The Education of Henry Adams by Adams, Henry - CHAPTER XXI

(download Open eBook Format)

The Education of Henry Adams

CHAPTER XXI

TWEN­TY YEARS AF­TER (1892)

ONCE more! this is a sto­ry of ed­uca­tion, not of ad­ven­ture! It is meant to help young men — or such as have in­tel­li­gence enough to seek help — but it is not meant to amuse them. What one did — or did not do — with one’s ed­uca­tion, af­ter get­ting it, need trou­ble the in­quir­er in no way; it is a per­son­al mat­ter on­ly which would con­fuse him. Per­haps Hen­ry Adams was not worth ed­ucat­ing; most keen judges in­cline to think that bare­ly one man in a hun­dred owns a mind ca­pa­ble of re­act­ing to any pur­pose on the forces that sur­round him, and ful­ly half of these re­act wrong­ly. The ob­ject of ed­uca­tion for that mind should be the teach­ing it­self how to re­act with vig­or and econ­omy. No doubt the world at large will al­ways lag so far be­hind the ac­tive mind as to make a soft cush­ion of in­er­tia to drop up­on, as it did for Hen­ry Adams; but ed­uca­tion should try to lessen the ob­sta­cles, di­min­ish the fric­tion, in­vig­orate the en­er­gy, and should train minds to re­act, not at hap­haz­ard, but by choice, on the lines of force that at­tract their world. What one knows is, in youth, of lit­tle mo­ment; they know enough who know how to learn. Through­out hu­man his­to­ry the waste of mind has been ap­palling, and, as this sto­ry is meant to show, so­ci­ety has con­spired to pro­mote it. No doubt the teach­er is the worst crim­inal, but the world stands be­hind him and drags the stu­dent from his course. The moral is sten­to­ri­an. On­ly the most en­er­get­ic, the most high­ly fit­ted, and the most fa­vored have over­come the fric­tion or the vis­cos­ity of in­er­tia, and these were com­pelled to waste three-​fourths of their en­er­gy in do­ing it.

Fit or un­fit, Hen­ry Adams stopped his own ed­uca­tion in 1871, and be­gan to ap­ply it for prac­ti­cal us­es, like his neigh­bors. At the end of twen­ty years, he found that he had fin­ished, and could sum up the re­sult. He had no com­plaint to make against man or wom­an. They had all treat­ed him kind­ly; he had nev­er met with ill-​will, ill-​tem­per, or even ill-​man­ners, or known a quar­rel. He had nev­er seen se­ri­ous dis­hon­esty or in­grat­itude. He had found a readi­ness in the young to re­spond to sug­ges­tion that seemed to him far be­yond all he had rea­son to ex­pect. Con­sid­er­ing the stock com­plaints against the world, he could not un­der­stand why he had noth­ing to com­plain of.

Dur­ing these twen­ty years he had done as much work, in quan­ti­ty, as his neigh­bors want­ed; more than they would ev­er stop to look at, and more than his share. Mere­ly in print, he thought al­to­geth­er ridicu­lous the num­ber of vol­umes he count­ed on the shelves of pub­lic li­braries. He had no no­tion whether they served a use­ful pur­pose; he had worked in the dark; but so had most of his friends, even the artists, none of whom held any lofty opin­ion of their suc­cess in rais­ing the stan­dards of so­ci­ety, or felt pro­found re­spect for the meth­ods or man­ners of their time, at home or abroad, but all of whom had tried, in a way, to hold the stan­dard up. The ef­fort had been, for the old­er gen­er­ation, ex­haust­ing, as one could see in the Hunts; but the gen­er­ation af­ter 1870 made more fig­ure, not in pro­por­tion to pub­lic wealth or in the cen­sus, but in their own self-​as­ser­tion. A fair num­ber of the men who were born in the thir­ties had won names — Phillips Brooks; Bret Harte; Hen­ry James; H. H. Richard­son; John La Farge; and the list might be made fair­ly long if it were worth while; but from their school had sprung oth­ers, like Au­gus­tus St. Gau­dens, McKim, Stan­ford White, and scores born in the for­ties, who count­ed as force even in the men­tal in­er­tia of six­ty or eighty mil­lion peo­ple. Among all these Clarence King, John Hay, and Hen­ry Adams had led mod­est ex­is­tences, try­ing to fill in the so­cial gaps of a class which, as yet, showed but thin ranks and lit­tle co­he­sion. The com­bi­na­tion of­fered no very glit­ter­ing prizes, but they pur­sued it for twen­ty years with as much pa­tience and ef­fort as though it led to fame or pow­er, un­til, at last, Hen­ry Adams thought his own du­ties suf­fi­cient­ly per­formed and his ac­count with so­ci­ety set­tled. He had en­joyed his life amaz­ing­ly, and would not have ex­changed it for any oth­er that came in his way; he was, or thought he was, per­fect­ly sat­is­fied with it; but for rea­sons that had noth­ing to do with ed­uca­tion, he was tired; his ner­vous en­er­gy ran low; and, like a horse that wears out, he quit­ted the race-​course, left the sta­ble, and sought pas­tures as far as pos­si­ble from the old. Ed­uca­tion had end­ed in 1871; life was com­plete in 1890; the rest mat­tered so lit­tle!

