Edwin Lawrence Godkin was not quite fifty-two when he became editor-in-chief in 1883, and was in the prime of life, with fifteen years of vigorous journalistic labor2 before him. He wrote Charles Eliot Norton that he had no intention, even if his health permitted, of staying with the Evening Post more than ten years, but his heart was enlisted3 far too keenly in his work and the great causes he espoused4 to let him go until failing health made his retirement5 in 1899 imperative6. It is natural that his published letters should emphasize his joyous7 sense of a greater freedom as he entered the newspaper office; his feeling that he was giving himself to a publication which did not depend absolutely upon his pen and mind as the Nation did, and could have his vacations like other workers. But he felt also his new responsibilities. He valued the opportunity the Post gave him to impress his opinions daily upon the public; to reach a wider audience—the Post’s 20,000 buyers as well as the Nation’s 10,000; and to give more attention to certain subjects, as municipal misgovernment. “My notion is, you know,” he wrote W. P. Garrison9 in 1883, “that the Evening Post ought to make a specialty10 of being the paper to which sober-minded people would look at crises of this kind, instead of hollering and bellering and shouting platitudes11 like the Herald12 and Times.”
The independent character of the political course Godkin would steer13 had been fully14 indicated by the volumes of the Nation. This weekly, founded when the last shots of the Civil War were ringing in men’s ears, had undertaken the fearless discussion of public questions at a moment that seemed peculiarly unpropitious. The prevalent459 tendency of the years after the war, as Godkin said, was a fierce illiberalism, represented by such leaders as Thaddeus Stevens in the House. The Nation had at once declared war upon this narrow, rancorous political spirit, and attempted to substitute progressive and enlightened views. It had questioned the wisdom of the impeachment16 of Andrew Johnson. It had been ten years in advance of public opinion in its attacks upon that demagogic politician, Ben Butler. It had been one of the first Republican organs to denounce the carpet-bag régime at the South, and to assail17 President Grant for his failures. In 1876 occurred its most serious collision with a considerable body of readers; it condemned18 the Southern frauds which gave Hayes the Presidency19, and called his induction20 into office a “most deplorable and debauching enterprise,” this course costing it 3,000 subscribers. Godkin inclined in his sympathies to the Republican party, but he would not hesitate to break from it upon any question of principle.
When Godkin assumed the helm of the Evening Post, he had a shrewd suspicion that the Presidential campaign about to open would present a fundamental question of principle. As he wrote long after, James G. Blaine’s audacity21, good humor, horror of rebel brigadiers, and contempt for reformers made his nomination22 sooner or later inevitable23, and such a nomination in Godkin’s eyes presented a moral question of the first magnitude. No American newspaper has ever conducted a more effective campaign fight than that which the Evening Post waged in 1884. It was a fight not only against Blaine, but in behalf of the one contemporary American statesman whom Godkin, in his long journalistic career after 1865, highly admired.
Of reformers like Godkin, Blaine wrote in advance of his nomination: “They are noisy, but not numerous; pharisaical, but not practical; ambitious, but not wise; pretentious24, but not powerful.” The Evening Post’s opinion of Blaine was equally frank. It believed that the Mulligan letters, published in 1876, convicted Blaine of460 prostituting his office as a member of Congress and Speaker in order to make money in various Western railways, and of lying in a vain effort to conceal25 the fact. It added as lesser26 counts against him that in his twelve years in the House he had never performed a single service for good government, and had done it much disservice, as by his covert27 opposition28 to civil service reform, and his defense29 of the spoliation of the public lands; that in all his public appearances he had been sensational30, theatrical31, and a lover of notoriety; and that while Secretary of State under Garfield “he plunged32 into spoils, and wallowed in them for three months, like a rhinoceros33 in an African pool, using every office he could lay his hands on for the reward of his henchmen and hangers-on, without shame or scruple35.” But its central objection was always that he had sold his official power and influence.
The great “Mugwump” bolt from the Republican party as soon as Blaine was nominated took with it many influential36 Eastern journals—Harper’s Weekly, the New York Times, the Boston Herald, the Boston Advertiser, and the Springfield Republican—but it took no other pen like Godkin’s. Long in advance of the convention, he and Schurz had warned the Republican leaders that Blaine’s nomination would disrupt the party. The Evening Post pointed37 out in November, 1883, that the next election would probably be close, and that New York, where the voters were more independent than anywhere else, would certainly be the pivotal State. The election of 1876 had hung upon several artificial decisions in the South; that of 1884 would be likely to hang upon the judgment38 of a small body of thoughtful, impartial39 voters. On April 23, 1884, a rich New Jersey40 Congressman41 named William Walter Phelps published an article defending Blaine, to which Godkin immediately replied in a long and elaborate review of “Mr. Blaine’s Railroad Transactions.” Thereafter the paper kept up a drum-fire upon the “tattooed man.”
How could the campaign be most effectively conducted? Godkin saw that of the arsenal43 of weapons available,461 the parallel column could be used with the most telling force. The attack, in the first place, must be focussed upon the Republican candidate. No one cared about the rival platforms. As for the general character of the two parties, most voters believed the Republican party to be superior, and Godkin himself would have thought so had not its jobbing, corrupt44 element, as he said, gradually “come to a head, in the fashion of a tumor45, in Mr. James G. Blaine.” How could Blaine’s weaknesses be most clearly exposed? By his own letters, made public through Mulligan, which stripped his dealings as a Congressman with the Little Rock & Fort Smith, the union Pacific, and the Northern Pacific interests, and by his own speeches defending these transactions. Adroit46 though he was, Blaine in his panicky efforts at self-justification had repeatedly contradicted both himself and the admitted facts. This, with all its implications, could be concisely47 proved by the parallel columns.
