156 
PUTNAM. 
which they were the expression : a thought — or motive — be- 
yond — not beneath — the capacity of his members. Ele- 
mental his nature was, — notably so, — its effect enhanced by 
lovable contrasts: a naivete against his outer austerity, like 
sunny verdure against rugged cliff. Not himself either wit 
or humorist, he valued wit and had the sense for humor, and 
the keenest relish in paradox and pleasantry-— a relish which 
subsisted seriously beyond the occasion. 
I have heard that he was at times brusque of speech and 
inconsiderate of the feelings of others. Doubtless he was, 
or rather seemed so, especially in his earlier years, and cer- 
tainly in his prompt contempt of anything which seemed 
to him chicanery. My own acquaintance with him was 
limited to the mellower period of his later life, and occasions 
in themselves mellowing. In memory, moreover, I idealize 
him. But that is precisely the privilege of this occasion, and 
the duty, for to idealize is to reach for and draw out the 
essential idea behind the external man; to seek the motive 
behind the manner, the character behind the characteristic. 
Of a breeding merely social, the breeding which imports 
refinement of speech and of manner, he had little. He may 
not have thought this worth while, or he may have been 
physically incapable of it. The shyness which, I believe, 
in him, as in many other such natures, accompanied his 
simplicity and directness, impeded. As with many others, 
too, it may often have given an impression less kind than 
he intended. So also doubtless did the absorption of mind, 
which in him, as in Dr. Spofford, produced an abstraction 
of manner likely to be misconstrued as indifference. On 
no occasion under my observation, however, have I seen 
his geniality waver, nor his tolerance before contrary opin- 
ion, nor his modesty in stating his own opinion upon 
matters within his especial field, nor his deference in rela- 
tion to fields of which he had made no study. For the 
extent and precision of his field of knowledge was equalled 
by the candor of his field of ignorance: and yet there were 
very few fields, even of human affairs, to which he had not 
given some thought; for, like the astronomer Houzeau, his 
