Hon. S. S. Cox, an authority in such matters, in "Why we Laugh" places Mr. Hardin among the foremost of legislative humorists:

"Who can fill the place of Ben Hardin or Tom Corwin? No one has approached either, unless it be another Kentuckian, J. Proctor Knott, the present member from Bardstown. In him Kentucky gives to us a second edition of Hardin. * *

*

"These three members of Congress-Hardin, Corwin, and Knott—are selected," says Cox, "to illustrate this extravagant type of humor. Whence came this inspiration? All three were Kentuckians. It is said of Sheridan that he ripened a witty idea with a glass of port, and if it resulted happily another glass was the reward; like the Kentucky Congressman who took two cocktails before breakfast. When asked why, he said, 'One makes me feel like another fellow, and then I must treat the other fellow.' Is the humor which Kentucky gave, and gives, owing to any particular juice or humor growing out of her soil? Is it drawn from the still' air of delightful studies? Governor Corwin once told me that Hardin was the most entertaining man he ever knew. He had an exhaustless fund of anecdote, and with it great natural parts and acquired culture. His celebrity for a quarter of a century as a Southern Whig member of Congress was not altogether owing to his gift of remembering or telling good stories, nor to his bonhomie. Now, while Hardin is not to be classed with these characters which I have described, a greater disadvantage attends a sketch of his career as a humorist. He is not reported according to his reputation. His quarter of a century of service fails to show the voluminous fun with which he enlivened and enforced his positions. Here and there we have a few shots from small arms, as when he said meekly that if like a sheep I am shorn, unlike a sheep I will make a noise about it.' When denouncing extravagant naval salaries and referring to the naval lobby, he exclaimed, "Their march may be on the mountain wave, but their home is-in the gallery!' *

The reader is indebted to Dr. Rob Morris for the following expressions of Mr. Hardin on the general subject. Referring to the opinion expressed by Tom Corwin that the worst possible reputation for a politician was a reputation for wit, he said that when he made a viva-voce argument, the logic is lost by the audience while they are waiting for the humor. He esteemed wit as a valuable auxiliary to a local fame, as, for instance, that of a lawyer upon his own circuit, but to one aspiring to larger fame it was an injury.†

* Mr. Cox refers to the circumstance that in debate in Congress he had applied the epithet of "snarling Thersites" to a colleague from Massachusetts, as Caleb Cushing in 1835 had retorted the same epithet on Mr. Hardin. General James Wilkinson, in his "Memoirs" in 1816, thus referred to John Randolph, of Roanoke: "Unoffending, absent, and defenseless, I became the favorite theme of this American Thersites."

"If I were giving advice to a young fellow of talent, with two or three facets to his mind, I would tell him by all means to keep his wit in the background until after he had made a reputation by his more solid qualities." (Autocrat, page 108.,

Mr. Hardin was fond of the late Charles G. Wintersmith, and admired his legal skill and his accurate and extensive learning. Wintersmith delighted in Hardin's wit, and gave of him the following descriptive quotation :

"He is a chief who leads his merry sons,

Full armed with points, antitheses, and puns."

Repartee is the best test of wit, since no time is allowed for premeditation. It nearest approaches inspiration. The following is a specimen of Mr. Hardin's talent in that line: When a member of the constitutional convention, he had a colleague, a young man of fine. parts (though suspected of egotism), for whom he had great liking. He will here be called X. X— delivered an excellent speech on one occasion, which Mr. Hardin praised. But, said he to the exultant young orator, you mispronounced a word. This was controverted, but a resort to the dictionary showed the criticism just. Shortly afterward, Mr. Hardin made a speech, and during its delivery used the word leviathan, with the accent on the a in the third syllable. X- caught the opportunity to correct his censor. "Mr. Hardin," says he, you corrected my pronunciation the other day, now you must allow me the same privilege." "All right," responded Hardin. "The accent in leviathan," proceeded X-, "is on the i, not on the a, as you had it." "Ah! Billy," good-humoredly rejoined Hardin,

"I fear you put too much emphasis on the 'I.'"