Not all these contradictions were immediately evident. By the end of September, just after Mulligan had published a new group of Blaine letters, Godkin and his associates, Horace White, Joseph Bucklin Bishop48, and A. G. Sedgwick, had detected a half dozen. By November they had raised the total to ten. Reprinted day after day, they had a value that will be evident from a couple of examples:
BLAINE LIE NO. 5
“My whole connection with the road has been open as the day. If there had been anything to conceal about it, I should never have touched it. Wherever concealment50 is advisable, avoidance is advisable, and I do not know any better test to apply to the honor and fairness of a business transaction.”—Mr. Blaine’s speech in Congress, April 24, 1876.
“I want you to send me a letter such as the enclosed draft.... Regard this letter as strictly51 confidential52. Do not show it to anyone. If you can’t get the letter written in season for the nine o’clock mail to New York, please be sure to mail it during the night.... Sincerely, J. G. B. (Burn this letter)”—Blaine to Fisher, April 16, 1876.
BLAINE LIE NO. 9 [IN PART]
“Third.—I do not own and never did own an acre of coal land or any other kind of land in the Hocking Valley or in any other part of Ohio. My letter to the Hon. Hezekiah Bundy in July last on this same subject was accurately53 true.
Very truly yours,
J. G. Blaine.”
(Letter to the Hon. Wm. McKinley, dated Belleaire, Ohio, Oct. 4, 1884.)
“Boston, Dec. 15, 1880.
“Received of James G. Blaine, $25,180.50, being payment in full for one share in the association formed for the purchase of lands known as the Hope Furnace Tract54, situated55 in Vinton and Athens Counties, Ohio. This receipt to be exchanged for a certificate when prepared.
J. N. Denison, Agent.”
462 One particularly notable use of the parallel columns was in contradiction of Blaine’s statement that subsequent to his purchase of the bonds of the Fort Smith railroad, only one act of Congress had been passed applying to the line, and that merely to rectify56 a previous mistake in legislation. The fact was, as the paper showed, that the act repealed57 the proviso that the railway’s grant of public lands should not be sold for more than $2.50 an acre, thus adding to the value of its securities.
The deadly parallel columns were applied58 to careless campaign speakers for Blaine. They were repeatedly used against the leading Blaine newspapers, the New York Tribune, Philadelphia Press, Chicago Tribune, and Cincinnati Commercial. A happy stroke, for example, exhibited their efforts to ignore the second batch59 of Mulligan letters:
BLAINE’S OWN VIEW OF THE LETTERS
“There is not a word in the letters which is not entirely60 consistent with the most scrupulous61 integrity and honor. I hope that every Republican paper in the United States will republish them in full.”—Mr. Blaine’s interview with the Kennebec Journal, Sept. 15, 1884.
EARLY VIEWS OF HIS ORGANS
The Tribune, Sept. 15, 1884, suppressed all the letters and had no comments.
The Boston Journal, Sept. 15, 1884, suppressed nine letters, gave misleading summaries of many of them, and commented not at all upon the suppressed ones.
The Philadelphia Press, Sept. 15, 1884, published the letters in a part of its edition only, and had no comment.
For the unprecedented62 scandal-mongering of this campaign, which Godkin called fit for a tenement63 stairway, the Evening Post and other decent newspapers felt only disgust. But when the vicious elements in Buffalo64 which had learned to hate Cleveland as a reform Mayor and Governor revealed the fact that, as a young man, he had once formed an illicit65 connection, the Post felt it necessary to treat the charge in detail and place it in its true importance. A large number of clergymen, suffrage66 leaders, and others hastened to declare that no man with an illegitimate child could be supported for the Presidency. Considering Blaine’s character, this seemed to the Post both ridiculous and vicious. Which was better fitted to be President, a man once unchaste, as Franklin, Webster, and Jefferson had been, or a man who sold his official463 power for money? Godkin argued that in a statesman official probity67 was all important, while an early lapse68 in personal morals was of minor69 significance:
“Well, but,” we shall be asked, “does not the charge against Cleveland, as you yourselves state and admit it, disqualify him, in your estimation, for the Presidency of the United States?” We answer frankly70: “Yes, if his opponent be free from this stain, and as good a man in all other ways.” We should like to see candidates for the Presidency models of all the virtues71, pure as the snow and steadfast72 as the eternal hills. But when the alternative is a man of whom the Buffalo Express, a political opponent, said immediately after his nomination, “that the people of Buffalo had known him as one of their worthiest73 citizens, one of their manliest74 men, faithful to his clients, faithful to his friends, and faithful to every public trust” ... a good son and good brother, and unmarried in order that he might be the better son and brother, against whom nothing can be said except that he has not been proof against one of the most powerful temptations by which human nature is assailed75; or, on the other hand, a man convicted out of his own mouth of having publicly lied in order to hide his jobbery in office, of having offered his judicial76 decisions as a sign of his possible usefulness to railroad speculators in case they paid him his price, of trading in charters which had been benefited by legislation in which he took part, and of having broken his word of honor in order to destroy documentary evidence of his corruption77—a man who has accumulated a fortune in a few years on the salary of a Congressman—then we say emphatically no—ten thousand times no.
A public office like the Presidency was not a reward for a blameless private life, insisted Godkin, but a heavy duty and responsibility, to be given only to a statesman of ability and official integrity. Schurz pointed out that Hamilton, the founder78 of the Post, was once placed in a position where he had to remain silent concerning a slur79 upon his honesty in office, or confess to an offense80 like Cleveland’s; and he hesitated not an instant to clear his public honor at this cost to private reputation. The articles of the Evening Post and Nation powerfully conduced to right thinking on this subject.
The abuse visited upon the Evening Post in this campaign464 was the greatest since the slavery struggle. The Chicago Tribune said that “it was a natural instinct of servility to the great corporations that has bound it with hoops81 of steel to Cleveland’s cause”; a remarkable82 charge in view of the fact that Jay Gould, H. H. Rogers, Cyrus W. Field, Russell Sage83, H. D. Armour84, and other corporation heads supported Blaine, and by their dinner with him at Delmonico’s just before election—“Belshazzar’s Feast”—did not a little to defeat him. “The Evening Post has finally gone down so low,” remarked the Poughkeepsie Eagle in September, “that it lies about itself.” The Harrisburgh Telegraph published an attack by Bryant upon Jefferson as proof that the Post had always been addicted85 to malevolent86 personalities87; not mentioning the fact that Bryant had written these verses in 1803, at the age of nine, twenty-three years before he joined the Post. The New York Tribune turned Godkin’s statement, “Cleveland’s virtues are those which bind88 human society together,” into “Cleveland’s sins are of the sort which bind society together,” and repeatedly printed it in this form. As for Dana’s Sun, it continually called the Post “stupid”; but Dana this year was proving his own brilliance89 by supporting the farcical Greenback candidacy of Ben Butler, who polled 3,500 votes in New York city.
On the other hand, the paper received a steady stream of congratulatory letters. Henry Ward34 Beecher wrote in September that the editorials were clear, honest, and weighty. “How any one who has read them can vote for Blaine passes my comprehension. They ought to be circulated over the whole land as one of the best campaign documents. They stand in striking contrast with the inefficient90 speeches of Hawley, Hoard91, and Dawes, and the essays and letters of Mead92, Bliss93 & Co. Allow me to say that the Evening Post has never stood higher in its long and honorable life than now. It may almost be called the ideal family newspaper.” As a matter of fact, the editorials were circulated as campaign documents. Godkin’s articles on Blaine’s railway transactions sold 20,000 copies in pamphlet form before Sept. 20,465 when a revised edition appeared. In October the Post issued a pamphlet called “The Young Men’s Party,” by Col. T. W. Higginson, and another which embraced a reply to George Bliss and the table of ten Blaine falsehoods. In the closing days of the campaign the paper received subscriptions94 of $1,000 a week for the independent Campaign Fund. Godkin maintained his fierce editorial attacks to the last moment, and did not fail to make the most of the “Rum-Romanism-Rebellion” indiscretion of the Rev15. Mr. Burchard, saying that Blaine had given “tacit assent” to this insult against Catholicism.
The fight was by no means won with the closing of the polls on election day, Nov. 4. Early next morning every one knew that Cleveland had carried the South, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Indiana, that his election was assured if he had carried New York, and that New York was doubtful. The World claimed the Empire State for the Democrats96, and the Sun conceded it to them, but the Tribune declared that Blaine had won. The Post’s headlines that afternoon ran: “Cleveland Probably Elected—213 Electoral Votes for Him—New York in Cleveland Column”; while the editorial declared simply that, with the returns very backward, the indications were that Cleveland had a safe majority. Crowds all day filled the streets in front of the bulletin boards, and for a time there was a threat of rioting against Jay Gould and the western union Telegraph officers, who were accused of delaying and tampering97 with the returns in the interest of Blaine. With an audacity born of their memory of 1876, the Republicans continued to claim the victory all day Thursday the 6th. The Tribune footed up the county returns for New York as giving Blaine a plurality of 1,166, but the addition was inaccurate—they really gave Cleveland a plurality of 128! The Associated Press, whose returns were inexcusably fragmentary and late, gave Cleveland 1,057 plurality, and the Post, with its own dispatches from every county save one, 1,378—the official figure being later given as 1,149. The excited Mail and Express made the same blunder as the Tribune,466 claiming New York for Blaine when its own inaccurately98 added table of counties gave Cleveland a plurality of 4,000. At two a. m. on the 7th the Associated Press announced Cleveland’s election, and Godkin was able to write:
At daylight this morning everybody conceded Cleveland’s election save the Tribune, which remains99 in doubt. If it persists in declaring Blaine elected there will be two inauguration100 ceremonies on March 4, one of Cleveland in Washington and one of Blaine on the steps of the Tribune building, the oath of office being administered by William Walter Phelps.
II
Our one American President whose dislike of newspapers in general could be called intense was Cleveland. He deeply resented the mud-slinging in which they had indulged against both himself and Blaine during his first campaign; and when he married in 1886, he was outraged101 by the manner in which a crowd of correspondents followed him into the Maryland hills on his honeymoon102, occupied points of vantage, and spied upon him with field-glasses. Late that year he spoke103 of the “silly, mean, and cowardly lies” of the press, and of the “ghoulish glee” with which it desecrated104 every sacred relation of private life, an utterance105 which Mr. Godkin emphasized by editorial endorsement106, for no editor ever hated newspaper mendacity and sensationalism more than Godkin. Cleveland’s hottest wrath107 was reserved for Dana’s Sun, which professed108 to believe that he culled109 his speeches from an encyclopedia110, and that Miss Cleveland wrote his messages to Congress; when in 1890 the Sun made some offensive reference to his corpulence, Mr. Cleveland expressed his feelings without restraint. But he made one exception in his general dislike. He read the Evening Post faithfully, respected its views, and had a high regard for Mr. Godkin, whom he knew personally.
His friendliness111 had ample reason, for the Post supported almost every act of his first administration. It praised his early observance, in spirit and letter, of the467 Civil Service law, and his courageous112 veto of vicious little pension bills. Above all, it maintained that his administration was an invaluable113 demonstration114 that the unity8 of the nation was real, that it was no longer necessary for one section and party to monopolize115 political power. One New Yorker, the day after Cleveland’s election, had offered in a fit of rage and despair to sell Godkin his securities for fifty cents on the dollar. Some men had believed that the tariff116 would be wrecked117 overnight, and that the Confederacy would return “to the saddle” and compel the North to pay an indemnity118 of billions in settlement of Civil War damages. From this nightmare, which disposed men to put up with all sorts of Republican corruption, a Democratic administration had been necessary to rescue the country.
Mr. Godkin never called Cleveland brilliant, and praised him rather for an honest obstructiveness, balking119 the schemes of raiders, visionaries, and predatory interests, than for marked constructive120 abilities. Like the other “Mugwump” organs, the Evening Post was offended in 1887–88 by his apparent acquiescence121 in several raids upon the civil service by spoilsmen. In April, 1889, it accused the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury122, Mr. J. H. Maynard, of bringing heavy pressure to bear upon the New York Custom House for the dismissal of capable Republicans. Maynard denied the charge in a hot telegram; the Evening Post appealed to the Senate Committee upon the Civil Service to come to New York and investigate; and it did so, sustaining the Post’s charges in their entirety. But Mr. Godkin never forgot the consideration which Cleveland later urged in defending himself: “You know the things in which I yielded; but no one save myself can ever know the things which I resisted.” The President, said the Evening Post, had fallen short of his promises, but had done far more than any predecessor123. “No man, for example, who has filled the Presidential chair since Jackson’s day would have listened for one moment to the suggestion that the New York Post Office should be taken out of politics, or would have468 kept the Custom House in its present comparatively neutral condition, or postponed124 the removal of the great bulk of officers to the end of their terms, or extended in any degree the application of the rules, or have so steadily125 used his veto to oppose Congressional jobbery and extravagance. No one, too, has kept the White House and its purlieus so free from the small scandals which worked so much disgrace in the days of Grant, Hayes, Garfield, and Arthur.”
In 1888 the Post showed genuine enthusiasm in advocating the election of Cleveland over Benjamin Harrison. His courageous message in favor of a low tariff in December, 1887, which did so much to ensure his defeat the next fall, met the views of the editors precisely126. The Republicans declared in their platform for maintenance of the existing tariff, but for a reduction in the internal revenue taxes, and Godkin labeled them the party of “high clothes and cheap whisky.” A sharp attack was made upon Harrison’s Congressional record—“the advocate of centralization, the defender127 of reckless pension schemes, the friend of Hennepin Canal jobs.” Once more, but moderately, parallel columns were employed:
MURAT HALSTEAD (REP.)
“The bottom truth about Cleveland is that he may have been a Copperhead, for he is of about that grade of snake, but he has been too ignorant all his life to be an intelligent member of any political party.”
HUGH M’CULLOCH (REP.)
“I have watched Mr. Cleveland’s Administration very carefully, and I consider it to have been marked with signal ability and uprightness.”
Cleveland’s defeat the Evening Post attributed in part, it is interesting to note, to the folly128 of the New York Democrats in nominating David B. Hill for Governor, a choice which disgusted independent voters. Naturally, Harrison’s administration confirmed by a half dozen acts the paper’s loyalty129 to the ex-President. The choice of Blaine to be Secretary of State, the McKinley Tariff Act, the Service Pensions Act of 1890, and the Sherman Silver-Purchase Act seemed to the editors, and to a great body of intelligent and thoughtful citizens, to be so many milestones130 on a road of perversity131 and danger. The reckless way in which our foreign relations were handled,469 as we shall see later, aroused grave apprehensions133 in Mr. Godkin. At the moment when the disgust of the Evening Post with the Republican Party was deepest, in February, 1891, Cleveland’s famous letter in opposition to the free coinage of silver, characterizing it as a “dangerous and reckless experiment,” was published. All his enemies, Dana at their head, thought that by this courageous act he had destroyed himself politically. So did many Democrats. “Again,” wrote Godkin, “the shrewd politicians sat down on the party stoop and wept, and prepared sorrowfully to nominate a first-class juggler134 in the person of David B. Hill, who was to show the wretched Mugwumps how much better it was to be able to keep six balls in the air than to be able to show the absurdity135 of a fluctuating currency.”
But Cleveland’s uncompromising stroke filled the Evening Post with joy. It had feared the Democratic Party was rushing down a steep place to destruction by accepting an alliance with these silver enthusiasts136 who were trying to debase the currency. Now it had faith in the willingness of the party rank and file to respond to the ex-President’s unflinching words. As it turned out, the newspaper was right. The people recognized the voice of a real statesman, and the scheming bosses who had rejoiced at his supposed political suicide, found that he had at once rescued the party from a ruinous coalition137 with the Populists, and made his own renomination inevitable. In the canvass138 which followed this renomination, the Evening Post found it unnecessary to say much about the silver question, so completely had Cleveland knocked it out of the campaign, and it centered its attention upon the McKinley Tariff. That wages had fallen in many industries, that prices of many groups of commodities had risen, and that a hundred “tariff trusts” had attained139 new vigor1 behind the McKinley bulwark140, was shown in a long series of editorial articles. Lowell had already, while the McKinley Act was pending141, published anonymously142 in the Evening Post a satirical poem upon the argument that higher rates were needed to protect our “infant industries.”470 When Cleveland was decisively re?lected that November, Godkin traced his victory primarily to the effect his anti-tariff message of 1887 and his anti-free-silver letter of 1891 had produced upon men:
Mr. Cleveland’s triumph to-day has been largely due to the young voters who have come on the stage since the reign132 of passion and prejudice came to an end and the era of discussion has opened. If the last canvass has consisted largely of appeals to reason, to facts, to the lessons of human experience ... it is to Mr. Cleveland, let us tell them, that they owe it. But they are indebted to him for something far more valuable than even this—for an example of splendid courage in the defense and assertion of honestly formed opinions; of Roman constancy under defeat, and of patient reliance on the power of deliberation and persuasion143 on the American people. Nothing is more important, in these days of boodle, of indifference144, of cheap bellicose145 patriotism146, than that this confidence in the might of common sense and sound doctrine147 and free speech should be kept alive.
No one reading this editorial would have believed that within little more than three years Mr. Godkin would turn savagely148 upon the man whose fine qualities he thus praised. Mr. Godkin would not have believed it. Cleveland’s second administration began well, and his policy was particularly liked by the Post in that field of foreign relations in which the break was to come. He withdrew the treaty for the annexation149 of Hawaii, which Godkin had opposed. He protected American rights in Cuba, but maintained strict American neutrality in the war Spain was waging there. When Great Britain put in a claim of damages against Nicaragua, and landed marines to collect the money, Cleveland acted with admirable discretion95 and tact150. His belligerent151 Venezuelan message of December, 1895, indeed, was almost a flash out of a clear sky.
To understand the consternation152 with which Godkin received this message, which seemed to presage153 certain war with England, it must be appreciated how much he abhorred154 jingoism155 and war. When Crimean correspondent for the London Daily News he had described the471 horrors of the battlefields with indignation; and the suffering back of the lines—“the great ocean of misery156 which war has caused to roll over the heads of mankind ever since wars began”—he thought even more heartrending. He was no pacifist: a war in a good cause, like the war of the North to extinguish slavery and disunion, he approved. But wars merely to vindicate157 what some one fancied to be “national honor” he abominated158 as the worst relic159 of savagery160:
Jingoism is, in fact, like Indian readiness for war, simply another name for imperfect civilization. It is a simple outburst like negro-burning, lynching, and jail-breaking, of the imperfectly subdued161 barbarous instincts of an earlier time. To get men to abandon fighting as the chief and most honorable business of their lives, and the only respectable way of ending disputes, has been the main work of modern civilization; and what hard work it has been, one has only to read a little Froissart or Joinville to see.
We must also appreciate that Cleveland’s act seemed to Godkin a base surrender to jingo elements in American politics which he had hitherto been opposing. As we have said, the Evening Post had lamented162 what it thought the defiant163 tone of Harrison’s foreign policy. This it attributed to Blaine’s desire to be a “brilliant” Secretary of State. When he held that position under Garfield, he had promptly164 embroiled165 the United States with Chile, and it had fallen to President Arthur to appoint a new Secretary and extricate166 the nation. Seven years later he had returned, and what had he done? He had made an effort to exercise the right of search on British vessels167 in the Bering Sea, had filled Harrison’s administration with the resulting controversy168, and had maneuvered169 the United States into a position in which it was defeated in arbitration170 proceedings171. Since Cleveland’s inauguration the editors of the Evening Post had constantly deplored173 the bellicose talk indulged in by a considerable group of Republicans. Henry Cabot Lodge174 in the spring of 1895 had predicted a war in Europe, hinted that we might be drawn175 into it, and said that the British fortifications at472 Halifax, Bermuda, Kingston, and Esquimault “threaten us.” The same month Senator Frye, at Bridgeport, had called for a strong navy, and declared: “We [the Republicans] will show people a foreign policy that is American in every fiber176, and hoist177 the American flag on whatever island we think best, and no hand shall ever pull it down.” Senator Cullom wanted Cuba instantly annexed178. Godkin was justified179 in writing (Feb. 13, 1895):
The number of men and officials in this country who are now mad to fight somebody is appalling180. Navy officers dream of war and talk and lecture about it incessantly181. The Senate debates are filled with predictions of impending182 war and with talk of preparing for it at once. With the country under the necessity for the most stringent183 economy, appropriations184 of $12,000,000 for battleships are urged upon Congress, not because we need them now, but because we shall need them “in the next great war.” Most truculent185 and bloodthirsty of all, the Jingo editors keep up a din42 day after day about the way we could cripple one country’s fleet and destroy another’s commerce, and fill the heads of boys and silly men with the idea that war is the normal state of a civilized186 country.
To the early stages of the controversy between Venezuela and England over the western boundary of British Guiana neither the Evening Post nor any other journal paid close attention. Mr. Godkin did not think that the Monroe Doctrine could properly be stretched to cover American interference in the quarrel; and when Secretary Olney asked Great Britain to submit the dispute to arbitration, and Lord Salisbury refused, Godkin defended Salisbury’s action upon the ground that we had tended to prejudge the case in Venezuela’s favor. As yet the editor was not disturbed, trusting the President implicitly187. But suddenly, on Dec. 17, 1895, Cleveland sent Congress a message asking for the appointment of a commission to determine the boundary, and stating that it would be the duty of the United States “to resist by every means in its power, as a wilful188 aggression189 upon its rights and interests,” the taking by Great Britain of any lands that the commission assigned to Venezuela.
