter of the indirect claims will never be paid, and therefore the only honest course is to object now before going into court. Has the coming Presidential election or nomination anything to do with this matter? Or is Mr. Sumner's view of the dispute dominant in Washington? I should have thought your government might have said: 'We will not press the claims objected to before the tribunal, but we shall retain them in our "case" as historic evidence of our sense of magnitude of the grievance of which we complain.'

"This, I dare say, would have satisfied our government and people, and practically it would have satisfied every reasonable man in the States. To such as would not be content with it, friendship and peace would, in the nature of things, seem to be denied."

Soon after his return home he received the following letter, and returned the answer to that of Mr. Bright:

"WASHINGTON, 1512 H Street, _29th March_.

"_My dear Mr. Field,_--I cannot tell you how grieved I have been at the difficulty which has arisen respecting the Washington Treaty.

"I do not think that anything would have induced me to accept the appointment which brought me here but the pride I felt in taking a part, however humble, in the execution of a treaty which I thought the glory of the age and which seemed to me so full of promise to all civilized nations.

"I cannot think with patience of all our hopes being dashed to the ground by what Bright truly describes as a 'passionate speech,' followed by a claim utterly extravagant, from which the party making it never expected to get a farthing.

"I confess that I should not have been afraid to go to arbitration upon it, but I see the difficulty which any government would have in justifying themselves to their people in leaving it to any five persons to say whether a fine of two hundred millions should be inflicted on them.

"You have done your part excellently, but why do not others raise their voices against this tremendous folly which is not unlikely, sooner or later, to lead us into war?

"I fully believe that both governments are very anxious to accommodate matters, but I confess that I do not see how that accommodation is to be brought about without a concession, which it is very difficult for a government to make on the eve of a Presidential election.

"Believe me "Very sincerely yours, "RUSSELL GURNEY."

"GRAMERCY PARK, "NEW YORK, _2d April, 1872_.

"_My dear Mr. Bright,_--I arrived on 25th March, after a very rough passage of sixteen days....

"Since my return I have devoted much of my time to ascertain the real sentiment of the people of this country in regard to the Washington Treaty, and as far as I can judge, after seeing many persons of different political parties, it appears to be almost unanimous that our government has made a great mistake in including these indirect claims in the 'case.' I am convinced that the best people in England and America desire to have this question settled in a fair and honorable manner. In fact, many say to me that they have got tired of hearing about the indirect claims....

"With great respect and kind regards to your family, "I remain, my dear Mr. Bright, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

It was while he was in London, in December, 1872, that Mr. Junius Morgan said to him that he had just received a letter from Mr. John Taylor Johnston about the Cesnola collection, then in London, and he asked him, if he had the time to do so, to examine it and give him his opinion. Mr. Field went at once to see it, and he was much impressed with its value. Of this time General Cesnola writes:

"The officers of the British Museum had already examined the collection, and it was perhaps on their report that Mr. Gladstone came to see the collection; but whether he came with a view to securing it for the British Museum or not I cannot say. Your father asked me to drive back with him to Mr. Morgan's office, and suggested to Mr. Morgan (as agent for Mr. Johnston) to close the purchase of the collection with me _verbally at once_, and a payment was made on account without delay, and without waiting for the papers to be drawn up.

"It was through your father that my collection became the property of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It was he who introduced me to Mr. Gladstone, Earl Granville, Mr. Adams, then United States minister in London; also to the Dean of Westminster and Lady Augusta Stanley, and to many other of his English friends. He invited a large party to meet me at dinner, and also brought many to see my Cypriote collection. I doubt if, without the great personal interest shown by your father, it would ever have become the property of the Metropolitan Museum; because it was only after this that the London press went wild over securing it for England.

"I have said, and shall always say, that it is chiefly, if not wholly, due to Cyrus W. Field that my discoveries are in this city to-day."

The sale of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company was made early in this year, and on July 2, 1873, he writes to Mr. Orton, the president of the Western Union Telegraph Company:

"The New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, having been consolidated with the Anglo-American Telegraph Company, Limited, drafts will hereafter be made upon your company, and communications made in the name of the said Anglo-American Telegraph Company, Limited."

Among the cable messages sent during the autumn of this year these are of interest:

"September 19th.--Great panic here in money market."

"September 20th.--Confidently believed, reliable quarter, government will take measures relieve market before Monday, but thus far panic has exceeded anything ever known."

