Transcriber’s Note

This ebook contains several wide tables that may display poorly on some e-readers. The HTML version may be a better option for viewing these tables.

A. K. McCLURE

[Pg i]

# OUR PRESIDENTS
AND
HOW WE MAKE THEM

BY
A. K. McCLURE, LL.D.

ILLUSTRATED

NEW YORK AND LONDON

HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS

1900

[Pg ii]

Copyright, 1900, by A. K. McClure.

All rights reserved.

[Pg iii]

## CONTENTS

[Pg v]

## ILLUSTRATIONS

[Pg vii]

## INTRODUCTION

The crux of American politics is the quadrennial election of President. In the ebb and flow of our political activity the flood-tide comes in the Presidential contests. There are often tumultuous struggles and decisive events in the intervals, but their political effect and all the issues and movements of parties crystallize in the recurring conflict for the possession of the chief executive power.

Our American system makes the President the centre and focus of political life. He is at once Prime Minister and independent executive. He blends the functions of what in parliamentary government is the head of the Cabinet, and what in other government is the head of the State. He is a vital part of the legislative power without being amenable to its control or dependent on its life. He is the framer of policies and the arbiter of parties. All this makes the election of President the central chord and the arterial force of our broad political action.

The history of Presidential elections, if not the history of the nation, is at least the history of its determining periods. The successive epochs of our national progress, with their passionate struggles and controlling influences, are fully reflected in these contests. After the retirement of Washington the battles from 1800 for a quarter of a century, which gave the succession of Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, marked the reaction from federal authority and the rise of the democratic impulse in the young Republic. Then came the period running through the three contests and two elections of Jackson, the heirship of[Pg viii] Van Buren, and the cyclonic reversal under “Tippecanoe and Tyler too” in 1840, which turned on practical questions of internal polity and signalized the transition from the formative stage of the government to the inevitable clash between the sections. This was followed by the long political and moral contention between freedom and slavery, which began with the success of Polk and the Texas annexation policy in 1844 and ended with the defeat of the divided Democracy and the election of Lincoln in 1860, when the political combat culminated in the armed and colossal struggle of the civil war. Since its conclusion and its settlements the nation has been engaged in the mighty work of internal upbuilding, never equalled anywhere else in the world, and the elections have involved the contending theories.

The narrative of these elections, with the rise and fall of parties, their divisions and their creeds, presents the outlines of the national development. For this work Colonel McClure, by experience, taste, and special knowledge, is peculiarly and pre-eminently fitted. It is doubtful if any other living American has borne so active and so intimate a part in so many Presidential elections. Not yet of age, but already a zealous and eager observer of political movements as a young editor, he attended the Whig National Convention of 1848 in Philadelphia, and witnessed the nomination of General Taylor. From that time he has been personally familiar with the inner workings of every national convention and campaign. Including this year, there have been twenty-nine Presidential contests in our history. Colonel McClure has actively participated in fourteen, or practically one-half of the entire number.

He was born at Centre, Perry County, Pennsylvania, on the 9th of January, 1828. Spending his youth on his father’s farm, he became a tanner’s apprentice at fifteen, and remained at this trade for three years. His schooling was very limited, and his mental equipment was almost wholly the rich endowment nature had given him and[Pg ix] the attainments which his extraordinary intellectual force brought in after-years. At nineteen he became the editor of the Juniata Sentinel, and his natural ability and vigorous pen soon gave him a recognized position and a distinct influence. Before he was twenty-one he served as a conferee for Andrew G. Curtin in his Congressional candidacy, and laid the foundations of his long and intimate friendship with the great War Governor. Speedily called to the editorship of a more important paper at Chambersburg, his impress broadened, and in 1853, at the age of twenty-five, he was nominated by the Whigs for Auditor-General, the youngest man ever named by any party in Pennsylvania for a State office. Four years later he was elected to the Legislature, serving in the House and then in the Senate for several years. His career in that body was brilliant and distinctive. He was independent, fearless, and aggressive, a ready and trenchant debater, and he displayed political and parliamentary abilities of the highest order.

In the Republican National Convention of 1860 he played a prominent part. He and Curtin were potential in leading the Pennsylvania break from Cameron to Lincoln, and in promoting the nomination of the latter. With that success he accepted the chairmanship of the State Committee, and made a dashing and energetic campaign, which resulted in the October State victory that assured and portended the election of Lincoln. This relation to the contest and subsequent service with Governor Curtin, in directing Pennsylvania’s part in the war, placed him on an intimate footing with the President, and during those dramatic and trying years he was a commanding figure in the State. Later he settled in Philadelphia in the practice of the law; became one of the leading spirits in the Republican revolt of 1872 which led to the Greeley movement; returned to the Legislature, where, free from party shackles, he waged unsparing war against jobbery and wrong, and where his forensic talent, his bold attacks,[Pg x] and rare powers of invective and sarcasm made him at once respected and feared. Finally, he found what was to prove his higher and truer place, and entered upon what was to be his main life-work in the establishment of the Philadelphia Times, where he has had an ample and conspicuous arena for the editorial genius which has ranked him among the foremost journalists of the country. Here, for twenty-five years, with ripened experience and mellowed spirit, but with unabated passion for political movements, Colonel McClure has been both the actor and the critic in the great and constantly changing drama of public events. Standing between both parties, bound by neither, but in the counsels of each, he has been exceptionally informed on all the currents of political activity. No one has had a broader acquaintance with the public men of his time, or has been more thoroughly behind the scenes in the shifting transformations of public action. From his earliest years politics has had an extraordinary fascination for his fertile mind, and his taste and talent for it have been equally marked. There has been no national convention of either party for years that he has not attended, and the episodes and influences which have turned the decision of the hour have been as familiar to him as the broader principles which have moulded the general course of action.

Colonel McClure is thus peculiarly qualified, not only to present the large history of Presidential contests, but to illuminate it with the instructive side-lights which are as entertaining as they are suggestive. Comprehensive in its treatment, infused with the very life and spirit of political action, prepared with complete knowledge, and written in a style of singular charm and force, this work is not only a labor of love, but a valuable contribution to the historical literature of American politics.

Charles Emory Smith

Washington, April, 1900

[Pg xi]

## PREFACE

I have endeavored in this volume to supply a want in our political history by giving not only a detailed and reliable report of the nomination and election of every President of the United States, but by giving with it many important sidelights relating to the selection and character of our Chief Magistrates.

With a personal knowledge of national conventions covering over half a century, and an intimate acquaintance with the chief actors of both parties in selecting Presidential candidates, I am able to give the inside movements of some of our important national struggles which are imperfectly understood. The inspiration and organization of all the various political parties, great and small, are concisely presented, and the personal reminiscences of the struggles of the great men of the country have been most carefully prepared.

Absolute accuracy in the preparation of political history covering a period of one hundred and twelve years is not to be expected, as record evidence is at times either imperfectly preserved or entirely destroyed; but no pains have been spared to make this volume a complete and reliable history of our Presidents and how we make them.

I am indebted to Edward Stanwood’s “History of Presidential Elections” and to Greeley’s “Political Text-Book of 1860” for valuable data of the earlier conflicts for the Presidency. Many of the personal and political reminiscences given are an elaboration of a series of articles originally prepared for the Saturday Evening Post, of Philadelphia.

A. K. M.

Philadelphia, March 1, 1900.

[Pg xiii]

[Pg 1]

GEORGE WASHINGTON

## THE WASHINGTON ELECTIONS

1789–1792

The first election for President of the United States was held on the first Wednesday of January, 1789, and it was an election in which the people took no part whatever in most of the States. The election should have been held in November, 1788, but the Constitution of 1787, that required ratification by nine States to make it the supreme law of the nation, did not receive the approval of the requisite number of States until the 21st of June, 1788, when New Hampshire made up the ninth State approving it. Vermont followed five days later, and New York, after a bitter struggle, ratified the Constitution on the 26th of July. There was then ample time for Congress to make provisions for a Presidential election in November, but many weeks were wasted in a struggle for the location of the national capitol, and it was not until the 13th of September that Congress was prepared to pass a resolution declaring the ratification of the Constitution, and directing the election of Presidential electors.

Communication was at that time very slow and uncertain between the several States, and as Congress did not fix the time for an election until the middle of September, the first Wednesday of January, 1789, was deemed the earliest period at which an election could be had. Considering the length of time required to communicate with the different States, and the extreme difficulty in the States communicating with their people and Legislatures, it was practically impossible to have a Presidential election in which the people of the country generally could participate.

None of the States had made any preparation for an election, and the only practical method for choosing electors was by the Legislatures, as the Constitution provided then, as it does now, that each State shall appoint Presidential electors[Pg 2] “in such manner as its Legislature may direct.” Attempts were made to hold popular elections in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, but even in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, after elections had been held after a fashion, the Legislatures of those States finally chose the electors. There were next to no votes cast in Pennsylvania,[1] Maryland, and Virginia, as there was no contest, the election of Washington being conceded by all; and whatever votes were cast in the States have never found their way into the political statistics of the country. Rhode Island and North Carolina had not ratified the Constitution and did not choose electors, and in New York a bitter contest arose in the Legislature between the friends and opponents of the Constitution, resulting in a disagreement between the Senate and House that was not adjusted in time for the Legislature to choose electors. Thus, New York, Rhode Island, and North Carolina gave no votes for President in the Electoral College of 1789.

There had been no formal nomination of Washington for President and Adams for Vice-President in any part of the country. In later Presidential elections it was common for Legislatures and mass-meetings to present candidates for President, but I cannot find a record of any formal presentation of either the name of Washington or Adams as candidates at the first Presidential election. Washington was accepted as the logical ruler of the Republic, whose sword had won its independence, and Massachusetts, the State of Lexington and Bunker Hill, was conceded the second place on the ticket by general assent. Both were pronounced Federalists, and Washington was much more positive in his partisanship than is now generally believed. He was consulted about the choice of a Vice-President, and he answered that while he took it for granted that “a true Federalist” would be elected to the Vice-Presidency, he was unwilling to indicate any preference; but it was generally known that he and his immediate friends preferred John Adams, who had been one of the committee with Jefferson to prepare the Declaration of Independence, and who had written a very vigorous pamphlet in favor of the adoption of the Constitution.

It is now generally assumed that there was no shade of [Pg 3]opposition to Washington’s election to the Presidency, but the anti-Federalists, many of whom were opposed to the Constitution, made several ineffectual efforts to defeat him. It is known that Franklin was approached on the question of being Washington’s competitor, but there is little doubt that he peremptorily refused. At that time the Presidential electors did not vote directly for President and Vice-President as they do now. Each elector voted for two men for President, both of whom could not be a resident of the same State, and the candidate receiving the largest vote, if a majority, was chosen President, and the candidate receiving the second largest vote for President became Vice-President. Several movements were made, without ever attaining the dignity of importance, to have votes quietly taken from Washington and given to Adams, and other movements were made to defeat Adams for Vice-President, but all of them were signal failures. It is understood that Hamilton, the closest friend of Washington, was not friendly to Adams. There is some reason to believe that he would have seconded the movement of the anti-Federalists to make George Clinton Vice-President had it given any promise of success.

The electoral colleges met on the first Wednesday of February, 1789, and elected Washington President, he receiving 69 votes, being the full number of electors, and John Adams received 34 votes for President, which made him Vice-President, although he did not receive a majority of the electoral votes. The following table shows the vote in detail as cast by the Electoral College, all of the men having been voted for only as Presidential candidates:

STATES. | George Washington. | John Adams. | Samuel Huntington. | John Jay. | John Hancock. | Robert H. Harrison. | George Clinton. | John Rutledge. | John Milton. | James Armstrong. | Edward Telfair. | Benjamin Lincoln.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
New Hampshire | 5 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 10 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | 7 | 5 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 6 | 1 | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 10 | 8 | — | — | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Delaware | 3 | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —[Pg 4]
Maryland | 6 | — | — | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Virginia | 10 | 5 | — | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | 7 | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | —
Georgia | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1
Total | 69 | 34 | 2 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1

The Congress of the Confederation had provided that the new Congress chosen under the Constitution should meet in New York on the first Wednesday of March to declare the result of the Presidential election and inaugurate the new Republic, but a quorum of the Senate did not appear until the 6th of April, and on that day the electoral vote was counted in the presence of the two Houses, and Washington and Adams declared elected. They were notified of their election as speedily as possible, but it was not until the 30th of April that they were inaugurated.

Washington’s second election was quite as unanimous as the first, both at the polls and in the electoral colleges. No opposition electoral tickets were formed in any of the States, as the re-election of Washington and Adams was universally accepted. The Presidential electors of that day were appointed in accordance with the obvious spirit of the Constitution, that meant to provide an entirely dispassionate and independent tribunal in the Electoral College to exercise the soundest discretion in the choice of a President and Vice-President. No pledges were asked or given by any one named as an elector, and each one was free to vote according to the dictates of his own judgment. Had there been opposition electoral tickets, they would have logically run on opposing lines with distinct obligations on the part of each side as to how their votes would be cast, but no such question arose until the first battle between Adams and Jefferson in 1796.

[Pg 5]

There was no organized opposition to the administration of Washington at the close of his first term, but the Democratic sentiment, so ardently cherished by Jefferson, had been steadily growing, and with two such able and aggressive opposing partisans as Jefferson and Hamilton in the Washington Cabinet, it was only natural that opposition to the Federal policy would gradually take shape to be effective when the overshadowing personality of Washington became eliminated from the politics of the country. Jefferson and Hamilton often had serious differences in the Cabinet, and Washington uniformly sided with Hamilton. Washington had little personal and no political sympathy whatever with Jefferson, and only one of Jefferson’s rare tact and sagacity could have remained in the Washington Cabinet and fashioned the great opposition party that carried him triumphantly into the Presidential chair four years after Washington’s retirement. As opposition to the re-election of Washington and Adams would have been entirely fruitless, it was wisely not attempted, and the election passed off in almost as perfunctory a manner as did the first election in 1789.

Rhode Island and North Carolina had ratified the Constitution, and Vermont became a State on the 4th of March, 1791, and Kentucky on the 1st of June, 1792, giving fifteen States to participate in the second Presidential election. In nine of the States Presidential electors were chosen by the Legislatures, and by popular vote in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia, but there were very few votes polled, and what were cast indicated nothing politically, as there were no opposing electoral tickets.

Washington again received the unanimous vote in the electoral colleges—132 in number—and Adams became Vice-President by receiving 77 votes for President. When the two Houses met to declare the vote, Vice-President Adams presided in the House, opened and read the certificates of the votes of the several States, and declared Washington and himself elected President and Vice-President. The following is the official vote in the electoral colleges as cast in 1792:

[Pg 6]

STATES. | Washington. | Adams. | Clinton. | Jefferson. | Burr.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
New Hampshire | 6 | 6 | — | — | —
Vermont | 3 | 3 | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 16 | 16 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | 4 | — | — | —
Connecticut | 9 | 9 | — | — | —
New York | 12 | — | 12 | — | —
New Jersey | 7 | 7 | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 15 | 14 | 1 | — | —
Delaware | 3 | 3 | — | — | —
Maryland | 8 | 8 | — | — | —
Virginia | 21 | — | 21 | — | —
North Carolina | 12 | — | 12 | — | —
South Carolina | 8 | 7 | — | — | 1
Georgia | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
Kentucky | 4 | — | — | 4 | —
Total | 132 | 77 | 50 | 4 | 1

[Pg 7]

## THE ADAMS-JEFFERSON CONTEST

1796

While it was generally accepted that Washington would not be a candidate for a third term, he gave no definite expression on the subject until he issued his farewell address a short time before the election of 1796. Washington was an extremely reticent man, and it is possible that, in view of the serious complications between this country and France, he may have anticipated a contingency that would make him accept a third election to the Presidency, but it seems to have been well understood by those nearest to him in official circles that he earnestly desired to retire to private life at the expiration of his second term. He was then the richest man in the country, his wealth being almost wholly composed of land and slaves, and for twenty years he had been unable to give any attention to his large business interests. While his election and re-election to the Presidency by a unanimous vote were very gratifying to him, he greatly preferred the life upon his plantation, where he gave most careful attention to all the details of its management.

As early as 1793 it was generally accepted by the public that Washington would not be a candidate for re-election, and that Jefferson and Adams would be the logical competitors for the succession. Jefferson had cleared his decks for the battle by resigning his office as Secretary of State early in 1794. He was not in harmony with the severe Federal policy of Washington, and was very positively hostile to the policy of the administration in failing to support the French Revolution. Jefferson led the Democratic forces of the country; Washington, and Adams as his logical successor, led the Federal forces, and between them there was an irreconcilable dispute as to the form of government the new Republic should assume. Washington, Adams, Hamilton,[Pg 8] and their associates did not believe in the capacity of the people for self-government. They favored the strongest possible government, with checks and balances which could effectually restrain what they regarded as positive and dangerous ebullitions of public sentiment. They would have made Senators for life and given only the semblance of government to the people. Jefferson, on the other hand, took the broad ground that the people were sovereign and should rule. He logically supported the French Revolution against the Bourbon Kings, and cherished the strongest prejudices against England. As Secretary of State he could not well have remained in the Washington Cabinet the last two years of the administration, but he doubtless resigned to be entirely free to make his great battle for the Presidency in 1796.

Neither Jefferson nor Adams was nominated for the Presidency in 1796 by any Legislature or mass-meeting of which there is any record as far as I have been able to ascertain. Adams was the choice of Washington, and the logical successor to Washington as the Federal candidate for President, and Jefferson stood head and shoulders over all the Republicans of that day. The title of Republican was adopted by the friends of Jefferson, and the Democratic party was founded in 1796 by Jefferson under the name of Republican, established as the majority party of the nation four years later, and it fought and won the Democratic battles under that name until 1824, when the Jackson party changed the title to Democracy.

If the overshadowing individuality of Washington could have been eliminated from the contest of 1796, Jefferson would have defeated Adams by a decided majority, but Washington was earnestly enlisted in the support of Adams, and all the power of the administration was wielded in favor of the Federal candidate. While Washington was not charged with violent partisanship in his appointments, it is none the less true that when the issue came between Adams and Jefferson, every Federal official of the country felt bound to support, with all the power he possessed, the candidate preferred by Washington. Had Grover Cleveland lived in that day, he would have had ample opportunity to denounce the “pernicious activity” of office-holders with as much reason as he denounced them a century later in his support of civil service reform.

Not only were the Federal officials aggressively enlisted[Pg 9] in favor of Adams, but the personal influence of Washington, that was greater than that ever wielded by any other official or citizen of the Republic down to the present time, was a serious obstacle to Jefferson’s success. The people loved Jefferson as the author of the Declaration of Independence, and a large majority of them sympathized with his liberal ideas of popular government, but the name of Washington was sacred to a large majority, and his wishes were paramount in deciding their political action. Such were the conditions under which Jefferson entered the contest against Adams in 1796.

In this contest, for the first time, there were two candidates distinctly declared as competitors for the Presidency, and other candidates as distinctly declared as competitors for Vice-President, although all had to be voted for as candidates for President in the Electoral College. At that time Aaron Burr was in the zenith of his power. He was one of the most astute politicians of that day, inordinately ambitious, unscrupulous in his methods, and he was generally accepted by the friends of Jefferson as the candidate for Vice-President.

New York was a Federal State, but it was hoped that by the masterly ability of Burr the electoral vote of New York might be won for Jefferson, although while there was entire unanimity among the Republicans in support of Jefferson, there was not equal unanimity in the support of Burr. He failed to carry New York for Jefferson, but succeeded in carrying it for Jefferson and himself in 1800, and his victory was won so early in the contest by the election of a Republican Legislature in that State in May, 1800, that he practically decided the battle against Adams.

The Presidential contest between Jefferson and Adams developed into the most defamatory campaign ever known in the history of American politics, unless the second campaign of 1800 between the same leaders may be accepted as equalling it. In no modern national campaign have candidates and parties been so maliciously defamed as were candidates and parties when Jefferson and Adams fought for power in the contest of the Fathers of the Republic. Jefferson was denounced as an unscrupulous demagogue, and Adams was denounced as a kingly despot without sympathy with the people, and opposed to every principle of popular government.

[Pg 10]

There were few newspapers, but it was the age of the pamphleteer, and the political pamphlets of those days, if compared with the political asperities of the present age, would make the partisan vituperation of the evening of the nineteenth century appear as tame and feeble. Nor were political leaders of that day any less unscrupulous than are the political leaders of the present. The struggles of mean ambition were as common then as now, and political leaders jostled each other in the most vituperative assaults to give victory to their cause.

The contest ended in November, when the elections were held in the various States. Tennessee had been admitted to the Union on the 1st of June, 1796, making sixteen States to participate in the choice of a President. Of these, six States held some form of popular elections, while ten chose their electors by the Legislature. The popular vote cast at these elections had no material significance. There was but one ticket voted for in nearly or quite all of the six States which assumed to choose electors by popular vote, as the New England States were solid for Adams, and the Southern States, where elections were held, were strong in the support of Jefferson. The result was the election of Adams in the Electoral College by a vote of 71 to 68 for Jefferson, who thereby became Vice-President. The following is the vote in detail, as cast in the Electoral College, the electors voting only for President:

STATES. | John Adams, Mass. | Thomas Jefferson, Va. | Thomas Pinckney, S. C. | Aaron Burr, N. Y. | Samuel Adams, Mass. | Oliver Ellsworth, Conn. | George Clinton, N. Y. | John Jay, N. Y. | James Iredell, N. C. | George Washington, Va. | Samuel Johnston, N. C. | John Henry, Md. | Charles C. Pinckney, S. C.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
New Hampshire | 6 | — | — | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Vermont | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 16 | — | 13 | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | 2 | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | 9 | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | —
New York | 12 | — | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 7 | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 1 | 14 | 2 | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Delaware | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —[Pg 11]
Maryland | 7 | 4 | 4 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2 | —
Virginia | 1 | 20 | 1 | 1 | 15 | — | 3 | — | — | 1 | — | — | —
North Carolina | 1 | 11 | 1 | 6 | — | — | — | — | 3 | 1 | — | — | 1
South Carolina | — | 8 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Georgia | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | — | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Tennessee | — | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Total | 71 | 68 | 59 | 30 | 15 | 11 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1

It will be seen by the foregoing table that Pennsylvania,[2] Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina cast divided electoral votes for the Presidency between Jefferson and Adams. In Pennsylvania, Adams received 1 electoral vote to 14 for Jefferson. In Maryland, Adams received 7 to 4 for Jefferson. In Virginia, Jefferson’s own State, Adams received 1 to 20 for Jefferson, and in North Carolina the vote was 1 for Adams to 11 for Jefferson. In all of these States the electors were chosen by popular vote, and they were doubtless selected with reference to their character and intelligence without pledges as to how they should cast their ballots in the electoral colleges. One of the Virginia electors exercised his admitted right to vote against Jefferson, who had the largest popular following in the State. It was this independent action of a few electors in 1796 that made both parties draw their lines severely in the selection of the candidates for electors, and from that time until the present all electoral tickets have been made up of men who were accepted as solemnly pledged to vote for their party candidates in the Electoral College.

[Pg 12]

## THE JEFFERSON-ADAMS-BURR CONTEST

1800–1

The Presidential contest of 1800 was as revolutionary in its aim and in its accomplishment as was the Republican revolution of 1860. The Federalists had practically undisputed control of the Government for twelve years, under Washington and John Adams, and the power of the Federal party, with the overwhelming individuality of Washington in its favor, accomplished the election of Adams over Jefferson in 1796. When the battle of 1800 opened, Washington was dead, and Hamilton, one of the ablest of the Washington political lieutenants, was not in hearty sympathy with Adams.

The Federalists held both branches of Congress, and a tidal wave of partisan bitterness and personal defamation ran riot, both in Congress and throughout the country. Our foreign complications with France had become very serious, and Congress approved what was then regarded as very extensive preparations for a war that was bitterly opposed by the Republican minority, the followers of Jefferson. So violent were the political discussions of the country that Adams, acting in accord with the Federal theory of a strong suppressive government, demanded and secured the passage of what are known as the Alien and Sedition laws, which now rank among the most odious legislative acts in the history of the Republic.

While the Alien and Sedition laws were apparently aimed at those who were open enemies of the country in war, they were, in fact, intended to suppress criticism of the administration and to impose the severest penalties for open hostility to its policy. The first session of the Congress of 1797–98[Pg 13] lasted eight months, and even in the fierce passions of civil war the Congressional debates did not equal the asperities of the Congressional debates of a century ago. The first Alien law lengthened the period for naturalization to fourteen years, and all emigrants were required to be registered and the certificate of registration to be the only proof of residence. All alien enemies were forbidden the right of citizenship under any circumstances.

JOHN ADAMS

Another of the series gave the President the power in case of war to seize or expel all resident aliens of the nation at war with us, and yet another gave the President power to deport any alien whom he might think dangerous to the country, and if after being ordered away he remained in the country, he was subject to imprisonment for three years and forbidden citizenship. In addition to these provisions, aliens so imprisoned could be removed from the country by the President’s order. Such were the general provisions of the Alien law. The Sedition bill, that was part of the same policy, declared that any who hindered officers in the discharge of their duties or opposed any of the laws of the country were guilty of high crime and misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment. Those who were guilty of writing or publishing any false and malicious writings against Congress or the President, or aided therein, were made punishable by a fine of $2000 and imprisonment for two years.

These measures were in harmony with the Federal theory of government. The Federal leaders did not believe the people capable of self-government, and Adams felt justified in imposing the severest penalties upon all who severely criticised or violently opposed the administration. Washington was yet alive and in full mental and physical vigor when these laws were passed, and it is reasonable to assume that he approved of them, as he could have defeated them if he had opposed their enactment. Hamilton vainly protested against the Alien and Sedition laws as a fatal political blunder, but Federalism had never suffered defeat, and President Adams never doubted his re-election until the vote was declared against him.

The contest of 1800 had its lines so well defined from the outset that candidates for President and Vice-President were as clearly indicated, although without any formal declaration, as national tickets would be indicated by a national convention of modern times. There is no record[Pg 14] of the Congressional caucus in 1800, but it seems to be an accepted tradition that the Federals, who had a majority of the House, first called a secret caucus to confer about the management of the campaign. They did not formally name candidates, but by general consent Adams was accepted as the candidate for President and Charles C. Pinckney, of South Carolina, for Vice-President. Apparently well-authenticated reports tell of a Republican Congressional caucus held during the same year, but there is no preserved record of it. If such a caucus was held, candidates were not nominated nor was any declaration of principles made. The chief object of the Republican caucus seems to have been to harmonize the friends of Jefferson on Burr as the accepted candidate for Vice-President, but no preference was expressed in any formal way. When the Federalists held their first caucus the Republicans denounced it as a “Jacobinical conclave,” and so severe were the criticisms of the Philadelphia Aurora, the leading Jefferson organ, that its editor was at one time arraigned before the bar of the Senate.

The contest of 1800 opened early in the year, the reported Congressional caucuses having been held in February or March, and from that time until the election the political discussions were acrimonious to a degree that would surprise the present generation. Jefferson had cordially united his friends in the support of Burr, and it was Burr’s magnificent leadership that carried the electoral vote of New York by winning the Legislature of that State as early as May. New York had voted for Adams in 1796, and the loss to Adams of one of the leading States of the Union and its transfer to Jefferson made the battle next to hopeless for Adams, but he and his friends fought it out to the bitter end.

No new States had been admitted during the Adams administration, and the same sixteen States which had elected Adams over Jefferson were then to pass a second judgment upon the great leaders of the two opposing political theories of that day. In Pennsylvania the Federalists controlled the Senate chiefly by hold-over Senators, as the popular sentiment of the State was strongly for Jefferson. In the three previous elections for President the Pennsylvania Legislature had passed special acts authorizing a popular vote for President, but in 1800, the Federals having control of the Senate, refused to pass a bill for an election whereby the[Pg 15] choice of electors was thrown into the Legislature, and it required joint action of the Federal Senate and the largely Republican House to provide for a choice of electors even by the Legislature. The Federal Senators refused to go into joint convention except upon conditions which would divide the electoral vote, and the Republicans of the House were compelled to choose between disfranchising the State, as New York had been disfranchised in 1789, or to concede a large minority of the electors to Adams.

It was finally agreed that each House should nominate 8 electors, and that the Houses should then meet jointly and each member should vote together for 15 of the 16 thus nominated. The result was that the Federalists forced the election of 7 Adams electors with 8 for Jefferson. The Federal Senators, 13 in number, who controlled the Senate against the 11 Republicans, were heralded by their party papers and leaders as grand heroes, because by the accident of power in one body of the Legislature not immediately chosen by the people they had wrested 7 electors from Jefferson, which would have been given to him either by a popular vote or by a joint vote of the Legislature.

Rhode Island at this election for the first time chose electors by popular vote, making 6 States which chose electors by the vote of the people and 10 which chose electors by the Legislature. As the electoral colleges could vote only for candidates for President, Jefferson and Burr received precisely the same vote, 73 in number, and Adams received 65, with 64 for Pinckney and 1 for John Jay. The following is the table of the vote as cast in the electoral colleges:

STATES. | Thomas Jefferson, Va. | Aaron Burr, N. Y. | John Adams, Mass. | C. C. Pinckney, S. C. | John Jay, N. Y.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
New Hampshire | — | — | 6 | 6 | —
Vermont | — | — | 4 | 4 | —
Massachusetts | — | — | 16 | 16 | —
Rhode Island | — | — | 4 | 3 | 1[Pg 16]
Connecticut | — | — | 9 | 9 | —
New York | 12 | 12 | — | — | —
New Jersey | — | — | 7 | 7 | —
Pennsylvania | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | —
Delaware | — | — | 3 | 3 | —
Maryland[3] | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | —
Virginia | 21 | 21 | — | — | —
North Carolina | 8 | 8 | 4 | 4 | —
South Carolina | 8 | 8 | — | — | —
Georgia | 4 | 4 | — | — | —
Kentucky | 4 | 4 | — | — | —
Tennessee | 3 | 3 | — | — | —
| 73 | 73 | 65 | 64 | 1

It is impossible to give anything like an intelligent presentation of the popular vote between Jefferson and Adams. In most of the States which chose electors by popular vote there was practically no contest, as the New England States voted solidly for Adams, and the Southern States south of Maryland voted as solidly for Jefferson, with the exception of North Carolina, where an electoral ticket seems to have been chosen on the original theory that electors should exercise sound discretion in the choice of a President, and in the exercise of that discretion 4 of the North Carolina electors voted for Adams and 8 for Jefferson. Had Pennsylvania been permitted to give expression either to the popular will or to the decided Republican majority of the Legislature, 7 of the Pennsylvania votes would have been taken from Adams and added to Jefferson, which would have made him 80 electoral votes to 58 for Adams.

Jefferson had won his election, and there should have been no question about according it to him. Under the electoral system of that day, by which each elector voted for two candidates for President, Jefferson and Burr each received 73 votes for the Presidency, and upon the face of the returns[Pg 17] were equally entitled to claim the highest honor of the Republic. True, Burr had not been discussed or seriously thought of as a candidate for President. He was accepted by the Republicans distinctly as the candidate for Vice-President, and the whole battle was fought out on the issue between Jefferson and Adams. Had Burr been honest and manly, he would have ended the struggle at once by declaring that the people had elected Jefferson to the Presidency, and that Burr could not consent to be presented to the country and the world as seeking to wear the stolen honors of the Government; but Burr developed his true character as soon as he discovered that his vote was equal to that given to Jefferson. While he did not make any open or visible effort to elect himself over Jefferson, he silently assented to the use of his name, and thus made the Presidency hang in uncertainty from the time of the election in November until the 17th of February, when the contest was finally decided in favor of Jefferson, and Burr stamped with infamy. That he wished to be elected over Jefferson cannot be reasonably doubted. If he had not permitted the use of his name without protest as a candidate against Jefferson, there would have been no discussion and no uncertainty, as the House would have chosen Jefferson on the 1st ballot.

Jefferson could have accomplished his own election without a serious contest if he had accepted the proposition of the Federalists to give him the election, to which he was entitled by the vote of the people, if he would agree not to remove the Federalists who then filled all the offices of the Government. Under Washington and Adams, the Republicans were practically proscribed in national appointments, and Adams had been specially proscriptive in dispensing the patronage of his administration. One of the most discreditable acts of his administration was the creation, by his Federal Congress in the expiring hours of Federal rule, of a number of judges, to whom commissions were issued by Adams at midnight before his retirement from office. They were known in political discussions of that day as the “midnight judges,” and the measure was so odious that it speedily destroyed itself. Jefferson, while not specially proscriptive in political appointments, regarded it as inconsistent with his appreciation of executive duties to give any pledge to the opposition to retain their friends in office. They naturally assumed that Jefferson would be as proscriptive[Pg 18] as Adams had been, and that their only safety was in making terms with Jefferson, whose election they could accomplish without difficulty.

It is quite probable that they could have made such terms with Burr, and it is possible that such conditions were proposed and accepted, but the Federalists knew that the defeat of Jefferson would be a monstrous perversion of the popular will; and Hamilton and Bayard, of Delaware, and other prominent Federalists earnestly opposed all affiliation with Burr. Burr having failed to announce that Jefferson had been elected President by the people, and should be elected by the House, and Jefferson having refused to make terms with the Federalists, the election went into the House under rules which had been adopted by Congress to meet the special case. Under the rules, the House was required to retire to its own chamber after the announcement of the electoral vote showing no choice, and proceed to ballot for President, and to continue to ballot without adjournment until a choice was effected. That session of the House continued for seven days. The balloting began on the 11th of February and ended on the 17th, as the House, instead of adjourning, simply took recesses from time to time. Each State could cast but one vote in the House, and that vote was determined by a majority of the delegation. Where the delegation was evenly divided the State had no vote. The following is the vote of the States on the 1st ballot, February 11, 1801:

STATES. | Jefferson. | Burr. | State voted for.
--- | --- | --- | ---
New Hampshire | — | 4 | Burr.
Vermont | 1 | 1 | Divided—Blank.
Massachusetts | 3 | 11 | Burr.
Rhode Island | — | 2 | Burr.
Connecticut | — | 7 | Burr.
New York | 6 | 4 | Jefferson.
New Jersey | 3 | 2 | Jefferson.
Pennsylvania | 9 | 4 | Jefferson.
Delaware | — | 1 | Burr.
Maryland | 4 | 4 | Divided—Blank.
Virginia | 16 | 3 | Jefferson.
North Carolina | 9 | 1 | Jefferson.
South Carolina | — | 5 | Burr.
Georgia | 1 | — | Jefferson.
Kentucky | 2 | — | Jefferson.
Tennessee | 1 | — | Jefferson.
Total | 55 | 49 |

[Pg 19]

Nineteen ballots were taken on the same day, then a recess was taken until the 12th, when 9 additional ballots were taken, and 1 ballot was taken on the 13th, 4 on the 14th, 1 on the 16th (the 15th being Sunday), and 1 on the 17th, making an aggregate of 35 ballots, all of which were precisely a repetition of the 1st ballot given in the foregoing table. Jefferson received the vote of 8 States, Burr of 6, and 2 were blank, because of divided delegations. The vote of 9 States was necessary to an election, and there was no choice.

On the 2d ballot cast on the 17th, being the 36th ballot in all, Jefferson was successful, receiving the votes of 10 States to 4 for Burr and 2 blank. The changes in favor of Jefferson were made by one Vermont member declining to vote, thus allowing his colleague to cast the vote of the State for President, and by four from Maryland also declining to vote, by which the tie in that State was broken in Jefferson’s favor.

In addition to these changes South Carolina and Delaware cast blank votes, but they did not help Jefferson, as he required the positive vote of 9 States to accomplish his election. It was James A. Bayard, of Delaware, a leading Federalist, who changed his vote on the last ballot from a vote for Burr to a blank ballot. Jefferson was thus declared elected President, and Burr became Vice-President by the mandate of the Constitution, he having received the highest electoral vote for President excepting that cast for Jefferson.

It can be readily understood that Burr’s permission of the use of his name to defeat the election of Jefferson in the House made an impassable gulf between them, and that contest dated the decline of Burr’s power in the land. He knew that there could be no future for him, and his restless genius sought new fields in which to gratify his ambition, ending in his arrest and trial for treason, and also staining his skirts with the murder of Hamilton. Hamilton was open in his hostility to Burr in the contest between Jefferson and Burr in the House, and it was Burr’s resentment of Hamilton’s hostility to his election that made him seize upon a trivial pretext to force Hamilton into a duel, in which Hamilton fell mortally wounded at the first fire. Burr’s public career was thus ended by the Jefferson-Burr contest, and although he lived many years thereafter, he drank the[Pg 20] bitterest dregs of sorrow, and died in poverty and unlamented.

Adams accepted his defeat most ungracefully. He remained in the Executive Mansion until midnight of the 3d of March, 1801, when he and his family deserted it, leaving it vacant for Jefferson to enter, without a host to welcome him. It was the only instance in which the retiring President did not personally receive the incoming President in the Executive Mansion, with the single exception of President Johnson, who did not remain at the White House to receive Grant; but Johnson was excusable from the fact that Grant had expressed his purpose not to permit Johnson to accompany him in the inauguration ceremonies. Jefferson, in marked contrast with the pomp and ceremony of Federal inaugurations, appeared on the 4th of March clad in home-spun, and rode his own horse unattended to the Capitol, and after the inauguration ceremonies returned to the Executive Mansion in like manner. Both Jefferson and Adams lived for more than a quarter of a century after their great battle terminated in 1800, and time greatly mellowed the asperities of their desperate political conflicts. In the later years of their life, when both had lived long in retirement, they had friendly correspondence; and it is one of the most notable events in our political annals that Jefferson and Adams, who stood side by side in presenting the Declaration of Independence to Congress, and who had fought the fiercest political battles of the nation as opposing leaders, both died on the same day—the natal day of the Republic—July 4, 1826.

[Pg 21]

THOMAS JEFFERSON

## THE JEFFERSON-PINCKNEY CONTEST

1804

The election of Jefferson in 1800 was a complete revolution in the political policy of the new Republic, and it maintained its supremacy for sixty years. The Republican party that triumphed with Jefferson never suffered a defeat until after the name of the party had been changed to Democracy under Jackson. John Quincy Adams, who was elected President in 1824, was nominated and supported as a Republican, as were Jackson, Crawford, and Clay, and the Whig triumphs of 1840 and 1848 stand in our history as accidental victories without changing the general policy of the Government in any material respect. It may be accepted as a fact that from 1800 until 1900, the full period of a century, there have been but two political policies established and maintained in the government of this country. The Democratic policy ruled from 1800 to 1860, and from 1860 to 1900 the Republican policy has maintained its supremacy, notwithstanding the two Democratic administrations of Cleveland. They were but temporary checks upon Republican mastery, as the Whig successes of 1840 and 1848 were mere temporary checks upon Democratic rule.

With Jefferson’s success in 1800 came, for the first time, the control of the Republicans in both branches of Congress, and Jefferson thus had the entire legislative power of the Government in thorough sympathy and harmony with himself. He was bitterly opposed by the Federalists at every step. They justly criticised his hostility to an American navy; they complained vehemently of his removals from office in partisan interests, and they specially assailed his ostentatious attempts to limit the authority and powers of the General Government to give the supreme sovereignty of the nation to the people.

[Pg 22]

The one act of his administration that was most violently assailed was his purchase of Louisiana in 1803. It was proclaimed by the Federalists as the most flagrant usurpation of authority, as an utter overthrow of the Constitution, and as the beginning of the end of the Union. There is not an argument made to-day against the acquisition of the Philippines and Puerto Rico that is not the echo of the earnest arguments made by the Federalists against the acquisition of Louisiana. The ablest of the Federalists proclaimed in the Senate and House that the Union was practically destroyed by the acquisition of a distant country, containing a people with no sympathy with our interests or institutions; who were generally strangers to our language and could never be educated to the proper standard of American citizenship. But the country then, as now, believed in expansion, and the acquisition of Louisiana stands out as one of the grandest achievements of statesmanship exhibited by any administration, from Washington to McKinley.

The contest between Jefferson and Burr for the Presidency, after one had been distinctly supported as a candidate for President and the other as distinctly as a candidate for Vice-President, taught the necessity of changing the method of choosing a President in the Electoral College, but the Federalists bitterly opposed the change, chiefly on the ground that it was desired solely to gratify the personal ambition and interests of Jefferson. The proposed amendment prevailed, however, and was ratified by thirteen of the sixteen States in ample time for the contest of 1804. The dissenting States in the ratification of the amendment were Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Delaware. Under that amendment the electors voted for President and Vice-President as they do to-day, and the candidate for Vice-President must now have a majority of the electoral vote as well as the candidate for President to be successful.

The Congressional caucus that made Presidents for many years became an accepted institution in 1804, when the Republican or Jeffersonian members of Congress were publicly invited to meet on the 25th of February. They unanimously nominated Mr. Jefferson for re-election, and as Burr was unthought of for Vice-President, they nominated George Clinton, of New York, for that office. This was the first open political caucus or convention to nominate national candidates. The caucuses of 1800 were held in secret by both[Pg 23] the Federalists and Republicans, and no record was preserved of their actions. Those who called the caucus, appreciating the prejudice that would likely be provoked by Congress attempting to dictate the candidates for President and Vice-President, distinctly declared that the caucus or conference was called solely as individuals, and not as official representatives of the Senate and House. If the Federalists held a caucus in 1804, there is no record of it that I have been able to find, but they united on Charles C. Pinckney, of South Carolina, for President, and Rufus King, of New York, for Vice-President. Both of the parties gave the second place on their respective tickets to New York, clearly indicating that they regarded New York as one of the pivotal States of the conflict.

Ohio had been admitted into the Union in 1802, making 17 States to take part in the election of 1804, and the new apportionment, shaped by the census of 1800, enlarged the number of electoral votes. While the Federalists had greatly diminished in popular strength by the loss of power and the steadily gaining approval of Jefferson and his Republican policy, they did not abate in any degree the intensity of their hostility to Jefferson, and in a few States where contests were made, the campaigns were conducted on the old defamatory lines which marked the two great battles between Jefferson and Adams.

In most of the States there was practically no contest, but in Massachusetts and Connecticut, where Federalism had always maintained its supremacy, the Federalists fought with an earnestness and desperation such as might have been expected in a hopeful struggle. The fiercest battle was fought in Massachusetts, where for the first time the Republicans defeated the Federalists in the largest vote ever cast in the State. Jefferson electors received 29,310 votes to 25,777 for the Pinckney ticket, giving Jefferson a majority of 3533. This was a terrible blow to Adams, and it was aggravated by the fact that while Massachusetts faltered, Connecticut gave her electoral vote to the Federal ticket. Delaware, with her three electoral votes, was the only other State that maintained her devotion to the Federal cause, and the electoral votes of those 2 States, with 2 added from the 11 votes of Maryland, summed up the entire vote of the Federal candidate for President in the Electoral College, the vote being 162 for Jefferson to 14 for Pinckney, and a like vote[Pg 24] for Clinton and King for Vice-President. The following table presents the official vote cast in the electoral colleges:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Thomas Jefferson. | Charles C. Pinckney. | George Clinton. | Rufus King.
New Hampshire | 7 | — | 7 | —
Vermont | 6 | — | 6 | —
Massachusetts | 19 | — | 19 | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | 4 | —
Connecticut | — | 9 | — | 9
New York | 19 | — | 19 | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | 8 | —
Pennsylvania | 20 | — | 20 | —
Delaware | — | 3 | — | 3
Maryland | 9 | 2 | 9 | 2
Virginia | 24 | — | 24 | —
North Carolina | 14 | — | 14 | —
South Carolina | 10 | — | 10 | —
Georgia | 6 | — | 6 | —
Kentucky | 8 | — | 8 | —
Tennessee | 5 | — | 5 | —
Ohio | 3 | — | 3 | —
Total | 162 | 14 | 162 | 14

[Pg 25]

JAMES MADISON

## THE MADISON-PINCKNEY-CLINTON CONTESTS

1808–12

The election of Jefferson ended the line of the succession to the Presidency from the Vice-Presidency. Adams as Vice-President succeeded Washington as President, and Jefferson as Vice-President succeeded Adams, but the Burr fiasco made it impossible for the succession to be maintained, and for many years the line of succession to the Presidency was in the Premiers of the administration. Indeed during the entire century from 1800 to 1900 but one Vice-President has been elected to the Presidency. That single exception was Martin Van Buren, and he started under the Jackson administration as Premier. Madison, who was Secretary of State under Jefferson, succeeded Jefferson to the Presidency; Monroe, Secretary of State under Madison, succeeded Madison as President; John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State under Monroe, succeeded Monroe as President, and since that time Buchanan was the only Secretary of State who reached the Presidency, although Webster, Cass and Blaine, who were Premiers under several administrations, were defeated in Presidential contests.

Madison was generally regarded as the favorite of Jefferson for the succession, and Jefferson’s power at that time was second only to the power of Washington in dictating who should succeed him to the highest honor of the Republic. Irritating opposition to Madison came from his own State of Virginia, where the friends of Monroe were quite aggressive. Two caucuses had been held in the Virginia Legislature, one by the friends of Madison, and the other, much smaller in number, by the friends of Monroe, and both were thus formally presented to the country to succeed Jefferson.

A caucus of the Republican members of both branches of[Pg 26] Congress was called to meet on the 23d of January, 1808. It was known that the friends of Madison largely outnumbered the friends of Monroe in Congress, and the active supporters of Monroe earnestly opposed a nomination by the Congressional caucus. The caucus was held, however, and was attended by a majority of the Senators and Representatives, and Madison was nominated on the 1st ballot, receiving 83 votes to 3 for Monroe and 3 for George Clinton. Monroe had a considerably larger strength in Congress, but the result was predetermined, and a number of them did not participate. George Clinton was nominated by substantially the same vote for Vice-President. The caucus system was under fire, and the caucus, in justification of its own act, adopted a resolution declaring that in making the nominations the members had “acted only in their individual characters as citizens,” and because it was “the most practical mode of consulting and respecting the interests and wishes of all upon a subject so truly interesting to the people of the United States.”

It was a considerable time before the friends of Monroe gave a cordial adhesion to the caucus nominations, but Jefferson, who was friendly to both Madison and Monroe, interposed and reconciled the friends of Monroe by the expectation that Monroe would succeed Madison; and as there was practically no serious opposition to Madison presented by the Federalists, the campaign drifted into the general acceptance of Madison’s election long before the election was held. The Federalists did not hold any caucus or formally present candidates, but accepted Pinckney and King, for whom they had voted in the last contest against Jefferson.

In the New England States vigorous contests were made by the Federalists to regain the supremacy they had lost, and New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, which had voted for Jefferson, were regained by the Federalists, but the struggle was not made with any hope of defeating Madison for President. There had been no increase in the number of States nor in the vote of the electoral colleges. Madison won an easy and decisive victory, receiving 122 electoral votes to 47 for Pinckney and 6 for George Clinton, who was the regular nominee of the Republicans for Vice-President, and who was elected to that office by 113 electoral votes to 47 for King and 15 scattering. New York was obviously disaffected, as while the Republican caucus had accorded[Pg 27] to Clinton of that State the second place on the ticket, and elected him Vice-President, the electoral vote of New York was divided, Madison receiving 13 to 6 cast for Clinton, and in the same electoral college Clinton received 13 votes for Vice-President to 3 for Madison and 3 for Monroe. The votes of North Carolina and Maryland were also divided, but that was not unusual, as after Washington retired the electoral votes of those States were divided, because their electors were chosen by Congressional districts.

There is no intelligent record of the popular vote, and it would be needless to attempt to present it, as outside of New England the States which were contested generally chose their electors by the Legislature. The following is the vote in detail as cast in the Electoral College:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
James Madison, Va. | George Clinton, N. Y. | C. C. Pinckney, S. C. | George Clinton, N. Y. | James Madison, Va. | John Langdon, N. H. | James Monroe, Va. | Rufus King, N. Y.
New Hampshire | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | 7
Vermont | 6 | — | — | — | — | 6 | — | —
Massachusetts | — | — | 19 | — | — | — | — | 19
Rhode Island | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4
Connecticut | — | — | 9 | — | — | — | — | 9
New York | 13 | 6 | — | 13 | 3 | — | 3 | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 20 | — | — | 20 | — | — | — | —
Delaware | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3
Maryland | 9 | — | 2 | 9 | — | — | — | 2
Virginia | 24 | — | — | 24 | — | — | — | —
North Carolina | 11 | — | 3 | 11 | — | — | — | 3
South Carolina | 10 | — | — | 10 | — | — | — | —
Georgia | 6 | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | —
Kentucky[4] | 7 | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | —
Tennessee | 5 | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | —
Ohio | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | —
| 122 | 6 | 47 | 113 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 47

[Pg 28]

The battle for Madison’s second election in 1812 began in the early period of our second war with Great Britain. Many complicated foreign questions excited earnest discussion and renewed the partisan bitterness of the earlier national contests, while the struggle for the renewal of the charter of the United States bank convulsed financial and business circles. The bill was lost by indefinite postponement in the House in 1811 by a single vote, and soon thereafter a like bill was rejected in the Senate by the casting vote of the Vice-President. Madison did not possess the breadth of statesmanship so grandly exhibited by Jefferson, and he lacked in the positive qualities needed to meet the grave issues which confronted him. He parried our foreign questions with almost endless diplomatic correspondence, and in the conduct of the war he lacked in the settled purpose and methods which are always necessary to sustain a government in such a crisis.

It was then that Clay came to the front as Commoner of the nation, and it was his able, eloquent, and inspiring utterances and actions, aided by Senator Crawford, of Georgia, that saved the administration when it was apparently threatened with defeat. Madison was unwilling to accept war with England until it became clearly evident that he must declare war or give the Federalists a restoration to power, and it was only after he had been very earnestly appealed to by the men upon whom he had most to depend, that he sent a message to Congress pointing out the necessity of a declaration of war, to which both branches in secret sessions gave their approval.

It was not until after Madison had decided upon an aggressive war policy with England that the Congressional caucus was called to nominate Republican candidates for President and Vice-President. The caucus met on the 12th of May apparently without objection, and Madison was renominated by a unanimous vote, only one member present declining to vote. Clinton had died in office, and a new nomination had to be made for Vice-President. John Langdon, of New Hampshire, who was the first Senator to be President pro tem. of the body, was nominated for Vice-President, receiving 64 votes to 16 for Elbridge Gerry and 2 scattering. Langdon declined the nomination, and the second caucus was convened when Gerry was nominated by a vote of 74 to 3 scattering. While the proceedings of the caucus[Pg 29] were apparently very harmonious, there was significance in the fact that some 50 Republican Senators and Representatives did not attend, only one being present from New York State.

The reason for the New York members declining to attend the caucus was soon developed by a counter movement, made in New York, to bring out DeWitt Clinton, who was the leader of the Republicans of that State, as the candidate in opposition to Madison. The Federalists had no part in making him the competitor of Madison, but they were quite willing, in their utter helplessness, to support any bolt against the omnipotence of the Republican caucus. Many of the Republicans thought that the administration was not sufficiently aggressive in its opposition to England, and many others opposed Madison and were ready to support Clinton or any other promising candidate who was entirely opposed to the war. Had Clinton acted in harmony with the Republicans and supported Madison, he would have been a very formidable competitor of Monroe for the succession, but in allowing himself to be made a candidate of the opposition, he entirely lost his position as a Republican leader.

Madison had been nominated by the Republican Congressional caucus on the 12th of May, and on the 29th of May a caucus of the Republican members of the New York Legislature was held, at which 91 of the 93 members were present, and they unanimously nominated Clinton as a candidate for President, and the Federalists gradually dropped into his support. The Federalists took no formal action for the selection of candidates until September, when a conference of the leaders of that party was held in New York, with representatives from 11 States, and that conference nominated Clinton for President with Jared Ingersoll for Vice-President.

The campaign logically drifted into a square issue between the war and the peace parties, and even with all the factional hostility to Madison in the Republican ranks, such an issue could result only in the success of the party that sustained the Government in its war with England. The Federalists carried a solid New England vote for Clinton with the exception of Vermont, that broke loose from her Federal moorings and cast her entire electoral vote for Madison. New York, with the largest electoral vote of any State, was carried chiefly by Clinton’s personal popularity, and New Jersey was lost to Madison in disregard of the popular vote of[Pg 30] the State by a Federal Senate and House that was successful against a Republican majority by reason of the peculiar shaping of the legislative districts. The Legislature repealed the law for the choice of electors by a popular vote, and elected Federal electors by the Legislature. Had the popular vote of New Jersey prevailed, the vote between Madison and Clinton in the Electoral College would have been 136 for Madison to 81 for Clinton. The following is the vote as cast by the electoral colleges:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
James Madison, Va. | DeWitt Clinton, N. Y. | Elbridge Gerry, Mass. | Jared Ingersoll, Penn.
New Hampshire | — | 8 | 1 | 7
Vermont | 8 | — | 8 | —
Massachusetts | — | 22 | 2 | 20
Rhode Island | — | 4 | — | 4
Connecticut | — | 9 | — | 9
New York | — | 29 | — | 29
New Jersey | — | 8 | — | 8
Pennsylvania | 25 | — | 25 | —
Delaware | — | 4 | — | 4
Maryland | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5
Virginia | 25 | — | 25 | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | 15 | —
South Carolina | 11 | — | 11 | —
Georgia | 8 | — | 8 | —
Kentucky | 12 | — | 12 | —
Tennessee | 8 | — | 8 | —
Louisiana | 3 | — | 3 | —
Ohio | 7 | — | 7 | —
Total | 128 | 89 | 131 | 86

Louisiana was admitted into the Union on the 8th of April, 1812, and participated in the Presidential election, making 18 States. It will be seen that there was but one State that cast a divided electoral vote. Maryland continued[Pg 31] to choose all but the electors at large by Congressional districts, and gave 6 votes to Madison and 5 to Clinton. North Carolina changed her method of electing by districts to the choice of electors by the Legislature, thus making her electoral vote solid. Gerry, the candidate for Vice-President on the ticket with Madison, received 3 more votes in the Electoral College than were given to Madison, one of which came from New Hampshire and two from Massachusetts.

[Pg 32]

## THE MONROE ELECTIONS

1816–20

The election of James Monroe to the Presidency in 1816 and his re-election in 1820 did not rise to the dignity of political contests. The Federal party was practically overthrown by the success of the war with England, and after the close of the war Federalism never asserted itself as a political factor in national affairs. There were murmurings of discontent in the Republican organization, but the Federalists were then in the unenviable attitude of having sympathized with the enemy in a foreign war, and the prejudices of the patriotic people of the country were intensified against the action of the Hartford convention, for which the Federalists were held responsible.

Whether justly or unjustly, it was believed by the Republicans throughout the country that the Hartford conventionists had given “blue-light” signals to the enemy’s ships, and thereby hindered the escape of American vessels which were blockaded. The overthrow of Federalism was so complete that the party never again formally presented candidates for President and Vice-President, and the first Monroe election of 1816 would probably have been as unanimous in the Electoral College as was his second election but for the fact that the three Federal States which voted against Monroe did not hold popular elections for President at all, but chose their electors by the Legislature. Massachusetts, the home of Adams, that had always chosen Presidential electors by popular vote, repealed the law in 1816, so that there was not a single elector chosen by the people against Monroe.

While Monroe’s two elections and administrations are now pointed to as the “era of good feeling,” that has never been repeated in this country. Monroe himself did not[Pg 33] reach the Presidency by the rosy path that would now be naturally accepted for him in his journey to the highest civil trust of the nation. The usual Congressional caucus was called on the 10th of March, 1816, asking the Republican Senators and Representatives to meet on the 12th for the purpose of nominating candidates for President and Vice-President. Only 58 of the 141 Republican members attended this meeting, and, instead of taking action, a resolution was passed calling a general caucus for the 16th, and at that caucus 118 members appeared. There were strong and widespread prejudices against the Congressional caucus system, and it was denounced by many prominent Republicans as “King Caucus” that sought to control the people in the selection of the highest officers.

JAMES MONROE

Senator Crawford, of Georgia, who had been the leading Senator, as Clay was the leading Representative, in the support of the war during the Madison administration, was an aggressive candidate for President, and was more popular with the politicians generally throughout the country than was Monroe. Great anxiety was felt about the probable action of the caucus, as it was feared that Monroe might be overthrown, notwithstanding the fact that he was favored by both Jefferson and Madison. When the caucus met with twenty-three Republican absentees, the majority of whom absented themselves because they were positively opposed to the caucus system, Mr. Clay offered a resolution declaring it inexpedient to nominate candidates, but his proposition failed. He thus put himself on record as early as 1816 against the caucus system, and he rejected and took the field against it as a candidate in 1824.

The canvass between Monroe and Crawford was very animated, and Monroe succeeded by only 11 majority, the vote being 65 for Monroe and 54 for Crawford. Governor Daniel D. Tompkins, of New York, was nominated for Vice-President, receiving 20 votes more than were given to Monroe. The Crawford sentiment was strong in New York and New Jersey, as well as in North Carolina, Kentucky, and his native State of Georgia, and public meetings were held in different sections of the country after the nominations had been made, denouncing the caucus system, at one of which Roger B. Taney, who later became Chief Justice, was one of the aggressive opponents.

Had there been a formidable Federal party, it is doubtful[Pg 34] whether Monroe’s election might not have been seriously imperilled, but the war feeling was too fresh in the minds of the people to tolerate anything that was in sympathy with that expiring political organization. The Republicans who were opposed to Monroe had to choose between falling in with the caucus nomination, and giving Monroe a unanimous support, or making a square fight as a bolting Republican faction, without permitting the aid of the Federalists. As that was impracticable, the Republican discontent gradually subsided and the election of Monroe was conceded by all.

The Federalists made no nomination, but supported Rufus King, one of their old national candidates, and scattered their few votes for Vice-President, no two of the three States voting for the same candidate. Indiana had adopted a State Constitution in June, but was not formally admitted to the Union until the 11th of December, after the Presidential election had been held. The State, however, had voted for President, and elected three Republican electors for Monroe, but an animated dispute arose in Congress about counting the vote, because of the alleged ineligibility of Indiana to vote for President when not formally admitted into the Union, even though the people had adopted a State Constitution several months before the election. The two bodies separated, to enable the House to decide the issue, but finally the question was postponed by a nearly unanimous vote, and the Senate invited to return, when the vote was declared as follows:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
James Monroe, Va. | Rufus King, N. Y. | Daniel D. Tompkins, N. Y. | John E. Howard, Md. | James Ross, Penn. | John Marshall, Va. | Robert G. Harper, Md.
New Hampshire | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Vermont | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | — | 22 | — | 22 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | 4 | —[Pg 35]
Connecticut | — | 9 | — | — | 5 | — | —
New York | 29 | — | 29 | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 25 | — | 25 | — | — | — | —
Delaware | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3
Maryland | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Virginia | 25 | — | 25 | — | — | — | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | 15 | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | 11 | — | 11 | — | — | — | —
Georgia | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | 12 | — | 12 | — | — | — | —
Tennessee | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Ohio | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Indiana | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Total | 183 | 34 | 183 | 22 | 5 | 4 | 3

Monroe’s re-election in 1820 presents the singular political spectacle of his success without having been formally nominated by any party, and without a single electoral vote being chosen against him. That had occurred in Washington’s two elections, but it was not believed possible that, with the bitter partisan disputes which immediately followed Washington’s retirement, any man could ever be chosen for the Presidency without more or less of a contest. Monroe’s administration had no serious political or diplomatic problem to confront it, and the country was rapidly recovering from the war and proud of the achievements of the American army and navy in the second contest with the English.

Monroe was naturally cautious and conservative. There was nothing aggressive in the policy of his administration, and really no occasion to invite aggression. The Federal Party was practically extinct, and the Republicans were in[Pg 36] thorough accord with the Monroe administration. A feeble movement was made early in 1820 to supersede Monroe, but it never attained importance, and even those who attempted it denied responsibility for it. The usual Republican Congressional caucus was called, and very few members took the trouble to attend it, as there was really nothing to do; and it was deemed better for the party to accept Monroe and Tompkins for re-election than to have formal nominations made by a very few representatives of the party. Monroe and Tompkins were thus accepted without any formalities whatever as the Republican candidates for President and Vice-President, and no opposing candidates were presented in any way whatever of which I can find any record or tradition. Monroe thus ran in 1820, as Washington did at both his elections, without opposition, and every electoral vote of the nation was chosen for him.

Five new States had been admitted and participated in the election of 1820. Mississippi came in December, 1817; Illinois in December, 1818; Alabama in December, 1819; Maine in March, 1820, and Missouri had adopted a Constitution in July, 1820, and although not formally admitted into the Union until August, 1821, the vote of that State was counted, as was the vote of Indiana in 1816. The following is the official vote as announced by Congress:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
James Monroe, Va. | John Quincy Adams, Mass. | Daniel D. Tompkins, N. Y. | Richard Stockton, N. J. | Robert G. Harper, Md. | Richard Rush, Penn. | Daniel Rodney, Del.
Maine | 9 | — | 9 | — | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 7 | 1 | 7 | — | — | 1 | —
Vermont | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 15 | — | 7 | 8 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | 9 | — | 9 | — | — | — | —
New York | 29 | — | 29 | — | — | — | —[Pg 37]
New Jersey | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania[5] | 24 | — | 24 | — | — | — | —
Delaware | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | 4
Maryland | 11 | — | 10 | — | 1 | — | —
Virginia | 25 | — | 25 | — | — | — | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | 15 | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | 11 | — | 11 | — | — | — | —
Georgia | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Alabama | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Mississippi[5] | 2 | — | 2 | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | 12 | — | 12 | — | — | — | —
Tennessee[5] | 7 | — | 7 | — | — | — | —
Ohio | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Indiana | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Illinois | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Missouri | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Total | 231 | 1 | 218 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 4

It will be seen that a single electoral vote was cast against Monroe in the New Hampshire Electoral College. The whole 8 electors were chosen as Monroe men, and would have voted for him had it been necessary to elect him, but one of the New Hampshire electors gave as his reason for voting for John Quincy Adams for President and Richard Rush, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President, that he was unwilling that any other President than Washington should receive a unanimous electoral vote.

Monroe’s administrations were uneventful beyond the assertion of what has ever since been known as the Monroe Doctrine, that was evolved by Monroe and John Quincy[Pg 38] Adams, his Secretary of State, and the first serious contest in Congress over the Slavery issue, growing out of the admission of Missouri as a State. After the admission of Louisiana as a State the remainder of the territory embracing the Louisiana purchase was organized as the Territory of Missouri, and in 1818 the portion of the territory now embraced in the State of Missouri applied for admission into the Union as a State. In 1819 the House passed a bill for the admission of Missouri, with a clause prohibiting slavery, but it was not accepted by the Senate.

In 1820 the Senate sent a bill to the House for the admission of Maine, and authorizing the organization of the State of Missouri. The House had already passed a bill for the admission of Maine, but it refused to accept the Senate’s provision relating to Missouri. There was very violent agitation on the Slavery question for some time, and many feared that it would end in the disruption of the Union; but Clay became the pacificator, and chiefly by his efforts what has ever since been known as the Missouri Compromise was accepted, admitting Missouri as a slave State, but prohibiting slavery in all of the Louisiana territory north of 36 degrees and 30 minutes north latitude. This compromise did not fully satisfy either side, but it was accepted, and on the 10th of August, 1821, President Monroe proclaimed the admission of Missouri into the Union.

Monroe had the most unruffled period of rule ever known in the history of the Republic. Washington, with all his omnipotence, was fearfully beset by factional strife and the wrangles of ambition on every side, and there was no period of his two administrations in which he was not greatly fretted by the persistent and often desperate disputes among those who should have been his friends; but Monroe had an entirely peaceful reign, with the single exception of the slavery dispute over the Missouri question, and at the close of his term he retired to his home in Virginia entirely exhausted in fortune. For several years he acted as a Justice of the Peace, but his severely straitened circumstances finally compelled him to make his home with his son-in-law in New York, where he died in 1831, and, like Jefferson and Adams, on the 4th of July.

[Pg 39]

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS

## THE ADAMS-JACKSON-CRAWFORD-CLAY CONTEST

1824

With the re-election of Monroe in 1820, the Federal party had perished as a political factor; “King Caucus,” as the Congressional caucus for nominating national candidates had been generally designated, had fulfilled its mission, and none pretended that it could be revived to name the successor of Monroe. As Federalism was unfelt and unfeared, and as the Congressional caucus had lost its prestige and power, the Presidential field of 1824 invited a free-for-all race, and the discussion of the succession began actively as early as 1822. It seems unaccountable that the Republicans, after having had the benefit of the Congressional caucus to concentrate their vote on national candidates, did not conceive the idea of a general conference of representative Republicans from the different States to unite them on candidates for President and Vice-President, but no national convention was ever held by any party until the anti-Masons inaugurated it in Philadelphia in 1830, two years before the Presidential election of 1832.

As there was practically no Federal party, none but Republicans were discussed for the succession to Monroe. It is a common but erroneous idea that John Quincy Adams was in harmony with the Federal sentiment of his State and New England generally. After having filled a number of important offices, principally in diplomatic circles, he was elected to the United States Senate as a Federalist by the Massachusetts Legislature in 1802, but he heartily supported the administration of Jefferson, resulting in instructions passed by the Legislature demanding that he should change his political policy. He refused to obey the Legislative instructions, but resigned his seat in the Senate, and thenceforth he acted uniformly with the Republicans, and was Secretary of State during the eight years of Monroe’s administration.

[Pg 40]

While very many candidates were discussed for the succession, when the time came for concentration only six names remained, and three of those were members of the Monroe Cabinet. They were John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State; John C. Calhoun, Secretary of War; William H. Crawford, Secretary of the Treasury; Henry Clay, of Kentucky, who had been Speaker of the House; Ex-Governor De Witt Clinton, of New York, who was not then in official position, and General Andrew Jackson, of Tennessee, who had been Senator, Representative, and Supreme Judge. Mr. Clay was presented to the people as a candidate for President by the Kentucky Legislature as early as the 18th of November, 1822, or two years before the election, and the Missouri Legislature also adopted a resolution about the same time recommending Mr. Clay. During the year 1823 the Legislatures of Illinois, Ohio, and Louisiana had also formally favored Clay.

General Jackson was first formally named for the Presidency by a mass-meeting in Blount County, Tenn., early in 1823, and that was followed up by various mass-meetings and local conventions in different parts of the Union. Mr. Adams, although not in sympathy with the Federalists, having earnestly supported the war with England against the Federal sentiment of his State, was presented as a candidate by the Legislature of Massachusetts, and it was seconded by most of the New England States during the early part of the year 1824.

Clinton was nominated by local mass-meetings in New York and Ohio. Calhoun was presented by the Legislature of South Carolina, and Crawford by the Legislature of Virginia. It is worthy of note that while Adams was the Premier of the administration, Crawford was obviously the favorite candidate of President Monroe, as the Legislature of Virginia recommended Crawford, and Virginia voted for him at the election.

All of these candidates were opposed to the Congressional caucus excepting Crawford, who had been the competitor of Monroe in the caucus in 1816. His friends made earnest effort to get the prestige of a caucus nomination, and 6 Senators and 5 Representatives from different States called a caucus to meet on the 14th of February, 1824, “to recommend candidates to the people of the United States for the office of President and Vice-President.” That call was met[Pg 41] by a card signed by 24 Republican Senators and members declaring that of the 261 Senators and Representatives there were 81 who were opposed to the caucus. The caucus was held, however, but only 66 members appeared, a majority of whom were from 4 States, and 8 States were not represented at all. A motion to adjourn to meet some weeks later was opposed by Mr. Van Buren and rejected. A ballot was then had for President, when Crawford received 64, Adams 2, Jackson 1, and Macon 1. Albert Gallatin, of Pennsylvania, was also nominated for Vice-President.

The caucus nomination was certainly a hindrance rather than a help to Crawford, as it concentrated his opponents to a very large extent. The caucus system had become very odious, and with 5 of the 6 candidates openly hostile to the caucus, it placed Crawford at a decided disadvantage. Gallatin, who was of foreign birth, was bitterly assailed, and a month before the election he withdrew his name as a candidate, but no attempt was made to give formal nomination to a successor for him on the ticket.

Strange as it may appear, Pennsylvania, the home of Gallatin, did not cordially respond to his nomination, and there was a decided preference in that State in favor of Calhoun for Vice-President. Calhoun and Clinton, being without any large measure of support, gradually dropped out of the Presidential contest, leaving Adams, Jackson, Crawford, and Clay to make the scrub race. There were 24 States to participate in the election, and New York, Vermont, Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia and Louisiana chose their electors by their Legislatures, while Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Illinois, and Kentucky chose electors by districts, and in the other States popular elections were held and electors chosen by general ticket.

An incident that occurred in the selection of electors by the Legislature of New York resulted in making Clay the fourth candidate in the Electoral College instead of the third. There were 3 of the electors chosen by the Legislature who were elected as Clay men by a combination between the Clay and Adams men, who in the Electoral College divided their votes between Adams, Crawford, and Jackson, and had they voted for Clay, as it was expected they would, Clay would have had 40 votes in the electoral colleges and Crawford only 38. As only the three highest candidates in the Electoral College could be returned to the House from which a[Pg 42] choice had to be made, Crawford was thus returned instead of Clay, and if Clay had been returned, it is probable that Adams would not have been chosen President. The New York Legislature had a protracted contest in choosing electors. The combined strength of the candidates in the two Houses as shown by the 1st ballot was 60 for Crawford, 57 for Adams, and 39 for Clay. Finally a combination was made between the friends of Adams and Clay, and divided electors were chosen, by which Adams received 26 votes, Crawford 5, Clay 4, and Jackson 1. In Delaware the electors were divided by a like dispute in the Legislature.

The contest was not one of great bitterness, and in some States there was practically no contest at all. Massachusetts and Virginia, for instance, did not poll half their votes, as they were really not contested, one being conceded to Adams and the other to Crawford. The following is the popular vote of the States except where the electors were chosen by the Legislature, as nearly as it can be ascertained after the most exhaustive investigation of the records:

STATES. | Jackson. | Adams. | Crawford. | Clay.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Maine[6] | ——— | 10,289 | 2,336 | ———
New Hampshire | 643 | 4,107 | ——— | ———
Vermont[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Massachusetts[6] | ——— | 30,687 | 6,616 | ———
Rhode Island | ——— | 2,145 | 200 | ———
Connecticut | ——— | 7,587 | 1,978 | ———
New York[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
New Jersey | 10,985 | 9,110 | 1,196 | ———
Pennsylvania | 36,100 | 5,440 | 4,206 | 1,609
Delaware[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Maryland[6] | 14,523 | 14,632 | 3,646 | 695
Virginia | 2,861 | 3,189 | 8,489 | 416
North Carolina | 20,415 | ——— | 15,621 | ———
South Carolina[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Georgia[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Alabama | 9,443 | 2,416 | 1,680 | 67
Mississippi | 3,234 | 1,694 | 119 | ———
Louisiana[7] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Kentucky[6] | 6,455 | ——— | ——— | 17,321
Tennessee | 20,197 | 216 | 312 | ———
Missouri | 987 | 311 | ——— | 1,401
Ohio | 18,457 | 12,280 | ——— | 19,255
Indiana | 7,343 | 3,095 | ——— | 5,315
Illinois[6] | 1,901 | 1,542 | 219 | 1,047
Totals | 153,544 | 108,740 | 46,618 | 47,136

[Pg 43]

The popular vote as given in the foregoing table does not fully represent the relative strength of the opposition candidates to Jackson. There were what were called “Opposition” tickets, “People’s” tickets, and “Convention” tickets voted in different States. It will be seen that Jackson received no votes in New England excepting a few in New Hampshire, and in most of those States electoral tickets were known as “Opposition” designed to concentrate all the opposition to Adams, and in North Carolina the Jackson ticket was voted as the “People’s” ticket, but no more intelligent and satisfactory presentation of the popular vote can be gathered from the records than that presented.

The following is the vote of the Electoral College:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Andrew Jackson, Tenn. | J. Q. Adams, Mass. | W. H. Crawford, Ga. | H. Clay, Ky. | John C. Calhoun, S. C. | Nathan Sanford, N. Y. | Nathaniel Macon, N. C. | Andrew Jackson, Tenn. | M. Van Buren, N. Y. | H. Clay, Ky.
Maine | — | 9 | — | — | 9 | — | — | — | — | —
New Hampshire | — | 8 | — | — | 7 | — | — | 1 | — | —
Vermont | — | 7 | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | — | 15 | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | — | —
Rhode Island | — | 4 | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | —
New York | 1 | 26 | 5 | 4 | 29 | 7 | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 28 | — | — | — | 28 | — | — | — | — | —
Delaware | — | 1 | 2 | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | 2
Maryland | 7 | 3 | 1 | — | 10 | — | — | 1 | — | —
Virginia | — | — | 24 | — | — | — | 24 | — | — | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | 11 | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | —
Georgia | — | — | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | 9 | —
Alabama | 5 | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | —
Mississippi | 3 | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | 3 | 2 | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | — | — | — | 14 | 7 | 7 | — | — | — | —
Tennessee | 11 | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | —
Missouri | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | 3 | — | —
Ohio | — | — | — | 16 | — | 16 | — | — | — | —
Indiana | 5 | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | —
Illinois | 2 | 1 | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | —
Total | 99 | 84 | 41 | 37 | 182 | 30 | 24 | 13 | 9 | 2

[Pg 44]

Jackson led the popular vote, as was generally expected, and next to him is Adams, with Clay third and Crawford fourth. While all of the 4 candidates were regarded as Republicans as between Federalism and Republicanism, the friends of Adams in a number of the States fought the battle under the title of National Republicans, and the supporters of Jackson, who represented the more Democratic element of the opponents of Federalism, entitled themselves in some States the Democratic Republicans. As was generally expected, there was no choice for President, as no one of the 4 candidates had a majority of either the popular or electoral votes, but Calhoun was elected Vice-President by a large majority, having received the support of the Adams men generally in New England, and of the Jackson men in Pennsylvania, Maryland, North and South Carolina, and indeed in all of the Southern States, excepting Georgia, Kentucky, and Missouri.

Thus for the second time in the history of the Republic the Presidential election was remanded to the House for final decision, and the names of Jackson, Adams, and Crawford, the three highest in the Electoral College, were returned to that body from which a choice had to be made by a majority of the States. Although Clay had received less votes than Crawford, he was a very much more potent factor in deciding the contest between the three candidates than Crawford could have been, and it soon became evident that the friends of Clay were in much closer accord and sympathy with Adams than they were with the friends of either Crawford or Jackson. Clay certainly had no love for Jackson, as Jackson was not accredited with any great qualities of statesmanship, and it was the general apprehension that Clay would control the election in favor of Adams that made the friends of Jackson publish the accusation of “bargain and sale” between Adams and Clay, by which Clay was to make Adams President and receive the position of Premier under the administration. Although the Legislature of Kentucky had requested the Congressmen from that State to vote for Jackson, there were well-known reasons, both public and personal, why Clay could not favor Jackson, and on the first ballot in the House Adams received the votes of 13 States, with 7 for Jackson and 4 for Crawford. The majority of the delegation of each State decided how the vote should be cast, and the following table shows not only how the vote of[Pg 45] each State was given, but the divisions in the different delegations in deciding between the three candidates:

STATES. | Adams. | Jackson. | Crawford. | Vote for—
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Maine | 7 | — | — | Adams.
New Hampshire | 6 | — | — | Adams.
Vermont | 5 | — | — | Adams.
Massachusetts | 12 | 1 | — | Adams.
Rhode Island | 2 | — | — | Adams.
Connecticut | 6 | — | — | Adams.
New York | 18 | 2 | 14 | Adams.
New Jersey | 1 | 5 | — | Jackson.
Pennsylvania | 1 | 25 | — | Jackson.
Delaware | — | — | 1 | Crawford.
Maryland | 5 | 3 | 1 | Adams.
Virginia | 1 | 1 | 19 | Crawford.
North Carolina | 1 | 2 | 10 | Crawford.
South Carolina | — | 9 | — | Jackson.
Georgia | — | — | 7 | Crawford.
Alabama | — | 3 | — | Jackson.
Mississippi | — | 1 | — | Jackson.
Louisiana | 2 | 1 | — | Adams.
Kentucky | 8 | 4 | — | Adams.
Tennessee | — | 9 | — | Jackson.
Missouri | 1 | — | — | Adams.
Ohio | 10 | 2 | 2 | Adams.
Indiana | — | 3 | — | Jackson.
Illinois | 1 | — | — | Adams.
| 87 | 71 | 54 |

The administration of John Quincy Adams will be regarded by the careful and dispassionate student of American history as the model government of the Republic. He was the most accomplished scholar who ever filled the position, and surpassed all others in general and accurate intelligence. He was a tireless student until the day of his death, and he had no taste and no fitness for political manipulation. He removed but two men from office during his four years in the Presidency, and they were dismissed for very good cause, and in the discharge of his official duties he looked solely to what he conceived to be the interests of the nation.

He made no efforts to popularize himself personally; was regarded as austere and unapproachable, but he was always courteous, and the arts of the demagogue had no[Pg 46] place in the Executive Mansion. He was the real author of the Monroe Doctrine, and earnestly attempted to accomplish what Blaine struggled to accomplish three-quarters of a century later—that is, the unity of the South American governments in sympathy with our Government. His Cabinet was not in political harmony, but as he regarded politics as entirely outside of Cabinet duties, he never took note of political disagreements. He aimed to win a re-election solely by deserving the considerate approval of the American people. After his defeat he returned to his home in Massachusetts, but was soon elected to Congress, where he continued until his death in 1848.

As an illustration of the careful methods of his life my own experience in obtaining his autograph serves a good purpose. A few weeks before his death, when I was the editor of a village newspaper and ambitious to have the autographs of the celebrated men of the country, I wrote him asking for an autograph letter. I received no reply, and after his death was announced I assumed that the letter had gone into the waste basket; but three months after his death I received a letter franked by Louise Catharine Adams (widows of Presidents were then accorded the franking privilege), and the envelope contained only the autograph of John Quincy Adams, clipped from a public document that he had franked. The pressure of duties had prevented him from answering my letter, but the fact that it was answered by his wife so long after his death is evidence that many letters had accumulated, all of which were answered by Mrs. Adams. He fitly died in the Capitol of the nation. He was stricken with paralysis during a session of the House, and died on the following day, having written, as I believe, the most lustrous political record of any of our statesmen, with the single exception of Abraham Lincoln.

[Pg 47]

ANDREW JACKSON

## THE JACKSON-ADAMS-CLAY CONTESTS

1828–32

The election of Jackson to the Presidency in 1828 was not in any sense a revolution as to the general policy of the Government, but it was a decided revolution in the political methods of our national administrations. Madison, Monroe, and Adams were not confronted by the spoils system. They never entertained the question of removing men from office to reward political friends or to punish political enemies.

The civil service system of the Government under those administrations was an ideal system, but the Jackson leaders openly inspired the followers of their favorite to earnest political action by the declaration that “to the victors belong the spoils.” That slogan was first heard in the Jackson-Adams campaign of 1828, and when Jackson succeeded, for the first time Washington was overrun with a countless host of greedy spoilsmen, clamoring for the dismissal of every man who had not supported Jackson.

Jackson himself was thoroughly committed to the policy of political proscription, and from that day until the present time it has been generally accepted that a change of politics in the national administrations means a general change of the now enormous army of Federal officers, excepting as it is feebly restrained by all parties professing devotion to a civil service system with none honestly maintaining it.

When it is remembered that Jackson was defeated by Adams in 1824, although having more popular and electoral votes than Adams, it is not surprising that the friends of Jackson became intensely embittered, and they opened the campaign of 1828 immediately after the inauguration of Adams in 1825. In the Southwest, where Jackson lived and had his chief strength outside of Pennsylvania, the cockpit, the race-course and the gaming-table were favorite amusements,[Pg 48] and the people were strongly prejudiced against what they regarded as the aristocratic power that had been maintained by the Virginia Presidents and continued by Adams. They had a candidate who enthused his followers to the uttermost, and the quiet citizens of Washington, long used to the delectable and cultivated official circles which had prevailed from Washington to the second Adams, were shocked at the mob of Democratic place-hunters who crowded into the Capitol when Jackson became President, and had access to the White House regardless of conventionality, where Jackson is reported to have smoked his corn-cob pipe during his greeting of visitors. With Jackson came the spoils system that has done so much to demoralize the politics of the Republic.

Jackson held a very strong position before the nation, not only because of his triumph over the British at New Orleans, but because of the high civil positions which he had filled with reasonable credit, but without displaying any high standard of statesmanship. He aided in framing the Tennessee Constitution in 1796, and was elected as the first Representative in Congress by the people after the admission of the State, then entitled to only one member.

He had been an ardent supporter of Jefferson in his first contest with the elder Adams, and in 1797 he was elected to the United States Senate, but he resigned a year later to become a Judge of the Supreme Court of the State, where he served until 1804, and was again elected Senator in 1823. He had filled all those important civil positions before he had attained any military distinction. He had served in the last year of the war of the revolution as a boy, and the only thing notable that is preserved of his military record of that day is the tradition that after he had been captured by the British he was wounded by an English officer because he refused to clean the officer’s boots.

It is not likely that he ever would have been a prominent candidate for President but for the fact that he defeated the English in the battle of New Orleans on the 8th of January, 1815. Had there been steamships, cables, and telegraphs at that time Jackson could never have commanded the hero worship that twice elected him President and made him practically political dictator.

The treaty of peace between England and the United States was signed at Ghent on December 24, 1814, but it required[Pg 49] nearly a month for the Government to receive information that the treaty had been signed and that the war was ended. On January 8, 1815, more than a fortnight after England and the United States were actually at peace by their own treaty, the battle of New Orleans was fought between Jackson and Packenham, and a victory achieved over the English that then electrified the country as thoroughly as did Dewey’s victory at Manila. That victory, and that victory alone, made Jackson President, and with his rugged and indomitable will, for nearly a generation he stamped his impress upon the policy of the Government with greater emphasis than any other living man since Washington.

The Presidential contest of 1828 formally began soon after the inauguration of Adams, when the Legislature of Tennessee presented Jackson as a candidate, and the criticisms of the Adams administration revived much of the political asperities and resentments of the violent discussions between the old Federalist and Republican parties in the days of Jefferson and the elder Adams. One of the reasons strongly urged against the re-election of Adams was that his administration had become recklessly extravagant, as the expenditures of the Government under him had reached the enormous sum of nearly $14,000,000 a year.

Adams was attacked also because of his liberal views on the questions of protection and public improvements, although Jackson had sustained nearly or quite the same views by his votes in Congress. Adams had no trained political leaders; his Cabinet was divided even on the question of supporting himself, and the ideal statesmanship that Adams worshipped was not calculated to school and equip great politicians. Chiefly through the efforts of Martin Van Buren the supporters of Crawford were brought into the support of Jackson, a feat that was probably not difficult from the fact that Clay, the Secretary of State under Adams, was not friendly with Crawford.

The Congressional caucus was not thought of, and Adams became a candidate to succeed himself by resolutions of Legislatures and mass-meetings. Calhoun, who was the Vice-President under Adams, was accepted by the friends of Jackson and received nearly as large an electoral vote as his chief. It was a contest between the dignified statesmanship of that day and the Democratic element of the country. Adams was accepted as the National Republican candidate[Pg 50] and Jackson was supported under the flags of Republican Democracy, and in some sections of Democracy alone. It was this contest and the success of Jackson that crystallized the Republican party of Jefferson into the Democratic party that then had the ablest political leaders of the nation.

The friends of Adams seem to have been confident of his re-election, and a majority of the States chose their electors by popular vote. It was a battle between the Democratic hero of New Orleans, the friend of the people, and the aristocratic power of the Republic. With Jackson’s great prestige and Adams’s feebleness in resources to support himself in the great contest before the people, it is not surprising that Jackson was elected by a very large popular and electoral majority. The following is the popular vote where a direct vote was had in the several States between Jackson and Adams:

STATES. | Jackson. | Adams.
--- | --- | ---
Maine[8] | 13,927 | 20,733
New Hampshire | 20,922 | 24,134
Vermont | 8,350 | 25,363
Massachusetts | 6,016 | 29,876
Rhode Island | 821 | 2,754
Connecticut | 4,448 | 13,838
New York[8] | 140,763 | 135,413
New Jersey | 21,951 | 23,764
Pennsylvania | 101,652 | 50,848
Delaware[9] | ——— | ———
Maryland[8] | 24,565 | 25,527
Virginia | 26,752 | 12,101
North Carolina | 37,857 | 13,918
South Carolina[9] | ——— | ———
Georgia[9] | 19,363 | No opposition.
Alabama[9] | 17,138 | 1,938
Mississippi[9] | 6,772 | 1,581
Louisiana[9] | 4,603 | 4,076
Kentucky[9] | 39,397 | 31,460
Tennessee[8] | 44,293 | 2,240
Missouri | 8,272 | 3,400
Ohio | 67,597 | 63,396
Indiana | 22,257 | 17,052
Illinois | 9,560 | 4,662
Totals | 647,276 | 508,064

[Pg 51]

The majority for Jackson was so decisive both in popular and electoral votes that the verdict was accepted by the country, and the vote was counted and declared by Congress without any incident worthy of note. The following table presents the vote in detail for President and Vice-President in the Electoral College:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Andrew Jackson, Tenn. | John Quincy Adams, Mass. | John C. Calhoun, S. C. | Richard Rush, Penn. | William Smith, S. C.
Maine | 1 | 8 | 1 | 8 | —
New Hampshire | — | 8 | — | 8 | —
Vermont | — | 7 | — | 7 | —
Massachusetts | — | 15 | — | 15 | —
Rhode Island | — | 4 | — | 4 | —
Connecticut | — | 8 | — | 8 | —
New York | 20 | 16 | 20 | 16 | —
New Jersey | — | 8 | — | 8 | —
Pennsylvania | 28 | — | 28 | — | —
Delaware | — | 3 | — | 3 | —
Maryland | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | —
Virginia | 24 | — | 24 | — | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | 15 | — | —
South Carolina | 11 | — | 11 | — | —
Georgia | 9 | — | 2 | — | 7
Alabama | 5 | — | 5 | — | —
Mississippi | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Louisiana | 5 | — | 5 | — | —
Kentucky | 14 | — | 14 | — | —
Tennessee | 11 | — | 11 | — | —
Ohio | 16 | — | 16 | — | —
Indiana | 5 | — | 5 | — | —
Illinois | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Missouri | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Totals | 178 | 83 | 171 | 83 | 7

The campaign of 1832 resulting in the triumphant re-election[Pg 52] of Jackson developed a more confused condition of politics in the nation than had ever been presented. The Federal party was dead, and did not even pretend to maintain its organization in any of the States. The Republican party was divided between the National Republicans and the Democratic Republicans, who followed Jackson, and finally adopted the flag of Democracy. Jackson’s first administration had been anything but a peaceful one. An open quarrel had broken out between Jackson and Vice-President Calhoun, and Jackson was not only a good hater, but a good fighter. He was largely influenced by Van Buren, who was his Secretary of State, and who was one of the most sagacious political managers of his day. He aimed to succeed Jackson as President by having the Jackson administration enlisted in his favor, and his first step toward that end was to overthrow Calhoun, and Jackson emphasized his hostility to Calhoun by dictating the nomination of Van Buren for Vice-President.

A considerable number of prominent old Republicans who had supported Jackson had become alienated from him because of the intensely partisan qualities of his administration and because of his aggressive interference in the Cabinet scandal resulting from Mrs. Eaton’s social ambition as the wife of a Cabinet minister. Scandals were multiplied in Washington about the Jackson Kitchen Cabinet, of which Amos Kendall was regarded as the chief, but with all the disturbance in the National Capitol, the people of the country were sturdy in their devotion to Jackson, as was proved by his large majority, both in popular and electoral votes, over Clay, who was confessedly the ablest leader of the opposition.

This contest brings us to the introduction of the National Convention. The first political national convention held in this country was called to meet in Philadelphia in September, 1830, by a number of prominent anti-Masonic leaders. The anti-Mason party had sprung up suddenly and attained great power in the North, as it was the only outlet for the old Federalists, most of whom were in sympathy with the opposition of the new party to Masonic and all other secret societies.

The death of William Morgan, who, it was claimed, had been murdered by the Masons for revealing the secrets of the order, was most dramatically presented in the political[Pg 53] organs of the day, and the new party speedily absorbed most of the opposition elements to the Democracy in the Northern States. The anti-Masonic national convention that met in Philadelphia in 1830 was presided over by Francis Granger, of New York, and was composed of 96 delegates, representing New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Maryland, and the Territory of Michigan. This convention was held more than two years before the Presidential election, for which it was expected to nominate candidates for President, but instead of making nominations, it adjourned to meet in Baltimore in September, 1831, when it had 112 delegates, with Indiana and Ohio added to the States presented. John C. Spencer was its president, and William Wirt, of Maryland, was nominated for President, and Amos Ellmaker, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President. Instead of passing a platform, as is now common, the convention issued an elaborate address to the people of the Union.

This action of the anti-Masons was followed by the National Republicans, who met in national convention at Baltimore, on December 12, 1831, with 17 States, represented by 157 delegates. Henry Clay was nominated for President and John Sergeant, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President. No platform was adopted by this convention, but it followed the anti-Masons by issuing an address to the people of the country in which it was stated that “the political history of the Union for the last three years exhibits a series of measures plainly dictated in all their principal features by blind cupidity or vindictive party spirit, marked throughout by a disregard of good policy, justice, and every high and generous sentiment, and terminating in a dissolution of the Cabinet under circumstances more discreditable than any of the kind to be met with in the annals of the civilized world.”

The Democrats followed the anti-Masons and National Republicans by calling a National Democratic convention, to meet in Baltimore in May, 1832, to nominate a candidate for Vice-President. Jackson was so universally accepted as the candidate of the Democrats for re-election that the convention was not allowed to make a nomination for the first office, but a resolution was passed declaring that the convention “cordially concurred in the repeated nominations that General Jackson had received in various parts of the country for re-election as President.” The convention adopted the two-thirds[Pg 54] rule that has prevailed in every Democratic convention from that day until the present time, requiring that “two-thirds of the whole number of the votes in the convention shall be necessary to constitute a choice.”

Van Buren was nominated for Vice-President, receiving 208 votes to 26 for Richard M. Johnson and 49 for Philip P. Barbour. No platform of principles was adopted, nor was an address issued by the convention to the people, but a resolution was passed declaring that “in place of a general address from this body” the delegations should address their respective constituents on the political issues of the day.

Never were two candidates presented for the first office of the nation who so widely differed in their chief qualities. Jackson was a clear-headed man of rugged intellect, of inflexible purpose, a relentless opponent and a devoted friend, while Clay was the most magnetic of all the popular leaders this country has ever produced. No one before or since Clay’s time has approached him in that peculiar quality but James G. Blaine. The hero-worship of Jackson was earnest and always aggressive when summoned to battle, but Clay was beloved and idolized beyond that accorded to any leader of any party in the history of the Republic. He was a most brilliant orator, imposing in presence and gifted in every grace that attracted the multitude, and he was imperious as Cæsar in his leadership. His friends battled for him with matchless enthusiasm, but Jackson was so strongly entrenched in the confidence of the masses that he won an easy victory over the Sage of Ashland.

The contest was one of unusual violence and defamation, and it was doubtless aggravated by the personal enmity that existed between Jackson and Clay. The veto of the bill rechartering the Bank of the United States had greatly disturbed financial circles, and it was believed in the early part of the struggle that the financial and business interests of the country would endanger Jackson’s success, but the popular prejudice against banks in that day was so great that Jackson largely profited by the open opposition of his former supporters who were interested in maintaining a national financial institution. The anti-Masonic electoral ticket was adopted by the National Republicans in several of the States, and it is specially shown in the popular vote of Vermont, where Clay appears to have carried the State, and yet the electoral vote was given to William Wirt, the anti-Masonic[Pg 55] candidate. Had it been possible for the electoral vote of that State to elect Clay President, it would have been cast for him.

The number of electors had been enlarged by the new apportionment, and Delaware had provided for the choice of electors by a popular vote, leaving South Carolina as the only State to appoint electors by the Legislature. That State continued the system of the legislative choice of electors without interruption until the civil war of 1861. Several of the States also abandoned the election of delegates by the district system, Maryland alone adhering to it. In Alabama there was no electoral ticket opposed to Jackson, and the popular vote is not attainable. Georgia was also without an anti-Jackson electoral ticket, while Missouri, that was friendly to Clay in 1824, seems to have made no battle for him against Jackson. The following is the popular vote, as nearly as it can be ascertained:

STATES. | Jackson. | Clay.
--- | --- | ---
Maine | 33,291 | 27,204
New Hampshire | 25,486 | 19,010
Vermont | 7,870 | 11,152
Massachusetts | 14,545 | 33,003
Rhode Island | 2,126 | 2,810
Connecticut | 11,269 | 17,755
New York | 168,497 | 154,896
New Jersey | 23,856 | 23,393
Pennsylvania | 90,983 | 56,716
Delaware | 4,110 | 4,276
Maryland | 19,156 | 19,160
Virginia | 33,609 | 11,451
North Carolina | 24,862 | 4,563
South Carolina | ——— | ———
Georgia | 20,750 | ———
Alabama | ——— | ———
Mississippi | 5,919 | ———
Louisiana | 4,049 | 2,528
Kentucky | 36,247 | 43,396
Tennessee | 28,740 | 1,436
Missouri | 5,192 | ———
Ohio | 81,246 | 76,539
Indiana | 31,552 | 15,472
Illinois | 14,147 | 5,429
Totals | 687,502 | 530,189

[Pg 56]

There was some ragged voting for President and much more for Vice-President. Jackson received 219 votes in the Electoral College to 49 for Clay, 11 for Floyd, and 7 for Wirt, given by Vermont, and which would have gone to Clay had they been needed. South Carolina, under the influence of Calhoun, refused to vote for either Jackson or Van Buren, but cast the electoral vote for John Floyd, of Virginia, for President, and for Henry Lee, of Massachusetts, for Vice-President. Van Buren was not acceptable to all the friends of Jackson, as the Pennsylvania Democratic Convention positively instructed the electors to vote for William Wilkins for Vice-President, which instructions were obeyed in the Electoral College, and a convention of Jackson men had been held in June, in Charlottesville, Va., and nominated P. P. Barbour, of that State, for the Vice-Presidency, with Jackson for President. A like convention was held, composed of delegates from a number of counties in North Carolina, in which Jackson and Barbour were nominated, but Barbour did not reach the dignity of support in the Electoral College.

There were no disputes as to the return of the electoral colleges, and the vote was declared by Congress as follows:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Andrew Jackson, Tenn. | Henry Clay, Ky. | John Floyd, Va. | William Wirt, Md. | Martin Van Buren, N. Y. | John Sergeant, Penn. | William Wilkins, Penn. | Henry Lee, Mass. | Amos Ellmaker, Penn.
Maine | 10 | — | — | — | 10 | — | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 7 | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | —
Vermont | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | 7
Massachusetts | — | 14 | — | — | — | 14 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | — | 4 | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | —
Connecticut | — | 8 | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | —
New York | 42 | — | — | — | 42 | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 30 | — | — | — | — | — | 30 | — | —
Delaware | — | 3 | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | —[Pg 57]
Maryland | 3 | 5 | — | — | 3 | 5 | — | — | —
Virginia | 23 | — | — | — | 23 | — | — | — | —
North Carolina | 15 | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | 11 | —
Georgia | 11 | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | —
Alabama | 7 | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | —
Mississippi | 4 | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | 5 | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | — | 15 | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | —
Tennessee | 15 | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | —
Ohio | 21 | — | — | — | 21 | — | — | — | —
Indiana | 9 | — | — | — | 9 | — | — | — | —
Illinois | 5 | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | —
Missouri | 4 | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | —
Totals | 219 | 49 | 11 | 7 | 189 | 49 | 30 | 11 | 7

Jackson’s second administration was even more tempestuous than the first. His nullification proclamation that convulsed the country from centre to circumference, and the first “pocket veto” in the history of the country by which he had killed the Land bill, were among the later acts of his first administration, and entered very largely into the bitterness of political dispute that continued during his second term. Both were denounced as violent usurpations, and it is doubtful whether any but Andrew Jackson could have made the record he left on both of those vital issues.

He had vetoed the recharter of the United States Bank during his first term, and supplemented that hostility to the institution early in his second term by the removal of the Government deposits from the bank. His Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Duane, resolutely opposed the removal of the deposits, but Jackson would not brook opposition, and in order to carry out his new financial policy, he accepted[Pg 58] Duane’s resignation and appointed Roger B. Taney, who was in accord with the President, and who was finally rewarded by his promotion to the Chief Justiceship of the United States.

He had devoted followers in Congress; he was absolute master of Congressional action during his second term, and he was heartily supported by the great mass of the people, a very large portion of whom regarded him as the model patriot and the infallible political oracle of the nation. They loved his courage and his pugnacity, and as he always was the winner, they had every inspiration to rejoice over the triumphs of their devotedly worshipped leader.

Strange as it may seem, the first evidence of the weakness of Jackson’s popular strength was exhibited in his own State of Tennessee, where Hugh L. White, a Senator from that State, was nominated to succeed Jackson as President by the Tennessee Legislature. Jackson was much disturbed by it. When the question was before the Legislatures of Alabama and Tennessee, copies of the Washington Globe, the organ of the administration, containing severe assaults upon Senator White, were franked to the members of those Legislatures by the President himself; but notwithstanding all Jackson’s efforts to make Van Buren his successor, Tennessee voted for Judge White by 10,000 majority.

Upon his retirement from the Presidency in 1837, he imitated Washington by a farewell address to the American people, that was received by a large majority as second in reverence only to the farewell address of Washington. His health was feeble when his stormy eight years of Presidential rule were ended, and after the inauguration of Van Buren he retired to “The Hermitage,” his home, near Nashville, in Tennessee, where he died on the 8th of June, 1845.

[Pg 59]

MARTIN VAN BUREN

## THE VAN BUREN-HARRISON CONTEST

1836

The national contest of 1836 that made Martin Van Buren President gave birth to a new political organization known as the Whig party. The opposition to Jackson agreed only in opposing Jackson, but it was not possible to unite on any national policy. The strongest organized element of the opposition was the anti-Masonic party, that was very powerful in the North, but among the opponents of Jackson were many who, like Mr. Clay, were Masons of high degree, and they could not act with a political party that made anti-Masonry one of the cardinal principles of its faith.

The National Republican party practically perished with the defeat of Clay in 1832, and a very large majority of its members were not in sympathy with the anti-Masons. These conditions led to the organization of the Whig party in 1834, and it gradually absorbed all the old National Republicans, Federalists, anti-Masons, and all the other varied forms of opposition to Jackson. Its name and its declaration of principles were declared by a number of leading men in 1834, and it gradually developed in strength until it was the leading factor in the support of Harrison in 1836, and won the election of Harrison by an overwhelming majority of both the popular and electoral votes in 1840. The Whig party maintained itself as one of the ablest political organizations the country has ever had, but it was much more noted for its conservative restraints upon the Democrats than for the successful establishment of its policy in the administration of the Government. It elected two Presidents, Harrison and Taylor, but neither seriously impressed the policy of the Whig party upon the nation. It practically perished in 1852, when it made its last great[Pg 60] battle for General Scott for President, and carried but four States.

As the contest of 1836 was approached the various elements of opposition to Jackson felt confident that they could poll a majority of the popular vote, but there was no possibility of their uniting upon any one candidate without suffering great loss in their popular following. It was decided, therefore, that instead of attempting to unite the opposition to Jackson on one candidate, they would support several candidates who were particularly strong in their respective localities, with the hope that a majority of the electors might thus be chosen who would unite in the election of the strongest of the opposition candidates.

The Democrats were very much disturbed, as signs of disintegration were visible to all. Jackson was the most potent of any of our retiring Presidents, with the exception of Washington, and he dictated Van Buren for the succession. Without the omnipotent power of Jackson, Van Buren could not have been nominated or elected. Jackson had the Democracy thoroughly organized, and he wielded all the official power of his administration relentlessly to carry out his political aims. There was much hesitation about the Democrats accepting a national convention, because of the opposition to Van Buren, but Jackson personally importuned the leading Democrats to summon a convention at an early period, and a convention was finally called, to be held in Baltimore on the 20th of May, 1835, nearly a year and a half before the Presidential election.

It was not a representative convention, as although over six hundred delegates attended, a majority of them were from Maryland alone, but each State was allowed to cast the vote corresponding with its representation in Congress. Van Buren was nominated unanimously on the 1st ballot, and Richard M. Johnson, of Kentucky, was made the candidate for Vice-President, receiving 178 votes, with 87 cast for William C. Rives, of Virginia. The two-thirds rule was reaffirmed in the convention, and even after Johnson had been nominated under the rule Virginia refused to approve the action of the convention presenting him as the candidate for Vice-President. No platform was adopted and no address was issued by the body to the people of the country.

The prominent candidates presented in opposition to[Pg 61] Van Buren were General William H. Harrison and Judge John McLean, of Ohio; Daniel Webster, of Massachusetts, and Judge Hugh L. White, of Tennessee. Willie P. Mangum, who received the electoral vote of South Carolina chosen by the Legislature, was not a candidate before the people, and it is remarkable that South Carolina, at war with Jackson on the right of nullification, cast her electoral vote for Mangum, who was one of the leaders of the Whig party and afterward distinguished as a Whig United States Senator.

No attempt was made to bring these opposing opposition elements together. Harrison was first nominated at Harrisburg, Penn., by two State conventions, both meeting ostensibly as anti-Masons, the one being Democratic and the other inclining to the new Whig organization, and he was also presented by Legislatures and mass-meetings in other States. Webster was nominated by the Whig Legislature of Massachusetts, and Judge White was nominated by the Legislatures of Tennessee and Alabama, and by mass-meetings in different sections of the South. He was then a United States Senator from Tennessee, but at war with Jackson, and he was confessedly the strongest opponent of Jackson in the entire South. The fact that he could command a nomination from the Democratic Legislature of Tennessee while Jackson was President is the best evidence of his exceptional popularity with the people, and it was proved also by him carrying the electoral vote of the State over Van Buren by a decided majority. Judge McLean gradually dropped out of the fight, as he was from Harrison’s State, and Harrison soon developed as much the strongest candidate of the entire opposition competitors.

The contest was one of intense bitterness. There were no conflicting opposition tickets run against Van Buren. In States where White was strongest the opposition united on White electoral tickets, where Harrison was strongest they united on Harrison electoral tickets, and where Webster was strongest they united on Webster electoral tickets. The campaign was thus shrewdly managed by the opposition, and it gave some promise of success, as if a majority of the electoral votes had been chosen against Van Buren, they would doubtless have been united upon one candidate before the time for meeting of the electoral colleges. In Clay’s State the battle was made for Harrison[Pg 62] with him in the forefront of the fight, and Harrison carried the State by a safe majority.

The defamation of the contest of 1836 was equal to any of the malignant contests of the early days of the Republic. Van Buren, Harrison, White, and Webster were most vindictively assailed, and their public and private lives criticised far beyond the lines of decent disputation. Van Buren was proclaimed the mere puppet of Jackson; Harrison was denounced as a failure in field and forum, where he had been General, Governor, and Senator; Webster was defamed as an old blue-light Federalist, and White was assailed in the South as an ingrate who had sacrificed his self-respect to ambition.

