JK (V f ', Z ^ CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY FROM DATE DUE INTEf^Ll X OAfi- /rcf y wyy K Ifr nnMWMM f: U" |jp^rffi7 -K^ GAYLORD PRINTED IN U.S.A. JK2356 .RST" ""'^^^''y Library ^i?iS..fcte(.„S,?l?,yb!ican movement oljn 3 1924 030 485 746 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT \^\\ dsSh M 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/cu31924030485746 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT BY EARLE DUDLEY ROSS, Ph.D. Sometime Fellow in American History, Cornell University Professor of History, Illinois fVesleyan University A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY NEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 1919 R-- }- Copyright, ipio By CORNELL UNIVERSITY The Rumford Press I Concord, N. H. TO MY PARENTS PREFACE This study was prepared in 1915 as a doctoral disserta- tion in the Graduate School of Cornell University. The aim has been to contribute something to the history of poli- tical parties and of party government by tracing the develop- ment of a movement that came at a time of readjustment in both party issues and party organization. The investi- gation of a nation-wide movement, the sources of which are to be found in the local party organizations, involves many complexities and frequent opportunities for error. The years 1 873-1 876, in particular, have presented a tangle of party interests from which it has been most difficult to ravel the Liberal thread. Much assistance has been derived from monographs on the political history of the individual states during the Reconstruction era, and in this connec- tion special mention should be made of the studies prepared under the master guidance of Professor W. A. Dunning, of Columbia University. The writer has endeavored very consciously and, he trusts, very concientiously to avoid the besetting sin of mono- graph writers, that of exaggerating the importance of their problems. He has nevertheless been convinced, as a result of his investigation, that the Liberal Republican Movement was something more than a mere "spasm of political enthu- siasm of the negative character" which "passed away as quickly as it came," as a writer on political parties has characterized it.' Grateful acknowledgments are made to the Cornell Uni- versity Library, to the Harvard University Library, to the Library of Congress, to the State Historical Society of ' S. D. Fess, History of Political Theory and Party Organization in the United States, 233. VIU PREFACE Wisconsin, to the Minnesota Historical Society, to the State Historical Society of Missouri at Columbia, to the Missouri Historical Society at St. Louis, to the Iowa State Library at Des Moines, to the New York State Library at Albany, to the New York Public Library, and to the Bos- ton Public Library. The investigation has been carried on under the direction of Professor Charles H. Hull, of Cornell University, who has been throughout a patie;it, understanding, and undic- tatorial counselor. My indebtedness to him is too great to be expressed adequately in any formal acknowledgement. Professor Julian P. Bretz, of Cornell University, has ren- dered most generous and effective service in the critical reading of the manuscript. Both the manuscript and the proof have profited greatly by the careful readings of my wife. E. D. R. Illinois Wesleyan University, Bloomington, Illinois. December, 191 8. CONTENTS Chapter Page I. Origin of the Liberal Faction in the Union Republican Party. Introduction i Grant's problems and qualifications at the beginning of his first term 6 Administration policies create opposition within the regular organization 9 The reformers alienated from the administration 12 Factions in the state organizations 17 Republican losses in the congressional elections of 1870 .... 34 Futile opposition to Grant's renomination 34 Failure of efforts to reconcile the factions 41 II. Development of a National Liberal Movement. Suggestions of a new party, 1870-71 45 Schurz's organization work in 1871 46 Growing sentiment for a new party 50 Missouri call for a national Liberal convention 51 Activity of Liberal leaders in Congress 52 The response to the Missouri call 55 Personnel of the new movement 61 Condition of the Democratic party and its attitude towards the Liberal movement 68 Discussion over possible candidates 76 III. Reformers Versus Politicians in the Cincinnati Convention. Composition of the gathering 86 Politicians' plans thwarted by the independent journalists before the convention 87 Contest in the New York delegation 89 Organization of the convention 91 Triumph of the Greeley delegates from New York 91 Schurz's speech 92 Compromise on the tariff question 93 ix X CONTENTS The platform 95 The nominations 96 Reasons for Greeley's success 100 Reunion and Reform convention 104 IV. The Liberals and Their Candidate. Division of the Liberal leaders 106 Plans for a new ticket no Steinway Hall meeting Iii Attitude of Republican leaders toward Greeley's nomination 114 Sumner's " phillipic '' 116 The Republican national convention 117 The Fifth Avenue conference and its results 118 The reformers in the campaign 126 V. The Democratic-Liberal Coalition. Problem confronting the Democrats after the Cincinnati convention 129 Southern party sentiment for coalition 130 Greeley sentiment prevails in