Democratic Sentinel, Volume 7, Number 41, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 9 November 1883 — ARTEMUS WARD’S HOME. [ARTICLE]

ARTEMUS WARD’S HOME.

A letter from Waterford,Me., to the N. Y. Sun says: Of all the pretty inland hamlets of Me., and they are many, not one surpasses in picturesqueness and quiet beauty the little village of Waterford, in Oxford county, where Chas. F Brown, better known as Artemus Ward, was born. The place is about forty-five miles from Portland. It contains only about one hundred inhabitant s. It lies on the shore of a great lake known as Tom pond, at the foot of & precipitous mountain called Mount Tire’m. The inhabitants are mostly farmers, and, as a rule, well-to-do. Within

the limits of the township are hills, ponds, and fine trout brooks, while the crooked river manages, by hard work and strict attention to business, to wander eighteen miles in crossing the seven-mile-wide township. The country about Waterford is fertile, and once confined the finest belt of timber in Maine. Artem us liked Waterford but not Oxford county; for he relates that within two months after a scurrilous young man had made fun of nis bald head his aunt died and left him a farm in Oxford county, Maine. “The human mind can picter no greater misfortin’ than this.” Artemus’ father died when the boy was about 14 years old. and, as the family circumstances were somewhat limited thereby, he was apprenticed to Mr. J. M. Rix, who published the Coos Democrat, at Lancaster, N. H. The stage line to Lancaster ran by the Brown homestead, and „ the drivers were not unfamiliar with the future “genial showman” in the way of practical jokes.

They knew how he organized shows, wherein his hither’s red cow, with a coat sleeve Stuffed full of hay hanging from her nose served as the elephant, upon which innocent country, cnildren were invited to ride, with startling results. They knew, too, how Deacon Hale’s white horse had been induced to wander away for miles following a tempting bit of hay, hung just beyond reach by means of a lath strapped to the horse’s neck. There was an endless series of pranks gotten up by the boy to mystify the villagers in general, and his mother in particular, and all these were well known to the stage drivers. So when the young humorist started for Lancaster, eager to know as much as possible about his

future residence, the veteran driver, Steve Seary, having previously conspired with the boys in Rix’s office to give young Brown a fitting reception, assured him that Mr. Rix was a pious man, and that his hands were, if anything, more pious than he, and that the sooner the would-be apprentice crammed on the catechism the better, diaries listened dolefully. It was late at night when the stage reached Lancaster, and in the morning young Brown hied himself to to the office. The “force” consisted of a journeyman and an apprentice named Smith.— They received him solemnly. The journeyman handing him a bible made him read a chapter, after which he was examined in the catechism. His ignorance was severely commented upon, but he was permitted to go to work. At noon a similar performance was enacted, while intense gloom rested on the office during the day. The next morning Charles went to the office resolved to run away at the end of the week, but, on looking about, tailed to find his fellow-crafts-men. Further search revealed them under the garret stairs too intoxicated to walk. Young Brown was so angry over the sell that he wrote a note to the driver threatening vengeance, which was never carried out. Brown’s fame as a humorist was a surprisefto all who knew him, and even to himself. A

greater surprise to his kinfolk now is the interest still manifested in the dead merrymaker and his work. They thought that all attention would cease with his life, but every year the number of people who visit Waterford to see his mothernow almost 80 years old—increases. The town has changed but little since his time. The village green, about which he wrote and loved to think, is as green and pretty as ever. The old Brown homestead is still one of the best in town, and the tide of summer travel troubles the quiet streets but little. Brown’s remains were buried in the Elm vale cemetery, near the old Emerson place. The grave is marked with a jiain slab, much neglected. At Retime of his burial some of uis literary friends proposed getting up a monument, and aid pass resolutions to that effect. The monument, though much needed, has never appeared. A copy of the resolutions was, however, sent to the Grateful relatives. As usual in such cases, the villagers looked with much suspicion on the reports of Charles’ successes. Had they not always known him as a tow-headed, mischievous lad whose future they disliked to predict? But now the line engraved upon his tombstone seems to4be true wherever “A. Ward’s” sayings are known: His memory shall remain a sweet and unfading recollection.”