As had hap­pened so of­ten, he found him­self in Lon­don when the ques­tion of re­turn im­posed its ver­dict on him af­ter much fruit­less ef­fort to rest else­where. The time was the month of Jan­uary, 1892; he was alone, in hos­pi­tal, in the gloom of mid­win­ter. He was close on his fifty-​fourth birth­day, and Pall Mall had for­got­ten him as com­plete­ly as it had for­got­ten his el­ders. He had not seen Lon­don for a dozen years, and was rather amused to have on­ly a bed for a world and a fa­mil­iar black fog for hori­zon. The coal-​fire smelt home­like; the fog had a fruity taste of youth; any­thing was bet­ter than be­ing turned out in­to the wastes of Wig­more Street. He could al­ways amuse him­self by liv­ing over his youth, and driv­ing once more down Ox­ford Street in 1858, with life be­fore him to imag­ine far less amus­ing than it had turned out to be.

The fu­ture at­tract­ed him less. Ly­ing there for a week he re­flect­ed on what he could do next. He had just come up from the South Seas with John La Farge, who had re­luc­tant­ly crawled away to­wards New York to re­sume the grind­ing rou­tine of stu­dio-​work at an age when life runs low. Adams would rather, as choice, have gone back to the east, if it were on­ly to sleep for­ev­er in the trade-​winds un­der the south­ern stars, wan­der­ing over the dark pur­ple ocean, with its pur­ple sense of soli­tude and void. Not that he liked the sen­sa­tion, but that it was the most un­earth­ly he had felt. He had not yet hap­pened on Rud­yard Kipling’s “Man­dalay,” but he knew the po­et­ry be­fore he knew the po­em, like mil­lions of wan­der­ers, who have per­haps alone felt the world ex­act­ly as it is. Noth­ing at­tract­ed him less than the idea of be­gin­ning a new ed­uca­tion. The old one had been poor enough; any new one could on­ly add to its faults. Life had been cut in halves, and the old half had passed away, ed­uca­tion and all, leav­ing no stock to graft on.

The new world he faced in Paris and Lon­don seemed to him fan­tas­tic Will­ing to ad­mit it re­al in the sense of hav­ing some kind of ex­is­tence out­side his own mind, he could not ad­mit it rea­son­able. In Paris, his heart sank to mere pulp be­fore the dis­mal bal­lets at the Grand Opera and the eter­nal vaudeville at the old Palais Roy­al; but, ex­cept for them, his own Paris of the Sec­ond Em­pire was as ex­tinct as that of the first Napoleon. At the gal­leries and ex­hi­bi­tions, he was racked by the ef­fort of art to be orig­inal, and when one day, af­ter much re­flec­tion, John La Farge asked whether there might not still be room for some­thing sim­ple in art, Adams shook his head. As he saw the world, it was no longer sim­ple and could not ex­press it­self sim­ply. It should ex­press what it was; and this was some­thing that nei­ther Adams nor La Farge un­der­stood.

Un­der the first blast of this fur­nace-​heat, the lights seemed fair­ly to go out. He felt noth­ing in com­mon with the world as it promised to be. He was ready to quit it, and the eas­iest path led back to the east; but he could not ven­ture alone, and the rarest of an­imals is a com­pan­ion. He must re­turn to Amer­ica to get one. Per­haps, while wait­ing, he might write more his­to­ry, and on the chance as a last re­source, he gave or­ders for copy­ing ev­ery­thing he could reach in archives, but this was mere habit. He went home as a horse goes back to his sta­ble, be­cause he knew nowhere else to go.

Home was Wash­ing­ton. As soon as Grant’s ad­min­is­tra­tion end­ed, in 1877, and Evarts be­came Sec­re­tary of State, Adams went back there, part­ly to write his­to­ry, but chiefly be­cause his sev­en years of la­bo­ri­ous ban­ish­ment, in Boston, con­vinced him that, as far as he had a func­tion in life, it was as sta­ble-​com­pan­ion to states­men, whether they liked it or not. At about the same time, old George Ban­croft did the same thing, and present­ly John Hay came on to be As­sis­tant Sec­re­tary of State for Mr. Evarts, and stayed there to write the “Life” of Lin­coln. In 1884 Adams joined him in em­ploy­ing Richard­son to build them ad­join­ing hous­es on La Fayette Square. As far as Adams had a home this was it. To the house on La Fayette Square he must turn, for he had no oth­er sta­tus — no po­si­tion in the world.

Nev­er did he make a de­ci­sion more re­luc­tant­ly than this of go­ing back to his manger. His fa­ther and moth­er were dead. All his fam­ily led set­tled lives of their own. Ex­cept for two or three friends in Wash­ing­ton, who were them­selves un­cer­tain of stay, no one cared whether he came or went, and he cared least. There was noth­ing to care about. Ev­ery one was busy; near­ly ev­ery one seemed con­tent­ed. Since 1871 noth­ing had ruf­fled the sur­face of the Amer­ican world, and even the progress of Eu­rope in her side-​way track to dis-​Eu­ro­pean­ing her­self had ceased to be vi­olent. Af­ter a drea­ry Jan­uary in Paris, at last when no ex­cuse could be per­suad­ed to of­fer it­self for fur­ther de­lay, he crossed the chan­nel and passed a week with his old friend, Milnes Gaskell, at Thornes, in York­shire, while the west­er­ly gales raved a warn­ing against go­ing home. York­shire in Jan­uary is not an is­land in the South Seas. It has few points of re­sem­blance to Tahi­ti; not many to Fi­ji or Samoa; but, as so of­ten be­fore, it was a rest be­tween past and fu­ture, and Adams was grate­ful for it.