the West 131 Division of the party in the East 133 Coalition sentiment generally prevails 140 The Baltimore convention endorses the Liberal platform and candidates 140 Coalitions in the state conventions 142 The coalition in the campaign 143 The "Straight-Out" movement 146 VL The Political Campaign of 1872. General character of the campaign igo The press in the campaign 151 Cartoonists 1 53 Campaign oratory j cj Campaign methods i cq Racial appeals jg^ Appeals to sectarian prejudice 167 Chief campaign issues j5y Liberal prospects early in the campaign 177 The North Carolina election 178 The result in the October states 180 Overwhelming defeat of the Liberal ticket 183 Explanation of the result 183 CONTENTS XI VII. The Later Activities of the Liberal Republican Faction. The Liberal movement after 1872 192 The Liberals in Congress 192 South 197 West 198 East 218 In the campaign of 1876 227 Conclusion 237 Bibliography 240 Index 255 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT CHAPTER I ORIGIN OF THE LIBERAL FACTION IN THE UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY The Civil War, which tried so severely all of the institu- tions of the American Nation, created an anomalous situa- tion in the party system. The Republicans had arisen and come into power as a distinctly sectional party. The Demo- cratic organization, held together almost to the last by its politicians, had been forced asunder by the sectional con- flict. The northern Democrats then divided among them- selves. One portion supported the administration for the time being, and the rest maintained a moderate or extreme opposition. During the war the administration Unionists and the opposition Democrats completely filled the polit- ical field; the all-dominating issue of the preservation of the Union left no room for the activities of third parties. Reconstruction inevitably brought readjustment in party organizations and issues. The chief problems of the Democ- racy, discredited by their connection with the war, were to regain the country's confidence and to secure positive, forward-looking issues. The Republicans, despite their seeming security, had the grave tasks of becoming a gen- uinely national party and of amalgamating the diverse elements that during the war had rallied under the party's banner. The composition of the Union party,' at first a ' See Dunning, "The Second Birth of the Republican Party," Ameri- can Historical Review, XVI, 56 flf.; Greene, "Some Aspects of Politics in the Middle West," Proceedings of the Wisconsin Historical Society for jgii, 60 &.; Julian, Political Recollections, 330. 2 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT source of power, was now becoming a cause of instability. While national integrity was at stake^ differences over other issues had been suppressed, but with the cessation of war old-time constitutional views reasserted themselves. The inevitable result was a disintegration of the party. There was a pronounced difference of opinion between the extreme or "radical" nationalists and the moderates or "conservatives" as to the conditions and method of restora- tion of the seceded states. Although Johnson's "National Union" movement of 1866 failed in its immediate aims, it forced the two factions of the Union Republican party into a struggle which was renewed with increasing bitter- ness in the impeachment contest and culminated in 1872 in open rupture.^ For the time being, the Republicans were united in support of the war amendments ; but it was becoming evident that all attempts to continue extreme restrictive and punitive policies would meet with an active opposition within their ranks. Furthermore the Republi- cans were suffering from the demoralizing effects of an impotent opposition. Their party had not been kept on its mettle. Internal dissension was one of the consequences and by 1869 several of the state organizations were weak- ened by bitter factional contests.^ The political situation in the Reconstruction era was further complicated by economic and social problems. Gov- ernmental abuses, long tolerated or condoned, were now being challenged and thus were coming within the cogni- zance of political parties. A reform influence was developing that threatened Republican unity almost as seriously as did contentious constitutional lawyers in Congress or fac- tious politicians in the state organizations. 2 Johnston- Woodburn, American Political History, II, 585; De Witt, Impeachment of Andrew Johnson, 516 ff.; White, Trumbull, 286, 312-326; Salter, Grimes, 357-362; Schurz, Reminiscences, III, 292. ' See, for instance, Julian, 302 f.; McClure, Old Time Notes of Pennsyl- vania, II, 203-217; Stebbins, Political History of New York, 412 f.; Dilla, Politics of Michigan, 99; Morehouse, Fell, 96-97. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 3 In the late sixties there began, in the East and Middle West, the more or less definite activity of a group of reform- ers, composed largely of editors and scholars, who during the past decade had been for the greater part faithful sup- porters of the Republican party, but who from this time down to 1900, with some changes in personnel, endeavored to oppose abuses and secure reforms by concerted independ- ent political action. In ability, in sincerity of purpose, and, all too often, in impracticabiHty of method these men have a unique place in American history. But, although they were keenly alive to political and economic evils and honestly desirious of bringing about reformations, some of them at times seemed to be mere destructive critics.'' Cer- tain of their number, too, as their activity in the Liberal movement was to show, were speculative theorists, following unworkable theories, rather than efficient, pragmatical re- formers. They remind us of Colonel Roosevelt's "people of means" who "will get together in a large hall, will vocif- erously demand 'reform,' as if it were some concrete sub- stance which could be handed out to them in slices, and will then disband with a feeling of most serene self-satis- faction, and the belief that they have done their entire duty as citizens and members of the community."* Nor was their manner of appeal calculated to attract a wide following. Choate's characterization of Godkin's editorials as making virtue repellent was a pertinent criticism of many of these would-be reformers, (in the East the views of this group were best voiced by Godkin in the Nation, Bryant and Godwin in the Evening Post, Ottendorfer in the Staats Zeitung, Bowles in the Springfield Republican, Arthur George Sedgwick in the Atlantic Monthly (1872- 1873), and a number of writers, especially the Adams brothers, D. A. Wells, and Edward Atkinson, in the North * See, for example, Rhodes' comment on Godkin in Historical Essays, 276. ' Roosevelt, American Ideals (Standard Library Edition), 79. 4 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT American Review^ In the Middle West the spokesmen were Horace White in the Chicago Tribune, Murat Halstead in the Cincinnati Commerical, Fred Hassaurek in the Cincin- nati Volksblatt, W. M. Grosvenor in the Missouri Democrat (until 1 871), and Schurz in the Westliche Post. The rise of independent journalism in the years following the war is a factor always to be taken into account in the political devel- opment of the period, although its influence on the great mass of the voters was but gradually extended.^ Most of these men had a regard for the Republican, or Union Re- publican party, the organization that, in spite of all its falterings and blunderings, had preserved the Union; but they desired that the party should be progressive, that it should face the new issues and not merely rest upon its past achievements. If the old party should fail to meet the pressing needs of the day they were ready to leave it for any 'organization that might appear more worthy of support. It was natural that one of the first of the new issues to be championed by this group was civil service reform, as some of their number had been persistent advocates of the merit system since the introduction of Jenckes' bill in 1865." • See Merriam, Bowles, II, 132-134. For the ideas of this group, in ad- dition to the editorials in the journals mentioned above, see Schurz's Reminiscences and his Writings; Lowell's Letters; Norton's Letters; C. F. Adams' Autobiography; Bigelow's Retrospection; Brinkerhoff' s Recollec- tions; Koerner's Memoirs; Austen's Letters and Diaries of Moses Coit Tyler; Ogden, Godkin; Godwin, Bryant; Merriam, Bowles; Gary, Curtis; White, Trumbull; Lloyd, Lloyd; Adams, C. F. Adams; Rhodes' essays on Godkin and Cox in Historical Essays; writings of Godwin, Godkin, Lloyd , Wells ; publications of the American Free Trade League. Charles Francis Adams, Jr., in a speech during the campaign of 1872, said: "Meanwhile, for a long time past, and especially during the present campaign, I have acted in close sympathy with the class whose feelings now find vigorous expression through the columns of the N. Y. Evening Post and the Nation, — a class insignificant in numbers only, and one not safely to be disregarded." Springfield Weekly Republican, Oct. 4, 1872. ' Fish, Civil Service and the Patronage, 209-212. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 5 Tariff reduction was another of their projects. To further this cause, the American Free Trade League was estab- lished in 1869, with Bryant, Godkin, Schurz, J. D. Cox, George Hoadly, Horace White, David A. Wells, and Edward Atkinson as leading members.^ In the basic reconstruc- tion measures they had generally supported the party, but, as anyone who understood the character of such men should have known, they would inevitably oppose the continuance of illiberal policies for partisan or other unworthy ends. In the campaign of 1868 the Republicans relied most effectively upon their control of the South and the continu- ing popular distrust of their opponents. But while from a superficial reading of the election returns the Republican strength seemed overwhelming, a more careful analysis of the figures revealed serious weaknesses. The Democratic candidates had carried three northern states, including New York, they had been defeated by small majorities in three others, and with a "solid South," of which there were already serious portents, they would have won the election.' To be sure, most of the dangers that confronted the party were still latent. Wise, tactful leadership might prevent serious divisions ; but it would have required no great gift of political prophecy to foresee the results of false moves ^y the Republican chiefs. The Liberal Republican movement, coming in the midst of this period of party readjustment, combined something of all these complex, divisive forces in the Union Republican party. It marked the first deliberate attempt to meet the new political problems. The present study, while dealing to some extent with all phases of the movement, is con- cerned especially with its influence upon the reorganization of national parties. ' Lloyd, Lloyd, I, 24. Garrison started a " Revenue Reform League" in Boston in 1869. Garrison, Garrison, IV, 262. » Cf. Dunning, Reconstruction, 134; Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, 11,408. 