473 “I was thunderstruck,” Godkin wrote Charles Eliot Norton. He described the week that followed as “the most anxious I have known in my career.” For the first three days the United States seemed to rise in unanimous support of Cleveland. Republican newspapers like the Tribune, which had never said a good word for him, rushed to his assistance. The editor saw so much jingoism among even intelligent people, he said, “that the prospect190 which seemed to open itself before me was a long fight against a half-crazed public, under a load of abuse, and the discredit191 of foreign birth, etc., etc.”; but he never hesitated.
The first afternoon there was time to write only a paragraph editorial expressing consternation at the doctrine that the United States should “assert such ownership of the American hemisphere as will enable us to trace all the boundary lines on it to our own satisfaction in defiance192 of the rest of the world.” On the second day the Evening Post devoted193 both its column editorials to the subject. The first, “Mr. Cleveland’s Coup49 d’Etat,” drew a striking contrast between war, with all it involved of suffering, loss, and moral deterioration194, and the triviality of the possible cause, a wrangle195 about an obscure boundary line. The second reviewed the Venezuela correspondence, and attempting to refute Cleveland’s arguments, said that his message “humiliates us by its self-contradictions,” and characterized his proposal for a boundary commission as “ludicrously insulting and illogical.”
In later issues the Evening Post mingled196 invective197 with calm, sound argument. It tried to show that Salisbury’s claims in British Guiana had been, in the main, supported by incontestable evidence. It traced the history of our relations with Venezuela, and demonstrated that the little republic had missed few opportunities to treat us insolently198. It declared that a commission of inquiry199 might be proper, but that it was indefensible to create one as a hostile proceeding172, with a threat of war behind it. Months earlier, during the Nicaragua dispute, the Evening Post had issued in pamphlet form an essay by John474 Bassett Moore upon the Monroe Doctrine, showing that it gave the United States no right of interference in such affairs, and this it now sold in large quantities. Godkin unfortunately prejudiced his case by two errors—he failed to allow for the strong sentiment of most Americans in favor of a flexible interpretation200 of the Doctrine, and he unjustly hinted that Cleveland was eyeing a third term.
But the editor’s fears that he would stand alone were at once dissipated. The World lost no time in denouncing the belligerent message as “A Great Blunder,” and so did the Journal of Commerce. Among prominent Democratic newspapers which took their stand with the Evening Post were the Charleston News and Courier, Wilmington Every Evening, Memphis Commercial, and Louisville Post. The Cleveland Plain Dealer201 summed up the view of a multitude of thoughtful men in a little jest: “Teacher:—Johnny, now tell us what we learn from the Monroe Doctrine. Johnny:—That the other fellow’s wrong.” Prof. J. W. Burgess of Columbia contributed to the Evening Post a column article, in which he said: “On the whole, I have never read a more arrogant202 demand than that now set up by President Cleveland and Secretary Olney, in all diplomatic history.” Half a dozen times in the next fortnight the Post filled one or two columns with letters of congratulation and support. Its circulation rose materially. “In fact,” wrote Godkin when it was all over, with a touch of his eternal irony203, “our course has proved the greatest success I have ever had and ever known in journalism204.”
As every one knows, Lord Salisbury finally accepted arbitration, and the result was that the British obtained practically all the territory for which they had contended. The peaceful ending of the episode, and the gratification of the public over the President’s assertion of the national dignity, as most men viewed it, left Cleveland with increased prestige. The editors of the Evening Post never changed their opinion, but the incident, of course, did not materially shake their esteem205 of Cleveland. When475 he went out of office, the newspaper reviewed his eight years as the most satisfactory since the Civil War, praised his plain speech, courage, and honesty highly, and declared that he had made “a deeper mark upon the history of his time than any save the greatest of his predecessors206.”
