Those who came last evening to hear CoIonel Higginson lecture on Wendell Phillips enjoyed one of the most charming talks that it has been the good fortune of Cambridge people to hear this year.

Colonel Higginson began his lecture by a definition of what was characterized as the "Boston Style" before the rebellion, and showed how this had become florid, almost turgid, because of its origin and developement from the firm belief of the Boston public in the literary superiority of Dr. Johnson, and because of its foundation in the Latin. It had an easy flow of eloquent words, but was absolutely lacking in conciseness and brevity. This style was the personification of that inflated diction which required translation by inverse ratio and which Dr. Johnson, Rufus Choate, and Carlyle to a certain extent affected. This style has now completely passed away and it is as the agent of the change which overthrew it that Wendell Phillips appears. It was probably the anti-slavery movement itself, with its feelings and sympathies calling for a poignant type of eloquence, which produced the change.

The style which Wendell Phillips introduced was mainly characterized by its conversational simplicity and charm.

Even such men as Theodore Parker, Garrison, and Frederick Douglas, though far surpassing Phillips in force and weight of reasoning, were unable to compete with the charm of his eloquence. It was like a parlor chat and yet it completely disarmed his hearers of their objections. No one ever lived who knew better the value of the short sentence and the seemingly modest preparation for his argument. "Only the indolent wave of the ocean can parallel one of his powerful rolling sentences." Like Milton, he gave many particulars and was never vague.

The period in which he lived was marked by strong social distinctions and it was the renunciation of his all-his hopes and prospects of social eminence-which made his career such a noble sacrifice. Brought up to be a lawyer and looking forward to his social position as such, it was only the influence of his wife which prevailed upon him to commence this labor for humanity.

Francis Parkman as a constitutional conservative represents almost the exact opposite of Phillips the reformer. The later years of Parkman showed that feeling of dissatisfaction and disappointment belonging to the conservative, while the youth of a reformer is a source of sunshine for his old age.

Although Wendell Phillips had the misfortune of outliving the main pursuit of his life, yet even after the abolition of slavery, he maintained his position as reformer, firmly believing in the rights of women, in the prohibition movement and the abolition of capital punishment.

He had the bearing of an aristocrat, with the convictions of a radical. He had, besides, a literary man's memory,- he could illustrate anything with an appropriate anecdote. No man can retain such power as he possessed for any length of time without being materially changed; he himself said that his life was not wholesome, as he had a constant craving for opposition. Like most of the prohibitionists, he had difficulty in keeping his desire for opposition and controversy out of lectures when there was no call for them. He had difficulty in drawing the line in after life between the reformer and the demagogue, and it was owing to this want of distinction that his name was associated with that of Butler and that, in such connection, it suffered severe and unwarranted attacks.

Late in life he received an invitation to address the Phi Beta Kappa and then in his closing words gave a mighty plea for the personification in Harvard of all that stands for liberty and freedom.