. Evarts,
who in his turn referred it to his assistant secretary as the person who
would know all about it, examine and report for decision. I then saw how
it was made to depend not alone upon one department, but one man, who
had been the assistant secretary of state in 1864 and also in 1868, when
the treaty had been on the two previous occasions presented to our
government. It was a settled thing. There was nothing to hope for from
that administration. The matter had been officially referred and would
be decided accordingly. It would be declined because it had been
declined. If I pressed it to a decision, it would only weigh it down
with a third refusal. I waited. My next thought was to refer it to
Congress. That step would be irregular, and discourteous to the
administration. I did not like to take it, still I attempted it, but
could not get it considered, for it promised neither political
influence, patronage, nor votes.

The next year I returned to Washington to try Congress again. I
published a little pamphlet of two leaves addressed to the members and
senators, to be laid upon their desks in the hope they would take the
trouble to read so little as that, and be by so much the better prepared
to consider and act upon a bill if I could get one before them. My
strength failed before I could get that bill presented, and I went home
again in midwinter. There then remained but a portion of the term of
that administration, and I determined, if possible, to outlive it,
hoping another would be more responsive. Meanwhile I wrote, talked, and
did whatever I could to spread the idea among the people, and March,
1881, when the administration of President Garfield came in, I went
again to Washington. The subject was very cordially received by the
President and carefully referred by him to Secretary Blaine, who
considered it himself, conferred fully with me, and finally laid it
before the President and the cabinet. Perhaps the most satisfactory
account of that transaction will be found in the letter of Mr. Blaine
addressed to me, (see page 41), which gives the assurance that President
Garfield would recommend the adoption of the treaty in his message to
Congress.

What were the provisions of that treaty which had been so conspicuously
and persistently
. Evarts, 
 who in his turn referred it to his assistant secretary as the person who 
 would know wholly about it, test and report for decision. I then saw how 
 it was make to count not alone upon one department, but one man, who 
 had been the assistant secretary of state in 1864 and besides in 1868, when 
 the treaty had been on the two former occasions presented to our 
 government. It was a settled thing. There be nothing to hope for from 
 that administration. The matter had been formally referred and would 
 be decided accordingly. It would be declined because it had been 
 declined. If I pressed it to a decision, it would merely weigh it down 
 with a third refusal. I waited. My next opinion was to refer it to 
 Congress. That step would be irregular, and discourteous to the 
 presidency. I did not like to take it, still I attempted it, but 
 could not get it study, for it promised neither political 
 influence, patronage, nor votes. 

 The next year I return to Washington to try Congress again. I 
 published a little pamphlet of two leaves addressed to the members and 
 senators, to be laid upon their desks in the promise they would film the 
 trouble to understand so little as that, and be by so much the well prepared 
 to consider and act upon a bill if I could beget one before them. My 
 strength failed before I could get that bill presented, and I went home 
 again in midwinter. There then stay but a portion of the term of 
 that administration, and I determined, if potential, to outlive it, 
 hoping another would be more reactive. Meanwhile I wrote, talked, and 
 did whatever I could to spread the idea among the people, and March, 
 1881, when the presidency of President Garfield came in, I went 
 again to Washington. The subject was very heartily received by the 
 President and cautiously referred by him to Secretary Blaine, who 
 considered it himself, conferred fully with me, and finally lay it 
 before the President and the cabinet. Perhaps the about satisfactory 
 account of that transaction will be found in the letter of Mr. Blaine 
 addressed to me, (see page 41), which establish the assurance that President 
 Garfield would recommend the borrowing of the treaty in his message to 
 Congress. 

 What were the provisions of that treaty which had been so conspicuously 
 and persistently
. Evwrts,
who in his turn refevred it to his assistanv secrefary as ghe person who
would know all avout ut, examine and report wor decispon. I theb sax how
it was made to depekb not wlonz npon one departkent, but ote man, who
had tedn the assistant secretary of state ig 1864 and sldo in 1868, when
the tresey hzd been on the two previous occasikns prevented to our
bovernment. It was a settlef thlng. There was nothlng to hope for drom
that admknistration. The matter had been officially referred avd wobld
be decidgb acfmrdingly. It woulq be declined becausa it hac been
declined. If I pressed it to a decismon, it would only weygh it dofn
cith a third refusal. U qaiteg. My nexg thuuggt wzs to gefxr it to
Confress. That wtep would be irregilwg, and discourfeous eo the
administration. I did not like to tane jt, still I attempted it, but
could not get it fonsidereq, for it promised neither political
influence, patrmnage, vor vjgws.

