CHAPTER XXXVIII.

The Late Horatio Seymour-The Characteristic Features, Virtues and Lessons of His Life-Recollections of the Writer.

I first met Horatio Seymour to know who he was, at the democratic state convention in Syracuse in 1847. He was then 37 years of age, an old hunker, and being a fluent speaker, he was impressed into the service of and did a good deal of talking for the branch of the party with which he affiliated. James T. Brady of New York and Mr. Seymour were the leading advo cates of the hunker faction. They were no match for the speakers on the other side, George Rathbun, James C. Smith, Martin Grover, E. G. Lapham, James R. Doolittle, John Van Buren and George P. Barker, but they acquitted themselves creditably, and perhaps I should have appreciated their efforts more fully had I been in sympathy with them. The truth, I suspect, was that the barnburners had the best speaking talent in the convention and the hunkers the best political managers. There were clever politicians among the latter, as sharp as the country has ever known, but they did not excel as speakers. John Stryker of Rome was one of the shrewdest operators in the state, and a very good lawyer, I believe, but he could never make a speech. And the same thing might be said of several other wellknown hunkers who occupied seats in the convention. So Mr. Seymour acted a conspicuous part in this once famous gathering.

I don't think Mr. Seymour excelled as a speechmaker. He lacked enthusiasm. I never saw him excited. He made a good impression, for his words were

well chosen and his manners easy and agreeable. While he had very decided convictions, there was little of the aggressive in his composition. He was naturally a conservative, and believed in letting well enough alone. So he was not a radical in anything. He naturally belonged to the Episcopal church. It was in consonance with his tastes. He was not a progressive either in religion or politics. He was something the style of man as General Dix, but less impulsive. The latter sometimes expressed himself in very emphatic terms and with great positiveness. Governor Seymour would never have given the order for shooting "on the spot persons that should presume to haul down the American flag. He would have employed other and more moderate language. Governor Seymour did not like to offend; never became impatient. General Dix sometimes "slopped over," spoke rashly, and acted in the same way. Governor Seymour told me that the factions in the city of New York gave him infinite trouble, and that the only way he could get along with them with any degree of satisfaction was to have them all offended with him.

He was the intimate and confidential friend of Governor Marcy, who was one of the pillars of the Albany regency. That organization had a way of picking up bright and promising young democrats, and utilizing them in the work of strengthening the cause in which they were engaged. General Dix was taken up for the reason named. He was a good writer and a very estimable man. Neither Dix nor Seymour was what would be called a strong man. They were amiable, gentlemanly, high-toned and trustworthy rather than great. They were popular leaders because they were careful not to antagonize themselves to any considerable number of people if they could avoid it.

While the governor was in political life he resided in the old mansion at Utica, which formerly belonged to his

father, Henry Seymour, and which, for a good many years, has been occupied by his brother, the late John F. Seymour.

When he retired from politics it was to an estate of five hundred acres in the town of Deerfield, three miles from Utica, on the north side of the Mohawk. This piece of land was divided into eight farms. Originally it was a part of the Crosby manor, and was purchased many years since by John Bleeker of Albany, the father of Mrs. Seymour.

The place was somewhat desolate when the governor went there. The house was small, and void of modern comforts, but it has been extended and beautified, and is at present a charming abode, although decidedly unpretentious. The whole estate is on the uplands, which slope gently toward the Mohawk valley. The Utica & Black River railroad, as it enters Utica, must pass very near the farm.

I spent an evening at the governor's residence in the fall of 1869 with a party of gentlemen from Utica. It is needless to say we were delightfully entertained. The governor was a charming converser. He was thoroughly informed on most subjects, and was, therefore, highly interesting.

The governor was an enthusiast on the subject of simplicity of style and the employment of short words. He thought words of one syllable the most expressive, and was wholly averse to the use of adjectives. These belonged to a by-gone age.

Like Daniel Webster and Silas Wright, the governor had a fondness for pastoral pursuits. He liked to see fine farms, well cultivated. It delighted him to look at good crops, to see fine stock. He delivered a great many agricultural addresses in his day.

Governor Seymour was always and everywhere a gentleman, affable, courteous, dignified. His neighbors and

fellow townsmen had great respect for him, for he sympathized with them. One who has known him for nearly half a century states that "for thirty years he was, more than any other individual, the leader of his party in the state and nation, and all the while he moved in and out of Utica as the simplest of its citizens, the least ostentatious among his neighbors, the most courteous and most sympathetic of friends."

He believed in the democratic party, as he did in the doctrines of his church, because he was reared in those organizations, and was so much of a conservative that he did not care to inquire whether there were better Christians than those in the church to which he was attached, or truer friends of the country and the public interest in other parties than in the one of which he was a life-long member.

Governor Seymour was one of those men who im- . parted character to office, and who made the holding of positions of public trust honorable. These positions are degraded when held by the incompetent and dishonest, and so they should be bestowed only upon those of unquestioned probity and upright

ness.

Much is said in our day respecting self-made men— those who succeed in spite of adverse circumstances, who pay their own way, educate themselves, and fight their way to distinction without adventitious help. Governor Seymour was not of this class. His father was in easy if not in affluent circumstances, and able to give his son a good education, and did it. Horatio Seymour never knew anything of want. And still that fact did not effect his ruin, as it has that of many others. He improved his advantages. He was a manly boy, and the excellent traits that distinguished him in youth adhered to him all through life. He felt that every man

was his peer, and that he was the peer of every man. He had a great heart, one full of charity, and he delighted in performing acts of kindness, in making others happy.

The governor somehow distrusted the New England states-perhaps he remembered the Hartford convention and what was said of it in his early days-and in his later years he is reported to have said that "the north. and the south are drawing closer together in sentiment and feeling through the exchange of products and the frequency of travel. There is more danger that the east and west may not agree so well. The tariff question is to be a serious one. For instance, a yard of cloth which costs fifty cents to import at the sea coast, as it passes from hand to hand increases to $2 in the west." The governor forgot for the moment that the west is the child of the east, and that there is little likelihood that ⚫ the latter will become a parricide. The west has a natural affection for the east, as the east has for the west. No doubt the notions of the east that its industries must have help from the general government in order to live and prosper are erroneous, but the two sections will talk the matter over some day, and very likely come to the sensible conclusion that it is no part of the duty of government to help anybody; that each individual must depend upon himself and every interest upon itself. It seems to me there is danger in the policy of protection, for the reason that it is impossible to afford equal aid to all sections and interests; some parties will obtain more than a fair share, especially as the favored by government are benefited at the expense of the unprotected. Of course, this should not be, and will not be when men get through soliciting favors for themselves that they are not willing all should enjoy.