"Saturday, October 30th.--Most of the firms that have suspended are those that have been doing too much business for their capital, but confidence is so shaken that many stocks are being sold at whatever they will bring. Think perhaps have seen worst, but don't yet see signs permanent improvement."

"Monday, November 1st.--Western Union sold before panic at 90. Has sold in last few days less than 44."

We find these entries in his diary:

"January 13th, 1874.--Arrived in London."

"February 14th.--Sailed from Liverpool for New York in the _Cuba_; fifty-sixth voyage."

This letter followed him to New York:

"11 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, "_March 31, 1874_.

_"My dear Mr. Cyrus Field,_--When I was about to thank you for your kind letter of the 10th, I received that of the 17th announcing to me the funeral of Mr. C. Sumner, and the great manifestation of feeling which it called forth.

"His loss must be heavily felt, and his name will long be remembered in connection with the abolition of slavery, which was wrought out in the United States by methods so wonderful and so remote from the general expectation.

"As respects events in this country, they have brought about for me a great and personally not an unacceptable change. I have always desired earnestly that the closing period of my life might be spent in freedom from political commotion, and I have plenty of work cut out for me in other regions of a more free and open atmosphere.

"As respects the political position, it has been one perfectly honorable for us, inasmuch as we are dismissed for or upon having done what we undertook or were charged to do; and as respects the new ministry, they show at present a disposition to be quiet.

"Believe me, my dear Mr. Field, "Yours very faithfully, "W. E. GLADSTONE."

The following extract is taken from Mr. Field's private papers:

"The bill for the expansion of the currency, which at this period passed both houses of Congress, after exhaustive debates, created much alarm among the leading financial men of New York and the Eastern States. Meetings were held at various places to protest against it, and to request the President to exercise his veto."

A number of the leading bankers, capitalists, and merchants of New York assembled on April 15th at Mr. Field's house on Gramercy Park to consider what action should be taken in the matter. A petition very extensively signed was read, and the following resolutions were adopted:

"_Resolved_, That the following gentlemen be appointed a committee to take charge of and present the foregoing petition to the President, bearing the signatures of all the 2500 leading bankers and business firms of the City of New York, asking him to interpose his veto to prevent the enactment of the Senate currency bill, which has recently passed both houses of Congress; or any other bill having in view the increase of inconvertible currency.

"_Resolved_, That the Senators from the State of New York, and such members of the House of Representatives from this State as entertain the views indicated in the foregoing resolution, be added to the committee, and their co-operation invited. The members of this committee are:

"J. J. Astor, Rev. Dr. Adams, Ethan Allen, W. H. Aspinwall, W. A. Booth, James M. Brown, August Belmont, S. D. Babcock, S. B. Chittenden, E. C. Cowdin, George S. Cole, John J. Cisco, W. B. Duncan, W. M. Evarts, Cyrus W. Field, Wilson G. Hunt, B. W. Jaynes, J. T. Johnston, A. A. Low, W. J. Lane, C. Lanier, C. P. Leverich, W. H. Macy, C. H. Marshall, R. B. Minturn, Royal Phelps, Howard Potter, M. O. Roberts, A. T. Stewart, J. H. Schultz, Isaac Sherman, Jonathan Sturges, Moses Taylor, J. A. Agnew, J. D. Vermilye, G. C. Ward, etc."

Mr. Field, with many influential members of this committee, proceeded to Washington with the petition, and had an interview with the President, who promised to give the subject his mature consideration. It is thought that the arguments adduced by the committee on this occasion had great weight with the President, and, combined with other influences, finally determined him to veto the bill, which he did shortly afterwards in a message in which he committed himself strongly against any further inflation of the currency. Had this bill passed into a law it would have been the first step towards national repudiation, for the wedge once inserted, it is impossible to predict how far it would eventually have been driven, and what effect even a moderate addition to the inconvertible currency would have had, not only on commerce, but on the moral conscience of the nation. A return of government bonds held in foreign countries would have been the inevitable result, and all values would have been unsettled. Reasoning and thoughtful men foresaw the crisis that was impending, and the country owes a debt of gratitude to the Chamber of Commerce for its prompt action, and to President Grant for listening attentively to the arguments of the committee for saving the country from threatened disaster.

On May 6th, Mr. and Mrs. Field were members of a large party which left New York for California, and on the 12th, at Omaha, Canon Kingsley and Miss Kingsley joined them. The journey was a pleasant one, but uneventful. Friday, May 22d, he writes:

"After breakfast I sent a telegraphic message to Dean Stanley, informing him that Canon Kingsley was well and would preach for us in the Yosemite Valley on Sunday."