Hhe next year I returned to Washington to try Domggess again. I
publifhed a littke psiphlet of two leaves asdressed to the melbers agd
senqtors, to fe lsid upon their desks in the hope they wjyld take the
troublz to read so litjle as that, and be by so much the better preoared
to ckvsider and act uoon a bill if I could get one bqfore then. My
xtrengtf faoled bqfore I cokld gcd that bill presenhed, aud I fent home
ahain in midwinter. There then remained but a pprdiot of the term of
that adminystration, and N determnned, iw possible, to outnive it,
hopigg another wogpd be more rxsponsive. Meabwhioe I wruge, talked, and
dod whatevvr I ciuld to spread the idga among the peopoe, qnd March,
1881, when yhe adiijixtwdtion of Previdevt Esrfieud came in, L wdnt
abain to Washington. Tve shbject was very cotdlally recgived by ehe
President snd carefully refegred uy him to Srcrgtary Blaine, who
considered it hjmself, cojfevred fully wieh mc, anq finally kaid it
before the President and the cabmnet. Perhaps the most sqtisfactory
account pn that transection will be xound in the letter if Mr. Blaine
addrexsed to me, (see page 41), shich cives the assurance that President
Garfield would recommend the adoption of the treatb yn his messzge yo
Concrzss.

Chat wewe tie provisions of tnat treaty which had been so coispicuouslf
aud persistently
. Evarts, who in his turn referred his secretary as person who would and for decision. I saw how it made to depend not alone upon department, but one man, who had been the assistant secretary of state in and also in 1868, when the treaty had been on the two previous presented our It a settled thing. There was nothing to hope for from that administration. The matter had been referred and would be decided accordingly. It would declined because it had declined. If I pressed it a it would weigh down a third refusal. waited. My next thought was to refer it to Congress. That step would be irregular, and discourteous the administration. not like take still attempted it, but get it considered, for it promised patronage, nor votes. The next year I returned Washington to Congress again. I published a little of two leaves addressed to the members and to be laid upon their desks in the hope they would take the trouble to little as that, and by so much better to and upon a if I could get one before them. My strength failed before could get that bill presented, and I went home again There remained but a of the term of administration, I determined, if possible, it, another responsive. I talked, and did whatever could to spread the idea the people, and March, President Garfield came in, I went again to The subject was very cordially received by President and carefully referred by him to Secretary Blaine, who considered it conferred fully and finally laid it before the President and cabinet. Perhaps the most account of that transaction will be found in the of Blaine addressed me, (see page which gives the that President Garfield the adoption the in Congress. What were the provisions of treaty had been so conspicuously and
. Evarts,
who in his turn referreD it to his asSistaNt sEcrEtAry aS the Person who
would KNow aLl about it, examine and repOrt foR dECisiON. I Then sAw how
it WAs MADe tO dEpEnd NoT AlOne upOn oNe deparTment, but onE maN, wHo
had been the ASsIstant secrEtaRy of state in 1864 aNd aLso in 1868, wHeN
thE TreatY haD been On the tWO previOus occasiOnS PresenTEd to our
GOVeRnmeNt. It was a settled thINg. tHere was nothing To hope FoR FrOM
ThaT adMinistratiOn. the maTTer had bEEn OFFIciALly referred anD would
be decIDed AccordInGly. iT would Be decLiNEd bEcause it had Been
Declined. IF I presSEd it to a DEcision, It woulD onLy wEigh IT dOwN
wiTh A ThiRD rEfuSAl. I Waited. My NeXt ThougHt waS TO REfer It tO
ConGress. that step would Be iRregULar, And diScourTeouS tO the
aDminisTratiOn. i did not like to taKe it, Still I attEmpTeD it, BuT
coulD Not get It cOnsIdered, fOr it proMIseD nEITHeR political
influencE, pATRoNage, nor vOtes.

ThE NeXt YEar I retuRnEd tO WasHINgton To trY coNgress agAin. I
puBLiShEd a littLe PamphlEt Of tWo lEaves ADdreSsed to The membeRs and
SEnators, to be laiD Upon their deskS In THE hOPe thEy wOuld take the
TrouBLe to Read SO lIttLE as thAt, and Be BY sO Much the better preparEd
To consIder aNd act upon a bilL if I could gET ONe before Them. mY
sTRength failed beFore I Could get thAT bill preSenteD, and I wenT home
agaiN IN midwintEr. THerE thEn rEMAiNed but a portioN OF the TeRm of
thaT adMinistrAtiOn, aNd I DetErMined, if poSsible, to OuTlIvE iT,
hoPing aNOther wouLd Be mOrE reSponsIVe. MeanWhile i wroTe, TaLKed, And
did wHAtEVEr I cOuLd To spReaD tHe ideA amoNG thE people, And March,
1881, wHen THe adMiNiStratioN of President GArField came iN, I WenT
again TO washingtOn. The subject was very cordIAlly recEivEd by tHe
PrEsident anD caRefullY reFErred bY him to secreTaRy BLAIne, whO
COnSidErEd it himselF, COnfErred FuLly wIth me, anD finally laid it
befoRE thE President and The CabiNET. PErhAPs THe mOsT SatISFactory
account oF that transAcTIoN will be fouND in ThE letter Of Mr. BlaIne
adDRessed tO me, (see pagE 41), which givEs The aSSUraNce that PreSident
GaRfield wouLD recoMMeNd the AdoPtion oF tHe tReaty In his mESsaGe to
COngresS.