There were twenty-six States to participate in the election of 1836. Arkansas had come into the Union on the 15th of June, and Michigan, where electors were chosen before the admission of the State, was formally admitted into the Union on the 26th of January, 1837, before the electoral count took place in Congress, and the precedent in the Missouri case in 1821 settled the right of Michigan to participate in the election. In all of the States, with the single exception of South Carolina, the electors were chosen by popular vote and by general ticket. The following was the popular vote as returned for the several candidates, taking the vote of the opposition electors chosen as an indication of the choice of their respective States:

STATES. | Van Buren. | Harrison. | White. | Webster.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Maine | 22,990 | 15,239 | ——— | ———
New Hampshire | 18,722 | 6,228 | ——— | ———
Vermont | 14,039 | 20,996 | ——— | ———
Massachusetts | 34,474 | ——— | ——— | 42,247
Rhode Island | 2,964 | 2,710 | ——— | ———
Connecticut | 19,291 | 18,749 | ——— | ———
New York | 166,815 | 138,543 | ——— | ———
New Jersey | 25,592 | 26,137 | ——— | ———
Pennsylvania | 91,475 | 87,111 | ——— | ———
Delaware | 4,153 | 4,733 | ——— | ———
Maryland | 22,168 | 25,852 | ——— | ———
Virginia | 30,261 | ——— | 23,468 | ———
North Carolina | 26,910 | ——— | 23,626 | ———
South Carolina[10] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ———
Georgia | 22,104 | ——— | 24,876 | ———[Pg 63]
Alabama | 20,506 | ——— | 15,612 | ———
Mississippi | 9,979 | ——— | 9,688 | ———
Louisiana | 3,653 | ——— | 3,383 | ———
Arkansas | 2,400 | ——— | 1,238 | ———
Kentucky | 33,025 | 36,687 | ——— | ———
Tennessee | 26,129 | ——— | 36,168 | ———
Missouri | 10,995 | ——— | 7,337 | ———
Ohio | 96,948 | 105,404 | ——— | ———
Indiana | 32,478 | 41,281 | ——— | ———
Illinois | 17,275 | 14,292 | ——— | ———
Michigan | 7,332 | 4,045 | ——— | ———
Totals | 762,678 | 548,007 | 145,396 | 42,247

As Van Buren was successful, not only by a small popular majority, but by a clear majority of the electoral vote, no effort was necessary to unite the opposition electoral colleges, and they divided their votes between Harrison, White, and Webster, according to the preferences of the respective States. Virginia refused to give her electoral vote to Johnson for Vice-President, and that left him without an election, as he had not a majority of the whole Electoral College. He was, however, promptly elected by the Senate, receiving 33 votes to 16 for Francis Granger. He was the only Vice-President in the history of the Republic who was not elected by the Electoral College. When Adams, Jackson, Crawford, and Clay ran in 1824, and there was no choice for President in the Electoral College, John C. Calhoun received a decided majority in the college and was elected without an appeal to the Senate. The following is the vote as cast for President and Vice-President in the electoral colleges:

[Pg 64]

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Martin Van Buren, N. Y. | William H. Harrison, O. | Hugh L. White, Tenn. | Daniel Webster, Mass. | Willie P. Mangum, N. C. | Richard M. Johnson, Ky. | Francis Granger, N. Y. | John Tyler, Va. | William Smith, Ala.
Maine | 10 | — | — | — | — | 10 | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 7 | — | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | —
Vermont | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | 7 | — | —
Massachusetts | — | — | — | 14 | — | — | 14 | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | —
Connecticut | 8 | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | —
New York | 42 | — | — | — | — | 42 | — | — | —
New Jersey | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | —
Pennsylvania | 30 | — | — | — | — | 30 | — | — | —
Delaware | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | —
Maryland | — | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | 10 | —
Virginia | 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 23
North Carolina | 15 | — | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | —
South Carolina | — | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | 11 | —
Georgia | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | 11 | —
Alabama | 7 | — | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | —
Mississippi | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | —
Louisiana | 5 | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | —
Arkansas | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | —
Kentucky | — | 15 | — | — | — | — | 15 | — | —
Tennessee | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | — | 15 | —
Missouri | 4 | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | —
Ohio | — | 21 | — | — | — | — | 21 | — | —
Indiana | — | 9 | — | — | — | — | 9 | — | —
Illinois | 5 | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | —
Michigan | 3 | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | —
Totals | 170 | 73 | 26 | 14 | 11 | 147 | 77 | 47 | 23

[Pg 65]

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON

## THE HARRISON-VAN BUREN CONTEST

1840

Memorable as was the campaign of 1840 that called General Harrison to the Presidency by a popular whirlwind, the thoughtful student of American politics will regard that campaign as even more memorable because it gave birth to a party, of the humblest pretensions at the start as a political power, that twenty years later saw its principles triumph in the election of Lincoln, and the mastery of the party that has controlled the policy of the Government for forty years. The Abolition party, that was the corner-stone upon which the modern Republican party is reared, was organized in December, 1839, at Warsaw, Genesee County, N. Y., when, at a mass convention, with but few States represented, it nominated James G. Birney, of New York, for President, and Francis G. Lemoyne, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President.

This party had but one vital principle that made up its political faith, and that was the abolition of slavery. It was looked upon as a movement of a few political cranks, and was not regarded as a possible factor in that or any future political contest. It cast a few votes in 1840, but in 1844 it diverted enough votes from Henry Clay in New York State to defeat him for the Presidency. Its total vote in 1840 aggregated only 7069, one-third of which was cast in New York and one-fourth in Massachusetts; but it was the party of destiny, and its origin can be studied with profit. Its few supporters of that day who braved the prejudices of all parties were actuated by a sincere conviction, and that conviction was made more and more acceptable from year to year as the aggressions of slavery multiplied, until it finally died a colossal suicide.

The divided opposition elements which had polled within 30,000 of the vote received by Van Buren in 1836 were[Pg 66] coerced by supreme necessities to united action for the campaign of 1840. But three candidates were prominently discussed. They were General William H. Harrison of Ohio, Henry Clay of Kentucky, and Winfield Scott of Virginia. Clay was much the ablest of them, and had the most enthusiastic and earnest friends, but the old anti-Masonic element crucified Clay in the Whig convention of 1839, just as Seward was crucified in the convention of 1860 by the American sentiment that was an indispensable factor to enable the Republicans to win. Clay was a Royal Arch Mason, and he would doubtless have lost largely in the rank and file of the anti-Masons, who had been educated in the fiercest strife of political contests to believe that Masonry was incompatible with patriotism.

Harrison had been Governor of the Indiana Territory, Senator in Congress and a successful general, having won a decisive victory over the English and the Indians at Tippecanoe. Scott was green with the laurels of Chippewa and Lundy’s Lane, and was regarded as the first soldier of the Republic. One thing strongly in Harrison’s favor was the fact that in the free-for-all race of 1836 he had largely outstripped his anti-Jackson associate candidates for President.

The Whig National Convention was called to meet at Harrisburg on the 4th of December, 1839, just one year before the Presidential election, and no national convention in the history of our politics ever moved with such extreme caution. It was three days after the convention was organized before a ballot was reached for President, the whole time having been occupied in formal conferences of committees appointed by each delegation to confer in the frankest way as to the best ticket to unite the incongruous opposition elements. Clay had made exhaustive effort to unite the opposition, even if necessary to sacrifice himself. On repeated occasions he publicly declared that his name should not be entertained if it was in any degree an obstacle to success, and in a Buffalo address delivered some time before the convention met, he said: “If my name creates any obstacle to union and harmony, away with it, and concentrate upon some individual more acceptable to all branches of the office.”

A Union Pennsylvania convention had been held in Harrisburg in September, embracing representatives of the old National Republicans, anti-Masons, and Whigs. It was[Pg 67] largely planned and carried out by Thaddeus Stevens, whose violent anti-Masonic convictions made him the opponent of Clay, and that convention, while highly complimenting Clay, declared that General Harrison was the most available of all the candidates named for President. Governor Barbour, of Virginia, presided over the national convention, and instead of proceeding to ballot for candidates, the convention, after careful consideration, decided that the delegations from the different States should confer with each other, through sub-committees, and if possible reach a conclusion as to the best nomination and report to the convention.

While there is no official record of the action of these committees, it is known that at the start more favored Clay than any of the two other candidates, as one of the known facts relating to their action gave Clay 103 votes to 94 for Harrison and 57 for Scott. This vote is based on the assumption that the entire delegation of each State would vote in harmony with its committee, as the resolution under which the committees were appointed provided that “each State represented shall vote its full electoral vote by such delegation in the committee.” After three days of conference, the joint committees reported to the convention that they had decided in favor of Harrison by a vote of 148 to 90 for Clay and 16 for Scott.

On the following day the convention accepted the report of the committees by adopting a resolution declaring General Harrison the candidate of the convention, and it was unanimously approved amidst great enthusiasm. The friends of Clay gave very prompt and cordial support to the action of the convention, and the friends of Harrison proved their appreciation of the magnanimity of Clay’s friends by unanimously nominating John Tyler, of Virginia, for Vice-President, who was the leader of the Clay forces in the convention. No platform or expression of principles was given in any manner. Indeed, none of the political questions of the day diverted the convention at any time from the supreme purpose of uniting the opposition to Van Buren on a single ticket.

It was the vote of Virginia that finally decided the question of making Harrison the candidate of the convention. The three prominent candidates were all sons of Virginia, and had Clay been available he would doubtless have been preferred. A very earnest effort was made to force the nomination[Pg 68] of General Scott when Clay was conceded to be unavailable, and the Virginia delegates long hesitated in making a choice between Harrison and Scott. Both were of Old Dominion birth, and the pride of the Mother of Presidents would have been gratified with the nomination of either.

It was at this stage of the contest that Thaddeus Stevens, who was the leading delegate from Pennsylvania, controlled the Virginia delegation by a scheme that was more effective than creditable. Scott, who was quite too fond of writing letters, had written a letter to Francis Granger, of New York, in which he evidently sought to conciliate the antislavery sentiment of that State. It was a private letter, but Granger exhibited it to Stevens and permitted Stevens to use it in his own way. As the headquarters of the Virginia delegation were the centre of attraction, they were always crowded, and Stevens called there along with many others. Before leaving he dropped the Scott letter on the floor, and it was soon discovered and its contents made known to the Virginians. That letter decided the Virginians to support Harrison and to reject Scott. Either could have been elected if nominated, as the Van Buren defeat of 1840 was one of the most sweeping political hurricanes in the history of the country.

My authority for this is Mr. Stevens himself. He disliked Scott on general principles through his great aversion to all men whose vanity was conspicuous, but he had a much stronger reason for nominating Harrison in his possession of an autograph letter from General Harrison, assuring Stevens that if he, Harrison, was elected President, Stevens would be a member of his Cabinet. After the election Stevens said nothing and made no movement to make himself prominent as a candidate for the Cabinet, as he felt entirely secure, while Josiah Randall, father of the late Samuel J. Randall, and then a prominent Whig, and Charles B. Penrose, grandfather of the present United States Senator Penrose, entered the field aggressively as candidates for a Cabinet portfolio. When the Cabinet was announced, Stevens was dumbfounded to find his name omitted. He never forgave Webster, who was made the head of the Cabinet, for the failure, and he believed until the day of his death that Webster had prevented his appointment.

There was much dissatisfaction with the Van Buren administration. The severe business and industrial depression[Pg 69] which came upon the country about the middle of Van Buren’s term was very disastrous, and the financial troubles were largely charged to the arbitrary financial system introduced by Jackson and maintained by Van Buren. Labor was largely unemployed and business was paralyzed. So grave were the financial disturbances that several of the States were swept from their honest moorings by the cheap money craze, and irresponsible banks were created almost without limit or restraint, all of which brought speedy and fearful disaster to the people.

A large portion of the Democratic party had not at any time heartily favored Van Buren, and only their devotion to Jackson made them accept Van Buren as their candidate. The Democratic leaders of a number of the States openly declared that they would not participate in the national convention. A convention was finally called, and met in Baltimore on the 5th of May, 1840, with Connecticut, Delaware, Virginia, South Carolina, and Illinois not represented, while some of the other States had but one or two delegates. Governor William Carroll, of Tennessee, presided over the convention, and Van Buren was renominated by the adoption of a resolution declaring that as he was the unanimous choice of the party and the convention, “he should be presented as the Democratic candidate for the office of President.” Another resolution, offered at the same time and by the same man, Mr. Clay, of Alabama, was as follows: “That the convention deem it expedient at the present time not to choose between the individuals in nomination, but to leave the decision to their Republican Democratic fellow-citizens in the several States, trusting that before the election shall take place their opinions shall become so concentrated as to secure the choice of a Vice-President by the electoral colleges.”

There was positive opposition to the election of Vice-President Johnson in 1836, as was shown by his failure to command a majority of the electoral votes, while Van Buren was elected President, and that opposition seems to have increased rather than diminished. There was much discussion in the convention after it had unanimously adopted the first resolution declaring Van Buren the candidate for President as to what action the convention should take on the Vice-Presidency, and finally the resolution before quoted was unanimously adopted, leaving the party without a formally nominated candidate for the second place on the ticket.

[Pg 70]

This convention for the first time presented a national party platform as follows:

1. Resolved, That the Federal Government is one of limited powers derived solely from the Constitution, and the grants of power shown therein ought to be strictly construed by all the departments and agents of the Government, and that it is inexpedient and dangerous to exercise doubtful constitutional powers.

2. Resolved, That the Constitution does not confer upon the General Government the power to commence and carry on a general system of internal improvement.

3. Resolved, That the Constitution does not confer authority upon the Federal Government, directly or indirectly, to assume the debts of the several States, contracted for local internal improvements, or other State purposes; nor would such assumption be just or expedient.

4. Resolved, That justice and sound policy forbid the Federal Government to foster one branch of industry to the detriment of another, or to cherish the interest of one portion to the injury of another portion of our common country; that every citizen and every section of the country has a right to demand and insist upon an equality of rights and privileges, and to complete an ample protection of person and property from domestic violence or foreign aggression.

5. Resolved, That it is the duty of every branch of the Government to enforce and practise the most rigid economy in conducting our public affairs, and that no more revenue ought to be raised than is required to defray the necessary expenses of the Government.

6. Resolved, That Congress has no power to charter a United States Bank; that we believe such an institution one of deadly hostility to the best interests of the country, dangerous to our Republican institutions and the liberties of the people, and calculated to place the business of the country within the control of a concentrated money power, and above the laws and the will of the people.

7. Resolved, That Congress has no power, under the Constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States, and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs not prohibited by the Constitution; that all efforts of the Abolitionists or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our political institutions.

8. Resolved, That the separation of the moneys of the Government from banking institutions is indispensable for the safety of the funds of the Government and the rights of the people.

9. Resolved, That the liberal principles embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, and sanctioned in the Constitution, which makes ours the land of liberty and the asylum of the oppressed of every nation, have ever been cardinal principles in the[Pg 71] Democratic faith; and every attempt to abridge the present privilege of becoming citizens and the owners of soil among us ought to be resisted with the same spirit which swept the Alien and Sedition laws from our statute book.

JOHN TYLER

The campaign of 1840 was the most unique of our political history. The Democrats, in attempting to belittle General Harrison, declared that he lived in a “log cabin” and drank hard cider. Instead of resenting these expressions, intended to prejudice the public against the Whig candidate, the Whigs at once took up the log cabin as one of the great illustrative features of the contest, and when the battle reached its zenith, and the people gathered by thousands at the mass-meetings, the log cabin was always in the procession as the symbol of the simplicity of the party candidate for President. It was a campaign of speeches and songs, and it developed a new class of campaign orators, of which the then celebrated and long after well-known Buckeye Blacksmith was a type.

It was the first national campaign in which the masses of the people took intense interest, and alike in the cities of the East, the prairies of the West, and the savannas of the South the people were singing and shouting for “Tippecanoe and Tyler, too.” The Whig campaign culminated in a tempest against the Democrats, and resulted in the overwhelming defeat of Van Buren, and General Harrison certainly contributed largely to the result by taking the stump in Ohio in September and October, to vindicate himself against the accusations made that he was a mere puppet in the hands of political leaders and unable to speak for himself. The following was the popular vote for Harrison and Van Buren:

STATES. | Harrison. | Van Buren. | Birney.
--- | --- | --- | ---
Maine | 46,612 | 46,201 | 194
New Hampshire | 26,163 | 32,761 | 126
Vermont | 32,440 | 18,018 | 319
Massachusetts | 72,874 | 51,944 | 1,621
Rhode Island | 5,278 | 3,301 | 42
Connecticut | 31,601 | 25,296 | 174
New York | 225,817 | 212,527 | 2,808
New Jersey | 33,351 | 31,034 | 69
Pennsylvania | 144,021 | 143,672 | 343
Delaware | 5,967 | 4,874 | ——[Pg 72]
Maryland | 33,528 | 28,752 | ——
Virginia | 42,501 | 43,893 | ——
North Carolina | 46,376 | 33,782 | ——
South Carolina[11] | —— | —— | ——
Georgia | 40,261 | 31,921 | ——
Alabama | 28,471 | 33,991 | ——
Mississippi | 19,518 | 16,995 | ——
Louisiana | 11,296 | 7,616 | ——
Kentucky | 58,489 | 32,616 | ——
Tennessee | 60,391 | 48,289 | ——
Missouri | 22,972 | 29,760 | ——
Arkansas | 5,160 | 6,766 | ——
Ohio | 148,157 | 124,782 | 903
Indiana | 65,302 | 51,604 | ——
Illinois | 45,537 | 47,476 | 149
Michigan | 22,933 | 21,131 | 321
Totals | 1,275,016 | 1,129,102 | 7,069

There was nothing to quibble about in declaring the count in Congress, as Harrison had nearly three-fourths of the electoral vote, with a very large popular majority. While the Democrats had not nominated any candidate for Vice-President, and as a division of the vote would be of little consequence, the Democratic electors generally voted for Vice-President Johnson for re-election. Virginia, that cast a solid vote against him four years before, gave him 22 of the 23 votes, and South Carolina, while voting for Van Buren, gave its 11 votes to L. W. Tazewell, of Virginia, for Vice-President, leaving Johnson with only 48 of the 294 electoral votes.

The following is the vote as cast in the electoral colleges:

[Pg 73]

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
W. H. Harrison, Ohio. | Martin Van Buren, N. Y. | John Tyler, Va. | R. M. Johnson, Ky. | L. W. Tazewell, Va. | James K. Polk, Tenn.
Maine | 10 | — | 10 | — | — | —
New Hampshire | — | 7 | — | 7 | — | —
Vermont | 7 | — | 7 | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 14 | — | 14 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | —
Connecticut | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | —
New York | 42 | — | 42 | — | — | —
New Jersey | 8 | — | 8 | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 30 | — | 30 | — | — | —
Delaware | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | —
Maryland | 10 | — | 10 | — | — | —
Virginia | — | 23 | — | 22 | — | 1
North Carolina | 15 | — | 15 | — | — | —
South Carolina | — | 11 | — | — | 11 | —
Georgia | 11 | — | 11 | — | — | —
Alabama | — | 7 | — | 7 | — | —
Mississippi | 4 | — | 4 | — | — | —
Louisiana | 5 | — | 5 | — | — | —
Kentucky | 15 | — | 15 | — | — | —
Tennessee | 15 | — | 15 | — | — | —
Missouri | — | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
Arkansas | — | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Ohio | 21 | — | 21 | — | — | —
Indiana | 9 | — | 9 | — | — | —
Illinois | — | 5 | — | 5 | — | —
Michigan | 3 | — | 3 | — | — | —
Totals | 234 | 60 | 234 | 48 | 11 | 1

Harrison was in feeble health when he was called from the clerkship of the Cincinnati courts, that he had held for many years, to the highest civil trust of the world, and the intense pressure upon him after his election so impaired his vitality that he died a little more than a month after his inauguration. Harrison’s death was the first break in the Presidency since[Pg 74] the organization of the Government. John Tyler was Vice-President, and was living quietly on his farm on the Virginia Peninsula. He could not be reached by railways, and telegraphs were unknown. He had no knowledge that he had become President through the death of Harrison until late the next day, when Webster and another member of the Cabinet finally found their way to his home, partly by water and partly overland, and formally announced to him the death of the President and the new duties which devolved upon him. He hastened to Washington to find a very grave dispute among the leading statesmen of both parties as to whether he became President or simply Acting President. It was important to determine whether he was President with the full title. The question was brought up in Congress, and in the midst of a discussion on the subject a message was received from the Executive Mansion signed “John Tyler, President.” The dispute was at once ended, and the question settled for all time.

[Pg 75]

JAMES K. POLK

## THE POLK-CLAY CONTEST

1844

President Tyler wrecked the Whig party and defeated Henry Clay for President in 1844. The Whigs had carried a majority in both Senate and House in the Harrison sweep of 1840, and they confidently expected that the Whig policy of a national bank to take the place of the bungling Sub-Treasury, of aid to public improvements, and of a protective tariff to stimulate our industries, would inaugurate a Whig political system that could be permanently maintained by the American people. President Harrison died only a little more than a month after he had been inaugurated. He was the oldest President at the time of his inauguration that the country has had, either before or since, and he was physically unequal to the severe exactions put upon him by the clamor for political positions. Civil service reform had then no part in the politics of the country, and as Jackson and Van Buren had been vindictively proscriptive in Federal appointments, it was logically expected that there would be a general removal of the Van Buren favorites. Harrison exhausted his vitality by trying to meet his friends and confer with them about political appointments, in addition to the important questions of State which demanded his attention, and he literally wore himself out and died from exhaustion.

John Tyler, who had been one of the most ardent of the Clay Whigs, was confidently expected to maintain the policy of Harrison. The public measures advocated by Clay were well understood by all, and it was reasonable to assume that Tyler, who had been long one of his most earnest supporters, was in entire accord with his chief. A special session of Congress was summoned to meet on the 31st of May, 1841, and the Whigs expected to carry all their political theories into practical effect by national statutes at an early day.[Pg 76] To the surprise of some of the leaders, President Tyler exhibited some measure of unsoundness on the question of the United States Bank, but after repeated conferences with him they believed that they could frame a bill that would entirely meet his views and command his approval. The bill was passed by a decided majority in both branches, and the Whigs were dumbfounded by a prompt veto from the President. Other conferences followed, and a new bill was framed, to which the President assented, and although it was passed without amendment, another veto followed. The first veto of the Bank bill brought out very angry criticisms from a number of the Whig leaders, and one of the most earnest and aggressive of Tyler’s critics was John Minor Botts, then a Whig Congressman from Virginia, and one of the most brilliant and erratic of the Whig leaders of his day. It was believed that the irritation of the President, caused by the criticisms of leading Whigs, finally decided the President to veto the second Bank bill.

Thus the Whigs were defeated in one of the cardinal measures of their faith. The Whig Senators and Representatives met in caucus and published an address to the country, in which it was declared that “those who brought the President into power can no longer in any manner or degree be justly held responsible or blamed for the administration of the Executive branch of the Government.” Thus the Whig power was broken and demoralized at the very threshold of its existence, and the chasm between the Whig Senate and House, on the one side, and the President, on the other, steadily widened and deepened until it was admittedly impassable.

President Tyler’s political antecedents offer some excuse for his failure to approve the national bank. He opposed Jackson, as did many other able men in the South, because Jackson had violated the strict construction policy of Southern leaders, especially in his aggressive warfare against nullification, and one trained in the school of strict construction of the supreme law could readily find excuse for withholding his approval from the United States Bank. The same principle applied to internal improvements by the Government, and could have been applied to forbid a protective tariff. The only fruit the Whigs gathered from their great triumph of 1840 was the protective tariff of 1842, that became so popular, especially in the North, that[Pg 77] many Democrats who supported Polk in 1844 declared that they favored the tariff of 1842, and that it could not be disturbed if Polk were elected. In Pennsylvania it was common to see in Democratic processions banners bearing the inscription of “Polk-Dallas-Shunk and the Tariff of 1842,” and a letter received by Judge Kane, of Philadelphia, from Mr. Polk during the campaign was interpreted, and plausibly interpreted, as meaning an approval of the then existing tariff. The Whigs, defeated in all their other important measures, were sadly crippled in the campaign for the succession, and even the tariff of 1842 was repealed for a moderate free-trade tariff in 1846.

President Tyler had provoked the earnest and generally vindictive hostility of the Whigs without having made friends with the Democrats. They loved and cheered his apostasy, but gave no love or individual support to the apostate. He confidently expected that they would make him the Democratic candidate for President in 1844, and that delusion was cherished by him until the Democratic National Convention met in Baltimore to nominate national candidates. It was attended by a very large number of office-holders and other friends of Tyler. Finding that they could not command any support for their favorite in the convention, they improvised a national convention of their own on the same day that the Democratic convention met, and unanimously nominated Tyler for President without naming any candidate for Vice-President. The movement had no vitality, as there was no response from either the press or the public, and on the 20th of August Tyler wrote an elaborate and reproachful letter, withdrawing his name from the list of Presidential candidates.

When his term ended he lived in retirement on his Virginia farm, unknown and unfelt as a political factor. He was among the almost forgotten men of the past when, half a generation later, he appeared in Washington as a member of the Peace Convention that was called in 1861 to devise some measures to prevent a civil war, that he did not live to see fulfil its bloody mission.

When Van Buren was defeated for re-election to the Presidency in 1840, his friends imitated the Jackson tactics of 1825 by at once renominating him by mass-meetings and through Democratic newspapers as the Democratic candidate for President in 1844, and a decided majority of the[Pg 78] delegates to the national convention were either instructed for Van Buren or elected as his friends. Calhoun was favored by the Democrats of South Carolina and Georgia, and ex-Vice-President Johnson was an energetic candidate for the nomination, with General Cass, of Michigan, as the man who was looked to as most likely to concentrate the opposition to Van Buren. Van Buren was in the attitude before the Democratic National Convention of 1844 that Seward was before the Chicago Republican Convention of 1860. A decided majority of the delegates desired his nomination, but many of them believed that Clay would defeat him, and they were quite willing to reaffirm the two-thirds rule, even against the earnest protest of Van Buren’s most faithful leaders, because it was well known that he never could attain the two-thirds vote of the convention.

Van Buren was regarded as a most accomplished and rather an unscrupulous politician. He was certainly a brilliant political leader, a very sagacious counsellor, and believed in shaping the policy of the party chiefly or wholly with the view of success; but a short time before the meeting of the national convention he made one of the boldest political deliverances of his life against the annexation of Texas, and he did it with the knowledge that the Democrats of the South were practically united in the support of annexation, with a very large proportion of the Northern Democrats in harmony with it. In the month of May letters were given to the public from both Van Buren and Clay, opposing the annexation of Texas at that time as inexpedient, because it would mean war with Mexico, unless annexed with the consent of that nation. Clay’s letter did not strengthen him in the South, but certainly strengthened him in the North, and should have prevented the Abolition vote in New York from sacrificing Clay and electing an ardent supporter of the annexation of Texas with its slave Constitution, and under a treaty that permitted its subdivision into four new States, each of which would increase the slave power in the Senate.

Van Buren’s letter was made public just about one month before the meeting of the Democratic National Convention, and it was severely criticised by Southern newspapers and Democratic leaders generally, and with great severity by those who desired his defeat. The Richmond[Pg 79] Enquirer, then one of the ablest and most influential of the Democratic organs of the country, edited by Mr. Ritchie, demanded that the instructions which had been given to the Virginia delegates to support Van Buren should be rescinded. In some instances delegates did disobey Van Buren instructions and others resigned rather than support him.

The convention met in Baltimore on the 27th of May, South Carolina being the only State not represented. The first important movement made in the body after its organization was the readoption of the two-thirds rule, which all understood meant the defeat of Van Buren, notwithstanding that a majority of the delegates would vote for him. The sincere and earnest friends of Van Buren battled earnestly against the adoption of the rule, but it finally prevailed by a vote of 148 to 118, and a large majority of the votes in favor of the rule were cast by Southern delegates. It was claimed by his friends, and I doubt not with reason, that had the delegates in the convention voted as they had been instructed to vote, Van Buren would have received within a very few votes of the necessary two-thirds to make a nomination on the 1st ballot.

The convention was anything but harmonious, and stormy debates were common from the beginning to the end of the proceedings of the convention. Finally the convention reached the ballot for President, and Van Buren received on the 1st ballot 146 votes to 120 for all others, giving him a clear majority of 26 of the whole convention, but under the two-thirds rule it required 178 to nominate him. The following table shows the nine ballots in detail, the last resulting in the nomination of James K. Polk, of Tennessee:

| 1st. | 2d. | 3d. | 4th. | 5th. | 6th. | 7th. | 8th. | 9th.
M. Van Buren, N. Y. | 146 | 127 | 121 | 111 | 103 | 101 | 99 | 104 | 2
L. Cass, Mich. | 83 | 94 | 92 | 105 | 107 | 116 | 123 | 114 | 29
R. M. Johnson, Ky. | 24 | 33 | 38 | 32 | 29 | 23 | 21 | — | —
J. Buchanan, Pa. | 4 | 9 | 11 | 17 | 26 | 25 | 22 | 2 | —
L. Woodbury, N. H. | 2 | 1 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Com. Stewart, Pa. | 1 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
J. C. Calhoun, S. C. | 6 | 1 | 2 | — | — | — | — | 2 | —
J. K. Polk, Tenn. | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 44 | 233

[Pg 80]

Mr. Polk was the first “dark-horse” candidate ever nominated by any hopeful party for the Presidency. He had not been discussed as a candidate for President, but had been pressed by some of his political friends as a candidate for the Vice-Presidency. He had been long in Congress, was distinguished for his ability and impartiality as Speaker of the House, and had been elected Governor of his State in 1841, but had been defeated in the contest for re-election in 1843, only one year before his nomination for President. Although his nomination for President seemed to be a spontaneous movement of the convention to rescue the party from its bitter factional feuds and the wrangling ambitions of its leaders, there is little doubt that the slavery managers of the South would be satisfied with none other than a positive Texas annexationist, and secretly but systematically prepared a number of the delegates to accept Polk as a compromise when the convention should come to a deadlock on the other candidates. Polk was heralded as the special friend and protégé of Jackson, who was yet living, and those who paved the way for his nomination had very plausible arguments to offer, especially to Southern men, with whom the slavery issue had become vital. However the nomination of Polk may have been organized, it had all the appearance of a spontaneous stampede in the convention. He had only 44 votes on the 8th ballot, the first in which his name appears. While the 9th ballot was in progress the delegates began to change their votes to Polk, and the result was that before its close the chairmen of delegations were jostling each other to get their votes recorded early for the successful candidate. The Morse experimental telegraph line had just been completed between Washington and Baltimore, and the Democratic leaders at Washington were advised by telegraph of Polk’s nomination, to which a congratulatory response was promptly given.

Although the Van Buren men had finally voted for Polk, preferring him to any of the candidates who had aggressively opposed the success of Van Buren, they were profoundly grieved at Van Buren’s defeat. They believed that slavery had crucified Van Buren, and it was their purpose, during the flush of their anger, to allow Polk to suffer a humiliating disaster. The friends of Polk well understood the deep disaffection that would confront them among the[Pg 81] friends of Van Buren, and they adopted the very shrewd policy of taking Van Buren’s ablest lieutenant as the candidate for Vice-President. Silas Wright, of New York, Van Buren’s own State, was then one of the ablest of the Democratic Senators of that day, and a most zealous supporter of Van Buren. He was nominated for Vice-President by practically a unanimous vote, only eight of the Georgia delegates preferring Levi Woodbury, of New Hampshire. Mr. Wright, being in the Senate at Washington, was at once informed by telegraph of his nomination, but smarting under what he believed to be the betrayal of Van Buren, he promptly sent a curt and peremptory declination back on the wire. Had there been no electric telegraph, Mr. Wright would have accepted the nomination for Vice-President and been elected to that position, but the success of Morse’s great invention, that had been completed between Washington and Baltimore only a few days before the convention met, changed his political destiny.

After mature reflection the friends of Van Buren were brought to terms by the Democratic leaders in the interest of Polk, and they decided to give a cordial support to the national ticket, but New York was regarded as certain to vote against Polk unless some extraordinary measures were adopted to save it. It was finally decided that only by nominating Senator Wright for Governor could the vote of the State be assured to Polk, and the man who had declined the Vice-Presidency that was within his reach, because he expected and really desired the ticket to be defeated, was compelled to resign his seat in the Senate to accept the Democratic nomination for Governor of New York. He was admittedly the strongest man in the party, and it was that nomination that saved the Democrats of New York from demoralization and made Mr. Polk President.

Two years later Wright suffered a humiliating defeat in a contest for re-election, and thus ended a political career that should have been rounded out in the second office of the Government. Jackson was made President because there were no steamers, cables, or telegraphs to advise him on the 8th of January, 1815, when he fought and won the battle of New Orleans, that peace had been declared between the two nations a fortnight before, and Silas Wright lost the Vice-Presidency and ended his political career in disaster[Pg 82] because the telegraph had just been invented and put into operation between Washington and Baltimore.

The convention then proceeded to a second nomination for Vice-President, with the following result:

| 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
John Fairfield, Maine | 107 | 30
Levi Woodbury, New Hampshire | 44 | 6
Lewis Cass, Michigan | 39 | —
R. M. Johnson, Kentucky | 26 | —
Com. Stewart, Pennsylvania | 23 | —
Geo. M. Dallas, Pennsylvania | 13 | 220
Wm. L. Marcy, New York | 5 | —

The nomination of Dallas was made unanimous.

In constructing the Democratic platform for 1844 the Democrats threw out a political drag-net. The first Democratic national platform that had been adopted by the convention of 1840 was embodied in its entirety in the platform of this convention, and the following new resolutions added:

Resolved, That the American Democracy place their trust, not in factitious symbols, not in displays and appeals insulting to the judgment and subversive of the intellect of the people, but in a clear reliance upon the intelligence, patriotism, and the discriminating justice of the American people.

Resolved, That we regard this as a distinctive feature of our political creed, which we are proud to maintain before the world, as the great moral element in a form of government springing from and upheld by the popular will; and we contrast it with the creed and practice of Federalism, under whatever name or form, which seeks to palsy the will of the constituent, and which conceives no imposture too monstrous for the popular credulity.

Resolved, Therefore, that, entertaining these views, the Democratic party of this Union, through the delegates assembled in general convention of the States, coming together in a spirit of concord, of devotion to the doctrines and faith of a free representative Government, and appealing to their fellow-citizens for the rectitude of their intentions, renew and reassert before the American people the declaration of principles avowed by them on a former occasion, when, in general convention, they presented their candidates for the popular suffrage.

Resolved, That the proceeds of the public lands ought to be sacredly applied to the national objects specified in the Constitution; and that we are opposed to the laws lately adopted, and to any law, for the distribution of such proceeds among the States, as alike inexpedient in policy and repugnant to the Constitution.

[Pg 83]

Resolved, That we are decidedly opposed to taking from the President the qualified veto power by which he is enabled, under restrictions and responsibilities amply sufficient to guard the public interest, to suspend the passage of a bill, whose merits cannot secure the approval of two-thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, until the judgment of the people can be obtained thereon, and which has thrice saved the American people from the corrupt and tyrannical domination of the Bank of the United States.

Resolved, That our title to the whole of the territory of Oregon is clear and unquestionable; that no portion of the same ought to be ceded to England or any other power; and that the reoccupation of Oregon and the reannexation of Texas at the earliest practical period are great American measures which this convention recommends to the cordial support of the Democracy of the Union.

Resolved, That this convention hold in the highest estimation and regard their illustrious fellow-citizen, Martin Van Buren of New York; that we cherish the most grateful and abiding sense of the ability, integrity, and firmness with which he discharged the duties of the high office of President of the United States, and especially of the inflexible fidelity with which he maintained the true doctrines of the Constitution and the measures of the Democratic party during his trying and nobly arduous administration; that in the memorable struggle of 1840 he fell a martyr to the great principles of which he was the worthy representative, and we revere him as such; and that we hereby tender to him, in honorable retirement, the assurance of the deeply seated confidence, affection, and respect of the American Democracy.

The Whigs had nominated their national ticket in advance of the Democrats, the convention having been held at Baltimore on the 1st of May, with every State fully represented. It was a national assembly of unusual ability, and was most heartily and enthusiastically united in the support of Clay for the Presidency. It did not require the formality of a ballot to present him as the Whig candidate, and his nomination was made by acclamation. It required three ballots to nominate a candidate for Vice-President, as follows:

| First. | Second. | Third.
T. Frelinghuysen, N. J. | 101 | 118 | 155
John Davis, Mass. | 83 | 74 | 79
Millard Fillmore, N. Y. | 53 | 51 | 40
John Sergeant, Penn. | 38 | 32 | —
Total | 275 | 275 | 274

[Pg 84]

The platform adopted by the Whigs was brief but expressive. The Whig faith was tersely given in a single resolution. The other resolutions were simply eloquent tributes to Clay and Frelinghuysen, and the convention adjourned, making the welkin ring with cheers for “Harry Clay of the West” and for the “Mill Boy of the Slashes,” and absolutely confident of the triumphant election of their great leader to the highest honors of the Republic. The first Whig national platform was as follows:

Resolved, That, in presenting to the country the names of Henry Clay for President and of Theodore Frelinghuysen for Vice-President of the United States, this convention is actuated by the conviction that all the great principles of the Whig party—principles inseparable from the public honor and prosperity—will be maintained and advanced by these candidates.

Resolved, That these principles may be summed as comprising: a well-regulated currency; a tariff for revenue to defray the necessary expenses of the Government, and discriminating with special reference to the protection of the domestic labor of the country; the distribution of the proceeds from the sales of the public lands; a single term for the presidency; a reform of executive usurpations; and generally such an administration of the affairs of the country as shall impart to every branch of the public service the greatest practical efficiency, controlled by a well-regulated and wise economy.

Resolved, That the name of Henry Clay needs no eulogy. The history of the country since his first appearance in public life is his history. Its brightest pages of prosperity and success are identified with the principles which he has upheld, as its darkest and more disastrous pages are with every material departure in our public policy from those principles.

Resolved, That in Theodore Frelinghuysen we present a man pledged alike by his Revolutionary ancestry and his own public course to every measure calculated to sustain the honor and interest of the country. Inheriting the principles as well as the name of a father who, with Washington, on the fields of Trenton and of Monmouth, perilled life in the contest for liberty, and afterward, as a Senator of the United States, acted with Washington in establishing and perpetuating that liberty, Theodore Frelinghuysen, by his course as Attorney-General of the State of New Jersey for twelve years, and subsequently as a Senator of the United States for several years, was always strenuous on the side of law, order, and the Constitution, while, as a private man, his head, his hand, and his heart have been given without stint to the cause of morals, education, philanthropy, and religion.

The third national convention that presented candidates for the campaign of 1844 was that of the Abolitionists. They had grown since 1840, when they first nominated Mr. Birney as their candidate, and their platform, elaborate as it[Pg 85] is, is well worthy of careful study. It met at Buffalo, in August, 1843, and nominated James G. Birney, of New York, for President, and Thomas Morris, of Ohio, for Vice-President, and it increased its vote up to 62,300, all of which were cast in the Northern States, including 15,812 for Birney in New York. As nearly all of them were of Whig antecedents, they would have preferred Clay to Polk if they had not presented a ticket of their own to divert their votes, and it was their support of Birney that gave Polk the majority over Clay in the Empire State, whose electoral vote decided the contest. The following is the full text of the first platform presented by an Abolition national convention:

Resolved, That human brotherhood is a cardinal principle of true democracy, as well as of pure Christianity, which spurns all inconsistent limitations; and neither the political party which repudiates it nor the political system which is not based upon it can be truly democratic or permanent.

Resolved, That the Liberty party, placing itself upon this broad principle, will demand the absolute and unqualified divorce of the General Government from slavery, and also the restoration of equality of rights among men, in every State where the party exists or may exist.

Resolved, That the Liberty party has not been organized for any temporary purpose by interested politicians, but has arisen from among the people in consequence of a conviction, hourly gaining ground, that no other party in the country represents the true principles of American liberty or the true spirit of the Constitution of the United States.

Resolved, That the Liberty party has not been organized merely for the overthrow of slavery. Its first decided effort must indeed be directed against slaveholding as the grossest and most revolting manifestation of despotism, but it will also carry out the principle of equal rights into all its practical consequences and applications, and support every just measure conducive to individual and social freedom.

Resolved, That the Liberty party is not a sectional party, but a national party; was not originated in a desire to accomplish a single object, but in a comprehensive regard to the great interests of the whole country; is not a new party nor a third party, but is the party of 1776, reviving the principles of that memorable era, and striving to carry them into practical application.

Resolved, That it was understood in the times of the Declaration and the Constitution that the existence of slavery in some of the States was in derogation of the principles of American liberty, and a deep stain upon the character of the country and the implied faith of the States; and the nation was pledged that slavery should never be extended beyond its then existing limits, but should be gradually, and yet at no distant day, wholly abolished by State authority.

[Pg 86]

Resolved, That the faith of the States and the nation thus pledged was most nobly redeemed by the voluntary abolition of slavery in several of the States, and by the adoption of the ordinance of 1787 for the government of the territory northwest of the river Ohio, then the only territory in the United States, and consequently the only territory subject in this respect to the control of Congress, by which ordinance slavery was forever excluded from the vast regions which now compose the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and the Territory of Wisconsin, and an incapacity to bear up any other than free men was impressed on the soil itself.

Resolved, That the faith of the States and nation thus pledged has been shamefully violated by the omission on the part of many of the States to take any measures whatever for the abolition of slavery within their respective limits; by the continuance of slavery in the District of Columbia and in the Territories of Louisiana and Florida; by the legislation of Congress; by the protection afforded by national legislation and negotiation to slaveholding in American vessels, on the high seas, employed in the coastwise slave traffic; and by the extension of slavery far beyond its original limits, by acts of Congress admitting new Slave States into the Union.

Resolved, That the fundamental truth of the Declaration of Independence, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, was made the fundamental law of our National Government by that amendment of the Constitution which declares that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Resolved, That we recognize as sound the doctrine maintained by slaveholding jurists, that slavery is against natural rights and strictly local, and that its existence and continuance rest on no other support than State legislation, and not on any authority of Congress.

Resolved, That the General Government has, under the Constitution, no power to establish or continue slavery anywhere, and therefore that all treaties and acts of Congress establishing, continuing, or favoring slavery in the District of Columbia, in the Territory of Florida, or on the high seas, are unconstitutional, and all attempts to hold men as property within the limits of exclusive national jurisdiction ought to be prohibited by law.

Resolved, That the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, which confer extraordinary political powers on the owners of slaves, and thereby constituting the two hundred and fifty thousand slaveholders in the Slave States a privileged aristocracy, and the provision for the reclamation of fugitive slaves from service, are anti-republican in their character, dangerous to the liberties of the people, and ought to be abrogated.

Resolved, That the practical operation of the second of these provisions is seen in the enactment of the Act of Congress respecting persons escaping from their masters, which act, if the construction given to it by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania be correct, nullifies the habeas corpus acts of all the States, takes away the whole legal security of personal freedom, and ought therefore to be immediately repealed.

Resolved, That the peculiar patronage and support hitherto extended[Pg 87] to slavery and slaveholding by the General Government ought to be immediately withdrawn, and the example and influence of national authority ought to be arrayed on the side of liberty and free labor.

Resolved, That the practice of the General Government, which prevails in the Slave States, of employing slaves upon the public works, instead of free laborers, and paying aristocratic masters, with a view to secure or reward political services, is utterly indefensible and ought to be abandoned.

Resolved, That the freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of petition and the right of trial by jury, are sacred and inviolable; and that all rules, regulations, and laws in derogation of either are oppressive, unconstitutional, and not to be endured by free people.

Resolved, That we regard voting, in an eminent degree, as a moral and religious duty, which, when exercised, should be by voting for those who will do all in their power for immediate emancipation.

Resolved, That this convention recommend to the friends of liberty in all those Free States where any inequality of rights and privileges exists on account of color, to employ their utmost energies to remove all such remnants and effects of the slave system.

Whereas, The Constitution of these United States is a series of agreements, covenants, or contracts between the people of the United States, each with all and all with each; and

Whereas, It is a principle of universal morality, that the moral laws of the Creator are paramount to all human laws; or, in the language of an Apostle, that “we ought to obey God rather than men;” and

Whereas, The principle of common law, that any contract, covenant, or agreement to do an act derogatory to natural rights is vitiated and annulled by its inherent immorality, has been recognized by one of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, who in a recent case expressly holds that any “contract that rests upon such a basis is void;” and

Whereas, The third clause of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States, when construed as providing for the surrender of a fugitive slave, does “rest upon such a basis,” in that it is a contract to rob a man of a natural right, namely, his natural right to his own liberty, and is, therefore, absolutely void; therefore,

Resolved, That we hereby give it to be distinctly understood by this nation and the world, that, as Abolitionists, considering that the strength of our cause lies in its righteousness, and our hope for it in our conformity to the laws of God and our respect for the rights of man, we owe it to the Sovereign Ruler of the universe, as a proof of our allegiance to Him, in all our civil relations and offices, whether as private citizens or as public functionaries sworn to support the Constitution of the United States, to regard and to treat the third clause of the fourth article of that instrument, whenever applied to the case of a fugitive slave, as utterly null and void, and consequently as forming no part of the Constitution of the United States, whenever we are called upon or sworn to support it.

Resolved, That the power given to Congress by the Constitution, to provide for calling out the militia to suppress insurrection, does[Pg 88] not make it the duty of the Government to maintain slavery by military force, much less does it make it the duty of the citizens to form a part of such military force. When freemen unsheath the sword, it should be to strike for liberty, not for despotism.

Resolved, That to preserve the peace of the citizens and secure the blessings of freedom, the Legislature of each of the Free States ought to keep in force suitable statutes rendering it penal for any of its inhabitants to transport, or aid in transporting from such State, any person sought to be thus transported merely because subject to the slave laws of any other State; this remnant of independence being accorded to the Free States by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Prigg v. The State of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Clay enjoyed a much larger measure of personal popularity than any other man in the nation, and he was universally accepted as the most gifted political orator of his day. He was to the Whigs of that time what Blaine was to the Republicans during his several unsuccessful battles for the Presidency. It is a notable fact in political history that no pre-eminent political orator ever succeeded in reaching the Presidency. Garfield was the nearest approach to it, but he was a contemporary of Blaine, and Blaine far outstripped him either on the hustings or in parliamentary debate. Clay had entered both the House and Senate when little more than eligible by age, and he was admittedly the most accomplished presiding officer the House ever had. He was the Commoner of the war of 1812, and rendered most conspicuous service to his country. His speeches in the House did more than the persuasion of any other dozen men to force the young Republic into a second contest with England on the right of search on the high seas. He was always strong in argument, was often impassioned and superbly eloquent, and in every great emergency of the country during the first half of the present century he was the pacificator. President Madison was most reluctant to declare war against England, and he yielded to it only when it became a supreme necessity to obey the general demand of the country for an appeal to arms.

When Clay was nominated for President in 1844, it was generally believed that he would have an easy victory over Van Buren, and when Polk, of Tennessee, was made the compromise candidate against him, the Whigs at first believed that the nomination of a comparatively obscure man against the great chieftain of the Whigs would give them a walk-over. The campaign had made little progress, however,[Pg 89] until the Whigs discovered that the Democrats were going to be thoroughly united on Polk, and that he was probably the strongest candidate who could have been nominated against Clay. His chief strength was in his negative qualities. He had not been involved in any of the conflicts of ambition among the Democratic leaders. He was regarded as the favorite of Jackson, and while his nomination had been made without any previous discussion or suggestion of his claims to the Presidency, he had filled high State and national positions with credit, and he could not be accused of incompetency. I doubt indeed whether any other Democrat could have been nominated by the Democratic convention to make a successful battle against Clay.

The Whigs entered the contest defiant in confidence and enthusiastic to a degree that had never before been exhibited in the support of any candidate. The devotion of the Whigs to Clay was little less than idolatry, and strong men shed scalding tears over his defeat. He was largely handicapped in his battle by the complications put upon the Whig party by President Tyler. The Cabinet was wholly Democratic and bitterly against Clay. Under the demoralization caused by Tyler’s betrayal of the party the Whigs had lost the House in 1842, but they retained their mastery in the Senate, and a new peril to Clay was soon developed in the growth of the Abolition sentiment of Western New York. Neither Clay nor Polk made campaign speeches, and both maintained themselves with scrupulous dignity throughout the long and exceptionally desperate contest.

Pennsylvania was then, as in 1860, the pivotal State of the struggle, and the death of the Democratic candidate for Governor during the midsummer deprived the Whigs of a source of strength that most likely would have given them the State in October. The Democrats had a violent factional dispute in choosing a candidate for Governor. Mr. Muhlenberg, who had been a bolting candidate against Governor Wolfe in 1835, thereby electing Ritner, the anti-Masonic candidate, was finally nominated for Governor over Francis R. Shunk, the candidate of the opposing faction. Muhlenberg was weakened by his aggressive factional record, and the Democrats were hardly hopeful of his election, but he died just when the struggle was at its zenith, and Shunk was then unanimously and cordially accepted as the Democratic leader.

[Pg 90]

The Whigs had nominated General Markle, of Westmoreland, who was unquestionably the strongest man they could have presented. The Presidential battle was practically fought in that contest for Governor, and when Shunk was elected by 4397 majority, there were few who cherished much hope of Clay’s election. Pennsylvania lost in October could not be regained in November, but the Whigs did not in any measure relax their efforts, and Polk carried the State over Clay by 6332.

When Pennsylvania faltered the greatly impaired hopes of the Whigs centred in New York, as it was believed that New York might decide the contest in favor of Clay, even with Pennsylvania certain to vote against him. The nomination of Silas Wright for Governor had thoroughly united the Van Buren followers in support of Polk, and while Clay stood against the annexation of Texas and the extension of the slave power, the antislavery sentiment of New York was greatly strengthened by the fact that both Clay and Polk were Southerners and slaveholders. Birney, the Abolition candidate, received 15,812 votes, while Polk’s majority in the State was 5106. Mr. Greeley, who was one of the leaders in the antislavery movement, and much more practical than the organized Abolitionists, bitterly denounced that party for defeating Clay. In his Whig Almanac for 1845 he had an elaborate review of the contest, in which he said:

“The year 1844 just ended has witnessed one of the most extraordinary political contests that has ever occurred. So nice and equal a balance of parties; so universal and intense an interest; so desperate and protracted a struggle, are entirely without parallel.... James K. Polk owes his election to the Birney or Liberty party. Had there been no such party drawing its votes nine-tenths from the Whig ranks, Mr. Clay would have received at least the votes of New York and Michigan, in addition to those actually cast for him, giving him 146 electoral votes to Polk’s 129. To Birney & Co., therefore, is the country indebted for the election of Polk and the annexation and anti-tariff ascendency in the Federal Government.”

The number of States voting was 26, the same as in 1840. The new Congressional apportionment had reduced the Representatives from 242 to 223, making the total number of electors 275. The following table exhibits the popular and electoral vote:

[Pg 91]

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electors.
--- | --- | ---
James K. Polk. | Henry Clay. | James G. Birney. | Polk. | Clay.
Maine | 45,719 | 34,378 | 4,836 | 9 | —
New Hampshire | 27,160 | 17,866 | 4,161 | 6 | —
Vermont | 18,041 | 26,770 | 3,954 | — | 6
Massachusetts | 52,846 | 67,418 | 10,860 | — | 12
Rhode Island | 4,867 | 7,322 | 107 | — | 4
Connecticut | 29,841 | 32,832 | 1,943 | — | 6
New York | 237,588 | 232,482 | 15,812 | 36 | —
New Jersey | 37,495 | 38,318 | 131 | — | 7
Pennsylvania | 167,535 | 161,203 | 3,138 | 26 | —
Delaware | 5,996 | 6,278 | —— | — | 3
Maryland | 32,676 | 35,984 | —— | — | 8
Virginia | 49,570 | 43,677 | —— | 17 | —
North Carolina | 39,287 | 43,232 | —— | — | 11
South Carolina[12] | —— | —— | —— | 9 | —
Georgia | 44,177 | 42,100 | —— | 10 | —
Alabama | 37,740 | 26,084 | —— | 9 | —
Mississippi | 25,126 | 19,206 | —— | 6 | —
Louisiana | 13,782 | 13,083 | —— | 6 | —
Kentucky | 51,988 | 61,255 | —— | — | 12
Tennessee | 59,917 | 60,030 | —— | — | 13
Missouri | 41,369 | 31,251 | —— | 7 | —
Arkansas | 9,546 | 5,504 | —— | 3 | —
Ohio | 149,117 | 155,057 | 8,050 | — | 23
Michigan | 27,759 | 24,337 | 3,632 | 5 | —
Indiana | 70,181 | 67,867 | 2,106 | 12 | —
Illinois | 57,920 | 45,528 | 3,570 | 9 | —
Totals | 1,337,243 | 1,299,062 | 62,300 | 170 | 105

The Whigs, in keen despair over the defeat of their ablest and most beloved champion, charged fraud as the controlling factor in giving the Democrats their victory, but the battle had been fought and lost, and there was nothing left for them but submission. The electoral count was uneventful, and Polk and Dallas were formally declared elected President and Vice-President without objection.

The most desperate contests outside of New York and[Pg 92] Pennsylvania were made in Tennessee and Delaware. Tennessee was the home of Polk, and the “Old Hero of New Orleans” threw himself into the contest for Polk with tireless energy. He inspired his veteran followers not only because he wanted Polk elected, but because he much more wanted Clay defeated. Clay had defeated him for President in the House in 1825, and Jackson never forgot a friend and rarely forgave an enemy. It was many days after the election before the vote of Tennessee could be ascertained, and it was claimed by both parties until the official vote was declared. It was finally announced that Clay had carried the State by 113, and the success of Clay in that State was the only silver lining the Whigs had to the dark cloud of their defeat.

Another memorable battle, though not in any sense an important contest as affecting the result, was fought in Delaware. The States did not then vote for President on the same day as now. All of them voted for Presidential electors in the month of November, although at that time nearly all the States elected their State officers and Congressmen earlier in the year. Delaware, with only 3 electoral votes, held both her State and her Presidential elections on the second Tuesday of November, and when her election day came around it was known to all that Clay was absolutely defeated for President.

New York and Pennsylvania had voted for Polk a week before, and on the second Tuesday of November only Massachusetts and Delaware were left among the States that had not yet chosen electors. Massachusetts was Whig and hardly contested, but Delaware made a most heroic battle for Clay, even when it was known that a victory in the little Diamond State could not aid the election of their favorite. The Democrats, inspired by their positively assured success in the national contest, exhausted their resources and efforts to win, but in the largest vote ever cast in the State, Clay won by 287 majority, receiving a larger vote than was cast for the Whig candidates for Governor or for Congress, both of whom were successful, the first by 45 majority and the last by 173.

The Kentucky electors met at their Capitol on the day appointed for the electoral colleges to cast their votes for President, and in sorrowing devotion to their chief cast the vote of the State for Clay for President. After their official[Pg 93] duties had been performed a committee was appointed to prepare an address to be delivered to Mr. Clay at Ashland. All the members of the college, with many other citizens, accompanied the committee, and Clay met them at his hospitable door to hear the address delivered by Mr. Underwood, the chairman. Clay’s reply was one of the most beautiful of his very many exquisite illustrations of oratory. He said he would not “affect indifference to the personal concern which I had in the political contest just terminated, but unless I am greatly self-deceived, the principal attraction to me of the office of President of the United States arose out of the cherished hope that I might be an humble instrument, in the hands of Providence, to accomplish public good,” and in conclusion he said: “I heartily thank you, sir, for your friendly wishes for my happiness in the retirement which henceforth best becomes me.” Thus closed the memorable Polk-Clay contest of 1844.

[Pg 94]

## THE TAYLOR-CASS-VAN BUREN CONTEST

1848

President Polk was not blessed with a tranquil administration. The annexation of Texas had been approved by Tyler several days before Polk was inaugurated as President, and that at once made strained relations between this country and Mexico. It was an open secret then, and is now a part of the undisputed history of the country, that the election of Polk and the annexation of Texas were regarded by the friends of slavery extension as most important achievements, and that period dated the aggressive action of the South, first to extend and next to nationalize slavery. The annexation of Texas brought in a Slave State and two United States Senators, with the treaty right to add eight new Senators by the subdivision of the State.

This met Calhoun’s complaint that the South could not maintain its equilibrium in the Senate because of the growing West. The purposes of the Southern extensionists, however, went far beyond the annexation of Texas. They meant to have part of Mexico, peaceably if possible, by war if necessary; and the war was deliberately planned and precipitated upon Mexico by the action of the administration. The territory between the Nueces and the Rio Grande rivers was claimed by both Texas and Mexico, but Mexico had exercised uniform jurisdiction. Texas had never served a writ or collected a dollar of revenue on the Rio Grande, and the United States army of occupation, commanded by General Taylor, had not gone south of the Nueces. There was much violent discussion in Mexico over the annexation of Texas, whose independence Mexico disputed, and threats of war were freely made.

The President, without the authority or knowledge of[Pg 95] Congress, ordered General Taylor to march to the Rio Grande and maintain it as the southern line of Texas. This precipitated the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma, in which Taylor defeated the Mexicans. The Democratic Congress then prefaced a bill providing for the national defence by declaring that “we are at war by the act of Mexico.” The purpose of the Mexican war was very freely and severely criticised by a large portion of the people and by many of the ablest men of the nation. The Whigs in Congress were willing to vote for all needed appropriations for the support of the army, but a few members of the House, with the late John Strohm, of Pennsylvania, as the leader, after unsuccessfully struggling to strike out the declaration that “we were at war by the act of Mexico,” refused to vote for the army appropriation; and Corwin, of Ohio, made the ablest speech that ever was delivered in the Senate, with the single exception of Webster’s reply to Hayne, against the Mexican war and against appropriating money for its prosecution.

ZACHARY TAYLOR

The certainty that the administration would acquire a large portion of Mexican territory for the purpose of creating new Slave States gave dignity and importance to the slavery agitation that it never before attained, and in the fall elections of 1846 the Whigs carried the popular branch of Congress by a decided majority. The repeal of the protective tariff of 1842 and the substitution of the revenue tariff of 1846 contributed considerably to the Democratic disaster, and the war was finally prosecuted by the administration with an adverse House, although willing to furnish all appropriations necessary to support the armies in the field.

After Taylor’s early victories over the Mexicans he invaded Mexican territory and captured Monterey, and these victories made his name a household word throughout the country. Instead of permitting Taylor to proceed with the war that he had so successfully conducted up to that time, the administration decided to practically retire him. General Scott was called to plan an independent campaign from Vera Cruz to the capital of Mexico. It was openly charged that the administration feared the popularity of “Old Zach,” as Taylor was generally called by the people, and that it had little fear of Scott as a Presidential candidate. Scott planned his campaign; was furnished with an independent army, and when he arrived at Vera Cruz he stripped General Taylor[Pg 96] of nearly all his regulars, leaving him an army of but little over 4000, most of them volunteers. Santa Anna, whose return to Mexico had been sanctioned by our Government, made himself Military Dictator. He gathered an army of 22,000 of the best Mexican troops and made a rapid movement to strike and crush General Taylor at Buena Vista. The history of that battle is well known. Taylor not only defeated but routed the Mexicans, and thereby made himself the next President of the United States.

General Scott made a most brilliant campaign, fighting repeated battles, and finally captured the City of Mexico, when the administration involved him in bitter controversy, as was easily done with General Scott, and had him tried by a court of his inferiors in the Capitol of the enemy he had conquered. Brilliant as was his military campaign he returned home with little if any increased prestige, and every schoolboy in the land was huzzaing for “Old Zach,” or for “Old Rough and Ready.”

There seems to be poetic justice in the marvellous historical fact that with the large amount of territory conquered from Mexico, and the additional territory afterward purchased by the Gadsden treaty, the South did not gain a single Slave State, and it quickened the issue of slavery that greatly hastened its destruction just when it hoped to attain omnipotence.

It was uncertain after the war of Mexico was inaugurated and the certainty of the acquisition of Mexican territory accepted just when and in what shape the issue of the extension of slavery would be presented. To the surprise of the friends of the administration it came much sooner and in much graver form than they had anticipated. On the 8th of August, 1846, President Polk sent a message to Congress asking for an appropriation to be placed at the President’s disposal to enable him to negotiate an advantageous treaty of peace with the Mexican Government, and a bill was promptly presented to the House appropriating $32,000,000 for immediate use in negotiations with Mexico. There were a number of able and earnest antislavery Democrats in the House, and among them David Wilmot, of Pennsylvania. When the bill, making the large appropriation to obtain peace with Mexico, that obviously meant the acquisition of Southern territory, was presented to the House, repeated conferences were had between the antislavery Democratic[Pg 97] leaders, and what has since been known as the “Wilmot Proviso” was originally drawn by Judge Brinkerhoff, then a Democratic Congressman from Ohio, and finally revised and agreed upon, to be offered as an amendment to the Mexican Appropriation bill.

The Speaker was adverse to the antislavery Democrats, and it was uncertain whether any of them could obtain the floor to offer the amendment. The result was that a copy of the proviso was furnished to some half a dozen, with the understanding that each should take advantage of any opportunity to obtain the floor during the consideration of the bill and offer the amendment. The opportunity happened to come to Mr. Wilmot, and he offered the following amendment, that is the original of what is now known as the “Wilmot Proviso.”

“Provided, That as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty that may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory except for crime whereof the party shall be first duly convicted.”

This proviso came like a bombshell into the ranks of the administrationists, and they were unable to defeat it. It was carried in Committee of the Whole by a vote of 83 to 64, with only 3 Democrats from the Free States opposing it. When the measure was reported to the House, Mr. Tibbatts, of Kentucky, moved that it do lie on the table, and the motion was defeated by 93 to 79. The bill was engrossed for third reading by 85 to 80, and passed finally without further division, with a motion to reconsider laid on the table by vote of 83 to 73. Thus what is now known as the Wilmot Proviso was embodied by the House in the Appropriation bill for negotiating peace with Mexico.

The Wilmot Proviso raised the slavery issue in the most direct form, and it played an important part in the Presidential contest of 1848. It was simply a repetition of the clause prohibiting slavery that was put in the ordinance of 1787 by Thomas Jefferson, when the Northwestern Territory was ceded by Virginia to the United States. It was a very embarrassing issue to many Northern Democrats, and to a few Southern Whigs who inclined to prevent slavery extension. General Cass, who was made the candidate for President[Pg 98] in 1848, originally declared himself in favor of the Wilmot Proviso, but he learned a year later that no man could maintain his fellowship with the Democratic party under the Polk administration and support the prohibition of slavery in the Territories.

When the discussion of candidates for the Presidential contest of 1848 became active, General Cass was addressed on the subject of slavery by A. O. P. Nicholson, of Nashville, Tenn., in which he inquired of Cass whether he was in favor of the acquisition of Mexican territory, and what his views were as to the Wilmot Proviso. General Cass answered, December 24, 1847, in which he declared himself in favor of the acquisition of Mexican territory and against the Wilmot Proviso, on which point he said: “I am strongly impressed with the opinion that a great change has been going on in the public mind upon this subject, in my own as well as others, and that doubts are resolving themselves into convictions that the principle it involves should be kept out of the national Legislature and left to the people of the Confederacy in their respective local governments.” But for this declaration Cass would not have been the Democratic candidate for President in 1848, and that declaration also opened the door for the Van Buren bolt that defeated Cass in the great ambition of his life.

In addition to the serious political complications which confronted the Polk administration and threatened the defeat of the Democratic party at its close, the Oregon dispute with England, that had been made one of the chief features of the Polk campaign of 1844, was sensibly adjusted by Secretary of State Buchanan, but in utter disregard of the Democratic declarations and ostentatious professions of the campaign. In that contest the Democrats from every stump declared that the boundary line between Oregon and England must be “54° 40´, or fight”; but when the issue became a question of statesmanship and diplomacy, a treaty was made fixing 49° as the boundary, and thus confessing that the claim of the Democrats in the campaign was made either in ignorance or insincerity.

Another of the troubles that confronted the Democracy was the intense factional dispute in New York between what were known as the Hunkers and the Barnburners. The Hunkers were so called in derision by their enemies as men who always hunkered after office, and the Barnburners[Pg 99] were so called by their opponents because it was charged that to correct evils in the party, they were ready to follow the foolish farmer who burnt his barn to rid it of rats.

Silas Wright, who had lost the Vice-Presidency in 1844 by his devotion to Van Buren, and was finally compelled to run for Governor to save the State, suffered a severe defeat in 1846 when a candidate for re-election. That defeat was charged by Van Buren and his friends to the perfidy of the Hunkers. So intense was the bitterness between these factions that they could not agree on delegations to the national convention, and two opposing delegations were chosen, the Barnburners being antislavery Democrats and the Hunkers the regular or pro-slavery Democrats. The national convention met at Baltimore on the 22d of May, 1848, with every State represented, and New York with a double delegation. Andrew Stevenson, of Virginia, was made President, and the two-thirds rule was adopted by a vote of 175 to 78. For two days the convention wrangled over the disputing delegations from New York, and after protracted and angry debate a motion was finally passed by 126 to 124 admitting both delegations, each to cast half the vote of the State.

While this was a comparative victory for the Barnburners, they withdrew from the convention, and the Hunker delegation refused to participate in the proceedings. The prominent candidates before the convention for President were Cass and Buchanan, with Cass immensely in the lead and reasonably certain to be nominated before the convention met. He had a large plurality on the 1st ballot, but did not reach the requisite two-thirds vote until the 4th, as is shown by the following table, giving the ballots in detail:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth.
Necessary to a choice | 168 | 168 | 169 | 169
Lewis Cass, Mich. | 125 | 133 | 156 | 179
James Buchanan, Penn. | 55 | 54 | 40 | 33
Levi Woodbury, N. H. | 53 | 56 | 53 | 38
George M. Dallas, Penn. | 3 | 3 | — | —
W. J. Worth, Tenn. | 6 | 6 | 5 | 1
John C. Calhoun, S. C. | 9 | — | — | —
W. O. Butler, Ky. | — | — | — | 3

The convention adjourned after the nomination of Cass to meet in evening session to select a candidate for Vice-President,[Pg 100] and without any preliminaries the ballot was had as follows:

Wm. O. Butler, Ky. | 114
J. A. Quitman, Miss. | 74
John Y. Mason, Va. | 24
Wm. R. King, Ala. | 29
Jas. J. McKay, N. C. | 13
Jefferson Davis, Miss. | 1

A 2d ballot was had and ended in the unanimous nomination of Butler.

The platform of the party was not reported until the fifth and final day of the convention, and it was altogether the most elaborate declaration of principles ever made by a political party in national convention. Immediately after the first resolution as we give it followed the full text of the Democratic platforms adopted in 1840 and 1844, and to the fifth resolution of the platform of 1844 the following sentence was added: “And for the gradual but certain extinction of the debt created by the prosecution of a just and necessary war after peaceful relations shall have been restored.” The Democratic platform of 1848, therefore, included the platforms of 1840 and 1844, with the following new declarations of faith:

Resolved, That the American Democracy place their trust in the intelligence, the patriotism, and the discriminating justice, of the American people.

Resolved, That the war with Mexico, provoked on her part by years of insult and injury, was commenced by her army crossing the Rio Grande, attacking the American troops, and invading our sister State of Texas; and that, upon all the principles of patriotism and the laws of nations, it is a just and necessary war upon our part, in which every American citizen should have shown himself on the side of his country, and neither morally nor physically, by word or deed, have given aid and comfort to the enemy.

Resolved, That we should be rejoiced at the assurance of a peace with Mexico, founded on the just principles of indemnity for the past and security for the future; but that, while the ratification of the liberal treaty offered to Mexico remains in doubt, it is the duty of the country to sustain the administration in every measure necessary to provide for the vigorous prosecution of the war, should that treaty be rejected.

Resolved, That the officers and soldiers who have carried the arms of their country into Mexico have crowned it with imperishable glory. Their unconquerable courage, their daring enterprise, their unfaltering perseverance and fortitude when assailed on all sides by innumerable foes—and that more formidable enemy, the diseases of the climate—exalt their devoted patriotism into the highest heroism, and give them a right to the profound gratitude of their country and the admiration of the world.

[Pg 101]

Resolved, That the Democratic National Convention of thirty States, composing the American Republic, tender their fraternal congratulations to the National Convention of the Republic of France, now assembled as the free suffrage representatives of the sovereignty of thirty-five millions of republicans, to establish governments on those eternal principles of equal rights, for which their Lafayette and our Washington fought side by side in the struggle for our national independence; and we would especially convey to them and to the whole people of France our earnest wishes for the consolidation of their liberties, through the wisdom that shall guide their counsels, on the basis of a democratic constitution, not derived from the grants or concessions of kings or dynasties, but originating from the only true source of political power recognized in the States of this Union: the inherent and inalienable rights of the people, in their sovereign capacity, to make and to amend their forms of government in such a manner as the welfare of the community may require.

Resolved, That with the recent development of this grand political truth—of the sovereignty of the people and their capacity and power for self-government, which is prostrating thrones and erecting republics on the ruins of despotism in the Old World—we feel that a high and sacred duty is devolved, with increased responsibility, upon the Democratic party of this country, as the party of the people, to sustain and advance among us constitutional liberty, equality, and fraternity, by continuing to resist all monopolies and exclusive legislation for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many; and by a vigilant and constant adherence to those principles and compromises of the Constitution, which are broad enough and strong enough to embrace and uphold the Union as it was, the Union as it is, and the Union as it shall be, in the full expansion of the energies and capacity of this great and progressive people.

Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be forwarded, through the American Minister at Paris, to the National Convention of the Republic of France.

Resolved, That the fruits of the great political triumph of 1844, which elected James K. Polk and George M. Dallas President and Vice-President of the United States, have fulfilled the hopes of the Democracy of the Union in defeating the declared purposes of their opponents to create a national bank; in preventing the corrupt and unconstitutional distribution of the land proceeds, from the common treasury of the Union, for local purposes; in protecting the currency and labor of the country from ruinous fluctuations, and guarding the money of the people for the use of the people; by the establishment of the constitutional treasury; in the noble impulse given to the cause of free trade, by the repeal of the tariff of 1842, and the creation of the more equal, honest, and productive tariff of 1846; and that, in our opinion, it would be a fatal error to weaken the hands of a political organization by which these great reforms have been achieved, and risk them in the hands of their known adversaries, with whatever delusive appeals they may solicit our surrender of that vigilance which is the only safeguard of liberty.

Resolved, That the confidence of the Democracy of the Union in the principles, capacity, firmness, and integrity of James K. Polk, manifested by his nomination and election in 1844, has been signally[Pg 102] justified by the strictness of his adherence to sound Democratic doctrines, by the purity of purpose, the energy and ability which have characterized his administration in all our affairs at home and abroad; that we tender to him our cordial congratulations upon the brilliant success which has hitherto crowned his patriotic efforts, and assure him in advance that, at the expiration of his Presidential term, he will carry with him to his retirement the esteem, respect, and admiration of a grateful country.

Resolved, That this convention hereby present to the people of the United States Lewis Cass, of Michigan, as the candidate of the Democratic party for the office of President, and William O. Butler, of Kentucky, as the candidate of the Democratic party for Vice-President of the United States.

After the platform had been reported, Mr. Yancey, of Alabama, offered an additional resolution providing, “That the doctrine of non-interference with the rights of property of any portion of the people of this Confederacy, be it in the States or Territories thereof, by any other than the parties interested in them, is the true Republican doctrine recognized by this body,” but it was rejected by a vote of 216 to 36. Yancey’s resolution stated just what the convention believed, but what it did not dare express.

Notwithstanding the serious complications which confronted the Democrats at the opening of the campaign of 1848, they started out with every prospect of electing their national ticket. Cass was accepted as the ablest of the Democratic leaders of that day, and his nomination seemed to inspire the Democrats to earnest effort for his election. There was then no apprehension of the Van Buren bolt that grew to such immense proportions before the campaign closed, and made the defeat of Cass inevitable.

The Whigs were in an unfortunate position to go before the country. They had opposed the Mexican war vehemently, had protested against the acquisition of Mexican territory, and were certain to be divided on sectional lines arising from the additional Territories and future States our expansion was sure to give us. They were in the same position in which they found themselves in 1839, when they had to unite discordant elements of opposition to Van Buren to win the victory. The idolatry for Clay was yet cherished in all its intensity, and although enfeebled by age, he yielded to the earnest importunities of his friends, and announced himself as candidate for the nomination, though all intelligent and dispassionate Whig leaders knew that he was not available.

[Pg 103]

General Scott had been clouded by serious differences with the administration, in which his volubility had served his enemies a good purpose, and Webster never had a large popular following as a Presidential candidate. It was the first national convention that I ever witnessed, being then a boy editor in the interior and not old enough to vote for the men I supported. It was held in Chinese Hall, in Philadelphia, where the Continental Hotel now stands, and was dominated by the wonderfully able political leaders and statesmen which the South produced in ante-bellum days. They knew that they could not meet the slavery issue in the new Territories, and they presented General Taylor to the convention, and, without a pledge from Taylor himself, they formally pledged themselves to the convention that if not nominated he would not be the candidate of any other party, and would support the ticket.

The Whig National Convention convened at Philadelphia on the 7th of June, with a full representation from every State excepting Texas. Ex-Governor John M. Morehead, of North Carolina, presided. The conferences of the Whig leaders were anything but harmonious, and there were indications at times of an open and very serious rupture. Clay’s friends knew that it was the last battle that ever could be made for him. Their idolatry for Clay made them earnest, enthusiastic, even desperate, although most of them could not but foresee that his nomination was impossible, and that his election, if nominated, would be quite improbable.

The friends of Clay and Scott did not take kindly to General Taylor. He had been nominated some time before by a Native American National Convention that then represented but an inconsiderable following principally in the Eastern cities, and he had never distinctly declared his devotion to the Whig policy. Congressman L. D. Campbell, of Ohio, offered a resolution just before the balloting began, declaring that the convention should not entertain the candidacy of any man for President or Vice-President “who had not given assurances that he would abide by the action of the convention; that he would accept the nomination and that he would consider himself the candidate of the Whig party.” An angry debate was avoided by the President ruling the resolution out of order. Mr. Campbell appealed, but the appeal was lost. Mr. Fuller, of New York, then offered a resolution declaring that no man should be nominated for President unless “he stands pledged to support[Pg 104] in good faith the nominees and to be the exponent of Whig principles.” This was also ruled out of order, and an appeal was tabled.

Even after Taylor had been nominated, Mr. Allen, of Massachusetts, who afterward bolted the party and supported Van Buren as a Free Soiler, offered a resolution declaring that the Whig party would abide by the nomination of Taylor on condition that he would accept the nomination as the candidate of the Whig party, and adhere to its great fundamental principles of no extension of slavery territory, no acquisition of foreign territory by conquest, protection to American industry, and opposition to Executive usurpation.” That was ruled out of order, as were several other resolutions aiming at some expression on the question of slavery.

The Southern Whig leaders saw that the only possible way to save the Whigs in the South was to nominate a Southern man; General Taylor was the only Southern man whom they believed could command favor in the North, and they wanted no expression from the convention on any of the delicate and perilous issues which confronted them. A number of leading Southern delegates, headed by Balie Peyton, of Tennessee, gave their formal pledge to the convention that General Taylor would accept the nomination and would abide by the decision of the party, and that he could safely be trusted as an exponent of the Whig policy. The convention had three ballots before a choice was reached for President, as follows:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth.
Zachary Taylor, La. | 111 | 118 | 133 | 171
Henry Clay, Ky. | 97 | 86 | 74 | 32
Winfield Scott, N. J. | 43 | 49 | 54 | 63
Daniel Webster, Mass. | 22 | 22 | 17 | 14
John McLean, Ohio. | 2 | — | — | —
John M. Clayton, Del. | 4 | 4 | 1 | —

The nomination of Taylor was not made unanimous, as a number of the New England delegates and some from Ohio[Pg 105] had decided not to support him under any circumstances, and they were later welcomed into the Free Soil Democracy that nominated Van Buren on the distinct antislavery extension platform. Among the most disgruntled of those who attended the convention was Horace Greeley. I met him then for the first time, and saw as much of him as I could, as he was my ideal fellow-editor. As soon as Taylor was nominated he started for New York, and I met him just as he was departing. He was evidently in great haste to make the Camden & Amboy train, and he was hurrying down Chestnut Street. His low-crowned, broad-brimmed, fuzzy fur hat set at an angle of 45 degrees on the back of his head, his profusion of shirt collar protected from wandering over his shoulders by an immense black silk handkerchief he used as a necktie, with the awkward knot serenely resting under his left ear, and his immense baggy black swallowtail coat, and the literal carpetbag he held by one handle, while the other lay down on the side of the bag, did not contribute much toward his genteel appearance. It was evident that he was mad clear through. In answer to my question as to how he liked the nomination of Taylor, he curtly answered, “Can’t say that I admire it,” and shuffled along toward the ferry, but the Tribune of the next morning had a terrific leader against Taylor, the title of which was “The Philadelphia Slaughterhouse,” and Greeley long hesitated about coming into the support of Taylor. He could not follow Van Buren, in whom he had no faith and against whom he had made his first great battle as an editor in 1840. Finally, seeing that the choice was between Cass and Taylor, Greeley decided to support the Whig candidate, and the Whigs of New York showed their appreciation of his action by nominating him to fill an unexpired term in Congress, to which he was elected by a large majority.

The contest for Vice-President had been very animated, and for some time before the meeting of the convention it seemed probable that Abbott Lawrence, a New England millionaire, might win it. He made the first attempt that had been ventured to gain a national nomination by the money-in-politics system, but after Taylor had been nominated for President his friends naturally looked to some representative supporter of Clay to be placed second on the ticket, and Fillmore led Lawrence on the 1st ballot and was nominated on the 2d. The ballots were as follows:

[Pg 106]

| 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
Millard Fillmore | 115 | 173
Abbott Lawrence | 109 | 83
Scattering | 50 | 4

George Evans, of Maine, and T. M. T. McKennen, Andrew Stewart, and John Sergeant, of Pennsylvania, all received a few votes. The nomination of Fillmore was made unanimous by the delegates who remained in the convention. The convention adopted no platform.

After the nomination of General Taylor for President an interesting, and what would now be regarded as a most ludicrous, incident occurred relating to the letter written by Governor Morehead, President of the Convention, to General Taylor advising him of his nomination for the Presidency. At that time the prepayment of postage was not compulsory, and unpaid letters were charged from five to ten times the present rate of letter postage. President Morehead promptly mailed a letter to General Taylor at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, notifying him of his nomination, but several weeks elapsed without any response. The telegraph was then in its infancy, and unthought of as an agent except in the most urgent emergency, and Governor Morehead finally sent a trusted friend to visit General Taylor and inquire why his letter of acceptance had not been given. Every political crank, as well as many others in the country, had been writing letters to General Taylor on the subject of the Presidency, very few of whom prepaid their letter postage. Old “Rough and Ready” became vexed beyond endurance at the tax imposed upon him, and he gave peremptory orders to the postmaster to send to the dead-letter office all letters addressed to him which were unpaid. Governor Morehead, assuming that a letter advising a man of his nomination for the Presidency, that carried with it a reasonably certain election, was a matter of quite as much interest to Taylor as to himself, had not prepaid the postage on his letter, and it had gone to the dead-letter office in accordance with Taylor’s general orders. When the mistake was discovered, the error was corrected by the sending of a second letter—postage prepaid—to General Taylor, to which he promptly responded, and[Pg 107] the explanation given that the original letter had miscarried in the mails.

MILLARD FILLMORE

One of the interesting episodes of the convention was the arrival in Philadelphia, while the Whig convention was in session, of General Cass and his suite of Democratic leaders of national fame. Cass was on his way home from Washington, and the short time that he remained here he liberally divided public attention with the Whigs. An immense crowd welcomed Cass at the Jones Hotel, on Chestnut, above Sixth, and I there for the first time saw and heard General Cass, Senator Houston, Senator Allen, Senator Benton, and Representative Stevenson, all of whom spoke from the balcony of the hotel, and were cheered to the echo. I recall Houston as one of the handsomest men I have ever seen, with perfect physique, of heroic form, and a superbly chiselled face, portraying all the strength of the best type of the Roman. Cass was heavy and ponderous, but an able and attractive speaker, and I remember Benton well because his speech made him remembered as a colossal, perpendicular I. Allen was then notable as the “fog-horn,” and he could be heard a square beyond any of the others. A facetious delegate in the Whig convention, with admirable mock gravity, suggested that as the Democratic funeral train was in this city taking Cass’s body home by the lakes, the convention should adjourn.

As might have been expected, and as was greatly feared by both the leading parties, the slavery issue was at once made the vital one of the contest. The Democrats hoped that as the contest warmed up the Van Buren followers would acquiesce as they did in 1844, but what at first seemed to be a cloud on the Democratic horizon no bigger than a man’s hand soon after developed into a promised tempest. The Barnburners, who had withdrawn from the Democratic National Convention, called a State convention, to meet at Utica, N. Y., on the 22d of June, and invited delegates from other States for conference. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Ohio, and Wisconsin were represented, and after devoting two days to the discussion of the best policy to adopt, Van Buren was formally nominated for President, and Henry Dodge, of Wisconsin, for Vice-President, who declined, and supported Cass. Van Buren’s formal acceptance of the nomination followed soon thereafter, and it was the first definite notice to the regular Democrats that the[Pg 108] Free-Soil Democracy was going to be earnestly arrayed against Democratic success.

Although Van Buren had accepted the first nomination, it was deemed wise as the campaign progressed to have a much more representative national body to make him the candidate, and a largely attended mass convention met at Buffalo on the 9th of August, over which Charles Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, presided, and which had representatives from seventeen States. On the formal ballot for President, Van Buren had 159 votes to 129 for John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, who had already been nominated by the Abolitionists, and Charles Francis Adams was nominated by acclamation for Vice-President. After this convention had made its nominations and declared its platform, Mr. Hale, the Abolition candidate, retired from the contest, and he and his followers gave a cordial support to Van Buren. The following was the Van Buren platform as declared by the Buffalo convention:

Whereas, We have assembled in convention, as a union of freemen, for the sake of freedom, forgetting all past political differences, in common resolve to maintain the rights of free labor against the aggressions of the slave power, and to secure free soil for a free people; and

Whereas, The political conventions recently assembled at Baltimore and Philadelphia, the one stifling the voice of a great constituency, entitled to be heard in its deliberations, and the other abandoning its distinctive principles for mere availability, have dissolved the national party organizations heretofore existing by nominating for the chief magistracy of the United States, under the slaveholding dictation, candidates, neither of whom can be supported by the opponents of slavery extension without a sacrifice of consistency, duty, and self-respect; and

Whereas, These nominations so made furnish the occasion and demonstrate the necessity of the union of the people under the banner of free democracy, in a solemn and formal declaration of their independence of the slave power, and of their fixed determination to rescue the Federal Government from its control:

Resolved, Therefore, that we, the people here assembled, remembering the example of our fathers in the days of the first Declaration of Independence, putting our trust in God for the triumph of our cause, and invoking His guidance in our endeavors to advance it, do now plant ourselves upon the national platform of freedom, in opposition to the sectional platform of slavery.

Resolved, That slavery in the several States of this Union which recognize its existence depends upon State laws alone, which cannot be repealed or modified by the Federal Government, and for which laws that Government is not responsible. We therefore propose no interference by Congress with slavery within the limits of any State.

[Pg 109]

Resolved, That the proviso of Jefferson, to prohibit the existence of slavery after 1800 in all the Territories of the United States, southern and northern; the votes of six States and sixteen delegates, in the Congress of 1784 for the proviso, to three States and seven delegates against it; the actual exclusion of slavery from the Northwestern Territory by the ordinance of 1787, unanimously adopted by the States in Congress; and the entire history of that period—clearly show that it was the settled policy of the nation not to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, localize, and discourage slavery; and to this policy, which should never have been departed from, the Government ought to return.

Resolved, That our fathers ordained the Constitution of the United States in order, among other great national objects, to establish justice, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty; but expressly denied to the Federal Government, which they created, all constitutional power to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due legal process.

Resolved, That, in the judgment of this convention, Congress has no more power to make a slave than to make a king; no more power to institute or establish slavery than to institute or establish a monarchy. No such power can be found among those specifically conferred by the Constitution, or derived by any just implication from them.

Resolved, That it is the duty of the Federal Government to relieve itself from all responsibility for the existence or continuance of slavery wherever the Government possesses constitutional authority to legislate on that subject, and is thus responsible for its existence.

Resolved, That the true and, in the judgment of this convention, the only safe means of preventing the extension of slavery into territory now free is to prohibit its existence in all such territory by an act of Congress.

Resolved, That we accept the issue which the slave power has forced upon us; and to their demand for more Slave States and more slave territory, our calm but final answer is, no more Slave States and no more slave territory. Let the soil of our extensive domains be ever kept free for the hardy pioneers of our own land, and the oppressed and banished of other lands, seeking homes of comfort and fields of enterprise in the New World.

Resolved, That the bill lately reported by the committee of eight in the Senate of the United States was no compromise, but an absolute surrender of the rights of the non-slaveholders of all the States; and while we rejoice to know that a measure which, while opening the door for the introduction of slavery into territories now free, would also have opened the door to litigation and strife among the future inhabitants thereof, to the ruin of their peace and prosperity, was defeated in the House of Representatives, its passage, in hot haste, by a majority embracing several Senators who voted in open violation of the known will of their constituents, should warn the people to see to it that their representatives be not suffered to betray them. There must be no more compromises with slavery; if made, they must be repealed.

Resolved, That we demand freedom and established institutions for our brethren in Oregon, now exposed to hardships, peril, and massacre by the reckless hostility of the slave power to the establishment[Pg 110] of free government for free territory, and not only for them, but for our new brethren in New Mexico and California.

And whereas, It is due not only to this occasion, but to the whole people of the United States, that we should declare ourselves on certain other questions of national policy; therefore,

Resolved, That we demand cheap postage for the people; a retrenchment of the expenses and patronage of the Federal Government; the abolition of all unnecessary offices and salaries; and the election by the people of all civil officers in the service of the Government, so far as the same may be practicable.

Resolved, That river and harbor improvements, whenever demanded by the safety and convenience of commerce with foreign nations, or among the several States, are objects of national concern; and that it is the duty of Congress, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to provide therefor.

Resolved, That the free grant to actual settlers, in consideration of the expenses they incur in making settlements in the wilderness, which are usually fully equal to their actual cost, and of the public benefits resulting therefrom, of reasonable portions of the public lands, under suitable limitations, is a wise and just measure of public policy which will promote, in various ways, the interests of all the States of this Union; and we therefore recommend it to the favorable consideration of the American people.

Resolved, That the obligations of honor and patriotism require the earliest practicable payment of the national debt; and we are, therefore, in favor of such a tariff of duties as will raise revenue adequate to defray the necessary expenses of the Federal Government, and to pay annual instalments of our debt, and the interest thereon.

Resolved, That we inscribe on our banner, “Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Labor and Free Men,” and under it will fight on, and fight ever, until a triumphant victory shall reward our exertions.

The Presidential contest of 1848 for the first time presented the Native American party in the field with national candidates. It had its origin chiefly from the Philadelphia riots of 1844, resulting from a bitter feud between the Catholics and Protestants in the uptown river districts of Philadelphia. The organization of the Native American party immediately followed in Philadelphia, with opposition to Catholics and foreigners as its faith, and for nearly a decade it held the balance of power between the Whigs and Democrats in that city, and several times elected members of Congress. A like party was organized in New York, and attained some local success in that city. The national convention of the Native Americans was held in Philadelphia in September, 1847, and while it did not make a formal nomination, it recommended General Taylor for President and chose Henry A. S. Dearborn, of Massachusetts, for[Pg 111] Vice-President. The party was unknown and unfelt in the contest, although it aided somewhat in giving the electoral vote of Pennsylvania to Taylor.

In November, 1847, the Liberty party, that had twice nominated and ran Birney as its candidate for President, met at New York and nominated John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, for President, and Leicester King, of Ohio, for Vice-President. When the Free-Soil Democracy developed huge proportions and nominated Van Buren, the old Abolition party was entirely absorbed in the Free-Soil organization. The Liberty League, made up of a small number of the more radical Abolitionists, held a meeting at Rochester on the 2d of June, 1848, and nominated Gerrit Smith, of New York, for President, and Rev. Charles E. Foote, of Michigan, for Vice-President; and what was called the Industrial Congress, made up of a handful of labor agitators, met at Philadelphia on the 13th of June, 1848, and nominated Gerrit Smith for President and William S. Waitt, of Illinois, for Vice-President. Neither the Hale Abolition party, the Liberty League Abolition party, nor the Industrial Congress party presented any electoral tickets of which I have been able to find any record. The canvass was a very earnest one, and the Whigs steadily grew in confidence as it progressed, while the Democrats were threatened on every side with disaster.

Pennsylvania broke from her Democratic moorings at the October election, when William F. Johnson, Whig, was elected Governor by 305 majority, and generally the preliminary elections were favorable to the Whigs. There were then thirty States, as Florida had come in March 3, 1845; Texas, December 29, 1845; Iowa, December 28, 1846, and Wisconsin, May 29, 1848, and the Presidential electors were then for the first time all chosen on the same day, with the single exception of Massachusetts. Van Buren did not carry a State, but he gave Taylor an easy triumph by the large Democratic defection he caused in the pivotal States. The following table exhibits the popular and electoral votes as declared by Congress:

[Pg 112]

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electors.
--- | --- | ---
Zachary Taylor, La. | Lewis Cass, Mich. | Martin Van Buren, N. Y. | Taylor. | Cass.
Maine | 35,125 | 39,880 | 12,096 | — | 9
New Hampshire | 14,781 | 27,763 | 7,560 | — | 6
Vermont | 23,122 | 10,948 | 13,837 | 6 | —
Massachusetts | 61,070 | 35,281 | 38,058 | 12 | —
Rhode Island | 6,779 | 3,646 | 730 | 4 | —
Connecticut | 30,314 | 27,046 | 5,005 | 6 | —
New York | 218,603 | 114,318 | 120,510 | 36 | —
New Jersey | 40,015 | 36,901 | 829 | 7 | —
Pennsylvania | 185,513 | 171,176 | 11,263 | 26 | —
Delaware | 6,421 | 5,898 | 80 | 3 | —
Maryland | 37,702 | 34,528 | 125 | 8 | —
Virginia | 45,124 | 46,586 | 9 | — | 17
North Carolina | 43,550 | 34,869 | ——— | 11 | —
South Carolina[13] | ——— | ——— | ——— | — | 9
Georgia | 47,544 | 44,802 | ——— | 10 | —
Alabama | 30,482 | 31,363 | ——— | — | 9
Florida | 3,116 | 1,847 | ——— | 3 | —
Mississippi | 25,922 | 26,537 | ——— | — | 6
Louisiana | 18,217 | 15,370 | ——— | 6 | —
Texas | 4,509 | 10,668 | ——— | — | 4
Arkansas | 7,588 | 9,300 | ——— | — | 3
Missouri | 32,671 | 40,077 | ——— | — | 7
Tennessee | 64,705 | 58,419 | ——— | 13 | —
Kentucky | 67,141 | 49,720 | ——— | 12 | —
Ohio | 138,360 | 154,775 | 35,354 | — | 23
Michigan | 23,940 | 30,687 | 10,389 | — | 5
Indiana | 69,907 | 74,745 | 8,100 | — | 12
Illinois | 53,047 | 56,300 | 15,774 | — | 9
Wisconsin | 13,747 | 15,001 | 10,418 | — | 4
Iowa | 11,084 | 12,093 | 1,126 | — | 4
Totals | 1,360,099 | 1,220,544 | 291,263 | 163 | 127

All parties made earnest efforts to control the popular branch of Congress, and national interest naturally centred in the Wilmot district of Pennsylvania, as he was the author of the Wilmot Proviso, that was the fountain of the slavery[Pg 113] dispute. He had been twice elected to Congress in what was then a strong Democratic district, composed of Bradford, Susquehanna, and Tioga, but which have been among the strongest Republican counties in the State since the organization of that party. The district had given over 2000 majority for Polk against Clay, and although Wilmot was the only member of Congress from Pennsylvania who voted for the tariff of 1846, he was re-elected in the fall of that year by a decided majority.

When Van Buren was nominated, Wilmot openly declared himself as a Free-Soil Democrat, but he received the regular Democratic nomination for Congress in his district. The Cass pro-slavery Democrats bolted and nominated Jonah Brewster as a Simon-pure Democrat, and the Whigs nominated Henry W. Tracy, confidently expecting to elect him. Wilmot was triumphantly elected, receiving 8597 votes to 4795 for Tracy, Whig, and 922 for Brewster, Cass Democrat. He also nearly evenly divided the Democratic vote of Bradford and Tioga between Cass and Van Buren, giving Taylor a large plurality over Cass in the district.

While the Wilmot Free-Soil Democrats bolted on the Democratic national ticket, they generally supported Morris Longstreth, the Democratic candidate for Governor, who was defeated by Johnson in October by 305 majority. The re-election of Wilmot in one of the strong Democratic districts of Pennsylvania greatly strengthened the antislavery cause throughout the country. He and his followers fell back into the regular Democratic line in 1852 in support of Pierce, and they finally severed their relations with the Democratic party in 1854, provoked by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and in 1856 they carried the Northern counties of the State by large majorities for Fremont.

Cass carried every State west of the Pennsylvania line, including Ohio, where the antislavery sentiment of the Western Reserve was unwilling to accept a large slaveholder as a candidate for President. Corwin, the most brilliant and impressive of the stump-speakers of that day, made desperate efforts to save the State, but Van Buren received over 35,000 votes, and Cass won the electors by a plurality of over 16,000. I once heard Corwin in his inimitable way tell the story of that campaign. The people of Ohio in that day were taught their politics by mass-meetings, and any one of the audience was entirely at liberty to interrogate[Pg 114] the speaker. Corwin, in his plausible and fascinating way, was trying to explain how the antislavery cause would be best served by electing a slaveholder President, when a tall, lank countryman, sitting on the fence, put a very pointed question to him, that he felt unable to answer. He tried to meet it in a humorous way, but only aroused his interrogator to make a more pointed inquiry of him, that Corwin could not answer. He was one of the few orators who could convulse an audience with his superb humor, and his facial expression was at times even more mirth provoking than his language. The question involved the negro issue, and Corwin had an unusually swarthy complexion, and he unhorsed his inquirer by saying to his audience with an expression that powerfully accentuated his remark: “I submit, fellow-citizens, whether it is proper to put such a question to a man of my complexion,” and the dispute ended in boisterous laughter and cheers for Corwin. The Whigs won easy victories in all the debatable States of the South; and General Taylor came to the Presidency knowing less about how his election had been accomplished than any man who had ever been called to the Chief Magistracy of the Republic. Thus was Martin Van Buren avenged for the Southern betrayal of 1844.

[Pg 115]

FRANKLIN PIERCE

## THE PIERCE-SCOTT CONTEST

1852

While the Whigs were apprehensive as to General Taylor’s fidelity to an aggressive Whig policy both before and after his election, when he came to the selection of his Cabinet he quieted all doubts by appointing a positive Whig Cabinet, with John M. Clayton, one of the ablest of the Whig leaders of that day and an eminently practical politician, to the Premiership. Taylor had little fitness for responsible civil duties, and charged his Cabinet, that was made up of eminently able men, with the administration of their different departments. The slavery question was uppermost in the politics of the day, and the Taylor Cabinet finally decided upon a policy to solve the delicate problem by admitting none of the newly acquired Mexican possessions as Territories, but leaving the question of slavery to be determined by themselves when they came to admission as States.

This policy was antagonized by the ultra antislavery people, who wanted the distinct prohibition of slavery in Territorial organizations, and also by the extreme slavery Whigs, who desired them admitted as Territories without any expression on slavery, believing that slaves could be taken into any Territory south of the Missouri Compromise line unless prohibited by the organic law. Clay had returned to the Senate, and being neither more nor less than human, he had little inclination to harmonize with an accidental Whig President who filled the position to which Clay felt he was justly entitled. As opposed to the policy of the President, Clay came in as pacificator and proposed what then became known, and what have since been known as the Compromise Measures of 1850. It is doubtful whether either the administration or the Clay Compromise policy could have been successful had the President lived. Certainly the Compromise bill would have failed, but it is uncertain whether the administration[Pg 116] could have wielded sufficient power to carry its policy through Congress. Its policy was a negative one, postponing the slave issue in the new acquisitions until the people could act in their sovereign capacity in the creation of States.

President Taylor died July 9, 1850, and Millard Fillmore became President by virtue of his office as Vice-President. Taylor’s death changed the political purposes of the administration in the earnest struggle then in Congress to meet the question of slavery in the newly acquired territory. Fillmore, like nearly all Vice-Presidents, was not in harmony with the President, and when he became President himself he reversed the policy of the administration.

It was on this issue that Webster wrecked himself. He was in the confidence of the Taylor administration, and was chosen to be the champion of its policy for meeting the slavery issue in the Territories. He personally conferred with the Cabinet forty-eight hours before he delivered his memorable seventh-of-March speech, in which he cast his lot with Clay and the pro-slavery wing of the party, and neither the President nor any Cabinet officer had any notice of his purpose to change until they were astounded by hearing the views he expressed in his speech. William M. Meredith, of Philadelphia, was then Secretary of the Treasury, and he was so much offended by what he regarded as Webster’s perfidy that he never spoke to him thereafter.

Fillmore was the second Vice-President who had succeeded to the Presidency by the death of the President, and, like Tyler, he reversed the policy of the party, and estranged the Whigs of the North very generally from him. After he became President the Compromise Measures were revived, and Clay made the last great battle of his life as pacificator. With the power of the administration added, the Clay Compromise Measures passed both branches of Congress, and were promptly approved by the President. They declared, first, against the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia; second, in favor of the admission of California as a Free State; third, in favor of a severely stringent Fugitive Slave law; fourth, for the payment to Texas of $10,000,000 for yielding her claims to New Mexico, and fifth, in favor of the admission of Utah and New Mexico as Territories without restrictions as to slavery.

The passage of the Compromise Measures practically[Pg 117] united the Democratic party, as the friends of slavery extension had won a substantial triumph, and the Democrats of the North were generally in harmony with that policy, but it greatly weakened the Whigs in the North without strengthening them in the South, and Fillmore, and Webster, then Secretary of State, became rival candidates for the Whig nomination, while the anti-Compromise or antislavery element of the Whigs united on General Scott.

When the Democratic National Convention met at Baltimore, June 1, 1852, the leaders were entirely confident of electing their candidates. John W. Davis, of Indiana, was made President, and the two-thirds rule reaffirmed. The sessions of the convention were protracted, lasting six days, but there was little angry dispute as to either candidates or measures. There were 49 ballots for President, Cass and Buchanan being the leading competitors at the start. The Virginia delegation, that was always potential in Democratic conventions, had become weary of the hopeless contest between the candidates, and on the 35th ballot cast a solid vote for Franklin Pierce, of New Hampshire, whose name had not up to that time been before the convention. The friends of Cass made an earnest rally, but were unable to concentrate sufficient strength to approach the two-thirds vote, and Marcy finally loomed up as the leading competitor of Pierce. The following table gives the detail vote on each ballot:

BALLOTS. | Cass. | Buchanan. | Douglas. | Marcy. | Butler. | Houston. | Dodge. | Lane. | Dickinson. | Pierce.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1 | 116 | 93 | 20 | 27 | 2 | 8 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
2 | 118 | 95 | 23 | 27 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
3 | 119 | 94 | 21 | 26 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
4 | 115 | 89 | 31 | 25 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
5 | 114 | 88 | 34 | 26 | 1 | 8 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
6 | 114 | 88 | 34 | 26 | 1 | 8 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
7 | 113 | 88 | 34 | 26 | 1 | 9 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
8 | 113 | 88 | 34 | 26 | 1 | 9 | 3 | 13 | 1 | —
9 | 112 | 87 | 39 | 27 | 1 | 8 | — | 13 | 1 | —
10 | 111 | 86 | 40 | 27 | 1 | 8 | — | 14 | 1 | —
11 | 101 | 87 | 50 | 27 | 1 | 8 | — | 13 | 1 | —
12 | 98 | 88 | 51 | 27 | 1 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
13 | 98 | 88 | 51 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
14 | 99 | 87 | 51 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
15 | 99 | 87 | 51 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
16 | 99 | 87 | 51 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
17 | 99 | 87 | 50 | 26 | 1 | 11 | — | 13 | 1 | —
18 | 96 | 85 | 56 | 25 | 1 | 11 | — | 13 | 1 | —[Pg 118]
19 | 89 | 85 | 63 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
20 | 81 | 92 | 64 | 26 | 1 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
21 | 60 | 102 | 64 | 26 | 13 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
22 | 53 | 104 | 77 | 26 | 15 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
23 | 37 | 103 | 78 | 26 | 19 | 11 | — | 13 | 1 | —
24 | 33 | 103 | 80 | 26 | 23 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
25 | 34 | 101 | 81 | 26 | 24 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
26 | 33 | 101 | 80 | 26 | 24 | 10 | — | 13 | 1 | —
27 | 32 | 98 | 85 | 26 | 24 | 9 | — | 13 | 1 | —
28 | 28 | 96 | 88 | 26 | 25 | 11 | — | 13 | 1 | —
29 | 27 | 93 | 91 | 26 | 25 | 12 | — | 13 | 1 | —
30 | 33 | 91 | 92 | 26 | 20 | 12 | — | 13 | 1 | —
31 | 64 | 79 | 92 | 26 | 16 | 10 | — | — | 1 | —
32 | 98 | 74 | 80 | 26 | 1 | 8 | — | — | 1 | —
33 | 123 | 72 | 60 | 25 | 2 | 6 | — | — | 1 | —
34 | 130 | 49 | 53 | 23 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 16 | —
35 | 131 | 39 | 52 | 44 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 15
36 | 122 | 28 | 43 | 58 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 30
37 | 120 | 28 | 37 | 70 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
38 | 107 | 28 | 33 | 84 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
39 | 106 | 28 | 33 | 85 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
40 | 106 | 27 | 33 | 85 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
41 | 107 | 27 | 33 | 85 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
42 | 101 | 27 | 33 | 91 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
43 | 101 | 27 | 33 | 91 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
44 | 101 | 27 | 33 | 91 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
45 | 96 | 27 | 32 | 97 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 29
46 | 78 | 28 | 32 | 97 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 44
47 | 75 | 28 | 33 | 95 | 1 | 5 | — | — | 1 | 49
48 | 73 | 28 | 33 | 90 | 1 | 6 | — | — | 1 | 55
49 | 2 | — | 2 | — | 2 | — | — | — | — | 282

Two ballots were had for Vice-President, the first resulting as follows:

Wm. R. King, Ala. | 126
Gideon J. Pillow, Tenn. | 25
D. R. Atchison, Mo. | 25
T. J. Rusk, Texas | 12
Jefferson Davis, Miss. | 2
Wm. O. Butler, Ky. | 27
Robert Strange, N. C. | 23
S. U. Downs, La. | 30
J. B. Weller, Cal. | 28
Howell Cobb, Ga. | 2

The 2d ballot ended with the unanimous nomination of Mr. King.

The party platform was precisely that of 1848, all embodied in full text, with two new resolutions added on the subject of slavery and additional resolutions relating to other national issues. The Democratic platform of 1852, therefore, embraced all the previous Democratic platforms with the following added:

[Pg 119]

Resolved, That the foregoing proposition covers, and is intended to embrace, the whole subject of slavery agitated in Congress; and therefore the Democratic party of the Union, standing on this national platform, will abide by and adhere to a faithful execution of the acts known as the “Compromise” Measures settled by the last Congress—the act for reclaiming fugitives from service or labor included; which act, being designed to carry out an express provision of the Constitution, cannot with fidelity thereto be repealed, nor so changed as to destroy or impair its efficiency.

Resolved, That the Democratic party will resist all attempts at renewing in Congress, or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made.

Then follow the resolutions in former platforms respecting the distribution of the proceeds of land sales, that respecting the veto power, and these additions:

Resolved, That the Democratic party will faithfully abide by and uphold the principles laid down in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1792 and 1798, and in the report of Mr. Madison to the Virginia Legislature in 1799; that it adopts those principles as constituting one of the main foundations of its political creed, and is resolved to carry them out in their obvious meaning and import.

Resolved, That the war with Mexico, upon all the principles of patriotism and the law of nations, was a just and necessary war on our part in which no American citizen should have shown himself opposed to his country, and neither morally nor physically, by word or deed, given aid and comfort to the enemy.

Resolved, That we rejoice at the restoration of friendly relations with our sister republic of Mexico, and earnestly desire for her all the blessings and prosperity which we enjoy under republican institutions, and we congratulate the American people on the results of that war, which have so manifestly justified the policy and conduct of the Democratic party, and insured to the United States indemnity for the past and security for the future.

Resolved, That, in view of the condition of popular institutions in the Old World, a high and sacred duty is devolved, with increased responsibility, upon the Democracy of this country, as the party of the people, to uphold and maintain the rights of every State, and thereby the union of States, and to sustain and advance among them constitutional liberty, by continuing to resist all monopolies and exclusive legislation for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, and by a vigilant and constant adherence to those principles and compromises of the Constitution which are broad enough and strong enough to embrace and uphold the Union as it is, and the Union as it should be, in the full expansion of the energies and capacity of this great and progressive people.

The nomination of Pierce was received very generally by the Democrats with great enthusiasm. The spirit of young[Pg 120] Democracy had grown up in the party and become very formidable. The Democratic Review, the monthly organ of Democracy, had been reorganized with an able and most aggressive staff devoted to the overthrow of “old fogyism” in the party, and when Pierce was nominated the boys who do the shouting were almost wholly in sympathy with the young Democracy, and the old-timers had to fall in the rear of the procession. With the Democratic party united on candidates who were free from factional complication, and with the Compromise Measures, on which they could unite both the North and South, they started in the contest with every advantage and maintained it until election day, when the Whig party suffered its Waterloo.

The Whig convention met in Baltimore on the 16th of June with every State represented, and John G. Chapman, of Maryland, was made the presiding officer. The Southern delegates fortified themselves before the meeting of the convention by a caucus declaration of the party platform, and it was an open secret that if the convention accepted the platform, enough Southern men would support Scott to give him the nomination. They knew that Fillmore could not be elected, and that Webster was even weaker than Fillmore, and they were willing to accept Scott, who was the candidate of the antislavery element of the party, if the Compromise Measures were squarely affirmed by the party convention, while Scott was willing to accept the nomination with any platform the convention might formulate. Fillmore had carried the Compromise Measures and forced the Whigs to accept them in the party platform, but the insincerity of that expression was manifested by the refusal to nominate Fillmore, and by the nomination of Scott, who represented the anti-Compromise Whigs of the country. There were 53 ballots for President, but during the long struggle there was little exhibition of ill-temper. Scott started with 131 to 133 for Fillmore and 29 for Webster, and ended with 159 for Scott to 112 for Fillmore and 21 for Webster. The following table presents the ballots in detail:

[Pg 121]

BALLOTS. | Scott. | Fillmore. | Webster.
--- | --- | --- | ---
1 | 131 | 133 | 29
2 | 133 | 131 | 29
3 | 133 | 131 | 29
4 | 134 | 130 | 29
5 | 130 | 133 | 30
6 | 133 | 131 | 29
7 | 131 | 133 | 28
8 | 133 | 131 | 28
9 | 133 | 133 | 29
10 | 135 | 130 | 29
11 | 134 | 131 | 28
12 | 134 | 130 | 28
13 | 134 | 130 | 28
14 | 133 | 130 | 29
15 | 133 | 130 | 29
16 | 135 | 129 | 28
17 | 132 | 131 | 29
18 | 132 | 131 | 28
19 | 132 | 131 | 29
20 | 132 | 131 | 29
21 | 133 | 131 | 28
22 | 132 | 130 | 30
23 | 132 | 130 | 30
24 | 133 | 129 | 30
25 | 133 | 128 | 31
26 | 134 | 128 | 30
27 | 134 | 128 | 30
28 | 134 | 128 | 30
29 | 134 | 128 | 30
30 | 134 | 128 | 29
31 | 134 | 128 | 30
32 | 134 | 128 | 30
33 | 134 | 128 | 29
34 | 134 | 126 | 28
35 | 134 | 128 | 28
36 | 136 | 127 | 28
37 | 133 | 128 | 28
38 | 136 | 127 | 29
39 | 134 | 128 | 30
40 | 132 | 129 | 32
41 | 132 | 129 | 32
42 | 134 | 128 | 30
43 | 134 | 128 | 30
44 | 133 | 129 | 30
45 | 133 | 127 | 32
46 | 134 | 127 | 31
47 | 135 | 129 | 29
48 | 137 | 124 | 30
49 | 139 | 122 | 30
50 | 142 | 122 | 28
51 | 142 | 120 | 29
52 | 146 | 119 | 27
53 | 159 | 112 | 21
Necessary to choose, 147

The nomination of Scott was made unanimous, and William A. Graham, of North Carolina, who was Secretary of the Navy under the Fillmore administration, was given a unanimous nomination for Vice-President on the 2d ballot. The following platform was adopted without opposition, excepting as to the eighth and last, affirming the new and stringent Fugitive Slave law. After an earnest debate it was adopted by a vote of 212 to 70. Many of the friends of General Scott voted for that resolution from considerations of expediency. General Scott in his letter of acceptance broadly affirmed the platform in its entirety.

The Whigs of the United States, in convention assembled, adhering to the great conservative principles by which they are controlled and governed, and now, as ever, relying upon the intelligence[Pg 122] of the American people, with an abiding confidence in their capacity for self-government, and their devotion to the Constitution and the Union, do proclaim the following as the political sentiments and determination for the establishment and maintenance of which their national organization as a party was effected:

First. The Government of the United States is of a limited character, and it is confined to the exercise of powers expressly granted by the Constitution, and such as may be necessary and proper for carrying the granted powers into full execution, and that powers not granted or necessarily implied are reserved to the States respectively and to the people.

Second. The State governments should be held secure to their reserved rights, and the General Government sustained on its constitutional powers, and that the Union should be revered and watched over as the palladium of our liberties.

Third. That while struggling freedom everywhere enlists the warmest sympathy of the Whig party, we still adhere to the doctrines of the Father of his Country, as announced in his Farewell Address, of keeping ourselves free from all entangling alliances with foreign countries, and of never quitting our own to stand upon foreign ground; that our mission as a republic is not to propagate our opinions, or impose on other countries our forms of government by artifice or force; but to teach by example, and show by our success, moderation and justice, the blessings of self-government and the advantage of free institutions.

Fourth. That, as the people make and control the Government, they should obey its Constitution, laws, and treaties, as they would retain their self-respect and the respect which they claim and will enforce from foreign powers.

Fifth. That the Government should be conducted on principles of the strictest economy; and revenue sufficient for the expenses thereof, in time of peace, ought to be mainly derived from a duty on imports, and not from direct taxes; and in laying such duties sound policy requires a just discrimination, and protection from fraud by specific duties, when practicable, whereby suitable encouragement may be afforded to American industry, equally to all classes and to all portions of the country.

Sixth. The Constitution vests in Congress the power to open and repair harbors, and remove obstructions from navigable rivers, whenever such improvements are necessary for the common defence and for the protection and facility of commerce with foreign nations or among the States—said improvements being in every instance national and general in their character.

Seventh. The Federal and State governments are parts of one system, alike necessary for the common prosperity, peace and security, and ought to be regarded alike with a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment. Respect for the authority of each, and acquiescence in the just constitutional measures of each, are duties required by the plainest considerations of national, State and individual welfare.

Eighth. That the series of acts of the Thirty-second Congress, the act known as the Fugitive Slave law included, are received and acquiesced in by the Whig party of the United States as a settlement in principle and substance of the dangerous and exciting questions[Pg 123] which they embrace; and, so far as they are concerned, we will maintain them, and insist upon their strict enforcement, until time and experience shall demonstrate the necessity of further legislation to guard against the evasion of the laws on the one hand and the abuse of their powers on the other, not impairing their present efficiency; and we deprecate all further agitation of the question thus settled, as dangerous to our peace, and will discountenance all efforts to continue or renew such agitation, whenever, wherever, or however the attempt may be made; and we will maintain this system as essential to the nationality of the Whig party and the integrity of the Union.

The Compromise Measures were pressed upon the country as a finality, and the Democrats, with all of the Southern Whigs and many Northern Whigs, accepted them as such. Had the Pierce administration permitted the slave issue to rest on the Compromise Measures, it is probable that the birth of the Republican party would have been long postponed, but the repeal of the Missouri Compromise gave fresh vitality to the slavery dispute and quickened the antislavery sentiment of the country to the aggressive battle that culminated in the election of Lincoln in 1860.

The Free-Soil Democrats called a national convention to meet at Pittsburg on the 11th of August, over which Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts, presided. John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, was nominated for President, and George W. Julian, of Indiana, for Vice-President without the formality of a ballot. The following platform was adopted:

Having assembled in national convention as the Democracy of the United States; united by a common resolve to maintain right against wrong and freedom against slavery; confiding in the intelligence, patriotism, and discriminating justice of the American people; putting our trust in God for the triumph of our cause, and invoking His guidance in our endeavors to advance it—we now submit to the candid judgment of all men the following declaration of principles and measures:

1. That governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed are instituted among men to secure to all those unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with which they are endowed by their Creator, and of which none can be deprived by valid legislation, except for crime.

2. That the true mission of American Democracy is to maintain the liberties of the people, the sovereignty of the States, and the perpetuity of the Union, by the impartial application to public affairs, without sectional discriminations, of the fundamental principles of human rights, strict justice, and an economical administration.

3. That the Federal Government is one of limited powers, derived solely from the Constitution, and the grants of power therein ought[Pg 124] to be strictly construed by all the departments and agents of the Government, and it is inexpedient and dangerous to exercise doubtful constitutional powers.

4. That the Constitution of the United States, ordained to form a more perfect Union, to establish justice, and secure the blessings of liberty, expressly denies to the General Government all power to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; and, therefore, the Government, having no more power to make a slave than to make a king, and no more power to establish slavery than to establish a monarchy, should at once proceed to relieve itself from all responsibility for the existence of slavery wherever it possesses constitutional power to legislate for its extinction.

5. That, to the persevering and importunate demand of the slave power for more Slave States, new Slave Territories, and the nationalization of slavery, our distinct and final answer is: No more Slave States, no Slave Territory, no nationalized slavery, and no national legislation for the extradition of slaves.

6. That slavery is a sin against God and a crime against man, which no human enactment or usage can make right; and that Christianity, humanity, and patriotism alike demand its abolition.

7. That the Fugitive Slave act of 1850 is repugnant to the Constitution, to the principles of the common law, to the spirit of Christianity, and to the sentiments of the civilized world. We therefore deny its binding force upon the American people, and demand its immediate and total repeal.

8. That the doctrine that any human law is a finality, and not subject to modification or repeal, is not in accordance with the creed of the founders of our Government, and is dangerous to the liberties of the people.

9. That the acts of Congress known as the “Compromise” Measures of 1850—by making the admission of a sovereign State contingent upon the adoption of other measures demanded by the special interest of slavery; by their omission to guarantee freedom in the Free Territories; by their attempt to impose unconstitutional limitations on the power of Congress and the people to admit new States; by their provisions for the assumption of five millions of the State debt of Texas, and for the payment of five millions more and the cession of a large territory to the same State under menace, as an inducement to the relinquishment of a groundless claim; and by their invasion of the sovereignty of the States and the liberties of the people, through the enactment of an unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional Fugitive Slave law—are proved to be inconsistent with all the principles and maxims of Democracy, and wholly inadequate to the settlement of the questions of which they are claimed to be an adjustment.

10. That no permanent settlement of the slavery question can be looked for except in the practical recognition of the truth that slavery is sectional and freedom national; by the total separation of the General Government from slavery, and the exercise of its legitimate and constitutional influence on the side of freedom; and by leaving to the States the whole subject of slavery and the extradition of fugitives from service.

11. That all men have a natural right to a portion of the soil;[Pg 125] and that, as the use of the soil is indispensable to life, the right of all men to the soil is as sacred as their right to life itself.

12. That the public lands of the United States belong to the people, and should not be sold to individuals nor granted to corporations, but should be held as a sacred trust for the benefit of the people, and should be granted in limited quantities, free of cost, to landless settlers.

13. That a due regard for the Federal Constitution and a sound administrative policy demands that the funds of the General Government be kept separate from banking institutions; that inland and ocean postage should be reduced to the lowest possible point; that no more revenue should be raised than is required to defray the strictly necessary expenses of the public service, and to pay off the public debt; and that the power and patronage of the Government should be diminished, by the abolition of all unnecessary offices, salaries, and privileges, and by the election, by the people, of all civil officers in the service of the United States, so far as may be consistent with the prompt and efficient transaction of the public business.

14. That river and harbor improvements, when necessary to the safety and convenience of commerce with foreign nations or among the several States, are objects of national concern; and it is the duty of Congress, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to provide for the same.

15. That emigrants and exiles from the Old World should find a cordial welcome to homes of comfort and fields of enterprise in the New; and every attempt to abridge their privilege of becoming citizens and owners of soil among us ought to be resisted with inflexible determination.

16. That every nation has a clear right to alter or change its own government, and to administer its own concerns, in such a manner as may best secure the rights and promote the happiness of the people; and foreign interference with that right is a dangerous violation of the laws of nations, against which all independent governments should protest, and endeavor by all proper means to prevent; and especially is it the duty of the American Government, representing the chief republic of the world, to protest against, and by all proper means to prevent, the intervention of kings and emperors against nations seeking to establish for themselves republican or constitutional governments.

17. That the independence of Hayti ought to be recognized by our Government, and our commercial relations with it placed on a footing of the most favored nation.

18. That as, by the Constitution, the “citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States,” the practice of imprisoning colored seamen of other States, while the vessels to which they belong lie in port, and refusing the exercise of the right to bring such cases before the Supreme Court of the United States, to test the legality of such proceedings, is a flagrant violation of the Constitution, and an invasion of the rights of the citizens of other States, utterly inconsistent with the professions made by the slaveholders, that they wish the provisions of the Constitution faithfully observed by every State in the Union.

[Pg 126]

19. That we recommend the introduction into all treaties hereafter to be negotiated between the United States and foreign nations, of some provision for the amicable settlement of difficulties by a resort to decisive arbitration.

20. That the Free Democratic party is not organized to aid either the Whig or the Democratic wing of the great slave-compromise party of the nation, but to defeat them both; and that, repudiating and renouncing both as hopelessly corrupt and utterly unworthy of confidence, the purpose of the Free Democracy is to take possession of the Federal Government, and administer it for the better protection of the rights and interests of the whole people.

21. That we inscribe on our banner, “Free soil, free speech, free labor, and free men!” and under it will fight on and fight ever until a triumphant victory shall reward our exertions.

22. That upon this platform the convention presents to the American people as a candidate for the office of President of the United States, John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, and as a candidate for the office of Vice-President of the United States, George W. Julian, of Indiana, and earnestly commends them to the support of all free men and all parties.

The contest of 1852 was a hopeless one for the Whigs from the start. General Scott had great faith in his own election, but he stood almost entirely alone in that confidence. After the disastrous October elections he took the stump against the advice of his more discreet friends, and delivered a number of campaign speeches, which are now remembered chiefly because of his flattery to the foreign vote, complimenting the “rich Irish brogue” and “the sweet German accent” of many of his supporters. The result was that Pierce, a man who had never been discussed for the Presidency, but had been brought out as the “dark horse” at the national convention, carried every State in the Union but four—Massachusetts and Vermont, in the North, and Kentucky and Tennessee, in the South. The following is the popular and electoral vote:

[Pg 127]

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electors.
--- | --- | ---
Franklin Pierce, N. H. | Winfield Scott, N. Y. | John P. Hale, N. H. | Pierce. | Scott.
Maine | 41,609 | 32,543 | 8,030 | 8 | —
New Hampshire | 29,997 | 16,147 | 6,695 | 5 | —
Vermont | 13,044 | 22,173 | 8,621 | — | 5
Massachusetts | 44,569 | 52,683 | 28,023 | — | 13
Rhode Island | 8,735 | 7,626 | 644 | 4 | —
Connecticut | 33,249 | 30,357 | 3,160 | 6 | —
New York | 262,083 | 234,882 | 25,329 | 35 | —
New Jersey | 44,305 | 38,556 | 350 | 7 | —
Pennsylvania | 198,568 | 179,174 | 8,525 | 27 | —
Delaware | 6,318 | 6,293 | 62 | 3 | —
Maryland | 40,020 | 35,066 | 54 | 8 | —
Virginia | 73,858 | 58,572 | —— | 15 | —
North Carolina | 39,744 | 39,058 | —— | 10 | —
South Carolina[14] | —— | —— | —— | 8 | —
Georgia | 34,705 | 16,660 | —— | 10 | —
Alabama | 26,881 | 15,038 | —— | 9 | —
Florida | 4,318 | 2,875 | —— | 3 | —
Mississippi | 26,876 | 17,548 | —— | 7 | —
Louisiana | 18,647 | 17,255 | —— | 6 | —
Texas | 13,552 | 4,995 | —— | 4 | —
Arkansas | 12,179 | 7,404 | —— | 4 | —
Missouri | 38,353 | 29,984 | —— | 9 | —
Tennessee | 57,018 | 58,898 | —— | — | 12
Kentucky | 53,806 | 57,068 | —— | — | 12
Ohio | 169,220 | 152,526 | 31,682 | 23 | —
Michigan | 41,842 | 33,859 | 7,237 | 6 | —
Indiana | 95,340 | 80,901 | 6,929 | 13 | —
Illinois | 80,597 | 64,934 | 9,966 | 11 | —
Wisconsin | 33,658 | 22,240 | 8,814 | 5 | —
Iowa | 17,763 | 15,856 | 1,604 | 4 | —
California | 40,626 | 35,407 | 100 | 4 | —
Totals | 1,601,274 | 1,386,580 | 155,825 | 254 | 42

President Pierce could have had a tranquil administration and generally maintained sectional peace if he had not wantonly reopened the slavery issue by assenting to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and making it a Democratic measure. Kansas and Nebraska, which were north[Pg 128] of the Missouri line, whose territory had been solemnly dedicated to freedom by the Missouri Compromise of 1820, that admitted Missouri as a Slave State, were coveted by the slavery extensionists, and they decided not only against the solemnly plighted faith of the nation, but, in disregard of climatic objections, to force slavery in both of those Territories and make them Slave States. The slavery propagandists had failed to gather any substantial fruits for slavery from our Mexican acquisitions, and in the desperation of the suicide they resolved to force slavery into Kansas and Nebraska by a system of violence that was generally described at that time as “border ruffianism,” and that made the name of John Brown immortal.

The repeal of the Missouri Compromise was the beginning of the end of slavery. It was noticed that there could be no peace with Northern industry and progress advancing rapidly and hastening the formation of new States, while the South was standing still. A number of new and very able men had been called into the political arena by the slavery agitation. Salmon P. Chase, of Ohio, and Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts, were both elected to the Senate by a solid Democratic vote, united with the Free Soilers of their respective Legislatures. Henry Wilson, the “Natick Cobbler,” had become more potent in Massachusetts than was Webster at the time of his death; and the antislavery sentiment was visibly and speedily growing toward immense proportions.

The Whig party made its final battle in 1852, although it was nominally in the field in 1856, and a new party was created out of the odds and ends of the old Native American party. Opposition to Catholics had been intensified by Pierce appointing Judge Campbell, of Philadelphia, Postmaster-General. He was a very able and faithful Cabinet officer, and there was no pretence that his religious views in any way influenced his official appointments, but it revived the embers of Native Americanism, and the great mass of the Whigs, who knew that the Whig party had practically perished, and the antislavery Democrats were without political vocations. They were like the Federalists who first found refuge in anti-Masonry, and with anti-Masonry afterward found refuge in the Whig party. The result was the very rapid spread of the new American, or what was commonly called the Know-Nothing party, with secret[Pg 129] lodges and its members all sworn not to divulge the movements of the organization and to vote for its nominated candidates. It exhibited wonderful strength in many localities early in 1854, and it was not uncommon in local elections, when the vote was counted, to find that all the officers elected were unknown to the public as candidates. Its first important triumph was in the municipal election of Philadelphia in May, 1854, when Judge Conrad, candidate of the Whigs and secret candidate of the Know-Nothings, was elected Mayor by an overwhelming majority.

The Democrats lost a large number of their ablest men on the slavery issue, provoked to defection by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and it was evident that the party would be divided in the next national campaign; but the various elements of opposition were even more incongruous and had little prospect of anything approaching the unity necessary to succeed. Pierce, like Fillmore, Polk, and Tyler, was a candidate for re-election, but failed disastrously in his own convention after wielding the power of his position to the uttermost, and his administration ended with the country rent by sectional feuds and gravely threatened with fraternal war.

[Pg 130]

## THE BUCHANAN-FREMONT-FILLMORE CONTEST

1856

The Presidential battle of 1856, that gave Pennsylvania her only President in James Buchanan, is memorable chiefly because it dated the birth of the Republican party as a national organization, that was destined to conduct the greatest civil war of modern history, to abolish slavery, maintain its power uninterruptedly for a quarter of a century, and to write the most lustrous chapters in the annals of the Republic.

The Democrats were greatly demoralized by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and they suffered the aggressive defection of a number of Democratic leaders with large popular following, but the various shades of opposition to the Democracy were even more hopelessly divided. The Democrats had the advantage of being able to command a solid vote from the South on a square slavery issue, and they reasonably hoped that they could hold enough States in the North to give them success. Buchanan had been abroad as Minister during the troublesome times of the Pierce administration, and he returned just in good time to make the most out of the disturbed situation that confronted him. The renomination and re-election of Pierce were hopeless. Cass had been defeated by the people and suffered repeated defeats in national conventions. Buchanan thus had a strong lead for the Presidential nomination, and he was most fortunate in having the accomplished, devoted, and tireless Colonel Forney to manage his campaign, not only for the nomination, but to direct the national contest in the few Northern States which could be held to the Democratic flag.

The Southern leaders had absolute confidence in Buchanan, and they were entirely justified in their faith. He[Pg 131] had been a Federal member of Congress in early days, and later entered the Democratic party with all the strict construction ideas of Federalism, which were then in harmony with the Democratic policy as applied to the slavery issue. He was the logical Democratic candidate for President in 1856; and President Pierce, an utterly impossible candidate, as it was known that he never could command the necessary two-thirds vote in the convention, was his only serious competitor when the balloting began.

JAMES BUCHANAN

The Democratic National Convention met in Cincinnati on the 2d of June, with full delegations from every State, and two contesting delegations from New York and Missouri. The quarrel between the factions in both States was intensely bitter. The opposing factions of New York were known as the “Hards,” who were a spawn of the old Hunkers, and the “Softs,” who took the place of the Barnburners. The Missouri delegations were known as the Bentonites and the Regulars, the Bentonites having lost the control of the party organization in the State. The convention solved the problem by admitting both delegations from each State, and giving each delegate only half a vote. John E. Ward, of Georgia, was made the permanent president, and the two-thirds rule was reaffirmed without a contest.

It was at this convention that Stephen A. Douglas first developed as an aggressive candidate for President, and as he had led the battle for the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, he was in harmony with the Pierce administration. As will be seen by the ballots, his strength was almost wholly given to Pierce until Pierce’s unavailability was clearly established, when the Pierce vote was mostly transferred to Douglas. The following table presents the 17 ballots in detail, resulting in the nomination of Buchanan:

BALLOTS. | Buchanan. | Pierce. | Douglas. | Cass.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1 | 135 |  | 122 |  | 33 |  | 5 |
2 | 139 |  | 119 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 | ¹⁄₂ | 6 |
3 | 139 | ¹⁄₂ | 119 |  | 32 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
4 | 141 | ¹⁄₂ | 119 |  | 30 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
5 | 140 |  | 119 | ¹⁄₂ | 31 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
6 | 155 |  | 117 | ¹⁄₂ | 28 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂[Pg 132]
7 | 143 | ¹⁄₂ | 89 |  | 58 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
8 | 147 | ¹⁄₂ | 87 |  | 56 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
9 | 146 |  | 87 |  | 56 |  | 7 |
10 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 80 | ¹⁄₂ | 59 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂
11 | 147 | ¹⁄₂ | 80 |  | 63 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
12 | 148 |  | 79 |  | 63 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂
13 | 150 |  | 77 | ¹⁄₂ | 63 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
14 | 152 | ¹⁄₂ | 75 |  | 63 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂
15 | 168 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 | ¹⁄₂ | 118 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | ¹⁄₂
16 | 168 |  | — |  | 121 |  | 6 |
17 | 296 |  | — |  | — |  | — |

As Buchanan was from the North, the Vice-Presidency was conceded to the South, and 10 candidates were placed in nomination. The 1st ballot resulted as follows:

J. A. Quitman, Miss. | 59
Linn Boyd, Ky. | 33
A. V. Brown, Tenn. | 29
J. A. Bayard, Del. | 31
T. J. Rusk, Texas | 2
J. C. Breckenridge, Ky. | 55
B. Fitzpatrick, Ala. | 11
H. V. Johnson, Ga. | 31
Trusten Polk, Mo. | 5
J. C. Dobbin, N. C. | 13

When the 2d ballot was called, a number of the candidates had their names withdrawn, and Mr. Breckenridge was given a unanimous nomination. He was the idol of the young Democracy of the South, having won his spurs by two of the most remarkable Congressional campaigns in the history of Kentucky, in which he had defeated Governor Letcher and Leslie Combs, two of the ablest of the old Clay leaders in the Ashland district. His success was due entirely to his own personal popularity. He was not only one of the ablest of all the Breckenridges, but he was a most accomplished, genial, and delightful companion, and his nomination greatly strengthened the Democratic ticket in all sections of the country.

The platform was finally adopted without a contest. It recited first the preamble adopted in 1844, followed by ten resolutions from other previous platforms, embracing the first five of 1840, and others embracing the Democratic views on the proceeds of the public land; in opposition to a national[Pg 133] bank; in favor of the subtreasury system; in support of the veto power, and opposing any new limitations upon naturalization. To these the following new resolutions were added:

And whereas, Since the foregoing declaration was uniformly adopted by our predecessors in national convention, an adverse political and religious test has been secretly organized by a party claiming to be exclusively American, and it is proper that the American Democracy should clearly define its relations thereto, and declare its determined opposition to all secret political societies, by whatever name they may be called—

Resolved, That the foundation of this Union of States having been laid in, and its prosperity, expansion, and pre-eminent example of free government built upon entire freedom in matters of religious concernment, and no respect of persons in regard to rank or place or birth, no party can be justly deemed national, constitutional, or in accordance with American principles which bases its exclusive organization upon religious opinions and accidental birthplace. And hence a political crusade in the nineteenth century, and in the United States of America, against Catholics and foreign-born, is neither justified by the past history nor future prospects of the country, nor in unison with the spirit of toleration and enlightened freedom which peculiarly distinguishes the American system of popular government.

Resolved, That we reiterate with renewed energy of purpose the well-considered declarations of former conventions upon the sectional issue of domestic slavery and concerning the reserved rights of the States—

1. That Congress has no power under the Constitution to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States, and that all such States are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs not prohibited by the Constitution; that all efforts of the Abolitionists or others made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend of our political institutions.

2. That the foregoing covers, and was intended to embrace, the whole subject of slavery agitation in Congress, and therefore the Democratic party of the Union, standing on this national platform, will abide by and adhere to a faithful execution of the acts known as the “Compromise” Measures, settled by the Congress of 1850, the act for reclaiming fugitives from service or labor included; which act, being designed to carry out an express provision of the Constitution, cannot, with fidelity thereto, be repealed, or so changed as to destroy or impair its efficiency.

3. That the Democratic party will resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made.

4. The Democratic party will faithfully abide by and uphold the[Pg 134] principle laid down in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1797 and 1798, and in the report of Mr. Madison to the Virginia Legislature in 1799; that it adopts these principles as constituting one of the main foundations of its political creed, and is resolved to carry them out in their obvious meaning and import.

And that we may more distinctly meet the issue on which a sectional party, subsisting exclusively on slavery agitation, now relies to test the fidelity of the people, North and South, to the Constitution and the Union—

1. Resolved, That, claiming fellowship with and desiring the co-operation of all who regard the preservation of the Union under the Constitution as the paramount issue, and repudiating all sectional issues and platforms concerning domestic slavery which seek to embroil the States and incite to treason and armed resistance to law in the Territories, and whose avowed purpose, if consummated, must end in civil war and disunion, the American Democracy recognize and adopt the principles contained in the organic laws establishing the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas as embodying the only sound and safe solution of the slavery question, upon which the great national idea of the people of this whole country can repose in its determined conservation of the Union, and non-interference of Congress with slavery in the Territories or in the District of Columbia.

2. That this was the basis of the compromise of 1850, confirmed by both the Democratic and Whig parties in national conventions, ratified by the people in the election of 1852, and rightly applied to the organization of the Territories in 1854.

3. That by the uniform application of the Democratic principle to the organization of Territories, and the admission of new States with or without domestic slavery, as they may elect, the equal rights of all the States will be preserved intact, the original compacts of the Constitution maintained inviolate, and the perpetuity and expansion of the Union insured to its utmost capacity of embracing, in peace and harmony, every future American State that may be constituted or annexed with a republican form of government.

Resolved, That we recognize the right of the people of all the Territories, including Kansas and Nebraska, acting through the legally and fairly expressed will of the majority of the actual residents, and whenever the number of their inhabitants justifies it, to form a constitution, with or without domestic slavery, and be admitted into the Union upon terms of perfect equality with the other States.

Resolved, Finally, that in view of the condition of popular institutions in the Old World (and the dangerous tendencies of sectional agitation, combined with the attempt to enforce civil and religious disabilities against the rights of acquiring and enjoying citizenship in our own land), a high and sacred duty is devolved, with increased responsibility, upon the Democratic party of this country, as the party of the Union, to uphold and maintain the rights of every State, and thereby the Union of the States; and to sustain and advance among us constitutional liberty, by continuing to resist all monopolies and exclusive legislation for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many; and by a vigilant and constant adherence to those principles and compromises of the Constitution[Pg 135] which are broad enough and strong enough to embrace and uphold the Union as it was, the Union as it is, and the Union as it shall be, in the full expansion of the energies and capacity of this great and progressive people.

1. Resolved, That there are questions connected with the foreign policy of this country which are inferior to no domestic question whatever. The time has come for the people of the United States to declare themselves in favor of free seas, and progressive free trade throughout the world, and by solemn manifestations to place their moral influence at the side of their successful example.

2. Resolved, That our geographical and political position with reference to the other States of this continent, no less than the interest of our commerce and the development of our growing power, requires that we should hold sacred the principles involved in the Monroe Doctrine. Their bearing and import admit of no misconstruction, and should be applied with unbending rigidity.

3. Resolved, That the great highway, which nature as well as the assent of States most immediately interested in its maintenance has marked out for free communication between the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans, constitutes one of the most important achievements realized by the spirit of modern times, in the unconquerable energy of our people; and that result would be secured by a timely and efficient exertion of the control which we have the right to claim over it; and no power on earth should be suffered to impede or clog its progress by any interference with relations that it may suit our policy to establish between our Government and the governments of the States within whose dominions it lies. We can, under no circumstances, surrender our preponderance in the adjustment of all questions arising out of it.

4. Resolved, That, in view of so commanding an interest, the people of the United States cannot but sympathize with the efforts which are being made by the people of Central America to regenerate that portion of the continent which covers the passage across the inter-oceanic isthmus.

5. Resolved, That the Democratic party will expect of the next administration that every proper effort be made to insure our ascendancy in the Gulf of Mexico, and to maintain permanent protection to the great outlets through which are emptied into its waters the products raised out of the soil and the commodities created by the industry of the people of our Western valleys and of the Union at large.

Resolved, That the administration of Franklin Pierce has been true to Democratic principles, and therefore true to the great interests of the country. In the face of violent opposition he has maintained the laws at home, and vindicated the rights of American citizens abroad; and therefore we proclaim our unqualified admiration of his measures and policy.

When Buchanan was nominated for President everything indicated his election by a very large majority and without a serious struggle. It was evident to all that the antislavery sentiment was making rapid strides in the North. The Democrats felt certain of a solid vote in the South, and they[Pg 136] did not regard it as possible for the Republican party to unite the American and conservative Whig elements to sufficient extent to enable it to make a hopeful contest in Pennsylvania, New York, and the Western Democratic States; but very soon after the meeting of the first Republican National Convention the new party grew with such rapidity that the Democratic leaders finally looked the fact in the face that they had a very desperate and doubtful contest before them.

The Republican party first appeared in the political arena in 1854. It had then a small organization in New York State, and cast a sufficient number of votes to elect Clark, the Whig candidate, for Governor, over Seymour, the Democratic candidate, who lost the Governorship by 309 majority. I was at the cradle of the Republican party; was a delegate to its first State convention, held in Pittsburg, Penn., in 1855. It was a mass convention, composed of a loose aggregation of political free-thinkers, but a number of very able men, including Giddings and Bingham, of Ohio, and Allison, of Pennsylvania, who presided, delivered addresses. There was but one State office to fill in Pennsylvania, that of Canal Commissioner. The convention was made up very largely of the aggressive Abolition element of the State, small in number, but bold and assertive in action, as was shown by the spontaneous nomination of Passmore Williamson, who was then in prison for contempt of court in a fugitive slave case. The nomination was resented by all the conservative Whigs and by the Americans, and without the votes of those parties the Republican organization could not carry a township in the State. Williamson was finally persuaded to retire, and the Whig, American, and Republican committees united on Thomas Nicholson, of Beaver, but the elements were too discordant, and the State was lost by some 12,000.

I was a delegate to the first Republican National Convention, that met in Philadelphia on the 17th of June, 1856. It was also a mass convention, as the party had no organization, and States sent large or small delegations as was most convenient. I went to the convention, hoping to aid in the nomination of Judge McLean for President, who was sufficiently conservative to command both the Whig and American votes, and I had no faith whatever in the success of a distinctive Republican candidate and party. I was[Pg 137] surprised to find the Republicans of New England and of New York who were attending the convention in favor of a radical Republican policy, and I was so much dissatisfied with the evident outcome of the convention that, although I attended its first session, I did not enroll as a delegate, and did not participate in any of its important proceedings. I well remember meeting Mr. Greeley among the first of those who came to the convention, and wondered how he had lost all his political cunning when he told me, in the most enthusiastic way, that Fremont would carry New York by 50,000 majority, and that the Republican party would be sufficiently strong to win the battle without any concessions whatever to the other elements opposed to the Democratic party. I had no faith in Fremont, either as a candidate or as a President. I shared the general conservative Whig sentiment of Pennsylvania that the Republican convention in nominating Fremont on a square-toed Republican platform was altogether too “wild and woolley” in flavor to win at the election. Greeley was mistaken as to New York only in making the Republican majority one-third less than it turned up on election night, when Fremont had nearly as many votes as Buchanan and Fillmore combined.

The nomination of Fremont was engineered by some of the shrewdest of the old Democratic leaders, most conspicuous of whom was the elder Francis P. Blair, who had been one of the most sagacious of the Democratic politicians during the administrations of Jackson, Van Buren, and Polk. They believed it best to take a candidate for the Presidency who had no political record whatever to antagonize the conflicting political views which must be united to give the party success; and Fremont was young, had served in the army with credit, had made what then were regarded as wonderful explorations in the Rocky Mountains, and had the distinction of having been forced to retire from the army for what was claimed to have been conspicuously heroic and patriotic action on his part. He had never said anything or done anything to offend any political prejudice. It turned out that he was strongest where he was least known. The old California Forty-niners, who were back in Pennsylvania, and some of them prominent in politics, did not enthuse over Fremont’s nomination. I distinctly recollect the trite summing up of Fremont’s qualities by one who had been with him in California by saying: “Fremont is a[Pg 138] millionaire without a dollar, a soldier who never fought a battle, and a statesman who never made a speech;” but that his nomination was altogether the strongest that could have been made in the Philadelphia convention cannot be doubted by any who study the history of that contest and the marvellous political revolution it wrought. Henry S. Lane, of Indiana, presided over the convention, and a single ballot was had for President, as follows:

STATES. | Fremont. | McLean.
--- | --- | ---
Maine | 13 | 11
New Hampshire | 15 | —
Vermont | 15 | —
Massachusetts | 39 | —
Rhode Island | 12 | —
Connecticut | 18 | —
New York | 93 | 3
New Jersey | 7 | 14
Pennsylvania | 10 | 71
Delaware | — | 9
Maryland | 4 | 3
Ohio | 30 | 39
Indiana | 18 | 21
Illinois | 14 | 19
Michigan | 18 | —
Wisconsin | 15 | —
Iowa | 12 | —
Minnesota | — | 3
Kansas | 9 | —
Nebraska | — | 3
Kentucky | 5 | —
California | 12 | —
Totals | 359 | 196

The nomination of Fremont was made unanimous with great enthusiasm, and there was only one ballot for Vice-President, resulting as follows:

William L. Dayton, N. J. | 259
Abraham Lincoln, Ill. | 110
N. P. Banks, Mass. | 46
David Wilmot, Penn. | 43
Charles Sumner, Mass. | 35
Jacob Collamer, Vt. | 15
John A. King, N. Y. | 9
S. C. Pomeroy, Kan. | 8
Thomas Ford, Ohio | 7
Henry Wilson, Mass. | 5
Cassius M. Clay, Ky. | 4
Henry C. Carey, Penn. | 3
Wm. F. Johnston, Penn. | 2

[Pg 139]

Mr. Dayton was then declared the nominee of the convention by a unanimous vote, and the following platform was adopted:

This convention of delegates, assembled in pursuance of a call addressed to the people of the United States, without regard to past political differences or divisions, who are opposed to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, to the policy of the present administration, to the extension of slavery into Free Territory; in favor of admitting Kansas as a Free State, of restoring the action of the Federal Government to the principles of Washington and Jefferson; and who purpose to unite in presenting candidates for the offices of President and Vice-President, do resolve as follows:

Resolved, That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution is essential to the preservation of our republican institutions, and that the Federal Constitution, the rights of the States, and the union of the States, shall be preserved.

Resolved, That with our republican fathers we hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men are endowed with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the primary object and ulterior designs of our Federal Government were to secure these rights to all persons within its exclusive jurisdiction; that, as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, it becomes our duty to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it for the purpose of establishing slavery in any Territory of the United States, by positive legislation, prohibiting its existence or extension therein. That we deny the authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, of any individual or association of individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any Territory of the United States while the present Constitution shall be maintained.

Resolved, That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign power over the Territories of the United States, for their government, and that in the exercise of this power it is both the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery.

Resolved, That while the Constitution of the United States was ordained and established by the people in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, and secure the blessings of liberty, and contains ample provision for the protection of the life, liberty, and property of every citizen, the dearest constitutional rights of the people of Kansas have been fraudulently and violently taken from them; their territory has been invaded by an armed force; spurious and pretended legislative, judicial, and executive officers have been set over them, by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the Government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced; the rights of the people to keep and bear arms have been infringed; test oaths of[Pg 140] an extraordinary and entangling nature have been imposed as a condition of exercising the right of suffrage and holding office; the right of an accused person to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury has been denied; the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures has been violated; they have been deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law; that the freedom of speech and of the press has been abridged; the right to choose their representatives has been made of no effect; murders, robberies, and arsons have been instigated and encouraged, and the offenders have been allowed to go unpunished; that all these things have been done with the knowledge, sanction, and procurement of the present administration; and that for this high crime against the Constitution, the Union, and humanity, we arraign the administration, the President, his advisers, agents, supporters, apologists, and accessories, either before or after the fact, before the country and before the world, and that it is our fixed purpose to bring the actual perpetrators of these atrocious outrages, and their accomplices, to a sure and condign punishment hereafter.

Resolved, That Kansas should be immediately admitted as a State of the Union, with her present free Constitution, as at once the most effectual way of securing to her citizens the enjoyment of the rights and privileges to which they are entitled, and of ending the civil strife now raging in her territory.

Resolved, That the highwayman’s plea, that “might makes right,” embodied in the Ostend circular, was in every respect unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and dishonor upon any government or people that gave it their sanction.

Resolved, That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean, by the most central and practical route, is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country, and that the Federal Government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction; and, as an auxiliary thereto, the immediate construction of an emigrant route on the line of the railroad.

Resolved, That appropriations by Congress for the improvement of rivers and harbors, of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of our existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution, and justified by the obligation of Government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.

The American or Know-Nothing party had become the leading factor of the opposition elements to Democracy in the elections of 1854–55. In some sections the Whig party was entirely obliterated, and in the South there was no organization opposed to Democracy but the American. The cardinal principle of its faith was that “Americans must rule America,” and its opposition to the Catholic Church was positive and pronounced. It had gravitated from the original Native Americans of 1844 into the Order of United Americans, and it coalesced with the remnants of the Whig party[Pg 141] and with the antiadministration Democrats in most of the Northern States. It had reached about its highest measure of strength in 1855, chiefly because of its strong hold in the South. In New England and the far Western States the Americans had been very generally absorbed in the Republican organization when the battle opened for the Presidency in 1856.

The American National Council was called to meet in Philadelphia on the 19th of February, 1856, and nearly all the States were represented. The Council was a secret body, in accordance with the usages of the party. After three days of animated discussion it adopted a party platform, and on the 22d of February the Council adjourned and organized the American National Nominating Convention. Ephraim Marsh, of New Jersey, was made president. An earnest effort was made in the convention to antagonize the right of the National Council to make the platform for the party. Mr. Killinger, of Pennsylvania, offered a resolution, declaring that the Council had no authority to prescribe a platform of principles, and that the convention should nominate no man for President or Vice-President “who is not in favor of interdicting the introduction of slavery into territory North 36° 30´ by Congressional action,” but his proposition failed by a vote of 141 to 59. The failure of this resolution led to the retirement from the convention of the more pronounced antislavery delegates or North Americans, as they were called. The convention then proceeded to ballot for President as follows:

| 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
--- | --- | ---
M. Fillmore, New York | 71 | 179
George Law, New York | 27 | 24
Garrett Davis, Kentucky | 13 | 10
John McLean, Ohio | 7 | 13
R. F. Stockton, New Jersey | 8 | —
Sam. Houston, Texas | 6 | 3
John Bell, Tennessee | 5 | —
Kenneth Raynor, North Carolina | 2 | 14
Erastus Brooks, New York | 2 | —
Lewis D. Campbell, Ohio | 1 | —
John M. Clayton, Delaware | 1 | —

[Pg 142]

After the 2d ballot, Mr. Fillmore was unanimously declared the nominee, and on the 1st ballot Andrew Jackson Donelson, of Tennessee, who was the adopted son of General Jackson, was nominated for Vice-President, receiving 181 votes to 8 for Governor Gardner, of Massachusetts, 8 for Percy Walker, of Alabama, and 8 for Kenneth Raynor, of North Carolina. The following platform was then unanimously adopted:

1. An humble acknowledgment of the Supreme Being, for his protecting care vouchsafed to our fathers in their successful Revolutionary struggle, and hitherto manifested to us, their descendants, in the preservation of their liberties, the independence and the union of these States.

2. The perpetuation of the Federal Union and Constitution, as the palladium of our civil and religious liberties and the only sure bulwark of American independence.

3. Americans must rule America; and to this end native-born citizens should be selected for all State, Federal and municipal offices of Government employment, in preference to all others. Nevertheless,

4. Persons born of American parents residing temporarily abroad should be entitled to all the rights of native-born citizens.

5. No person should be selected for political station (whether of native or foreign birth) who recognizes any allegiance or obligation of any description to any foreign prince, potentate, or power, or who refuses to recognize the Federal and State Constitutions (each within its sphere) as paramount to all other laws as rules of political action.

6. The unqualified recognition and maintenance of the reserved rights of the several States, and the cultivation of harmony and fraternal good-will between the citizens of the several States, and, to this end, non-interference by Congress with questions appertaining solely to the individual States, and non-intervention by each State with the affairs of any other State.

7. The recognition of the right of native-born and naturalized citizens of the United States, permanently residing in any Territory thereof, to frame their constitution and laws, and to regulate their domestic and social affairs in their own mode, subject only to the provisions of the Federal Constitution, with the privilege of admission into the Union whenever they have the requisite population for one representative in Congress; provided, always, that none but those who are citizens of the United States, under the Constitution and laws thereof, and who have a fixed residence in any such Territory, ought to participate in the formation of a constitution or in the enactment of laws for said Territory or State.

8. An enforcement of the principle that no State or Territory ought to admit others than citizens to the right of suffrage, or of holding political offices of the United States.

9. A change in the laws of naturalization, making a continued residence of twenty-one years, of all not heretofore provided for, an[Pg 143] indispensable requisite for citizenship hereafter, and excluding all paupers and persons convicted of crime from landing upon our shores; but no interference with the vested rights of foreigners.

10. Opposition to any union between Church and State; no interference with religious faith or worship, and no test oaths for office.

11. Free and thorough investigation into any and all alleged abuses of public functionaries, and a strict economy in public expenditures.

12. The maintenance and enforcement of all laws constitutionally enacted, until said laws shall be repealed or shall be declared null and void by competent judicial authority.

13. Opposition to the reckless and unwise policy of the present administration in the general management of our national affairs, and more especially as shown in removing “Americans” (by designation) and conservatives in principle from office, and placing foreigners and ultraists in their places; as shown in a truckling subserviency to the stronger, and an insolent and cowardly bravado toward the weaker powers; as shown in reopening sectional agitation, by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise; as shown in granting to unnaturalized foreigners the right of suffrage in Kansas and Nebraska; as shown in its vacillating course on the Kansas and Nebraska question; as shown in the corruptions which pervade some of the departments of the Government; as shown in disgracing meritorious naval officers through prejudice or caprice; and as shown in the blundering mismanagement of our foreign relations.

14. Therefore, to remedy existing evils, and to prevent the disastrous consequences otherwise resulting therefrom, we would build up the “American party” upon the principles hereinbefore stated.

15. That each State Council shall have authority to amend their several constitutions, so as to abolish the several degrees, and substitute a pledge of honor, instead of other obligations, for fellowship and admission into the party.

16. A free and open discussion of all political principles embraced in our platform.

The seceding delegates, consisting of the antislavery wing of the party and small in number, organized a convention of their own, and without the formality of a ballot, nominated John C. Fremont, of California, for President, and Ex-Governor William F. Johnston, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President, but they finally supported Fremont and Dayton.

The fragments of the old Whig party met in national convention at Baltimore on the 17th of September, in which 26 States were raggedly represented. Edward Bates, of Missouri, presided over the convention, and the proceedings were uneventful. Fillmore and Donelson, the candidates nominated by the American party, were unanimously nominated for President and Vice-President by resolution, and the following platform adopted:

[Pg 144]

Resolved, That the Whigs of the United States, now here assembled, hereby declare their reverence for the Constitution of the United States, their unalterable attachment to the national Union, and a fixed determination to do all in their power to preserve them for themselves and their posterity. They have no new principles to announce, no new platform to establish, but are content to broadly rest—where their fathers rested—upon the Constitution of the United States, wishing no safer guide, no higher law.

Resolved, That we regard with the deepest interest and anxiety the present disordered condition of our national affairs—a portion of the country ravaged by civil war, large sections of our population embittered by mutual recriminations; and we distinctly trace these calamities to the culpable neglect of duty by the present national administration.

Resolved, That the Government of the United States was formed by the conjunction in political unity of widespread geographical sections, materially differing not only in climate and products, but in social and domestic institutions; and that any cause that shall permanently array the different sections of the Union in political hostility and organized parties, founded only on geographical distinctions, must inevitably prove fatal to a continuance of the national Union.

Resolved, That the Whigs of the United States declare, as a fundamental rule of political faith, an absolute necessity for avoiding geographical parties. The danger so clearly discerned by the Father of his Country has now become fearfully apparent in the agitation now convulsing the nation, and must be arrested at once if we would preserve our Constitution and our Union from dismemberment, and the name of America from being blotted out from the family of civilized nations.

Resolved, That all who revere the Constitution and the Union must look with alarm at the parties in the field in the present Presidential campaign—one claiming only to represent sixteen Northern States, and the other appealing mainly to the passions and prejudices of the Southern States; that the success of either faction must add fuel to the flame which now threatens to wrap our dearest interests in a common ruin.

Resolved, That the only remedy for an evil so appalling is to support a candidate pledged to neither of the geographical sections now arrayed in political antagonism, but holding both in a just and equal regard. We congratulate the friends of the Union that such a candidate exists in Millard Fillmore.

Resolved, That, without adopting or referring to the peculiar doctrines of the party which has already selected Mr. Fillmore as a candidate, we look to him as a well-tried and faithful friend of the Constitution and the Union, eminent alike for his wisdom and firmness; for his justice and moderation in our foreign relations; for his calm and pacific temperament, so well becoming the head of a great nation; for his devotion to the Constitution in its true spirit; his inflexibility in executing the laws; but, beyond all these attributes, in possessing the one transcendant merit of being a representative of neither of the two sectional parties now struggling for political supremacy.

Resolved, That, in the present exigency of political affairs, we[Pg 145] are not called upon to discuss the subordinate questions of administration in the exercising of the constitutional powers of the Government. It is enough to know that civil war is raging, and that the Union is imperilled; and we proclaim the conviction that the restoration of Mr. Fillmore to the Presidency will furnish the best if not the only means of restoring peace.

The campaign of 1856 was one of the most desperately fought conflicts in the history of American politics. In some of the Northern States, and particularly in Pennsylvania, that had to be carried against Buchanan in October to give promise of his defeat, the American party, or the supporters of Fillmore and Donelson, were nearly or quite as strong as the distinctive Republicans. Both were opposed to the election of Buchanan, but they were wide apart not only on the slavery issue, but on the questions of citizenship and religious proscription. As the contest warmed up the necessity for some sort of union between these elements was accepted on both sides, and in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, and some other States the Americans, Republicans, and old Whigs united on State tickets. Illinois, while it gave its electoral vote to Buchanan, elected Colonel Bissell, an antislavery and anti-Buchanan Democrat, Governor, and in Pennsylvania the Democratic ticket was successful in October only by a very small majority.

In several of the States they harmonized on an electoral ticket. They did it by printing two electoral tickets for the two wings of the opposition. On one ticket the first candidate for elector was John C. Fremont, and on the other ticket was the name of Millard Fillmore. The understanding was that if the Union electoral ticket succeeded, the entire vote, less the one lost by using the names of Fillmore and Fremont, should be cast for either candidate if thereby he could be elected, and if such united vote would not elect either candidate the vote was to be divided between Fillmore and Fremont, as the voters indicated by the first name at the head of the ticket.

In common with the great mass of conservative Whigs who were at first greatly disappointed in the nomination of Fremont and the radical attitude of the new Republican party, I gradually drifted into the contest because of the offensive deliverances on slavery made by the Cincinnati platform. I knew Mr. Buchanan personally, and if I could have obeyed my individual preferences as to a candidate,[Pg 146] would have voted for him. The slavery issue soon became so sharply defined that the great mass of the Whigs of the North fell in to the support of Fremont. There was considerable defection of prominent Whigs in Buchanan’s State, embracing the Reeds, the Ingersolls, the Whartons, the Randalls, and others of Philadelphia, whose conservative Whig views, with their great personal respect for Buchanan, influenced them to support him. Buchanan was not a magnetic man, not a popular man in the common acceptation of the term, but he was respected by all not only for his ability, but for his integrity and generally blameless reputation. He was a very courteous gentleman, but the multitude did not rush into his arms as it did into the arms of Clay and Blaine, and it is quite probable that his bachelor life, a destiny given him by a devotion with tragic end, doubtless made him less genial than he might have been.

Pennsylvania was the pivotal State in the contest, and Colonel Forney was chairman of the Democratic State Committee. He was thoroughly familiar with the political situation, and greatly impaired his health by his exhaustive efforts to save Buchanan in his home State. His relations with Buchanan were of the closest and most confidential nature, and each implicitly trusted the other. Buchanan knew Forney’s ability in the management of a great political battle, and there was no concealment between them as to the reward Forney should receive if Buchanan succeeded. Forney’s ambition was to continue in journalism, and it was not only understood, but the assurance voluntarily given to Forney by Buchanan, that if Buchanan became President, Forney should conduct the national organ in Washington and receive the Senate printing. What was then known as the Senate printing was an abuse that had grown up from small to large proportions until it became a fortune to any man who received it during the period of an administration. Gales and Seaton, of the National Intelligencer, had enjoyed it for many years, and when Democratic administrations became more distinctly partisan the favoritism was continued and the profits magnified. It was deemed a necessity for each administration to have an organ, and it was accepted in those days as the Democratic oracle of the nation. By making Forney the editor of the administration organ at Washington with the Senate printing, his highest ambition in his journalistic career would have been gratified, with ample fortune added.[Pg 147] So intimate were Buchanan and Forney, that Forney’s family spent part of the summer at Wheatland, where Forney would occasionally tarry for a day’s rest and to consult with his chief.

Both parties were very confident of carrying the State in October, but Forney outgeneralled the leaders of the Union ticket by his masterful manipulation of Philadelphia, and the Buchanan State ticket was successful in October by 3500 majority. Had the Buchanan State ticket been defeated, Buchanan’s defeat for President would have been clearly foreshadowed, as it would doubtless have made a successful union on the electoral tickets in New Jersey, Indiana, and Illinois, as had already been done in Pennsylvania. Notwithstanding the loss of Pennsylvania in October, the friends of Fremont and Fillmore made desperate efforts to carry the State in November, and so well did they fight their battle that Buchanan’s majority in the State over the combined vote of Fremont and Fillmore was only 1025. The Fremont and Fillmore people believed that they had been defrauded out of the October election in Pennsylvania, and Forney was denounced with extreme bitterness that had lost none of its intensity in the Senatorial fight of 1857, when the resentments of the opposition made Forney’s defeat for Senator possible in a Democratic Legislature.

Buchanan, Fremont, and Fillmore each bore themselves with great dignity during the campaign. Fillmore was not in sympathy with Buchanan, but he had even less sympathy for Fremont and the radical Republican policy he represented. Fremont made his home during the contest in New York, under the strictest orders not to discuss any political question, either orally or by letter, with any outside of those in charge of his campaign. Along with several others, I called upon him at his home some time before the election, simply to pay our respects to the man we were supporting for President, and he was so extremely cautious that he evaded the most ordinary expressions relating to the conduct and prospects of the battle. He impressed me as possessing a stronger individuality than I had credited him with, and his enforced policy of silence made him appear as a severely dignified gentleman with strong intellectual possibilities. But considering the record he made in the early part of the war, when he had, for the first time, opportunity to display his abilities, there are few who will not feel that his election to[Pg 148] the Presidency might have been equally disastrous to himself and to the country.

The battle ended by the election of Buchanan, although Fremont carried the New England States and New York and the Northwestern Democratic States with the whirl of the tempest. The following table exhibits the popular and electoral vote:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
James Buchanan, Penn. | John C. Fremont, Cal. | Millard Fillmore, N. Y. | Buchanan. | Fremont. | Fillmore.
Maine | 39,080 | 67,379 | 3,325 | — | 8 | —
New Hampshire | 32,789 | 38,345 | 422 | — | 5 | —
Vermont | 10,569 | 39,561 | 545 | — | 5 | —
Massachusetts | 39,240 | 108,190 | 19,626 | — | 13 | —
Rhode Island | 6,680 | 11,467 | 1,675 | — | 4 | —
Connecticut | 34,995 | 42,715 | 2,615 | — | 6 | —
New York | 195,878 | 276,007 | 124,604 | — | 35 | —
New Jersey | 46,943 | 28,338 | 24,115 | 7 | — | —
Pennsylvania | 230,710 | 147,510 | 82,175 | 27 | — | —
Delaware | 8,004 | 308 | 6,175 | 3 | — | —
Maryland | 39,115 | 281 | 47,460 | — | — | 8
Virginia | 89,706 | 291 | 60,310 | 15 | — | —
North Carolina | 48,246 | —— | 36,886 | 10 | — | —
South Carolina[15] | —— | —— | —— | 8 | — | —
Georgia | 56,578 | —— | 42,228 | 10 | — | —
Alabama | 46,739 | —— | 28,552 | 9 | — | —
Florida | 6,358 | —— | 24,195 | 7 | — | —
Louisiana | 22,164 | —— | 20,709 | 6 | — | —
Texas | 31,169 | —— | 15,639 | 4 | — | —
Arkansas | 21,910 | —— | 10,787 | 4 | — | —
Missouri | 58,164 | —— | 48,524 | 9 | — | —
Tennessee | 73,638 | —— | 66,178 | 12 | — | —
Kentucky | 74,642 | 314 | 67,416 | 12 | — | —
Ohio | 170,874 | 187,497 | 28,126 | — | 23 | —
Michigan | 52,136 | 71,762 | 1,660 | — | 6 | —
Indiana | 118,670 | 94,375 | 22,386 | 13 | — | —
Illinois | 105,348 | 96,189 | 37,444 | 11 | — | —
Wisconsin | 52,843 | 66,090 | 579 | — | 5 | —
Iowa | 36,170 | 43,954 | 9,180 | — | 4 | —
California | 53,365 | 20,691 | 36,165 | 4 | — | —
Totals | 1,838,169 | 1,341,264 | 874,534 | 174 | 114 | 8

[Pg 149]

A quarrel between Buchanan and Forney was more far-reaching in its results than can well be estimated by those not entirely familiar with the beginning and the end of the dispute. During the campaign, Buchanan, greatly pressed with the increased correspondence that came to him, asked Forney to send him a competent and trustworthy secretary, and Buchanan, for the first time, abandoned his uniform policy of writing all his own letters in clear, beautiful copper-plate style. Forney sent one of his own assistants to aid Buchanan, and having charge of Buchanan’s correspondence he became cognizant of the fact that the Southern leaders were very generally and earnestly demanding of Buchanan the pledge that Forney should not be made editor of the administration organ.

Buchanan parried the appeals of the Southern friends for some time, but finally, knowing that his election depended upon a united South, they became mandatory, and Buchanan, without advising Forney of the fact, finally gave his pledge that Forney should not be chosen. The secretary was indignant at this betrayal of his friend, and quietly sought Forney, advised him of the fact and expressed his purpose not to return. Forney required the secretary to go back and perform his duties and take no note of what had happened. He was greatly disappointed, as it denied him what was the great ambition of his life, involving editorial distinction and fortune, but he believed that Buchanan had yielded to imperious necessity and that he would not be allowed to suffer from the change.

It was not until after the election that Buchanan informed Forney of the necessity of making a change in his reward, and Forney proposed to accept a position in the Cabinet, to which Buchanan would have willingly consented, but the same intense opposition to Forney as a Cabinet officer surged against him from the South. It was next proposed by Buchanan that Forney should take the Berlin mission with a liberal commercial salary added, but Mrs. Forney peremptorily refused to entertain it. It was finally agreed that Forney should be elected to the Senate. The Democrats had a majority of three on joint ballot, and it was not doubted that any Democrat nominated by the caucus would be chosen. Henry D. Foster, a very prominent Democrat, who had been in Congress and who was the Democratic candidate for Governor in 1860, was a member of the House. He was a candidate for Senator, and doubtless would have been chosen[Pg 150] had Forney not been suddenly injected into the field. It was not until the Legislature was about to meet that Forney’s candidacy was decided upon. It required very prompt and positive action to secure the nomination of Forney, and Buchanan, with all his extreme caution under ordinary circumstances, wrote a letter to Senator Mott urging the election of Forney. That letter became public and greatly exasperated the friends of the other candidates, but a new Democratic administration with the President from the State and just on the threshold of great political power was able to command the nomination for Forney, and it was accomplished, but leaving many open sores.

The Republicans and Americans of the Legislature were smarting under what they regarded as the fraud that Forney engineered to give the State to Buchanan, and they were quite willing to join any movement to defeat him. General Cameron had come into the Republican party in 1856, and was at the head of the electoral ticket, and he had a very strong hold upon some old Democratic friends. He proposed to the Republicans and Americans of the Legislature that if they would give him a united vote he could command three Democratic votes and be elected. The Union caucus, as it was called, appointed a committee to whom three Democrats must be shown and give their pledges to vote for Cameron, and if such report was made back to the caucus by the committee, without giving the names of the Democrats who were to vote for Cameron, the Republicans were pledged to vote unitedly for Cameron on the 1st ballot. The committee saw Representatives Lebo, Maneer, and Wagonseller, Democrats, who pledged themselves to vote for Cameron if they could elect him, and to the surprise of all parties except the very few who understood the arrangement, Cameron was elected Senator and Forney suffered a most humiliating defeat.

After Forney’s defeat for Senator, it became much more difficult than even before for Buchanan to reward him, as he doubtless felt should be done. Efforts were made to give him a liberal share of the post-office printing, but Forney and Buchanan were gradually becoming estranged, and finally Forney decided that he could not harmonize with Buchanan and his friends, and that he would renew his journalistic career on independent lines. The result was the establishment of the Philadelphia Press.

[Pg 151]

The slavery issue speedily divided Douglas and Buchanan, and Forney had his opportunity. He had suffered much from the proscriptive hatred of the South, and he became Douglas’s ablest and most enthusiastic supporter in the North, which brought him into direct antagonism with Buchanan. From the time that battle began, Forney and Buchanan were strangers during the remainder of their lives, and no one man did more to educate the North up to the election of Abraham Lincoln than John W. Forney.

We are told that the political methods of the present age are greatly degenerate as compared with the political methods of the old-school leaders, of which Buchanan was about the last representative in the White House. It will surprise many of the present day to be told that Buchanan gave personal attention not only to organize county leaders in his support for the Presidency, but wrote elaborate letters even to township leaders. I have in my possession a number of Mr. Buchanan’s anti-Presidential letters, and I think it due to the truth of history to give one of them as a foot-note to illustrate the politics of half a century ago.[16] Perry County, to [Pg 152] which the letter refers, is a small county adjoining Franklin, the birthplace of Buchanan. It had only a single delegate to the Democratic State Convention, and, considering Buchanan’s location, he should have been able to command its support without special effort. The friend to whom he wrote was an Associate Judge of the county and active in politics, and when it is remembered that this letter is only one of very many written to a single small county to gain a single delegate for Buchanan against General Cass, who lived in a distant State, the political methods employed to reach the Presidency in that day will be generally accepted as no improvement on the methods now employed to gain the highest honors of the Republic.

Buchanan entered the Presidency earnestly determined to end the slavery agitation, but unfortunately he hoped to end it by the unqualified success of slavery in all of the new Territories and the right of transit through the free States of slaves as servants. The Dred Scott decision was foreshadowed in his inaugural address, and he and the pro-slavery statesmen of that time were confident that the Republican ebullition of 1856 was a mere tidal wave that would speedily perish, and that the South would be so strongly entrenched for the defence of slavery that it could not be successfully assailed. He was elected by the South; he was the strictest of strict constructionists on all Constitutional questions, and he naturally sustained the South in going far beyond what his[Pg 153] judgment approved in the efforts to force slavery into Kansas and Nebraska.

The strength of the slavery sentiment steadily grew under the aggravations of the pro-slavery men who sought to force slavery into the new Territories of the West, and it was this continued discussion and the outrages perpetrated on the people of Kansas and Nebraska that made the election of a Republican President possible in 1860, and that finally precipitated the Civil War. Buchanan adhered to the South until open rebellion was organized by the capture of forts and arsenals and the organization of a Confederate government, but when he found himself powerless to restrain the South from armed rebellion, he reorganized his Cabinet and exhausted his then wasted powers to bring the South into submission to the Government. He had an aggressively loyal Cabinet during the last few months of his administration, and when he retired, generally denounced by the loyal sentiment of the country as a faithless Executive, he earnestly supported the Government in every measure necessary to suppress the rebellion and prevent the dismemberment of the Republic. He died soon after the close of the war, a thoroughly honest and patriotic public servant, but widely misunderstood. His revolutionary Kansas-Nebraska policy made the Republican revolution of 1860 inevitable, and made Abraham Lincoln President.

[Pg 154]

## THE LINCOLN-BRECKENRIDGE-DOUGLAS-BELL CONTEST

1860

In 1860 the nation proclaimed the third great political epoch of its history by an aggressive departure from Democracy to the Republicanism that has since ruled without material interruption. There have been two Democratic administrations since the Republican epoch of 1860, but though they, for the time, halted and modified the Republican policy, they never had the power to make a decisive reversal of Republican mastery. Thus an epoch of twelve years of Federalism, another of sixty years of Democracy, and another of forty years of Republicanism tell the story of the political revolutions of the Republic during a period of one hundred and twelve years.

When Fremont made his brilliant campaign of 1856 and narrowly escaped election to the Presidency, it was generally accepted by all the varied phases of politics opposed to radical Republicanism that the Republican movement was like a bee—biggest at its birth—and that it never could win a national victory; but all the chief events affecting the political sentiment of the country from 1856 until 1860 tended to strengthen Republican sentiment and to alienate a large portion of the intelligent elements of Democracy. The significant elections of 1858 and 1859, with the Kansas-Nebraska war convulsing the country from centre to circumference, steadily strengthened Republican lines, and when the leaders of the party came to face the great battle of 1860 they well understood that success was within their reach, and never did a party exhibit greater sagacity in leadership than was displayed in the convention that nominated Lincoln.

William H. Seward was the confessed Republican leader of the nation. He was admittedly its ablest champion and was among its earliest supporters. He had been long in the Senate, and was the peer of any in the discussion of all the[Pg 155] grave questions which then agitated our national Legislature. He was not only the ablest of his party, but he was one of the most exemplary and courteous of men. Two-thirds of all the delegates elected to that convention were friends of Seward and expected to vote for him, and his nomination would have been inevitable on the 1st ballot had not the convention been restrained by considerations of expediency which were most reluctantly accepted. Lincoln’s own delegation from Illinois embraced one-third of positive Seward men. They were instructed for Lincoln without hope of his nomination at the time, and most of them expected to perform a mere perfunctory duty by voting for him on one or more ballots.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN

Horace Greeley had sounded the first note of warning against the nomination of Seward, and his paper, the New York Tribune, was then the most influential journal ever published in this country. It was the Republican Bible, and its weekly edition was more read in the West than all other Eastern papers combined. He startled the party by a series of dignified and masterly articles in favor of Edward Bates, of Missouri, for President, on the ground that Seward was not available, and that a man of the great ability and conservative attitude of Bates alone could win in that contest. But though the conservative element of the opposition to the Democracy was not enthusiastic for Seward and his “irrepressible conflict,” the true reason of Seward’s defeat was not presented either by Mr. Greeley or by any public discussion before the meeting of the convention.

I have read many romances about how, why and by whom Abraham Lincoln was nominated for President at Chicago, but the explanation is very simple, and when presented must be accepted by all as conclusive. Henry S. Lane had been nominated as the Republican candidate for Governor of Indiana, and Andrew G. Curtin had been nominated by the Republicans for Governor of Pennsylvania. These States voted for Governor and other State officers on the second Tuesday of October, and they were the pivotal States of the national contest. It was an absolute necessity to carry them in October to assure the election of a Republican President, and the first inquiry of the Republican leaders at Chicago, outside of those who were blindly devoted to Seward, was “Who can carry Indiana and Pennsylvania?”

Lane and Curtin were there solely for the purpose of getting[Pg 156] the strongest possible national ticket nominated to aid them in their State contests. With Lane was John D. Defrees, as Chairman of the Republican State Committee of Indiana, and I was with Curtin, as he had charged me with the same responsible duty in Pennsylvania. Curtin and Lane decided that they could not be elected if Seward were nominated for President. They were not personally or politically hostile to him; they had but one thing in view, and that was their own election, which was essential to elect a Republican President.

Prior to 1860 the Republican party had never carried either Pennsylvania or Indiana. Opposition to the pro-slavery policy of the Buchanan administration had crystallized antislavery Democrats, Whigs, and Americans into the support of Union State tickets, and had elected them; but in Pennsylvania the Republican name was omitted from necessity, and the organization was entitled the People’s party. In both of these States there was an organized and powerful American party yet in existence, without which the Republicans could not succeed. It was the remnant of the American or Know-Nothing revolution of 1854, and they cherished their own faith with great fidelity and would not support any candidate who was friendly to the Catholics.

When Seward was elected Governor of New York in 1838 it was largely by the influence of Archbishop Hughes, one of the ablest Catholic prelates this country has ever had; and Seward, not only because of his gratitude to his Catholic friends, but because of his broad and liberal views generally, in a message to the Legislature urged a division of the school fund between the Catholics and Protestants. That was the rock on which Seward was wrecked. Had he been nominated, the entire American element of the opposition would have been aggressively against him, and Pennsylvania and Indiana would have been lost not only by the defeat of Curtin and Lane in October, but by the defeat of Seward in November.

The situation was earnestly presented by Curtin and Lane, and Mr. Defrees and I accompanied them in their conferences with various delegations which were devoted to Seward, but were willing to abandon him—not because they loved Seward less, but because they loved Republican success more. I saw several rural delegates from New England States shed tears as they confessed that they must abandon[Pg 157] Seward because he could not carry Pennsylvania and Indiana, and certainly more than one-third of all the delegates who voted for Lincoln in that convention did it in sincerest sorrow because compelled to abandon their great leader for the sake of victory.

Under such conditions the Seward lines were steadily weakening, but never was a movement so ably led as was the Seward movement at Chicago. It was literally a battle of giants. Thurlow Weed, the master of masters in politics, led the fight for Seward, and he had around him Governor Morgan, Chairman of the National Committee; Raymond, of the Times, and many others of distinguished ability in such struggles. Weed invited Lane to drive with him, and, in the course of their conversation, assured him that if his delegation would support Seward all the money needed to carry his election in Indiana would be generously furnished; but Lane knew that no amount of money could give him victory in October with Seward as the national candidate.

The convention met on Wednesday, May 16, and George Ashman, of Massachusetts, was made permanent president. The first day was devoted to routine duties, and the second to the adoption of a platform and rules to govern the convention. The convention adjourned on Thursday evening profoundly impressed with the great battle that was to be fought on the following day, and both sides exhausted political strategy to gain the advantage. Weed organized a most imposing street parade of the Seward people. They had thousands of Seward spectators outside of the delegates, and it was one of the most impressive public displays I have ever witnessed. They paraded the streets for an hour or more before the meeting of the convention.

The friends of Lincoln had been tireless in their efforts, and they displayed wonderful ability in handling their forces. The leaders in immediate charge of the Lincoln people were Colonel Medill, of the Chicago Tribune; David Davis, afterward Judge of the Supreme Court; Norman B. Judd, Chairman of the Republican State Committee, and Leonard Swett, who was almost a copy of Lincoln physically, and who was Lincoln’s closest friend until the day of his death. When they found that the Seward parade was to come off, they counselled how to meet it, and they finally decided that while the Seward men were parading they would fill the immense temporary wigwam—erected for the convention, and capable[Pg 158] of holding five thousand spectators—with men who should go there solely for the purpose of hurrahing for Lincoln. They carried this plan into very successful operation, and when the Seward procession attempted to march into the convention hall they found it filled to overflowing, and very few Seward men outside the delegation could obtain admission.

Just before the convention opened I saw the New York delegation file in and fill the only vacant place in the immense building. They were appalled when they saw how they had been outgeneralled. Almost immediately behind the New York men, who were under the lead of Evarts as Chairman of the delegation, sat Horace Greeley at the head of the Oregon delegation. That new State, just admitted into the Union, was so far from civilization, as the iron horse had not yet been heard in either the Rockies or the Sierra Nevadas, that the Republican convention selected a number of prominent men in the East, including Greeley, to represent the State. I never saw a more benignant face than that of Greeley’s when the nomination of Lincoln was declared. It was known by the supporters of Seward that Pennsylvania and Indiana had both decided to support Lincoln, the Pennsylvanians having declared for Lincoln by four majority over Bates, after giving a complimentary ballot to Cameron.

With very little preliminary movement the ballot began, and Seward’s two-thirds vote of the convention dwindled down to 173¹⁄₂ when 234 were necessary to a choice. Lincoln, with Pennsylvania and Ohio giving complimentary ballots to Cameron and Chase, had 102 votes. As the ballots were announced, every vote for Lincoln was cheered to the echo, while there were but few cheers for Seward except from the delegates themselves. When the 2d ballot was called the Seward people felt that they must largely increase their strength or fall in the race. As Lincoln gained most of the vote of Pennsylvania, with important gains from other States, the wildest cheering greeted the announcements, and when the ballot was given with only 10 votes gained by Seward and 75 votes gained by Lincoln, it became evident to all that Seward’s strength was exhausted and that Lincoln was the coming man. The next and last ballot soon showed Lincoln as leading Seward, and from that time on it was difficult to announce the votes of the States because of the frenzied cheers for “Abe Lincoln.”

When the last State was called it was known that Lincoln[Pg 159] was either nominated or very close to it. The vote as recorded was 231¹⁄₂ for Lincoln, being 2¹⁄₂ votes short of a majority, and 180 for Seward, with some 50 scattering. Before the result was announced Chairman Carter, of Ohio, got up on his chair to assure the attention of the President, and said:

“I rise to announce the change of four votes from Ohio from Mr. Chase to Abraham Lincoln.”

It was known then that this gave Lincoln the majority, and I have never before nor since witnessed such a scene as was made by the great mass of the Lincoln people who were in the hall. A large charcoal picture of Lincoln was presented in the gallery at the rear of the hall, and the whole vast audience, with few exceptions outside of the New York delegation, rose to indulge in the wildest enthusiasm for some minutes.

When order was finally restored, Maine, Massachusetts, and Missouri changed a number of votes to Lincoln, giving him a total of 354, being 120 odd votes more than he needed. When the vote was announced by the President cheers broke out afresh, but they soon quieted down to await the action of the New York delegation that was expected to move the unanimous nomination. There was certainly fully five minutes of dead silence in the body, as the New York delegates were mortified beyond expression at their discomfiture; but after a long wait that seemed to be vastly longer than it was, the tall form of William M. Evarts arose, and with reluctance that was unconcealed said:

“Mr. President, I move that the nomination of Abraham Lincoln be made unanimous.”

Governor Andrew, of Massachusetts, rose as soon as he saw Evarts rise, and when Evarts’s motion was made Andrew seconded it, and with the unanimous vote of the convention and the heartiest huzzas from the many thousands who witnessed the proceedings, Abraham Lincoln was declared the Republican candidate for President. The convention adjourned to meet again in the evening to nominate a candidate for Vice-President.

As there will be general interest felt in the proceedings of the Republican National Convention that gave the country the first Republican President in Abraham Lincoln, I give the detailed vote of each State represented in the convention on the three ballots for President, as follows:

[Pg 160]

STATES. | 1st Ballot.
--- | ---
Seward. | Lincoln. | Wade. | Cameron. | Bates. | McLean. | Read. | Chase. | Dayton. | Sumner. | Fremont. | Collamer.
Maine | 10 |  | 6 | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 1 |  | 7 | — | — |  | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | 1 | —
Vermont | — |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 10
Massachusetts | 21 |  | 4 | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Rhode Island | — |  | — | — | — |  | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | — |  | 2 | 1 | — |  | 7 | — | — | 2 | — | — | — | —
New York | 70 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | — |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | 14 | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | — | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Maryland | 3 |  | — | — | — |  | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Delaware | — |  | — | — | — |  | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Virginia | 8 |  | 14 | — | 1 |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | 5 |  | 6 | 2 | — |  | — | 1 | — | 8 | — | 1 | — | —
Ohio | — |  | 8 | — | — |  | — | 4 | — | 34 | — | — | — | —
Indiana | — |  | 26 | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Missouri | — |  | — | — | — |  | 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Michigan | 12 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Illinois | — |  | 22 | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Texas | 4 |  | — | — | — |  | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Wisconsin | 10 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Iowa | 2 |  | 2 | — | 1 |  | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | — | — | — | —
California | 8 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Minnesota | 8 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Oregon | — |  | — | — | — |  | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Kansas | 6 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Nebraska | 2 |  | 1 | — | 1 |  | — | — | — | 2 | — | — | — | —
District of Columbia | 2 |  | — | — | — |  | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Totals | 173 | ¹⁄₂ | 102 | 3 | 50 | ¹⁄₂ | 48 | 12 | 1 | 49 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 10

STATES. | 2d Ballot.
--- | ---
Seward. | Lincoln. | Bates. | Cameron. | McLean. | Chase. | Dayton. | C. M. Clay.
Maine | 10 |  | 6 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
New Hampshire | 1 |  | 9 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Vermont | — |  | 10 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Massachusetts | 22 |  | 4 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Rhode Island | — |  | 3 | — | — | 2 |  | 3 |  | — | —
Connecticut | — |  | 4 | 4 | — | — |  | 2 |  | — | 2
New York | 70 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
New Jersey | 4 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | 10 | —
Pennsylvania | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | 48 | — | 1 | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — | —
Maryland | 3 |  | — | 8 | — | — |  | — |  | — | —[Pg 161]
Delaware | — |  | 6 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Virginia | 8 |  | 14 | — | 1 | — |  | — |  | — | —
Kentucky | 7 |  | 9 | — | — | — |  | 6 |  | — | —
Ohio | — |  | 14 | — | — | 3 |  | 29 |  | — | —
Indiana | — |  | 26 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Missouri | — |  | — | 18 | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Michigan | 12 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Illinois | — |  | 22 | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Texas | 6 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Wisconsin | 10 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Iowa | 2 |  | 5 | — | — |  | ¹⁄₂ |  | ¹⁄₂ | — | —
California | 8 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Minnesota | 8 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Oregon | — |  | — | 5 | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Kansas | 6 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Nebraska | 3 |  | 1 | — | — | — |  | 2 |  | — | —
Dist. of Columbia | 2 |  | — | — | — | — |  | — |  | — | —
Totals | 184 | ¹⁄₂ | 181 | 35 | 2 | 8 |  | 42 | ¹⁄₂ | 10 | 2

STATES. | 3d Ballot.
--- | ---
Seward. | Bates. | Chase. | Lincoln. | McLean. | Dayton. | C. M. Clay.
Maine | 10 | — | — |  | 6 |  | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 1 | — | — |  | 9 |  | — | — | —
Vermont | — | — | — |  | 10 |  | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 18 | — | — |  | 8 |  | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 1 | — | 1 |  | 5 |  | 1 | — | —
Connecticut | 1 | 4 | 2 |  | 4 |  | — | — | 1
New York | 70 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
New Jersey | 5 | — | — |  | 8 |  | — | 1 | —
Pennsylvania | — | — | — |  | 52 |  | 2 | — | —
Maryland | 2 | — | — |  | 9 |  | — | — | —
Delaware | — | — | — |  | 6 |  | — | — | —
Virginia | 8 | — | — |  | 14 |  | — | — | —
Kentucky | 6 | — | 4 |  | 13 |  | — | — | —
Ohio | — | — | 15 |  | 29 |  | 2 | — | —[Pg 162]
Indiana | — | — | — |  | 26 |  | — | — | —
Missouri | — | 18 | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Michigan | 12 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Illinois | — | — | — |  | 22 |  | — | — | —
Texas | 6 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Wisconsin | 10 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Iowa | 2 | — |  | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — | — | —
California | 8 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Minnesota | 8 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Oregon | 1 | — | — |  | 4 |  | — | — | —
Kansas | 6 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Nebraska | 3 | — | 2 |  | 1 |  | — | — | —
Dist. of Columbia | 2 | — | — |  | — |  | — | — | —
Totals | 180 | 22 | 24 | ¹⁄₂ | 231 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | 1 | 1

So keen were the disappointments of the New York delegation, and Mr. Weed, who was the Seward leader, that when earnestly urged to name a candidate for Vice-President, who would have been accepted by a nearly unanimous vote, they churlishly refused to do so. Governor Morgan would have been taken as the candidate to emphasize the desire of the friends of Lincoln to recognize the friends of Seward, but he peremptorily refused to accept it, and the convention then nominated Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine, as a representative of the Democratic-Republican element; but New York divided her vote between five candidates, giving a bare majority to Hamlin from personal choice.

As the friends of Seward declined to indicate a candidate for Vice-President the convention reassembled in the evening to enter a free-for-all race for the second place on the ticket. Hamlin commanded nearly a solid vote from New England that attracted others. He was known throughout the country as the man who had resigned the chairmanship of his committee in the Senate in 1856 to declare himself for Fremont, although an earnest Democrat up to that time, and that he had accepted the Republican nomination for Governor[Pg 163] and won out by an overwhelming majority. There was a strong sentiment in the convention in favor of Cassius M. Clay, not because he was personally preferred, but because it was thought wise by many to desectionalize the party by taking a candidate for Vice-President from a Slave State. Hamlin had a good lead on the 1st ballot, and on the 2d won an easy victory. The two ballots were as follows:

STATES. | 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
--- | --- | ---
C. M. Clay. | Banks. | Reeder. | Hickman. | Hamlin. | Hamlin. | Clay. | Hickman.
Maine | — |  | — |  | — | — | 16 | 16 | — | —
New Hampshire | — |  | — |  | — | — | 10 | 10 | — | —
Vermont | — |  | — |  | — | — | 10 | 10 | — | —
Massachusetts | — |  | 20 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 | 26 | — | —
Rhode Island | — |  | — |  | — | — | 8 | 8 | — | —
Connecticut | 2 |  | 1 |  | — | 2 | 5 | 10 | — | 2
New York | 9 |  | 4 |  | 2 | 11 | 35 | 70 | — | —
New Jersey | 1 |  | — |  | 7 | — | 6 | 14 | — | —
Pennsylvania | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | 24 | 7 | 11 | 54 | — | —
Maryland | 2 |  | — |  | — | 1 | 8 | 10 | 1 | —
Delaware | 3 |  | — |  | — | 1 | 2 | 6 | — | —
Virginia | 23 |  | — |  | — | — | — | — | 23 | —
Kentucky | 23 |  | — |  | — | — | — | — | 28 | —
Ohio | — |  | — |  | — | — | 48 | 46 | — | —
Indiana | 18 |  | — |  | — | — | 8 | 12 | 14 | —
Missouri | — |  | 9 |  | — | 9 | — | 13 | 5 | —
Michigan | 4 |  | — |  | — | — | 8 | 8 | 4 | —
Illinois | 2 |  | — |  | 16 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 2 | —
Texas | — |  | — |  | — | — | — | — | 6 | —
Wisconsin | 5 |  | — |  | — | — | 5 | 5 | 5 | —
Iowa | — |  | 1 |  | 1 | — | 6 | 3 | — | —
California | — |  | — |  | — | 8 | — | 7 | 1 | —
Minnesota | 1 |  | — |  | — | 1 | 6 | 7 | 1 | —
Oregon | — |  | 1 |  | — | 3 | 1 | 3 | — | 2
Kansas | — |  | — |  | — | 6 | — | 2 | 1 | 3
Nebraska | 1 |  | — |  | — | 5 | — | — | — | 6
District of Columbia | 2 |  | — |  | — | — | — | 2 | — | —
Totals | 101 | ¹⁄₂ | 38 | ¹⁄₂ | 51 | 58 | 194 | 367 | 86 | 13

The Chicago convention that nominated Lincoln for President was not only the ablest national political body that ever[Pg 164] met in the country up to that time, but it exhibited the highest type of political strategy. It has never since then been equalled in ability and leadership, with the single exception of the Republican convention of 1880, in which the friends of Grant made their last stand to give their chieftain a third term. As compared with these two, all subsequent conventions were tame.

The following platform was unanimously adopted:

Resolved, That we, the delegated representatives of the Republican electors of the United States, in convention assembled, in discharge of the duty we owe to our constituents and our country, unite in the following declarations:

1. That the history of the nation, during the last four years, has fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and perpetuation of the Republican party, and that the causes which called it into existence are permanent in their nature, and now, more than ever before, demand its peaceful and constitutional triumph.

2. That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution—“that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”—is essential to the preservation of our republican institutions; and that the Federal Constitution, the rights of the States, and the union of the States, must and shall be preserved.

3. That to the union of the States this nation owes its unprecedented increase in population, its surprising development of material resources, its rapid augmentation of wealth, its happiness at home, and its honor abroad; and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for disunion, come from whatever source they may; and we congratulate the country that no Republican member of Congress has uttered or countenanced the threats of disunion so often made by Democratic members, without rebuke and with applause from their political associates; and we denounce those threats of disunion, in case of a popular overthrow of their ascendancy, as denying the vital principles of a free government, and as an avowal of contemplated treason, which it is the imperative duty of an indignant people sternly to rebuke and forever silence.

4. That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

5. That the present Democratic administration has far exceeded our worst apprehensions, in its measureless subserviency to the exactions of a sectional interest, as especially evinced in its desperate[Pg 165] exertions to force the infamous Lecompton Constitution upon the protesting people of Kansas; in construing the personal relation between master and servant to involve an unqualified property in person; in its attempted enforcement, everywhere, on land and sea, through the intervention of Congress and of the Federal courts, of the extreme pretensions of a purely local interest; and in its general and unvarying abuse of the power entrusted to it by a confiding people.

6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government; that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans; while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the Federal metropolis show that an entire change of administration is imperatively demanded.

7. That the new dogma that the Constitution, of its own force, carries slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United States, is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit provisions of that instrument itself, with contemporaneous exposition, and with legislative and judicial precedent; is revolutionary in its tendency, and subversive of the peace and harmony of the country.

8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; that as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individual, to give legal existence to slavery in any Territory of the United States.

9. That we brand the recent reopening of the African slave-trade, under the cover of our national flag, aided by perversions of judicial power, as a crime against humanity, and a burning shame to our country and age; and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.

10. That in the recent vetoes, by their Federal governors, of the acts of the Legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting slavery in those Territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted Democratic principle of non-intervention and popular sovereignty, embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and a demonstration of the deception and fraud involved therein.

11. That Kansas should of right be immediately admitted as a State under the Constitution recently formed and adopted by her people and accepted by the House of Representatives.

12. That, while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests of the whole country; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.

13. That we protest against any sale or alienation to others of[Pg 166] the public lands held by actual settlers, and against any view of the free-homestead policy which regards the settlers as paupers or suppliants for public bounty; and we demand the passage by Congress of the complete and satisfactory homestead measure which has already passed the House.

14. That the Republican party is opposed to any change in our naturalization laws, or any State legislation by which the rights of citizenship hitherto accorded to immigrants from foreign lands shall be abridged or impaired; and in favor of giving a full and efficient protection to the rights of all classes of citizens, whether native or naturalized, both at home and abroad.

The bitter estrangement of Douglas and President Buchanan made an impassable gulf between Douglas and the radical Southerners who stood by Buchanan. Douglas had a desperate contest in his State for re-election to the Senate in 1858, when he was opposed by Lincoln as the Republican candidate, and was even more vindictively opposed by all the power of the national administration. Lincoln won the State, as he carried the Republican or Union State ticket, but the legislative districts were so gerrymandered that Douglas won the Legislature and came back in triumph to defy the President. There was no reasonable prospect, therefore, of Democratic unity in the campaign of 1860. Douglas, who was the most astute of all the Democratic politicians of his day, clearly foresaw that the violent attitude of the South must result in the defeat of the slavery party and the early extinction of slavery; but slavery had always been omnipotent since the battle began, and it would not learn that its mastery could be overthrown.

The Democratic National Convention was called for the first time to meet far South, in the city of Charleston, the home of Calhoun, the cradle of nullification, and the one place in the Union where secession ran rampant. It was obviously intended to environ the convention with an army of the ablest Southern leadership. The convention met on the 23d of April, 1860, and every State was fully represented, with double delegations from Illinois and New York. The few administration followers in Illinois had made a rump Democratic organization and sent an anti-Douglas delegation to Charleston, and in New York they had another contest between the “Hards” and the “Softs,” the “Hards” being opposed to Douglas and the “Softs” for him. Caleb Cushing was made permanent president, and it was decided that no ballot should be had for President until a platform was adopted. On the following day the convention did not[Pg 167] get beyond the settlement of contested seats, admitting the “Softs” of New York and the Douglas men from Illinois, and the debates on even the most trivial disputes were unusually bitter. On the third day threats of bolting became common among the Southern delegates, as the admission of the Douglas delegates from New York and Illinois clearly indicated that the Douglas people controlled the convention. On the fourth day majority and minority reports were made on the platform, the majority by Mr. Avery, of North Carolina, and the minority by Mr. Payne, of Ohio. General Benjamin F. Butler, who was a prominent delegate in the convention, as he would be anywhere, and who voted for Jefferson Davis for the Presidency right along, presented a minority report of his own, and Senator Bayard, of Delaware, followed with a platform of his invention. On the fifth day Senator Bigler, of Pennsylvania, moved to recommit the platforms to the committee with instructions to report in an hour, and the motion to recommit was carried, 152 to 151, while the motion to instruct was lost by a very large vote. On the same day Mr. Avery, from the majority of the committee on platform, reported a new declaration of principles, and an elaborate discussion followed, and Mr. Samuels, of Iowa, presented a new minority report.

After a protracted and ill-tempered debate, it was finally decided that the vote on the platform should be taken on Monday, the 30th, and on that day the convention proceeded to vote without debate. Butler’s platform was rejected by 198 to 105. Next the minority report of Mr. Samuels, being the Douglas platform, was carried by 165 to 138. The report of the committee as amended was then adopted without a vote by States, upon which the Alabama delegation presented a written protest announcing the purpose of the delegates to withdraw from the convention. The Mississippi, Florida, and Texas delegations gave like notice, and the Louisiana delegation excepting two, the South Carolina delegation excepting three, with three of the Arkansas delegation, two of the Delaware delegation, including Senator Bayard, and one from North Carolina then withdrew from the convention. There were great pomp and ceremony in this proceeding, as formal protests and elaborate speeches were made by the retiring delegates. The convention was thus largely depleted, but a resolution, declaring that two-thirds of a full convention, being 202 votes, shall be necessary[Pg 168] to make nominations, was adopted by 141 to 112. The convention then proceeded to ballot for President with the following result:

BALLOTS. | Douglas. | Guthrie. | Hunter. | Dickinson. | A. Johnson. | Lane. | Jeff. Davis. | Toucey. | F. Pierce.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1 | 145 | ¹⁄₂ | 35 |  | 42 |  | 7 |  | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | 1
2 | 147 |  | 36 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 6 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 |  | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | —
3 | 148 | ¹⁄₂ | 42 |  | 36 |  | 6 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
4 | 149 |  | 37 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 |  | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
5 | 149 | ¹⁄₂ | 37 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 |  | 5 |  | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
6 | 149 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 |  | 3 |  | 12 |  | 7 |  | — |  | — |  | —
7 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 38 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 |  | 4 |  | 11 |  | 6 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
8 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 38 | ¹⁄₂ | 40 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 11 |  | 6 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
9 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 |  | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | 6 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
10 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 |  | 4 |  | 12 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
11 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 38 |  | 4 |  | 12 |  | 6 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
12 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 38 |  | 4 |  | 12 |  | 6 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
13 | 149 | ¹⁄₂ | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | 28 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | 12 |  | 20 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
14 | 150 |  | 41 |  | 27 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
15 | 150 |  | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 26 | ¹⁄₂ |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
16 | 150 |  | 42 |  | 26 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
17 | 150 |  | 42 |  | 26 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
18 | 150 |  | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 26 |  | 1 |  | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
19 | 150 |  | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 26 |  | 1 |  | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
20 | 150 |  | 42 |  | 26 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
21 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 26 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
22 | 150 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 26 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
23 | 152 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 25 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 19 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
24 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 25 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 19 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
25 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 25 |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 19 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
26 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 41 | ¹⁄₂ | 25 |  | 12 |  | 12 |  | 9 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
27 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 42 | ¹⁄₂ | 25 |  | 12 |  | 12 |  | 8 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
28 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 42 |  | 25 |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 8 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
29 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 42 |  | 25 |  | 13 |  | 12 |  | 7 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
30 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 45 |  | 25 |  | 13 |  | 11 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
31 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | 32 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 |  | 11 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
32 | 152 | ¹⁄₂ | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | 22 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 |  | 11 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
33 | 152 | ¹⁄₂ | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | 22 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 |  | 11 |  | 14 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
34 | 152 | ¹⁄₂ | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | 22 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 |  | 11 |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | —
35 | 152 |  | 47 | ¹⁄₂ | 22 |  | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
36 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 48 |  | 22 |  | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
37 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 64 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ |  | ¹⁄₂ | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | —
38 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 66 |  | 16 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 13 |  | — |  | — |  | —
39 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 66 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | —
40 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 66 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | —
41 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 66 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | —
42 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 66 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | — |  | — |  | —
43 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
44 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
45 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
46 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
47 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
48 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 5 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
49 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
50 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
51 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
52 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
53 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
54 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 61 |  | 20 | ¹⁄₂ | 2 |  | — |  | 16 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
55 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
56 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —
57 | 151 | ¹⁄₂ | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | 16 |  | 4 |  | — |  | 14 |  | 1 |  | — |  | —

[Pg 169]

Douglas had a large plurality of the votes, but could not obtain even a two-thirds vote of the remaining delegates. After the 57th ballot a motion was made to adjourn the convention to reassemble at Baltimore on the 18th of June. That was adopted by 195 to 55, whereupon President Cushing adjourned the convention to reconvene in Baltimore. The retiring delegates met at St. Andrew’s Hall, in Charleston, elected Senator Bayard, of Delaware, president, and after much discussion adopted a platform of its own. After spending four days wholly devoted to discussion, that body adjourned to reconvene in Richmond on the second Monday in June. This convention reconvened in Richmond on the 11th of June, with delegates from Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, and Virginia. John Erwin, of Alabama, was made President, when it adjourned to meet again in Richmond on the 21st of June, and reassembled on that day and awaited the action of the Democratic seceders of the Baltimore convention, who nominated Breckenridge and Lane, when it accepted the candidates of the seceders and their platform, and adjourned sine die.

The regular Democratic National Convention reassembled in Baltimore on the 18th of June, and the first three days were devoted to a wrangling discussion on rules, platforms, rights of delegates, etc. The first disturbing questions the convention had to meet were the admission of delegates and the right of partial delegations representing States to cast the full vote of the State. The decision of the convention started another small tidal wave of secession and Virginia retired. North Carolina followed, then Tennessee, and a portion of Maryland. Later California and Delaware withdrew with a part of Kentucky, and President Cushing became so disgusted that he resigned his position and bolted himself. The convention finally proceeded to ballot for President, and two ballots were had, with the following result:

[Pg 170]

STATES. | 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
--- | --- | ---
Douglas. | Breckenridge. | Guthrie. | Douglas. | Breckenridge. | Guthrie.
Maine | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | — |
New Hampshire | 5 |  | — |  | — |  | 5 |  | — |  | — |
Vermont | 5 |  | — |  | — |  | 5 |  | — |  | — |
Massachusetts | 10 |  | — |  | — |  | 10 |  | — |  | — |
Rhode Island | 4 |  | — |  | — |  | 4 |  | — |  | — |
Connecticut | 3 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | — |  | 3 | ¹⁄₂ |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |
New York | 35 |  | — |  | — |  | 35 |  | — |  | — |
New Jersey | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
Pennsylvania | 10 |  | 3 |  | 3 |  | 10 |  | 7 |  | 2 | ¹⁄₂
Maryland | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
Virginia | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 3 |  | — |  | — |
North Carolina | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |
Alabama | 9 |  | — |  | — |  | 9 |  | — |  | — |
Louisiana | 6 |  | — |  | — |  | 6 |  | — |  | — |
Arkansas | 1 |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
Missouri | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂
Tennessee | 3 |  | — |  | — |  | 3 |  | — |  | — |
Kentucky | — |  | — |  | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 3 |  | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂
Ohio | 23 |  | — |  | — |  | 23 |  | — |  | — |
Indiana | 13 |  | — |  | — |  | 13 |  | — |  | — |
Illinois | 11 |  | — |  | — |  | 11 |  | — |  | — |
Michigan | 6 |  | — |  | — |  | 6 |  | — |  | — |
Wisconsin | 5 |  | — |  | — |  | 5 |  | — |  | — |
Iowa | 4 |  | — |  | — |  | 4 |  | — |  | — |
Minnesota | 2 | ¹⁄₂ |  | ¹⁄₂ | 1 |  | 4 |  | — |  | — |
| 173 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 |  | 10 |  | 181 | ¹⁄₂ | 7 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂

As Douglas had received nearly the unanimous vote of the remaining delegates, it was finally resolved that as he had two-thirds of all the votes given in the convention, he was the nominee of the party for President. Benjamin Fitzpatrick, Senator from Alabama, was nominated for Vice-President, receiving 198¹⁄₂ votes to 1 for William C. Alexander, of New Jersey. Senator Fitzpatrick declined the nomination when notified of it, and the National Committee supplied the vacancy by the nomination of Herschel V. Johnson, of Georgia. The platform adopted by this convention was as follows:

[Pg 171]

1. Resolved, That we, the Democracy of the Union, in convention assembled, hereby declare our affirmance of the resolutions unanimously adopted and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic convention at Cincinnati in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are unchangeable in their nature when applied to the same subject-matters; and we recommend as the only further resolutions the following:

Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the Democratic party as to the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial legislature, and as to the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories—

2. Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on the questions of constitutional law.

3. Resolved, That it is the duty of the United States to afford ample and complete protection to all its citizens, whether at home or abroad, and whether native or foreign.

4. Resolved, That one of the necessities of the age, in a military, commercial, and postal point of view, is speedy communication between the Atlantic and Pacific States; and the Democratic party pledge such constitutional government aid as will insure the construction of a railroad to the Pacific Coast at the earliest practicable period.

5. Resolved, That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of the island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just to Spain.

6. Resolved, That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave law are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effects.

7. Resolved, That it is in accordance with the interpretation of the Cincinnati platform, that, during the existence of the Territorial governments, the measure of restriction, whatever it may be, imposed by the Federal Constitution on the power of the Territorial Legislature over the subject of the domestic relations, as the same has been, or shall hereafter be, finally determined by the Supreme Court of the United States, should be respected by all good citizens, and enforced with promptness and fidelity by every branch of the General Government.

The seceders from the Baltimore convention, who were really representing the seceders from the Charleston convention then in session at Richmond, immediately organized a new convention in the Front Street Theatre, of Baltimore, with 21 States fully or partially represented. Caleb Cushing was made chairman, and after adopting the two-thirds rule, a ballot was had for President, all of the votes being cast for J. C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, by the following States:

[Pg 172]

Vermont |  | ¹⁄₂
Massachusetts | 8 |
New York | 2 |
Pennsylvania | 4 |
Maryland | 4 | ¹⁄₂
Virginia | 11 | ¹⁄₂
North Carolina | 8 | ¹⁄₂
Georgia | 10 |
Florida | 3 |
Alabama | 9 |
Louisiana | 6 |
Mississippi | 7 |
Texas | 4 |
Arkansas | 4 |
Missouri | 1 |
Tennessee | 9 | ¹⁄₂
Kentucky | 4 | ¹⁄₂
Minnesota | 1 |
California | 4 |
Oregon | 3 |

Breckenridge, having received the unanimous vote of the convention, was declared the candidate with great enthusiasm, and Joseph Lane, of Oregon, received a like unanimous vote for Vice-President on the 1st ballot. The convention then adopted the following platform, being the same that had been reported to the Charleston convention by the majority of the platform committee:

Resolved, That the platform adopted by the Democratic party at Cincinnati be affirmed, with the following explanatory resolutions:

1. That the government of a Territory organized by an act of Congress is provisional and temporary; and during its existence all citizens of the United States have an equal right to settle with their property in the Territory, without their rights either of person or of property being destroyed or impaired by Congressional legislation.

2. That it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its departments, to protect, when necessary, the rights of persons and property in the Territories, and wherever else its constitutional authority extends.

3. That when the settlers in a Territory, having an adequate population, form a State constitution, the right of sovereignty commences, and, being consummated by admission into the Union, they stand on an equal footing with the people of other States; and the State thus organized ought to be admitted into the Federal Union, whether its constitution prohibits or recognizes the institution of slavery.

4. That the Democratic party are in favor of the acquisition of the island of Cuba, on such terms as shall be honorable to ourselves and just to Spain, at the earliest practicable moment.

5. That the enactments of State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave law are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect.

6. That the Democracy of the United States recognize it as the imperative duty of this Government to protect the naturalized citizen in all his rights, whether at home or in foreign lands, to the same extent as its native-born citizens.

Whereas, One of the greatest necessities of the age, in a political, commercial, postal, and military point of view, is a speedy communication between the Pacific and Atlantic coasts—

[Pg 173]

Therefore be it Resolved, That the Democratic party do hereby pledge themselves to use every means in their power to secure the passage of some bill, to the extent of the constitutional authority of Congress, for the construction of a Pacific railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, at the earliest practicable moment.

A convention of delegates, representing the Constitutional Union party, met at Baltimore on the 9th of May and nominated John Bell, of Tennessee, for President, and Edward Everett, of Massachusetts, for Vice-President. Two ballots were had, as follows:

| 1st Ballot. | 2d Ballot.
John Bell | 68 | ¹⁄₂ | 138 |
Samuel Houston | 57 |  | 69 |
John M. Botts | 9 | ¹⁄₂ | 7 |
John McLean | 21 |  | 1 |
J. J. Crittendon | 28 |  | 1 |
Edward Everett | 25 |  | 9 | ¹⁄₂
William Goggin | 3 |  | — |
William A. Graham | 22 |  | 18 |
William L. Sharkey | 7 |  | 8 | ¹⁄₂
William C. Rieves | 13 |  | — |

Mr. Bell was declared the unanimous choice of the convention, and Mr. Everett was unanimously nominated without the formality of a ballot. The following platform was adopted by this convention:

Whereas, Experience has demonstrated that platforms adopted by the partisan conventions of the country have had the effect to mislead and deceive the people, and at the same time to widen the political divisions of the country by the creation and encouragement of geographical and sectional parties, therefore—

Resolved, That it is both the part of patriotism and of duty to recognize no political principle other than the Constitution of the country, the union of the States, and the enforcement of the laws, and that, as representatives of the constitutional Union men of the country in national convention assembled, we hereby pledge ourselves to maintain, protect, and defend, separately and unitedly, these great principles of public liberty and national safety, against all enemies at home and abroad, believing that thereby peace may once more be restored to the country, the rights of the people and of the States re-established, and the Government again placed in that condition of justice, fraternity, and equality which, under the[Pg 174] example and Constitution of our fathers, has solemnly bound every citizen of the United States to maintain a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

It will be noticed that the American party had entirely disappeared as a political factor in 1860, and what was called the Constitutional Union party had its origin from a number of old and conservative Americans who could not follow either of the old parties. The movement originated chiefly with the friends of General Houston, of Texas, who had separated from the Democratic party and was elected Governor of his State after he identified himself with the American organization. It was expected by those who did the preliminary work of organizing the Constitutional Union party that Houston would be made the candidate for President, and it will be seen that on the 1st ballot he was within 9 votes of Bell. The movement gained unexpected strength through the North, and when the delegates assembled at Baltimore a majority of them regarded it as a necessity to nominate two of the ablest, cleanest, and most conservative men of the country, and John Bell was taken because it was known that he could command a much larger vote from the old Whigs and Americans of the South, where the Republicans could have no votes, than any other candidate. The American party never reappeared in the political arena after 1856, when it succeeded in carrying the electoral vote of Maryland for Fillmore.