In his sermon on the afternoon of Whit Sunday, Dean Stanley alluded to this message.

Early in June he sailed for England, and of his journey to Iceland, undertaken during this summer, Mr. Murat Halstead writes:

"My judgment is that your father had no business reasons for going to Iceland. Really the trip was a sentimental adventure. Mr. Field had been a profound student of the North Atlantic, and was familiar with the fact that Iceland is but nine hundred miles from Scotland and Norway and three hundred from Greenland. 'It seemed so near, and yet so far.' ... In the spring of 1874 Mr. and Mrs. Cyrus W. Field visited Cincinnati, and at a reception given by Mr. Probasco Mr. Field said to me: 'Come and go with me to Iceland; it is the millennial year of the settlement of the island. It would be very interesting. The King of Denmark is to be there, and the whole affair will be extraordinary.' I asked how one could get to Iceland, and Mr. Field had evidently made the subject a close study. He said there were monthly boats from Copenhagen touching at Leith, the port of Edinburgh, and we should sail from Scotland, and Iceland was about a thousand miles from Scotland.

"Mr. Field must have gotten his impulse to go to Iceland from his familiarity with the North Atlantic during the anxious years he spent in studying it with reference to the cable. He was struck by the narrowness of the ocean between Greenland and Norway, with Iceland between just below the arctic circle. He had, of course, contemplated a cable by way of Greenland and Iceland to Scotland if it should be found impracticable to cross the Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland. When it became known that Mr. Field was going to Iceland there were conjectures that he thought of a cable to the island; but that was a mere fancy. There was not a chance for business over the line. There would be no news except of volcanoes and the price of codfish. If there should ever be a cable connection with Iceland it would be for the weather reports.

"I was thinking of a trip to Europe in the summer of 1874, when Mr. Field spoke to me, and a few weeks later decided to go. Mr. Field was going earlier than I could, and just before he sailed I telegraphed, asking on what date it would be necessary for me to meet him in London in order to go with him to Iceland. His reply was, 'July 9th.' On my arrival at Southampton by the Bremen boat I remembered the day was the 9th of July, and that night about ten o'clock I found Mr. Field at the Buckingham Palace Hotel, and he said he had been expecting me, and was waiting to see me before going to bed. That, I suppose, was a joke, but it was not all a joke. I found in London Bayard Taylor, going to the Icelandic millennium for the New York _Tribune_, and Dr. I. I. Hayes, the arctic explorer, going for the New York _Herald_; Dr. Kneeland, of the Boston Institute of Technology, and Professor Magnussen, of Cambridge University, an Icelander by birth. I resolved to go, and we chartered the steam yacht _Albion_, Captain Howland, sailing from Leith. Mr. Field and I made a tour through the Highlands, and, passing Balmoral and the Earl of Fyfe's hunting and fishing lodge, found the rest of the party at Aberdeen, where it was necessary for us to enlist as British seamen, and we were paid a shilling each for our services during the voyage, which was one of great interest and considerable hardship. We halted at the Orkney, Shetland, and Faroe islands, at the latter place falling in with the king's fleet. Our Icelandic experiences are familiar, as Mr. Taylor and Dr. Kneeland published books on the subject. Mr. Field's Iceland party, for he was our leader, attracted much attention--almost as much sometimes as the king's procession. We rode across the lava beds to the geysers, saw Mount Hecla--and the Great Geyser would not spout for the king."

It will have been observed, in the course of this narrative, that with Mr. Field, so inexhaustible was his energy, rest was only a "change of motion."

