OCR Text |
Show was the people.". That is true in this sense: -His partj was the people so long as the people accepted his leadership; when that was disputed he was ready for another revolution. The same paper says "he was a born rebel and revolutionist," which is true. The Staats Zeitung says truly that he was "the intellectual leader of the Germans in America for the past fifty years." That is true, but there were other German-born -Americans who served their adopted" county much f better.' : Sigel was "one of them, Osterhous was another. Schurz never originated origi-nated a policy unless it was to "buck" when what he held to be the-"onward march" halted. Incapable Incapa-ble of commanding in the army, he still was ready to disobey orders and to quarrel with his superiors. He took the same spirit into the conduct of the Government, Govern-ment, and as we look over 'his public career there was not one commanding figure among those in .control with the single exception of Charles Sumner, Sum-ner, who had one kind word for Carl Bchurz. ., Such a man, no matter what courage or patriotism patriot-ism or what graces of intellect, he possessed, had some fatal weaknesses. II is was his matchless egotism, ego-tism, his immeasurable vanity and the envy which followed when either his- vanity or egotism was wounded. He was never halter-broken or bitted in his youth his disposition all his life was to fly the track. - ,' '- ' " -' " AGAIN CARL SCHURZ. It is interesting to read the notices of the Eastern East-ern press, of Carl.Schurz. His marvelous ability is conceded; his personal physical courage is not doubted, but beyond those two attributes there is a conflict of opinion, and still not one journal gives the idea of Carl Schurz which his own life set out in vivid colors. The Inter-Ocean of Chicago gives a glimpse of him when it says that, "In the army he did not win the confidence or enthusiasm of his men and was captious with his superiors. At one' time Stanton ordered him under arrest for disobedience and he became engaged in controversies with the officers ofhis division and corps.". , . That Is a good description. The war did. not go on as he would have it, and though po General himself, him-self, he bucked. There was no such thing as disci-, pline in his composition. On the other hand, the New York Evening Post declares that when elected to the Senate he became, "not only the most effective speaker of the Republican Repub-lican party, but the greatest orator who. has appeared ap-peared in Congress in our generation." That passes over Sumner, Blaine, Conkling, ' McKinley, and a score of others and is all rot. Noting his repeated i changes of party, the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle ascribes them all to the loftiest motives, ears he was not a good party man, that "his party |