John A. Griswold, of New York; William Windom, one of the silent members, who has grown steadily in power; James F. Wilson, who was destined to decline three successive offers of Cabinet positions by President Grant; Daniel W. Voorhies, of Indiana, now Senator; John A. Kasson, of Iowa, now our Minister to Austria; Theodore M. Pomeroy, of New York, afterward Acting Speaker for a brief period; William R. Morrison, of Illinois, since a Democratic candidate for the Presidency; William S. Holman and George W. Julian, of Indiana, both able men; and Fernando Wood—­these were all prominent members of the House.  It will be seen that the House was a more trying arena for a young member like Garfield than the Senate would have been; for the contests of the former—­unsubdued and unmitigated by ’the courtesy of the Senate’—­were conducted by as ready and able a corps of debaters as ever sat in that body.”

This was surely a formidable array of men, and a man of ordinary powers would have found it prudent to remain silent during the first session, lest he should be overwhelmed by some one of the ready speakers and experienced legislators with whom he was associated.  But the canal-boy, who had so swiftly risen from his humble position to the post of college president and major-general, till at the age of thirty-two he sat in the national council the youngest member, was not daunted.  His term of service as State Senator was now of use to him, for it had given him a knowledge of parliamentary law, and the practice in speaking which he gained long ago in the boys’ debating societies, and extended in college, rendered him easy and master of himself.

Indeed he could not remain silent, for he represented the “boys at the front,” and whenever a measure was proposed affecting their interests, he was expected to take part in the debate.  It was not long before the House found that its new member was a man of grace and power, with whom it was not always safe to measure weapons.  He was inclined to be peaceful, but he was not willing to permit any one to domineer over him, and the same member did not often attempt it a second time.

My young readers are sure to admire pluck, and they will, therefore, read with interest of one such occasion, when Garfield effectually quelled such an attempt.  I find it in a chapter of reminiscences contributed to the Boston Journal, by Ben Perley Poore, the well-known correspondent: 

“When the Jenckes Bankrupt Bill came before the House, Gen. Garfield objected to it, because in his opinion it did not provide that the estates of rebels in arms should escape the operations of the law.  He also showed that money was being raised to secure the enactment of the bill, and Mr. Spalding, of the Cleveland district, was prompted by Mr. Jenckes to ‘sit down on him.’  But Gen. Garfield was not to be silenced easily and quite a scene ensued.  The next day Garfield rose to a personal explanation, and said: