It is not difficult to see the reason for this. Politics have become a trade, and the politician is he who deals in the trade of politics. From this circumstance and other causes has come about the present condition of things; namely, that the vast majority of the people hold themselves aloof from politics, and, except as they are stirred up by party excitement when election day comes, take no interest in it. In fact, the merchant, farmer, trader, mechanic, and storekeeper, who attends to his own business, keeps out of politics that he may do so, and likes to have it understood that he leaves politics for those who make it their business. A very large percentage of the voters of every State abstain from voting, and a considerable proportion of the most respectable men in every State refuse to hold office.

All this is a most wretched mistake. It leaves the political business of the country to be done by a very few persons, who are certainly not the best adapted to do this business well.

The possible forms of government are said to be three: a monarchy, which is the government of one; a democracy, which is the government of many, or of all; and an oligarchy, which is the government of a few. There have been in history several instances of a government by an oligarchy. In some of these instances a few men have gained possession of political power by violence; in others they have held it by belonging by birth to a caste which claimed and held governmental authority.

Of all these three forms of government, an oligarchy is certainly the worst; and is there not some danger, at least some possibility, of our degenerating into the very worst form of this worst method of government? That is to say, of the actual government of this country falling into the hands of an oligarchy who have possessed themselves of power by mere corruption.

Let me repeat this statement, for I would not be misunderstood: Is there not some danger that the actual control and direction of public affairs may fall into the hands of a few men— an oligarchywho gain their power by corrupt means. And this oligarchy by corruption will sustain its power, and will recruit its ranks from those who begin by being the tools of the oligarchy, and live on the crumbs which fall to them during their apprenticeship to corruption, until by superiority in audacity, contrivance, and utter want of principle, they in their turn get to be leaders.

I know that this sad picture is not a true representation of all parts of our country, and some of my readers may wonder that I should have drawn it in such dark colors. But it is even now a true portrait of some parts; and if during the next thirty years, corruption should increase and advance as much as it has done in the

last thirty years, would my picture fall far short of a true portrait of the whole?

When we remember the means by which a large proportion of those who hold office were put in office; when we remember how customs are established among us, in all parts of the country, by which caucuses and primary meetings, that few attend but those personally interested, begin the work, and then, by a series of contrivances well adjusted for their purposes, a few who hold the wires control elections; when we remember these things, and with them the corruption which has grown enormously within the last few years, and now infects or threatens almost every department of government, great or small, and is become so bold that it refuses to pay to honesty the poor tribute of hypocrisy,- have we not cause for fear?

This country is by its institutions a representative democracy; and however we may be dazzled by our marvellous prosperity, which is now the wonder of the world, can we not discern that there is some possibility at least that a worm is gnawing at the roots of the tree which has grown so high and spread so widely?

This country, I have already said, is a representative democracy. Our great parties take different names, and will continue to do so; but there can never grow up in this country a party which avows a purpose of taking the government from the people. But any party, call itself what it may, which lends itself, consciously or unconsciously, to the schemes of trading politicians, is just so far working to take the government from the many and give it to the few, who are able successfully to cheat the many.

If we look around us and compare the present with the past, and observe the steps by which the politics of this country have come into their present condition, is there not a possibility, whatever party may at one time or another gain the ascendancy, and whatever party name or watchword may for a time have power, that there is growing through it all an oligarchy which seeks to confound itself with the people, that it may use the people as their tool, and to acquire the control of affairs by false pretences, asserting vociferously a sympathy with the people, when, in fact, its whole aim is to make use of the people without their actual and intelligent consent? As it is not possible to do this by violence, it is, or will be, done by fraud and falsehood.

If there be this danger or possibility, what is the remedy? That one which this subject of suffrage leads me at once to suggest, is, that every voter in this country should remember that politics is his business, that it is a most important part of his business. Very many farmers, merchants, and traders in this country-good, honest

and industrious men - devote themselves to what they consider their business, and spare no pains to avoid mistakes which would bring on them disaster, and to adopt such courses as promise to make them comfortable and successful. How happens it that they forget that very much of their comfort and success, even their pecuniary success, is involved in the good conduct of government, in the adoption of wise measures intended for the good of the whole, in the suppression of fraud and the defeat of corruption, and in the prevention of those measures which will subserve the interests of a few, and are carried out by these few through the men they send into office?

