with frankness, and now he was as clear and elevated in his tone as before. While President he had spoken to me in an evening's conversation with the frankness of a statesman who felt that past events belonged to history; and in this interview his remarks were in the same tone. Soon after his first inauguration, I called in the evening with a gentleman of Georgia, at his invitation, to bring to his attention the state of public affairs in the South. There was on my part no grievance to present, no protest to offer against the action of the government, but an assurance that our people were in good faith adjusting themselves to the new conditions under which they lived; and I expressed the hope that no measures would be adopted to alter the status of the South. The statement of his views at that time was most satisfactory. He spoke of Mr. Lincoln's emancipation proclamation in terms of perfect candor, saying that when it was issued he regarded it as a war measure only-brutem fulmen-to strengthen the Union cause.

At our interview in Paris he said that he had intervened during President Johnson's administration for the protection of the men in Virginia who had been in the Confederate service against judicial proceedings, which he regarded as a violation of the terms made at the time of General Lee's surrender.

I had heretofore felt great respect for General Grant, and this sentiment was heightened by his remarks made to me in this interview.

The estimate of General Grant as a general leading great armies to final triumph, as a statesman administering the government at a critical period, and as a man of large capacity and noble nature, rises with every advancing year. His place in history is secure; his heroic stature will be seen in still larger proportions when viewed through the telescope of time.

The Chamber of Deputies was in session, and I decided

to visit it. Presenting my card at the entrance I was admitted. The coup d'œil was interesting: the construction of the Chamber, the arrangement of the seats, the brilliant coloring, the chair for the President, the tribune,— everything was new to me. The animation of the members, the style of debate, and the whole aspect of the

body interested me.

Gambetta presided; I saw him for the first time, and studied his appearance with deep interest. He was an impressive figure; his face was very fine, even in repose; the brow finely arched, the nose large and well formed, the chin prominent, and the whole expression was one of dominant intellect. The eyes were fine, and the blemish in one could not be observed from my seat; the form was well proportioned, somewhat full, and wearing an air of dignity. The man seated in the chair of authority seemed self-possessed; yet there was a look of sadness in his aspect, and the gentleness in his bearing did not express the tremendous energy of his nature. He was the lion before me: the

in repose. The history of the man rose early struggle for recognition; the first flush of fame upon his brow; his splendid triumphs on the hustings and in the tribune; his impassioned oratory; his courageous assaults upon men of state intrenched in high places; his vehement denunciation of Louis Napoleon while yet an emperor; his rousing the people to the overthrow of a dynasty associated with past glories; his defiance of the army of powerful invaders in the very moment of their assured victory; his rallying the dispersed armies of France to avenge defeat and retrieve disaster; his consecration of himself to France when the darkest hour of her destiny deepened upon her;-all these came up as I saw Gambetta. His presence recalled the memory of Rienzi, the last of the Roman tribunes.

At Bordeaux I was much pleased to meet Count Koskul, who was returning from a visit to Russia; his

presence enlivened the voyage. Nothing occurred to hinder the course of our noble ship as it bore us over the placid waters from Europe to South America.

Upon our arrival at Rio we congratulated each other at having been passengers in the same ship, and resumed our places once more in the diplomatic circle.

CHAPTER XXXV.

Aspect of Political Affairs-Slavery Agitation-Mr. Nabuco, President of the Anti-Slavery Society-His Appeal to me to State the Result of Emancipation in the United States-Correspondence on the SubjectExcitement Produced by it-Interview with the Emperor.

THE imperial government of Brazil was one of limited. powers; the constitution defined its authority. The reign of the Emperor, Dom Pedro II., was enlightened and liberal, maintaining the supremacy of law throughout the vast empire.

Upon my return to Rio from my visit to the United States, I observed the aspect of political affairs with interest. While there was a strong growing sentiment in favor of bringing the administration of the government under the influence of liberal ideas, there was no sign of hostility to the Emperor's authority; everywhere there was seen a picture of national contentment. Speculations were sometimes indulged in political circles as to the future; but it seemed to be understood that the Emperor's reign would continue to be upheld and respected. After the Emperor, no one could read the horoscope of the nation.

There was one subject which was warmly discussedslavery. The law of September 28, 1871, passed under the lead of that great statesman, Visconde do Rio Branco, provided that the children of women slaves born in the empire from that date shall be considered to be free. But the million and a half of slaves born prior to Septem

ber 28, 1871, were left still in hopeless bondage. Beneficent as the measure adopted was, still some forty or fifty years must elapse before slavery would cease to exist in the empire. Leading statesmen of the empire who desired to effect the total abolition of slavery immediately, organized a society for the accomplishment of that object, under the name of the Brazilian Anti-Slavery Society. Senhor Joaquim Nabuco was elected president of the new organization. He entered upon the task assigned him with ardor, and he soon won numerous friends and powerful supporters for the cause. The society encountered from the outset determined opposition; the large coffee and sugar planters, strongly represented in the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, were roused into resistance to the proposed measure.

Mr. Nabuco was a member of the Chamber of Deputies from Pernambuco. He came to me and requested me to give my views as to the effect of the abolition of slavery in the United States. I was in sympathy with his opposition to slavery in Brazil, but I could not take part in the conflicts of parties in regard to a question which so deeply affected the fortunes of the empire. Still, while I declined to intervene in a great contest, officially I felt at liberty to reply to Mr. Nabuco's appeal, by giving a statement of the result of the abolition of slavery in the United States. It seemed eminently proper for me to do so, being a Southern man, and having had ample opportunity to observe the effect of emancipation in the slave-holding States, as it affected the planters of the South and the race that had been recently set free. In this interview with Mr. Nabuco, I said to him at its close: "If you think proper, Mr. Nabuco, to address me a letter upon that subject I will undertake to reply to it." Soon after, Mr. Nabuco wrote me a letter alluding to my connection with slavery in the United States, I being a Southern man, and having been a member of the Whig