woman; now she is nothing.' And what an extraordinary picture that is in the 'Peau de Chagrin' of the controlling power of society over a fashionable woman! And again, in 'Père Goriot.' How sad they all are, and the sadness of a life that toils not nor spins! Verily, to be happy, we must take no note of the flying hours, and live outside of ourselves. Is not the condition of joyous life to forget that we are living? Here most of the characters are so entirely selfish that one sometimes thinks there is not one single friendly heart in the entire story. All are so conscious of living-even those in the higher sphere — and so anxious to appear other than they are, that their entire lives are only ignoble struggles, with nothing of serene repose. When the strife is not for gold or position it is for love, which is thus degraded."

The late Benjamin Butterworth, of Ohio, speaking apropos of Tom Reed, as Butterworth affectionately called him, related the following: "The way Reed's constituents have stood by him is one of the most gratifying things to me in American politics. During one of his campaigns, in which I spoke for him, I met some Democrats in his district; I said, 'Gentlemen, I do not know anything about your politics, but you have a man of sterling qualities to represent you.' 'Yes,' they replied, he is an intense Republican and has peculiarities, but we like him because he represents the best thought of the district, and we vote for him on the sly.'

That plain-speaking man, whose chief characteristic is to be true to his own convictions, is a pretty good specimen of the Puritan. Had he been in Cromwell's army he either would not have prayed at all or he would have prayed just as long as Cromwell did. In either case he would have fought for what he believed to be the right, all the time, and given no quarter.

Touching what might be called his blunt frankness, I recall an incident told me by a member, of what was known as the Whisky Bill. Mr. Reed had baffled the attempts of the whisky men to get it up, but in his temporary absence, through the inadvertence or incapacity of a member, the bill was forced on the House. Reed ran down to the fellow, and vented his feelings in the remark, "You are too big a fool to lead, and have not got sense enough to follow."

If his bits of speeches flung about in the heat of debate,

THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY

ASTOR, LENOX AND TILDEN FOUNDATIONS

either in retort or in attack, were gathered, they would make an unusually interesting book. No other man has like him the power to condense a whole argument into a few striking words. His epigrams are worthy of the literary artist in that they are perfect in form. Though struck out on the spur of the moment you cannot take a word from nor recast them. They have for solid basis a most profound knowledge of human nature, of life, and they exhibit to a luminous degree the possession in their author of that prime quality of a true man horse sense. Such a fragment of a speech as the following is worthy to be perpetuated in any guise: "Gentlemen, everybody has an opinion about silver, except those who have talked so much about it that they have ceased to think."

Since his retirement from Congress, Mr. Reed's professional career in New York has been quite as remarkable, though less spectacular perhaps, as when he swayed parties and issues within the domain of public service.

MAKE, SAVE, GIVE ALL YOU CAN.

OHN WESLEY put all that can be said truthfully about money into the following maxim: "Make all you can, save all you can, give all you can.' This rule is so brief, exhaustive, and scriptural, that it would not be out of place in the Bible. Wesley himself never made a happier statement of truth than this; he crowded the whole subject into a nutshell.

So far from wrong being attached to money-making, duty enjoins it. He who has the talent and opportunity to accumulate is under special obligation to make money. Some men and women are born money-makers; "they find a gold dollar under every stone they turn over." Their Midas-touch converts everything they handle into gold. They are called lucky, fortunate. But that is not it. It is simply their genius for making money. Matthews says of this class: "They have the instinct of accumulation. The talent and inclination to convert dollars into doubloons by bargains or shrewd investments are in them just as strongly marked and as uncontrollable as were the ability and the inclination of Shakespeare to produce a Hamlet and an Othello, of Raphael to paint the cartoons, of Beethoven to compose his symphonies, or Morse to invent an electric telegraph. As it would have been

a gross dereliction of duty, a shameful perversion of gifts, had these latter disregarded the instincts of their genius and engaged in the scramble for wealth, so would a Rothschild, an Astor, or a Peabody have sinned had any one of them done violence to his nature, and thrown his energies into channels where they would have proved dwarfs, and not giants. The mission of a Lawrence, equally with that of an Agassiz, a Bierstadt, or a Cornell, is defined in the faculties God has given him; and no one of them has a right to turn aside from the paths to which his finger so plainly points." Academies, colleges, hospitals, museums, libraries, railroads,-none of which could have been possible without their accumulation,- are the proofs of their usefulness, and though the millionaire too often converts his brain into a ledger, and his heart into a millstone, yet this starvation of his spiritual nature is no more necessary in his pursuit than in that of the doctor or the lawyer. The same law of duty that enjoins accumulation, also prescribes the rules under which it must be made. If millions are made, under a careful observation of these rules, no sin can attach to the fortune. It is just as right to acquire a million as a dollar, if it be honestly done. Dishonesty makes the acquisition wrong, whether it be much or little. The wrong does not lie in the amount accumulated, but in the method. Therefore we say, without hesitation, that it is the duty of men who can to make money.

Others are not born with a genius to grow rich, any more than to paint or orate. They must cultivate a talent in this direction, as opportunity offers, as they would cultivate a talent for any work of the artisan. In this way, and in this alone, can they improve their God-given faculties as duty requires. With strict integrity of character any person can safely make the venture. The late Amos Lawrence wrote to a younger brother: "As a first and leading principle, let every transaction be of that pure and honest character that you would not be ashamed to have it appear before the whole world as clearly as to yourself. It is of the highest consequence that you should not only cultivate correct principles, but that you should place your standard so high as to require great vigilance in living up to it." It was under the rule of principle as high as this that Lawrence amassed his own fortune. Duty requires that others should observe the same rule