SEVENTH GENERATION ‘ I39

judges, fast anchored in the affections of local politicians, drifted and disappeared on the tide ofridicule raised by Mr. Updike. He did another good work in pushing through the “ Married Woman” act. Here he had to encounter a dead—weight of prejudice, and he overcame it. He labored incessantly in the cause of popular education, and his great and valu— able services therein have deserved and received ample acknowledgment. This is a good record. But let us come a little nearer to Mr. Updike, for after all what a man is and not what he does is the main thing. He was first of all an orator. He worked, not by moving masses of capital, for he was not rich, nor by running party machinery, for in this he had no skill, but by direct action on the minds and hearts of men by means of speech. No formal orations, but talk; not in mass meetings, but wherever men and women were gathered to— gether,—at dinner tables, in railroad cars, in taverns, in court—houses, and above all in the General Assembly. It is the fashion now to decry mere speakers, and fools have much to say in praise of practical men. For two generations there was no contest in Rhode Island in which the tongue of-Mr. Updike could be safely counted out. But how did he speak? Since his death there have been friendly notices of him, and some of them say he was not logical. If that means anything, it means that he was not stupid. I think the popular idea oflogic is methodical stupidity, and in this sense, Mr. Updike certainly was not logical. Nor did he make much dis— play of argumentative tools. He reasoned very much as lightning moves. He went right at his mark, and left the result to show the force of the blow. In the dreary work of reporting the proceedings of the General Assembly, it has been my duty to hear many excellent speeches, to listen to which was a discipline and a toil. Listening was a necessity when Mr. Updike was talking. You might agree with him or differ from him,but you must listen to him. It is easy to talk about his sarcasm, his ridicule, and this and that, after the usual manner of those who must say something and don’t know what to say. It is not easy to reproduce Mr. Updike as he was; like all living things he dies in the process of analysis. You may retain what he was made of, but you have lost him. He was always in earnest. If he urged a measure, it was because he thought it ought to pass. If he abused a man it was because he thought he ought to be abused. If he raised a laugh against a man in debate, it was with the zeal ofa man in the discharge ofa religious duty. Perhaps there was never on the whole a more favorable exhibition of his powers than in the discussions on the old State debt. He did not think that the farmers ought to be taxed to pay that debt. I do not know whether it ought to have been paid or not. Having made up his mind to oppose its pay— ment, Mr. Updike did not waste his power in answering the learned and logical and historical arguments in its favor. He went right at the practical purpose of making the members of the General Assembly vote against it. He had to deal with the history of the State, with all the leading men he had known. His blows were all hard, some I doubt not fell on innocent shoulders, but they all told. One reason