466 MEMOIR OF DANIEL TREADWELL. 



aristocrats arc costly, and although they do some good, they do mucli harm. But we in 

 America have, with our democratic freedom, great licentiousness, every kind of fraud in 

 speculation, to a degree that no man knows when his property is secure, — a despotism of 

 the masses, instead of the despotism of a gentleman. I am a republican, and prefer the 

 American government to any other ; but I greatly fear that we are becoming demoralized and 

 disorganized, and I cannot say but I should like the government of Nero better than that of 

 Robespierre and his cut-throat associates, although they were republicans. But enough of this. 



Ever most heartily yours, 



Daniel Treadwell. 



To Dr. John Ware. 



London', June 7, 1S55. 



Dear Doctor, — We are yet at 58 Margaret Street, and nothing worth noting has happened 

 to us since you left. You are now, I hope, safe in Weston, instructing Mr. W. in the impor- 

 tance of the cultivation of colza. Don't be put down by any of his allusions to former failures 

 in carrots. The great soul makes every failure the path to success, and the Sebastopol of 

 carrots will be forgotten in the glorious Sea of Azof that shall be obtained from colza. 



You of course had the news of the successes of the Allies, and have by this time got over 

 your mourning for them (the successes). The English feel their triumph, and will not abate 

 one inch of the terms of peace which were rejected by the Russians at Vienna. To these terms 

 the Russians must come, and well will it be for the world if they accede in time, and before the 

 Allies raise their demands. 



1 went to the House of Commons on Tuesday night, and heard a great debate, at which I sat 

 from six to half-past twelve o'clock. I heard Cobden, Sir James Graham, Lord John (Russell), 

 Disraeli, Mr. Bright, Jjord Palmerston, and several small men. Upon the whole, my opinion of 

 Parliamentary speaking was not elevated by the debate. Cobden, who was the linst speaker 

 after a whole week's adjournment of the debate for preparation, and who had evidently used the 

 time in hunting up the subject, did not exhibit the kind of power that I had supposed him to 

 possess, and which would seem necessary for a great popular agitator, — that which we call 

 stump oratory. He stammered and hesitated a great deal, and after all did not find the choice 

 words he seemed in seai-ch of. The House was very full, and evidently expected much from 

 him ; and though the after speeches were mainly in answer to him, he was reproached with not 

 having shown the power once possessed by the leaders of the Corn Law League. Sir J. Gra- 

 ham and Lord J. Russell appeared to me to be about of equal ability. Fair, plain, sensible state- 

 ments and reasoning were all that either exhibited, without anything approaching eloquence, ob 

 to those /t'rt^s of logic that carry men even against their own instincts. But they gained upon 

 the confidence of the House by showing themselves impressed with the interests of the state, as 

 involved in the question, and not striving for themselves or their party alone. They both seemed 

 like sensible men, wishing to do the best they could, each according to his own carefully con- 

 sidered course, for the interests of England. Disraeli presented a strong contrast to Sir James 

 and Lord John in every point of character. He is a great master of words that flow in an easy 

 stream, and amongst them many choice and appropriate ones, but you see in a few minutes that 

 his whole object is to damage his opponents. 



It is nothing to him beyond a mere pretence whether a measure is good or bad for the 

 country, but whether he can persuade the House that the Minister is wrong, and that the only 

 way is to turn him out, and give his place and his X5,000 to him, Disraeli. He is, you 