The contest was one of great activity, with much more bitterness exhibited by the Democratic factions toward each other than either displayed toward the Republicans. Douglas took the stump and spoke as far South as New Orleans, throughout the West, in various places in New York and other Eastern States. His speeches were the ablest and most aggressive ever delivered in a national contest. Lincoln, Breckenridge, and Bell took no prominent individual part in the battle. One of the peculiar features of the campaign of 1860 was the development of a war spirit in the North that was quickened by the organization known as “The Wide-Awakes.” They were Republican organizations uniformed by caps and capes, and each one carrying a lantern in night processions. Many of them drilled as military companies, for the threat of war came up with almost every echo[Pg 175] from the South. The young men of the North, and especially the young men just from our colleges, entered largely and very enthusiastically into the Lincoln ranks, and in no previous Presidential battle was there such able and general discussion of public questions on the hustings. The slavery question had presented a new phase to the people of the North. It was not a mere battle against slavery, although that appealed very strongly to the convictions of most of the Republicans, but the South had, by the deliverances of its leading men, made the issue directly against the mastery of the free labor of the North. It was denounced by some of the ablest Southern leaders as unworthy of respect or recognition, holding that labor was menial, and that the North was made up very largely of “small-fisted farmers” and “greasy mechanics,” and Senator Chestnut, of South Carolina, who delivered the most honest and one of the ablest speeches on the labor question, compared the slave labor of the South most favorably with the “mud-sills of the North.” This attitude of the South logically brought the most intelligent labor classes of all conditions into the support of the Republican ticket to vindicate their own manhood and independence. The following table presents the popular and electoral vote:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Abraham Lincoln, Ill. | Stephen A. Douglas, Ill. | John C. Breckenridge, Ky. | John Bell, Tenn. | Lincoln. | Douglas. | Breckenridge. | Bell.
Maine | 62,811 | 26,693 | 6,368 | 2,046 | 8 | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 37,519 | 25,881 | 2,112 | 441 | 5 | — | — | —
Vermont | 33,808 | 6,849 | 218 | 1,969 | 5 | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 106,533 | 34,372 | 5,939 | 22,331 | 13 | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 12,244 | 7,707[18] | ——— | ——— | 4 | — | — | —
Connecticut | 43,792 | 15,522 | 14,641 | 3,291 | 6 | — | — | —
New York | 362,646 | 312,510[18] | ——— | ——— | 35 | — | — | —
New Jersey | 58,324 | 62,801[18] | ——— | ——— | 4 | 3 | — | —
Pennsylvania | 268,030 | 16,765 | 178,871[18] | 12,776 | 27 | — | — | —
Delaware | 3,815 | 1,023 | 7,337 | 3,864 | — | — | 3 | —
Maryland | 2,294 | 5,966 | 42,482 | 41,760 | — | — | 8 | —
Virginia | 1,929 | 16,290 | 74,323 | 74,681 | — | — | — | 15[Pg 176]
North Carolina | ——— | 2,701 | 48,539 | 44,990 | — | — | 10 | —
South Carolina[17] | ——— | ——— | ——— | ——— | — | — | 8 | —
Georgia | ——— | 11,590 | 51,889 | 42,886 | — | — | 10 | —
Florida | ——— | 367 | 8,543 | 5,437 | — | — | 3 | —
Alabama | ——— | 13,651 | 48,831 | 27,875 | — | — | 9 | —
Mississippi | ——— | 3,283 | 40,797 | 25,040 | — | — | 7 | —
Louisiana | ——— | 7,625 | 22,861 | 20,204 | — | — | 6 | —
Texas | ——— | ——— | 47,548 | 15,438[18] | — | — | 4 | —
Arkansas | ——— | 5,227 | 28,732 | 20,094 | — | — | 4 | —
Missouri | 17,028 | 58,801 | 31,317 | 58,372 | — | 9 | — | —
Tennessee | ——— | 11,350 | 64,709 | 69,274 | — | — | — | 12
Kentucky | 1,364 | 25,651 | 53,143 | 66,058 | — | — | — | 12
Ohio | 231,610 | 187,232 | 11,405 | 12,194 | 23 | — | — | —
Michigan | 88,480 | 65,057 | 805 | 405 | 6 | — | — | —
Indiana | 139,033 | 115,509 | 12,295 | 5,306 | 13 | — | — | —
Illinois | 172,161 | 160,215 | 2,404 | 4,913 | 11 | — | — | —
Wisconsin | 86,110 | 65,021 | 888 | 161 | 5 | — | — | —
Minnesota | 22,069 | 11,920 | 748 | 62 | 4 | — | — | —
Iowa | 70,409 | 55,111 | 1,048 | 1,763 | 4 | — | — | —
California | 39,173 | 38,516 | 34,334 | 6,817 | 4 | — | — | —
Oregon | 5,270 | 3,951 | 5,006 | 183 | 3 | — | — | —
Totals | 1,866,452 | 1,375,157 | 847,953 | 590,631 | 180 | 12 | 72 | 39

The election of Lincoln was the second great political revolution in the history of the country, and it came with fearful import. The revolution won by Jefferson in 1800 simply displaced the Federalists, gave authority to the Republicans, and liberalized the policy of the Government. The revolution that brought Lincoln into the Presidency was the first popular expression emphasizing the purpose of the nation to halt the extension of slavery; and while the Republican policy meant no more than to prevent slavery extension, it was well understood in the South that it menaced the safety of slavery even where it was then undisputed. The Southerners had little tolerance for Republicanism. They had seen it grow from the despised Abolition cranks to the Republican party that had dominated Congress before it elected a President. Republicans in Congress were seldom treated with respect by their Southern associates, and often the most wanton[Pg 177] and flagrant insults were given them not only on the floor of the House but on other occasions.

Personal encounters disgraced the record of both House and Senate, and the most respectable term the South ever applied to antislavery members was that of “Black Republican.” Even in Philadelphia, that became the most loyal of all cities, nearly the whole commercial and financial interests were arrayed against Lincoln, because they regarded the Republican party as disturbers of national tranquillity and of all the interests of trade. So strong was the conservative element among the old Whigs in that State that the name of Republican had to be discarded. Curtin was elected Governor as the candidate of the “People’s party,” and the delegates to the Chicago convention represented only that organization. When Lincoln’s election was announced the Democrats could not reconcile themselves to the mastery of a party they had so openly and persistently despised.

I witnessed an interesting episode in Philadelphia, on the night of Curtin’s election. The Prince of Wales was then on a visit to this country, and had just arrived at the Continental Hotel in Philadelphia. My headquarters as chairman of the Lincoln committee were at the Girard House immediately opposite, and I saw the handsome young Prince, then a picture of manly vigor and beauty, stand on the Chestnut Street balcony for an hour, surrounded by his suite of nobles, watching what he regarded as the dying agonies of the Republic. The main streets of the city were crowded with shouting, wrangling, and rioting partisans, and the Prince obviously congratulated himself that he had just happened in this country in time to see its angry dissolution. He witnessed the riotous enthusiasm of the Republicans, and the much more riotous madness of the defeated party, until he wearied of it, and he was astounded the next morning to discover that the city was as quiet and serene as an average Philadelphia Sunday.

Lincoln brought to the Presidency the strongest personality that has ever adorned the highest trust of the nation. It is studied with increased interest as time passes onward in its flight, and it is worthy of extended notice here. I had not met Lincoln personally until after his election. I had attended the Chicago convention as chairman of the State committee along with Curtin, and bore some humble part in aiding the nomination of Lincoln; and my correspondence with[Pg 178] him during the campaign would have made one of the most interesting of Lincoln relics, but unfortunately the letters were destroyed when Chambersburg, including my own house, was burnt by General McCausland.

Pennsylvania was the battle ground, and he naturally tried to keep in close touch with it. His letters were always kind and hopeful, sometimes quaint, and always going directly to the point of winning the State. He communicated with me every week from the time I opened headquarters early in June until after the election, and I prized more highly the Lincoln correspondence of that struggle than any of all the many valued letters I have ever received. I think it safe to say that he was as familiar with the details of the contest in Pennsylvania as I was myself, and knew every element of strength and every element of weakness in our lines. He was never enthusiastic or sentimental, but always thoroughly practical, with occasional flashes of his exquisite Western humor.

After such intercourse with Lincoln, lasting from the beginning to the close of the great battle of his life, I of course had formed what I supposed to be an intelligent and accurate estimate of the character and attributes of the man, but I never had a glimpse of the grandeur of Lincoln’s character until I met him personally at his home in Springfield on the 3d of January, 1861. A contest over the appointment of Cameron to the Cabinet, in which I took part, in opposition to Cameron, made Lincoln telegraph me on the 2d of January to visit him at Springfield. I was then a member of the Senate; the Legislature was just about to meet, and I made as hurried a trip as possible. I reached Springfield about seven o’clock on the evening of the 3d, having telegraphed him in advance that I would arrive at that hour and must return at eleven. I went from the depot directly to his house, and when I rang the bell the door was opened by Lincoln himself, and I saw no other person during my stay.

I think I did not well conceal my disappointment when I stood before him in the dimly lighted hall looking up into the face of the new President. There was nothing in his appearance calculated to make a favorable impression at first sight. He was illy clad, ungraceful in movement, and his rudely chiselled face, that was always sad in repose, clearly portrayed the fretting anxieties which his election to the Presidency to meet the severest trial of the Republic had[Pg 179] brought upon him. He had then decided to appoint Cameron to the Cabinet, against which I had protested, and he had sent for me to know whether there were good reasons for a change of judgment. We sat down in his plainly furnished parlor, and for an hour or more he heard me patiently with evident interest. During this part of the conversation he said but little, but gave many incisive questions to be answered. He did not exhibit a single trace of humor, and it seemed to me most of the time as if I were making my appeal to a sphinx. He gave no sign whatever as to whether I impressed him or not, and when I left him I had not a single clue by which to judge what importance he had attached to my arguments, but before he retired that night he wrote a letter to Cameron revoking the appointment, and suggesting that Cameron should regard the position as tendered, and give a letter of declination.

In that letter, which can be found in Nicolay and Hay’s “Life of Lincoln,” he uses this language: “You will say this comes of an interview with McClure, and this is partly but not wholly true.” The result was that the position of Secretary of War was held open until Lincoln arrived in Washington, when Seward and Weed finally prevailed upon the President to give the position to Cameron. He advised me of his purpose after he had decided, and was much gratified for the assurance that no factional hostility would be made against either Cameron or the administration. Seward and Weed were much embittered at Curtin and Lane for defeating Seward at Chicago, and they dealt a retributive blow by securing the appointment of Cameron, as Cameron and Curtin were never in political accord after the bitter struggle they had for Senator in 1855.

It was not until after the question of the Cabinet appointment was dismissed that I had an opportunity to see something of Lincoln as he was. It was my part to do the talking on the Cabinet issue; after that it was his part to talk, and he gradually developed all the great and grand qualities of his character. He was appalled at the prospect of civil war being the sequel of his election to the Presidency, and above all things, he wanted peace if consistent with the line of duty. He fully appreciated that he was confronted by graver problems than had ever beset American statesmanship, and that he was compelled to meet the great issue of the threatened dismemberment of the Republic.

[Pg 180]

He was painfully and profoundly impressed with the fearful responsibility that devolved upon him, but the first great attribute of his character developed by this discussion, or rather by his statements of the situation, was his unswerving fidelity to duty regardless of all personal or political interests, and even regardless of life itself. He well understood that armed rebellion was apparently inevitable, and that he must meet the most appalling peril that ever confronted our free government, and one for which neither the history of this Government nor of any other Government of the world furnished precedents to guide him in his course. The right of secession had been claimed and denied since the formation of the Constitution with almost equal ability and integrity, and there he was, crowned with the laurels of the highest trust of the civilized world, with the prospect of a nearly united South in rebellion, and the North divided—and intensely divided—as to the power of the Government to maintain the unity of the States by force. I heard Lincoln in this conversation but a short time before I discovered that he had but one purpose, from which no interests could swerve him, and that was to perform his duty with fidelity and accept the consequences. He felt that as a Republican President he would owe it to his party to give it the advantages of power; yet he understood that the Government could not be maintained without the co-operation of the Democrats.

My next meeting with Lincoln was under circumstances well calculated to study his true character intelligently. I was one of a dozen or more who dined with him at what is now the Commonwealth Hotel in Harrisburg on the evening of the 22d of February, 1861. The dinner was given by Governor Curtin to the President-elect, and I believe that none of the guests are now living but myself. The story of Lincoln’s sudden departure on the memorable midnight journey to Washington from Harrisburg on that night has been many times told, and in no instance with entire correctness. He arrived in Philadelphia on the evening of February 21, and the published programme of his journey to Washington was from Philadelphia to Harrisburg on the 22d, and from Harrisburg to Washington by the Northern Central Railroad through Baltimore on the 23d. He was met in Philadelphia by Mr. Fenton, President of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad, and by Pinkerton’s detectives, who informed him that he could not pass[Pg 181] through Baltimore according to his published programme without inviting assassination, that had been deliberately planned; and the son of Senator Seward brought Lincoln a letter signed by Seward and General Scott, insisting that he should change his route, because he could not safely pass through Baltimore if the time of his coming were known.

He was earnestly urged to omit his Harrisburg appointment and take the eleven o’clock train from Philadelphia to Washington that night, but he peremptorily refused, and left the question to be determined at Harrisburg. He hoisted the flag on Independence Hall early on the morning of the 22d, and delivered an address that betrayed none of the serious emotions which must have agonized him at the time. He arrived at Harrisburg early in the afternoon, where I was one of the legislators to receive him, had a reception and delivered a brief address in the hall of the House, and soon after five o’clock he sat down to the dinner at the hotel as the guest of Governor Curtin, who was there advised by Colonel Lamon and Colonel Sumner of the information received in Philadelphia the night before, and of the necessity of considering the question of changing his route.

Dinner was hastily served, when the servants were cleared from the dining-hall, and Governor Curtin stated the facts to the dining guests, and insisted that Lincoln’s programme should be changed. Every one present promptly responded in approval, and the only silent man at the table was Lincoln. I sat near enough to him to watch and study his face, and there was not a sign of agitation upon it, and when he was called upon to give his views, it was at once made evident to all that he thought much more of commanding the respect and honor of the nation than of preserving his life. His answer was substantially, and I think exactly, in these words: “I cannot consent. What would the nation think of its President stealing into its capital like a thief in the night?” His voice was clear and distinct, and his cool and earnest manner made his expression painfully pathetic.

Fortunately, among the guests was the late Colonel Thomas A. Scott, and when Governor Curtin declared that the question was not one for Lincoln to decide, Colonel Scott at once proposed to take charge of the new programme, and send Lincoln back to Philadelphia on a special train in time to make the eleven o’clock from Broad and Prime Streets to Washington that night. Scott was a master alike in keenness[Pg 182] of perception and swiftness of execution. He at once directed the Governor to take Lincoln down to the front of the hotel, where there were multitudes awaiting to cheer them, and loudly call a carriage to take them to the Executive Mansion, as that would be the natural place for them to go. They entered the carriage, drove up along the river front toward the Executive Mansion, and then made a detour to reach the depot in thirty minutes, as instructed by Colonel Scott. I accompanied Colonel Scott to the depot, when he first cleared one track of his line to Philadelphia, forbidding anything to enter upon it until released, and with his own hands cut all of the few telegraph wires which then came into Harrisburg. A locomotive and a car were in readiness at the time appointed a square below the depot, where Lincoln and Curtin arrived with Colonel Lamon, and Lincoln and Lamon entered the car for their journey. When I shook hands with Lincoln and wished him God’s protection on his journey, he was as cool and deliberate as ever in his life.

Every precaution had been taken to prevent the knowledge of a change in Lincoln’s programme being known to any who might possibly communicate by telegraph, and when the wires were all cut we felt assured that unless Lincoln should be accidentally detected in Philadelphia, none would know of his journey until he arrived at Washington. But one person in Philadelphia was advised of the movement, and he was Superintendent Kenney, of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad, still prominently connected with its service, who was instructed by Colonel Scott to meet Lincoln at the Pennsylvania depot and conduct him to the Broad and Prime station. Beyond Superintendent Kenney, no one outside of the few in Harrisburg who had arranged and started Lincoln on his journey had any knowledge of the change in his route.

He was received by Superintendent Kenney in a carriage, taken to the Broad and Prime station, where a section of a sleeping car had been engaged for him, entered it without attracting attention, and at six o’clock the next morning he was in Washington. We had a sleepless and a terribly long and anxious night at Harrisburg, but about six o’clock Colonel Scott reunited the wires in his railroad station, and received the despatch: “Plums delivered Nuts safely,” which announced the safe arrival of the President.

[Pg 183]

ANDREW JOHNSON

## THE LINCOLN-McCLELLAN CONTEST

1864

The average intelligent student of our Civil War a generation after the conflict ended, with Lincoln’s achievements in the grateful remembrance of every patriot, would naturally assume that Lincoln’s re-election to the Presidency in 1864 was never in any measure doubtful; but in fact three months after his renomination in Baltimore his defeat by General McClellan was generally apprehended by his friends and frankly conceded by Lincoln himself. On the 23d of August, 1864, he wrote the following with his signature appended:

“This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to co-operate with the President-elect so as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration, as he will have secured his election on such grounds that he cannot possibly save it afterward.”

This paper he sealed and delivered to Secretary Welles with notice not to open it until after the election.

There was very earnest opposition to Lincoln’s renomination by men of eminent ability and influential leadership in the Republican party. Chase, Wade, Henry Winter Davis, and Horace Greeley were bitterly opposed to accepting him as the Republican candidate for the second contest, as they believed that he could not be elected. In addition to these, Sumner was not heartily for him; Stevens was earnestly opposed to the President because he had not pressed confiscation and other punishments against the South, and the extreme radical wing of the Republican party was aggressive in its hostility. Lincoln’s strength was with the people, and they overwhelmed the leaders who sought his overthrow.

The only exhibition of weakness I ever saw in Lincoln was[Pg 184] exhibited during what might be called the contest for his renomination. There was, in point of fact, no contest at all, as after all the efforts of the opposing leaders had been exhausted the Republican people rallied to his support and asserted their mastery. He was painfully impressed with the apprehension that he might be defeated in the convention, and on a number of occasions I heard him discuss the question with a degree of interest that was painful. Even after a majority of all the delegates to the convention had been positively instructed for him, and certainly two-thirds of the remainder were publicly pledged to his support, he could not dismiss the fears of his possible defeat.

I visited him several times within a month of the convention, in obedience to his telegrams, when he discussed only the political dangers which beset him. He told me that his name would go into history darkly shadowed by a fraternal war that he would be held responsible for inaugurating if he were unable to continue in office to conquer the Rebellion and restore the Union.

Lincoln was human, as are all men, and a more anxious candidate I have never known. The last time I conferred with him on the subject was within two weeks of the meeting of the convention, and I could hardly treat with respect his anxiety about his renomination. He had given close study to the election of delegates, and I called his attention to the fact that a decided majority were positively instructed for him, and that he certainly knew that a majority of the others could not be diverted from him. He had to admit that there seemed to be no plausible reason for doubting the result, but, with a merry twinkle of the eye, he said:

“Well, McClure, I don’t quite forget that I was nominated by a convention that was two-thirds for the other fellow.”

I had to admit that he had been nominated by a convention that was two-thirds for Seward, but no such conditions could arise as presented themselves in the Seward fight to swerve the convention from its purpose.

So anxious was he about the situation that he made the very unreasonable request of me to become a delegate-at-large from Pennsylvania when I had already been unanimously elected a delegate from my Congressional district. I vainly attempted to convince him that it mattered not whether I was a delegate-at-large or a district delegate, as my power to serve him would be just the same; but he persisted[Pg 185] in urging me to go before the State convention with the ungracious request to elect me a delegate-at-large—a position that was sought as one of honor—when I was already a member of the delegation from my district.

The only possible explanation I could conceive was that, as Cameron was certain to be a delegate-at-large, he desired me to be one with Cameron, and thus have both the Cameron and Curtin wings of the party equally represented at the head of the delegation. Fortunately, political conditions enabled me to carry out his wish, and Cameron and I were elected on the 1st ballot by a nearly unanimous vote.

I never suspected Lincoln’s purpose in asking me to change my position as a delegate until three days before the meeting of the convention, when I went to Washington in obedience to his summons. He then asked me to vote for the nomination of Andrew Johnson for Vice-President. He had Cameron already committed to the nomination of Johnson as a War Democrat to succeed Hamlin, but he gave me no intimation of Cameron’s position. I was favorable to the renomination of Hamlin, but after hearing Mr. Lincoln’s reasons for the request he made I would have voted for Johnson in obedience to a sense of public duty, although Lincoln was not wrong in assuming that I was likely to vote for any candidate for Vice-President he specially desired. He was not opposed to Hamlin, but he knew that the success of the party depended upon bringing into the Republican fold a large body of War Democrats who had never become Republicans, such as Judge Holt, General Dix, General Butler, and Governor Johnson, and he wished to nationalize the Republican party.

But the conclusive reason why he desired the nomination of Johnson was that it would most effectually prevent the recognition of the Confederacy by England and France. That was the great peril in the last year of the war, and Lincoln believed that in no way could the success of the Government in the suppression of the Rebellion be so clearly presented to the world as by taking Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, who had filled every important position within the gift of his State, and elect him to the Vice-Presidency from a reorganized rebellious State in the heart of the Confederacy. It is needless to say that, notwithstanding my prejudice against Johnson, I agreed to support him; but Lincoln’s caution prevented him from giving me any intimation as to[Pg 186] the attitude of Cameron, who was equally pledged to Lincoln in the Johnson cause. Cameron and I met at the convention in Baltimore on June 7 without either knowing the position of the other, and as our political relations were not of the confidential order, although our personal intercourse was always pleasant, it required some diplomacy for us to reach an understanding. Cameron had been committed to Hamlin, with whom he had served in the Senate, and was somewhat embarrassed, and he suggested that while he was friendly to Hamlin he did not believe that he could be nominated, to which I agreed. He then proposed that we should line up the two factions of the State in the delegation and cast a unanimous vote for Hamlin when the State was first called, and change it to a unanimous vote for Johnson when the roll-call ended, to which I readily assented; and with some effort we had a harmonious delegation on that line with the exception of Thaddeus Stevens, who sat beside me when I cast my vote for Johnson, and who with a grim smile said to me: “Can’t you find a candidate for Vice-President without going down into a d——d rebel province?” The vote of the State was, however, recorded unanimously for Johnson, and it was the like efforts of Lincoln in his very quiet and earnest way that made Andrew Johnson Vice-President and President.

The Republican National Convention met in Baltimore on the 7th of June, 1864, and the venerable Rev. Dr. Robert J. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, was temporary president and Ex-Governor William Dennison, of Ohio, permanent president. Every State outside of the Southern Confederacy, and some that were partially inside of it, were fully represented. There was no contest for President, as the nomination of Lincoln was conceded. He received the unanimous vote of every State on 1st ballot with the exception of the Missouri delegation, that was instructed for Grant, and that was promptly changed to Lincoln to make the vote unanimous. There was a considerable undercurrent in the convention that was not friendly to Lincoln, but so powerless that no attempt was made to assert it.

The important contest of the convention was for Vice-President. Until a short time before the meeting it was generally expected that Vice-President Hamlin would be renominated with President Lincoln; but when the delegates came together, opposition to Hamlin was developed and[Pg 187] unexpectedly to many of the members, and it soon became evident that a powerful organization had been quietly crystallized to nominate Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, then Military Governor of that State. The 1st ballot gave Andrew Johnson 200 and 150 for Hamlin and 108 for Dickinson, with 61 votes scattered; but before the ballot closed Pennsylvania led off by changing from Hamlin and giving a unanimous vote for Johnson. Stevens was opposed to the change, but finding himself alone in the delegation, he permitted his vote to be recorded with the majority. Other changes were made, and the 1st and only ballot was finally announced as 494 for Johnson, 17 for Dickinson, and 9 for Hamlin. The following platform was prepared and reported to the convention by Henry J. Raymond, of New York, and unanimously adopted:

1. Resolved, That it is the highest duty of every American citizen to maintain against all their enemies the integrity of the Union, and the permanent authority of the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that, laying aside all differences of political opinion, we pledge ourselves as Union men, animated by a common sentiment, and aiming at a common object, to do everything in our power to aid the Government in quelling by force of arms the rebellion now raging against its authority, and in bringing to the punishment due to their crimes the rebels and traitors arrayed against it.

2. Resolved, That we approve the determination of the Government of the United States not to compromise with rebels, or to offer them any terms of peace, except such as may be based upon an unconditional surrender of their hostility and a return to their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that we call upon the Government to maintain this position, and to prosecute the war with the utmost possible vigor to the complete suppression of the rebellion, in full reliance upon the self-sacrificing patriotism, the heroic valor, and the undying devotion of the American people to their country and its free institutions.

3. Resolved, That as slavery was the cause, and now constitutes the strength of this rebellion, and as it must be, always and everywhere, hostile to the principles of republican government, justice and the national safety demand its utter and complete extirpation from the soil of the Republic; and that, while we uphold and maintain the acts and proclamations by which the Government, in its own defence, has aimed a deathblow at this gigantic evil, we are in favor, furthermore, of such amendment to the Constitution, to be made by the people in conformity with its provisions, as shall terminate and forever prohibit the existence of slavery within the limits or the jurisdiction of the United States.

4. Resolved, That the thanks of the American people are due to the soldiers and sailors of the army and navy who have perilled their lives in defence of their country and in vindication of the honor of its flag; that the nation owes to them some permanent recognition[Pg 188] of their patriotism and their valor, and ample and permanent provision for those of their survivors who have received disabling and honorable wounds in the service of the country; and that the memories of those who have fallen in its defence shall be held in grateful and everlasting remembrance.

5. Resolved, That we approve and applaud the practical wisdom, the unselfish patriotism, and the unswerving fidelity with which Abraham Lincoln has discharged, under circumstances of unparalleled difficulty, the great duties and responsibilities of the Presidential office; that we approve and endorse, as demanded by the emergency and essential to the preservation of the nation and as within the provisions of the Constitution, the measures and acts which he has adopted to defend the nation against its open and secret foes; that we approve, especially, the proclamation of emancipation and the employment as Union soldiers of men heretofore held in slavery; and that we have full confidence in his determination to carry these and all other constitutional measures essential to the salvation of the country into full and complete effect.

6. Resolved, That we deem it essential to the general welfare that harmony should prevail in the national councils, and we regard as worthy of public confidence and official trust those only who cordially endorse the principles proclaimed in these resolutions, and which should characterize the administration of the Government.

7. Resolved, That the Government owes to all men employed in its armies, without regard to distinction of color, the full protection of the laws of war; and that any violation of these laws, or of the usages of civilized nations in time of war, by the rebels now in arms, should be made the subject of prompt and full redress.

8. Resolved, That foreign immigration, which in the past has added so much to the wealth, development of resources, and increase of power to this nation—the asylum of the oppressed of all nations—should be fostered and encouraged by a liberal and just policy.

9. Resolved, That we are in favor of a speedy construction of the railroad to the Pacific coast.

10. Resolved, That the national faith, pledged for the redemption of the public debt, must be kept inviolate, and that for this purpose we recommend economy and rigid responsibility in the public expenditures, and a vigorous and just system of taxation; and that it is the duty of every loyal State to sustain the credit and promote the use of the national currency.

11. Resolved, That we approve the position taken by the Government, that the people of the United States can never regard with indifference the attempt of any European power to overthrow by force or to supplant by fraud the institutions of any republican Government on the western continent; and that they will view with extreme jealousy, as menacing to the peace and independence of their own country, the efforts of any such power to obtain new foot-holds for monarchical governments, sustained by foreign military force, in near proximity to the United States.

The sixth resolution, read in the light of the present, would seem to be a very harmless and proper expression on general[Pg 189] principles, but every member of the convention voted for it, well understanding that it meant a demand from the supreme authority of the party that Montgomery Blair should retire from the position of Postmaster-General. He was not in harmony with the policy of the administration, but Lincoln hesitated to remove him, as their personal relations were always pleasant. Some weeks after the convention had adjourned the more earnest opponents of Postmaster-General Blair were disappointed that Lincoln did not remove him, and several of them called upon Lincoln to explain why he had not obeyed the command of the party. Lincoln answered that he fully recognized the right of the Republican party, through its highest tribunal, to instruct him as to members of the Cabinet, but he added, with a significant twinkle of the eye, that those resolutions related to the next administration and not to the present. Soon thereafter, however, Mr. Blair resigned, and Governor Dennison, of Ohio, succeeded him.

The Democratic convention met in Chicago on August 29, and Horatio Seymour was permanent president. It was on the 23d of the same month that Lincoln had written the paper before referred to, expressing his settled belief that he would be defeated. Grant had been hammering away between the Wilderness and the James with appalling sacrifice of life and without visible substantial results. Sherman had been fighting his way toward Atlanta, and had never won anything approaching a victory over Johnson. Thus the summer was well-nigh ended without the inspiration of victory, and the long, fearful strain and sacrifice suffered by the people made many patriotic hearts inclined to accept peace on any reasonable terms.

The Democratic convention thus met just when the country was most profoundly impressed with the terrible sacrifices of war and the apprehension that the military power of the Confederacy could not be conquered. It was this condition that made the Democrats commit the fatal blunder of declaring in their national platform, “As the sense of the American people that, after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, under the pretence of a military necessity of a war power higher than the Constitution,” considerations of humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand “that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities with a view to an ultimate convention of all the[Pg 190] States.” Had the election been held at that time, McClellan would have been elected, but the delegates from the Democratic convention when on their way home after their fatal deliverance against the war met the people at every city and village cheering to the echo over the capture of Atlanta, and by night they found almost a continuous line of torches displayed by crowds cheering themselves hoarse over the great victory that was the beginning of the end of the war.

It was universally accepted by the Democrats before the Chicago convention met that General George B. McClellan would be their candidate. He had been in retirement at Orange, N. J., after he had been removed from the command of the Army of the Potomac in the fall of 1862, and his friends were very enthusiastic in his support. It was believed that he had sufficient flavor of the soldier to hold war Democrats, and he was known to be in very positive antagonism with the whole political and war policy of the President. He was a man of blameless character and altogether the strongest candidate upon whom the Democrats could unite. The 1st and only ballot for President in the convention gave 174 votes to McClellan, with 38 for Thomas H. Seymour, of Connecticut, 12 for Horatio Seymour, of New York, with ¹⁄₂ vote for Charles O’Conor, of New York, and 1¹⁄₂ votes blank. Changes were made before the ballot closed, giving McClellan 202¹⁄₂ votes to 28¹⁄₂ for Thomas H. Seymour, and the nomination of McClellan was made unanimous with great enthusiasm.

There was only one ballot for Vice-President, as follows:

James Guthrie, Ky. | 65 | ¹⁄₂
Geo. H. Pendleton, Ohio | 55 | ¹⁄₂
Lazarus W. Powell, Ky. | 32 | ¹⁄₂
George W. Cass, Pa. | 26 |
Daniel W. Voorhees, Ind. | 13 |
J. H. Caton | 16 |
Augustus C. Dodge, Iowa | 9 |
John S. Phelps, Mo. | 8 |

Very soon after the 2d ballot began Mr. Guthrie’s name was withdrawn, followed by the withdrawal of other candidates, and Mr. Pendleton was nominated unanimously. The following platform was adopted with little opposition:

Resolved, That in the future, as in the past, we will adhere with unswerving fidelity to the Union under the Constitution as the only solid foundation of our strength, security, and happiness as a people, and as a framework of Government equally conducive to the welfare and prosperity of all the States, both Northern and Southern.

Resolved, That this convention does explicitly declare, as the[Pg 191] sense of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretence of a military necessity, or war power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired—justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view to an ultimate convention of the States, or other peaceable means, to the end that, at the earliest practicable moment, peace may be restored on the basis of the Federal union of the States.

Resolved, That the direct interference of the military authorities of the United States in the recent elections held in Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and Delaware was a shameful violation of the Constitution; and a repetition of such acts in the approaching election will be held as revolutionary, and resisted with all the means and power under our control.

Resolved, That the aim and object of the Democratic party is to preserve the Federal Union and the rights of the States unimpaired; and they hereby declare that they consider that the administrative usurpation of extraordinary and dangerous powers not granted by the Constitution; the subversion of the civil by military law in States not in insurrection; the arbitrary military arrest, imprisonment, trial, and sentence of American citizens in States where civil law exists in full force; the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press; the denial of the right of asylum; the open and avowed disregard of State rights; the employment of unusual test oaths; and the interference with and denial of the right of the people to bear arms in their defence; are calculated to prevent a restoration of the Union and the perpetuation of a Government deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed.

Resolved, That the shameful disregard of the administration to its duty in respect to our fellow-citizens who are now, and long have been, prisoners of war and in a suffering condition, deserves the severest reprobation, on the score alike of public policy and common humanity.

Resolved, That the sympathy of the Democratic party is heartily and earnestly extended to the soldiery of our army and the sailors of our navy, who are and have been in the field and on the sea, under the flag of our country; and, in the event of its attaining power, they will receive all the care, protection, and regard that the brave soldiers and sailors of the Republic have so nobly earned.

The renomination of Lincoln by the Republican National Convention was so entirely assured early in the year that the Republican opponents of the President made a desperate effort to crystallize an opposition to Lincoln of such formidable character as to compel the national convention to choose another candidate. The call for the Republican convention to meet at Baltimore was issued on the 22d of February, and very active efforts were made by the leaders of the[Pg 192] opposition to place a Republican ticket in the field before Lincoln could be renominated. A mass convention was called, to meet at Cleveland on the 31st of May, and some three hundred and fifty responded to the call. John Cochrane, of New York, was made permanent president, and without the formality of a ballot John C. Fremont was nominated for President and John Cochrane for Vice-President by acclamation. Both promptly accepted the nominations, but instead of inspiring Republican revolt against Lincoln, as was anticipated, the nominations gave no exhibition of popular strength, and after considerable conference between the insurgents and the regulars, Fremont and Cochrane announced their retirement from the contest on the 21st of September, and urged the re-election of Lincoln. The following platform was adopted by the Fremont convention:

First. That the Federal Union shall be preserved.

Second. That the Constitution and laws of the United States must be observed and obeyed.

Third. That the Rebellion must be suppressed by force of arms, and without compromise.

Fourth. That the rights of free speech, free press, and the habeas corpus be held inviolate, save in districts where martial law has been proclaimed.

Fifth. That the Rebellion has destroyed slavery, and the Federal Constitution should be amended to prohibit its re-establishment, and to secure to all men absolute equality before the law.

Sixth. That integrity and economy are demanded at all times in the administration of the Government, and that in time of war the want of them is criminal.

Seventh. That the right of asylum, except for crime and subject to law, is a recognized principle of American liberty; that any violation of it cannot be overlooked, and must not go unrebuked.

Eighth. That the national policy known as the “Monroe Doctrine” has become a recognized principle, and that the establishment of an anti-republican government on this continent by any foreign power cannot be tolerated.

Ninth. That the gratitude and support of the nation are due to the faithful soldiers and the earnest leaders of the Union army and navy for their heroic achievements of deathless valor in defence of our imperilled country and civil liberty.

Tenth. That the one-term policy for the Presidency adopted by the people is strengthened by the force of the existing crisis, and should be maintained by constitutional amendments.

Eleventh. That the Constitution should be so amended that the President and Vice-President shall be elected by a direct vote of the people.

[Pg 193]

Twelfth. That the question of the reconstruction of the rebellious States belongs to the people, through their representatives in Congress, and not to the Executive.

Thirteenth. That the confiscation of the lands of the rebels, and their distribution among the soldiers and actual settlers, is a measure of justice.

The country was prepared, at the time the Democratic platform was adopted, to receive its demands relating to the war with some respect, but the aspect of the contest was speedily changed by Sherman’s capture of Atlanta and Sheridan’s brilliant victories in the Shenandoah Valley. General McClellan and his friends appreciated the unfortunate expression of the convention against the war, that was made very generally odious among loyal people by the thrilling victories of the army, and in his letter of acceptance, that he delayed long enough to give the fullest consideration to the subject, he plainly dissented from the war plank of the platform. He said: “I could not look in the face of my gallant comrades of the army and navy who have survived so many bloody battles and tell them that their labors and the sacrifice of so many of our slain and wounded brethren had been in vain, that we had abandoned that Union for which we have so often perilled our lives;” to which he added: “No peace can be permanent without union.”

While the contest had been fairly doubtful and at times exceedingly gloomy for Lincoln, the victories of Sherman and Sheridan caused a sudden tidal wave, that utterly overwhelmed McClellan and left him the worst defeated candidate of history in any contested election, receiving only 21 electoral votes to 212 for Lincoln. The following table gives the popular and electoral vote, with the soldier vote in a separate table, as cast in the field:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Lincoln. | McClellan. | Lincoln. | McClellan.
Maine | 72,278 | 47,736 | 7 | —
New Hampshire | 36,595 | 33,034 | 5 | —
Vermont | 42,422 | 13,325 | 5 | —
Massachusetts | 126,742 | 48,745 | 12 | —
Rhode Island | 14,343 | 8,718 | 4 | —
Connecticut | 44,693 | 42,288 | 6 | —[Pg 194]
New York | 368,726 | 361,986 | 33 | —
New Jersey | 60,723 | 68,014 | — | 7
Pennsylvania | 296,389 | 276,308 | 26 | —
Delaware | 8,155 | 8,767 | — | 3
Maryland | 40,153 | 32,739 | 7 | —
Kentucky | 27,786 | 64,301 | — | 11
West Virginia | 23,223 | 10,457 | 5 | —
Ohio | 265,154 | 205,568 | 21 | —
Indiana | 150,422 | 130,233 | 13 | —
Illinois | 189,487 | 158,349 | 16 | —
Michigan | 85,352 | 67,370 | 8 | —
Iowa | 87,331 | 49,260 | 8 | —
Wisconsin | 79,564 | 63,875 | 8 | —
Minnesota | 25,060 | 17,375 | 4 | —
Kansas | 14,228 | 3,871 | 3 | —
Missouri | 72,991 | 31,026 | 11 | —
Nevada[19] | 9,826 | 6,594 | 2 | —
California | 62,134 | 43,841 | 5 | —
Oregon | 9,888 | 8,457 | 3 | —
Totals | 2,213,665 | 1,802,237 | 212 | 21

STATES. | Soldier Vote.
--- | ---
Lincoln. | McClellan.
Maine | 4,174 | 741
New Hampshire | 2,066 | 690
Vermont | 243 | 49
Pennsylvania | 26,712 | 12,349
Maryland | 2,800 | 321
Kentucky | 1,194 | 2,823
Ohio | 41,146 | 9,757
Michigan | 9,402 | 2,959
Iowa | 15,178 | 1,364
Wisconsin | 11,372 | 2,458
California | 2,600 | 237
Totals | 116,887 | 33,748

The army vote of Vermont, Kansas, and Minnesota was not received in time to be taken into the official count, and part of the vote of Wisconsin was rejected for informality.

[Pg 195]

The States of Tennessee and Louisiana also held elections and were carried for Lincoln, but their votes were not necessary to the election of the Republican ticket, and although Lincoln earnestly desired that these States should be recognized and the votes counted, Congress, by joint resolution, that Lincoln signed with great reluctance, declared that they should not be recognized, and they were omitted in the final count by Congress.

Pennsylvania was the only Republican State that faltered in the fall elections of 1864. There was no State ticket to be chosen, and the Republicans in charge of the campaign assumed that Lincoln would carry the State without extraordinary efforts, while the friends of McClellan, a native of the State, with strong individual and social relations, made exhaustive efforts to give him the victory.

The October election was practically a stand-off, and Lincoln telegraphed me on the morning after the election to come to Washington. He was much distressed at the attitude of our State, and apprehensive that New York, with Horatio Seymour as Governor, one of the ablest Democrats of the country, might vote for McClellan, as Tammany was then in the very zenith of its power. I had been Chairman of the State Committee when Lincoln was elected in 1860, and General Cameron was my successor in 1864. He was thoroughly competent for the task, but evidently did not appreciate the perils which confronted him. Lincoln asked me to join Cameron and devote the intervening month between the October and November elections to assure a victory. I answered that I could not make the suggestion to Cameron, as our political relations were not especially friendly, to which he replied, asking me whether I would do it if so requested by Cameron. I of course assented, and the following day I received a letter from Cameron at my home in Chambersburg, requesting me to join him, where I found Honorable Wayne MacVeagh, who had been the Republican chairman the year before and who was then not more friendly to Cameron than myself. We all united in an earnest effort to win the State, always acting in entire harmony with Cameron and his committee.

I had private quarters at the Continental, while Cameron’s quarters were at the Girard, and, as requested, advised Lincoln each day of the apparent progress of the battle. My reports were not so assuring as he desired, for the[Pg 196] friends of McClellan, inspired by the partial victory of October, renewed their energies for the November fight. Postmaster-General Dennison came to see me on a special mission from Lincoln about two weeks before the election to learn the situation as precisely as possible, and I had to tell him that I saw but little hope of carrying the State on the home vote. The army vote would doubtless be largely for Lincoln and give him the State, but it would be declared a “bayonet election,” and with such a result in Pennsylvania, and New York lost, as was possible, while Lincoln’s election could not be defeated, as the Southern States did not vote, the moral power of the new administration to prosecute the war and attain peace would be greatly impaired. My answer to Lincoln was that I would go to Washington within a few days if it should appear necessary to take extreme measures to save the State on the home vote.

As the political conditions did not improve, I telegraphed to Lincoln that I would meet him at nine o’clock in the evening to discuss the campaign. I found him nervously anxious about Pennsylvania, although not doubting his re-election. He knew that New York was trembling in the balance and might be lost, and his fears were fully warranted, as he had but little over 6000 majority in a million votes. I told him that I had not confidence in the State being carried by the home vote, but that it could be done without interfering with the military operations of the army, as Grant was then besieging Petersburg and Sheridan had whipped the Confederates clear out of the valley. I suggested that he should in some way have Grant furlough five thousand Pennsylvania soldiers home for twenty days, and that Sheridan should do the same, as that vote cast at home would insure a home majority. He hesitated about making the request of Grant for reasons which I could not understand, and I then suggested that General Meade was a soldier and a gentleman, and that he could safely send an order to him as Commander of the Army of the Potomac, and that Meade would obey it and permit the order to be returned.

A messenger from the War Office went the next morning to Meade, bearing the order from Lincoln, brought it back with him, and fully five thousand Pennsylvania soldiers were furloughed to return home. I said: “How about Sheridan?” Lincoln’s face brightened and with great enthusiasm he said:

[Pg 197]

“Oh, Phil; he’s all right.”

The same order went to Sheridan, of which no record was ever kept, and Sheridan sent five thousand of his veterans home to vote as they shot, and Lincoln’s majority on the home vote was 5712, to which the army vote added 14,363, making a total majority in the State of 20,075.

It is not generally known how earnestly Lincoln labored for compensated emancipation. He made earnest efforts to save the Border States to the Union by the assurance of compensation for slaves, and even after all the slave States south of the Potomac and the Ohio had joined the Confederacy, he adhered to the policy of compensated emancipation until the day of his death. In August, 1864, when the political situation presented a very gloomy aspect, I had a long conference with Lincoln at the White House, and he then introduced the subject of compensated emancipation.

In that conversation he gave me the first intimation of his purpose to try and end the war by paying the South $400,000,000 as compensation for the freedom of the slaves. He had the proposition written out in his own handwriting, but he well knew that if such a purpose on his part were made public, it would make his re-election impossible. He discussed it freely and very earnestly, however, and said that he regarded compensated emancipation as the only way to restore fellowship between the States. He did not doubt the ability of the North to overthrow the military power of the Confederacy, but what he most feared was that the people of the South, driven to desperation by the severe sacrifices they had suffered, and the general desolation of their country, that gave them no hope of regaining prosperity, would make their armies disband into guerrilla squads and would be implacable in their resentments against the Government.

In all of the many expressions I heard Lincoln make use of, toward the close of the war, he always exhibited an earnest desire to do something that would impressively teach the Southern people that they were not to be held as conquered subjects of a despotic power, but were to come back into the Union and enjoy the blessings of a reunited people.

Lincoln believed that in no way could he so widely and profoundly impress the Southern people with the desire of the Government to deal with them in generous justice as[Pg 198] by paying them $400,000,000 as compensation for the loss of their slaves. I can never forget the earnestness with which he spoke of this proposition at a time when he did not dare breathe it to the public. He said the war was costing $4,000,000 a day, and that it would certainly last for more than four months, thus costing the Government more than the whole amount he would have gladly given as compensation for the freedom of the slaves, not to calculate the sacrifice of life and destruction of property. He fretted because he could not convey to the South what he believed should be done to close the war and enable them to re-establish their homes and fruitful fields. He believed in his theory of compensated emancipation until his death, and he abandoned it only a short time before the surrender of Lee. He would have suggested it to Vice-President Stephens, of the Confederacy, at their City Point meeting in the winter of 1865, had not Stephens advised him at the outset that he was instructed by Jefferson Davis to entertain no proposition that did not perpetuate the Confederacy, and after his return he wrote a message to Congress in favor of it, submitted it to his Cabinet, by which it was nearly or quite unanimously disapproved, and he endorsed upon it the disapproval of the Cabinet and laid it away.

Lincoln was the most notable combination of sadness and mirth that I ever met with in any of our public men. His face in repose, under all circumstances, was one of the saddest I ever beheld. It would brighten in conversation, and at times would portray a measure of sorrow that could not be surpassed. He was from his youth much given to melancholy. While he was known as fond of sports and brimful of humor, a very large portion of his life was always given to isolation and solitude, when he gave free latitude to the melancholy tendencies of his mind.

Strange as it may seem, he was always a hopeful man, never pessimistic, and always inclined when discussing any question to take the bright side. He was severely conscientious in his convictions and in his actions. He had faith in the present and greater faith in the future. He had been in early life what is now commonly called an agnostic, with a strong inclination to atheism, but in his mature years he never exhibited a trace of it. I have never known any man who had greater reverence for God than Abraham Lincoln. Throughout his writings, political and otherwise, will be[Pg 199] found multiplied expressions of his abiding faith in the Great Ruler of nations and individuals.

In a single sentence to be found in Lincoln’s second inaugural address the country and the world have the most complete portrayal of his character. When he was inaugurated for a second term as President, on the 4th of March, 1865, the military power of the Confederacy was broken, and many in his position would have exhibited the pride of the victor over the vanquished on such an occasion; but after stating in the kindest and most temperate language the duty of himself and of the patriotic people of the country to protect the Union against dismemberment, he does not utter a word of resentment against the South. “With malice toward none; with charity for all,” was the brief and eloquent sentence in which he defined the duty of those who had then substantially destroyed the power of the Rebellion. That beautiful expression came from the heart of Abraham Lincoln, and it profoundly impressed the whole country, then wildly impassioned by the bitterness of fraternal strife. He knew the resentments which must confront him in restoring the shattered fragments of the Union, and his supreme desire was to have the bitterness of the conflict perish when peace came.

No man who has filled the Presidential chair was so vindictively and malignantly defamed as was Lincoln in the South. The opponents of the war in the North were guilty of unpardonable assaults upon his integrity, his ability, and his methods, but the South had no knowledge of him, as he had filled no important part in national affairs before his election to the Presidency; and his humble birth in Kentucky, close by the birthplace of Jefferson Davis, and his exaggerated rudeness of appearance and manner made the people of the South ready to believe anything to his discredit. He was proclaimed throughout the Confederacy as a second Nero; as a bloody and remorseless butcher; as a vulgar clown who met the sorrows of the nation with ribald jest. Not a single virtue was conceded to him.

No one could know Lincoln well without seeing some features of his home life. I have seen him in grave conversation with public men on the most momentous subjects, when “Tad” Lincoln, his favorite boy, would rush into the room, bounce on to his father’s lap, throw his arms around his neck, and play hobby-horse on his foot regardless of all the sacred[Pg 200] affairs of State. There never was a frown from the father, and the fretting questions of even a great war seemed to perish until “Tad” had completed his romp. The greatest sorrow of Lincoln’s life shadowed the altar of his own home, and it was one he had to suffer in silence. The calamity that befell Mrs. Lincoln after his death was visible to those who had opportunity to see for themselves at an early period of his administration. Mrs. Lincoln was mentally unbalanced, but not sufficiently so to prevent the performance of her social functions, and her vagaries often led to severe reflections upon the President, at times even to the extent of charging her with sympathy for the South, as her brothers were prominent in the Southern army.

I first saw Mrs. Lincoln at Harrisburg on the night that Lincoln made his midnight journey to Washington, and the greatest difficulty we had on that occasion was to prevent her from creating a scene that would have given publicity to the movement. I thought her a fool, and was so disgusted with her that I never spoke to her afterward, although I had frequently gone with ladies to her receptions. I wronged her, for she was then not wholly responsible, and soon after Lincoln’s death the climax came, leaving her to grope out the remainder of her life in the starless midnight of insanity. With Lincoln’s many other sorrows, considering his love of home and family, it may be understood how keenly he suffered, and how he was clouded by shadows for which the world could give no relief.

No man ever came in contact with Abraham Lincoln who did not learn to love, honor, and even reverence him. His ablest political enemies ever paid the highest tributes, not only to his personal attributes, but to his masterly ability, and none surpassed Stephen A. Douglas, the ablest foeman Lincoln ever met, in his appreciation of Lincoln’s qualities. He had to accept vastly the gravest responsibilities ever put upon any President of the United States, and I am quite sure that no other man could have filled Lincoln’s place during the Civil War with equal safety to the Republic. Had he been vindictive and resentful his fame would not be without blemish to-day.

What was to me the most beautiful tribute I have ever heard paid to him came from the lips of Jefferson Davis, when I visited him at his home in Mississippi some ten years after the war. He never tired of discussing the character[Pg 201] and the actions of Lincoln, and asked me many questions about his personal qualities. After he had heard all that could be given in the brief time that I had, he said with a degree of mingled earnestness and pathos that few could have equalled:

“Next to the destruction of the Confederacy, the death of Abraham Lincoln was the darkest day the South has ever known.”

[Pg 202]

## THE GRANT-SEYMOUR CONTEST

1868

To the casual reader of our political history, the election and re-election of Grant to the Presidency immediately after the close of the war would seem to be a result at once logical and inevitable; but there are few of the present day who have any knowledge of the many obstacles which confronted Grant in his transfer from the highest military to the highest civil duties of the nation.

It is noted that Grant, the Great Captain of the Age, was elected and re-elected by large majorities; that General Hayes, another soldier of national fame, succeeded him; that General Garfield, a soldier-statesman, succeeded Hayes, defeating Hancock, the most brilliant Democratic soldier of the war, by only a few thousands on the popular vote; that Blaine, the first civilian candidate of the party, was the first Republican to suffer defeat after the political revolution of 1860; that General Harrison, another honored soldier, was successful as the Republican candidate in 1888, and that Major McKinley, now Chief Magistrate of the Republic, carried his musket as a private in the flame of battle, and came out of the war an officer promoted for gallantry. With such a line of military Presidents, the natural assumption of the student of our political history would be that General Grant’s election came about because none could question its fitness.

There were very serious obstacles to Grant’s nomination for the Presidency by the Republicans in 1868. First, he was not a Republican and never had been. He had never voted a Republican ticket, and he never cast a Republican ballot until after he had been eight years a Republican President. His last vote before he re-entered the army was cast for a radical pro-slavery Democrat, and he did not even sympathize[Pg 203] with Stephen A. Douglas in 1860, although he lived in Illinois, the home of the great Democratic leader of that day. Second, he was resolutely averse to being a candidate for the Presidency. He was General of the Army, with freedom to retire without diminution of pay; he had no political training, and felt himself unfitted for a political career. He was honest and apparently fixed in his purpose not to become a candidate. These objections at first appeared to be insuperable obstacles to Grant’s nomination, but he was human, and had he declined the Presidency when it was apparently within his reach, he would have stood as the only man in the history of the Republic who had refused its crown.

U. S. GRANT

The Democrats were in a hopeless condition, and they at once began a systematic movement to make him their candidate. This alarmed the Republicans, and they made equally earnest and methodical efforts to make him their leader. It is doubtful upon which side General Grant would have fallen had it not been for the early estrangement between President Johnson and himself. Johnson made repeated attempts to overslaugh him either directly or indirectly. He ordered Grant to Mexico to get him out of the country, but Grant refused to go, and he afterward made an earnest effort to supersede Grant by calling General Thomas to the command of the army, but Thomas stubbornly refused to consider the call. As the Republicans were then in bitter warfare against Johnson, Grant logically found sympathy in Republican circles, and finally, with visible reluctance, he agreed to become the candidate of the Republicans. Had he been nominated by the Democrats he would have been elected, but his administration would have greatly conserved and liberalized the Democratic teachings of that day. His final assent to become the Republican candidate for President was obtained by the late Colonel Forney.

The assassination of Lincoln and the succession of Vice-President Johnson to the Presidency repeated the political history of Tyler and Fillmore in a radical change of the policy of the Government. Johnson started under a cloud in his career as Vice-President. On the day of his inauguration he appeared in the Senate visibly intoxicated, and delivered a maudlin harangue so disgraceful that a correct report was never permitted to be given to the public. The report of that address as severely modified by the omission of the most offensive[Pg 204] expressions was highly discreditable. He was immediately hurried away to the country residence of the elder Francis P. Blair, and there remained most of the time until more than a month later, when Lincoln was assassinated. He never attempted to resume his place in the Senate as presiding officer, although he was frequently in Washington and was there on the night of the assassination.

As President he at first startled the country by the most violent demands for the punishment of all those prominently engaged in the Rebellion. His favorite declaration was that “treason must be made odious.” It was not long, however, until his views were materially changed, and he gradually drifted into entire sympathy with the South and aggressively against the policy of the Republicans in Congress. It was this conflict between the Executive and the legislative powers of the Government that led to the radical policy of reconstruction and the wholesale enfranchisement of the colored voters of the South. All the reconstruction measures were vetoed by the President and passed over his veto by the Senate and House, and the issue grew more and more in bitterness until it culminated in the impeachment of Johnson, in which he escaped conviction by a single vote. Grant and Johnson had an acrimonious dispute when Grant, as Secretary of War ad interim, admitted Stanton back to the office after the Senate had refused to approve his removal by the President, and from that time Grant and Johnson never met or exchanged courtesies on any other than official occasions, where the necessity for it was imperative. When the arrangements were about to be made for the inauguration of Grant, he peremptorily refused to permit President Johnson to accompany him in the carriage to the Capitol for the inauguration ceremonies, and Johnson did not make his appearance on that occasion.

I never met President Johnson but once during his term in the White House. I had met him casually before and during the war, but cherished a strong prejudice against him as an arch demagogue because of a debate between him and Senator Bell, his colleague from Tennessee, that I happened to hear in the Senate. Bell was one of the ablest and most dignified of Senators, and I never witnessed a more offensive exhibition of the studied arts of the demagogue than Johnson displayed in that Senatorial controversy. It was on some phase of the sectional issue, and Bell’s exalted patriotism and[Pg 205] manly plea for union and fellowship contrasted with Johnson as the soaring eagle contrasts with the mousing owl. I had voted for his nomination for Vice-President in the Republican convention of 1864, because I surrendered my own preferences to considerations of expediency presented by Lincoln.

When he made the disgraceful exhibition of himself on inauguration day as he appeared as Vice-President in the Senate, I published an editorial in my Chambersburg paper denouncing Johnson as having offended against the dignity and decency not only of our own Government, but of civilized governments throughout the world, and demanded his resignation. Little more than a month thereafter he became President, and a troop of new friends flocked about him. It is needless to say that he was soon advised of the severe criticism I had made upon the inauguration address. I did not see or hear from him or communicate with him in any way until the early fall, when Governor Curtin informed me that he had received a request from the President for Curtin and myself to visit him at Washington. My answer to Curtin was that as he was in an official position it was probably his duty to regard a request from the President as a command, but as I was not anybody of consequence, I would not go. Within a fortnight a second and more pressing request was made to Curtin for us to come to Washington to confer with the President on the political situation. Curtin felt that we should go. He thought it possible that Johnson might yet be saved from political apostasy, although I had no confidence whatever in the future of the administration, judging from the surroundings he had invited, but I accompanied the Governor to Washington and called upon the President.

At that time Johnson had attempted and largely carried out a scheme of reconstruction of his own, that had gradually drifted him into very close and sympathetic relations with the ruling class of the South that had been active in rebellion. He had appointed provisional Governors, Legislatures had been chosen, Congressmen and Senators had been elected to some extent, and I was utterly surprised to find the President entirely confident that his scheme of reconstruction would be sanctioned by Congress. I was well informed by conference with the leading Republicans of the North as to the policy they would pursue in Congress, and I knew that there was not the shadow of a chance for any of his reconstructed[Pg 206] States to be readmitted into the Union on the basis of his policy.

Curtin’s more responsible official position and general distrust made him quite willing to avoid discussion with the President, who opened the conversation by an earnest appeal to us to give tranquillity to the country and renewed prosperity to business by accepting his method of reconstruction, that he always spoke of as “my policy.” I answered by stating that it would be simply a waste of time and effort to attempt to maintain his policy, as not a single Senator and Representative then elected to the next Congress, or to be elected thereafter by Southern States as then reconstructed, would be admitted into Congress. He seemed to be utterly amazed at the audacity of such a declaration, and informed me in the most imperious and insolent manner that every State would be restored to the Union and to representation in the coming Congress. I told him that he was suffering from the common misfortune of power in seldom hearing the truth. He exhibited much irritation, and several times walked the full length of the Executive Chamber with rapid step, apparently to get cooling time for his passion. He finally tempered the discussion by more courteous expression, and we went over the whole ground with rugged frankness on both sides, ending in the disagreement on which we had started.

I then asked him what he proposed to do with Jefferson Davis, who was still in prison at Fortress Monroe, charged with complicity in the assassination of Lincoln. I saw that he was much embarrassed by the inquiry, and told him that he owed it to the truth of history, to Davis himself and to public justice to give him a fair trial. I reminded him also that Wurz, who had just been tried by a court-martial for wanton and murderous brutality to the Union prisoners, with the judgment in the case then in the hands of the Government, but not announced, would be condemned and executed, as he was poor and friendless. I said that if Wurz was guilty of studied brutality to prisoners he deserved to die, but that if he was simply executing the policy of the government of the Confederacy, as was then publicly charged, of deliberately and systematically murdering Union prisoners by giving them unwholesome or insufficient food, and withholding the necessary and possible attention to the sick and dying, the responsible criminal was Jefferson Davis. In answer, the President asked how that could be done, to[Pg 207] which I responded by saying that a court-martial, consisting of Generals Grant, Sherman, Thomas, Sheridan and Meade, could well be charged with so grave an inquiry, as their judgment would be accepted by the country and the world. If they condemned Davis, he deserved to be executed. If they acquitted him, as I believed they would, he would stand acquitted of one of the most colossal crimes ever charged against an individual. To my surprise, the President answered that there was strong prejudice growing up against court-martials. He was quite right in that declaration, as up to that time he had used them freely and almost wholly in the administration of justice in all cases having any connection with the war. He had denounced Davis as an assassin, and in his new relations with the South, which changed his conditions materially, he was anxious to protect Davis, and evidently did not wish his accusations to be passed upon by a competent court.

I then said to the President that it was his duty to discharge Davis; that Davis should either be tried or given his liberty at an early day, as he had already been long in prison, and I reminded him also that he could not try a man for treason who was President of a government that had beleaguered our Capitol for four years, and that had been recognized by our own Government and by the leading governments of the world as a belligerent power. The discussion of the Davis question, that was a very unpleasant one to the President, brought the conference to a finish, and every prediction that I made to him about his reconstruction policy was fulfilled to the letter. Curtin took only an incidental part in the conference, and we parted with ceremonial courtesy, never to meet again.

While the Republicans had been seriously divided by Johnson’s defection, chiefly because of the large patronage he had to dispense, their columns became gradually reunited, and in 1868 it was practically a solid Republican party arrayed against Johnson with a very few deserters; and the Democrats, while appreciating Johnson’s betrayal of the Republicans, had no love and little respect for the betrayer. From the time that Grant’s candidacy was announced no other aspirant was seriously discussed in Republican circles, and his name brought not only most of the later stragglers of the party into the fold, but commanded the support of a large Democratic element in addition.

[Pg 208]

The Republican National Convention met at Chicago on the 20th of May, and easily finished its work in two days. Carl Schurz was temporary president, and General Joseph R. Hawley, of Connecticut, was the permanent president. The usual preliminaries were disposed of without jar during the first day, and the committee on resolutions reported promptly on the morning of the second day. The following is the full text of the platform as adopted by a unanimous vote:

The National Republican party of the United States, assembled in national convention in the city of Chicago, on the 21st day of May, 1868, make the following declaration of principles:

1. We congratulate the country on the assured success of the reconstruction policy of Congress, as evinced by the adoption, in the majority of the States lately in rebellion, of constitutions securing equal civil and political rights to all; and it is the duty of the Government to sustain those institutions and to prevent the people of such States from being remitted to a state of anarchy.

2. The guarantee by Congress of equal suffrage to all loyal men at the South was demanded by every consideration of public safety, of gratitude, and of justice, and must be maintained; while the question of suffrage in all the loyal States properly belongs to the people of those States.

3. We denounce all forms of repudiation as a national crime; and the national honor requires the payment of the public indebtedness in the uttermost good faith to all creditors at home and abroad, not only according to the letter, but the spirit of the laws under which it was contracted.

4. It is due to the labor of the nation that taxation should be equalized, and reduced as rapidly as the national faith will permit.

5. The national debt, contracted as it has been for the preservation of the Union for all time to come, should be extended over a fair period for redemption; and it is the duty of Congress to reduce the rate of interest thereon, whenever it can be honestly done.

6. That the best policy to diminish our burden of debt is so to improve our credit that capitalists will seek to loan us money at lower rates of interest than we now pay, and must continue to pay, so long as repudiation, partial or total, open or covert, is threatened or suspected.

7. The Government of the United States should be administered with the strictest economy; and the corruptions which have been so shamefully nursed and fostered by Andrew Johnson call loudly for radical reform.

8. We profoundly deplore the untimely and tragic death of Abraham Lincoln, and regret the accession to the Presidency of Andrew Johnson, who has acted treacherously to the people who elected him and the cause he was pledged to support; who has usurped high legislative and judicial functions; who has refused to execute the laws; who has used his high office to induce other officers to ignore and violate the laws; who has employed his executive[Pg 209] powers to render insecure the property, the peace, the liberty and life of the citizen; who has abused the pardoning power; who has denounced the national Legislature as unconstitutional; who has persistently and corruptly resisted, by every means in his power, every proper attempt at the reconstruction of the States lately in rebellion; who has perverted the public patronage into an engine of wholesale corruption; and who has been justly impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and properly pronounced guilty thereof by the vote of thirty-five Senators.

9. The doctrine of Great Britain and other European powers, that because a man is once a subject he is always so, must be resisted at every hazard by the United States as a relic of feudal times, not authorized by the laws of nations, and at war with our national honor and independence. Naturalized citizens are entitled to protection in all their rights of citizenship, as though they were native born; and no citizen of the United States, native or naturalized, must be liable to arrest and imprisonment by any foreign power for acts done or words spoken in this country; and, if so arrested and imprisoned, it is the duty of the Government to interfere in his behalf.

10. Of all who were faithful in the trials of the late war, there were none entitled to more special honor than the brave soldiers and seamen who endured the hardships of campaign and cruise and imperilled their lives in the service of the country; the bounties and pensions provided by the laws for these brave defenders of the nation are obligations never to be forgotten; the widows and orphans of the gallant dead are the wards of the people—a sacred legacy bequeathed to the nation’s protecting care.

11. Foreign immigration, which in the past has added so much to the wealth, development, and resources, and increase of power to this Republic—the asylum of the oppressed of all nations—should be fostered and encouraged by a liberal and just policy.

12. This convention declares itself in sympathy with all oppressed peoples struggling for their rights.

13. We highly commend the spirit of magnanimity and forbearance with which men who have served in the Rebellion, but who now frankly and honestly co-operate with us in restoring the peace of the country and reconstructing the Southern State governments upon the basis of impartial justice and equal rights, are received back into the communion of the loyal people; and we favor the removal of the disqualifications and restrictions imposed upon the late rebels in the same measure as the spirit of disloyalty will die out, and as may be consistent with the safety of the loyal people.

14. We recognize the great principles laid down in the immortal Declaration of Independence as the true foundation of Democratic government; and we hail with gladness every effort toward making these principles a living reality on every inch of American soil.

The convention then proceeded to make nominations, and after an able and impassioned speech by General Logan presenting General Grant’s name, the roll was called and every vote responded in favor of Grant, giving 650 in all. As soon[Pg 210] as the vote was announced, a curtain on the rear of the stage was lifted, presenting a heroic picture of Grant, and the convention responded to the nomination and the picture of the Great Captain with deafening cheers.

There was a spirited contest for the Vice-Presidency. Wade, of Ohio, had the lead, and Fenton, of New York, Wilson, of Massachusetts, and Colfax, of Indiana, all started with a very promising vote. I was chairman of the Pennsylvania delegation, and in obedience to the unanimous instructions of the State, presented to the convention the name of Andrew G. Curtin for second place on the ticket. It soon became evident that the contest would be between Wade and Colfax, and when the struggle was thus narrowed Colfax won an easy victory. The following table presents the several ballots for Vice-President:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth.
Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio | 147 | 170 | 178 | 206 | 38
Reuben E. Fenton, of New York | 126 | 144 | 139 | 144 | 69
Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts | 119 | 114 | 101 | 87 | —
Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana | 115 | 145 | 165 | 186 | 541
Andrew G. Curtin, of Penn. | 51 | 45 | 40 | — | —
Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine | 28 | 30 | 25 | 25 | —
James Speed, of Kentucky | 22 | — | — | — | —
James Harlan, of Iowa | 16 | — | — | — | —
John A. J. Creswell, of Maryland | 14 | — | — | — | —
Samuel C. Pomeroy, of Kansas | 6 | — | — | — | —
William D. Kelley, of Penn. | 4 | — | — | — | —

The swift mutations in American politics were strangely illustrated in the nomination for Vice-President at that convention. Senator Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio, who was about closing a term of eighteen years in the service of the Senate, who was then President pro tem. of that body, and who was expected to reach the Presidency for a period of eight months by the impeachment and dismissal of President Johnson, was the prominent candidate for Vice-President before the meeting of the convention. It was generally believed that Johnson would be successfully impeached; that Wade would become President for the remainder of the term, with illimitable patronage, and that his nomination for the Vice-Presidency was apparently assured. But when many delegates were on their way to Chicago on Saturday, the[Pg 211] 16th, the trained lightning sped the message westward that Johnson had been acquitted by a single vote in the Senate, and that ended Wade’s candidacy. He had many friends independent of the prospective power that had made him formidable, and they made a stubborn battle for him, but though he was highest of all on the 1st ballot, on the 5th and final vote he had but 38 votes to 541 for Schuyler Colfax and 69 for Senator Fenton, of New York. Thus two crushing disasters had befallen Wade in a single week. He had the Presidency apparently within his grasp—and this would have carried the Vice-Presidency for another term—but he was smitten in both efforts, and these crowning disasters closely followed his defeat for re-election to the Senate. He was the sturdy, bluff, uncompromising patriot of the Senate during the war, and after these three disasters came upon him in quick succession, the old man groped his way along for a few years in solitude and then slept the dreamless sleep of the dead.

The Democratic National Convention met in New York on the 4th of July, and there was a strong sentiment among the delegates favorable to the nomination of a liberal Republican for President. The Republicans had nominated a Democrat, and Chief Justice Chase, who was an old-time Democrat, and who had won a very large measure of Democratic confidence by his rulings in the impeachment case of President Johnson, was a favorite with a very powerful circle of friends, who had quietly, but very thoroughly, as they believed, organized to have him nominated by a spontaneous tidal wave after a protracted deadlock between the leading candidates. I have every reason to believe that Chase would have been nominated at the time Seymour was chosen, and in like manner, had it not been for the carefully laid plan of Samuel J. Tilden to prevent the success of Chase. Horatio Seymour, the ablest Democrat of that day, was president of the convention, and he had no more idea of being nominated for President than he had of becoming the Czar of Russia. It was generally supposed that Seymour left the chair of the convention because some votes had been cast for him for President, but he really left the chair because he expected to aid in the nomination of Chase, and when Seymour called another to preside, the Tilden strategy completed its purpose by an able Democrat demanding the nomination of Horatio Seymour, and delivering a most eloquent[Pg 212] and impressive eulogy upon the confessed leader of the Democracy. In vain did Seymour give a peremptory declination. The convention had been organized for its work, and men in nearly every delegation who had been assigned to their task rose and swelled the hurrah for Seymour. When he found the tide was likely to be overwhelming, he declared with equal earnestness and pathos, “Your candidate I cannot be;” but the wave sped on and Seymour was made the candidate by a practically unanimous vote.

He was prevailed upon to consider the subject, and that meant, of course, that he could not decline. There had been twenty-one ballots before the nomination of Seymour, in which Pendleton, Hancock, and Hendricks were the leading competitors. It was then that the nomination of Chase was expected to be made just as the nomination of Seymour was made, and Tilden’s was the master hand that shaped the action of the convention.

Tilden was a master leader, as subtle and sagacious as he was able, and he thoroughly organized the plan to nominate Seymour, not so much because he desired Seymour as the candidate, as because he was implacable in his hostility to Chase. It was well known by Chase and his friends that Tilden crucified Chase in the Democratic convention of 1868, and this act of Tilden’s had an impressive sequel eight years later, when the election of Tilden hung in the balance in the Senate, and when the accomplished daughter of Chase decided the battle against Tilden.

The convention met on the 4th of July, which was Saturday, and nothing beyond organization was accomplished until Monday. The supporters of Pendleton were altogether the most aggressive of all the candidates. They represented the “Greenback” issue that had then taken form, and exhibited considerable popular strength, not only in the Democratic party, but to some extent in the Republican party. The two-thirds rule was reaffirmed, and on Tuesday the committee on platform reported the following resolutions, which were unanimously adopted:

The Democratic party, in national convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence, patriotism, and discriminating justice of the people, standing upon the Constitution as the foundation and limitation of the powers of the Government and the guarantee of the liberties of the citizen, and recognizing the questions of slavery and secession as having been settled, for all time to come, by the[Pg 213] war, or the voluntary action of the Southern States in constitutional conventions assembled, and never to be renewed or reagitated, do, with the return of peace, demand:

1. Immediate restoration of all the States to their rights in the Union under the Constitution, and of civil government to the American people.

2. Amnesty for all past political offences, and the regulation of the elective franchise in the States by their citizens.

3. Payment of the public debt of the United States as rapidly as practicable; all moneys drawn from the people by taxation, except so much as is requisite for the necessities of the Government, economically administered, being honestly applied to such payment, and where the obligations of the Government do not expressly state upon their face, or the law under which they were issued does not provide that they shall be paid in coin, they ought, in right and in justice, to be paid in the lawful money of the United States.

4. Equal taxation of every species of property according to its real value, including Government bonds and other public securities.

5. One currency for the Government and the people, the laborer and the officeholder, the pensioner and the soldier, the producer and the bondholder.

6. Economy in the administration of the Government; the reduction of the standing army and navy; the abolition of the Freedmen’s Bureau, and all political instrumentalities designed to secure negro supremacy; simplification of the system, and discontinuance of inquisitorial modes of assessing and collecting internal revenue, so that the burden of taxation may be equalized and lessened; the credit of the Government and the currency made good; the repeal of all enactments for enrolling the State militia into national forces in time of peace; and a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and such equal taxation under the internal revenue laws as will afford incidental protection to domestic manufacturers, and as will, without impairing the revenue, impose the least burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country.

7. Reform of abuses in the administration, the expulsion of corrupt men from office, the abrogation of useless offices, the restoration of rightful authority to, and the independence of, the executive and judicial departments of the Government, the subordination of the military to the civil power, to the end that the usurpations of Congress and the despotism of the sword may cease.

8. Equal rights and protection for naturalized and native-born citizens, at home and abroad; the assertion of American nationality which shall command the respect of foreign powers, and furnish an example and encouragement to peoples struggling for national integrity, constitutional liberty, and individual rights, and the maintenance of the rights of naturalized citizens against the absolute doctrine of immutable allegiance, and the claims of foreign powers to punish them for alleged crime committed beyond their jurisdiction.

In demanding these measures and reforms, we arraign the Radical party for its disregard of right, and the unparalleled oppression and tyranny which have marked its career.

After the most solemn and unanimous pledge of both Houses of[Pg 214] Congress to prosecute the war exclusively for the maintenance of the Government and the preservation of the Union under the Constitution, it has repeatedly violated that most sacred pledge under which alone was rallied that noble volunteer army which carried our flag to victory. Instead of restoring the Union, it has, so far as in its power, dissolved it, and subjected ten States, in the time of profound peace, to military despotism and negro supremacy. It has nullified there the right of trial by jury; it has abolished the habeas corpus, that most sacred writ of liberty; it has overthrown the freedom of speech and the press; it has substituted arbitrary seizures and arrests, and military trials and secret star-chamber inquisitions for the constitutional tribunals; it has disregarded, in time of peace, the right of the people to be free from searches and seizures; it has entered the post and telegraph offices, and even the private rooms of individuals, and seized their private papers and letters without any specific charge or notice or affidavit, as required by the organic law; it has converted the American Capitol into a bastile; it has established a system of spies and official espionage to which no constitutional monarchy of Europe would now dare to resort; it has abolished the right of appeal, on important constitutional questions, to the supreme judicial tribunals, and threatened to curtail or destroy its original jurisdiction, which is irrevocably vested by the Constitution, while the learned Chief Justice has been subjected to the most atrocious calumnies, merely because he would not prostitute his high office to the support of the false and partisan charges preferred against the President. Its corruption and extravagance have exceeded anything known in history, and, by its frauds and monopolies, it has nearly doubled the burden of the debt created by the war. It has stripped the President of his constitutional power of appointment, even of his own Cabinet. Under its repeated assaults the pillars of the Government are rocking on their base, and should it succeed in November next and inaugurate its President, we will meet, as a subjected and conquered people, amid the ruins of liberty and the scattered fragments of the Constitution.

And we do declare and resolve that ever since the people of the United States threw off all subjection to the British crown the privilege and trust of suffrage have belonged to the several States, and have been granted, regulated, and controlled exclusively by the political power of each State respectively, and that any attempt by Congress, on any pretext whatever, to deprive any State of this right, or interfere with its exercise, is a flagrant usurpation of power, which can find no warrant in the Constitution, and, if sanctioned by the people, will subvert our form of government, and can only end in a single centralized and consolidated government, in which the separate existence of the States will be entirely absorbed, and unqualified despotism be established in place of a Federal union of coequal States. And that we regard the Reconstruction Acts (so-called) of Congress, as such, as usurpations, and unconstitutional, revolutionary, and void.

That our soldiers and sailors, who carried the flag of our country to victory against a most gallant and determined foe, must ever be gratefully remembered, and all the guarantees given in their favor must be faithfully carried into execution.

[Pg 215]

That the public lands should be distributed as widely as possible among the people, and should be disposed of either under the pre-emption or homestead lands, or sold in reasonable quantities, and to none but actual occupants, at the minimum price established by the Government. When grants of the public lands may be allowed, necessary for the encouragement of important public improvements, the proceeds of the sale of such lands, and not the lands themselves, should be so applied.

That the President of the United States, Andrew Johnson, in exercising the powers of his high office in resisting the aggressions of Congress upon the constitutional rights of the States and the people, is entitled to the gratitude of the whole American people, and in behalf of the Democratic party we tender him our thanks for his patriotic efforts in that regard.

Upon this platform the Democratic party appeal to every patriot, including all the conservative element and all who desire to support the Constitution and restore the Union, forgetting all past differences of opinion, to unite with us in the present great struggle for the liberties of the people; and that to all such, to whatever party they may have heretofore belonged, we extend the right hand of fellowship, and hail all such co-operating with us as friends and brethren.

Resolved, That this convention sympathize cordially with the workingmen of the United States in their efforts to protect the rights and interests of the laboring classes of the country.

Resolved, That the thanks of the convention are tendered to Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase for the justice, dignity, and impartiality with which he presided over the court of impeachment on the trial of President Andrew Johnson.

The ballots for President began on Tuesday and ended Thursday. The following table gives the ballots in detail:

BALLOTS. | Geo. H. Pendleton, Ohio. | Andrew Johnson, Tenn. | Winfield S. Hancock, Penn. | Sanford E. Church, N. Y. | Asa Packer, Penn. | Joel Parker, N. J. | James E. English, Conn. | James R. Doolittle, Wis. | Thos. A. Hendricks, Ind. | Horatio Seymour, N. Y. | Francis P. Blair, Mo. | Reverdy Johnson, Md. | Scattering.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1 | 105 |  | 65 |  | 33 | ¹⁄₂ | 33 |  | 26 |  | 13 |  | 16 |  | 13 |  | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | 10 | ¹⁄₂
2 | 104 |  | 52 |  | 40 | ¹⁄₂ | 33 |  | 26 |  | 15 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 2 |  | — |  | 10 | ¹⁄₂ | 8 |  |  | ¹⁄₂
3 | 119 | ¹⁄₂ | 34 | ¹⁄₂ | 45 | ¹⁄₂ | 33 |  | 26 |  | 13 |  | 7 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 |  | 9 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 11 |  | 1 |
4 | 118 | ¹⁄₂ | 32 |  | 43 | ¹⁄₂ | 33 |  | 26 |  | 13 |  | 7 | ¹⁄₂ | 8 |  | 11 | ¹⁄₂ | 9 |  | 2 |  | 16 |  | 1 |
5 | 122 |  | 24 |  | 46 |  | 33 |  | 27 |  | 13 |  | 7 |  | 15 |  | 19 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 9 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 |
6 | 122 | ¹⁄₂ | 21 |  | 47 |  | 33 |  | 27 |  | 13 |  | 6 |  | 12 |  | 30 |  | — |  | 5 |  | — |  | — |
7 | 137 | ¹⁄₂ | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 42 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | 6 |  | 12 |  | 39 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
8 | 156 | ¹⁄₂ | 6 |  | 28 |  | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | 6 |  | 12 |  | 75 |  | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
9 | 144 |  | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 24 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | 6 |  | 12 |  | 80 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — | [Pg 216]
10 | 147 | ¹⁄₂ | 6 |  | 34 |  | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 12 |  | 82 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
11 | 144 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 32 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 88 |  | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |
12 | 145 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 30 |  | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 12 | ¹⁄₂ | 89 |  | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂
13 | 134 | ¹⁄₂ | 4 | ¹⁄₂ | 48 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 81 |  | — |  |  | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 1 | ¹⁄₂
14 | 130 |  | — |  | 50 |  | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 13 |  | 84 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | — |
15 | 129 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 79 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 12 |  | 82 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | — |
16 | 107 | ¹⁄₂ | 5 | ¹⁄₂ | 113 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | 12 |  | 70 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | — |
17 | 70 | ¹⁄₂ | 6 |  | 137 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 7 |  | — |  | 12 |  | 80 |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 3 | ¹⁄₂
18 | 56 | ¹⁄₂ | 10 |  | 144 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 31 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 12 |  | 87 |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 3 | ¹⁄₂
19 | — |  | — |  | 135 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | 22 |  | 6 |  | 4 |  | 107 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 13 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | 5 |
20 | — |  | — |  | 142 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | 16 |  | 12 |  | 121 |  | 2 |  | 13 |  | — |  | 9 |
21 | — |  | — |  | 135 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | 19 |  | 12 |  | 132 |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 5 |
22 | — |  | 4 |  | 90 | ¹⁄₂ | — |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | 4 |  | 140 | ¹⁄₂ | 21 |  | — |  | — |  | — |

Before the 22d ballot was announced delegations began to change their votes to Seymour, and the changes were continued amid great enthusiasm until he received the unanimous nomination. The twenty-one votes given him on the last ballot were all cast by Ohio delegates.

It was charged that the nomination of Seymour had been carefully planned by his friends before the meeting of the convention, in imitation of the nominations of Polk and Pierce, but in point of fact the nomination of Seymour was not planned by his friends nor had they any idea of nominating him when the convention met, as his name was not before the convention at all until the 22d ballot and the third day of balloting. He was most earnestly averse to accepting the nomination. His health was impaired, he had had many and very earnest political conflicts, and he felt himself physically and mentally unequal to the exacting duties of a campaign. His nomination was, as I have stated, conceived and executed for the purpose of defeating Chase.

Having failed to nominate a Republican for President, the convention unanimously nominated General Frank P. Blair, of Missouri, for Vice-President without the formality of a ballot. He was one of the most radical and aggressive of Republicans when the Republican party was organized in 1856, and brought the first important victory to that party when, in the early fall of 1856, he was elected to Congress[Pg 217] from St. Louis, being the first Republican who ever represented a Southern State in the national Legislature. I remember meeting him in Washington just before the clash of arms began, after the bombardment of Sumter. He was impatient with Lincoln for not precipitating the war, and told me that he would go back to Missouri the next day, and that the country would soon hear of battles fought in that State. He executed his purpose, for it was through him chiefly or wholly that the early and bloody battles of Missouri were fought. He was one of the most brilliant of the corps commanders of the army, but had evidently fallen into disfavor with Grant, and Blair was as tireless a fighter as Grant himself. In a public letter, directed to J. C. Broadhead a short time before the convention met, General Blair denounced Grant as aiming at imperialism, and declared that his election to the Presidency would date the downfall of our Republican institutions.

General Blair spoke frequently during the contest, but his speeches were so violent that they gave offence to many conservative Democrats; and after the October elections, which were disastrous to the Democrats, the New York World, the leading Democratic organ, came out in a leader demanding that he be retired from the ticket; but Blair was not the man to retreat under fire. Seymour took the stump, to present the party in a more conservative attitude, and delivered a number of speeches, which rank among the ablest popular addresses of American politics; but he could not halt the tidal wave that swept Grant into the Presidency. The following table gives the electoral and popular vote:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Grant. | Seymour. | Grant. | Seymour.
Maine | 70,426 | 42,396 | 7 | —
New Hampshire | 38,191 | 31,224 | 5 | —
Vermont | 44,167 | 12,045 | 5 | —
Massachusetts | 136,477 | 59,408 | 12 | —
Rhode Island | 12,993 | 6,548 | 4 | —
Connecticut | 50,641 | 47,600 | 6 | —
New York | 419,883 | 429,883 | — | 33
New Jersey | 80,121 | 83,001 | — | 7
Pennsylvania | 342,280 | 313,382 | 26 | —[Pg 218]
Delaware | 7,623 | 10,980 | — | 3
Maryland | 30,438 | 62,357 | — | 7
Virginia[20] | ——— | ——— | — | —
West Virginia | 29,025 | 20,306 | 5 | —
North Carolina | 96,226 | 84,090 | 9 | —
South Carolina | 62,301 | 45,237 | 6 | —
Georgia | 57,134 | 102,822 | — | 9
Florida[21] | ——— | ——— | 3 | —
Alabama | 76,366 | 72,086 | 8 | —
Mississippi[20] | ——— | ——— | — | —
Louisiana | 33,263 | 80,225 | — | 7
Texas[20] | ——— | ——— | — | —
Arkansas | 22,152 | 19,078 | 5 | —
Missouri | 85,671 | 59,788 | 11 | —
Tennessee | 56,757 | 26,311 | 10 | —
Kentucky | 39,566 | 115,889 | — | 11
Ohio | 280,128 | 238,700 | 21 | —
Michigan | 128,550 | 97,069 | 8 | —
Indiana | 176,552 | 166,980 | 13 | —
Illinois | 250,293 | 199,143 | 16 | —
Wisconsin | 108,857 | 84,710 | 8 | —
Minnesota | 43,542 | 28,072 | 4 | —
Iowa | 120,399 | 74,040 | 8 | —
Nebraska | 9,729 | 5,439 | 3 | —
Kansas | 31,049 | 14,019 | 3 | —
Nevada | 6,480 | 5,218 | 3 | —
California | 54,592 | 54,078 | 5 | —
Oregon | 10,961 | 11,125 | — | 3
Totals | 3,012,833 | 2,703,249 | 214 | 80

There was dispute as to the right of some of the Southern States to participate in the election. It will be seen that West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee, and Kentucky had all participated in the election. Fortunately, the disputed States did not in any way affect the result, and Congress passed a joint resolution declaring that none of the rebellious States should be entitled to electoral votes, unless at the time of the election they had adopted Constitutions since the 4th of March, 1867, and had an organized State Government, and unless such States had representation[Pg 219] in Congress under the Reconstruction laws. Of course, President Johnson vetoed the measure, but it was promptly passed over the veto by both branches of Congress, and became a law. By that resolution, Virginia, Mississippi, and Texas were absolutely excluded from the election.

The other Southern States had representation in Congress, with the exception of Georgia. The question whether Georgia should be permitted to have her vote counted resulted in a very serious dispute, on which the Senate and the House divided, but Mr. Wade, President of the Senate, in declaring the result, counted the vote of Georgia and precipitated a very disgraceful scene, in which General Butler most offensively assailed the presiding officer. There was no question whatever as to the election of Grant and Colfax, and Congress duly declared them President and Vice-President of the United States.

The contest of 1868 crystallized the “Greenback” sentiment of the country under the leadership of George H. Pendleton, who was the nominee for Vice-President with McClellan in 1864, and who expected to capture the Democratic National Convention of 1868, to nominate himself for President on the Greenback platform. The Pendleton followers were the hustlers of that convention, and they were all decorated with a badge that was an imitation of the greenback. Gold had been at a high premium during the war, and was at a considerable premium in 1868, with resumption apparently very far off. The cheap-money idea had been industriously impressed upon the people by the demagogues of that day, and as many of the obligations of the United States were payable only in lawful money, while the bonds issued during the war were payable in coin, it was easy to make plausible appeal to the prejudices of the industrial classes, who were paying very high prices for all the necessaries of life.

This theory had been very widely discussed by the various shades of opposition to the Republicans, but the Pendleton movement for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency dignified it as a national issue, and it succeeded in making the New York Democratic platform go more than half way in favor of repudiation of our obligations by payment in greenbacks. The greenback issue thus vitalized became a very important one in many of the States and caused strange political revolutions, such as the election of Democratic[Pg 220] Governors and Democratic Legislatures in Maine and Ohio.

It is doubtful whether the Republicans could have been lined up squarely in the support of the national credit with any other candidate than Grant, and one of the first acts that he signed as President distinctly provided for the payment in coin of all bonds of the Government bearing interest, and declared also that specie payments should be resumed as speedily as practicable. The Greenback party not only figured largely in State politics, but became formidable as a third party in national contests, and the free-silver theory of to-day is simply the old greenback issue of cheap money in another form.

[Pg 221]

## THE GRANT-GREELEY CONTEST

1872

General Grant was a thorough soldier, with little qualification for civil duties and a natural distaste for politics. I doubt whether he had any defined political policy when he entered the Presidency. He believed in maintaining the credit of the Government, and accepted in a conservative way the general policy of the Republican party, but he knew little or nothing of the political leadership of the nation, and his friends generally felt that the success of his administration would depend very largely upon surrounding him with a Cabinet composed of the ablest and most sagacious men of the party, but Grant cherished no such ideas himself. He evidently assumed that politics could be run by general orders, as an army could be commanded, and it was that mistake that alienated a very large portion of the Republicans from him in the early period of his administration, and culminated in the Liberal Republican Convention at Cincinnati in 1872.

I had frequently met General Grant before his nomination and election to the Presidency, but only in the most casual way on social occasions, and never had any conversation with him, either on politics generally or on his candidacy for the Presidency. I was earnestly in favor of his nomination and election, because I believed that calling him to the Presidency would do more to reconcile the South and give better assurance of sectional tranquillity than the election of any of the leading Republican statesmen of that day. I had just changed my residence to Philadelphia, having suffered serious financial disaster in the burning of Chambersburg by McCausland, and it was my settled purpose after Grant’s election to cease active participation in politics and devote my efforts wholly to my profession.

My first and only meeting with Grant before his retirement[Pg 222] from the Presidency, at which we had any protracted conversation, was a short time before his inauguration. Chief Justice Read, of Pennsylvania, handed me a letter, addressed to the President-elect, and asked me to deliver it in person when I next visited Washington. I did not know its contents, but inferred that it related to the appointment of Curtin to a Cabinet office. A few days thereafter when in Washington I called upon General Grant at his headquarters and delivered the letter, and after a very brief conversation, rose to take my leave. He had opened the letter in the meantime, and as I reached the door he called me back, saying that Judge Read’s letter strongly urged the appointment of Curtin to the Cabinet, and that he desired to tell me frankly as a close friend of Curtin why he could not meet the wishes of the many friends of Curtin by giving him a Cabinet portfolio. He spoke very highly of Curtin, and showed his appreciation of Curtin’s position by nominating him as Minister to Russia at an early day after his inauguration, and against the protest of Senator Cameron. In the course of the conversation I saw Grant’s crude theory of conducting a national administration. He said that his Cabinet officers would be his official confidential family, and he desired to appoint them entirely in accordance with his personal preferences. I said to him that it was certainly his right to have only men in his Cabinet who were entirely agreeable to himself, but that it was very important for him to have the ablest politicians of the country largely represented in it, to save his administration from the many political complications which would otherwise confront him.

I saw that Grant was not a willing listener to any suggestions, although given in the most courteous manner, and he answered with a somewhat liberal display of what some called “obstinacy” and others called “determination,” as one of the leading attributes of his character. I then spoke more freely and frankly, and finally said to him that if I were suddenly called to the command of the army, with little or no military experience, I would feel that my greatest need was generals; and I added that it was in no measure disrespectful to him to say that, having been called from the command of the army to the Presidency of the Republic, without experience in high civil duties, his greatest need was statesmen. The advice was not grateful to Grant; on the contrary, he was obviously fretted, as none of the many[Pg 223] who sought favors at his hands had ventured to tell him the truth so plainly. When the conversation ended he gave me a moderately cordial good-by, and I never again met him, excepting once at the large banquet given by Mr. Childs on the evening after the opening of the Philadelphia Centennial in 1876, until soon after he had retired from his eight years’ service in the Presidency, and never had any communication with him.

I opposed his renomination, participated in the Liberal Republican Convention that nominated Greeley, had charge of the Greeley campaign in Pennsylvania, and labored very earnestly for Grant’s defeat in 1872. On the day that he retired from the Presidency I had an editorial in the Philadelphia Times, speaking of General Grant as history would record his achievements, and of necessity highly complimentary to him. A few days thereafter I met him with Mr. Childs at the Continental Hotel, and he came forward in a manner that was unusually demonstrative for Grant, and was profuse in his thanks for the editorial referred to. He said that he specially valued it because it came from one who had been among his severest critics during his Presidential term, and he ended by inviting me to lunch with him at Mr. Drexel’s office that afternoon.

I willingly accepted the invitation and spent two hours with Grant, most of the time alone after Mr. Drexel and Mr. Childs had left us. I was surprised to find him one of the most agreeable of conversationalists, and he discussed politics generally and the Hayes-Tilden contest with a degree of frankness and intelligence that surprised me. He said that he confidently expected the Electoral Commission to give the vote of Louisiana to Mr. Tilden, but that as Chief Magistrate it was his duty only to maintain the law, and that when the law of the nation made the Electoral Commission a final tribunal for the settlement of the dispute, he would have maintained that judgment with all the power of the Government.

I was specially gratified at this interview to have a particular prejudice that I had cherished against Grant since 1864 entirely dissipated by a conversation into which I cautiously led him on the Lincoln-McClellan campaign of 1864. I have stated in another chapter that Mr. Lincoln hesitated in October, 1864, to send an order to General Grant to furlough five thousand of his Pennsylvania soldiers[Pg 224] home to vote for President, and sent it to Meade. I had known how Lincoln had sustained Grant after the battle of Shiloh, when Grant had few friends and none outside of Lincoln able to sustain him. When Lincoln hesitated to send the order to Grant, I spoke very freely and reminded Lincoln how he had saved Grant, and wanted to know why he could not now trust the man who would have been overwhelmed but for the generous and heroic offices of Lincoln. Lincoln finally answered that he had never received or heard of any expression from General Grant expressing a preference for his election over General McClellan. Lincoln certainly at that time doubted Grant’s attitude in that contest, and having been one of the many who had urged Lincoln to remove Grant from his command after Shiloh, I could not fail to cherish some prejudice against Grant as wanting in fidelity to Lincoln.

In our general discussion of politics I remarked that he had very studiously avoided all political expression during the war, and that I had specially noted his silence during the campaign of 1864 between Lincoln and McClellan. His answer was prompt and given evidently in the frankest manner, as he said substantially: “Of course, I could not with propriety give any public expression in a political contest where one candidate had given me the highest commission in the army and the other candidate had been my predecessor in command of the army.” The answer was given in such simple earnestness that I never thereafter doubted Grant’s fidelity to Lincoln, although Lincoln certainly was disappointed that Grant gave no expression during the campaign. On the night of Lincoln’s election Grant sent him a very hearty telegram of congratulation.

President Grant drifted into a political control that ultimately made his administration intensely sectional and factional, and during his first administration he was intolerant of criticism, and often openly disregarded Republican sentiment in sustaining many of his favorites, who brought scandals upon his rule. On great questions, however, Grant certainly was great. He conceived the idea of territorial expansion that has been so successfully carried out by the present administration with the hearty approval of an overwhelming majority of the people. He made an earnest movement for the annexation of San Domingo, and he gave exhaustive public and private efforts to attain it. This[Pg 225] policy was severely criticised by some of the leading members of the party, prominent among whom were Sumner and Greeley, and the San Domingo scheme was ridiculed from one end of the country to the other as a wild, visionary, political enterprise, designed to give place and fortune to administration favorites.

So bitter did the Republican national feud become that the anti-administration leaders decided to take the initiative in opposing Grant’s re-election. At no time in the history of any administration was the political machinery of the Government so complete and despotic as it was under Grant, although not in any degree personally directed by himself, and it was well known that the opposition would have little voice in the regular Republican convention, and that it was entirely powerless to prevent Grant being presented as the Republican nominee.

The first national conventions of the year were held at Columbus, O., in February. The Labor Reformers were first in the field, as their convention was held at Columbus on the 21st of February, with Edward M. Chamberlain, of Massachusetts, as President. This convention was made up largely or wholly of men who believed in the greenback policy, as it demanded an indefinite issue of greenbacks, which would be a legal tender for the payment of all public and private debts. The following is the full text of its platform:

We hold that all political power is inherent in the people, and free government is founded on their authority and established for their benefit; that all citizens are equal in political rights, entitled to the largest religious and political liberty compatible with the good order of society, as also to the use and enjoyment of the fruits of their labor and talents; and no man or set of men is entitled to exclusive separable endowments and privileges, or immunities from the Government, but in consideration of public services; and any laws destructive of these fundamental principles are without moral binding force, and should be repealed. And believing that all the evils resulting from unjust legislation now affecting the industrial classes can be removed by the adoption of the principles contained in the following declaration, therefore,

Resolved, That it is the duty of the Government to establish a just standard of distribution of capital and labor by providing a purely national circulating medium, based on the faith and resources of the nation, issued directly to the people without the intervention of any system of banking corporations; which money shall be legal tender in the payment of all debts, public and private, and interchangeable at the option of the holder for Government[Pg 226] bonds bearing a rate of interest not to exceed 3.65 per cent., subject to future legislation by Congress.

2. That the national debt should be paid in good faith, according to the original contract, at the earliest option of the Government, without mortgaging the property of the people or the future earnings of labor, to enrich a few capitalists at home and abroad.

3. That justice demands that the burdens of Government should be so adjusted as to bear equally on all classes, and that the exemption from taxation of Government bonds bearing extortionate rates of interest is a violation of all just principles of revenue laws.

4. That the public lands of the United States belong to the people and should not be sold to individuals nor granted to corporations, but should be held as a sacred trust for the benefit of the people, and should be granted to landless settlers only, in amounts not exceeding one hundred and sixty acres of land.

5. That Congress should modify the tariff so as to admit free such articles of common use as we can neither produce nor grow, and lay duties for revenue mainly upon articles of luxury and upon such articles of manufacture as will, we having the raw materials in abundance, assist in further developing the resources of the country.

6. That the presence in our country of Chinese laborers, imported by capitalists in large numbers for servile use, is an evil, entailing want and its attendant train of misery and crime on all classes of the American people, and should be prohibited by legislation.

7. That we ask for the enactment of a law by which all mechanics and day-laborers employed by or on behalf of the Government, whether directly or indirectly, through persons, firms, or corporations, contracting with the State, shall conform to the reduced standard of eight hours a day, recently adopted by Congress for national employés, and also for an amendment to the acts of incorporation for cities and towns, by which all laborers and mechanics employed at their expense shall conform to the same number of hours.

8. That the enlightened spirit of the age demands the abolition of the system of contract labor in our prisons and other reformatory institutions.

9. That the protection of life, liberty, and property are the three cardinal principles of government, and the first two are more sacred than the latter; therefore money needed for prosecuting wars should, as it is required, be assessed and collected from the wealth of the country, and not entailed as a burden upon posterity.

10. That it is the duty of the Government to exercise its power over railroads and telegraph corporations, that they shall not in any case be privileged to exact such rates of freight, transportation, or charges, by whatever name, as may bear unduly or unequally upon the producer or consumer.

11. That there should be such a reform in the civil service of the national Government as will remove it beyond all partisan influence, and place it in the charge and under the direction of intelligent and competent business men.

12. That as both history and experience teach us that power ever seeks to perpetuate itself by every and all means, and that its[Pg 227] prolonged possession in the hands of one person is always dangerous to the interests of a free people, and believing that the spirit of our organic laws and the stability and safety of our free institutions are best obeyed on the one hand and secured on the other by a regular constitutional change in the chief of the country at each election; therefore, we are in favor of limiting the occupancy of the Presidential chair to one term.

13. That we are in favor of granting general amnesty and restoring the Union at once on the basis of equality of rights and privileges to all, the impartial administration of justice being the only true bond of union to bind the States together and restore the government of the people.

14. That we demand the subjection of the military to the civil authorities, and the confinement of its operations to national purposes alone.

15. That we deem it expedient for Congress to supervise the patent laws, so as to give labor more fully the benefit of its own ideas and inventions.

16. That fitness, and not political or personal considerations, should be the only recommendation to public office, either appointive or elective, and any and all laws looking to the establishment of this principle are heartily approved.

Four ballots were had to nominate a candidate for President, resulting in the choice of David Davis, of Illinois. The following table exhibits the ballots in detail:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth.
John W. Geary, of Pennsylvania | 60 | — | — | —
Horace H. Day, of New York | 59 | 21 | 59 | 3
David Davis, of Illinois | 47 | 88 | 93 | 201
Wendell Phillips, of Massachusetts | 13 | 76 | 12 | —
J. M. Palmer, of Illinois | 8 | — | — | —
Joel Parker, of New Jersey | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7
George W. Julian, of Indiana | 6 | 1 | 5 | —
B. Gratz Brown, of Missouri | — | — | 14 | —
Horace Greeley, of New York | — | — | 11 | —

Two ballots were had for Vice-President, as follows:

| First. | Second.
E. M. Chamberlain, Massachusetts | 72 | 57
Joel Parker, New Jersey | 70 | 112
Allanson M. West, Mississippi | 18 | —
Thomas Ewing, Ohio | 31 | 22
W. G. Bryan, Tennessee | 10 | —

[Pg 228]

Davis and Parker were unanimously declared the candidates of the party for President and Vice-President.

Although Judge Davis had responded by telegraph to the notification of his nomination from the convention, expressing his gratitude for the honor conferred, he did not definitely accept. Had Judge Davis been nominated by the Liberal Republicans at Cincinnati in May, he would doubtless have remained as the candidate of the Labor Reformers, but in June, when there was no possibility of him being a candidate of any other organization, Davis and Parker both declined and retired from the contest. A small portion of the delegates were reconvened, and Charles O’Conor, of New York, was nominated for President, without naming any candidate for Vice-President. Thus, the Labor Reform organization was practically out of the battle of 1872.

A Prohibition National Convention was also held at Columbus on the 22d of February, with representatives from nine States, and Samuel Chase, of Ohio, was made permanent president. An elaborate platform was adopted, but the party does not seem to have been of sufficient importance to command the publication of its platform in full in the newspapers, and it is lost to history, as I have not been able to find it. James Black, of Pennsylvania, was nominated for President, and John Russell, of Michigan, for Vice-President by a unanimous vote, after having been presented by a committee on nominations.

The Liberal Republican National Convention met at Cincinnati on the 1st of May. The organized Republican opposition to Grant had its origin in the State contest in Missouri, where the Democrats and the Liberals united to efface a most proscriptive Constitution and laws, denying all rights of citizenship to those who had been engaged in rebellion. A number of meetings were held in the Western cities to organize the Liberal Republican party, and it was a mass-meeting of the Liberals of Missouri in Jefferson City, in January, 1872, that first decided to call a national convention of Liberal Republicans, and fixed Cincinnati and the 1st of May as the place and time for it to assemble.

It seemed evident to all who had intelligently and dispassionately observed the political situation that the majority of the people of the country would vote against the re-election of Grant if they could be heartily united, but the elements were strangely incongruous, as Greeley, Sumner,[Pg 229] Trumbull, and many others of the Liberal leaders had been among the most earnest champions of radical Republicanism, and had antagonized the Democratic party so fiercely and persistently as to make unity between them apparently impossible. It was only the utterly helpless condition of the Democrats that made them entertain the question of fusing with the Liberals by taking their ticket and platform.

Strange as it may seem, Mr. Vallandigham, one of the most aggressive of all the Northern “Copperheads” during the war, and who had been arrested by Burnside and banished into the Southern lines, was one of the first of the leading Democrats to propose a union of all the elements opposed to Grant and unite in fully accepting the results of the war, the reconstruction policy, and the amendments to the Constitution. I attended this convention as a delegate and acted as chairman of the delegation. Of the prominent men named for the nomination, I greatly preferred David Davis, the executor of Abraham Lincoln, and a man so conservative and liberal in his political views and so thoroughly identified with the substantial interests of the country that he would have provoked no antagonism whatever from the financial and business interests of the nation, but Horace Greeley was his competitor for the place, and there was no man in the country for whom I cherished stronger affection. I had known Greeley for many years.

When the Liberal agitation began, the prominent candidates discussed were Horace Greeley, Charles Francis Adams, David Davis, and B. Gratz Brown, of Missouri. Greeley became intensely interested in his own nomination. He felt that he had devoted his life to the best efforts for his country, and especially for the lowly. He was the foremost of all in the great battle for the overthrow of slavery, and he craved the recognition of his work by an election to the Presidency. Before the convention met he made an appointment to meet me at the Colonnade Hotel in Philadelphia. He felt that he could speak with entire freedom to me, and he opened his heart to the full extent of saying how much he desired the nomination and what it meant to him.

Could I have made him President, I would gladly have done so, but I knew that he could not be elected, and told him so with frankness that he appreciated. He yielded to my judgment as to his availability, and accepted the suggestion[Pg 230] that had then been made generally by the more conservative of the Liberal Republicans that David Davis would be the only candidate who could certainly defeat Grant. He was conservative, able, and clear-headed, and the business interests of the country would have had entire confidence in him. In answer to my statement that the Democrats certainly could not be united in Greeley’s favor, and without which an election could not be accomplished, he said: “Well, if they won’t take me head foremost, they might take me boots foremost,” meaning for Vice-President. I said I did not doubt that his nomination for the second place could be accomplished with every prospect of success at the election. We parted with the distinct understanding that his friends should move unitedly to nominate David Davis for President and Greeley for Vice-President.

When we reached Cincinnati a conference of the leading friends of Davis and Greeley was held the night before the convention met, Senator Fenton being present as the leader of the Greeley forces. Leonard Swett, the immediate representative of Davis, was present, along with John D. Defrees, of Indiana, and a number of others. The plan of operation was agreed upon, and when we adjourned to enjoy a late supper we regarded it as settled that Davis and Greeley would be nominated on the next day.

About midnight it was whispered that General Frank P. Blair, as the representative of B. Gratz Brown, of Missouri, and others had held a secret conference to unite the Greeley and Brown forces to make Greeley the candidate for President and Brown second on the ticket. We soon discovered that the movement had been thoroughly organized, and many Greeley men who were much more zealous than discreet at once accepted the new situation, and forced even Fenton to fall back to the support of Greeley. Fenton was one of Greeley’s most sincere and devoted friends, and it was with great reluctance that he joined in the effort to nominate Greeley when he felt that it could result only in crucifying him. The withdrawal of the Greeley men from the Davis-Greeley combination left Davis a hopeless candidate, as the convention was largely radical and little inclined to consider questions of expediency.

The Liberal Republican National Convention was simply a huge mass-meeting, with nearly all of the States of the Union represented, and it was boiling over with go-as-you-please[Pg 231] independence in politics. Stanley Matthews, afterward made Supreme Judge, was temporary president, and although he denounced the Grant administration in his opening speech as a monument of corruption, he soon thereafter bolted Greeley and supported Grant. Carl Schurz was made permanent president. The contest for President was evidently narrowed down to Adams and Greeley. I voted on every ballot for Adams, with whom I had little sympathy, and three-fourths of the Pennsylvania delegation voted with me. On the 6th ballot Greeley was nominated by changes of votes after the ballot had been announced, but I did not change the vote of Pennsylvania until he had received a majority of the votes of the convention. The following are the ballots for President:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth. | Sixth.
Charles Francis Adams, Mass. | 203 |  | 243 | 264 | 279 | 258 | 324
Horace Greeley, New York | 147 |  | 245 | 258 | 251 | 309 | 332
Lyman Trumbull, Illinois | 110 |  | 148 | 156 | 141 | 81 | 19
B. Gratz Brown, Missouri | 95 |  | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | —
David Davis, Illinois | 92 | ¹⁄₂ | 75 | 41 | 51 | 30 | 6
Andrew G. Curtin, Pennsylvania | 62 |  | — | — | — | — | —
Salmon P. Chase, Ohio | 2 | ¹⁄₂ | 1 | — | — | 24 | 32

Mr. Greeley’s nomination was made unanimous, and the convention proceeded to ballot for Vice-President as follows:

| First. | Second.
B. Gratz Brown, Missouri | 237 |  | 435
Lyman Trumbull, Illinois | 158 |  | 175
George W. Julian, Indiana | 134 | ¹⁄₂ | —
Gilbert C. Walker, Virginia | 84 | ¹⁄₂ | 75
Cassius M. Clay, Kentucky | 34 |  | —
Jacob D. Cox, Ohio | 25 |  | —
John M. Scoville, New Jersey | 12 |  | —
Thomas W. Tipton, Nebraska | 8 |  | 3
John M. Palmer, Illinois | — |  | 8

The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The administration now in power has rendered itself guilty of wanton disregard of the laws of the land, and of usurping powers not granted by the Constitution; it has acted as if the laws had binding force only for those who were governed, and not for those[Pg 232] who govern. It has thus struck a blow at the fundamental principles of constitutional government and the liberties of the citizen.

The President of the United States has openly used the powers and opportunities of his high office for the promotion of personal ends.

He has kept notoriously corrupt and unworthy men in places of power and responsibility, to the detriment of the public interest.

He has used the public service of the Government as a machinery of corruption and personal influence, and has interfered with tyrannical arrogance in the political affairs of States and municipalities.

He has rewarded with influential and lucrative offices men who had acquired his favor by valuable presents, thus stimulating the demoralization of our political life by his conspicuous example.

He has shown himself deplorably unequal to the task imposed upon him by the necessities of the country, and culpably careless of the responsibilities of his high office.

The partisans of the administration, assuming to be the Republican party and controlling its organization, have attempted to justify such wrongs and palliate such abuses to the end of maintaining partisan ascendancy.

They have stood in the way of necessary investigations and indispensable reforms, pretending that no serious fault could be found with the present administration of public affairs, thus seeking to blind the eyes of the people.

They have kept alive the passions and resentments of the late civil war, to use them for their own advantage; they have resorted to arbitrary measures in direct conflict with the organic law, instead of appealing to the better instincts and latent patriotism of the Southern people by restoring to them those rights the enjoyment of which is indispensable to a successful administration of their local affairs, and would tend to revive a patriotic and hopeful national feeling.

They have degraded themselves and the name of their party, once justly entitled to the confidence of the nation, by a base sycophancy to the dispenser of executive power and patronage, unworthy of republican freemen; they have sought to silence the voice of just criticism, and stifle the moral sense of the people, and to subjugate public opinion by tyrannical party discipline.

They are striving to maintain themselves in authority for selfish ends by an unscrupulous use of the power which rightfully belongs to the people, and should be employed only in the service of the country.

Believing that an organization thus led and controlled can no longer be of service to the best interests of the Republic, we have resolved to make an independent appeal to the sober judgment, conscience, and patriotism of the American people.

We, the Liberal Republicans of the United States, in national convention assembled at Cincinnati; proclaim the following principles as essential to just government:

1. We recognize the equality of all men before the law, and hold that it is the duty of government, in its dealings with the people, to mete out equal and exact justice to all, of whatever nativity, race, color, or persuasion, religious or political.

2. We pledge ourselves to maintain the union of these States,[Pg 233] emancipation and enfranchisement, and to oppose any reopening of the questions settled by the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution.

3. We demand the immediate and absolute removal of all disabilities imposed on account of the Rebellion, which was finally subdued seven years ago, believing that universal amnesty will result in complete pacification in all sections of the country.

4. Local self-government, with impartial suffrage, will guard the rights of all citizens more securely than any centralized power. The public welfare requires the supremacy of the civil over the military authority, and the freedom of the person under the protection of the habeas corpus. We demand for the individual the largest liberty consistent with public order, for the State self-government, and for the nation a return to the methods of peace and the constitutional limitations of power.

5. The civil service of the Government has become a mere instrument of partisan tyranny and personal ambition, and an object of selfish greed. It is a scandal and reproach upon free institutions, and breeds a demoralization dangerous to the perpetuity of republican government. We therefore regard a thorough reform of the civil service as one of the most pressing necessities of the hour; that honesty, capacity and fidelity constitute the only valid claims to public employment; that the offices of the Government cease to be a matter of arbitrary favoritism and patronage, and that public station shall become again a post of honor. To this end it is imperatively required that no President shall be a candidate for re-election.

6. We demand a system of Federal taxation which shall not unnecessarily interfere with the industry of the people, and which shall provide the means necessary to pay the expenses of the Government, economically administered, the pensions, the interest on the public debt, and a moderate reduction annually of the principal thereof; and recognizing that there are in our midst honest but irreconcilable differences of opinion with regard to the respective systems of protection and free trade, we remit the discussion of the subject to the people in their congressional districts and the decision of Congress thereon, wholly free from executive interference or dictation.

7. The public credit must be sacredly maintained, and we denounce repudiation in every form and guise.

8. A speedy return to specie payments is demanded alike by the highest considerations of commercial morality and honest government.

9. We remember with gratitude the heroism and sacrifices of the soldiers and sailors of the Republic, and no act of ours shall ever detract from their justly earned fame or the full rewards of their patriotism.

10. We are opposed to all further grants of lands to railroads or other corporations. The public domain should be held sacred to actual settlers.

11. We hold that it is the duty of the Government in its intercourse with foreign nations to cultivate the friendships of peace by treating with all on fair and equal terms, regarding it alike dishonorable to demand what is not right or submit to what is wrong.

12. For the promotion and success of these vital principles, and[Pg 234] the support of the candidates nominated by this convention, we invite and cordially welcome the co-operation of all patriotic citizens, without regard to previous political affiliations.

When the convention adjourned I regarded the opportunity to make a successful contest against Grant as wholly lost. Greeley had been hammering the Democrats in his pungent paragraphs for thirty years, and they could have little sympathy with him, and the business interests of the country could not accept a President whose financial policy was expressed in the single sentence, “The way to resume is to resume,” referring, of course, to the resumption of specie payments, then the most vital issue. There were a number of prominent Democrats at the convention as spectators, and I was surprised to learn before midnight that many of them had decided to favor the nomination of the Cincinnati ticket by the Democratic convention.

The Democrats of Tennessee led off for the endorsement of Greeley by the Democratic National Convention, as did a number of other States, but it was not until the Democratic State Convention of Indiana met and nominated Hendricks for Governor, with a positive declaration in favor of supporting the Liberal Republican national ticket, that the position of the Democratic party was finally determined. After the bold attitude assumed by Hendricks, the Democratic dispute as to the policy of the party practically ended. It was very generally accepted that the only chance the Democrats had was to fall in as part of the Liberal Republican procession.

The Republican National Convention met in Philadelphia on the 5th of June, and as all the disturbing anti-administration elements had been eliminated by the organization of the Liberal Republicans, there was entire harmony in the renomination of General Grant. Morton McMichael, of Pennsylvania, was temporary chairman, and Judge Settle, of North Carolina, permanent presiding officer. The nomination of Grant was made by acclamation and with great enthusiasm, but there was a spirited and, indeed, a desperate contest for the Vice-Presidency. Colfax had been in ill-health some months before the meeting of the convention, and publicly announced his purpose not to be a candidate for re-election. Until then he had been an almost universal favorite with the newspaper correspondents of Washington, who had then become a very formidable political power, but after the[Pg 235] announcement of his retirement his fellowship with them gradually diminished, and when later he announced that, notwithstanding his public declination, he would be a candidate for renomination, the Washington newspaper men organized and made an aggressive battle against him. It is not disputed that they accomplished his defeat, as Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts, was nominated on the 1st ballot, receiving 364¹⁄₂ votes to 321¹⁄₂ for Colfax.

The campaign literature of this contest presented the singular fact that neither of the Republican candidates for the two highest offices of the Government bore his own proper name. Grant’s name was Hiram Ulysses, but when he was appointed a cadet to West Point he was erroneously entered as Ulysses S. Grant, and he accepted that name until his death. Another campaign story told how Henry Wilson’s true name was Jeremiah Colbath, and that when known as the “Natick Cobbler” he studied night and day to advance himself. He was very much charmed with the eloquence of Representative Wilson, of New Hampshire, and he finally adopted the name of Henry Wilson, by which he was known throughout his entire public career. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Republican party of the United States, assembled in national convention in the city of Philadelphia, on the 5th and 6th days of June, 1872, again declares its faith, appeals to its history, and announces its position upon the questions before the country.

During eleven years of supremacy it has accepted with grand courage the solemn duties of the time. It suppressed a gigantic rebellion, emancipated four millions of slaves, decreed the equal citizenship of all, and established universal suffrage. Exhibiting unparalleled magnanimity, it criminally punished no man for political offences, and warmly welcomed all who proved loyalty by obeying the laws and dealing justly with their neighbors. It has steadily decreased with firm hand the resultant disorders of a great war, and initiated a wise and humane policy toward the Indians. The Pacific Railroad and similar vast enterprises have been generously aided and successfully conducted, the public lands freely given to actual settlers, immigration protected and encouraged, and a full acknowledgment of the naturalized citizens’ rights secured from European powers. A uniform national currency has been provided, repudiation frowned down, the national credit sustained under the most extraordinary burdens, and new bonds negotiated at lower rates. The revenues have been carefully collected and honestly applied. Despite annual large reductions of the rates of taxation, the public debt has been reduced during General Grant’s Presidency at the rate of a hundred millions a year. Great financial crises have been avoided, and peace and plenty prevail throughout the land. Menacing foreign difficulties have been peacefully and honorably[Pg 236] composed, and the honor and power of the nation kept in high respect throughout the world. This glorious record of the past is the party’s best pledge for the future. We believe the people will not intrust the Government to any party or combination of men composed chiefly of those who have resisted every step of this beneficent progress.

2. The recent amendments to the national Constitution should be cordially sustained because they are right, not merely tolerated because they are law, and should be carried out according to their spirit by appropriate legislation, the enforcement of which can safely be intrusted only to the party that secured these amendments.

3. Complete liberty and exact equality in the enjoyment of all civil, political, and public rights should be established and effectually maintained throughout the Union by efficient and appropriate State and Federal legislation. Neither the law nor its administration should admit any discrimination in respect of citizens by reason of race, creed, color, or previous condition of servitude.

4. The National Government should seek to maintain honorable peace with all nations, protecting its citizens everywhere, and sympathizing with all peoples who strive for greater liberty.

5. Any system of the civil service under which the subordinate positions of the Government are considered rewards for mere party zeal is fatally demoralizing, and we therefore favor a reform of the system by laws which shall abolish the evils of patronage and make honesty, efficiency, and fidelity the essential qualifications for public positions, without practically creating a life-tenure of office.

6. We are opposed to further grants of the public lands to corporations and monopolies, and demand that the national domain be set apart for free homes for the people.

7. The annual revenue, after paying current expenditures, pensions, and the interest on the public debt, should furnish a moderate balance for the reduction of the principal, and that revenue, except so much as may be derived from a tax upon tobacco and liquors, should be raised by duties upon importations, the details of which should be so adjusted as to aid in securing remunerative wages to labor, and promote the industries, prosperity, and growth of the whole country.

8. We hold in undying honor the soldiers and sailors whose valor saved the Union. Their pensions are a sacred debt of the nation, and the widows and orphans of those who died for their country are entitled to the care of a generous and grateful people. We favor such additional legislation as will extend the bounty of the Government to all soldiers and sailors who were honorably discharged, and who, in the line of duty, became disabled, without regard to the length of service or cause of such discharge.

9. The doctrine of Great Britain and other European powers concerning allegiance—“Once a subject always a subject”—having at last, through the efforts of the Republican party, been abandoned, and the American idea of the individual right to transfer allegiance having been accepted by European nations, it is the duty of our Government to guard with jealous care the rights of adopted citizens against the assumption of unauthorized claims by their former governments, and we urge continued careful encouragement and protection of voluntary immigration.

[Pg 237]

10. The franking privilege ought to be abolished, and the way prepared for a speedy reduction in the rates of postage.

11. Among the questions which press for attention is that which concerns the relations of capital and labor, and the Republican party recognizes the duty of so shaping legislation as to secure full protection and the amplest field for capital, and for labor, the creator of capital, the largest opportunities and a just share of the mutual profits of these two great servants of civilization.

12. We hold that Congress and the President have only fulfilled an imperative duty in their measures for the suppression of violent and treasonable organizations in certain lately rebellious regions, and for the protection of the ballot-box; and therefore they are entitled to the thanks of the nation.

13. We denounce repudiation of the public debt, in any form or disguise, as a national crime. We witness with pride the reduction of the principal of the debt, and of the rates of interest upon the balance, and confidently expect that our excellent national currency will be perfected by a speedy resumption of specie payment.

14. The Republican party is mindful of its obligations to the loyal women of America for their noble devotion to the cause of freedom. Their admission to wider spheres of usefulness is viewed with satisfaction; and the honest demand of any class of citizens for additional rights should be treated with respectful consideration.

15. We heartily approve the action of Congress in extending amnesty to those lately in rebellion, and rejoice in the growth of peace and fraternal feeling throughout the land.

16. The Republican party proposes to respect the rights reserved by the people to themselves as carefully as the powers delegated by them to the States and to the Federal Government. It disapproves of the resort to unconstitutional laws for the purpose of removing evils by interference with the rights not surrendered by the people to either the State or the National Government.

17. It is the duty of the General Government to adopt such measures as may tend to encourage and restore American commerce and shipbuilding.

18. We believe that the modest patriotism, the earnest purpose, the sound judgment, the practical wisdom, the incorruptible integrity, and the illustrious services of Ulysses S. Grant have commended him to the heart of the American people, and with him at our head we start to-day upon a new march to victory.

19. Henry Wilson, nominated for the Vice-Presidency, known to the whole land from the early days of the great struggle for liberty as an indefatigable laborer in all campaigns, an incorruptible legislator, and representative man of American institutions, is worthy to associate with our great leader and share the honors which we pledge our best efforts to bestow upon them.

The Democratic National Convention met in Baltimore on the 9th of July. Thomas Jefferson Randolph, of Virginia, was the temporary president and ex-Senator James R. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, was permanent president. The Cincinnati Liberal Republican platform was reported by the[Pg 238] committee without the change of a word. Senator Bayard, of Delaware, vigorously opposed it, but it was adopted by 670 to 62. A ballot was had for President, resulting as follows:

Horace Greeley, New York | 686
Jeremiah S. Black, Pennsylvania | 21
Thos. F. Bayard, Delaware | 16
Wm. S. Groesback, Ohio | 2
Blank | 7

On the 1st ballot for Vice-President, B. Gratz Brown received 713 votes to 6 for John W. Stevenson, of Kentucky, and 13 blank. The nominations were then made unanimous. It was one of the most harmonious conventions that I ever witnessed, and there was very general and absolute confidence felt that the Democrats and Liberals united could sweep the country and elect Greeley to the Presidency.

There were few among the Democratic leaders who openly and determinedly dissented. In point of fact the Democratic leaders were quite sufficiently united on Greeley to have given him the victory, but the rank and file refused to follow, as was proved by the State elections, all of which showed that the Democrats lost more of their following than the Republicans gave them from the Liberal ranks.

It was not until September 3d that the Democratic opposition to Greeley took form, when a national convention was held at Louisville, Ky., and nominated Charles O’Conor, of New York, for President and John Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, for Vice-President without the formality of a ballot. Adams had agreed to accept the nomination if O’Conor stood at the head of the ticket, but O’Conor promptly and peremptorily declined, after which Mr. Lyon, president of the convention, was nominated for President, but he also declined. The nomination for President was then tendered to Mr. Adams, but he refused, and finally the convention renominated O’Conor, and adjourned without inquiring whether the candidates would stand or decline. The following is the platform adopted by the Democratic dissenters:

Whereas, A frequent recurrence to first principles, and eternal vigilance against abuses, are the wisest provisions for liberty, which is the source of progress, and fidelity to our constitutional system is the only protection for either; therefore,

Resolved, That the original basis of our whole political structure is a consent in every part thereof. The people of each State voluntarily created their State, and the States voluntarily formed the[Pg 239] Union; and each State has provided, by its written Constitution, for everything a State should do for the protection of life, liberty, and property within it; and each State, jointly with the others, provided a Federal Union for foreign and inter-State relations.

Resolved, That all government powers, whether State or Federal, are trust powers coming from the people of each State; and that they are limited to the written letter of the Constitution and the laws passed in pursuance of it, which powers must be exercised in the utmost good faith, the Constitution itself providing in what manner they may be altered and amended.

Resolved, That the interests of labor and capital should not be permitted to conflict, but should be harmonized by judicious legislation. While such a conflict continues, labor, which is the parent of wealth, is entitled to paramount consideration.

Resolved, That we proclaim to the world that principle is to be preferred to power; that the Democratic party is held together by the cohesion of time-honored principles which they will never surrender in exchange for all the offices which presidents can confer. The pangs of the minorities are doubtless excruciating; but we welcome an eternal minority under the banner inscribed with our principles rather than an almighty and everlasting majority purchased by their abandonment.

Resolved, That, having been betrayed at Baltimore into a false creed and a false leadership by the convention, we repudiate both, and appeal to the people to approve our platform, and to rally to the polls and support the true platform, and the candidates who embody it.

Resolved, That we are opposed to giving public lands to corporations, and favor their disposal to actual settlers only.

Resolved, That we favor a judicious tariff for revenue purposes only, and that we are unalterably opposed to class legislation which enriches a few at the expense of the many under the plea of protection.

The campaign was a very earnest one, but after the Greeley tide had struck its ebb in the North Carolina election in August, the battle was a hopeless one for Greeley, and he was defeated by a very large majority. The following table gives the popular vote:

STATES. | Grant. | Greeley. | O’Conor. | Black.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Maine | 61,422 | 29,087 | —— | ——
New Hampshire | 37,168 | 31,424 | 100 | 200
Vermont | 41,481 | 10,927 | 593 | ——
Massachusetts | 133,472 | 59,260 | —— | ——
Rhode Island | 13,665 | 5,329 | —— | ——
Connecticut | 50,638 | 45,880 | 204 | 206
New York | 440,736 | 387,281 | 1,454 | 201
New Jersey | 91,656 | 76,456 | 630 | ——
Pennsylvania | 349,589 | 212,041 | —— | 1,630[Pg 240]
Delaware | 11,115 | 10,206 | 487 | ——
Maryland | 66,760 | 67,687 | 19 | ——
Virginia | 93,468 | 91,654 | 42 | ——
West Virginia | 32,315 | 29,451 | 600 | ——
North Carolina | 94,769 | 70,094 | —— | ——
South Carolina | 72,290 | 22,703 | 187 | ——
Georgia | 62,550 | 76,356 | 4,000 | ——
Florida | 17,763 | 15,427 | —— | ——
Alabama | 90,272 | 79,444 | —— | ——
Mississippi | 82,175 | 47,288 | —— | ——
Louisiana[22] | 71,663 | 57,029 | —— | ——
Louisiana[23] | 59,975 | 66,467 | —— | ——
Texas | 47,468 | 66,546 | 2,580 | ——
Arkansas | 41,373 | 37,927 | —— | ——
Missouri | 119,196 | 151,434 | 2,439 | ——
Tennessee | 85,655 | 94,391 | —— | ——
Kentucky | 88,766 | 99,995 | 2,374 | ——
Ohio | 281,852 | 244,321 | 1,163 | 2,100
Michigan | 138,455 | 78,355 | 2,861 | 1,271
Indiana | 186,147 | 163,632 | 1,417 | ——
Illinois | 241,944 | 184,938 | 3,058 | ——
Wisconsin | 104,997 | 86,477 | 834 | ——
Minnesota | 55,117 | 34,423 | —— | ——
Iowa | 131,566 | 71,196 | 2,221 | ——
Nebraska | 18,329 | 7,812 | —— | ——
Kansas | 67,048 | 32,970 | 596 | ——
Nevada | 8,413 | 6,236 | —— | ——
California | 54,020 | 40,718 | 1,068 | ——
Oregon | 11,819 | 7,730 | 572 | ——
Totals | 3,597,132 | 2,834,125 | 29,489 | 5,608

I find that many tables of the popular vote are discordant, and I have accepted the table prepared by Mr. Stanwood as he presented it. The Louisiana dispute arose from two returning boards. Governor Warmouth, who was, by virtue of his office, the head of the returning board, had supported Greeley, and the dispute led to two returning boards, each of which made a different return of the official vote of the State, one giving it to Greeley and the other to Grant. Mr. Greeley died soon after the election and before the electoral colleges met, and the minority electors, who had been chosen for Greeley, were entirely at sea, as will be seen by the following table of the electoral vote as returned to Congress.[Pg 241] There were many quibbles raised in the joint convention of the two houses in counting and declaring the vote. Mr. Hoar, of Massachusetts, objected to the Georgia votes cast for Greeley because he was dead at the time, and various other technical objections were made, but the table I give shows the vote as it was accepted:

STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
Ulysses S. Grant, Ill. | Thomas A. Hendricks, Ind. | B. Gratz Brown, Mo. | Horace Greeley, N. Y. | Charles J. Jenkins, Ga. | David Davis, Ill. | Henry Wilson, Mass. | B. Gratz Brown, Mo. | George W. Julian, Ind. | Alfred H. Colquitt, Ga. | John M. Palmer, Ill. | Thomas E. Bramlette, Ky. | Nathaniel P. Banks, Mass. | William S. Groesbeck, O. | Willis B. Machen, Ky.
Maine | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Hampshire | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Vermont | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Massachusetts | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Connecticut | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New York | 35 | — | — | — | — | — | 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
New Jersey | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Pennsylvania | 29 | — | — | — | — | — | 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Delaware | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Maryland | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Virginia | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
West Virginia | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
North Carolina | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
South Carolina | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Georgia | — | — | 6 | 3[24] | 2 | — | — | 5 | — | 5 | — | — | 1 | — | —
Florida | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Alabama | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Mississippi | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | 8[24] | — | — | — | — | — | 8[24] | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Louisiana | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8[24] | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Texas | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Arkansas | 6[24] | — | — | — | — | — | — | 6[24] | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | —
Missouri | — | 6 | 8 | — | — | 1 | — | 6 | 5 | — | 3 | — | — | — | —
Tennessee | — | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Kentucky | — | 8 | 4 | — | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | 1
Ohio | 22 | — | — | — | — | — | 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Michigan | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Indiana | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Illinois | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Wisconsin | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Minnesota | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Iowa | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Nebraska | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Kansas | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Nevada | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
California | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Oregon | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Total (as declared) | 286 | 42 | 18 | — | 2 | 1 | 286 | 47 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1

[Pg 242]

From the time that Greeley was nominated in May, until probably a month after the meeting of the Democratic convention in July, everything pointed to his triumphant election. Leading men of the party were daily announcing themselves as his supporters, and a tidal wave that would sweep Greeley into the Presidency seemed certain. But in August the great business interests of the country, then rocked in the tempest of inflation created by the war, became appalled at the prospect of the election of Greeley, whose financial and business policy would be but an experiment. All knew that the business of the country was dangerously inflated, and that disaster must come sooner or later, but they felt that it would be delayed by the re-election of Grant, and in the brief period of one month the Greeley tide began its ebb, which doomed him to a most humiliating defeat. Had David Davis been the candidate there would have been no such apprehension in business and monetary circles, and I have never doubted that he would have been elected as the logical successor of Abraham Lincoln.

Although I had opposed the nomination of Greeley, he well understood that it was solely because I felt that I was thus a better friend to him than he was to himself, and I devoted my time to tireless effort to give him success. Outside his editorial duties, in which he was a master of masters, he was as guileless and unsophisticated as a child, and even his closest friends trembled when they regarded his election to the Presidency as more than probable. About the 1st of August, before the revulsion had become visible, I was sent for by Waldo Hutchings to meet the friends of Greeley in conference at the Astor House. Among those present were Mr. Hutchings, Whitelaw Reid, ex-Congressman Cochran, and several others, and they informed me that I had been sent for to call upon Greeley and earnestly admonish him against making any pledges or promises whatever, before the election, as to his Cabinet appointments. They said that if elected President his safety would be in having about him an able, faithful and discreet Cabinet, and they feared that in the kindness of his heart he would become complicated with those who sought to importune him for preferment. In order to keep him from visitors he was then hidden away in a private upstairs room in Brooklyn, where I was directed to call on my mission.

I never saw a happier face than that of Greeley when I[Pg 243] met him, as he was then entirely confident of success, and in a very kind and facetious way he reminded me that I had underestimated his strength with the people. When opportunity came in the conversation I suggested to him that a man who was elected President by a combination of opposing political interests would have very grave and complicated duties to perform, and that he should especially avoid any Cabinet complications. With the simplicity and confidence of a child his answer was: “Don’t misunderstand me; you ought to know that I would appoint no Cabinet officer from your section without your approval.” He was surprised to find that I was not there to obtain promises, but to warn him against the peril of saying to others just what he had said to me, and after reviewing the conditions he agreed that his only safety was in avoiding all obligations relating to appointments until the duty confronted him.

He asked me to go to North Carolina and give a week to the campaign in that State, and to that I agreed, although I was in charge of the Pennsylvania battle. That was the last time that I saw Horace Greeley. After the disastrous elections of October, which clearly foreshadowed his defeat, he made New England and Western tours, and delivered speeches which well compare with the grandest utterances of our best statesmanship. But the tide against him was resistless, and while nursing a dying wife and worn out by his ceaseless offices of affection, the blow came that clouded one of the noblest, purest, and ablest of the great men of the land.

On the last day that he put pen to paper he wrote me a brief letter saying that he was “a man of many sorrows,” but that he “could not forget the gallant though luckless struggle” I had made in his behalf. Broken in health, bereaved in his affections, and disappointed in his greatest ambition, his reason toppled from its throne and he died an inmate of an asylum. The two chieftains of the political contest of 1872 were brought together soon after the victor and vanquished were declared, as President Grant stood at the tomb of Horace Greeley to pay the last tribute of himself and the nation to the fallen philanthropist.

[Pg 244]

## THE HAYES-TILDEN CONTEST

1876

The Presidential contest of 1876 brought into the national political arena the strongest personality developed by the Republican party, with the single exception of Abraham Lincoln. James G. Blaine was admittedly the Henry Clay of the Republican party, and both were equally idolized and equally fated. The Republican party had men of profounder intellect than Blaine, but no one who so completed the circle of all the qualities of a popular leader, including masterly ability as a disputant. Like Clay, he was idolized by his friends and most bitterly defamed by his foes, and both were twice defeated by their party for Presidential nominations when the party was successful, and both nominated only to suffer defeat.

With an intimate knowledge of the public men of the last half century, I regard Blaine as the most magnetic man I have ever met. His greeting to friend and stranger was always generous without gush, and at once brought all who had any communication with him into apparently the closest relations. He remembered names of the humblest and most distant of his acquaintances; always knew something of their communities and their interests. It was not the art of a demagogue, but the natural impulse of a big-hearted, big-brained enthusiast, and Blaine was an enthusiast in everything that enlisted his interest. When, in addition to these charming personal qualities, he possessed every attribute of a great popular orator, it is not difficult to understand why Blaine became the favorite of the people. Like all who have reached any measure of distinction in that line, he had bitter and malignant foes, and he could well have said of himself, as Clay once did when overcome by an exhibition of the generosity of his friends, who had paid a note that greatly embarrassed him: “Never had man such friends and such enemies as Henry Clay.” The chief difference between Clay and Blaine was in the fact that the[Pg 245] masses did not know Clay from personal contact, while the masses well knew Blaine, and saw him as he was in his every-day life as well as in his great achievements in politics and statesmanship. In another respect Blaine differed widely from Clay. Blaine was a fatalist, and from 1876, when he was first defeated for the Republican nomination for President in Cincinnati, until his name was last presented to the Republican National Convention in 1892, he was oppressed, profoundly oppressed, with the belief that he never could be President; while Clay hoped to realize the great dream of his life, and confidently expected his election to the Presidency until his final defeat in the Philadelphia convention of 1848.

RUTHERFORD B. HAYES

I saw Blaine soon after the Cincinnati convention of 1876, and talked with him for an hour alone at the Continental Hotel, and I well remember the sad expression of his strong face when he said: “I am the Henry Clay of the Republican party; I can never be President.” He was standing by a window looking out upon the street, with his arm over my shoulder, and he spoke of his hopes and fears with a subdued eloquence that was painfully impressive. He was again defeated for nomination in 1880, thus suffering two defeats when the candidates chosen by the convention were elected. He was nominated in 1884 and defeated, thus completing the circle of the sad history of Clay and the Whig party.

Clay was defeated in the Harrisburg convention of December, 1839, by Harrison, who was elected; he was nominated by the Baltimore convention in 1844, and defeated by Polk; and in 1848 he was again defeated for the nomination in the Philadelphia convention by Taylor, who was elected. Thus both Clay and Blaine were twice defeated in their respective party conventions when their successful competitors were elected, and both nominated when their parties suffered defeats. Soon after Blaine’s nomination, in 1884, I sent a brilliant staff correspondent of my paper, who had intimate personal relations with Blaine, to stay with him at Augusta for several weeks. One pleasant afternoon they walked along the banks of the Kennebec River, when Blaine insensibly diverted the conversation into a soliloquy. He said: “Clay was defeated in two conventions when he could have been elected President, and he was nominated for President when his competitor was elected, and that competitor was one who had not been publicly discussed as[Pg 246] a Presidential candidate before the meeting of the Baltimore convention of 1844. I was defeated in two conventions when I could have been elected. I am nominated now with a competitor alike obscure with the competitor of Clay.” He then brought the soliloquy to a climax by holding up his hand and repeating what he seemed to regard as talismanic figures, “1844–1884.” Clay was defeated in 1844, and Blaine was impressed with the belief that he would suffer defeat in 1884.

The prospect for Republican success was not flattering at the opening of the campaign of 1876. The Grant administration was severely criticised and the party greatly weakened by the scandals of the Whiskey Ring, the impeachment of Secretary Belknap, and by the general business depression that began in 1873. The Democrats had carried a large majority in the popular branch of Congress in 1874, and the Republicans were so seriously alarmed at the prospect of losing the election of 1876 that Senator Oliver P. Morton, the ablest of the Republican leaders, made an earnest effort to procure an amendment to the Constitution providing for the election of Presidents by popular vote, but the scheme failed. There was also some disturbance in the Republican party, caused by the evident desire of General Grant to secure a third term. He had written a letter to General Harry White, of Pennsylvania, that was very unlike Grant, whose habit was to express his convictions clearly and tersely, but in this letter he elaborately discussed the question of a third term, without distinctly declaring whether he would or would not accept it.

There was but one conclusion that could be drawn from the letter, and that was that Grant was more than willing to have a third nomination tendered to him. The State convention of Pennsylvania, over which General White presided, had declared with emphasis “opposition to the election to the Presidency of any person for a third term.” General White expected a letter from President Grant in accord with that expression, but the nearest that Grant came to a declination was in the single sentence of the letter, speaking of the third term, he said: “I do not want it any more than I did the first,” to which he added the suggestion that the Constitution put no restriction upon the period a President might serve.

Another pointed admonition to Grant not to press his[Pg 247] candidacy was given by the adoption of a resolution in the House, declaring that the established precedent of Washington, who retired from the Presidency after the second term, had become “a part of our Republican system of government, and that any departure from this time-honored custom would be unwise, unpatriotic, and fraught with peril to our free institutions.” This resolution passed by 234 to 18, and was supported not only by all the Democrats, but of the 88 Republicans voting, 70 voted for it. One of the peculiar features of the contest for the Republican nomination was presented in the candidacy of Benjamin H. Bristow, then Secretary of the Treasury, who was not in harmony with the President, and yet refused to resign. He was the candidate of the most violent anti-Grant element.

The Republican convention met at Cincinnati on the 14th of June, and it was one of the most earnest and stubborn contests I have ever witnessed. Blaine had a clear majority of the delegates in the convention, and certainly would have been nominated with anything like fair play. On the Sunday morning immediately before the meeting of the convention, and when all the delegates and the outside political hustlers were earnestly at work in Cincinnati, a dispatch came from Washington that fell like a thunderbolt from an unclouded sky upon Blaine’s friends. He had fallen at the church door when about to enter for service, and was unconscious for some time, and the opponents of Blaine made the most of the misfortune.

The first reports of his illness were greatly exaggerated, and his friends at the convention were much disconcerted and discouraged, but when on Monday morning he telegraphed them himself that his illness was not serious, all were again thoroughly united to force his nomination. The friends of Blaine had a majority of the convention. There was not an hour during the sessions of that body that a majority of the delegates did not desire to nominate him for President, but many were held by instructions or other complications, as was the entire Pennsylvania delegation, made up almost wholly of Blaine men, but instructed for Governor Hartranft. Strange as it may seem, he received the votes of a majority of all the delegates in the convention, but not on any one ballot, and never was the wish of a nominating body so artfully misled from its intent.

The speech of Ingersoll nominating Blaine was the most[Pg 248] powerful and impressive I ever heard before a deliberative body, and had a ballot been reached on that day no combination could have prevented Blaine’s success. The struggle was desperate for delay, and the opponents of Blaine, fearing that the session might be extended into the evening, and thus reach a ballot without adjournment, had the gas clandestinely cut off from the building, and an adjournment was enforced by darkness. The enemies of Blaine were very powerful. President Grant was one of the most aggressive and vindictive, and ex-Senator Cameron, who was then Secretary of War, was chairman of the Pennsylvania delegation, and pitiless and tireless in his opposition to Blaine.

At nearly midnight, before the second day of the convention, Cameron had decided that he must give up the battle against Blaine and assent to his nomination, as his delegation had become very refractory, and all knew that Blaine could be nominated whenever all who desired his nomination were free to vote for him. His defeat was planned in and executed from Cameron’s room, who had his trusted lieutenants about him, including the late Robert W. Mackey, who was the most accomplished and practical politician of his day in Pennsylvania, and the late William H. Kemble. It was decided to propose to the Pennsylvania delegation that as they were instructed for Hartranft, and to vote as a unit, they should do so only while Hartranft’s vote increased, and that whenever he dropped in the race the delegation should then vote as a unit as the majority directed. This was enthusiastically accepted by the friends of Blaine, as they believed that Hartranft’s strength would soon be exhausted, and that then they would get a solid vote for Blaine; but Mackey and Kemble, who understood how to manage politicians of every grade, including the carpet-baggers and colored political speculators from the South, arranged with a number of delegations, chiefly in the Southern States, to have Hartranft’s vote increased slightly on every ballot.

Instead of starting Hartranft with an exhibition of his full strength, part of it was held back, and, to the consternation of the Blaine men from this State, Hartranft’s vote was maintained until the climax came in the landslide to Governor Hayes, of Ohio, as a compromise candidate. But for Secretary Cameron and State Treasurer Mackey and ex-State Treasurer Kemble, Blaine’s nomination would have been absolutely certain at the Cincinnati convention in 1876.

[Pg 249]

The convention had as permanent president Edward McPherson, of Pennsylvania, who was a devoted friend of Blaine, but whose delegation, under the manipulation of Chairman Cameron, was held from Blaine until it was too late to be of service to him. Conkling, of New York, who had the unanimous support of his State, was the favorite candidate of the administration, but from Blaine’s opponents was heard on every side the slogan “anybody to beat Blaine.” It was not until the third day that a ballot was reached, and on the 7th a stampede was made to Governor Hayes, of Ohio, and he was unanimously declared the nominee of the party. The following table exhibits the ballots in detail:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth. | Sixth. | Seventh.
Blaine | 285 | 296 | 293 | 292 | 286 | 308 | 351
Morton | 125 | 120 | 113 | 108 | 95 | 85 | —
Bristow | 113 | 114 | 121 | 126 | 114 | 111 | 21
Conkling | 99 | 93 | 90 | 84 | 82 | 81 | —
Hayes | 61 | 64 | 67 | 68 | 104 | 113 | 384
Hartranft | 58 | 63 | 68 | 71 | 69 | 50 | —
Jewell | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Scattering | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | —

William A. Wheeler, of New York, was nominated for Vice-President without a formal ballot, as soon after the balloting began the several other candidates were withdrawn, and he was nominated by acclamation. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

When, in the economy of Providence, this land was to be purged of human slavery, and when the strength of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, was to be demonstrated, the Republican party came into power. Its deeds have passed into history, and we look back to them with pride. Incited by their memories to high aims for the good of our country and mankind, and looking to the future with unfaltering courage, hope, and purpose, we, the representatives of the party in national convention assembled, make the following declaration of principles:

1. The United States of America is a nation, not a league. By the combined workings of the national and State governments, under their respective Constitutions, the rights of every citizen are secured, at home and abroad, and the common welfare promoted.

2. The Republican party has preserved these governments to the[Pg 250] hundredth anniversary of the nation’s birth, and they are now embodiments of the great truths spoken at its cradle, “That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that for the attainment of these ends governments have been instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Until these truths are cheerfully obeyed, or, if need be, vigorously enforced, the work of the Republican party is unfinished.

3. The permanent pacification of the Southern section of the Union, and the complete protection of all its citizens in the free enjoyment of all their rights, is a duty to which the Republican party stands sacredly pledged. The power to provide for the enforcement of the principles embodied by the recent constitutional amendments is vested by those amendments in the Congress of the United States, and we declare it to be the solemn obligation of the legislative and executive departments of the Government to put into immediate and vigorous exercise all their constitutional powers for removing any just causes of discontent on the part of any class, and for securing to every American citizen complete liberty and exact equality in the exercise of all civil, political, and public rights. To this end we imperatively demand a Congress and a Chief Executive whose courage and fidelity to these duties shall not falter until these results are placed beyond dispute or recall.

4. In the first act of Congress signed by President Grant, the National Government assumed to remove any doubts of its purpose to discharge all just obligations to the public creditors, and “solemnly pledged its faith to make provision, at the earliest practicable period, for the redemption of the United States notes in coin.” Commercial prosperity, public morals, and national credit demand that this promise be fulfilled by a continuous and steady progress to specie payment.

5. Under the Constitution the President and heads of departments are to make nominations for office; the Senate is to advise and consent to appointments, and the House of Representatives is to accuse and prosecute faithless officers. The best interest of the public service demands that these distinctions be respected; that Senators and Representatives, who may be judges and accusers, should not dictate appointments to office. The invariable rule in appointments should have reference to the honesty, fidelity, and capacity of the appointees, giving to the party in power those places where harmony and vigor of administration require its policy to be represented, but permitting all others to be filled by persons selected with sole reference to the efficiency of the public service, and the right of all citizens to share in the honor of rendering faithful service to the country.

6. We rejoice in the quickened conscience of the people concerning political affairs, and will hold all public officers to a rigid responsibility, and engage that the prosecution and punishment of all who betray official trusts shall be swift, thorough, and unsparing.

7. The public-school system of the several States is a bulwark of the American Republic, and, with a view to its security and permanence, we recommend an amendment to the Constitution of the United States forbidding the application of any public funds or[Pg 251] property for the benefit of any schools or institutions under sectarian control.

8. The revenue necessary for current expenditures and the obligations of the public debt must be largely derived from duties upon importations, which, so far as possible, should be adjusted to promote the interests of American labor and advance the prosperity of the whole country.

9. We reaffirm our opposition to further grants of the public land to corporations and monopolies, and demand that the national domain be devoted to free homes for the people.

10. It is the imperative duty of the Government so to modify existing treaties with European governments, that the same protection shall be afforded to the adopted American citizen that is given to the native-born; and that all necessary laws should be passed to protect emigrants, in the absence of power in the States for that purpose.

11. It is the immediate duty of Congress fully to investigate the effect of immigration and importation of Mongolians upon the moral and material interests of the country.

12. The Republican party recognizes with its approval the substantial advances recently made toward the establishment of equal rights for women by the many important amendments effected by Republican Legislatures in the laws which concern the personal and property relations of wives, mothers, and widows, and by the appointment and election of women to the superintendence of education, charities, and other public trusts. The honest demands of this class of citizens for additional rights, privileges, and immunities should be treated with respectful consideration.

13. The Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign power over the Territories of the United States for their government, and in the exercise of this power it is the right and duty of Congress to prohibit and extirpate, in the Territories, that relic of barbarism—polygamy; and we demand such legislation as shall secure this end and the supremacy of American institutions in all the Territories.

14. The pledges which the nation has given to her soldiers and sailors must be fulfilled, and a grateful people will always hold those who imperilled their lives for the country’s preservation in the kindest remembrance.

15. We sincerely deprecate all sectional feeling and tendencies. We therefore note with deep solicitude that the Democratic party counts, as its chief hope of success, upon the electoral vote of a united South, secured through the efforts of those who were recently arrayed against the nation; and we invoke the earnest attention of the country to the grave truth that a success thus achieved would reopen sectional strife and imperil national honor and human rights.

16. We charge the Democratic party with being the same in character and spirit as when it sympathized with treason; with making its control of the House of Representatives the triumph and opportunity of the nation’s recent foes; with reasserting and applauding in the national Capitol the sentiments of unrepentant rebellion; with sending Union soldiers to the rear, and promoting Confederate soldiers to the front; with deliberately proposing to repudiate the plighted faith of the Government; with being equally false and imbecile upon the overshadowing financial questions; with thwarting the ends of justice by its partisan mismanagement and obstruction of[Pg 252] investigation; with proving itself, through the period of its ascendancy in the lower house of Congress, utterly incompetent to administer the Government; and we warn the country against trusting a party thus alike unworthy, recreant, and incapable.

17. The national administration merits commendation for its honorable work in the management of domestic and foreign affairs, and President Grant deserves the continued hearty gratitude of the American people for his patriotism and his eminent services, in war and in peace.

18. We present as our candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States two distinguished statesmen, of eminent ability and character, and conspicuously fitted for those high offices, and we confidently appeal to the American people to intrust the administration of their public affairs to Rutherford B. Hayes and William A. Wheeler.

The friends of Blaine were grievously disappointed at the action of the Cincinnati convention, but Blaine promptly came to the front in his heroic way, and made a tireless battle for the success of the ticket.

The Democratic convention met at St. Louis on the 28th of June. Henry Watterson, of Kentucky, was temporary chairman, and was succeeded by General John A. McClernand, of Illinois, as permanent presiding officer. This was the first convention to cross the Father of Waters, and it was a thoroughly organized Tilden convention before it met. Tilden was the ablest political manager in the Democratic party of that day. He was tireless, methodical, and sagacious, and he made his nomination over Hancock and Hendricks by early and complete organization of his friends in all the debatable States. He had won national reputation by his courage in bringing Tweed to justice, and he was regarded by the country generally as well equipped for the high duties of Chief Magistrate. The friends of Hendricks made a desperate battle for him, but they were outclassed in leadership, and it was a Tilden convention when the body convened, with very able men to hold it in subjection.

The Tilden forces required little leadership at St. Louis, as his nomination had been thoroughly accomplished before the convention met. Tilden exhausted his wonderful powers of organization in getting control of the delegations of doubtful States, and looked minutely to the men who should be chosen as delegates, and when the convention met there was no boisterous jostling between the opposing forces, as the majority was complete in its organization and moved with directness to the accomplishment of its purpose.[Pg 253] William L. Scott, of Erie, Penn., who was twice elected to Congress in an overwhelmingly Republican district, was the accepted leader of the Tilden people. He was personally popular, self-poised, sagacious, and discreet, and all he had to do was to keep his solid lines unbroken.

The minority was dumbfounded at the development of the Tilden strength, but the Hendricks people, led by McDonald, of Indiana—afterward United States Senator—and most zealously and aggressively aided by the helpless Tammany minority in the New York delegation, fought heroically at every step; but with Scott to manage and Harry Watterson to inspire the Tilden people, they maintained their mastery from start to finish, and Tilden was declared the nominee. When the nomination was announced the convention presented a singular spectacle. The Tilden delegates were at once upon their feet cheering lustily and waving their handkerchiefs, and one after another of the minority delegations rose and joined in the huzzas for the declared candidate, but the Indiana delegates sat stubbornly in their seats, presenting the appearance of a small cleared patch in a forest. The convention waited some minutes for the Indiana men to rise, but they kept their seats. The next day Hendricks was made the candidate for Vice-President in spite of the protests of his delegation and his friends, and finally the convention joined in united cheers for the ticket.

Much bitterness was developed during the struggle between the opposing clans, and a duel between General Morgan, a fighting Democratic soldier of Ohio, and Colonel Breckenridge, of Kentucky, was only averted, when the convention adjourned, by Colonel Watterson hurrying Breckenridge off to dinner, and compelling him to make concessions which properly satisfied the Ohio warrior.

It required only two ballots to give Tilden the nomination, as follows:

| First. | Second.
Samuel J. Tilden, N. Y. | 417 | 535
Thomas A. Hendricks, Ind. | 140 | 60
Winfield S. Hancock, Penn. | 75 | 59
William Allen, Ohio | 56 | 54
Thomas F. Bayard, Del. | 33 | 11
Joel Parker, N. J. | 18 | 18
Allen G. Thurman, Ohio | — | 7

[Pg 254]

The platform was prepared under Tilden’s own direction, and it was unanimously adopted as follows:

We, the delegates of the Democratic party of the United States, in national convention assembled, do hereby declare the administration of the Federal Government to be in urgent need of immediate reform; do hereby enjoin upon the nominees of this convention, and of the Democratic party in each State, a zealous effort and co-operation to this end; and do hereby appeal to our fellow-citizens of every former political connection to undertake with us this first and most pressing patriotic duty.

For the Democracy of the whole country, we do here reaffirm our faith in the permanence of the Federal Union, our devotion to the Constitution of the United States, with its amendments universally accepted as a final settlement of the controversies that engendered civil war, and do here record our steadfast confidence in the perpetuity of Republican self-government.

In absolute acquiescence in the will of the majority—the vital principle of republics; in the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; in the total separation of Church and State, for the sake alike of civil and religious freedom; in the equality of all citizens before just laws of their own enactment; in the liberty of individual conduct, unvexed by sumptuary laws; in the faithful education of the rising generation, that they may preserve, enjoy, and transmit these best conditions of human happiness and hope—we behold the noblest products of a hundred years of changeful history; but, while upholding the bond of our Union and great charter of these our rights, it behooves a free people to practise also that eternal vigilance which is the price of liberty.

Reform is necessary to rebuild and establish in the hearts of the whole people the Union, eleven years ago happily rescued from the danger of a secession of States, but now to be saved from a corrupt centralism which, after inflicting upon ten States the rapacity of carpet-bag tyrannies, has honeycombed the offices of the Federal Government itself with incapacity, waste, and fraud; infected States and municipalities with the contagion of misrule, and locked fast the prosperity of an industrious people in the paralysis of hard times.

Reform is necessary to establish a sound currency, restore the public credit, and maintain the national honor.

We denounce the failure, for all these eleven years of peace, to make good the promise of the legal tender notes, which are a changing standard of value in the hands of the people, and the non-payment of which is a disregard of the plighted faith of the nation.

We denounce the improvidence which, in eleven years of peace, has taken from the people in Federal taxes thirteen times the whole amount of the legal tender notes, and squandered four times their sum in useless expense without accumulating any reserve for their redemption.

We denounce the financial imbecility and immorality of that party which, during eleven years of peace, has made no advance toward resumption, no preparation for resumption, but instead has obstructed[Pg 255] resumption, by wasting our resources and exhausting all our surplus income; and, while annually professing to intend a speedy return to specie payments, has annually enacted fresh hindrances thereto. As such hindrance, we denounce the resumption clause of the act of 1875, and we here demand its repeal.

We demand a judicious system of preparation by public economy, by official retrenchment, and by wise finance, which shall enable the nation soon to assure the whole world of its perfect ability and its perfect readiness to meet any of its promises at the call of the creditor entitled to payment.

We believe such a system, well devised, and, above all, intrusted to competent hands for its execution, creating at no time an artificial scarcity of currency, and at no time alarming the public mind into a withdrawal of that vaster machinery of credit by which ninety-five per cent. of all business transactions are performed—a system open, public, and inspiring general confidence—would, from the day of its adoption, bring healing on its wings to all our harassed industries, set in motion the wheels of commerce, manufactures, and the mechanic arts, restore employment to labor, and renew in all its natural resources the prosperity of the people.

Reform is necessary in the sum and modes of Federal taxation, to the end that capital may be set free from distrust, and labor lightly burdened.

We denounce the present tariff, levied upon nearly four thousand articles, as a masterpiece of injustice, inequality, and false pretence. It yields a dwindling, not a yearly rising revenue. It has impoverished many industries to subsidize a few. It prohibits imports that might purchase the products of American labor. It has degraded American commerce from the first to an inferior rank on the high seas. It has cut down the sales of American manufactures at home and abroad and depleted the returns of American agriculture—an industry followed by half our people. It costs the people five times more than it produces to the treasury, obstructs the processes of production, and wastes the fruits of labor. It promotes fraud, fosters smuggling, enriches dishonest officials, and bankrupts honest merchants. We demand that all custom-house taxation shall be only for revenue.

Reform is necessary in the scale of public expense—Federal, State, and municipal. Our Federal taxation has swollen from sixty millions gold, in 1860, to four hundred and fifty millions currency, in 1870; our aggregate taxation from one hundred and fifty-four millions gold, in 1860, to seven hundred and thirty millions currency, in 1870; or in one decade from less than five dollars per head to more than eighteen dollars per head. Since the peace, the people have paid to their tax gatherers more than thrice the sum of the national debt, and more than twice that sum for the Federal Government alone. We demand a rigorous frugality in every department, and from every officer of the Government.

Reform is necessary to put a stop to the profligate waste of the public lands and their diversion from actual settlers by the party in power, which has squandered two hundred million acres upon railroads alone, and out of more than thrice that aggregate has disposed of less than a sixth directly to tillers of the soil.

Reform is necessary to correct the omissions of a Republican[Pg 256] Congress, and the errors of our treaties and diplomacy, which have stripped our fellow-citizens of foreign birth and kindred race recrossing the Atlantic, of the shield of American citizenship, and have exposed our brethren of the Pacific coast to the incursions of a race not sprung from the same great parent stock, and, in fact, now by law denied citizenship through naturalization as being neither accustomed to the traditions of a progressive civilization nor exercised in liberty under equal laws. We denounce the policy which thus discards the liberty-loving German and tolerates a revival of the Cooly trade in Mongolian women imported for immoral purposes, and Mongolian men held to perform servile labor-contracts, and demand such modification of the treaty with the Chinese empire or such legislation within constitutional limitations as shall prevent further importation or immigration of the Mongolian race.

Reform is necessary, and can never be effected but by making it the controlling issue of the elections, and lifting it above the two false issues with which the office-holding class and the party in power seek to smother it:

1. The false issue with which they would enkindle sectarian strife in respect to the public schools, of which the establishment and support belong exclusively to the several States, and which the Democratic party has cherished from their foundation, and is resolved to maintain without prejudice or preference for any class, sect, or creed, and without largesses from the treasury to any.

2. The false issue by which they seek to light anew the dying embers of sectional hate between kindred peoples once estranged, but now reunited in one indivisible republic and a common destiny.

Reform is necessary in the civil service. Experience proves that efficient, economical conduct of the governmental business is not possible if its civil service be subject to change at every election; be a prize fought for at the ballot-box; be a brief reward of party zeal, instead of posts of honor assigned for proved competency, and held for fidelity in the public employ; that the dispensing of patronage should neither be a tax upon the time of all our public men, nor the instrument of their ambition. Here, again, promises falsified in the performance attest that the party in power can work out no practical or salutary reform.

Reform is necessary even more in the higher grades of the public service. President, Vice-President, judges, Senators, Representatives, Cabinet officers—these and all others in authority are the people’s servants. Their offices are not a private perquisite; they are a public trust.

When the annals of this Republic show the disgrace and censure of a Vice-President; a late Speaker of the House of Representatives marketing his rulings as a presiding officer; three Senators profiting secretly by their votes as law-makers; five chairmen of the leading committees of the House of Representatives exposed in jobbery; a late Secretary of the Treasury forcing balances in the public accounts; a late Attorney-General misappropriating public funds; a Secretary of the Navy enriched or enriching friends by percentages levied off the profits of contractors with his department; an ambassador to England censured in a dishonorable speculation; the President’s private secretary barely escaping conviction[Pg 257] upon trial for guilty complicity in frauds upon the revenue; a Secretary of War impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors,—the demonstration is complete that the first step in reform must be the people’s choice of honest men from another party, lest the disease of one political organization infect the body politic, and lest, by making no change of men or parties, we get no change of measures and no real reform.

All these abuses, wrongs, and crimes, the product of sixteen years’ ascendency of the Republican party, create a necessity for reform confessed by Republicans themselves; but their reformers are voted down in convention and displaced from the Cabinet. The party’s mass of honest voters is powerless to resist the eighty thousand office-holders, its leaders and guides.

Reform can only be had by a peaceful civic revolution. We demand a change of system, a change of administration, a change of parties, that we may have change of measures and of men.

Resolved, That this convention, representing the Democratic party of the United States, do cordially endorse the action of the present House of Representatives in reducing and curtailing the expenses of the Federal Government, in cutting down salaries, extravagant appropriations, and in abolishing useless offices and places not required by the public necessities; and we shall trust to the firmness of the Democratic members of the House that no committee of conference and no misinterpretation of the rules shall be allowed to defeat these wholesome measures of economy demanded by the country.

Resolved, That the soldiers and sailors of the Republic, and the widows and orphans of those who have fallen in battle, have a just claim upon the care, protection, and gratitude of their fellow-citizens.

Business and trade were very much depressed in 1876, as the country was then approaching the panic and industrial troubles of 1877, which convulsed the country from Eastern to Western sea, and the Greenback or Independent National party, as it was called, exhibited formidable proportions in the contest. It held its national convention at Indianapolis on the 18th of May, with Thomas J. Durant, of Washington, D. C., as permanent president. Peter Cooper, the noted philanthropist of New York, was unanimously nominated for President, and Newton Booth, then a California Senator, was in like manner nominated for Vice-President, but he declined, and General Samuel F. Cary, of Ohio, was substituted. There were 19 States represented by 239 delegates. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Independent party is called into existence by the necessities of the people, whose industries are prostrated, whose labor is deprived of its just reward, by a ruinous policy which the Republican and Democratic parties refuse to change, and in view of the failure[Pg 258] of these parties to furnish relief to the depressed industries of the country, thereby disappointing the just hopes and expectations of the suffering people, we declare our principles, and invite all independent and patriotic men to join our ranks in this movement for financial reform and industrial emancipation.

1. We demand the immediate and unconditional repeal of the Specie-Resumption act of January 14, 1875, and the rescue of our industries from ruin and disaster resulting from its enforcement; and we call upon all patriotic men to organize, in every Congressional district of the country, with a view of electing Representatives to Congress who will carry out the wishes of the people in this regard, and stop the present suicidal and destructive policy of contraction.

2. We believe that a United States note, issued directly by the Government, and convertible on demand into United States obligations, bearing a rate of interest not exceeding one cent a day on each one hundred dollars, and exchangeable for United States notes at par, will afford the best circulating medium ever devised. Such United States notes should be full legal tender for all purposes except for the payment of such obligations as are, by existing contracts, especially made payable in coin, and we hold that it is the duty of the Government to provide such circulating medium, and insist, in the language of Thomas Jefferson, that bank paper must be suppressed, and the circulation restored to the nation, to whom it belongs.

3. It is the paramount duty of the Government, in all its legislation, to keep in view the full development of all legitimate business, agricultural, mining, manufacturing, and commercial.

4. We most earnestly protest against any further issue of gold bonds, for sale in foreign markets, by which we would be made, for a long period, hewers of wood and drawers of water for foreigners, especially as the American people would gladly and promptly take, at par, all bonds the Government may need to sell, provided they are made payable at the option of the holder, and bearing interest at 3.65 per cent. per annum, or even a lower rate.

5. We further protest against the sale of Government bonds for the purpose of purchasing silver, to be used as a substitute for our more convenient and less fluctuating fractional currency, which, although well calculated to enrich owners of silver mines, yet in operation it will still further oppress, in taxation, an already over-burdened people.

The Prohibitionists held their national convention at Cleveland, O., on the 17th of May, and nominated Greene Clay Smith, of Kentucky, for President, and G. T. Stewart, of Ohio, for Vice-President, by acclamation, and adopted the following platform:

The Prohibition Reform party of the United States, organized in the name of the people to revive, enforce, and perpetuate in the Government the doctrines of the Declaration of Independence, submit in this centennial year of the Republic, for the suffrages of all[Pg 259] good citizens, the following platform of national reforms and measures:

1. The legal prohibition in the District of Columbia, the Territories, and in every other place subject to the laws of Congress, of the importation, exportation, manufacture, and traffic of all alcoholic beverages as high crimes against society; an amendment of the national Constitution to render these prohibitory measures universal and permanent; and the adoption of treaty stipulations with foreign powers to prevent the importation and exportation of all alcoholic beverages.

2. The abolition of class legislation and of special privileges in the Government, and of the adoption of equal suffrage and eligibility to office without distinction of race, religious creed, property, or sex.

3. The appropriation of the public lands in limited quantities to actual settlers only; the reduction of the rates of inland and ocean postage; of telegraphic communication; of railroad and water transportation and travel to the lowest practicable point by force of law, wisely and justly framed, with reference not only to the interests of capital employed, but to the higher claims of the general good.

4. The suppression by law of lottery and gambling in gold, stocks, produce, and every form of money and property, and the penal inhibition of the use of the public mails for advertising schemes of gambling and lotteries.

5. The abolition of those foul enormities, polygamy and the social evil, and the protection of purity, peace, and happiness of homes by ample and efficient legislation.

6. The national observance of the Christian Sabbath, established by laws prohibiting ordinary labor and business in all departments of public service and private employment (works of necessity, charity, and religion excepted) on that day.

7. The establishment by mandatory provisions in national and State Constitutions, and by all necessary legislation, of a system of free public schools for the universal and forced education of all the youth of the land.

8. The free use of the Bible, not as a ground of religious creeds, but as text-book of the purest morality, the best liberty, and the noblest literature, in our public schools, that our children may grow up in its light, and that its spirit and principles may pervade the nation.

9. The separation of the Government in all departments and institutions, including the public schools and all funds for their maintenance, from the control of every religious sect or other association, and the protection alike of all sects by equal laws, with entire freedom of religious faith and worship.

10. The introduction into all treaties hereafter negotiated with foreign governments of a provision for the amicable settlement of international difficulties by arbitration.

11. The abolition of all barbarous modes and instruments of punishment; the recognition of the laws of God and the claims of humanity in the discipline of jails and prisons, and of that higher and wiser civilization worthy of our age and nation, which regards the reform of criminals as a means for the prevention of crime.

12. The abolition of executive and legislative patronage, and the election of President, Vice-President, United States Senators,[Pg 260] and of all civil officers, so far as practicable, by the direct vote of the people.

13. The practice of a friendly and liberal policy to immigrants from all nations, the guarantee to them of ample protection, and of equal rights and privileges.

14. The separation of the money of Government from all banking institutions. The National Government only should exercise the high prerogative of issuing paper money, and that should be subject to prompt redemption on demand in gold and silver, the only equal standards of value recognized by the civilized world.

15. The reduction of the salaries of public officers in a just ratio with the decline of wages and market prices, the abolition of sinecures, unnecessary offices, and official fees and perquisites; the practice of strict economy in Government expenses, and a free and thorough investigation into any and all alleged abuses of public trusts.

A mass convention held under the name of the American National party met in Pittsburg on the 9th of June, 1875, and nominated James B. Walker, of Illinois, for President, and Donald Kirkpatrick, of New York, for Vice-President. This political organization made no figure in the contest of 1876, and did not again appear in the subsequent national elections. The following platform was adopted:

We hold: 1. That ours is a Christian and not a heathen nation, and that the God of the Christian Scriptures is the author of civil government.

2. That God requires and man needs a Sabbath.

3. That the prohibition of the importation, manufacture, and sale of intoxicating drinks as a beverage is the true policy on the temperance question.

4. The charters of all secret lodges granted by our Federal and State Legislatures should be withdrawn, and their oaths prohibited by law.

5. That the civil equality secured to all American citizens by Article 13th, 14th, and 15th of our amended Constitution should be preserved inviolate.

6. That arbitration of differences with nations is the most direct and sure method of securing and perpetuating a permanent peace.

7. That to cultivate the intellect without improving the morals of men, is to make mere adepts and experts; therefore, the Bible should be associated with books of science and literature in all our educational institutions.

8. That land and other monopolies should be discountenanced.

9. That the Government should furnish the people with an ample and sound currency, and a return to specie payment as soon as practicable.

10. That maintenance of the public credit, protection to all loyal citizens, and justice to Indians are essential to the honor and safety of our nation.

11. And finally, we demand for the American people the abolition of electoral colleges, and a direct vote for President and Vice-President of the United States.

[Pg 261]

The contest of 1876 was conducted with great earnestness, but it was not distinguished for the defamation of candidates. The popular tide seemed to be with Tilden, as the reformation he had wrought in the Democratic party by the overthrow of Tweed in New York presented him in bold contrast to the administration of Grant, that had brought a tempest of scandals upon the party; but misfortune seemed to multiply upon Tilden from the beginning to the close of the battle. His first disaster, and what in the end proved to be a fatal one, was the result of the admission of Colorado into the Union. Thomas N. Patterson, an active Democrat, had been chosen as a delegate to Congress from Colorado in 1874 by a majority of 2163, and he gave the Democrats, who largely controlled the House, the positive assurance that the admission of Colorado would bring in another Democratic State. They had the power to exclude Colorado, but believing that the large majority of the Democrats had, under Patterson’s lead in 1874, anchored the Territory safely in the Democratic column, the Democrats admitted the new State, and her three electoral votes decided the election against Tilden, as even with South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana taken from Tilden, all of which had voted for him, Hayes was chosen by a single vote.

The first State election in Colorado was held in the summer of 1876, and to the utter consternation of the Democrats the Republicans elected the entire State ticket with 25 majority on joint ballot in the Legislature, and it was settled before the State election that the new State would not be put to the trouble and expense of another election for President in the fall, and that the Legislature would choose the electors, as it did. Tilden thus started in the contest with three electoral votes positively assured against him in the new State, that had been admitted because it was confidently expected to be Democratic.

On the popular vote Tilden had, according to the Republican returns, 252,224 majority over Hayes, and had the electoral colleges cast their votes as the popular vote was cast in Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina, Tilden would have received 203 to 156 for Hayes. The following table presents the popular vote and gives the Democratic and Republican returns of Florida and Louisiana, with the totals as they would appear with either count accepted:

[Pg 262]

STATES. | Samuel J. Tilden. | Rutherford B. Hayes. | Peter Cooper. | Green Clay Smith.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Maine | 49,917 | 66,300 | 663 | ——
New Hampshire | 38,509 | 41,539 | 76 | ——
Vermont | 20,350 | 44,428 | —— | ——
Massachusetts | 108,777 | 150,063 | 779 | 84
Rhode Island | 10,712 | 15,787 | 68 | 60
Connecticut | 61,934 | 59,034 | 774 | 378
New York | 521,949 | 489,207 | 1,987 | 2,359
New Jersey | 115,962 | 103,517 | 712 | 43
Pennsylvania | 366,204 | 384,184 | 7,187 | 1,319
Delaware | 13,381 | 10,752 | —— | ——
Maryland | 91,780 | 71,981 | 33 | 10
Virginia | 139,670 | 95,558 | —— | ——
West Virginia | 56,495 | 42,046 | 1,373 | ——
North Carolina | 125,427 | 108,417 | —— | ——
South Carolina | 90,896 | 91,870 | —— | ——
Georgia | 130,088 | 50,446 | —— | ——
Florida[25] | 22,927 | 23,849 | —— | ——
Florida[26] | 24,434 | 24,340 | —— | ——
Alabama | 102,989 | 68,708 | —— | ——
Mississippi | 112,173 | 52,605 | —— | ——
Louisiana[25] | 70,508 | 75,315 | —— | ——
Louisiana[26] | 83,723 | 77,174 | —— | ——
Texas | 104,803 | 44,803 | —— | ——
Arkansas | 58,071 | 38,669 | 289 | ——
Missouri | 203,077 | 145,029 | 3,498 | 64
Tennessee | 133,166 | 89,566 | —— | ——
Kentucky | 159,696 | 97,156 | 1,944 | 818
Ohio | 323,182 | 330,698 | 3,057 | 1,636
Michigan | 141,095 | 166,534 | 9,060 | 766
Indiana | 213,526 | 208,011 | 17,233 | 141
Illinois | 258,601 | 278,232 | 9,533 | ——
Wisconsin | 123,926 | 130,070 | 1,509 | 27
Minnesota | 48,799 | 72,962 | 2,311 | 72
Iowa | 112,121 | 171,326 | 9,901 | 36
Nebraska | 17,554 | 31,916 | 2,320 | 1,599
Kansas | 37,902 | 78,322 | 7,776 | 110
Colorado[27] | —— | —— | —— | ——
Nevada | 9,308 | 10,383 | —— | ——
California | 76,468 | 78,322 | 44 | ——
Oregon | 14,149 | 15,206 | 510 | ——
Total, Republican count | 4,285,992 | 4,033,768 | 81,737 | 9,522
Total, Democratic count | 4,300,590 | 4,036,298 | 81,737 | 9,522

[Pg 263]

On the morning after the election, newspapers of all parties announced the election of Tilden for President, but a murmur of the coming storm came at the same time from Senator Chandler, of New Hampshire, who was secretary of the national committee, of which Senator Zachariah Chandler, of Michigan, was chairman, who announced that Hayes was elected, and declared that the States of Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina had honestly voted for Hayes, and that he would finally receive their electoral votes. With the whole machinery of the Government in the hands of the Republicans, it was almost a hopeless battle for Tilden to fight for the disputed Southern States, but the Democratic people became violently aroused, and threats were freely made that the inauguration of Hayes would be prevented by mob violence if attempted.

So grave had the situation become that both branches of Congress finally passed an act, creating what was known as the Electoral Commission, that should be a tribunal of last resort, to determine the disputed election. The bill passed the House by the vote of 158 Democrats and 33 Republicans, with 68 Republicans and 18 Democrats voting in the negative; and in the Senate the bill was passed by the votes of 26 Democrats and 21 Republicans, with 16 Republicans and 1 Democrat voting against it. The measure was approved by the President on the 29th of January. As a majority of the Democrats in both Houses favored the measure, it was assumed that Tilden desired them to support it, but in point of fact Tilden was irresolute, and put it upon his friends to decide what should be done. Had any other man been the Democratic candidate, he would have been a great leader and an aggressive one; but from the beginning to the close of the post-election battle Tilden was apparently dwarfed into utter helplessness, and when it became evident that the Commission would decide against him, he distinctly disclaimed all responsibility for the creation of the tribunal. The Electoral Commission was finally made up under the law, composed of Senators Edmunds, Morton, Frelinghuysen, Republicans, and Thurman and Bayard, Democrats; of Representatives Payne, Hunton, and Abbott, Democrats, and Garfield and Hoar, Republicans, with Justices Strong and Miller, Republicans, and Clifford and Field, Democrats, and the fifth member of the court to be chosen by the four. Justice David Davis was first chosen as the fifth judicial[Pg 264] member of the court, but he declined, as he had just been elected to the Senate by Illinois, and Justice Bradley was then selected to fill his place. Had Davis remained on the Commission, it is reasonably certain that the vote of the Electoral Commission would have been 8 for Tilden and 7 for Hayes. This Commission, whose judgment was to be final, decided in favor of Hayes on every disputed proposition by a vote of 8 to 7, and thus made him President by the following electoral vote:

STATES. | Hayes. | Tilden.
--- | --- | ---
Maine | 7 | —
New Hampshire | 5 | —
Vermont | 5 | —
Massachusetts | 13 | —
Rhode Island | 4 | —
Connecticut | — | 6
New York | — | 35
New Jersey | — | 9
Pennsylvania | 29 | —
Delaware | — | 3
Maryland | — | 8
Virginia | — | 11
West Virginia | — | 5
North Carolina | — | 10
South Carolina | 7 | —
Georgia | — | 11
Florida | 4 | —
Alabama | — | 10
Mississippi | — | 8
Louisiana | 8 | —
Texas | — | 8
Arkansas | — | 6
Missouri | — | 15
Tennessee | — | 12
Kentucky | — | 12
Ohio | 22 | —
Michigan | 11 | —
Indiana | — | 15
Illinois | 21 | —
Wisconsin | 10 | —
Minnesota | 5 | —
Iowa | 11 | —
Nebraska | 3 | —
Kansas | 5 | —
Colorado | 3 | —
Nevada | 3 | —
California | 6 | —
Oregon | 3 | —
| 185 | 184

The true history of the struggle for the control of the electoral votes of South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana has never been written and now never can be fully written. The ablest men of both sides attended the contest in those States to battle for or against the action of the returning boards. All three States had voted for Tilden, but the returning boards, which had been created by the carpet-bag rule of the South, set aside the returns on the plea of fraud and certified the electoral vote for Hayes. The strength of the claim of the Democrats was practically admitted after the inauguration of Hayes by the President aiding in the adjustments which gave the Democrats the Governors and the Legislatures[Pg 265] of those States, and ousting the Republicans who had given the electoral vote to the President.

The chief factor in the bold and revolutionary action that returned the three States named for the Republican candidate for President was J. Donald Cameron, then Secretary of War under President Grant, and later United States Senator. He is nothing if not heroic when occasion demands it. I remember calling upon him at the Continental Hotel a few days after the election, and inquired of him whether he really meant to force the reversal of the vote in those States and have Hayes returned as elected. He answered with perfect frankness that he had started in to do it, that he meant to do it, and that it was right to do it, as the Republicans had not opportunity to vote in the South, and the only way to meet such frauds was by the strong power of the Government.

But for the assurance that the army and navy would sustain the returning boards of those States in whatever they did under color of law, the reversal of the popular vote never could have been accomplished. The State of Florida was manipulated by Robert W. Mackey, who was the most accomplished politician the Republicans have ever produced in Pennsylvania. He was apparently dying of consumption for ten years, and when it became necessary to send some competent man to handle Florida, he was selected. He started on his mission, and his racking cough and general consumptive features gave plausibility to the statement that he was going South to nurse his health. Two Democratic visiting committeemen were on the same train, and he overheard them mature their plans to hold the State for Tilden. He telegraphed to C. D. Brigham, who had been a prominent editor and Republican politician in Pittsburg, but who then resided in Florida, to meet him at the station, and before the Democrats attempted to carry their plans into execution they were completely blocked by Mackey, who could summon all the Federal officials to his aid.

Governor Curtin and Senator Sherman met face to face at New Orleans in the struggle to win the electoral vote of Louisiana, and at one stage of the battle Tilden could have secured the vote by telegraphing a single word to Curtin; but Tilden seemed to have lost his cunning, and hesitation was exhibited by him at every stage of the conflict when the promptest action was indispensable. I visited him at his[Pg 266] home in Gramercy Park when the contest was on at white heat, and was amazed to find his table covered with legal briefs, as though his election depended upon the law that would govern before a competent and impartial judicial tribunal. He permitted himself and his friends to become involved in a compromising way in the Oregon dispute for a single elector, and had the same method been adopted in Louisiana, he would have won. Instead of discussing the situation as it was, he presented to me elaborate arguments to show how it should be, and I could not refrain from reminding him that he was not dealing with judicial tribunals nor with honest men, and that he must either meet them on their own ground and with their own weapons or he must fall in the fight. He seemed to be utterly bewildered, and the man who had organized his nomination and election with consummate skill shrivelled up into pitiable indecision and inaction when he had the power to cast the die for or against himself.

The severe strain upon the popular sentiment of the country that had given Tilden 250,000 majority for President was greatly tempered, especially in the South, by a very shrewd movement planned early in the after-election contest to conciliate the leading people of the South. They received positive assurances from men very close to Hayes, and who gave the assurance of Hayes’s approval of the movement, that if Hayes should be inaugurated President without violence the State governments of Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina would be given to the Democrats. That Hayes approved of the plan is evidenced by the fact that after he became President he stood resolutely by the promise made by his friends to give the Democrats control of the governments of those States.

There was not serious friction in Florida; the Democratic candidate for Governor was allowed to be inaugurated on a returned majority of 195 as given by the Supreme Court. In South Carolina the face of the returns gave Wade Hampton 1134 majority for Governor, with about a like majority for the Democratic Presidential electors, but the Returning Board threw out Democratic counties and returned Chamberlain, Republican, as elected Governor by a majority of 3433, and gave the Republican electors majorities ranging from 600 to 900.

Two Legislatures were organized and two claimants for[Pg 267] the Governorship were qualified, but after a long siege, in which the friends of Hampton were with difficulty restrained from taking violent possession of the Capitol, the Republicans gave up the contest, as they discovered that President Hayes would not support them, and Hampton and his associate Democratic candidates and a Democratic Legislature were accepted.

The great battle was made in Louisiana, where the Returning Board gave Hayes the State by a majority of 4807, and declared the Republican electors chosen by about the same majority. The face of the returns gave a majority of 7876 for Tilden and 8101 for Nichols, Democratic candidate for Governor. There, as in South Carolina, two Governors were qualified and two Legislatures organized, and Stephen B. Packard, who had been counted in as the Republican Governor, and had been largely instrumental in giving the electoral vote to Hayes, and thereby electing him, demanded that the President should sustain him, logically insisting that if Hayes was elected Packard was elected, and that if Packard must go out Hayes must go out with him.

The faith of the President and his friends were pledged to the people of property in Louisiana that they should have their own State government, but it was a most difficult obligation to discharge. Finally, the President appointed a committee of eminent Republicans, two of whom were the present Senator Hawley, of Connecticut, and ex-Attorney-General Wayne MacVeagh, of Washington, to go to New Orleans and solve the problem. The first necessity to accomplish that result was to withdraw enough Senators and Representatives from the Packard Legislature to the Nichols Legislature to give Nichols a quorum in both houses of undisputed legislators, as that would leave Packard without a Legislature and clothe Nichols’s government with all the ceremony of law.

Many of the Packard legislators were negroes, and most of them commercial. The change could be effected only by purchase, in which the Hawley and MacVeagh committee had no part. There were enough and to spare of Packard legislators who were willing to sell out, but the Democrats were impoverished and could not raise money to buy them. One of the active men in the movement was Duncan F. Kenner, one of the most prominent men in the State for many years, and among the Senators in the market was one of his former[Pg 268] slaves, who demanded a high price. The State had been desolated, business paralyzed, and the people of Louisiana had not recovered from the universal waste of war, and while they were more than willing to buy enough of the Packard men to give Nichols the Legislature, they were absolutely without the means to do it.

In this emergency the Louisiana Lottery Company came forward and proposed to furnish the citizens of New Orleans, who were managing the movement, all the money they needed on condition that when the Democrats came into power and amended the Constitution, they should give the Louisiana Lottery a twenty-five-year charter in the Constitution. It was a hard bargain, but as they could do no better they accepted the proffer, and a very large sum of money was thus furnished and paid to the negroes and carpet-bag legislators, who were very glad to get under cover with cash in their pockets, knowing that the end of carpet-bag rule was near at hand. Packard finally found himself abandoned by a majority of the undisputed Senators and Representatives. His administration thus ended, and the promise of the friends of Hayes, which Hayes manfully sustained, was fully performed, and the property people of the South were given their right to govern their own States as the price of assenting to Hayes as President.

The Nichols government kept faith with the Louisiana Lottery Company, and the people of Louisiana have ever since been unjustly criticised as the only State in the Union that gave the highest possible charter to a lottery company, as they could not explain the inexorable conditions which compelled them to do it. This was the last act of the great political drama of 1876–77 that made Rutherford B. Hayes President.

The action of Tilden defeating Chase in the Democratic convention of 1868 had its sequel with mingled romance and reality in the defeat of Tilden for the Presidency in 1877, when the vote of Louisiana was passed upon by the Senate. Kate Chase Sprague was the most brilliant woman in Washington society during the war period, and in every way one of the most attractive. Her home in Washington was the centre of the most accomplished men in public life, and among them was Roscoe Conkling, the ablest of the Republican Senators. The contest for the Presidency before the Electoral Commission in 1876–77 turned on the vote of[Pg 269] Louisiana, and it required the approving vote of the Senate to give the electoral vote of that State to Hayes. Had it been given to Tilden, he would have been the President. Many believed that Hayes had not been elected and should not be declared elected, and among those who shared that conviction was Mr. Conkling, although he did not publicly express it.

The Senate was carefully canvassed, and enough Republican votes were marshalled to throw the vote of the Senate in favor of Tilden on the Louisiana issue if Conkling would lead in support of that policy, and it was understood that he had agreed to do so. When the crucial time came Conkling did not appear at all, and the anti-Hayes Republicans, being without a leader, fell back to their party lines and gave the vote of the State and the Presidential certificate to Hayes. It is an open secret that Conkling resolved his doubts as urged by Mrs. Sprague, who thereby avenged the defeat of her father in the Democratic nomination of 1868, that had been accomplished by Tilden; and thus Tilden lost the Presidency, to which he had been elected by a popular majority of over 250,000.

[Pg 270]

## THE GARFIELD-HANCOCK CONTEST

1880

The greatest battle ever fought in a national convention was witnessed at Chicago where the Republican National Convention met on June 2, 1880. Grant had made his journey around the world, received the homage of the highest rulers of every clime, and returned to be greeted with a degree of popular enthusiasm that had never before been given to any citizen of the Republic. During Grant’s absence his friends had made tireless efforts to organize his forces in all the States, and the friends of Blaine, who fought this battle royal with the friends of Grant, had been equally earnest and ceaseless to give Blaine the victory. It was indeed a battle of giants, and the auditorium in which the convention was held was the most impressive picture I have ever witnessed. There were not less than ten thousand spectators in addition to the full delegations and alternates from the States. Neither of the opposing chieftains ever had a majority in the body, but for a week they stood up face to face with unbroken lines and belligerent leaders in hand-to-hand conflict.

Among the delegates were Conkling, Garfield, Harrison, Logan, and many other conspicuous and able leaders of the opposing factions. Blaine’s people, with the aid of the field, weakened Grant’s lines by preventing the unit rule in any delegation, whereby Grant lost a considerable number of votes in New York, Pennsylvania, and other States. That was a test of the distinctive Grant strength in the body. Conkling opened the nominations by presenting the name of Grant, and he did it in imperial grandeur and with a degree of eloquence that was most impressive. Next to the speech of Ingersoll, who nominated Blaine in 1876, Conkling’s appeal for the nomination of Grant will stand as the ablest of all the many able deliverances in the history[Pg 271] of American politics. I sat quite close to him on the platform when he delivered it, and he was a most interesting study. Had he been as discreet as he was eloquent, it would have been a perfect exhibition of impressive oratory; but Conkling was inspired not only by his love of Grant, but more influenced than he confessed to himself by an intense hatred of Blaine, that he cherished until his death.

JAMES A. GARFIELD

He mortally offended every friend of Blaine, and thereby made it impossible even to win the hesitating men in the Blaine ranks by his keen and pungent fling at the delegates who disregarded their instructions to vote as a unit for Grant, and by his aggressive assault upon Blaine when he referred to Grant as a candidate “without patronage, without emissaries, without committees, without bureaus, without telegraph wires running from his house to this convention or running from his house anywhere.” Unlike the Ingersoll speech nominating Blaine in 1876, the speech of Conkling, able, eloquent, and grand as it was, left Grant weaker, instead of stronger.

Very general interest centred in General Garfield, who was at the head of the Ohio delegation, that was instructed for Senator Sherman for President. Garfield knew the situation; he knew that a third candidate must eventually be accepted, and he illy concealed his efforts to advance himself, while ostensibly struggling for Sherman. His speech nominating Sherman was a plea for peace rather than an aggressive presentation of Sherman’s claims, and it was well understood that his plea for peace was, in fact, a plea for himself. At various stages of the balloting tidal waves of enthusiasm would start for Garfield, and he narrowly escaped a spontaneous nomination. He was personally very popular, of imposing presence, a most accomplished speaker, and he was finally accepted by the friends of Blaine because he was not the partisan of either Blaine or Grant, and also because they could certainly win with him, and thus defeat Grant.

The convention became weary of what was evidently an equal contest between the Grant and Blaine forces, and all who were not intensely enlisted in the factional fight were glad to end the bitter struggle by accepting Garfield. Grant’s memorable 306 stood by him and never lowered their flag until they were defeated and fell with their faces to the foe.

Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts, was the permanent[Pg 272] president of the convention, and it was a battle of giants, lasting well in to the second week. Mr. Joy, who presented the name of Blaine to the convention, grievously disappointed the friends of the Plumed Knight. His advocacy of his chief was tame compared with the masterly orations of Conkling and Garfield, but his friends were in admirable fighting trim, and no such heroic struggle as that between Blaine and Grant has ever been recorded in the history of American politics. Conkling was chairman of his delegation, and was offensively imperious in every announcement that he made to the convention. His delegation had been instructed to vote a unit for Grant, but the convention had unshackled the delegates by allowing each one to cast his vote according to his choice, and Conkling in announcing the vote for Blaine in New York always did it with a sneer, and often with offensive expression. A ballot was not reached until Monday of the second week in the convention, and for two days the extraordinary spectacle was presented of Grant and Blaine holding their forces with but little variation, until the Blaine column finally broke for Garfield. The following table presents the ballots in detail:

BALLOTS. | James A. Garfield. | Ulysses S. Grant. | James G. Blaine. | John Sherman. | Elihu B. Washburne. | George F. Edmunds. | William Windom. | Rutherford B. Hayes. | George W. McCrary. | Roscoe Conkling. | John F. Hartranft. | Edmund J. Davis. | Philip H. Sheridan. | Benjamin Harrison. | Total. | Necessary to a choice.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1st | — | 304 | 284 | 93 | 31 | 34 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
2d | 1 | 305 | 282 | 94 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
3d | 1 | 305 | 282 | 93 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 755 | 378
4th | 1 | 305 | 281 | 95 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 755 | 378
5th | 1 | 305 | 281 | 95 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 755 | 378
6th | 2 | 305 | 280 | 95 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
7th | 2 | 305 | 281 | 94 | 31 | 32 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
8th | 1 | 306 | 284 | 91 | 32 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
9th | 2 | 308 | 282 | 90 | 32 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
10th | 2 | 305 | 282 | 92 | 32 | 31 | 10 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
11th | 2 | 305 | 281 | 93 | 32 | 31 | 10 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
12th | 1 | 304 | 283 | 92 | 33 | 31 | 10 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
13th | 1 | 305 | 285 | 89 | 33 | 31 | 10 | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
14th | — | 305 | 285 | 89 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
15th | — | 309 | 281 | 88 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378[Pg 273]
16th | — | 306 | 283 | 88 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 754 | 378
17th | — | 303 | 284 | 90 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | 755 | 378
18th | — | 305 | 283 | 91 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
19th | 1 | 305 | 279 | 96 | 32 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | 755 | 378
20th | 1 | 308 | 276 | 93 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | 755 | 378
21st | 1 | 305 | 276 | 96 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | 755 | 378
22d | 1 | 305 | 275 | 97 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | 755 | 378
23d | 2 | 304 | 275 | 97 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
24th | 2 | 305 | 279 | 93 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
25th | 2 | 302 | 281 | 94 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
26th | 2 | 303 | 280 | 93 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
27th | 2 | 306 | 277 | 93 | 36 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
28th | 2 | 307 | 279 | 91 | 35 | 31 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
29th | 2 | 305 | 278 | 116 | 35 | 12 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
30th | 2 | 306 | 279 | 120 | 33 | 11 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | — | 755 | 378
31st | 1 | 308 | 276 | 118 | 37 | 11 | 3 | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
32d | 1 | 309 | 270 | 117 | 44 | 11 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
33d | 1 | 309 | 276 | 110 | 44 | 11 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378
34th | 17 | 312 | 275 | 107 | 30 | 11 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 756 | 379
35th | 50 | 313 | 257 | 99 | 23 | 11 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 756 | 379
36th | 399 | 306 | 42 | 3 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 755 | 378

While it was generally expected that the convention would eventually stampede to Garfield, the movement was given vitality and form by the Wisconsin delegation. The only name prominently discussed as a compromise candidate in addition to that of Garfield was the name of Senator Windom, of Minnesota, who had received the vote of his State from the start. In a caucus of the delegation a small majority of the Wisconsin delegation voted to prefer Garfield to Windom, and that movement started the tide that gave the victory to Garfield. It is quite possible that if Wisconsin had declared for Windom, instead of Garfield, as it failed to do by only a very few votes, Windom might have been made the candidate, as he occupied a very strong position in the party, was free from factional alliances, and probably would have been quite as strong a candidate with the people[Pg 274] as Garfield. When the Wisconsin delegation decided to break the deadlock by accepting Garfield, it opened the door for the wearied anti-Grant gladiators to find speedy and gratifying refuge. Grant’s column stood to him with marvellous fidelity. He started with 304 votes, never fell below 302, never rose above 313, and ended on the final ballot with 306. The nomination of Garfield was made unanimous amidst the wildest enthusiasm.

Senator Conkling was in violent temper over the defeat of Grant, and when he was asked to name a candidate for Vice-President he at first petulantly refused to do so, but some of his more deliberate friends suggested the name of Chester A. Arthur, who was in the delegation. Arthur had acted as chairman during part of the balloting when Conkling was absent, and his dignified and manly manner of announcing the vote of his State contrasted very favorably with the offensive manner of Conkling. Conkling assented to rather than dictated the nomination of Arthur, and the 1st ballot for Vice-President was as follows:

Chester A. Arthur, N. Y. | 468
Elihu B. Washburne, Ill. | 199
Marshall Jewell, Conn. | 43
Horace Maynard, Tenn. | 30
Edmund J. Davis, Texas | 20
Blanche K. Bruce (Col.), Miss. | 8
James L. Alcorn, Miss. | 4
Thomas Settle, Fla. | 2
Stewart L. Woodford, N. Y. | 1

CHESTER A. ARTHUR

The nomination was promptly made unanimous. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Republican party in national convention assembled, at the end of twenty years since the Federal Government was first committed to its charge, submits to the people of the United States this brief report of its administration. It suppressed the Rebellion which had armed nearly a million of men to subvert the national authority. It reconstructed the Union of the States with freedom instead of slavery as its corner-stone. It transformed four millions of human beings from the likeness of things to the rank of citizens. It relieved Congress from the infamous work of hunting fugitive slaves, and charged it to see that slavery does not exist. It has raised the value of our paper currency from thirty-eight per cent. to the par of gold. It has restored upon a solid basis payment in coin for all the national obligations, and has given us a currency absolutely good and equal in every part of our extended country. It has lifted the credit of the nation from the point where six per cent. bonds sold at eighty-six per cent. to that where four per cent. bonds are eagerly sought at a premium. Under its administration railways have increased from thirty-one thousand miles in 1860 to more than eighty-two thousand miles in 1879. Our foreign trade has increased from seven hundred million dollars to one billion, one hundred and fifty million dollars in the same time, and our exports, which were twenty million[Pg 275] dollars less than our imports in 1860, were two hundred and sixty-four million more than our imports in 1879. Without resorting to loans, it has, since the war closed, defrayed the ordinary expenses of government besides the accruing interest on the public debt, and has annually disbursed more than thirty million dollars for soldiers’ pensions. It has paid eight hundred and eighty-eight million dollars of the public debt, and, by refunding the balance at lower rates, has reduced the annual interest charge from nearly one hundred and fifty-one million dollars to less than eighty-nine million dollars. All the industries of the country have revived, labor is in demand, wages have increased, and throughout the entire country there is evidence of a coming prosperity greater than we have ever enjoyed.

Upon this record the Republican party asks for the continued confidence and support of the people, and this convention submits for their approval the following statement of the principles and purposes which will continue to guide and inspire its efforts:

1. We affirm that the work of the last twenty-one years has been such as to commend itself to the favor of the nation, and that the fruits of the costly victories which we have achieved through immense difficulties should be preserved; that the peace regained should be cherished; that the dissevered Union, now happily restored, should be perpetuated, and that the liberties secured to this generation should be transmitted undiminished to future generations; that the order established and the credit acquired should never be impaired; that the pensions promised should be extinguished by the full payment of every dollar thereof; that the reviving industries should be further promoted, and that the commerce, already so great, should be steadily encouraged.

2. The Constitution of the United States is a supreme law, and not a mere contract; out of confederated States it made a sovereign nation. Some powers are denied to the nation, while others are denied to the States; but the boundary between the powers delegated and those reserved is to be determined by the national, and not by the State tribunals.

3. The work of popular education is one left to the care of the several States, but it is the duty of the National Government to aid that work to the extent of its constitutional duty. The intelligence of the nation is but the aggregate of the intelligence in the several States, and the destiny of the nation must be guided, not by the genius of any one State, but by the average genius of all.

4. The Constitution wisely forbids Congress to make any law respecting an establishment of religion, but it is idle to hope that the nation can be protected against the influences of sectarianism while each State is exposed to its domination. We therefore recommend that the Constitution be so amended as to lay the same prohibition upon the Legislature of each State, and to forbid the appropriation of public funds to the support of sectarian schools.

5. We affirm the belief avowed in 1876, that the duties levied for the purpose of revenue should so discriminate as to favor American labor; that no further grant of the public domain should be made to any railway or other corporation; that, slavery having perished in the States, its twin barbarity, polygamy, must die in the Territories; that everywhere the protection accorded to citizens of American[Pg 276] birth must be secured to citizens by American adoption; and that we esteem it the duty of Congress to develop and improve our watercourses and harbors, but insist that further subsidies to private persons or corporations must cease; that the obligations of the Republic to the men who preserved its integrity in the hour of battle are undiminished by the lapse of the fifteen years since their final victory—to do them perpetual honor is, and shall forever be, the grateful privilege and sacred duty of the American people.

6. Since the authority to regulate immigration and intercourse between the United States and foreign nations rests with Congress, or with the United States and its treaty-making powers, the Republican party, regarding the unrestricted immigration of the Chinese as an evil of great magnitude, invoke the exercise of those powers to restrain and limit that immigration by the enactment of such just, humane and reasonable provisions as will produce that result.

7. That the purity and patriotism which characterized the earlier career of Rutherford B. Hayes in peace and war, and which guided the thoughts of our immediate predecessors to him for a Presidential candidate, have continued to inspire him in his career as Chief Executive, and that history will accord to his administration the honors which are due to an efficient, just, and courteous discharge of the public business, and will honor his interposition between the people and proposed partisan laws.

We charge upon the Democratic party the habitual sacrifice of patriotism and justice to a supreme and insatiable lust of office and patronage; that to obtain possession of the national and State Governments and the control of place and position they have obstructed all efforts to promote the purity and to conserve the freedom of suffrage, and have devised fraudulent certifications and returns; have labored to unseat lawfully elected members of Congress, to secure at all hazards the vote of a majority of the States in the House of Representatives; have endeavored to occupy by force and fraud the places of trust given to others by the people of Maine, and rescued by the courageous action of Maine’s patriotic sons; have, by methods vicious in principle and tyrannical in practice, attached partisan legislation to appropriation bills, upon whose passage the very movements of the Government depend, and have crushed the rights of individuals; have advocated the principles and sought the favor of rebellion against the nation, and have endeavored to obliterate the sacred memories of the war, and to overcome its inestimably valuable results of nationality, personal freedom, and individual equality.

The equal, steady, and complete enforcement of laws and the protection of all our citizens in the enjoyment of all privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution, are the first duties of the nation. The dangers of a solid South can only be averted by a faithful performance of every promise which the nation has made to the citizen. The execution of the laws and the punishment of all those who violate them are the only safe methods by which an enduring peace can be secured and genuine prosperity established throughout the South. Whatever promises the nation makes, the nation must perform, and the nation cannot with safety delegate this duty to the States. The solid South must be divided by the peaceful agencies of the ballot, and all opinions must there find[Pg 277] free expression, and to this end the honest voter must be protected against terrorism, violence, or fraud.

And we affirm it to be the duty and the purpose of the Republican party to use every legitimate means to restore all the States of this Union to the most perfect harmony that may be practicable; and we submit it to the practical, sensible people of the United States to say whether it would not be dangerous to the dearest interests of our country at this time to surrender the administration of the National Government to the party which seeks to overthrow the existing policy under which we are so prosperous, and thus bring distrust and confusion where there are now order, confidence, and hope.

The Republican party, adhering to principles affirmed by its last national convention of respect for the constitutional rule covering appointments to office, adopts the declaration of President Hayes, that the reform of the civil service should be thorough, radical, and complete. To this end it demands the co-operation of the legislative with the executive department of the Government, and that Congress shall so legislate that fitness, ascertained by proper, practical tests, shall admit to the public service.

General Grant had become intensely interested in the contest for a third term, and he had every reason to believe that it would be accorded to him. Foreign travel and intelligent observation had greatly enlarged his narrow political ideas and tempered his political asperities, and he would undoubtedly have made a much better President than ever he did before. But the unwritten law of the nation confronted him, declaring that no man could fill the Presidential chair for a longer period than did George Washington. It was that sentiment that decided the contest against him.

He was at his home in Galena, not far from Chicago, during the sessions of the convention, but while he was advised of what transpired from day to day, he gave no directions and made no suggestions to his friends. He had the ablest galaxy of leaders that ever appeared in a national convention in support of any one candidate, and he trusted them implicitly. On the morning after the convention adjourned he came to Chicago, and I met him at the Palmer House, where he had come to confer with his discomfited friends. His face gave no sign of the disappointment he had suffered. He met his friends in even a more genial way than was his custom. He expressed himself as entirely content with the decision of the convention, and greatly appreciated the support that had been given him. He never looked better in his life, and while I could not congratulate him, I could truthfully express my gratification at seeing him the picture of health and comfort.

[Pg 278]

He was then in entire accord with his leading friends in their purpose to prevent the election of Garfield, and for two months after the campaign opened Garfield would have been overwhelmingly beaten, but after Conkling’s conference with Garfield in Ohio, Grant’s friends gave a most zealous support to Garfield’s election, and barely saved him by the aid of Tammany’s betrayal of Hancock.

The Democratic National Convention met at Cincinnati on the 22d of June, with John W. Stevenson, of Kentucky, as permanent president. The dispute over contested seats lasted until the second day. Massachusetts, that had never voted for a Democratic candidate for President, put up the fiercest fight between disputing delegations, and New York had a bitter factional quarrel between delegations chosen by the regular Democrats and another chosen by the Tammany people. The Tammany followers, under the lead of John Kelly, were very vindictive in their opposition to Tilden, openly declaring that they would not support Tilden if nominated, and the Tammany delegation was rejected. The position of Tilden was regarded as doubtful until well on in the second day of the contest, when an elaborate letter from him was read to the convention withdrawing his name. The letter had been prepared by Tilden and given to a trusted friend to use it only if it became evident that Tilden could not be again nominated, or that he could not be elected if nominated. The judgment of his most dispassionate friends was that he might be nominated, but that he could not be elected, with the fierce opposition of Tammany and his failure to assert his right to the Presidency in 1877.

After Tilden’s withdrawal the contest was really between Hancock and Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania. If the Tilden strength had been concentrated on Randall at the opening of the convention, his nomination would have been within the range of probability, but even after Tilden withdrew he hesitated until the 2d ballot before he gave Randall any support. Bayard was a close second to Hancock on the 1st ballot, but he was at no time within sight of a nomination.

It was on this occasion that the late Daniel Dougherty made the most eloquent speech of his life, presenting the name of Hancock to the convention. He was not a member of the delegation, but was called into it for the purpose on the morning of the day that the nomination was to be made.[Pg 279] He hurried around to my room at the St. Nicholas, as he hesitated about accepting the duty assigned him. He always prepared his important speeches and memorized them. I earnestly urged him to go at once to his room and write a short speech and be prepared to deliver it. He finally decided to do so, and in a speech of not over twenty minutes he delivered the greatest oration of his life.

Only two ballots were had for President, and on the second Hancock was so largely in the lead, having 320 to 128¹⁄₂ for Randall, that the delegations began to change their votes until Hancock had 705 to 33 for all others. The following table gives the ballots in detail:

CANDIDATES. | First. | Second. | After changes.
--- | --- | --- | ---
Winfield S. Hancock, Pennsylvania | 171 |  | 320 |  | 705
Thomas F. Bayard, Delaware | 153 | ¹⁄₂ | 113 |  | 2
Henry B. Payne, Ohio | 81 |  | — |  | —
Allen G. Thurman, Ohio | 68 | ¹⁄₂ | 50 |  | —
Stephen J. Field, California | 65 |  | 65 | ¹⁄₂ | —
William R. Morrison, Illinois | 62 |  | — |  | —
Thomas A. Hendricks, Indiana | 50 | ¹⁄₂ | 31 |  | 30
Samuel J. Tilden, New York | 38 |  | 6 |  | 1
Horatio Seymour, New York | 8 |  | — |  | —
Samuel J. Randall, Pennsylvania | — |  | 128 | ¹⁄₂ | —
Scattering | 31 |  | 22 |  | —

As Indiana was one of the debatable States, William H. English, of that State, was nominated for Vice-President, with only Richard M. Bishop, of Ohio, named against him. Before the ballot had proceeded to any considerable extent, Bishop’s name was withdrawn, and English given a unanimous nomination. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Democrats of the United States, in convention assembled, declare—

1. We pledge ourselves anew to the constitutional doctrines and traditions of the Democratic party, as illustrated by the teachings and example of a long line of Democratic statesmen and patriots, and embodied in the platform of the last national convention of the party.

2. Opposition to centralizationism and to that dangerous spirit of encroachment which tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever be the form of government, a real despotism. No sumptuary laws; separation of[Pg 280] Church and State for the good of each; common schools fostered and protected.

3. Home rule; honest money, consisting of gold and silver, and paper convertible into coin on demand; the strict maintenance of the public faith, State and national; and a tariff for revenue only.

4. The subordination of the military to the civil power, and a general and thorough reform of the civil service.

5. The right to a free ballot is the right preservative of all rights, and must and shall be maintained in every part of the United States.

6. The existing administration is the representative of conspiracy only, and its claim of right to surround the ballot-boxes with troops and deputy marshals, to intimidate and obstruct the electors, and the unprecedented use of the veto to maintain its corrupt and despotic power, insult the people and imperil their institutions.

7. The grand fraud of 1876–77, by which, upon a false count of the electoral votes of two States, the candidate defeated at the polls was declared to be President, and, for the first time in American history, the will of the people was set aside under a threat of military violence, struck a deadly blow at our system of representative government; the Democratic party, to preserve the country from a civil war, submitted for a time in firm and patriotic faith that the people would punish this crime in 1880; this issue precedes and dwarfs every other; it imposes a more sacred duty upon the people of the Union than ever addressed the conscience of a nation of freemen.

8. We execrate the course of this administration in making places in the civil service a reward for political crime, and demand a reform by statute which shall make it forever impossible for the defeated candidate to bribe his way to the seat of a usurper by billeting villains upon the people.

9. The resolution of Samuel J. Tilden not again to be a candidate for the exalted place to which he was elected by a majority of his countrymen, and from which he was excluded by the leaders of the Republican party, is received by the Democrats of the United States with sensibility, and they declare their confidence in his wisdom, patriotism, and integrity, unshaken by the assaults of a common enemy, and they further assure him that he is followed into the retirement he has chosen for himself by the sympathy and respect of his fellow-citizens, who regard him as one who, by elevating the standards of public morality, merits the lasting gratitude of his country and his party.

10. Free ships and a living chance for American commerce on the seas and on the land. No discrimination in favor of transportation lines, corporations, or monopolies.

11. Amendment of the Burlingame treaty. No more Chinese immigration, except for travel, education, and foreign commerce, and therein carefully guarded.

12. Public money and public credit for public purposes solely, and public land for actual settlers.

13. The Democratic party is the friend of labor and the laboring man, and pledges itself to protect him alike against the cormorant and the commune.

14. We congratulate the country upon the honesty and thrift of a Democratic Congress, which has reduced the public expenditure forty million dollars a year; upon the continuation of prosperity at[Pg 281] home and the national honor abroad; and, above all, upon the promise of such a change in the administration of the Government as shall insure us genuine and lasting reform in every department of the public service.

The National Greenback party held its national convention at Chicago on the 9th of June, with Richard Trevellick, of Michigan, as permanent president. A single ballot was had for President, resulting as follows:

James B. Weaver, Iowa. | 224 | ¹⁄₂
Henry B. Wright, Penn. | 126 | ¹⁄₂
Stephen D. Dillaye, N. Y. | 119 |
Benj. F. Butler, Mass. | 95 |
Solon Chase, Maine. | 89 |
Edward P. Allis, Wis. | 41 |
Alexander Campbell, Ill. | 21 |

Before the vote was finally announced delegations speedily changed their votes to Weaver, and he was declared unanimously chosen as the candidate. B. B. Chambers, of Texas, was nominated for Vice-President by 403 votes to 311 for Allanson M. West, of Mississippi. The following platform was adopted:

1. That the right to make and issue money is a sovereign power to be maintained by the people for the common benefit. The delegation of this right to corporations is a surrender of the central attribute of sovereignty, void of constitutional sanction, conferring upon a subordinate irresponsible power absolute dominion over industry and commerce. All money, whether metallic or paper, should be issued and its volume controlled by the Government, and not by or through banking corporations, and, when so issued, should be a full legal tender for all debts, public and private.

2. That the bonds of the United States should not be refunded, but paid as rapidly as practicable, according to contract. To enable the Government to meet these obligations, legal tender currency should be substituted for the notes of the national banks, the national banking system abolished, and the unlimited coinage of silver, as well as gold, established by law.

3. That labor should be so protected by national and State authority as to equalize its burdens and insure a just distribution of its results; the eight-hour law of Congress should be enforced; the sanitary condition of industrial establishments placed under rigid control; the competition of contract labor abolished; a bureau of labor statistics established; factories, mines, and workshops inspected; the employment of children under fourteen years of age forbidden; and wages paid in cash.

4. Slavery being simply cheap labor, and cheap labor being simply slavery, the importation and presence of Chinese serfs necessarily tends to brutalize and degrade American labor; therefore immediate steps should be taken to abrogate the Burlingame treaty.

5. Railroad land grants forfeited by reason of non-fulfilment of contract should be immediately reclaimed by Government; and henceforth the public domain reserved exclusively as homes for actual settlers.

[Pg 282]

6. It is the duty of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. All lines of communication and transportation should be brought under such legislative control as shall secure moderate, fair, and uniform rates for passenger and freight traffic.

7. We denounce, as destructive to prosperity and dangerous to liberty, the action of the old parties in fostering and sustaining gigantic land, railroad, and money corporations, invested with, and exercising, powers belonging to the Government, and yet not responsible to it for the manner of their exercise.

8. That the Constitution, in giving Congress the power to borrow money, to declare war, to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, never intended that the men who loaned their money for an interest consideration should be preferred to the soldier and sailor who perilled their lives and shed their blood on land and sea in defence of their country; and we condemn the cruel class legislation of the Republican party, which, while professing great gratitude to the soldier, has most unjustly discriminated against him and in favor of the bondholder.

9. All property should bear its just proportion of taxation; and we demand a graduated income tax.

10. We denounce as most dangerous the efforts everywhere manifest to restrict the right of suffrage.

11. We are opposed to an increase of the standing army in time of peace, and the insidious scheme to establish an enormous military power under the guise of militia laws.

12. We demand absolute democratic rules for the government of Congress, placing all representatives of the people upon an equal footing, and taking away from committees a veto power greater than that of the President.

13. We demand a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, instead of a government of the bondholders, by the bondholders, and for the bondholders; and we denounce every attempt to stir up sectional strife as an effort to conceal monstrous crimes against the people.

14. In the furtherance of these ends, we ask the co-operation of all fair-minded people. We have no quarrel with individuals, wage no war upon classes, but only against vicious institutions. We are not content to endure further discipline from our present actual rulers, who, having dominion over money, over transportation, over land and labor, and largely over the press and the machinery of government, wield unwarrantable power over our institutions, and over our life and property.

15. That every citizen of due age, sound mind, and not a felon, be fully enfranchised, and that this resolution be referred to the States, with recommendation for their favorable consideration.

The Prohibition convention met at Cleveland on the 17th of June. The platform was substantially a repetition of the platform of 1876, and General Neal Dow, of Maine, was presented for President, and A. M. Thompson, of Ohio, for Vice-President.

[Pg 283]

The few scattered fragments of the American party held a convention on the 27th of June, and nominated John W. Phelps, of Vermont, for President, and Samuel C. Pomeroy, of Kansas, for Vice-President. Their platform declared against secret societies, Freemasonry in particular, and all other anti-Christian movements. The party was not heard of in the contest.

The Presidential contest of 1880 was remarkable for the absence of bitterness or vituperation. Garfield and Hancock were both highly respected, and I cannot recall a struggle for the Presidency that exhibited less of the asperities which are usually displayed in the struggle for the political control of the nation. Hancock was beaten on the popular vote by a majority of but little over 7000, and he lost his election by Tammany failing to give him a cordial support in New York.

The following table presents the popular and electoral vote of 1880:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
James A. Garfield, Ohio. | Winfield S. Hancock, Penn. | James B. Weaver, Iowa. | Neal Dow, Maine. | Garfield. | Hancock.
Maine | 74,039 | 65,171[28] | 4,408 | 93 | 7 | —
New Hampshire | 44,852 | 40,794 | 528 | 180 | 5 | —
Vermont | 45,567 | 18,316 | 1,215 | —— | 5 | —
Massachusetts | 165,205 | 111,960 | 4,548 | 682 | 13 | —
Rhode Island | 18,195 | 10,779 | 236 | 20 | 4 | —
Connecticut | 67,071 | 64,415 | 868 | 409 | 6 | —
New York | 555,544 | 534,511 | 12,373 | 1,517 | 35 | —
New Jersey | 120,555 | 122,565 | 2,617 | 191 | — | 9
Pennsylvania | 444,704 | 407,428 | 20,668 | 1,939 | 29 | —
Delaware | 14,133 | 15,275 | 120 | —— | — | 3
Maryland | 78,515 | 93,706 | 818 | —— | — | 8
Virginia | 84,020 | 128,586[29] | —— | —— | — | 11
West Virginia | 46,243 | 57,391 | 9,079 | —— | — | 5
North Carolina | 115,874 | 124,268 | 1,126 | —— | — | 10
South Carolina | 58,071 | 112,312 | 566 | —— | — | 7
Georgia | 54,086 | 102,470 | 969 | —— | — | 11
Florida | 23,654 | 27,964 | —— | —— | — | 4[Pg 284]
Alabama | 56,221 | 91,185 | 4,642 | —— | — | 10
Mississippi | 34,854 | 75,750 | 5,797 | —— | — | 8
Louisiana | 38,637[30] | 65,067 | 439 | —— | — | 8
Texas | 57,893 | 156,428 | 27,405 | —— | — | 8
Arkansas | 42,436 | 60,775 | 4,079 | —— | — | 6
Missouri | 153,567 | 208,609 | 35,135 | —— | — | 15
Tennessee | 107,677 | 128,191 | 5,917 | 43 | — | 12
Kentucky | 106,306 | 149,068 | 11,499 | 258 | — | 12
Ohio | 375,048 | 340,821 | 6,456 | 2,616 | 22 | —
Michigan | 185,341 | 131,597 | 34,895 | 942 | 11 | —
Indiana | 232,164 | 225,522 | 12,986 | —— | 15 | —
Illinois | 318,037 | 277,321 | 26,358 | 443 | 21 | —
Wisconsin | 144,400 | 114,649 | 7,986 | 69 | 10 | —
Minnesota | 93,903 | 53,315 | 3,267 | 286 | 5 | —
Iowa | 183,927 | 105,845 | 32,701 | 592 | 11 | —
Nebraska | 54,979 | 28,523 | 3,950 | —— | 3 | —
Kansas | 121,549 | 59,801 | 10,851 | 25 | 5 | —
Colorado | 27,450 | 24,647 | 1,435 | —— | 3 | —
Nevada | 8,732 | 9,613 | —— | —— | — | 3
California | 80,348 | 80,426 | 3,892 | —— | 1 | 5
Oregon | 20,619 | 19,948 | 249 | —— | 3 | —
Totals | 4,454,416 | 4,444,952 | 308,578 | 10,305 | 214 | 155

Garfield possessed more political honors at one time than any other public man in the history of the country. After the November election of 1880, he was the Congressman from his district; he was United States Senator-elect, having been chosen by the Ohio Legislature in January of the same year, and he was President-elect. He had many elements of popularity, but was not a courageous leader like Blaine. He was not a strong, aggressive man, although able in debate and one of the most scholarly of our public men. He had a most difficult rôle to fill when he came into the Presidency. Conkling wholly distrusted him when Garfield was first nominated for President, as was clearly evidenced by Conkling failing to call upon Garfield when Garfield made his first visit to New York after the Chicago convention, although he stopped at the same hotel where Conkling[Pg 285] was a guest. Later in the campaign Conkling was earnestly urged to visit Garfield, and he made the visit, resulting in the Conkling and Grant forces earnestly supporting Garfield’s election.

General Grant, for the first time in his life, took the stump to aid the Garfield cause; but even after having turned the tide in favor of Garfield’s election, Conkling knew that Garfield was not a self-reliant leader, and after the appointment of Blaine to the Cabinet, with whom Conkling had no relations whatever, private or official, Conkling had little confidence in Garfield fulfilling his pledges made to the friends of Grant. The open breach came when Garfield nominated Robertson for Collector of New York. Robertson was one of the New York delegates to Chicago who voted against Grant, and was one of the most aggressive anti-Conkling men in the State. This appointment was at once charged upon Blaine, but the evidence is conclusive that it was made by Garfield alone, without even a suggestion from Blaine, who certainly did not desire to precipitate a war between the administration of which he was Premier and so formidable a political factor as Conkling. It was simply Garfield’s blunder, made in haste, and it proved very clearly that he was not equipped to meet the political exigencies which confronted him. Conkling blundered even worse than Garfield. He petulantly resigned his seat in the Senate, in which his colleague, Senator Platt (now Senator from New York), joined him, although he had served but a fraction of a year of his full term.

Conkling confidently hoped to be re-elected by the New York Legislature, and he doubtless would have succeeded had not the presiding officer of the Senate, by a very shrewd and simple parliamentary act, postponed the election a week longer than Conkling expected. That delay was fatal, and a protracted and humiliating contest was made by Conkling and Platt, each week both losing prestige and support, until finally the Republicans of the New York Legislature were compelled to cast them both aside and elect new Senators. Vice-President Arthur stood manfully abreast with Conkling, his friend, in his battle at Albany for re-election, but after the failure on the 1st ballot there never was a time when the re-election of Conkling and Platt was possible. Conkling retired from politics utterly disgusted, located in New York, where he very rapidly acquired a lucrative practice,[Pg 286] and his tragic death from exposure in the great blizzard of 1888 ended the career of one of the ablest of the statesmen of his day.

Arthur was the fourth Vice-President who succeeded to the Presidency by the death of the President, and he was the second whose honors had come to him by the assassination of his chief. The accession of Arthur created very general distrust in both business and political circles. He was little known beyond his factional conflicts in New York, having been removed from a leading Custom House office by Secretary Sherman. That removal was sustained by the Republican Senate in defiance of the power of Conkling. It was generally assumed that the administration of Arthur, under the lead of Conkling, would be one of political vengeance, and of necessity convulse the party and end Republican power in the nation.

Business interests were disturbed because they feared that Arthur would be a political President with little exhibition of statesmanship, but Arthur rose to the full measure of his responsible duties. While he moved with great caution, to avoid a breach with his own friends, he soon offended Conkling, and gradually won the confidence and respect of the nation to an extent that few Presidents have enjoyed. The Garfield administration had been started on lines that Arthur could not follow, and the retirement of the Garfield Cabinet, with the exception of Robert T. Lincoln, then Secretary of War, was soon accomplished. The prosecution of the Star-Route Postal frauds was the one thing on which Blaine and MacVeagh, the Attorney-General, had decided to make a creditable record for the administration, and while Arthur was quite as honest as Garfield, political necessities compelled him to discourage those prosecutions. Beyond that there was not a blemish on his administration of some three years and a half. He appreciated the fact that the President should be above the rule of faction, and in that he early offended Conkling. He nominated Conkling as Supreme Judge of the United States, but Conkling peremptorily rejected it, and thenceforth the relations between Arthur and Conkling were severely strained.

Arthur was the one of the four Vice-Presidents succeeding to the Presidency who did not change the policy of the administration. He gradually won the esteem of all parties in the land by his dignity, courtesy, and manliness in every[Pg 287] emergency that confronted him. He was one of the most genial and delightful of all the Presidents who occupied the White House, and he would doubtless have been nominated for President in 1884 but for the fact that Blaine had that honor safely mortgaged. Arthur was desirous of a nomination, but Blaine was so strong with the leaders and also with the rank and file of the party that he won an easy victory over the President.

The opposition to Arthur in the Republican convention of 1884 was not inspired by hostility to him or to his administration. It was simply the overwhelming Republican sentiment of the country that demanded Blaine as the party candidate for President. I had met President Arthur frequently during his Presidential term, although I never had any political or personal interests to serve. It was always a pleasure to call upon him and enjoy the dignified and cordial welcome he ever gave to visitors. I last saw him on the night of the Cleveland inauguration day, that closed his Presidential term. He was the guest of honor at a dinner given by Senator Cameron, and I was painfully impressed with what I then assumed to be the keen disappointment of Arthur at his retirement from the Presidency. He seemed greatly depressed in spirit and to lack his usual genial and fascinating qualities. It was not long after, however, when it became known that he had retired from the Presidential office the victim of a fatal disease, that exhausted his vitality. He lived a very quiet life, beloved by all who knew him and respected by the whole nation during the brief period between his retirement and his death.

[Pg 288]

## THE CLEVELAND-BLAINE CONTEST

1884

The Presidential campaign of 1884 was opened on June 5 by the Republican National Convention at Chicago, which nominated Blaine after the Arthur administration had made a feeble struggle against him. Strange as it may seem, Blaine took much less interest in his nomination at that time than he had in his contests of 1876 and 1880. He was painfully impressed by the conviction that he was fated not to be President, and he feared his defeat. A recent article by ex-Governor Boutwell, of Massachusetts, who was then in Congress with Blaine, stated that a short time before the meeting of the convention, when Blaine knew that the nomination was within his own hands, he told Boutwell that he was glad to have some votes in the convention, but that he did not wish the nomination. He desired to defeat President Arthur, and urged Boutwell to organize for the nomination of General Sherman for President and Robert Lincoln for Vice-President.

I saw Blaine frequently during the months preceding the nomination, and he never exhibited any special gratification at the fact that he could then, for the first time, surely attain the leadership in his party for which he had so long struggled; but he had not the courage to decline it. The nomination came to him, and though he did not heartily welcome it, he was justly proud of it.

The contest between Cleveland and Blaine was one of the most spirited and earnest of our national political struggles. The assassination of Garfield and the factional troubles which arose under Garfield, and continued to some extent under Arthur, greatly disturbed Republican tranquillity, and in 1882 the Democrats won all the debatable States and carried the popular branch of Congress. Grover Cleveland in that year became a national political factor by his election as[Pg 289] Governor of New York by nearly 200,000 majority. Blaine had the vital Republican element very earnestly in his support, but had to confront the implacable opposition of many of the ablest leaders of his party. He had already been a candidate before two Republican conventions, in which his enemies had defamed him without limit, and the Grant influence was as vindictive, although not so powerful, in 1884 as it was in 1876 and 1880.

GROVER CLEVELAND

The Republican National Convention met at Chicago on the 3d of June, and ex-Representative John R. Lynch, of Mississippi (colored), was made temporary president, and ex-Senator John B. Henderson, of Missouri, permanent president. The friends of President Arthur, largely representing Federal officials, made a very earnest battle for their chief, but it was a Blaine convention from start to finish. Many questions of party policy and rules were discussed and a platform adopted during the first three days of the convention, and it was not until the evening session of the third day that Presidential candidates were presented. On the morning of the fourth day, the convention proceeded to ballot, resulting in the nomination of Blaine, as follows:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth.
James G. Blaine, of Maine | 334 | ¹⁄₂ | 349 | 375 | 541
Chester A. Arthur, of New York | 278 |  | 276 | 274 | 207
George F. Edmunds, of Vermont | 93 |  | 85 | 69 | 41
John A. Logan, of Illinois | 63 | ¹⁄₂ | 61 | 53 | 7
John Sherman, of Ohio | 30 |  | 28 | 25 | —
Joseph R. Hawley, of Connecticut | 13 |  | 13 | 13 | 15
Robert T. Lincoln, of Illinois | 4 |  | 4 | 8 | 2
William T. Sherman, of Missouri | 2 |  | 2 | 2 | —

The nomination of Blaine was made unanimous with great enthusiasm. The convention then adjourned until evening, when General John A. Logan, of Illinois, was nominated for Vice-President on the 1st ballot, receiving 779 votes to 7 for Lucius Fairchild, of Wisconsin, and 6 for Walter Q. Gresham, of Indiana. General Logan was regarded as one of the most prominent of the Grant leaders, and it was considered good policy to unite the two elements of the party by giving him second place. His nomination was also made unanimous, and cheered to the echo. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

[Pg 290]

1. The Republicans of the United States, in national convention assembled, renew their allegiance to the principles upon which they have triumphed in six successive Presidential elections, and congratulate the American people on the attainment of so many results in legislation and administration by which the Republican party has, after saving the Union, done so much to render its institutions just, equal, and beneficent, the safeguard of liberty, and the embodiment of the best thought and highest purposes of our citizens. The Republican party has gained its strength by quick and faithful response to the demands of the people for the freedom and equality of all men; for a united nation, assuring the rights of all citizens; for the elevation of labor; for an honest currency; for purity in legislation; and for integrity and accountability in all departments of the Government. And it accepts anew the duty of leading in the work of progress and reform.

2. We lament the death of President Garfield, whose sound statesmanship, long conspicuous in Congress, gave promise of a strong and successful administration, a promise fully realized during the short period of his office as President of the United States. His distinguished services in war and in peace have endeared him to the hearts of the American people.

3. In the administration of President Arthur we recognize a wise, conservative, and patriotic policy, under which the country has been blessed with remarkable prosperity; and we believe his eminent services are entitled to and will receive the hearty approval of every good citizen.

4. It is the first duty of a good Government to protect the rights and promote the interests of its own people. The largest diversity of industry is most productive of general prosperity and of the comfort and independence of the people. We therefore demand that the imposition of duties on foreign imports shall be made, not for revenue only, but that, in raising the requisite revenues for the Government, such duties shall be so levied as to afford security to our diversified industries and protection to the rights and wages of the laborers, to the end that active and intelligent labor, as well as capital, may have its just reward, and the laboring man his full share in the national prosperity.

5. Against the so-called economical system of the Democratic party, which would degrade our labor to the foreign standard, we enter our most earnest protest. The Democratic party has failed completely to relieve the people of the burden of unnecessary taxation by a wise reduction of the surplus.

6. The Republican party pledges itself to correct the irregularities of the tariff and to reduce the surplus, not by the vicious and indiscriminate process of horizontal reduction, but by such methods as will relieve the taxpayer without injuring the laborer or the great productive interests of the country.

7. We recognize the importance of sheep husbandry in the United States, the serious depression which it is now experiencing, and the danger threatening its future prosperity; and we therefore respect the demands of the Representatives of this important agricultural interest for a readjustment of duties upon foreign wool, in order that such industry shall have full and adequate protection.

8. We have always recommended the best money known to the[Pg 291] civilized world, and we urge that an effort be made to unite all commercial nations in the establishment of an international standard which shall fix for all the relative value of gold and silver coinage.

9. The regulation of commerce with foreign nations and between the States is one of the most important prerogatives of the General Government, and the Republican party distinctly announces its purpose to support such legislation as will fully and efficiently carry out the constitutional power of Congress over interstate commerce.

10. The principle of the public regulation of railway corporations is a wise and salutary one for the protection of all classes of the people, and we favor legislation that shall prevent unjust discrimination and excessive charges for transportation, and that shall secure to the people and to the railways alike the fair and equal protection of the laws.

11. We favor the establishment of a national bureau of labor; the enforcement of the eight-hour law; a wise and judicious system of general education by adequate appropriation from the national revenues wherever the same is needed. We believe that everywhere the protection of a citizen of American birth must be secured to citizens by American adoption, and we favor the settlement of national differences by international arbitration.

12. The Republican party, having its birth in a hatred of slave labor, and in a desire that all men may be truly free and equal, is unalterably opposed to placing our workingmen in competition with any form of servile labor, whether at home or abroad. In this spirit we denounce the importation of contract labor, whether from Europe or Asia, as an offence against the spirit of American institutions, and we pledge ourselves to sustain the present law restricting Chinese immigration, and to provide such further legislation as is necessary to carry out its purposes.

13. Reform of the civil service, auspiciously begun under Republican administration, should be completed by the further extension of the reformed system already established by law to all the grades of the service to which it is applicable. The spirit and purpose of the reform should be observed in all executive appointments, and all laws at variance with the objects of existing reformed legislation should be repealed, to the end that the dangers to free institutions which lurk in the power of official patronage may be wisely and effectively avoided.

14. The public lands are a heritage of the people of the United States, and should be reserved, as far as possible, for small holdings by actual settlers. We are opposed to the acquisition of large tracts of these lands by corporations or individuals, especially where such holdings are in the hands of non-resident aliens, and we will endeavor to obtain such legislation as will tend to correct this evil. We demand of Congress the speedy forfeiture of all land-grants which have lapsed by reason of non-compliance with acts of incorporation, in all cases where there has been no attempt in good faith to perform the conditions of such grants.

15. The grateful thanks of the American people are due to the Union soldiers and sailors of the late war; and the Republican party stands pledged to suitable pensions for all who were disabled, and for the widows and orphans of those who died in the war. The[Pg 292] Republican party also pledges itself to the repeal of the limitation contained in the Arrears act of 1879, so that all invalid soldiers shall share alike, and their pensions begin with the date of disability, and not with the date of the application.

16. The Republican party favors a policy which shall keep us from entangling alliances with foreign nations, and which gives us the right to expect that foreign nations shall refrain from meddling in American affairs—the policy which seeks peace and trade with all powers, but especially with those of the Western Hemisphere.

17. We demand the restoration of our navy to its old-time strength and efficiency, that it may in any sea protect the rights of American citizens and the interests of American commerce. We call upon Congress to remove the burdens under which American shipping has been depressed, so that it may again be true that we have a commerce which leaves no sea unexplored, and a navy which takes no law from superior force.

18. That appointments by the President to offices in the Territories should be made from the bona fide citizens and residents of the Territories wherein they are to serve.

19. That it is the duty of Congress to enact such laws as shall promptly and effectually suppress the system of polygamy within our Territories, and divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power of the so-called Mormon Church, and that the law so enacted should be rigidly enforced by the civil authorities, if possible, and by the military, if need be.

20. The people of the United States, in their organized capacity, constitute a nation, and not a mere confederacy of States. The National Government is supreme within the sphere of its national duties, but the States have reserved rights which should be faithfully maintained, and which should be guarded with jealous care, so that the harmony of our system of government may be preserved and the Union kept inviolate.

21. The perpetuity of our institutions rests upon the maintenance of a free ballot, an honest count, and correct return. We denounce the fraud and violence practised by the Democracy in Southern States, by which the will of the voter is defeated, as dangerous to the preservation of free institutions; and we solemnly arraign the Democratic party as being the guilty recipient of the fruits of such fraud and violence.

22. We extend to the Republicans of the South, regardless of their former party affiliations, our cordial sympathy, and pledge to them our most earnest efforts to promote the passage of such legislation as will secure to every citizen, of whatever race and color, the full and complete recognition, possession, and exercise of all civil and political rights.

The Democratic National Convention met at Chicago on the 8th of July, and was temporarily organized with Richard D. Hubbard, of Texas, as chairman. The first day of the convention was unusually boisterous. The Tammany delegates, under the lead of John Kelly, were in a minority in the delegation, and under the Democratic unit rule their votes[Pg 293] would be cast for Cleveland, to whose nomination they were bitterly opposed. A desperate struggle was made to break the unit rule, and thus release Tammany from the support of Cleveland. The proposition was very largely defeated, and during the balloting the Tammany people made various and ineffectual efforts to have their votes recorded. On the morning of the second day, William F. Vilas, of Wisconsin, was made permanent president, and the presentation of candidates for President followed, after which the platform was adopted and one ballot had for President, and on the following morning the 2d ballot was had, resulting in the selection of Cleveland.

Cleveland’s nomination was accomplished solely by the earnest and skilful management of his cause by Daniel Manning, who was Secretary of the Treasury during half of Cleveland’s first administration. Cleveland was a reluctant candidate, for he was not confident that he could be nominated, and doubted if he could be elected if nominated; but Manning gathered about him a very powerful organization, and under the unit rule carried the New York delegation solid for Cleveland, though Tammany, under the lead of John Kelly, stoutly opposed him.

Randall had been named as the candidate for President by Pennsylvania, and had a delegation strongly committed to his support. I was present at the conferences of Randall’s friends, and it became evident at an early stage of the battle that Randall’s nomination was not within the range of possibility. His pronounced protection views made him ineligible. Ex-Attorney-General William U. Hensel was there, and was actively enlisted in the Randall cause. When the defeat of Randall became clearly inevitable Hensel and I had a conference with Manning, and after a careful review of the situation it became apparent that Cleveland could be nominated with the aid of Randall’s friends. We made no suggestions to Manning as to conditions, but told him that we would telegraph for Randall and have him there the next morning early, so that he and Randall could confer alone. Hensel and I telegraphed Randall urgently requesting him to take the first train for Chicago. He arrived the next morning, was brought directly by Mr. Hensel to my room, where Mr. Manning was in waiting, and Hensel and I went to breakfast.

No one but Mr. Hensel and myself knew of Randall’s[Pg 294] arrival, but within half an hour after he and Manning had met word was passed from Randall himself for his friends to support Cleveland. That settled the contest in Cleveland’s favor. Tammany protested, but the Tammany vote was cast for Cleveland all the same under the unit rule that the New York Democrats have always maintained.

The following are the ballots for President in detail:

| First. | Second.
--- | --- | ---
Grover Cleveland, of New York | 392 | 683 |
Thomas F. Bayard, of Delaware | 170 | 81 | ¹⁄₂
Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana | — | 145 | ¹⁄₂
Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio | 88 | 4 |
Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania | 78 | 4 |
Joseph E. McDonald, of Indiana | 56 | 2 |
John G. Carlisle, of Kentucky | 27 | — |
Roswell P. Flower, of New York | 4 | — |
George Hoadly, of Ohio | 3 | — |
Samuel J. Tilden, of New York | 1 | — |

Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana, upon whom the opposition to Cleveland had largely united on the 2d ballot for President, was unanimously nominated for Vice-President. On a motion to make the nomination of Cleveland unanimous, vigorous “nos” came up, especially from the Tammany Hall delegates, but the nomination of Hendricks was welcomed with the heartiest cheers. The following is the Democratic platform as adopted in 1884:

The Democratic party of the Union, through its representatives in national convention assembled, recognizes that, as the nation grows older, new issues are born of time and progress, and old issues perish; but the fundamental principles of the Democracy, approved by the united voice of the people, remain and will ever remain, as the best and only security for the continuance of free government. The preservation of personal rights, the equality of all citizens before the law, the reserved rights of the States, and the supremacy of the Federal Government within the limits of the Constitution, will ever form the true basis of our liberties, and can never be surrendered without destroying that balance of rights and powers which enables a continent to be developed in peace, and social order to be maintained by means of local self-government. But it is indispensable for the practicable application and enforcement of these fundamental principles that the Government should not always be controlled by one political party. Frequent change of administration[Pg 295] is as necessary as constant recurrence to the popular will. Otherwise, abuses grow, and the Government, instead of being carried on for the general welfare, becomes an instrumentality for imposing heavy burdens on the many who are governed, for the benefit of the few who govern. Public servants thus become arbitrary rulers. This is now the condition of the country; hence a change is demanded.

The Republican party, so far as principle is concerned, is a reminiscence. In practice it is an organization for enriching those who control its machinery. The frauds and jobbery which have been brought to light in every department of the Government are sufficient to have called for reform within the Republican party; yet those in authority, made reckless by the long possession of power, have succumbed to its corrupting influence, and have placed in nomination a ticket against which the independent portion of the party are in open revolt. Therefore a change is demanded. Such a change was alike necessary in 1876, but the will of the people was then defeated by a fraud which can never be forgotten nor condoned. Again, in 1880, the change demanded by the people was defeated by the lavish use of money contributed by unscrupulous contractors and shameless jobbers, who had bargained for unlawful profits or high office. The Republican party, during its legal, its stolen, and its bought tenures of power, has steadily decayed in moral character and political capacity. Its platform promises are now a list of its past failures. It demands the restoration of our navy; it has squandered hundreds of millions to create a navy that does not exist. It calls upon Congress to remove the burdens under which American shipping has been depressed; it imposed and has continued these burdens. It professes the policy of reserving the public lands for small holdings by actual settlers; it has given away the people’s heritage, till now a few railroads and non-resident aliens, individual and corporate, possess a larger area than that of all our farms between the two seas. It professes a preference for free institutions; it organized and tried to legalize a control of State elections by Federal troops. It professes a desire to elevate labor; it subjected American working-men to the competition of convict and imported contract labor. It professes gratitude to all who were disabled or died in the war, leaving widows and orphans; it left to a Democratic House of Representatives the first effort to equalize both bounties and pensions. It professes a pledge to correct the irregularities of our tariff; it created and has continued them. Its own tariff commission confessed the need of more than twenty per cent. reduction; its Congress gave a reduction of less than four per cent. It professes the protection of American manufactures; it has subjected them to an increasing flood of manufactured goods and a hopeless competition with manufacturing nations, not one of which taxes raw materials. It professes to protect all American industries; it has impoverished many, to subsidize a few. It professes the protection of American labor; it has depleted the returns of American agriculture, an industry followed by half our people. It professes the equality of all men before the law, attempting to fix the status of colored citizens; the acts of its Congress were overset by the decisions of its courts. It “accepts anew the duty of leading in the work of progress and[Pg 296] reform;” its caught criminals are permitted to escape through contrived delays or actual connivance in the prosecution. Honeycombed with corruption, outbreaking exposures no longer shock its moral sense. Its honest members, its independent journals, no longer maintain a successful contest for authority in its canvasses or a veto upon bad nominations. That change is necessary is proved by an existing surplus of more than $100,000,000, which has yearly been collected from a suffering people. Unnecessary taxation is unjust taxation. We denounce the Republican party for having failed to relieve the people from crushing war taxes, which have paralyzed business, crippled industry, and deprived labor of employment and of just reward.

The Democracy pledges itself to purify the administration from corruption, to restore economy, to revive respect for law, and to reduce taxation to the lowest limit consistent with due regard to the preservation of the faith of the nation to its creditors and pensioners. Knowing full well, however, that legislation affecting the occupations of the people should be cautious and conservative in method, not in advance of public opinion, but responsive to its demands, the Democratic party is pledged to revise the tariff in a spirit of fairness to all interests. But, in making reduction in taxes, it is not proposed to injure any domestic industries, but rather to promote their healthy growth. From the foundation of this Government, taxes collected at the custom house have been the chief source of Federal revenue. Such they must continue to be. Moreover, many industries have come to rely upon legislation for successful continuance, so that any change of law must be at every step regardful of the labor and capital thus involved. The process of reform must be subject in the execution to this plain dictate of justice: all taxation shall be limited to the requirements of economical government. The necessary reduction in taxation can and must be effected without depriving American labor of the ability to compete successfully with foreign labor, and without imposing lower rates of duty than will be ample to cover any increased cost of production which may exist in consequence of the higher rate of wages prevailing in this country. Sufficient revenue to pay all the expenses of the Federal Government, economically administered, including pensions, interest and principal of the public debt, can be got under our present system of taxation from custom-house taxes on fewer imported articles, bearing heaviest on articles of luxury, and bearing lightest on articles of necessity. We therefore denounce the abuses of the existing tariff; and, subject to the preceding limitations, we demand that Federal taxation shall be exclusively for public purposes, and shall not exceed the needs of the Government economically administered.

The system of direct taxation, known as the “internal revenue,” is a war tax, and, so long as the law continues, the money derived therefrom should be sacredly devoted to the relief of the people from the remaining burdens of the war, and be made a fund to defray the expenses of the care and comfort of worthy soldiers disabled in the line of duty in the wars of the Republic, and for the payment of such pensions as Congress may from time to time grant to such soldiers, a like fund for the sailors having been already provided; and any surplus should be paid into the Treasury.

[Pg 297]

We favor an American continental policy, based upon more intimate commercial and political relations with the fifteen sister republics of North, Central, and South America, but entangling alliances with none.

We believe in honest money, the gold and silver coinage of the Constitution, and a circulating medium convertible into such money without loss.

Asserting the equality of all men before the law, we hold that it is the duty of the Government, in its dealings with the people, to mete out equal and exact justice to all citizens, of whatever nativity, race, color, or persuasion, religious or political.

We believe in a free ballot and a fair count; and we recall to the memory of our people the noble struggle of the Democrats in the Forty-fifth and Forty-sixth Congresses, by which a reluctant Republican opposition was compelled to assent to legislation making everywhere illegal the presence of troops at the polls as the conclusive proof that a Democratic administration will preserve liberty, with order.

The selection of Federal officers for the Territories should be restricted to citizens previously resident therein.

We oppose sumptuary laws, which vex the citizens and interfere with individual liberty.

We favor honest civil service reforms and the compensation of all United States officers by fixed salaries, the separation of Church and State, and the diffusion of free education by common schools, so that every child in the land may be taught the rights and duties of citizenship.

While we favor all legislation which will tend to the equitable distribution of property, to the prevention of monopoly, and to the strict enforcement of individual rights against corporate abuses, we hold that the welfare of society depends upon a scrupulous regard for the rights of property as defined by law.

We believe that labor is best rewarded where it is freest and most enlightened. It should, therefore, be fostered and cherished. We favor the repeal of all laws restricting the free action of labor, and the enactment of laws by which labor organizations may be incorporated, and of such legislation as will tend to enlighten the people as to the true relation of capital and labor.

We believe that the public land ought, as far as possible, to be kept as homesteads for actual settlers; that all unearned lands heretofore improvidently granted to railroad corporations by the action of the Republican party should be restored to the public domain, and that no more grants of land shall be made to corporations or be allowed to fall into the ownership of alien absentees.

We are opposed to all propositions which, upon any pretext, would convert the General Government into a machine for collecting taxes to be distributed among the States or the citizens thereof.

In reaffirming the declaration of the Democratic platform of 1856, that “the liberal principles embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, and sanctioned in the Constitution, which makes ours the land of liberty and the asylum of the oppressed of every nation, have ever been cardinal principles in the Democratic faith,” we nevertheless do not sanction the importation of foreign labor or the admission of servile races, unfitted by habits,[Pg 298] training, religion, or kindred, for absorption into the great body of our people, or for the citizenship which our laws confer. American civilization demands that against the immigration or importation of Mongolians to these shores our gates be closed.

The Democratic party insists that it is the duty of this Government to protect with equal fidelity and vigilance the rights of its citizens, native and naturalized, at home and abroad; and, to the end that this protection may be assured, United States papers of naturalization, issued by courts of competent jurisdiction, must be respected by the executive and legislative departments of our own Government and by all foreign powers. It is an imperative duty of this Government to efficiently protect all the rights of persons and property of every American citizen in foreign lands, and demand and enforce full reparation for any invasion thereof. An American citizen is only responsible to his own Government for any act done in his own country or under her flag, and can only be tried therefor on her own soil and according to her laws; and no power exists in this Government to expatriate an American citizen to be tried in any foreign land for any such act.

This country has never had a well-defined and executed foreign policy, save under Democratic administration. That policy has ever been in regard to foreign nations, so long as they do no act detrimental to the interests of the country, or hurtful to our citizens, to let them alone. As the result of this policy, we recall the acquisition of Louisiana, Florida, California and the adjacent Mexican Territory by purchase alone, and contrast these grand acquisitions of Democratic statesmanship with the purchase of Alaska, the sole fruit of a Republican administration of nearly a quarter of a century.

The Federal Government should care for and improve the Mississippi River and other great waterways of the Republic, so as to secure for the interior States easy and cheap transportation to tide water.

Under a long period of Democratic rule and policy, our merchant marine was fast overtaking and on the point of outstripping that of Great Britain. Under twenty years of Republican rule and policy, our commerce has been left to British bottoms, and the American flag has almost been swept off the high seas. Instead of the Republican party’s British policy, we demand for the people of the United States an American policy. Under Democratic rule and policy, our merchants and sailors, flying the Stars and Stripes in every port, successfully searched out a market for the various products of American industry; under a quarter of a century of Republican rule and policy, despite our manifest advantages over all other nations, in high paid labor, favorable climates, and teeming soils; despite freedom of trade among all these United States; despite their population by the foremost races of men, and an annual immigration of the young, thrifty, and adventurous of all nations; despite our freedom here from the inherited burdens of life and industry in Old World monarchies, their costly war navies, their vast tax-consuming, non-producing standing armies; despite twenty years of peace—that Republican rule and policy have managed to surrender to Great Britain, along with our commerce, the control of the markets of the world. Instead of the Republican[Pg 299] party’s British policy, we demand, in behalf of the American Democracy, an American policy. Instead of the Republican party’s discredited scheme and false pretence of friendship for American labor, expressed by imposing taxes, we demand, in behalf of the Democracy, freedom for American labor by reducing taxes, to the end that these United States may compete with unhindered powers for the primacy among nations in all the arts of peace and fruits of liberty.

With profound regret we have been apprised by the venerable statesman, through whose person was struck that blow at the vital principles of republics, acquiescence in the will of the majority, that he cannot permit us again to place in his hands the leadership of the Democratic hosts, for the reason that the achievement of reform in the administration of the Federal Government is an undertaking now too heavy for his age and failing strength. Rejoicing that his life has been prolonged until the general judgment of our fellow-countrymen is united in the wish that that wrong were righted in his person, for the Democracy of the United States we offer to him, in his withdrawal from public cares, not only our respectful sympathy and esteem, but also that best of homage of freemen—the pledge of our devotion to the principles and the cause now inseparable in the history of this Republic from the labors and the name of Samuel J. Tilden.

With this statement of the hopes, principles and purposes of the Democratic party, the great issue of reform and change in administration is submitted to the people, in calm confidence that the popular voice will pronounce in favor of new men and new and more favorable conditions for the growth of industry, the extension of trade and employment and due reward of labor and of capital, and the general welfare of the whole country.

The campaign of 1884 gave birth to the Anti-Monopoly party, that held its national convention at Chicago on the 14th of May, with John F. Henry as permanent president. General Benjamin F. Butler, of Massachusetts, was nominated as the candidate for President on the 1st ballot, receiving 122 votes to 7 for Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio, and 1 for Solon Chase, of Maine. No nomination for Vice-President was made. The National Committee later nominated A. M. West, of Mississippi, for that office. The following platform was adopted by a vote of 85 to 29:

The Anti-Monopoly organization of the United States, in convention assembled, declares:

1. That labor and capital should be allies; and we demand justice for both by protecting the rights of all against privileges for the few.

2. That corporations, the creatures of law, should be controlled by law.

3. That we propose the greatest reduction practicable in public expenses.

4. That in the enactment and vigorous execution of just laws,[Pg 300] equality of rights, equality of burdens, equality of privileges, and equality of powers in all citizens, will be secured. To this end we declare:

5. That it is the duty of the Government to immediately exercise its constitutional prerogative to regulate commerce among the States. The great instruments by which this commerce is carried on are transportation, money, and the transmission of intelligence. They are now mercilessly controlled by giant monopolies, to the impoverishment of labor, the crushing out of healthful competition, and the destruction of business security. We hold it, therefore, to be the imperative and immediate duty of Congress to pass all needful laws for the control and regulation of these great agents of commerce, in accordance with the oft-repeated decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States.

6. That these monopolies, which have exacted from enterprise such heavy tribute, have also inflicted countless wrongs upon the toiling millions of the United States; and no system of reform should commend itself to the support of the people which does not protect the man who earns his bread by the sweat of his face. Bureaus of labor statistics must be established, both State and national; arbitration take the place of brute force in the settlement of disputes between employer and employed; the national eight-hour law be honestly enforced; the importation of foreign labor under contract be made illegal; and whatever practical reforms may be necessary for the protection of united labor must be granted, to the end that unto the toiler shall be given that proportion of the profits of the thing or value created which his labor bears to the cost of production.

7. That we approve and favor the passage of an interstate commerce bill. Navigable waters should be improved by the Government, and be free.

8. We demand the payment of the bonded debt as it falls due; the election of United States Senators by the direct vote of the people of their respective States; a graduated income tax; and a tariff, which is a tax upon the people, that shall be so levied as to bear as lightly as possible upon necessaries. We denounce the present tariff as being largely in the interest of monopoly, and demand that it be speedily and radically reformed in the interest of labor, instead of capital.

9. That no further grants of public lands shall be made to corporations. All enactments granting lands to corporations should be strictly construed, and all land grants should be forfeited where the terms upon which the grants were made have not been strictly complied with. The lands must be held for homes for actual settlers, and must not be subject to purchase or control by non-resident foreigners or other speculators.

10. That we deprecate the discrimination of American legislation against the greatest of American industries—agriculture, by which it has been deprived of nearly all beneficial legislation, while forced to bear the brunt of taxation; and we demand for it the fostering care of Government, and the just recognition of its importance in the development and advancement of our land; and we appeal to the American farmer to co-operate with us in our endeavors to advance the national interests of the country and the[Pg 301] overthrow of monopoly in every shape, whenever and wherever found.

The National party, that was the legatee of the Greenback party, held its national convention at Indianapolis, on the 28th of May, with James B. Weaver, of Iowa, its president. General Benjamin F. Butler, of Massachusetts, was nominated for President on the 1st ballot, as follows:

Benjamin F. Butler, Mass. | 322
Jesse Harper, Ill. | 99
Solon Chase, Me. | 2
Edward P. Allis, Wis. | 1
David Davis, Ill. | 1

General Butler was then declared the choice of the convention, but the motion to make it unanimous called out hisses from a portion of the delegates. A. M. West, of Mississippi, was nominated for Vice-President by acclamation. The following platform was adopted:

Eight years ago our young party met in this city for the first time, and proclaimed to the world its immortal principles, and placed before the American people as a Presidential candidate that great philanthropist and spotless statesman, Peter Cooper. Since that convention our party has organized all over the Union, and through discussion and agitation has been educating the people to a sense of their rights and duties to themselves and their country. These labors have accomplished wonders. We now have a great, harmonious party, and thousands who believe in our principles in the ranks of other parties.

“We point with pride to our history.” We forced the remonetization of the silver dollar; prevented the refunding of the public debt into long-time bonds; secured the payment of the bonds, until “the best banking system the world ever saw,” for robbing the producer, now totters because of its contracting foundation; we have stopped the wholesale destruction of the greenback currency, and secured a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States establishing forever the right of the people to issue their own money.

Notwithstanding all this, never in our history have the banks, land-grant railroads, and other monopolies been more insolent in their demands for further privileges—still more class legislation. In this emergency the dominant parties are arrayed against the people, and are the abject tools of the corporate monopolies.

In the last Congress, they repealed over twelve million dollars of annual taxes for the banks, throwing the burden upon the people to pay, or pay interest thereon.

Both old parties in the present Congress vie with each other in their efforts to further repeal taxes in order to stop the payment of the public debt and save the banks whose charters they have renewed for twenty years. Notwithstanding the distress of business, the shrinkage of wages, and panic, they persist in locking up, on various[Pg 302] pretexts, four hundred million dollars of money, every dollar of which the people pay interest upon, and need, and most of which should be promptly applied to pay bonds now payable.

The old parties are united—as they cannot agree what taxes to repeal—in efforts to squander the income of the Government upon every pretext rather than pay the debt.

A bill has already passed the United States Senate making the banks a present of over fifty million dollars more of the people’s money, in order to enable them to levy a still greater burden of interest taxes.

A joint effort is being made by the old party leaders to overthrow the sovereign constitutional power of the people to control their own financial affairs, and issue their own money, in order to forever enslave the masses to bankers and other business. The House of Representatives has passed bills reclaiming nearly one hundred million acres of land granted to and forfeited by railroad companies. These bills have gone to the Senate, a body composed largely of aristocratic millionaires, who, according to their own party papers, generally purchased their elections in order to protect great monopolies which they represent. This body has thus far defied the people and the House, and refused to act upon these bills in the interest of the people.

Therefore we, the National party of the United States, in national convention assembled, this twenty-ninth day of May, A.D., 1884, declare:

1. That we hold the late decision of the Supreme Court on the legal tender question to be a full vindication of the theory which our party has always advocated on the right and authority of Congress over the issue of legal tender notes, and we hereby pledge ourselves to uphold said decision, and to defend the Constitution against alterations or amendments intended to deprive the people of any rights or privileges conferred by that instrument. We demand the issue of such money in sufficient quantities to supply the actual demand of trade and commerce, in accordance with the increase of population and the development of our industries. We demand the substitution of greenbacks for national bank notes, and the prompt payment of the public debt. We want that money which saved our country in time of war, and which has given it prosperity and happiness in peace. We condemn the retirement of the fractional currency and the small denomination of greenbacks, and demand their restoration. We demand the issue of the hoards of money now locked up in the United States Treasury, by applying them to the payment of the public debt now due.

2. We denounce, as dangerous to our republican institutions, those methods and policies of the Democratic and Republican parties which have sanctioned or permitted the establishment of land, railroad, money, and other gigantic corporate monopolies; and we demand such governmental action as may be necessary to take from such monopolies the powers they have so corruptly and unjustly usurped, and restore them to the people, to whom they belong.

3. The public lands being the natural inheritance of the people, we denounce that policy which has granted to corporations vast tracts of land, and we demand that immediate and vigorous measures be taken to reclaim from such corporations, for the people’s use[Pg 303] and benefit, all such land grants as have been forfeited by reason of non-fulfilment of contract, or that may have been wrongfully acquired by corrupt legislation, and that such reclaimed lands and other public domain be henceforth held as a sacred trust, to be granted only to actual settlers in limited quantities; and we also demand that the alien ownership of land, individual or corporate, be prohibited.

4. We demand Congressional regulation of interstate commerce. We denounce “pooling,” stock watering, and discrimination in rates and charges, and demand that Congress shall correct these abuses, even, if necessary, by the construction of national railroads. We also demand the establishment of a Government postal telegraph system.

5. All private property, all forms of money and obligations to pay money, should bear their just proportion of the public taxes. We demand a graduated income tax.

6. We demand the amelioration of the condition of labor, by enforcing the sanitary laws in industrial establishments, by the abolition of the convict labor system, by a rigid inspection of mines and factories, by a reduction of the hours of labor in industrial establishments, by fostering educational institutions, and by abolishing child labor.

7. We condemn all importations of contracted labor, made with a view of reducing to starvation wages the workingmen of this country, and demand laws for its prevention.

8. We insist upon a constitutional amendment reducing the terms of United States Senators.

9. We demand such rules for the government of Congress as shall place all representatives of the people upon an equal footing, and take away from committees a veto power greater than that of the President.

10. The question as to the amount of duties to be levied upon various articles of import has been agitated and quarrelled over, and has divided communities, for nearly a hundred years. It is not now, and never will be, settled, unless by the abolition of indirect taxation. It is a convenient issue, always raised when the people are excited over abuses in their midst. While we favor a wise revision of the tariff laws, with a view to raising a revenue from luxuries rather than necessities, we insist that, as an economic question, its importance is insignificant as compared with financial issues; for whereas we have suffered our worst panics under low and also under high tariffs, we have never suffered from a panic, nor seen our factories and workshops closed, while the volume of money in circulation was adequate to the needs of commerce. Give our farmers and manufacturers money as cheap as you now give it to our bankers, and they can pay high wages to labor, and compete with all the world.

11. For the purpose of testing the sense of the people upon the subject, we are in favor of submitting to a vote of the people an amendment to the Constitution in favor of suffrage regardless of sex, and also on the subject of the liquor traffic.

12. All disabled soldiers of the late war should be equitably pensioned, and we denounce the policy of keeping a small army of office-holders, whose only business is to prevent, on technical grounds,[Pg 304] deserving soldiers from obtaining justice from the Government they helped to save.

13. As our name indicates, we are a national party, knowing no East, no West, no North, no South. Having no sectional prejudices, we can properly place in nomination for the high offices of state, as candidates, men from any section of the Union.

14. We appeal to all people who believe in our principles to aid us by voice, pen, and votes.

The Prohibitionists divided in the contest of 1884. Their first was a mass convention, held at Chicago on the 19th of June, under the title of the American Prohibition National Convention, with J. L. Barlow, of Connecticut, as president. The fact that it was not largely a representative body is evidenced from the fact that on the ballot for President, Samuel C. Pomeroy, of Kansas, received 72 votes to 12 for all others, and was declared the nominee, and John A. Conant, of Connecticut, was nominated for Vice-President without a ballot. This organization did not have any electoral tickets as far as I can learn.

It adopted the following platform:

We hold: 1. That ours is a Christian, and not a heathen, nation, and that the God of the Christian Scriptures is the author of civil government.

2. That the Bible should be associated with books of science and literature in all our educational institutions.

3. That God requires and man needs a Sabbath.

4. That we demand the prohibition of the importation, manufacture, and sale of intoxicating drinks.

5. That the charters of all secret lodges granted by our Federal and State Legislatures should be withdrawn and their oaths prohibited by law.

6. We are opposed to putting prison labor or depreciated contract labor from foreign countries in competition with free labor to benefit manufacturers, corporations, and speculators.

7. We are in favor of a thorough revision and enforcement of the law concerning patents and inventions, for the prevention and punishment of frauds either upon inventors or the general public.

8. We hold to and will vote for woman suffrage.

9. We hold that civil equality secured to all American citizens by Articles Thirteen, Fourteen, and Fifteen of our amended national Constitution should be preserved inviolate, and the same equality should be extended to Indians and Chinamen.

10. That international differences should be settled by arbitration.

11. That land and other monopolies should be discouraged.

12. That the General Government should furnish the people with an ample and sound currency.

13. That it should be the settled policy of the Government to reduce the tariffs and taxes as rapidly as the necessities of revenue and vested business interests will allow.

[Pg 305]

14. That polygamy should be immediately suppressed by law, and that the Republican party is censurable for its long neglect of its duty in respect to this evil.

15. And, finally, we demand for the American people the abolition of electoral colleges, and a direct vote for President and Vice-President of the United States.

The regular national Prohibition party held its convention in Pittsburg on the 23d of July with Samuel Dickie, of Michigan, as permanent president. The sentiment of the party was very strongly in favor of Governor John P. St. John, of Kansas, who was unanimously nominated as President, and William Daniel, of Maryland, was chosen for Vice-President by a like unanimous vote. The following platform was adopted:

The Prohibition-Home-Protection party, in national convention assembled, acknowledge Almighty God as the rightful sovereign of all men, from whom the just powers of government are derived, and to whose laws human enactments should conform. Peace, prosperity, and happiness only can come to the people when the laws of their national and State governments are in accord with the divine will.

That the importation, manufacture, supply, and sale of alcoholic beverages, created and maintained by the laws of the national and State governments, during the entire history of such laws, is everywhere shown to be the promoting cause of intemperance, with resulting crime and pauperism; making large demands upon public and private charity; imposing large and unjust taxation and public burdens for penal and sheltering institutions upon thrift, industry, manufactures, and commerce; endangering the public peace; causing desecration of the Sabbath; corrupting our politics, legislation, and administration of the laws; shortening lives; impairing health, and diminishing productive industry; causing education to be neglected and despised; nullifying the teachings of the Bible, the Church, and the school, the standards and guides of our fathers and their children in the founding and growth under God of our widely extended country; and, while imperilling the perpetuity of our civil and religious liberties, are baleful fruits by which we know that these laws are alike contrary to God’s laws and contravene our happiness; and we call upon our fellow-citizens to aid in the repeal of these laws and in the legal suppression of this baneful liquor traffic.

The fact that, during the twenty-four years in which the Republican party has controlled the General Government and that of many of the States, no effort has been made to change this policy; that Territories have been created from the national domain and governments from them established, and States admitted into the Union, in no instance in either of which has this traffic been forbidden, or the people of these Territories or States been permitted to prohibit it; that there are now over two hundred thousand distilleries, breweries, wholesale and retail dealers in these drinks, holding certificates and claiming the authority of Government for the continuation of a business which is so destructive to the moral and material welfare[Pg 306] of the people, together with the fact that they have turned a deaf ear to remonstrance and petition for the correction of this abuse of civil government, is conclusive that the Republican party is insensible to or impotent for the redress of those wrongs, and should no longer be intrusted with the powers and responsibilities of government; that although this party, in its late national convention, was silent on the liquor question, not so were its candidates, Messrs. Blaine and Logan. Within the year past Mr. Blaine has publicly recommended that the revenues derived from the liquor traffic shall be distributed among the States, and Senator Logan has by bill proposed to devote these revenues to the support of schools. Thus both virtually recommend the perpetuation of the traffic, and that the State and its citizens shall become partners in the liquor crime.

The fact that the Democratic party has, in its national deliverances of party policy, arrayed itself on the side of the drink makers and sellers by declaring against the policy of prohibition of such traffic under the false name of “sumptuary laws,” and, when in power in some of the States, in refusing remedial legislation, and, in Congress, of refusing to permit the creation of a board of inquiry to investigate and report upon the effects of this traffic, proves that the Democratic party should not be intrusted with power or place.

There can be no greater peril to the nation than the existing competition of the Republican and Democratic parties for the liquor vote. Experience shows that any party not openly opposed to the traffic will engage in this competition, will court the favor of the criminal classes, will barter away the public morals, purity of the ballot, and every trust and object of good government, for party success; and patriots and good citizens should find in this practice sufficient cause for immediate withdrawal from all connection with their party.

That we favor reforms in the administration of the Government, in the abolition of all sinecures, useless offices and officers, in the election by the people of officers of the Government instead of appointment by the President. That competency, honesty, and sobriety are essential qualifications for holding civil office, and we oppose the removal of such persons from mere administrative offices, except so far as it may be absolutely necessary to secure effectiveness to the vital issues on which the general administration of the Government has been intrusted to a party.

That the collection of revenue from alcohol, liquors, and tobacco should be abolished, as the vices of men are not a proper subject for taxation; that revenue for customs duties should be levied for the support of the Government, economically administered; and when so levied, the fostering of American labor, manufactures, and industries should constantly be held in view.

That the public land should be held for homes for the people and not for gifts to corporations, or to be held in large bodies for speculation upon the needs of actual settlers.

That all money, coin and paper, shall be made, issued, and regulated by the General Government, and shall be a legal tender for all debts, public and private.

That grateful care and support should be given to our soldiers and sailors, their dependent widows and orphans, disabled in the service of the country.

[Pg 307]

That we repudiate as un-American, contrary to and subversive of the principle of the Declaration of Independence, from which our Government has grown to be the government of fifty-five millions of people, and a recognized power among nations, that any person or people shall or may be excluded from residence or citizenship with all others who may desire the benefits which our institutions confer upon the oppressed of all nations.

That while there are important reforms that are demanded for purity of administration and the welfare of the people, their importance sinks into insignificance when compared with the reform of the drink traffic, which annually wastes eight hundred million dollars of the wealth created by toil and thrift, and drags down thousands of families from comfort to poverty; which fills jails, penitentiaries, insane asylums, hospitals, and institutions for dependency; which destroys the health, saps industry, and causes loss of life and property to thousands in the land, lowers intellectual and physical vigor, dulls the cunning hand of the artisan, is the chief cause of bankruptcy, insolvency, and loss in trade, and by its corrupting power endangers the perpetuity of free institutions.

That Congress should exercise its undoubted power, and prohibit the manufacture and sale of intoxicating beverages in the District of Columbia, in the Territories of the United States, and in all places over which the Government has exclusive jurisdiction; that hereafter no State shall be admitted into the Union until its Constitution shall expressly prohibit polygamy and the manufacture and sale of intoxicating beverages.

We earnestly call the attention of the laborer and mechanic, the miner and manufacturer, and ask investigation of the baneful effects upon labor and industry caused by the needless liquor business, which will be found the robber who lessens wages and profits, the destroyer of happiness and the family welfare of the laboring man, and that labor and all legitimate industry demand deliverance from the taxation and loss which this traffic imposes, and that no tariff or other legislation can so healthily stimulate production or increase a demand for capital and labor, or produce so much of comfort and content as the suppressing of this traffic would bring to the laboring man, mechanic, or employer of labor throughout our land.

That the activity and co-operation of the women of America for the promotion of temperance has in all the history of the past been a strength and encouragement which we gratefully acknowledge and record. In the later and present phase of the movement for the prohibition of the licensed traffic by the abolition of the drinking-saloon, the purity of purpose and method, the earnestness, zeal, intelligence, and devotion of the mothers and daughters of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union has been eminently blessed by God. Kansas and Iowa have been given her as “sheaves of rejoicing;” and the education and arousing of the public mind, and the demand for constitutional amendment now prevailing, are largely the fruit of her prayers and labors, and we rejoice to have our Christian women unite with us in sharing the labors that shall bring the abolition of this traffic to the polls, she shall join in the grand “Praise God, from whom all blessings flow,” when by law our boys and friends shall be free from legal drink temptation.

That we believe in the civil and political equality of the sexes, and[Pg 308] that the ballot in the hand of woman is a right for her protection, and would prove a powerful ally for the abolition of the drink-saloon, the execution of law, the promotion of reform in civil affairs, and the removal of corruption in public life; and thus believing, we relegate the practical outworking of this reform to the discretion of the Prohibition party in the several States, according to the condition of public sentiment in those States; that gratefully we acknowledge and praise God for the presence of His Spirit, guiding our counsels and granting the success which has been vouchsafed in the progress of temperance reform, and looking to Him from whom all wisdom and help come, we ask the voters of the United States to make the principles of the above declaration a ruling principle in the government of the nation and of the States.

Resolved, That henceforth the Prohibition-Home-Protection party shall be called by the name of the Prohibition party.

The following table exhibits the popular and electoral vote for 1884:

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Grover Cleveland, New York. | James G. Blaine, Maine. | Benjamin F. Butler, Massachusetts. | John P. St. John, Kansas. | Cleveland and Hendricks. | Blaine and Logan.
Maine | 52,140 | 72,209 | 3,953 | 2,160 | — | 6
New Hampshire | 39,183 | 43,249 | 552 | 1,571 | — | 4
Vermont | 17,331 | 39,514 | 785 | 1,752 | — | 4
Massachusetts | 122,481 | 146,724 | 24,433 | 10,026 | — | 14
Rhode Island | 12,391 | 19,030 | 422 | 928 | — | 4
Connecticut | 67,199 | 65,923 | 1,688 | 2,305 | 6 | —
New York | 563,154 | 562,005 | 16,994 | 25,016 | 36 | —
New Jersey | 127,798 | 123,440 | 3,496 | 6,159 | 9 | —
Pennsylvania | 392,785 | 473,804 | 16,992 | 15,283 | — | 30
Delaware | 16,964 | 12,951 | 6 | 55 | 3 | —
Maryland | 96,932 | 85,699 | 531 | 2,794 | 8 | —
Virginia | 185,497 | 139,356 | ——— | 138 | 12 | —
West Virginia | 67,317 | 63,096 | 810 | 939 | 6 | —
North Carolina | 142,952 | 125,068 | ——— | 454 | 11 | —
South Carolina | 69,890 | 21,733 | ——— | ——— | 9 | —
Georgia | 94,667 | 48,603 | 145 | 195 | 12 | —
Florida | 31,766 | 28,031 | ——— | 72 | 4 | —
Alabama | 93,951 | 59,591 | 873 | 612 | 10 | —
Mississippi | 76,510 | 43,509 | ——— | ——— | 9 | —
Louisiana | 62,540 | 46,347 | ——— | ——— | 8 | —[Pg 309]
Texas | 225,309 | 93,141 | 3,321 | 3,534 | 13 | —
Arkansas | 72,927 | 50,895 | 1,847 | ——— | 7 | —
Missouri | 235,988 | 202,929 | ——— | 2,153 | 16 | —
Tennessee | 133,258 | 124,078 | 957 | 1,131 | 12 | —
Kentucky | 152,961 | 118,122 | 1,691 | 3,139 | 13 | —
Ohio | 368,280 | 400,082 | 5,179 | 11,069 | — | 23
Michigan | 149,835 | 192,669 | 42,243 | 18,403 | — | 13
Indiana | 244,990 | 238,463 | 8,293 | 3,028 | 15 | —
Illinois | 312,355 | 337,474 | 10,910 | 12,074 | — | 22
Wisconsin | 146,459 | 161,157 | 4,598 | 7,656 | — | 11
Minnesota | 70,144 | 111,923 | 3,583 | 4,684 | — | 7
Iowa | 177,316 | 197,089 | ——— | 1,472 | — | 13
Nebraska | 54,391 | 79,912 | ——— | 2,899 | — | 5
Kansas | 90,132 | 154,406 | 16,341 | 4,495 | — | 9
Colorado | 27,723 | 36,290 | 1,953 | 761 | — | 3
Nevada | 5,578 | 7,193 | 26 | ——— | — | 3
California | 89,288 | 102,416 | 2,017 | 2,920 | — | 8
Oregon | 24,604 | 26,860 | 726 | 492 | — | 3
| 4,874,986 | 4,851,981 | 175,370 | 150,369 | 219 | 182

No man was ever big enough to conduct a Presidential contest for himself. The intense interest a candidate must have in the struggle, and the constant strain upon him, would unbalance the most forceful intellect the world has ever produced. Blaine would have been matchless in the skilful management of a Presidential campaign for another, but he was dwarfed by the overwhelming responsibilities of conducting the campaign for himself, and yet he assumed the supreme control of the struggle and directed it absolutely from start to finish. He was of heroic mould, and he wisely planned his own campaign tours to accomplish the best results. In point of fact, he had won his fight after stumping the country, and lost it by his stay in New York on his way home. He knew how to sway multitudes, and none[Pg 310] could approach him in that important feature of a conflict; but he was not trained to consider the thousand intricacies which fall upon the management of every Presidential contest.

Three causes combined to lose New York by 1100 majority when the electoral vote of that State would have made him President. One was his implacable quarrel with Conkling, that lost him 1000 votes, cast directly for his opponent in Conkling’s county of Oneida. They had quarrelled when both were comparatively young and rivals for the leadership of the House. In a heated controversy between them Blaine unhorsed Conkling, and inflicted wounds which never healed, and they never spoke from that time during their lives. When both were members of the Senate, if either had occasion to refer to the remarks made by the other, instead of referring to the “Senator from Maine” or the “Senator from New York,” they would say: “It has been stated on this floor.” Many efforts were made to bring them together, but Conkling was an intense hater, and Blaine was willing to be broken rather than bend. He dined with Jay Gould during his brief stay in New York City, and that brought him no votes and lost him many.

The Burchard episode, that Blaine was blunderingly brought into in New York just on the eve of the election, was very generally accepted as costing him more than enough votes to have given him the State of New York, and thereby his election to the Presidency. It was miserably bad politics in its conception and could not have been more bunglingly executed. Blaine had suffered much from the attacks upon his public integrity, and some of his friends in New York assumed that it would be a great card to have him called upon by forty or fifty ministers of different denominations and congratulated as the candidate for President.

As originally planned it might have accomplished some good, and certainly would not have done any harm. It was intended that Rev. Dr. Tiffany should deliver the address to Blaine. He was one of the most eloquent divines of the country, was well up in politics, had been in active political movements in Pennsylvania as a leader in the American party when he was connected with Dickinson’s College, and was a candidate for United States Senator before the Legislature of 1855. Had he delivered the address to Blaine, it[Pg 311] would have been an elegant and faultless congratulation, but when the ministers met some of them strenuously objected to Dr. Tiffany as the oracle of the party, and there were indications of considerable ill-feeling. There was little time for conference, and the dispute was suddenly ended by some one proposing that the oldest minister present should deliver the address to Blaine, and that was adopted to settle the dispute.

Dr. Burchard, unfortunately, happened to be the oldest minister in attendance, and he was rampant against “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion,” but none supposed for a moment that he would make such a fearful break as to publicly denounce Romanism in an address of congratulation to a Presidential candidate, whose mother and sisters were devout Catholics. On his way home from the West he had visited his sister at a convent in Indiana, where she was Mother Superior. Burchard, of course, had no opportunity for preparation, and when the ministerial crowd came into the presence of Blaine he fired off his address in a manner not highly creditable, and proclaimed the fatal sentence against “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion.”

Blaine in his reply made no reference to that feature of Dr. Burchard’s address, and he seems not to have appreciated its fearful import until the next day, when he gave out an interview, disclaiming sympathy with it; but it was accepted as an afterthought, and that deliverance of Dr. Burchard certainly drove away from Blaine more than the six hundred votes necessary to give him the State of New York and the Presidency. I saw Blaine soon after the election, and asked him why it was that he overlooked the expression at the time. He was a man of such keen perception and so ready in every emergency that I was amazed at his failure to turn the blunder to his advantage, as he could have done by a generous expression on the religious issue involved. He told me that he heard the expression distinctly, but that his mind was just then concentrated on his reply, as he generally spoke spontaneously, and that he thereby failed to become impressed with its importance. He said that when the proceedings were over, and he gave it a moment’s reflection, he saw what a fearful mistake had been made; but the emergency was extreme and called for immediate action, and he unfortunately hesitated until another day had passed. It was then too late, and Dr. Burchard certainly cost Blaine[Pg 312] many more votes than would have given him his election. Had Blaine been under the command of a competent chairman of his national committee, he would never have been permitted to stop in New York after his great battle had been fought before the people, and had he gone directly from the West to his home in Maine, he would have been President instead of Cleveland.

Blaine and Tilden are the only men I can recall who undertook to manage a Presidential contest for themselves, and both suffered defeats, for which they were wholly responsible.

Blaine committed many serious blunders during the campaign of 1884. He and Cleveland were both made the targets of flagrant scandals, and when the Cleveland scandal was sent to Blaine in the early part of the contest, instead of peremptorily forbidding its use as a campaign factor, as would have been most wise, he sent it to his national committee, and it was given publicity. The Blaine scandal was sent to Cleveland early in the fight, and he at once gave notice to those in charge of his campaign that any personal scandals against Blaine should not have the sanction of the Democratic organization. Blaine never would have committed such a mistake if he had been managing a Presidential campaign for another, and had he been such responsible manager, he never would have permitted a libel suit to be instituted against a newspaper publisher for any scandal, however false and malignant. He was a man of intense earnestness, and the intensity of his interest in his own election for the Presidency unbalanced his judgment and made him often the creature of impulse when he should have been most dispassionate and philosophical. The scandals did not affect a thousand votes out of the many millions cast for President, and Blaine suffered vastly more than Cleveland, because he dignified the scandal against himself by legal proceedings for defamation. The fact that he voluntarily discontinued the suit after the election is the best evidence of the error committed against himself.

Charles A. Dana, then editor of the New York Sun, became estranged from Mr. Cleveland the year before the Presidential election of 1884. He had earnestly supported Cleveland for Governor in 1882, but when a movement was made by Mr. Manning to organize the State for Cleveland in 1884 Dana was implacable in his opposition. I met him[Pg 313] several times before Cleveland was nominated, and he always discussed the question with an unusual degree of acrimony. He believed that Cleveland was not available; that he was unworthy of the position, and that if nominated he would be overwhelmingly defeated. He gave me no reason for his changed relations with Cleveland, and I did not learn the true cause until after Cleveland had been elected President.

Soon after Cleveland’s nomination I was spending a few days at Saratoga, and was watching Dana’s paper with much interest, for he was very much disgruntled. He did not at first declare himself aggressively against Cleveland’s election, but one morning at Saratoga, in taking up the Sun, I found one of Dana’s terrible deliverances against Cleveland, that left no possible chance for a reconciliation. I telegraphed to Mr. Dana and asked him to meet me at his office at three o’clock that afternoon, and called there on my way home. Mr. Dana had gone too far to recede, but I tried to temper his bitterness, as I thought it would do great harm, not only to Cleveland, but to his own newspaper as well, then one of the most prosperous in the country.

Mr. Dana was petulant and violent in his expressions against Cleveland, and said that he had decided to support General Butler, who was the candidate of the Labor-Socialistic element, and who, he said, would receive not less than 25,000 votes in New York City. I told him that Butler might receive 2500, and if there were 25,000 disgruntled Democrats who wanted to defeat Cleveland, they would certainly vote for Blaine.

The result was about as I had predicted. Butler received only a few thousand votes, and Dana and his following, while ostensibly supporting Butler, voted squarely for Blaine. Dana’s paper was the most aggressive of all the anti-Cleveland newspapers in the country, and it doubtless exerted great influence, but not sufficient to lose Cleveland the State.

Charles A. Dana was the ablest editor ever developed by American journalism. Horace Greeley was more pungent and telling in his political articles, and Henry Watterson is more brilliant, but Charles A. Dana was the strongest editorial writer this country has ever produced. He was versatile, powerful, and elegant, but an unfortunate personal estrangement made him the bitterest of Cleveland’s enemies, and paved the way for the Sun to be transformed from an[Pg 314] out-and-out Tammany organ to the most aggressive of Republican organs.

It was not until I met Cleveland at Albany, soon after his election, that I learned the cause of the estrangement between Cleveland and Dana, and the statement given by Mr. Cleveland was subsequently confirmed by Mr. Dana. Dana had very earnestly supported Cleveland’s nomination and election for Governor in 1882, and after the election he wrote a personal letter to Cleveland asking the appointment of a friend to the position of Adjutant-General. His chief purpose was to give a position on the staff to his son, Paul Dana, who is now his successor in the editorial chair. Cleveland received that letter as he received thousands of other letters recommending appointments, instead of recognizing the claim Mr. Dana had upon him for the courtesy of an answer. Beecher had a candidate for the same position, and Cleveland gave it to Beecher’s man without any explanation whatever to Dana, who felt that he had been discourteously treated by Cleveland.

Mr. Dana gave no open sign of his disappointment, but some time after Cleveland’s inauguration, when it became known that Dana felt grieved at the Governor, some mutual friends intervened and proposed to Cleveland that he should invite Dana to join with some acquaintances at the Executive Mansion. To this Cleveland readily assented. Dana was informed that Cleveland would tender such an invitation if it would be accepted, and he promptly assented. Cleveland then became involved in the pressing duties of the Legislature, and allowed the session to close without extending the promised and expected invitation to Dana. Mr. Cleveland told me that he was entirely to blame for neglect in both instances, as Dana would doubtless have been satisfied if he had courteously informed him of his convictions which required him to appoint another for Adjutant-General; and he had no excuse to offer but that of neglect for not inviting Dana to dinner.

Dana naturally assumed that Cleveland had given him deliberate affront, and Cleveland could make no satisfactory explanation. As Governor and as President he was first of all devoted to his official duties, which he discharged with rare fidelity, and he gave little time even to the common courtesies which most Governors and Presidents would recognize as justly belonging to their friends. Efforts were[Pg 315] made to conciliate Dana, but he never would discuss the question, and he sacrificed half the circulation of his paper in the campaign of 1884 in his battle against Cleveland. When Cleveland’s election was announced, and the Republicans were disposed to dispute the vote of New York, Dana came out boldly and declared that Cleveland was elected and that no violent measures should be tolerated to deprive him of the honor conferred upon him by the people.

It is quite possible that Dana got even with Cleveland in 1888. His paper gave a nominal support to Cleveland, but did more damage to the Cleveland cause than any other newspaper in the country by subtle and persistent attacks upon the administration and the party, though never exhibiting on the surface a trace of personal hostility to the President. The Sun was then the organ of Tammany, and Tammany certainly defeated Cleveland in 1888 by giving the State to Harrison, when Hill, the Democratic candidate for Governor on the same ticket, was elected by nearly 20,000. It is not a strained conclusion that Dana defeated Cleveland’s re-election in 1888. The estrangement between Dana and Cleveland continued, as they never met or had any intercourse.

Blaine’s nomination was possible in 1888 when Harrison was made the candidate, but after hesitating for three days, during which time he freely conferred by cable with his friends, as he was then in Europe, he finally decided to decline.

His belief that he was fated not to be President was not weakened by advancing age, and his final assent to the use of his name in 1892, at the Minneapolis convention that renominated Harrison, was the first exhibition of decay in one who had been a giant among the giants in the most eventful history of the Republic. He had been a possibly successful candidate in four national conventions; had once been nominated and defeated, and it was a sad spectacle to see him, like a great oak with its green boughs fall and its heart corroding from the storms of many winters, broken in a tempest of political resentments and in a struggle that had not so much as a silver lining to the cloud of despair that hung over him. His nomination was hopeless; his defeat, if nominated, inevitable, and thus ended the life tragedy of one of the ablest, bravest, and most beloved of our public men.

[Pg 316]

## THE HARRISON-CLEVELAND CONTEST

1888

The Democratic National Convention of 1888 met at St. Louis on June 5, and it was the most perfunctory body of the kind I have ever witnessed. I never saw a national political body so entirely devoid of enthusiasm; yet it was entirely fixed in its purpose to renominate President Cleveland. He appealed strongly to the convictions and judgment of the party, but not to its affection or enthusiasm. He was nominated by a unanimous vote without the formality of a ballot, and it had been settled long before the convention met that the sturdy old Roman of Ohio, ex-Senator Thurman, should be the candidate for the second place, as Vice-President Hendricks had died in office.

BENJAMIN HARRISON

Patrick A. Collins, of Massachusetts, was permanent president of the body, and there were no questions of rules or party policy to excite discussion. Cleveland’s nomination was unanimous, and on the single ballot for Vice-President, Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio, had 690 votes to 105 for Isaac B. Gray, of Indiana, and 25 for John C. Black, of Illinois. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Democratic party of the United States, in national convention assembled, renews the pledge of its fidelity to Democratic faith, and reaffirms the platform adopted by its representatives in the convention of 1884, and endorses the views expressed by President Cleveland in his last earnest message to Congress as the correct interpretation of that platform upon the question of tariff reduction; and also endorses the efforts of our Democratic representatives in Congress to secure a reduction of excessive taxation.

Chief among its principles of party faith are the maintenance of an indissoluble union of free and indestructible States, now about to enter upon its second century of unexampled progress and renown; devotion to a plan of government regulated by a written Constitution strictly specifying every granted power and expressly[Pg 317] reserving to the States or people the entire ungranted residue of power; the encouragement of a jealous popular vigilance, directed to all who have been chosen for brief terms to enact and execute the laws and are charged with the duty of preserving peace, insuring equality, and establishing justice.

The Democratic party welcomes an exacting scrutiny of the administration of the Executive power which, four years ago, was committed to its trusts in the election of Grover Cleveland, President of the United States; but it challenges the most searching inquiry concerning its fidelity and devotion to the pledges which then invited the suffrages of the people. During a most critical period of our financial affairs, resulting from over-taxation, the anomalous condition of our currency, and a public debt unmatured, it has, by the adoption of a wise and conservative policy, not only averted a disaster, but greatly promoted the prosperity of the people. It has reversed the improvident and unwise policy of the Republican party touching the public domain, and has reclaimed from corporations and syndicates, alien and domestic, and restored to the people nearly one hundred millions of acres of valuable land to be sacredly held as homesteads for our citizens.

While carefully guarding the interests of the taxpayers and conforming strictly to the principles of justice and equity, it has paid out more for pensions and bounties to the soldiers and sailors of the Republic than was ever paid before during an equal period.

It has adopted and consistently pursued a firm and prudent foreign policy, preserving peace with all nations, while scrupulously maintaining all the rights and interests of our own Government and people at home and abroad. The exclusion from our shores of Chinese laborers has been effectually secured under the provision of a treaty the operation of which has been postponed by the action of a Republican majority in the Senate.

Honest reform in the civil service has been inaugurated and maintained by President Cleveland, and he has brought the public service to the highest standard of efficiency, not only by rule and precept, but by the example of his own untiring and unselfish administration of public affairs.

In every branch and department of the Government under Democratic control the rights and welfare of all the people have been guarded and defended; every public interest has been protected, and the equality of all our citizens before the law, without regard to race or color, has been steadfastly maintained.

Upon its record thus exhibited, and upon a pledge of a continuance to the people of these benefits, the Democracy invokes a renewal of popular trust by the re-election of a Chief Magistrate who has been faithful, able, and prudent. We invoke, in addition to that trust, the transfer also to the Democracy of the entire legislative power.

The Republican party controlling the Senate and resisting in both houses of Congress a reformation of unjust and unequal tax laws which have outlasted the necessities of war and are now undermining the abundance of a long peace, denies to the people equality before the law, and the fairness and the justice which are their right. Thus the cry of American labor for a better share in the rewards of industry is stifled with false pretences, enterprise is[Pg 318] fettered and bound down to home markets, capital is discouraged with doubt, and unequal, unjust laws can neither be properly amended nor repealed. The Democratic party will continue with all the power confided to it the struggle to reform these laws, in accordance with the pledges of its last platform, endorsed at the ballot-box by the suffrages of the people.

Of all the industrious freemen of our land, the immense majority, including every tiller of the soil, gain no advantage from excessive tax laws, but the price of nearly everything they buy is increased by the favoritism of an unequal system of tax legislation. All unnecessary taxation is unjust taxation. It is repugnant to the creed of Democracy that by such taxation the cost of the necessaries of life should be unjustifiably increased to all our people. Judged by Democratic principles, the interests of the people are betrayed when, by unnecessary taxation, trusts and combinations are permitted to exist which, while unduly enriching the few that combine, rob the body of our citizens by depriving them of the benefits of natural competition. Every Democratic rule of governmental action is violated when, through unnecessary taxation, a vast sum of money, far beyond the needs of an economical administration, is drawn from the people and the channels of trade, and accumulated as a demoralizing surplus in the national Treasury. The money now lying idle in the Federal Treasury, resulting from superfluous taxation, amounts to more than one hundred and twenty-five million dollars, and the surplus collected is reaching the sum of more than sixty millions annually. Debauched by this immense temptation, the remedy of the Republican party is to meet and exhaust by extravagant appropriations and expenses, whether constitutional or not, the accumulation of extravagant taxation. The Democratic policy is to enforce frugality in public expense, and to abolish unnecessary taxation. Our established domestic industries and enterprises should not, and need not, be endangered by the reduction and correction of the burdens of taxation. On the contrary, a fair and careful revision of our tax laws, with due allowance for the difference between the wages of American and foreign labor, must promote and encourage every branch of such industries and enterprises, by giving them assurance of extended market and steady and continuous operations in the interests of American labor, which should in no event be neglected. The revision of our tax laws contemplated by the Democratic party should promote the advantage of such labor, by cheapening the cost of the necessaries of life in the home of every workman, and at the same time securing to him steady and remunerative employment. Upon this question of tariff reform, so closely concerning every phase of our national life, and upon every question involved in the problem of good government, the Democratic party submits its principles and professions to the intelligent suffrages of the American people.

Resolved, That this convention hereby endorses and recommends the early passage of the bill for the reduction of the revenue now pending in the House of Representatives.

Resolved, That a just and liberal policy should be pursued in reference to the Territories; that right of self-government is inherent in the people, and guaranteed under the Constitution; that the[Pg 319] Territories of Washington, Dakota, Montana, and New Mexico are, by virtue of population and development, entitled to admission into the Union as States, and we unqualifiedly condemn the course of the Republican party in refusing Statehood and self-government to their people.

Resolved, That we express our cordial sympathy with the struggling people of all nations, in their efforts to secure for themselves the inestimable blessings of self-government, and civil and religious liberty, and we especially declare our sympathy with the efforts of those noble patriots who, led by Gladstone and Parnell, have conducted their grand and peaceful contest for home rule in Ireland.

The Republican convention met at Chicago on the 19th of June, with M. M. Estee, of California, as permanent president. It was assumed by the friends of Blaine in Pennsylvania, and generally throughout the country, that he did not desire to be nominated as the Republican candidate for President. Pennsylvania, where Blaine’s friends were largely in the ascendency, declared in favor of Senator Sherman, of Ohio. Senator Quay was at the head of his delegation, with instructions from the State convention to support Sherman, and ex-Governor Hastings, then Adjutant-General, presented the name of Sherman to the convention in the name of Pennsylvania.

Blaine was in Europe, and while he evidently did not desire to confess himself a candidate, he seemed unwilling then to make his declination peremptory, as he had done in two letters long before the convention met. His hesitation delayed the action of the convention several days, but finally he authorized the withdrawal of his name from the list of candidates, and a very earnest contest was made between the friends of Sherman, Gresham, Alger, and Harrison. Governor Alger was largely supported by the commercial delegates from the South, and Sherman and his friends bitterly complained that the Southern delegates had been corruptly diverted from the Sherman ranks. Gresham represented the more conservative Republican element. He was not a radical politician, as was shown by his support of Cleveland in 1892, but while conservative with Mugwump flavor, it was evident from the demonstrations made in Chicago during the convention that the labor elements of the country were very strongly in sympathy with him, although his own delegation was against him.

Depew was only an ornamental candidate, and was brimful of humor as he mingled with the delegates and spectators.[Pg 320] He knew that the Grangers of the West would no more vote for him than they would for the Czar of Russia, but his State had declared for him with great unanimity, and he was very cordially supported by a number of friends outside of New York. It soon became evident that Sherman could not succeed, as he reached his highest vote on the 2d ballot and steadily declined thereafter, while Harrison increased on every ballot from the first to the eighth, when he was nominated by a large majority. The following are the several ballots for President:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth. | Sixth. | Seventh. | Eighth.
John Sherman, Ohio | 229 | 249 | 244 | 235 | 224 | 244 | 231 | 118
Walter Q. Gresham, Ind. | 111 | 108 | 123 | 98 | 87 | 91 | 91 | 59
Chauncey M. Depew, N. Y. | 99 | 99 | 91 | — | — | — | — | —
Russell A. Alger, Mich. | 84 | 116 | 122 | 135 | 142 | 137 | 120 | 100
Benjamin Harrison, Ind. | 80 | 91 | 94 | 217 | 213 | 231 | 278 | 544
William B. Allison, Iowa | 72 | 75 | 88 | 88 | 99 | 73 | 76 | —
James G. Blaine, Me. | 35 | 33 | 35 | 42 | 48 | 40 | 15 | 5
John J. Ingalls, Kan. | 28 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | —
Jere. M. Rusk, Wis. | 25 | 20 | 16 | — | — | — | — | —
William W. Phelps, N. J. | 25 | 18 | 5 | — | — | — | — | —
E. H. Fitler, Pa. | 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | —
Robert T. Lincoln, Ill. | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | — | — | 2 | —
William McKinley, Jr., Ohio | 2 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 12 | 16 | 4
Samuel F. Miller, Iowa | — | — | 2 | — | — | — | — | —
Frederick Douglass | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | —
J. B. Foraker, Ohio | — | — | — | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | —
Frederick D. Grant, N. Y. | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | — | —
Creed Haymond, Cal. | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | —

One ballot was had for Vice-President, as follows:

Levi P. Morton, N. Y. | 591
Walter Wm. Phelps. N. J. | 119
Wm. O. Bradley, Ky. | 103
Blanche K. Bruce (col.), Miss. | 11
Walter F. Thomas, Texas | 1

The nomination of Morton was made unanimous. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The Republicans of the United States, assembled by their delegates in national convention, pause on the threshold of their proceedings to honor the memory of their first great leader, the immortal champion of liberty and the rights of the people, Abraham Lincoln, and to cover also with wreaths of imperishable remembrance and gratitude the heroic names of our later leaders, who have more recently been called away from our councils—Grant, Garfield, Arthur, Logan, Conkling. May their memories be faithfully cherished. We also recall with our greetings and with prayer for[Pg 321] his recovery, the name of one of our living heroes, whose memory will be treasured in the history both of Republicans and of the Republic, the name of that noble soldier and favorite child of victory, Philip H. Sheridan.

In the spirit of these great leaders, and of our own devotion to human liberty, and with that hostility to all forms of despotism and oppression which is the fundamental idea of the Republican party, we send fraternal congratulations to our fellow-Americans of Brazil upon their great act of emancipation, which completed the abolition of slavery throughout the two American continents. We earnestly hope that we may soon congratulate our fellow-citizens of Irish birth upon the peaceful recovery of home rule for Ireland.

We reaffirm our unswerving devotion to the national Constitution and to the indissoluble union of the States; to the autonomy reserved to the States under the Constitution; to the personal rights and liberties of citizens in all the States and Territories in the Union, and especially to the supreme and sovereign right of every lawful citizen, rich or poor, native or foreign-born, white or black, to cast one free ballot in public elections, and to have that ballot duly counted. We hold the free and honest popular ballot and the just and equal representation of all the people to be the foundation of our republican Government, and demand effective legislation to secure the integrity and purity of elections, which are the fountains of public authority. We charge that the present administration and the Democratic majority in Congress owe their existence to the suppression of the ballot by a criminal nullification of the Constitution and laws of the United States.

We are uncompromisingly in favor of the American system of protection. We protest against its destruction, as proposed by the President and his party. They serve the interests of Europe; we will support the interests of America. We accept the issue, and confidently appeal to the people for their judgment. The protective system must be maintained. Its abandonment has always been followed by disaster to all interests, except those of the usurer and the sheriff. We denounce the Mills bill as destructive to the general business, the labor, and the farming interests of the country, and we heartily endorse the consistent and patriotic action of the Republican representatives in Congress opposing its passage. We condemn the proposition of the Democratic party to place wool on the free list, and we insist that the duties thereon shall be adjusted and maintained so as to furnish full and adequate protection to that industry. The Republican party would effect all needed reduction of the national revenue by repealing the taxes upon tobacco, which are an annoyance and burden to agriculture, and the tax upon spirits used in the arts, and for mechanical purposes, and by such revision of the tariff laws as will tend to check imports of such articles as are produced by our people, the production of which gives employment to our labor, and release from import duties those articles of foreign production, except luxuries, the like of which cannot be produced at home. If there shall still remain a larger revenue than is requisite for the wants of the Government, we favor the entire repeal of internal taxes, rather than the surrender of any part of our protective system, at the joint behest of the whiskey trusts and the agents of foreign manufacturers.

[Pg 322]

We declare our hostility to the introduction into this country of foreign contract labor, and of Chinese labor, alien to our civilization and our Constitution, and we demand the rigid enforcement of the existing laws against it, and favor such immediate legislation as will exclude such labor from our shores.

We declare our opposition to all combinations of capital, organized in trusts or otherwise, to control arbitrarily the condition of trade among our citizens, and we recommend to Congress and the State Legislatures, in their respective jurisdictions, such legislation as will prevent the execution of all schemes to oppress the people by undue charges on their supplies, or by unjust rates for the transportation of their products to market. We approve the legislation by Congress to prevent alike unjust burdens and unfair discriminations between the States.

We reaffirm the policy of appropriating the public lands of the United States to be homesteads for American citizens and settlers, not aliens, which the Republican party established in 1862, against the persistent opposition of the Democrats in Congress, and which has brought our great Western domain into such magnificent development. The restoration of unearned railroad land grants to the public domain for the use of actual settlers, which was begun under the administration of President Arthur, should be continued. We deny that the Democratic party has ever restored one acre to the people, but declare that by the joint action of the Republicans and Democrats about fifty millions of acres of unearned lands, originally granted for the construction of railroads, have been restored to the public domain, in pursuance of the conditions inserted by the Republican party in the original grants. We charge the Democratic administration with failure to execute the laws securing to settlers title to their homestead, and with using appropriations made for that purpose to harass innocent settlers with spies and prosecutions under the false pretence of exposing frauds and vindicating the law.

The government by Congress of the Territories is based upon necessity only, to the end that they may become States in the Union; therefore, whenever the conditions of population, material resources, public intelligence, and morality are such as to insure a stable local government therein, the people of such Territories should be permitted, as a right inherent in them, the right to form for themselves constitutions and State governments, and be admitted into the Union. Pending the preparation for statehood, all officers thereof should be selected from the bona-fide residents and citizens of the Territory wherein they are to serve. South Dakota should, of right, be immediately admitted as a State under the constitution framed and adopted by her people, and we heartily endorse the action of the Republican Senate in twice passing bills for her admission. The refusal of the Democratic House of Representatives, for partisan purposes, favorably to consider these bills is a wilful violation of the sacred American principle of local self-government, and merits the condemnation of all just men. The pending bills in the Senate for acts to enable the people of Washington, North Dakota, and Montana Territories to form constitutions and establish State governments should be passed without unnecessary delay. The Republican party pledges itself to do all[Pg 323] in its power to facilitate the admission of the Territories of New Mexico, Wyoming, Idaho and Arizona to the enjoyment of self-government as States, such of them as are now qualified as soon as possible, and the others as soon as they become so.

The political power of the Mormon Church in the Territories as exercised in the past is a menace to free institutions, a danger no longer to be suffered; therefore, we pledge the Republican party to appropriate legislation, asserting the sovereignty of the nation in all Territories where the same is questioned, and in furtherance of that end to place upon the statute books legislation stringent enough to divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power, and thus stamp out the attendant wickedness of polygamy.

The Republican party is in favor of the use of both gold and silver as money, and condemns the policy of the Democratic administration in its efforts to demonetize silver.

We demand the reduction of letter postage to one cent per ounce.

In a Republic like ours, where the citizen is the sovereign, and the official the servant, where no power is exercised except by the will of the people, it is important that the sovereign and the people should possess intelligence. The free school is the promoter of that intelligence which is to preserve us a free nation, therefore the State or nation, or both combined, should support free institutions of learning, sufficient to afford to every child growing up in the land the opportunity of a good common school education.

We earnestly recommend that prompt action be taken by Congress in the enactment of such legislation as will best secure the rehabilitation of our American merchant marine; and we protest against the passage by Congress of a free-ship bill, as calculated to work injustice to labor by lessening the wages of those engaged in preparing materials as well as those directly employed in our shipyards.

We demand appropriations for the early rebuilding of our navy; for the construction of coast fortifications and modern ordnance, and other approved modern means of defence for the protection of our defenceless harbors and cities; for the payment of just pensions to our soldiers; for necessary works of national importance in the improvement of harbors and the channels of internal, coastwise, and foreign commerce; for the encouragement of the shipping interests of the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific States, as well as for the payment of the maturing public debt. This policy will give employment to our labor; activity to our various industries; increase the security of our country; promote trade; open new and direct markets for our produce, and cheapen the cost of transportation. We affirm this to be far better for our country than the Democratic policy of loaning the Government’s money, without interest, to “pet banks.”

The conduct of foreign affairs by the present administration has been distinguished by its inefficiency and its cowardice. Having withdrawn from the Senate all pending treaties effected by Republican administration for the removal of foreign burdens and restrictions upon our commerce, and for its extension into better markets, it has neither effected nor proposed any others in their stead. Professing adherence to the Monroe Doctrine, it has seen, with idle complacency, the extension of foreign influence in Central[Pg 324] America and of foreign trade everywhere among our neighbors. It has refused to charter, sanction or encourage any American organization for constructing the Nicaragua Canal—a work of vital importance to the maintenance of the Monroe Doctrine, and of our national influence in Central and South America, and necessary for the development of trade with our Pacific territory, with South America and with the islands and farther coasts of the Pacific Ocean.

We arraign the present Democratic administration for its weak and unpatriotic treatment of the fisheries question, and its pusillanimous surrender of the essential privileges to which our fishing vessels are entitled in Canadian ports under the treaty of 1818, the reciprocal maritime legislation of 1830, and the comity of nations, and which Canadian fishing vessels receive in the ports of the United States. We condemn the policy of the present administration and the Democratic majority in Congress toward our fisheries as unfriendly and conspicuously unpatriotic, and as tending to destroy a valuable national industry and an indispensable resource of defence against a foreign enemy.

The name of American applies alike to all citizens of the Republic and imposes upon all alike the same obligation of obedience to the laws. At the same time that citizenship is and must be the panoply and safeguard of him who wears it, and protects him, whether high or low, rich or poor, in all his civil rights, it should and must afford him protection at home and follow and protect him abroad, in whatever land he may be, on a lawful errand.

The men who abandoned the Republican party in 1884, and continue to adhere to the Democratic party, have deserted not only the cause of honest government, of sound finance, of freedom, of purity of the ballot, but especially have deserted the cause of reform in the civil service. We will not fail to keep our pledges because they have broken theirs, nor because their candidate has broken his. We therefore repeat our declaration of 1884, to wit: “The reform of the civil service auspiciously begun under the Republican administration should be completed by the further extension of the reform system already established by law, to all the grades of the service to which it is applicable. The spirit and purpose of the reform should be observed in all executive appointments, and all laws at variance with the object of existing reform legislation should be repealed, to the end that the dangers to free institutions, which lurk in the power of official patronage, may be wisely and effectively avoided.”

The gratitude of the nation to the defenders of the Union cannot be measured by laws. The legislation of Congress should conform to the pledge made by a loyal people, and be so enlarged and extended as to provide against the possibility that any man who honorably wore the Federal uniform shall become an inmate of an almshouse, or dependent upon private charity. In the presence of an overflowing treasury, it would be a public scandal to do less for those whose valorous services preserved the Government. We denounce the hostile spirit shown by President Cleveland, in his numerous vetoes of measures for pension relief, and the action of the Democratic House of Representatives in refusing even a consideration of general pension legislation.

In support of the principles herewith enunciated, we invite the[Pg 325] co-operation of patriotic men of all parties, and especially of all workingmen, whose prosperity is seriously threatened by the free-trade policy of the present administration.

The first concern of all good government is the virtue and sobriety of the people, and the purity of their homes. The Republican party cordially sympathizes with all wise and well-directed efforts for the promotion of temperance and morality.

There were two distinct Labor parties in existence in 1888, and they both called their national conventions to meet at Cincinnati on the 15th of May. The Union Labor party was the only one whose candidate figured in the contest. Mr. Streeter, its nominee for President, received 146,935 votes, with only 2418 for Cowdrey, who was the candidate of the United Labor party. The Union Labor Convention had representatives from twenty States, and John Seitz was permanent president. There was no ballot for President, as Alson J. Streeter, of Illinois, was nominated by acclamation, and Samuel Evans, of Texas, was selected for Vice-President on the 1st ballot, receiving 124 votes, to 44 for T. P. Rynders, of Pennsylvania, and 32 for Charles R. Cunningham, of Arkansas. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

General discontent prevails on the part of the wealth-producer. Farmers are suffering from a poverty which has forced most of them to mortgage their estates, and the prices of products are so low as to offer no relief, except through bankruptcy, and laborers are sinking into greater dependence. Strikes are resorted to without bringing relief, because of the inability of employers, in many cases, to pay living wages, while more and more are driven into the street. Business men find collections almost impossible, and, meantime, hundreds of millions of idle public money, which is needed for relief, is locked up in the United States Treasury, or placed without interest in favored banks in grim mockery of distress. Land monopoly flourishes as never before, and more owners of the soil are daily becoming tenants. Great transportation corporations still succeed in extorting their profits on watered stock through unjust charges. The United States Senate has become an open scandal, its membership being purchased by the rich in open defiance of the popular will. Various efforts are made to squander the public money, which are designed to empty the Treasury without paying the public debt. Under these and other alarming conditions, we appeal to the people of our country to come out of old party organizations, whose indifference to the public welfare is responsible for this distress, and aid the Union Labor party to repeal existing class legislation, and relieve the distress of our industries by establishing the following principles:

[Pg 326]

Land.—While we believe that the proper solution of the financial question will greatly relieve those now in danger of losing their homes by mortgages and foreclosures, and enable all industrious persons to secure a home as the highest result of civilization, we oppose land monopoly in every form, demand the forfeiture of unearned grants, the limitation of land ownership, and such other legislation as will stop speculations in lands, and holding it unused from those whose necessities require it.

We believe the earth was made for the people, and not to enable an idle aristocracy to subsist, through rents, upon the toil of the industrious, and that corners in land are as bad as corners in food, and that those who are not residents or citizens should not be allowed to own lands in the United States. A homestead should be exempt, to a limited extent, from execution or taxation.

Transportation.—The means of communication and transportation should be owned by the people, as is the United States postal service.

Money.—The establishment of a national monetary system in the interest of the producer, instead of the speculator and usurer, by which the circulating medium, in necessary quantity and full legal tender, shall be issued directly to the people, without the intervention of banks, or loaned to citizens upon land security at a low rate of interest, to relieve them from extortions of usury and enable them to control the money supply. Postal savings banks should be established. While we have free coinage of gold, we should have free coinage of silver. We demand the immediate application of all the money in the United States Treasury to the payment of the bonded debt, and condemn the further issue of interest-bearing bonds, either by the National Government or by States, Territories, or municipalities.

Labor.—Arbitration should take the place of strikes and other injurious methods of settling labor disputes. The letting of convict labor to contractors should be prohibited, the contract system be abolished in public works, the hours of labor in industrial establishments be reduced, commensurate with the increased production by labor-saving machinery, employés protected from bodily injury, equal pay for equal work for both sexes, and labor, agricultural, and co-operative associations be fostered and encouraged by law. The foundation of a republic is in the intelligence of its citizens, and children who are driven into workshops, mines, and factories are deprived of the education which should be secured to all by proper legislation.

Pensions.—We demand the passage of a service pension bill to every honorably discharged soldier and sailor of the United States.

Income Tax.—A graduated income tax is the most equitable system of taxation, placing the burden of Government on those who can best afford to pay, instead of laying it on the farmers and producers, and exempting millionaire bondholders and corporations.

United States Senate.—We demand a constitutional amendment making United States Senators elective by a direct vote of the people.

Contract Labor.—We demand the strict enforcement of laws prohibiting the importation of subjects of foreign countries under contract.

[Pg 327]

Chinese.—We demand the passage and enforcement of such legislation as will absolutely exclude the Chinese from the United States.

Woman Suffrage.—The right to vote is inherent in citizenship, irrespective of sex, and is properly within the province of State legislation.

Paramount Issues.—The paramount issues to be solved in the interests of humanity are the abolition of usury, monopoly, and trusts, and we denounce the Democratic and Republican parties for creating and perpetuating these monstrous evils.

The United Labor party had a limited attendance at its convention. William B. Ogden was made president, and Rev. Edward McGlynn, of New York, a priest noted for his discussion of labor problems, prepared and reported the platform. Robert H. Cowdrey, of Illinois, was nominated for President, and W. H. T. Wakefield, of Kansas, for the second place on the ticket without the formality of a ballot. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

We, the delegates of the United Labor party of the United States, in national convention assembled, hold that the corruptions of Government and the impoverishment of the masses result from neglect of the self-evident truths proclaimed by the founders of this Republic, that all men are created equal and are endowed with inalienable rights. We aim at the abolition of the system which compels men to pay their fellow-creatures for the use of the common bounties of nature, and permits monopolizers to deprive labor of natural opportunities for employment.

We see access to farming land denied to labor, except on payment of exorbitant rent or the acceptance of mortgage burdens, and labor, thus forbidden to employ itself, driven into the cities. We see the wage-workers of the cities subjected to this unnatural competition, and forced to pay an exorbitant share of their scanty earnings for cramped and unhealthful lodgings. We see the same intense competition condemning the great majority of business and professional men to a bitter and often unavailing struggle to avoid bankruptcy; and that, while the price of all that labor produces ever falls, the price of land ever rises.

We trace these evils to a fundamental wrong—the making of the land on which all must live the exclusive property of but a portion of the community. To this denial of natural rights are due want of employment, low wages, business depressions, that intense competition which makes it so difficult for the majority of men to get a comfortable living, and that wrongful distribution of wealth which is producing the millionaire on one side and the tramp on the other.

To give all men an interest in the land of their country; to enable all to share in the benefits of social growth and improvement; to prevent the shutting out of labor from employment by the monopolization of natural opportunities; to do away with the one-sided competition[Pg 328] which cuts down wages to starvation rates; to restore life to business, and prevent periodical depressions; to do away with that monstrous injustice which deprives producers of the fruits of their toil while idlers grow rich; to prevent the conflicts which are arraying class against class, and which are fraught with menacing dangers to society—we propose so to change the existing system of taxation that no one shall be taxed on the wealth he produces, nor any one suffered to appropriate wealth he does not produce by taking to himself the increasing values which the growth of society adds to land.

What we propose is not the disturbing of any man in his holding or title; but, by taxation of land according to its value and not according to its area, to devote to common use and benefit those values which arise, not from the exertion of the individual, but from the growth of society, and to abolish all taxes on industry and its products. This increased taxation of land values must, while relieving the working farmer and small homestead owner of the undue burdens now imposed upon them, make it unprofitable to hold land for speculation, and thus throw open abundant opportunities for the employment of labor and the building up of homes. We would do away with the present unjust and wasteful system of finance which piles up hundreds of millions of dollars in treasury vaults while we are paying interest on an enormous debt; and we would establish in its stead a monetary system in which a legal tender circulating medium should be issued by the Government, without the intervention of banks.

We wish to abolish the present unjust and wasteful system of ownership of railroads and telegraphs by private corporations—a system which, while failing to supply adequately public needs, impoverishes the farmer, oppresses the manufacturer, hampers the merchant, impedes travel and communication, and builds up enormous fortunes and corrupting monopolies that are becoming more powerful than the Government itself. For this system we would substitute Government ownership and control for the benefit of the whole people instead of private profit.

While declaring the foregoing to be the fundamental principles and aims of the United Labor party, and while conscious that no reform can give effectual and permanent relief to labor that does not involve the legal recognition of equal rights to natural opportunities, we, nevertheless, as measures of relief from some of the evil effects of ignoring those rights, favor such legislation as may tend to reduce the hours of labor, to prevent the employment of children of tender years, to avoid the competition of convict labor with honest industry, to secure the sanitary inspection of tenements, factories, and mines, and to put an end to the abuse of conspiracy laws.

We desire also to simplify the procedure of our courts and diminish the expense of legal proceedings, that the poor may therein be placed on an equality with the rich, and the long delays which now result in scandalous miscarriages of justice may be prevented. Since the ballot is the only means by which, in our Republic, the redress of political and social grievances is to be sought, we especially and emphatically declare for the adoption of what is known as the Australian system of voting, in order that the effectual secrecy of the ballot, and the relief of candidates for public office from the heavy[Pg 329] expenses now imposed upon them, may prevent bribery and intimidation, do away with practical discriminations in favor of the rich and unscrupulous, and lessen the pernicious influence of money in politics.

We denounce the Democratic and Republican parties as hopelessly and shamelessly corrupt, and, by reason of their affiliation with monopolies, equally unworthy of the suffrages of those who do not live upon public plunder; we therefore require of those who would act with us that they sever all connection with both.

In support of these aims, we solicit the co-operation of all patriotic citizens, who, sick of the degradation of politics, desire by constitutional methods to establish justice, to preserve liberty, to extend the spirit of fraternity, and to elevate humanity.

The Prohibition Convention of 1888 was the most notable assembly of Prohibitionists ever held in the country. It met at Indianapolis on the 20th of May, with several thousands in attendance outside of the delegates. According to the report of the committee on credentials there were 1029 delegates present. Among those who participated in the proceedings of the convention were James Black, the party candidate for President in 1872, Neal Dow, who was the nominee in 1880, and John P. St. John, who led the Prohibitionists in the Presidential contest of 1884. John P. St. John was the permanent president, and Clinton B. Fisk, of New Jersey, was nominated for President, and John A. Brooks, of Missouri, for Vice-President by acclamation without the formality of a ballot. The following platform was adopted with great enthusiasm:

The Prohibition party, in national convention assembled, acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all power in government, do hereby declare:

1. That the manufacture, importation, exportation, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages should be made public crimes, and punished as such.

2. That such prohibition must be secured through amendments of our National and State Constitutions, enforced by adequate laws adequately supported by administrative authority; and to this end the organization of the Prohibition party is imperatively demanded in State and nation.

3. That any form of license, taxation, or regulation of the liquor traffic is contrary to good government; that any party which supports regulation, license, or tax enters into alliance with such traffic and becomes the actual foe of the State’s welfare, and that we arraign the Republican and Democratic parties for their persistent attitude in favor of the licensed iniquity, whereby they oppose the demand of the people for prohibition, and, through open complicity with the liquor cause, defeat the enforcement of law.

[Pg 330]

4. For the immediate abolition of the internal revenue system, whereby our National Government is deriving support from our greatest national vice.

5. That, an adequate public revenue being necessary, it may properly be raised by impost duties and by an equitable assessment upon the property and the legitimate business of the country, but import duties should be so reduced that no surplus shall be accumulated in the treasury, and that the burdens of taxation shall be removed from foods, clothing, and other comforts and necessaries of life.

6. That civil service appointments for all civil offices, chiefly clerical in their duties, should be based upon moral, intellectual and physical qualifications, and not upon party service or party necessity.

7. That the right of suffrage rests on no mere circumstance of race, color, sex or nationality, and that where, from any cause, it has been held from citizens who are of suitable age and mentally and morally qualified for the exercise of an intelligent ballot, it should be restored by the people through the Legislatures of the several States, on such educational basis as they may deem wise.

8. For the abolition of polygamy and the establishment of uniform laws governing marriage and divorce.

9. For prohibiting all combinations of capital to control and to increase the cost of products for popular consumption.

10. For the preservation and defence of the Sabbath as a civil institution without oppressing any who religiously observe the same on any other day than the first day of the week.

11. That arbitration is the Christian, wise, and economic method of settling national differences, and the same method should, by judicious legislation, be applied to the settlement of disputes between large bodies of employés and employers; that the abolition of the saloons would remove the burdens, moral, physical, pecuniary, and social, which now oppress labor and rob it of its earnings, and would prove to be the wise and successful way of promoting labor reform; and we invite labor and capital to unite with us for the accomplishment thereof; that monopoly in land is a wrong to the people, and the public land should be reserved to actual settlers, and that men and women should receive equal wages for equal work.

12. That our immigration laws should be so enforced as to prevent the introduction into our country of all convicts, inmates of other dependent institutions, and of others physically incapacitated for self-support, and that no person should have the ballot in any State who is not a citizen of the United States.

Recognizing and declaring that prohibition of the liquor traffic has become the dominant issue in national politics, we invite to full party fellowship all those who, on this one dominant issue, are with us agreed, in the full belief that this party can and will remove sectional differences, promote national unity, and insure the best welfare of our entire land.

Another convention was held at Washington on the 14th of August, composed of a few fragments of the old American party. The fact that it polled in the entire country only 1590 votes for its candidates showed that it was practically without[Pg 331] constituents. It was natural enough that the national convention of a party made up almost wholly of ambitious and discordant leaders should have a split, and they managed to get up a row and have a secession of the delegates representing a number of States on the simple question of how the delegates should vote. The seceders, however, made no nominations. After the dissatisfied delegates had left the convention, only the delegates from New York and California remained, but they were 80 of the 126 delegates all told. They nominated James Langdon Curtis, of New York, for President, and James R. Greer, of Tennessee, for Vice-President. Mr. Greer declined the nomination, and I can find no record of any one having been chosen in his place. The following platform was adopted:

Resolved, That all law-abiding citizens of the United States of America, whether native or foreign born, are politically equals (except as provided by the Constitution), and all are entitled to, and should receive, the full protection of the laws.

Resolved, That the Constitution of the United States should be so amended as to prohibit the Federal and State Governments from conferring upon any person the right to vote unless such person be a citizen of the United States.

Resolved, That we are in favor of fostering and encouraging American industries of every class and kind, and declare that the assumed issue “Protection” vs. “Free Trade” is a fraud and a snare. The best “protection” is that which protects the labor and life blood of the Republic from the degrading competition with and contamination by imported foreigners; and the most dangerous “free trade” is that in paupers, criminals, communists, and anarchists, in which the balance has always been against the United States.

Whereas, One of the greatest evils of unrestricted foreign immigration is the reduction of the wages of the American working-man and working-woman to the level of the underfed and underpaid labor of foreign countries; therefore,

Resolved, That we demand that no immigrant shall be admitted into the United States without a passport obtained from the American consul at the port from which he sails; that no passport shall be issued to any pauper, criminal, or insane person, or to any person who, in the judgment of the consul, is not likely to become a desirable citizen of the United States; and that for each immigrant passport there shall be collected by the consul issuing the same the sum of one hundred dollars to be by him paid into the Treasury of the United States.

Resolved, That the present naturalization laws of the United States should be unconditionally repealed.

Resolved, That the soil of America should belong to Americans; that no alien non-resident should be permitted to own real estate[Pg 332] in the United States; and that the realty possessions of the resident alien should be limited in value and area.

Resolved, That no flag shall float on any public buildings, municipal, State, or national, in the United States, except the municipal, State, or national flag of the United States—the flag of the stars and stripes.

Resolved, That we reassert the American principles of absolute freedom of religious worship and belief, the permanent separation of Church and State; and we oppose the appropriation of public money or property to any church, or institution administered by a church. We maintain that all church property should be subject to taxation.

The contest of 1888 differed from the Cleveland contest of 1884 in its freedom from vituperation and bitterness. It was conducted with earnestness and dignity on both sides. Neither of the candidates greatly enthused the rank and file of their party, as did Blaine and Hancock in former national conflicts, but they commanded not only the entire confidence and respect of their parties, but also of the whole country. Cleveland took little personal part in the conflict, but Harrison made a most vigorous and telling campaign by his almost daily speeches delivered to visiting delegations at Indianapolis, in which he discussed every phase of the public questions of the day. These addresses were doubtless carefully prepared and given to the associated press, but they were not only very able, but they were singularly versatile and adroit, and presented Harrison to the public in an entirely new light. I cannot recall another Presidential contest that was conducted on both sides with greater dignity and decency than that between Cleveland and Harrison in 1888. Nearly equal respect was shown to both candidates in the Garfield-Hancock contest of 1880, but the famous forgery of the Morey letter to control the vote of the Pacific States against Garfield and the Credit Mobilier scandal marred the dignity of that conflict.

The following table exhibits the popular and electoral vote of 1888:

[Pg 333]

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Benjamin Harrison, Indiana. | Grover Cleveland, New York. | Clinton B. Fisk, New Jersey. | Alson J. Streeter, Illinois. | Harrison and Morton. | Cleveland and Thurman.
Alabama | 56,197 | 117,320 | 583 | —— | — | 10
Arkansas | 58,752 | 85,962 | 641 | 10,613 | — | 7
California | 124,816 | 117,729 | 5,761 | —— | 8 | —
Colorado | 50,774 | 37,567 | 2,191 | 1,266 | 3 | —
Connecticut | 74,584 | 74,920 | 4,234 | 240 | — | 6
Delaware | 12,973 | 16,414 | 400 | —— | — | 3
Florida | 26,657 | 39,561 | 423 | —— | — | 4
Georgia | 40,496 | 100,499 | 1,808 | 136 | — | 12
Illinois | 370,473 | 348,278 | 21,695 | 7,090 | 22 | —
Indiana | 263,361 | 261,013 | 9,881 | 2,694 | 15 | —
Iowa | 211,598 | 179,887 | 3,550 | 9,105 | 13 | —
Kansas | 182,934 | 103,744 | 6,768 | 37,726 | 9 | —
Kentucky | 155,134 | 183,800 | 5,225 | 622 | — | 13
Louisiana | 30,484 | 85,032 | 160 | 39 | — | 8
Maine | 73,734 | 50,481 | 2,691 | 1,344 | 6 | —
Maryland | 99,986 | 106,168 | 4,767 | —— | — | 8
Massachusetts | 183,892 | 151,856 | 8,701 | —— | 14 | —
Michigan | 236,370 | 213,459 | 20,942 | 4,541 | 13 | —
Minnesota | 142,492 | 104,385 | 15,311 | 1,094 | 7 | —
Mississippi | 30,096 | 85,471 | 218 | 22 | — | 9
Missouri | 236,257 | 261,974 | 4,539 | 18,632 | — | 16
Nebraska | 108,425 | 80,552 | 9,429 | 4,226 | 5 | —
Nevada | 7,229 | 5,362 | 41 | —— | 3 | —
New Hampshire | 45,728 | 43,458 | 1,593 | 13 | 4 | —
New Jersey | 144,344 | 151,493 | 7,904 | —— | — | 9
New York | 648,759 | 635,757 | 30,231 | 626 | 36 | —
North Carolina | 134,784 | 147,902 | 2,787 | 32 | — | 11
Ohio | 416,054 | 396,455 | 24,356 | 3,496 | 23 | —
Oregon | 33,291 | 26,522 | 1,677 | 363 | 3 | —
Pennsylvania | 526,091 | 446,633 | 20,947 | 3,873 | 30 | —
Rhode Island | 21,968 | 17,530 | 1,250 | 18 | 4 | —
South Carolina | 13,736 | 65,825 | —— | —— | — | 9
Tennessee | 138,988 | 158,779 | 5,969 | 48 | — | 12
Texas | 88,422 | 234,883 | 4,749 | 29,459 | — | 13
Vermont | 45,192 | 16,785 | 1,460 | —— | 4 | —
Virginia | 150,438 | 151,977 | 1,678 | —— | — | 12
West Virginia | 77,791 | 79,664 | 669 | 1,064 | — | 6
Wisconsin | 176,553 | 155,232 | 14,277 | 8,552 | 11 | —
Totals | 5,439,853 | 5,540,329 | 249,506 | 146,935 | 233 | 168

[Pg 334]

Cleveland lost his election in 1888 by his message to Congress, delivered a year before, making the tariff and revenue question the sole issue before the country. His message referred to no other question than the issue of reduced revenues and taxes. I saw him on Saturday night before the meeting of Congress, and with Speaker Carlisle, who was to be re-elected to the Speakership on the following Monday, earnestly urged him to modify his message. Carlisle was quite as positive as I was in assuring him that it would result in disaster to himself and his administration. His answer was that possibly we were right, but that it was a duty that should be performed, and while he might fall, he believed the country would vindicate him at an early day. He was a man who gave very serious thought to his official duties, performed them with great fidelity, and when convinced as to his duty none could dissuade him from his purpose. But for that message he would certainly have been re-elected President in 1888.

Cleveland entered the Presidency enjoying the confidence and respect of the country in a much larger degree than is usually accorded to new Presidents. His record as Mayor of Buffalo, as Governor of New York, and his political and official utterances generally were all in the line of the purest and best politics, and the sturdiness with which he maintained his convictions even against all considerations of expediency compelled the respect alike of friend and foe. No more conscientious man ever filled the Executive chair of the nation, and I doubt whether any other President gave such tireless labor to the duties of the office. His Cabinet officers were simply advisory as to the direction of their departments, and every question of importance came to him for final decision. I think he was as nearly capable of giving up the Presidency to maintain his convictions as any man who ever filled the position.

He certainly knew when he sent his tariff message to Congress against the advice of nearly all of those upon whose political judgment he most depended, that he was inviting political disaster, and that he was inviting it when the Republican leaders freely confessed their inability to defeat his re-election. He had inspired the interest of the best political elements of the country by his courageous support of civil service reform, that was then in its infancy. He did it with the full knowledge that he had a party behind him that was[Pg 335] most unwilling to surrender the spoils of power to any sentiment, however sacred. I met him very often during his first term, and was sometimes invited to come to the Executive Mansion after ten o’clock at night, when he would willingly converse until the small hours in the morning. These habits were improved when the beautiful and accomplished wife came as mistress to the White House, and it was delightful to see his ordinarily rather heavy face brighten when he spoke of the woman who had brought into his life a measure of happiness to which he had ever before been stranger. I met him frequently during the contest of 1888, and while he hoped that he might be re-elected he was not confident. I saw him soon after his defeat, and no man ever bore great political disaster with such serene philosophy. He knew that his tariff message had defeated him, but he said that he believed it better that he should be thus defeated than not to have faced the issue as he did.

In reviewing the contest, he said that he had but a single unpleasant memory of it and its results, and that was that the malicious scandals of some of his most unscrupulous foes relating to his domestic life had brought sorrow to the “dear little woman,” to use his own expression, who deserved the respect and protection of every one. Some of the desperate Tammany leaders had formulated the scandals against Cleveland’s domestic life, distributed them broadcast in a circular at the St. Louis convention, and there are always many whose political prejudices make them welcome and accept such assaults upon a political nominee. I was much with Cleveland during his first and second terms of the Presidency, and also during the interval, and a more affectionate and devoted husband I have never seen. He was not a man to exhibit the arts of the demagogue, for to them he was an entire stranger, but I saw him tell the story of his home life more eloquently than words could ever have given it, when, on the 4th of March, 1893, as he was about to leave the large parlor of the Arlington, crowded with his many friends, to go to the inauguration ceremony, he stepped up to his wife, gave her a hearty kiss and affectionately patted her on the head, as he bowed himself off to accept the highest civil trust of the world.

Greatly as Cleveland’s tariff message had obstructed his election, he would have succeeded but for the perfidy of Tammany. He carried the country by nearly 100,000 popular[Pg 336] majority, being much larger than the popular majority he received in 1884, but the electoral vote of New York lost him the Presidency. The betrayal of Cleveland by Tammany was clearly evident by the returns of the election in that State. Cleveland was at the head of the Democratic ticket for President, and Governor Hill, the favorite of Tammany, was on the same ticket for Governor, and he was re-elected by a majority of 19,171, while Cleveland lost the State by a majority of 14,373. Tammany and Mr. Dana, of the Sun, that was then the Tammany organ, had their revenge.

[Pg 337]

## THE CLEVELAND-HARRISON-WEAVER CONTEST

1892

President Harrison had anything but a tranquil administration. Soon after his inauguration bitter factional strife was developed, and he seemed never to be able to get into anything approaching close and sympathetic relations with the leaders of his party. He was much like Cleveland in his conscientious devotion to his public duties, and he was poorly equipped and had little taste for political direction. He was generally respected by the people of all parties, but he held the political leaders of his own faith at arm’s length. Senator Quay called upon him soon after his inauguration, expecting to receive the generous thanks of the President for his management of the desperate campaign that had given him and the party victory; but Quay’s political trust in his chieftain was greatly chilled as the President congratulated his Field Marshal that Providence had been with them in the contest and carried them safely through. While Quay is of the same old-school Presbyterian stock as Harrison, and had the training of his Presbyterian minister father, his faith in foreordination was not so rugged as to assume that Providence would have carried Harrison through if Quay had not exhausted all political resources, regular and irregular, to wrest New York from Cleveland and give Harrison the victory. Cameron, who had served in the Senate with Harrison, while he had entire faith in the integrity and ability of the new President, had no faith in his political usefulness, and from the start there were not the most cordial relations between the Pennsylvania Senators and the administration.

Harrison had failed to carry the popular majority over Cleveland, and the Republican majority in both Senate and House was regarded as too small for the present and future[Pg 338] safety of the party. It was this political necessity that led to the admission of the six new States of North and South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Wyoming, which were expected to bring 12 additional Republican Senators, 7 additional Republican Congressmen, and 19 additional Republican electoral votes. How sadly the Republican leaders miscalculated on these new States is shown by the fact that Idaho and North Dakota voted for Weaver, while Montana and Wyoming were saved by nominal majorities, and all of these States, with the exception of North Dakota, voted against the Republican candidate for President in 1896.

The small Republican majority in the House was rapidly and ruthlessly increased by admitting Republican contestants regardless of the merits of their claims, and the whole policy of the Republican leadership, outside of Harrison himself, who did not inspire it, was to maintain Republican supremacy by might, regardless of right. Not only were six new States added, but a new Force bill was decided upon to restore Republican supremacy in the South. The attempt to revive such a measure was simply midsummer madness, as it was opposed by the entire conservative Republican element and arrayed the South in implacable hostility to the administration. Blaine had defeated the Force bill when it was urged under the Grant administration, and Senator J. Donald Cameron defeated it under the Harrison administration. Cameron had decided the contest between M. C. Butler, Democrat, and David T. Corbin, Republican, of South Carolina, in 1877. Corbin was one of the ablest of the South Carolina carpet-baggers, and was elected by the Republican Legislature, that had been finally dispersed by President Hayes refusing to support it, and Butler had been elected by the Hampton or Democratic Legislature.

There was a peculiar condition of affairs in South Carolina at the time. Patterson, the Republican Senator from that State, was a fugitive after the Hampton Government attained power, and Small, Cardoza, and a number of other colored leaders and officials in the State were under indictment for embezzlement and other frauds, and some of them had been convicted. On the other side, a number of Democratic citizens of South Carolina were under indictment in the Federal Courts for outrages perpetrated by them in the Ku Klux organization, and had the course of justice been permitted to go on without interruption, a large number of[Pg 339] the leaders of both sides would have ended in prison. A truce was agreed upon, and finally an unwritten but well-maintained agreement was reached that there should be no further prosecution of the Ku Klux clan, and no further prosecution of Senator Patterson or any of the other Republicans who were then at the mercy of the Democrats. This was assented to by the Democrats on condition that Butler should be admitted to the Senate, and Cameron was the man who accomplished it.

When the new Force bill came up under the Harrison administration, Cameron was earnestly opposed to it, and he is entitled to the full credit of having defeated it. His Senatorial term expired on the 4th of March, 1891, and he was a candidate for re-election before a Republican Legislature that had been chosen in the fall of 1890, when the Democrats elected Pattison, Democrat, to his second term as Governor. It was expected that the vote on the Force bill would be had before the Senatorial election, and Cameron was threatened with defeat if he did not line up with the party in its favor. A majority of the considerate Republicans of Pennsylvania doubtless agreed with him, but he had many political enemies, and they would have been glad had he given them an opportunity to attack him as opposing the accepted policy of the party.

Some time before the Legislature met, Cameron requested me to meet him at the Continental Hotel in Philadelphia. He stated the case frankly; said he could command the Republican nomination for Senator without a doubt and by a large majority, but that if the Democrats would unite with the bolting Republicans, he might be defeated if a vote was reached on the Force bill before the Senatorial election and he voting against it. What he desired was the assurance that if Cameron was threatened with defeat by the Republicans because of his opposition to the Force bill, the Democrats should not permit him to be crucified for opposing and defeating a bill that they were most anxious to have defeated. Pattison had been elected Governor and William F. Harrity had been announced as the coming Secretary of the Commonwealth. I said to Cameron that both of them were within two squares of us and that I could ascertain their views in a very few minutes. I immediately called on Pattison and Harrity, presented the case to them, and they both authorized me to give the assurance to Senator Cameron[Pg 340] that if he were opposed by Republicans because of his opposition to the Force bill, the Democrats would not permit him to be sacrificed for what they would regard as one of the bravest and most patriotic of his public acts. That assurance was given to Cameron, and he was then safe. It became well known to the anti-Cameron Republicans that the Democrats would not permit him to be sacrificed. The result was that Cameron was elected by Republican votes, although his position on the Force bill was well understood.

There were thus many disturbing elements in the Republican ranks, and one of the most serious was the McKinley Tariff bill of 1890. President McKinley was then chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, and the Tariff bill of 1890 was known as the McKinley Tariff, but it is due to him to say that he was overruled in many of its most offensive features, and some of the most important schedules were made by the manufacturers interested, who had, in accordance with positive promises given them, made large contributions to the Republican campaign fund of 1888.

I happened to be a guest at a public dinner and seated beside McKinley a short time before the election of 1890, and soon after the McKinley bill had passed. He discussed the situation freely, and was evidently concerned as to the result of the coming election, as there was but little time after the passage of the bill for the people to understand it, but he was confident that it would be sustained. In that he was greatly mistaken, as the Republicans never suffered such a disastrous defeat as that of 1890, due almost wholly to the McKinley Tariff. True, the elections of 1891 showed that the Republicans had regained some of their losses of 1890, but when the Republican convention met to nominate a candidate the contest was regarded as at least doubtful by the more intelligent and considerate Republican leaders, and the political situation was greatly intensified by Blaine suddenly retiring from the Cabinet three days before the convention met. His letter of resignation was curt and emphatic. It was notice to the country that Blaine had ceased to be in sympathy with the Harrison administration.

The Republican convention met at Minneapolis on the 7th of June, with J. Sloat Fassett as temporary chairman and Governor William McKinley, of Ohio, as permanent president. When McKinley accepted the presidency of the convention he did not expect to be a candidate for nomination,[Pg 341] but the swiftly changing events of American politics made him what was regarded as a hopeful candidate before a ballot was reached, and he was voted for by all of his Ohio delegates, excepting himself, who voted for Harrison. The 1st and only ballot resulted as follows:

Benjamin Harrison, Ind. | 535 | ¹⁄₆
James G. Blaine, Maine | 182 | ⁵⁄₆
Wm. McKinley, Jr., Ohio | 182 |
Thomas B. Reed, Maine | 4 |
Robert T. Lincoln, Illinois | 1 |

Whitelaw Reid, of New York, was nominated for Vice-President by acclamation. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

The representatives of the Republicans of the United States, assembled in general convention on the shores of the Mississippi River, the everlasting bond of an indestructible republic, whose most glorious chapter of history is the record of the Republican party, congratulate their countrymen on the majestic march of the nation under the banners inscribed with the principles of our platform of 1888, vindicated by victory at the polls and prosperity in our fields, workshops, and mines, and make the following declaration of principles:

We reaffirm the American doctrine of protection. We call attention to its growth abroad. We maintain that the prosperous condition of our country is largely due to the wise revenue legislation of the Republican Congress.

We believe that all articles which cannot be produced in the United States, except luxuries, should be admitted free of duty, and that on all imports coming into competition with the products of American labor there should be levied duties equal to the difference between wages abroad and at home.

We assert that the prices of manufactured articles of general consumption have been reduced under the operations of the Tariff Act of 1890.

We denounce the efforts of the Democratic majority of the House of Representatives to destroy our tariff laws piecemeal, as is manifested by their attacks upon wool, lead, and lead ores, the chief products of a number of States, and we ask the people for their judgment thereon.

We point to the success of the Republican policy of reciprocity, under which our export trade has vastly increased, and new and enlarged markets have been opened for the products of our farms and workshops.

We remind the people of the bitter opposition of the Democratic party to this practical business measure, and claim that, executed by a Republican administration, our present laws will eventually give us control of the trade of the world.

The American people, from tradition and interest, favor bimetallism, and the Republican party demands the use of both gold and silver as standard money, with such restrictions and under such provisions,[Pg 342] to be determined by legislation, as will secure the maintenance of the parity of values of the two metals, so that the purchasing and debt-paying power of the dollar, whether of silver, gold, or paper, shall be at all times equal. The interests of the producers of the country, its farmers and its workingmen, demand that every dollar, paper or coin, issued by the Government, shall be as good as any other.

We commend the wise and patriotic steps already taken by our Government to secure an international conference to adopt such measures as will insure a parity of value between gold and silver for use as money throughout the world.

We demand that every citizen of the United States shall be allowed to cast one free and unrestricted ballot in all public elections, and that such ballot shall be counted and returned as cast; that such laws shall be enacted and enforced as will secure to every citizen, be he rich or poor, native or foreign born, white or black, this sovereign right guaranteed by the Constitution. The free and honest popular ballot, the just and equal representation of all the people, as well as their just and equal protection under the laws, are the foundation of our republican institutions, and the party will never relax its efforts until the integrity of the ballot and the purity of elections shall be fully guaranteed and protected in every State.

We denounce the continued inhuman outrages perpetrated upon American citizens for political reasons in certain Southern States of the Union.

We favor the extension of our foreign commerce, the restoration of our mercantile marine by home-built ships, and the creation of a navy for the protection of our national interests and the honor of our flag; the maintenance of the most friendly relations with all foreign powers, entangling alliances with none, and the protection of the rights of our fishermen.

We reaffirm our approval of the Monroe Doctrine, and believe in the achievement of the manifest destiny of the Republic in its broadest sense.

We favor the enactment of more stringent laws and regulations for the restriction of criminal, pauper, and contract immigration.

We favor efficient legislation by Congress to protect the life and limbs of employés of transportation companies engaged in carrying on interstate commerce, and recommend legislation by the respective States that will protect employés engaged in State commerce, in mining, and manufacturing.

The Republican party has always been the champion of the oppressed, and recognizes the dignity of manhood, irrespective of faith, color, or nationality; it sympathizes with the cause of home rule in Ireland, and protests against the persecution of the Jews in Russia.

The ultimate reliance of free popular government is the intelligence of the people and the maintenance of freedom among men. We therefore declare anew our devotion to liberty of thought and conscience, of speech and press, and approve all agencies and instrumentalities which contribute to the education of the children of the land; but, while insisting upon the fullest measure of religious liberty, we are opposed to any union of Church and State.

We reaffirm our opposition, declared in the Republican platform[Pg 343] of 1888, to all combinations of capital, organized in trusts or otherwise, to control arbitrarily the condition of trade among our citizens. We heartily endorse the action already taken upon this subject, and ask for such further legislation as may be required to remedy any defects in existing laws, and to render their enforcement more complete and effective.

We approve the policy of extending to towns, villages, and rural communities the advantages of the free delivery service, now enjoyed by the larger cities of the country, and reaffirm the declaration contained in the Republican platform of 1888, pledging the reduction of letter postage to one cent, at the earliest possible moment consistent with the maintenance of the Post-office Department, and the highest class of postal service.

We commend the spirit and evidence of reform in the civil service, and the wise and consistent enforcement by the Republican party of the laws regulating the same.

The construction of the Nicaragua Canal is of the highest importance to the American people, both as a measure of national defence and to build up and maintain American commerce, and it should be controlled by the United States Government.

We favor the admission of the remaining Territories at the earliest practical date, having due regard to the interests of the people of the Territories and of the United States. All the Federal officers appointed for the Territories should be selected from bona fide residents thereof, and the right of self-government should be accorded as far as practicable.

We favor cession, subject to the homestead laws, of the arid public lands to the States and Territories in which they lie, under such Congressional restrictions as to disposition, reclamation, and occupancy by settlers as will secure the maximum benefits to the people.

The World’s Columbian Exposition is a great national undertaking, and Congress should promptly enact such reasonable legislation in aid thereof as will insure a discharge of the expenses and obligations incident thereto, and the attainment of results commensurate with the dignity and progress of the nation.

In temperance we sympathize with all wise and legitimate efforts to lessen and prevent the evils of intemperance and promote morality.

Ever mindful of the services and sacrifices of the men who saved the life of the nation, we pledge anew to the veteran soldiers of the Republic a watchful care and recognition of their just claims upon a grateful people.

We commend the able, patriotic, and thoroughly American administration of President Harrison. Under it the country has enjoyed remarkable prosperity, and the dignity and honor of the nation, at home and abroad, have been faithfully maintained, and we offer the record of pledges kept as a guarantee of faithful performance in the future.

The Democratic National Convention met at Chicago on June 21, and Cleveland was nominated for a third time after the most desperate and acrimonious strife I have ever witnessed in a national convention. It was on that occasion[Pg 344] that Bourke Cockran made a speech against Cleveland that gave him national fame, and it was one of extraordinary ability and power. The convention was really adverse to Cleveland’s nomination. Had a majority of the delegates followed their own personal inclinations he would have been defeated, and he was nominated solely by the matchless leadership of William C. Whitney. But for him and his wonderful skill and energy, the convention would have run away from Cleveland at the outset. Never in the history of American politics was there such an achievement as the nomination of Cleveland over the solid and aggressively hostile vote of his own State of New York, that was regarded as the pivotal State of the battle. Tammany had always opposed Cleveland in national conventions, but never before had control of the delegation against him, and a protest was published to the convention signed by every delegate from the State, demanding his defeat.

Cleveland was strong with the people, but weak with the political leaders, and it was only Whitney’s masterful management of the convention that held it to Cleveland. The platform was made by the enemies of Cleveland; the nomination for Vice-President was made over his friends, and the hostility to him was so pronounced that the opposing leaders were confident of his defeat at the polls. The convention sat at night and far on in the morning hours, when Cleveland received 617 votes, just ten more than were necessary to nominate him. Had he not been nominated on that ballot his defeat would have been certain.

The strength of Cleveland’s position before the people was pointedly illustrated by his nomination in a convention that was not specially friendly, but that was forced to make him the candidate because of the overwhelming popular Democratic sentiment that demanded it. A year or so before the convention met, he had written a brief and positive letter against the free coinage of silver, and the Democrats of the South and West almost with one voice declared against him at the time, but when the Democratic people faced the conditions presented by the battle of 1892, the masses came to the support of Cleveland and the leaders were compelled to follow. The cheap-money craze had made serious inroads in both of the great parties, and the Republican platform was a weak and awkward straddle of the whole issue, while the Democratic convention had an honest money plank[Pg 345] declaring for bimetallism and the free use of gold and silver with the intrinsic value of the dollar to be maintained.

The Democratic Convention at Chicago was presided over by William C. Owens, of Kentucky, as temporary president, and William L. Wilson, of West Virginia, as permanent president. After a protracted and acrimonious discussion that extended the session of the convention of the second day until long after midnight, the ballot for President was finally reached, resulting as follows:

Grover Cleveland, N. Y. | 617 | ¹⁄₃
David B. Hill, N. Y. | 114 |
Horace Boies, Iowa | 103 |
Arthur P. Gorman, Md. | 36 | ¹⁄₂
Adlai E. Stevenson, Ill. | 16 | ²⁄₃
John G. Carlisle, Ky. | 14 |
Wm. R. Morrison, Ill. | 3 |
James E. Campbell, Ohio | 2 |
Wm. C. Whitney, N. Y. | 1 |
Wm. E. Russell, Mass. | 1 |
Robert E. Pattison, Penn. | 1 |

There was an animated contest for Vice-President, and the special friends of Cleveland were united in favor of Isaac P. Gray, of Indiana, but they were defeated in their choice, as they were on several vital points of the platform. Only one ballot was had for Vice-President, resulting as follows:

Adlai E. Stevenson, Ill. | 402
Isaac P. Gray, Ind. | 344
Allen B. Morse, Mich. | 86
John L. Mitchell, Wis. | 45
Henry Watterson, Ky. | 26
Bourke Cockran, N. Y. | 5
Lambert Tree, Ill. | 1
Horace Boies, Iowa | 1

Stevenson had not received the requisite two-thirds, but he so far outstripped the candidate of the Cleveland leaders that they cordially acquiesced, and the nomination of Stevenson was made unanimous. The following platform was adopted after having been amended in open convention, where the tariff plank of the platform was substituted for the more temperate plank reported by the committee, by a vote of 564 to 342.

Section 1. The representatives of the Democratic party of the United States, in national convention assembled, do reaffirm their allegiance to the principles of the party as formulated by Jefferson, and exemplified by the long and illustrious line of his successors in Democratic leadership, from Madison to Cleveland; we believe the public welfare demands that these principles be applied to the conduct of the Federal Government through the accession to power of the party that advocates them; and we solemnly declare that the need of a return to these fundamental principles of a free popular government, based on home rule and individual[Pg 346] liberty, was never more urgent than now, when the tendency to centralize all power at the Federal capital has become a menace to the reserved rights of the States that strikes at the very roots of our Government under the Constitution as framed by the fathers of the Republic.

Sec. 2. We warn the people of our common country, jealous for the preservation of their free institutions, that the policy of Federal control of elections to which the Republican party has committed itself is fraught with the greatest dangers, scarcely less momentous than would result from a revolution practically establishing monarchy on the ruins of the Republic. It strikes at the North as well as the South, and injures the colored citizen even more than the white. It means a horde of deputy marshals at every polling-place armed with Federal power, returning boards appointed and controlled by Federal authority, the outrage of the electoral rights of the people in the several States, the subjugation of the colored people to the control of the party in power, and the reviving of race antagonisms now happily abated, of the utmost peril to the safety and happiness of all; a measure deliberately and justly described by a leading Republican Senator as “the most infamous bill that ever crossed the threshold of the Senate.” Such a policy, if sanctioned by law, would mean the dominance of a self-perpetuating oligarchy of office-holders, and the party first intrusted with its machinery could be dislodged from power only by an appeal to the reserved right of the people to resist oppression, which is inherent in all self-governing communities. Two years ago, this revolutionary policy was emphatically condemned by the people at the polls; but in contempt of that verdict, the Republican party has defiantly declared in its latest authoritative utterance that its success in the coming elections will mean the enactment of the Force bill, and the usurpation of despotic control over elections in all the States. Believing that the preservation of republican government in the United States is dependent upon the defeat of this policy of legalized force and fraud, we invite the support of all citizens who desire to see the Constitution maintained in its integrity, with the laws pursuant thereto, which have given our country a hundred years of unexampled prosperity; and we pledge the Democratic party, if it be intrusted with power, not only to the defeat of the Force bill, but also to relentless opposition to the Republican policy of profligate expenditure, which in the short space of two years has squandered an enormous surplus, and emptied an overflowing treasury, after piling new burdens of taxation upon the already overtaxed labor of the country.

Sec. 3. We denounce the Republican protection as a fraud, a robbery of the great majority of the American people for the benefit of the few. We declare it to be a fundamental principle of the Democratic party that the Federal Government has no constitutional power to impose and collect tariff duties, except for the purposes of revenue only, and we demand that the collection of such taxes shall be limited to the necessities of the Government when honestly and economically administered.

We denounce the McKinley Tariff law enacted by the Fifty-first Congress as the culminating atrocity of class legislation; we endorse the efforts made by the Democrats of the present Congress to modify[Pg 347] its most oppressive features in the direction of free raw materials and cheaper manufactured goods that enter into general consumption, and we promise its repeal as one of the beneficent results that will follow the action of the people in intrusting power to the Democratic party. Since the McKinley Tariff went into operation, there have been ten reductions of the wages of laboring men to one increase. We deny that there has been any increase of prosperity to the country since that tariff went into operation, and we point to the dulness and distress, the wage reductions and strikes in the iron trade, as the best possible evidence that no such prosperity has resulted from the McKinley act.

We call the attention of thoughtful Americans to the fact that, after thirty years of restrictive taxes against the importation of foreign wealth in exchange for our agricultural surplus, the homes and farms of the country have become burdened with a real estate mortgage debt of over $2,500,000,000, exclusive of all other forms of indebtedness; that in one of the chief agricultural States of the West there appears a real estate mortgage debt averaging $165 per capita of the total population, and that similar conditions and tendencies are shown to exist in the other agricultural exporting States. We denounce a policy which fosters no industry so much as it does that of the sheriff.

Sec. 4. Trade interchange on the basis of reciprocal advantage to the countries participating is a time-honored doctrine of the Democratic faith; but we denounce the sham reciprocity which juggles with the people’s desire for enlarged foreign markets and freer exchanges by pretending to establish closer trade relations for a country whose articles of export are almost exclusively agricultural products with other countries that are also agricultural, while erecting a custom-house barrier of prohibitive tariff taxes against the richest countries of the world, that stand ready to take our entire surplus of products, and to exchange therefor commodities which are necessaries and comforts of life among our own people.

Sec. 5. We recognize, in the trusts and combinations which are designed to enable capital to secure more than its just share of the joint product of capital and labor, a natural consequence of the prohibitive taxes which prevent the free competition which is the life of honest trade, but we believe their worst evils can be abated by law; and we demand the rigid enforcement of the laws made to prevent and control them, together with such further legislation in restraint of their abuses as experience may show to be necessary.

Sec. 6. The Republican party, while professing a policy of reserving the public land for small holdings by actual settlers, has given away the people’s heritage, till now a few railroad and non-resident aliens, individual and corporate, possess a larger area than that of all our farms between the two seas. The last Democratic administration reversed the improvident and unwise policy of the Republican party touching the public domain, and reclaimed from corporations and syndicates, alien and domestic, and restored to the people, nearly 100,000,000 acres of valuable land, to be sacredly held as homesteads for our citizens, and we pledge ourselves to continue this policy until every acre of land so unlawfully held shall be reclaimed and restored to the people.

[Pg 348]

Sec. 7. We denounce the Republican legislation known as the Sherman act of 1890 as a cowardly makeshift, fraught with possibilities of danger in the future which should make all of its supporters, as well as its author, anxious for its speedy repeal. We hold to the use of both gold and silver as the standard money of the country, and to the coinage of both gold and silver without discrimination against either metal or charge for mintage; but the dollar unit of coinage of both metals must be of equal intrinsic and exchangeable value, or be adjusted through international agreement, or by such safeguards of legislation as shall insure the maintenance of the parity of the two metals, and the equal power of every dollar at all times in the markets and in the payment of debts; and we demand that all paper currency shall be kept at par with and redeemable in such coin. We insist upon this policy as especially necessary for the protection of the farmers and laboring classes, the first and most defenceless victims of unstable money and a fluctuating currency.

Sec. 8. We recommend that the prohibitory ten per cent. tax on State bank issues be repealed.

Sec. 9. Public office is a public trust. We reaffirm the declaration of the Democratic National Convention of 1876 for the reform of the civil service, and we call for the honest enforcement of all laws regulating the same. The nomination of a President, as in the recent Republican convention, by delegations composed largely of his appointees, holding office at his pleasure, is a scandalous satire upon free popular institutions, and a startling illustration of the methods by which a President may gratify his ambition. We denounce a policy under which Federal office-holders usurp control of party conventions in the States, and we pledge the Democratic party to the reform of these and all other abuses which threaten individual liberty and local self-government.

Sec. 10. The Democratic party is the only party that has ever given the country a foreign policy consistent and vigorous, compelling respect abroad and inspiring confidence at home. While avoiding entangling alliances, it has aimed to cultivate friendly relations with other nations, and especially with our American neighbors on the American continent whose destiny is closely linked with our own, and we view with alarm the tendency to a policy of irritation and bluster which is liable at any time to confront us with the alternative of humiliation or war. We favor the maintenance of a navy strong enough for all purposes of national defence, and to properly maintain the honor and dignity of the country abroad.

Sec. 11. This country has always been the refuge of the oppressed from every land—exiles for conscience’ sake; and in the spirit of the founders of our Government, we condemn the oppression practised by the Russian Government upon its Lutheran and Jewish subjects, and we call upon our National Government, in the interest of justice and humanity, by all just and proper means, to use its prompt and best efforts to bring about a cessation of these cruel persecutions in the dominions of the Czar, and to secure to the oppressed equal rights. We tender our profound and earnest sympathy to those lovers of freedom who are struggling for home rule and the great cause of local self-government in Ireland.

[Pg 349]

Sec. 12. We heartily approve all legitimate efforts to prevent the United States from being used as the dumping-ground for the known criminals and professional paupers of Europe; and we demand the rigid enforcement of the laws against Chinese immigration, or the importation of foreign workmen under contract, to degrade American labor and lessen its wages; but we condemn and denounce any and all attempts to restrict the immigration of the industrious and worthy of foreign lands.

Sec. 13. This convention hereby renews the expression of appreciation of the patriotism of the soldiers and sailors of the Union in the war for its preservation, and we favor just and liberal pensions for all disabled Union soldiers, their widows and dependents; but we demand that the work of the Pension Office shall be done industriously, impartially, and honestly. We denounce the present administration of that office as incompetent, corrupt, disgraceful, and dishonest.

Sec. 14. The Federal Government should care for and improve the Mississippi River and other great waterways of the Republic, so as to secure for the interior States easy and cheap transportation to the tidewater. When any waterway of the Republic is of sufficient importance to demand the aid of the Government, such aid should be extended for a definite plan of continuous work until permanent improvement is secured.

Sec. 15. For purposes of national defence and the promotion of commerce between the States, we recognize the early construction of the Nicaragua Canal, and its protection against foreign control, as of great importance to the United States.

Sec. 16. Recognizing the World’s Columbian Exposition as a national undertaking of vast importance, in which the General Government has invited the co-operation of all the powers of the world, and appreciating the acceptance by many of such powers of the invitation extended, and the broadest liberal efforts being made by them to contribute to the grandeur of the undertaking, we are of the opinion that Congress should make such necessary financial provision as shall be requisite to the maintenance of the national honor and public faith.

Sec. 17. Popular education being the only safe basis of popular suffrage, we recommend to the several States most liberal appropriations for the public schools. Free common schools are the nursery of good government, and they have always received the fostering care of the Democratic party, which favors every means of increasing intelligence. Freedom of education, being an essential of civil and religious liberty, as well as a necessity for the development of intelligence, must not be interfered with under any pretext whatever. We are opposed to State interference with parental rights and rights of conscience in the education of children, as an infringement of the fundamental Democratic doctrine that the largest individual liberty consistent with the rights of others insures the highest type of American citizenship and the best government.

Sec. 18. We approve the action of the present House of Representatives in passing bills for the admission into the Union as States of the Territories of New Mexico and Arizona, and we favor the early admission of all the Territories having necessary population[Pg 350] and resources to admit them to Statehood; and, while they remain Territories, we hold that the officials appointed to administer the government of any Territory, together with the Districts of Columbia and Alaska, should be bonâ fide residents of the Territory or district in which their duties are to be performed. The Democratic party believes in home rule, and the control of their own affairs by the people of the vicinage.

Sec. 19. We favor legislation by Congress and State Legislatures to protect the lives and limbs of railway employees, and those of other hazardous transportation companies, and denounce the inactivity of the Republican party, and particularly the Republican Senate, for causing the defeat of measures beneficial and protective to this class of wageworkers.

Sec. 20. We are in favor of the enactment by the States of laws for abolishing the notorious sweating system, for abolishing contract convict labor, and for prohibiting the employment in factories of children under fifteen years of age.

Sec. 21. We are opposed to all sumptuary laws as an interference with the individual rights of the citizen.

Sec. 22. Upon this statement of principles and policies, the Democratic party asks the intelligent judgment of the American people. It asks a change of administration and a change of party in order that there may be a change of system and a change of methods, thus assuring the maintenance unimpaired of institutions under which the Republic has grown great and powerful.

The platform, as originally reported, contained, instead of the first paragraph of Section 3, the following:

We reiterate the oft-repeated doctrines of the Democratic party that the necessity of the Government is the only justification for taxation, and whenever a tax is unnecessary it is unjustifiable; that when custom-house taxation is levied upon articles of any kind produced in this country, the difference between the cost of labor here and labor abroad, when such a difference exists, fully measures any possible benefits to labor; and the enormous additional impositions of the existing tariff fall with crushing force upon our farmers and workingmen, and, for the mere advantage of the few whom it enriches, exact from labor a grossly unjust share of the expenses of the Government; and we demand such a revision of the tariff laws as will remove their iniquitous inequalities, lighten their oppressions, and put them on a constitutional and equitable basis. But in making reduction in taxes, it is not proposed to injure any domestic industries, but rather to promote their healthy growth. From the foundation of this Government, taxes collected at the custom-house have been the chief source of Federal revenue. Such they must continue to be. Moreover, many industries have come to rely upon legislation for successful continuance, so that any change of law must be at every step regardful of the labor and capital thus involved. The process of reform must be subject in the execution to this plain dictate of justice.

The National Prohibition Convention was held at Cincinnati on the 29th of June, with John P. St. John, of Kansas,[Pg 351] as temporary chairman, and Eli Ritter, of Indiana, as permanent chairman. The convention remained in session two days. The following was the only ballot for President:

John Bidwell, Cal. | 590
Gideon T. Stewart, Ohio | 179
W. J. Demorest, N. Y. | 139
Scattering | 3

A single ballot was had for Vice-President, as follows:

J. P. Cranfill, Texas | 417
Joshua Levering, Md. | 351
W. W. Satterlee, Minn. | 26
T. R. Carskoden, W. Va. | 19

The nominations of Bidwell and Cranfill were made unanimous. The following platform was adopted:

The Prohibition party, in national convention assembled, acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all true government, and His law as the standard to which all human enactments must conform to secure the blessings of peace and prosperity, presents the following declaration of principles:

1. The liquor traffic is a foe to civilization, the arch enemy of popular government, and a public nuisance. It is the citadel of the forces that corrupt politics, promote poverty and crime, degrade the nation’s home life, thwart the will of the people, and deliver our country into the hands of rapacious class interests. All laws that, under the guise of regulation, legalize and protect this traffic, or make the Government share in its ill-gotten gains, are “vicious in principle and powerless as a remedy.”

We declare anew for the entire suppression of the manufacture, sale, importation, exportation, and transportation of alcoholic liquors as a beverage, by Federal and State legislation; and the full powers of the Government should be exerted to secure this result. Any party that fails to recognize the dominant nature of this issue in American politics is undeserving of the support of the people.

2. No citizen should be denied the right to vote on account of sex, and equal labor should receive equal wages, without regard to sex.

3. The money of the country should be gold, silver, and paper, and be issued by the General Government only, and in sufficient quantities to meet the demands of business and give full opportunity for the employment of labor. To this end an increase in the volume of money is demanded, and no individual or corporation should be allowed to make any profit through its issue. It should be made a legal tender for the payment of all debts, public and private. Its volume should be fixed at a definite sum per capita, and made to increase with our increase in population.

4. We favor the free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold. (Rejected by the convention.)

5. Tariffs should be levied only as a defence against foreign governments which put tariffs upon or bar our products from their[Pg 352] markets, revenue being incidental. The residue of means necessary to an economical administration of the Government should be raised by levying a burden on what the people possess instead of upon what we consume.

6. Railroad, telegraph, and other public corporations should be controlled by the Government in the interest of the people, and no higher charges allowed than necessary to give fair interest on the capital actually invested.

7. Foreign immigration has become a burden upon industry, one of the factors in depressing wages and causing discontent; therefore our immigration laws should be revised and strictly enforced. The time of residence for naturalization should be extended, and no naturalized person should be allowed to vote until one year after he becomes a citizen.

8. Non-resident aliens should not be allowed to acquire land in this country, and we favor the limitation of individual and corporate ownership of land. All unearned grants of lands to railroad companies or other corporations should be reclaimed.

9. Years of inaction and treachery on the part of the Republican and Democratic parties have resulted in the present reign of mob law, and we demand that every citizen be protected in the right of trial by constitutional tribunals.

10. All men should be protected by law in their right to one day’s rest in seven.

11. Arbitration is the wisest and most economical and humane method of settling national differences.

12. Speculations in margins, the cornering of grain, money, and products, and the formation of pools, trusts, and combinations for the arbitrary advancement of prices, should be suppressed.

13. We pledge that the Prohibition party if elected to power will ever grant just pensions to disabled veterans of the Union army and navy, their widows and orphans.

14. We stand unequivocally for the American public school, and opposed to any appropriation of public moneys for sectarian schools. We declare that only by united support of such common schools, taught in the English language, can we hope to become and remain an homogeneous and harmonious people.

15. We arraign the Republican and Democratic parties as false to the standards reared by their founders; as faithless to the principles of the illustrious leaders of the past to whom they do homage with the lips; as recreant to the “higher law,” which is as inflexible in political affairs as in personal life; and as no longer embodying the aspirations of the American people, or inviting the confidence of enlightened progressive patriotism. Their protests against the admission of “moral issues” into politics is a confession of their own moral degeneracy. The declaration of an eminent authority, that municipal misrule is “the one conspicuous failure of American politics,” follows as a natural consequence of such degeneracy, and is true alike of cities under Republican and Democratic control. Each accuses the other of extravagance in Congressional appropriations, and both are alike guilty; each protests when out of power against the infraction of the civil service laws, and each when in power violates those laws in letter and spirit; each professes fealty to the interests of the toiling masses, but both covertly truckle to[Pg 353] the money power in their administration of public affairs. Even the tariff issue, as represented in the Democratic Mills bill and the Republican McKinley bill, is no longer treated by them as an issue upon great and divergent principles of government, but is a mere catering to different sectional and class interests. The attempt in many States to wrest the Australian ballot system from its true purpose, and to so deform it as to render it extremely difficult for new parties to exercise the rights of suffrage, is an outrage upon popular government. The competition of both the parties for the vote of the slums, and their assiduous courting of the liquor power and subserviency to the money power, have resulted in placing those powers in the position of practical arbiters of the destinies of the nation. We renew our protest against these perilous tendencies, and invite all citizens to join us in the upbuilding of a party that, as shown in five national campaigns, prefers temporary defeat to an abandonment of the claims of justice, sobriety, personal rights, and the protection of American homes.

The only opposition being to the fourth resolution declaring for the free coinage of silver, that was defeated by a vote of 596 to 335.

The campaign of 1892 gave birth to the People’s party, that embraced the old Greenbackers and most of the other odds and ends of former side political organizations, and it proved to be an important factor in the struggle. It held its national convention at Omaha on the 2d of July, with C. H. Ellington, of Georgia, as temporary chairman and H. L. Loucks, of South Dakota, as permanent president. The 1st and only ballot for President resulted as follows:

James B. Weaver, Iowa | 995
James H. Kyle, S. D. | 265
Scattering | 3

Only one ballot was had for Vice-President, as follows:

James G. Field, Virginia | 733
Benj. S. Terrell, Texas | 554

The nominations of Weaver and Field were made unanimous and the following platform adopted:

Assembled upon the 116th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the People’s party of America, in their first national convention, invoking upon their action the blessing of Almighty God, puts forth, in the name and on behalf of the people of this country, the following preamble and declaration of principles:

The conditions which surround us best justify our co-operation; we meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge of moral, political, and material ruin. Corruption dominates the ballot-box, the Legislature, the Congress, and touches even the ermine of the[Pg 354] bench. The people are demoralized; most of the States have been compelled to isolate the voters at the polling-places to prevent universal intimidation or bribery. The newspapers are largely subsidized or muzzled; public opinion silenced; business prostrated; our homes covered with mortgages; labor impoverished; and the land concentrating in the hands of the capitalists. The urban workmen are denied the right of organization for self-protection; imported pauperized labor beats down their wages; a hireling standing army, unrecognized by our laws, is established to shoot them down, and they are rapidly degenerating into European conditions. The fruits of the toil of millions are boldly stolen to build up colossal fortunes for a few, unprecedented in the history of mankind; and the possessors of these, in turn, despise the Republic and endanger liberty. From the same prolific womb of governmental injustice we breed the two great classes of tramps and millionaires.

The national power to create money is appropriated to enrich bondholders; a vast public debt, payable in legal tender currency, has been funded into gold-bearing bonds, thereby adding millions to the burdens of the people. Silver, which has been accepted as coin since the dawn of history, has been demonetized to add to the purchasing power of gold by decreasing the value of all forms of property as well as human labor; and the supply of currency is purposely abridged to fatten usurers, bankrupt enterprise, and enslave industry. A vast conspiracy against mankind has been organized on two continents, and it is rapidly taking possession of the world. If not met and overthrown at once, it forebodes terrible social convulsions, the destruction of civilization, or the establishment of an absolute despotism.

We have witnessed for more than a quarter of a century the struggles of the two great political parties for power and plunder, while grievous wrongs have been inflicted upon the suffering people. We charge that the controlling influences dominating both these parties have permitted the existing dreadful condition to develop without serious effort to prevent or restrain them. Neither do they now promise us any substantial reform. They have agreed together to ignore in the campaign every issue but one. They propose to drown the outcries of a plundered people with the uproar of a sham battle over the tariff, so that capitalists, corporations, national banks, rings, trusts, watered stock, the demonetization of silver, and the oppressions of the usurers may all be lost sight of. They propose to sacrifice our homes, lives, and children on the altar of mammon; to destroy the multitude in order to secure corruption funds from the millionaires.

Assembled on the anniversary of the birthday of the nation, and filled with the spirit of the grand general chief who established our independence, we seek to restore the government of the Republic to the hands of “the plain people,” with whose class it originated. We assert our purposes to be identical with the purposes of the national Constitution, “to form a more perfect union and establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity.” We declare that this Republic can only endure as a free Government while built upon the love of the whole people for each other and for the nation; that it cannot be pinned[Pg 355] together by bayonets; that the civil war is over, and that every passion and resentment which grew out of it must die with it; and that we must be in fact, as we are in name, one united brotherhood of freemen.

Our country finds itself confronted by conditions for which there is no precedent in the history of the world: our annual agricultural productions amount to billions of dollars in value, which must, within a few weeks or months, be exchanged for billions of dollars of commodities consumed in their production; the existing currency supply is wholly inadequate to make this exchange; the results are falling prices, the formation of combines and rings, the impoverishment of the producing class. We pledge ourselves, if given power, we will labor to correct these evils by wise and reasonable legislation, in accordance with the terms of our platform. We believe that the powers of Government—in other words, of the people—should be expanded (as in the case of the postal service) as rapidly and as far as the good sense of an intelligent people and the teachings of experience shall justify, to the end that oppression, injustice, and poverty shall eventually cease in the land.

While our sympathies as a party of reform are naturally upon the side of every proposition which will tend to make men intelligent, virtuous, and temperate, we nevertheless regard these questions—important as they are—as secondary to the great issues now pressing for solution, and upon which not only our individual prosperity but the very existence of free institutions depends; and we ask all men to first help us to determine whether we are to have a Republic to administer before we differ as to the conditions upon which it is to be administered; believing that the forces of reform this day organized will never cease to move forward until every wrong is remedied, and equal rights and equal privileges securely established for all the men and women of this country.

We declare, therefore—

First. That the union of the labor forces of the United States this day consummated shall be permanent and perpetual; may its spirit enter all hearts for the salvation of the Republic and the uplifting of mankind!

Second. Wealth belongs to him who creates it, and every dollar taken from industry without an equivalent is robbery. “If any will not work, neither shall he eat.” The interests of rural and civic labor are the same; their enemies are identical.

Third. We believe that the time has come when the railroad corporations will either own the people or the people must own the railroads; and, should the Government enter upon the work of owning and managing all railroads, we should favor an amendment to the Constitution by which all persons engaged in the Government service shall be placed under a civil service regulation of the most rigid character, so as to prevent the increase of the power of the national administration by the use of such additional Government employés.

We demand—

First, A national currency, safe, sound, and flexible, issued by the General Government only, a full legal tender for all debts, public and private, and that, without the use of banking corporations, a just, equitable, and efficient means of distribution direct to the people,[Pg 356] at a tax not to exceed two per cent. per annum, to be provided as set forth in the sub-treasury plan of the Farmers’ Alliance, or a better system; also, by payments in discharge of its obligations for public improvements.

(a) We demand free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold at the present legal ratio of sixteen to one.

(b) We demand that the amount of circulating medium be speedily increased to not less than fifty dollars per capita.

(c) We demand a graduated income tax.

(d) We believe that the money of the country should be kept as much as possible in the hands of the people, and hence we demand that all State and national revenues shall be limited to the necessary expenses of the Government economically and honestly administered.

(e) We demand that postal savings banks be established by the Government for the safe deposit of the earnings of the people and to facilitate exchange.

Second, Transportation. Transportation being a means of exchange and a public necessity, the Government should own and operate the railroads in the interest of the people.

(a) The telegraph and telephone, like the post-office system, being a necessity for the transmission of news, should be owned and operated by the Government in the interest of the people.

Third, Land. The land, including all the natural sources of wealth, is the heritage of the people, and should not be monopolized for speculative purposes, and alien ownership of land should be prohibited. All land now held by railroads and other corporations in excess of their actual needs, and all lands now owned by aliens, should be reclaimed by the Government and held for actual settlers only.

The following supplemental report was made, not to be regarded as a part of the party platform, but as expressive of the opinion of the party, as follows:

Whereas, Other questions have been presented for our consideration, we hereby submit the following, not as a part of the platform of the People’s party, but as resolutions expressive of the sentiment of this convention.

1. Resolved, That we demand a free ballot and a fair count in all elections, and pledge ourselves to secure it to every legal voter without federal intervention, through the adoption by the States of the unperverted Australian or secret ballot system.

2. Resolved, That the revenue derived from a graduated income tax should be applied to the reduction of the burden of taxation now resting upon the domestic industries of this country.

3. Resolved, That we pledge our support to fair and liberal pensions to ex-Union soldiers and sailors.

4. Resolved, That we condemn the fallacy of protecting American labor under the present system, which opens our ports to the pauper and criminal classes of the world, and crowds out our wage-earners; and we denounce the present ineffective laws against contract labor, and demand the further restriction of undesirable immigration.

[Pg 357]

5. Resolved, That we cordially sympathize with the efforts of organized workingmen to shorten the hours of labor, and demand a rigid enforcement of the existing eight-hour law on Government work, and ask that a penalty clause be added to the said law.

6. Resolved, That we regard the maintenance of a large standing army of mercenaries, known as the Pinkerton system, as a menace to our liberties, and we demand its abolition; and we condemn the recent invasion of the Territory of Wyoming by the hired assassins of plutocracy, assisted by Federal officials.

7. Resolved, That we commend to the favorable consideration of the people and the reform press the legislative system known as the initiative and referendum.

8. Resolved, That we favor a constitutional provision limiting the office of President and Vice-President to one term, and providing for the election of Senators of the United States by a direct vote of the people.

9. Resolved, That we oppose any subsidy or national aid to any private corporation for any purpose.

The convention was a mass assembly, as Texas cast more votes than New York and nearly thrice the vote of Pennsylvania.

The Socialists’ Labor Convention met at New York on the 28th of August, and nominated Simon Wing, of Massachusetts, for President and Charles H. Machett, of New York, for Vice-President, and adopted the following platform:

Social Demands: 1. Reduction of the hours of labor in proportion to the progress of production.

2. The United States shall obtain possession of the railroads, canals, telegraphs, telephones, and all other means of public transportation and communication.

3. The municipalities to obtain possession of the local railroads, ferries, water-works, gas-works, electric plants, and all industries requiring municipal franchises.

4. The public lands to be declared inalienable. Revocation of all land grants to corporations or individuals, the conditions of which have not been complied with.

5. Legal incorporation by the States of local trade unions which have no national organization.

6. The United States to have the exclusive right to issue money.

7. Congressional legislation providing for the scientific management of forests and waterways, and prohibiting the waste of the natural resources of the country.

8. Inventions to be free to all; the inventors to be remunerated by the nation.

9. Progressive income tax and tax on inheritances; the smaller incomes to be exempt.

[Pg 358]

10. School education of all children under fourteen years of age to be compulsory, gratuitous, and accessible to all by public assistance in meals, clothing, books, etc., where necessary.

11. Repeal of all pauper, tramp, conspiracy, and sumptuary laws. Unabridged right of combination.

12. Official statistics concerning the condition of labor. Prohibition of the employment of children of school age, and of the employment of female labor in occupations detrimental to health or morality. Abolition of the convict labor contract system.

13. All wages to be paid in lawful money of the United States. Equalization of women’s wages with those of men where equal service is performed.

14. Laws for the protection of life and limb in all occupations, and an efficient employers’ liability law.

Political Demands: 1. The people to have the right to propose laws and to vote upon all measures of importance, according to the referendum principle.

2. Abolition of the Presidency, Vice-Presidency, and Senate of the United States. An Executive Board to be established, whose members are to be elected, and may at any time be recalled, by the House of Representatives, as the only legislative body. The States and municipalities to adopt corresponding amendments to their constitutions and statutes.

3. Municipal self-government.

4. Direct vote and secret ballots in all elections. Universal and equal right of suffrage, without regard to color, creed, or sex. Election days to be legal holidays. The principle of minority representation to be introduced.

5. All public officers to be subject to recall by their respective constituencies.

6. Uniform civil and criminal law throughout the United States. Administration of justice to be free of charge. Abolition of capital punishment.

The battle between Cleveland and Harrison was very earnestly contested, and it will be remembered as the only instance in which the party of power was defeated when the country was prosperous. The McKinley Tariff bill had largely increased protection to our manufactures, but without materially increasing wages. The result was an unusual number of labor strikes, the most notable of which was that of Homestead at the Carnegie works, and the Republicans suffered very generally throughout the country by the loss of industrial votes.

The following table presents the popular and electoral vote of 1892:

[Pg 359]

STATES. | Popular Vote. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | ---
Grover Cleveland, New York. | Benjamin Harrison, Indiana. | James B. Weaver, Iowa. | John Bidwell, California. | Simon Wing, Massachusetts. | Cleveland and Stevenson. | Harrison and Reid. | Weaver and Field.
Alabama | 138,138 | 9,197 | 85,181 | 239 | —— | 11 | — | —
Arkansas | 87,834 | 46,884 | 11,831 | 113 | —— | 8 | — | —
California | 117,908 | 117,618 | 25,226 | 8,056 | —— | 8 | 1 | —
Colorado | —— | 38,620 | 53,584 | 1,638 | —— | — | — | 4
Connecticut | 82,395 | 77,025 | 806 | 4,025 | 329 | 6 | — | —
Delaware | 18,581 | 18,083 | 13 | 565 | —— | 3 | — | —
Florida | 30,143 | —— | 4,843 | 475 | —— | 4 | — | —
Georgia | 129,361 | 48,305 | 42,937 | 988 | —— | 13 | — | —
Idaho | —— | 8,599 | 10,520 | 288 | —— | — | — | 3
Illinois | 426,281 | 399,288 | 22,207 | 25,870 | —— | 24 | — | —
Indiana | 262,740 | 255,615 | 22,208 | 13,050 | —— | 15 | — | —
Iowa | 196,367 | 219,795 | 20,595 | 6,402 | —— | — | 13 | —
Kansas | —— | 157,237 | 163,111 | 4,539 | —— | — | — | 10
Kentucky | 175,461 | 135,441 | 23,500 | 6,442 | —— | 13 | — | —
Louisiana | 87,922 | 13,281 | 13,282 | —— | —— | 8 | — | —
Maine | 48,044 | 62,931 | 2,381 | 3,062 | 336 | — | 6 | —
Maryland | 113,866 | 92,736 | 796 | 5,877 | 27 | 8 | — | —
Massachusetts | 176,813 | 202,814 | 3,210 | 1,539 | 649 | — | 15 | —
Michigan | 202,296 | 222,708 | 19,892 | 14,069 | —— | 5 | 9 | —
Minnesota | 100,920 | 122,823 | 29,313 | 12,182 | —— | — | 9 | —
Mississippi | 40,237 | 1,406 | 10,256 | 910 | —— | 9 | — | —
Missouri | 268,398 | 226,918 | 41,213 | 4,331 | —— | 17 | — | —
Montana | 17,581 | 18,851 | 7,334 | 549 | —— | — | 3 | —
Nebraska | 24,943 | 87,227 | 83,134 | 4,902 | —— | — | 8 | —
Nevada | 714 | 2,811 | 7,204 | 89 | —— | — | — | 3
New Hampshire | 42,081 | 45,658 | 292 | 1,297 | —— | — | 4 | —
New Jersey | 171,042 | 156,068 | 969 | 8,131 | 1,337 | 10 | — | —
New York | 654,868 | 609,350 | 16,429 | 38,190 | 17,956 | 36 | — | —
North Carolina | 132,951 | 100,342 | 44,736 | 2,636 | —— | 11 | — | —
North Dakota | —— | 17,519 | 17,700 | 899 | —— | 1 | 1 | 1
Ohio | 404,115 | 405,187 | 14,850 | 26,012 | —— | 1 | 22 | —
Oregon | 14,243 | 35,002 | 26,965 | 2,281 | —— | — | 3 | 1
Pennsylvania | 452,264 | 516,011 | 8,714 | 25,123 | 898 | — | 32 | —
Rhode Island | 24,335 | 26,972 | 228 | 1,654 | —— | — | 4 | —
South Carolina | 54,692 | 13,345 | 2,407 | —— | —— | 9 | — | —
South Dakota | 9,081 | 34,888 | 26,544 | —— | —— | — | 4 | —
Tennessee | 138,874 | 100,331 | 23,447 | 4,851 | —— | 12 | — | —
Texas | 239,148 | 81,444 | 99,688 | 2,165 | —— | 15 | — | —
Vermont | 16,325 | 37,992 | 43 | 1,415 | —— | — | 4 | —
Virginia | 163,977 | 113,262 | 12,275 | 2,738 | —— | 12 | — | —
Washington | 29,802 | 36,460 | 19,165 | 2,542 | —— | — | 4 | —
West Virginia | 84,467 | 80,293 | 4,166 | 2,145 | —— | 6 | — | —
Wisconsin | 177,335 | 170,791 | 9,909 | 13,132 | —— | 12 | — | —
Wyoming | —— | 8,454 | 7,722 | 530 | —— | — | 3 | —
Totals | 5,556,543 | 5,175,582 | 1,040,886 | 255,841 | 21,532 | 277 | 145 | 22

One of the notable features of the foregoing table is in the fact that both Republicans and Democrats fused with[Pg 360] the Weaver or People’s party in different States. No votes were cast for Cleveland in Colorado, Kansas, North Dakota, and Wyoming, and none were cast for Harrison in Florida, and only a nominal vote given him in Alabama and Mississippi. The general political disturbance of the country may be understood when it is remembered that Weaver received near a million votes for President, while the Prohibition candidate kept the vote of that party up to its highest point.

Cleveland and Jackson are the only Presidential candidates in the history of the Republic who made three consecutive contests for the place, carried a popular plurality or majority each time, and increased it at each successive contest, and both were defeated in one battle, although receiving a larger popular vote than the successful competitor.

[Pg 361]

WILLIAM McKINLEY

## THE McKINLEY-BRYAN CONTEST

1896

Cleveland and Harrison were cast in the same mould of statesmanship, differing only in degree, and they had some important qualities in common. Both stood for a better political system than was acceptable to their respective parties, and both regarded public duty as paramount to political or individual interests. They are the only two men of the nation each of whom retired from the Presidency defeated by the other. Both were vastly in advance of the dominant sentiment of their followers in the support of civil service reform. Neither of them was accomplished as a national politician. They never could have nominated themselves for President by political manipulation, nor could they have mastered the intricacies inevitable in the management of a great national contest. They employed none of the arts which have been common among public men to popularize themselves, and both were called to the leadership of their respective parties in Presidential battles because they were wanted rather than because they wanted the place. Both were regarded as unsympathetic by the ardent political leaders of their parties when it came to the distribution of administration patronage, and yet no two Presidents were ever more pronounced in their devotion to their party faith.

Cleveland was a Democrat all through from hat to boots; Harrison was equally positive as a Republican, and both held to the better teachings of their parties in the better days. Cleveland was a Jackson Democrat, Harrison a Lincoln Republican, and neither took to the modern political frills which sacrifice the substance of conviction to glittering shadows to protect political degeneracy. Cleveland was the more positive in purpose and bolder in action; Harrison was probably the stronger intellectual force, with greater aptness in adaptability to political movements, and both were thoroughly[Pg 362] honest, tireless in devotion to duty, and sincerely patriotic. Both were exemplars of public and private purity, alike in home and trust, and the prattle of “Baby McKee” and of “Little Ruth” would at any time call either to forgetfulness of the honors and cares of State. Both finally retired from the Presidency, leaving records as Chief Magistrates which will ever shed rich lustre upon the annals of the Republic.

Cleveland’s second administration fell upon troublous times. The country was about to enter upon a severe season of industrial and business depression, that no political power nor the wisest legislation could have prevented. The products of our farms had reached the minimum of value. Debts were steadily increasing, labor was largely unemployed, and consumption of the necessaries of life was reduced to the lowest standard. The McKinley tariff of 1890 had given excessive protection to our industries, but that only stimulated production while it narrowed the markets for our products, and it was not surprising when silver reached the point that made a dollar worth only 50 cents, that the free silver theory should attract the hopeless debtor class by the promise of paying their obligations practically with one-half the money they had borrowed.

Both parties were severely honeycombed with the cheap-money theory, and although Cleveland had a Democratic Congress and was able, after the most exhaustive effort, to halt the continued purchase of silver for coinage, it was the last and only achievement he attained with the aid of Congress to better our financial system. It was most fortunate for the country that in this fearful peril to our national credit Grover Cleveland was President of the United States. He stood impregnable as the rock of Gibraltar when the fierce waves of repudiation surged against him from both parties, and when the West and South appeared to be practically unanimous in demanding cheap money, while even the more stable business and financial States of the North were greatly divided on the issue. Just as the peril to our national honor increased Cleveland’s determination and courage to maintain the right increased with it, and he finally braved a howling repudiation Congress by a demand for gold bonds to sustain Government credit with notice that, if refused by Congress, whereby a loss of many millions would be forced upon the country, he would sell bonds, as then authorized by law, to[Pg 363] any extent necessary to maintain the most scrupulous faith of the nation.

Congress refused and Cleveland stood grandly alone with Congress against him, and saved the Republic from a stain of dishonor that would have been ineffaceable. This was a vastly more heroic act than Jackson’s throttling of nullification, as Jackson was sustained by the patriotic devotion to the Union. Another record of his administration that stands out among the heroic of Presidential actions was his promptness and courage in meeting the Chicago riots when the commerce of the nation was interrupted by lawlessness. In a single order issued by Cleveland directing public peace to be maintained and commerce permitted to go on uninterrupted by the strong arm of national power he effaced forever the last lingering dregs of States’ rights that would make a great Commonwealth the prey of the lawless with the National Government powerless to interfere. The Governor of Illinois was in hearty and open sympathy with the lawless, and refused the protection to public peace and to commerce that was his sworn duty to give, and the civil authorities of Chicago were the mere plaything of the mob.

These two acts of Grover Cleveland will go into history as among the most heroic and self-sacrificing acts of any of our long line of Presidents. Harrison would doubtless have met both of these emergencies as Cleveland did, but Cleveland had to brave the overwhelming prejudices of his own party to discharge the duty, while Harrison would have been heartily and unitedly sustained by his party in meeting the Chicago issue, and would have had the majority of his party followers in sympathy with him in maintaining the national credit. Cleveland retired from his second term of the Presidency with his party very generally alienated from him, and yet he had not in any material degree departed from the Democratic platform on which he was re-elected. He was not in any measure an apostate, but he stood resolutely where his party had planted him, while his party apostatized and became his bitterest foe.

No administration can command the support of the country when industry and trade are severely depressed. It matters not what may be the true cause of financial, commercial, and industrial revulsion; it is always charged to the policy of the party in power, and Cleveland could not escape political disaster because of conditions which he had no more part[Pg 364] in producing than he had in creating the stars when they first sang together. The mid-administration elections of 1894 resulted in the most disastrous defeat the Democracy had ever suffered, and the cheap-money heresy rapidly grew in strength, disintegrating both the old parties until the question of maintaining national credit became one of the gravest ever presented to the people, with the single exception of the secession that caused our civil war.

The Wilson Tariff bill was passed with protective features sufficiently liberal to maintain our industries with the enlarged markets it would have produced for American products, but it was assailed as one of the chief causes of our industrial depression, and it became an important factor in the election of McKinley in 1896. It is now demonstrated before the close of the McKinley administration, that the protective features of the Wilson bill were more than equal to the necessities of the present. New and unexpected conditions brought this country suddenly to a policy of expansion in territory and trade, and to-day we have hardly an industry that really needs protection if it can have free markets for its products.

Cleveland was bitterly assailed as unfriendly to a liberal pension policy for our soldiers. He came into his second term in the midst of a tidal wave of pension profligacy. Private pensions were passed by the hundreds in Congress usually without debate, and often with only a small fraction of a quorum present. Cleveland vetoed a number of these bills, and I cannot recall one vetoed private pension bill that was passed over his veto, although there may have been a very few.

I happened to witness a painful exhibition of the cowardice of Congressmen in meeting the pension question after Cleveland had vetoed a bill greatly enlarging our pension system. On the morning of the day that the veto was to be taken in the House to sustain the veto or pass the bill, notwithstanding the objections of the President, I called upon Speaker Carlisle in his room in the Capitol, and there found him in earnest consultation with twelve or fifteen leading Democratic Congressmen. There was grave danger that the bill would pass over the veto, although certainly not one-third of the members of the House believed that the bill was just. The question discussed at that conference was who of the Democratic leaders could afford to take the floor in defence[Pg 365] of the veto. All heartily approved of it, but only two of all those present expressed his willingness to come to the front and stand for the right. Governor Curtin, then a member of the House, had the courage to say that as the friend of the true soldier he would defend the veto on the floor, and while every one present agreed with him, a majority of them declared that it was a necessity, for their own safety at home, to vote for the bill. It was only by the greatest effort that the veto was sustained for want of a two-thirds vote, although a decided majority of the House voted for the bill.

Such were the conditions in which the people entered upon the memorable contest of 1896. Governor McKinley and Speaker Reed took the lead early in the race for the Republican nomination for President, and McKinley was most fortunate in having his Warwick in Mark A. Hanna, of Ohio, who conducted the McKinley battle on the same lines that Samuel J. Tilden conducted the contest for his nomination in 1876. His fight was won by well-organized and earnestly directed contests in every debatable State, and for a year or more before the convention met Hanna was tireless in his work. He had a strong candidate in McKinley; a man of blameless character, of admitted ability, a champion of protection, a soldier who had carried his musket as a private in the flame of battle, and possessing many attributes of personal popularity. Reed in his rough way fought his battle more heroically than wisely, and was finally unhorsed at the close of the contest by McKinley sweeping some of the New England States from him. That defeated Reed, and McKinley’s nomination was assured.

On only one point did Hanna seriously miscalculate the lines of safety. He saw the cheap-money and repudiation issue formidable on every side and in both parties, and he decided that McKinley should be nominated for President on a platform that straddled the money issue in a cowardly way. In order to give the cue to the party on the money issue, he called the Republican State Convention of Ohio to meet on the 11th of March, 1896, and that convention adopted the following money plank, intended to be the McKinley platform:

“We contend for honest money; for a currency of gold, silver, and paper with which to measure our exchanges, that shall be as sound as the Government and as untarnished as its honor, and to that end we favor bimetallism, and demand the use of both gold and[Pg 366] silver as standard money, either in accordance with a ratio to be fixed by an international agreement, if that can be obtained, or under such restrictions and such provisions, to be determined by legislation, as will secure the maintenance of the parities of value of the two metals so that the purchasing and debt-paying power of the dollar, whether of silver, gold, or paper, shall be at all times equal.”

The Ohio money plank was generally accepted by the Republicans of the West as a cunning straddle, that would hold the cheap-money Republicans, whose devotion to protection made them willing to yield something on the money question, but it was severely criticised by a number of the ablest Republicans of the East, and before the convention met it became evident that the friends of an emphatic honest-money plank were likely to dominate the body.

The Republican National Convention met at St. Louis on the 16th of June. There was little or no dispute as to who would be nominated for President, as a decided majority of the delegates came there for the purpose of nominating McKinley. Charles W. Fairbanks, of Indiana, was temporary chairman and present Senator John M. Thurston, of Nebraska, permanent president. The struggle over the money plank of the platform kept the convention in idleness until the third day, when an agreement was reached in favor of the gold standard. There has been some dispute recently as to who made Hanna adopt the gold platform. There were many and very earnest consultations in St. Louis before an agreement with Hanna could be reached, and it was finally accomplished by a number of able members of the body deciding that they would notify Hanna, giving him one hour to accept the gold-standard platform, or they would carry it into the convention and compel McKinley’s friends to meet the issue in open debate. I was at the same hotel, on the same floor with Hanna, and knew just when that proposition was sent to him, and knew also that in little over half an hour he agreed to the demand of the gold-standard Republicans, and it was then adopted without a contest. When the platform was reported, Senator Teller, of Colorado, who led the Silver Republicans, and who was a member of the committee on resolutions, offered the following as a substitute for the money plank of the platform:

“The Republican party favors the use of both gold and silver as equal standard money, and pledges its power to secure the free, unrestricted, and independent coinage of gold and silver at our mints at the ratio of 16 parts of silver to 1 of gold.”

[Pg 367]

Senator Teller delivered an earnest and able argument in support of his substitute, but it was rejected by 818¹⁄₂ votes to 105¹⁄₂. A separate vote was also had on the financial plank as reported by the majority, and it was adopted by 812¹⁄₂ to 110¹⁄₂. When the platform was adopted, Senator Cannon, of Utah, presented a protest against the money plank of the platform, after which thirty-four delegates from the Western States, including Senators Teller and Cannon, withdrew from the convention. There was only one ballot for President, as follows:

William McKinley, Ohio | 661 | ¹⁄₂
Thomas B. Reed, Me. | 84 | ¹⁄₂
Matthew S. Quay, Pa. | 61 | ¹⁄₂
Levi P. Morton, N. Y. | 58 |
William B. Allison, Ia. | 35 | ¹⁄₂
J. Donald Cameron, Pa. | 1 |
Blank | 4 |

The nomination of Garret A. Hobart, of New Jersey, for Vice-President was made on the 1st ballot by the following vote:

Garret A. Hobart, N. J. | 535 | ¹⁄₂
Henry Clay Evans, Tenn. | 277 | ¹⁄₂
Morgan J. Bulkeley, Conn. | 39 |
James A. Walker, Va. | 24 |
Charles E. Lippitt, R. I. | 8 |
Thomas B. Reed, Maine | 3 |
Chauncey M. Depew, N. Y. | 3 |
John M. Thurston, Neb. | 2 |
Fred D. Grant, N. Y. | 2 |
Levi P. Morton, N. Y. | 1 |

The nominations of McKinley and Hobart were made unanimous with the wildest enthusiasm. The following is the Republican platform as adopted by the convention:

The Republicans of the United States, assembled by their representatives in national convention, appealing for the popular and historical justification of their claims to the matchless achievements of the thirty years of Republican rule, earnestly and confidently address themselves to the awakened intelligence, experience, and conscience of their countrymen in the following declaration of facts and principles:

For the first time since the Civil War the American people have witnessed the calamitous consequences of full and unrestricted Democratic control of the Government. It has been a record of unparalleled incapacity, dishonor, and disaster. In administrative management it has ruthlessly sacrificed indispensable revenue, entailed an unceasing deficit, eked out ordinary current expenses with borrowed money, piled up the public debt by $262,000,000 in time of peace, forced an adverse balance of trade, kept a perpetual menace hanging over the redemption fund, pawned American credit to alien syndicates, and reversed all the measures and results of successful Republican rule.

In the broad effect of its policy it has precipitated panic, blighted[Pg 368] industry and trade with prolonged depression, closed factories, reduced work and wages, halted enterprise, and crippled American production while stimulating foreign production for the American market. Every consideration of public safety and individual interest demands that the Government shall be rescued from the hands of those who have shown themselves incapable of conducting it without disaster at home and dishonor abroad, and shall be restored to the party which for thirty years administered it with unequalled success and prosperity, and in this connection we heartily endorse the wisdom, the patriotism, and the success of the administration of President Harrison.

We renew and emphasize our allegiance to the policy of protection as the bulwark of American industrial independence and the foundation of American development and prosperity. This true American policy taxes foreign products and encourages home industry; it puts the burden of revenue on foreign goods; it secures the American market for the American producer; it upholds the American standard of wages for the American workingman; it puts the factory by the side of the farm, and makes the American farmer less dependent on foreign demand and price; it diffuses general thrift, and founds the strength of all on the strength of each. In its reasonable application it is just, fair, and impartial, equally opposed to foreign control and domestic monopoly, to sectional discrimination and individual favoritism.

We denounce the present Democratic tariff as sectional, injurious to the public credit, and destructive to business enterprise. We demand such an equitable tariff on foreign imports which come into competition with American products as will not only furnish adequate revenue for the necessary expenses of the Government, but will protect American labor from degradation to the wage level of other lands. We are not pledged to any particular schedules. The question of rates is a practical question, to be governed by the conditions of the time and of production; the ruling and uncompromising principle is the protection and development of American labor and industry. The country demands a right settlement, and then it wants rest.

We believe the repeal of the reciprocity arrangements negotiated by the last Republican administration was a national calamity, and we demand their renewal and extension on such terms as will equalize our trade with other nations, remove the restrictions which now obstruct the sale of American products in the ports of other countries, and secure enlarged markets for the products of our farms, forests, and factories.

Protection and reciprocity are twin measures of Republican policy, and go hand in hand. Democratic rule has recklessly struck down both, and both must be re-established. Protection for what we produce; free admission for the necessaries of life which we do not produce; reciprocity agreements of mutual interests which gain open markets for us in return for our open market to others. Protection builds up domestic industry and trade, and secures our own market for ourselves; reciprocity builds up foreign trade and finds an outlet for our surplus.

We condemn the present administration for not keeping faith with the sugar-producers of this country. The Republican party favors[Pg 369] such protection as will lead to the production on American soil of all the sugar which the American people use, and for which they pay other countries more than $100,000,000 annually.

To all our products—to those of the mine and the fields, as well as those of the shop and factory; to hemp, to wool, the product of the great industry of sheep husbandry, as well as to the finished woollens of the mills—we promise the most ample protection.

We favor restoring the early American policy of discriminating duties for the upbuilding of our merchant marine and the protection of our shipping in the foreign carrying trade, so that American ships—the product of American labor, employed in American shipyards, sailing under the Stars and Stripes, and manned, officered, and owned by Americans—may regain the carrying of our foreign commerce.

The Republican party is unreservedly for sound money. It caused the enactment of the law providing for the resumption of specie payments in 1879; since then every dollar has been as good as gold.

We are unalterably opposed to every measure calculated to debase our currency or impair the credit of our country. We are, therefore, opposed to the free coinage of silver, except by international agreement with the leading commercial nations of the world, which we pledge ourselves to promote, and until such agreement can be obtained the existing gold standard must be preserved. All our silver and paper currency must be maintained at parity with gold, and we favor all measures designed to maintain inviolably the obligations of the United States and all our money, whether coin or paper, at the present standard, the standard of the most enlightened nations of the earth.

The veterans of the Union armies deserve and should receive fair treatment and generous recognition. Whenever practicable, they should be given the preference in the matter of employment, and they are entitled to the enactment of such laws as are best calculated to secure the fulfilment of the pledges made to them in the dark days of the country’s peril. We denounce the practice in the Pension Bureau, so recklessly and unjustly carried on by the present administration, of reducing pensions and arbitrarily dropping names from the rolls, as deserving the severest condemnation of the American people.

Our foreign policy should be at all times firm, vigorous, and dignified, and all our interests in the Western Hemisphere carefully watched and guarded. The Hawaiian Islands should be controlled by the United States, and no foreign power should be permitted to interfere with them; the Nicaragua Canal should be built, owned, and operated by the United States; and by the purchase of the Danish islands we should secure a proper and much-needed naval station in the West Indies.

The massacres in Armenia have aroused the deep sympathy and just indignation of the American people, and we believe that the United States should exercise all the influence it can properly exert to bring these atrocities to an end. In Turkey, American residents have been exposed to the gravest dangers and American property destroyed. There and everywhere American citizens and American property must be absolutely protected at all hazards and at any cost.

We reassert the Monroe Doctrine in its full extent, and we re-affirm[Pg 370] the right of the United States to give the doctrine effect by responding to the appeal of any American State for friendly intervention in case of European encroachment. We have not interfered and shall not interfere with the existing possessions of any European power in this hemisphere, but those possessions must not on any pretext be extended. We hopefully look forward to the eventual withdrawal of the European powers from this hemisphere, and to the ultimate union of all English-speaking parts of the continent by the free consent of its inhabitants.

From the hour of achieving their own independence, the people of the United States have regarded with sympathy the struggles of other American people to free themselves from European domination. We watch with deep and abiding interest the heroic battle of the Cuban patriots against cruelty and oppression, and our best hopes go out for the full success of their determined contest for liberty.

The Government of Spain, having lost control of Cuba, and being unable to protect the property or lives of resident American citizens, or to comply with its treaty obligations, we believe that the Government of the United States should actively use its influence and good offices to restore peace and give independence to the island.

The peace and security of the Republic and the maintenance of its rightful influence among the nations of the earth demand a naval power commensurate with its position and responsibility. We therefore favor the continued enlargement of the navy and a complete system of harbor and seacoast defences.

For the protection of the quality of our American citizenship and of the wages of our workingmen against the fatal competition of low-priced labor, we demand that the immigration laws be thoroughly enforced, and so extended as to exclude from entrance to the United States those who can neither read nor write.

The civil service law was placed on the statute book by the Republican party, which has always sustained it, and we renew our repeated declarations that it shall be thoroughly and honestly enforced and extended wherever practicable.

We demand that every citizen of the United States shall be allowed to cast one free and unrestricted ballot, and that such ballot shall be counted and returned as cast.

We proclaim our unqualified condemnation of the uncivilized and barbarous practice, well known as lynching, or killing of human beings suspected or charged with crime, without process of law.

We favor the creation of a national Board of Arbitration to settle and adjust differences which may arise between employers and employés engaged in interstate commerce.

We believe in an immediate return to the free-homestead policy of the Republican party, and urge the passage by Congress of a satisfactory free-homestead measure such as has already passed the House, and is now pending in the Senate.

We favor the admission of the remaining Territories at the earliest practicable date, having due regard to the interests of the people of the Territories and of the United States. All the Federal officers appointed for the Territories should be selected from bona fide residents thereof, and the right of self-government should be accorded as far as practicable.

[Pg 371]

We believe the citizens of Alaska should have representation in the Congress of the United States, to the end that needful legislation may be intelligently enacted.

We sympathise with all wise and legitimate efforts to lessen and prevent the evils of intemperance and promote morality.

The Republican party is mindful of the rights and interests of women. Protection of American industries includes equal opportunities, equal pay for equal work, and protection to the home. We favor the admission of women to wider spheres of usefulness, and welcome their co-operation in rescuing the country from Democratic and Populist mismanagement and misrule.

Such are the principles and policies of the Republican party. By these principles we will abide and these policies we will put into execution. We ask for them the considerate judgment of the American people. Confident alike in the history of our great party and in the justice of our cause, we present our platform and our candidates in the full assurance that the election will bring victory to the Republican party and prosperity to the people of the United States.

The Democratic National Convention met at Chicago on the 7th of July, and the emphatic deliverance of the Republican convention in favor of the gold standard greatly strengthened the free-silver Democratic element, but the sound-money Democrats had control of the national committee, with William F. Harrity, chairman, whose duty it was to call the convention to order. Earnest efforts were made to harmonize the party in the organization, but the Free Silverites were aggressive from the start, and when the national committee named Senator Hill, of New York, as temporary chairman, a bitter debate was precipitated, and Senator Daniel, of Virginia, an out-and-out Free Silverite, was elected by 556 to 349. On the second day the report of the committee on credentials strengthened the free-silver wing by the admission of the Bryan delegation from Nebraska, and four sound-money Democrats were rejected from Michigan, and their places given to free-silver delegates. Senator White, of California, was made permanent president. The platform was adopted, as is usual, before the nomination for President, and it was in the protracted and intensely bitter debate of the money question that brought out the eloquent and dramatic address of William J. Bryan, that carried him into the Democratic nomination with a tidal wave.

A sound financial plank was offered by the minority, but rejected by 626 to 303. Another resolution, declaring, “We commend the honesty, economy, courage, and fidelity of the[Pg 372] present Democratic (Cleveland) administration,” was greeted with a yell of derision and rejected by 564 to 357. Senator Hill offered two amendments to temper the repudiation plank, but they were rejected without a division. The platform was then adopted by 628 to 301. The sound-money Democrats found themselves in a helpless and hopeless minority. Many of them desired to withdraw from the convention, but the more considerate refused to do so, and all of them remained, 178 of them refusing to vote on the 1st ballot for President. Chairman Harrity, of the national committee, with his delegation participated in all the ballots and steadily voted for ex-Governor Pattison. Five ballots were had for President, with Bryan starting at 119 to 235 for Bland, of Missouri, who was the father of the silver dollar, and should have been accepted as the logical candidate of the free-silver party, but Bryan’s “crown of thorns” had captured the convention, and he won an easy victory. The following table gives the five ballots for President in detail:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth.
Whole number of votes | 752 | 768 | 768 | 769 | 768
Necessary for a choice (two-thirds) | 502 | 512 | 512 | 513 | 512
William J. Bryan, Nebraska | 119 | 190 | 219 | 280 | 500
Richard P. Bland, Missouri | 235 | 283 | 291 | 241 | 106
Robert E. Pattison, Pennsylvania | 95 | 100 | 97 | 97 | 95
Horace Boies, Iowa | 85 | 41 | 36 | 33 | 26
Joseph S. C. Blackburn, Kentucky | 83 | 41 | 27 | 27 | —
John R. McLean, Ohio | 54 | 53 | 54 | 46 | —
Claude Matthews, Indiana | 37 | 33 | 34 | 36 | 31
Benjamin R. Tillman, South Carolina | 17 | — | — | — | —
Sylvester Pennoyer, Oregon | 8 | 8 | — | — | —
Henry M. Teller, Colorado | 8 | 8 | — | — | —
Adlai E. Stevenson, Illinois | 7 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 8
William E. Russell, Massachusetts | 2 | — | — | — | —
James E. Campbell, Ohio | 1 | — | — | — | —
David B. Hill, New York | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1
David Turpie, Indiana | — | — | — | — | 1
Not voting | 178 | 162 | 162 | 162 | 162

On the 5th ballot Bryan was only 12 votes short of the necessary two-thirds, and immediately after the roll-call was completed, and before the vote had been given, 78 delegates changed their votes from other candidates to Bryan, giving him the nomination. The convention received the result with the wildest cheers for Bryan, mingled with some hisses and general sullen silence among the sound-money Democrats.

[Pg 373]

There was a spirited contest for the Vice-Presidency, in which John R. McLean, of Ohio, was well to the front, and led all others on the 4th ballot, but on the 5th a whirl was made to Sewall, of Maine, giving him the nomination. The following table gives the ballot in detail:

| First. | Second. | Third. | Fourth. | Fifth.
Whole number of votes | 670 | 675 | 675 | 677 | 679
Necessary for a choice (two-thirds) | 447 | 450 | 450 | 452 | 453
Arthur Sewall, Maine | 100 | 37 | 97 | 261 | 568
Joseph C. Sibley, Pennsylvania | 163 | 113 | 50 | — | —
John R. McLean, Ohio | 111 | 158 | 210 | 296 | 32
George F. Williams, Massachusetts | 76 | 16 | 15 | 9 | 9
Richard P. Bland, Missouri | 62 | 294 | 255 | — | —
Walter A. Clark, North Carolina | 50 | 22 | 22 | 46 | 22
John R. Williams, Illinois | 22 | 13 | — | — | —
William F. Harrity, Pennsylvania | 21 | 21 | 19 | 11 | 11
Horace Boies, Iowa | 20 | — | — | — | —
Joseph S. C. Blackburn, Kentucky | 20 | — | — | — | —
John W. Daniel, Virginia | 11 | 1 | 6 | 54 | 36
James H. Lewis, Washington | 11 | — | — | — | —
Robert E. Pattison, Pennsylvania | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1
Henry M. Teller, Colorado | 1 | — | — | — | —
Stephen M. White, California | 1 | — | — | — | —
George W. Fithian, Illinois | 1 | — | — | — | —
Not voting | 260 | 255 | 255 | 253 | 251

The following is the full text of the Democratic platform:

We, the Democrats of the United States, in national convention assembled, do reaffirm our allegiance to those great essential principles of justice and liberty, upon which our institutions are founded, and which the Democratic party has advocated from Jefferson’s time to our own—freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of conscience, the preservation of personal rights, the equality of all citizens before the law, and the faithful observance of constitutional limitations.

During all these years the Democratic party has resisted the tendency of selfish interests to the centralization of governmental power, and steadfastly maintained the integrity of the dual scheme of government established by the founders of this republic of republics. Under its guidance and teachings, the great principle of local self-government has found its best expression in the maintenance of the rights of the States, and in its assertion of the necessity of confining the General Government to the exercise of the powers granted by the Constitution of the United States.

The Constitution of the United States guarantees to every citizen the rights of civil and religious liberty. The Democratic party has always been the exponent of political liberty and religious freedom, and it renews its obligations and reaffirms its devotion to these fundamental principles of the Constitution.

[Pg 374]

Recognizing that the money question is paramount to all others at this time, we invite attention to the fact that the Federal Constitution names silver and gold together as the money metals of the United States, and that the first coinage law passed by Congress under the Constitution made the silver dollar the money unit, and admitted gold to free coinage at a ratio based upon the silver dollar unit.

We declare that the act of 1873 demonetizing silver without the knowledge or approval of the American people has resulted in the appreciation of gold and a corresponding fall in the prices of commodities produced by the people; a heavy increase in the burden of taxation and of all debts, public and private; the enrichment of the money-lending class at home and abroad; the prostration of industry and impoverishment of the people.

We are unalterably opposed to monometallism, which has locked fast the prosperity of an industrial people in the paralysis of hard times. Gold monometallism is a British policy, and its adoption has brought other nations into financial servitude to London. It is not only un-American, but anti-American, and it can be fastened on the United States only by the stifling of that spirit and love of liberty which proclaimed our political independence in 1776 and won it in the war of the Revolution.

We demand the free and unlimited coinage of both silver and gold at the present legal ratio of sixteen to one without waiting for the aid or consent of any other nation. We demand that the standard silver dollar shall be a full legal tender, equally with gold, for all debts, public and private, and we favor such legislation as will prevent for the future the demonetization of any kind of legal tender money by private contract.

We are opposed to the policy and practice of surrendering to the holders of the obligations of the United States the option reserved by law to the Government of redeeming such obligations in either silver coin or gold coin.

We are opposed to the issuing of interest-bearing bonds of the United States in time of peace, and condemn the trafficking with banking syndicates, which, in exchange for bonds and at enormous profit to themselves, supply the Federal Treasury with gold to maintain the policy of gold monometallism.

Congress alone has the power to coin and issue money, and President Jackson declared that this power could not be delegated to corporations or individuals. We therefore denounce the issuance of notes intended to circulate as money by national banks as in derogation of the Constitution, and we demand that all paper which is made a legal tender for public and private debts, or which is receivable for duties to the United States, shall be issued by the Government of the United States and shall be redeemable in coin.

We hold that tariff duties should be levied for purposes of revenue, such duties to be so adjusted as to operate equally throughout the country, and not discriminate between class or section, and that taxation should be limited by the needs of the Government honestly and economically administered.

We denounce as disturbing to business the Republican threat to restore the McKinley law, which has twice been condemned by the people in national elections, and which, enacted under the false plea[Pg 375] of protection to home industry, proved a prolific breeder of trusts and monopolies, enriched the few at the expense of the many, restricted trade, and deprived the producers of the great American staples of access to their natural markets.

Until the money question is settled we are opposed to any agitation for further changes in our tariff laws, except such as are necessary to meet the deficit in revenue caused by the adverse decision of the Supreme Court on the income tax. But for this decision by the Supreme Court, there would be no deficit in the revenue under the law passed by a Democratic Congress in strict pursuance of the uniform decisions of that court for nearly one hundred years, that court having in that decision sustained constitutional objections to its enactment which had previously been overruled by the ablest judges who have ever sat on that bench. We declare that it is the duty of Congress to use all the constitutional power which remains after that decision, or which may come from its reversal by the court as it may hereafter be constituted, so that the burdens of taxation may be equally and impartially laid, to the end that wealth may bear its due proportion of the expenses of the Government.

We hold that the most efficient way of protecting American labor is to prevent the importation of foreign pauper labor to compete with it in the home market, and that the value of the home market to our American farmers and artisans is greatly reduced by a vicious monetary system which depresses the prices of their products below the cost of production, and thus deprives them of the means of purchasing the products of our home manufactories; and, as labor creates the wealth of the country, we demand the passage of such laws as may be necessary to protect it in all its rights.

We are in favor of the arbitration of differences between employers engaged in interstate commerce and their employés, and recommend such legislation as is necessary to carry out this principle.

The absorption of wealth by the few, the consolidation of our leading railroad systems, and the formation of trusts and pools require a stricter control by the Federal Government of those arteries of commerce. We demand the enlargement of the powers of the interstate commerce commission, and such restrictions and guarantees in the control of railroads as will protect the people from robbery and oppression.

We denounce the profligate waste of the money wrung from the people by oppressive taxation and the lavish appropriations of recent Republican Congresses, which have kept taxes high, while the labor that pays them is unemployed and the products of the people’s toil are depressed in price till they no longer repay the cost of production. We demand a return to that simplicity and economy which befits a democratic government and a reduction in the number of useless offices, the salaries of which drain the substance of the people.

We denounce arbitrary interference by Federal authorities in local affairs as a violation of the Constitution of the United States and a crime against free institutions, and we especially object to government by injunction as a new and highly dangerous form of oppression by which Federal judges, in contempt of the laws of the[Pg 376] States and rights of citizens, become at once legislators, judges, and executioners; and we approve the bill passed at the last session of the United States Senate, and now pending in the House of Representatives, relative to contempts in Federal courts and providing for trials by jury in certain cases of contempt.

No discrimination should be indulged in by the Government of the United States in favor of any of its debtors. We approve of the refusal of the Fifty-third Congress to pass the Pacific Railroad Funding bill, and denounce the effort of the present Republican Congress to enact a similar measure.

Recognizing the just claims of deserving Union soldiers, we heartily endorse the rule of the present Commissioner of Pensions, that no name shall be arbitrarily dropped from the pension roll; and the fact of enlistment and service should be deemed conclusive evidence against disease and disability before enlistment.

We favor the admission of the Territories of New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma into the Union as States, and we favor the early admission of all the Territories having the necessary population and resources to entitle them to statehood, and, while they remain Territories, we hold that the officials appointed to administer the government of any Territory, together with the District of Columbia and Alaska, should be bonâ fide residents of the Territory or district in which the duties are to be performed. The Democratic party believes in home rule, and that all public lands of the United States should be appropriated to the establishment of free homes for American citizens.

We recommend that the Territory of Alaska be granted a delegate in Congress, and that the general land and timber laws of the United States be extended to said Territory.

The Monroe Doctrine, as originally declared and as interpreted by succeeding Presidents, is a permanent part of the foreign policy of the United States, and must at all times be maintained.

We extend our sympathy to the people of Cuba in their heroic struggle for liberty and independence.

We are opposed to life tenure in the public service, except as provided in the Constitution. We favor appointments based upon merit, fixed terms of office, and such an administration of the civil service laws as will afford equal opportunities to all citizens of ascertained fitness.

We declare it to be the unwritten law of this Republic, established by custom and usage of a hundred years, and sanctioned by the examples of the greatest and wisest of those who founded and have maintained our Government, that no man should be eligible for a third term of the Presidential office.

The Federal Government should care for and improve the Mississippi River and other great waterways of the Republic, so as to secure for the interior States easy and cheap transportation to tidewater. When any waterway of the Republic is of sufficient importance to demand aid of the Government, such aid should be extended upon a definite plan of continuous work until permanent improvement is secured.

Confiding in the justice of our cause and the necessity of its success at the polls, we submit the foregoing declaration of principles and purposes to the considerate judgment of the American[Pg 377] people. We invite the support of all citizens who approve them, and who desire to have them made effective, through legislation, for the relief of the people and the restoration of the country’s prosperity.

A minority of the Committee on Resolutions, consisting of the members from sixteen States, submitted a dissenting report, expressing their inability to give their assent to “many declarations” of the platform. “Some are ill-considered and ambiguously phrased, while others are extreme and revolutionary of the well-recognized principles of the party.” They offered two amendments, the first a substitute for the financial plank, as follows:

We declare our belief that the experiment on the part of the United States alone of free silver coinage and a change in the existing standard of value, independently of the action of other great nations, would not only imperil our finances, but would retard, or entirely prevent, the establishment of international bimetallism, to which the efforts of the Government should be steadily directed.

It would place this country at once upon a silver basis, impair contracts, disturb business, diminish the purchasing power of the wages of labor, and inflict irreparable evils upon our nation’s commerce and industry.

Until international co-operation among leading nations for the coinage of silver can be secured, we favor the rigid maintenance of the existing gold standard as essential to the preservation of our national credit, the redemption of our public pledges, and the keeping inviolate of our country’s honor.

We insist that all our paper currency shall be kept at a parity with gold. The Democratic party is the party of hard money, and is opposed to legal tender paper money as a part of our permanent financial system, and we therefore favor the gradual retirement and cancellation of all United States notes and treasury notes, under such legislative provisions as will prevent undue contraction.

We demand that the national credit shall be resolutely maintained at all times and under all circumstances.

The People’s party, then better known as the Populists, and the Free Silver party, held their conventions at St. Louis on the 22d of July. The cheap-money elements were divided into two extreme factions, with a third that was known as the “Middle-of-the-Road” men. The Populist convention was presided over by Senator Butler, of North Carolina, as temporary chairman, and Senator Allen, of Nebraska, as permanent president, and the question of acting with the Democratic party in support of the Chicago platform and candidate for President, was settled by the preliminary motion[Pg 378] to proceed to the nomination of a candidate for Vice-President. It was adopted by 785 to 615. That meant the nomination of Bryan, but the rejection of Sewall. A single ballot was had for Vice-President, resulting as follows:

Thomas E. Watson, Ga. | 539 | ³⁄₄
Arthur Sewall, Maine | 257 | ¹⁄₈
Frank Burkett, Miss. | 190 | ³⁄₄
Harry Skinner, N. C. | 142 | ¹⁄₄
A. L. Mims, Tenn. | 118 | ⁵⁄₁₆
Mann Page, Virginia | 89 | ⁵⁄₁₆

Watson lacked over 100 of the majority, but a sufficient number of delegates promptly changed their votes to make him the nominee. After nominating the candidate for Vice-President, the convention proceeded to ballot for President, as follows:

William J. Bryan, Neb. | 1,042
S. F. Norton, Ill. | 321
Eugene B. Debs, Ind. | 8
Ignatius Donnelly, Minn. | 3
J. S. Coxey, Ohio | 1

The following platform was adopted after three minority reports had been rejected:

The People’s party, assembled in national convention, reaffirms its allegiance to the principles declared by the founders of the Republic, and also to the fundamental principles of just government as enunciated in the platform of the party in 1892.

We recognize that through the connivance of the present and preceding administrations the country has reached a crisis in its national life as predicted in our declaration four years ago, and that prompt and patriotic action is the supreme duty of the hour. We realize that while we have political independence our financial and industrial independence is yet to be attained by restoring to our country the constitutional control and exercise of the functions necessary to a people’s government, which functions have been basely surrendered by our public servants to corporate monopolies. The influence of European money-changers has been more potent in shaping legislation than the voice of the American people. Executive power and patronage have been used to corrupt our Legislatures and defeat the will of the people, and plutocracy has been enthroned upon the ruins of democracy. To restore the Government intended by the fathers and for the welfare and prosperity of this and future generations, we demand the establishment of an economic and financial system which shall make us masters of our own affairs, and independent of European control, by the adoption of the following declaration of principles:

1. We demand a national money, safe and sound, issued by the General Government only, without the intervention of banks of issue, to be a full legal tender for all debts, public and private; a just, equitable, and efficient means of distribution direct to the people and through the lawful disbursements of the Government.

[Pg 379]

2. We demand the free and unrestricted coinage of silver and gold at the present legal ratio of sixteen to one, without waiting for the consent of foreign nations.

3. We demand that the volume of circulating medium be speedily increased to an amount sufficient to meet the demands of business and population and to restore the just level of prices of labor and production.

4. We denounce the sale of bonds and the increase of the interest-bearing debt made by the present administration as unnecessary and without authority of law, and demand that no more bonds be issued except by specific act of Congress.

5. We demand such legislation as will prevent the demonetization of the lawful money of the United States by private contract.

6. We demand that the Government, in payment of its obligations, shall use its option as to the kind of lawful money in which they are to be paid, and we denounce the present and preceding administrations for surrendering this option to the holders of Government obligations.

7. We demand a graduated income tax, to the end that aggregated wealth shall bear its just proportion of taxation; and we regard the recent decision of the Supreme Court relative to the income tax law as a misinterpretation of the Constitution, and an invasion of the rightful powers of Congress over the subject of taxation.

8. We demand that postal savings banks be established by the Government for the safe deposit of the savings of the people and to facilitate exchange.

9. Transportation being a means of exchange and a public necessity, Government should own and operate the railroads in the interests of the people and on a non-partisan basis, to the end that all may be accorded the same treatment in transportation, and that the tyranny and political power now exercised by the great railroad corporations, which result in the impairment, if not the destruction, of the political rights and personal liberties of the citizen, may be destroyed. Such ownership is to be accomplished gradually, in a manner consistent with sound public policy.

10. The interest of the United States in the public highways, built with public moneys, and the proceeds of extensive grants of land to the Pacific railroads should never be alienated, mortgaged, or sold, but guarded and protected for the general welfare as provided by the laws organizing such railroads. The foreclosure of existing liens of the United States on these roads should at once follow default in the payment thereof by the debtor-companies; and at the foreclosure sales of said roads the Government shall purchase the same if it become necessary to protect its interests therein, or if they can be purchased at a reasonable price; and the Government shall operate said railroads as public highways for the benefit of the whole people, and not in the interest of the few, under suitable provisions for protection of life and property, giving to all transportation interests equal privileges and equal rates for fares and freight.

11. We denounce the present infamous schemes for refunding these debts, and demand that the laws now applicable thereto be executed and administered according to their true intent and spirit.

[Pg 380]

12. The telegraph, like the post-office system, being a necessity for the transmission of news, should be owned and operated by the Government in the interest of the people.

13. The true policy demands that national and State legislation shall be such as will ultimately enable every prudent and industrious citizen to secure a home, and therefore the lands should not be monopolized for speculative purposes. All lands now held by railroads and other corporations in excess of their actual needs should by lawful means be reclaimed by the Government and held for actual settlers only, and subject to the right of every human being to acquire a home upon the soil, and private land monopoly, as well as alien ownership, should be prohibited.

14. We condemn the frauds by which the land grants to the Pacific Railroad companies have, through the connivance of the Interior Department, robbed multitudes of actual bonâ fide settlers of their homes and miners of their claims, and we demand legislation by Congress which will enforce the exemption of mineral land from such grants after as well as before the patent.

15. We demand that bonâ fide settlers on all public lands be granted free homes as provided in the National Homestead law, and that no exception be made in the case of Indian reservations when opened for settlement, and that all lands not now patented come under this demand.

We favor a system of direct legislation through the initiative and referendum under proper constitutional safeguards.

1. We demand the election of President, Vice-President, and United States Senators by a direct vote of the people.

2. We tender to the patriotic people of Cuba our deepest sympathy in their heroic struggle for political freedom and independence, and we believe the time has come when the United States, the great Republic of the world, should recognize that Cuba is and of right out to be a free and independent State.

3. We favor home rule in the Territories and the District of Columbia, and the early admission of Territories as States.

4. All public salaries should be made to correspond to the price of labor and its products.

5. In times of great industrial depression, idle labor should be employed on public works as far as practicable.

6. The arbitrary course of the courts in assuming to imprison citizens for indirect contempt, and ruling by injunction, should be prevented by proper legislation.

7. We favor just pensions for our disabled Union soldiers.

8. Believing that the elective franchise and an untrammelled ballot are essential to a government of, for, and by the people, the People’s party condemn the wholesale system of disfranchisement adopted in some of the States as unrepublican and undemocratic, and we declare it to be the duty of the several State Legislatures to take such action as will secure a full, free, and fair ballot and an honest count.

9. While the foregoing propositions constitute the platform upon which our party stands, and for the vindication of which its organization will be maintained, we recognize that the great and pressing issue of the present campaign upon which the present Presidential election will turn is the financial question, and upon this great and[Pg 381] specific issue between the parties we cordially invite the aid and co-operation of all organizations and citizens agreeing with us upon this vital question.

The National Silver party held its convention at the same time and place, with Frank G. Newlands, of Nevada, as temporary chairman, and William P. St. John, of New York, as permanent president. No time during the proceedings of the convention was a vote had to indicate the number of delegates. William J. Bryan, of Nebraska, was nominated for President, and Arthur Sewall, of Maine, for Vice-President, both by acclamation. The following platform was adopted:

The National Silver party of America, in convention assembled, hereby adopts the following declaration of principles:

First, the paramount issue at this time in the United States is indisputably the money question. It is between the British gold standard, gold bonds, and bank currency on the one side, and the bimetallic standard, no bonds, Government currency, and an American policy on the other.

On this issue we declare ourselves to be in favor of a distinctive American financial system. We are unalterably opposed to the single gold standard, and demand the immediate return to the constitutional standard of gold and silver, by the restoration by this Government, independently of any foreign power, of the unrestricted coinage of both gold and silver into standard money, at the ratio of sixteen to one, and upon terms of exact equality, as they existed prior to 1873; the silver coin to be of full legal tender, equally with gold, for all debts and dues, public and private; and we demand such legislation as will prevent for the future the destruction of the legal tender quality of any kind of money by private contract.

We hold that the power to control and regulate a paper currency is inseparable from the power to coin money, and hence that all currency intended to circulate as money should be issued, and its volume controlled, by the General Government only, and should be a legal tender.

We are unalterably opposed to the issue by the United States of interest-bearing bonds in time of peace, and we denounce as a blunder worse than a crime the present treasury policy, concurred in by a Republican House of Representatives, of plunging the country into debt by hundreds of millions in the vain attempt to maintain the gold standard by borrowing gold; and we demand the payment of all coin obligations of the United States as provided by existing laws, in either gold or silver coin, at the option of the Government, and not at the option of the creditor.

The demonetization of silver in 1873 enormously increased the demand for gold, enhancing its purchasing power and lowering all prices measured by that standard; and, since that unjust and indefensible act, the prices of American products have fallen, upon an average, nearly fifty per cent., carrying down with them proportionately the money value of all other forms of property.

[Pg 382]

Such fall of prices has destroyed the profits of legitimate industry, injuring the producer for the benefit of the non-producer; increasing the burden of the debtor, swelling the gains of the creditor, paralyzing the productive energies of the American people, relegating to idleness vast numbers of willing workers, sending the shadows of despair into the home of the honest toiler, filling the land with tramps and paupers, and building up colossal fortunes at the money centres.

