Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030463933 Cornell University Library JK611 .H66 A history of the President's cabinet olin 3 1924 030 463 933 The University of Michigan Historical Studies Published under the direction of the Department of History A HISTORY OF THE PRESIDENT'S CABINET A HISTORY OF THE PRESIDENT'S CABINET BY MARY L. HINSDALE, Ph.D. A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND THE ARTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, 1911 -0 Ann Arbor, Michigan George Wahr 1911 COPYRIGHT, 1911 I BY MARY L. HINSDALE COMPOSED AND PRINTED BY THE LORD BALTIMORE PRESS BALTIMORE l MD. : U.S.A. To My Mother. PREFACE. It was upon advice with the late Professor B. A. Hinsdale that the author selected The American Cabinet for the subject of an academic investigation. But the assistance that was to come from one who was both historical scholar and father was soon taken away. The prosecution of the work has been several times postponed. But the period of delay has been one of phenomenal activity among librarians and editors in the field of Americana. And the slow com- pletion has perhaps been justified by the use of larger stores of critical biographies and private papers. The latter kind of material is specially important to the subject; and it is one that, at the best, lags a generation behind current events. The investigation has been carried on partly as a seminary study at Radcliffe College, and partly by independent research at various libraries. Acknowledgments for many privileges and personal cour- tesies are due to the gentlemen in authority at the Library of the New England Historic Genealogical Society, the Library of the His- torical Society of Pennsylvania, Lenox Library, the Library of the University of Michigan, the Library of Harvard University, and the Division of Manuscripts of the Library of Congress. For informa- tion about the inside operations of the Executive, cordial thanks are paid to Mr. Gaillard Hunt, formerly of the Bureau of Citizenship in the Department of State, and to Hon. James Rudolph Garfield, ex-Secretary of the Interior. Valuable academic assistance was re- ceived from Professor Andrew C. McLaughlin, both at the Univer- sity of Michigan and the Carnegie Institution. The highest tribute of gratitude is reserved for Professor Albert Bushnell Hart, one of the most inspiring of instructors. It is through the generosity of the Hon. Wm. L. Clements, regent of the University of Michigan, that the publication of this work has been made possible. Mary Louise Hinsdale. CONTENTS. CHAPTER. PAGE. Preface vii "IThe Origin of the Cabinet I Washington 17 John Adams 29 'Jefferson 39 Madison 49 Monroe 63 John Quincy Adams 71 Jackson 79 Van Buren 97 William Henry Harrison 103 Tyler 109 Polk 125 Taylor 137 Fillmore 145 Pdxrce 151 Buchanan 159 Lincoln 169 Johnson 189 Grant 205 Hayes 219 Garfield 229 Arthur / 239 Cleveland 24s Benjamin Harrison 251 Cleveland 257 McKinley 261 Roosevelt 267 Taft 277 The Principles of Cabinet Making 283 The Cabinet and Congress 301 The Cabinet and the President 313 THE ORIGIN OF THE CABINET. .•The use of the term Cabinet to denote a purely American institu- '"'rion is one of the misfortunes of political science. The Government of the United States drew upon the English nomenclature compara- tively little. But this conspicuous instance has sufficed to make the English Ministry an almost inevitable point of departure for analyz- ing the functions of the President and his advisers. Writers have a fashion of seeking for resemblances that do not exist. And then they resort to negative and consequently disparaging definitions. The present study will try to determine what the American Cabinet is by bringing together the important facts of its own history, and attempting very little reference to English or Continental models. • We cannot ignore, however, the general background supplied by the political heritage that a group of English Colonies brought to the Government into which they entered as independent States. The Colonial charters were wont to provide for Governors and Councils, or Governors and Assistants ; wherein the Privy Council appears in American Government from its beginnings. In the mingling of executive and legislative functions, these associates of the Governor combined, as a rule, the two characters of Council and Upper House. The ordinary Colonial Executive, therefore, was as though the 'President of the United States should sit in consultation with the Senate, except for the size of the latter body. These Privy Councils of the original Governments survived the transition from Colony to State, though in various forms and under differing styles. The transitional Constitutions, laying hold of a different classification of governmental organs and functions, than had prevailed before, introduced the separation of Executive, Leg- islature and Judiciary. But this was not carried out so consistently as to break up all personal connection between Senates and Councils. On this point, a very few Constitutions retained the old arrangement, or modified it by providing for a smaller Council composed, of specially chosen members of the Legislature ; others were silent about 2 The President's Cabinet. the matter; while a substantial group definitely stipulated that a member of the Council should not at the same time be a member of the Legislature. These Councils in the early States had no ex- officio connection with the administrative offices. Neither was their appointment by the Governor the vogue. The root of the American Cabinet that is found in the Executive! Departments naturally put forth its first substantial growth in Ameri- \ can soil during the Revolutionary period. 1 A General Post Office had been established among the Colonies ; but the Departments of War, Finance, and Foreign Affairs grew out of the exigencies of the strug- gle for independence. These establishments passed through the three forms of Committees of the Continental Congress, sometimes draw- ing members from outside, Boards, and finally, Departments with single Heads. This was a time when French examples were engag- ing the attention of some American publicists. And, when single Department Heads were agitated as the corrective for the divided responsibility and shifting membership of the Boards, the new feat- ure was, to some extent, the substitution of French for English practice. Thus Alexander Hamilton wrote, in 1780: "Congress should instantly appoint the following great officers of State, a Secre- tary for Foreign Affairs, a President of War, a President of Marine, a Financier, a President of Trade. These officers should have nearly the same powers and functions as those in France analogous to themj. and each should be chief in his own department; with subordinate! boards composed of assistants, clerks, etc., to execute his orders."*' Acting upon suggestions of the kind, Congress created the office of Secretary of Foreign Affairs, by a resolution passed January 10, 1781J And, in like manner, it provided, on February 7, for a Superintended of Finance, a Secretary of War, and a Secretary of Marine. The designation, Superintendent of Finance, was an appropriation of I French title of office, defunct at the time." The Departments were not more vigorous than other branches 01 j 1 Jameson, Essays in the Constitutional History of the United States: J. C. Guggenheimer, The Development of the Executive Departments, 148-165! -Works of Hamilton, (J. C. Hamilton ed.) 1, 158-159, Hamilton to Jaines| Duane. Also contemporary letters to Robert Morris and Isaac Sears. "American Historical Review, X, 565: Henry Barrett Learned, Origin Title Superintendent of Finance. The Origin of the Cabinet. 3 the General Government during the period of the Confederation. A year elapsed before the Board of War gave way to a single head. Then, General Benjamin Lincoln served as Secretary two years, a chief clerk supplied a year's vacancy, and finally, General Henry Knox assumed the office. The Department of Finance reverted to a Board of Treasury, when Robert Morris was no longer available for superintendent. The Marine Office had no separate existence, being handed over to the Superintendent of Finance. The Depart- ment of Foreign Affairs was more steadily maintained than the others ; it had for incumbents two such prominent men as Robert R. Livingston and John Jay. These early Department Heads were the appointees of the Congress. They were also the agents of that body ; and enjoyed the privilege of personal intercourse with it, with- out being members. They never constituted a great Executive Committee or college. However, the ex-officio relation of the great administrative officers to councils of state, and even ministries, was already a matter of conscious practice in the English and some Continental Governments, having its beginnings, so far as the Mother Country was concerned back of the founding of the Colonies. And the plan was not likely to be ignored by the f ramers of the Constitution of the United States. The Federal Convention had the question of a Privy Council before it in several forms. About June 4, in a discussion in which James Wilson and Roger Sherman were the principals, the subject came up, as a part of the question of a single or plural Executive.* Wilson ob- served that all of the thirteen States, though they agreed in scarcely anything else, placed a single magistrate at the head of the Govern- ment. Sherman interposed to the effect that in all of the States there was a council of advice without which the chief magistrate could not act, and that this would seem to be a necessity, in order to make the new arrangement acceptable to the people. " Even in Great Britain," he said, " the King has a Council, and, though he appoints it himself, its advice has its weight with him, and attracts the confidence of the people." The question was then put to Wilson, whether he intended to include a Council, to which he replied that he did not, because such a body served more often to cover than to prevent malpractices. 4 Elliot's Debates, ed. 1845. I. ISC ISI- 4 The President's Cabinet. Much later in the deliberations, the subject came up for fuller dis- cussion. August 1 8 ' Oliver Ellsworth remarked that a council had not yet been provided for the President, and that it ought to be done. In his opinion, such a body should be made up of the President of the Senate, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Ministers for the Departments of Foreign and Domestic Affairs, War, Finance, and Marine, as such might be established, and it should advise, but not conclude the President. Charles Pinckney threw out the sugges- tion that the President should be authorized to call for advice or not, as he might choose ; since, if he were given an able council, he would be thwarted by it, and, if he had a weak one, he would use it to shelter himself. Two days later, Gouverneur Morris, seconded by Charles Pinck- ney, introduced resolutions upon which definite action was taken." ' There should be a Council of State ; its membership should consist of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Heads of Depart- ments or Secretaries, of which there should be five, to be appointed by the President and to hold office during his pleasure. The Presi- dent should be authorized to submit any matter to the Council for j discussion, and to require the written opinion of any one or more of its members. But he should be expected in all cases to use his own judgment, and either conform to such opinions or not, as he might; think proper. Moreover, every member was to be held responsible for his opinion on the affairs relating to his particular Department. * Morris' plan was at once referred to the Committee of Detail, whose members were John Rutledge, Edmund Randolph, Nathaniel Gorham, Oliver Ellsworth, and James Wilson. August 22, the Com- mittee reported a clause that increased the proposed membership! by two officers : " The President of the United States shall havefjj Privy Council, which shall consist of the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice ofj the Supreme Court, and the principal officer in the respective Dm partments of Foreign Affairs, Domestic Affairs, War, Marine, and| 5 Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 442. 'Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 446. The Origin of the Cabinet. 5 Finance, as such departments of office shall from time to time be established ; whose duty it shall be to advise him in matters, respect- ing the execution of his office, which he shall think proper to lay before them ; but their advice shall not conclude him nor affect his responsibility for the measures which he shall adopt." ' It was the fate of this clause, however, to be one of those that the Convention, weary of its tedious sittings and overwhelmed with many questions, passed over to the Committee of States, that was appointed towards the end to digest the unfinished parts of the Constitution in draft. And in the hands of this Committee, the plan was rejected, although its virtual author, Gouverneur Morris, and another pro- nounced advocate, Roger Sherman, were members. In lieu of it, there were reported, September 4, two provisions, that have since become familiar as parts of the Federal Constitution. " The Pres- ident, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, and other public ministers, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein provided for." And, " He may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the Executive Depart- ments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices." 8 This merely recognized that the proposed single Executive would come into such relation to the Departments, as Congress had previously enjoyed. Making the proposed Upper Chamber a council of appointments is traceable to the example of the State of New York. 8 But another plan for a privy council, was now interjected by George Mason. With a zeal which declared that to reject a council to the President was to try an experiment upon which the most despotic government had never ventured, since even the Grand Seignior had his divan, the distinguished Virginian introduced the motion, " That it be an instruction to the Committee of the States to prepare a clause or clauses for establishing an Executive council, to consist of six members, two from the Eastern, two from the Middle, and two from ' Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 462. "Elliot Debates, Ed. 184S, V, 507. • Constitution of New York, 1777, Article XXIII. 6 The President's Cabinet. the Southern States, with a rotation and duration of office similar to that in the Senate, such council to be appointed by the Legislature of the State. 10 Such suggestion of Oriental despotism seems for a moment to have reduced the misgivings about an Executive council to mere prejudice against the plan for its personal union with the Departments and its appointment by the Chief Executive. At any rate, the proposition to provide for a privy council after the fashion of those in the States found distinguished support. Franklin sec- j onded Mason's motion, remarking that a council would not onliy ' be a check upon a bad President, but a relief to a good one. And Madison spoke in favor of reinstructing the committee, being himself a member of it. But Gouverneur Morris now dissented, saying that the question of a council had been considered by the committee, and that it was decided that the President would persuade such a board / to concur in his wrong measures, and so acquire protection for them. This was decisive ; for the motion to reinstruct was defeated by vote of eight States .to three. The provision that the President should have power to call for the opinions of the Heads of Departments in writing was then adopted, only one State dissenting. The clause constituting the Senate a council to .the President on the two subjects! of appointments and treaties had been adopted earlier." Thus the vague fear that a privy council would make the ExecuJ| tive the more formidable was allowed to have its way, so far as a Constitutional provision was concerned. But far-seeing minds were not unobservant of the fact that the way was left open for such a body to be evolved. The point was made once or twice, by Rutledge, chairman of the committee which reported favorably on the Gouv- erneur Morris scheme, that the President could advise with the high officers of State voluntarily." Of Hamilton's views no intimation was given beyond what may have lurked in the resolution that he intro-j duced, June 18, that the Chief Executive should have the sole ap-| pointment of the heads or chief officers of the Departments of Finance, War, and Foreign Affairs." But Hamilton foresaw a great| M Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 522, 525. u Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 526. a Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 349, 442, 446. " Elliot Debates, Ed. 1845, V, 205. The Origin of the Cabinet. 7 place for .those chief officers. George Mason, with a Virginian's faith in Privy Councils, combined with suspicion of .the New Yorker's Senatorial Council of Appointments, and hatred of English Cabinets, pointed out the lines of least resistance, and declared it a certainty that they would lead to ruin. The President had no Con- stitutional council, a thing unknown in any safe and regular govern- ment. Being unsupported by proper information and advice, he would be directed by minions and favorites, or he would become a tool of the Senate ; or a council of state would grow out of .the prin- cipal officers of the great departments, the worst and most dangerous of all ingredients for such a council in a free country, xlt was true that the Constitution had fixed two centres from which the development of a privy council might proceed. And one of these was the Senate. With the new Government inaugurated, the President made a series of attempts to utilize the provision for advice about appointments and treaties." The most notable example is Washington's attendance, accompanied by General Knox, as Sec- retary of War, upon the Senate, for consultation on a negotiation with the Indians. But he found that body gauche and even unwilling, when its advisory powers were called into play. For more men ap- prehended the aggrandizement of the Presidency and the Depart- ments than caught the vision of great consultative powers for the Upper Chamber. The result was that previous consultation was promptly eliminated both from appointment making and treaty mak- ing ; and the evolution of a Privy Council from the Senate was there- by precluded. The other nucleus was afforded by the Departments. Still earlier than his attempt to frame a treaty face to face with twenty-two un- responsive Senators, Washington had exercised his Constitutional power to call upon the principal officers in the Departments for written, opinio ns about subjects relating to their respective offices, by issuing a circular letter, addressed to the Secretary of Foreign Af- fairs, the Secretary of War, the Board of Treasury, and the Post- master-General, all being appointees of the old Congress, holding " Proceedings of the American Political Science Association, II, 128 : Mary L. Hinsdale, The Cabinet and Congress. 8 The President's Cabinet. office by continuation under the new Government. 15 Then came the great series of statutes that placed the Departments upon a new footing, as contemplated by the Constitution. The Act to establish the Department of Foreign Affairs was passed Ju ly 27 ^1780^; and September 15, the Supplementary Act, adding certain internal duties, and changing the name to Department of State. The War Depart- ment was established by Act of August 7. The Treasury was delayed almost a month longer, until September 2. There were certain differences of expression between the Treasury Act and the others, which were the subject of extended debate at the time, and were reserved for more momentous controversy forty years afterwards. The^tate and War establishments were styled, Executive Departments, while that ofFirtance was called, Department of Treas- ury. The Secretaries of State and War, it was ordered, should " perform and execute such duties as shall from time to time be en-fl joined on or entrusted to them by the President of the United States."!' The Secretary of the Treasury, on the other hand, was to discharge a series of functions that were enumerated by statute, and more gen-| erally, " to perform all such services relative to the finances, as he ] shall be directed to perform," the law being silent as to whether! President or Congress should give the directions. Furthermore,' the Secretary of the Treasury was formally authorized " to make report and give information to either branch of the Legislature, in person or in writing, as he may be required." So far the Treasury > preserved much of its position under the old Government. However, the Heads of all the Departments alike were to be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, and all were removable by the President alone." The office of^ Attorney-Gener al was created by the Act to establish i the Judicial Courts of the United States, passed September 24. Its functions were to prosecute in the Supreme Court all suits in which the United States was concerned, and to serve as counsel on questions 1 of law to the President and the Heads of Departments." "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 11, 12 (with Footnote). 16 Statutes at Large, I, 28, 49, 65. 17 Statutes at Large, I, 93. The Origin of the Cabinet. 9 The final and most essential action in the formation of the Cabinet is the institution by the President, without authority of law, of a college of advisers made up of the three Department Heads and the Attorney-General. This step presents a problem in the setting apart of those particular officers from certain others who were more or less obvious candidates for place in the President's councils. A year had elapsed from the inauguration of the Government, before the Secretaries and Attorney-General were fully established in their offices. Alexander Hamilton, of New York, and Henry Knox, of Massachusetts, officially appointed to the Treasury and War Departments, on September 11 and 12, had been in virtual possession from the first. Hamilton, thoughhe~was technically but a by-stander, had assisted at the creation of his prospective Department, by suf- ferance of the President and Congress. The appointments were completed within a couple of weeks. But it was several months, before Edmund Randolph, the Attorney-General, arrived from Vir- ginia. And Thomas JefJerseH-assumed the State Department so late as March, 1790, delaying for a visit to his Virginia estates, after he had quitted his diplomatic post at Paris. In the early consulta- tions, these officers are far frpjri, equally conspicuous. It is only in Cabinet polls that the President's official advisers ever are equal. And during this preliminary season, when consultations are recorded in written opinions only, the Secretary of War and the Attorney- General are not strongly in evidence. General Knox' inferior ability in the writing of state papers probably explains the case so far as he is concerned. StiH further, a coterie of informal adviser s, made up of Madison 'and "Jay, and^sometirnes ; Adams , had been in the Preside ntls-CQuncils during the preceding year. 18 And with the Departments and the Ju- dTcTSry^rganized, the two groups become intermixed. Irregular con- sultations with Congressional leaders, and perhaps with the Chief Justice and Vice-President, ' are common to all Presidents. They arise from both official and personal reasons. But with the Cabinet in a nascent condition, we would discover what principle determined the separation. And we cannot forbear to notice that if we substi- 18 Writings of Washington, X, Appendices II, IV. IO The President's Cabinet. tute the figure of Madison, the leader of the House of Represen- tatives, for Muehlenburg the Speaker, the entire group corresponds exceedingly well with the Privy Council that had been formally recommended by Committee to the Federal Convention. If, however, we would determine the principle upon which the line was drawn between Cabinet and extra-Cabinet consultations, we must examine a long series of more or less petty occurrences. A few weeks after Jefferson's arrival at New York, Washington wrote to Lafayette : " Many of your old acquaintances are associated with me in the administration of the Government. By having Mr. Jefferson at the head of the Department of State, Mr. Jay of the Judiciary, Hamilton of the Treasury, and Knox of that of War, I find myself supported by able coadjutors who harmonize extremely well together." He here includes the Chief Justice and omits the Attorney-General, where a later President would have called the names of his Cabinet. August 27, 1790, the President, by circular letter, called for written 'opini&"fis~en"the following questions : " What should be the answer of "ffie Executive'of the United States to Lord Dorchester, in case he should apply for permission to march troops through the territory of the said States from Detroit to the Mississippi ? " And, "What notice ought to be taken of the measure, if it should be undertaken without leave, which is the most probable proceeding of the two? " On .this occasion, the three Secretaries, the Chief Justice, ' and the Vice-President were called upon for advice, but not the At- torney-General." In preparing the Annual Address to Congress that was delivered December 8, 1790, the President consulted the three Secretaries and " The Editors of Washington's Works make the statement that the circular letter was addressed to "the several members of the Cabinet" and to the Vice-President and the Chief Justice in addition — Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 112, Footnote; Ford ed., XI, 497, Footnote — . But the Letter Books give no sign that the Attorney-General was asked for an opinion. They do indicate, however, that Randolph was on one of his absences from the seat of Government — Letter Book, 1790, 1, 2, 3, Washington to Randolph, August 25- The Origin of the Cabinet. ii the Chief Justice, and apparently left out the Attorney-General. 20 Some of the earlier Addresses, it is attested, were submitted for criticism to Madison. 21 The famous consultation on the question whether the Act to Incorporate the Subscribers to the Bank of the United States was constitutional (February 15-25, 1791) brings the Attorney-General into prominence. If the accepted tradition be correct, the Attorney- General and each of the three Secretaries were called upon for written opinions, and the Cabinet comes into view differentiated. But there is a negative evidence that the Secretary of War was over- looked on this occasion. According to Washington's own statement, he had at first called upon the Attorney-General, in whose line the matter seemed more particularly to be, for his official examination and opinion. The Attorney-General's report being that the Consti- tution did not warrant the Act, he then applied to the Secretary of State for his sentiments upon the subject. These being found to coincide with the Attorney-General's, he required an opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary of War, he does not mention. 22 Neither do any other contemporary documents make reference to that officer. 23 We suspect that such a great Constitu- tional question was too alien to Knox's talents for him to be called upon. It does not appear that he was absent from the seat of Gov- ernment. Howbeit, the consultation has an extraneous figure in the person of Madison, who prepared for the President a draft of a veto message. 24 "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 116, Washington to Hamilton, October 10; also 119, Washington to Knox, November 2; Writings of Jef- ferson, Ford ed., V, 257; Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, III, 409- 21 Hamilton, History of the Republic, IV, 520, Hamilton to Carrington, May 26, 1792. 22 Washington's Letter Book, Treasury Department, 1790, 1792; Works of Alexander Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., 185 1, IV, 103. 23 Clarke and Hall, Legislative and Documentary History of the First Bank of the United States. 36 et seq. "Writings of James Madison, Hunt ed., VI, 42. The accepted tradition seems to have been established by Marshall, who uses the following words: "The Cabinet was divided upon it (the Bank). . . . The advice of each 12 The President's Cabinet. The next pertinent event is a rudjmentar^^C^n^meeting, rudi- mentary in that it Ja£ked-tlieZ.essential^ figure of_the President, but included_ihe..Vi.c,e-President. The circumstances wereThat Washing- ton, on setting out for"a two weeks' tour of the South, addressed a letter, April 4, 1791, to the three Secretaries, saying that they should X meet together for consultation, if any important business arose during his absence, and that the Vice-President should be included in their councils, if he had not already left the seat of Government. Neither the Attorney-General nor the Chief Justice was mentioned in the order; but Jefferson, who summoned a meeting, included Randolph with the others. 25 J_n 1792, the Cabinet becomes better differentiated. In April, the three Secretaries and the Attorney-tjeneraleach submittd an opinion on the constitutionality of an Act for the Apportionment of Represen- tatives, this being the occasion of the first veto. 26 On August 15, the President, while enjoying his annual vacation at Mt. Vernon, wrote to the Secretary of War regarding certain Indian despatches, and requested that the Secretary of the Treasury should also consider them, observing that he should also have included the Secretary of State, had the latter officer been at Philadelphia. In a communication of four days later, he added that the Attorney-General should also be called on to aid with his opinions. 2 ' In September there appears to have been a written consultation between the President and each of the four chosen officers regarding the Executive Proclamation, issued on the 15th of that month in consequence of the violation of the Minister with his reasoning in support of it was required in writing" — Life of Washington, V, 345 — . But neither Marshall nor any other early writer states what was Knox's opinion. Hildreth seems to be the first of those that venture to be more definite : " The President required the written opinions of the members of his Cabinet as to its (the Bank's) constitutionality. Hamilton, supported by Knox, was strong in the affirmative; Jefferson and Randolph took the other side — the first instance, it would seem, of an important differ- ence of opinion in the Cabinet " — History of the United States, IV, 263. 25 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 157 ; Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., I, 165. M Works of Hamilton, J. C, Hamilton ed., 1851, IV, 196-215 27 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 266-275. The Origin of the Cabinet. 13 Excise Law. 58 Furthermore, each was called upon for both special and general suggestions concerning the Annual Address to Congress that was delivered December 8, 1792." Meanwhile, a fuller collegiate charagter^was being, added by an occasional j ahjnet^rneetirig. Presumably, these were in the first place informal ; and it is pleasant to think that they were facilitated by the personal ties between Washington and his official household. Between him and Jefferson, there had hitherto been only a formal acquaintance, but the style of their association as President and Sec- retary was friendly. Randolph he had known as military aide, neigh- bor, and business adviser. Towards Knox he felt the bond of com- radeship in the Revolutionary War very strongly. And to Hamilton, he was as deeply attached as he was to Lafayette. Furthermore, three of this group of five were Virginians, two of whom had been Governors of their State; whence it is highly probable that the collegiate Executive of the Old Dominion put its stamp upon the National councils. 30 Cabinet meetings of 1792, and perhaps 1791, are recorded, rather vaguely, it is true, in Jefferson's Anas. Butjwith JuhejjDenhig^of .1793, they arg. attested by Washington j^d^Hamilton also, an^JornjaLsunaiaoases-appear. 81 28 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 296. 23 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 282—285 (with Footnote), 289. 30 Constitution of Virginia, 1776. 1,1 March 11, 1792, Jefferson writes, speaking of the latter part of November, 1791, " Hamilton then, proposed to the President at one of our meetings " etc. ; and in the same entry, he refers to " one of our consultations " held in December of that year. (2) March g, he notes for the day "a consultation at , present H. K. & J. (3) March 31, he records " A meeting at the P's, present Th. J., A. H., H. K. & E. R. "the question being whether the Executive should comply with the call of a Committee of the House of Representatives upon the Secretary of War, for papers relating to General St. Clair's expedition in the Northwest. April 12, he says "Met again at Ps on same subject" (4) October 31, a propos of the Spanish interference with the execution of the treaty between the United States and the Creeks, he says " he (the President) desired a consultation of Hamilton, Knox, E. R., and myself on these points.'' This consultation which Jefferson records in very definite terms, seems to be one, or one of a series, that John C. Hamil- ton, in his Republic denies ever to have occurred, V, 121. (5) December 10, the Anas says, "Present: A. H., General Knox, E. R. & Th. J. at the 14 The President's Cabinet. But the decisive hours for the coherence of the Cabinet were in the monthsof panic, produced by the mission of the French Minis- ter Genet'The most tangible mark of this is the closer association of the Attorney-General with the rest of the group. Randolph's aptitude for foreign affairs now made him a real force in the Ex- ecutive Councils ; while it so happened that the division which had existed since the Bank consultation gave to him the balance of power in the Cabinet polls to which the President now resorted."* It was to Randolph, rather than the Attorney-General, that the increased im- portance belonged; nevertheless, the office enjoyed a better assured place thereafter. Furthermore, the whole Cabinet felt the cementing influence of assembling frequently. On April 19, occurred one of the most momentous Cabinet meetings of American history, the pur- pose being to arrange a policy of neutrality on the basis of a schedule of questions regarding .the treaties with France, which the President had submitted on the 18th, by circular letter." And throughout the summer and autumn of 1793, there were very frequent, often daily sessions, with the interruption of the President's vacation at Mt. Vernon. Jefferson marked this season _aj_thgjxsLbeginning ..of as-, sembled- consultation ; forjigjvrote, seventeen years afterwards, that it had been Washington's practice to confer with his advisers sepa- rately, until the affairs of England and France, which threatened to embroil the United States, rendered discussion desirable." The President also attempted, at thi^ crisis^to-.attach .advisory functions to the highest Judicial authority. Some of the State Con- President's the subject being a proposed Indian treaty " — Writings of Jeffer- son, Ford ed., I, 179-210. For a Cabinet meeting of February 25, 1793, see Washington, Sparks ed., X, 317; Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., IV, 340; Jefferson, Ford ed., I, 218. Also for the two meetings held to discuss the style of the President's second inauguration, Washington, Sparks ed., X, 322, Footnote; Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., IV, 341, 342. 32 Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., I, 228; Anas, May 7, 1793: ibid. 270; Anas, November 28, 1793: ibid. V, 344; Jefferson to Madison, August n, 1793. "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 337; also Appendix XV. 84 Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., IX, 273 ; Jefferson to Walter Jones, March S, 1810. The Origin of the Cabinet. 15 stitutions furnished a sort of precedent for such action. 85 We believe, however, that Washington simply lent himself in this matter to one of Hamilton's ideas. The President called upon the Justices of the Supreme Court, with a long list of questions, for an application of certain principles of international law to the treaties between the United States and France. /But the extraordinary counsel idea was frustrated by the refusal 0/ (he Judges to answer the questions, on the ground that they lay outside of their province.* On this occasion, an interesting conversation occurred between Jefferson and Randolph. The Secretary of State proposed to the Attorney-General that a bill be prepared to be submitted to Congress for the creation of a Board of Advice on International Law, and kindred subjects; to which the Attorney-General replied that he should propose annexing such Board to his own office, whereat the other dropped the subject." It would seem that Randolph's idea was virtually brought to pass, years afterwards, by the creation, inside of the Department of Justice, of Solicitors, or Assistant Attorneys-General to the State and other Departments. Not only was a definite Council now set apart by the President's repeated summonses ; but it began to be called by a particular name. Madison, Jefferson, and Randolph were among.ihe fks£, to refer to the President's Council as the Cabinet. Washington did not employ the term, his customary phrase being "the Secretaries and the Attorney-General," or, " the Heads of Departments and the Attorney-General," with such variations as " the confidential officers of Government," and " the gentlemen with whom I usually advise on these occasions." Neither did Hamilton adopt the name Cabinet, though he freely employed the term Ministers. In Congressional usage we have not noted the name earlier than the spring j>fj8o6, when the changes were rung on it in a caustic debate in which John Randolph figured. It appears in a Resolution of the House of Re- presentatives, for the first time, we believe, so late as July 1867. And it remained unknown to the statutes, until it appeared in the General Appropriation Act of February 26, 1907. 35 Constitution of Massachusetts, 1780; Constitution of Pennsylvania, 1776. "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 360: also Apendix XVIII. " Conway, Edmund Randolph, 186. 16 The President's Cabinet. ; It remains to formulate the principle by which the members of the Cabinet were set apart from other advisers to the President. Obviously the inner Council was built upon the plan that had been before the Federal Convention, having for its basis the administra- tive Departments, but including the chiefs of all the branches of the Government. How soon Washington drew a line in his own mind across the larger group, there is nothing to show ; the Cabinet meet- ing marks the visible separation. There is some slight ground for believing that in choosing his judicial adviser, he hesitated between the Chief Justice and the much humbler Attorney-General, who had not been named in the Convention. As for the rule by which the line was drawn, — there can be no doubt that it was removability by the President, a conclusion that is borne out by the whole history of the Cabinet. President. GEORGE WASHINGTON, Virginia. Vice-President. JOHN ADAMS, Massachusetts. April 30, 1789, to March 4, 1793. Secretary of State. Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia, September 26, 1789. Secretary of the Treasury. Alexander Hamilton, of New York, September 11, 1789. Secretary of War. Henry Knox, of Massachusetts, September 12, 1789. Attorney-General. Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, September 26, 1789. 17 President. GEORGE WASHINGTON, Virginia. Vice- President. JOHN ADAMS, Massachusetts. March 4, 1793, to March 4, 1797. Secretary of State. Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia; continued from last Administration. Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, January 2, 1794. Timothy Pickering, of Pennsylvania (Secretary of War), ad interim, August 20, 1795. Timothy Pickering, of Pennsylvania, December 10, 1795. Secretary of the Treasury. Alexander Hamilton, of New York; continued from last Administration. Oliver Wolcott, Jr., of Connecticut, February 2, 1795. Secretary of War. Henry Knox, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. Timothy Pickering, of Pennsylvania, January 2, 1795. James McHenry, of Maryland, January 27, 1796. Attorney-General. Edmund Randolph, of Virginia; continued from last Administration. William Bradford, of Pennsylvania, January 27, 1794. Charles Lee, of Virginia, December 10, 1795. 18 WASHINGTON. The first Cabinets that Washington formed had two features which should command particular attention for the very reason that their unsuitability to the political genius of the new Nation was so quickly demonstrated. We refer, in the first place, to the bend that was momentarily given to the Executive by Hamilton. Though the great Secretary-Publicist bears a general reputation for political anglomania, the fund of comment upon his theories and purposes has been more fragmentary than exhaustive. Nor can we at present be more ambitious than to note his more striking utterances and practices. In one of his Federalist Letters, Hamilton points to a radical dif- ference between the English and American Executive as proof that a Constitutional Council to the President would bring bad results. The English Government had a permanent Chief Magistrate; his person was sacred : whence it had been convenient for the maxim to prevail that he was irresponsible. And the responsibility that could not reside in him, a Constitutional Council was the most eligi- ble means of supplying. But under a republican Government, no such character appertained to the Chief Magistrate ; he was himself a responsible officer : whence the addition of a Constitutional Council would vitiate, or at least seriously impair, in the American Executive, the very thing that it supplied to the British. 1 In his practice, as in his writings, Hamilton never put any stress upon the collegiate Cabi- net, though he conceived that the President must necessarily act through Ministers. Especially did he conceive of the Head of the Treasury as a more exalted officer of state than earlier use of the title, Secretary, would signify. In the Federalist he forecast that the finances were to be put ^he Federalist, No. LXX. 19 20 The President's Cabinet. into the hands of a single statesman, who should be not merely an ad- ministrative officer, but the originator of all plans of revenue.' On the vital question of separation of the great branches of government, Hamilton upheld the Constitutional arrangement as a security to the rights of the people. 3 But the provision that officers of the Govern- ment shall not at the same time be members of the Legislature, left room, as he construed it, for personal communication with Congress by Department Heads, as practiced under the former Government. Indeed it would seem to have denied none of a member's active privi- leges except voting. All these views the prospective Secretary was able to incorporate^ into the Treasury Act. It is true that a heated debate in the House resulted in a narrowing of the proposed authority to introduce plans for revenue, by withholding the privilege of making uncalled for' reports. 4 Still the head of the Department remained potentially a real Minister of Finance. Furthermore, the provision that the Sec- retary of the Treasury should make reports in person or in writ- ing, as directed, seems by its very absence from the Acts creating the State and War Departments, to set apart the Minister of Finance as the organ of communication between the Executive and Congress. All in all, the Treasury was to be the very heart of the administra- tion, not only the main artery through which the stream of Executive operations must pass, but also the seat of the propelling force. For Hamilton's activities as Secretary of the Treasury, Depart- , ment lines scarcely existed. He concerned himself with proposed commercial negotiations with England and France, and held con- ferences to that end with the Ministers of those Governments. 6 Resisted by Jefferson with some success, he went so far as to order the revision of the foreign despatches when Randolph was Secretary.' '| And he assumed the leading part in shaping Jay's mission to Eng- 2 Federalist, No. XXXVI. 'Federalist, No. LI. 4 Annals of Congress, I, 616-631 : Works of Fisher Ames, I, 56. 5 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, Appendix XIII ; Jefferson to Washington, September 9, 1792. "Works of Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., IV, 544. Washington. 21 land. 7 He concerned himself equally about the business of the Secretary of War, and found Knox comparatively tractable. His crowning- act of assumption of responsibility occurred in the Whiskey Insurrection, when he accompanied the President on the expedition into Western Pennsylvania, in some such fashion as a chancellor attends his emperor in the field. This affair he made a pretense of bringing within the pale of his own Department, by urging that the insurrection was in resistance to the Excise Act, and that in such a Government as the American, it must have a good effect for the per- son who was understood to be the advisor or proposer of a measure that brought danger to his fellow citizens, to share in that danger himself. 8 Both of the other Secretaries seem to have countenanced this Chief Ministership to the extent of referring to the Treasury as an intermediary between their Departments and Congress, when money was desired. Thus Jefferson referred a proposed negotiation with the Barbary States to Hamilton, on the question, how great a douceur the Senate would agree to. 9 And a similar situation is found in the communication to the House of Representatives by Hamilton of what was really a request from Knox for the rehabilitation of West Point. 10 Hamilton also assumed authority to call upon the Chief Justice to prepare a draft of a Proclamation of Neutrality in the hour of Minister Genet's arrival." And it was at his instance that the President turned to the Supreme Bench for extraordinary counsel. Of his legal responsibility to the President, the Secretary-Minister seems to have been duly sensible. It is true that he addressed to the Speaker of the House of Representatives a notice of his intention to retire ; but this seems to be traceable entirely to the fact that his Department was undergoing investigation at the time. 12 7 J. C. Hamilton, History of the Republic, IV, 544-554, 567- 8 Works of Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., V, 30; Hamilton to Washington, September 19, 1794. "Works of Hamilton, J. C. Hamilton ed., IV, 215. "Works of Hamilton, III, 82. 11 Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, III, 474-477- 13 J. C. Hamilton, History of the Republic, IV, 136; Hamilton to Speaker of House of Representatives, December 1, 1794. 22 The President's Cabinet. Such assumption of authority was not slow to incur the charge of Ministerial ambition. Edmund Pendleton, a looker-on in Virginia, plainly asserted, writing to Washington, that the Secretary of the Treasury had " made the system of the British Ministry the model of his conduct as assumed American primate." a The question arises whether Hamilton's conception of the Executive does not better re- semble the Elizabethan than any Georgian model. But, whatever his',! theory was, his practice looked to a chief ministership, which, jf ;..■ realized, must have circumscribed the development of the Presidency, and have given a very different trend to American practice in legislation. The other marked feature of the early Executive that quickly proved impracticable was the representation in the Cabinet of dif- '"' ferent political parties. This practice was attendant upon the idea that the President was superior to party. Such conception was soon found to be totally incongruous with having the highest office in a re- publican government elective, though it was justified by the working of the machinery for choosing Presidents in 1789 and again in 1793. Furthermore, Washin gton himself found mixed councils a sore griev- ance, and settled_down toa_party_Cabinet for the last two years of his administrat ion. Doubtless the quarrels between Jefferson and "Hamilton gave him a turn towards this decision. But a more im- mediate incentive was his grief and rage at Randolph's faithlessness towards the administration, while he was Secretary of State. The theory of a balanced Executive has been overdone, when it has been used to explain the original Cabinet appointments. And some of the familiar statements about it commit the double anachronism of assuming, both, that parties were differentiated, and that a clear notion of the Cabinet existed, when those appointments were made. It seems a trustworthy tradition that Washington fixed upon Ham- ilton for the Treasury, Jay and Robert Morris advising it, for the paramount reason of his ability to organize the finances. And regarding the selection of Jefferson and Randolph, there are letters , by Washington that speak of fitness and availability, but are silent J "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 370, Footnote. Washington. 23 about those gentlemen's views of the Constitution. But a clear pur- pose to represent widely divergent political sentiments in the Execu- tive appears in the President's persistent efforts to retain the two great leaders after distinctions of Federalist and Republican had brought discord into the administration. Everybody knows that the two Secretaries had common ground enough at the outset to enter into a bargain, whereby the Virginian gave his influence to such a centralizing measure as the assumption of the State debts, in return for a concession to Southern pride by the New Yorker, in the matter of locating the National Capital. Jefferson's first note of opposition to Hamilton was sounded in a letter written in January, 1791, when the Bank Act was pending. He herein refers to the need of putting the agricultural interest above that of the stock jobbers; and goes on to say that there is a sect in the Government, which is opposed to the French, and which believes that the English Constitution contains whatever is perfect in human institutions. At about the same date, the correspondence between the two Secretaries loses its personal flavor, and becomes strictly official. By the following year, the breach had so widened that the hostile Ministers fought a battle in the newspapers, Jeffer- son attacking Hamilton through the columns of Freneau's National Gazette, and Hamilton retaliating through Fenno's Gazette of the United States. The situation demanded the interposition of the President ; and Washington addressed a long letter to each, in which he enjoined "mutual forbearance" and "temporizing yieldings," and lamented that the young government was endangered by animos- ities between those who should be its protectors." In 1793, the Cabi- net table became the scene of such quarrels that Jefferson afterwards wrote : " Hamilton and I were daily pitted in the Cabinet like two cocks." 1! As the President's first term of office neared its close, the Secre- tary of State talked of resignation; but his chief dissuaded him. And on one occasion, Washington is represented as distinctly saying "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, Appendix XIII. 15 Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., X, 273 ; Jefferson to Walter Jones, March 5, 1810. 24 The President's Cabinet. that it was important to preserve the check of Jefferson's opinions in the administration, in order to keep things in their proper channel." Viewed through the atmosphere of decades of party history, the position of the Secretary of State in 1793 appears too incongruous to be maintained. The policy of the Government was strict neutral- ity between France and England. The Foreign Secretary, by his political affiliations and personal ties, sympathized with the French. At the same time, his antagonist in the Treasury sympathized with the English. Perhaps Washington found the shades of feeling and opinion in this crisis no more divergent than Lincoln felt them to be in the Civil War. But Jefferson's position is unique in American history, in that he was him self th e organ of a, policy,^ which hejvas empHatically opposed. Herein lies the reason why his secretaryship is the least 3istinguished chapter in his career. The rule of political balance made it impracticable to institute that other rule, very com- monly observed in later times, of paying deference in a Cabinet question to the Secretary whose Department is most closely touched. Washington reached his decisions during this season by Cabinet polls, much ofjthe time ij^ding^acxoxding to the majority. Never- ThelessTThe State Department held down the Treasury. And Jeffer- son was too derogatory of his own influence, when he declared four years afterwards, apropos of the rumor that President Adams was going to summon the Vice-President to the Cabinet councils, that he could not wish to see the scenes of '93 revived, and to descend daily into the arena like a gladiator to suffer martyrdom in every conflict. Jefferson's retirement at the close of this year was followed by the promotion of Randolph to the State Department. A number of men had previously been considered, both Republicans and Federalists. 17 16 Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., I, 204. "Jefferson states that the following men were mentioned between the President and himself: Madison, who would have been the President's first choice, but was unwilling to accept office under the Executive, Chief Justice Jay, who preferred the post that he already had, William Smith and Edward Rutledge, both of South Carolina, Judge Thomas Johnson, of Maryland, Chancellor R. R. Livingston, of New York, and finally Edmund Randolph, the Attorney-General. (Writings of Jefferson, Ford ed., I, 257 ; Anas, August 6- 1793) Washington. 25 The resulting vacancy in the office of Attorney-General was filled by the appointment of William Bradford, a young lawyer from Pennsylvania, who was presumably Hamilton's choice. A year later, further reconstruction was necessitated by the retirement of both Hamilton and Knox. Hamilton named his own successor, Oliver Wolcott, previously Comptroller of the Treasury. A Secretary of War was found in Timothy Pickering, who had at .the time a resi- dence in Pennsylvania. Mr. Pickering had been a member of the old Board of Treasury, and had latterly become Postmaster-General. And from the War Office, he went to the State Department. Whence he bears the commonplace distinction of the most varied experience in the Departments that any man has had." In the State Department, Randolph showed himself a consistent Republican, with his colleagues all Federalists of one shade or another. He was at variance with the administration, both on the suppression of the Whiskey Insurrection, and the ratification of Jay's Treaty with England. But there was no plan to put an end to the anomaly, until the Secretary of State was discovered in an in- trigue with the French Minister. In his isolated position, Randolph allowed himself to become a party to one of those cases of diplomatic interference that held the Government, during its first quarter of a century, in a sort of wardship to France and England. At the time of the Whiskey Insurrection, he fell to communicating the secrets of the administration to Minister Fauchet, who made them the subject of despatches to his own Government, which not only based their information upon " the precious confessions of Mr. Randolph," but alluded to transactions that had involved " some thousands of dollars." The papers were intercepted by a British war vessel, passed into the hands of the British Minister to the United States, 18 The War Department was first offered to General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, who had declined an Associate-Justiceship in 1791, and was re- garded as one of the most prominent men in the country that did not desire office under the National Government. Though expressing a preference for the War Department over all other offices, General Pinckney declined the offer, chiefly on personal grounds. (Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., X, 391, 392, with Footnote.) 26 The President's Cabinet. and were communicated to the Secretary of the Treasury. The President, returning from his vacation retirement to hold a Cabinet council on the acceptance of Jay's Treaty, confronted his Secretary of State with the suspicious disclosures, and one day later, that officer put his resignation into the hands of his chief. The affair stirred a great storm of emotions in Washington's breast." The ensuing reconstruction of the Cabinet furnishes, by its ex- treme difficulty, one of the most striking proofs of the unpopularity that the Government sustained by the ratification of the Treaty of 1795 with England. But the most significant fact is £he_President's decision that the representation, of different,. political.. parties in the Executive was insupportable. He made a distinct declaration in a letter to his Secretary of War : " I shall not, while I have the honor to administer the Government, bring a man into office of consequence, knowingly, whose political tenets are adverse to the measures, which the General Government are pursuing ; for this, in my opinion, would be a sort of political suicide. That it would embarrass its move- ments is most certain." " At least one candidate that attracted the President's favorable consideration for the State Department, Ed- mund Pendleton of Virginia, was dropped, because Hamilton pointed out that he was leaning too much to the political doctrines of Jefferson and Madison. The vacancy was filled after a long inter* val by the promotion of the Secretary of War. 21 The War Department was thus vacated, as was also the Attorney- Generalship, Mr. Bradford having died in office. The former was accepted by James McHenry of Maryland, and the latter by Charles Lee, a young lawyer from Virginia. The Cabinet was now an entirely Federalist body. And the unanimity of party principles 18 Upham, Life of Timothy Pickering, III, 225, 226. 20 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, 74; Washington to Pickering, September 27, 1795. 21 The State Department was offered successively to Judge Thomas Johnson of Maryland, General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, As- sociate-Justice William Patterson of New Jersey, and Patrick Henry of Virginia. (Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, 78, 81 ; Washington to Edward Carrington and to Patrick Henry.) Washington. 27 thus established immediately became the fundamental rule of form- ing an administration. 22 23 Before the War Office found an incumbent on this occasion, it was offered to Colonel Edward Carrington of Virginia, an intimate friend of Hamilton's, and to Governor John E. Howard of Maryland. (Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, 78, 93, 106.) The Attorney-Generalship was first offered to John Marshall, who had not yet held office under the National Government, and declined this post on the ground that it would too greatly interfere with his private practice. It was then offered to Colonel Innes, also of Virginia. (Writings of Washing- ton, Sparks ed., XI, 62, with Footnote.) President. JOHN ADAMS, Massachusetts. Vice-President. THOMAS JEFFERSON, Virginia. March 4, 1797, to March 4, 1801. Secretary of State. 'Timothy Pickering, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. Charles Lee, of Virginia (Attorney-General), ad interim, May 13, 1800. John Marshall, of Virginia, May 13, 1800. Secretary of the Treasury. Oliver Wolcott, Jr., of Connecticut; continued from last Administration. ' Samuel Dexter, of Massachusetts, January 1, 1801. Secretary of War. James McHenry, of Maryland; continued from last Administration. 'Benjamin Stoddert, of Maryland (Secretary of the Navy), ad interim, May 6, 1800. ^Samuel Dexter, of Massachusetts, May 13, 1800. Samuel Dexter, of Massachusetts (Secretary of the Treasury), ad interim, January 1, 1801. Attorney-General. Charles Lee, of Virginia; continued from last Administration. Secretary of the Navy. Benjamin Stoddert, of Maryland, May 21, 1798. 29 JOHN ADAMS. The administration of John Adams is signalized by the first testing of the authority of the President over his official advisors. The in- subordination of the Secretaries was not a conscious attack upon the Chief Executive's office, but only a part of a quarrel between two factions of Federalists. And yet the controversy shows, in many of its details, that a comparatively humble place^was reserved for the Presidency, when Washington retired from his peculiar office as sponsor for the Constitution. And Adams' resort to powers as yet unused was an important step towards fixing the relation between the two parts of the Executive. The new President retained the Cabinet of his predecessor, though - Secretary' Wolcott is known to have offered his resignation. The existing procedure was also continued for a time. The President promptly called for written opinions on a schedule of questions concerning the state of diplomatic relations between the United States and France. 1 In preparing the Address to Congress for the special session of 1797, he requested suggestions that were not to be confined to departmental matters. Cabinet meetings were also continued. The actual mastery, however, Adams had to dispute with Ham- ilton, in th^_exJaaJegaijavl£^fpaii^_chief. The political antagonism between the two had been manifest from the earliest presidential elections. And with Adams now elevated to that office, the party leader put aside the deference that Washington had commanded of him. At the same time he retained the influence over the Secretaries that he had gained as a sort of permanent Minister to the previous administration. Wolcott, in the Treasury, was his echo. Pickering, in the State Department, was more emboldened by a sense of long experience in Executive office, which indeed antedated the Pres- 'Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, I, 500. 31 32 The President's Cabinet. idency. Moreover, he was like President Adams himself, in being the victim of a pugnacious and stubborn disposition. In such a delicate situation, Mr. Adams allowed concerted action between President and Department Heads to suffer for his absences from the Capital. Washington had been accustomed to spend about two months at Mt. Vernon, during the hot season. Indeed the^ important consultation over the acceptance of Jay's Treaty was con- ducted almost entirely by correspondence. And, when he was at the seat of Government, he sometimes authorized the Cabinet to delib- erate without being himself present. But Washington, fortified by loyalty to his person, had no reason to fear cabals. Notwithstanding his different situation, Adams indulged himself in longer vacations. And, during one of the most critical periods in his term of office, the summer of 1799, being detained by illneiss in his family, he was absent from the proper scene of his official duties between seven and eight months. "As the special session of 1797 approached, the President's Con- stitutional relation to the subject of foreign affairs was made little account of, by former members of the Government. Fisher Ames, now retiring from the House of Representatives, wrote to Wolcott, urging that the three Secretaries should digest a plan of action, and be prompt to secure the cooperation of the Federalists in Congress.' And Hamilton put a matured scheme for a special commission to France into the hands of certain Senators. 3 The latter proceeding came to Adams' knowledge; and, when he published an account of his Cabinet quarrels years afterwards, he likened Hamilton to a physician, who undertook " to prescribe for a President, Senate, and House of Representatives, all desperately sick, and in a deplorable state of debility, without being called." The strife between Adams and his Cabinet included three distinct controversies. The first was about the appointment of the Com- missioners that were dispatched to France in 1797. 1 The President 2 Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, I, 499; Ames to Wol- cott, April 27, 1797. 3 Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, I, 463. 4 Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, I, 463-470. John Adams. 33 earnestly desired to name Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts as one of the number; and the suggestion that the Commission include one Republican with two Federalists was received with so much favor, that the names of both Madison and Vice-President Jefferson were proposed. But of Gerry, the Cabinet would not approve. The Presi- dent accordingly nominated three Federalists, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, the Minister lately rejected by the French Government, John Marshall of Virginia, and Francis Dana of Massachusetts. But Judge Dana declined to serve; whereupon Gerry was appointed in his stead. Thus the President yielded at first ; but ultimately carried his point. The second controversy arose about the ranking of the Major- . Generals in the provisional army created in 1798. 5 Washington had "" been appointed Lieutenant-General, with the understanding that he should have a share in the naming of the other officers. 6 Upon receipt of his commission, the Lieutenant-General transmitted a list of Major-Generals, which included Alexander Hamilton, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, and Henry Knox, ranking in the order named. Displeased at the advancement of Hamilton over two officers who had been his superiors in the Revolutionary War, in which mat- ter his objections had more than a personal basis, since Knox ulti- mately declined his commission, the President sought a means of preserving the old order. The appointments were made as arranged ; but the commissions were so dated as to put Knox first, Pinckney sec- ond, and Hamilton third. Washington now interposed. Charging the President, in calm but forcible terms, with failure to carry out the agreement between them, he threatened to resign his own com- mission. And Adams was compelled to reverse the order of rank for the Major-Generals. 7 Doubtless Washington was actuated by his old partiality. But the Secretaries were in his counsels. Picker- "Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, II, 99-103. "Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, Appendix XI; Adams to Mc- Henry, July 6, 1798. Also Adams to Washington, July 7, 1798. 'Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, 304; Washington to Adams, September 23, 1798: also Appendix XIV; Adams to Washington, October 9, 1798- 34 The President's Cabinet. ing had urged him to secure the placing of Hamilton at the head of the list. 8 And McHenry was believed to have had a hand in the ar- rangement, when he conveyed the Lieutenant-General's commission to Mt. Vernon. It was to the prestige of Washington's name that the President yielded ; but, nevertheless, the Secretaries had a share in .the triumph over him. April 30, 1798, the Act was passed that established the Depart- ment of the Navy. Much difficulty attended the filling of the new Secretaryship. And Wolcott wrote four weeks after its "creation, that the proper business of the new Department continued to be divided between the War Office and the Treasury, and was likely to remain so. Ex-Senator George Cabot of Massachusetts, a prominent member of the Hamilton faction, declined the office; and it was finally accepted by Benjamin Stoddert of Maryland, a man engaged in extensive mercantile pursuits. The administration was next at cross purposes about the second attempt to resume diplomatic relations with France.* June 21, 1798, in a famous message to Congress, the President had disclaimed all intention of making another approach to the French Government, until certain assurances had been received from it. But, December 8, in his Annual Address, he moderated that tone, and acted contrary to the advice of the Cabinet in so doing. He furthermore, withheld his confidence from his official advisers, as his new policy shaped itself. February 18, 1799, without the previous knowledge of the Secretary of State, or any other of the Cabinet officers, he nominated . as Minister Plenipotentiary to France, William Vans Murray. The proposed embassy being converted into a second commission, the names of Chief-Justice Oliver Ellsworth, and Governor William R. Davie of South Carolina were added. The President's appointments were confirmed in the face of active opposition from the Cabinet The Secretaries then proceeded to take advantage of the Presi- dent's long absence to devise plans for defeating his policy. And they finally joined in a written demand that the Commission to 8 Writings of Washington, Sparks ed., XI, Appendix XI, Pickering to Wash- ington, July 6, 1798. "Gibbs, Administrations of Washington and Adams, II, 188-272. John Adams. 35 France be delayed." This brought the administration together again, the President meeting the Cabinet, October 15, at Trenton. Before Mr. Adams' arrival, Hamilton had been on the scene. The President refrained from declaring his own state of mind at the Cabinet meet- ing, for which he was afterwards accused of misleading his advisers. He discussed the proposed instructions with them, and a day later, issued to the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Navy final orders for despatching the Commission. Thus in the last and most aggravated controversy of his administration, President Adams carried his point. He did not have a united Cabinet against him ; for Stoddert, the newest of the Secretaries, had not staunchly supported his seniors, and Attorney-General Lee, finding the Commission fav- orably regarded by the Virginia Federalists, was of like mind. Six monthsjaterj Jh§Jg£gg&dei&-&mtp\!ete<& 4h«»4eHi©nstea±ithe administration is that of a President in full control of affairs. Formal consultation under Polk was more frequent than it had been under his predecessors; for he held two Cabinet meetings a week, on Tuesday and Saturday. His personal views on this subject he stated thus: "At each meeting of the Cabinet, I learn from each member of the Cabinet what is being done in his particular Depart- ment, and especially if any question of doubt or difficulty has arisen. I have never called for any written opinions from my Cabinet, pre- ferring to take their opinions, after discussion in Cabinet and in the presence of one another. In this way, harmony of opinion is more likely to exist." 1T 5*. Upon the Oregon question, Polk took the very unusual course of seeking a previous consultation with the Senate. June 10, 1846, he submitted to that body a preliminary convention presented to the Secretary of State by the British Minister. The accompanying message stated that in the early periods of the Government, the opinion and advice of the Senate were often taken in advance upon important questions of our foreign policy. 18 What inspired President "Buchanan MSS. 15 Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Toucey, July 12, 1850. 18 Polk's Diary, Lenox Library, III, 45. " Polk's Diary, Lenox Library, XXI, 61, September 23, 1848. 18 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, IV, 449. Polk was mistaken about this. Some interesting facts about the early practice with re- gard to previous consultation by written communication are afforded by the Polk. 133 Polk to resort to this early abandoned expedient, we do not know. But the time had long passed for such a step to have any effect upon the functions of Senate and Cabinet. The Executive initiative in Congress during Polk's presidency was unusually brisk. The Tariff Act of 1846 was distinctly an administration measure; and in originating other legislation, the Treasury Department was more than ordinarily conspicuous. Further- more, the affairs with England and Mexico presented an unusual array of matters in which Congress was dependent upon the Heads of Departments. A series of changes in the Cabinet personnel was set in motion by Bancroft's resignation from the Navy in September, 1846. Spe- cial interest attaches to this for personal reasons. Bancroft had ad- ministered the Navy with unwonted energy, completely giving the lie to the objection that he was a man of books and the closet, with little experience of affairs. But his administration was more efficient than popular. At the Secretary's order, a board of naval officers met at Washington in July 1846, to consider the subject of promotions. A proposition was laid before this board that the rule of seniority be given up for a system of merit, which the Secretary should determine. Although this was adopted, it called forth a minority protest and much public criticism. 19 A little later, the Senate defeated a list of naval appointments. 20 Bancroft's retirement, however, was in- spired, as the President's Diary indicates, by a genuine preference for a diplomatic post. Inasmuch as the English and French Missions were both to be vacated, the subject had come up between President and Secretary some weeks before the unpleasantness in naval circles. The original plan was to send Bancroft to France, because Bu- chanan's name was connected with the other position. But the Sec- retary of State decided to remain in the Cabinet ; and Bancroft was appointed Minister to England. 21 following references: Writings of Jefferson, I, 191, Anas, April g, 1792; also 220, February 26, 1793 ; also, Life and Letters of George Cabot, 236, Pickering to Cabot, September 13, 1799- 19 Niles Register, LXIX, 323, August 13, 1846. 20 Senate Executive Journal, August 4, 1846. 21 Polk's Diary, Lenox Library, VIII, 10, 12. 134 The President's Cabinet. Mason was now put back into the Navy Department ; and Polk looked to New England for an Attorney-General. Nathan Clifford of Maine was appointed, after an offer to Franklin Pierce of New Hampshire. A year and a half later, Mr. Clifford retired, to under- take a commission to Mexico; and Isaac Toucey of Connecticut, became Attorney-General. Mr. Toucey became an intimate friend of Buchanan and was called into his Cabinet. One of President Polk's last official acts was to sign the Act to establish the Home Department, or the Department of the Interior ^ March 3, 1849. ^ n the first session of Congress, under the Consti- tution, it had been proposed by Representative Vining of Delaware to establish a separate Home Department ; s but at that time few men thought it necessary to provide an establishment for domestic admin- istration along with the Departments of War, Finance, and Foreign Affairs. In 1816, however, President Madison, in his last Annual Message to Congress, called attention to the fact that the progress and growing population of the country required an additional Ex- ecutive Department. 23 Nine years later, President John Quincy Adams, renewed Madison's recommendation; and declared in the light of his own Cabinet experience that the union of Foreign with Interior Affairs, established in the first year of the Government, had become an unquestionable detriment to the public service. 21 In the dis- cussion of this message by the Cabinet, Clay had said that a new De- partment was of most urgent necessity ; but that he doubted if such a measure would command five votes in the House of Representatives. That body went so far, however, as to appoint a committee to investi- gate the subject, of which Webster was chairman ; M and a bill was pro- jected for a Home Department to have charge of internal correspon- dence, roads and canals, Indians, and the patent office. Jackson also took up the subject in his First Annual Message; but refused to recommend a Home Department, because such plan had already failed in Congress on account of the belief that it would increase the "Annals of Congress, I, 369-371. a Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, I, 577. " Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, II, 314. M Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, VII, 63, 83, 109. Polk. 135 centralizing tendency of the Federal Government. He was none the less urgent for some arrangement that would give the Secretary of State more time for foreign affairs. 28 The result of this was a project to create the office of Assistant-Secretary of Internal Affairs within the State Department. This jealousy of a Home Department availed to put off its establishment, until the relief of the other Departments became an absolute necessity; moreover, President Polk signed the act reluctantly. 27 The new Department was given charge over .the Patent Office and the Census, which had previously been the business of the Department of State; also over the Land Office and United States Mines, hitherto belonging to the Treasury, over Indian Affairs, which had been in charge of the War Office, and over the Pension Bureau, the supervision of which had been divided between the War and Navy Departments, besides some miscellaneous functions. The expansion of departmental business was further indicated by the cre- ation, under the Home Department Act, of an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. 26 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, II, 461. 27 Polk's Diary, Lenox Library, XXIII, 160. President. ZACHARY TAYLOR, Louisiana. ((Died July 9, 1850.) Vice- President. MILLARD FILLMORE, New York. March 5, 1849, to July 9, 1850. Secretary of State. James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration, John M. Clayton, of Delaware, March 7, 1849. Secretary op the Treasury. Robert J. Walker, of Mississippi; continued from last Administration. McClintock Young (Chief Clerk), ad interim, March 6, 1849. William M. Meredith, of Pennsylvania, March 8, 1849. Secretary of War. William L. Marcy, of New York; continued from last Administration. Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland (Attorney-General), ad interim, March 8, 1849. George W. Crawford, of Georgia, March 8, 1849. Attorney-General. Isaac Toucey, of Connecticut; continued from last Administration. Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, March 8, 1849. Postmaster-General. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee; continued from last Administration. Selah R. Hobbie, of New York (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, March 5, 1849. Jacob Collamer, of Vermont, March 8, 1849. Secretary of the Navy. John Y. Mason, of Virginia; continued from last Administration. William B. Preston, of Virginia, March 8, 1849. Secretary of the Interior. Thomas Ewing, of Ohio, March 8, 1849. 137 TAYLOR. The composition of the Cabinet of President Zachary Taylor is quite inexplicable by any code of rules ; and bears abundant testimony to the naivete of the hero of the Mexican War with regard to government and politics. Two weeks after his nomination, General Taylor communicated to Governor Crittenden of Kentucky, who was serving as his guide and champion, at the price of a former allegi- ance to Clay, that, if he were elected President, his entire Cabinet should be formed of Whigs. 1 Apparently Thurlow Weed had im- posed upon the Whigs a great risk of forfeiting the spoils to the enemy for a second time, when he so laid the wires, and shuffled the National Convention as to put up a no-party hero for the Presi- dency. It is alleged, however, that he had not acted without ac- quainting himself with General Taylor's real sympathies. 2 Unlike Harrison, who was not so much of a novice in affairs of government, General Taylor failed to associate himself with the statesmen of the party, though neither Clay nor Webster had shown any hostility to him, after the nomination was determined. For his preliminary instructions, he turned to Crittenden; and his first lesson seems to have been on the impracticability of calling Vice- President Fillmore into the Cabinet. 3 The pupil made no great progress, however, in the accepted rules for distributing portfolios, though the peculiar combination of States and factions that had elected him, might have rendered them some- what inapplicable in more experienced hands. The Cabinet arrange- ments began with an interview at Frankfort, Kentucky, between President-elect and Governor. Crittenden declined the State port- folio for himself, but recommended Senator John M. Clayton of 1 Coleman, Life of J. J. Crittenden, I, 316 ; Taylor to Crittenden, July 1, 1848. ' Alexander, A Political History of the State of New York, II, 136. •Thurlow Weed, Autobiography, 586. 139 140 The President's Cabinet. Delaware, who had been an avowed Cabinet aspirant in the Harrison- Tyler administration; and the appointment was promptly arranged by telegraph. Abbott Lawrence, a prominent Massachusetts mer- chant, who had stood second to Fillmore as candidate for the Vice- Presidency, was slated for the Navy, and Thomas Ewing of Ohio, Harrison's Secretary of the Treasury, for the Post-Office. The selec- tion of George W. Crawford of Georgia for the War Department was made by Robert H. Toombs and Alexander H. Stephens, after Gen- eral Taylor arrived at the seat of Government. William M. Mere- dith, a Pennsylvania lawyer of considerable skill, but without ex- perience of public affairs, was chosen for Secretary of the Treasury, by the advice of Mr. Clayton. Furthermore, Representative William B. Preston, of Virginia, was substituted for Abbott Lawrence in the Navy Department. The Attorney-Generalship was assigned to Senator Reverdy Johnson of Maryland. There is a story that the places assigned to Preston and Johnson were originally reversed; but Preston was not a lawyer, and when the duties of the At- torney-General were explained to General Taylor, the exchange was made. As the Cabinet arrangements were being completed, much feeling was manifested .that New England was being slighted. The Treasury was desired by that section of the country, and had been asked for Mr. Lawrence, who declined the Navy. Ex- Senator George Evans of Maine was also named for that post; and there is some evidence that Webster supported him. An opportunity was afforded for giving New England a second offer by the creation of the Department of the Interior, on the last day of the expiring administration; and William H. Seward of New York, whom the late Whig triumph had sent to the Senate, sought to have the new office put at the disposal, not of Webster, but the newly elected Sena- tor from Connecticut, Truman Smith. The final arrangement, how- ever, was the transfer of Mr. Ewing to the Interior Department, and the appointment of Representative Jacob Collamer of Vermont to the Post-Office.* Mr. Seward's first speech in the Senate was to secure the confirmation of the Postmaster-General, which was threatened by an attempt to refer the nomination to a committee, Mr. Collamer * Seward at Washington, I, ioo. Taylor. 141 being singled out from all the others for opposition, because of his abolition sentiments. 5 It was an exceedingly mediocre Cabinet that was formed in this novel fashion. Though four of its seven members came from slave- holding States, Crawford and Preston afterwards joining the Con- federacy, none of them had strength enough to stamp the slave interest upon the administration. The most distinguished member was the Secretary of the Interior, for Mr. Ewing had won some prominence in the two fruitless struggles for a Third Bank of the United States. The Secretary of State is remembered chiefly for the connection of his name with the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. He threw the Department into such confusion, that his resignation was agitated, and he seems to have written it on two different occasions, and once to have actually tendered it. 6 The prime force in this brief administration was Seward. Taylor's reliance upon him is an exceedingly good illustration of the confiden- tial relations which sometimes grow out of the President's needs of personal connections with Congress, whereby a Congressional leader becomes a sort of outside Minister. There was a rivalry of brief duration between Senator and Vice-President for the inside track. The Whigs of New York were divided as well as the Democrats. Weed, who was one with Seward, had given an affront to Fillmore at the time of the Whig victory, eight years before, by failing to send him to the Senate in place of Tallmadge, who had previously been a Democrat. And the two factions were shortly to be opposed on the Compromises of 1850, as Radicals and Conservatives, or Sew- ard men and Silver-Grays. 7 Shortly after the inauguration, Seward wrote to Weed that all idea of calling the Vice-President into the Cabinet had been dissipated; evidently that project of General Tay- lor's had caused the two some concern. Seward's control of the patronage was sufficient for Toombs to write to Crittenden, who fell into the background, as General Taylor * Seward at Washington, I, 106. "Seward at Washington, I, in; Clayton MSS., Paper of December, 1849; ibid., June 18, 1850. 7 Alexander, A Political History of the State of New York, II, 30, 155. 142 The President's Cabinet. reached Northern influences, that the Senator from New York was being permitted to force the whole Northern Whig party into his anti-slavery position ; and that only Crawford, the Georgia member of the Cabinet, was resisting, because Preston of Virginia had been fooled into supposing that Seward's aspirations were for 1856, and that he would yield to the South in 1852, if given free rein. 8 Seward's influence extended also to the gravest matters of State. Less than a month after the inauguration, the rumor having gone abroad that the President was false to his promise about the Wilmot Proviso, the Senator from New York published in the National Intelligencer, .the organ of the Whigs, a " Vindication of General Taylor on the Free Soil question " : for the consideration of which he was privileged to meet with the President and Cabinet." He also concurred in the project to despatch an executive agent to California for furthering the preparation of a State Constitution. After the assembling of Congress and the introduction of the Compromises, Seward's Cabinet influence was chiefly with the free- State members; though the division that now began to manifest itself among the Heads of Departments was of little consequence to the relations between the Cabinet and Congress. Clay himself bears witness to the retired position of the Executive ; " I have never before seen such an administration. There is very little cooperation or concord between the two ends of the Avenue. There is not, I believe, a prominent Whig in either House that has any confidential inter- course with the Executive. Mr. Seward, it is said, had; but his late abolition speech had, I presume, cut him off from any such intercourse." 10 But the old chieftain did not know the true in- wardness of things at the White House and the Departments. As a matter of fact the notes of the " Higher Law " speech had been approved by Ewing, and had been submitted to Clayton, who was less favorable because the Northern sentiment was too strong." Moreover Clay's speech of May 21, 1850, attacking the President 8 Coleman, Life of J. J. Crittenden, II, 364 ; April 25, 1850. 'Seward at Washington, I, 108, March 29, 1849. "Clay's Works, ed., 1904, V, 604; Clay to James Harlan, March 16, 1850. 11 Seward at Washington, I, 125, March 11, 1850. Taylor. 143 and administration, caused the Senator from New York to form a plan " to vindicate and defend the administration and the noble old chief " if opportunity should arise." It is probable that the weak and colorless Cabinet which General Taylor in his inexperience had allowed a medley of advisers to select for him, would have given place to a stronger one, had it not been for his untimely death; for the scandal of the Galphin Claim had driven the President to resolve upon a reconstruction. This was a claim for several thousand dollars put forth by the State of Georgia ; and it transpired that Secretary Crawford of the War Department was personally interested in it, notwithstanding that his friend Toombs maintained that the whole affair was an attempt to drive him from office. Other members of the Cabinet shared in the reproach; for Secretary Meredith of the Treasury had ordered the payment of the claim, and Attorney-General Johnson had recom- mended it. An investigation by the House of Representatives resulted in the censure of the Secretary of War, and morally con- victed his two colleagues of stupidity; in which latter verdict Sec- retary Ewing of the Interior was made to share by the simultaneous discovery of a blunder in the office of Indian affairs, being now a bureau in the Department of the Interior. 13 The President's plan, as he stated it to Thurlow Weed, was to detain the Senate at the adjournment of the Congressional session, and submit the new appointments. Meredith, Ewing, and Collamer, whom he highly esteemed in spite of the Departmental blunders, were to be transferred to diplomatic posts. The new Cabinet was to have the majority of its members from the free States, which General Taylor regarded as entitled to the larger representation, by virtue of population and industrial interests. Mr. Weed's suggestion that no Southern Whig could be trusted on the tariff, and that a suitable Secretary of the Treasury would be Governor Hamilton Fish of New York, was apparently received with tacit consent ; wherein lies an intimation that Seward would have remained in the Senate. 14 " Seward at Washington, I, 134, May 22, 1850. " Seward at Washington, I, 130, 133, 143- " Autobiography of Thurlow Weed, 590, 591. 144 The President's Cabinet. Notwithstanding the insipidity of the Taylor Cabinet, the Execu- tive relations during this brief administration are not without interest. They show on the part of a President, entirely untrained in politics and affairs of State, a power to identify himself with the rising forces in the Government, which his more experienced suc- cessors did not possess. President. MILLARD FILLMORE, New York. President Pro Tempore of the Senate. WILLIAM R. KING, Alabama. July 9, 1850, to March 4, 1853. Secretary of State. John M. Clayton, of Delaware; continued from Taylor's Administration. Daniel Webster, of Massachusetts, July 22, 1850. Charles M. Conrad, of Louisiana (Secretary of War), ad interim, September 2, 1852. Edward Everett, of Massachusetts, November 6, 1852. William Hunter (Chief Clerk), ad interim, March 4, 1853. Secretary of the Treasury. William M. Meredith, of Pennsylvania; continued from Taylor's Adminis- tration. Thomas Corwin, of Ohio, July 23, 1850. Secretary of War. George W. Crawford, of Georgia; continued from Taylor's Administration. Samuel J. Anderson (Chief Clerk), ad interim, July 23, 1850. Winfield Scott (Major-General, U. S. A.), ad interim, July 24, 1850. Charles M. Conrad, of Louisiana, August 15, 1850. Attorney-General. Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland; continued from Taylor's Administration. John J. Crittenden, of Kentucky, July 22, 1850. Postmaster-General. Jacob Collamer, of Vermont; continued from Taylor's Administration. Nathan K. Hall, of New York, July 23, 1850. Samuel D. Hubbard, of Connecticut, August 31, 1852. Secretary of the Navy. William B. Preston, of Virginia; continued from Taylor's Administration. William A. Graham, of North Carolina, July 22, 1850. Lewis Warrington (Captain, U. S. N.), ad interim, July 23, 1850. John P. Kennedy, of Maryland, July 22, 1852. Secretary of the Interior. Thomas Ewing, of Ohio; continued from Taylor's Administration. Daniel C. Goddard (Chief Clerk), ad interim, July 23, 1850. Thomas M. T. McKennan, of Pennsylvania, August 27, 1850. Daniel C. Goddard (Chief Clerk), ad interim, August 27, 1850. Alexander H. H. Stuart, of Virginia, September 12, 1850. 10 I4S FILLMORE. The accession of Vice-President Fillmore to the Presidency on July 10, 1850, gave the government into the hands of the Compro- mise Whigs ; for the Seward faction now had to yield to the Silver- Grays. The Cabinet situation was very different from what it had been at Tyler's accession nine years before. The fact that Taylor's advisers were not in touch with Congress, together with the reproach of the Galphin Claim threw the weight of opinion in favor of a complete change ; moreover, the principle now began to be applied to an accidental President that, unless he appointed his own Cabinet, the administration would not be his own. 1 Seward waited upon Mr. Fillmore and advised the retention of all of the existing Cabinet, ex- cept the Secretary of War, urging as the least consideration that the Secretary of State be retained. But the members of the Cabinet, though all of them except Crawford would have preferred to remain at their posts, professed such eagerness to withdraw, that they had to be urged to allow the President time to look for their successors, and their resignations were accepted to take effect July 22. President Fillmore turned at once to Clay and Webster, and formed his administration in much the same fashion as Harrison had done, though change of issues and the advanced years of the two statesmen made the situation somewhat different. Clay, as before, desired Cabinet honors for his rival but not for himself; which significant fact called forth the following from Fletcher Webster : " Mr. Clay is very anxious to have father go into the Cabinet. This alarms me. He would not do it, unless he thought it would dispose of Mr. Webster out of his way. I am afraid of the kisses of an enemy." 3 The new President further consulted Clay about his relations with Crittenden, and was informed that there was 1 Seward at Washington, I, 145-149- 2 Van Tyne, Letters of Daniel Webster, 420; Fletcher Webster to Peter Har- vey, undated. 147 148 The President's Cabinet. no obstacle to appointment of that gentleman to the Cabinet, although the former intimacy was at an end. Accordingly, Mr. Crittenden, whose governorship had now expired, assumed the Attorney- General's office for .the second time. Further than this, the res- toration of the Harrison Cabinet did not go; for Mr. Ewing, the natural representative of the North-West had identified himself with the Seward wing of the party. The Treasury portfolio was assigned, however, to Senator Thomas Corwin of Ohio, whose remarks on the Mexican War were too well remembered to make the appointment altogether popular ; in fact Seward prepared himself to champion Corwin's confirmation, if obstruction should be attempted. In providing for the other Departments, President Fillmore exper- ienced a good deal of difficulty. All were inconspicuously filled, and there was much shifting. The State Department also changed hands before the close of the administration. Webster's second incumbency had been much inter- rupted by ill health, which became more serious, after he was dis- appointed of the presidential nomination of 1852; at the close of September of that year, he resigned, being within a few weeks of his death. Edward Everett, who had the same constituency and political affiliations as Webster, succeeded him ; and maintained the dignity of the Department according to the standard of his predecessor, although his brief incumbency afforded no opportunity for great dis- tinction. The Fillmore administration, with its achievements in the field of foreign affairs, and its harmonious relations with Congress, showed average strength. In the affairs of State, the President was over- shadowed by the Secretary ; but in his political following he had the advantage. The intrusion of an accidental President into an admin- istration, has never failed to complicate the question of the presiden- tial succession; and on this occasion the Cabinet relations were involved. Just as Clay was removed by physical collapse in the session of 185 1 -'52, Webster found a new rival in Fillmore, and Fillmore probably enjoyed Clay's support. Though the situation was a delicate one, no Cabinet rupture resulted, neither did personal friction outwardly weaken the administration. Fillmore. 149 On the whole, the Whigs raised the status of the Cabinet above the level to which it had sunken during the Jackson regime, not- withstanding the shocks suffered by the extraordinary number of changes in the Executive personnel. For, while the Whig party degraded the Presidency, by setting aside its statesmen for candi- dates with purely popular qualifications, it restored the old standard of Cabinet ability by reversing Jackson's rule that excluded presi- dential aspirants from the Departments. There was also a gain in the influence of the Cabinet with Congress. A few weeks before Tyler's break with the Whigs, Silas Wright asserted that he had never known the Executive influence to be so much felt in the Upper House, and Mr. Wright had entered the Senate in Jackson's presidency. Despite the vicissitudes that followed, the Cabinet was again influential when the Whig period closed. The Executive initiative, however, was not so much felt as it would have been, had Clay consented to become a member of the administration. On the last day of the Fillmore administration, March 3, 1853, an act was passed raising the salaries of the Cabinet officers and placing the Attorney-General and Postmaster-General upon the same level with the Secretaries. This act also created the office of Assistant Secretary in the Department of State. President. FRANKLIN PIERCE, New Hampshire. Vice-President. WILLIAM R. KING, Alabama. (Died April 18, 1833.) President Pro Tempore of the Senate. David R. Atchison, Missouri. Lewis Cass, Michigan. Jesse D. Bright, Indiana. Charles E. Stuart, Michigan. James M. Mason, Virginia. March 4, 1853, to March 4, 1857. Secretary of State. William Hunter (Chief Clerk), ad interim, March 4, 1853. William L. Marcy, of New York, March 7, 1853. Secretary of the Treasury. Thomas Corwin, of Ohio; continued from last Administration. James Guthrie, of Kentucky, March 7, 1853. Secretary of War. Charles M. Conrad, of Louisiana; continued from last Administration. Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi, March 7, 1853. Samuel Cooper (Adjutant-General, U. S. A.), ad interim, March 3, 1857. Attorney-General. John J. Crittenden, of Kentucky; continued from last Administration. Caleb Cushing, of Massachusetts, March 7, 1853. Postmaster-General. Samuel D. Hubbard, of Connecticut; continued from last Administration. James Campbell, of Pennsylvania, March 7, 1853. Secretary of the Navy. John P. Kennedy, of Maryland; continued from last Administration. James C. Dobbin, of North Carolina, March 7, 1853. Secretary of the Interior. Alexander H. H. Stuart, of Virginia; continued from last Administration. Robert McClelland, of Michigan, March 7, 1853. 151 PIERCE. The conditions that attended the making of a Democrat Cabinet in 1852 strongly resembled those of 1844 ; but there is not so much information available about the demands that confronted Pierce as there is in the case of Polk. The strong competitors for the presi- dential nomination, before a sufficiently colorless candidate was found in Franklin Pierce of New Hampshire, had been Cass, Buchanan, Marcy, and Stephen A. Douglas. The factional divisions within the larger States had changed form in eight years. In New York, there were now the " Softs " and " Hards " who united for the election of the President, but resumed their rivalries so soon as the admin- istration was inaugurated. In Pennsylvania Buchanan was in the ascendant; and the strength of his following is indicated by the choice of one of his particular friends, William R. King of Alabama, as the candidate for the Vice-Presidency. With his rival from the Keystone State, Pierce desired amicable but not intimate relations ; and Buchanan's conflicting emotions with regard to the comparative abasement to which he was subjected give a good deal of flavor to the story of how the administration was formed. Early in December, the President-elect entered into corre- spondence with the ex-Secretary of State ; and, with kind but explicit announcement that Buchanan himself would not be invited into the Cabinet, he asked for other suggestions. The correspondence re- sulted in the appointment of James Campbell of Pennsylvania to the Postmaster-Generalship. 1 Additional political significance attached to the fact that Judge Campbell was a Roman Catholic in religion, since the President-elect had been charged with favoring the religious test act of New Hampshire. 1 1 Buchanan MSS., Letters between Pierce and Buchanan, 1852; also Buchanan to Campbell, March 10, 1853. "Daily Union, August 7, 1853. 153 154 The President's Cabinet. The Treasury portfolio went to the South, as it had done under Polk, the new Secretary being James Guthrie of Kentucky, a man of advanced years, who was prominent in the affairs of his State, but was unknown in National politics. The War Department was pressed upon Jefferson Davis of Mississippi, who had won distinction in the Mexican War, and when confronted with a choice between a Cabinet office and a seat in the Senate, decided reluctantly in favor of the former. The Navy portfolio was assigned to James C. Dobbin, a young North Carolina lawyer, who had been a controlling force in the Democrat National Convention, and had nominated Pierce for the Presidency. The Interior Department was given to Robert McClelland of Michigan, a former member of the House of Repre- sentatives, and Governor of his State, this arrangement being a concession to the Cass interest. The chosen representative of New England was Caleb Cushing of Massachusetts; and there is a tra- dition that Pierce would have put him over the State Department, had it not been that, in spite of his fellowship with Tyler, the South was mindful that Cushing had once companied with abolitionists. 5 The State portfolio had been reserved for New York ; but the diffi- culty of choosing between the factions there deferred the final arrangement, until two or three days beyond the usual time for submitting the Cabinet slate to the Senate. John A. Dix, who had been very prominent within the State, and had also had a short ser- vice in the United States Senate, was singled out as a suitable incumbent, and was bidden to Pierce's home at Concord, to receive there a definite offer of the State portfolio. Mr. Dix, however, had been a "Barnburner;" and in 1848, he had run for the office of Governor on the Free-Soil ticket. And, when it was pointed out to the President-elect, that such a selection might cost him the support of the Southern Democracy, he sought a release from the engage- ment. 4 Mr. Dix's opportunity for Cabinet distinction was thereby postponed to a later administration. And the State portfolio was shifted to Marcy, whose " Hunker " conservatism on the issues that had begun to divide the party eight years before rendered his past s Ben Perley Poore, Reminiscences, I, 427. 4 Memoirs of John A. Dix, I, 271, 272. Pierce. 155 less objectionable. It was thus an afterthought that Pierce put at the head of his Cabinet one of his prominent competitors for the presidential nomination. The qualifications of Polk's Secretary of War for such elevation do not greatly suffer for being reflected through the medium of Buchanan's disaffection. Writing to one of their common colleagues, the former Secretary of State said : " I have no cause of complaint against Marcy He would have succeeded in any other Department of the government; but I know of no other man of experience and character who is more ignorant than he is of all which relates to our foreign affairs. He has never made them any portion of his study. But he has a cool, clear head, and a strong intellect, and I place great reliance on his capacity. He may and I trust will succeed It is but justice to the President to remark that he had good reasons to believe that I did not desire the State Department at the time he appointed Marcy. Still less do I desire the mission to England." " Inasmuch as Buchanan accepted the mis- sion to England, which he quitted in time to prepare for the presi- dential canvass of 1856, it may be inferred that he would not have declined a second incumbency of the State Department. The Pierce Cabinet was an able one. With Marcy, Davis, and Cushing among its members, there were strong and varied person- alities about the council table. This administration is proverbial, moreover, for its stability, being the only one that has experienced no change of personnel; although both Washington and Jefferson, barring the delays that attended the forming of an administration in the early years of the Government, passed through a single term of office, without parting with any of their Ministers. An extraordinary mastery over men on the part of President Pierce is held up by Southern writers, as the explanation of the stability of his Cabinet, as well as of the great harmony which they claim for it.* The same authorities, nevertheless, portray Pierce as a President who so disliked to cause pain to his opponents that he had the air of seek- ing a compromise; and admit that he surmounted differences by 5 Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Cave Johnson, May 3, 1853. * Alfriend, Life of Jefferson Davis, 89. 156 The President's Cabinet. agreeing with his adversary. It is asserted that on only one occasion was there any serious disagreement between him and Secretary Davis, and that .this was settled by the President's saying that he would take the responsibility; this one difference, moreover, was on a minor point. 7 Such harmony in Cabinet affairs is phenomenal ; and its ex- istence at this date between the future President of the Confederacy and a President of the United States, bred in the traditions of New England, points to great adaptability on one side or the other. The farewell letters exchanged between Pierce and his Cabinet reflect an exceedingly friendly feeling." They appear, however, to have been somewhat of a formality; for the Fillmore Cabinet upon retiring had joined in a cordial letter of farewell to the President, and Tyler had gone so far as to include a tribute to his Cabinet in his last Annual Message to Congress. The inside relations of this administration are better revealed by the impartial and searching investigations of Mr. James Ford Rhodes than by the eulogies upon Jefferson Davis. By importuning Davis to enter the Cabinet, and breaking off the arrangement with Dix, Pierce had foreshadowed a policy of concession to the slave interest, and had identified himself with what proved to be the controlling spirit in Congress. The rearrangement of the Cabinet slate had done much to forestall dissension in the Executive, but had not entirely precluded it ; for Marcy, despite his previously acceptable record, did not show himself adaptable to the slave interest in its new aspects. An antagonism immediately developed between Marcy and Cushing. Less than a month after the inauguration, this was commented upon by Seward, who was fast becoming opposition leader in the Senate.' There were also rumors inside of the party loud enough to reach Buchanan at London. 10 Upon the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, the Cabinet became distinctly divided. The Daily Union, being the Democrat organ, gave out that this was an administration measure. 11 And Seward believed that the ' Memoir of Jefferson Davis, I, 544. 'American Historical Review, X, 354. 'Seward at Washington, I, 203. "Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Forney, December 13, 1853. u March 22, 1854. Pierce. 157 section for the repeal of the Missouri Compromise was agreed upon at a meeting of Douglas with the whole Cabinet. 12 But Davis' more authoritative account is to the effect that Douglas, with other members of the Committee, called first upon himself; and that he repaired with them to the Executive Mansion, to enlist the aid of the President. He makes no mention of other Secretaries ; but implicitly denies that the bill was prepared by the President or any member of the Cabinet." Cushing joined Davis as a champion of the measure, but Marcy was uncertain from the first." McClelland, who represented the North-West, was also inactive. The Secretary of State hesitated more and more, as he foresaw the effect of the measure upon the integrity of the Democrat party; and he finally contemplated resignation from the Cabinet. Moreover, it was the solicitude of Marcy's friends, lest his withdrawal should forfeit all that their wing of the party possessed, more than tactful manage- ment on the part of Pierce, that held him to his post. 1 " The selection of Davis as the intermediary between the authors of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill and the President is a good measure of the influence exerted by the Secretary of War in this administration. He largely dictated the behavior of the Executive towards the dis- orders in Kansas, and brought about the concessions to the slave interest. President Pierce's habit of seeing things the way his advisers saw them has given rise to a tradition that his customary practice in reaching a decision was to take a poll of the Cabinet, and adopt the opinion of the majority. Stronger Presidents than he have resorted to Cabinet polls on occasion ; and have adopted the majority opinion, where they could not see their own way, or even yielded to it on minor points. The charge that Cabinet polls were habitual with Pierce scarcely admits of proof from such material as is at present available; and should rather be regarded as a general formula for his amiable fashion of allowing his advisers to make up his mind for him. 12 Seward at Washington, 1, 217, 218. 15 Jefferson Davis, Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, I, 27. " Memoirs of John A. Dix, I, 285. '* Rhodes, History of the United States, I, 481. President. JAMES BUCHANAN, Pennsylvania. Vice- President. JOHN C. BRECKINRIDGE, Kentucky. March 4, 1857, to March 4, 1861. Secretary of State. William L. Marcy, of New York; continued from last Administration. Lewis Cass, of Michigan, March 6. 1857. William Hunter (Chief Clerk), ad interim, December 13, i860. Jeremiah S. Black, of Pennsylvania, December 17, i860. SecretaryI of the Treasury. James Guthrie, of Kentucky; continued from last Administration. Howell Cobb, of Georgia, March 6, 1857. Isaac Toucey, of Connecticut (Secretary of the Navy), ad interim, Decem- ber 10, i860. Philip F. Thomas, of Maryland, December 12, i860. John A. Dix, of New York, January 11, 1861. Secretary of War. Samuel Cooper (Adjutant-General, U. S. A.), ad interim, March 4, 1857. John B. Floyd, of Virginia, March 6, 1857. Joseph Holt, of Kentucky (Postmaster-General), ad interim, January 1, 1861. Joseph Holt, of Kentucky, January 18, 1861. Attorney-General. Caleb Cushing, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. Jeremiah S. Black, of Pennsylvania, March 6, 1857. Edwin M. Stanton, of Pennsylvania, December 20, i860. Postmaster-General. James Campbell, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. Aaron V. Brown, of Tennessee, March 6, 1857. Horatio King, of Maine (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, March 9, 1859. Joseph Holt, of Kentucky, March 14, 1859. Horatio King, of Maine, (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, January I, 1861. Horatio King, of Maine, February 12, 1861. Secretary of the Navy. James C Dobbin, of North Carolina; continued from last Administration. Isaac Toucey, of Connecticut, March 6, 1857. Secretary of the Interior. Robert McClelland, of Michigan ; continued from last Administration. Jacob Thompson, of Mississippi, March 6, 1857. Moses Kelly (Chief Clerk), ad interim, January 10, 1861. 159 BUCHANAN The election of 1856 brought to James Buchanan the opportunity to make a Cabinet for himself ; for the former Secretary of State and Minister to England now received the presidential nomination over Pierce, who had won in the South a strong support for a second term of office, but was much less acceptable to the Northern Democ- racy than his rival from Pennsylvania. The third candidate on the list was Douglas, and at the foot stood Cass commanding only seven votes at the most. From his seat in the Senate, which he had held since the inauguration of President Polk, General Cass was about to be deposed; for his constituency was in possession of the newly formed Republican party. This at least left him free to receive more distinguished attention than he ever had done before in the formation of the Cabinet. On February 23, the President-elect wrote to the English Minister of Foreign Affairs : " General Cass is to be my Secretary of State, and no Englishman need feel the least uneasiness on this account. His anglophobia, as you used facetiously to term it, if it ever existed, no longer exists. His age, his patriotism, his long and able public services, his unsullied private character and the almost universal feeling in his favor rendered his appointment pecul- iarly appropriate." * Since General Cass was already in his seventy- fifth, year, Buchanan probably viewed this appointment as a semi- honorary one. He himself was prepared to take a more direct part than recent Presidents had done in foreign affairs ; furthermore, there was now an Assistant Secretary of State. However, the letter in which the State portfolio was formally tendered to Cass paid a grace- ful compliment to the phenomenal preservation of his physical and mental vigor. The Treasury portfolio, Buchanan like Pierce, as- signed to the South, appointing Howell Cobb of Georgia, a man of distinguished experience in the House of Representatives, and later a 1 Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Lord Clarendon, February 23, 1853. 11 161 162 The President's Cabinet. member of the Congress of the Confederacy, and an officer of rank in its army. Both for his talents and his personal qualities, Secretary Cobb was highly esteemed by Buchanan; and it was a source of gratification that no personal rancor attended their separation. The War Office was conferred upon ex-Governor John B. Floyd of Vir- ginia; an appointment for which Buchanan was afterwards pleased to excuse himself by saying that the electoral college of Virginia had recommended Mr. Floyd for a seat in the Cabinet, in which matter that gentleman had shown a most commendable modesty, and that the position of his family was also a credential. The Navy Department was assigned to Isaac Toucey of Connecticut, who, like Cass, was about to yield his seat in the Senate to a Republican ; Mr. Toucey had been one of President Buchanan's colleagues in the Polk Cabinet. Jeremiah S. Black of Pennsylvania, a brilliant lawyer, and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of that State, became Attorney- General. The extraordinary relation which he afterwards assumed towards his nominal chief lends interest to the fact that Mr. Buchanan subjected himself to a good deal of opposition among the politicians of Pennsylvania in making this appointment." The Interior Depart- ment was assigned to Jacob Thompson of Mississippi, formerly a somewhat prominent member of the House of Representatives. As to whether this arrangement was dictated by Jefferson Davis, we have found no evidence; though the relations of the parties concerned would justify such an inference. Secretary Thompson afterwards became Governor of Mississippi under the Confederacy, and an of- ficer in the Confederate army. A Postmaster-General was found in the person of ex-Governor Aaron V. Brown of Tennessee; who, however, died in office and was succeeded by Joseph Holt of Ken- tucky. In the crisis of the administration, Mr. Holt like Judge Black became a great executive force. The significant period in Buchanan's Cabinet affairs does not begin until the election of his successor, Abraham Lincoln, to the Pres- idency, November 6, i860. The enormous demand, made upon the President by the crisis that ensued, was met by the assumption of a >virtual regency on the part of such of his Ministers as were loyal to 2 Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Black, March 6, 1857. Buchanan. 163 the Union, a situation without parallel in the history of the Executive. A necessary incident of this was a Cabinet reconstruction, indeed, we are prompted to say, two reconstructions ; for, although the several changes occurred at intervals of but a few days, and only one Depart- ment twice changed hands, they reflect two distinctly different stages in the handling of the secession problem. The preparations for secession from the Union, in which South Carolina was taking the lead, called forth in the President's Annual Message of December 3, i860, the declaration that secession was not a Constitutional right of the States, but along with it the contrary proposition that Congress had no authority to coerce into submission a State that had actually seceded, or was attempting such a course. The non-coercion doctrine had been asserted by the Attorney-General in a recent opinion; moreover, it had the apparent sanction of the other Northern members. The denial of a right of secession, how- ever, caused the Southern Secretaries to take issue ; and on Decem- ber 8, Cobb of the Treasury quitted the administration. However, Thompson of the Interior, who was equally devoted to the Southern cause, stuck to his post, out of deference to the President's wish that his Secretaries should go out of office at the same time with himself. What the President hoped to accomplish by keeping the Cabinet outwardly intact, after such schism existed in its sentiments and purposes, would be hard to tell. But it would seem that he was more concerned about his personal relations than he was about the fate of the Government. As he himself expressed it, six years after- wards in his vindication of his administration : " The President had earnestly desired that his Cabinet might remain together until the close of the administration. He felt sensibly the necessary with- drawal of some of its members, after all had been so long united in bonds of mutual confidence and friendship." * Meanwhile, the Secretary of the Interior was retained, although he publically undertook the office of Commissioner of the State of Mississippi to the State of North Carolina, to influence the latter to take secession measures. Secretary Floyd likewise remained at his post, despite suspicion regarding the distribution of the government ' The Administration of James Buchanan, in. 164 The President's Cabinet. arms. Moreover, the vacancy in the Treasury Department was filled by the appointment of another secessionist, Philip F. Thomas of Maryland. The next break in the Cabinet came from the North. General Cass, notwithstanding his acquiescence in the doctrine of non- coercion, two weeks before, had felt his Union sentiments outraged at the President's supineness about protecting the national property in Charleston harbor ; and on December 12, with free expression of his views as to his chief's behavior in the matter, he tendered a formal resignation of the State Department, 4 the acceptance of which was not assured until three days later. On the 13th, the retiring Sec- retary attended a Cabinet meeting and made a final plea for the forts at Charleston ; and, to quote Secretary Floyd's description : " The President said to him in reply, with a beautiful countenance and with a heroic decision :....' I have considered this question. I am sorry to differ from the Secretary of State ; I have made up my mind. The interests of the country do not demand a reenforcement of the forces in Charleston. I cannot do it ... . and I take the responsibility upon myself.' " 5 Postmaster-General Holt tried to urge his Northern col- leagues to reconsider his action, averring that the loyal members of the Cabinet ought, more than ever, to stick to their posts ; but the aged Secretary insisted that for him to remain would be treasonable, though the same argument did not apply to a member from a border State. On the 15th, the President accepted the resignation by formal letter, reiterating his determination not to strengthen the forces at Charleston. The blunt frankness of this affair left a wound that always rankled in Mr. Buchanan's breast ; and while dealing gently with the memory of his Southern colleagues in his later utterances, he was not averse to disparaging the record of General Cass. In pre- paring his vindication of his administration, he purposed to say that the Secretary of State had sought to recall his resignation, but that the President would not permit him to do so ; however, Judge Black, whose account of an interview with Cass was to be used for evidence, 4 Curtis, Life of Buchanan, II, 397. 5 Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, II, 396-398. "Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Toucey, May 13, 1864. Buchanan. 165 declined to make any statement for publication. 6 The break in the State Department was tided over by the Assistant Secretary William F. Trescott, who was a South Carolinian, and was using his office to the advantage of that State. But December 17, Attorney-General Black was promoted to the State Department ; and was promptly suc- ceeded in his former office by Edwin M. Stanton, also of Pennsyl- vania, which arrangement seems to have been a condition of Black's acceptance of the more responsible post.' Probably General Cass's refusal to associate with such an administration longer had not been without effect upon the loyal sentiment in .the Cabinet. The same spectacle that had wrought upon him had worked a simultaneous development in the views of Black. November 20, as Attorney-Gen- eral, he had given an opinion against offensive coercion by the Na- tional Government ; but early in December, he asserted in a memor- andum to the President a right of coercion for defensive purposes. 8 Furthermore, Mr. Stanton, whom he selected for his successor in the Attorney-Generalship was known to be in accord with himself in his Union sentiments. The yielding of Buchanan to this influence, may be viewed as the preparation for the stand of the Executive against secession. The next change in the Cabinet had other significance than the sectional crisis ; but was permitted to be glossed over, as of one kind with the other resignations. It transpired that Secretary Floyd was implicated in a defalcation in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, where his notes were appearing in lieu of bonds amounting to nearly a million of dollars. On December 23, President Buchanan preserving his wonted graciousness by making one of Mr. Floyd's friends his agent, communicated a request for the Secretary's resignation, and received an answer that the request would be complied with; no resignation followed, however, until the shaping of the Southern question afforded a good pretext for quitting the War Department. The removal of the United States garrison at Charleston from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter, together with the arrival of the South Carolina Commissioners at Washington, brought the opportunity; ' Gorham, Edwin, M. Stanton, I, 131. 8 Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, I, 122. 166 The President's Cabinet. and Mr. Buchanan himself gives a partial account of the insolent manner in which it was embraced. The Cabinet was now in almost continuous session ; and at a meeting of December 27, the Secretary of War, who had not resorted to secession utterances before, pre- sented a paper in which he charged that Major Anderson's removal from Moultrie to Sumter was a gross violation of solemn pledges, and demanded that the garrison be withdrawn altogether." The posibility of the President's acceding to this demand caused the new Attorney-General and presumably some of his colleagues to prepare for resignation ; 10 but the issue was .that the Secretary of War re- signed. Incidentally to the discussion of the proposition for the re- moval of the garrison, Mr. Stanton referred to the disappearance of the Indian trust funds, and Mr. Floyd did not appear again among his colleagues. On the 29th, being Saturday, he tendered his resigna- tion on the ground that he could not be the agent of the Government in its policy of bloodshed. 11 The following Monday, Postmaster-Gen- eral Holt was put in charge of the War Department, at first tem- porarily. The establishment of the Cabinet Regency is signalized by the prep- aration of the reply of the Executive to the Commissioners from South Carolina as much as by any one event. On the night of December 29, President Buchanan submitted a letter which he had prepared, announcing, in reply to the demands of the Commissioners, a continuation of his policy of inaction. Only Secretary Toucey, the member from New England approved. Thompson and Thomas wished that the answer should be one of concession to the South, h while Black, Stanton, and Holt demanded that it should declare an unmistakable purpose to preserve the Union. The President adhered to his plan of neutrality, however, until news was brought to him on the following morning that Secretary Black had announced a deter- mination to withdraw from his service. A hurried interview with that officer led to the surrender of the important paper into his hands ; and Black assisted by Stanton, with Holt concurring, drafted a substi- " Administration of James Buchanan, 185-188. M Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, I, 156. u Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, I, 154. Buchanan. 167 tute with the President's promise that he would sign what they submitted." It is asserted by one authority that the President did not actually use the reply prepared by his Ministers but a second one of his own preparation. 13 Howbeit, the insolent rejoinder of the South Carolina agents, with other occurences, constrained him to yield to the Unionist influence. The second reconstruction of the Cabinet now occurred. January 2, a meeting was held to consider the reenforcement of the garrison at Charleston. Six days later occurred the expedition of the Star of the West; and Thompson siezed it as a pretext for resignation. So recently as December 31, the President had followed up his reply to the South Carolina Commissioners with the suspension of orders for the sailing of the Brooklyn; and the Secretary of the Interior had won from him a promise not to resume the reenforcement plan without previous discussion in Cabinet. Notwithstanding the session of January 2, the Secretary boldly accused his chief of bad faith; and for once Mr. Buchanan returned a spirited answer." During the remainder of the administration the direction of the Interior Depart- ment devolved upon its chief clerk. One day later, January 9, Thomas was forced out of the Treasury. The bankers and capitalists of New York City, impelled by the impending financial situation, had communicated to the President a resolution to enter into no fiscal transactions with the National Government, until he placed in the Cabinet men upon whom the friends of the Union could depend; and they further made the specific condition that John A. Dix should be appointed Secretary of the Treasury. At an interview of January 8, Mr. Dix was offered the War Department, which had not had a regular incumbent since Secretary Floyd's withdrawal. The President was informed that only the Treasury would be considered ; and having secured the resig- nation of Thomas, for which the Star of the West expedition afforded a timely pretext, he appointed Mr. Dix Secretary of the Treasury, on January 11. 1S On the 17th, Mr. Holt was regularly a Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, III, 73-86. 13 Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, I, 147. " Buchanan MSS., Buchanan to Thompson, January 9, 1861. 11 Memoirs of John A. Dix, I, 362. 168 The President's Cabinet. appointed Secretary of War, the vacancy in the Post Office being filled by the promotion of Horatio King, previously First Assistant Postmaster-General. The Cabinet Regency was now fully established, Black, Stanton, Holt, and Dix being its members. The triumph of Union sentiment in the Executive had been signalized January 8, by the transmission of a message to Congress wherein the right of defensive coercion was asserted, after the manner of Judge Black's memorandum of a month before. This was followed by numerous acts for the enforce- ment of the laws of the National Government within the disaffected States. But every important measure was traceable to the four Ministers. 16 And such resistance as their nominal chief occasionally opposed to their movements was promptly overcome." Under the second group of Democrat Presidents, the Cabinet had unmistakably gathered head as a part of the Executive. It remained to be seen whether it could preserve such a dominant position in the hands of Abraham Lincoln. "Rhodes, History of the United States, III, 287. "Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, III, 130. President. ABRAHAM LINCOLN, Illinois. Vice-President. HANNIBAL HAMLIN, Maine. March 4, 1861, to March 4, 1865. Secretary of State. Jeremiah S. Black, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. William H. Seward, of New York, March 5, 1861. Secretary of the Treasury. John A. Dix, of New York; continued from last Administration. Salmon P. Chase, of Ohio, March 5, 1861. George Harrington, of the District of Columbia (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, July 1, 1864. William P. Fessenden, of Maine, July 1, 1864. George Harrington, of the District of Columbia (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, March 4, 1865. Secretary of War. Joseph Holt, of Kentucky; continued from last Administration. Simon Cameron, of Pennsylvania, March 5, 1861. Edwin M. Stanton, of Pennsylvania, January 15, 1862. Attorney-General. Edwin M. Stanton, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. Edward Bates, of Missouri, March 5. 1861. James Speed, of Kentucky, December 2, 1864. Postmaster-General. Horatio King, of Maine; continued from last Administration. Montgomery Blair, of the District of Columbia, March 5, 1861. William Dennison, of Ohio, September 24, 1864. Secretary of the Navy. Isaac Toucey, of Connecticut; continued from last Administration. Gideon Welles, of Connecticut, March 5, 1861. Secretary of the Interior. Moses Kelly (Chief Clerk), ad interim, March 4, 1861. Caleb B. Smith, of Indiana, March 5, 1861. John P. Usher, of Indiana (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, January 1, 1863. John P. Usher, of Indiana, January 8, 1863. 169 President. ABRAHAM LINCOLN, Illinois. (Died April 15, 1865.) Vice- President. ANDREW JOHNSON, Tennessee. March 4, 1865, to April 15, 1865. Secretary of State. William H. Seward, of New York; continued from last Administration. Secretary of the Treasury. George Harrington, of the District of Columbia (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, March 4, 1865. Hugh McCulloch, of Indiana, March 7, 1865. Secretary of War. Edwin M. Stanton, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. Attorney-General. James Speed, of Kentucky; continued from last Administration. Postmaster-General. William Dennison, of Ohio; continued from last Administration. Secretary of the Navy. Gideon Welles, of Connecticut ; continued from last Administration. Secretary of the Interior. John P. Usher, of Indiana; continued from last Administration. 170 LINCOLN. There is a dramatic story, which owes its authority to Gideon Welles, that Lincoln thought out the personnel of his Cabinet, during the wakeful hours that followed his departure, in the early morning of Wednesday, November 7, i860, from the little telegraph office at Springfield, where he had awaited the returns from the elections. 1 The fewness and directness of the strokes with which he afterwards accomplished the task, that under the circumstances was nothing less than colossal, also point to an early and thorough grasp of the prin- ciples upon which his administration should be made up. For, from the time when he began his definite arrangements, early in December, until their completion, the day after his inauguration, the only matter of serious doubt was what representation could be given to the South. One of the rules that he fixed upon was to divide the Cabinet as equally as might be between the old Whigs and Democrats, in recognition that the Republican party was a fusion. Another was to bind together the several personal factions by taking his compet- itors for the presidential nomination to be his official advisers. The former geographical code was to be changed, only as the dismembered condition of the Union should render impossible the proportional representation of the slave interest; though it was evident that the modification would have to be a great one. Those of Mr. Lincoln's rivals who had shown the strongest sup- port were William H. Seward of New York, Simon Cameron of Pennsylvania, Salmon P. Chase of Ohio, all of them members of the United States Senate, though Chase had more recently been Governor of his State, and Edward Bates of Missouri, a prominent figure in Western politics. Of these Seward and Bates had been previously Whigs, Cameron and Chase, Democrats. So soon as Mr. Lincoln was apprized of his nomination, he had settled upon Seward 'Atlantic Monthly, CIII, No. 2; Diary of Gideon Welles. 171 172 The President's Cabinet. and Bates for members of his Cabinet; and had assigned to Mr. Seward, by virtue of his political seniority and his long and varied experience of public affairs, the State Department. He made the formal tender by a letter of December 8, i860, and shortly received an acceptance, Mr. Seward himself not visiting Springfield, though his representative, Thurlow Weed, duly appeared there in the throng of Cabinet makers. On the 18th, Mr. Bates, whom .the President-elect had approached in a peculiarly complimentary way, visited Spring- field in person ; and was given authority to publish in the Missouri Democrat that he would be offered and would accept a place in the new Cabinet, though the particular post was not yet determined. Meanwhile politicians were circulating the report that the new President would, in view of the peculiar situation, include among his official advisers, several of his political enemies, and Mr. Lincoln sought to quiet this by inserting a pointed editorial in the Illinois Journal of December 12: "We hear such frequent allusions to a supposed purpose on the part of Mr. Lincoln to call into his Cabinet two or three Southern gentlemen from the parties opposed to him politically, that we are prompted to ask a few questions. First, is it known that any such gentleman of character would accept a place in the Cabinet? Second, if yea, on what terms does he surrender to Mr. Lincoln, or Mr. Lincoln to him, on the political differences between them ; or do they enter upon the administration in open opposition to each other ? " Pennsylvania was again asking for the Treasury; and various considerations pointed to Simon Cameron as the most suitable repre- sentative of that State. Mr. Cameron was bidden to Springfield, and on December 31, departed from there with a written statement that he would be nominated either for Secretary of the Treasury or Sec- retary of War, the indefiniteness being due to Mr. Lincoln's own inclination towards Governor Chase for his Minister of Finance. This engagement proved to be a most embarrassing one; for three days after it was made, Mr. Lincoln was constrained to withdraw the offer and hold the Pennsylvania appointment open. On the day of Cameron's departure, moreover, Mr. Chase had been summoned to Springfield, where Lincoln made certain propositions regarding the Lincoln. 173 Treasury with accompanying explanation that Mr. Seward was to be Secretary of State. However, he made no engagement with Chase, which seems to indicate that he shrank from too great haste in setting over against each other those two great men, differing as they did in temperament and political antecedents, and giving promise of rivalry for future preferment. Though not giving his confidence to his prospective Secretary of State in such measure as some Presidents-elect have done, he was in correspondence with him, especially upon the subject of finding representative Southern gentlemen, identified with the slave interest, whom loyalty to the Union might render eligible to a place in the National Executive; a project which was especially attractive to Mr. Seward. In this correspondence were considered Randall Hunt of Louisiana, John A. Gilmer and Kenneth Raynor, both of North Carolina, and Robert E. Scott of Virginia. Up to the close of Janu- ary, strong hopes were entertained of an arrangement with Mr. Gilmer, but it was a very serious difficulty that that gentleman advocated the extension of slavery in the Territories, and he more- over advised that the President-elect should seek to ingratiate himself with the South by means of a published letter defining his position, which expedient Lincoln viewed as a practical apology for having been elected. Mr. Gilmer declined to visit Springfield ; and no further attempt was made to find a Cabinet Minister south of the border slave States. Lincoln had early settled in his own mind upon Gideon Welles of Connecticut to be the member from New England. Mr. Welles was a man of advanced years, and an old time Democrat, who had latterly enjoyed no particular influence in his section. In Jackson's time, he had held office under the government of his State, and Polk had made him the head of a bureau in the Navy Department. It was for the Navy portfolio that he was now slated. The choice was appro- priately referred to one of the Senators from Connecticut, and to the Vice-President-elect, Hamilton Hamlin of Maine, and others, who confirmed it. Between Lincoln and Hamlin, there was a per- sonal interview at Chicago, two weeks after the election, that was the occasion of Cabinet discussion. 174 The President's Cabinet. Meanwhile, politicians from Indiana were not slow to wait upon the President-elect; for in the new geographical adjustment, that State had appeared upon the list of those that an administration must reckon with. Two " favorite sons " were urged for the Cabinet, Schuyler Colfax and Caleb B. Smith, the former a member and the latter an ex-member of the House of Representatives. Mr. Smith was decided upon for the Interior Department, being preferred, as Lincoln graciously wrote his competitor, for his more advanced years, which left him little prospect of a career in the future. Of these several arrangements, only those with Seward and Bates were complete, when Lincoln arrived at Washington, February 23. Chase and Smith were under advisement; and Welles had not yet been approached. An engagement with Pennsylvania had been broken off, while nothing had been accomplished towards finding the seventh member, who, as it was determined, was to come from a loyal slave State. In perfecting his arrangements, Mr. Lincoln renewed his offer of the War Department to Cameron, with tactful explanation that he no longer regarded the objections which had been raised as vital ; and Mr. Cameron accepted. The general plan of the new administration was almost broken in two, however, by the selection of the Postmaster-General. This portfolio was assigned to Maryland, where Winter Davis was passed over in favor of Mont- gomery Blair, son of Frank P. Blair, former editor of the Globe, and brother of Frank P. Blair, Jr., who was to attain some prominence as a Republican Congressman from Missouri, and as a General in the Union Army, the reason for the preference being that Mr. Davis had formerly been a Whig, while Mr. Blair preserved the traditions of the Jackson Democrats. It is said that this decision, whereby the odd portfolio went to the former Democrats, was one of the occasions when Mr. Lincoln remarked that he himself had been an old line Whig, and would always be present to make the parties even. 3 But the prospective Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, had been accumulat- ing a bundle of grievances of which this was the last straw. The closing of the arrangement with Chase threatened his own hoped for supremacy in the administration, and in his misconception of how the ' Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, III, 369. LlNCOLfc. 175 Cabinet was to be operated, he assumed that with four portfolios in the hands of Democrats, and only three in the hands of Whigs, the Secretary of the Treasury would outweigh him. On March 2, he entered a request to withdraw his acceptance of the State Depart- ment; and Lincoln was far enough from truckling to him to say: " When that slate breaks again, it will break at the top." Other Presi- dents have been left in the lurch at the last moment ; but none have emerged so triumphantly as Lincoln. On the day of his inauguration, he pressed upon Seward, both by correspondence and interview, the plea that the public service needed him; and the following day the resignation was recalled. Accordingly, on March 5, the nominations were made and confirmed with feeble opposition to Blair and Bates. The new President had had extraordinary success in combining in seven men requisites of locality, influence, and political antecedents with a very high order of training and ability; but he had brought together such varying personalities and conflicting temperaments that the most tactful control was necessary. Nicolay and Hay remark that in weaker hands than Lincoln's such a Cabinet would have proved a hot-bed of strife, while under him, it became a tower of strength. But, according to the lively disclosures of Gideon Welles' Diary, it did not fail of being a hot-bed of strife also. It is impossible to appreciate the difficulty with which men in public life in 1861 came to understand that a man, who was but recently a second rate Illinois lawyer, had suddenly become the real Chief Magistrate of the United States. And it was favorable to miscon- ception that Lincoln showed more than ordinary deliberateness, while he discussed with the Cabinet and the head of the army the situa- tion at the Southern harbors. After the administration had lagged a month, Seward was convinced that the Government needed a Prime Minister, and opened formal arrangements for assuming that role. There are very few instances in which Cabinet officers have been bold enough to make formal demands of their chief ; and this proposition that the President vest the general functions of his office in the Secretary of State stands by itself. On April 1, 1861, Seward transmitted to Lincoln a paper bearing the title, " Some Thoughts for the President's Consideration." 176 The President's Cabinet. Premising that a month had passed without determining upon an administration policy, either domestic or foreign, he ventured to offer his own ideas. With little appreciation of what the " irrepressible conflict " had come to, he proposed a domestic policy that should divert the people from the question of slavery to a broader one of union and patriotism ; while in the foreign field he would inaugurate an ambitious movement against European intervention, to the extent of convening Congress and declaring war on France, Great Britain, and Spain, unless satisfactory explanations could be secured of their designs in Mexico. The pith of the " Thoughts " is the Secretary's offer to assume the direction of " the administration." " Whatever policy we adopt, there must be an energetic prosecution of it. For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue and direct it incessantly. Either the President must do it himself, and be all the while active in it, or devolve it on some member of his Cabinet Once adopted, debates on it must end and all agree and abide. It is not my special province, but I neither seek to evade nor assume responsibility." The President promptly replied to all the points in respectful but decisive terms, disposing of the crucial question as follows : " Upon your closing propositions I remark that if this must be done, I must do it. When a general line of policy is adopted, I apprehend there is no danger of its being changed without good reason, or continuing to be a subject of unnecessary debate; still upon points arising in its progress I wish, and suppose I am entitled to have, the advice of all the Cabinet." * This remarkable overture did not go beyond Lincoln's knowledge ; and the tactful rebuff served to orient the Secretary of State as to his relation to the President. Nevertheless, Seward sometimes improved the opportunities for overstepping Departmental bounds, which the inordinate stress of business afforded. A familiar instance is his ordering an expedition to Pensacola, without the previous knowledge of the War and Navy Departments ; on which occasion the President admitted that he had signed a number of papers with- out being aware of their contents, but asked what he was to do, s Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, III, 445. Lincoln. 177 if he could not trust the Secretary of State.* Another is his com- munication to the British Legation that the mails carried by captured merchant vessels would not be searched. 5 However, more than or- dinary confidence was reposed by Lincoln in his Secretary of State, which resulted from the fact that Seward was in better accord than any of his colleagues with the President's individual views, and was assisted by the circumstance of his residing near the White House. At Seward's death his eulogist, Charles Francis Adams, regarding the Lincoln administration from a diplomat's point of view, asserted that the Secretary of State had been the real head of the Executive." The surviving members of the Lincoln Cabinet, Gideon Welles and Montgomery Blair, published a reply to Mr. Adams, in which they assigned to their late colleague a place of sufficient subordination to their common chief to satisfy any qualms of jealousy that his real priority in Lincoln's counsels might have aroused. 7 Before the first year of the administration had passed, Secretary Cameron of the War Department was superseded by Edwin M. Stanton, who showed himself comparable with Seward and Chase as one of the administration forces. The issue of Cameron's appointment to the War Office had been that the Department was virtually put in commission for the next nine months, its appropriate duties being shared by the Secretaries of State and the Treasury. The Department was infested with secessionists like the others, and it had fallen into a particularly bad condition through the misconduct of Secretary Floyd ; moreover, it was the first to feel the demands of the Civil War. To these Cam- eron proved quite inadequate ; and much of the work of organizing troops devolved upon Chase, 8 while military arrests were put within the competence of Seward. Furthermore, scandals arose concerning contracts in both the War and Navy Departments ; and an investiga- tion by Congress resulted in Cameron's censure, though this was 4 Welles, Lincoln and Seward, 68, 70. 5 Atlantic Monthly, CIII, No. 5 ; Diary of Gideon Welles. "Charles Francis Adams, Address on the Life, Character, and Services of William H. Seward. * Gideon Welles, Lincoln and Seiitard. 8 Hart, Salmon P. Chase, 211. 178 The President's Cabinet. afterwards recalled with Lincoln's approval. However, the Secretary of War in his Annual Report overstepped his authority by advocating a policy in which the President was not prepared to sustain him, viz., the arming of fugitive negroes, and by giving the report for publica- tion, before it had been censored ; whereupon the President's order that the paragraph be retracted caused much embarrassment. This combination of difficulties, in which incompetency probably had the greatest weight, caused Lincoln to rid himself of Cameron as a Sec- retary and Cabinet officer, in January, 1862, the dismissal being softened by the tender of the Mission to Russia, which Cameron did not want, but accepted for a short time ; " and further mitigated by the publication of a more complimentary correspondence on the sub- ject than the one that had actually passed. 10 In his dealing with Cameron, Lincoln had shown great power to avoid giving offence; but he showed equally great superiority to taking it, when he called Stanton into his service. Mr. Stanton had not allied himself with the Republicans in the presidential election. Moreover, the whole tone of his correspondence during the first months of the administration and the early repulses to the Union arms had been one of contempt for Mr. Lincoln. A specimen may be found in one of his letters to ex-President Buchanan, written after the defeat at Bull Run : " It is not unlikely that some changes in the War and Navy Departments may take place, but none beyond those two Departments, until Jeff Davis turns out the whole concern. .... While Lincoln, Scott, and the Cabinet are disputing who are to blame, the city is unguarded, and the enemy at hand." u Stan- ton's biographer, Gorham, extenuates these expressions as mere ex- amples of the great Secretary's hasty temper and abrupt speech. Lin- coln was probably aware that he was not regarded with approval by the man whom he selected for so great a trust ; but he, of all Presi- dents, was best able to overlook personal considerations for the sake of the public interest. There was much to recommend Mr. Stanton for 8 Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, V, 127. 10 Rhodes, History of the United States, III, 576 ; McClure, Lincoln and the Men of. War Times, 150. 11 Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, I, 223. Lincoln. 179 the office in question. His energetic services at the crisis of the last administration had won him great prestige. He had shown himself a supporter of the Union. Furthermore, he satisfied the same require- ment of locality as his predecessor, being a Pennsylvanian. The credit for selecting Stanton was claimed by several of the Cabinet of- ficers, including Cameron himself, which presumably means that Lin- coln made previous mention of the appointment to two or three of them. Such surprise was caused in the Senate at the naming of a member of the late administration for Secretary of War, that the nomination was referred; and Secretary Chase, of whom the com- mittee sought an explanation, was prepared to recommend that Mr. Stanton be confirmed. In the second year of the Lincoln administration, there occurred the most significant attempt to dictate the Cabinet relations and pro- cedure by Congressional interference that the history of the Govern- ment affords. A variety of facts entered into the situation which prompted this. The war had not been successfully prosecuted; General McClellan's command had been especially futile; and there was a disposition to charge the disasters to the Executive mismanage- ment. The Cabinet as a council had not been sufficiently in evidence to satisfy those members of the Government who thought that the existing crisis demanded increased consultation rather than the opposite. His military counsels President Lincoln was disposed to hold with a few chosen officers of whom the Secretary of War and the General-in-Chief of the Army were the principals ; not even the great army appointments were referred to the Cabinet with any regularity. The President was furthermore disposed to emphasize the separate character of the Department Heads over the collective in meeting the unprecedented demands of the Government upon the Executive. Thus it was only the President, much of the time, that listened to the despatches of the Secretary of State ; " and in similar fashion, the business of the Treasury was despatched. 18 The result was a some- what irregular existence for the Cabinet council, and it began to be "Fessenden, Wiliam Pitt Fessenden, I, 242. "Hugh McCulloch, Men and Measures of Half a Century, 199. 180 The President's Cabinet. said that there was " no Cabinet " and " no administration in the pro- per sense," a charge Secretary Chase was largely responsible for. Re- presenting the opinion of the radical Republicans, that the extermina- tion of slavery should be immediate, and not made to wait upon the preservation of the Union, Chase was at variance with the dilatoriness of the administration. Further than this, in his consciousness of the good military judgment which he had demonstrated during Cam- eron's incumbency of the War Office, and his intolerance of Lincoln's unmethodicalness, he conceived of a Directory, in which the Depart- ment Heads should regularly confer with President and Generals as the corrective for the mistakes which the Executive was making. The majority of the government party in the Senate shared the Sec- retary's views ; among others, Secretary Fessenden, chairman of the Committee of Finance, was in substantial accord with him ; and the situation was favorable to the dissemination of Mr. Chase's criticism of Executive operations. On the other hand, the conservative opinion in the party was repre- sented by the President himself, and the Secretary of State; which concurrence was highly favorable to the preconceived notion, that while Mr. Lincoln was the titular President, Mr. Seward would be the actual one. Accordingly as the administration became unpopular, the Secretary of State incurred much of the blame. Attendant upon this was an almost inexplicable loss of the political favor which Mr. Seward had enjoyed. His popularity with the Senate was over; a few conservative utterances during the Congressional session that preceded Lincoln's administration had cost him the confidence of Senator Fessenden ; and certain despatches of the summer of 1862, had been especially offensive to Sumner, who as chairman of the Committee of Foreign Relations stood in the same official relation to him as Fessenden to Chase. Even the support of his own State was uncertain. The defeat of General Burnside at Fredericksburg in December, 1862, served the Senate as a signal for action ; and all of the Repub- lican members, with the exception of one of the Senators from New York, joined in a demand for the removal of the Secretary of State. At caucuses held on successive days, December 16 and 17, the dis- Lincoln. 181 integrated condition of the Cabinet council was discussed, resolutions were passed recommending a partial reconstruction of the Cabinet, and a committee was appointed to present to the President the demand of the parties assembled for changes both in the conduct and the personnel of the Cabinet. There was even a suggestion that the demand be made official by introducing a resolution in the open Senate. The committee included Senators Collamer, Wade, Grimes, Trumbull, Sumner, Harris, Pomeroy, and Howard. Mr. Collamer had himself been a Cabinet officer ; and his assertion in caucus that the theory and practice of the Government demanded a Cabinet coun- cil and that it was unsafe and wrong to leave each member to his own Department, probably indicates that President Taylor, ineffective as his Cabinet was, had kept up the forms of general consultation. Collamer's statement was incorporated in a paper which he prepared to submit to the President. Another clause was to the effect that the Cabinet should be exclusively composed of statesmen who were the cordial, resolute, and unwavering supporters of the vigorous prosecu- tion of the war, and was plainly directed against Secretary Seward. President Lincoln accomplished one of his master strokes in his treatment of this demand from the Senate. After a preliminary hearing on December 18, the spirit of which was on the whole derogatory to the attitude of the Senators, he brought on the 19th, Committee and Cabinet face to face. Seward, who had tendered his resignation upon information from Senator King of New York, was absent. The first result of the interchange of charges and answers that ensued, was a backing down on the part of Chase, who maintained that questions of importance had generally been con- sidered in the Cabinet, though, perhaps, not so fully as might have been desired, and that there had been no want of unity but a general acquiescence on public measures. On the 20th, Chase followed Seward with a resignation. He had had an interview with the Secretary of State ; but his reasons for resigning, as he expressed them to one of his Senatorial friends, were the fear that he might be accused of manceuvering to get Mr. Seward out, if he himself remained, since the two had been appointed as representing different wings of the party, and doubt as to whether he could manage the 182 The President's Cabinet. Treasury Department, which was difficult at best, if he had the dis- affection of Seward's friends to contend with." Upon receipt of Mr. Chase's resignation, Mr. Lincoln announced that he should accept neither ; both Secretaries resumed their posts ; and the only result of this extraordinary episode, so far as Cabinet affairs were concerned, was the fuller subjection of both Seward and Chase to the President's control. The biographers who have written up this episode naturally emphasize its bearing upon the relations between the two rival Secretaries and the President, though they do not agree in their construction of it. Thus, Nicolay and Hay, who are quite unfair to the radical elements in the Government, represent the Senatorial interference merely as an attack upon the Secretary of State fomented by the Secretary of the Treasury, which covered the latter with confusion, and attested President Lincoln's power to reduce contending factions to his control. 15 Professor Albert Bushnell Hart, quoting the Memoirs of Major Wright Bannister, represents that the two Secretaries, in this particular transaction, were acting together. 16 For our purpose the great significance of the affair lies in its being a well considered attempt by the whole Government party in the Sen- ate to act as a superior council, in dictating the procedure as well as the personnel of the Cabinet. Indeed, Mr. Fessenden, when called upon to state his complaints before the President, prefaced his charges of lack of general consultations and undue influence from a single Department, with saying that the Senate, " as Constitutional advisers of the President " had deemed the emergency serious enough to offer their friendly counsel. The restiveness and uncertain loyalty of Secretary Chase as an Executive subordinate worked the most serious friction that arose within the administration. Perfect concord between Secretary and President was prevented, in the first place, by their different views of the administration problem; they had different conceptions also of the nature of the Executive, or rather of the way it ought to "Fessenden, William P. Fessenden, I, 231-253. 15 Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, VI, 264-271. 18 Hart, Salmon P. Chase, 302. Lincoln. 183 operate in a great war ; and still further, their personal incongruities were too great to be well harmonized. The chief subject that brought Chase into actual conflict with his superior was that of presidential appointments within the Treasury Department. The Secretary took the stand that, for the sake of efficient service, his recommendations as head of the Department, must prevail over those of the representatives of the localities inter- ested ; while the President was inclined to consider local preferences, as a means of conciliating feeling towards the Government. On this subject a series of differences arose, in which Chase resorted to the peevish expedient of resigning his office, as a means of carrying his point. The first controversy, which occurred in March, 1863, con- cerned an internal revenue collectorship in Connecticut, about which the Secretary came into collision with one of the Senators from that State ; the difficulty was quieted by a personal conference arranged by the President. The second, which followed three months later, related to a collectorship of customs on Puget Sound ; the collector had been appointed as a favor to Chase, but had proven his incompetency, whereat the President, yielding to pressure brought to bear by Congressmen from the Pacific coast, removed the officer, but conceded that the Secretary should name a successor. A third difficulty of the same sort grew out of a demand for the removal of the collector of customs, at New York, June, 1864; though Lincoln approved of the existing incumbent highly enough to propose his transfer to the Mission to Portugal, he was inclined to gratify the local demand for the removal, but after conference with Chase, surrendered to his wishes and declined to make the change. Only a few days later occurred the final difficulty, which concerned the assistant treasurership at New York ; the incumbent of that office desiring to resign, Chase urged for his successor a candidate to whom one of the New York Senators objected ; this affair was settled by prevailing upon the existing Assistant Treas- urer to continue in office. On the first of these occasions, Chase had written a resignation, but refrained from sending it; on the second he actually resigned, and required the most considerate per- suasion from Lincoln to remain at his post; on the third occasion, 184 The President's Cabinet. when he fully carried his point, there is some indication that he threatened to resign; on the fourth occasion, he had written a resignation before the controversy was settled to his satisfaction, and sent it after his triumph. This the President accepted, July 1, 1864. An additional factor in the strained relations between Lincoln and his Secretary of the Treasury was their rivalry for the pres- idential nomination of 1864. While a general purpose to further his own interests probably inhered in Mr. Chase's habit of disparag- ing the existing administration, and in his practice of personally in- gratiating himself in military and other quarters, he is not charged, even by his most severe critics, with dispensing the patronage in his own behalf. However, he was indirectly a party to a very great offence against the loyalty to his chief which custom required of him, by his share in the publication of the Pomeroy Circular. This was a campaign document put out in February, 1864, which openly disparaged President Lincoln for his compromising disposition, and presented Secretary Chase as the one candidate who combined the qualities which the existing crisis demanded of a President. Chase partially exonerated himself for this act in his behalf, and intimated a willingness to resign from the Cabinet, if President Lincoln desired. Moreover, he publicly withdrew from his presidential can- didacy in April, and on June 7, 1864, Mr. Lincoln received of the Republican National Convention a nomination for a second term of office. An additional unpleasantness had arisen, however, by the President's renewal of General Frank P. Blair's commission in the army, immediately after that gentleman, as Representative from Missouri, had made an attack upon the Secretary of the Treasury in the House of Representatives ; though it was outwardly removed by Mr. Lincoln's explanation that he had resolved to renew the commission, before he heard of the speech derogatory to Mr. Chase. In accepting the particular resignation, which followed the contro- versy about the assistant-treasurership at New York, Lincoln doubtless felt that the constant irritation had begun to impair Chase's efficiency; and that further temporizing would mean a greater surrender than the Chief Executive ought to make. Three Lincoln. 185 months later, he nominated Chase to be Chief- Justice of the United States, and received the oath of office from him at his second inauguration. The Treasury portfolio was promptly offered to Governor David Tod of Ohio, who declined it; whereupon a literal impressment of a Cabinet officer occurred in the summary appoint- ment of Senator William P. Fessenden of Maine." There is no stronger proof of Lincoln's power as a master of men than the loyal and efficient service which he commanded of Stanton as his War Minister; for it was this same Secretary that showed himself in the hands of Lincoln's successor, the most intractable of Cabinet officers. In spite of his previous disparagement of Lincoln, Stanton came to feel for him, as the two shared the anxieties of the war, the most loyal appreciation. That Lincoln promptly discovered how to get along with Stanton's peculiar disposition is not so strange. When the Secretary of War showed resistance to authority, it proceeded not so much from difference of views and temperament, as was the case with the Secretary of the Treasury, but from hastiness of temper, and stubbornness. Between Lincoln and Stanton, there were many cases of disagreement; which gen- erally related to such questions as military pardons, privileges within the army lines, etc. Sometimes, indeed, the Secretary's severity was required to prevent the President's clemency from destroying discipline. It was an exasperating practice of Stanton's to refuse to sign orders which did not suit his judgment; and to scribble in place of his name the assertion that perhaps another man would sign the paper, but he would resign first. With this habit, Lincoln seems to have had three ways of dealing: viz., to persuade Stanton to affix his signature, to yield to him, or to let the matter in question proceed without written authority, and sustain the parties afterward. Perhaps the sharpest dispute was one that grew out of the President's order of September 1, 1864, relative to rebel prisoners at Rock Island, in which Stanton, after declaring against the execution of the order, for the third time, submitted to the President's will. 18 The relative authority of President and Cabinet, is especially " Fessenden, William Pitt Fessenden, I, 3 x 5-324- 18 Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, V, 142-147. 186 The President's Cabinet. hard to measure during the Civil War, because the functions of the whole Government were so greatly expanded. In large questions of policy, Lincoln was accustomed to consult the whole Cabinet, and to give abundant opportunity for suggestions. However, the Emanci- pation Proclamation has become proverbial as the crowning instance of a President's independence of advice. Lincoln resolved upon this measure, and drafted the instrument, before his official advisers knew of it, save that he had intimated his purpose to two of the Secretaries, a few days before he officially notified the whole Cabinet. However, he was not strictly breaking new ground, inasmuch as the subject of emancipation had been discussed off and on for a good many months. Besides, the Proclamation was made the subject of four Cabinet meetings, July 22 and 23, September 22, and December 30, in the course of which the President agreed to postponement and rewrote the paper with changes, of which one or two were more than verbal. 18 On the whole the share of the Cabinet in this extraordinary exercise of the executive power was a very humble one, and there is probably no more marked case of a President's unaided initiative. In his judgments of the state of the public pulse, Lincoln seems to have been especially independent. Those decisions of 1862, in which his failure to take advice provoked criticism in Congress, were of this sort, the establishing of General Halleck at Washington to act as General-in-Chief, and the placing of the army under McClellan after his return from the Peninsula, being examples. Concerning the dismissal of Cabinet officers, he would no more brook the inter- ference of Secretaries than of Senators ; and in July 1864, he admin- istered a sharp rebuke to the whole Cabinet, when a demand was brought by hand of Secretary Stanton, for the removal of Postmaster-General Blair, because the latter officer had criticized certain army officers, in his indignation at the burning of his house and library during the attack upon Washington. 20 While he seldom, if ever, decided a cardinal point against his own judgment, Lincoln was not superior to yielding his opinion, even in large matters, when he was not satisfied of its wisdom. Thus, in February, 1865, after "Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, VI, 123-130; 158-164; 405-421. 20 Lincoln's Complete Works, II, 548. Lincoln. 187 holding a conference with certain leaders of the secession at Fortress Monroe, Secretary Seward attending, he formulated a plan to indem- nify the States in rebellion for their slave property, on condition of their ceasing from resistance to the National authority. Upon the unanimous disapproval of the Cabinet, the Message laying the project before Congress was withheld, and the plan abandoned. 21 When Lincoln entered upon his second term of office the per- sonnel of the Cabinet had been greatly changed ; and, on the whole, not strengthened. Secretary Smith, never a conspicuous figure, retired from the Interior Department in December, 1862, having been appointed to a District Judgeship; and, after some delay, was succeeded by John P. Usher, who had been Assistant-Secretary of the Department, and, like his predecessor, represented the State of Indiana. In November, 186^ Attorney-General Bates resigned, because as he stated it, he was " weary with the general revolutionary spirit, and tried with the continuous innovations upon law and precedent necessary to the war administration." The President, desiring to preserve the original geographical distribution, tried to find a successor to Bates in Missouri, but, failing of this, turned to Kentucky, and made a tender to Joseph Holt, who had served in Buchanan's administration, both as Postmaster-General and Secre- tary of War. Holt, however, declined; and Lincoln had to satisfy himself with James Speed, a lawyer without National reputation. The retirement of Postmaster-General Blair was an incident of the presidential election of 1864, and reveals Lincoln in the char- acter of a politician. Blair had made an efficient Postmaster- General ; but had been an administration thorn from the outset, both for his personal enmities and his constituency. Moreover, as fac- tional differences waxed warmer with the discontent about the war, Blair became the special target of the Radicals. The Radical Republicans nominated General John C. Fremont for the Pres- idency; while the Union Republicans nominated Lincoln, but put a resolution into their platform that was aimed against the ultra- conservative element in the Cabinet. In September, 1864, when the issue of the election seemed especially doubtful, Lincoln called for 21 Lincoln's Complete Works, II, 636. 188 The President's Cabinet. Blair's resignation, and it was cheerfully tendered. 22 William A. Dennison of Ohio, was immediately appointed Postmaster-General. In January, 1865, Secretary Fessenden was reelected to the Senate, which he preferred to the Treasury. The candidates recommended to the President for the vacant portfolio were Governor E. D. Morgan of New York, Governor John A. Andrew of Massachusetts, Vice-President Hannibal Hamlin of Maine, and Hugh McCulloch of Indiana, Comptroller of the Currency. Lincoln first nominated Governor Morgan, who was supported by the conservative Republi- cans of New York ; upon Morgan's refusal to accept, he appointed Hugh McCulloch who was the choice of Jay Cooke and the Chicago bankers. It was a part of the understanding that Secretary Usher would retire from the Interior Department to avoid the double representation of the State of Indiana; and James Harlan, Senator from Iowa, was selected to succeed him, though this change had not been accomplished at the President's death. Thus the Cabinet which Lincoln left to his successor was composed of Seward, McCulloch, Stanton, Speed, Welles, Dennison, and Usher, of whom Seward and Welles were the only survivors of the original group. 22 The attempt of Lincoln's friends to deprive the incident of its political meaning is hard to harmonize with the order of events. August 23, Lincoln wrote in a memorandum that it seemed probable that he would not be re- elected. Fremont's withdrawal from his candidacy was already under discussion. September 1, and again on the 3d, Lincoln summoned Blair to return to Washington immediately. September 21, Fremont actually with- drew; and on the 23d, Lincoln called in writing for Blair's resignation, accompanying the request with a letter of commendation for his services. President. ANDREW JOHNSON, Tennessee. President Pro Tempore of the Senate. LAFAYETTE S. FOSTER, Connecticut. BENJAMIN F. WADE, Ohio. April 15, 1865, to March 4, 18 Secretary of State. William H. Seward, of New York; continued from Lincoln's Adminis- tration. Secretary of the Treasury. Hugh McCulloch, of Indiana; continued from Lincoln's Administration. Secretary of War. Edwin M. Stanton, of Pennsylvania; continued from Lincoln's Adminis- tration. Ulysses S. Grant, (General of the Army), ad interim, August 12, 1867. Edwin M. Stanton, 1 of Pennsylvania; reinstated January 13, 1868. Lorenzo Thomas (Adjutant-General, U. S. A.), ad interim, February 21, 1868. John M. Schofield, of Illinois, May 28, 1868. Attorney-General. James Speed, of Kentucky; continued from Lincoln's Administration. J. Hubley Ashton, of Pennsylvania (Assistant Attorney-General), acting, July 17, 1866. Henry Stanbery, of Ohio, July 23, 1866. Orville H. Browning, of Illinois (Secretary of the Interior), ad interim, March 13, 1868. William M. Evarts, of New York, July 15, 1868. Postmaster-General. William Dennison, of Ohio; continued from Lincoln's Administration. Alexander W. Randall, of Wisconsin (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, July 17, 1866. 1 Mr. Stanton did not cease to perform the duties of Secretary of War until their assumption by Major-General Schofield. 189 190 The President's Cabinet. Secretary of the Navy. Gideon Welles, of Connecticut; continued from Lincoln's Administration. Secretary of the Interior. John P. Usher, of Indiana; continued from Lincoln's Administration. James Harlan, of Iowa, May 15, 1865. Orville H. Browning, of Illinois, July 27, 1866, to take effect September 1, 1866. JOHNSON. For more than a year, Johnson preserved Lincoln's Cabinet intact, save that Secretary Usher resigned from the Interior Department as previously arranged. The new President went so far as to appoint to the vacancy James Harlan of Iowa, the man of his pre- decessor's selection, and three of Lincoln's earlier appointees, Seward, McCulloch, and Welles, he retained to the end of his administration. The explanation of this course, which is in bold contrast with that of Tyler in 1841, of Fillmore in 1850, and of Arthur in 1881, is, as Johnson's sympathizers asserted, that he sought to identify his policy of Reconstruction with the plan which was maturing in the minds of Lincoln and his advisers, and had been presented by the Secretary of War at Lincoln's last Cabinet meeting, April 14, 1865.' Further- more in retaining his predecessor's Cabinet, Johnson resisted a pres- sure that is amazing both for its persistence and the respectability of its sources, and which can only be explained by the disintegration in the Republican party that followed the close of the War and the death of Lincoln. This agitation for a change of Cabinet began three days after Johnson's accession, 3 -and continued until the presi- dential nominations of 1868 made the existing administration a matter of minor interest. Among the President's advisers, the most notable were Thomas Ewing, a former member of two Whig Cabinets, and Frank P. Blair, Sr., administration editor to Jackson and Van Buren. These two men, now advanced in years, loom up among Johnson's corres- pondents as preservers of party traditions by which the accidental President, in his ill-defined political position, might be expected to 2 Gideon Welles, Lincoln and Johnson in the Galaxy, vol. 13, pp. 521-532; 663-674. 3 Johnson MSS., J. L. Dawson to Johnson, April 17, 1865 ; New York State Committee of the War Democracy to Johnson, April 21, 1865. 191 192 The President's Cabinet. profit. Duff Green also reappeared on the scene ; though his timely- suggestions as to how the new President might succeed himself in 1869 did not contemplate a change of Cabinet.* Ewing and Blair alike approved of Stanton's removal, Ewing's name appearing at the head of a petition for that purpose, that was presented between the first and second sessions of Congress. 5 More- over, General Frank P. Blair, son of the elder Blair, pushed hard for Stanton's place, 6 while the other son, Montgomery Blair, who had acquiesced in his own dismissal from the Postmaster-Generalship, to further Lincoln's reelection, now came forward to even up scores by decrying both Stanton and Seward, 7 and was furthermore recom- mended by his friends for reinstatement. 8 If pressure is ever suf- ficient cause for a Cabinet removal, Johnson would have been justi- fied in dismissing Stanton at any moment from his accession to the passage of the Tenure-of-Office Act. The personal unpopularity of the Secretary of War was voiced at the outset both from military and other quarters ; and in due time were added charges of consort- ing with the President's enemies. There might also have been reason for dispensing with Seward; since it was charged at first that he and Weed were manipulating New York against the President, and later that he was an " effete body " and a " dead weight," the decline of whose political following made it impossible for him to lend prestige to the administration.' The actual changes in the Cabinet began in July, 1866, when Attorney-General Speed, Postmaster-General Dennison, and Secre- tary Harlan, in terms of doubtful cordiality, resigned their offices, being disaffected towards the President's Reconstruction policy. Of these resignations, Seward wrote : " The Cabinet, which has been 'Johnson MSS., Duff Green to Johnson, June 25, 1865. "Johnson MSS., September 16, 1866. "Johnson MSS., Jas. S. Rollins of Missouri to Johnson, June 7, 1865; David Dudley Field to Johnson, June 8, 1865. 'Johnson MSS., Montgomery Blair to Johnson, June 15, 1865. "Johnson MSS., N. D. Sherry, Secretary of National Union Committee to Johnson, May 4, 1865. 9 Johnson MSS., Samuel Barlow to Montgomery Blair, June, 1865; Mont- gomery Blair to Johnson, April 11 and August 9, 1866. Johnson. 193 held so long together is at last struck, and begins to go apart. I regret it. Cabinets seldom separate for the good of the country, if they are made up of loyal men as this one has been. I part with Mr. Dennison and Mr. Speed with regret. The times require great firmness and coolness on the part of the Executive. It does not surprise, although it pains me, that all of my associates have not been able to see it their duty, as I see it mine, to sustain him." Secretary Harlan promptly returned to the Senate where he had resigned his seat the year before to accept the Interior Department ; and in the impeachment trial, he voted for the President's conviction. The new appointments were Henry Stanbery of Ohio, Attorney- General; Alexander W. Randall of Wisconsin, Postmaster-Gen- eral; and Orville H. Browning of Illinois, Secretary of the Interior. Stanbery and Browning, both of Whig antecedents, were warmly recommended by Ewing for ability and political character; while Randall's appointment was a promotion from the position of First Assistant in the Department. All of these proved loyal sup- porters of the President. Indeed the Attorney-General's opinions reflected the President's point of view so strongly that Congress by the supplementary Reconstruction Act of July 19, 1867, sought to limit their effect by forbidding the commanders of the military districts into which the States lately in revolt had been organized to be bound by " any opinion of any civil officer of the United States." Mr. Stanbery resigned his office to become one of the President's counsel in the impeachment trial ; and when renominated, failed of confirmation. According to the normal conception of a Cabinet officer's relation to the President, Stanton should have resigned, at least as early as the end of the Congressional session i865-'66; inasmuch as his disaffection with the administration policy was determined, according to his biographer, in the preceding September. The Secretary of War and his friends, however, seized upon the idea of the Cabinet as a check or safeguard against a wayward President, making a greatly aggravated case of the relation which the Harrison Cabinet attempted to establish with Tyler. Accordingly, he stuck to his 13 194 The President's Cabinet. post in behalf of the general welfare. 10 That Johnson did not dismiss him between the adjournment of Congress in 1866 and the passage of the Tenure-of-Office Act is an enigma ; though it is entirely sup- posable that the President did not appreciate the extent of the antag- onism; he certainly was not aware of Stanton's participation in the framing of certain radical legislation." Moreover, we find no act of real and open defiance before June 18 and 19, 1867, when the Secre- tary of War, dissenting from the rest of the Cabinet, entered written protests against the opinions of the Attorney-General on the Recon- struction Acts. The Tenure-of-Office Act of March 2, 1867 is of signal im- portance, because it was potential of a radical change in the nature of the Cabinet; yet it loses very much of its significance, for the reason that it was a spasmodic and avowedly temporary measure. Hereby, the power to remove the Heads of Departments was so limited by the Senatorial concurrence that the means by which the President had heretofore kept his privy council in subordination was practically vitiated. The main provisions of the act were that the President might suspend an officer in the recess of Congress ; that he should report each suspension to the Senate, together with his reasons for making it, within twenty days after the subsequent assembling: that if the Senate should concur, the President might then remove the officer and appoint another in the usual way; that if the Senate did not concur, the suspended officer should resume his duties." That this poor substitute for the time-honored power of removal should extend to the Cabinet, was a more drastic proposition than Congress was prepared to entertain, when the act first came before it, early in the session of i866-'67. Though bent upon taking the patronage out of the President's hands, it was still bound by the idea of a special relation between the Chief Executive and his con- fidential advisers, which ought not to be interfered with. As the M Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, 1 1, 300. u Dewitt, Impeachment of Andrew Johnson, 267. "Salmon, The Appointing Power of the President, 91-93; Fish, The Civil Service and the Patronage, 193-202. Johnson. 195 bill left the Senate, it read, " That every person (excepting the Secretaries of State, of the Treasury, of War, of the Navy, and of the Interior, the Postmaster-General, and the Attorney-General) holding any civil office to which he has been appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and every person who shall hereafter be appointed to any such office, and shall become duly qualified to act therein, is, and shall be entitled to hold such office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed and duly qualified, except as herein otherwise provided." During the debate in the Senate, a motion to strike out the exception had been twice offered and twice defeated, the first time without a division, and the second by a vote of 23 to 13. It is an interesting fact that the author of this motion was Timothy O. Howe, of Wisconsin, inas- much as that gentleman afterwards served as Postmaster-General under President Arthur. However, when the House of Representa- tives took up the bill, two months of the session had passed, and the hostility to the President had become aggravated. The great Military Reconstruction Act was pending, and the Secretary of War was distinctly assuming the role of agent and guardian of the Congressional policy. The Tenure-of-Office Act was accordingly amended by striking out the Cabinet exemption, though the motion was lost on the first trial, and on reconsideration, carried by a bare majority of 63 to 67. 13 The Senate at first adhered to its original stand, and refused to concur in the amendment, by a vote of 28 to 17. It is interesting to discover at this point John Sherman, Secretary of the Treasury under Hayes, and a prominent aspirant for the Presi- dency in 1880, as .the principal champion of the President's personal right to a choice of his Cabinet. Apropos of the amendment, Sher- man said : " It is a question with me, not of constitutional law, but a question of propriety I would as soon think of imposing upon the President a private secretary with whom he had no kindly rela- tions, personal and political, as to impose upon him a Cabinet Minister with whom his relations were not kind Any gentleman fit to be a Cabinet Minister, who receives an intimation from his chief that his longer continuance in that office is unpleasant to him, would 13 Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 2d session, 937, 943-4, 970. 196 The President's Cabinet. necessarily resign. If he did not resign it would show he was unfit to be there." The bill was referred to a joint committee; the Senate was represented by Sherman, Charles R. Buckalew of Penn- sylvania, a supporter of the President, and George H. Williams of Oregon, who was afterwards Attorney-General under Grant; while Robert Schenk of Ohio, Thomas Williams of Pennsylvania, and James F. Wilson of Iowa, represented the Lower House. This committee inserted in the bill, in the place of the Cabinet ex- emption, a proviso to the effect " that the Secretaries of State, of the Treasury, of War, of the Navy, and of the Interior, the Postmaster-General, and the Attorney-General shall hold their offices *> respectively for and during the term of the President by whom they may have been appointed and for one month thereafter, sub- ject to removal by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The application of this to the existing Secretary of War was by no means clear. This officer was the appointee of President Lincoln, his commission dating from January 15, 1862. The President's Constitutional term of four years, within which this appointment had been made, terminated March 4, 1865 ; but it had been renewed by reelection. Then Lincoln had died in office; and the remnant of the second period of four years had fallen to Johnson. Did the expression " term of the President," when applied to the Lincoln appointees, mean the Constitutional term within which the appoint- ment occurred ? And did Johnson's retention of Stanton constitute a reappointment? Or had the law no application to the Secretary of War? The conferees for the House of Representatives reported that they had carried their point. Of the Senators, only Sherman and Wil- liams agreed to the report, Williams on the ground that Cabinet removals would be precluded by the resignation of such officers upon the President's request, and Sherman for the additional reason that the provision did not hamper the power of a President to dis- miss the Ministers selected by his predecessor. When Sherman voted for the conviction of President Johnson, he took his ground upon a different class of Cabinet regulations to be noticed in due order. His interpretation of the Tenure-of-Office Act appears to have Johnson. 197 been decisive in securing its adoption in amended form by the Sen- ate; though that body acted with great inadvertency, if not insin- cerity. The President now determined to make a test case, and have the Tenure-of-Office Act pronounced upon by the Supreme Court. His declaration of this purpose to the Senate in his special message of February 22, 1868, is sufficiently borne out both by the develop- ments in the trial proceedings, and by private correspondence. 14 August 5, 1867, Congress not being in session, the President wrote to the Secretary of War that his resignation would be ac- cepted; to which the latter promptly replied that public consid- erations of a high character constrained him not to resign before the next meeting of Congress. On the 12th, the President notified the Secretary that he was suspended from office, basing the action upon the " power and authority " vested in himself " as President, by the Constitution and laws of the United States." At the same time, he designated General Grant to act as Secretary of War ad interim. It appears, moreover, that if Grant had consented, the President would have issued to him a vacation commission, thereby removing Stanton, in direct challenge to the Tenure- of-Office Act. December 12, a few days after reassembling, the Senate was notified of Stanton's suspension, with causes, and after taking a month to deliberate, resolved January 13, by a vote of 35 to 6, thirteen Senators not voting, not to sustain the President. On the following day General Grant quitted the War Office, and Secre- tary Stanton resumed possession. Meanwhile Thomas Ewing, bent upon extricating Johnson before it was too late, had been urging the nomination of J. D. Cox of Ohio, in the belief that the Senate would promptly confirm it, and thereby avoid a direct vote upon Stanton. Indeed it seems to have been due to Ewing's advice that the suspen- sion had been reported within the time stipulated by the Tenure-of- Office Act, thus keeping the affair within the letter of the law. The President, having failed of the assistance of General Grant, sought that of General Sherman, making to him, on January 25, and again on "Impeachment of Andrew Johnson, I, 680; Johnson MSS., Johnson to Grant, January 31, 1868; Jerome B. Stillson to Benjamin R. Curtis, April 4, 1868. 198 The President's Cabinet. the 30th, a tender of the War Department ad interim. 1 ' But Sherman would not enter into the controversy, and Ewing, who was his father-in-law, was not favorable to the arrangement. Moreover, the latter now urged the President not to remove Stanton. The President next approached General George H. Thomas to assume the duties of Secretary of War ad interim, and failed in that quarter. He then fell back on Lorenzo Thomas, Adjutant-General of the Army. February 21, he notified Stanton of his removal from the office of Secretary of War, and issued to Thomas a letter of authority to act as Secretary of War ad interim, notifying the Senate of the action on the same day. On the 22d, that body responded with the rejpjution ._: " That under the Constitution and laws of the United States, the President has no power to remove the Secretary of War and to designate any other officer to perform the duties of that office ad interim." The vote on this occasion differed from that which reinstated Stanton, January 13, in that five Senators who voted against the suspension on that occasion refrained from voting, as the matter became more serious. The resolution immediately called forth from the President a message stating at length upon what legal grounds he based his action, including the following argument : " Whether the act were Constitutional or not, it was always my opinion that it did not secure him (Stanton) from removal. I was, however, aware that there were doubts as to the construction of the law, and from the first I deemed it desirable that at the earliest possible moment, those doubts should be settled and the true con- struction of the act fixed by decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. My order of suspension in August last was in- " According to Sherman's testimony in the impeachment trial, Impeachment I, 483, it was an ad interim appointment that the President proposed. But Sherman's Memoirs, 26. edition, II, 426, have the following: "To effect this removal, two modes were indicated by the President, to wit: to simply cause him (Stanton) to quit the War Office building, and notify the Treasury Department and the army staff departments no longer to respect him as Secretary of War; or to remove him and submit my name to the Senate for confirmation." This would imply that Johnson proposed to rid himself of Stanton, by nominating Sherman in the regular way to be Secretary of War. Johnson. 199 tended to place the case in such a position as would make a resort to a judicial decision both necessary and proper. My understanding and wishes, however, under that order of suspension were frustrated, and the late order for Mr. Stanton's removal was a further step toward the accomplishment of that purpose." 10 The President also communicated the nomination of Thomas Ewing to be Secre- tary of War, though the notice did not actually reach the Senate until February 24, the 22d being Saturday and a holiday. The nomination was never acted upon. This step was cited in the im- peachment trial, together with the notification of the removal, to show that the President had not sought to debar the Senate from exercising its concurrent power in the transaction, and such was probably its purpose; since the President could not have expected the Senate would confirm the appointment, and there is no evidence that Ewing would have accepted it. Of the articles of impeachment brought against the President in 1868, as an outcome, we are concerned only with .the first three." Article I related exclusively to the removal of Stanton as a violation of the Tenure-of-Office Act. Reviewing the transaction in detail, from the suspension to the removal, it declared that the President, unmindful of his oath of office and of the requirement of the Con- stitution that the laws be faithfully executed, issued the order of removal with intent to violate the act regulating the tenure of certain civil offices, and was thereby guilty of a high misdemeanor in office. Articles II and III were concerned with the ad interim appointment of Thomas. Article II declared that, contrary to the provisions of the Tenure-of-Office Act, and without the advice and consent of the Senate, that body being at the time in session, and without authority of law, the President issued to Lorenzo Thomas a letter of authority designating him to act as Secretary of War ad interim, and thereby committed a high misdemeanor. Article III differed from II only in its technical aspect; it declared that the President committed a M Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, VI, 622-627. "Although Article I was not voted upon, it is incorporated with other charges in Article XI, which with II and III forms the group upon which the Senate took action. 200 The President's Cabinet. high misdemeanor in office, in that he, without authority of law, during the session of the Senate, appointed Lorenzo Thomas to be Secretary of War -ad interim, without the advice and consent of the Senate, no vacancy having happened in said office during the recess of the Senate, and no vacancy existing at the time when said ap- pointment was made. The charges against the President, then, so far as related to the War Department, are reducible to two (i) the removal in defiance of the Tenure-of-office Act, and (2) the failure to make a regular appointment. While the real animus lay in the combination of the two events into one transaction, whereby the concurrent power of the Senate had been evaded, the judges were required to distinguish between the two, and to apply to the case both the Tenure-of-office Act and the laws relating to the ad interim Cabinet service. The President, on the other hand, in his message to the Senate, February 22, 1868, had made the two points. (1) That he desired to have the constitutionality of the Tenure-of-Office Act passed upon by the courts, and (2) That an Act of 1795, which made it lawful for the President to designate any person at his discretion to supply a vacancy, for a period not to exceed six months, was still in force, so far forth as vacancies caused by removal were concerned. 18 The President's counsel went into an exhaustive discussion of all the statutes relating to the ad interim service in the Departments. They maintained both that the Act of 1795 had contemplated vacancies arising from death, resignation, appointment to other office, expira- tion of term, and removal, and that so far as the last three of these contingencies were concerned, it was not repealed by an Act of 1863. The vacancy laws were discussed also by those Senators who entered opinions ; and Sherman and Howe, who could not hold the President guilty for the removal of Stanton, having denied at the time when the Tenure-of-Office Act was passed, that the Cabinet proviso applied to the appointees of Lincoln, nevertheless found ground for con- viction in that the designation of an ad interim Secretary was illegal, and was an attempt to usurp the War Office. On the other hand, Trumbull, who had made the ad interim appointment, and not the 18 Richardson, Messages and Papers' of the Presidents, VI, 622. Johnson. 201 removal, his ground for supporting the Senate resolution of censure, February 21, now justified the President, on the ground that he had discovered that the Act of 1795 contemplated an area that was not covered by the Act of 1863, and was so far still in force. Inasmuch as the acquittal was determined by the separation of seven of the forty-two Republican Senators who united with the twelve Demo- crats to make a vote of nineteen against thirty-five, and the adding of a single vote to the large majority would have raised it to the two thirds necessary to convict, Trumbull's change of ground was of signal importance. However, the interest which these technicalities have for a study of vacancies in the Departments, should not obscure the fact that such hair-splittings really covered a luke-warmness towards the prosecution, and that the acquittal turned on more serious considera- tions than the defense reveals. An understanding was presumably reached between the President's counsel and a group of Senators, who, though opposed to Johnson, dreaded the effect of conviction upon the stability of the Government, that a Secretary of War, ac- ceptable to all factions, would be nominated. Certain it is, that on April 24, 1868, the name of General John M. Schofield of Illinois was sent to the Senate, by arrangement made between President Johnson and Schofield two or three days earlier through William M. Evarts. 1 " Not till May 26, was the President's acquittal recorded : and on the same day, Stanton communicated to the President his re- linquishment of the War Office, on the ground that the resolution of the Senate censuring the removal and the ad interim designation had not been sustained by the issue of the trial. Two days later, May 28, the Senate confirmed Schofield, first resolving that the War Depart- ment had been vacated by Stanton's resignation of two days previous. Judge Stanbery was also nominated to resume the office of Attorney-General ; but the Senate refused to confirm him. The post was then tendered to Judge B. R. Curtis, who had been one of the President's counsel, but was declined. It was then urged upon Evarts, who was constrained by the sense of duty to accept it. On May 25, the day before the articles of impeachment came to 19 Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army, 413, 418. 202 The President's Cabinet. a vote, Senator Benjamin F. Wade, who as President pro tempore of the Senate would assume the office of President of the United States, in case Johnson were convicted, began to contrive a Cabinet, and consulted General Grant, who was the presumptive candidate of the Republican party for the next presidential term, as to what appointments would be agreeable. This kind of consultation was perhaps suitable to the novelty of the situation. It would seem to imply that Wade did not trust his own ability to compose the distracted Government during the ten months which were to ensue, and like Johnson, when he undertook to test the Tenure-of-Office Act, sought the cooperation of Grant as the most popular man of the hour. President Johnson, on the other hand, had the grim satisfaction of recommending to Congress, shortly after his acquittal, a new rule for the presidential succession, in the event of the disability of both President and Vice-President. In a message of July 18, 1868, he stated that recent events had shown the necessity of an amendment to the Constitution for that purpose, since enactment by the Legis- lature might be of doubtful constitutionality and liable to repeal. 20 Under an Act of 1792, the succession was in the President pro tempore of the Senate, and failing him the Speaker of the House of Repre- sentatives. Johnson suggested that it was more suitable to vest it in the Executive branch of the Government than in either the Legis- lature or the Judiciary, especially since both the President pro tem- pore of the Senate and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court might be members of a tribunal by which the vacancy in the Presi- dency was produced. He accordingly recommended an amendment to the Constitution whereby the duties of the President should, in the event contemplated, devolve upon sorne one of the Heads of the Executive Departments. Johnson's recommendation was scornfully ignored; but eighteen years afterwards, January 19, 1886, Congress passed an act vesting in the Cabinet the succession to the Presidency, in case of the removal, death or other disability of both President and Vice-President, and making the order of precedence as follows : the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary M Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, VI, 639. Johnson. 203 of War, the Attorney-General, the Postmaster-General, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Interior. 21 As an immediate result of the trial proceedings, the entire law code relating to ad interim service in the Departments was revised. An act of July 23, 1868, swept away all of the preceding legislation upon the subject and ordered that the first or sole assistant in any Depart- ment should in case of the death, resignation, absence, or sickness of the head thereof, perform the duties of such head until a suc- cessor were appointed or the disability should cease. The President might, however, at his discretion authorize the head of another Department or some other officer therein who was appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the duties, provided that in case of death or resignation, the vacancy should not be supplied in this manner longer than ten days. In actual practice the Assistant Secretaries had already become the usual, if not the regular directors of their departments, in case of the disability of the heads; and since .this enactment, the practice has become almost invariable. Under the existing Departmental organi- zation, it would provoke jealousy, if the Head of one Department were temporarily placed over another, unless some special situation seemed to necessitate the arrangement. The most recent instance of the sort occurred upon the death of Secretary Hay, July, 1905, when President Roosevelt informally designated Secretary Taft of the War Department to take charge of certain matters appertaining to the State Department. Upon the accession of President Grant, Congress acknowledged the temporary character of the Tenure-of-Office Act by so amending it, April 5, 1869, that the suspending power became almost equiva- lent to removal. The Cabinet proviso was stricken out ; and in lieu of the provision that officers duly appointed and qualified should hold their places until successors should be appointed and qualified, the amendment declared that such officers should hold " during the term " for which they should have been appointed, unless sooner removed, etc. An immediate result was a new precedent governing the retention a George F. Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, II, 168-171. y 204 The President's Cabinet. of Cabinet officers from one presidential term of four years into another. March 17, 1873, President Grant, with the concurrence of the Senate, reappointed all of his Cabinet, except the Secretary of the Treasury who was retiring, although their respective periods of service varied from four years and twelve days, in the case of the Postmaster-General, to one year and two months in that of the Attorney-General. The situation did not recur until 1901 when President McKinley, on March 3, reappointed all of his Cabinet. March 6, 1905, President Roosevelt, entering upon a new term of office, likewise reappointed all of his Cabinet, except the two mem- bers who were retiring. This new practice does not extend to the interruption of a presidential term by the death of the President and the accession of another incumbent. Thus President Arthur retained permanently one member of the Cabinet whom he found in office, and the others remained a few months, but he reappointed none. President Roosevelt likewise made no reappointments until the ex- piration of the Constitutional term of his predecessor. President. ULYSSES S. GRANT, Illinois. Vice-President. SCHUYLER COLFAX, Indiana. March 4, 1869, to March 4, 1873. Secretary of State. Elihu B. Washburne, of Illinois, March 5, 1869. Hamilton Fish, of New York, March 11, 1869. Secretary of the Treasury. John F. Hartley, of Maine (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, March 5, 1869. George S. Boutwell, of Massachusetts, March 11, 1869. Secretary of War. John M. Schofield, of Illinois; continued from last Administration. John A. Rawlins, of Illinois, March 11, 1869. William T. Sherman, of Ohio, September 9, 1869. William W. Belknap, of Iowa, October 25, 1869. Attorney-General. J. Hubley Ashton, of Pennsylvania (Assistant Attorney-General), acting, March 5, 1869. Ebenezer R. Hoar, of Massachusetts, March 5, 1869. Amos T. Akerman, of Georgia, June 23, 1870. George H. Williams, of Oregon, December 14, 1871, to take effect January 10, 1872. Postmaster-General. St. John B. L. Skinner, of New York (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, March 4, 1869. John A. J. Cresswell, of Maryland, March 5, 1869. Secretary of the Navy. William Faxon, of Connecticut (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, March 4, 1869. Adolph E. Borie, of Pennsylvania, March 5. 1869. George M. Robeson, of New Jersey, June 25, 1869. Secretary of the Interior. Jacob D. Cox, of Ohio, March 5, 1869. Columbus Delano, of Ohio, November 1, 1870. 205 President. ULYSSES S. GRANT, Illinois. Vice-President. HENRY WILSON, Massachusetts. (Died November 22, 1875.) President Pro Tempore of the Senate. THOMAS W. FERRY, Michigan. March 4, 1873, to March 4, 1877. Secretary or State. Hamilton Fish, of New York; continued from last Administration. Hamilton Fish, of New York; recommissioned March 17, 1873. Secretary of the Treasury. George S. Boutwell, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. William A. Richardson, of Massachusetts, March 17, 1873. Benjamin H. Bristow, of Kentucky, June 2, 1874. Charles F. Conant, of New Hampshire (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, June 21, 1876. Lot M. Morrill, of Maine, June 21, 1876. Secretary of War. William W. Belknap, of Iowa; continued from last Administration. William W. Belknap, of Iowa; recommissioned March 17, 1873. George M. Robeson, of New Jersey (Secretary of the Navy), ad interim, March 2, 1876. Alphonso Taft, of Ohio, March 8, 1876. James D. Cameron, of Pennsylvania, May 22, 1876. Attorney-General. George H. Williams, of Oregon; continued from last Administration. George H. Williams, of Oregon; recommissioned March 17, 1873. Edwards Pierrepont, of New York, April 26, 1875, to take effect May 15 187S. Alphonso Taft, of Ohio, May 22, 1876. Postmaster-General. John A. J. Cresswell, of Maryland; continued from last Administration. John A. J. Cresswell, of Maryland, recommissioned March 17, 1873. James W. Marshall, of Virginia, July 3, 1874. Marshall Jewell, of Connecticut, August 24, 1874. James M. Tyner, of Indiana, July 12, 1876. Secretary of the Navy. George M. Robeson, of New Jersey; continued from last Administration. George M. Robeson, of New Jersey; recommissioned March 17, 1873. Secretary of the Interior. Columbus Delano, of Ohio ; continued from last Administration. Columbus Delano, of Ohio, recommissioned March 17, 1873. Benjamin R. Cowen, of Ohio (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, September 30, 1875. Zachariah Chandler, of Michigan, October 19, 1875. 206 GRANT. Down to 1869 the materials for the study of the Cabinet are rich and accessible. From the published correspondence and diaries of men in immediate touch with affairs, together with available manuscripts, we catch the inner spirit of Executive relations and incidents. But from 1869 to 191 1, there is only the periodical litera- ture, which is rarely a faithful picture of what it represents, and the memoirs and biographies that have been published too early to lift the veil from the personal features of political history. Only a bald outline of Cabinet events can be drawn. And yet the narrow glimpse that is afforded shows unmistakably that a fuller view would discover points of the liveliest interest and of much significance. President Grant's administration is the unsavory period in Cabinet affairs. And it further presents a most extraordinary array of departures from the normal course of the Executive. It was variously styled a " military rule," a " personal rule," and a " de- partmental regime." The Executive Office was open to the " Sena- torial group " that figured in the public prints at the time. And the ante-rooms were under the direction of members of General Grant's late military staff, who became a sort of " Kitchen Cabinet." It was as though George Mason's prediction had come to pass, that the President would become the tool of the Senate, or would be con- trolled by minions and favorites. 1 Furthermore, the official Cabinet became both the camp of the President's personal friends and the battleground of politicians. Its roster was in a continual flux. General Grant's naivete about civil affairs resulted in the an- nouncement of a most impracticable Cabinet slate. And, before a working Executive was fully secured, more than three months had elapsed. March 5, 1869, six Cabinet appointments were made, to be followed on the nth by a revisionary list of three. 1 Chapter, The Origin of the Cabinet. 207 208 The President's Cabinet. There had been a special arrangement at the War Office that was in no way chargeable to inexperience. General Schofield was re- tained a week from the Johnson Cabinet, for the purpose of putting into operation certain new regulations concerning the War Depart- ment and the army, in which he and President Grant had been inter- ested together, while the latter was General-in-Chief. 2 The common interpretation of the matter was that a special compliment was paid to Schofield, because his assumption of the War Office had assisted in re- storing peace between the Executive and Congress. At the expiration of a week, General John A. Rawlins was set over the Department. Both military comrade and personal friend of the President's, some men saw in him qualities that promised a very salutary influence over his chief. In appointing a Secretary of the Treasury, President and Sena- tors alike were convicted of ignorance or inadvertency. The man chosen was Alexander T. Stewart, the leading merchant of New York City. In this matter, General Grant manifested the disposition, often laid to his charge, to heap official honors upon men of wealth who had been of service to him. But Mr. Stewart by his peculiar talents was fitted for the office, and was ambitious to crown his success in the business world with public distinction. But a legal obstacle existed. And it was nothing less than the exclusion of men engaged in trade on a scale that made them importers from the higher offices in the Treasury Department, provided in the very Act that established the Department, and repeated in half a dozen later statutes. 3 That the watch Congress had kept over Andrew Johnson's Cabinet operations did not save the Senate from being caught napping the moment he was out of the Presidency was a bit ludicrous. But the Stewart appointment was confirmed without questions. When the blunder was discovered, the President was disposed to demand legislation that should remove the difficulty. And a motion was introduced by Senator Sherman to repeal the prohibiting clauses. Mr. Stewart, on the other hand, was consid- ering the conveyance of his business interests to others during 2 Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army, 418. 3 Statutes at Large, I, 65. Grant. 209 his incumbency. But the legal advices, in which the prospective Attorney-General, Judge E. Rockwood Hoar, took part, were unfav- orable to special arrangements in any form. 1 The issue was that the Treasury portfolio, was conferred upon George S. Boutwell, a man who had had the training that the great financial committees give, and had gained another sort of fame as a manager for the im- peachment of President Johnson. The appointment was approved for bringing into the administration the element of Congressional experience. But the double representation that Massachusetts re- ceived by the choice of both Mr. Boutwell and Judge Hoar was a factor in the Attorney-General's early retirement. The fruitless appointment at the Treasury seems to have been the loose cog that upset the gearing for the State Department. Elihu B. Washburne was incumbent of that portfolio for a single week, and then gave way to Hamilton Fish of New York. The selection of Mr. Washburne had something of the personal in it. As member of the House of Representatives for the Galena District of Illi- nois, he was one of the discoverers of General Grant. His assign- ment to the State Department was peculiar, because the nick-name he had earned in Congress, " watch-dog of the Treasury," seemed to mark him for the Finances. However, he immediately accepted the French Mission, and rendered very acceptable service during the Franco-Prussian War. Had he continued in the Cabinet after the appointment of General Rawlins, the anomaly of double represen- tation must have extended to Illinois. But it would not have been so serious as the assignment of both the State and Treasury Depart- ments to the Empire State." Probably the Washburne appointment was not considered tempo- rary, when it was made. The permanent incumbent had had no previous notice ; but was pressed into the State Department in sum- mary fashion. 6 Though Mr. Fish had been a member of both Houses 'Senate Journal, 41 Congress, First Session, 14, 15, 28; Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 205; Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, I, 241. 8 Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 213. * Pierce, Memoir of Charles Sumner, II, 39, Fish to Sumner, March 13, 1869. 14 210 The President's Cabinet. of Congress, and Governor of his State, his political retirement from the time of the formation of the Republican party made him a some- what antiquated figure. There was not much enthusiasm over his appearance as Secretary of State; but the fact did not prejudice the recognition that he gained for presiding with dignity over diplomatic affairs, and negotiating the Treaty of Washington. The Cabinet cast, as completed on March n, was broken again in June by the resignation of Secretary Adolph E. Borie from the Navy Department. The gentleman's qualifications for the office had con- sisted of his social position as a wealthy Philadelphian, and the fa- vors he had shown to General Grant. Only one Senator, it is said, recognized the name, when the nomination was read. Naval affairs proving distasteful, Mr. Borie resigned, after an incumbency of less than four months, during which interval, as he himself pleasantly averred, Admiral Porter had directed the Department.' George M. Robeson, a prominent New Jersey lawyer, became a more permanent Secretary of the Navy. A change then occurred that was a real misfortune to President Grant. Only six months after his appointment to the War Depart- ment, General Rawlins died. And his place was taken by General W. W. Belknap of Iowa, who was also a military favorite. 8 General Jacob D. Cox, himself Secretary of the Interior at the time, is responsible for the statement that, if this break in the administration had not occurred, the President would not have fallen under the sway of politicians and army minions in the way that he did. Rawlins had no particular genius for civil affairs ; but he possessed some insight into government by deliberation. This was what General Grant 1 McCulloch, Men and Measures of half a Century, 350. 8 For a brief interval, William T. Sherman, General-in-Chief of the Army, served as Secretary of War by a vacation commission, the office of Assistant- Secretary having been abolished. A somewhat similar expedient appears on the Cabinet rolls in the bridging over of the interval between the retirement of Postmaster-General Cresswell, July 3, 1874, and the appointment of Marshall Jewell. James W. Marshall, First Assistant-Postmaster-General, was made Head of the Department by a vacation commission. Grant. 211 notoriously lacked, and the favor with which he regarded his Sec- retary of War gave promise that the deficiency might be supplied. 8 It is generally acknowledged that President Grant used the meth- ods of his military command in directing his civil subordinates. The most astounding departure from official precedent, as described by Secretary Cox, was the affront given to the entire Cabinet, and especially the Secretary of State, in the negotiation of the treaty to annex San Domingo to the United States. The President's agent was . General O. F. Babcock, who, in the role of irregular private secretary, bore some such relation to him, as Major Lewis had done to Jackson. There had been occasional discussion of the subject of annexation among the members of the administration, incidentally to overtures from the San Domingan Government. And, although the President had not committed himself, a general impression had settled down that both Executive and Congress were opposed to the project. General Babcock, however, was despatched to San Domingo for the alleged purpose of reporting as an engineer upon the desirability of one of the harbors for a coaling station. Some weeks later, the Cabinet was electrified by the President's announcement that Babcock had returned, bringing a treaty for the annexation of San Domingo, and that the difficulty of his having acted without proper diplomatic powers could be easily remedied by securing the signature of the consular agent. Cabinet discussion went no fur- ther than Secretary Cox's question : " But Mr. President, has it been settled, then, that we want to annex San Domingo?" But the treaty was duly submitted to the Senate. Secretary Fish tendered his resignation in consequence of the slight; 10 but some influence constrained him to remain at his post, presumably fear for the Presi- dent's soundness as a party man. The McGarrahan Claim affair was the occasion of another extraor- dinary assertion of the President's discretion. In this matter, the Department of the Interior was concerned with a demand for a patent to mining lands in California. President Grant herein set at naught the official opinion of Attorney-General Hoar, and enjoined Secre- * Jacob D. Cox, How Judge Hoar Ceased to be Attorney-General, in Atlantic Monthly, LXXVI, 162-173. 10 Reminiscences of Carl Schurz, III, 323. 212 The President's Cabinet. tary Cox from carrying out the statute that related to the subject. 11 Both officers were among the ablest members of the Administration, and the unconventional treatment accorded to them was a factor, in their retirement, though not the immediate circumstance. The chief cause of the generally unsettled condition of this Cabinet was the strife between the reign of party politics in the Departments and the rising demand for Civil Service Reform. An excep- tional opportunity for the control of the appointive offices by Con- gressmen had been afforded by the degradation of the Executive power in the hands of President Johnson. And a coterie of singu- larly astute politicians in the Senate had made haste to improve it. The chief of the " Senatorial group " was Roscoe Conkling who was now assuming Seward's place as party leader in New York. Oliver P. Morton of Indiana was another of its members. And figures that had been a little longer on the scene were Chandler of Michigan and Cameron of Pennsylvania. The reform movement, on the other hand, expressed itself in unmistakable terms in the Liberal Repub- lican defection in 1872. President Grant oscillated between the two forces. And Cabinet officers were both made and unmade for their reform sentiments. Of the original appointments, both Judge Hoar and General Cox chanced to be reformers. Furthermore, Judge Hoar soon found occasion to ignore the rule of " Senatorial courtesy " in making recommendations for filling the great judicial offices that were cre- ated by the Act that established the United States Circuit Court. The President supported his Attorney-General; but was not equal to protecting him afterwards." He nominated Judge Hoar to the Supreme Bench of the United States, but disaffected Senators de- feated the appointment. A little later the Attorney-General yielded his place to Amos T. Akerman of Georgia. The latter gentleman had little to recommend him except the fact that he was a Southern Republican. There were indications that his appointment was the price paid to the " carpet bagger " Senators for their votes on the San Domingan treaty. 13 The influence of the Senatorial politicians 11 The Nation, XI, 324. a Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 211. 13 J. D. Cox in the Atlantic Monthly, LXXVI, 163-173. Grant. 213 with the President became well assured during this session. Mr. Conkling's ascendency dated from a struggle to confirm a collector of customs at New York that terminated in July, 1870. 14 A second reformer disappeared from the Cabinet for coming into conflict with Senator Cameron. Secretary Cox protested against the levying of assessments upon clerks in his Department in the elections of 1870. President Grant failed to sustain him. And Columbus Delano, who had been a member of the House of Representatives and latterly Commissioner of Internal Revenue, became Secretary of the Interior. With this reform sentiments disappeared from the administration. President Grant entered upon his second term of office without giving the Liberal Republican movement any immediate notice. With a single exception, he reappointed his entire Cabinet. Secretary Boutwell of the Treasury was able to satisfy his preference for legislative work by election to the seat in the Senate that was vacated when Henry Wilson became Vice-President. His successor was William A. Richardson, whose credentials consisted in the fact that he represented the State of Massachusetts, and was already on the ground as Assistant-Secretary. The "carpet-bagger " Attorney- General had previously given place to George H. Williams, who brought the Pacific Coast into the administration. A peculiarly low ebb in the character of the Cabinet is now reached. Not only had the standards of ability fallen, but charges of corruption were rife. The columns of such a journal as the Nation, which was especially sane and reliable at this time, show the Secretaries under almost constant fire. Changes occurred in rapid succession. In June, 1874, Secretary Richardson was driven from the Treasury Department by the scandal of the Sanborn contracts. These were contracts for the collection of certain taxes and excises that had been illegally withheld from the Government, in executing which a man named Sanborn collected, at an enormous commission, funds that were within the proper province of the Internal Revenue Bureau. The investigation by a committee of the House of Repre- sentatives would have resulted in a resolution of lack of confidence in the Secretary of the Treasury, had not the President quieted the " Conkling, Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, 326. 214 The President's Cabinet. affair by appointing Mr. Richardson to the Court of Claims, and promoting Benjamin F. Bristow of Kentucky, who was an avowed Civil Service Reformer to the Head of the Treasury." Almost simul- taneously, Postmaster-General Cresswell retired. There was a tender of the vacant place to Representative Eugene Hale of Maine, that is of interest for its factional significance. For, while Mr. Hale had personal ties to some of the Grant chieftains, he was identified politically with the fortunes of James G. Blaine, who was Speaker of the House of Representatives, and one of the new figures on the Presidential horizon. Between Senator Conkling and Mr. Blaine relations of avowed hostility already existed. 18 Any idea of cement- ing factions was thrust aside by Mr. Hale's declining the Post-Office and its vast patronage for the alleged reason of ill health." The place was filled by the appointment of Marshall Jewell of Con- necticut, a choice that is classed as one of General Grant's reform- ing measures. Meanwhile Attorney-General Williams had incurred censure for his looseness in prosecuting evaders of the excise. This was probably the cause of the refusal of the Senate to act upon his name, when President Grant nominated him for Chief Justice of the United States in December, i874. ls In the following May, Edwards Pierrepont of New York succeeded to the Attorney-General- ship; and somewhat improved the credit of the office." In October, 1875, Secretary Delano retired from the Interior Department, where he had been under constant fire from the reformers and independents who never forgave him for succeeding General Cox. While Mr. Delano was ably succeeded by Senator Chandler, the appointment of the latter marked the tightening of the grip of the politicians upon the administration, which had relaxed during the preceding year, as a result of the disclosure of frauds in the internal revenue service. The most serious scandal within the Executive grew out of Secre- tary Belknap's sale of traderships at the army posts ; and was the 15 Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, I, 325. 16 Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 260. 17 The Nation, XIX, 1. 18 The Nation, XVII, 415. 10 Ibid., XX, 305. Grant. 215 occasion of the first and only impeachment of a Cabinet officer. This occurred in the spring of 1876. On March 3, the House of Repre- sentatives adopted articles of impeachment, appointed managers, and notified the Senate ; but while this action was being taken, the Secre- tary of War resigned, and the President accepted his resignation. The issue was now made, whether the Senate had authority to con- vict a party who had been an officer of the Government, but had ceased to be such, before impeachment proceedings were instituted. Upon the plea of lack of jurisdiction, the majority requisite to con- vict upon impeachment failed to be secured, though the vote stood 37 to 25 against the accused. 20 The late Senator Hoar, who was the chief manager of the im- peachment, expressed the belief that party feeling operated to save Belknap from the full penalty prescribed by the Constitution; and that the opinion expressed by the vote of the majority, that his liability was not terminated by resignation, will prevail hereafter, unless political sympathies should prevent. 21 But, nevertheless, the way was found to vitiate the Constitutional provision for dealing with misconduct in office, so far as officers holding at the President's pleas- ure are concerned. With the retirement of General Belknap, the War Office was mo- mentarily conferred upon Judge Alphonso Taft of Ohio, who was, however, transferred to the Attorney-Generalship two months later, when Mr. Pierrepont, his predecessor in that office, became Minister to England. Though the change was approved by the better judg- ment of the country, its alleged purpose was to vacate the War Department for Don J. Cameron, Senator Cameron's son. 22 The ap- proach of the presidential election gave the remnant of the adminis- tration entirely to the politicians. Mr. Bristow, the reforming Sec- retary of the Treasury, had been for some time treading dangerous ground in the prosecution of the " whiskey ring " for the evasion of the excise wherein he had come into conflict with some of the Presi- dent's personal favorites, notably General Babcock, the negotiator of 20 Congressional Record, IV, Part 7, Trial of W. W. Belknap. a Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, I, 365. 22 The Nation, XXII, 327. 216 The President's Cabinet. the San Domingo treaty. 23 Postmaster-General Jewell, likewise, showed a disposition to scrutinize postal contracts more sharply than the prevailing sentiment required. 21 Furthermore, the Republican Na- tional Convention, which incorporated a civil service reform plank in its platform, brought forward each of those gentlemen as a reform candidate for the presidential nomination. Mr. Jewell's following amounted to nothing more than the vote of his own State. But Mr. Bristow's candidacy was formidable enough to bring him into re- proach for setting himself up against Senator Conkling, the adminis- tration candidate. 25 Notwithstanding the warnings of the inde- pendent press that it would be unwise to open the campaign by offending the reforming Republicans, Mr. Bristow yielded his place in the Cabinet to Senator Lot M. Morrill of Maine ; which was at least a more dignified arrangement than the one that simultaneously occurred in the Post-Office. In the latter Department, the pro- motion of James M. Tyner of Indiana from the position of Second Assistant was a bald expedient for securing a pivotal State to the Republican party, being presumably dictated by Senator Morton, who had rivalled Conkling in the administration councils, and had been himself a candidate for the presidential nomination. An important change in the Executive organization occurred under President Grant. An act was passed, June 22, 1870, to estab- lish a Department of Justice whereof the Attorney-General became the head. The Attorney-Generalship as established by the original Judiciary Act, in addition to the function of prosecuting in the Supreme Court suits in which the United States was concerned, was charged with the duty of furnishing advice and opinions on questions of law to' the President and the Heads of Departments, in matters concerning the performance of their duties. Washington viewed the office as a purely judicial one, but soon associated its incumbent with his Executive coadjutors in his Cabinet. Whether the officer should also advise Congress, or its Committees, as to the validity of pending legislation was a question that came up from 28 The Nation, XXIII, 2. 21 The Nation, XXIII, 18. 25 The Nation, XXIII, in. Grant. 217 time to time ; and Attorneys-General Wirt, Taney, Crittenden, Bates, Evarts, and Williams may be mentioned as having declined on legal grounds to render such service, although other incumbents of the office acted in this capacity by courtesy. By act of August 2, 1861, and incidentally to the general enlargement of the Departments to meet the demands of the Civil War, the Attorney-General was charged with the superintendence and direction of the marshals and district attorneys throughout the United States and its Territories. By the act which erected the office into the headship of a Department, the duties of the Attorney-General were left substantially as they had been previously defined, with the extension of his functions in the courts to correspond with the enlargement of the Federal judiciary. A Solicitor-General also was provided to assist the Attorney-General and to act in his stead in case of vacancy or disability; and the two Assistant Attorney-Generalships already existing were con- tinued ; later acts have added additional assistants. The first Attorney-General to enjoy the dignity of being a Department Head was Amos T. Akerman of Georgia." 28 The Government of the Confederate States anticipated the National Government in making the Attorney-General the Head of a Department, inasmuch as it passed an act, February 21, 1861, to create a Department of Justice, wherein the powers of the Attorney-General were defined precisely as in the laws of the United States, after the supervision over marshals and district attorneys had been added. President. RUTHERFORD B. HAYES, Ohio. Vice-President. WILLIAM A. WHEELER, New York. March 5, 1877, to March 4, 1881. Secretary of State. Hamilton Fish, of New York; continued from last Administration. William M. Evarts, of New York, March 12, 1877. Secretary of the Treasury. Lot M. Morrill, of Maine; continued from last Administration. John Sherman, of Ohio, March 8, 1877. Henry F. French, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary) , ad interim, March 4, 1881. Secretary of War. James D. Cameron, of Pennsylvania ; continued from last Administration. George W. McCrary, of Iowa, March 12, 1877. Alexander Ramsey, of Minnesota, December 10, 1879. Attorney-General. Charles Devans, of Massachusetts, March 12, 1877. Postmaster-General. James M. Tyner, of Indiana; continued from last Administration. David M. Key, of Tennessee, March 12, 1877. Horace Maynard, of Tennessee, June 2, 1880. Secretary of the Navy. George M. Robeson, of New Jersey; continued from last Administration. Richard W. Thompson, of Indiana, March 12, 1877. Alexander Ramsey, of Minnesota (Secretary of War), ad interim, December 21, 1880. Nathan Goff, Jr., of West Virginia, January 6, 1881. Secretary of the Interior. Zachariah Chandler, of Michigan; continued from last Administration. Carl Schurz, of Missouri, March 12, 1877. 2ig HAYES. The salient facts about the Hayes Cabinet are its draught upon the Independents, or Reformers, and its failure to represent the great factions of the Republican party. The combination that nominated Rutherford B. Hayes for the Presidency was an incongruous one. The very chieftains who controlled President Grant united with men who had been Liberal Republicans in 1872, in a common purpose to defeat Mr. Blaine. But with the nomination determined, the dis- appointed candidates went through the forms of pledging their sin- cere support to the successful one. 1 And the precarious issue of the election is probably to be attributed to the discredit which the Grant administration had incurred, and the success with which the Demo- crat party assayed the role of reform, rather than to defection among the Republican leaders. It would not be surprising, however, if there were a chapter of inside history, of a somewhat sensational character, regarding the pre-inaugural relations between the party standard bearer and the party chieftains. Senator Conkling was prevented by illness from taking the part in the campaign that had been arranged. What passed between him and Mr. Hayes on the subject of the New York patronage has not been revealed ; but the recom- mendation of Thomas C. Piatt of that State to be Postmaster-General is enough to incite conjecture. 3 It was a forewarning that the party organization in New, York was to be at variance with the National administration, when Conkling refused to endorse the decision of the Electoral Commission. 8 Blaine's defection seems also to have had its immediate cause in failure to dictate a Cabinet appointment ; though the Senator from Maine had other grievances. The one exception to the estrangement between Hayes and the factions is found in his rela- 1 Foulke, Life of Oliver P. Morton, I, 402. s Conkling, Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, 520. "Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 264. 221 222 The President's Cabinet. tions with Morton, who was a valued adviser during the campaign and in the formation of the Cabinet. The support of the Republican candidate by the Independents was determined by Carl Schurz, lately a Senator from Missouri, and the acknowledged leader of the civil service reform movement. Hayes was disposed to recognize the demands of this movement, and it was under Mr. Schurz's advice that certain steps in that direction were taken. These included the civil service reform paragraph in the letter of acceptance, and the refusal to become a candidate for a second term of office, an observance of a rule advocated in the plat- form of the Liberal Republicans, four years before, and believed by them to be necessary to purging the Departments of political abuses. Mr. Schurz was invited to make suggestions about the Cabinet; and proposed William M. Evarts to be Secretary of State, and Ben- jamin F. Bristow, lately of the Grant administration, to be Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Evarts, who had been Attorney-General under Johnson, after defending him on his impeachment, was now an Independent, and inclined towards civil service reform as strongly as any prominent man in New York, though he was less ardent than Schurz. Bristow's attitude towards reform had been fully demon- strated by his career in the Grant Cabinet, and the support which he commanded in the Republican National Convention. The Presi- dent, however, had marked Mr. Schurz himself for the Cabinet, and had made his own choice for the Treasury, in the person of Senator John Sherman of Ohio. On the score of ability and previous train- ing, Mr. Sherman was a highly eligible candidate, being chairman of the Senate Committee of Finance, while the important monetary questions of the Grant administration were under consideration; but he was not a reformer. Mr. Schurz was given a choice of the Post-Office and Interior Departments and took the latter. These three important appointments were definitely arranged late in Feb- ruary, when the Electoral Commission began to give signs that its findings would be in favor of the Republican party. 4 Besides departing from the rule of factional representation, this * Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years in the House, Senate, and Cabinet, I. S61-563. The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz, III, 373-375. Hayes. 223 Cabinet affords the anomaly of going outside of the party for one of its members. The suggestion that the Southern member should be taken from the ranks of the Democrats seems to have emanated from Mr. Schurz ; and it was cordially taken up by the President- elect as an earnest of his determination to withdraw the remnants of military rule from the South. It was even proposed to put Gen- eral Joseph E. Johnson at the head of the War Department; but conference with military men showed that such arrangement would very seriously embarrass the relations between the department and the army. Accordingly the project dwindled to making David M. Key of Tennessee Postmaster-General. Mr. Key had served in the army of the Confederacy as Lieutenant-Colonel ; and since 1875, he had been a member of the United States Senate on the Democrat side. The opposition which must have been aroused by putting the patronage of the Post-Office into the hands of a Southern Democrat was forestalled, in a measure, by an arrangement to put James M. Tyner, whom political considerations had marked for head of the Department during the presidential campaign, into the first as- sistantship. The Morton influence was probably present in this; though that Senator's biographer asserts that Key himself requested the arrangement. Morton at least was given the control of the Cabinet appointment from Indiana, with a suggestion that he should accept it himself. He, however, preferred to remain in the Senate ; and merely submitted a list, of acceptable names from which Richard W. Thompson was chosen and ultimately assigned to the Navy. 5 The other Western appointment was that of George W. McCrary of Iowa, who was a prominent member of the House of Representatives, and had attracted special attention by introducing the resolution which led to instituting the Electoral Commission. Considerable interest attaches to the determination of Mr. McCrary's portfolio. His ambition for a judicial career connected his name with the Department of Justice; but a moral disqualification existed in his attitude towards the McGarrahan Claim, which was still unsettled. A solution was proposed in a temporary exchange of portfolios between Mr. McCrary and the member from New England. That 5 Foulke, Life of Oliver P. Morton, II, 479, 480. 2,24 The President's Cabinet. this person should be General Charles Devens, Judge of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, had been determined by advising with Senator George F. Hoar. This would have made Mr. Devens pro- visional Attorney-General and Mr. McCrary provisional Secretary of War; but Judge Devens, though willing to accept either office permanently, refused to enter into a temporary arrangement, upon the ground that the transfer would lead to surmises that his judicial services had not been satisfactory. Accordingly, Mr. McCrary was constrained to accept the War Department, while Mr. Devens became Head of the Department of Justice. 6 The selection of Judge Devens as the representative of New England disaffected Senator Blaine, whose plans contemplated the placing of William P. Frye of Maine, in the Cabinet. To this Presi- dent Hayes would not agree, though he made an offer to Mr. Hale, who had three years before received an overture from President Grant. 7 There is a curious letter from Mr. Blaine, written soon after the inauguration, in which he denies the current charges of opposition to the new Cabinet ; and says that the President offered a place to Mr. Hale, but assigned as a reason for not taking Mr. Frye the fact that he did not know him. 8 A very large number of actual Cabinet officers would have been excluded by the application of this rule. The communication of the Cabinet list to the Senate aroused that body to a very extraordinary assertion of its powers of obstruction. Herein lay the means of redress against the President's independent course, and the scanty consideration which it accorded to the Sena- torial chiefs. The present practice of referring Cabinet appointments to Committees was not established at this time, at least so far as incoming administrations were concerned; and, had it been so, the rule of courtesy which ordinarily exempts the Senate's own members from such reference, would have been applicable to two of these particular nominations. Accordingly very special significance at- taches to the steps taken in confirming this Cabinet. On March 7, ° Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, II, 10. 'Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, II, 7. 8 Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 429. Hayes. 225 the nominations being delayed until that date, Senator Morrill of Vermont introduced a motion that each of the nominations, those of Sherman and Key included, be referred to the committee corre- sponding to the department in question, when appointed; and the motion promptly passed. The next day, the clause relating to Sherman was judiciously re- considered, and his appointment was confirmed, receiving 37 votes in its favor to 11 against. Two days after the original motion, it was announced that the committees were appointed, and that the Cabinet nominations were duly referred. One day more sufficed for the committees to report favorably, and the votes showed practically no opposition, Schurz, who was chief of the Independents, being confirmed with a single dissenting voice, while Evarts and Key, the one an Independent and the other a Democrat, each received two " nays." ° The explanation of this change of attitude was that public opinion had interposed. During the three anxious days, mails and telegraph poured inquiries and expressions of disapproval into the Capitol, until it became evident that the country would not support .the action of the Senate. Although the Hayes Cabinet was an exceptionally able one, it was greatly hampered by the political disagreement between the Execu- tive and Congress. In the House of Representatives, the Democrats had had a majority since the middle of Grant's second term of office ; and the Republicans did not recover it until the election of 1880. In the Senate, the coming of a Democrat majority, by the mid-term elections, was not more serious than the estrangement between the President and the factions. Mr. Blaine was out of sympathy with President Hayes's Southern policy ; and was not pleased at the spec- tacle of Mr. Schurz in the Cabinet. 10 During the last three years of the administration he did not enter the White House. Between Mr. Conkling and the administration there was a memorable war over the removal of the three leading United States officials at the port of New York; when the substitution of Edwin A. Merritt for Chester A. Arthur, as Collector of Customs, was accomplished by a vacation sus- 'Senate Executive Journal, 1877-1879, 3, 5, 6. ™ Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, II, 595-597- IS 2,26 The President's Cabinet. pension under the Tenure-of-Office Acts of 1867 and 1869, the diffi- cult task of securing the assent of the Senate, being achieved largely through the strenuous efforts of Secretary Sherman. 11 The death of Senator Morton shortly after the inauguration, put an end to support from that quarter. The great task of resuming specie payments gave the Treasury Department the place of greatest prominence. Moreover, Secretary Sherman's political seniority over his chief had called forth the pre- diction that he would be the controlling spirit of the administration. But the issue proved that President Hayes maintained his authority over all his subordinates. On one occasion, in fact, he overruled his principal secretary within his own department. As he stated in an interview which he granted some years after his presidency, he had on at least two occasions decided and carried out matters against the wishes of the Head of the Department affected, one of them being Mr. Sherman whose opinion he usually valued. 12 The differ- ence referred to was probably with reference to the veto of the Bland-Allison Bill for the remonetization of silver, passed in 1878. Sherman himself says of this matter that he had been in communication with Senator Allison as to desirable amendments upon the bill ; and believed that a way had been found to prevent the dreaded evils ; therefore he did not sustain the President in his veto, though he did not care to antagonize his decision. 13 President Hayes and Secretary Sherman also differed on the important question of re- tiring United States notes. The Annual Message of 1880, and the Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitted to Congress on the same day, make radically different suggestions upon this sub- ject, this being one of the few cases which raise the question whether the President has the same authority over the reports from the Treasury as he has over those from the other Departments. 11 The recognition of civil service reform in the Cabinet did not go far enough to have very great results. Mr. Schurz would have had 11 Burton, John Sherman, 290-296. 12 Stevens, Sources of the Constitution of the United States, 167, Footnote. " Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, II, 623. 11 Richardson, Messages, VII, 616 ; Sherman, Recollections, II, 794. Hayes. 227 the Treasury, Interior, and Post-Office Departments all filled by men who were thorough reformers ; but the Interior, over which he himself presided, was the only one where a consistent effort in that direction was made. He remarked, some years later that experience had convinced him that no President, however firm and courageous he might be, could succeed in systematic reform, if he had to carry on the reform against his own Cabinet. Inasmuch as Hayes had declined a second term of office, Sherman became an active aspirant for the Presidency ; and did not escape the charge of using the vast patronage of the Treasury to secure the nomination in 1880. In the Post-Office, Key was understood to have reforming inclinations ; but they were of little account with Tyner dispensing the Northern patronage. The division of authority in this Department worked badly; and probably had something to do with entailing the Star Route scandals upon the next administration. The recognition of the political South amounted to nothing more than sentiment ; and when Mr. Key retired in June, 1880, to accept a District Judgeship, the idea was abandoned. Horace Maynard, who succeeded him, was also from Tennessee; but had previously been in the Republican ranks, having held a diplomatic office under President Grant. Two other Departments changed hands. Secretary McCrary found satisfaction for his judicial aspirations in a Circuit Judgeship, and was succeeded in the War Office by Alexander Ramsay of Minnesota. Secretary Thompson, whose naivete in matters pertain- ing to naval armaments had afforded some amusement among his associates, retired, as the administration was nearing its end, to become Chairman of the Panama Canal Commission. President Hayes offered to appoint in advance the man whom President-elect Garfield had selected for the Navy; but inasmuch as the incoming Cabinet was not yet determined upon, he designated Nathan Goff of West Virginia for the remnant of his term. Notwithstanding the political isolation of the Hayes administra- tion, it was doubtless due in part to the creditable manner in which it acquitted itself that the Republican party in 1880, with General James A. Garfield for its presidential candidate, polled a larger popu- lar vote than it had done for six years. President. JAMES A. GARFIELD, Ohio. (Died September 19, 1881.) Vice-President. CHESTER A. ARTHUR, New York. March 4, 1881, to September 19, 1881. Secretary of State. 1 William M. Evarts, of New York ; continued from last Administration. James G. Blaine, of Maine, March 5, 1881. Secretary of the Treasury. Henry F. French, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, March 4, 1881. William Windom, of Minnesota, March 5, 1881. Secretary of War. Alexander Ramsey, of Minnesota; continued from last Administration. Robert T. Lincoln, of Illinois, March 5, 1881. Attorney-General. Charles Devens, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. Wayne MacVeagh, of Pennsylvania, March 5, 1881. Samuel F. Phillips, of North Carolina (Solicitor-General), ad interim, March 7, 1881. Postmaster-General. Horace Maynard, of Tennessee; continued from last Administration. Thomas L. James, of New York, March 5, 1881. Secretary of the Navy. Nathan Goff, Jr., of West Virginia; continued from last Administration. William H. Hunt, of Louisiana, March 5, 1881. Secretary of the Interior. Carl Schurz, of Missouri; continued from last Administration. Samuel J. Kirkwood, of Iowa, March 5, 1881. 229 GARFIELD. Notwithstanding the fact that the Republicans secured the House of Representatives, with a good prospect of controlling the Senate, by the elections of 1880, the factional situation rendered the problem of forming an administration that could command the support of Congress one of almost unparalleled difficulty. The lines along which President Garfield proceeded were determined, to a great extent, by the circumstances which brought about his nomination. In 1880 the hostility between Conkling and Blaine continued to divide the Republican party. However, Mr. Conkling, instead of confronting Mr. Blaine in the Republican Convention as a personal candidate for presidential honors, overmatched him with a strong combination that supported ex-President Grant for a third term of office, the balance of power being held by the supporters of " favorite sons," of whom the strongest was Sherman. After long and tedious balloting, the Blaine forces combined with the lesser delegations upon General James A. Garfield of Ohio, who had had a distinguished career in the House of Representatives, and was now Senator-elect. The Grant or Conkling forces stood firm throughout, showing on the last ballot 306 votes. It was a political necessity that the Vice- Presidential candidate should represent that wing of the party ; and Chester A. Arthur, who had been prominent in New York politics as Collector of Customs at New York City and Chairman of the Republican State Committee, was nominated for the second place on the ticket. The problem of dealing with the " 306," when the time came to form the Cabinet, was complicated by its geographical distribution, which seriously crossed State lines. Even New York had not stood solidly for General Grant; for the Republican party was distinctly divided there into the " Regulars " or " Stalwarts," whom Conkling commanded, and a much smaller wing of " Independents." Further- more a like division existed in the States of Pennsylvania and Illi- 231 232 The President's Cabinet. nois, the Grant forces being commanded in the one by Don Cameron, who had succeeded to his father's place in Keystone politics, and in the other by General John A. Logan. It was this division in the State delegations to the Republican National Convention that caused the memorable controversy over the " unit rule " ; in which Garfield, who was himself delegate-at-large from Ohio, scored a triumph over Conkling, and Judge William H. Robertson of New York came forward as leader of the Independent Republicans in Conkling's own State. The moment that the Republican triumph was assured, the President-elect, in his home at Mentor, began to feel the pressure of throngs of Cabinet makers, both through the mails and by personal visitation. The story of the making of no other Cabinet is so dramatic. And it would seem that a certain cheapening of Cabinet office in the popular mind, which had resulted from the low condition of that body under President Grant, asserted itself afresh, as the Independent regime of President Hayes came to an end. 1 In the midst of these solicitations, Mr. Garfield wrote to a friend : " Pres- sure for the appointment of anybody to the Cabinet has come to be, in my mind, an almost insuperable obstacle in that direction." 2 Still the most suitable of the names proposed were duly considered, and several found temporary places upon the Cabinet slate. The plan that Mr. Garfield adopted had two parts ; first, to give the highest consid- eration to that wing of the party which had nominated him, and from which he might expect a consistent support ; second, to accord to the Grant wing, men who were moderate " Regulars," but were not the creatures of the respective " Stalwart " leaders. Stated in geographi- cal terms, the plan accorded a member to New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and Illinois respectively, with two of the remaining portfolios reserved for the West and Northwest, and one for the 1 The only first hand material on the subject that has been published is the correspondence between Garfield and Blaine, which appears in Gail Hamilton's Biography of the latter. However, two or three of Garfield's confidential friends within his Congressional District are reliable authority for additional facts. "Garfield to B. A. Hinsdale, January II, 1881. Garfield. 233 South. 8 Late in November, 1880, the President-elect, while on a visit to Washington, offered the State portfolio to Mr. Blaine, which was formally accepted about three weeks later. The next selection, that of Mr. Wayne MacVeagh of Pennsylvania for the Attorney-Gen- eralship, was hardly less significant, for Mr. MacVeagh, being an Independent and a Hayes Republican, was as far from supporting Blaine as he was from supporting Conkling; and notwithstanding his political heresy, he was "persona grata" to the Pennsylvania " Regulars," by virtue of being Simon Cameron's son-in-law. A for- tunate arrangement was also made for the representation of Illinois, in that Robert T. Lincoln, son of the martyred President, became Secretary of War. Politically, Mr. Lincoln had followed, the lead of General Logan in supporting Grant, but sentiment made his appoint- ment acceptable to all factions. The New York " Stalwarts," under Mr. Conkling' s lead, were not so easily satisfied ; and forced an issue with the President-elect about the filling of the Treasury Department, which it is hard to interpret in any other light than as a special precaution for the control of the great offices at the port of New York for which they had unsuccess- fully contended with President Hayes. The newspapers have re- cently published a distorted account of the attempt to make Levi P. Morton Secretary of the Treasury. 1 It is known, however, in Mr. Garfield's former constituency, that there was such an attempt, and that it began before the election, and was not relinquished until the very hour of the inauguration. Mr. Garfield considered Mr. Morton ineligible to the Treasury for his business connections; but would have assigned him a different portfolio, had that gentleman's promp- ters allowed him to accept it ; as is was, he made Morton Minister to France. Moreover, having resolved to place the Treasury portfolio outside of Wall Street, but not necessarily outside of New York, he favor- ably considered Charles J. Folger, Judge of the Supreme Court of that State, and a moderate " Regular " ; which arrangement failed for * Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 490 ; Blaine to Garfield, December' 10, 1880. * December, 1907. 234 The President's Cabinet. the reason that Judge Folger was at the time personally interested in a claim against the United States. At one time it occurred to Mr. Garfield to appoint Senator Conkling himself to the Treasury De- partment. But there was reason to fear that the discord which must have resulted would defy all the conciliating forces that could be brought to bear ; and it can hardly be said that the proposition was discussed for any other than its psychological interest." The ultimate arrangement for the representation of the Empire State, was the ap- pointment of Thomas L. James to be Postmaster-General. Mr. James was a " Stalwart," having held under the Conkling regime .the office of Postmaster of New York City, in which he had shown adminis- trative ability of a high order. Additional difficulties attended the filling of the Treasury. The efficient administration of Mr. Sherman, during the " resumption " period, raised the question of his retention ; but such an arrangement would have entailed political embarrassments, and discrimination among the members of the retiring Cabinet seemed undesirable. Moreover, Mr. Sherman himself preferred to return to the Senate. 3 There was, furthermore, a feeling that the agricultural, rather than the manufacturing or commercial part of the country, should on this occasion furnish the Minister of Finance. And considerations of locality, combined with those of fitness, pointed to William B. Alli- son, Senator from Iowa, and William Windom, Senator from Minnesota, both of whom had been prominent members of Congres- sional committees corresponding to the Treasury Department. 7 In- asmuch as it was thought that Mr. Allison would be the more willing of the two to leave the Senate, the first offer was made to him. But the result proved the contrary. Furthermore, Mr. Allison was pre- vented by domestic considerations from undertaking the social re- sponsibilities of a Cabinet officer. Accordingly, Mr. Windom became Secretary of the Treasury. The selection of a suitable representative of the South was also a difficult matter, because of the lack of representative Republicans 5 Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 497. " Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, II, 802. ' Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 495. Garfield. 235 in that section of the country. Late in January, Mr. Garfield jocosely wrote to his prospective Secretary of State : " The Southern member still eludes me, as Creusa's image eluded Aeneas. One by one, the Southern roses fade. Do you know of a magnolia blossom that will stand our Northern climate ? " The problem was finally solved by ap- pointing William H. Hunt of Louisiana, to be Secretary of the Navy. A Secretary of the Interior was found in Senator Samuel J. Kirk- wood of Iowa. That the incoming Cabinet was less able than the re- tiring one was generally admitted ; but it was received on the whole with expressions of approval. It was one of those Cabinets in which the Secretary of State was conspicuously superior to all of his colleagues by virtue of ability and previous experience. There was a preconceived opinion, more- over, which might be paralleled with the cases of Lincoln and Seward, and Hayes and Sherman, that the Secretary would be President de facto. In fact there is an impression, fastened upon the reading public by the Nation, which has taken its inspiration entirely from " Stalwart " sources, that such was actually the case. Moreover, the Blaine publications carry a similar impression, though from a differ- ent motive. 8 The late Senator Hoar is perhaps the only prominent man who has distinctly asserted that President Garfield would have shown himself master of his own administration, had the public had time to find him out; but he is also the only one free from prejudices, and in possession of inside information, who has written upon the subject." Mr. Blaine had had the longer and more varied public experience. Moreover, when his supporters turned to Garfield, he at once espoused the cause of the new leader with an eagerness that went rather more than half way in making him a confidential adviser during the months that preceded the election and the inauguration. 10 Mr. Garfield, however, by no means lacked knowledge of public men, and was fully aware of Mr. Blaine's weaknesses. In 1876, he had 8 Stanwood, James G. Blaine, 238. ' Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, I, 399, 400. "Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 500; Blaine to Garfield, January 28; February 5, 1881. 236 The President's Cabinet. preferred him for the presidency before Conkling and Morton, but after Bristow. 11 Moreover, he had written of Blaine only two years before his own elevation to the Presidency : " Though I have long been warmly his friend, I have not been blind to his faults, which it seems to me, are growing rather than decreasing. He seems to have undoubted faith in management, while I have but little, and I think his mind is warped by the constant pressure of the presidential idea upon him." a In considering Mr. Blaine's influence over Mr. Garfield's admin- istration, it should be noticed that Mr. Garfield had surrounded him- self with a " coalition " Cabinet, in fact one that was as truly such as Lincoln's, though by no means composed of such great personali- ties. The presence of two Grant men at the council table assured the existence of an anti-Blaine element; furthermore, the Secretary of State had promptly found a strong counterpoise in the Attorney- General. 18 And it is known that in one important appointment Gar- field supported MacVeagh over Blaine. A Cabinet of this type could hardly have been dominated by any of its members, and have held together. The most striking of President Garfield's acts which has been ascribed to Secretarial influence was the change in the office of col- lector at the port of New York, whereby William H. Robertson, a leader of the Independents, superseded Edwin A. Merritt, whom President Hayes had appointed in the face of Senatorial opposition. The contemporary " Stalwart " version of this matter, as stated by General Grant, was that this was the continuation of an attempt to ruin Senator Conkling, that had been begun by President Hayes; and that it would not have occurred, if Mr. Blaine had not been in the Cabinet." A recent " Stalwart " writer, however, takes the ground that the appointment was not Mr. Blaine's act at all, but an impulsive turn on President Garfield's part, that he took because a list of appointments made a day or two before, and more acceptable 11 Garfield to B. A. Hinsdale, April 4, 1876. 12 Idem, January 30, 1879. 13 Stanwood, James G. Blaine, 238. 14 Contemporary Newspapers on Interview with General Grant at Chicago. Garfield. 237 to Mr. Conkling, had called forth criticism from a different quarter.' 5 The two versions are equally in error. Mr. Garfield had decided, not impulsively but after long deliberation, to give conspicuous recogni- tion to the New York Independents, and he had singled out Mr. Robertson for his stand against the " unit rule." " One of his advisers in the matter had been Judge Folger, who approved the appointment. That Mr. Garfield had always regarded the prevalent dictation of Na- tional appointments by Senators with disfavor, was proven by his pre- vious career. The appointment was not Mr. Blaine's. He had been in- vited into the administration, under the express declaration by Mr, Garfield that it was not to be made any man's battle-ground for the next. And the only way in which he could have shared in the Robertson appointment, was in exerting an influence as to the time when the nomination was made. 17 The fact that Postmaster- General James did not go with the two New York Senators in re- signing, although he had joined with them and Vice-President Arthur in a protest against the appointment," bespeaks Mr. Garfield's influence. President Garfield's long illness, extending from July 2 to Septem- ber 19, 1881, threw the Executive into a situation that there was no precedent for dealing with. The question was raised, whether it was not an occasion for the Vice-President to assume the direction of the Government. Moreover, the President, who was much of the time apprized of the course of public affairs, was fully competent to delegate extraordinary functions to his Secretary of State, had he desired to do so ; which arrangement would have been better in keep- ing with the trend of Executive development than a resort to the more Constitutional expedient. There was abundant willingness on Mr. Blaine's part ; but other members of the Cabinet were unwilling. A few precedents might have been unearthed out of Washington's administration for the Cabinet to deliberate without the President's attendance. The actual course of events was a Government by 15 Boutwell, Sixty Years of Public Affairs, II, 273, 274. 16 Garfield to B. A. Hinsdale, April 14, 1881. " Mrs. James G. Blaine, Letters, I, 197, March 24, 1881. 18 Conkling, Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, 640. /& The President's Cabinet. Departments, each head of necessity assuming an extraordinary discretion. The fact that Congress was not in session, made this arrangement the more satisfactory. The collegiate Cabinet was prac- tically suspended, unless it were for ceremonial purposes. In that character and no other, did the Secretary of State hold the precedence. President. CHESTER A. ARTHUR, New York. President Pro Tempore of the Senate. THOMAS F. BAYARD, Delaware. DAVID DAVIS, Illinois. GEORGE F. EDMONDS, Vermont. September 20, 1881, to March 4, 1885. Secretary of State. James G. Blaine, of Maine; continued from Garfield's Administration. Frederick T. Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey, December 12, 1881. Secretary of the Treasury. William Windom, of Minnesota ; continued from Garfield's Administration. Charles J. Folger, of New York, October 27, 1881. Charles E. Coon, of New York (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, Septem- ber 4, 1884. Henry F. French, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, September 8, 1884. Charles E. Coon, of New York (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, September IS, 1884. Walter Q. Gresham, of Indiana, September 24, 1884. Hugh McCulloch, of Indiana, October 28, 1884. Henry F. French, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, October 29, 1884. Secretary of War. Robert T. Lincoln, of Illinois; continued from Garfield's Administration. Attorney- General. Wayne MacVeagh, of Pennsylvania; continued from Garfield's Adminis- tration. Samuel F. Phillips, of North Carolina (Solicitor-General), ad interim, November 12, 1881. Benjamin H. Brewster, of Pennsylvania, December 19, 1881. Postmaster-General. Thomas L. James, of New York; continued from Garfield's Administration. Thomas L. James, of New York, recommissioned October 27, 1881. Timothy O. Howe, of Wisconsin, December 20, 1881. Frank Hatton, of Iowa (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, March 26, 1883. Walter Q. Gresham, of Indiana, April 3, 1883. Frank Hatton, of Iowa (First Assistant Postmaster-General), ad interim, September 25, 1884. Frank Hatton, of Iowa, October 14, 1884. Secretary of the Navy. William H. Hunt, of Louisiana; continued from Garfield's Administration. William E. Chandler, of New Hampshire, April 12, 1882. Secretary of the Interior. Samuel J. Kirkwood, of Iowa; continued from Garfield's Administration. Henry M. Teller, of Colorado, April 6, 1882. 239 ARTHUR. President Arthur's course in establishing his administration is somewhat of an enigma; though perhaps the political situation at President Garfield's death affords a sufficient clew to its solution. The doctrine of a personal right on the President's part to select his own advisers, which had been rather strengthened than otherwise by the events attendant upon the impeachment of Johnson, afforded sufficient ground for the country to expect a change of Cabinet. But the hostility between the party factions, which had now changed places, was a yet stronger reason. The newspapers represented the new President as being constantly surrounded by the " Stalwart " chiefs ; and it was a common prediction that Conkling, now a private citizen, would receive a prominent appointment. On September 22, 1 88 1, the Garfield Cabinet tendered their resignations ; and President Arthur accepted them to take effect some time after the next regular meeting of Congress. It was the middle of April, 1882, however, before the changes were completed; and no entirely new slate was at any time presented, though the portfolios changed hands singly, until only Secretary Lincoln of the War Department remained. Towards the close of October, 1881, Secretary Windom, not waiting to transmit his Annual Report to Congress, as the President desired of the retiring officers, vacated the Treasury Department, hoping to return to the Senate. President Arthur first nominated as Mr. Windom's successor ex-Governor Edwin D. Morgan of New York. Rumors were rife, however, that the choice was only temporary and that the portfolio was being reserved for Conkling himself. Mr. Morgan belonged to the " Stalwart " wing of the party ; but was a somewhat antiquated figure, having received his first offer of the Treasury from Lincoln at the time of Fessenden's retirement. Furthermore, his business connections were called in question, while his name was before the Senate. He was confirmed, however, but declined the office. Accordingly, Judge Charles J. Folger became 16 241 242 The President's Cabinet. Secretary of the Treasury, the disqualification which existed when President Garfield tendered that post to him, being now removed. This appointment seems to mark a withdrawal on President Arthur's part from Conkling's influence. A few weeks later, Feb- ruary 21, 1882, he honored his former chief with the offer of an appointment to the Supreme Bench of the United States; 1 but in making up his official household, he determined upon a middle course, so far as outward indications show. In November, Attorney-General MacVeagh retired; and was succeeded by Benjamin H. Brewster, who was, like his predecessor, a Pennsylvania lawyer. In December, Secretary Blaine was permitted to retire, and was succeeded by ex- Senator Frederick T. Frelinghuysen of New Jersey. Neither of these appointments had any particular bearing upon the factional situation. Postmaster-General James 2 retired a few weeks after Mr. Blaine, and was succeeded by ex-Senator Timothy O. Howe of Wisconsin, who was a Grant man. Secretaries Kirkwood and Hunt retained their positions until the following April, when Sena- tor Henry M. Teller of Colorado became Secretary of the Interior, and William E. Chandler of New Hampshire, Secretary of the Navy, the latter being a Blaine man. 3 The Arthur Cabinet was one of only moderate ability; moreover, its personnel shifted much, though the changes were confined to the Treasury and Post-Office Departments. Postmaster-General Howe retired in April, 1883 ; and was succeeded by Walter Q. Gresham of Indiana, who was not a great Cabinet officer, but was quite unique for the fact that after holding two portfolios in a Republican admin- istration, he appeared at the head of a Democrat Cabinet. In Sep- tember, 1884, Secretary Folger died in office ; whereupon Mr. Gres- ham was transferred to the Treasury, and Frank Hatton of Iowa, previously First Assistant Postmaster-General became the Head of 1 Conkling, Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, 676. 2 Postmaster-General James had been recommissioned a little more than a month after President Arthur's accession pursuant to an Act of June, 1872, which limited the tenure of the Postmaster-General to the term of the Presi- dent appointing him and 30 days thereafter. 3 Autobiography of Thomas Collier Piatt, 180. Arthur. 243 the Department. A month later, Mr. Gresham quitted the Cabinet to accept a Circuit Judgeship ; and Hugh McCulloch of Indiana, who had been Secretary of the Treasury under Lincoln and Johnson, was called to that office. The probable explanation of Mr. Arthur's failure to set up a Conkling regime is found in the discrediting of the ex-Senator by the New York Legislature. Fortune was not likely to favor the " Stalwarts " at the next presidential election ; and Mr. Arthur, like every other of the accidental Presidents, was a candidate for another term of office. On the other hand, any serious alliance with the Blaine faction was scarcely possible, although Mr. Blaine would probably have continued in the State Department, had it been de- sired. The apparent object of Mr. Arthur's course was to build up a third faction by drawing followers from the other two; but this he was not a sufficiently forceful man to accomplish. President. GROVER CLEVELAND, New York. Vice-President. THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, Indiana. (Died November 25, 1885.) President Pro Tempore of the Senate. JOHN SHERMAN, Ohio. JOHN J. INGALLS, Kansas. March 4, 1885, to March 4, 1889. Secretary of State. Frederick T. Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey; continued from last Admin- istration. Thomas F. Bayard, of Delaware, March 6, 1885. Secretary of the Treasury. Hugh McCulloch, of Indiana; continued from last Administration. Daniel Manning, of New York, March 6, 1885. Charles S. Fairchild, of New York, April 1, 1887. Secretary of War. Robert T. Lincoln, of Illinois; continued from last Administration. William C. Endicott, of Massachusetts, March 6, 1885. Attorney-General. Benjamin H. Brewster, of Pennsylvania ; continued from last Administration. Augustus H. Garland, of Arkansas, March 6, 1885. Postmaster-General. Frank Hatton, of Iowa; continued from last Administration. William F. Vilas, of Wisconsin, March 6, 1885. Don M. Dickinson, of Michigan, January 16, 1888. Secretary of the Navy. William E. Chandler, of New Hampshire; continued from last Adminis- tration. William C Whitney, of New York, March 6, 1885. Secretary of the Interior. Lucius Q. C. Lamar, of Mississippi, March 6, 1885. Henry L. Muldrow, of Mississippi (First Assistant Secretary), ad interim, January 10, 1888. William F. Vilas, of Wisconsin, January 16, 1888. Secretary of Agriculture. Norman J. Coleman, of Missouri, February 13, 1889. 245 CLEVELAND. President Grover Cleveland introduced an important improve- ment into the methods of Cabinet making by persistently violating the rule against the double representation of a State. For, although his own Cabinets were not superior or even equal to some that had been formed under the strictest geographical rules, later Presidents have secured greater fitness in their Heads of Departments by the sub- ordination of locality to other considerations. Furthermore, the re- turn of the Democrat party to power restored to the Southern States the representation in the Executive councils which they had enjoyed before the breaking up of the Buchanan Administration on the eve of the Civil War. President Cleveland's Cabinet appointments were as follows : Senator Thomas F. Bayard of Delaware, Secretary of State; Daniel Manning of New York, Secretary of the Treasury; Judge William C. Endicott of Massachusetts, Secretary of War; Senator Augustus H. Garland of Arkansas, Attorney-General ; Wil- liam F. Vilas of Wisconsin, Postmaster-General ; William C. Whit- ney of New York, Secretary of the Navy ; and, Senator Lucius Q. C. Lamar of Mississippi, Secretary of the Interior. Manning and Whitney, the two members from New York, both of whom were business men, were personal friends of Mr. Cleveland, and had had much to do with securing his nomination for the Presidency. Mr. Vilas was the recognized leader of the Democrat party within his State ; and seems to have attracted Mr. Cleveland's attention by his part in the Democrat National Convention of 1884. On the whole political services received a more than ordinary recognition in form- ing .the administration. However, the selection of three Senators, two of whom, Messrs. Bayard and Lamar, had been conspicuous among members of their party in Congress, was favorable to the desired intimacy between Executive and Legislature. It is a curious fact that the confirmation of the Cabinet was delayed a day, by an objection to Mr. Bayard on the part of a Democrat Senator from 247 248 The President's Cabinet. Virginia, who made the charge that the proposed Secretary of State had more sympathy with England than with the United States, and hence ought not to be entrusted with the foreign policy of the country. 1 The Cabinet was enlarged during this administration by the crea- tion of the Department of Agriculture. A minor office bearing that name had been established by act of May 15, 1862, under the direc- tion of a Commissioner of Agriculture. The duties of this officer were to distribute useful information concerning agriculture; also to propagate and distribute new plants and seeds. A very general demand had arisen, however, among the farmers of the country for a more substantial organization, and in response to repeated resolu- tions from agricultural societies, Congress passed an act, February 9, 1889, to " enlarge the powers and duties of the Department of Agriculture and to create an Executive Department to be known as the Department of Agriculture." A Secretary and an Assistant Secretary were provided for who should receive the same salaries as were paid to the Heads and Assistants in the other Executive Departments. The duties were continued as under the earlier office. The first incumbent of this Department was Norman J. Coleman of Missouri. It was not until McKipley's administration, when it re- ceived an eminently vigorous head, that it acquired sufficient im- portance to justify its creation. Changes in the Cabinet personnel were caused by the retirement cf Secretary Manning, because of ill health, and the appointment of Secretary Lamar to an Associate Judgeship in the Supreme Court of the United States. The vacancy in the Treasury Department was filled by the promotion of Charles S. Fairchild, of New York, whom Secretary Manning had chosen as First Assistant, and who had been the virtual head for some time. The Interior Department was filled by the transfer of Postmaster-General Vilas, to whose former place Don M. Dickinson of Michigan was appointed. If .the Executive relations of this administration differed con- spicuously from the normal order, the fact has not been revealed. Perhaps Mr. Cleveland had less intercourse with members of Con- *New York Times, March 6, 1885. Cleveland. 249 gress than many Presidents because of his lack of previous con- nection with the National Government, and his independent stand. In the Executive he was doubtless the controlling force. It has been affirmed by one of the politician editors, who had the entree to the White House, that President Cleveland's Cabinet officers were simply advisory as to the direction of their Departments and that every question of importance came to him for final decision. 2 This administration affords a striking illustration of the fact that there is no power to unify the policies of Cabinet officers, under the American system, below the President. Incidentally to the negotia- tions with England, respecting the North-Eastern and Behring Sea fisheries, Mr. Manning, the Secretary of the Treasury, issued orders which were distinctly at variance with those of Mr. Bayard, the Secretary of State; whereupon President Cleveland asserted what policy should be enforced. 8 On the whole, this Cabinet was not a brilliant one ; but it seems to have been harmonious and loyal to its chief. 2 A. K. McClure, Our Presidents and How We Make Them, 334. "House Executive Documents, XX; Hart, Practical Essays, 129. President. BENJAMIN HARRISON, Indiana. Vice-President. LEVI P. MORTON, New York. March 4, 1889, to March 4, 1893. Secretary of State. Thomas F. Bayard, of Delaware; continued from last Administration. James G. Blaine, of Maine, March 5, 1889. William F. Wharton, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, June S, 1892. John W. Foster, of Indiana, June 29, 1892. William F. Wharton, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, February 23, 1893. Secretary of the Treasury. Charles S. Fairchild, of New York; continued from last Administration. William Windom, of Minnesota, March 5, 1889. Allured B. Nettleton, of Minnesota (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, January 30, 1891. Charles Foster, of Ohio, February 24, 1891. Secretary of War. William C. Endicott, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. Redfield Proctor, of Vermont, March 5, 1889. Lewis A. Grant, of Minnesota (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, December 6, 1891. Stephen B. Elkins, of West Virginia, December 22, 1891. Attorney- General. Augustus H. Garland, of Arkansas; continued from last Administration. William H. H. Miller, of Indiana, March 5, 1889. Postmaster-General. Don M. Dickinson, of Michigan ; continued from last Administration. John Wanamaker, of Pennsylvania, March 5, 1889. Secretary of the Navy. William C. Whitney, of New York; continued from last Administration. Benjamin F. Tracy, of New York, March 5, 1889. Secretary of the Interior. William F. Vilas, of Wisconsin; continued from last Administration. John W. Noble, of Missouri, March 5, 1889. Secretary of Agriculture. Norman J. Coleman, of Missouri ; continued from last Administration. Jeremiah M. Rusk, of Wisconsin, March 5, 1889. 251 BENJAMIN HARRISON. President Benjamin Harrison repeated the Garfield Cabinet in the two most conspicuous Departments ; which fact was probably due to the partial survival of the same conditions within the Republican party as had existed eight years before. Mr. Blaine, after being defeated by Mr. Cleveland in 1884, had not seriously stood for the Presidential nomination in 1888 ; but neither had he ceased to be the dictator of the largest faction in the party. This fact added to his personal qualifications attracted President Harrison to him as the most eligible head for the State Department. Furthermore, it seemed expedient to award the Treasury portfolio to the West ; and Mr. Windom was again the most obvious candidate after eliminat- ing Sherman and Allison. Once more the New York appointment had an inside history that is not yet disclosed in its details. The so- called " promise " of the Treasury to Levi P. Morton in 1881 was echoed in a claim that a like pledge was now given to Thomas C. Piatt. The late Senator has declared that Mr. Harrison gave such a promise in writing, without producing the document, however. 1 A very plausible interpretation of both " promises " is that the New York dictators told a North- Western President-elect what was ex- pected of him, beyond his power to assert his independence on every occasion. At the last moment, Benjamin F. Tracy was permitted to accept the Navy, which Mr. Morton had been forbidden to do. The War Office was assigned to ex-Governor Redfield Proctor of Ver- mont, who had been a prominent supporter of General Harrison in the Republican National Convention ; Mr. Proctor's associations with Senator Edmunds, moreover, marked him as an anti-Blaine man. A Secretary of the Interior was found in John W. Noble of Missouri, a lawyer, who was unknown outside of his State, and was probably rec- ommended by considerations of locality, and his previous acquain- 1 Thomas Collier Piatt, Autobiography, 218. 253 254 The President's Cabinet. tance with President Harrison. The Department of Agriculture was assigned to ex-Governor Jeremiah Rusk of Wisconsin, who had been a member of the House of Representatives, and had acquired some reputation in his gubernatorial office. The appointment which aroused the most unfavorable comment was that of John Wana- maker, the great Philadelphia merchant, to be Postmaster-General; it being alleged that the cause of his receiving Cabinet honors, was his service in raising a campaign fund at a critical moment. Never- theless, Mr. Wanamaker brought to his office great executive ability, while the filling of the Attorney-Generalship from purely personal considerations made a notably weak spot in the administration. President Harrison conferred this office upon William H. H. Miller of Indiana, his law partner and intimate friend. Later when he desired to appoint Mr. Miller to the Supreme Bench of the United States, he was prevented by the knowledge that he could not be confirmed. This administration, like the one that preceded it, affords an im- portant illustration of conflict between Departments, and reveals the powerlessness of the Secretary of State to enforce his policies upon his colleagues. In the controversy between the United States and Chili, in i8c;i-'92, either Mr. Blaine, Secretary of State, and Mr. Tracy, Secretary of the Navy, were at cross purposes, about the conduct of the United States naval officers who were charged with interference between factions in the Chilean Government, or the State Department acquiesced in an assumption of authority over foreign relations on the part of the Navy. 2 There is, moreover, reason to suppose that President Harrison overbore Mr. Blaine in this matter, and virtually took it out of his hands, in issuing the ultima- tum, which demanded a thorough apology from the Chilean Govern- ment." The relations between Harrison and Blaine show with especial distinctness the authority which the President can exercise over his so-called " Premier," even when the advantages of ability, and previous position are on the Secretary's side ; though Mr. Blaine's 'The Nation, LIV, 44, Navalism; Hart, Practical Essays, 129. 8 The Nation, LIV, 64. Benjamin Harrison. , 255 biographers are so non-committal about .the alleged causes of disa- greement that little more than the general fact can be asserted. 4 Mr. Blaine's superiority as an experienced statesman over his chief and colleagues was more marked than it had been in the Garfield adminis- tration ; yet it is patent on the surface that he was not the dominating force of the administration. A serious personal affront was sustained at the outset by President Harrison's refusal to let him appoint his First Assistant Secretary, in which relation he had desired to have one of his sons associated with him, as Webster and Seward had done. The Chilean affair seems to indicate that he was at least once over- ruled in his foreign policy. It is true that his administration of foreign affairs was extraordinarily energetic, and his Pan-American policy led him to concern himself with the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, to an extent that is unusual with a Cabinet officer. Neverthe- less, his position was hampered both by domestic troubles and in- creasing alienation from his chief. The same sort of trouble existed in the latter quarter, as had come between Webster and Fillmore, and Lincoln and Chase. June 4, 1892, Mr. Blaine resigned from the Department. He had abruptly quitted a Cabinet meeting shortly before, and the story arose that he was angry at the Secretary of the Treasury, though his biographer asserts that illness was the cause. 5 Three days after his resignation, the Republican National Convention met, and nominated President Harrison on the first ballot for a sec- ond term of office, Mr. Blaine being the second candidate on the list, but showing only one-third as many votes as his former chief. John W. Foster of Indiana, an eminent authority on International Law, succeeded Mr. Blaine as Secretary of State. Two other changes in the Cabinet personnel had already occurred. In January, 1891, Mr. Windom, Secretary of the Treasury, died in office, and was succeeded by ex-Governor Charles Foster of Ohio. In Decem- ber of the same year, Mr. Proctor, Head of the War Department, resigned to take the seat in the Senate that was vacated by the death of Mr. Edmunds, and was succeeded in the Cabinet by Repre- sentative Stephen B. Elkins of West Virginia. * Stanwood, James G. Blaine, 334-336 ; Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 704. 5 Stanwood, James G. Blaine, 340. President. GROVER CLEVELAND, New York. Vice- President. ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Illinois. March 4, 1893, to March 4, 1897. Secretary of State. William F. Wharton, of Massachusetts (Assistant Secretary), ad interim; continued from last Administration. Walter Q. Gresham, of Illinois, March 6, 1893. Edwin F. Uhl, of Michigan (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, May 28, 1893. Richard Olney, of Massachusetts, June 8, 1895. Secretary of the Treasury. Charles Foster, of Ohio; continued from last Administration. John G. Carlisle, of Kentucky, March 6, 1893. Secretary of War. Stephen B. Elkins, of West Virginia; continued from last Administration. Daniel S. Lamont, of New York, March 6, 1893. Attorney-General. William H. H. Miller, of Indiana; continued from last Administration. Richard Olney, of Massachusetts, March 6, 1893. Judson Harmon, of Ohio, June 8, 1895. Postmaster-General. John Wanamaker, of Pennsylvania; continued from last Administration. Wilson S. Bissell, of New York, March 6, 1893. William L. Wilson, of West Virginia, March 1, 1895. Secretary of the Navy. Benjamin F. Tracy, of New York; continued from last Administration. Hilary A. Herbert, of Alabama, March 6, 1893. Secretary of the Interior. John W. Noble, of Missouri; continued from last Administration. Hoke Smith, of Georgia, March 6, 1893. David R. Francis, of Missouri, September I, 1896. John M. Reynolds, of Pennsylvania (Assistant Secretary), ad interim, September 2, 1896. Secretary of Agriculture. Jeremiah M. Rusk, of Wisconsin ; continued from last Administration. Julius Sterling Morton, of Nebraska, March 6, 1893. 17 257 CLEVELAND. When President Cleveland was elected for a second term of office in 1892, having been defeated by the Republican candidate in 1888, he recalled none of his former Cabinet; although Mr. Bayard, who had been his Secretary of State, now succeeded to the dignified post of Ambassador to England. In making up his second administra- tion, Mr. Cleveland put the State Department into the hands of Judge Walter Q. Gresham, who had figured in the Arthur Cabinet as a moderate Grant man, and had shown a good deal of strength in the Republican National Convention of 1884, as a candidate for the Presidency; but had latterly bolted his party out of dis- like of the McKinley Tariff Act. The fact that Judge Gresham showed only average qualifications for administering the foreign affairs of the country, renders the selection the more peculiar. A Secretary of the Treasury was found in John G. Carlisle of Ken- tucky, formerly Speaker of the House of Representatives, and lat- terly a prominent member of the Senate. The South received two additional portfolios, in that Hilary A. Herbert of Alabama, for- merly a member of the House of Representatives, where he had served on the Naval Committee, became Secretary of the Navy, while Hoke Smith of Georgia, who had not previously been connected with the National Government, became Secretary of the Interior. New England was recognized by the appointment of Richard Olney, an able Massachusetts lawyer, to the Attorney-Generalship. The De- partment of Agriculture was assigned to Julius Sterling Morton of Nebraska. New York, as before, furnished two members, and both of the appointments were personal, Daniel S. Lamont, private secretary of Mr. Cleveland's former administration, becoming Secre- tary of War, and Wilson S. Bissell, a former law partner, Post- master-General. No incidents of particular significance are associated with this Cabinet. The administration incurred a reputation for weakness, 259 ■2<5o The President's Cabinet. which neither accords with the firm character of the President, nor does justice to the ability of his advisers. This was due chiefly to the disagreement within the party over the Wilson Tariff Bill of 1894, and the dissentions over the silver question. The member of the House of Representatives, who gave his name to the new tariff law, William L. Wilson of West Virginia, entered the Cabinet in 1895 as Postmaster-General. David R. Francis of Missouri, assumed the Interior portfolio late in the administration. The most conspicu- ous change, however, occurred in the State Department, to which At- torney-General Olney was transferred in June, 1895, Secretary Gresham having died in office. The ensuing vacancy in the Depart- ment of Justice was filled by the appointment of Judson Harmon of Ohio. President. WILLIAM McKINLEY, Ohio. Vice- President. GARRET A. HOBART-, New Jersey. (Died November 21, 1899.) President Pro Tempore of the Senate. WILLIAM P. FRYE, Maine. March 4, 1897, to March 4, 1901. Secretary of State. Richard Qlney, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. John Sherman, of Ohio, March 5, 1897. William R. Day, of Ohio, April 26, 1898. Alvey A. Adee (Second Assistant Secretary), ad interim, September 17, 1898. John Hay, of the District of Columbia, September 20, 1898. Secretary of the Treasury. John G. Carlisle, of Kentucky; continued from last Administration. Lyman J. Gage, of Illinois, March 5, 1897. Secretary of War. Daniel S. Lamont, of New York; continued from last Administration. Russell A. Alger, of Michigan, March 5, 1897. Elihu Root, of New York, August 1, 1899. Attorney-General. Judson Harmon, of Ohio; continued from last Administration. Joseph McKenna, of California, March 5, 1897. John K. Richards, of Ohio (Solicitor-General), ad interim, January 25, 1898. John W. Griggs, of New Jersey, January 25, 1898. Postmaster-General. William L. Wilson, of West Virginia; continued from last Administration. James A. Gary, of Maryland, March 5, 1897. Charles Emory Smith, of Pennsylvania, April 21, 1898. Secretary of the Navy. Hilary A. Herbert, of Alabama; continued from last Administration. John D. Long, of Massachusetts, March 5, 1897. Secretary of the Interior. David R. Francis, of Missouri; continued from last Administration. Cornelius N. Bliss, of New York, March 5, 1897. Ethan A. Hitchcock, of Missouri, December 21, 1898. Secretary of Agriculture. Julius Sterling Morton, of Nebraska; continued from last Administration. James Wilson, of Iowa, March 5, 1897. 261 President. WILLIAM McKINLEY, Ohio. (Died September 14, 1901.) Vice- President. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, New York. March 4, 1901, to September 14, 1901. Secretary of State. John Hay, of the District of Columbia; continued from last Administration. John Hay, of the District of Columbia; recommissioned March 5, 1901. Secretary of the Treasury. Lyman J. Gage, of Illinois; continued from last Administration. Lyman J. Gage, of Illinois ; recommissioned March 5, 1901. Secretary of War. Elihu Root, of New York; continued from last Administration. Elihu Root, of New York; recommissioned March 5, 1901. Attorney-General. John W. Griggs, of New Jersey; continued from last Administration. John W. Griggs, of New Jersey ; recommissioned March 5, 1901. John K. Richards, of Ohio (Solicitor-General), ad interim, April I, 1901. Philander C. Knox, of Pennsylvania, April 5, 1901. Postmaster-General. Charles Emory Smith, of Pennsylvania; continued from last administration. Charles Emory Smith, recommissioned March 5, 1901. Secretary of the Navy. John D. Long, of Massachusetts; continued from last Administration. John D. Long, of Massachusetts; recommissioned March 5, 1901. Secretary of the Interior. Ethan A. Hitchcock, of Missouri ; continued from last Administration. Ethan A. Hitchcock, of Missouri ; recommissioned March 5, 1901. Secretary of Agriculture. James Wilson, of Iowa; continued from last Administration. James Wilson, of Iowa ; recommissioned March 5, 1901. 262 McKINLEY. In 1896, the Republican party entered upon a new era, and elected William McKinley as President. Inasmuch as the great party issue was the maintaining of the gold standard, the selection of the Sec- retary of the Treasury was regarded as being, in a peculiar sense, an index to the administration policy. January 28, 1897, the Nation advocated the appointment of Lyman J. Gage of Illinois, who had never been in politics, but whose knowledge of mone- tary affairs was attested by his high standing with the American Association of Bankers. The qualifications urged were that Mr. Gage was a believer in the gold standard, that he was not an advocate of bimetalism, national or international, and that he approved of a banking system regulated by, but otherwise inde- pendent of the Government. Almost simultaneously, the selection of Mr. Gage for the Treasury portfolio was announced. Although some of the other Departments were very ably filled, considerations of merit were mixed with the gratification of local pride, and with purely political aims, in determining the appointments. The State Department was manipulated in a manner thathas no exact parallel. It received a semi-honorary head in the person of John Sherman, who was too far advanced in years to assume the direction of the office, and against his own judgment was withdrawn from the Senate, presumably for the purpose of vacating a seat for Mark A. Hanna, who had sprung into great political prominence as Chair- man of the National Republican Committee. William R. Day, a neighbor and professional partner of the President's, was shortly made Assistant Secretary of State. The War Department was filled by General Russell A. Alger, ex-Governor of Michigan. The Navy Department was accorded to John D. Long of Massa- chusetts, formerly Governor of his State, and a member of the Lower House of Congress. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy was Theodore Roosevelt of New York, and the tradition that he brought about the appointment of Admiral, then Commodore, Dewey, to the 263 264 The President's Cabinet. command of the Asiatic Station, even though it be an overstatement, is not an exaggerated illustration of the part which officers of this rank have begun to take in their Departments. Cornelius N. Bliss of New York, became Secretary of the Interior; while the modern rule that the South must have one member in a Republican Cabinet received a half recognition in the appointment of James A. Gary of Maryland, to the Postmaster-Generalship. The Department of Agriculture was filled by James Wilson of Iowa, a practical farmer, and a professor of scientific agriculture. The State of California, hitherto never represented in the National Executive, received a complimentary recognition in the appointment of Joseph McKenna, Judge of the United States Circuit Court, to the Attorney-General- ship; the real purpose being apparently explained ten months later, when Mr. McKenna was appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. This Cabinet proved to have less than the average permanence; but as it changed, it increased its efficiency. The outbreak of the War with Spain in 1898 revealed its weak places. Secretary Sherman retired in April, and Assistant Secretary Day became the titular, as he had previously been the actual, head of the State Department. Postmaster-General Gary also avoided the ad- ditional stress which his Department must incur, by a timely resig- nation ; and Charles Emory Smith, editor of the Philadelphia Press, succeeded him. More notable changes came with the close of the War. Secretary Day became one of the members of the Peace Commission which assembled at Paris in September, 1898; and on his return, he was made Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the State Department received one of its most distin- guished incumbents in John Hay, who had been introduced to public affairs as private secretary to Lincoln, and had enjoyed an extended diplomatic career. While .the Navy Department emerged from the hostilities with Spain with high credit, the War Office was discredited by friction with the head of the army. Though a study of this Department would discover many instances of difficulty along this line, it would find an aggravated case in the affair between Secretary Alger and General Miles. Charges of gross incompetency in the administration McKlNLEY. 265 of the Department constrained President McKinley to order an inves- tigation of certain bureaus ; but he still retained the Secretary a full year in the face of much public criticism ; he then requested his resig- nation through the agency of Vice-President Hobart, Mr. Alger's candidacy for a seat in the Senate serving to ease the situation. The Secretaryship of War was now likely to become the most im- portant Cabinet office, inasmuch as that Department would direct, for a time, the governing of the new insular dependencies. Presi- dent McKinley looked for a man of legal rather than military training to be the counsellor and agent of this new task, and in choosing Elihu Root of New York, secured an eminently vigorous Secretary of War, who promptly addressed himself not only to the new problems, but also to correcting the defects in the military organization which the war had discovered. Secretary of the Interior Bliss, also from New York, had quietly retired from the Interior Department a year before, having pre- sumably found it an uncongenial task to cope with abuses in the Land Office and Pension Bureau. He was succeeded by Ethan A. Hitchcock of Missouri, whose longer incumbency and more strenuous support were fruitful of important results. When the Cabinet was reappointed at the beginning of President McKinley's second term of office, no changes were made in its personnel; but a month later Attorney-General Griggs retired, and was succeeded by Philander C. Knox of Pennsylvania, whose ability as a lawyer was certified by the opposition to him on the ground that he had previously been employed by the steel trust and other large corporations. When the assassination of President McKinley occurred in Buffalo, September 5, 1901, the members of his Cabinet, with only one or two exceptions, gathered together there, to assume the ceremonial functions which custom would devolve upon them in the event of the President's death. Secretary of State Hay was designated at this time by the press as the " senior member " and the " ranking member" of the Cabinet. Moreover, his place in the Presidential succession, under the law of 1886, was recognized by his remaining at the seat of Government, while the new President, Theodore Roosevelt, accompanied the funeral party. President. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, New York. President Pro Tempore of the Senate. WILLIAM P. FRYE, Maine. September 14, 1901 to March 4, 1905. \ Secretary of State. John Hay, of the District of Columbia; continued from McKinley's Admin- istration. Secretary of the Treasury. Lyman J. Gage, of Illinois; continued from McKinley's Administration. Leslie M. Shaw, of Iowa, January 9, 1902. Secretary of War. Elihu Root, of New York; continued from McKinley's Administration. William H. Taft, of Ohio, January 11, 1904. Attorney-General. Philander C. Knox, of Pennsylvania; continued from McKinley's Adminis- tration. William H. Moody, of Massachusetts, July 1, 1904. Postmaster-General. Charles Emory Smith, of Pennsylvania; continued from McKinley's Ad- ministration. Henry C. Payne, of Wisconsin, January 9, 1902. Robert J. Wynne, of Pennsylvania, October 10, 1904. Secretary of the Navy. John D. Long, of Massachusetts ; continued from McKinley's Administration. William H. Moody, of Massachusetts, April 29, 1902. Paul Morton, of Illinois, July 1, 1904. Secretary of the Interior. Ethan A. Hitchcock, of Missouri; continued from McKinley's Adminis- tration. Secretary of Agriculture. James Wilson, of Iowa; continued from McKinley's Administration. Secretary of Commerce and Labor. George B. Cortelyou, of New York, February 16, 1903. Victor H. Metcalf, of California, July 1, 1904. 267 President. THEODORE ROOSEVELT, New York. Vice-President. CHARLES W. FAIRBANKS, Indiana. March 4, 1905 to March 4, 1909. Secretary of State John Hay, of the District of Columbia; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Elihu Root, New York, July 7. I9°5- Robert Bacon, of New York, January 27, 1909. Secretary of the Treasury. Leslie M. Shaw, of Iowa ; recommissioned March 6, 1905. George B. Cortelyou, of Massachusetts, January 15, 1907, to take effect March 4, 1907. Secretary of War. William H. Taft, of Ohio ; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Luke E. Wright, of Tennessee, June 29, 1908. Attorney-General. William H. Moody, of Massachusetts; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Charles J. Bonaparte, of Maryland, December 12, 1906. Postmaster-General. George B. Cortelyou, of New York, March 6, 1905. George von L. Meyer, of Massachusetts, January 15, 1907, to take effect March 4, 1907. Secretary of the Navy. Paul Morton, of Illinois; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Chas. J. Bonaparte, of Maryland, July 1, 1905. Victor H. Metcalf, of California, December 12, 1906. Truman H. Newberry, of Michigan, December 1, 1908. Secretary of the Interior. Ethan A. Hitchcock, of Missouri; recommissioned March 6, 1905. James R. Garfield, of Ohio, January 15, 1907, to take effect March 4, 1907. Secretary of Agriculture. James Wilson, of Iowa; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Secretary of Commerce and Labor. Victor H. Metcalf, of California ; recommissioned March 6, 1905. Oscar S. Straus, of New York, December 12, 1906. 268 ROOSEVELT. President Roosevelt forestalled the resignation of the McKinley Cabinet by requesting its members to continue in office, and announc- ing that he would not inaugurate a new administration, but complete that of his predecessor. Notwithstanding this determination, the Cabinet was in a state of fluctuation during his entire presidency, going through two seasons of recasting, prior to the expiration of his predecessor's Constitutional term, and being two or three times readjusted in the course of Mr. Roosevelt's second term of office. A few weeks after the assembling of Congress in December, 1901, Postmaster-General Smith resigned to resume his duties as editor of the Philadelphia Press, and was succeeded by Henry C. Payne of Wisconsin, who had some political prominence as a member of the National Republican Committee. Simultaneously, Secretary Gage of the Treasury Department returned to private life; and ex-Governor Leslie M. Shaw of Iowa, an open candidate for the presidential nomination of 1904, was called into the Cabinet. A few months later, Secretary Long of the Navy Department retired to resume his profession ; and William H. Moody, a member of the Massachusetts delegation in the House of Representatives, suc- ceeded him in the Cabinet, a selection which satisfied the President's desire to keep a New England man in his administration, and was attributed by the press to the influence of his confidant Senator Lodge. In February, 1903, a Cabinet appointment was necessitated by the establishment of an Executive Department of Commerce and Labor, which had been strongly urged by President Roosevelt in his Annual Message of December, 1901. The President's recommenda- tion was to establish a Department of Commerce, a proposition which called out the endorsement of the merchants and manufacturers of the country. A bill for the purpose was promptly introduced in the 269 270 The President's Cabinet. Senate ; and in the following session, February 14, 1903, an Act was passed to establish a Department of Commerce and Labor. It was to be the province and duty of the Department .to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce, the mining, manu- facturing, shipping, and fishery industries, the labor interests, and the transportation facilities of the United States. Many bureaus and offices discharging the functions herein enumerated already ex- isted ; and the Department of Commerce and Labor, like that of the Interior, was built up to a great extent, by relieving the older Depart- ments of branches which more appropriately belonged under a differ- ent organization and title. The arrangement was not satisfactory to the American Federation of Labor, which organization showed a disposition, both at the time and afterwards, to demand a separate Department to look after its interests. The first incumbent of the Department of Commerce and Labor was George B. Cortelyou of New York, who had been private secretary to President McKinley, and was retained in that capacity by Roosevelt. Early in 1904, Secretary of War Root relinquished public office for a time; but the prominence which the Department had sustained under his administration suffered no falling off by the succession of Judge William H. Taft of Ohio, previously head of the Commission for governing the Philippine Islands. A few months later Attorney- General Knox left the Cabinet, and assumed the seat in the Senate, which was vacated by the death of Matthew M. Quay of Pennsyl- vania. Secretary Moody was now transferred to the Attorney- Generalship, and the resulting vacancy in the Navy was filled by the appointment of Paul Morton of Illinois. The latter choice provoked much criticism, partly because of Mr. Morton's Democratic ante- cedents, and partly on account of his relations with the business world. And the arrangement proved only temporary. At the same time, Secretary Cortelyou quitted the new Department, which he had set into operation, in order to become Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The selection of his successor, Victor H. Metcalf, a member of the House of Representatives from California, was determined largely by geographical considerations. The Cabinet had now greatly changed its complexion since the Roosevelt. 271 death of President McKinley; and, inasmuch as the presidential election of 1904 was at hand, the critics of the administration, espe- cially the Nation, were disposed to connect the shuffling with the political interests of Mr. Roosevelt. It could not be claimed at this juncture, that the ability of the Cabinet had increased; and it was easy to charge the President with making politics and not efficiency, the prime consideration. 1 The Roosevelt administration will undoubt- edly stand out as one conspicuous for political activity. Some of the Secretaries went onto the stump in 1904; and the whole Cabinet in 1908. Duff Green would certainly have stigmatized it as a " traveling Cabinet " that went about on " electioneering perambulations," mak- ing Presidents and Governors, instead of attending to its proper duties. It could not be charged, however, that the Cabinet officers were made and unmade with reference to .their dexterity in turning the patronage to political ends, or in redemption of political pledges. Neither would the exclusion of those men who have charge of the policies of the administration, from the right to explain them to .the people, appeal to the best judgment of the country. Even the Nation admits that this is a legitimate function, and sometimes a highly de- sirable one. Less than a month before the presidential election, Post- master-General Payne, whose appointment had been especially viewed as a political one, was permitted to retire, having incurred public criticism for coming into collision with the Civil Service Commis- sioners, and for other causes. The early months of Mr. Roosevelt's second term of office saw another Cabinet reconstruction; and although the distinguished figure of Secretary Hay was now lost, the administration, on the whole, gained in strength. It also assumed a peculiarly representa- tive character, not of geographical sections, but of types of American citizenship. Mr. Cortelyou, after conducting the presidential cam- paign in a manner that was at the same time clean and vigorous, reentered the administration as Postmaster-General, the brief incum- bency of Robert J. Wynne of Pennsylvania having intervened since the retirement of Mr. Payne. Charles J. Bonaparte of Maryland, a lawyer of standing, succeeded Paul Morton in the Navy Depart- ^he Nation, LXXVIII, 504. .272 The President's Cabinet. ment. Being a leading Civil Service reformer, Mr. Bonaparte gave to the administration a tinge of what Bristow, Schurz, and Wayne MacVeagh had stood for in the 'Seventies and 'Eighties, when those principles were the subject of greater and more necessary agitation. In religion, Mr. Bonaparte was a Roman Catholic. The death of Secretary Hay, in July, 1905, vacated the State Department, and ended one of the most brilliant careers in the history of the Cabinet. But the vacancy was most satisfactorily filled. Elihu Root, who had shown himself, by his late incumbency of the War Department, most efficient as an Executive officer, and superior to any of his col- leagues as an intermediary between the administration and the country, set aside his professional interests a second time to enter public life, and became Secretary of State. From this time on, Secretaries Root and Taft, and Attorney-General Moody, until his resignation, enjoyed in the public mind the distinction of possessing a more than ordinary share of the President's confidence. This series of changes, transfers, and promotions called forth from captious critics its due measure of condemnation. The Nation commented as follows : " We think that the real importance of the Cabinet in our system has been clouded of late. A tradition of ' loyalty ' to the President has grown up, which too much tends to degrade the Secretaries into echoes and adulators. But the truest loyalty of a Cabinet member lies in giving his chief unflinchingly both advice and frequent doses of what it is so hard for President or Czar ever to hear, to say nothing of acting upon it — plain truth." " In ascribing the tradition of " loyalty " to a late date, the critic was in error ; and equally so in supposing that the Cabinet was undergoing any eclipse. Certainly there were marks of a very vigorous and active presidential policy. If the abruptness that detracted from the Presi- dent's popularity with Congress led to heated Cabinet episodes, their secrecy was preserved. The Loeb Letter of October, 1905, directed against the communication of Cabinet affairs to the newspapers, was apparently the occasion of a sharp discussion, and it was believed that the President modified the spirit of the order. It was only the man- ner of the order, however, that was peculiar to Mr. Roosevelt, for he a The Nation, LXXXI, 26. Roosevelt. 273 was not the first President to caution his Cabinet about the news- papers. As a protector of his Secretaries against the kind of criticism that administrative reforms call out, Mr. Roosevelt showed himself the equal of any of his predecessors, and the superior of most. Secre- tary Hitchcock's vigorous administration of the Interior Department, especially in the Land Office, would not have been possible, without the avowed and persistent support of his chief. And Secretary Wil- son was similarly sustained in the face of assaults upon the Depart- ment of Agriculture. In the winter of igoS-'o?, another reconstruction occurred. A vacancy upon the Supreme Bench made it possible for Mr. Roose- velt to honor Attorney-General Moody by elevation to that tribunal. At about the same time, Secretary Shaw was pleased to retire from the Treasury Department. Mr. Shaw had never been a great force in the administration. Since the monetary and fiscal legislation under President McKinley, the Treasury had been relatively of less importance than the State and War Departments ; and it was believed, moreover, that this particular appointment was primarily intended to put a presidential candidate where he would not be formidable in 1904. Secretary Hitchcock's retirement was com- monly accredited to his advanced years and failing health. In recasting the Cabinet on this occasion, Mr. Roosevelt allowed him- self a particularly wide latitude in placing men where he wanted them, and in securing the desired personal types, regardless of geographical and other rules. Postmaster-General Cortelyou was promoted to the Treasury Department ; Secretary Bonaparte of the Navy, to the Attorney-Generalship; and Secretary Metcalf of the Department of Commerce and Labor, to the Navy. The result- ing vacancy in the Post-Office Department was filled by the appoint- ment of George von L. Meyer, of Massachusetts, a man who had occupied two or three conspicuous diplomatic posts, and was espe- cially qualified for Cabinet office on the social side. The Department of Commerce and Labor was filled by Oscar S. Straus, a prominent lawyer from New York. Mr. Straus was especially identified with the work of civic reform; and was independent in his political affiliations, having held a diplomatic office under a Democratic admin- 18 274 The President's Cabinet. istration. He was also a representative of the Jewish element. Secretary Hitchcock was succeeded in the Interior Department by James Rudolph Garfield of Ohio, a former member of the Civil Ser- vice Commission, and Commissioner of Corporations under the Department of Commerce and Labor. Mr. Garfield was the young- est member of the Cabinet; and was conspicuous for his high political ideals. The Congressional session of igo6-'oj took action upon the salaries of Cabinet officers. Until 1853, there had been different grades of emolument ; but after that the Departments had been equal in this respect. By the original provision, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury received $3,500; the Secretary of War, $3,000; and the Attorney-General, $1,500. After ten years, in 1799, the salaries attached to the State and Treasury port- folios were raised to $5,000; those of the War Office and Navy Department, to $4,500; while that of the Attorney-General's office was made $3,000. In 1819, the Secretaryships were put upon one level at $6,000 ; but the office of Attorney-General was left so low as $3,500. The salary of the Postmaster-General was increased much faster than that of the Attorney-General ; and when that officer began to sit in the Cabinet, it was equal to that of the Secretaries. By act of March 3, 1853, all of the Cabinet salaries were placed at $8,000. Finally, the act making appropriations for the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses for the fiscal year i907-'o8, in- creased the Cabinet salaries to $12,000. The last months of the administration brought additional changes of personnel. In June, 1908, Secretary Taft was nominated for the Presidency ; and his immediate retirement from the Cabinet indicates both the enormous increase in the duties of Department Heads, and the change in the mode of conducting presidental cam- paigns since the old Republican days, when Secretaries of State proceeded immediately from that Department to the Executive Mansion. The vacancy in the War Office was filled by the appoint- ment of Luke E. Wright, of Kentucky, a choice prompted by a desire to recognize the South. Later Secretary Metcalf dropped out of the Navy Department ; and Mr. Root, who was about to become Senator Roosevelt. 275 from New York, resigned the State portfolio in time to gain a brief respite from public life. These vacancies, which would presumably have been filled by ad interim designations under the earlier law on that subject, were provided for by the promotion of the Assistant- Secretaries Truman H. Newberry in the Navy, and Robert Bacon, in the State Department. In its personal interest the Roosevelt Cabinet yields to no other. As to whether special significance attached to its official relations, the events are too recent to show. President. WILLIAM H. TAFT, Ohio. Vice-President. JAMES S. SHERMAN, New York. March 4, 1909 to Secretary of State. Philander C. Knox, of Pennsylvania; March 5, 1909. Secretary of the Treasury. Franklin MacVeigh, of Illinois, March 5, 1909. Secretary of War. Jacob M. Dickinson, of Tennessee, March 5, 1909. Henry L. Stimson, of New York, May 15, 191 1. Attorney-General. George W. Wickersham, of New York, March 5, 1909. Postmaster-General. Frank H. Hitchcock, of Massachusetts, March 5, 1909. Secretary of the Navy. George von L. Meyer, of Massachusetts, March 5, 1909. Secretary of the Interior. Richard A. Ballinger, of Washington, March 5, 1909. Walter H, Fisher, of Illinois, March 13, 191 1. Secretary of Agriculture. James Wilson, of Iowa, recommissioned March 5, 1909. Secretary of Commerce and Labor. Charles Nagel, of Missouri, March 5, 1909. 277 TAFT. The make-up of the Taft Cabinet had much that was unusual about it, and some things that outwardly were not easy to explain. In the first place, Congress resorted to a special dispensation on behalf of a prospective Secretary who was Constitutionally disqualified. The President-elect had chosen for his Secretary of State, Senator Phil- ander C. Knox of Pennsylvania, formerly Attorney-General under both McKinley and Roosevelt. Some time after this choice had been announced, it was discovered that Mr. Knox had become ineligible for a Cabinet portfolio, under the clause of the Constitution that forbids any member of Congress to accept an office, the emoluments whereof have been increased during his term of service. A bill was at once prepared to reduce the salary of the Secretary of State to what it had been before the recent legislation upon the subject. This passed the Senate without a dissenting vote, and had also a wide margin in the Lower House, although the principle was not approved in all quarters. Still further, Mr. Taft selected for the Treasury portfolio, Franklin MacVeagh of Illinois, who was a man engaged in business on a large scale. Herein lay an .irregularity after the fashion of President Grant's attempt to appoint A. T. Stewart, the merchant- prince of his time to the same position, but in its size more like the case of Edwin D. Morgan, who was actually confirmed under President Arthur. It was understood that Mr. Mac Veagh had made conveyances of his business interests to other parties. And the appointment proceeded. New-made Republicans received more than ordinary honor. Mr. MacVeagh was by his traditions a Democrat, though with Pennsylvania connections. Between his assumption of the Treasury, and the pending tariff revision, there appeared to be no particular relation. The War Department was assigned to a still more doubtful party man, Jacob M. Dickinson of Tennessee. This choice, like that of Mr. Dickinson's immediate predecessor, pointed to a desire in the Republican party to break up the old sec- 279 280 The President's Cabinet. tional line. The Post-Office became a manager's portfolio again, falling to Frank H. Hitchcock, who had been Chairman of the Re- publican National Committee during the presidential campaign. Another feature was the retention of two members of the Roosevelt administration, Mr. George von L. Meyer, who was transferred from the Post-Office to the Navy, and Mr. James Wilson, who retained his former portfolio, the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Wilson's incumbency now bade fair to become the longest in the history of the Cabinet, being surpassed only by that of Albert Galla- tin, as Secretary of the Treasury. So far as outwardly appeared, the other appointments were determined primarily by considerations of locality. New York contributed the Attorney-General, George W. Wickersham. Missouri furnished the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, Charles Nagle. The Secretary of the Interior, Richard A. Ballinger, came from Washington. It might have been remarked that by the Wilson, Nagle, and Ballinger appointments, the three port- folios that reflect especially the industrial and economic progress of the country, and to some extent, its geographical expansion, lay decidedly towards the Newer West. In one case, this proved to be a sort of sectionalism that had disastrous results. Mr. Ballinger was a lawyer of reputation, and his appointment to be Head of the Interior Department was indirectly a promotion from the General Land Office. Much ill-suppressed disorder had attached to the Department from its establishment in 1849. And the evils that had the greatest consequences had grown out of the exposure of certain bureaus to the " interests " that were exploiting the Great West. A movement for the Conservation of the National Resources, popularized by President Roosevelt, had now thrust it into the very forefront of Cabinet affairs for its administrative importance. But the new Secretary's course was animated by the contrary idea of speedy development of the country. The result was the Ballinger- Pinchot controversy, which might well have been a scene from the Grant administration, acted over again, a generation afterwards. A subordinate in the General Land Office charged Secretary Ballinger with catering to corporation interests, especially in the management of the " Cunningham Claims," which were concerned with coal lands Taft. 281 in Alaska. Mr. Gifford Pinchot, who was Head of the Forestry Bureau in the Agricultural Department, carried the accusations still further, charging unsuitable administration of the forest preserves. The assault upon the Interior Department reached the proportions of a Congressional investigation. The Committee exonerated the Secretary by a party majority, and Congress refrained from acting upon its report. In due time, Mr. Ballinger resigned. President Taft had shown himself the most loyal of chiefs in the protection of his unfortunate Secretary. But he appointed a Conservationist to succeed him, Mr. Walter L. Fisher of Illinois. A few weeks later a change occurred in the War Department. And in appointing Mr. Henry L. Stimson of New York, to succeed Mr. Dickinson, who re- tired to look after private business, the President improved the oppor- tunity to cement the party factions for the approaching election. PRINCIPLES OF CABINET MAKING. One of the most characteristic features of the American Cabinet is its relation or exposure to party methods and aims. This would be expected under such a strenuous and all-embracing party system as operates the American Government. It is an aspect that has been touched upon many times in the foregoing sketches of the Administrations ; but merits further development by a summary of the principles and rules of Cabinet making. The first of these is that the incumbents of Cabinet portfolios must I hold the same political tenets as the President and the party that has elected him. The first Cabinet affords the incongruous spectacle of the chiefs of opposing parties, Hamilton and Jefferson, pitted against each other. But, whatever Washington's original purpose was re- garding a political balance in the Executive, he definitely committed himself to a party Cabinet, when Randolph retired from the State Department in 1795. John Adams, who was the first President to owe his election to a particular party, kept strictly within its ranks in choosing his official advisers; and this is the more significant, because the factional quarrel which followed his election was not unattended by overtures from the opposition. Still further, when the Government underwent for the first time a distinct change of princi- ples, with the accession of Jefferson in 1801, it was not expected that any of the former Ministers would be retained; and none of them were. So soon, then, as the Presidency itself became a party office, political agreement between President and Cabinet was recog- nized as the prime rule to be observed in forming an administration. Departures from this rule have been few. Apparent exceptions there have been, arising both from the shifting of party lines and individual cases of mugwumpery. Thus the virtual disap- pearance of parties during the interval when the old issues between Federalists and Republicans were giving place to new ones between Whigs and Democrats, brought men together in the Monroe Cabinet, 283 284 The President's Cabinet. who differed both in their earlier and later affiliations. The combina- tion of hitherto opposing elements into the modern Republican party was attended by a similar situation in the Lincoln Cabinet. And Tyler's attempt to bring about a fusion of the disaffected elements of two parties is reflected in the anomalous mixture at the Cabinet table. The most conspicuous individual case is that of Walter Q. Gresham, who became Secretary of State under Cleveland in 1893, after he had been a member of Arthur's Cabinet in 1883 and 1884, and had shown a strong candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination in 1888. The attitude of the Republican party towards the South, since the Civil War, has led to several appointments that are apparent exceptions to the rule of political agreement. The Roosevelt Cabinet afforded the example of Luke E. Wright in the War Department, and that of Taft furnished a similar case in Jacob M. Dickinson. Indeed there is a tendency of late for the President to indulge in a Cabinet appointment, usually early in his administration, that shall mark him as the head of the Nation, rather than the head of his party. But such cases disappear as political expediency becomes more pressing, as when President Taft began to call into his Cabinet prominent members of the faction whose insurgency had probably cost the Republican party the mid-term elections. There are only two instances in which men have been called into the Cabinet immediately from the opposition. Lincoln, in the selection of Stanton to be his War Minister, set aside the prime rule of Cabinet making in order to secure a particular man. The sequel was, however, that Stanton changed his party. The other instance is the appointment of David M. Key by Hayes to be Postmaster-General, in which case the opposi- tion Minister preserved his old affiliations. The circumstances which justify the overstepping of party lines in the administration are ex- ceedingly rare ; and nobody would advocate it as a practice, unless he were an Independent of the most visionary sort. Not only is the Cabinet thoroughly identified with the political party that is in power; but it also changes with the President. Although Cabinet rotation began earlier than the application of the rotation principle to the mass of appointive offices, and is enduring longer, its definite establishment resulted from the same idea. Its Principles of Cabinet Making. 285 beginnings were accidental, in that they resulted from the elevation of two Vice-Presidents, Tyler and Fillmore, to the Presidency, at times when factional divisions were so accentuated, that the change of President as thoroughly transformed the spirit of the administra- tion as if there had been a change of party. Buchanan distinctly avowed the rotation principle, when he permitted Pierce's Cabinet to retire in 1857, after a tenure of four years. At least one voice had been raised in the same cause in the Van Buren administration, when Secretary Woodbury volunteered to quit the Treasury, in order to avoid criticism for not allowing his fellow Democrats a fair chance to hold office. Cleveland apparently made an extreme application of the rotation idea, when on returning to office in 1893, after an interval of four years, he recalled none of his former Secretaries. Were it known that any of them desired to return, this would seem surprising, because the same President treated other rules associated with the spoils system with a good deal of defiance. The continuance of Cabinet rotation, after the decline of the ultra democratic con- ception of public office, is to be explained partly by the appreciation that has developed of the importance of personal compatibility in the working of the Executive, and partly by the notion that a President is his predecessor's echo, unless he chooses new Secretaries. But although a President is expected to form a Cabinet that shall reflect his individuality, he cannot wisely obtrude his private friend- ships upon official considerations. There have been a few cases of this sort. Jackson's determination to be personal in the selection of one member of his official household resulted in the absurd ap- pointment of Major Eaton. Several Presidents who have been lawyers, have decorated their partners with Cabinet honors ; Fillmore, Harrison, Cleveland, and McKinley, fall into this list. The most con- spicuous instance is McKinley's elevation of William R. Day, to the Department of State, after that gentleman had served a brief noviti- ate as First Assistant-Secretary with Sherman for an honorary superior. In Grant's original Cabinet, the personal idea predom- inated; and it was at no time absent from his choices. While such appointments provoke unfavorable comments, for failing to bring strength to the administration, none has ever incurred official oppo- 286 The President's Cabinet. sition. Should they become frequent, however, practical obstructions would be brought to bear. The President has always been constrained, furthermore, to form his Cabinet according to a geographical code. In 1795 Washington said, in the course of his search for a Secretary of State and an Attorney-General, that it had been his aim to combine geographical situation with ability and fitness. And the formation of an adminis- tration has continued to the present time to occasion much talk about Cabinet geography. The code has varied with the development of the country, the interests of particular sections, and the relation of the civil service to party politics. In the beginning the purpose was merely the identification of the Executive with the different quarters of the Union. The desirableness of such arrangement in a Union of States had been suggested in the Federal Convention, in George Mason's proposition to establish an Executive council of six members, two from the East, two from the Middle States, and two from the South. Political schemes began to enter into the geographi- cal distribution, however, so soon as there was an occasion. As early as 1801, the conciliation idea is brought out by the liberal rep- resentation in the first Republican Cabinet of Massachusetts, a Fed- eralist State. And a special recognition of political power is present in the precedence that was generally accorded to the four great States of Virginia, New York, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, over the other States in their respective sections. Prior to the political changes that came with Jackson's administra- tion, the double representation of a State was not seriously objected to, provided that portfolios of highest rank, — and there were three different grades at this time, — were not put together. Washington made the objection to a proposition .that Chancellor Livingston should succeed Jefferson in the State Department, Jefferson retiring before Hamilton did, that to give the State and Treasury Depart- ments both to New York would excite a newspaper conflagration. 1 The portfolios were both of first rank ; and New York was not as yet the Empire State. Within this period, eight duplications actually oc- curred ; but every one of them resulted from assigning the Navy De- 1 Writings of Jefferson, I, 256. Principles of Cabinet Making. 287 partment or Attorney-Generalship to a State that possessed a higher Cabinet office ; and both of these portfolios were so undesirable that they had to be placed where they would be accepted. The preponder- ance of Virginians in the first administration, that State possessing the State Department and the Attorney-General's office, as well as the Presidency, is one of the indications that the members of the Presi- dent's council were not definitely determined, when the appointments were made. Massachusetts held the Vice-Presidency and the War Office at the time; and New York the Chief- Justiceship and the Treasury. But the singling out of the three Secretaries and the Attorney-General to be councillors resulted in making the immediate administration very unequally balanced. The expansion of the country, the democratizing of politics, and the great controversy between North and South developed new rules for the period which dates, in a general way, from Jackson's acces- sion to the Presidency to the secession of the Southern States from the Union. The appearance of Clay in the John Quincy Adams administration in 1825 signalizes the admission of " the West " to the Cabinet table. Jackson included two Kentuckians and a Tennessean among the minions whom he placed there ; and he also brought in the important figure of Cass from the North- West. Though Clay never appeared again as a Cabinet Minister, Crittenden took his place, whenever the Whigs were in power ; while Ewing of Ohio, represented the North- West. In the later Democrat administrations, i853-'6i, Cass con- tinued to represent that section, once in person, and once by proxy. Prior to the Civil War, no State west of the Mississippi River fur- nished a Cabinet member, except that Edward Livingston of Louisi- ana was one of Jackson's later Secretaries of State. An offer was also made to Missouri by Fillmore. The guiding principle, however, during this middle period was to preserve the balance between the slave-holding and the free States. The retarded enunciation of this, — for it appears so late as the accession of Van Buren in 1837, coming from a Virginian, is doubt- less due to the fact that the slave interest had hitherto felt no need of it; but that the Southern preponderance in the Executive was 288 The President's Cabinet. now threatened by the advancement of New York at the expense of Virginia. Henceforth until the Civil War, the rule was rigorously- enforced ; even Lincoln took two of his seven Ministers from loyal slave States. So far as particular portfolios are concerned, the greatest signifi- cance has attached to the placing of the Treasury. From the passing of the Tariff Act of 1824 to the Civil War, Pennsylvania, as the chief representative of the protection interest, contested this portfolio with the planter States of the South as regularly as the administration changed. She actually furnished five Secretaries of the Treasury during this period, none of whom had very much except locality to recommend them. The later Democrat Presidents, Polk, Pierce, and Buchanan, whose administrations were identified with the lower- ing of the tariff, all placed the Treasury portfolio in the South ; but Polk had to conciliate Pennsylvania with the Kane letter. Lincoln was besought to assign the Treasury once more to the Keystone State ; but preferring Chase over Cameron, he awarded it to Ohio. Under the spoils system, the double representation of any State in the Cabinet was treated as a political anomaly; and this idea con- tinued in full force until the accession of Cleveland in 1885. Seven instances arose during the interval from Jackson to Cleveland; but four were emergency cases, and three resulted from General Grant's naivete about civil affairs ; all were of brief duration. In the exigency of secession, Buchanan called Stanton to the Attorney-Generalship, although he and Black, the Secretary of State, were both from Penn- sylvania. However, upon the death of a Postmaster-General, two years before, Buchanan had avoided appointing Stanton, which Black had urged him to do, and continued to give that office to the South. A more interesting case occurred under Lincoln. When Hugh Mc- Culloch of Indiana was made Secretary of the Treasury, John P. Usher, the Secretary of the Interior, but not a man indispensable to the administration, resigned in order to relieve an anomalous situa- tion. Lincoln would have sacrificed the rule, however, in order to secure a necessary man ; for he had offered the Treasury to Edwin D. Morgan of New York, before he did to McCulloch, though he would not have permitted Seward to resign in consequence. Grant Principles of Cabinet Making. 289 startled official circles by making assignments of this sort at the very opening of his administration, when he was under no stress of emergency. Thus, it appeared during the brief incumbency of Wash- burne that both the State and War Departments were to be filled from Illinois. In the shifting that ensued, the Treasury was assigned to George S. Boutwell of Massachusetts, although E. Rockwood Hoar of the same State had been appointed Attorney-General. The ir- regularity caused Judge Hoar to delay his acceptance, and afterwards became a factor in his retirement. Objections to double representation have sometimes been extended to the assignment of a Cabinet office to the State that had furnished the President. It is said that Lincoln was decided to appoint Norman B. Judd, his political and personal friend, to a diplomatic post instead of a Cabinet office, by the fact that Judd and himself both represented Illinois. And the story is in keeping with the caution that was exercised in forming the Civil War Cabinet. Mr. Blaine objected on this ground to the proposed retention of Sherman in the Garfield Cabinet, although an identical situation had existed betwen Sherman and Hayes. In actual practice, Presidents and Cabinet officers have come from the same State in many instances. When the Whigs gave place to the Democrats in 1853, a rule was given out by the party press, that a State which received a Cabinet office would not be given a foreign mission. 2 And Buchanan de- murred about accepting the office of Minister to England on the ground that Postmaster-General Campbell and himself were both Pennsylvanians, until he was assured that his acceptance would not jeopardize the sharing of his friends in other offices. 8 The ex-Sec- retary's behavior is not entirely free from suggestions of sulkiness. Since the Civil War, the geographical complexion of the Cabinet has been an index to the distribution of the party forces, even more than before. This is because political parties have been more com- pactly massed. A Republican administration, now gives the place enjoyed by the South during the slavery controversy to the West, reserving for the South only the complimentary recognition formerly 2 Fish, The Civil Service and the Patronage, 174. 3 Buchanan MSS. 19 ,290. The President's Cabinet. accorded to the newer parts of the country. The North-West, with its great pivotal States, is regarded equally with New York, Pennsyl- vania, and New England. Moreover, the Treasury portfolio, more disputed than any other, has become especially associated with this section, out of deference to the agriculture of the country, and the commercial interests that center at Chicago. From Chase to Mac- Veagh, the North- West has furnished eight Secretaries of the Treas- ury, two of whom have been members of two different administra- tions. Second in order, as a Treasury claimant, stands New York, the commercial capital of the country ; but the discrimination of the law against Ministers of Finance, who are themselves engaged in trade has several times told against her candidates. Furthermore, the peculiar relation between the National Executive and the political organization within the Empire State seems to give to the latter a special claim upon the State portfolio, although the practice of making Secretaries of State out of presidential candidates militates against any definite location of that office. Cabinet assignments were extended to the Pacific Coast so early as 1872, when President Grant made George H. Williams of Oregon, Attorney-General. This did not occur again until McKinley ap- pointed Joseph McKenna of California, to the same office in 1897; but the Pacific States have since been represented in both the Roose- velt and Taft administrations. A modern Democrat Cabinet differs from a Republican one in that it reverses the distribution between South and West. In 1885, there being seven portfolios at the time, Cleveland awarded three to the " solid South " and only one to the West. The rule against the double representation of any State in the Cabinet has been greatly relaxed within a few years. This tendency began with the first Cleveland Cabinet, which, in other ways, rather tightened the grip of party rules. In forming his first administra- tion, Mr. Cleveland assigned the Treasury portfolio to Daniel Man- ning and the Navy to William C. Whitney, both of New York, which State also furnished the President; furthermore, he appointed another New Yorker, Charles S. Fairchild, to succeed Mr. Manning, when the latter retired two years later. No President since that time Principles of Cabinet Making. 291 has entirely avoided duplications of this sort. Harrison had two Indiana men in his Cabinet, in the latter part of his administration, John W. Foster, Secretary of State, and William H. H. Miller, At- torney-General. In his second administration, Cleveland again had two New Yorkers, Daniel S. Lamont, Secretary of War, and Wilson S. Bissell, Postmaster-General. McKinley had two Pennsylvanians for a short time, Charles Emory Smith, Postmaster-General, and Philander C. Knox, Attorney-General. President Roosevelt outdid all precedent both in the number and duration of such appointments. For almost five years, Leslie M. Shaw and James Wilson, both of Iowa, sat together in his Cabinet, as Secretary of the Treasury and Secretary of Agriculture respectively. Within this interval, Elihu Root and George B. Cortelyou, both of New York, were Secretary of War and Secretary of Commerce and Labor for about a year ; which duplication was renewed, when Mr. Cortelyou reentered the Cabinet in 1905 as Postmaster-General, and Mr. Root as Secretary of State. In 1907, New York received triple representation by the appointment of Oscar S. Straus to be Secretary of Commerce and* Labor, Mr. Cor- telyou being at the same time promoted to the Treasury Department. With Mr. Roosevelt himself a New Yorker, this was an unparalleled massing of Executive offices. With Mr. Shaw's retirement from the Treasury, the Iowa duplication disappeared ; but its place was shortly filled by the appointment of James R. Garfield of Ohio, to be Secre- tary of the Interior, while William H. Taft, of the same State, was Secretary of War. The Taft Cabinet gave double representation to Massachusetts at the outset by the appointment of George von L. Meyer to the Navy Department, and Frank H. Hitchcock to .the Post- master-Generalship. And the Cabinet reconstruction brought in the additional cases of two members from Illinois and two from New York. The relaxing of geographical rules must be favorable in the long run to securing greater ability in the Cabinet and better adaptation of the members to their particular offices. But the discarding of such rules, by making the Cabinet a less representative body, would impair its efficiency in another direction. The representation of political factions is also one of the President's 292 The President's Cabinet. problems in establishing his administration. The demands of party chiefs sometimes run into the dramatic, though the public is usually denied knowledge of such affairs. Nobody has played the role of Cabinet dictator more successfully than Samuel Smith; and nobody has assayed it with greater determination than Roscoe Conkling and Thomas C. Piatt. Presidents have not often submitted to dictation of this sort; though Madison is a clear example. Public sentiment supports the President in making his own choices. However, when the party is divided by great personal interests, to ignore them in the Cabinet would jeopardize the influence of the Executive with Con- gress. A seriously disintegrated condition is sometimes met with a so-called " coalition " Cabinet, which brings together the chiefs of the opposing factions or their representatives. John Quincy Adams, Lincoln, and Garfield saw fit to follow factional lines very closely, but none of them yielded to pressure in their choices. The incompatibility between Executive office and a seat in the Senate is a restriction upon the President's power to secure the Sec- retaries that he desires. In the Cabinet reconstruction of 1795, the name of Richard Potts, Senator from Maryland, came up between Washington and Hamilton, in connection with the State Department ; but was dismissed with the question, whether it would be wise to weaken the Senate at that time. The problem that was encountered thus early is a constant one in Cabinet making. One of the common demands with which a President-elect is importuned is that he will find places in the Cabinet for men whom rival Senatorial aspirants wish to put out of the way. President Garfield was besought to render such aid both in Ohio and Pennsylvania. And there is no doubt that a demand of the sort was the foundation of the report that went out in November, 1908, that President Taft had reserved a portfolio for Theodore Burton of Ohio. The only instance in which a President is known to have used the Cabinet for such a purpose occurred in 1897, when McKinley assisted the election of Mark A. Hanna to the Senate by making Sherman Secretary of State. The comparative attractiveness of a seat in the Senate and a Cabinet portfolio has been, to a great extent, a matter of personal preference. The names of Clay, Oliver P. Morton, and Allison, on the Principles of Cabinet Making. 293 one side are matched by those of Webster, Sherman, and Blaine on the other. For comparing the actual draught of the Cabinet upon the Senate with the cases where portfolios have been declined, or not offered for fear of such results, these are not sufficient data. There is no doubt, however, that the draught of the Cabinet upon the Senate has very greatly declined since 1885. 4 From the forming of the Jackson Cabinet in 1829, to the com- pletion of the first Cleveland Cabinet in 1885, the usual order was to take two or three members out of six or seven from the Senate. There is no direct proof that this was a conscious rule; but special explanations for departures from it are easy to find. Thus Van Buren did not make a new Cabinet ; Pierce was limited to Senators- elect by a new salary act; and Grant was ignorant of the ways of government. Senator Hoar's criticism upon Grant's Cabinet, that it was not drawing sufficiently upon Congress to secure the requisite working connection, indicates that the taking of a part of the Cabinet from Congress was expected at the time. But the feeling about this seems to have changed. A change of atti- tude towards Cabinet office on the part of Congressmen, and Senators especially, is not the only cause of this. But some considerations which make Congressional leaders hesitate to enter the Cabinet have more weight than formerly. The increased importance of the social 4 The extent to which Presidents have taken Senators and Senators- elect for Cabinet officers appears from the following: John Adams (1800) Samuel Dexter; Madison (1814) George W. Campbell; Monroe (1823) Samuel L. Southard; John Quincy Adams (1825) James Barbour; Jackson (1829) John Eaton, John Branch, John M. Berrien (1831) Edward Livings- ton (1834) John Forsyth; Van Buren (1838) Felix Grundy; William Henry Harrison (1841) Daniel Webster, John J. Crittenden; Tyler (1844) William Wilkins; Polk (1845) James Buchanan, Robert J. Walker; Taylor (1849) John M. Clayton, Reverdy Johnson; Fillmore (1850) Daniel Webster, Thomas Corwin; Pierce (1853) Jefferson Davis; Lincoln (1861) William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, Simon Cameron (1864) William P. Fessenden; Johnson (1865) James Harlan; Grant (1876) Lot M. Morrill; Hayes (1877) John Sherman, David M. Key; Garfield (1881) James G. Blaine, William Windom, Samuel J. Kirkwood; Arthur (1884) Henry M. Teller; Cleveland (1885) Thomas F. Bayard, J. Q. C. Lamar, Augustus H. Garland; Cleveland (1893) John G. Carlisle; McKinley (1897) John Sherman; Taft (1909) Philander C. Knox. 294 The President's Cabinet. side of the Cabinet, while being an added attraction, is also known to have been a hindrance to two or three men who were strongly marked for particular portfolios by their work in Congress. A more serious hindrance is the greater uncertainty of Cabinet tenure. While a degree of permanence attaches to a seat in the Senate, Cabinet office, unless it be opportunely quitted, retires men from public life. And it is not only with the Senate that the Cabinet has had to com- pete ; for it has always been liable to decimation through resignations to accept diplomatic and judicial appointments. And the rule of ro- tation has added new force to the objection that the Cabinet is likely to be the end of a career. A few cases of retention by Roosevelt and Taft from the Cabinets of their predecessors faintly suggest a relax- ing of the latter rule. The relation of the Cabinet to the presidential succession at different times has had an effect upon the estimation in which Cabinet office was held, and has also determined whether specific appointments should or should not be made, especially to the State Department. Under the early Republican regime, the Cabinet was the immediate stepping stone to the Presidency ; and the public mind was even more deeply impressed with the fact than the few instances of succession, and the competition of other candidates justi- fied. It was this consideration that precluded the advancement of Gallatin to the State Department in 1809. It was this again that de- termined the appointment of John Quincy Adams in 1817, and at the same time prevented the promotion of Crawford. Although the contested election of 1824 pointed to a more democratic order, it was the political efficacy of the State Department that moved Clay to pre- fer it to the Speakership. Jackson and Van Buren excluded presiden- tial aspirants from the Cabinet; and Polk avowed the exclusion principle, but enforced it very imperfectly. While the Whigs did not adopt the rule of the Jackson Democrats, their preference for military heroes for presidential material made Cabinet service of little avail ; and Clay came to look upon the State Department as a good place for shelving Webster. With the multiplication of presidential aspir- ants, it became a frequent practice to put unsuccessful candidates for the nomination into the Cabinet. John Quincy Adams had set an Principles of Cabinet Making. 295 example in 1825 ; and Harrison's course in 1841 was still more a case in point. Candidacy for the nomination was a leading consideration in the appointment of Seward, Blaine, and Bayard respectively, to the State Department. It is obvious that this way of selecting Cabinet officers is closely related to the principle of factional repre- sentation. The connection between Cabinet office and the presidential succession has never been obliterated from the public mind, although its influence has largely faded away at times. Heads of Departments have, from time to time, shown a candidacy of some strength, as Bristow in the Grant Cabinet, and Sherman in the Hayes adminis- tration. So recently as the calling of Mr. Root to the State Depart- ment in 1905, there was discussion as to whether he was not to be the administration candidate for the Presidency ; and later both Mr. Taft and Mr. Cortelyou were added to the list. Mr. Taft's election, though it be but an isolated instance of return to the old Republican order, will probably be not without effect in commending Cabinet service to ambitious men. It has never been seriously proposed to put an ex-President into the Cabinet. The foregoing topics lead up to the subject of the sources from which Cabinet officers are supplied. The American Government knows no Ministerial class. Under our dual system, with its separa- tion of Executive and Legislature, it is impossible that any particular department of the public service should become a reservoir of Minis- ters in such a sense as the Houses of Parliament are under the British Government. The regime of the old Republican party, being a time of comparatively long tenures and of high prestige at least for the upper Cabinet offices, affords a half suggestion of the English way of forming a Ministry. But Cabinet rotation has been unfavorable to the existence of any limited group of potential Ministers. Since the Jackson era, the appearance of a Cabinet officer in more than one administration, whether by retention or recall, has been unusual. About eighteen instances can be enumerated, not counting cases of retention by accidental or reelected Presidents. The Fillmore Cabinet repeated that of the first Harrison in the State Department and the Attorney-General's Office ; and the Cabinet of the second Harrison repeated that of Garfield in the State Department and the Treasury. .296 The President's Cabinet. Of that large majority of Cabinet officers, who have had some previous training in public affairs, the greater part have served the National Government. The Cabinet rolls are almost equally divided between former members of Congress and men without experience in that body. Although the period of membership has been too short, in very many instances, to secure any important position in the working organization, the Committee Service has perhaps outranked every other place in the Government, as a training school for De- partment Heads. The most conspicuous connection of this sort, both for the number and the prominence of the Secretaries furnished, lies between the Treasury Department and the great Financial Com- mittees. Very striking examples are found in Gallatin and Sherman ; and a less distinguished group includes the names of Crawford, Mc- Lane, Walker, Fessenden, Boutwell, and Windom. The diplomatic service has very frequently been the preliminary to Cabinet appoint- ment ; and such brilliant Secretaries of State as John Quincy Adams and John Hay have had an important part of their training there. Mr. Hay had also been Assistant-Secretary of State. Immediate promotion from within the Departments is an important way to secure heads, very important, when- measured by the number of instances in which it has happened, but less significant, when cir- cumstances are taken into account. Two Assistant-Secretaries of State have risen directly to the headship, William R. Day under McKinley, and, for a very brief period, Robert Bacon under Roose- velt. In the Treasury Department, two Assistant-Secretaries, two Comptrollers of the Treasury, and one Comptroller of the Currency have risen to the head; the cases being William A. Richardson, appointed by Grant, Charles S. Fairchild, appointed by Cleveland, Oliver Wolcott, appointed by Washington, Walter Forward, ap- pointed by Tyler, and Hugh McCulloch, appointed by Lincoln. Five Assistant-Postmasters-General have been similarly advanced, one by Buchanan, one by Johnson, a third by Grant, the fourth by Arthur, and the fifth by Taft. The Interior Department has the instance of Assistant-Secretary, John P. Usher, which occurred under Lincoln, and a somewhat similar case in the transfer of James R. Garfield from the Commissionership of Corporations in the Department of Principles of Cabinet Making. 297 Commerce and Labor to the headship, of the Interior Department by Roosevelt. The Navy Department affords the case of the promotion of Truman H. Newberry from the Assistant-Secretaryship, also in the Roosevelt administration. Promotions from the bureau service and other subordinate offices would swell the list. It is a striking fact, however, that very few of these cases have been original appointments, and that some have been mere expedients for supply- ing vacancies during a remnant of an administration. Another form of promotion, arises from the changing of Cabinet officers from one Department to another ; since this shifting is almost always upward, according to the order of rank observed in the Presidential Succession Act of 1886. There have been about twenty- four immediate transfers and about eleven by recall. In some cases the purpose to advance an officer is very clear, as when Mr. Cortelyou was raised from the Postmaster-Generalship to the Treasury in 1907. But in others geographical rules have been the real consideration. Thus the Head of a Department has sometimes been transferred to one newly vacated, merely to fit the vacancy to an appointee from the section of the country whose representative is retiring. A clear illustration is found in the repeated transfer of John Y. Mason of the Tyler and Polk Cabinets. Mason was at first Secretary of the Navy ; but in order to vacate that Department for George Bancroft, the chosen representative of New England, Polk advanced Mason to the Attorney-General's office to which Bancroft was not suited. The purpose is made the clearer, by Mason's return to the Navy, according to previous agreement, when Bancroft resigned; whereupon the Attorney-Generalship was tendered to two lawyers from New Eng- land, Franklin Pierce and Nathan Clifford, the second of whom accepted it. There are several reasons why promotion has been a comparatively unimportant principle. Before the creation of the Assistant-Secretary- ship, which preceded the Civil War by only a few years, Department subordinates were not ordinarily men of sufficient calibre to serve as heads, even temporarily. And, in the second place, the sub- ordinate service has not been permanent enough to avail very much as a training school. Indeed promotion from the assistantships and 298 The President's Cabinet. the bureaus to the Cabinet would have been as much out of keeping with the most democratic conception of public office, as the long retention or reappointment of Ministers. The Governments of the great States have contributed much to the training of Cabinet officers. ; and have especially furnished a field for attaining the requisite political standing. Numerous ex-Governors appear on the Cabinet roll, distributed among all the Departments. Distinguished examples are found in Marcy, Chase, and Leslie M. Shaw. The State Judiciaries have contributed many Attorneys- General; and a considerable number have also been taken directly from private practice of the legal profession. Such names as Roger B. Taney, Jeremiah S. Black, William H. Evarts, and Richard Olney, the last three of whom were also Secretaries of State, show that lack of experience of the National Government is no disparagement to entering the Cabinet. The War Department has had a number of heads that have had military training, and have borne the title of " General." The names of Knox, Armstrong, Cass, Rawlins, Bel- knap, and Alger suggest themselves in this connection. Under Sec- retaries of this type, the administration of the office has ordinarily been indifferent, and sometimes notoriously weak ; while the efficient Secretaries of War like Stanton, Root, and Taft, have been men of legal training. The Navy Department has very often been filled from private life. In its first years it seemed to seek merchants ; and under the Jacksonians it became associated with men of letters, one of whom, George Bancroft, made a vigorous administrative officer. An especially varied group are the Postmasters-General, who include governors, judges, city postmasters, editors, and merchants, with the additional character of political manager frequently included. Party services can hardly be denied a separate place as a qualifica- tion for Cabinet office. This practice borders on the unsavory one of using Cabinet portfolios for political rewards. In such cases, there is ordinarily an attendant expectation that the recipient will look after the political side of the administration. An early example of such appointment, and a very conspicuous one, is the elevation of Amos Kendall to the Postmaster-Generalship by Jackson in 1835. The suitableness of the Post-Office for becoming a manager's portfolio Principles of Cabinet Making. 299 is obvious. The recognition of party services was very noticeable in the formation of Cleveland's first Cabinet, when three of seven appointments, that of Manning to the Treasury, Whitney to the Navy, and Vilas to the Post-Office, were induced by political activi- ties more than by any previously demonstrated fitness for Cabinet office. Especial criticism attached to Harrison's appointment of John Wanamaker to the Postmaster-Generalship ; because it was re- garded as a reward for securing campaign funds. Although Mr. Cortelyou became Postmaster-General in the Roosevelt Cabinet, shortly after his direction of the presidential campaign of 1904, the appointment was also recommended by his previous incumbency of the Department of Commerce and Labor. The designation of Frank H. Hitchcock, manager of the campaign of 1908, for the same De- partment under Taft, was also a promotion as well as a reward. The latest tendency in the selection of Cabinet officers is to increase the proportion of men who are primarily distinguished for skill in administering large professional or business interests, and to place such men at the upper end of the Cabinet table more than formerly. This is the counterpart of the falling off of the draught upon the Senate, and a cause rather than a result of it. Perhaps the tendency is not marked enough or long enough continued to be very significant. Nevertheless, the preference for men who have proven their admin- istrative ability, over those whose experience lies closer to the par- ticular business of the Departments, is one of several indications that a new stage in the operation of the Departments has been reached. The conformity of such an exalted body as the Cabinet to the tenets and rules of party practice has had important results. Early in the history of the Government, it hereby became an eminently democratic body ; and it has substantially preserved such a character. Just because it has undergone a democratizing, the Cabinet has fulfilled, the more satisfactorily to the country, that conception of a guarantee that the President will not act hastily or unadvisedly, which underlay the agitation for the establishment of such an organ by the Consti- tution, and which has called out remonstrance, whenever its activities have been suspended. THE CABINET AND CONGRESS. A British authority on political science was recently heard to say : " One of the most difficult things for a Canadian, as well as for an Englishman, to understand in the United States, is how a Govern- ment can work that is not, by the presence of Cabinet Ministers in the Legislative body, in close touch with the law-making and money- granting power from day to day. That it does work, we, of course, see." The present chapter will undertake to show how the Govern- ment of the United States does work in this particular. The principle that those who administer shall guide in the making of laws is effectually prevented from working into the structure of the American Government, as it has done in England and some Contin- ental countries. The modes of election render it possible for Execu- tive and Legislature to be out of joint politically, though party activity renders such a deadlock a rare thing. The physical separation of these two great functions is established by the Constitution ; for it is expressly provided that no person holding any office under the United States shall be a member of either of the Houses of Congress during his continuance in office. 