Nothing is more certain than this; and, at the same time, nothing is more certain than that the people at large do not seem to recognize this truth, or at least to act upon it. The enormous resources of this country, and its universal industry and thrift, give us, and probably for a time will give us, great prosperity, let the government and legislation of the country be conducted as they may. But if the whole people would awake to the truth, and see clearly how much of their personal success and well-being depends in the long run upon the conduct of government; and if every man, not because he is moved by partisan motives, but because of the convictions growing out of his study of the condition, prospects, and wants of the country, does what in him lies to see that honest and capable men are placed in authority, and that neither traders in nor gamblers for political power hold the places which better men should fill, how much fewer would be those panics and revulsions which now so often bring distress on multitudes!

How little need there would then be for the uprising of classes or sections of the people to cast off burdens imposed upon them. Legislation might still be sometimes mistaken, and measures adopted which do not promote the common welfare; but such mistakes would not be frequent; and the effort to remove them and make the law better would not be resisted by a class of politicians whose power depended upon corruption and falsehood: for their power would have come to an end, because the whole people cannot be corrupted, nor, if they will but attend to their true interests, be for any length of time blinded and cheated.

CHAPTER VII.

THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES GROWING OUT OF THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS.

SECTION 1.

PARENT AND CHILD.

The obligation of the father to maintain the child is, and always has been, recognized in all civilized countries in some way and in some degree. The infant cannot support himself: he would perish if others did not supply him with the means of subsistence; and the only question is, whether the public (that is the State) shall do this or his parent. Justice, equally with the best affections of our nature, answers that it is the duty of the parent. But upon some points it is not entirely settled how far this duty is a legal obligation.

We should say, however, that a consideration of all the authorities justifies us in stating as strongly if not universally prevailing rules in this country, the following: First, if goods supplied to an infant are necessaries, the father's authority is presumed, and he is therefore liable to pay for them, unless he supplies them himself or was ready to supply them; second, when the infant lives with the father or under his control, his judgment as to what are necessaries will be so far respected that he will be held liable only for things furnished to the infant to relieve him from absolute want; third, if the things supplied are strict and absolute necessaries, needful for the child's subsistence, or if the child is living away from the parent under circumstances which indicate a desertion by the parent, or that the child has been expelled from his house, or caused to leave it by the wrongful acts of the parents, then whosoever supplies the wants of the child, may recover their cost or value from the parent; fourth, if the goods supplied were proper and beneficial to the child, but were not strict and absolute necessaries, the supplier can recover from the father only by proving that he authorized the supply. But slight evidence is held to be 'sufficient to prove such authority, as if they were clothes, and the father saw the son wear them, or knew that he had received them, and made no objection when he might have done so, he must pay for them.

The word "necessaries" must be interpreted according to the circumstances of the case. If the child be of sufficient age and strength to earn by proper exertions the whole or a part of his subsistence, it will not be deemed "necessary" that such aid should be rendered to him as it would be necessary to give to an infant incapacitated from contributing to his own support, by tender years or by debility of mind or body. We give, as closely connected with this subject, the law concerning infants, the law of guardian and ward, and the law of apprenticeship.

INFANTS OR MINORS.

Generally, all persons may bind themselves by contracts. But some are incapacitated. The incapacity may arise from many causes; as from insanity, or from being under guardianship, or from alienage in time of war, or from marriage, or from infancy.

All persons are infants, in law, until the age of twenty-one. But in Vermont, Maryland, Ohio, Maine, Missouri, Texas, and perhaps one or two other States, women are considered of full age at eighteen, for some purposes.

The rule of law is, that a person becomes of age at the beginning of the day before his twenty-first birthday. This rule opposes the common notion, and it rests on no very good reason, but on ancient authority and constant repetition. The reason assigned is, that the law takes no notice of parts of a day. The effect of the rule is, that a person born on the 9th of May, in the year 1840, becomes of age at the beginning of the 8th of May, 1861, and may sign a note, or do any thing, with the full power of a person of age, on any hour of that day.

The contract of an infant (if not for necessaries) is voidable, but not void. That is, he may disavow it, and so annul it, either before his majority, or within a reasonable time after it. As he may avoid it, so he may ratify and confirm it. He may do this by word only. But mere acknowledgment that the debt exists is not enough. It must be substantially, if not in form, a new promise. In England, and in a few of our States, it is provided by statute that this confirmation can only be by a new promise in writing, signed by the promisor. This rule seems to be useful, and we think it will be more widely adopted.

It must be a promise by the party, after full age, to pay the debt; or such a recognition of the debt as may fairly be understood by the creditor as expressive of the intention to pay it; for this would be a promise by implication. There are no particular words or phrases which the law requires or favors as a confirmation. No