When Mr. Hardin semi-annually attended the terms of the Springfield courts, he always spent one night during his stay with Doctor Palmer, who had married his daughter Emily, and lived near Springfield. This habit he continued after his daughter's death, and after her place had been filled by a most excellent lady, daughter of the late Marshall Key. Mr. Key was visiting his daughter during one of the terms of court, and was there one evening when a message was received by Mrs. Palmer stating that Mr. Hardin would shortly be cut to spend the night. Now, it so happened that the new constitution had just been framed and adopted. The controversy engendered by it in many quarters was exceedingly acrimonious. Mr. Key had held the appointment of clerk under the old constitution, which office he lost by the abrogation of that instrument. This he regarded a personal grievance-and his feelings toward the new constitution and all who had favored it were of the most implacable nature. It was impossible for him to discuss it, or even refer to it, without the most

violent exhibition of bad temper. Mr. Hardin had not only favored the new constitution, but had been one of its most active promoters. He regarded his efforts in framing and securing the adoption of that instrument as the crowning triumph of his career. The prospect of Mr. Hardin and her father encountering each other filled Mrs. Palmer with apprehension. Hardin and Key were both old men, and with each this issue about the new constitution was a hobby. How to keep that subject out of sight, while Mr. Hardin remained, was the question. Mrs. Palmer communicated her fears to her husband, and enjoined upon him to exert himself to prevent constitutional discussion. Mr. Hardin arrived during the evening, and he and Mr. Key, under the supervision of their host, for a time got on very handsomely. Both were good talkers and in conversational frame, and found little difficulty in comparing and harmonizing their views on various topics. Supper was announced at this auspicious juncture. Mrs. Palmer's apprehensions were not only lulled, but she began to enjoy her escape from the disagreeable consequences that must have inevitably fol lowed the introduction of the tabooed topic. But her security. proved false and delusive.

The evening meal was not more than fairly begun before Mr. Key opened up on (what he styled) "so-called" constitutional reform. The new constitution he asserted was a fraud, a sham, a disgrace, an outrage, a swindle, an abomination, and the sum of all iniquities. Not only this, but its framers were a set of demagogues, tricksters, liars, scoundrels, jacobins, radicals, anarchists—and all who favored it were either knaves or fools, unworthy to enjoy the blessings of free government. This, and much more to the same effect and like tenor, did the old gentleman heatedly launch forth upon the "bastard thing called a new constitution." Dr. Palmer was embarrassed, and his good wife filled with consternation. After all precautions, the dreaded catastrophe had occurred, and all that could be done was to witness its progress and event. Mr. Hardin, to whom Mr. Key had addressed. his remarks, listened very attentively, but very quietly, till the phillipic ended. Then, with a twinkle in his eye, "Mr. Key," said he, "if I rightly apprehend the tenor of your remarks, you seem to be opposed to the new constitution." This concluded the subject, to the infinite relief of the Palmer household.

On one occasion, when Mr. Hardin was engaged in a trial in the Meade circuit court, in which he took little interest, N———————, a pushing young lawyer, whose talent Hardin held in light esteem, opposed

him.

The evidence completed, Hardin proposed to let the jury take the case without argument. N— objected. Hardin urged that the issue was simple, the law plain, and the evidence without conflict, so that neither side could hope to profit by argument. N- still insisted on addressing the jury. The court, who had not heard this colloquy between counsel, ordered the argument to begin. "If it please your honor," said Hardin, "I did not wish to argue this case. It is unnecessary, and I so said to counsel for the other side; but it seems that there is no way to get the load out of a small-bore rifle except to shoot it out."

On another occasion he was defending a young man of excellent family, charged with horse stealing, a charge always more difficult to meet in Kentucky than willful murder. His client admitted his guilt to his attorney, and witnesses were at hand to sustain the prosecution. The defendant was in jail. By dint of management a continuance was obtained, though not without difficulty. An effort to reduce bail, after a contest, was successful. The bail was then given. The defendant at that point asked advice as to what to do next. "Well," says Hardin, "your case is continued until next term, the court has reduced your bail, and you have now given lawful bailthat releases you-and unless you are a greater fool than I think you are, the next thing you will do will be to give leg bail."

The power of invective and sarcasm is often allied to wit and humor. Of the former, Mr. Hardin was master. "He was much more sarcastic than witty," writes one well qualified to judge, “and his denunciations were as fire applied to the flesh. Indeed, they were often so unmeasured as to give one the idea that he was being moved by personal vindictiveness." He was also an adept in the art of ridicule. His irony was finished and biting. Specimens of his invective, sarcasm. ridicule, and irony abound in all his speeches. None are finer than those found in his speech in the Owsley controversy embraced in this volume.

In Bynum against Wintersmith, a case in Meade county, Governor Helm was for plaintiff, Hardin for defendant. The facts were these: Some forty years ago a Yankee named Bynum visited Kentucky, introducing the silk worm and selling the white mulberry tree (morus multicaulis), the leaves of which furnished the worm its raw material. Wintersmith became a purchaser of some worms and trees, executing his note for the price. The trees proved defective and died, and payment of the note was refused. Hence, the law-suit. Mr. Hardin