the character of Washington. Could we not forego, for once, what the Indian chieftain said of the "charmed life" Washington bore at Braddock's defeat, to make room for one little reason why Washington was "completer in nature" and of "a nobler human type" than any and all of the heroes of romance?
Mr. Otis Kendall Stuart has written a most interesting account of "The Popular Opinion of Washington" as ascertained by inquiry among persons of all ages, occupations, and conditions. He found that Washington was held to be a "broad," "brave," "thinking," "practical," man; an aristocrat, so far as the dignity of his position demanded, but willing to "work with his hands," and with a credit that was "Ai!" And "when he did a thing, he did it;" and, if to the question, "Was he a great general and statesman?" there was some hesitation, to the question, "Was he a great man?" the answer was an unhesitating "Yes."
One may hold that such opinions as these have been gained from our school histories, but I think they are not so much from the