When he sought relaxation from exhausting business cares he found it in fatiguing journeys, and he preferred that these should be as difficult and adventurous as possible. This was the case in his journey to the Andes with Mr. Church in his earlier manhood. It was the case with the excursion in ripe middle age beyond the "furthest Thule" of the ancients. He was now again, thanks to his own exertions, and after years of struggle and of doubt that to others meant despair, independent in circumstances, and, as it seemed, beyond the power of fortune, and he was nearing his sixtieth birthday. Most men would have regarded this condition as an occasion to "rest and be thankful." But it was in this condition that Mr. Field undertook a new and arduous enterprise, for which he had had little specific training. It is evident that its very difficulty, as in the case of the Atlantic cable, was to him an element of attractiveness. But there was this difference between the Atlantic cable and the elevated railway system of New York. He was the pioneer, the projector, of the former. The latter had already been undertaken, and practically, it may be said, to have failed. Indeed, there was no "system" of elevated railways. The fragmentary roads that were in operation or projected were unrelated to each other in ownership, management, and traffic. Financially and practically they were languishing. It will be seen from the letter which will presently be given that the company with which he proposed to ally himself, the New York, which possessed the franchise for Third Avenue, had been so far from successful that sixty cents on the dollar was held to be a fair price for its securities. It may fairly be said that the elevated "system" is due to Mr. Field. Whoever remembers the conditions of transit in New York before 1877, and indeed for some years after, must own that the creation of this system has constituted a public benefaction. Many millions have been transported, with a loss of life that has been infinitesimal in comparison with the volume of the traffic, at a cost no greater than that of the conveyances which the system has superseded, and at a rate of speed that has built up the new and large cities, one on the east and one on the west side of Manhattan Island, which before it went into operation were outlying districts, practically inaccessible to busy men for purposes of residence. It was on May 16, 1877, that Mr. Field made this entry in his diary:

"Bought this day a controlling interest in the New York Elevated Railroad Company and was elected president of the company."

Some of the conditions on which he had made this investment and venture are set forth in the following letter to his friend, Mr. John H. Hall:

"NEW YORK, _14th May, 1877_.

"_My dear Mr. Hall_,--It is possible that I may purchase a majority of the stock of the Elevated Railroad, but _before deciding_ I wish to ascertain whether, if I do, you will remain in the board with Mr. David Dows, myself, and some other gentlemen of character and financial strength, and also whether you will take bonds at sixty cents for the debt now due you. If I have anything to do with the company I want it free from _all floating debt_, and everything purchased at the lowest price for cash.

"Mr. Dows has told me this morning that he will remain in the board and will take bonds for the $25,000 due him, provided I make the purchase and accept the presidency of the company.

"Will you have the kindness to see our mutual friend, Mr. A. S. Barnes, and ascertain whether he will take bonds for the debt due him and remain as a director. If I go into the concern I shall be willing to be president, but _without salary_, for the enterprise, to be a success, must be managed in every way with the greatest economy.

"An early answer will oblige. "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

His promptitude and energy are shown in the fact that on June 4th, less than three weeks after he took charge, a public meeting in favor of rapid transit was held.

"_The Evening Post_, "NEW YORK, _June 4, 1877_.

"TO CYRUS W. FIELD, Esq.:

"I cannot be present at the meeting to be held this evening at Chickering Hall, but I am heartily with you and your friends in the object of the meeting. I hope that a decided expression will be given to the conviction that an absolute necessity has arisen of instituting some method of conveying passengers between the upper and lower parts of the city which shall unite the greatest convenience with the utmost possible speed.

"Yours faithfully, "WM. C. BRYANT."

Mr. Charles O'Conor wrote on the same day to the chairman of the meeting:

"I much regret my inability to attend the meeting in favor of rapid transit, the state of my health not admitting of my doing so. I fully sympathize, however, with the objects sought to be obtained, and here repeat the remarks which I made in closing my address before the New York Historical Society at the Academy of Music on the 8th of last month:

"'It is said, and doubtless with truth, that the great cities have hitherto been destroyers of the human race. A single American contrivance promises to correct the mischief. The cheap and rapid transportation of passengers on the elevated rail, when its capacity shall have been fully developed, will give healthful and pleasant homes in rural territory to the toiling millions of our commercial and manufacturing centres. It will snatch their wives and children from tenement-house horrors, and, by promoting domesticity, greatly diminish the habits of intemperance and vice so liable to be forced upon the humbler classes or nurtured in them by the present concomitants of their city life.'"

On the 26th of September of this year the new president wrote:

"I believe that the early completion of the New York Elevated Railroad from the South Ferry, passing Wall, Fulton and Catharine Street ferries up the Bowery and Third Avenue to the Grand Central Depot, will be a benefit to the three great railroads the trains of which start from the depot."

And on the 1st of November, 1878, he was able to report to the directors:

"It is not eighteen months since I purchased from some of your then directors a majority of the stock of your company at such a price that to-day it sells for more than five times as much as it cost me; and at the same time I bought from the same parties a very large amount of bonds, and to-day they sell for more than double what they cost me, including seven per cent. interest to date. The above stock and bonds I purchased on the express condition that the contracts of the company with certain parties to build this road for one million two hundred thousand dollars per mile ($1,200,000), payable one-half in stock and the balance in first mortgage bonds of this company at par, should be cancelled. The amount that has been saved to this company by the cancelling of this contract you all well know."

William O. McDowell, in _Harper's Magazine_ for June, 1893, writes:

"At the time of the strike of the engineers on the elevated road in New York I had a part in bringing the representatives of the engineers and the late Cyrus W. Field, a director in the elevated company, to a meeting that resulted in a quick understanding between the conflicting interests and an ending of the strike. Mr. Field was so pleased with the fairness of the committee representing the engineers with whom he had to deal that he invited them at once to dine with him at Delmonico's, an invitation which their representatives declined for them, fearing that its acceptance might be misunderstood. Mr. Field, however, continued to feel that he wished to extend some social courtesy to the employés of the elevated road, and at a later date, when he was all-powerful in that corporation, he issued a formal invitation to the employés to a reception at his house. To a large number the initials 'R. S. V. P.' on the lower corner of the invitation were a great mystery, and, as the story goes, the invited compared notes and sought an explanation of them. At last one bright young man announced that he had discovered what they meant, and he explained to the others that 'R. S. V. P.' stood for 'Reduced salaries very probable.'"

This story is true, but the end is not given. The men accepted the invitation, enjoyed their supper, and listened with great interest to a speech made by Mr. Peter Cooper, which lasted over an hour. Mr. Cooper told the men of New York as it was in 1800, and the story of his life.

Dean Stanley preached in Calvary Church on Sunday evening, October 7, 1878. He came to Mr. Field's home at Irvington the following morning. Soon after breakfast on Tuesday the family realized that their guest was more familiar with the history of this part of the country than they were. It was just above Tarrytown that Major André had been captured; he was executed across the river. That was enough to excite the curiosity of the visitors, and at dinner on Tuesday evening it was proposed to the dean that the next morning he should cross the river to Tappan and find the spot. This was not easily done; no one knew the exact place. There was Washington's headquarters, and he had closed his shutters so as not to see André hanged, so that the scene of the execution must have been near that house. At last an old man of over ninety came and said that in 1821, when André's body was removed to England, he had stood by and had seen the grave opened; and that the roots of an apple-tree, which he pointed out, were twisted about the head of the coffin. The drive had been so long that it was past three o'clock before the party returned; and not until dinner did they tell that their search had been successful. It was then that Mr. Field said: "Mr. Dean, if you will write an inscription I will buy the land and put up a stone, and then the place will be known." His idea was simply to mark an event in the history of the country; but a part of the press insisted that an American had erected a monument to a British spy, and this was reiterated far and wide, and flew from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Dean Stanley felt this keenly, and wrote:

"If you find that there is really a feeling against it, pray do not think of it. The game is not worth the candle. Poor Major André, engaging as he was, is not worth the rekindling forgotten animosities."

The monument was twice injured by explosion of dynamite. After the second of these, on November 3, 1885, Mr. Field refused to replace the stone. He said that the spot was now sufficiently marked. On the stone were these words:

The twenty-fifth anniversary of the signing of the first cable contract was remembered on the evening of March 10, 1879. To use the words of the New York _Evening Post_:

"It was a notable anniversary which Mr. Cyrus W. Field celebrated last night, with the assistance of a multitude of his fellow-citizens, many of them eminent in various departments of public life. The obvious sentiment of the occasion, and the words with which everybody would describe it, are contained in the telegraphic message sent from Westminster Abbey by Dean Stanley, who calls it the 'silver wedding of England and America,' and says: 'What God hath joined together let no man put asunder.' The event which was commemorated is scarcely more remarkable than the rapid advance of all nineteenth century events which the recollection of this one suggests. It is only twenty-five years since a determined effort was made to realize what had been wildly dreamed of; it is considerably less than twenty-five years since the dream became a reality; yet already instantaneous communication between the Old World and the New has been consigned to the commonplace book of history. It has become one of those familiar things which we forget all about because they are familiar, but which are also indispensable, as we would be sharply reminded if we should lose them for a day, or an hour--things which are of the highest value, but of which it is hard to speak without talking platitudes. With this great event the names of Mr. Field and other men of business whose intelligence, liberality, and energy make the work of Morse and other men of science a practical triumph will be always and honorably associated."

A short extract is given from the speech of Rev. Dr. William Adams:

"I have no intention of saying a word in laudation of the Atlantic cable. The time for that has passed. 'He is of age: ask him: he shall speak for himself.' Though the ear catches no articulate words passing along its quivering strands, yet this polyglot interpreter is speaking now, with tongue of fire, beneath the astonished sea, in all the languages of the civilized world."