In the effort to maintain the gold standard, the country has, within the last two years, in a time of profound peace and plenty, been loaded down with $262,000,000 of additional interest-bearing debt under such circumstances as to allow a syndicate of native and foreign bankers to realize a net profit of millions on a single deal.

It stands confessed that the gold standard can be only upheld by so depleting our paper currency as to force the prices of our products below the European, and even below the Asiatic, level to enable us to sell in foreign markets, thus aggravating the very evils of which our people so bitterly complain, degrading American labor and striking at the foundations of our civilization itself.

The advocates of the gold standard persistently claim that the real cause of our distress is overproduction—that we have produced so much that it made us poor—which implies that the true remedy is to close the factory, abandon the farm, and throw a multitude of people out of employment—a doctrine that leaves us unnerved and disheartened, and absolutely without hope for the future.

We affirm it to be unquestioned that there can be no such economic paradox as overproduction, and at the same time tens of thousands of our fellow-citizens remaining half clothed and half fed, and piteously clamoring for the common necessities of life.

Over and above all other questions of policy, we are in favor of restoring to the people of the United States the time-honored money of the Constitution—gold and silver, not one, but both—the money of Washington and Hamilton and Jefferson and Monroe and Jackson and Lincoln, to the end that the American people may receive honest pay for an honest product; that the American debtor may pay his just obligations in an honest standard, and not in a dishonest and unsound standard, appreciated one hundred per cent. in purchasing power, and no appreciation in debt-paying power; and to the end, further, that silver standard countries may be deprived of the unjust advantage they now enjoy, in the difference in exchange between gold and silver, an advantage which tariff legislation cannot overcome.

We, therefore, confidently appeal to the people of the United States to hold in abeyance all other questions, however important and even momentous they may appear, to sunder, if need be, all former party ties and affiliations, and unite in one supreme effort to free themselves and their children from the domination of the money power—a power more destructive than any which has ever been fastened upon the civilized men of any race or in any age. And upon the consummation of our desires and efforts we invoke the aid of all patriotic American citizens, and the gracious favor of Divine Providence.

The sound-money Democrats of the country called a[Pg 383] national convention that met at Indianapolis on the 2d of September, and adopted the title of the National Democratic party. Governor Flower, of New York, was temporary chairman, and Senator Caffery, of Louisiana, was permanent president. General John M. Palmer, of Illinois, was nominated for President on the 1st ballot, receiving 769¹⁄₂ votes to 118¹⁄₂ votes for General Edward S. Bragg, of Wisconsin. General Simon B. Buckner, of Kentucky, was nominated for Vice-President by acclamation. The following platform was unanimously adopted:

This convention has assembled to uphold the principles on which depend the honor and welfare of the American people, in order that Democrats throughout the Union may unite their patriotic efforts to avert disaster from their country and ruin from their party.

The Democratic party is pledged to equal and exact justice to all men, of every creed and condition; to the largest freedom of the individual consistent with good government; to the preservation of the Federal Government in its constitutional vigor, and to the support of the States in all their just rights; to economy in the public expenditures; to the maintenance of the public faith and sound money; and it is opposed to paternalism and all class legislation.

The declarations of the Chicago convention attack individual freedom, the right of private contract, the independence of the judiciary, and the authority of the President to enforce Federal laws. They advocate a reckless attempt to increase the price of silver by legislation, to the debasement of our monetary standard, and threaten unlimited issues of paper money by the Government. They abandon for Republican allies the Democratic cause of tariff reform, to court the favor of protectionists to their fiscal heresy.

In view of these and other grave departures from Democratic principles, we cannot support the candidates of that convention nor be bound by its acts.

The Democratic party has survived defeats, but could not survive a victory won in behalf of the doctrine and policy proclaimed in its name at Chicago.

The conditions, however, which make possible such utterances from a national convention are the direct result of class legislation by the Republican party. It still proclaims, as it has for years, the power and duty of Government to raise and maintain prices by law, and it proposes no remedy for existing evils, except oppressive and unjust taxation.

The National Democracy here convened therefore renews its declaration of faith in Democratic principles, especially as applicable to the conditions of the times. Taxation—tariff, excise, or direct—is rightfully imposed only for public purposes, and not for private gain. Its amount is justly measured by public expenditures, which should be limited by scrupulous economy. The sum derived by the Treasury from tariff and excise levies is affected by the state of trade and volume of consumption. The amount required by the Treasury is determined by the appropriations made by Congress. The[Pg 384] demand of the Republican party for an increase in tariff taxation has its pretext in the deficiency of revenue, which has its causes in the stagnation of trade and reduced consumption, due entirely to the loss of confidence that has followed the Populist threat of free coinage and depreciation of our money, and the Republican practice of extravagant appropriations beyond the needs of good government.

We arraign and condemn the Populist conventions of Chicago and St. Louis for their co-operation with the Republican party in creating these conditions, which are pleaded in justification of a heavy increase of the burdens of the people by a further resort to protection. We therefore denounce protection and its ally, free coinage of silver, as schemes for the personal profit of a few at the expense of the masses, and oppose the two parties which stand for these schemes as hostile to the people of the Republic, whose food and shelter, comfort and prosperity, are attacked by higher taxes and depreciated money. In fine, we reaffirm the historic Democratic doctrine of tariff for revenue only.

We demand that henceforth modern and liberal policies toward American shipping shall take the place of our imitation of the restricted statutes of the eighteenth century, which were long ago abandoned by every maritime power but the United States, and which, to the nation’s humiliation, have driven American capital and enterprise to the use of alien flags and alien crews, have made the Stars and Stripes almost an unknown emblem in foreign ports, and have virtually extinguished the race of American seamen. We oppose the pretence that discriminating duties will promote shipping; that scheme is an invitation to commercial warfare upon the United States, un-American in the light of our great commercial treaties, offering no gain whatever to American shipping, while greatly increasing ocean freights on our agricultural and manufactured products.

The experience of mankind has shown that, by reason of their natural qualities, gold is the necessary money of the large affairs of commerce and business, while silver is conveniently adapted to minor transactions, and the most beneficial use of both together can be insured only by the adoption of the former as a standard of monetary measure, and the maintenance of silver at a parity with gold by its limited coinage under suitable safeguards of law. Thus the largest possible enjoyment of both metals is gained with a value universally accepted throughout the world, which constitutes the only practical bimetallic currency, assuring the most stable standard, and especially the best and safest money for all who earn their livelihood by labor or the produce of husbandry. They cannot suffer when paid in the best money known to man, but are the peculiar and most defenceless victims of a debased and fluctuating currency, which offers continual profits to the money-changer at their cost.

Realizing these truths, demonstrated by long and public inconvenience and loss, the Democratic party, in the interests of the masses and of equal justice to all, practically established by the legislation of 1834 and 1853 the gold standard of monetary measurement, and likewise entirely divorced the Government from banking and currency issues. To this long-established Democratic policy we adhere, and insist upon the maintenance of the gold standard, and of the parity therewith of every dollar issued by the Government, and are[Pg 385] firmly opposed to the free and unlimited coinage of silver and to the compulsory purchase of silver bullion. But we denounce also the further maintenance of the present costly patchwork system of national paper currency as a constant source of injury and peril. We assert the necessity of such intelligent currency reform as will confine the Government to its legitimate functions, completely separated from the banking business, and afford to all sections of our country uniform, safe, and elastic bank currency under governmental supervision, measured in volume by the needs of business.

The fidelity, patriotism, and courage with which President Cleveland has fulfilled his great public trust, the high character of his administration, its wisdom and energy in the maintenance of civil order and the enforcement of the laws, its equal regard for the rights of every class and every section, its firm and dignified conduct of foreign affairs, and its sturdy persistence in upholding the credit and honor of the nation, are fully recognized by the Democratic party, and will secure to him a place in history beside the fathers of the Republic.

We also commend the administration for the great progress made in the reform of the public service, and we endorse its effort to extend the merit system still further. We demand that no backward step be taken, but that the reform be supported and advanced until the un-Democratic spoils system of appointments shall be eradicated.

We demand strict economy in the appropriations and in the administration of the Government.

We favor arbitration for the settlement of international disputes.

We favor a liberal policy of pensions to deserving soldiers and sailors of the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States was wisely established by the framers of our Constitution as one of the three co-ordinate branches of the Government. Its independence and authority to interpret the law of the land without fear or favor must be maintained. We condemn all efforts to degrade that tribunal or impair the confidence and respect which it has deservedly held.

The Democratic party ever has maintained, and ever will maintain, the supremacy of law, the independence of its judicial administration, the inviolability of contracts, and the obligations of all good citizens to resist every illegal trust, combination, or attempt against the just rights of property and the good order of society, in which are bound up the peace and happiness of our people.

Believing these principles to be essential to the well-being of the Republic, we submit them to the consideration of the American people.

The National Prohibition party held its national convention at Pittsburg on the 27th of May. A. A. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, was temporary chairman, and Oliver W. Stewart, of Illinois, permanent president. The deliberations of the convention were seriously disturbed by the free-silver issue, and the opposing factions known as the “Narrow-Gaugers” and the “Broad-Gaugers,” the latter being[Pg 386] favorable to a general platform covering free coinage and all other national questions, while the former wanted the issue confined to the liquor question. The majority and minority reports were made on the platform, and the convention decided to bring both reports before the body and pass upon them seriatim. It was finally decided by a vote of 427 to 387 to reject the free-coinage plank, and the “Narrow-Gaugers” then adopted their own platform as follows:

We, the members of the Prohibition party, in national convention assembled, renewing our declaration of allegiance to Almighty God as the rightful Ruler of the universe, lay down the following as our declaration of political purpose:

The Prohibition party, in national convention assembled, declares its firm conviction that the manufacture, exportation, importation, and sale of alcoholic beverages has produced such social, commercial, industrial, and political wrongs, and is now so threatening the perpetuity of all our social and political institutions, that the suppression of the same, by a national party organized therefor, is the greatest object to be accomplished by the voters of our country, and is of such importance that it of right ought to control the political actions of all our patriotic citizens until such suppression is accomplished.

The urgency of this course demands the union, without further delay, of all citizens who desire the prohibition of the liquor traffic; therefore be it

Resolved, That we favor the legal prohibition by State and national legislation of the manufacture, importation, and sale of alcoholic beverages. That we declare our purpose to organize and unite all the friends of prohibition into one party, and in order to accomplish this end we deem it of right to leave every Prohibitionist the freedom of his own convictions upon all other political questions, and trust our representatives to take such action upon other political questions as the changes occasioned by prohibition and the welfare of the whole people shall demand.

Resolved, That the right of suffrage ought not to be abridged on account of sex.

Immediately after the adoption of the platform, the “Broad-Gaugers” withdrew, and those who remained nominated Joshua Levering, of Maryland, for President by acclamation, and on a ballot for Vice-President, Hale Johnson, of Illinois, was chosen, receiving 309 votes to 132 for T. C. Hughes, of Arizona.

The seceders from the Prohibition convention met in Pittsburg on the next day, May 28th, with A. L. Moore, of Michigan, as chairman, and the roll-call showed 299 delegates present. Rev. Charles E. Bentley, of Nebraska, was nominated for President, and James A. Southgate, of North[Pg 387] Carolina, was nominated for Vice-President, both by acclamation. The following platform was adopted:

The National party, recognizing God as the author of all just power in government, presents the following declaration of principles, which it pledges itself to enact into effective legislation when given the power to do so:

1. The suppression of the manufacture and sale, importation, exportation, and transportation of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes. We utterly reject all plans for regulating or compromising with this traffic, whether such plans be called local option, taxation, license, or public control. The sale of liquors for medicinal and other legitimate uses should be conducted by the State, without profit, and with such regulations as will prevent fraud or evasion.

2. No citizen should be denied the right to vote on account of sex.

3. All money should be issued by the General Government only, and without the intervention of any private citizen, corporation, or banking institution. It should be based upon the wealth, stability, and integrity of the nation. It should be a full legal tender for all debts, public and private, and should be of sufficient volume to meet the demands of the legitimate business interests of the country. For the purpose of honestly liquidating our outstanding coin obligations, we favor the free and unlimited coinage of both silver and gold, at the ratio of 16 to 1, without consulting any other nation.

4. Land is the common heritage of the people and should be preserved from monopoly and speculation. All unearned grants of land subject to forfeiture should be reclaimed by the Government, and no portion of the public domain should hereafter be granted except to actual settlers, continuous use being essential to tenure.

5. Railroads, telegraphs, and other natural monopolies should be owned and operated by the Government, giving to the people the benefit of service at actual cost.

6. The national Constitution should be so amended as to allow the national revenues to be raised by equitable adjustment of taxation on the properties and incomes of the people, and import duties should be levied as a means of securing equitable commercial relations with other nations.

7. The contract convict labor system, through which speculators are enriched at the expense of the State, should be abolished.

8. All citizens should be protected by law in their right to one day of rest in seven, without oppressing any who conscientiously observe any other than the first day of the week.

9. The American public schools, taught in the English language, should be maintained, and no public funds should be appropriated for sectarian institutions.

10. The President, Vice-President, and United States Senators should be elected by direct vote of the people.

11. Ex-soldiers and sailors of the United States army and navy, their widows and minor children, should receive liberal pensions, graded on disability and term of service, not merely as a debt of gratitude, but for service rendered in the preservation of the Union.

12. Our immigration laws should be so revised as to exclude[Pg 388] paupers and criminals. None but citizens of the United States should be allowed to vote in any State, and naturalized citizens should not vote until one year after naturalization papers have been issued.

13. The initiative and referendum, and proportional representation should be adopted.

The Socialist Labor party held a national convention in New York on the 4th of July, and gave a full week to the deliberations of the body, which were devoted almost wholly to disputation as to the policy and purposes of the organization. The attendance was limited, as Charles H. Matchett, of New York, was nominated for President on the 1st ballot, receiving 43 votes to 23 for Matthew Maguire, of New Jersey, and 4 for William Watkins, of Ohio. Matthew Maguire was then nominated for Vice-President by acclamation. The following platform was adopted:

The Socialist Labor party of the United States, in convention assembled, reasserts the inalienable right of all men to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

With the founders of the American Republic, we hold that the purpose of government is to secure every citizen in the enjoyment of this right; but in the light of our social conditions, we hold, furthermore, that no such right can be exercised under a system of economic inequality, essentially destructive of life, of liberty, and of happiness.

With the founders of this Republic, we hold that the true theory of politics is that the machinery of government must be owned and controlled by the whole people; but in the light of our industrial development we hold, furthermore, that the true theory of economics is that the machinery of production must likewise belong to the people in common.

To the obvious fact, that our despotic system of economics is the direct opposite of our democratic system of politics, can plainly be traced the existence of a privileged class, the corruption of government by that class, the alienation of public property, public franchises, and public functions to that class, and the abject dependence of the mightiest nations upon that class.

Again, through the perversion of Democracy to the ends of plutocracy, labor is robbed of the wealth which it alone produces, is denied the means of self-employment, and, by compulsory idleness in wage slavery, is even deprived of the necessaries of life. Human power and natural forces are thus wasted that the plutocracy may rule. Ignorance and misery, with all their concomitant evils, are perpetuated, that the people may be kept in bondage. Science and invention are diverted from their humane purpose to the enslavement of women and children.

Against such a system the Socialist Labor party once more enters its protest. Once more it reiterates its fundamental declaration,[Pg 389] that private property in the natural sources of production and in the instruments of labor is the obvious cause of all economic servitude and political dependence.

The time is fast coming when, in the natural course of social evolution, this system, through the destructive action of its failures and crises on the one hand, and the constructive tendencies of its trusts and other capitalistic combinations on the other hand, shall have worked out its own downfall.

We therefore call upon the wage-workers of the United States, and upon all other honest citizens, to organize under the banner of the Socialist Labor party into a class-conscious body, aware of its rights and determined to conquer them by taking possession of the public powers; so that, held together by an indomitable spirit of solidarity under the most trying conditions of the present class struggle, we may put a summary end to that barbarous struggle by the abolition of classes, the restoration of the land, and of all the means of production, transportation, and distribution to the people as a collective body, and the substitution of the co-operative commonwealth for the present state of planless production, industrial war, and social disorder; a commonwealth in which every worker shall have the free exercise and full benefit of his faculties, multiplied by all the modern factors of civilization.

With a view to immediate improvement in the condition of labor, we present the following demands:

1. Reduction of the hours of labor in proportion to the progress of production.

2. The United States to obtain possession of the mines, railroads, canals, telegraphs, telephones, and all other means of public transportation and communication; the employés to operate the same co-operatively under control of the Federal Government and to elect their own superior officers, but no employé shall be discharged for political reasons.

3. The municipalities to obtain possession of the local railroads, ferries, water-works, gas-works, electric plants, and all industries requiring municipal franchises; the employés to operate the same co-operatively under control of the municipal administration and to elect their own superior officers, but no employé shall be discharged for political reasons.

4. The public lands to be declared inalienable. Revocation of all land grants to corporations or individuals, the conditions of which have not been complied with.

5. The United States to have the exclusive right to issue money.

6. Congressional legislation providing for the scientific management of forests and waterways, and prohibiting the waste of the natural resources of the country.

7. Inventions to be free to all; the inventors to be remunerated by the nation.

8. Progressive income tax and tax on inheritances; the smaller incomes to be exempt.

9. School education of all children under fourteen years of age to be compulsory, gratuitous, and accessible to all by public assistance in meals, clothing, books, etc., where necessary.

10. Repeal of all pauper, tramp, conspiracy, and sumptuary laws. Unabridged right of combination.

[Pg 390]

11. Prohibition of the employment of children of school age, and the employment of female labor in occupations detrimental to health or morality. Abolition of the convict labor contract system.

12. Employment of the unemployed by the public authorities (county, city, state, and nation).

13. All wages to be paid in lawful money of the United States. Equalization of women’s wages with those of men where equal service is performed.

14. Laws for the protection of life and limb in all occupations, and an efficient employers’ liability law.

15. The people to have the right to propose laws and to vote upon all measures of importance, according to the referendum principle.

16. Abolition of the veto power of the executive (national, State, and municipal) wherever it exists.

17. Abolition of the United States Senate and all upper legislative chambers.

18. Municipal self-government.

19. Direct vote and secret ballots in all elections. Universal and equal right of suffrage without regard to color, creed, or sex. Election days to be legal holidays. The principle of proportional representation to be introduced.

20. All public officers to be subject to recall by their respective constituencies.

21. Uniform civil and criminal law throughout the United States. Administration of justice to be free of charge. Abolition of capital punishment.

The great battle of 1896 is yet fresh in the memories of the people. Its most notable feature was the unexampled campaign made by Bryan, the Democratic candidate for President. He covered a larger portion of territory and delivered more speeches during the campaign than had ever before been accomplished by any man in our political history, and he enthused his followers to a very remarkable degree. Considering the complications which confronted him, resulting from the internal feuds of his own household, and an open split on the Vice-Presidency, he made the most memorable Presidential campaign of the Republic and swept every State west of the Mississippi, with the exception of California, Oregon and North Dakota. Even Kansas and Nebraska, two rock-ribbed Republican States, gave Bryan large majorities, but Bryan did not carry a single electoral vote east of the Mississippi and north of the Ohio and the Potomac. The following tables exhibit the popular and electoral votes of 1896:

[Pg 391]

POPULAR VOTE.
STATES. | William McKinley, Ohio. | William J. Bryan, Nebraska. | Bryan and Watson.[31] | John M. Palmer, Illinois. | Joshua Levering, Maryland. | Charles E. Bentley, Nebraska. | Charles H. Matchett, New York.
Alabama | 54,737 | 131,226 | 24,089 | 6,462 | 2,147 | —— | ——
Arkansas | 37,512 | 110,103 | —— | —— | 839 | 893 | ——
California | 146,688 | 144,766 | 21,730 | 2,006 | 2,573 | 1,047 | 1,611
Colorado | 26,271 | 161,269 | 2,389 | 1 | 1,717 | 386 | 160
Connecticut | 110,285 | 56,740 | —— | 4,336 | 1,806 | —— | 1,223
Delaware | 20,452 | 16,615 | —— | 966 | 602 | —— | ——
Florida | 11,257 | 31,958 | 1,977 | 1,772 | 644 | —— | ——
Georgia | 60,091 | 94,672 | 440 | 2,708 | 5,716 | —— | ——
Idaho | 6,324 | 23,192 | —— | —— | 181 | —— | ——
Illinois | 607,130 | 464,523 | 1,090 | 6,390 | 9,796 | 793 | 1,147
Indiana | 323,754 | 305,573 | —— | 2,145 | 3,056 | 2,267 | 324
Iowa | 289,293 | 223,741 | —— | 4,516 | 3,192 | 352 | 453
Kansas | 159,541 | 171,810 | 46,194 | 1,209 | 1,921 | 630 | ——
Kentucky | 218,171 | 217,890 | —— | 5,114 | 4,781 | —— | ——
Louisiana | 22,037 | 77,175 | —— | 1,915 | —— | —— | ——
Maine | 80,461 | 34,587 | 2,387 | 1,866 | 1,589 | —— | ——
Maryland | 136,978 | 104,746 | —— | 2,507 | 5,922 | 136 | 588
Massachusetts | 278,976 | 105,711 | 15,181 | 11,749 | 2,998 | —— | 2,114
Michigan | 293,582 | 237,268 | —— | 6,968 | 5,025 | 1,995 | 297
Minnesota | 193,503 | 139,735 | —— | 3,222 | 4,363 | —— | 954
Mississippi | 5,123 | 63,793 | 7,517 | 1,071 | 485 | —— | ——
Missouri | 304,940 | 363,652 | —— | 2,355 | 2,169 | 293 | 599
Montana | 10,494 | 42,537 | —— | —— | 186 | —— | ——
Nebraska | 103,064 | 115,999 | —— | 2,797 | 1,243 | 797 | 186
Nevada | 1,938 | 8,377 | 575 | —— | —— | —— | ——
New Hampshire | 57,444 | 21,650 | 379 | 3,520 | 779 | 49 | 228
New Jersey | 221,367 | 133,675 | —— | 6,373 | 5,614 | —— | 3,985
New York | 819,838 | 551,369 | —— | 18,950 | 16,052 | —— | 17,667
North Carolina | 155,222 | 174,488 | —— | 578 | 676 | 245 | ——
North Dakota | 26,335 | 20,686 | —— | —— | 358 | —— | ——
Ohio | 525,991 | 477,497 | 2,615 | 1,858 | 5,068 | 2,716 | 1,167
Oregon | 48,779 | 46,662 | —— | 977 | 919 | —— | ——
Pennsylvania | 728,300 | 433,230 | 11,176 | 10,921 | 19,274 | 870 | 1,683
Rhode Island | 37,437 | 14,459 | —— | 1,166 | 1,160 | 5 | 558
South Carolina | 9,313 | 58,801 | —— | 824 | —— | —— | ——
South Dakota | 41,042 | 41,225 | —— | —— | 683 | —— | ——
Tennessee | 148,773 | 166,268 | 4,525 | 1,951 | 3,098 | —— | ——
Texas | 167,520 | 370,434 | 79,572 | 5,046 | 1,786 | —— | ——
Utah | 13,491 | 64,607 | —— | 21 | —— | —— | ——
Vermont | 50,991 | 10,607 | 461 | 1,329 | 728 | —— | ——
Virginia | 135,388 | 154,985 | —— | 2,127 | 2,350 | —— | 115
Washington | 39,153 | 51,646 | —— | 1,668 | 968 | 148 | ——
West Virginia | 104,414 | 92,927 | —— | 677 | 1,203 | —— | ——
Wisconsin | 268,135 | 165,523 | —— | 4,584 | 7,509 | 346 | 1,314
Wyoming | 10,072 | 10,655 | 286 | —— | 136 | —— | ——
Totals | 7,111,607 | 6,509,052 | 222,583 | 134,645 | 131,312 | 13,968 | 36,373

[Pg 392]

ELECTORAL VOTE.
STATES. | President. | Vice-President.
--- | --- | ---
McKinley. | Bryan. | Hobart. | Sewall. | Watson.
Alabama | — | 11 | — | 11 | —
Arkansas | — | 8 | — | 5 | 3
California | 8 | 1 | 8 | 1 | —
Colorado | — | 4 | — | 4 | —
Connecticut | 6 | — | 6 | — | —
Delaware | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Florida | — | 4 | — | 4 | —
Georgia | — | 13 | — | 13 | —
Idaho | — | 3 | — | 3 | —
Illinois | 24 | — | 24 | — | —
Indiana | 15 | — | 15 | — | —
Iowa | 13 | — | 13 | — | —
Kansas | — | 10 | — | 10 | —
Kentucky | 12 | 1 | 12 | 1 | —
Louisiana | — | 8 | — | 4 | 4
Maine | 6 | — | 6 | — | —
Maryland | 8 | — | 8 | — | —
Massachusetts | 15 | — | 15 | — | —
Michigan | 14 | — | 14 | — | —
Minnesota | 9 | — | 9 | — | —
Mississippi | — | 9 | — | 9 | —
Missouri | — | 17 | — | 13 | 4
Montana | — | 3 | — | 2 | 1
Nebraska | — | 8 | — | 4 | 4
Nevada | — | 3 | — | 3 | —
New Hampshire | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
New Jersey | 10 | — | 10 | — | —
New York | 36 | — | 36 | — | —
North Carolina | — | 11 | — | 6 | 5
North Dakota | 3 | — | 3 | — | —
Ohio | 23 | — | 23 | — | —
Oregon | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
Pennsylvania | 32 | — | 32 | — | —
Rhode Island | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
South Carolina | — | 9 | — | 9 | —
South Dakota | — | 4 | — | 2 | 2
Tennessee | — | 12 | — | 12 | —
Texas | — | 15 | — | 15 | —
Utah | — | 3 | — | 2 | 1
Vermont | 4 | — | 4 | — | —
Virginia | — | 12 | — | 12 | —
Washington | — | 4 | — | 2 | 2
West Virginia | 6 | — | 6 | — | —
Wisconsin | 12 | — | 12 | — | —
Wyoming | — | 3 | — | 2 | 1
Totals | 271 | 176 | 271 | 149 | 27

No mere party contest in the history of the country, and indeed no other contest, with the single exception of the issue of secession and civil war, ever exhibited so large[Pg 393] a measure of political independence as is shown in the vote for President in 1896. While the Democrats had a sound-money national ticket with such acceptable candidates as Palmer and Buckner, a very small proportion of the sound-money Democratic vote of the country was cast for that ticket. McKinley certainly received 500,000 Democratic votes, cast for him directly to assure the defeat of Bryan, and Bryan certainly received not less than 250,000 Republican votes.

It was not until six weeks before the election that the Republicans felt confident of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The first canvass of the Republican State committee made in Ohio indicated the defeat of McKinley, but as the business and industrial interests of the country faced the question of cheap money, and the business convulsion it must produce, the Republican ranks were steadily increased, and the States which were regarded as doubtful in September gave large majorities for McKinley in November.

This campaign gave a most impressive illustration of the true independence of American journalism. A number of the leading newspapers of the country which had supported Cleveland in his three contests, repudiated the Chicago platform and its candidate, and they stood in the forefront of American journalism, embracing such journals as the Boston Herald and Globe, the Hartford Times, the New York World, Sun, Herald, Times, and Evening Post, the Philadelphia Times and Record, the Baltimore Sun, the Louisville Courier-Journal, and others. These journals were all strongly owned and entirely independent in their political action. Not one of them ever had conference or communication with the McKinley leaders, or received or proposed any terms for their support, or ever sought, accepted, or desired favors from the McKinley administration. Some of them suffered pecuniary sacrifice, but they performed a heroic duty, and it was the inspiration they gave to the conservative Democratic sentiment of the country that made McKinley President by an overwhelming majority.

On the other side, especially in the West, and to some extent in the South, scores of thousands of the Republicans who had always voted the national ticket gave enthusiastic support to Bryan, as he carried some of the strongest Republican States of the West, while losing a large fraction of the Democratic vote. This struggle settled the financial[Pg 394] policy of the country, as Congress has recently distinctly established the gold standard by statute, in accord with the financial policy of all the great civilized nations of the world; and while the money issue may play some part in the national struggle of the present year, it will be wisely subordinated to other issues and probably be eliminated from the future political battles of the nation.

[Pg 395]

## SUMMARY OF POPULAR VOTES FOR PRESIDENTS

I was surprised, after careful examination of the various political handbooks, to find no table of the popular vote for President prior to 1824, and I made exhaustive effort to obtain official records in the archives of the nation and of the different States, to supply something approaching an intelligent table of the popular vote cast for the early Presidents; but I learned that the failure of others to supply such tables was not because of negligence, but because there are no records to furnish them. In Pennsylvania the vote returned to the Capitol was less than 5000 for Washington, and the vote of record for his second election but little exceeds 5000. The returns, however, are fragmentary and valueless. I was compelled to abandon the purpose of giving tables of the popular vote for Presidents prior to 1824, because all that could be obtained would be confusing rather than instructive.

I have also found much difficulty in trying to reconcile the conflicting returns of every Presidential election since 1824. After a very full and careful examination of these conflicting figures, I have adopted the tables prepared by Mr. Stanwood in his admirable work entitled “A History of the Presidency,” and I regard them as more nearly accurate than any other tables presented. The entire accuracy of these election tables is not a matter of vital importance, as in none of the many conflicting returns of different States would the result have been changed by the variations in the returns as stated in the many publications which for some years past have annually given them. The following summary of the popular vote for Presidents since 1824, with the electoral vote cast at each election, is taken from the New York World Almanac for 1900, the figures of which, as will be seen, usually vary from those presented in the tables I give with each chapter of this volume:

[Pg 396]

ELECTORAL AND POPULAR VOTES.
Year of Election. | Candidates for President, State, and Political Party. | Popular Vote. | Plurality. | Electoral Vote. | Candidates for Vice-President, State, and Political Party. | Electoral Vote.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1824 | Andrew Jackson, Tenn., Rep. | 155,872 | 50,551 | (b)99 | John C. Calhoun,[32] S. C., Rep. | 182
John Q. Adams,[32] Mass., Rep. | 105,321 | .... | 84 | Nathan Sanford, N. Y., Rep. | 30
Henry Clay, Ky., Rep. | 46,587 | .... | 37 | Nathaniel Macon, N. C., Rep. | 24
Wm. H. Crawford, Ga., Rep. | 44,282 | .... | 41 | Andrew Jackson, Tenn., Rep. | 13
M. Van Buren, N. Y., Rep. | 9
Henry Clay, Ky., Rep. | 2
1828 | Andrew Jackson,[32] Tenn., Dem. | [32]647,231 | 138,134 | 178 | John C. Calhoun,[32] S. C., Dem. | 171
John Q. Adams, Mass., Nat. R. | [32]509,097 | .... | 83 | Richard Rush, Pa., Nat. R. | 83
William Smith, S. C., Dem. | 7
1832 | Andrew Jackson,[32] Tenn., Dem. | 687,502 | 157,313 | 219 | M. Van Buren,[32] N. Y., Dem. | 189
Henry Clay, Ky., Nat. R. | 530,189 | .... | 49 | John Sergeant, Pa., Nat. R. | 49
John Floyd, Ga., Ind. | ⎫ ⎬ ⎭ | 33,108 | .... | ⎧ ⎨ ⎩ | 11 | Henry Lee, Mass., Ind. | 11
William Wirt (c), Md., Anti-M. | 7 | Amos Ellmaker (c), Pa., Anti-M. | 7
|  |  | William Wilkins, Pa., Dem. | 30
1836 | Martin Van Buren,[32] N. Y., Dem. | 761,549 | 24,893 | 170 | R. M. Johnson (d),[32] Ky., Dem. | 147
W. H. Harrison, O., Whig | ⎫ ⎪ ⎬ ⎪ ⎭ | 736,656 | .... | ⎧ ⎪ ⎨ ⎪ ⎩ | 73 | Francis Granger, N. Y., Whig | 77
Hugh L. White, Tenn., Whig | 26 | John Tyler, Va., Whig | 47
Daniel Webster, Mass., Whig | 14 | William Smith, Ala., Dem. | 23
Willie P. Mangum, N. C., Whig | 11
1840 | W. H. Harrison,[32] O., Whig | 1,275,017 | 146,315 | 234 | John Tyler,[32] Va., Whig | 234
Martin Van Buren, N. Y., Dem. | 1,128,702 | .... | 60 | R. M. Johnson, Ky., Dem. | 48
James G. Birney, N. Y., Lib. | 7,059 | .... | .. | L. W. Tazewell, Va., Dem. | 11
James K. Polk, Tenn., Dem. | 1
1844 | James K. Polk,[32] Tenn., Dem. | 1,337,243 | 38,175 | 170 | George M. Dallas,[32] Pa., Dem. | 170
Henry Clay, Ky., Whig | 1,299,068 | .... | 105 | T. Frelinghuysen, N. J., Whig | 105
James G. Birney, N. Y., Lib. | 62,300 | .... | .. | Thomas Morris, O., Lib. | ..
1848 | Zachary Taylor,[32] La., Whig | 1,360,101 | 139,557 | 163 | Millard Fillmore,[32] N. Y., Whig | 163
Lewis Cass, Mich., Dem. | 1,220,544 | .... | 127 | William O. Butler, Ky., Dem. | 127
Martin Van Buren, N. Y., F. Soil | 291,263 | .... | .. | Chas. F. Adams, Mass., F. Soil | ..
1852 | Franklin Pierce,[32] N. H., Dem. | 1,601,474 | 220,896 | 254 | William R. King,[32] Ala., Dem. | 254
Winfield Scott, N. J., Whig | 1,380,576 | .... | 42 | William A. Graham, N. C., Whig | 42
John P. Hale, N. H., F. D. (i) | 156,149 | .... | .. | George W. Julian, Ind., F. D. | ..
Daniel Webster (k), Mass., Whig | 1,670 | .... | ..
1856 | James Buchanan,[32] Pa., Dem. | 1,838,169 | 496,905 | 174 | J. C. Breckenridge,[32] Ky., Dem. | 174
John C. Fremont, Cal., Rep. | 1,341,264 | .... | 114 | William L. Dayton, N. J., Rep. | 114
Millard Fillmore, N. Y., Amer. | 874,538 | .... | 8 | A. J. Donelson, Tenn., Amer. | 8
1860 | Abraham Lincoln,[32] Ill., Rep. | 1,866,352 | 491,195 | 180 | Hannibal Hamlin,[32] Me., Rep. | 180
Stephen A. Douglas, Ill., Dem. | 1,375,157 | .... | 12 | H. V. Johnson, Ga., Dem. | 12
J. C. Breckenridge, Ky., Dem. | 845,763 | .... | 72 | Joseph Lane, Ore., Dem. | 72
John Bell, Tenn., Union | 589,581 | .... | 39 | Edward Everett, Mass., Union | 39
1864 | Abraham Lincoln,[32] Ill., Rep. | 2,216,067 | 407,342 | (e)212 | Andrew Johnson,[32] Tenn., Rep. | 212
George B. McClellan, N. J., Dem. | 1,808,725 | .... | 21 | George H. Pendleton, O., Dem. | 21
1868 | Ulysses S. Grant,[32] Ill., Rep. | 3,015,071 | 305,456 | (f)214 | Schuyler Colfax,[32] Ind., Rep. | 214
Horatio Seymour, N. Y., Dem. | 2,709,615 | .... | 80 | F. P. Blair, Jr., Mo., Dem. | 80
1872 | Ulysses S. Grant,[32] Ill., Rep. | 3,597,070 | 752,991 | 286 | Henry Wilson,[32] Mass., Rep. | 286
Horace Greeley, N. Y., D. & L. | 2,834,079 | .... | (g).. | B. Gratz Brown, Mo., D. L. | 47
Charles O’Conor, N. Y., Dem. | 29,408 | .... | .. | John Q. Adams, Mass., Dem. | ..
James Black, Pa., Temp. | 5,608 | .... | .. | John Russell, Mich., Temp. | ..
Thomas A. Hendricks, Ind., Dem. | .... | .... | 42 | George W. Julian, Ind., Lib. | 5
B. Gratz Brown, Mo., Dem. | .... | .... | 18 | A. H. Colquitt, Ga., Dem. | 5
Charles J. Jenkins, Ga., Dem. | .... | .... | 2 | John M. Palmer, Ill., Dem. | 3
David Davis, Ill., Ind. | .... | .... | 1 | T. E. Bramlette, Ky., Dem. | 3
W. S. Groesbeck, O., Dem. | 1
Willis B. Machen, Ky., Dem. | 1
N. P. Banks, Mass., Lib. | 1
1876 | Samuel J. Tilden, N. Y., Dem. | 4,284,385 | 250,935 | 84 | T. A. Hendricks, Ind., Dem. | 184
Rutherford B. Hayes,[32] O., Rep. | 4,033,950 | .... | (h)185 | William A. Wheeler,[32] N. Y., Rep. | 185
Peter Cooper, N. Y., Gre’nb. | 81,740 | .... | .. | Samuel F. Cary, O., Gre’nb. | ..
Green Clay Smith, Ky., Pro. | 9,522 | .... | .. | Gideon T. Stewart, O., Pro. | ..
James B. Walker, Ill., Amer. | 2,636 | .... | .. | D. Kirkpatrick, N. Y., Amer. | ..
1880 | James A. Garfield,[32] O., Rep. | 4,449,053 | 7,018 | 214 | Chester A. Arthur,[32] N. Y., Rep. | 214
W. S. Hancock, Pa., Dem. | 4,442,035 | .... | 155 | William H. English, Ind., Dem. | 155
James B. Weaver, Iowa, Gre’nb. | 307,306 | .... | .. | B. J. Chambers, Texas, Gre’nb. | ..
Neal Dow, Me., Pro. | 10,305 | .... | .. | H. A. Thompson, O., Pro. | ..
John W. Phelps, Vt., Amer. | 707 | .... | .. | S. C. Pomeroy, Kan., Amer. | ..
1884 | Grover Cleveland,[32] N. Y., Dem. | 4,911,017 | 62,683 | 219 | T. A. Hendricks,[32] Ind., Dem. | 219
James G. Blaine, Me., Rep. | 4,848,334 | .... | 182 | John A. Logan, Ill., Rep. | 182
John P. St. John, Kan., Pro. | 151,809 | .... | .. | William Daniel, Md., Pro. | ..
Benjamin F. Butler, Mass., Peop. | 133,825 | .... | .. | A. M. West, Miss., Peop. | ..
P. D. Wigginton, Cal., Amer. | .... | .... | .. |  | [Pg 397]
1888 | Grover Cleveland, N. Y., Dem. | 5,538,233 | 98,017 | 168 | Allen G. Thurman, O., Dem. | 168
Benjamin Harrison,[32] Ind., Rep. | 5,440,216 | ... | 233 | Levi P. Morton,[32] N. Y., Rep. | 233
Clinton B. Fisk, N. J., Pro. | 249,907 | ... | .. | John A. Brooks, Mo., Pro. | ..
Alson J. Streeter, Ill., U. L. | 148,105 | ... | .. | C. E. Cunningham, Ark., U’d L. | ..
R. H. Cowdry, Ill., U’d L. | 2,808 | ... | .. | W. H. T. Wakefield, Kan., U’d L. | ..
James L. Curtis, N. Y., Amer. | 1,591 | ... | .. | James B. Greer, Tenn., Amer. | ..
1892 | Grover Cleveland,[32] N. Y., Dem. | 5,556,918 | 380,810 | 277 | Adlai E. Stevenson,[32] Ill., Dem. | 277
Benjamin Harrison, Ind., Rep. | 5,176,108 | ... | 145 | Whitelaw Reid, N. Y., Rep. | 145
James B. Weaver, Iowa, Peop. | 1,041,028 | ... | 22 | James G. Field, Va., Peop. | 22
John Bidwell, Cal., Pro. | 264,133 | ... | .. | James B. Cranfill, Tex., Pro. | ..
Simon Wing, Mass., Soc. L. | 21,164 | ... | .. | Charles H. Matchett, N. Y., Soc. L. | ..
1896 | William McKinley,[32] O., Rep. | 7,104,779 | 601,854 | 271 | Garret A. Hobart,[32] N. J., Rep. | 271
William J. Bryan, Neb., Dem. | ⎫ ⎬ ⎭ | 6,502,925 | ... | 176 | Arthur Sewall, Me., Dem. | 176
William J. Bryan, Neb., Pop. | ... | .. | Thomas E. Watson, Ga., Pop. | ..
Joshua Levering, Md., Pro. | 132,007 | ... | .. | Hale Johnson, Ill., Pro. | ..
John M. Palmer, Ill., N. Dem. | 133,148 | ... | .. | Simon B. Buckner, Ky., N. Dem. | ..
Charles H. Matchett, N. Y., Soc. L. | 36,274 | ... | .. | Matthew Maguire, N. J., Soc. L. | ..
Charles E. Bentley, Neb., Nat. (j) | 13,969 | ... | .. | James H. Southgate, N. C., Nat. (j) | ..

I also present the lists of the Presidents and Vice-Presidents of the United States, as given in the New York World Almanac for 1900, as follows:

PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
Name. | Birthplace. | Year. | Paternal Ancestry. | Residence. | Inaugurated. | Politics. | Place of Death. | Year. | Age.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Year. | Age.
1 | George Washington | Westmoreland Co., Va. | 1732 | English | Va. | 1789 | 57 | Fed. | Mt. Vernon, Va. | 1799 | 67
2 | John Adams | Quincy, Mass. | 1735 | English | Mass. | 1797 | 62 | Fed. | Quincy, Mass. | 1826 | 90
3 | Thomas Jefferson | Shadwell, Va. | 1743 | Welsh | Va. | 1801 | 58 | Rep. | Monticello, Va. | 1826 | 83
4 | James Madison | Port Conway, Va. | 1751 | English | Va. | 1809 | 58 | Rep. | Montpelier, Va. | 1836 | 85
5 | James Monroe | Westmoreland Co., Va. | 1758 | Scotch | Va. | 1817 | 59 | Rep. | New York City | 1831 | 73
6 | John Quincy Adams | Quincy, Mass. | 1767 | English | Mass. | 1825 | 58 | Rep. | Washington, D. C. | 1848 | 80
7 | Andrew Jackson | Union Co., N. C. | 1767 | Scotch-Irish | Tenn. | 1829 | 62 | Dem. | Hermitage, Tenn. | 1845 | 78
8 | Martin Van Buren | Kinderhook, N. Y. | 1782 | Dutch | N. Y. | 1837 | 55 | Dem. | Lindenwold, N. Y. | 1862 | 79
9 | William H. Harrison | Berkeley, Va. | 1773 | English | O. | 1841 | 68 | Whig | Washington, D. C. | 1841 | 68
10 | John Tyler | Greenway, Va. | 1790 | English | Va. | 1841 | 51 | Dem. | Richmond, Va. | 1862 | 72
11 | James K. Polk | Mecklenburg Co., N. C. | 1795 | Scotch-Irish | Tenn. | 1845 | 50 | Dem. | Nashville, Tenn. | 1849 | 53
12 | Zachary Taylor | Orange Co., Va. | 1784 | English | La. | 1849 | 65 | Whig | Washington, D. C. | 1850 | 65
13 | Millard Fillmore | Summerhill, N. Y. | 1800 | English | N. Y. | 1850 | 50 | Whig | Buffalo, N. Y. | 1874 | 74
14 | Franklin Pierce | Hillsboro, N. H. | 1804 | English | N. H. | 1853 | 49 | Dem. | Concord, N. H. | 1869 | 64
15 | James Buchanan | Cove Gap, Pa. | 1791 | Scotch-Irish | Pa. | 1857 | 66 | Dem. | Wheatland, Pa. | 1868 | 77
16 | Abraham Lincoln | Larne Co., Ky. | 1809 | English | Ill. | 1861 | 52 | Rep. | Washington, D. C. | 1865 | 56
17 | Andrew Johnson | Raleigh, N. C. | 1808 | English | Tenn. | 1865 | 57 | Rep. | Carter’s Depot, Tenn. | 1875 | 66
18 | Ulysses S. Grant | Point Pleasant, O. | 1822 | Scotch | D. C. | 1869 | 47 | Rep. | Mt. McGregor, N. Y. | 1885 | 63
19 | Rutherford B. Hayes | Delaware, O. | 1822 | Scotch | O. | 1877 | 54 | Rep. | Fremont, O. | 1893 | 70
20 | James A. Garfield | Cuyahoga Co., O. | 1831 | English | O. | 1881 | 49 | Rep. | Long Branch, N. J. | 1881 | 49
21 | Chester A. Arthur | Fairfield, Vt. | 1830 | Scotch-Irish | N. Y. | 1881 | 51 | Rep. | New York City | 1886 | 56
22 | Grover Cleveland | Caldwell, N. J. | 1837 | English | N. Y. | 1885 | 48 | Dem. |  |  |
23 | Benjamin Harrison | North Bend, O. | 1833 | English | Ind. | 1889 | 55 | Rep. |  |  |
24 | Grover Cleveland | Caldwell, N. J. | 1837 | English | N. Y. | 1893 | 56 | Dem. |  |  |
25 | William McKinley | Niles, O. | 1843 | Scotch-Irish | O. | 1897 | 54 | Rep. |  |  |

[Pg 398]

VICE-PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
Name. | Birthplace. | Year. | Paternal Ancestry. | Residence. | Qualified. | Politics. | Place of Death. | Year. | Age at Death.
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1 | John Adams | Quincy, Mass. | 1735 | English | Mass. | 1789 | Fed. | Quincy, Mass. | 1826 | 90
2 | Thomas Jefferson | Shadwell, Va. | 1743 | Welsh | Va. | 1797 | Rep. | Monticello, Va. | 1826 | 83
3 | Aaron Burr | Newark, N. J. | 1756 | English | N. Y. | 1801 | Rep. | Staten Island, N. Y. | 1836 | 80
4 | George Clinton | Ulster Co., N. Y. | 1739 | English | N. Y. | 1805 | Rep. | Washington, D. C. | 1812 | 73
5 | Elbridge Gerry | Marblehead, Mass. | 1744 | English | Mass. | 1813 | Rep. | Washington, D. C. | 1814 | 70
6 | Daniel D. Tompkins | Scarsdale, N. Y. | 1774 | English | N. Y. | 1817 | Rep. | Staten Island, N. Y. | 1825 | 51
7 | John C. Calhoun | Abbeville, S. C. | 1782 | Scotch-Irish | S. C. | 1825 | Rep. | Washington, D. C. | 1850 | 68
8 | Martin Van Buren | Kinderhook, N. Y. | 1782 | Dutch | N. Y. | 1833 | Dem. | Kinderhook, N. Y. | 1862 | 79
9 | Richard M. Johnson | Louisville, Ky. | 1780 | English | Ky. | 1837 | Dem. | Frankfort, Ky. | 1850 | 70
10 | John Tyler | Greenway, Va. | 1790 | English | Va. | 1841 | Dem. | Richmond, Va. | 1862 | 72
11 | George M. Dallas | Philadelphia, Pa. | 1792 | English | Pa. | 1845 | Dem. | Philadelphia, Pa. | 1864 | 72
12 | Millard Fillmore | Summer Hill, N. Y. | 1800 | English | N. Y. | 1849 | Whig | Buffalo, N. Y. | 1874 | 74
13 | William R. King | Sampson Co., N. C. | 1786 | English | Ala. | 1853 | Dem. | Dallas Co., Ala. | 1853 | 67
14 | John C. Breckenridge | Lexington, Ky. | 1821 | Scotch | Ky. | 1857 | Dem. | Lexington, Ky. | 1875 | 54
15 | Hannibal Hamlin | Paris, Me. | 1809 | English | Me. | 1861 | Rep. | Bangor, Me. | 1891 | 81
16 | Andrew Johnson | Raleigh, N. C. | 1808 | English | Tenn. | 1865 | Rep. | Carter Co., Tenn. | 1875 | 66
17 | Schuyler Colfax | New York City, N. Y. | 1823 | English | Ind. | 1869 | Rep. | Mankato, Minn. | 1885 | 62
18 | Henry Wilson | Farmington, N. H. | 1812 | English | Mass. | 1873 | Rep. | Washington D. C. | 1875 | 63
19 | William A. Wheeler | Malone, N. Y. | 1819 | English | N. Y. | 1877 | Rep. | Malone, N. Y. | 1887 | 68
20 | Chester A. Arthur | Fairfield, Vt. | 1830 | Scotch-Irish | N. Y. | 1881 | Rep. | New York City, N. Y. | 1886 | 56
21 | Thos. A. Hendricks | Muskingum Co., O. | 1819 | Scotch-Irish | Ind. | 1885 | Dem. | Indianapolis, Ind. | 1885 | 66
22 | Levi P. Morton | Shoreham, Vt. | 1824 | Scotch | N. Y. | 1889 | Rep. |  |  |
23 | Adlai E. Stevenson | Christian Co., Ky. | 1835 | Scotch-Irish | Ill. | 1893 | Dem. |  |  |
24 | Garret A. Hobart | Long Branch, N. J. | 1844 | English | N. J. | 1897 | Rep. | Paterson, N. J. | 1899 | 55

President Buchanan was the only Chief Magistrate of the Republic who, having served one term in the Presidency, was not a candidate for re-election. He announced his purpose not to be a candidate in his inaugural address, and I doubt not that he never swerved from that determination. At the close of his administration the political conditions gave no promise of his re-election, however much he might have desired it, but he was then past the patriarchal years, and he is the one President who entered the office to serve only a term and adhered to it. The elder Adams was defeated for re-election by Jefferson; the younger Adams was defeated for re-election by Jackson; Van Buren was defeated for re-election by the elder Harrison, and the younger Harrison was defeated for re-election by Cleveland, while Hayes, Polk and Pierce were candidates for re-election, but were rejected by the party.

Four Vice-Presidents succeeded to the Presidency by the death of the President, and all of them were earnest candidates for election to another term. Tyler and Johnson sought the Democratic nomination and failed. Fillmore failed in the struggle for the Whig nomination, and Arthur was defeated by Blaine.

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Lincoln, Grant, and Cleveland were twice elected President. Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland were each defeated for the[Pg 399] Presidency, although twice elected. Jefferson and Jackson were defeated in their first contests, and then elected to two successive terms, and Cleveland was elected in 1884, defeated in 1888, and re-elected in 1892. Jackson and Cleveland are the only two Presidents who were candidates in three national elections and received an increased plurality in each successive contest. Both were defeated in one battle when they had received the largest popular vote. Grant was the only President who made a struggle for a third term.

Four Presidents died in office—namely, Harrison in 1841, after having served but little over a month; Taylor in 1850, after having served less than a year and a half; Lincoln in 1865, only a little more than a month after his second inauguration, and Garfield in 1881, before the close of the first year of his administration.

Six Vice-Presidents have died in office: Clinton in 1812, after having presided over the Senate for seven years; Gerry in 1814, after little more than a year of service; William R. King, in 1853, who took the oath as Vice-President on the 4th of March of that year in Cuba, and died soon thereafter; Henry Wilson in 1875, having served but little more than half his term; Thomas A. Hendricks in 1885, having served less than a year, and Hobart in 1899, leaving nearly a year and a half of his term unexpired.

No President pro tem. of the Senate has ever reached the Presidency. There was only one occasion in the history of the Government when it seemed probable that the President pro tem. might be called to the chief executive office of the nation. Johnson, as Vice-President, had succeeded Lincoln as President, and Senator Wade, of Ohio, was president pro tem. of the Senate. In 1868, some ten months before the expiration of Johnson’s term, he was impeached by the House, and acquitted in the Senate by a single vote. The question was then raised as to whether the President pro tem. of the Senate was such an officer as was contemplated by the Constitution to fill the office of President, and there was considerable agitation from time to time on the subject in Congress, which finally culminated in the passage of the Presidential Succession bill of January 18, 1886, by which the succession to the Presidency is fully defined and eligibles are provided quite sufficient in number to meet any possible emergency. The following is the full text of the present law regulating the Presidential succession:

[Pg 400]

Be it enacted, etc., that in case of the removal, death, resignation, or inability of both the President and Vice-President of the United States, the Secretary of State, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Secretary of the Treasury, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Secretary of War, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Attorney-General, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Postmaster-General, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Secretary of the Navy, or if there be none, or in case of his removal, death, resignation, or inability, then the Secretary of the Interior shall act as President until the disability of the President or Vice-President is removed, or a President shall be elected: provided, that whenever the powers and duties of the office of President of the United States shall devolve upon any of the persons named herein, if Congress be not then in session, or if it would not meet in accordance with law within twenty days thereafter, it shall be the duty of the person upon whom said powers and duties shall devolve to issue a proclamation convening Congress in extraordinary session, giving twenty days’ notice of the time of meeting.

Section 2. That the preceding section shall only be held to describe and apply to such officers as shall have been appointed by the advice and consent of the Senate to the offices therein named, and such as are eligible to the office of President under the Constitution, and not under impeachment by the House of Representatives of the United States at the time the powers and duties of the office shall devolve upon them respectively.

Sec. 3. That sections 146, 147, 148, 149, and 150 of the Revised Statutes are hereby repealed.

[Pg 401]

## CONTESTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

There have been only two seriously contested elections in the history of our Presidential conflicts. They were the contest between Jefferson and Burr in 1800–1 and the contest between Hayes and Tilden in 1876–7. The Hayes-Tilden contest brought the country to the verge of revolution, and the very close battle between Garfield and Hancock four years later, and the Cleveland-Blaine struggle of 1884, that turned upon 1100 majority in a vote of nearly 6,000,000 in New York State, taught the necessity of having some definite statute providing for the determination of disputed electoral votes in the States by which such disputes would be practically eliminated from the powers of Congress. The following is the full text of the present statute, approved February 3, 1887, providing for the determination of contested electors:

Be it enacted, etc., that the electors of each State shall meet and give their votes on the second Monday in January next following their appointment, at such place in each State as the Legislature of such State shall direct.

Section 2. That if any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods of procedure, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to the said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.

Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of the executive of each State, as soon as practicable after the conclusion of the appointment of electors in such State, by the final ascertainment under and in pursuance of the laws of such State providing for such ascertainment, to communicate under the seal of the State, to the Secretary[Pg 402] of State of the United States, a certificate of such ascertainment of the electors appointed, setting forth the names of such electors and the canvass or other ascertainment, under the laws of such State, of the number of votes given or cast for each person for whose appointment any and all votes have been given or cast; and it shall also thereupon be the duty of the executive of each State to deliver to the electors of such State, on or before the day on which they are required, by the preceding section, to meet, the same certificate, in triplicate, under the seal of the State; and such certificate shall be enclosed and transmitted by the electors at the same time and in the same manner as is provided by law for transmitting by such electors to the seat of government the lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President: and Section 136 of the Revised Statutes is hereby repealed; and if there shall have been any final determination in the State of a controversy or contest, as provided for in Section 2 of this act, it shall be the duty of the executive of such State, as soon as practicable after such determination, to communicate, under the seal of the State, to the Secretary of State of the United States, a certificate of such determination, in form and manner as the same shall have been made; and the Secretary of State of the United States, as soon as practicable after the receipt at the State Department of each of the certificates hereinbefore directed to be transmitted to the Secretary of State, shall publish, in such public newspaper as he shall designate, such certificates in full; and at the first meeting of Congress, thereafter, he shall transmit to the two Houses of Congress copies in full of each and every such certificate so received theretofore at the State Department.

Sec. 4. That Congress shall be in session on the second Wednesday in February succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of one o’clock in the afternoon, on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate, and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be the certificates of the electoral vote, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes, as they shall appear from the said certificates, and, the votes having been ascertained and counted in the manner and according to the rules in this act provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice-President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one senator and one member of the House[Pg 403] of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors, whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to Section 3 of this act, from which but one return has been received, shall be rejected; but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in Section 2 of this act to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors, or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise a question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in Section 2 of this act, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its laws; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then and in that case the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.

Sec. 5. That while the two Houses shall be in meeting as provided in this act, the President of the Senate shall have power to preserve order; and no debate shall be allowed and no question shall be put by the presiding officer, except to either House on a motion to withdraw.

Sec. 6. That when the two Houses separate to decide upon an objection that may have been made to the counting of any electoral vote or votes from any State, or other question arising in the matter, each Senator and Representative may speak to such objection[Pg 404] or question five minutes, and not more than once; but after such debate shall have lasted two hours, it shall be the duty of the presiding officer of each House to put the main question without further debate.

Sec. 7. Such joint meeting shall not be dissolved until the count of electoral votes shall be completed and the result declared; and no recess shall be taken unless a question shall have arisen in regard to counting any such votes, or otherwise under this act, in which case it shall be competent for either House, acting separately, in the manner hereinbefore provided, to direct a recess of such House not beyond the next calendar day, Sunday excepted, at the hour of ten o’clock in the forenoon. But if the counting of the electoral votes and the declaration of the result shall not have been completed before the fifth calendar day next after such first meeting of the two Houses, no further or other recess shall be taken by either House.

[Pg 405]

## INDEX

- Abolition party, birth of the, and its first candidates, 65;
- its second nominations, 84, 85;
- its platform in 1844, 85–88;
- its leaders denounced by Greeley, 90.
- Adams, Charles Francis, a candidate for the nomination of President by the Liberal Republicans, 229.
- Adams, John, his first election to the Vice-Presidency, 2–4;
- his second election to the Vice-Presidency, 4–6;
- his election to the Presidency, 7–11;
- supported by Washington as the Federalist candidate, 8;
- the campaign the most defamatory in American politics, 9;
- his vote in the third Electoral College, 10, 11;
- defeated for the Presidency, 12–20;
- his ungracious departure from the Executive Mansion, 20;
- his after-life and death, 20.
- Adams, John Quincy, defeated for the Presidency, 35, 37;
- his election to the Presidency by Congress, 39–46;
- his popular vote, 42;
- his vote in the tenth Electoral College, 43, 45;
- the real author of the Monroe Doctrine, 46;
- defeated for the Presidency, 47–51;
- a model President, his after-life and death, 45, 46.
- Adams, John Quincy, receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the Democratic dissenters in 1872, 238;
- offered the nomination of the Presidency by the same party, 238.
- Adams, Samuel, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Alien and Sedition laws, passage of, and their purposes, 12, 13.
- Allen, Philip, at a national Whig convention in 1848, 107.
- American National party, its candidates and platform in 1876, 260;
- its candidates and platform in 1880, 283;
- its candidates and platform in 1888, 330–332;
- splits on a question of voting, 331.
- American Prohibition National party (a split from the Prohibition party), its candidates and platform in 1884, 304, 305.
- Anti-Mason party, its birth and power, 52, 53;
- calls the first political national convention ever held in the country, at Philadelphia, 52;
- its nominations, 53;
- its ticket adopted by the National Republicans in several States, 54.
- Anti-Monopoly party, its candidates and platform in 1884, 299–301.
- Armstrong, James, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Arthur, Chester A., his election to the Vice-Presidency, 274–284;
- succeeds to the Presidency after the death of Garfield, 286;
- his admirable administration, 286, 287;
- the author meets him at a dinner given by Cameron, 287;
- his life after his retirement from office, 287.
- Ashman, George, permanent chairman[Pg 406] of Republican National Convention of 1860, 157.
- Banks, Nathaniel P., his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Barnburners, the, 98, 99, 107.
- Bell, John, the nominee of the Constitutional Union party for the Presidency, 173, 174;
- the author’s account of his debate with Johnson, 204.
- Bentley, Rev. Charles E., the nominee for the Presidency of the “Broad-Gauge” Prohibitionists, 386;
- his popular vote, 391.
- Benton, Thomas H., at a national Whig convention in 1848, 107.
- Bidwell, John, nominated for the Presidency by the Prohibition party, 351;
- his popular vote, 259.
- Birney, James G., the candidate of the Abolition party, his first defeat for the Presidency, 65, 71, 72;
- his second defeat for the Presidency as the candidate of the Liberty party, 90, 91.
- Black, James, nominated for the Presidency by the Prohibition party in 1872, 228;
- at the Prohibition National Convention in 1888, 329.
- Blaine, James G., compared with Henry Clay, 244–246;
- at the Republican convention at Cincinnati in 1876, 247–249, 252;
- his efforts to secure the Republican nomination for the Presidency in 1880, 270, 274;
- defeated for the Presidency, 288–315;
- he favored the nominations of General Sherman and Robert T. Lincoln, 288;
- his nomination, 289;
- his popular and electoral vote, 308, 309;
- why he was defeated in New York State and lost the election, 309–312;
- how he treated the Cleveland scandal, 312;
- he declines the Presidential nomination in 1888, 315;
- his after-life, 315.
- Blair, Francis P., shelters Johnson during his incapacity after his inauguration, 204;
- nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Democrats in 1868, 216.
- Booth, Newton, receives the “Greenback” nomination for the Presidency, 257.
- Bramlette, Thomas E., his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Breckenridge, John C., defeated for the Presidency, 166–176.
- Brooks, John A., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Prohibition party, 329.
- Brown, B. Gratz, the nominee of the Liberal Republicans for the Presidency, 229–231;
- nominated for the same office by the Democrats, 238;
- his vote in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Bryan, William J., his defeat for the Presidency, 361–394;
- his nomination by the Democratic party, 371–373;
- his nomination by the People’s party, 378;
- his remarkable campaign, 390;
- his popular vote, 391;
- his electoral vote, 392;
- the remarkable political independence shown in the contest, 392–394.
- Buchanan, James, his election to the Presidency, 130–153;
- favored by the Southern Democrats, 130, 131;
- his nomination at Cincinnati, 131, 132;
- one of the most desperately fought conflicts in American politics, 145;
- his popular and electoral vote, 148;
- far-reaching effects of his quarrel with Forney, 149–151;
- his political methods compared with those of the present day, 151, 152, and note;
- his determination to end the slavery agitation, 152;
- his reputation, character, and death, 153.
- Buckner, Simon B., the nominee of the “Sound Money” Democrats for the Vice-Presidency, 383.
- Burchard, Rev. Samuel D., his effort to restore public confidence in Blaine’s integrity jeopardizes his election to the Presidency, 310–312.
- [Pg 407]Burr, Aaron, his vote for the Presidency in the second Electoral College, 6;
- his character, 9;
- his vote in the third Electoral College, 10, 11;
- his election to the Vice-Presidency, 12–20;
- his infamous attempt to defeat Jefferson in the Electoral College, 17, 18, 19.
- Butler, Benjamin F., the nominee of the Anti-Monopoly party for the Presidency, 299;
- receives the Presidential nomination of the National (“Greenback”) party, 301;
- his popular vote, 308, 309.
- Calhoun, John C., his first election to the Vice-Presidency, 39–45;
- his second election to the same office, 49–51;
- Jackson’s quarrel with, 52.
- Cameron, Donald J., at the Republican convention of 1876, 248, 249;
- the chief factor in securing the election of Hayes, 265;
- his dinner given in honor of Arthur, 287;
- his strained relations with Harrison, 337, 338;
- his defeat of the Force bill and how it affected his political fortunes, 339, 340.
- Campbell, Judge, his appointment as postmaster-general by Pierce revives Native Americanism, 128.
- Cass, Lewis, how he came to be nominated and defeated for the Presidency, 98;
- at a Whig national convention in 1848, 107;
- popular and electoral vote cast for him, 112;
- his popularity in the West, 113.
- Chamberlain, Edward M., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Labor Reform party in 1872, 227.
- Chambers, B. B., “Greenback” candidate for the Vice-Presidency, 281.
- Chase, Salmon P., his anticipated nomination for the Presidency by the Democrats, 211, 212;
- how his defeat by Tilden was avenged by Conkling, 268, 269.
- Clay, Henry, his first defeat for the Presidency, 39–45;
- his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the tenth Electoral College, 43;
- his second defeat for the Presidency, 53–57;
- his third defeat for the Presidency, 75–93;
- his reply to the address of the Kentucky electors, 92, 93;
- compared with Blaine, 244–246.
- Cleveland, Grover, his first election to the Presidency, 288–315;
- the spirited and earnest character of the campaign, 288;
- his nomination, 294;
- his popular and electoral vote, 308, 309;
- how he gained the vote of New York State, 310–312;
- Dana’s estrangement from, 312–315;
- his treatment of the Blaine scandal, 312;
- devoted to his official duties, 314;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 316–336;
- his unanimous nomination, 316;
- character of the campaign, 332;
- his popular and electoral vote, 333;
- why he lost the election, 334;
- governed by his convictions, 334;
- his social and political character outlined in the author’s intercourse with him, 335;
- his second election to the Presidency, 337–360;
- his nomination, 343–345;
- character of the campaign, 358;
- his popular and electoral vote, 359;
- his contests for the Presidency like those of Jackson, 360;
- compared with Harrison, 361;
- a review of his administration, 362–365;
- his administration condemned at the Democratic National Convention of 1896, 371, 372.
- Clinton, De Witt, defeated for the Presidency, 29–31.
- Clinton, George, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4;
- in the second, 6;
- in the third, 10, 11;
- his first election to the Vice-Presidency, 22–24;
- his defeat for the Presidency and his second election to the Vice-Presidency, 25–27;
- died in office, 28.
- Cochrane, John, nominated for Vice-President by revolting Republicans in 1864, and his withdrawal, 192.
- [Pg 408]Cockran, Bourke, his speech against the nomination of Cleveland at the Democratic National Convention of 1892, 344.
- Colfax, Schuyler, his election to the Vice-Presidency, 210–220.
- Colquitt, Alfred H., his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Conant, John A., receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the American Prohibition National party, 304.
- Conkling, Roscoe, his efforts to secure the nomination of Grant at the Republican convention of 1880, at Chicago, 270, 271, 274;
- his breach with Garfield, 284, 285;
- his strained relations with Arthur, 286;
- his retirement from politics and his death, 285, 286.
- Constitutional Union party, its convention at Baltimore in 1860, and its candidates and platform, 173, 174.
- Contested Presidential elections, and the statute relating to, 401–404.
- Cooper, Peter, receives the “Greenback” nomination for President, 257.
- Corwin, Thomas, his illustration of the Taylor-Cass campaign in a speech in Ohio, 113, 114.
- Cowdrey, Robert H., nominated for the Presidency by the United Labor party, 327.
- Cranfill, J. P., the Vice-Presidential nominee of the Prohibition party, 351.
- Crawford, William H., defeated for the Presidency, 39–45.
- Curtin, Andrew G., his visit to Johnson accompanied by the author, 205–207;
- a candidate for the nomination of Vice-President in 1868, 210;
- a cabinet position refused him by Grant, who appoints him minister to Russia, 222;
- his courage in opposing pernicious pension legislation exposes the cowardice of Congressmen, 364, 365.
- Curtis, James Langdon, nominated for the Presidency by the American party, 331.
- Dallas, George M., his election to the Vice-Presidency in 1844, 75–93.
- Dana, Charles A., the story of his bitter estrangement from Cleveland, 312–315;
- his ability and character, 313.
- Daniel, John W., elected chairman of the Democratic National Convention of 1896, 371.
- Daniel, William, the Vice-Presidential nominee of the Prohibition party in 1884, 305.
- Davis, David, works for the nomination of Lincoln, 157;
- nominated for the Presidency by the Labor Reform party, 227, 228;
- favored as the nominee of the Liberal Republicans in 1872, 229;
- his vote for President in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241;
- his declination of service on the Hayes-Tilden Electoral Commission, and its results, 264.
- Davis, Jefferson, his tribute to Lincoln, 200, 201;
- Johnson puzzled how to dispose of him, 206, 207.
- Dearborn, Henry A. S., nominated to the Vice-Presidency by the Native American party, 110.
- Depew, Chauncey M., at the Republican National Convention of 1888, 319, 320.
- Donelson, Andrew Jackson, receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the American National Council, 142.
- Dougherty, Daniel, his memorable speech before the Democratic National Convention of 1880, 278, 279.
- Douglas, Stephen A., his defeat for the Presidency, 166–176.
- Dow, Neal, the Presidential nominee of the Prohibition party in 1880, 282;
- at the Prohibition convention of 1888, 329.
- Electoral and popular votes for Presidents and Vice-Presidents, [Pg 409] with their States and parties, 395–397.
- Electoral College, vote of the first, 3, 4;
- of the second, 6;
- of the third, 10, 11;
- of the fourth, 15, 16, 18;
- of the fifth, 24;
- of the sixth, 27;
- of the seventh, 30;
- of the eighth, 34, 35;
- of the ninth, 36, 37;
- of the tenth, 43, 45;
- of the eleventh, 51;
- of the twelfth, 56, 57;
- of the thirteenth, 64;
- of the fourteenth, 73;
- of the fifteenth, 91;
- of the sixteenth, 112;
- of the seventeenth, 127;
- of the eighteenth, 148;
- of the nineteenth, 175, 176;
- of the twentieth, 193, 194;
- of the twenty-first, 217, 218;
- of the twenty-second, 241;
- of the twenty-third, 264;
- of the twenty-fourth, 283, 284;
- of the twenty-fifth, 308, 309;
- of the twenty-sixth, 333;
- of the twenty-seventh, 359;
- of the twenty-eighth, 392.
- Electors, how the functions of, were first exercised, 11, 16.
- Ellmaker, Amos, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Anti-Mason party, 53;
- his vote in the twelfth Electoral College, 56, 57.
- Ellsworth, Oliver, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- English, William H., his defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 279–284.
- Evans, Samuel, receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the Union Labor party, 325.
- Everett, Edward, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Constitutional Union party, 173.
- Federal party, the, preferred by Washington, Adams, and Hamilton, 2, 5, 7, 8;
- opposed by Jefferson, 5, 7;
- its policy, 7, 8;
- passes the Alien and Sedition laws, 12;
- its bitter opposition to Jefferson, 21, 22, 23;
- practically overthrown by the success of the war of 1812, 32;
- perishes with the election of Monroe, 39.
- Fenton, Reuben E., his reluctance to aid in the nomination of Greeley to the Presidency, 230.
- Field, James G., receives the People’s party nomination for the Vice-Presidency, 353.
- Fillmore, Millard, his election to the Vice-Presidency, 105–112;
- he succeeds to the Presidency after the death of Taylor, 116;
- he reverses the policy of the administration, 116;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 130–153.
- Fisk, Clinton B., nominated for the Presidency by the Prohibition party, 329;
- his popular vote, 333.
- Floyd, John, his defeat for the Presidency, 56, 57.
- Foote, Rev. Charles E., candidate of the Liberty League for Vice-President in 1848, 111.
- Forney, Colonel John W., obtains the consent of Grant to accept the Republican nomination to the Presidency, 203.
- Franklin, Benjamin, solicited to become the competitor of Washington, 3.
- Free-Silver party. See People’s party.
- Free-Soil Democratic party, its first convention and nominees, 107, 108;
- its platform, 108–110;
- its candidates and platform in 1852, 123–126.
- Fremont, John C., his defeat for the Presidency, 130–153;
- his nomination by the first Republican National Convention, at Philadelphia, 136–138;
- his nomination endorsed by the anti-slavery seceders from the American National Council, 143;
- visited by the author, 147;
- his nomination for President by revolting Republicans to defeat Lincoln, and his final rejection of it, 192.
- Garfield, James A., his election to the Presidency, 270–287;
- his nomination, 271–274;
- character of the campaign, 283;
- his popular and electoral vote, 283, 284;
- his character, 284;
- his disagreement [Pg 410] with Conkling, 284, 285.
- Gerry, Elbridge, his election to the Vice-Presidency, 28–31.
- Gould, Jay, what a dinner with, cost Blaine, 310.
- Graham, William A., receives the Whig nomination to the Vice-Presidency in 1852, 121.
- Granger, Francis, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 63, 64.
- Grant, General Ulysses S., his first election to the Presidency, 202–220;
- the obstacles to his nomination, 202, 203;
- his dispute with Johnson, 204;
- refuses to ride with Johnson to the inauguration ceremonies, 204;
- his nomination at Chicago, 209–211;
- his popular and electoral vote, 217, 218;
- his second election to the Presidency, 221–243;
- his unfitness for civil affairs, 221–223;
- the author’s well-intended suggestions to him, 222, 223;
- his re-election opposed by the author, 223;
- his discussion of public affairs with the author, 223–225;
- his despotic control of the party machinery, 225;
- how his name was changed, 235;
- at the grave of Greeley, 243;
- scandals which disgraced his administration, 246;
- his discussion of the question of a third term, 246;
- Conkling presents his name as a candidate for a third term of the Presidency before the Republican National Convention of 1880, 270, 271;
- his disappointment at not securing a nomination to a third term, 277.
- Greeley, Horace, denounces the leaders of the Abolition party for defeating Clay, 90;
- disgruntled at the nomination of Taylor, 105;
- finally decides to support Taylor, and is sent to Congress by the Whigs of New York, 105;
- opposes the nomination of Seward to the Presidency, 155;
- opposes the renomination of Lincoln, 183;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 221–243;
- his nomination at Cincinnati, 228–234;
- nominated by the Democrats at Baltimore, 238;
- his popular vote, 239, 240;
- his electoral vote, 241;
- cause of his defeat, 242;
- incidents of his campaign, 242, 243;
- his sad death, 240, 243.
- “Greenback” (or Independent National) party, under the leadership of George H. Pendleton, 219, 220;
- its candidates and platform in 1876, 257, 258;
- its candidates and platform in 1880, 281, 282.
- Greer, James R., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the American party, 331.
- Groesbeck, William S., his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Hale, John P., nominated for the Presidency by the Liberty party, 111;
- nominated for the Presidency by the Free-Soil Democrats, 123.
- Hamilton, Alexander, in sympathy with Washington and Adams, and opposed to Jefferson, 7, 8.
- Hamlin, Hannibal, his election to the Vice-Presidency in 1860, 154–169.
- Hancock, John, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Hancock, Winfield S., defeated for the Presidency, 278–284;
- his popular and electoral vote, 283–284.
- Hanna, Mark A., his mistake in making McKinley straddle the money question, 365, 366.
- Harper, Robert G., his first defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 34, 35;
- his second defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 36, 37.
- Harrison, Benjamin, his election to the Presidency, 316–336;
- his nomination, 319, 320;
- character of the campaign, 332;
- his popular and electoral vote, 333;
- his administration not a tranquil one, 337–340;
- defeated for the Presidency, [Pg 411]337–360;
- his nomination, 340, 341;
- character of the campaign, 358;
- his popular and electoral vote, 359.
- Harrison, Robert H., his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Harrison, William Henry, defeated for the Presidency, 59–64;
- character of the campaign, 161;
- his election to the Presidency, 65–74;
- birth of the Abolition party during the campaign, 65;
- how his nomination was secured, 67, 68;
- a national party platform presented for the first time during this election, 70;
- the campaign one of great popular interest, 71;
- his popular and electoral vote, 71, 72, 73;
- his death shortly after his inauguration, 73.
- Hayes, Rutherford B., his election to the Presidency, 244–267;
- his nomination, 249;
- his popular vote, 262;
- his election decided by the Electoral Commission appointed by Congress, 263;
- his electoral vote as determined by the Electoral Commission, 264.
- Hendricks, Thomas A., nominated for the Vice-Presidency, 253;
- his election to the Vice-Presidency, 294–309.
- Henry, John, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Hill, David B., at the Democratic National Convention of 1896, 371, 372.
- Hobart, Garret A., his election to the Vice-Presidency, 367–394;
- his electoral vote, 392.
- Houston, General Samuel, at a national Whig convention in 1848, 107.
- Howard, John Eager, his vote for Vice-President in the eighth Electoral College, 34, 35.
- Hughes, Archbishop, how Seward’s friendship for, deprived him of the nomination for the Presidency, 156.
- Hunkers, the, 98, 99.
- Huntington, Samuel, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Industrial Congress party and their candidates in 1848, 111.
- Ingersoll, Jared, Federalist nominee for Vice-President in 1804, 29;
- his electoral vote, 30.
- Ingersoll, Robert G., his speech nominating Blaine before the Republican convention of 1876, 247, 248.
- Iredell, James, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Jackson, Andrew, defeated for the Presidency, 39–45;
- though receiving the largest popular and electoral vote, 42, 43;
- his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the tenth Electoral College, 43;
- his first election to the Presidency, 47–51;
- his initiation of the spoils system, 47;
- character of his campaign and to what his popularity was due, 47–49;
- his popular and electoral vote, 50, 51;
- his second election to the Presidency, 51–58;
- confused condition of politics during his second campaign, 51, 52;
- his popular and electoral vote, 55, 56, 57;
- his after-life and death, 58.
- Jay, John, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4;
- in the third, 10, 11;
- in the fourth, 15, 16.
- Jefferson, Thomas, his vote for the Presidency in the second Electoral College, 6;
- his election to the Vice-Presidency, 7–11;
- his election to the Presidency defeated by the influence of Washington, 9;
- defamatory character of the campaign, 9;
- his first election to the Presidency, 12–16;
- the revolutionary character of the campaign, 12, 13;
- his vote in the fourth Electoral College, 15, 16, 18;
- Burr’s infamous attempt to deprive him of his election, [Pg 412] 17, 18, 19;
- his honorable refusal to effect his election by making a deal with the Federalists, 17, 18;
- his opposition to pomp and ceremony, 20;
- his second election to the Presidency, 21–24;
- bitterly opposed by the Federalists, 21;
- his purchase of Louisiana, 22;
- his popular vote, 23;
- his vote in the fifth Electoral College, 24;
- his after-life and death, 20.
- Jenkins, Charles J., his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Johnson, Andrew, his election to the Vice-Presidency desired by Lincoln, 185, 186;
- responsible for the nomination of Grant by the Republicans, 203;
- intoxicated at his inauguration into office, 203, 205;
- his erratic conduct as President, 204, 205, 207, 218, 219;
- the author’s opinion of him, 204, 205;
- visited by Governor Curtin accompanied by the author, 205–207;
- his uncertainty regarding the cases of Wurz and Jefferson Davis, 206, 207.
- Johnson, Hale, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the “Narrow-Gauge” Prohibition Party, 386.
- Johnson, Herschel V., nominated for the Vice-Presidency, 170.
- Johnson, Richard M., elected to the Vice-Presidency, 59–64;
- defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 69, 73.
- Johnston, Samuel, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Judd, Norman B., works for Lincoln’s nomination, 157.
- Julian, George W., nominated by the Free-Soil Democrats for the Vice-Presidency, 123;
- his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- King, Leicester, nominated as Vice-President by the Liberty party, 111.
- King, Rufus, his first defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 23, 24;
- his second defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 26, 27;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 34, 35.
- King, William R., his election to the Vice-Presidency in 1852, 115–129.
- Kirkpatrick, Donald, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the American National party, 260.
- Labor Reform party, their platform of 1872, 225–227;
- their candidates, 227, 228.
- Langdon, John, his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the sixth Electoral College, 27.
- Lee, Henry, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 56, 57.
- Lemoyne, Francis G., receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the Abolition party, 65.
- Levering, Joshua, nominated for the Presidency by the “Narrow-Gauge” Prohibition party, 386;
- his popular vote, 391.
- Liberal Republican party, its organization and character, 228, 229;
- its platform, 231–234.
- Liberty (or Birney) party, 91;
- its candidates in 1847, 111.
- See Abolition party.
- Lincoln, Abraham, his first election to the Presidency, 154–182;
- the story of his nomination, 154–162;
- the character of the campaign, 174–175;
- his popular and electoral vote, 175, 176;
- the revolutionary character of his election, 176, 177;
- an interesting episode of the campaign, 177;
- the author’s correspondence with, destroyed by fire, 177, 178;
- a practical politician, 178;
- the grandeur of his character, 178, 180;
- his midnight journey from Harrisburg to Washington, 180–182;
- his second election to the Presidency, 183–196;
- he concedes the election of General McClellan, 183;
- his strength with the people rather than with the leaders, 183;
- his anxiety regarding his renomination, 184;
- his unreasonable [Pg 413] request, 184, 185;
- he seeks the nomination of Andrew Johnson for Vice-President rather than that of Hamlin, and his reason for the preference, 185, 186;
- his unanimous renomination at Baltimore, 186;
- an attempt to create a revolt against him in the Republican party, 191–193;
- his election made certain by the victories of Sherman and Sheridan, 193;
- his popular and electoral vote, 194;
- vote of the soldiers, 194;
- his friends’ efforts to win Pennsylvania, 195;
- and how the State was carried, 196, 197;
- he favored compensated emancipation, 197, 198;
- his character and traits, 198, 199;
- the unpardonable assaults upon his reputation, 199;
- his home life, 199, 200;
- a tribute from Jefferson Davis, 200, 201;
- he suspects that Grant favored the election of McClellan, 224.
- Lincoln, Benjamin, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Lincoln, Robert T., suggested for the Republican nomination for Vice-President, 288, 289.
- McClellan, General George B., defeated for the Presidency, 183–294.
- McGlynn, Rev. Edward, prepares the platform of the United Labor party, 327–329.
- Machen, Willis B., his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241.
- Machett, Charles H., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Socialists’ Labor party, 357;
- nominated for the Presidency by the same party, 388;
- his popular vote, 391.
- Mackey, Robert W., how he thwarted the Democrats in holding Florida for Tilden, 265.
- McKinley, William, the disastrous effect of his tariff bill, 340;
- president of the Republican National Convention of 1892, 340;
- his election to the Presidency, 361–394;
- his nomination, 365;
- his straddle of the money issue, 365, 366;
- his popular vote, 391;
- his electoral vote, 392;
- the lesson of the campaign, 392–394.
- McLean, John R., at the Democratic National Convention of 1896, 373.
- Macon, Nathaniel, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 43.
- Madison, James, his first almost unanimous election to the Presidency, 25–27;
- his vote in the sixth Electoral College, 27;
- his second election to the Presidency, 28–31;
- his nomination depended upon his vigorous war policy with England, 28;
- his vote in the seventh Electoral College, 30, 31.
- Maguire, Matthew, the nominee of the Socialists’ Labor party for Vice-President, 388.
- Mangum, Willie P., defeated for the Presidency, 59–64.
- Manning, Daniel, secures the first nomination of Cleveland to the Presidency, 293, 294.
- Marshall, John, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 34, 35.
- Medill, Colonel Joseph, leads the fight for Lincoln in Republican National Convention of 1860, 157.
- Milton, John, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Monroe, James, his vote for the Vice-Presidency in the sixth Electoral College, 27;
- his first election to the Presidency, 32–35;
- his animated canvass for the nomination, 33;
- Federalists make little or no opposition, 34;
- his vote in the eighth Electoral College, 34, 35;
- his second election to the Presidency, 35, 38;
- his election unanimous, no formal nominations being made by any party, 35, 36;
- the vote of the ninth Electoral College, 36–37;
- his peaceful reign, after-life, and death, 32, 38.
- [Pg 414]Morton, Levi P., his election to the Vice-Presidency, 320–326.
- National Democratic (“Sound Money”) party, its candidates and platform in 1896, 382–385.
- National (“Greenback”) party, its candidates and platform in 1884, 301–304.
- Native American (or “Know-Nothing”) party, birth of, 110, 111;
- its first convention and candidates, 110;
- its nomination of General Taylor, 103;
- its evolution into the American National Council, which meets at Philadelphia in 1856 and nominates Millard Fillmore for President and Andrew Jackson Donelson for Vice-President, 140–142;
- its platform, 142, 143;
- its disappearance, 174.
- O’Conor, Charles, nominated for the Presidency by Democratic dissenters in 1872, 238;
- he declines the nomination, 238.
- Palmer, John M., his vote for the Presidency in the twenty-second Electoral College, 241;
- the nominee for the Presidency by the “Sound Money” Democrats, 383;
- his popular vote, 391.
- Parker, Joel, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Labor Reformers, 227, 228.
- Pendleton, George H., nominated for the Vice-Presidency, 190;
- leads the “Greenback” party, and looks for the Democratic nomination to the Presidency, 219.
- People’s party, its candidates and platform in 1892, 353–357;
- its candidates and platform in 1896, 377–382.
- Phelps, John W., nominated for President by the American party, 283.
- Pierce, Franklin, his election to the Presidency, 115–129;
- his nomination at Baltimore, 117, 118;
- the Democrats enthusiastic in his support, 119, 120;
- his popular and electoral vote, 127;
- his wanton reopening of the slavery issue, 127, 128;
- his appointment of Judge Campbell to his cabinet excites the Native Americans, 128;
- his failure to secure a renomination, 129.
- Pinckney, Charles C., his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11;
- in the fourth, 15, 16;
- his first defeat for the Presidency, 23, 24;
- his second defeat for the Presidency, 26, 27.
- Pinckney, Thomas, his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Platt, Thomas C., backs his colleague in his disagreement with Garfield, 285.
- Polk, James K., defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 73;
- his election to the Presidency, 75–93;
- his nomination at Baltimore, 79, 82;
- his party’s platform, 82, 83;
- his popular and electoral vote, 91;
- incidents of the campaign, 91–93.
- Pomeroy, Samuel C., the nominee of the American party for the Vice-Presidency, 283;
- receives the Presidential nomination of the American Prohibition National party, 304.
- Popular vote, the, in early national contests had no particular significance, 10.
- Populists. See People’s party.
- Presidential elections, contested, the law regulating, 401–404.
- Presidents and Vice-Presidents of the United States, with many facts concerning their elections and tenure of office, 397–399;
- the law regulating the Presidential succession, 399, 400.
- Prohibition party, holds a national convention in 1872 and nominates candidates for President and Vice-President, 228;
- its candidates and platform in 1876, 258–260;
- its candidates and platform in 1880, 282;
- its candidates and platform in 1884, 305–308;
- its [Pg 415] candidates and platform in 1888, 329, 330;
- its candidates and platform in 1892, 350–353;
- its candidates and platform in 1896, 385, 386;
- the “Broad-Gaugers” withdraw from, 386.
- Prohibition (“Broad-Gauge”) party, its candidates and platform in 1896, 386–388.
- Quay, Matthew S., not in touch with Harrison, 337.
- Reed, Thomas B., in the Republican National Convention of 1896, 365.
- Reid, Whitelaw, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 341–360.
- Republican (Democratic) party, its birth and growth during Washington’s administration, 3, 7;
- opposes the passage of the Alien and Sedition laws, 12, 13;
- its sixty years’ dominance initiated by the election of Jefferson, 21;
- divides into National Republicans and Democratic Republicans, 53;
- changes its name to the “Democratic party” during Jackson’s second administration, 52, 53;
- Jackson’s mastery of, 60;
- the first party to present a national party platform, 70;
- its platform in 1844, 82, 83;
- its platform in 1848, 100–102;
- its platform in 1852, 118, 119;
- demoralized by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, 127, 128, 130;
- its platform in 1856, 132–135;
- a split in the convention at Charleston in 1860 results in the nomination of two tickets and the adoption of two platforms, 166–173;
- its platform in 1864, 190, 191;
- its hopeless condition at the close of the Rebellion, 203;
- how it failed to secure the leadership of Grant, 203;
- its platform in 1868, 212–215;
- its platform in 1872, 237, 238;
- after its nomination of Greeley dissenters hold a convention and make nominations, which are declined, 238;
- platform of Democratic dissenters in 1872, 238, 239;
- the party platform in 1876, 254–257;
- its platform in 1880, 279–281;
- its platform in 1884, 294–299;
- its platform in 1888, 316–319;
- its platform in 1892, 345–350;
- its platform in 1896, 373–377.
- Republican party, its forty years’ dominance, 21;
- its birth in 1854, in New York, 136;
- its entrance into national politics in 1856, 130, 136–138;
- its first platform, 139, 140;
- its affiliations with the “Know-Nothing” party, 156;
- its convention at Chicago in 1860 the ablest that had ever met up to that time, 163, 164;
- its platform in 1860, 164–166;
- its platform in 1864, 187, 188;
- why Grant, a pro-slavery Democrat, became its candidate, 203;
- its platform in 1868, 208, 209;
- its platform in 1872, 235–237;
- its platform in 1876, 249–252;
- its subversion of the popular will in making Hayes President, 264–268;
- its platform in 1880, 274–277;
- its platform in 1884, 290–292;
- its platform in 1888, 320–325;
- its platform in 1892, 341–343;
- its platform in 1896, 367–371.
- Rodney, Daniel, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 36, 37.
- Ross, James, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 34, 35.
- Rush, Richard, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 36, 37;
- his second defeat for the same office, 51.
- Russell, John, nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Prohibition party, 228.
- Rutledge, John, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- St. John, John P., receives the Presidential nomination of the Prohibition party, 305;
- his popular vote, 308, 309;
- at the National Prohibition Convention in 1888, 329;
- at that of 1892, 350.
- Sanford, Nathan, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 43.
- [Pg 416]Scott, General Winfield, regarded as the first soldier of the Republic, 66;
- his fondness for writing letters loses him the Presidential nomination, 68;
- his invasion of Mexico, 95, 96;
- defeated for the Presidency, 115–129;
- his nomination at Baltimore, 120, 121.
- Sergeant, John, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 53, 56, 57.
- Sewall, Arthur, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 373–394;
- his electoral vote, 392.
- Seward, William H., his ability and character, and how he failed to be nominated for the Presidency, 154–162.
- Seymour, Horatio, defeated for the Presidency, 202–220;
- his nomination at New York, 211–216;
- his popular and electoral vote, 217, 218.
- Sherman, John, a candidate for the Republican nomination of President in 1880, 288, 289.
- Smith, Gerrit, nominated in 1848 for the Presidency by the Liberty League party and the Industrial Congress party, 111.
- Smith, Greene Clay, is nominated for the Presidency by the Prohibitionists, 258.
- Smith, William, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 51;
- again defeated for the same office, 63, 64.
- Socialists’ Labor party, its candidates and platform in 1892, 357, 358;
- its candidates and platform in 1896, 388–390.
- Southgate, James A., the Vice-Presidential nominee of the “Broad-Gauge” Prohibition party, 386.
- Stevens, Thaddeus, how he carried the Whig convention for Harrison, 68.
- Stevenson, Adlai E., his election to the Vice-Presidency, 345–360.
- Stewart, G. T., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Prohibitionists, 258.
- Stockton, Richard, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 36, 37.
- Streeter, Alson J., receives the Presidential nomination of the Union Labor party, 325;
- his popular vote, 333.
- Swett, Leonard, Lincoln’s closest friend, works for his nomination, 157.
- Tammany Hall, its opposition to Tilden causes its rejection from the Democratic National Convention of 1880, 278;
- its attempt to control the Democratic National Convention in 1884, 292, 293;
- its delegates oppose the unanimous nomination of Cleveland, but welcome that of Hendricks with the heartiest cheers, 294;
- and the Sun, its organ, defeated Cleveland for the Presidency in 1888, 315, 335, 336;
- its protest ignored in the national convention of 1892, 344.
- Taylor, Zachary, his election to the Presidency, 94, 114;
- his campaign in Mexico, 95;
- his vote in the convention, 104;
- sends the letter notifying him of his nomination to the dead-letter office, 106;
- episodes of the nominating convention, 107;
- birth of the Native American party during this campaign, 110;
- his popular and electoral vote, 112;
- how Corwin helped him, 113, 114;
- his cabinet and its policy, 115;
- his death, 116.
- Tazewell, L. W., his vote in the fourteenth Electoral College for Vice-President, 73.
- Telfair, Edward, his vote for the Presidency in the first Electoral College, 3, 4.
- Texas, the question of its annexation, 94, 95.
- Thompson, A. M., nominated for the Vice-Presidency by the Prohibition party, 282.
- Thurman, Allen G., a candidate for the Presidential nomination of the Anti-Monopoly party, 299;
- his defeat for the Vice-Presidency, 316–336.
- Tilden, Samuel J., how Grant would have enforced the decision of the Electoral Commission in [Pg 417] the case of his disputed election, 223;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 244–267;
- his character and reputation, 252;
- earnestness of the campaign, 261;
- his popular vote, 262;
- Congress creates the Electoral Commission to decide the election of, 263;
- his electoral vote, as determined by the Electoral Commission, 264;
- his weakness in protecting his own interests, 265, 266;
- his defeat attributed to Conkling, who gratified a grudge caused by Tilden’s defeat of Chase for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency in 1868, 268, 269;
- his nomination opposed by Tammany Hall in the Democratic National Convention of 1880, 278.
- Tompkins, Daniel D., his first election to the Vice-Presidency, 34, 35;
- his second election to the Vice-Presidency, 35, 37.
- Tyler, John, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 63, 64;
- his election to the Vice-Presidency, 65–74;
- succeeds to the Presidency on the death of Harrison, 74;
- his wrecking of the Whig party, 75–77;
- his life after his retirement, 77;
- approves the bill annexing Texas a few days before the inauguration of Polk, 94.
- Union Labor party, its candidates and platform in 1888, 325–327.
- United Labor party, its candidates and platform in 1888, 327–329;
- its candidates and platform in 1896, 388–390.
- Vallandigham, Clement L., foremost in organizing the Liberal Republican party, 229.
- Van Buren, Martin, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 43;
- his election to the Vice-Presidency, 56, 57;
- his election to the Presidency, 59–64;
- and the birth of the Whig party, 59;
- his nomination dictated by Jackson, 60;
- the campaign one of intense bitterness, 61, 62;
- his popular and electoral vote, 62, 63, 64;
- defeated for the Presidency, 65–74;
- causes of his unpopularity, 68, 69;
- his defeat for the Presidency, 94–114.
- Wade, Benjamin F., a candidate for the nomination of Vice-President, an example of the swift mutations in American politics, 210, 211.
- Waitt, William S., nominated in 1848 for the Vice-Presidency by the Industrial Congress party, 111.
- Wakefield, W. H. T., receives the Vice-Presidential nomination of the United Labor party, 327.
- Walker, James B., nominated for the Presidency by the American National party, 260.
- Washington, George, his first election to the Presidency, 1–4;
- he received no formal nomination, 2;
- a pronounced Federalist, 2;
- opposition to his election, 2, 3;
- vote of the first Electoral College, 3, 4;
- his second election to the Presidency, 4–6;
- vote of the second Electoral College, 5, 6;
- regarded as the richest man in the country, 7;
- his vote for the Presidency in the third Electoral College, 10, 11.
- Watson, Thomas E., the nominee of the People’s party for the Vice-Presidency, 378;
- his popular and electoral vote, 391, 392.
- Weaver, James B., “Greenback” candidate for the Presidency, 281;
- receives the People’s party nomination for the Presidency, 353;
- his popular and electoral vote, 359.
- Webster, Daniel, defeated for the Presidency, 59–64.
- Weed, Thurlow, leads the fight for Seward in the Republican National Convention of 1860, 157;
- disappointed at Lincoln’s nomination, he refuses to name a candidate for the Vice-Presidency, 162.
- West, A. M., receives the Vice-Presidential [Pg 418] nomination of the National (“Greenback”) party, 301.
- Wheeler, William A., his election to the Vice-Presidency, 249–269.
- Whig party, birth of, 59;
- wreck of, by Tyler, 75–77;
- its nomination of Clay, 89, 90;
- its platform for 1844, 84;
- its lack of harmony in campaign of 1848, 103–106;
- its platform in the campaign of 1852, 121–123;
- makes its final battle, 128;
- in 1856 nominates the candidates of the American National Union, 143;
- its platform, 143–145.
- White, Hugh L., defeated for the Presidency, 63, 64.
- Whitney, William C., whose leadership secured the third Presidential nomination of Cleveland in 1898, 344.
- “Wide-Awakes,” the, description of, 174, 175.
- Wilkins, William, defeated for the Vice-Presidency, 56, 57.
- Wilson, Henry, his nomination for the Vice-Presidency, 235, 241;
- how his name was changed, 235.
- Wing, Simon, nominated for the Presidency by the Socialists’ Labor party, 357;
- his popular vote, 359.
- Wirt, William, the nominee for President of the Anti-Mason party, 53;
- his vote in the twelfth Electoral College, 56, 57.

THE END

[Pg 419]

BISMARCK’S AUTOBIOGRAPHY

BISMARCK, The Man and the Statesman: Being the Reflections and Reminiscences of Otto, Prince von Bismarck, Written and Dictated by Himself after his Retirement from Office. Translated from the German under the Supervision of A. J. Butler, late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Two Vols. With Two Photogravure Portraits. 8vo, Cloth, Ornamental, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $7 50.

In his reflections and reminiscences, Prince Bismarck presents himself in the more familiar garb of polite society, with the polished manner of a man of the world, keeping his tongue under control, a great and commanding figure, self-centred and self-restrained, a courtier and a statesman, filling not unworthily with his gigantic personality the world-stage on which he moved.—London Times.

The book is remarkably full as regards internal affairs and especially as regards the influences which prevailed at the Berlin court, as to the characters both of the kings of Prussia and the other men with whom Bismarck was brought in contact, and it contains a minute criticism on the workings of the Prussian and German Constitutions.—London Daily Chronicle.

This is a great work, one of the most important produced in modern times. It is a work gloriously full of great lights, and carries the study of the founding and founded empire and its inner motives on through the Culturkampf down to the last days of the lamented Frederick I.—Independent, N. Y.

HARPER & BROTHERS, Publishers
NEW YORK AND LONDON

The above work will be sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, Canada, or Mexico, on receipt of the price.

[Pg 420]

By G. W. E. RUSSELL

COLLECTIONS AND RECOLLECTIONS. By One Who Has Kept a Diary. With One Illustration. Crown 8vo, Cloth, Ornamental, Deckel Edges and Gilt Top, $2 50.

It does not often happen that a volume of reminiscences presents so much interesting and attractive matter.... It is difficult to lay aside a book which contains so much of the salt which seasons life. Such a volume is a never-failing resource for the reader wearied of overmuch feeding on the solid viands of literature. Especially commendable is the spirit of kindness which pervades the narratives. There are no flings at living pygmies or dead lions.—Brooklyn Eagle.

THE RIGHT HONORABLE WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE. (Queen’s Prime-Ministers.) Portrait. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $1 00.

Mr. George W. E. Russell, who writes this book, has done a difficult task well. The personal biography is necessarily brief, because the plan of the book calls for a political biography, and because Gladstone entered public life at twenty-two, and has lived and breathed the air of Parliament ever since. Yet it would not be possible to measure his public career justly without that knowledge of his personality and his ingrained tastes. Mr. Russell has provided the needful information in a succinct form, and his final chapter, in which he analyzes Mr. Gladstone’s character, is eloquent in its restraint and vigor of touch.—Atlantic Monthly.

HARPER & BROTHERS, Publishers
NEW YORK AND LONDON

Either of the above works will be sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, Canada, or Mexico, on receipt of the price.

## Footnotes

[1] Imperfect returns at Harrisburg show 5930 votes cast in Pennsylvania for Washington in 1789 and 4576 in 1792.

[2] The popular vote, as imperfectly preserved at Harrisburg, gives Adams 11,552 and Jefferson 8373, but as 14 of the 15 electors voted for Jefferson the vote of record is incomplete and misleading.

[3] One Maryland elector did not attend.

[4] One Kentucky elector did not attend. The State was entitled to 8 votes.

[5] One elector in each of the States of Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and Tennessee died after appointment, and before the meetings of the electors.

[6] By districts.

[7] By Legislature.

[8] Chosen by districts.

[9] By Legislature.

[10] Chosen by the Legislature.

[11] Chosen by Legislature.

[12] Chosen by Legislature.

[13] By Legislature.

[14] Chosen by Legislature.

[15] Chosen by Legislature.

[16] Private and Confidential.

Wheatland, near Lancaster, 12 Dec., 1851.

My dear Sir: A friend from Cumberland County, who has recently been in Perry, expresses much doubt about your county and says that unless strong efforts shall be made, it will go for Cass. I understand you elect by county meeting; and this mode is not a fair method of ascertaining public opinion throughout a large county. What can be done? My enemies perceiving that my prospects are daily becoming brighter and brighter throughout the Union are now intent upon producing such an appearance of division at home as they imagine may deter other States from voting for my nomination. In this point of view it is important I should carry Perry, if this can be done by fair and honorable means. Cass, their apparent but not their real candidate, can now make no show; but they will go for any candidate against myself. Pennsylvania has now for the first time in her history an opportunity of furnishing the candidate, should she think proper to exert her power with a reasonable degree of unanimity. I intend to write to my friends Black and Steward; but my main reliance is on yourself. General Fetter and Judge Junkin were formerly my warm friends—whether they are so now or not I do not know. Are A. B. Anderson and young McIntire my friends? I think you once told me they were. I am informed that young Miller is my bitter foe.

Could you make a trip over the county and ascertain the state of public opinion? I should esteem it a very great favor if you would; and in that event, I should insist that you shall not spend your own money in supporting me. This would be both unreasonable and unjust. If you could pass a few days in this manner, you would confer a favor upon me which I trust I may some day be able to repay. But you must not go at all unless at my expense. Your services will place me under obligations which I shall never forget without expending your own money for my benefit.

If you should ascertain that the county is against me and cannot be carried, as the Perry Democrat indicates, then it would be useless to make the effort. If it can be carried, then we must go to work and have the proper concert of action to bring my friends to the county meeting.

Will you let me hear from you soon on this subject, and believe me ever to be sincerely and gratefully your friend,

James Buchanan.

Hon. George Blattenberger.

P.S.—Jos. Bailey, who is a strange, capricious man, is now against me, though in 1843 he was one of my warmest friends and supporters, as you will perceive by the address which I send you. What have I done since?

[17] Chosen by Legislature.

[18] Fusion electoral tickets.

[19] Nevada chose three electors, one of whom died before election.

[20] Did not vote.

[21] Chosen by Legislature.

[22] “Custom house” count. The total vote of the country, as given above, includes these returns.

[23] Count by the Warmouth returning board. If these returns should be substituted for the others, the total vote of the country would be: for Grant, 3,585,444; Greeley, 2,843,563.

[24] Rejected by Congress.

[25] Republican count.

[26] Democratic count.

[27] By Legislature.

[28] Votes for a fusion electoral ticket, made up of three Democrats and four Greenbackers. A “straight” Greenback ticket was also voted for.

[29] Two Democratic tickets were voted for in Virginia. The regular ticket received 96,912, and was successful; the “Readjusters” polled 31,674 votes.

[30] Two Republican tickets were voted for.

[31] Bryan and Watson’s vote is included in the vote for W. J. Bryan.

[32] The candidates starred were elected, (a) The first Republican Party is claimed by the present Democratic Party as its progenitor. (b) No candidate having a majority of the electoral vote, the House of Representatives elected Adams, (c) Candidates of the Anti-Masonic Party. (d) There being no choice, the Senate elected Johnson. (e) Eleven Southern States, being within the belligerent territory, did not vote. (f) Three Southern States disfranchised. (g) Horace Greeley died after election, and Democratic electors scattered their vote, (h) There being a dispute over the electoral votes of Florida, Louisiana, Oregon, and South Carolina, they were referred by Congress to an electoral commission composed of eight Republicans and seven Democrats, which, by a strict party vote, awarded 185 electoral votes to Hayes and 184 to Tilden. (i) Free Democrat. (j) Free-Silver Prohibition Party, (k) In Massachusetts. There was also a Native American ticket in that State, which received 184 votes.

## Transcriber’s Note

Some inconsistencies in spelling, hyphenation, and punctuation have been retained.

- p. 56: changed “Charlotteville” to “Charlottesville” (in June, in Charlottesville)
- p. 104: a closing quote-mark with no accompanying opening mark was left as-printed, because no reliable source was found to identify where the quote begins. (... opposition to Executive usurpation.”)
- p. 107: changed “portrayng” to “portraying” (portraying all the strength)
- p. 109: changed “responsibilty” to “responsibility” (responsibility for the existence)
- p. 157: changed “Commitee” to “Committee” (of the National Committee)
- p. 168: changed ballot 55 (which was misprinted as “45”)
- p. 212: changed “conventon” to “convention” (action of the convention)
- p. 216: changed “enthusiam” to “enthusiasm” (continued amid great enthusiasm)
- p. 229: changed “Vallandingham” to “Vallandigham” (Mr. Vallandigham)
- p. 288: changed “nomition” to “nomination” (The nomination came to him)
- p. 290: changed “aways” to “always” (We have always recommended)
- p. 329: changed “spirt” to “spirit” (the spirit of fraternity)
- p. 349: changed “denfinite” to “definite” (extended for a definite plan)
- p. 398: changed Thomas Jefferson’s residence to “Va.” (printed as “a.”)
- p. 406: changed “Bently” to “Bentley” (Bentley, Rev. Charles E.)
- p. 413: an index entry with a possibly too-broad page range was left as-printed (McClellan, General George B., defeated for the Presidency, 183–294.)
- p. 414: changed “nominaiton” to “nomination” (his [Polk’s] nomination at Baltimore)
- p. 416: changed “Tellfair” to “Telfair” (Telfair, Edward)