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
vigor
|
|
| n.活力，精力，元气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
enlisted
|
|
| adj.应募入伍的v.（使）入伍， （使）参军( enlist的过去式和过去分词 )；获得（帮助或支持） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
espoused
|
|
| v.（决定）支持，拥护（目标、主张等）( espouse的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
retirement
|
|
| n.退休，退职 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
joyous
|
|
| adj.充满快乐的；令人高兴的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
garrison
|
|
| n.卫戍部队；驻地，卫戍区；vt.派(兵)驻防 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
specialty
|
|
| n.(speciality)特性，特质；专业，专长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
platitudes
|
|
| n.平常的话，老生常谈，陈词滥调( platitude的名词复数 )；滥套子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
herald
|
|
| vt.预示...的来临，预告，宣布，欢迎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
steer
|
|
| vt.驾驶，为…操舵；引导；vi.驾驶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
rev
|
|
| v.发动机旋转，加快速度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
impeachment
|
|
| n.弹劾；控告；怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
assail
|
|
| v.猛烈攻击，抨击，痛斥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
presidency
|
|
| n.总统(校长，总经理)的职位(任期) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
induction
|
|
| n.感应，感应现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
audacity
|
|
| n.大胆，卤莽，无礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
nomination
|
|
| n.提名，任命，提名权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
pretentious
|
|
| adj.自命不凡的，自负的，炫耀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
conceal
|
|
| v.隐藏，隐瞒，隐蔽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
lesser
|
|
| adj.次要的，较小的；adv.较小地，较少地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
covert
|
|
| adj.隐藏的；暗地里的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
defense
|
|
| n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
sensational
|
|
| adj.使人感动的，非常好的，轰动的，耸人听闻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
theatrical
|
|
| adj.剧场的，演戏的；做戏似的，做作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
plunged
|
|
| v.颠簸( plunge的过去式和过去分词 )；暴跌；骤降；突降 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
rhinoceros
|
|
| n.犀牛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
ward
|
|
| n.守卫，监护，病房，行政区，由监护人或法院保护的人（尤指儿童）；vt.守护，躲开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
scruple
|
|
| n./v.顾忌，迟疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
influential
|
|
| adj.有影响的，有权势的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
impartial
|
|
| adj.(in,to)公正的，无偏见的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
jersey
|
|
| n.运动衫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
Congressman
|
|
| n.（美）国会议员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
din
|
|
| n.喧闹声，嘈杂声 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
arsenal
|
|
| n.兵工厂，军械库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
corrupt
|
|
| v.贿赂，收买；adj.腐败的，贪污的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
tumor
|
|
| n.（肿）瘤，肿块(英)tumour | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
adroit
|
|
| adj.熟练的，灵巧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
concisely
|
|
| adv.简明地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
bishop
|
|
| n.主教，（国际象棋）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
coup
|
|
| n.政变；突然而成功的行动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
concealment
|
|
| n.隐藏, 掩盖，隐瞒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
confidential
|
|
| adj.秘（机）密的，表示信任的，担任机密工作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
tract
|
|
| n.传单，小册子，大片(土地或森林) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
situated
|
|
| adj.坐落在...的，处于某种境地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
rectify
|
|
| v.订正，矫正，改正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
repealed
|
|
| 撤销，废除( repeal的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
batch
|
|
| n.一批(组，群)；一批生产量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
scrupulous
|
|
| adj.审慎的，小心翼翼的，完全的，纯粹的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
unprecedented
|
|
| adj.无前例的，新奇的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
tenement
|
|
| n.公寓；房屋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
buffalo
|
|
| n.(北美)野牛；(亚洲)水牛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
illicit
|
|
| adj.非法的，禁止的，不正当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
suffrage
|
|
| n.投票，选举权，参政权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
probity
|
|
| n.刚直；廉洁，正直 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
lapse
|
|
| n.过失，流逝，失效，抛弃信仰，间隔；vi.堕落，停止，失效，流逝；vt.使失效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
frankly
|
|
| adv.坦白地，直率地；坦率地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
steadfast
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，不动摇的；忠实的；坚贞不移的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
worthiest
|
|
| 应得某事物( worthy的最高级 )； 值得做某事； 可尊敬的； 有（某人或事物）的典型特征 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
manliest
|
|
| manly（有男子气概的）的最高级形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
75
assailed
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
judicial
|
|
| adj.司法的，法庭的，审判的，明断的，公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
corruption
|
|
| n.腐败，堕落，贪污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
Founder
|
|
| n.创始者，缔造者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
slur
|
|
| v.含糊地说；诋毁；连唱；n.诋毁；含糊的发音 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
offense
|
|
| n.犯规，违法行为；冒犯，得罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
hoops
|
|
| n.箍( hoop的名词复数 )；（篮球）篮圈；（旧时儿童玩的）大环子；（两端埋在地里的）小铁弓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
sage
|
|
| n.圣人，哲人；adj.贤明的，明智的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
armour
|
|
| （=armor）n.盔甲；装甲部队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
addicted
|
|
| adj.沉溺于....的，对...上瘾的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
malevolent
|
|
| adj.有恶意的，恶毒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
personalities
|
|
| n. 诽谤，（对某人容貌、性格等所进行的）人身攻击； 人身攻击；人格, 个性, 名人( personality的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
bind
|
|
| vt.捆，包扎；装订；约束；使凝固；vi.变硬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
brilliance
|
|
| n.光辉，辉煌，壮丽，（卓越的）才华，才智 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
inefficient
|
|
| adj.效率低的，无效的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
hoard
|
|
| n./v.窖藏，贮存，囤积 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
mead
|
|
| n.蜂蜜酒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
bliss
|
|
| n.狂喜，福佑，天赐的福 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
subscriptions
|
|
| n.（报刊等的）订阅费( subscription的名词复数 )；捐款；（俱乐部的）会员费；捐助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
discretion
|
|
| n.谨慎；随意处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
democrats
|
|
| n.民主主义者，民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
tampering
|
|
| v.窜改( tamper的现在分词 )；篡改；（用不正当手段）影响；瞎摆弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
inaccurately
|
|
| 不精密地，不准确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
inauguration
|
|
| n.开幕、就职典礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
outraged
|
|
| a.震惊的，义愤填膺的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
honeymoon
|
|
