In the Century magazine, last spring, Gen. George B. McClellan undertook to present his explanation of the failure of the Army of the Potomac while under his command. In his article, he assaulted the memories of Lincoln and Stanton, and attempted much more than he accomplished,--at least, so thinks the HON. WILLIAM D. KELLEY, who examines McClellan's statements in a book recently published. It bears the simple title, _Lincoln and Stanton_.[8] Of this volume, which for the first time makes many fresh disclosures, we hope to have something to say at another time.
Senator SUMNER was once asked by Lord Brougham the origin and meaning of "caucus," and he replied: "It is difficult to assign any elementary to the word, but the most approved one referred its origin to the very town, and about the time (1772), of his lordship's birth." There is a tradition in Boston that "caucus" was a common word here before the Revolutionary war broke out, and that it originated in a feud between the British troops on the one side and the rope-walkers and calkers on the other. Bloody collisions, it is said, occurred between them. The latter held meetings in the _calkers' hall_ in the lower part of the city, at which resolutions were adopted and speeches made denouncing the soldiers, who, on their part deriding the wordy war offered, sneeringly snubbed their opponents "The Calkers," which by an easy corruption became "the caucus," and finally a term to denote the meetings.
Whether this be the origin or not of the word, one thing is certain--Mr. George W. LAWTON has done a most commendable thing in the publication of his little book on _The American Caucus System_.[9] It is exceedingly useful, and the wonder is for us why some such work has not earlier issued from the press, for it meets the requirements of the multitudinous politicians and others who are never absent on "caucus nights." The author begins at the beginning of his theme, and shows how easily men, that is, mankind in general, choose to be controlled by political power, and to bear its burdens; he then establishes the axiom that the direction of political power is with the caucus, and goes on still further to explain what gives the caucus its authority, to compare caucus nominations with self-nominations, and then historically to trace the growth of the caucus, and, lastly, to describe the proceedings of, and how to conduct, a caucus meeting. From first to last, these pages are suggestive, timely, and embody a great deal of good sound sense.