At last, on Febru­ary 3, he drove, af­ter a fash­ion, down the Irish Chan­nel, on board the Teu­ton­ic. He had not crossed the At­lantic for a dozen years, and had nev­er seen an ocean steam­er of the new type. He had seen noth­ing new of any sort, or much changed in France or Eng­land. The rail­ways made quick­er time, but were no more com­fort­able. The scale was the same. The Chan­nel ser­vice was hard­ly im­proved since 1858, or so lit­tle as to make no im­pres­sion. Eu­rope seemed to have been sta­tion­ary for twen­ty years. To a man who had been sta­tion­ary like Eu­rope, the Teu­ton­ic was a mar­vel. That he should be able to eat his din­ner through a week of howl­ing win­ter gales was a mir­acle. That he should have a deck state­room, with fresh air, and read all night, if he chose, by elec­tric light, was mat­ter for more won­der than life had yet sup­plied, in its old forms. Won­der may be dou­ble — even tre­ble. Adams’s won­der ran off in­to fig­ures. As the Ni­agara was to the Teu­ton­ic — as 1860 was to 1890 — so the Teu­ton­ic and 1890 must be to the next term — and then? Ap­par­ent­ly the ques­tion con­cerned on­ly Amer­ica. West­ern Eu­rope of­fered no such co­nun­drum. There one might dou­ble scale and speed in­def­inite­ly with­out pass­ing bounds.

Fate was kind on that voy­age. Rud­yard Kipling, on his wed­ding trip to Amer­ica, thanks to the me­di­ation of Hen­ry James, dashed over the pas­sen­ger his ex­uber­ant foun­tain of gai­ety and wit — as though play­ing a gar­den hose on a thirsty and fad­ed be­go­nia. Kipling could nev­er know what peace of mind he gave, for he could hard­ly ev­er need it him­self so much; and yet, in the full de­light of his end­less fun and va­ri­ety; one felt the old co­nun­drum re­peat it­self. Some­how, some­where, Kipling and the Amer­ican were not one, but two, and could not be glued to­geth­er. The Amer­ican felt that the de­fect, if de­fect it were, was in him­self; he had felt it when he was with Swin­burne, and, again, with Robert Louis Steven­son, even un­der the palms of Vail­ima; but he did not car­ry self-​abase­ment to the point of think­ing him­self sin­gu­lar. What­ev­er the de­fect might be, it was Amer­ican; it be­longed to the type; it lived in the blood. What­ev­er the qual­ity might be that held him apart, it was En­glish; it lived al­so in the blood; one felt it lit­tle if at all, with Celts, and one yearned re­cip­ro­cal­ly among Fi­ji can­ni­bals. Clarence King used to say that it was due to dis­cord be­tween the wave-​lengths of the man-​atoms; but the the­ory of­fered dif­fi­cul­ties in mea­sure­ment. Per­haps, af­ter all, it was on­ly that ge­nius soars; but this the­ory, too, had its dark cor­ners. All through life, one had seen the Amer­ican on his lit­er­ary knees to the Eu­ro­pean; and all through many lives back for some two cen­turies, one had seen the Eu­ro­pean snub or pa­tron­ize the Amer­ican; not al­ways in­ten­tion­al­ly, but ef­fec­tu­al­ly. It was in the na­ture of things. Kipling nei­ther snubbed nor pa­tron­ized; he was all gai­ety and good-​na­ture; but he would have been first to feel what one meant. Ge­nius has to pay it­self that un­will­ing self-​re­spect.

To­wards the mid­dle of Febru­ary, 1892, Adams found him­self again in Wash­ing­ton. In Paris and Lon­don he had seen noth­ing to make a re­turn to life worth while; in Wash­ing­ton he saw plen­ty of rea­sons for stay­ing dead. Changes had tak­en place there; im­prove­ments had been made; with time — much time — the city might be­come hab­it­able ac­cord­ing to some fash­ion­able stan­dard; but all one’s friends had died or dis­ap­peared sev­er­al times over, leav­ing one al­most as strange as in Boston or Lon­don. Slow­ly, a cer­tain so­ci­ety had built it­self up about the Gov­ern­ment; hous­es had been opened and there was much din­ing; much call­ing; much leav­ing of cards; but a soli­tary man count­ed for less than in 1868. So­ci­ety seemed hard­ly more at home than he. Both Ex­ec­utive and Congress held it aloof. No one in so­ci­ety seemed to have the ear of any­body in Gov­ern­ment. No one in Gov­ern­ment knew any rea­son for con­sult­ing any one in so­ci­ety. The world had ceased to be whol­ly po­lit­ical, but pol­itics had be­come less so­cial. A sur­vivor of the Civ­il War — like George Ban­croft, or John Hay — tried to keep foot­ing, but with­out bril­liant suc­cess. They were free to say or do what they liked; but no one took much no­tice of any­thing said or done.

A pres­iden­tial elec­tion was to take place in Novem­ber, and no one showed much in­ter­est in the re­sult. The two can­di­dates were sin­gu­lar per­sons, of whom it was the com­mon say­ing that one of them had no friends; the oth­er, on­ly en­emies. Calvin Brice, who was at that time al­to­geth­er the wit­ti­est and clever­est mem­ber of the Sen­ate, was in the habit of de­scrib­ing Mr. Cleve­land in glow­ing terms and at great length, as one of the lofti­est na­tures and no­blest char­ac­ters of an­cient or mod­ern time; “but,” he con­clud­ed, “in fu­ture I pre­fer to look on at his pro­ceed­ings from the safe sum­mit of some neigh­bor­ing hill.” The same re­mark ap­plied to Mr. Har­ri­son. In this re­spect, they were the great­est of Pres­idents, for, what­ev­er harm they might do their en­emies, was as noth­ing when com­pared to the mor­tal­ity they in­flict­ed on their friends. Men fled them as though they had the evil eye. To the Amer­ican peo­ple, the two can­di­dates and the two par­ties were so even­ly bal­anced that the scales showed hard­ly a per­cep­ti­ble dif­fer­ence. Mr. Har­ri­son was an ex­cel­lent Pres­ident, a man of abil­ity and force; per­haps the best Pres­ident the Re­pub­li­can Par­ty had put for­ward since Lin­coln’s death; yet, on the whole, Adams felt a shade of pref­er­ence for Pres­ident Cleve­land, not so much per­son­al­ly as be­cause the Democrats rep­re­sent­ed to him the last rem­nants of the eigh­teenth cen­tu­ry; the sur­vivors of Hosea Biglow’s Corn­wal­lis; the sole re­main­ing protes­tants against a banker’s Olym­pus which had be­come, for five-​and-​twen­ty years, more and more despot­ic over Esop’s frog-​em­pire. One might no longer croak ex­cept to vote for King Log, or — fail­ing storks — for Grover Cleve­land; and even then could not be sure where King Banker lurked be­hind. The cost­ly ed­uca­tion in pol­itics had led to po­lit­ical tor­por. Ev­ery one did not share it. Clarence King and John Hay were loy­al Re­pub­li­cans who nev­er for a mo­ment con­ceived that there could be mer­it in oth­er ide­als. With King, the feel­ing was chiefly love of ar­cha­ic races; sym­pa­thy with the ne­gro and In­di­an and cor­re­spond­ing dis­like of their en­emies; but with Hay, par­ty loy­al­ty be­came a phase of be­ing, a lit­tle like the loy­al­ty of a high­ly cul­ti­vat­ed church­man to his Church. He saw all the fail­ings of the par­ty, and still more keen­ly those of the par­ti­sans; but he could not live out­side. To Adams a West­ern Demo­crat or a West­ern Re­pub­li­can, a city Demo­crat or a city Re­pub­li­can, a W. C. Whit­ney or a J. G. Blaine, were ac­tu­al­ly the same man, as far as their use­ful­ness to the ob­jects of King, Hay, or Adams was con­cerned. They grad­ed them­selves as friends or en­emies not as Re­pub­li­cans or Democrats. To Hay, the dif­fer­ence was that of be­ing re­spectable or not.

Since 1879, King, Hay, and Adams had been in­sep­ara­ble. Step by step, they had gone on in the clos­est sym­pa­thy, rather shun­ning than invit­ing pub­lic po­si­tion, un­til, in 1892, none of them held any post at all. With great ef­fort, in Hayes’s ad­min­is­tra­tion, all King’s friends, in­clud­ing Abram He­witt and Carl Schurz, had car­ried the bill for unit­ing the Sur­veys and had placed King at the head of the Bu­reau; but King wait­ed on­ly to or­ga­nize the ser­vice, and then re­signed, in or­der to seek his pri­vate for­tune in the West. Hay, af­ter serv­ing as As­sis­tant Sec­re­tary of State un­der Sec­re­tary Evarts dur­ing a part of Hayes’s ad­min­is­tra­tion, then al­so in­sist­ed on go­ing out, in or­der to write with Nico­lay the “Life” of Lin­coln. Adams had held no of­fice, and when his friends asked the rea­son, he could not go in­to long ex­pla­na­tions, but pre­ferred to an­swer sim­ply that no Pres­ident had ev­er in­vit­ed him to fill one. The rea­son was good, and was al­so con­ve­nient­ly true, but left open an awk­ward doubt of his morals or ca­pac­ity. Why had no Pres­ident ev­er cared to em­ploy him? The ques­tion need­ed a vol­ume of in­tri­cate ex­pla­na­tion. There nev­er was a day when he would have re­fused to per­form any du­ty that the Gov­ern­ment im­posed on him, but the Amer­ican Gov­ern­ment nev­er to his knowl­edge im­posed du­ties. The point was nev­er raised with re­gard to him, or to any one else. The Gov­ern­ment re­quired can­di­dates to of­fer; the busi­ness of the Ex­ec­utive be­gan and end­ed with the con­sent or re­fusal to con­fer. The so­cial for­mu­la car­ried this pas­sive at­ti­tude a shade fur­ther. Any pub­lic man who may for years have used some oth­er man’s house as his own, when pro­mot­ed to a po­si­tion of pa­tron­age com­mon­ly feels him­self obliged to in­quire, di­rect­ly or in­di­rect­ly, whether his friend wants any­thing; which is equiv­alent to a civ­il act of di­vorce, since he feels awk­ward in the old re­la­tion. The hand­somest for­mu­la, in an im­par­tial choice, was the grand­ly cour­te­ous South­ern phrase of Lamar: “Of course Mr. Adams knows that any­thing in my pow­er is at his ser­vice.” A la dis­posi­cion de Ust­ed! The form must have been cor­rect since it re­leased both par­ties. He was right; Mr. Adams did know all about it; a bow and a con­ven­tion­al smile closed the sub­ject for­ev­er, and ev­ery one felt flat­tered.

Such an in­ti­mate, pro­mot­ed to pow­er, was al­ways lost. His du­ties and cares ab­sorbed him and af­fect­ed his bal­ance of mind. Un­less his friend served some po­lit­ical pur­pose, friend­ship was an ef­fort. Men who nei­ther wrote for news­pa­pers nor made cam­paign speech­es, who rarely sub­scribed to the cam­paign fund, and who en­tered the White House as sel­dom as pos­si­ble, placed them­selves out­side the sphere of use­ful­ness, and did so with en­tire­ly ad­equate knowl­edge of what they were do­ing. They nev­er ex­pect­ed the Pres­ident to ask for their ser­vices, and saw no rea­son why he should do so. As for Hen­ry Adams, in fifty years that he knew Wash­ing­ton, no one would have been more sur­prised than him­self had any Pres­ident ev­er asked him to per­form so much of a ser­vice as to cross the square. On­ly Tex­an Con­gress­men imag­ined that the Pres­ident need­ed their ser­vices in some re­mote con­sulate af­ter wor­ry­ing him for months to find one.

In Wash­ing­ton this law or cus­tom is uni­ver­sal­ly un­der­stood, and no one’s char­ac­ter nec­es­sar­ily suf­fered be­cause he held no of­fice. No one took of­fice un­less he want­ed it; and in turn the out­sider was nev­er asked to do work or sub­scribe mon­ey. Adams saw no of­fice that he want­ed, and he grave­ly thought that, from his point of view, in the long run, he was like­ly to be a more use­ful cit­izen with­out of­fice. He could at least act as au­di­ence, and, in those days, a Wash­ing­ton au­di­ence sel­dom filled even a small the­atre. He felt quite well sat­is­fied to look on, and from time to time he thought he might risk a crit­icism of the play­ers; but though he found his own po­si­tion reg­ular, he nev­er quite un­der­stood that of John Hay. The Re­pub­li­can lead­ers treat­ed Hay as one of them­selves; they asked his ser­vices and took his mon­ey with a free­dom that stag­gered even a hard­ened ob­serv­er; but they nev­er need­ed him in equiv­alent of­fice. In Wash­ing­ton Hay was the on­ly com­pe­tent man in the par­ty for diplo­mat­ic work. He cor­re­spond­ed in his pow­ers of use­ful­ness ex­act­ly with Lord Granville in Lon­don, who had been for forty years the sav­ing grace of ev­ery Lib­er­al ad­min­is­tra­tion in turn. Had use­ful­ness to the pub­lic ser­vice been ev­er a ques­tion, Hay should have had a first-​class mis­sion un­der Hayes; should have been placed in the Cab­inet by Garfield, and should have been re­stored to it by Har­ri­son. These gen­tle­men were al­ways us­ing him; al­ways in­vit­ed his ser­vices, and al­ways took his mon­ey.

Adams’s opin­ion of pol­itics and politi­cians, as he frankly ad­mit­ted, lacked en­thu­si­asm, al­though nev­er, in his sever­est tem­per, did he ap­ply to them the terms they freely ap­plied to each oth­er; and he ex­plained ev­ery­thing by his old ex­pla­na­tion of Grant’s char­ac­ter as more or less a gen­er­al type; but what roused in his mind more re­bel­lion was the pa­tience and good-​na­ture with which Hay al­lowed him­self to be used. The trait was not con­fined to pol­itics. Hay seemed to like to be used, and this was one of his many charms; but in pol­itics this sort of good-​na­ture de­mands su­per­nat­ural pa­tience. What­ev­er as­ton­ish­ing laps­es of so­cial con­ven­tion the politi­cians be­trayed, Hay laughed equal­ly hearti­ly, and told the sto­ries with con­stant amuse­ment, at his own ex­pense. Like most Amer­icans, he liked to play at mak­ing Pres­idents, but, un­like most, he laughed not on­ly at the Pres­idents he helped to make, but al­so at him­self for laugh­ing.

One must be rich, and come from Ohio or New York, to grat­ify an ex­pen­sive taste like this. Oth­er men, on both po­lit­ical flanks, did the same thing, and did it well, less for self­ish ob­jects than for the amuse­ment of the game; but Hay alone lived in Wash­ing­ton and in the cen­tre of the Ohio in­flu­ences that ruled the Re­pub­li­can Par­ty dur­ing thir­ty years. On the whole, these in­flu­ences were re­spectable, and al­though Adams could not, un­der any cir­cum­stances, have had any val­ue, even fi­nan­cial­ly, for Ohio politi­cians, Hay might have much, as he showed, if they on­ly knew enough to ap­pre­ci­ate him. The Amer­ican politi­cian was oc­ca­sion­al­ly an amus­ing ob­ject; Hay laughed, and, for want of oth­er re­source, Adams laughed too; but per­haps it was part­ly ir­ri­ta­tion at see­ing how Pres­ident Har­ri­son dealt his cards that made Adams wel­come Pres­ident Cleve­land back to the White House.

At all events, nei­ther Hay nor King nor Adams had much to gain by re­elect­ing Mr. Har­ri­son in 1892, or by de­feat­ing him, as far as he was con­cerned; and as far as con­cerned Mr. Cleve­land, they seemed to have even less per­son­al con­cern. The whole coun­try, to out­ward ap­pear­ance, stood in much the same frame of mind. Ev­ery­where was slack-​wa­ter. Hay him­self was al­most as lan­guid and in­dif­fer­ent as Adams. Nei­ther had oc­cu­pa­tion. Both had fin­ished their lit­er­ary work. The “Life” of Lin­coln had been be­gun, com­plet­ed, and pub­lished hand in hand with the “His­to­ry” of Jef­fer­son and Madi­son, so that be­tween them they had writ­ten near­ly all the Amer­ican his­to­ry there was to write. The in­ter­me­di­ate pe­ri­od need­ed in­ter­me­di­ate treat­ment; the gap be­tween James Madi­son and Abra­ham Lin­coln could not be ju­di­cial­ly filled by ei­ther of them. Both were hearti­ly tired of the sub­ject, and Amer­ica seemed as tired as they. What was worse, the re­deem­ing en­er­gy of Amer­icans which had gen­er­al­ly served as the re­source of minds oth­er­wise va­cant, the cre­ation of new force, the ap­pli­ca­tion of ex­pand­ing pow­er, showed signs of check. Even the year be­fore, in 1891, far off in the Pa­cif­ic, one had met ev­ery­where in the East a sort of stag­na­tion — a creep­ing paral­ysis — com­plaints of ship­ping and pro­duc­ers — that spread through­out the whole south­ern hemi­sphere. Ques­tions of ex­change and sil­ver-​pro­duc­tion loomed large. Cred­it was shak­en, and a change of par­ty gov­ern­ment might shake it even in Wash­ing­ton. The mat­ter did not con­cern Adams, who had no cred­it, and was al­ways rich­est when the rich were poor; but it helped to dull the vi­bra­tion of so­ci­ety.

How­ev­er they stud­ied it, the bal­ance of prof­it and loss, on the last twen­ty years, for the three friends, King, Hay, and Adams, was ex­ceed­ing­ly ob­scure in 1892. They had lost twen­ty years, but what had they gained? They of­ten dis­cussed the ques­tion. Hay had a sin­gu­lar fac­ul­ty for re­mem­ber­ing faces, and would break off sud­den­ly the thread of his talk, as he looked out of the win­dow on La Fayette Square, to no­tice an old corps com­man­der or ad­mi­ral of the Civ­il War, tot­ter­ing along to the club for his cards or his cock­tail: “There is old Dash who broke the rebel lines at Blankburg! Think of his hav­ing been a thun­der­bolt of war!” Or what drew Adams’s clos­er at­ten­tion: “There goes old Boutwell gam­bolling like the gam­bolling kid!” There they went! Men who had swayed the course of em­pire as well as the course of Hay, King, and Adams, less val­ued than the ephemer­al Con­gress­man be­hind them, who could not have told whether the gen­er­al was a Boutwell or Boutwell a gen­er­al. Theirs was the high­est known suc­cess, and one asked what it was worth to them. Apart from per­son­al van­ity, what would they sell it for? Would any one of them, from Pres­ident down­wards, refuse ten thou­sand a year in place of all the con­sid­er­ation he re­ceived from the world on ac­count of his suc­cess?

Yet con­sid­er­ation had val­ue, and at that time Adams en­joyed lec­tur­ing Au­gus­tus St. Gau­dens, in hours of de­pres­sion, on its eco­nomics: “Hon­est­ly you must ad­mit that even if you don’t pay your ex­pens­es you get a cer­tain amount of ad­van­tage from do­ing the best work. Very like­ly some of the re­al­ly suc­cess­ful Amer­icans would be will­ing you should come to din­ner some­times, if you did not come too of­ten, while they would think twice about Hay, and would nev­er stand me.” The for­got­ten states­man had no val­ue at all; the gen­er­al and ad­mi­ral not much; the his­to­ri­an but lit­tle; on the whole, the artist stood best, and of course, wealth rest­ed out­side the ques­tion, since it was act­ing as judge; but, in the last re­sort, the judge cer­tain­ly ad­mit­ted that con­sid­er­ation had some val­ue as an as­set, though hard­ly as much as ten — or five — thou­sand a year.

Hay and Adams had the ad­van­tage of look­ing out of their win­dows on the an­tiq­ui­ties of La Fayette Square, with the sense of hav­ing all that any one had; all that the world had to of­fer; all that they want­ed in life, in­clud­ing their names on scores of ti­tle-​pages and in one or two bi­ograph­ical dic­tio­nar­ies; but this had noth­ing to do with con­sid­er­ation, and they knew no more than Boutwell or St. Gau­dens whether to call it suc­cess. Hay had passed ten years in writ­ing the “Life” of Lin­coln, and per­haps Pres­ident Lin­coln was the bet­ter for it, but what Hay got from it was not so easy to see, ex­cept the priv­ilege of see­ing pop­ular book-​mak­ers steal from his book and cov­er the theft by abus­ing the au­thor. Adams had giv­en ten or a dozen years to Jef­fer­son and Madi­son, with ex­pens­es which, in any mer­can­tile busi­ness, could hard­ly have been reck­oned at less than a hun­dred thou­sand dol­lars, on a salary of five thou­sand a year; and when he asked what re­turn he got from this ex­pen­di­ture, rather more ex­trav­agant in pro­por­tion to his means than a rac­ing-​sta­ble, he could see none what­ev­er. Such works nev­er re­turn mon­ey. Even Frank Park­man nev­er print­ed a first edi­tion of his rel­ative­ly cheap and pop­ular vol­umes, num­ber­ing more than sev­en hun­dred copies, un­til quite at the end of his life. A thou­sand copies of a book that cost twen­ty dol­lars or more was as much as any au­thor could ex­pect; two thou­sand copies was a vi­sion­ary es­ti­mate un­less it were can­vassed for sub­scrip­tion. As far as Adams knew, he had but three se­ri­ous read­ers — Abram He­witt, Wayne McVeagh, and Hay him­self. He was am­ply sat­is­fied with their con­sid­er­ation, and could dis­pense with that of the oth­er fifty-​nine mil­lion, nine hun­dred and nine­ty-​nine thou­sand, nine hun­dred and nine­ty-​sev­en; but nei­ther he nor Hay was bet­ter off in any oth­er re­spect, and their chief ti­tle to con­sid­er­ation was their right to look out of their win­dows on great men, alive or dead, in La Fayette Square, a priv­ilege which had noth­ing to do with their writ­ings.

The world was al­ways good-​na­tured; civ­il; glad to be amused; open-​armed to any one who amused it; pa­tient with ev­ery one who did not in­sist on putting him­self in its way, or cost­ing it mon­ey; but this was not con­sid­er­ation, still less pow­er in any of its con­crete forms, and ap­plied as well or bet­ter to a com­ic ac­tor. Cer­tain­ly a rare so­pra­no or tenor voice earned in­finite­ly more ap­plause as it gave in­finite­ly more plea­sure, even in Amer­ica; but one does what one can with one’s means, and cast­ing up one’s bal­ance sheet, one ex­pects on­ly a rea­son­able re­turn on one’s cap­ital. Hay and Adams had risked noth­ing and nev­er played for high stakes. King had fol­lowed the am­bi­tious course. He had played for many mil­lions. He had more than once come close to a great suc­cess, but the re­sult was still in doubt, and mean­while he was pass­ing the best years of his life un­der­ground. For com­pan­ion­ship he was most­ly lost.

Thus, in 1892, nei­ther Hay, King, nor Adams knew whether they had at­tained suc­cess, or how to es­ti­mate it, or what to call it; and the Amer­ican peo­ple seemed to have no clear­er idea than they. In­deed, the Amer­ican peo­ple had no idea at all; they were wan­der­ing in a wilder­ness much more sandy than the He­brews had ev­er trod­den about Sinai; they had nei­ther ser­pents nor gold­en calves to wor­ship. They had lost the sense of wor­ship; for the idea that they wor­shipped mon­ey seemed a delu­sion. Wor­ship of mon­ey was an old-​world trait; a healthy ap­petite akin to wor­ship of the Gods, or to wor­ship of pow­er in any con­crete shape; but the Amer­ican wast­ed mon­ey more reck­less­ly than any one ev­er did be­fore; he spent more to less pur­pose than any ex­trav­agant court aris­toc­ra­cy; he had no sense of rel­ative val­ues, and knew not what to do with his mon­ey when he got it, ex­cept use it to make more, or throw it away. Prob­ably, since hu­man so­ci­ety be­gan, it had seen no such cu­ri­ous spec­ta­cle as the hous­es of the San Fran­cis­co mil­lion­aires on Nob Hill. Ex­cept for the rail­way sys­tem, the enor­mous wealth tak­en out of the ground since 1840, had dis­ap­peared. West of the Al­leghe­nies, the whole coun­try might have been swept clean, and could have been re­placed in bet­ter form with­in one or two years. The Amer­ican mind had less re­spect for mon­ey than the Eu­ro­pean or Asi­at­ic mind, and bore its loss more eas­ily; but it had been de­flect­ed by its pur­suit till it could turn in no oth­er di­rec­tion. It shunned, dis­trust­ed, dis­liked, the dan­ger­ous at­trac­tion of ide­als, and stood alone in his­to­ry for its ig­no­rance of the past.

Per­son­al con­tact brought this Amer­ican trait close to Adams’s no­tice. His first step, on re­turn­ing to Wash­ing­ton, took him out to the ceme­tery known as Rock Creek, to see the bronze fig­ure which St. Gau­dens had made for him in his ab­sence. Nat­ural­ly ev­ery de­tail in­ter­est­ed him; ev­ery line; ev­ery touch of the artist; ev­ery change of light and shade; ev­ery point of re­la­tion; ev­ery pos­si­ble doubt of St. Gau­dens’s cor­rect­ness of taste or feel­ing; so that, as the spring ap­proached, he was apt to stop there of­ten to see what the fig­ure had to tell him that was new; but, in all that it had to say, he nev­er once thought of ques­tion­ing what it meant. He sup­posed its mean­ing to be the one com­mon­place about it — the old­est idea known to hu­man thought. He knew that if he asked an Asi­at­ic its mean­ing, not a man, wom­an, or child from Cairo to Kamtchat­ka would have need­ed more than a glance to re­ply. From the Egyp­tian Sphinx to the Ka­maku­ra Daibuts; from Prometheus to Christ; from Michael An­ge­lo to Shel­ley, art had wrought on this eter­nal fig­ure al­most as though it had noth­ing else to say. The in­ter­est of the fig­ure was not in its mean­ing, but in the re­sponse of the ob­serv­er. As Adams sat there, num­bers of peo­ple came, for the fig­ure seemed to have be­come a tourist fash­ion, and all want­ed to know its mean­ing. Most took it for a por­trait-​stat­ue, and the rem­nant were va­cant-​mind­ed in the ab­sence of a per­son­al guide. None felt what would have been a nurs­ery-​in­stinct to a Hin­du ba­by or a Japanese jin­rick­sha-​run­ner. The on­ly ex­cep­tions were the cler­gy, who taught a les­son even deep­er. One af­ter an­oth­er brought com­pan­ions there, and, ap­par­ent­ly fas­ci­nat­ed by their own re­flec­tion, broke out pas­sion­ate­ly against the ex­pres­sion they felt in the fig­ure of de­spair, of athe­ism, of de­nial. Like the oth­ers, the priest saw on­ly what he brought. Like all great artists, St. Gau­dens held up the mir­ror and no more. The Amer­ican lay­man had lost sight of ide­als; the Amer­ican priest had lost sight of faith. Both were more Amer­ican than the old, half-​wit­ted sol­diers who de­nounced the wast­ing, on a mere grave, of mon­ey which should have been giv­en for drink.

Land­ed, lost, and for­got­ten, in the cen­tre of this vast plain of self-​con­tent, Adams could see but one ac­tive in­ter­est, to which all oth­ers were sub­servient, and which ab­sorbed the en­er­gies of some six­ty mil­lion peo­ple to the ex­clu­sion of ev­ery oth­er force, re­al or imag­inary. The pow­er of the rail­way sys­tem had enor­mous­ly in­creased since 1870. Al­ready the coal out­put of 160,000,000 tons close­ly ap­proached the 180,000,000 of the British Em­pire, and one held one’s breath at the near­ness of what one had nev­er ex­pect­ed to see, the cross­ing of cours­es, and the lead of Amer­ican en­er­gies. The mo­ment was deeply ex­cit­ing to a his­to­ri­an, but the rail­way sys­tem it­self in­ter­est­ed one less than in 1868, since it of­fered less chance for fu­ture prof­it. Adams had been born with the rail­way sys­tem; had grown up with it; had been over pret­ty near­ly ev­ery mile of it with cu­ri­ous eyes, and knew as much about it as his neigh­bors; but not there could he look for a new ed­uca­tion. In­com­plete though it was, the sys­tem seemed on the whole to sat­is­fy the wants of so­ci­ety bet­ter than any oth­er part of the so­cial ma­chine, and so­ci­ety was con­tent with its cre­ation, for the time, and with it­self for cre­at­ing it. Noth­ing new was to be done or learned there, and the world hur­ried on to its tele­phones, bi­cy­cles, and elec­tric trams. At past fifty, Adams solemn­ly and painful­ly learned to ride the bi­cy­cle.

Noth­ing else oc­curred to him as a means of new life. Noth­ing else of­fered it­self, how­ev­er care­ful­ly he sought. He looked for no change. He lin­gered in Wash­ing­ton till near Ju­ly with­out notic­ing a new idea. Then he went back to Eng­land to pass his sum­mer on the Dee­side. In Oc­to­ber he re­turned to Wash­ing­ton and there await­ed the re­elec­tion of Mr. Cleve­land, which led to no deep­er thought than that of tak­ing up some small notes that hap­pened to be out­stand­ing. He had seen enough of the world to be a cow­ard, and above all he had an un­easy dis­trust of bankers. Even dead men al­low them­selves a few nar­row prej­udices.