| n.蜜月（假期）；vi.度蜜月 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
desecrated
|
|
| 毁坏或亵渎( desecrate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
endorsement
|
|
| n.背书；赞成，认可，担保；签(注)，批注 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
wrath
|
|
| n.愤怒，愤慨，暴怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
culled
|
|
| v.挑选，剔除( cull的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
encyclopedia
|
|
| n.百科全书 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
friendliness
|
|
| n.友谊，亲切，亲密 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
courageous
|
|
| adj.勇敢的，有胆量的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
invaluable
|
|
| adj.无价的，非常宝贵的，极为贵重的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
demonstration
|
|
| n.表明，示范，论证，示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
monopolize
|
|
| v.垄断，独占，专营 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
tariff
|
|
| n.关税，税率；(旅馆、饭店等)价目表，收费表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
wrecked
|
|
| adj.失事的，遇难的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
indemnity
|
|
| n.赔偿，赔款，补偿金 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
balking
|
|
| n.慢行，阻行v.畏缩不前，犹豫( balk的现在分词 )；（指马）不肯跑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
constructive
|
|
| adj.建设的，建设性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
acquiescence
|
|
| n.默许；顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
treasury
|
|
| n.宝库；国库，金库；文库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
predecessor
|
|
| n.前辈，前任 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
postponed
|
|
| vt.& vi.延期，缓办，（使）延迟vt.把…放在次要地位；[语]把…放在后面（或句尾）vi.（疟疾等）延缓发作（或复发） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
steadily
|
|
| adv.稳定地；不变地；持续地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
defender
|
|
| n.保卫者，拥护者，辩护人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
milestones
|
|
| n.重要事件( milestone的名词复数 )；重要阶段；转折点；里程碑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
perversity
|
|
| n.任性；刚愎自用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
apprehensions
|
|
| 疑惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
juggler
|
|
| n. 变戏法者, 行骗者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
enthusiasts
|
|
| n.热心人，热衷者( enthusiast的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
coalition
|
|
| n.结合体，同盟，结合，联合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
canvass
|
|
| v.招徕顾客，兜售；游说；详细检查，讨论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
bulwark
|
|
| n.堡垒，保障，防御 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
pending
|
|
| prep.直到，等待…期间；adj.待定的；迫近的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
anonymously
|
|
| ad.用匿名的方式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
persuasion
|
|
| n.劝说；说服；持有某种信仰的宗派 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
indifference
|
|
| n.不感兴趣，不关心，冷淡，不在乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
bellicose
|
|
| adj.好战的；好争吵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
patriotism
|
|
| n.爱国精神，爱国心，爱国主义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
savagely
|
|
| adv. 野蛮地，残酷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
annexation
|
|
| n.吞并，合并 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
tact
|
|
| n.机敏，圆滑，得体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
belligerent
|
|
| adj.好战的，挑起战争的；n.交战国，交战者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
consternation
|
|
| n.大为吃惊，惊骇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
presage
|
|
| n.预感，不祥感；v.预示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
abhorred
|
|
| v.憎恶( abhor的过去式和过去分词 )；（厌恶地）回避；拒绝；淘汰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
jingoism
|
|
| n.极端之爱国主义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
vindicate
|
|
| v.为…辩护或辩解，辩明；证明…正确 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
abominated
|
|
| v.憎恶，厌恶，不喜欢( abominate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
relic
|
|
| n.神圣的遗物，遗迹，纪念物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
savagery
|
|
| n.野性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
subdued
|
|
| adj. 屈服的，柔和的，减弱的 动词subdue的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
lamented
|
|
| adj.被哀悼的，令人遗憾的v.（为…）哀悼，痛哭，悲伤( lament的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
defiant
|
|
| adj.无礼的，挑战的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
embroiled
|
|
| adj.卷入的；纠缠不清的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
extricate
|
|
| v.拯救，救出；解脱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
vessels
|
|
| n.血管( vessel的名词复数 )；船；容器；（具有特殊品质或接受特殊品质的）人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
maneuvered
|
|
| v.移动，用策略( maneuver的过去式和过去分词 )；操纵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
arbitration
|
|
| n.调停，仲裁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
proceedings
|
|
| n.进程，过程，议程；诉讼(程序)；公报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
deplored
|
|
| v.悲叹，痛惜，强烈反对( deplore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
lodge
|
|
| v.临时住宿，寄宿，寄存，容纳；n.传达室，小旅馆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
fiber
|
|
| n.纤维，纤维质 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
hoist
|
|
| n.升高，起重机，推动；v.升起，升高，举起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
annexed
|
|
| [法] 附加的，附属的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
appalling
|
|
| adj.骇人听闻的，令人震惊的，可怕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
incessantly
|
|
| ad.不停地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
impending
|
|
| a.imminent, about to come or happen | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
stringent
|
|
| adj.严厉的；令人信服的；银根紧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
appropriations
|
|
| n.挪用（appropriation的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
truculent
|
|
| adj.野蛮的，粗野的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
implicitly
|
|
| adv. 含蓄地, 暗中地, 毫不保留地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
wilful
|
|
| adj.任性的，故意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
aggression
|
|
| n.进攻，侵略，侵犯，侵害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
190
prospect
|
|
| n.前景，前途；景色，视野 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
discredit
|
|
| vt.使不可置信；n.丧失信义；不信，怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
defiance
|
|
| n.挑战，挑衅，蔑视，违抗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
deterioration
|
|
| n.退化；恶化；变坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
wrangle
|
|
| vi.争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
mingled
|
|
| 混合，混入( mingle的过去式和过去分词 )； 混进，与…交往[联系] | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
invective
|
|
| n.痛骂，恶意抨击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
198
insolently
|
|
| adv.自豪地，自傲地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
interpretation
|
|
| n.解释，说明，描述；艺术处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
dealer
|
|
| n.商人，贩子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
arrogant
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
irony
|
|
| n.反语，冷嘲；具有讽刺意味的事，嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
journalism
|
|
| n.新闻工作，报业 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
esteem
|
|
| n.尊敬，尊重；vt.尊重，敬重；把…看作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
predecessors
|
|
| n.前任( predecessor的名词复数 )；前辈；（被取代的）原有事物；前身 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |