The Daily Morning Astorian

In coming on here (to Washington) after we had talked of almost everything, Dr. Curry was asked some leading questions about the Confederate congress and about why Jefferson Davis was made President of the Confederacy. He replied (substantially): "There was nothing to develop great men in the Confederate congress. Nearly all of the legislation had reference to the war and the debates were all in secret session, except such as were of no consequence. As to why we elected Mr. Davis president, there were several reasons. He had distinguished himself in the Mexican war, had been trained a soldier at West Point and had been secretary of war. We all felt that it was necessary to elect a man of military capacity and experience, acquainted with the officers who would come to us.

Then Mr. Davis had distinguished himself in the United States senate as debater. He and Hunter and Benjamin and Toombs were the foremost men from the south in the senate at that time. Mr. Davis was an extreme man. He was a man of fine culture and in all debates where scientific principles were involved he could take part with credit to himself. He was a man of stainless character and his private life, as well as his public life, was blameless. The people who say that the choice of Mr. Davis for the presidency was a bad one should remember that the field of selection was a very restricted one. Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee had not then joined the Confederacy. Mr. Stephens had been a strong Union man and had recently made very strong Union speeches. Georgia presented him and he was elected vice-president with the hope of conciliating the south and uniting the whole people upon the great undertaking. I don't think there was much antagonism between Mr. Davis and Mr. Stephens. Mr. Davis took very few persons into his confidence. In Washington you will always find the vice-president has very little to do in aiding the president in the discharge of his duties. Mr. Benjamin was probably the greatest man we had, as a thinker and speaker, while his capacity for work was simply wonderful. Howell Cobb was another great man. As president of the provisional congress, in Montgomery he held himself admirably. He had been speaker of the old congress, and added to his large legislative experience, he was noted for his great ability and thorough integrity. In 1850, when there was great excitement in the south looking to secession, Cobb was a Union man and as such was elected governor of Georgia. He was a Jackson Democrat, in contradistinction from a Calhoun Democrat. He was secretary of the treasury under Buchanan and resigned and went home to plead for secession. He was one of the wisest of statesmen and many thought he would have made a better president than Davis.

Howell Cobb was in many things like Senator Joseph E. Brown, whom I regard as a very able man. In the provisional congress Georgia had the strongest representation. It had Stephens, Toombs, the two Cobbs, Ben Hill, Frank Bartow (killed at Manassas) and Nisbet. Ben Hill was the ablest debater in the United States senate and his loss was irreparable. I repeat there was nothing to develop statesmanship during the war and since the war. This race question has absorbed all questions and overshadows everything else. No man, north or south, seems to grasp it in all its bearings. The negro problem, more than any other in this country, or even in Europe, requires the highest order of statesmanship. Thus only can it be settled justly for both races. Our people do not see, as they should, that the principles of Christianity must enter into statesmanship. In our protest against the union of church and state, we have fallen into the error of separating Christianity from these great principles. The most remarkable exhibit of the appliance of Christian principles is, of course, in Gladstone. He has the courage to stand up in the house of commons and say that a certain course of action is wrong, because it is in opposition to Christian-