1 The vote on this clause in the Federal Con- vention had no dissenting voices ; and in the debates not one member distinctly advocated the system of fusion of the Executive in the Legislature. 2 Men were looking for a safe-guard against Monarchi- cal interference and Ministerial corruption. In its outward forms, the separation has been enforced with much strictness. The Constitutional provision does not of itself exclude the great administrative officers from personal communication with Congress, or even from the privileges of debate. The President's Annual Message, under the Federalist regime, took the form of a speech from the throne. Both the President and the Secretaries of '■Art. I, sec. 6. * Elliot, Debates, V, 420-424, 503-506. 301 302 The President's Cabinet. Foreign Affairs and of War communicated personally with the Senate in its Executive sessions, during the first few months after the Consti- tution went into operation. But the sufferance of Congress has never extended to such communication at a Legislative session. The sub- ject has been agitated both in the first years of the Government and more recently. And the history of the agitation is important to an understanding of the real spirit of the American Government. Alexander Hamilton succeeded in incorporating into the Treasury Act a provision for either written or oral commmunication from that particular Department, as Congress might direct. But, for the reason of greater convenience, his First Report was ordered to be submitted in writing. The question then fell into abeyance until the session of i792-'93. And the practice of the Government was then determined, permanently, as it proved, by the defeat of a motion to summon two Secretaries, the Heads of the Treasury and War Departments, to attend upon the House of Representatives, and give information that would assist the investigation of the causes of the failure of General St. Clair's expedition against the Indians. The immediate animus of the decision was that the matter had become a party issue, the Republicans of the House, taking a stand, under Madison's leadership, against Hamilton's aggressiveness. 8 The matter was scarcely heard of again for three quarters of a century. While the Government was emerging from the disorders of the Civil War, a school of writers sprang up that denounced the existing methods of Congress, and advocated a closer union between Legisla- ture and Executive. It presumably received its inspiration from the comparison between the " Parliamentary " and " Presidential " sys- tems of Government presented by the English publicist, Bagehot, in his treatise on the English Constitution. The propaganda was almost entirely an academic one ; but echoes of it reached Congress. The exigency of the Civil War had already reopened there the question of extending the privilege of debate, in the House of Repre- sentatives, to Cabinet officers. February 8, 1864, George H. Pendle- ton of Ohio, introduced in the House of Representatives a resolution, which led to the appointment of a special committee, that reported a 'Annals of Congress, III, 673-694, 696-701, 703-708, 711-712. The Cabinet and Congress. 303 bill to provide for admitting the Heads of Executive Departments to the floors of the Lower House for the purpose of taking part in the discussion of measures relating to their own Departments. An extended historical argument accompanied the draft of the bill. This report pointed out that the exigencies of recent times had made members of Congress sufficiently familiar with the necessity for speedy and accurate information from the Departments, the very words, " conscription," " legal tender," and " taxation," being a re- minder of the difficulties recently incurred. 4 Fifteen years later, March 26, 1879, the question was brought up again, when Mr. Pen- dleton, who was now in the Senate, introduced a bill which provided for the admission of Cabinet officers to privileges of debate in both Houses of Congress. On this occasion, a very distinguished com- mittee submitted a favorable report. 8 January 5, 1886, the question was revived for a third time, when Representative John D. Long, afterwards Secretary of the Navy, introduced a bill that provided for the voluntary attendance of the Heads of Departments upon the House of Representatives. None of these measures came to a vote, though the first two received an eminently respectable support. It was made very plain that Congress as a body did not desire a more direct connection with the Executive than that which had existed from the first years of the Government. There is yet another chapter of events bearing upon the temper of the American people towards the fusion of the Executive in the Legislature. When the seceded states formed a government in 1861, a few of their leaders, consciously imitating a feature of the English Government, which was then furnishing a more admirable model than it had done three quarters of a century before, had their Provisional Constitution so framed as to render personal contact permissible. And President Davis made his Cabinet appointments in such a way that one half of the Department Heads were members of Congress. The Permanent Constitution of the Confederate States undid the arrangement to the extent of forbidding actual member- ship in Congress to Executive officers ; but it made the compromise * House Report 43, Thirty-Eighth Congress, First Session. "Senate Report 873, Forty-Sixth Congress, Third Session. 304 The President's Cabinet. provision that Congress might by law grant to the principal officer in each of the Executive Departments a seat upon the floor of either House, with the privilege of discussing measures appertaining to his Department. But notwithstanding the approval of such a feature by men like Jefferson Davis, Alexander H. Stevens, and Robert Toombs, the Congress of the Confederate States failed to grant debat- ing privileges to Department Heads. 6 Notwithstanding the temper of American Legislatures towards personal union or fusion with the Executive, the principle that law- making processes require the guidance of administrative insight has made its contribution to the machinery of the Government. This is found in the high development of unofficial and informal means of connection. The lack of Ministerial leadership, Congress has supplied to it through the Speaker's office and the Standing Committee system.' The great Committee of Finance in the House of Repre- sentatives, with which the Standing Committee system began, was erected for a barrier against the administrative officers. For, with both Houses comparatively small bodies, the Federalist Secretaries found personal access to the leaders on the floors far too easy to suit Repub- lican sentiments. 8 But the array of Committees that have been erected with the growth of Congress are recognized avenues of approach. To- gether with the irregular procession of Congressional leaders that visits the White House, they are the most important line of contact between the Executive and Legislature. The first advance is from the Committees' side ; and they are jealous for the Congressional pre- rogatives. It is for them to grant and not for Secretaries to demand audiences. But, when a Department Head has a plan to present, — and it is only in their separate characters, that Cabinet officers are known to Congress at all, — he can, under ordinary circumstances, secure a summons. The success of the hearing must, of course, depend upon a variety of conditions. Very worthy of mention among the means of influence resorted to 6 Journal of the Congress of the Confederate States of America, I, 182, 863 ; Constitution of the Confederate States of America, Article I, section 6, clause 2. 7 McConachie, Congressional Committees, Appendix I, 351-353; Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, V, 131, 227, 286, 303 ; VI, 450. 8 Henry Adams, Life of Albert Gallatin, 157. The Cabinet and Congress. 305 by the Department powers are their social attentions to members. On this subject, there is an expression by Mrs. Jefferson Davis, herself a prominent Cabinet lady: "The wives of Mr. Pierce's Cabinet labored in their sphere, as well as their husbands. We each en- deavored to extend hospitality to every member of Congress, of both Houses, at least once during the winter — If a measure was to be recommended by the Administration, the chairman of the Executive Committee, to whom these recommendations would be referred, were invited and the plan was informally unfolded to them. If a man was dissatisfied with the administration and not personally offensive in his disapprobation, he was invited to breakfast or some informal meal, where a personal explanation was possible." * Cabinet officers have always enjoyed the privilege of the corridors and floors of the House of Congress. The diarist of the First Congress, William Maclay, Senator from Pennsylvania, refers to this frequently : " Mr. Hamilton is very uneasy, as far as I can learn, about his funding system. He was here early to wait on the Speaker, and I believe spent most of his time running from place to place among the members." There are some particularly graphic reflections of this practice of the time of the Polk administration. An opposition newspaper spoke out as follows on the passage of the measures that had originated at the Treasury: "The Heads of Departments feel that it is important to keep a vigilant watch over the doings of the Democratic members of Congress, fearing lest some of them, obeying the dictates of reason and conscience, might break loose from the trammels of party. When the final question was taken upon the Tariff Bill, the members of the Cabinet and Mr. Ritchie of the Union, all were present, closely scanning the sayings and doings of the members, and exerting all their influence to secure united action on the bill. It is stated also that during the discussion on the Land Graduation Bill, on Saturday in the House, every member of the Cabinet, except the Attorney-General, was on the floor, and expressed in various ways the interest they felt in the bill as an administration measure, and their presence saved the bill, or at least eked out its existence." " Still more engaging are the com- ' Jefferson Davis, Memoir by his Wife, I, 547. "Boston Journal. 20 306 The President's Cabinet. ments from the administration itself. President Polk wrote in his Diary in the session of i846-'47 : " It was agreed that each member of the Cabinet should be active in seeing members of Congress and urging them to support the bill to admit California at once as a State. Buchanan, Marcy, and Toucey were to see members from the North- ern States, Walker, Mason, and Johnson, from the Southern." And he recorded a little later : " The Cabinet met today ; all the members present, except the Secretary of the Treasury, who wrote me a note stating — that .the pendency before Congress of several important measures connected with his Department made it necessary that he should attend the Capitol and watch their progress through the two Houses." The Congressional sufferance in these matters has been attended by a good deal of caprice. In the session of I905-'o6, a story went out that there had been words between the Secretary of War, William H. Taft, and a member of the Senate. The Senator upon encountering the Secretary on the floor, asked what he had come there for, to which the Executive officer replied that he was there, because it was his privilege and duty, but proposed that, if the Sena- tor had scruples about such connections, it would be well for him to cease from his visits to the War Office, which were made to secure appointments and other favors. There has always been a great deal of written communication between the Executive and Congress. The Constitution makes pro- vision for the President's messages; neither does it limit them to information about the state of the Union, but includes the recom- mendation of such measures as he shall deem useful and expedient. The Department Heads exercise an analogous function, in making reports to Congress, though they are not so free to act voluntarily. The early Congresses showed a good deal of captiousness about the matter of calls and reports. But it was, in the main, an attempt to curb the aggressiveness of the Treasury. Three spirited debates were provoked by motions to call for information, or to refer a com- munication from a Secretary." And one of these was a twin contro- a Annals of Congress, III, 437-452, 673-694, 695-701, 703-708, 711-722; An- nals for l793-'95, pp. 1071-1080. The Cabinet and Congress. 307 versy with that which decided in the negative the question of sum- moning Secretaries to the floors of Congress. Attempts were made in these debates to enforce a distinction between allowing Depart- ment Heads to furnish needful information and suffering .them to offer advice. It is particularly interesting to discover Madison, who had been for the first two sessions the champion and mouth-piece of the Executive power, now resorting to Infant Government arguments to justify his earlier stand, and maintaining that Congress had reached the age, when guidance by the Departments was superfluous. None of these motions for a call or reference was defeated, the ma- jority perceiving that the practice was not one to be discontinued with the development of the Government. John Quincy Adams states .that between 1800 and 1820, the calls of Congress upon the Depart- ments increased five-fold. The practice of providing by law for reports from the Departments began with the Treasury. But statutes soon appear imposing upon the others the duty of reporting such matters as contracts ; and other subjects were duly added. The general report from the Treasury addressed to Congress, and transmitted at the opening of the session, rests upon the supplementary Treasury Act of 1800. The practice of including a sheaf of reports from the other Departments along with the Annual Message from the Chief Executive appears to have been instituted by President Monroe." Taylor added a report from the Secretary of the Interior upon the establishment of that Department. Annual reports from the Attorney General, the Secretary of Agri- culture, and the Secretary of Commerce and Labor are provided for in the acts that establish their Departments. No general report is submitted by the Secretary of State, that officer's proper subject being reserved to the President in his Annual Message. Secretary Olney made such a report, and President Cleveland transmitted it to Congress in like manner with those from the other Departments. But the action did not establish a precedent. The discrimination between information and advice, and between called for and voluntary communications, that frequently agitated Congress when modes of intercourse with the Departments were on a Richardson, Messages and Papers of the President, II, 207. 308 The President's Cabinet. trial, looks absurd in the light of the freedom which Cabinet officers have enjoyed later, and which has been stamped upon later day statutes. Thus the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized by law to report on " special subjects," not only when the President or one of the Houses of Congress orders it, but, whenever he thinks that the subject in his charge requires it. And the Secretary of Commerce and Labor is required to make such recommendations as he shall deem necessary for the effective performance of the duties of his Department. However, the Senate passed reactionary resolutions on the subject of voluntary communications so recently as the session of i907-'o8. The privilege of sending drafts of bills from the Departments to the official Congress has been exercised by particular Secretaries, but not distinctly conceded. And the latest action, like the earliest, is to prohibit such a direct initiative. In February, 1790, Hamilton, acting as head over the Postmaster-General, addressed to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, a bill for the organization of the Post Office. As the Clerk proceeded to read the bill, a member objected on the ground that it was improper for Executive officers to trans- mit bills to Congress ; and the objection was sustained. 15 The latest discussion on the subject occurred in the Senate in the session of io,07-'o8. The occasion was the transmittal of communications from the Secretary of the Interior and the Acting Secretary of War, which enclosed drafts of bills. These were received on December 10, 1907, and duly referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. On the fol- lowing day, '.the reference was reconsidered by motion of Senator Aldrich; and an extended discussion of the subject of communica- tions from the Departments ensued. The communications were next referred to the Committee on Rules. On January 15, Senator Lodge reported from that Committee resolutions against receiving any com- munications from Executive officers, except as specified. The list of precedents introduced in the discussion showed that the submitting of drafts of bills had been going on at least since 1874 ; and that such communications had been referred to appropriate Committees, under 13 Annals of Congress, I, Appendix ; Hamilton, History of the Republic, IV, 69. The Cabinet and Congress. 309 the order providing for communications from the Departments. It would seem from this that a means of influence, which the earlier Government had refused to allow, had crept in as a part of the in- crease of inter-communication that began with the Civil War. The result of the discovery was that the Senate passed a formal resolution against the receipt of any communication from Heads of Depart- ments, Commissioners, Chiefs of Bureaus, or any Executive officers, except when authorized by law, or submitted in response to the order of the Senate, unless said communication was transmitted by the President of the United States." A good idea of the average operation of the Department influence in drafting legislation is given in the Manual of Congressional Prac- tice, prepared in 1890, by T. H. MeKee, at one time Journal Clerk of the House of Representatives. Attention is herein directed to the annual publication known in the literature of the Government as a List of Reports to be made to Congress; and especial attention is called to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury entitled Esti- mates for Appropriations. It is asserted that this report becomes the basis upon which the Committee on .Appropriations and other Committees charged with money-granting make up the annual esti- mates. The Mawuai further asserts that it is the uniform practice of the Committees of both Houses of Congress, in the preparation of bills that relate to the administration of any of the Departments, for example on such subjects as Public Lands, the Indians, or Agri- culture, to submit the proposed measure to the proper Department, and that the Executive officer's recommendation is usually respected by the Committee. This reference for emendation and revision is so much a matter of course, that prepared forms of transmission to the appropriate Departments are a part of the material of certain Committees." A more amusing discussion of a legitimate Cabinet influence comes from President Polk's time, in the form of an altercation between the Daily Union and the National Intelligencer. The dispute began about the Tariff Act of 1846. This was distinctly an 14 Congressional Record, Vol. 42, Pt. I, Sixtieth Congress, First Session, 243, 294-302, 714, 772. 15 T. H. McKee, Manual of Congressional Practice, 290-292. 310 The President's Cabinet. administration measure. A tariff revision had been promised in the Democrat platform of 1844. And so soon as the new administration was inaugurated, the preparation of a bill was begun without calling a special session of Congress. Secretary Walker of the Treasury addressed a circular to the great manufacturing concerns of the country for the gathering of data. His course was ardently com- mended by the Daily Union, which was the administration organ. And the desired precedent was declared to be found in a circular issued by Secretary McLane in 1832. But the National Intelli- gencer, being the chief organ of the opposition, warned the country that it might well look with jealously upon such attempts by the Executive to originate legislation, and especially tariff bills. The supposed precedent it ruthlessly broke down by discovering that the McLane circular had issued at the order of Congress. But shortly, both sheets found occasion to change their tack. The follow- ing year the army bills lagged. And it was whispered that the Mexican War was making Whig Presidents too fast to please the existing administration. The National Intelligencer laid the retarded legislation to the charge of .the War Department. But the Daily Union exonerated that office of all remissness, by remarking that it was not considered the duty of a Department to prepare bills for a Committee, unless requested; and that it would be scarcely respect- ful to do so, inasmuch as the Committees were entirely qualified, in case they approved of Executive recommendation, to frame the proper provision for carrying it out. The vocabulary of American law-making recognizes that there is an administrative influence. This has become so marked that a stranger visiting the country during the first regular session of the Sixty-First Congress, ioopr'io, must have gained a wrong impres- sion of the system of Government. Newspapers and magazines spoke constantly of " administration measures," coupled the name of the Secretary of the Interior with conservation bills, and traced cor- poration legislation to the Attorney-General's authorship. But it cannot be asserted that the administration initiative is increasing. Along the whole course of American legislation, a few measures stand out as having an acknowledged administration origin. Ham- The Cabinet and Congress. 311 ilton was the obvious agent to institute the series of acts by which the National finances were organized. Congress, after bung- ling legislation for a session, appealed to the Secretary of the Treas- ury so soon as he was appointed. And plans for financial organiza- tion were forthcoming in the famous series of reports. The actual measures were introduced through the medium of special committees. So soon as this was accomplished, Hamilton's great influence upon the making of laws was at an end. The Republicans with their program for financial reforms, looked as naturally to the Head of the Treasury, Gallatin being their acknowledged master of finance. The Tariff Act of 1846, referred to above, was left to the adminis- tration. It seems to have been a time of transition between modes of preparing such bills. And the most, obvious Committees for such a work were not very strongly made up. A very interesting illustra- tion of the dependence of Congress upon the Executive offices, when measures are framed that require technical and scientific informa- tion, is furnished by the Mint and Coinage Act of 1873. Preparatory to framing this measure, the previous coinage laws were codified by Deputy Controller John J. Knox, who was afterwards con- sidered by President Garfield as a suitable Head for the Treasury Department. Secretary Boutwell directed the work, and himself transmitted the draft of a bill to the Chairman of the Senate Com- mittee of Finance, John Sherman, with a statement as to how it had been prepared and a strong recommendation that it be passed. Some new features were grafted onto the bill after it reached Congress. 16 With the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, Secretary Blaine was much concerned at the Committee rooms about the securing of " reci- procity " provisions, which were important to his South American policy. 17 The " Logan Act," of the early years of the Government, re- sulted from the suggestion of the Secretary of State, Timothy Pick- ering. Webster, while Secretary of State in the Tyler Administra- tion, drew up the measure that was passed to put an end to the dis- pute about the jurisdiction of the Federal Government that had been 16 Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, I, 463-467. "Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 682-698; Stanwood, James- G. Blaine. 312 The President's Cabinet. raised by the McLeod Case. This call upon the Executive is inter- esting, because the administration had very little support in Congress. An abnormal co-operation is found in Secretary Stanton's participa- tion in the framing of the Military Reconstruction Acts and of the Military Appropriation Act that curtailed the President's Authority over the Army." When a member of the administration is recognized as the most eligible person to frame a particular measure, he will or- dinarily be called upon. But the history of the Executive participa- tion in lawmaking will not permit a stronger statement of a Cabinet officer's opportunities to initiate. More important than the isolated instances of admitted Executive origin is a great mass of legislation that is a fusion of the minds of administrative officers and members of Congress. Whether the Executive or Legislative is the more active element must depend upon the comparative strength of Presidents, Secretaries, and Con- gresses. But it can be categorically asserted, that in all subjects, where technical information is required, Congress grows more and more disposed to admit the influence of the Departments, as the Civil Service becomes more permanent and expert. The real place of President and Cabinet with reference to law-making lies between two extreme views. There is no movement towards a fusion of the two great branches of Government, as a few American publicists with Anglican leanings might hope. But, neither are the processes of legislation so bungling, and so unaffected by administrative insight and advice, as they appear to English critics, with their predisposition to hold the Cabinet system of Government superior to the Presi- dential-Committee system. 18 Gorham, Life of Edwin M. Stanton, II, 373. THE CABINET AND THE PRESIDENT. The paramount aspect of the American Cabinet is its place in the Executive. The foregoing survey of the Administrations has devel- oped the subject of particular Cabinets and particular Presidents beyond that of ordinary Executive relations. But it has found its own justification in the discovery that the Cabinet is, to a very great extent, the resultant of the personal forces involved at any time, probably surpassing every other organ of the Government in the play that it allows to personal causes. No concise classification of Cabinets is possible, and none whose lines do not seriously cross. Taking ability and actual participation in the operations of Government for a criterion, those that stand highest in the distance are, Washington's Cabinet — with its original members — Jefferson's, Polk's, and Lincoln's — in the form made familiar by painter and engraver in the Emancipation Proclamation scene. We leave out the Monroe Cabinet with hesitation, but on the ground that, outside of the State Department, the Executive was dormant, when tested by the fully awake condition of Congress. The level sinks lowest, though broken here and there by a more elevated figure, under Jackson, Van Buren, Taylor, and Grant. It is the normal situation that the ability of the more important Depart- ment Heads shall be at least commensurate with that of the Presi- dent; this is induced by political necessity, if nothing else. There is a common type of Cabinet that masses its strength in the Secretary of State, but, under the Presidential System of Government, the Executive influence is best sustained, where there is less disparity among Department Heads. Taking the relative influence of Cabinet and President for a cri- terion, at one extreme, stands the Cabinet regency with which the Buchanan Administration went out of office, and at the other the quasi-military regimen of Jackson and Grant, under which Secre- taries were handled more like a General's orderlies than high civil 3i3 314 The President's Cabinet. officials. Between these there is a normal order, though it is not very rigidly defined. Officers with the talents and rank of Depart- ment Heads command a discretion that the Chief Executive does not interrupt, unless serious disagreement arises. And yet occasions for the assertion of the Presidential authority are too frequent for it to fall into abeyance. There are comments on this subject by two ex- Presidents, Hayes and Benjamin Harrison, which look at the matter from its opposite ends. Mr. Hayes, who by the way, had the abler Cabinet, makes a strong statement of the President's mastery, and the Secretary's subordination ; 1 while Harrison states in larger terms the Secretary's freedom from interference. 2 American Cabinet officers are not Ministers in the sense of the Constitutional Monarchies of Europe. It is chiefly by their responsi- bility to the President, and their exclusion from personal inter- course with Congress, that they fall short of that character. The Secretary of State approaches it more nearly than his colleagues. For, while the President is Minister of Foreign Affairs by the Con- stitution, he has often found it expedient to devote his activities to homelier matters, and adopt as his own the ideas of his exalted subordinate. Such Secretaries as John Quincy Adams, Webster, Seward, and Hay have originated and worked out a very important part of the diplomatic achievements of the Government. Still the President on occasion acts upon his own inspiration, and even in- dependently of advice. Very fresh and convincing are some of the examples. In the decision to demand the Philippine Islands, at the peace negotiations betwen the United States and Spain, President McKinley proceeded contrary to the opinion of Secretary Hay. 8 And the American intervention in the negations between Japan and Rus- sia has had distinguished recognition as President Roosevelt's own act. The Secretary of State enjoys a semi-fictitious headship over the Cabinet. To trace this to its origin, the earliest incumbent of the office, Jefferson, has put on record that it held first place, by the 1 Stevens, Sources of the Constitution of the United States, 167, Footnote. 2 Harrison, This Country of Ours, 105, et seq. 8 Foster, Diplomatic Memoirs, II, 257. The Cabinet and the President. 315 President's ranking, from the outset, though the source of this state- ment throws it open to suspicion of self-glorification. He represents Washington as saying, with regard to a proposition to put Governor Johnson of Maryland over the State Department temporarily, and afterwards transfer him to the Treasury, that men do not like to go from a higher Department to a lower one.* But during the early Republican period, the distinction came to be very generally recog- nized. In 1806, John Randolph, speaking to the House of Repre- sentatives, referred to the Secretary of the Treasury as the " Head of the second Department," though Wilson Cary Nicholas, writing to Gallatin in 1809, of the proposed transfer from the Treasury to the State Department, said that he had been for eight years in an office " of equal dignity and of greater trust and importance." ° Two years after the opening of the Monroe Administration, John Quincy Adams, in his consciousness of the political prestige attached to his of- fice, noted in his Diary that a general impression now pervaded the country that a higher consideration was due to the State Department than to the others, and that in all legislative acts, this was now named first and the Treasury second. 6 The name Premier occasionally used in unofficial parlance, was first applied, so far as we have noticed, to Webster, at the time when Tyler was breaking with the Harrison Cabinet. As an idea or sentiment, the primacy of the State Department has undeniable force. It causes the portfolios to be reserved for the most statesmanlike talents and the strongest public character that a President can secure in his assistants. Sometimes it is the first portfolio to be assigned, and the prospective incumbent is allowed materially to assist in forming the rest of the administration. But so far as the processes of Government are concerned, the superiority eludes definition. Both an ex-President, Benjamin Harrison, and an ex-Secretary of State and ambassador, John W. Foster, have made it subject of comment. But neither of these gentlemen could point to any advantages enjoyed by the Secretary of State over his col- 4 Writings of Jefferson, I, 258, Anas, August 6, 1793. "Henry Adams, Life of Albert Gallatin, 389. * Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, IV, 297- 316 The President's Cabinet. leagues, other than a more closely guarded confidence with the Presi- dent, rank in the succession next after the Vice-President, and cere- monial precedence.' Before regular Cabinet days were observed, the Secretary of State was often, if not customarily, the President's sum- moner. There has been an occasional exception to the recognition of superiority in this Department. When the Hayes Cabinet was being formed, it was said that no priority was considered to attach to it. 8 And the issue proved that Mr. Evarts did not impress himself upon that administration proportionately to his high standing as a Constitutional advocate. On the other hand, when the Garfield Cabinet was being formed, Mr. Blaine, and his family for him, en- tertained a very large idea of the headship belonging to the State Department." The Treasury has receded very far from the character that Hamil- ton assumed and that Gallatin had thrust upon him. The office of Secretary of the Treasury has not realized the possibilities that were thrown about it by the early statutes; but has come to share the role of Minister of Finance with the Chairmen of the great Financial Committees of Congress, especially of the House of Representatives. In the factional rivalries of Cabinet making, the Treasury portfolio has been more fiercely contested than any other. But desire to command the office does not find its explanation in power to frame the fiscal and commercial policies of the country. The first incentive is opportunity for influence in the distribution of the patronage; and a second, the fact that the commercial and fiscal regulations of the Government depend a good deal upon the spirit in which they are administered. The Secretary of the Treasury is at least a great administrative officer. Indeed these are the considera- tions that cause Cabinet appointments in general to be received with interest, whole Cabinets much more than the changes that occur separately. Political shading comes first. But beyond .that, an index to the President's policy in some matter is frequently read in the ' Harrison, This Country of Ours; Foster , A Century of American Diplomacy. 8 Reminiscences of Carl Schurz, III, 374. • Gail Hamilton, Biography of James G. Blaine, 530. The Cabinet and the President. 317 placing of a man who stands for a particular idea, where he can carry it out in administration. Characterization of the Cabinet on a chronological basis traces a very fluctuating line. Furthermore, the line shows no advance- ment, beyond the natural results of increase in the size of Gov- ernment operations. Growth there has been, but no development of function. There are two principal causes of this. One is the fact that Congress has preserved its separateness from the Executive rigidly and persistently ; the other, that the Presidency has developed to the disparagement of the Cabinet. In the first place, the President has exercised the powers of ap- pointment and removal with an energy far beyond the expectation of those who conveyed them to him. And he has made them an instrument for enforcing his will over his official advisers. The removal power was applied to Cabinet office very early. And by the sharpening that it received of the spoils system and rotation prin- cipal, the conception of the President's personal ownership of the Cabinet was carved out. With this notion in men's minds, the right to dismiss Secretaries has been conceded to the President much more unreservedly than before. It has always been subject to practical limitations, especially political expediency. Excessive shuffling of portfolios remains a matter of criticism. But the present day cavil- ing of newspaper editors is a mild substitute for the aspersions upon the President to which deposed Secretaries formerly resorted, and the acrimonious discussion that ensued. In dealing with such high officers as Department Heads, the removal power has been very delicately applied. Technically there are only two removals in the history of the Cabinet — the dismissal of Pickering by John Adams, and that of Duane by Jackson, — if it be held that the retirement of Stanton was effected, not by the Presi- dent's prime order of dismissal, but by the Secretary's resignation after the failure of the impeachment of the President on that issue. But virtual removals, couched in the polite phrases of resignation and acceptance, are numerous, probably more so than anybody knows, since there may well be cases, in which retiring Cabinet officers have succeeded to second or third class diplomatic posts, or 318 The President's Cabinet. to inferior judgeships, without knowledge on the part of the public as to whether the change was more desired by Secretary or President. The power has been applied for a variety of purposes. It was put into operation, in the first place, as a penalty for insubordination, when John Adams dismissed Pickering and McHenry. During the troubles of Madison's administration, especially the War of 1812, incompetency was the great cause of the many dismissals from the Cabinet. Indeed the Mexican War is the only one in which the United States has been engaged, that has not discovered that the Secretaries charged with the administration of the defences were at their best in time of peace. In 1862, Cameron had to be dismissed ; and in 1898, the Alger case arose. Jackson ridded himself of McLane and Duane, because their theory of the powers of their office clashed with his. The removal of Postmaster-General Blair by Lincoln was a presidential campaign measure. And in the period of unsavory politics that set in after the Civil War, Cabinet removals for political ends were common. Johnson deserves credit that he has never received for refusing to have his administration unmade and remade to suit the demands of the party managers. But Grant freely permitted the manipulation of his council board; and such figures as Ebenezer R. Hoar, Jacob D. Cox, Marshall Jewell, and Benjamin Bristow were made to give place to men who would exploit the political resources of the Departments more acceptably. The President's power to appoint his own Secretaries is subject to various political rules, and to the Constitutional check of confir- mation by the Senate. The first of these limitations is the more seriously felt. Geographical and kindred considerations sometimes exclude men whom the President would otherwise place over Depart- ments. The ability of the Cabinet, and the adaptation of members to their portfolios is impaired by such restrictions. But the field for choice is not so much narrowed that the President is constrained to take incapable men, or men that are likely to prove intractable. Some of the rules that have grown out of the spoils system have been to the President's advantage in his relations to his Cabinet. The possibilities of the Senatorial check are much greater than The Cabinet and the President. 319 the actual results. In the early years of the Government, whenever there was change of administration with change of principles, there were fears, if for any reason the party majority in the Senate was uncertain, that the confirmation of the Cabinet would be made an occasion for a party vote. Expedients for averting the danger were sought by both Jefferson and Jackson. An incoming Cabinet has occasionally been opposed by resistance to some particular mem- ber, in the form of delay, or a small adverse vote. But only once has an entire Cabinet slate been obstructed. And this was a sequel to the doubtful Hayes-Tilden election, and a manifestation of factional disaffection. The intervention of public opinion had a salutary effect. Four years later, President Garfield ventured to appoint a Secretary of the Treasury in opposition to the persistent demands of Senator Conkling and his faction, and the appointment was confirmed without delay, though the filling of one of the great offices within the Department precipitated a few weeks later a mem- orable struggle for the rights of Senators. At the next change of administration, a Republican Senate confirmed a Democrat Cabinet for President Cleveland. A new administration has a strong assur- ance of a fair trial under all circumstances. The reconstruction of Cabinets has been more seriously hampered than their inauguration, because change of Secretaries has frequently been a means of carrying out some purpose that has aroused oppo- sition. In Madison's administration, the changes fell foul of jeal- ousy over the management of the War of 1812, and the political rivalry between the Northern States and Virginia. Jackson invited opposition in the first place by breaking with Calhoun, the Vice- President, and later by his anti-bank policy. He was able, however, to plough around it by clever use of his vacation powers. Tyler's difficulties with Cabinet appointments were largely of a personal nature. Three times the Senate has prevented Cabinet nominees from taking their seats. And three times has it unseated officers who had been installed at the Cabinet table during its vacation. It is known that its power to reject has on a few occasions prevented Cabinet nominations. But the proportion of cases in which the Senate has asserted an effective opposition is very small. 320 The President's Cabinet. It is a conclusive commentary upon the importance of the powers of appointment and removal to the ordering of the Executive, that they have been the centre of attack in every movement on the part of Congress to put a curb on the Presidency. 10 In the earlier Republi- can period, an amendment to the Constitution was proposed that should take the power of appointing all Cabinet officers away from the President, and convey it to the two Houses of Congress. And a second proposition of the sort was brought up that contemplated the single Department of the Treasury. Then came a series of efforts in the same direction that were provoked by some of the memorable quarrels between President and Congress. Jackson's assertion of authority over the Treasury set in motion a series of propositions, which were brought forward by Clay in the Senate, and by a member of his delegation in the Lower House. Tyler's vetoes called forth a renewal of these propositions, Clay being again the protagonist. The actual infringement upon Johnson's power to control his Cabinet is matter of common knowledge. A few days after the Cabinet proviso of the famous Tenure-of-Office Act was repealed, a proposition was introduced to continue some restriction of the sort by Constitutional amendment. The limitation of the President's powers of appoint- ment and removal, so far as the members of the Cabinet are con- cerned, has not appealed to the sober judgment either of Congress or the country. But on the contrary, all plans for Civil Service Reform have retained and emphasized the immediate control by the President of his official advisers. It is a matter of some consequence that the Cabinet has grown from four members to nine, but it is of very little moment, compared with the fact that not a single addition has been made at variance with the rule of removability by the Chief Executive. The Vice-President has not been admitted to the Executive Councils, although the sug- gestion is sometimes heard to give him something more to do than handle the gavel in the Senate by making him a sort of Minister without a portfolio. In the second place, it has been detrimental to the freedom of Cabinet officers, and indirectly to the powers of the Cabinet itself, "Ames, Amendments to the Constitution, 131-138. The Cabinet and the President. 321 that the Presidency has developed an almost unlimited power of direction over the array of business that Congress imposes upon the Departments by specific statute. The Constitutional grant of Execu- tive power has, in a sense, its " elastic clause." And the prevailing construction of the provision that the President shall see that the laws are faithfully executed, is the one most favorable to that branch of the Government. The decisive battle over the President's adminis- trative powers was fought in the Jackson era. The particular form in which the narrower view of the Presidency expressed itself at that time was that the Departments are divided into two groups, of radically different nature. It was held that the Treasury and Post Office were agencies for the performance of functions that lay by Constitutional arrangement within the ordering of Congress, and were not Executive Departments at all. The State, War, and Navy Departments, on the other hand, correspond, in part of their extent, to fields that lay within the powers of the President, as enumerated in the Constitution. A very clear-cut statement of this doctrine is secured by combining Clay's arraignment of Jackson in the Senate for taking into his own hands the law that clothed the Secretary of the Treasury with a discretion about the deposit of the Government funds," and the argument before the Supreme Court, in the case of Kendall v. United States, to show that a mandamus issued against Postmaster-General Amos Kendall, to compel that officer to complete certain contracts entered into by his predecessor, ought to be sus- tained." We consider this position largely a partisan one. Very re- spectable authorities on political science hold that it is in line with the original view of the powers vested in the Presidency. But the minute investigation of the early status and condition of the two Depart- ments, requisite to prove this, has not been made, to our knowledge. Very different from this doctrine, and yet entangled with it in some of its applications to cases, is the recognition of a distinction between two different fields in every Department, in one of which the Department Head is the agent of the President, and controllable by him only, while in the other he is a public officer of the United u Congressional Globe, 1833-1835, PP- 54-57- u 12 Peters, 570, et seq. 322 The President's Cabinet. States, amenable to the laws for the performance of his duties. The Courts have recognized the latter character, whenever they have issued a writ of mandamus against a Cabinet officer. Chief Justice Marshall laid down this distinction in the case of Marbury v. Madi- son. 13 Though the passage is much quoted, it is not so lucid as the argument of Charles Lee, who was counsel for Marbury, and pre- viously Attorney-General to both Washington and John Adams. The particular officer in question was the Secretary of State. And Mr. Lee laid down that he exercises his functions in two distinct capacities; and that the difference is clearly illustrated by the two acts of Congress, establishing the office. Under the greater act, which constitutes the Secretary in question an agent to conduct the Foreign Affairs of the Government at the President's order, he is responsible only to the President. But, under the supplemen- tary act, which makes him Keeper of the Great Seal, and Custo- dian of the Records of the United States, he is a public ministerial officer, executing duties enjoined by law, and uncontrollable by the President of the United States." Obviously this position would be unfavorable to the President's power of direction, accordingly as the line was drawn between the two fields. Opposed to these restricted views in whatever form, is the theory of the Executive that is particularly associated with Jackson's name. We quote from his protest against the resolutions of censure passed by the Senate upon his conduct in taking the removal of the Govern- ment deposits from the Bank of the United States into his own hands : " The whole Executive power being vested in the President, who is responsible for its exercise, it is a necessary consequence that he should have a right to employ agents of his own choice in the performance of his duties, and to discharge them, when he is no longer willing to be responsible for their acts " . . . . And, " it would be an extraordinary result, if because the person charged by law with a public duty is one of his Secretaries, it were less the duty of the President to see that law faithfully executed than other laws enjoining duties upon subordinate officers or private citizens." 15 13 1 Cranch, 164. 14 1 Cranch, 137, et seq. 15 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, III, 79, 84. The Cabinet and the President. 323 Judicially, the points controverted between theories of the Execu- tive have not been fully covered. But in practice the power of re- moval renders and sustains a clear verdict in the President's favor. Very valuable testimony to this fact is furnished by the Tenure-of- Office Act itself, or rather by the attitude of the members of Con- gress towards that act. It was not the original purpose that the check put upon the removal power should operate to enjoin the President from changing his Cabinet officers ; but when the policy of Military Reconstruction was resolved upon, the obvious way to secure an unimpeded administration of that policy was to make the Head of the War Department irremovable by the President. 18 Jackson's triumph over two intractable Secretaries of the Treasury was none the less real for the temporary censure of the Senate, or the refusal to confirm the vacation incumbent, after the work for which he had been installed was done. Jackson's successors have pushed the presidential direction over the Treasury still further without incurring opposition. There have been some especially conspicuous applications to this Department of the President's power to recom- mend to Congress such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient, notably in President Cleveland's messages. The Sundry Civil Bill of March 4, 1909, contains a provision that is very strik- ingly at variance with the theory that the Treasury is an establish- ment outside of the Executive control. It is herein provided that the Secretary for the Department, upon receiving estimates of expendi- tures for the fiscal year, shall prepare an estimate of revenues, and report all discrepancies between the two to Congress so soon as it assembles; but that he shall also acquaint the President with the facts in order that the latter officer may make suggestions to Congress as to where appropriations could be cut down, or advise new taxes or loans." Whether it has become the practice for the President to exercise the same authority over the Secretary of the Treasury's reports as he does over those from the other Departments is not clear. The Annual Report from the Treasury and the Annual Mes- sage have occasionally been at cross-purposes. " Dewitt, Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson, 193. " Statutes at Large, XXXV, 1027, Section 7. 324 The President's Cabinet. The Interior Department has been a place for a good deal of friction between President and Secretary over the carrying out of specific acts of Congress. In the case of the McGarrahan Claim, President Grant overruled Secretary Cox so preemptorily, that it was questioned by the newspapers, whether official self-respect did not require the Secretary to resign. An apparent conflict between President Cleveland and Secretary Vilas attracted attention ; but in this case, facts and appearances seem to have been contradictory. 18 There is good reason to believe that in the disputes with which the Land Office has been concerned in more recent years, the President has set the orders of the Secretary of the Interior at naught more often than the public has known. The distinction is still drawn between the two kinds of acts or duties that a Department Head performs. But the Supreme Court in 1866, handed down a very restrictive definition of the field in which such officer has been deemed to be uncontrollable by the President: " A ministerial duty, the performance of which may, in proper cases, be required of the Head of a Department by judicial process, is one in respect to which nothing is left to discretion. It is a simple definite duty, arising under conditions admitted or proved to exist, and imposed by law." u On the other hand, in cases where discretion is involved in acts imposed by statutes, the working theory is that the ultimate discretion is the President's. This doctrine is upheld by the opinions of several Attorneys-General. 20 There are documentary sur- vivals of the narrower interpretation of the President's authority. Stanton expressed the restrictive view, in his reply to Johnson's charges. 21 And almost a generation later, John Sherman in an utter- ance that rings more like an echo than a voice, asserted the doctrine that the President has no more right to control or exercise the pow- ers or functions conferred upon the Department Heads by laws, than they have to control him in the exercise of his duties. 22 "Political Science Quarterly, IV, 452, F. P. Powers, Railroad Indemnity Lands. 18 4 Wallace, 498, Mississippi v. Johnson. "Opinions of the Attorney-General, VII, 453-482, Cushing; X, 527-539, Bates. 21 Gorham, Life of Edwin M. Stanton, II, 420. 22 Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, I, 449. The Cabinet and the President. 325 On the other hand, some changes are to the advantage of the Cabinet. The great gain to the Presidency in theory is of necessity modified in practice by the vast expansion of administrative opera- tions, an increase that is signalized not only by the doubling of the number of portfolios, but by great development in Department or- ganization, in which a new era may be distinctly traced from the beginning of the Civil War. The Secretaries themselves have with- drawn from operating the Departments in the sense in which they did during the first sixty or seventy years of the National Government. And the President has ceased from knowledge of the ordinary round of business. To great effect might Washington's direct acquaintance with Department correspondence 23 be set over against Lincoln's powerlessness to keep abreast of the papers that required his signa- ture. 21 Notwithstanding the fact that long usage is against inter- ference with ordinary Department business, a forceful Chief Execu- tive would probably assert the right to interfere, if any occasion for doing so came to his knowledge. The President has acquired new authority over his assistants ; but he has become more dependent upon them. The frequency and regu- larity of Cabinet sessions is a very visible proof. Prior to the Civil War, every President had a practice of his own. In the literature of Lincoln's administration, there are clear traces of the Tuesday- Friday rule ; but Lincoln was most unmethodical about observing it. Johnson held the semi-weekly consultations with great regularity. And the custom has since been observed without interruption, when the President is at the seat of Government and able to attend to his duties. Without the President, there is no such thing as a Cabinet meeting. A Cabinet conference is exactly like a conference of a Board of Directors. Ordinarily a few men dominate the discussion; and yet the suggestions of the others are helpful. The nature and scope of Cabinet discussions depend upon the President. General Grant seems to have had a fashion of calling for reports of things done in the different Departments. Many Presidents would despatch such 28 Writings of Jefferson, VIII, 09. 24 Welles, Lincoln and Seward, 68, 70. 326 The President's Cabinet. matters with individual Secretaries. And Lincoln treated such large affairs as purely Departmental concerns that he called forth a protest from the Senate. Washington's consultations ranged from the great problems of foreign relations to the details of procedure and the fine points of etiquette. The Cabinet's claims to a right to be consulted depend upon pre- cedent and custom. And these are only beginning to be appreciated as forces in American institutions. The President is not obliged to consult the Cabinet ; but he is expected to consult it. Public opinion cannot compel him to do so on specific subjects, because it is not sufficiently well informed of current happenings. The secrecy of the Cabinet is well guarded, despite the enterprise of press agencies. The inside history of President Roosevelt's intervention between Japan and Russia in 1905 is not yet generally known. The Adminis- tration was much dispersed at the time, and Mr. Hay, the Secretary of State, was in his last illness. A strong force to compel consulta- tion with individual Secretaries is the standard of official self-respect that attaches to Cabinet office. The rule may be laid down that the President ordinarily consults with the Cabinet on matters of grave public importance, and that only under most extraordinary conditions would he take action affecting the work of a particular Department without conference with the Head of that Department. The tendency of political science is to speak more disparagingly of the Cabinet's claims than actual practice justifies. An unfortu- nate legend has grown up that the Cabinet has been ignored in Executive transactions of very great importance. The Louisiana Purchase and the Emancipation Proclamation have become kind of stock examples, although facts to show that the Cabinet was not overlooked are matters of common knowledge. 35 President Jefferson himself did not know of the Louisiana Purchase, until after the Com- missioners had closed with the Emperor's proposal. The lesser pro- ject to acquire New Orleans had been previously discussed with his Cabinet, as was the ratification of the treaty afterwards. The Eman- cipation Proclamation was, in its important aspects, President Lin- coln's unassisted act. But everybody knows that the document was 25 Infra, Administrations of Jefferson and Lincoln. The Cabinet and the President. 327 read to the Cabinet. And much informal discussion of emancipation had preceded .the President's resolution to take the step. There have been real cases of failure to consult the Cabinet. But they are not so imposing as these legendary examples. And they tend to show that the opposite course is the one that is expected. President Polk refrained from consulting his Cabinet about the veto of the River and Harbor Bill of 1846, because he had made up his mind that he could not sign the bill under any circumstances* And President Hayes once announced a policy and carried it out, without asking his Cabinet for their views, because he knew beforehand that his course would be disapproved." General Grant, in his naivete about government by deliberation, either ignored or misled his Cabinet in the negotiation for the annexation of San Domingo. And Secretary Fish of the State Department would have laid down his office for the affront, had not fears for the welfare of his party constrained him. Technically the existence of the Cabinet is voluntary with the President. But it has strong sanctions in the body of unwritten law that is growing up. The idea that the Executive should be plural in its deliberations has obtained almost from its establishment. The proposition to attach a Council to the Presidency by Constitutional provision failed in the Federal Convention. But, when the Govern- ment had only rounded out its first decade, the dispersed condition of the Executive under President John Adams provoked sharp dis- approval, and contributed to the downfall of the Federalist party. Although the collegiate existence of the Cabinet was irregular for nearly three-quarters of a century, it was not often interrupted. Jackson held no Cabinet meetings during the first two years of his presidency; whereat a Congressional lobby from his own section of the country requested him to observe that practice. In the second year of the Civil War, the Cabinet was not sufficiently in evidence to satisfy all parties. And a powerful lobby from the Senate, instigated by Secretary Chase, waited upon the President about the matter. The separateness of the Cabinet from other advisers has been care- fully guarded. And the present view of those occasions when out- 28 Polk's Diary, VIII, 7- w Stevens, Sources of the Constitution, 167, Footnote. 328 The President's Cabinet. siders meet with it, as happened in the Spanish-American War of 1898, is that the affair is a special consultation, even though it should happen at the time and place of a regular Cabinet meeting. Acting Secretaries have sometimes been summoned, but such is not recent practice. Presidents have resorted to extra-Cabinet counsels with great freedom. Congressional intimacies are a necessity. Madison served Washington for a spokesman in the House of Representatives, as Lodge did Roosevelt in the Senate. Care for the political side of the administration also takes the President outside of the Cabinet, although the Post Office is a manager's portfolio. Amos Kendall and Thurlow Weed are a familiar type of Presidential adviser. The prestige of the official Cabinet has occasionally suffered for the favor shown to men who stood close to the President in informal ways. But " Kitchen Cabinets " are not pleasing to public sentiment. The Cabinet has once been recognized by statute. This occurred in the General Appropriations Act of 1907, where it is called by name in the clause that fixes the salaries of its members. The American Cabinet is not performing any blind or unsuspected functions. Neither has it been the seat of any great transformations in the nature of the Government. It is not a main-spring or a pivot ; but it has shown itself to be an essential attachment. It is so ad- justed that the American Executive is plural in deliberation, while it is single in responsibility. BIBLIOGRAPHY. CONTEMPORARY CORRESPONDENCE AND DIARIES. Adams, John. Works with a Life of the Author. Edited by C. F. Adams. 10 vols. Boston : 1854-1856. Adams, John Quincy. Memoirs, comprising parts of his Diary from 1795 to 1848. 12 vols. Philadelphia: 1874- 1877. Ames, Fisher. Works. Selections from Speeches and Correspondence. Edited by Seth Ames. 2 vols. Boston : 1854. Buchanan Papers. MSS. Library of Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Buchanan, James. Works. Edited by John Bassett Moore. 12 vols. Phila- delphia and London: 1908-1911. Calhoun, J. C. Correspondence. Edited by J. F. Jameson. American His- torical Association, Annual Report, 1899, II. Washington: 1900. Chase Papers. Diary and Correspondence of Salmon P. Chase. American Historical Association. Annual Report for 1902. II. Washington: 1903. Clay, Henry. Works. Edited by Calvin Colton; with an introduction by Thomas B. Reed, and an history of tariff legislation, 1812-1896, by William McKinley. 10 vols. New York: 1904. Clayton Papers. MSS. Library of Congress. Fillmore, Millard. Papers. Edited by Frank H. Severance. 2 vols. Publi- cations of the Buffalo Historical Society. X, XI. Buffalo : 1907. Gallatin, Albert. Writings. Edited by Henry Adams. 3 vols. Philadelphia : 1879. Garfield. MSS. Letters. Private Possession. Hamilton, Alexander. Works. Comprising his Correspondence, and his Political and Official Writings, exclusive of the Federalist, Civil and Military. Edited by John C. Hamilton. 7 vols. New York: 1851. Hamilton, Alexander. Works. Edited by Henry Cabot Lodge. 12 vols. New York and London: 1903. Jackson Papers. MSS. Library of Congress. Jay, John. Correspondence and Public Papers. Edited by Henry P. Johnson. 4 vols. New York and London: 1890-1893. Jefferson, Thomas. Writings. Edited by H. A. Washington. 9 vols. Wash- ington: 1853-1854. Jefferson, Thomas. Writings. Edited by P. L. Ford. 10 vols. New York: 1892-1899. Johnson Papers. MSS. Library of Congress. 320 33° Bibliography. Knox Papers. MSS. Library of New England Historic Genealogical Society. Maclay, William. Journal. New York: 1890. Madison, James. Letters and Other Writings. By order of Congress. 4 vols. New York: 1884. Madison, James. Papers. Edited by Henry D. Gilpin. 3 vols. Washington: 1840. Madison, James. Writings. Edited by Gaillard Hunt. 9 vols. New York, etc.: 1900-1910. Monroe, James. Writings. Edited by Stanislaus Murray Hamilton. 7 vols. New York and London: 1898-1903. Pierce, Franklin. Selected Letters. American Historical Review. X, No. 3. Polk. Diary and Letters. Lenox Library. Polk Papers. MSS. Library of Congress. Van Buren Papers. MSS. Library of Congress. Washington, George. Writings. Edited by Jared Sparks. 12 vols. Boston : 1837. Washington, George. Writings. Edited by W. C. Ford. 14 vols. New York: 1889- 1893. Washington's Letter Books. Library of Congress. Webster, Daniel. Private Correspondence. Edited by Fletcher Webster. 2 vols. Boston: 1857. Webster, Daniel. Letters. Edited by C. H. Van Tyne. New York: 1902. Welles, Gideon. Diary. Atlantic Monthly. 1909-1910. CHI, CIV. AUTOBIOGRAPHIES AND PERSONAL REMINISCENCES. Benton, T. H. Thirty Years' View: a History of the Working of the American Government for Thirty Years, from 1820 to 1850. New York : 1854-1856. Blaine, James G. Twenty Years of Congress, from Lincoln to Garfield. With a Review of the Events which led to the Political Revolution of i860. 2 vols. Norwich, Conn. : 1884 Boutwell, George S. Reminiscences of Sixty Years in Public Affairs. 2 vols. New York: 1902. Buchanan, James. Mr. Buchanan's Administration on the Eve of the Re- bellion. New York: 1866. Foster, John W. Diplomatic Memoirs. 2 vols. Boston : 1909. Hoar, George F. Autobiography of Seventy Years. 2 vols. New York: 1903. Kendall, Amos. Autobiography. Edited by William Stickney. Boston : 1872. King, Horatio. Turning on the Light. A Dispassionate Survey of President Buchanan's Administration, from i860 to its close. Philadelphia: 1895. McCulloch, Hugh. Men and Measures of Half a Century. New York : 1888. Piatt, Thomas Collier. Autobiography. New York: 1910. Bibliography. 331 Schofield, Lieutenant-General John M. Forty-Six Years in the Army. New York: 1897. Seward, F. W. William H. Seward. 3 vols. (I, Autobiography, 1831-1846; II, III, Seward at Washington, 1846- 1873.) New York: 1890. Sherman, John. Recollections of Forty Years in the House, Senate, and Cabinet. An Autobiography. 2 vols. Chicago: 1896. Schurz, Carl. Reminiscences. Completed by Frederic Bancroft and William A. Dunning. 3 vols. Chicago : 1907- 1908. Weed, Thurlow. Autobiography. Edited by Harriet A. Weed. (Vol. 1.5 Memoir of Thurlow Weed by Thurlow Weed Barnes. (Vol. II.) Bos- ton: 1884. DOCUMENTARY MATERIALS, MANUALS, ETC. Clarke, Matthew St. Clair, and Hall, David A. Legislative and Documentary History of the First Bank in the United States. Washington : 1832. Elliot, Jonathan. The Debates of the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. 5 vols. Washington: 1845. Lanman, Charles. Biographical Annals of the Civil Government of the United States during its First Century. Washington : 1876. McKee, T. H. Manual of Congressional Practice. Washington: 1890. Mosher, R. B. Executive Register of the United States, 1879-1902. Balti- more : 1903. Poore, Ben : Perley. The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and other Organic Laws of the United States. 2 vols. Washington: 1877. Richardson, James D. Messages and Papers of the Presidents. 1780-1897. 10 vols. Washington : 1899. United States. Annals of Congress. 1789- 1823. United States. Congressional Globe. 1833-1873. United States. Congressional Record. 1873. United States. Executive Journal of the Senate. 1789. United States. The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson. 3 vols. Washington: 1868. United States. Journals of the Senate and House of Representatives. 1789. United States. House of Representatives Reports, Thirty-Eighth Congress, First Session. No. 43. United States. Senate Documents, Twenty Seventh Congress, First Session. United States. Senate Reports, Forty-Sixth Congress, Third Session, No. 837. United States. The Statutes at Large of the United States. 1780. United States. Revised Statutes of the United States. 1878. 332 Bibliography. United States Reports. Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Supreme Court of the United States. New York : 1882- United States Official Opinions of the Attorneys-General of the United States. Washington: 1852. TREATISES, ETC. Bagehot, Walter. The English Constitution. New and Revised Edition. Boston: 1873. Bryce, James. The American Commonwealth. 2 vols. London and New York: 1888. Burgess, John W. Political Science and Constitutional Law. 2 vols. Boston and London: 1890. Fairlie, John A. National Administration of the United States of America. New York and London: 1905. Finley, John H. and Sanderson. The American Executive. New York: 1908. (The American State Series.) Foster, John W. A Century of American Diplomacy. Boston : 1900. Goodnow, Frank J. Comparative Administrative Law. 2 vols. New York and London: 1893. Goodnow, Frank J. Politics and Administration. New York : 1900. Hamilton, Alexander. With Madison and Jay. The Federalist Edited by J. C. Hamilton. Philadelphia: 1864. Harrison, Benjamin. This Country of Ours. New York: 1897. Hart, Albert Bushnell. Practical Essays on Government New York: 1893. Hart, Albert Bushnell. The Actual Government. New York: 1903. Hinsdale, B. A. The American Government. Chicago : 1895. Lalor, John J. Cyclopedia of Political Science, Political Economy, and of the Political History of the United States. 3 vols. Chicago: 1881-1884. Lowell, A. Lawrence. Essays on Government. Boston : 1889. Lowell, A. Lawrence. The Government of England. 2 vols. New York, etc.: 1908. Stevens, C. Ellis. Sources of the Constitution of the United States. New York: 1894. Wilson, Woodrow. Congressional Government. Boston: 1885. BIOGRAPHIES: CONTAINING CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER SOURCE MATERIAL. Avary, Myrta Lockett. Recollections of Alexander H. Stephens. New York : 1910. Coleman, Mrs. Chapman. The Life of John J. Crittenden. With Selections from his Correspondence and Speeches. Philadelphia: 1871. Conkling, Alfred R. Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling. New York: 1889. Bibliography. 333 Conway, Moncure D. Omitted Chapters of History Disclosed in the Life and Papers of Edmund Randolph. New York: 1888. Curtis, G. T. Life of James Buchanan, Fifteenth President of the United States. 2 vols. New York : 1883. Curtis, G. T. Daniel Webster. 2 vols. Fourth Edition. New York: 1872. Gorham, George C. Life and Public Services of Edwin M. Stanton. 2 vols. Boston: 1899. Hamilton, Gail. Biography of James G. Blaine. Norwich, Conn. : 1895. Hamilton, John C. History of the Republic of the United States as Traced in the Writings of Alexander Hamilton and his Contemporaries. 7 vols. Philadelphia, 1865. Howe, M. A. DeWolfe. Life and Letters of George Bancroft. 2 vols. New York: 1908. King, C. R. The Life and Correspondence of Rufus King. 6 vols. New York: 1894- 1900. Lodge, Henry Cabot. Life and Letters of George Cabot. Boston : 1877. Nicolay, John G., and Hay, John. Abraham Lincoln. A Memoir. 10 vols. New York: 1890. ' Pickering, Octavius, and Upham, Charles W. Life of Timothy Pickering. 4 vols. Boston: 1867-1873. Pierce, Edward L. Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner. 1811-1874. 4 vols. Boston: 1893. Schuckers, J. W. The Life and Public Services of Salmon Portland Chase. New York: 1874. Seward, Frederick W. Seward at Washington, as Senator and Secretary of State. A memoir of his life with selections from his letters. 1846-1872. 2 vols. New York: 1891. Steiner, Bernard C. The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry. Cleveland: 1907. Tarbell, Ida M. The Life of Abraham Lincoln. Drawn from original Sources and containing many speeches, letters, and telegrams hitherto unpublished. 2 vols. New York: igoo. Tyler, L. G. The Letters and Times of the Tylers. 3 vols. Richmond: 1884-1896. Warden, Robert B. An account of the Private Life and Public Services of Salmon Portland Chase. Cincinnati: 1874. BIOGRAPHIES AND LIVES. Adams, John Quincy, and Charles Francis. Life of John Adams. Two vols, in one. Philadelphia : 1874. Adams, John Quincy. Lives of Madison and Monroe. Buffalo, Cincinnati: 1850. Adams, Henry. Life of Albert Gallatin. Philadelphia : 1879. 334 Bibliography. Adams, Henry. John Randolph. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1882. Badeau, Adam. Grant in Peace. Hartford: 1887. Bancroft, Frederic. The Life of William H. Seward. 2 vols. New York, etc. : 1900. Buell, Augustus C. History of Andrew Jackson. 2 vols. New York : 1904. Burton, Theodore E. John Sherman. (American Statesmen, Second Series.) 1906. Chandler, Zachariah. An outline sketch of his life and public services. By The Detroit Post and Tribune. Detroit: 1880. Dallas, G. M. Life and Writings of Alexander James Dallas. (Philadelphia: 1871. Davis, Varina Jefferson. Jefferson Davis. A Memoir by his Wife. 2 vols. New York: 1890. Dix, John Adams. Memoirs. Compiled by his son, Morgan Dix. 2 vols. New York: 1883. Fessenden, Francis. William Pitt Fessenden. 2 vols. Boston and New York: 1907. Forman, S. E. Thomas Jefferson, Life and Writings. Indianapolis : 1900. Foulke, W. O. Oliver P. Morton. 2 vols. Indianapolis, etc.: 1899. Garland, Hamlin. Grant: His Life and Character. New York: 1898. Gay, Sidney Howard. James Madison. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1884. Hart, Albert Bushnell. Salmon Portland Chase. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston and New York: 1899. Harvey, Peter. Reminiscences of Daniel Webster. Boston: 1877. Herndon, William H., and Weik, Jesse W. Abraham Lincoln. The True Story of a Great Life. With an Introduction by Horace White. 2 vols. New York: 1896. Hunt, C. H. Life of Edward Livingston; with introduction by George Bancroft. New York: 1864 Hunt, Gaillard. Life of James Madison. New York: 1902. Jenkins, John S. Life of Silas Wright. Auburn, Rochester: 1852. Kennedy, J. P. Life of William Wirt. Two vols, in one. Philadelphia: i860. Lodge, Henry Cabot. Alexander Hamilton. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1882. Lodge, Henry Cabot. Daniel Webster. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1883. Lodge, Henry Cabot. George Washington. (American Statesmen Series.) 2 vols. Boston : 1889. Lothrop, Thornton K. William Henry Seward. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston, etc : 1897. McLaughlin, A. C. Lewis Cass. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston. etc. : 1891. Bibliography. 335 Marshall, John. Life of George Washington. 5 vols. London: 1806- 1807. Morrow, Josiah. Life and Speeches of Thomas Corwin. Cincinnati: 1896. Morse, John T. Abraham Lincoln. (American Statesmen Series.) 2 vols. Boston, etc. : 1896. Morse, John T. John Quincy Adams. (American Statesmen Series.) Bos- ton: 1882. Morse, John T. Thomas Jefferson. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1883. Parton, James. Life of Andrew Jackson. 3 vols. New York: i860. Parton, James. Thomas Jefferson. Boston : 1874. Randall, Henry S. Thomas Jefferson. 3 vols. New York: 1858. Randolph, Sarah N. The Domestic Life of Thomas Jefferson. New York: 1871. Raymond, Henry J. The Life and Public Services of Abraham Lincoln, Sixteenth President of the United States, together with his State Papers. New York: 1865. Roosevelt, Theodore. Thomas H. Benton. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1886. Schurz, Carl. Henry Clay. (American Statesmen Series.) 2 vols. Boston: 1890. Shepard, E. M. Martin Van Buren. (American Statesmen Series.) New York: 1888. Stanwood, Edward. James G. Blaine. (American Statesmen, Second Series.) Boston, etc.: 1905. Stevens, John Austin. Albert Gallatin. (American Statesmen Series.) Bos- ton: 1883. Sumner, W. G. Andrew Jackson as a Public Man. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston, etc. : 1882. Tyler, Samuel. Memoir of Roger Brooke Taney, LL. D. Baltimore : 1872. Von Hoist, H. John C. Calhoun. (American Statesmen Series.) Boston: 1882. Wheaton, Henry. William Pinkney. Some Account of Life, Writings, and Speeches. New York: 1826. Wise, H. A. Seven Decades of the Union. A Memoir of John Tyler. Richmond: 1881. HISTORIES : GENERAL WORKS. Adams, Henry. History of the United States. 1801-1817. 9 vols. New York: 1891. (Extensive notice of the Cabinet.) Hildreth, Richard. The History of the United States of America. 6 vols. New York: 1856. McMaster, J. B. A History of the People of the United States. 5 vols. New York: 1883- 1905. 336 Bibliography. Rhodes, James Ford. History of the United States, 1850-1877. 7 vols. New York and London: 1892- 1906. (Very valuable for study of the Pierce and Buchanan Cabinets.) Schouler, James. History of the United States of America under the Con-' stitution. 6 vols. Revised edition. New York: 1880- 1899. Von Hoist, H. The Constitutional and Political History of the United States. 6 vols. Chicago : 1877-1889. SPECIAL HISTORIES, MONOGRAPHS, AND ARTICLES. Alexander, De Alva Stanwood. A Political History of the State of New York. 3 vols. New York : 1906. Ames, Herman V. The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the United States during the First Century of its History. American Historical Association. Annual Report for 1896. II. Washington: 1897. Catterall, R. C. H. The Second Bank of the United States. Chicago : 1903. Dallinger, F. W. Nominations for Elective Office. (Harvard Historical Mon- ographs.) Boston: 1897. Davis, Jefferson. The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government. 2 vols. New York : 1881. Dewitt, David Miller. The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson. New York: 1903. Dunning, William A. Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction. The Macmillan Company: 1898. Fish, Carl R. ' The Civil Service and the Patronage. New York : 1905. Follet, Miss M. The Speaker. New York: 1896. Gibbs, George. Administrations of Washington and Adams, or Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams. Edited from the Papers of Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury. New York: 1846. Guggenheimer, J. C. The Development of the Executive Departments, 1775- 1789. In Essays in the Constitutional History of the United States. Edited by J. Franklin Jameson. Boston, etc. : 1889. Hunt, Gaillard. The Department of State: History and Functions. Wash- ington: 1893. McConachie, Lauros G. Congressional Committees. New York: 1898. Mason, Edward Campbell. The Veto Power: Its Origin, Development, and Function in the Government of the United States. 1789-1889. Edited by Albert Bushnell Hart Harvard Historical Monograph. No. I. Boston: 1890. Pollard, Edward A. Life of Jefferson Davis in Secret History of the South- ern Confederacy. Philadelphia, etc. : 1869. Salmon, Lucy M. History of the Appointing Power of the President. Papers of the American Historical Association. I. No. 5. New York, etc.: 1886. Stanwood, Edward. A History of the Presidency. Boston, etc. : 1898. Bibliography. 337 Stanwood, Edward. History of Presidential Elections. Fourth Edition. Revised. Boston : 1892. Stephens, Alexander H. A Constitutional View of the late War between the States. Two vols, in one. Philadelphia: 1868-1870. Tyler, L. G. Parties and Patronage in the United States. New York, etc. : 1891. Wood, John. The History of the Administration of John Adams. New York: 1802. American Political Science Association. Proceedings. II, 126-148, Mary L. Hinsdale, The Cabinet and Congress: an Historical Inquiry. American Political Science Review, III, 329-347. Henry Barrett Learned, Historical Significance of the term " Cabinet " in England and the United States. American Historical Review, X, 565. Henry Barrett Learned, Origin of Title " Superintendent of Finance." Yale Review, XV, 160-194. Henry Barrett Learned, Origin and Creation of the Presidents Cabinet. NEWSPAPERS AND MAGAZINE ARTICLES. Richmond Enquirer. Richmond: 1804, etc. Globe, Washington: 1830-1845. Madisonian, Washington: 1841-1842. The Nation. New York: 1866- National Intelligencer. Washington : 1800-1869. Niles Register. Baltimore: 1811-1849. New York Tribune. New York: 1841- Union. Washington : 1845-1857. . United States Telegraph. Washington: 1828- 1830. The Atlantic Monthly. Boston. XXVI, 463. Wilson, Henry, Black and Stanton. LXXVI, 162. Cox, Jacob D., How Judge Hoar Ceased to be Attorney-General. (Very important article in the present state of material.) The Century. New York. XXV, 341, 799- Dawes, Henry L., Garfield and Conkling. The Galaxy: X, 109-119. Gideon Welles, The Facts of the Abandonment of Gosport Navy Yard. Mr. Welles in Answer to Mr. Weed. Ibid., 613-637. Gideon Welles, Fort Sumpter. Facts in Relation to the Expedition Or- dered by the Administration of President Lincoln for the Relief of the Garrison in Fort Sumpter. Ibid., 474-482. Horatio King, James Buch- anan. XI, 257-276. J. S. Black, Mr. Black to Mr. Wilson. XIII, 521- 532; 663-673. Gideon Welles, Lincoln and Johnson. (Two Papers to show that Johnson's Plan of Reconstruction was substantially the same as Lincoln's.) The North American Review. Boston: New York. CXXIX. 4 Nos. The Diary of a Public Man. 22 338 Bibliography. SPEECHES AND PAMPHLETS. Adams. The Address of Charles Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, on the life, character, and services of William H. Seward. Delivered by invi- tation of the Legislature of the State of New York, in Albany, April 18, 1873. New York: 1873. Adams, John, and Cunningham, William. Correspondence between the Hon. John Adams, late President of the United States, and the late William Cunningham, Esq., beginning in 1803, and ending in 1812. Boston: 1823. Armstrong, Kosciuszko. Review of T. L. McKenney's Narrative of the causes which in 1814, led to General Armstrong's Resignation of the War Office. New York : 1846. Lincoln, Abraham. Complete Works, Comprising his speeches, state papers, and miscellaneous writings. Edited by John G. Nicolay and John Hay. 2 vols. New York: 1894. Pickering, Timothy. Review of the Correspondence between the Hon. John Adams and William Cunningham, Esq. Salem: 1824. Quincy, Josiah. Speeches Delivered in the Congress of the United States. Edited by his son Edmund Quincy. Boston : 1874. Randolph, Edmund. Vindication of Mr. Randolph's Resignation. Philadel- phia: 1795. MISCELLANEOUS. Blaine, Mrs. James G. Letters. Edited by Harriet S. Blaine Beale. 2 vols. New York: 1908. Carpenter, F. B. Six Months at the White House with Abraham Lincoln. New York: 1865. Dana, C. A. Recollections of the Civil War. With the Leaders at Wash- ington and in the Field in the Sixties. New York : 1898. Chittenden, L. E. Recollections of President Lincoln and his Administration. New York: 1891. Chittenden, L. E. Personal Reminiscences, 1840-1890, including some not hitherto published of Lincoln and the War. New York: 1893. Crook, William H. Through Five Administrations. Edited by Margarita Spalding Gerry. New York: 1910. Field, Maunsell B. Memories of Many Men and Some Women. New York: 1874. Forney, John W. Anecdotes of Public Men., 2 vols. New York: 1873 and 1881. Gilmore, James R. Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War. Boston: 1898. Gobright, L. A. Recollections of Men and Things at Washington, during the third of a Century. Philadelphia : 1869. Hamilton, James A. Reminiscences. Men and Events at Home and Abroad, during three quarters of a century. New York : 1869. Bibliography. 339 Lamon, Ward H. Recollections of Abraham Lincoln, 1847-1865. 1895. McClure, A. K. Abraham Lincoln and Men of War Times. Some personal recollections of War and Politics during the Lincoln Administration. Philadelphia: 1892. Piatt, Don. Memoirs of the Men who saved the Union. New York, etc. : 1887. Poore, Ben : Perley. Perley's Reminiscences of Sixty Years in , the National Metropolis. 2 vols. Philadelphia: 1886. Riddle, A. G. Recollections of War Times. Reminiscences of men and events in Washington. 1860-1865. New York: 1895. Rice, Allen Thorndike. Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln. By distinguished men of his time. Collected and edited by Allen Thorndike Rice. The North American Review. New York: 1888. Rothschild, Alonzo. Lincoln, Master of Men. Boston : 1906. Sargent, Nathan. Public Men and Events. 2 vols. Philadelphia: 1875. Sherman Letters, The. Correspondence between General and Senator Sher- man from 1837 to 1891. Edited by Rachel Sherman Thorndike. New York: 1894. Smith, Margaret Bayard. The First Forty Years of Washington Society. Letters. Edited by Gaillard Hunt. New York: 1908. Welles, Gideon. Lincoln and Seward. New York : 1874. INDEX. Adams, John, retains Washington's cabinet, 31 ; calls on cabinet for opinions on French relations, 31, 32 ; opposed to Hamilton, 31 ; and his cabinet, 31, 32; absences from Washington, 32; opinion of Hamil- ton, 32; his controversy over the major-generals, 33, 34; and his secretaries, 34, 35, 36. Adams, J. Q., Secretary of State, 66; coalition cabinet of, 73, 74; cabinet relations under, 75 ; resignations in his cabinet, 76, 77. Ad interim appointments, 203; act relative thereto, 203. Agriculture, Department of, estab- lished, 248 ; its history, 248 ; organi- zation, 248; report of the Secre- tary, 308. Alger, .Russell A., Secretary of War, 263; resigns, 265. Allison, William B., and Secretary- ship of the Treasury, 234. Ames, Fisher, urges co-operation of Federalists in Congress, 32. Akerman, Amos T., Attorney-Gen- eral, 212 ; character, 212. Armstrong, John, Secretary of War, 55 ; character, 55 ; resigns, 57. Arthur, Chester A., accepts resigna- tion of Garfield's cabinet, 241 ; ap- pointments, 241, 242, 243 ; ability of his cabinet, 242. . Assistant Attorney-General, 217. Assistant-Secretary, influence of, 263. Attorney-General, office created, 8; duties, 8; not consulted by the President at first, 10, n; consulted on Bank Act (1791), n; gives opinion on constitutionality of Ap- portionment Act (1792), 12; Presi- dent said should be consulted, 12; position in cabinet strengthened by Genet mission, 14; Bradford suc- ceeds Randolph as, 25; proposals for, 27, note; absent from seat of government, attending to private practice, 67; fixed residence, 67; Butler, non-resident, 101 ; ranks with the Secretaries, 149; heads Department of Justice, 216; duties, 216, 217; in the Confederate Gov- ernment, 217, note. Bacon, Robert, Secretary of State, 275- Badger, George, Secretary of the Navy, 107; resigns, 113. Ballinger, Richard A., Secretary of the Interior, 280; controversy over, 280, 281 ; resigns, 281. Bancroft, George, on Van Buren's policy towards the secretaries, 99, 100; Secretary of the Navy, 129; why appointed, 130; resigns, 133; efficiency, 133; Minister to Eng- land, 133. Barbour, James, Secretary of War, 74; Minister to England, 76. Barry, William T., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 83; first Postmaster-General of cabinet rank, 83. Bates, Edward, in Lincoln's cabinet, 171, 172, 174; resigns, 187. 341 342 Index. Bayard, Thomas F., Secretary of State, 247. Bell, John, Secretary of War, 106; resigns, 113. Belknap, W. W., Secretary of War, 210; impeached, 214, 215; resigns, 2IS- Berrien, John M., Attorney-General, 82. Bibb, George M., Secretary of the Treasury, 122. Bissell, Wilson S., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 259. Black, Jeremiah S., Attorney-Gen- eral, 162; Secretary of State, 165. Blaine, James G., and Hayes, 221, 225 ; Secretary of State, 233 ; char- acterized by Garfield, 235, 236; re- tires, 242 ; Secretary of State under Harrison, 253, 254, 255; resigns, 255- Blair, Frank P., Jackson and, 85; Johnson's adviser, 192. Blair, Montgomery, Postmaster- General, 174; resigns, 187, 188. Bliss, Cornelius N., Secretary of the Interior, 264; retires, 265. Bonaparte, Charles J., Secretary of the Navy, 271, 272; Attorney-Gen- eral, 273. Borie, Adolph E., in Grant's cabinet, 210; resigns, 210. Boutwell, Secretary of the Treasury, 209; enters Senate, 213. Bradford, William, succeeds E. Ran- dolph as Attorney-General, 25; dies, 26. Branch, John, Secretary of the Navy, 82. Brewster, Benj. H., Attorney-Gen- eral, 242. Brown, Aaron V., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 162; dies, 162. Browning, O. H., Secretary of the Interior, 193. Buchanan, James, declines Attorney- Generalship, 101 ; Secretary of State, 129; cabinet appointments, 161, 162; and his cabinet, 163, 164, 165, 167. Butler, B. F., Attorney-General, 94; resigns, 101 ; declines Secretaryship of War, 129. Cabinet, origin of, 1 ; executive de- partments in Continental Congress and, 2; under Washington, 7; Washington's first, 9; consulted by the President, 9, 10, 11; and Bank Act (1791), 11; meeting of (1791), 12; on constitutionality of Apportionment Act (1792), 12; consulted by President on Excise Law (1792), 12; and address to Congress (1792), 13; influenced by Virginia executive council, 13. meetings under Washington, 13; effect of Genet mission on, 14; and French Neutrality, 14; " assembled consultation " begins (i793)» 14; naming of, 15; separa- tion from other advisers, 16; dif- ferent parties in, 22, 23; conflict in, 23; reorganization of and Jay's Treaty, 26; Washington on diver- gent views in, 26; becomes entire- ly Federalist, 26; President Adams and, 37; relation with President discussed, 37; unanimity of Jef- ferson's, 43; meetings under Jef- ferson, 43 ; and Louisiana pur- chase, 46; relations discussed by Jefferson, 52, 53; quarrels, 55, 56, 57; double appointments in, 58; government by under Jefferson and Madison, Quincy's remarks on, 59, 60; geographical represen- Index. 343 tation in, 65; Monroe's attitude towards, 65 ; character under Mon- roe, 67; rivalry for the Presidency in, 68; and Congress, 68; meetings under Monroe, 69; and Jackson, 69; and Missouri Compromise, 69; goes with President to Capitol on last night of a session, 69; rela- tions under Monroe, 70; coalition cabinet of J. Q. Adams, 73, 74; relations under J. Q. Adams, 75; character of Adams', 75; and ap- pointment of the General-in-chief (1828), 75, 76; speeches by mem- bers of, 76; the "travelling Cabi- net," 76; tenure in discussed, 77; new features under Jackson, 81 ; Jackson's appointments, 81, 82, 83 ; Congress and Jackson's appoint- ments for, 84; character of Jack- son's 84; the "Kitchen," 84, 85, 86; meetings discontinued under Jackson, 86; attitude of Jackson to, 88, 89; Jackson's second, 89; removal of the deposits and Jack- son's, 90, 91 ; views of members on the removal, 91 ; reconstructed by Jackson, 91 ; character of Jack- son's last, 94; meetings under Van Buren, 99; Van Buren's character- ized, 101, 102; Tyler's relation with his, 112, 113; must change with President, 127; and division among Democrats, 127; character of Polk's, 130; meetings under Polk, 132; originates legislation, 133; formation of Taylor's, 140, 141 ; character of Taylor's 141 ; the Gal- phin Claim and Taylor's, 143; resignation of Taylor's, 147; and the whigs, 149; salaries raised (1853), 149; character under Pierce, 155; and the Kansas-Ne- braska Bill, 156, 157; polls of, 157; after Lincoln's election, 162, 163; reconstruction (i860), 163, 164, 165; and Buchanan, 164, 166, 167; second reconstruction of Buchan- an's, 167; regency of under Bu- chanan, 168; formation of Lin- coln's, 171, 172, 173, 174; relations within Lincoln's, 175 ; Lincoln and, 179; Chase's views, 180; Senate criticizes Lincoln's, 180, 181 ; Lin- coln and, 181; Senate's attitude discussed, 182; and the Emanci- pation Proclamation, 186; Tenure of Office Act and, 194, 19s, 196, 197; Presidential and members of, 202, 203; ad interim appointments, 203 ; act relative thereto, 203 ; Ten- ure of Office Act amended, 203, 204; reappointments of, 204; Grant's characterized, 207; his ap- pointments, 207, 208; double State representation in, 209, 210; Grant and, 211; low ebb of Grant's, 213; relations within Harrison's, 254; Harrison's Cabinet and Chile, 254; and McKinley's assassination, 265; under Roosevelt, 269; activity of Roosevelt's, 271 ; The Nation on, 272 ; and newspapers, 272, 273 ; salaries of members raised, 274; political relations of, 283, 284; and the South, 284; and the opposition, 284; changes of the, 284, 285; and the President, 285; and geographi- cal requirements, 286; precedence of state in, 286; double representa- tion of states in, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291 ; the West and, 287 ; balance be- tween North and South in, 287, 288; precedence of portfolios in, 288; President and cabinet mem- bers from the same state, 289; for- eign missions and, 289; sectional- ism and, 289, 290; and the North- 344 Index. west, 290; and New York, 290; and Pacific coast, 290; South and West and, 290; rule against double representation relaxed, 290 ; 291 ; political factions and, 291, 292; coalition cabinet, 292; membership in the Senate and, 292, 293 and note, 294; presidential aspirants excluded from, 294; and unsuc- cessful candidates for the Presi- dency, 294, 295; previous status of members of, 295, 296; Congres- sional committees as training- school for members, 296; promo- tion of assistants, 296, 297; trans- fer of members, 297; promotion discussed, 297, 298; state govern- ments as training-schools for cabi- net members, 298; qualification for, 298; membership in and party service, 298, 299; administrative ability and membership in, 299; cabinet members not in Congress, 301 ; communications from mem- bers of to Congress, 302; privilege of debate, 302, 303; Pendleton's resolution, 302, 303; and the Con- federate Congress, 303, 304; in- formal relations with Congress, 304, 305 ; social relations with Congressmen, Mrs. Jefferson Davis on, 305 ; admitted to halls and floors of Congress, 305; reports, 307; sends drafts of bills to Con- gress, 308; objected to, 308; Sen- ate's resolution against, 309; and appropriations, 309; and Tariff bills, 310; and administrative influ- ence, 310; and Mint and Coinage Act (1873), 311; relative influ- ence of, 312; not like European ministries, 314; subordination to the President, 317; removals, 317, 318, confirmation by the Senate, 319; control by the President, 320, 321 ; double character of members, 321, 322; Jackson on control of, 323 ; Supreme Court and Presiden- tial control of, 324; expansion of duties, 325; dependence of Presi- dent on, 325; weekly meetings of, 325 ; like a board of directors, 325 ; President expected to consult, 326; secrecy, 326; not ignored, 326, 327; outsiders seldom meet with, 327, 328. Cabot, George, declines secretaryship of the Navy, 34; on relations of President with cabinet, 37. Calhoun, John C, Secretary of War, 66, 67; Secretary of State, 122. California, McKenna, first member in a cabinet from, 264. Cameron Don, Secretary of War, 215- Cameron, Simon, Secretary of War, 174; superseded by Stanton, 177; Minister to Russia, 178. Campbell, George W., Secretary of the Treasury, 54, 55; resigns, 58. Campbell, James, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 153. Carlisle, John G., Secretary of the Treasury, 259. Carrington, Edward, proposed for Secretary of War, 27, note. Cass, Lewis, Buchanan's opinion of, 161 ; Secretary of State, 161 ; re- signs, 164. Chandler, William E., Secretary of the Navy, 242. Chandler, Zachariah, Secretary of the Interior, 214. Chase, Salmon P., and Lincoln's cabinet, 180; resigns, 181, 182; re- sumes his place, 182; and Lincoln, 182, 183, 184, 185; resigns, 184; Chief-Justice, 185. Index. 345 Chief Justice, in President's Council, 4; consulted by the President, 10, II. Chilian relations, Harrison's cabinet and, 254, 255. Civil Service Reform, in Grant's administration, 212; and Hayes' Cabinet, 226, 227. Clay, Henry, Secretary of State, 73; appointment criticized, 74; loyal to Adams, 76; and Harrison's ap- pointments, 105, 106; and Webster, 147. Clayton, John M., Secretary of State, 139. 140. Cleveland, Grover, and double-repre- sentation, 247; his cabinet, 247; and his cabinet, 249; does not re- call old cabinet in second adminis- tration, 259; appointments in sec- ond administration, 259, 260. Clifford, Nathan, Attorney-General, 134; resigns, 134. Cobb, Howell, Secretary of the Treasury, 161; resigns, 163. Coleman, Norman J., Secretary of Agriculture, 248. Collamer, Jacob, Postmaster-General, 140. Colonial governments, division of powers, 12. Commerce and Labor, Department of established, 269, 270; duties, 270; and other departments, 270; first Secretary, 270; report of the Secretary, 308. Confederation, the, executive gov- ernment in, 3. Congress, Jackson's cabinet appoint- ments and, 84. Conkling, Roscoe, and Hayes' ap- pointments, 221, 225; and Secre- taryship of the Treasury, 234. 23 Constitutional Convention (1787), discusses privy council, 3, 4, 5, 6. 7. Continental Congress, executive de- partments of, 2; created, 2; under the Confederation, 3. Cortelyou, George B., Secretary of Commerce and Labor, 270; Chair- man Republican National Com- mittee, 270 ; Postmaster-General, 271 ; Secretary of the Treasury, 273- Corwin, Thomas, Secretary of the Treasury, 148. Council, in colonial government, 1-2; in Constitutional Convention (1787), 3, 4- Council of State, resolution for in Constitutional Convention, 4, 5; rejected, 5; new resolution for adopted, 5; Mason's motion for (1787), 5. 6- Crawford, George W., Secretary of War, 140. Crawford, William H, Secretary of War, 58, 59; Secretary of the Treasury, 66, and note. Crittenden, John J., Attorney-Gen- eral, 106; resigns, 113; again ap- pointed, 148. Crowninshield, Benj., Secretary of the Navy, 58. Curtis, B. R., declines Attorney-Gen- eralship, 201. Cushing, Caleb, nominated Secretary of the Treasury, 119; rejected by Senate, 119; in Pierce's cabinet, 154, 155- Dallas, A. J., preferred by Madison for Secretary of the Treasury, 55; Secretary of the Treasury, 58; also Secretary of War, 58. 346 Index. Dana, Francis, named by Adams as Commissioner to France, 33; de- clines, 33. Davie, William R., commissioner to France, 34. Davis, Jefferson, Secretary of War, 154; his influence, 157. Day, William R., Assistant-Secretary of State, 263; Secretary of State, 264; Associate- Justice, 264. Dearborn, Henry, Secretary of War, 41. Delano, Columbus, Secretary of the Interior, 213; retires, 214. Democrats, division of affects Polk's cabinet, 127, 128; Jackson's views, 128. Dennison, William A., Postmaster- General, 188; resigns, 192. Departments, in Revolutionary gov- ernment, 2; under the Confedera- tion, 3; heads of responsible for, 4; President and, 5; Washington and heads of, 7; established, 8. Deposits, Jackson's cabinet and the removal of the, 90, 91 ; Jackson ad- dresses his cabinet on, 91, 92; ac- complished, 92; Congress and, 92. Devens, Charles, Attorney-General, 224; discussed, 223, 224. Dexter, Samuel, Secretary of War, 36; acts as Secretary of State, 36. Dickerson, Mahlon, Secretary of the Navy, 94. Dickinson, Don M., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 248. Dickinson, Jacob M., Secretary of War, 279; retires, 281. Dix, John A., offered Secretaryship of State, 154; Secretary of Treas- ury, 167. Dobbin, James C, Secretary of the Navy, 154- Domestic Affairs, Secretary of in President's Council, 4. Duane, William J., Secretary of the Treasury, 91 ; and removal of the deposits, 91 ; dismissed, 91. Eaton, John H., Secretary of War, 81; resigns, 87, 88. Ellsworth, Oliver, on President's council (1787), 4; commissioner to France, 34. Elkins, Stephen B., Secretary of War, 255. Emancipation Proclamation, Lin- coln's cabinet and, 186, 326, 327. Endicott, William C, Secretary of War, 247. England, Treaty with, 46. Eustis, William, Secretary of War, 52- Evarts, William M., Attorney-Gen- eral, 201. Everett, Edward, Secretary of State, 148. Ewing, Thomas, Secretary of the Treasury, 106; resigns, 113; his views, 114, 115; proposed for Post- master-General, 140; Secretary of the Interior, 140; Johnson's ad- viser, 192. Fairchild, Charles S., Secretary of the Treasury, 248. Fessenden, William, Secretary of the Treasury, 185; returns to Senate, 188. Fillmore, Millard, appointments, 147, 148; and Harrison's cabinet, 147, 148. Finance, superintendency of created (1781), 2; under the Confedera- tion, 3 ; secretary of in President's Council, 5. Fish, Hamilton, Secretary of State, 2og. Index. 347 Fisher, Walter L., Secretary of the Interior, 281. Floyd, John B., Secretary of War, 162, 163, 164; resigns, 165, 166. Folger, Charles J., and Secretaryship of the Treasury, 233, 234; Secre- tary of the Treasury, 241, 242; death of, 242. Foreign Affairs, secretaryship created (1781), 2; under the Confedera- tion, 3; in President's Council, 4; Department of established (1789), 8; name changed, 8. Forsyth, John, Secretary of State, 94. Forward, Walter H., Secretary of the Treasury, 118; resigns, 119. Foster, Charles, Secretary of the Treasury, 255. Foster, John W., Secretary of State, 255- France, relations with, 34. Francis, David R., Secretary of the Interior, 260. Franklin, B., on President's council, 6. Frelinghuysen, Frederick T, Secre- tary of State, 242. French ministry, Revolutionary offi- cers of state like, 2. Gage, Lyman J., Secretary of the Treasury, 263; his principles, 263; retires, 269. Gallatin, Albert, Secretary of the Treasury, 41; disliked by Federal- ists, 41; proposals for cabinet meetings, 43; position of, 44, 45 ; transfer to State Dartment op- posed, 51 ; minister to Russia, 54. Galphin Claim, Taylor's cabinet and, 143- Garfield, James A., and party fac- tions, 231, 232; demands on him, 232; his plan for appointments, 232; his appointments, 233, 234, 235; and his Secretaries, 235. Garfield, James Rudolph, Secretary of the Interior, 274. Garland, Augustus H., Attorney- General, 247. Gary, James A., Postmaster-General, 264; resigns, 264. Genet, mission of and cabinet, 14. Gerry, Elbridge, selected by Adams as commissioner to France (1797) ; not approved by cabinet, 33; ap- pointed, 33. Gilmer, Thomas W., appointed Sec- retary of the Navy, 120; killed, 121. Gilpin, Henry D., Attorney-General, 101. Goff, Nathan, Secretary of the Navy, 227. Granger, Francis, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 107; resigns, 113. Granger, Gideon, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 41. Grant, U. S., Secretary of War ad interim, 197; cabinet appointments, 207, 208, 209, 210; and his cabinet, 211, 212, and the McGarrahan claim, 211; and the politicians, 213, 215, 216; reappoints his first cabi- net, 213 ; his mediocre cabinet, 213 ; cabinet changes, 214; scandals, 214, 215. Green, Duff, Jackson and, 85. Gresham, Walter Q., Postmaster- General, 242; Secretary of the Treasury, 242; resigns, 243; Sec- retary of State, 259; dies, 260. Grundy, Felix, Attorney-General, 101. Guthrie', James, Secretary of the Treasury, 154. 348 Index. Hale, Eugene, 214; tendered Post- master-Generalship, 214; declines, 214. Hamilton, Alexander, advises follow- ing French practice with heads of department, 2; resolution for ap- pointment of chief officers by President (1787), 6; Secretary of the Treasury, 9; on English and American executive and council, 19; on the head of the Treasury, 19, 20; functions assumed as sec- retary of the Treasury, 20, 21 ; criticized, 22; opposes Jefferson, 23; retires from Washington's cabinet, 25; on relation of the President with his cabinet, 37. Hamilton, Paul, Secretary of the Navy, 52. Harlan, James, Secretary of the In- terior, 191 ; resigns, 192 ; in Senate, 193- Harmon, Judson, Attorney-General, 260. Harrison, Benj., appointments, 253, 254; relations within his cabinet, 254; and Blaine, 254, 255; cabinet changes, 255. Harrison, William Henry, his views on cabinet appointments, 105; his appointments, 105, 106, 107; death, 107. Hatton, Frank, Postmaster-General, 242, 243. Hay, John, Secretary of State, 264; death, 272. Hayes, Rutherford B., cabinet draws upon independents, 221 ; fails to represent factions, 221 ; cabinet ap- pointments, 222, 223, 224; Senate and, 224, 225; changes in his cabi- net, 227. Henshaw, David, Secretary of the Navy, 120 ; unseated by the Senate, 120. Herbert, Hilary, Secretary of the Navy, 259. Howe, Timothy O., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 242; retires, 242. Hill, Isaac, Jackson and, 85. Hitchcock, Ethan A., Secretary of the Interior, 265; retires, 273. Hitchcock, Frank H., Postmaster- General, 280. Holt, Joseph, Postmaster-General, 162; on Cass' resignation, 164; Acting-Secretary of War, 166 ; Sec- retary of War, 167, 168; declines Attorney-Generalship, 187. Howard, John E., proposed as Sec- retary of War, 27, note. Hunt, William H., Secretary of the Navy, 235; retires, 242. Impeachment, articles of against President Johnson, 199, 200. Ingham, Samuel D., Secretary of the Treasury, 82. Innes, Colonel, proposed for Attor- ney-General, 27, note. Insular Affairs, War Department and, 265. Interior, Department of established (1849), 134; previous history of, 135; its scope, 135; relations with the President, 324. Irving, Washington, declines Secre- taryship of the Navy, 100, 101. Jackson, Andrew, and J. Q. Adams, 74; his cabinet appointments, 81, 82, 83; discontinues cabinet meet- ings, 86; quarrels of his adminis- tration, 87, 88; resignations in his cabinet, 88; attitude towards the cabinet, 88, 89; second cabinet, 89; new cabinet appointments by, 94; character of his last cabinet, 94; discusses Polk's cabinet appoint- ments, 128. Index. 349 Sec—^ James, Thomas L., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 234; retires, 242. Jefferson, Thomas, Secretary of State, 9; opposes Hamilton, 23; position in Washington's cabinet, 24 ; proposed successors to the retary of State, 24, note ; first cabi net appointments, 41 ; harmony in his cabinet, 43; takes cabinet's ad- vice, 46; discusses cabinet rela- tions, 52, 53. Jewell, Marshall, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 214. Johnson, Andrew, retains Lincoln's cabinet, 191 ; reconstruction of his cabinet, 192; Seward's views of, 192, 193; new appointments, 193; Senate and, 198; impeachment of, 199, 200. Johnson, Cave, Postmaster-General, 130- Johnson, Reverdy, Attorney-General, 140. Jones, William, Secretary of the Navy, 54; resigns, 58. Justice, Department of, established, 216. Kansas-Nebraska Bill, Pierce's cabi- net and, 156, 157. Kendall, Amos, influences Jackson, 85; Postmaster-General, 94; re- signs, 101. Key, David M., Postmaster-General, 223; retires, 227. King, Horatio, Postmaster-General, 168. Kirkwood, Samuel J., Secretary of the Interior, 235; retires, 242. " Kitchen Cabinet," Jackson's, 84, 85, 86; Tyler's, 115. Knox, Henry, Secretary of War, 9; retires from Washington's cabinet, 25- Knox, Philander C, succeeds Griggs as Attorney-General, 265; enters Senate, 270; Secretary of State, 279; legality of his appointment questioned, 279. Lamar, Lucius Q. C, Secretary of the Interior, 247; Associate Judge, 248. Lamont, Daniel S., Secretary of War, 259. Lawrence, Abbott, proposed for Sec- retary of the Navy, 140. Lee, Charles, Attorney-General, 26; Circuit- Judge, 36; on double character of the Secretary of State, 322. Legare, Hugh, S., Attorney-General, 118; Secretary of State ad interim, 120. Lewis, W. B., Jackson and, 85. Lincoln, Abraham, formation of his cabinet, 171, 172; cabinet appoint- ments, 172, 173, 174 ; and the South, 173 J appointments confirmed, 175; relations in his cabinet, 17s ; on Seward's proposals, 176; his inde- pendence, 186; rebukes cabinet, 186 ; and slave indemnity, 186, 187 ; reconstruction of his cabinet, 187, 188. Lincoln, Levi, Attorney-General, 41; Secretary of State ad interim, 42. Lincoln, Robert T., Secretary of War, 233. Loeb Letter, the, on cabinet and newspapers, 272, 273. Long, John D., Secretary of the Navy, 263; retires, 269. Louisiana Purchase, Jefferson's cabi- net and, 46, 326, 327. McClelland, Robert, Secretary of the Interior, 154. 350 ItfBEX. McCrary, George W., Secretary of War, 224; discussed, 223, 224'; Cir- cuit-Judge, 227. McCulloch, Hugh, Secretary of the Treasury, 188, 243. McGarrahan Claim, 211; Grant and, 211, 212. McHenry, James, Secretary of War, 26. McKenna, Joseph, Attorney-General, 264; Justice of Supreme Court, 264. McKinley, William, cabinet appoint- ments, 263, 264; cabinet changes, 264; retains old cabinet in second administration, 265 ; assassination of and his cabinet, 265. McLean, John, Postmaster-General, 74; Justice of the Supreme Court, 83. McLean, John, refuses Secretaryship of War, 118. MacVeagh, Franklin, Secretary of the Treasury, 279. MacVeagh, Wayne, Attorney-Gen- eral, 233 ; position, 233 ; retires, 242. Madison, James, prepares veto mes- sage for Washington (1791), 11; Secretary of State, 41 ; first cabi- net, 51, 52. Manning, Daniel, Secretary of the Treasury, 247; retires, 248. Marcy, William L., Secretary of War, 129; Secretary of State, 154, 155 ; Buchanan's opinion of, 155. Marine, secretaryship of created, 2; in President's Council, 4. Marshall, John, proposed Attorney- General, 27, note; named by Adams commissioner to France, 33; Secretary of State, 36. Mason, George, motion for Execu- tive Council (1787), $; attitude to- wards Council, 7. Mason, John Y., Secretary of the Navy, 121; Attorney-General, 130; Secretary of the Navy again, 1341 Maynard, Horace, Postmaster-Geh- er'al, 227. Meredith, William W., Secretary of the Treasury, 140. Metcalf, Victor H., Secretary of Commerce and Labor, 270; Secre- tary of the Navy, 273 ; retires, 274, Meyer, George von L, Postmaster- General, 273; Secretary of the Navy, 280. Miller, William H. H., Attorney- General, 254. Monroe, James, Secretary of State, 53; Acting-Secretary of War, 54; quarrels with Armstrong, 56, 57; Secretary of War, 57; and Secre- tary of State also, 58; his cabinet, 66, 67; and J. Q. Adams, 69, 70 ;■ on cabinet tenure, 77. Moody, William H., Secretary of the Navy, 269; Attorney-General, 270; Associate-Justice, 273. Morgan, E. D., refuses Secretary- ship of the Treasury, 188. Morgan, Edwin D., Secretary of the Treasury, 241 ; confirmed but de- clines, 241. Morris, Gouverneur, his resolution for Council of State (1787), 4; on President and Council, 6. Morton, Julius Sterling, Secretary of Agriculture, 259. Morton, Levi, and Secretaryship of the Treasury, 233; Minister to France, 233. Morton, Paul, Secretary of the Navy, 270; retires, 271. Murray, William Vans, Minister Plenipotentiary to France, 34. Index. 35i Nagle, Charles, Secretary of Com- merce and Labor, 280. Nation, the, on the cabinet, 272. Navy, department established, 34. Navy Department, organization of, 67, 68. Newberry, Truman H., Secretary of the Navy, 275. New York, and Garfield's appoint- ments, 233, 234; Garfield and Col- lectorship of, 236, 237; and Har- rison's cabinet, 253. Noble, John W., Secretary of the Interior, 253. Olney, Richard, Attorney-General, 259; Secretary of State, 260. Paulding, James K., Secretary of the Navy, 101. Payne, Henry C, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 269; retires, 271. Pendleton, Edmund, considered for Secretary of State, 26. Pendleton, George H., his resolution to permit heads of departments to speak in Congress, 302, 303. Pennsylvania, associated with the Treasury portfolio, 74, 288. Pickering, Timothy, Secretary of War, 25; his officers, 25; against appointment of Colonel Smith by Adams, 35; dismissed by Adams, 36. Pierce, Franklin, cabinet appoint- ments, 153, 154. 155; Southern views of, 155, 156, relations, 156, 157; relations with cabinet, 157; character, 157. Pierrepont, Edwards, Attorney-Gen- eral, 214; minister to England, 215. Pinckney, Charles, on President's council of advice (1787). 4- Pinckney, General Charles Cotes- worth, offered Secretaryship of War, 25, note; named by Adams Commissioner to France, 33. Pinckney, William, Attorney-Gen- eral, succeeding Rodney, 53. Piatt, Thomas C, recommended as Postmaster-General, 221 ; and Harrison's cabinet, 253. Poinsett, Joel R., Secretary of War, 99- Polk, James K., declines Secretary- ship of the Navy, 121 ; appoint- ments advised by Jackson, 128; cabinet appointments, 129, 130; against Presidential aspirants in his cabinet, 130, 131; and Buchan- an, 131, 132; method of consulting cabinet, 132; consults Senate on Oregon Question, 132; originates legislation, 133. Porter, James M., Secretary of War, 120; unseated by the Senate, 120. Porter, Peter B., Secretary of War, 76. Postmaster-General, patronage im- portant, 41 ; enters cabinet, 83 ; and the President, 92, 93, 94; ranks with the Secretaries, 149; as party manager, 299. Post Office, power of the President over, 92, 93, 94. President, his college of advisors created from cabinet, 9; consulta- tions within and without the cabi- net, 9, 10; board of advisors in International Law, etc., proposed for, 15; relation with cabinet dis- cussed, 37; originates legislation, 133; and cabinet under Lincoln, 186. President, council of discussed in Constitutional Convention (1787), 4; resolution for, 4, 5; rejected, 5; 352 Index. new resolution for adopted, 5; Mason's resolution, 6, 7. Presidential Succession, Johnson's recommendations, 202, 203; pro- vided for, 203. Preston, William B., Secretary of the Navy, 140. Preston, W. C, proposed for Secre- taryship of the Navy, 107. " Princeton," explosion on kills cabi- net members, 121. Privy council, in Constitutional Con- vention (1787), 3- Proctor, Redfield, Secretary of War, 253; resigns, 255. Quincy, Josiah, on cabinet govern- ment under Jefferson and Madison, 59, 60. Ramsay, Alexander, Secretary of War, 227. Randall, Alexander W., Postmaster- General, 193. Randolph, Edmund, Attorney-Gen- eral, 9; position of in cabinet strengthened by Genet mission, 14; succeeds Jefferson as Secretary of State, 24; political opinions, 25; and Fauchet, 25 ; resigns, 26. Rawlins, John A., Secretary of War, 208; death, 210. Revolution, American, executive government in, 2. Richardson, William A., Secretary of the Treasury, 213; ousted, 213. Robeson, George, Secretary of the Navy, 210. Roosevelt, Theodore, Assistant Sec- retary of the Navy, 263; retains McKinley's cabinet, 269; changes in his cabinet, 269, 270, 271 ; and Hitchcock and Wilson, 273. Root, Elihu, Secretary of War, 265; and Insular Affairs, 265; tempor- arily retires, 270; Secretary of State, 272; retires, 274. Rush, Richard, Attorney-General, 55; Secretary of the Treasury, 74. Rusk, Jeremiah, Secretary of Agri- culture, 254. Rutledge, on President and Council, 6. Sanborn contracts, 213 ; scandal with, 213, 214. San Domingo, annexation of, 211; treaty before Grant's cabinet, 211; 327- Schofield, John M., Secretary of War, 201 ; retained by Grant, 208. Schurz, Carl, proposals for Hayes' cabinet, 222 ; Secretary of the In- terior, 222; and Civil Service Re- form, 226, 227. Senate, advice of President by, 7; evolution of privy council from precluded, 7; consulted by Polk on Oregon Question, 132; and Lincoln's cabinet, 180, 181 ; and Johnson, 198; and Hayes' appoint- ments, 224, 225; forced by public opinion, 225; and the confirmation of the cabinet, 319; President of in President's Council, 4; quarrel with Tyler, 120. Seward, William H., • and Taylor, 141, 142; his influence, 141, 142; and Fillmore, 147; Secretary of State, 171, 172; and Lincoln, 175, 176; his proposals to Lincoln, 176; assumes powers, 176, 177; resigns, 181 ; resumes his place, 182 ; in Johnson's cabinet, 192. Shaw, Leslie M., Secretary of the Treasury, 269; retires, 273. Index. 353 Shelby, Isaac, Secretary of War, 66; declines, 66. Sherman, on council of advice (1787), 3- Sherman, John, Secretary of the Treasury, 222, 225; and Hayes, 226; Secretary of State, 263; re- tires, 264. Sherman, W. T., on removal of Stanton, 198; Secretary of War, 210, note. Smith, Caleb B., Secretary of the Interior, 174; resigns, 187. Smith, Charles Emory, Postmaster- General, 264; resigns, 269. Smith, Hoke, Secretary of the In- terior, 259. Smith, Robert, Secretary of the Navy, 42; Secretary of State, 52; resigns, 52; Minister to Russia, 52. Smith, Samuel, opposes transfer of Gallatin to State Department, 51. Solicitors, or assistant attorneys- general in Department of Justice, IS- Solicitor-General, provided for, 217; duties, 217. South, the, demands representation in the cabinet of Van Buren, 99; members from in Taylor's cabinet, 141 ; and Lincoln's cabinet, 173 ; has a member of Hayes' cabinet, 223 ; and Garfield's cabinet, 235 ; in Cleveland's cabinet, 247; must be represented in the cabinet, 264. Southern Democrats, in Tyler's cabi- net, 121. Speaker, the, in President's Council, 4- Speed, James, Attorney-General, 187; resigns, 192. Stanbery, Henry, Attorney-General, 193- Stanton, Edwin M., Attorney-Gen- eral, 165; supersedes Cameron, 177; and Lincoln, 178, 179, 185; removal of, 192 ; and Johnson, 193, 194, 197; suspended by Johnson, 197; removed, 198; resigns, 201. State, Assistant-Secretary of, office created, 149. State, department of established, 8. State, Secretary of should have been consulted on certain Indian des- patches (1792), 12; position under Washington, 24; proposals for suc- cessor to Randolph, 26, note; priority, 45; does not issue report, 307; position of under the Presi- dent, 314, 315, 316. Stewart, Alexander T, Secretary of the Treasury, 208; disability, 208. Stimson, Henry L., Secretary of War, 281. Stoddert, Benjamin, Secretary of the Navy, 34- Straus, Oscar S., Secretary of Com- merce and Labor, 273. Supreme Court, justices of consulted by President on International Law, 14, IS- Taft, Alphonso, Secretary of War, 215; Attorney-General, 215. Taft, William H., Secretary of War, 270; retires, 274; cabinet appoint- ments, 279. Tallmadge, N. P., offered seat in Harrison's cabinet, 107. Taney, Roger B., nomination for Secretary of the Treasury reject- ed, 94- Taylor, Zachary, intentions, 139; and Crittenden, 139, 140; appointments, 140; advised in cabinet appoint- ments, 140; intended appointments before death, 143. 354 Index. Tazewell, Littleton W., offered Sec- retaryship of State, 82. Teller, Henry M., Secretary of the Interior, 242. Tenure of Office Act> members of cabinet and, 194, 195, 196, 197; President Johnson and, 200, 201 ; amended, 203. Thomas, Philip R, Secretary of the Treasury, 164; resigns, 167. Thompson, Richard W., Secretary of the Navy, 223; resigns, 227. Tod, David, declines Secretaryship of the Treasury, 185. Tompkins, Daniel D., declines to be Secretary of State, 57, 58. Thompson, Jacob, Secretary of the Interior, 162, 163; resigns, 167. Toucey, Isaac, Attorney-General, 134; Secretary of the Navy, 162. Tracy, Benj. R, Secretary of the Navy, 253. Treasury, department of established (1789), 8. Treasury, Secretary of to consider certain Indian despatches (1792), 12; functions assumed under Hamilton, 20, 21 ; criticized, 22 ; and Congress, 44; relation to the President and Congress, 89, 90, 92; Whig caucus would have him ap- pointed by Congress, 113; amend- ment to Constitution proposed, 113; candidates for (1865), 188; precedence of, 288; position of in the cabinet, 316. Trescott, William R, Secretary of State, 165. Tyler, John, retains Harrison's cabi- net, in; his cabinet considers his financial measures, 112, 113; four members of his cabinet resign, 113; financial measures and relations with Congress, in, 112, 113; Con- gress and, 113; Ewing's views of, 114; his "Kitchen" cabinet, ris; relations with his cabinet, 114, 115; conduct .discussed, 117; alliances, 117; new appointments, 116, 118, 119; quarrel with the Senate, 120; cabinet appointments, 121. Tyner, James M., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 216; First Assistant-Post- master-General, 223. Upshur, Abel P., Secretary of the Navy, 118; Secretary of State, 120; killed, 121. Usher, John P., Secretary of the Interior, 187; retirement, 188, 191. Van Buren, Martin, Secretary of State, 82; resigns, 88; his advisors outside the cabinet, 100; cabinet appointments, 100, 101 ; his cabinet characterized, 101, 102. Vice-President, meets with cabinet (1791), 12; not in the cabinet, 320. Vilas, William R, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 247; Secretary of the Inter- ior, 248. Virginia, executive council influences Washington's cabinet, 13. Wade, B. R, "contrives" a cabinet as possible successor to Johnson, 202. Walker, Robert J., Secretary of the Treasury, 129. Wanamaker, John, Postmaster-Gen- eral, 254. War, Department of, established (1789), 8; condition of (1860- 1861), 177; and the war with Spain, 264, 265; controversies over, 265 ; and Insular affairs, 265. War, secretaryship of created (1781), 2; in President's Council, Index. 355 4 ; Secretary of apparently not con- sulted on Bank Act (1791), 11; secretaries proposed, 27; military men made secretary of war, 298. Washburne, Elihu B., Secretary of State, 209. Washington, G., visits Senate for ad- vice, 7; relations with members of cabinet, 13 ; does not use word, "cabinet," 15; against different parties in the cabinet, 26; and the appointment of the major-generals by Adams, 34. "Watch-dog of the Treasury," 209. Webster, Daniel, Secretary of State, 105, 106; remains in Tyler's cabi- net, 114, us, 116; resigns, 119; position, 119, 120; resigns from Fillmore's cabinet, 148. Weed, Thurlow, influence in politics of, 85. Welles, Gideon, on formation of Lincoln's cabinet, 171 ; Secretary of the Navy, 173. Whigs, improve the cabinet, 149. Whitney, William C, Secretary of the Navy, 247. Wickersham, George W., Attorney- General, 280. Wickliffe, Charles A., Postmaster- General, 118. Wilkins, William, appointed Secre- tary of War, 120. Williams, George H., Attorney-Gen- eral, 213. Wilson, on single magistrate, 3, 4. Wilson, James, Secretary of Agri- culture, 264; 280. Wilson, William L., Postmaster- General, 260. Windom, William, Secretary of the Treasury, 234, resigns, 241 ; Secre- tary of Treasury under Harrison, 253; dies, 255. Wirt, William, Attorney, General, 67. Wolcott, Oliver, Secretary of the Treasury, 25; resigns, 36. Woodbury, Levi, Secretary of the Treasury, 94 ; his " rotation " prin- ciple, 100; and offers to resign, 100. Wright, Luke E., Secretary of War, 274. Wright, Silas, declines Secretaryship of the Treasury, 128. Wynne, Robert J., Postmaster-Gen- eral, 271.