A pretty story is told in a is sue of the New York Tribune A feeble old lady, poorly clad got into a street car and let a nickle drop, which she had just received from the conductor in change/ f lhe piece fell in between the grating on the floor, and after a short search was given up as lost — the old lady too feeble to make the extra exertion necessary to recover it. As she settled b ick in her seat with a sigh of regret, a gentleman opposite stooped down and affecting to pick np the missing coin, reached over and placed something in her lap. He then pulled the bell and got out. As the old ladv discovered the gold coin left by the stranger, a gentleman sitting near whispered to her the name of the donor. He is one of the best knawn philanthropists in New York, and the member of a family noted far and wide for its countless irood deeds.

The tariff-for-orotection people have a standing quarrel w ith political economy. The reason is that there is no scientific basis for their system.— They have tried very hand to find one, but have signally failed. There can never be found a scientific basis for a system which, like theirs, is at every point artificial and arbitrary, and which rests at the bottom upon the desire of some persons to get possession of the earnings of other persons without giving an equivalent. One might as well seek a scientific basis for chattel slavery. In fact, the protective system, as it is called, is a system of slavery; it; aim is to force some members of society to serve others without compensation. —Chicago Times.

A Michigan girl told her young man thal she wo’d never marry him until he was worth SIOO,OOO. So he started out with a brave heart to make it. “How are you getting on George?” she* asked at the expiration of a e« ti; 'p months. W’fell,” G eorge said hopefully. “I have saved up $22.” The girl dropp’d her eyelashes and blushmgly remarked: ‘T reckon that’s near enough, George.’*—Philadelphia Call. _,An 8-day clock beloning to Thos. Shourds has stood in ihe. saine piace it now occupies in his home in Salem counts ' N. J., for 124 years.

Workingmen are beg'nhing to learn where their tr le interests lie and liow to make a strike a real remedy for the oppression of capitalists. An exchange thus refers to a recent move on the part of some Pennsylvania laborers: ‘When dissatisfied workmen strike, combine their means and start in manufactories in opposition to their late employers, as the window-glass workers of Pittsburg have done, they are worthy of public sympathy and encouragement. We understand this is a manufacture that is protected with a large special bonus, on the plea of paying high wages to American workmen.’

There is material afloat for a grim joke on Justice Harlan. He hasn’t published liis reasons for dissenting from the civil rights decision and the length and breadth of the pleasantry can not be so plainly seen until he does! But lie dissented, and facts suffice. Naturally one will want to know what has caused the change of heart which this lone dissenter shows. Is it the difference of being on the bench and off? Is it an appeal from “Phillip drunk to Phillip sober” and if so which is the starting point? The justice ought to duly Consider this before he publishes his dissent. Here it is: In the city of Frankfort, Ky., in February, 1876, there was a mass meeting to consider Andrew Johnson’s veto of the Freedmen.s Bureau measure. There was a committee on resolutions appointed. The second name on the committee is this same John M. Harlan, the dissenter. It is said the resolutions, which j were unanimously adopted, ! were written by Mr, Harlan, but this he denies; at any rate his name was the second one in seven signed to them. Tl l c y are very interesting but they are long—both qualities doubi less which Mr. Harlan’s dissenting opinion will have. Al - ter denouncing the Freedmen’s Bureau bill as “monstrous, tyrannical, and unconstitional” the report amid much more of the same sort goes on to resolve, “That each state has the exjj elusive right to fix and regulate by law the political and civil'status of its citizens, and any attempt by the federal, government to interfere with this right of the states by spec ial legislation in favor of or against any class, race or nationality in the states, respectively s the exercise of power without constitutional warrant, and dangerous to the liberties of the people.” Mr. Harlan afterwards addressed the meeting, and in the course of his nrgency called the people to “resist the revolutionary measures of the radicals both in and out of congress.” Here’s a pretty kettle of fish indeed! What was the matter with Harlan then, or what is the matter with' him now? The civil rights bill was of the sort of the freedmen’s bureau bil 1 and lias been unanimously pronounced unconstitutional by eight.of Mr. Harlan’s judicial associates, among whom, to put it very mildly, are to be i found at least a few lawyers superior to Mr. Harlan. They have pronounced it unconstitutional, too, at length for substantially the same reason that Mr. Harlan’s resolution i gave in breif. Certainly Mr. Harlan’s resolution set over i against his decision, will be a j case of Kilkenny cats, or dog eat dog, or something of that sort; also it v ill strike the country if not that “the last last state of that man is worse than the first, “that it is at least considerably damaged by it. " ■■'«>! In a Livingston, Montana, court a defendant in a case of assault and battery said: Yes, I licked him and by G — I’ll lick him again.* And the j ury lot Hi ned. a verdict not guilty.