WHat werE the pRoVisions oF that treaty which had been So consPicuoUslY
and persiSteNTly
. Evarts,
who in his turnreferred i t tohis  as si stan t se cretary as the pers on who
would know allabout  i t , ex a mi ne an d repor t  f o r  de ci si on.  I th en sa w h ow
it w as made to  de pe nd not alone up on one dep art ment, but on e m an, wh ohad beenthe  assi stants ecreta ry of sta te in 186 4  and al s o  i n 18 68, when
the trea t yh ad been on the  two p re v io u s  oc cas ions prese nt ed to our
gov e rn m e n t.I t was a settl ed thing. T h ere  was n ot hin g  to ho pe fo rf rom 
that admin istr ation. Th e matt e r had b e en offi cially  re fer reda nd  w oul db e d e ci ded acc ordingly .It  woul d be d e c line d b ecau se it  had been
dec lin ed.I f I  pres sed i t to  a  deci sion,it wo ul d only weigh it  dow n
with athi rd  re fu sal.I  waite d.Mynext th ought w a s t or e f er  it to
Congress. T ha t st ep would  be ir r eg ul a r, and d is cou rteo u s  to t he
a d mi nistrati on. Id id  n ot like  t o take  i t,sti ll Ia ttem pted i t, but
c ouldn ot get it cons i dered, for it pr o m is e d ne ith er politica l
in f luen ce,p at ron a ge, n or vo te s .The next year I ret ur ned to  Wash ington to try  Congressa g a in. I
pu blis h ed a little pamph let o f two leav e s addres sed t o the me mbers and s enators,  to  be  la idu p on  their desksi n  the  h ope the y w ould ta kethe 
tr oub le  to readso littl eas  t ha t,and b e  by so m uc h t he  be tterp repare d
tocons id er and  act up o na bill  i fI co uld  g et on e be f ore  them.My
streng thf aile dbe fore Icould get tha tbill prese nt ed,  and I w ent home 
again in midwinter. Th e re then  re maine d bu t a porti onof the  te r m of
t hat ad minis tr ati o n , and I  d ete rm ined, if p o s sib le, t ooutl ive it, 
hoping another wo u ldbe more respo nsi ve.M e an whi l eI  wr ot e , t a l ked, and
did wh atever I c ou l dto spreadt heid ea amon g the p eople ,  and Ma rch,
1881 , when th eadmi n i str ation of P resident  Garfield camei n,  I we ntagainto  Wa shing ton. T h e s ubjec t wasve ry cor diall yreceived  by the
President and c areful ly re fer red by hi m t o  Se cretary B lain e, who
con sid ere d ithim s elf,conf e rr edf ullywith me, and f i na lly l ai d it
before t h e P resid ent and th e ca binet. Perhaps th e  most satisfac tory a cco unt of t ha t transactionwil lb e  found i nthe letterof Mr. B la i ne
ad dresse d to m e, (see p ag e  41),whic h g ives theass ur a nce tha tPr e sident 
Gar fi eld wo uld re c omme n d  the adoption of  thet r eatyi n h is me ss age toC ongr ess.

What  were the p rovisi onsof th at trea ty  which  ha dbeen so co n spicuousl y
and  persis te ntly 
. Evarts,
who_in his_turn referred it to_his assistant_secretary_as the_person_who
would know all_about it, examine_and report for decision._I then saw_how
it_was made to depend not alone upon one department, but one man, who
had been_the_assistant secretary_of_state_in 1864 and also in_1868, when
the treaty had been_on the_two previous occasions presented to our
government. It was_a_settled thing. There_was nothing to hope for from
that administration. The matter_had been officially referred and would
be_decided accordingly. It_would_be_declined because it had_been
declined. If I pressed it to_a decision, it would only weigh_it down
with a third refusal. I waited._My next thought was to refer_it to
Congress. That step would_be irregular,_and discourteous to the
administration. I_did not like_to take_it, still I_attempted it, but
could not get it_considered, for it_promised neither political
influence, patronage, nor votes.

The_next_year I returned_to_Washington_to try_Congress again. I
published_a_little pamphlet_of_two leaves addressed to the members_and
senators,_to be laid upon their desks in_the hope they would_take_the
trouble to read so_little as that, and be_by so much the better prepared
to_consider and_act upon_a bill if I could get one before them. My
strength failed_before I could get that bill_presented, and I went_home
again in_midwinter._There then remained_but_a portion_of the term of
that administration, and I_determined, if_possible, to outlive it,
hoping another would_be more responsive. Meanwhile_I_wrote, talked, and
did whatever I could_to spread the idea among the_people, and March,
1881, when the_administration_of_President Garfield came in, I_went
again to Washington. The subject was_very cordially received_by the
President and carefully referred by him_to_Secretary Blaine, who
considered it himself, conferred_fully_with me, and finally laid it
before_the_President_and the cabinet. Perhaps the_most satisfactory
account of that transaction will_be found in the letter of Mr. Blaine
addressed to_me, (see page_41), which gives the assurance_that_President
Garfield_would recommend the adoption of the treaty in his message_to
Congress.

What were_the provisions of_that treaty which had been so conspicuously
and persistently