6 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT As the foregoing suggestions indicate, President Grant, at the beginning of his first term, was confronted with many delicate problems which, both as politician and statesman, he must solve in order to keep his party intact and to retain the country's confidence. For the General the situation was one of peculiar opportunity. Had Grant but possessed the statesmanly capacity to formulate sound policies and the political skill to discipline recalcitrant factions he might well have become the real leader of his party and of the nation. He had not been chosen by reason of any party connections. The Republican managers had turned to him not as a Republican, but as the sole candidate whose suc- cess was reasonably assured.'" The rank and file, adoring the great hero of the war, looked forward to his achieve- ments "with an almost superstitious hope."" The reform- ers also cherished high expectations concerning him. Low- ell, in a letter to his friend, Leslie Stephen, shortly after the election, well expressed the prevailing cheerful view: "If you write about American politics remember that Grant has always chosen able lieutenants. My own opinion is (I give it to you for what it is worth), that the extreme Re- publicans will be wofully disappointed in Grant. At any rate, if he should throw away his opportunity to be an inde- pendent President, he is not the man I take him to be. No man ever had a better chance to be a great magistrate than he."" And, in fact, if few presidents have had such great difficulties to face, few have enjoyed, at the outset, so gen- eral and enthusiastic a support. '' But it was very soon apparent that the General was '" Rhodes, United States, VI, 159; White, 332. " Hoar, Autobiography, I, 246; Schurz, III, 285-303. "Lowell to Stephen, Thanksgiving Day, 1868, Lowell, Letters, II, 7. See also editorials in the Nation, May 28, June 20, Oct. 29, 1868; Godwin, Bryant, II, 274, 276; Norton to Curtis, Jan. 29, 1869 Norton, Letters, 1,319. " Cf. Rhodes, VI, 236. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 7 peculiarly ill-adapted for a r61e which would have tried the skill of the most experienced and tactful political leader. He was at this time as ridiculously ignorant of party poli- tics as he was of the duties of his high office. Having had the refusal, apparently, of both party nominations, he had consented to lead the Republicans only after stipu- lating that he should receive a renomination." He had, however, no conception of his responsibilities and obliga- tions as party leader. He looked upon the presidency as a just reward for his services to the country, and incident- ally to the Republican party. A soldier first and last, he brought his military ideas into the White House, regarding the relations of civil officials as he had those of officers in the army.'^ In his appointments, too, he felt entirely free to pay personal debts of friendship, regardless of party claims, to say nothing of the interests of the public service.'' With no more trepidation over his responsibilities in manag- ing the party than in managing the government, upon which he entered "without fear," he began by ignoring acknowl- edged party leaders. Urgent requests from a prominent Republican editor for inside information on proposed poli- cies were completely ignored.'^ The identity of the mem- bers of his cabinet, whom he considered as a personal "staff," was not divulged beforehand, even to his bosom friends." An influential Pennsylvania politician, who ven- tured to present the claims of his state to a portfolio, was given to understand that the President would select a cabi- net entirely in conformity with his own wishes. '° His unu- sual method of choosing advisers^" produced a cabinet which, " McClure, II, 216; Schurz's Writings (Bancroft ed.), II, 415. "Schurz, III, 306; Garland, Grant, 391. " Garland, 393; Sherman, Recollections, I, 474; Schurz, III, 308-310; Hoar, 1, 305. •' Badeau, Grant in Peace, 156. "Wilson, Dana, 405; Blaine, II, 424. " McClure, II, 221 f; Nation, Mar. 4, 1869, p. 164. '» For details, see Badeau, 161-166; White, 334-337. 8 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT when- finally announced, proved to be equally anomalous.''* Obscure friends without official experience or definite party standing were associated with men of marked ability and with some of pronounced reform sentiments. ^^ But in no case, apparently, was the good of the party organization considered in the original selections, and in one instance, at least, the President gratuitously created ill-feeling in a friend whom he had sought to please.^' Other important appoint- ments were equally unfortunate for party harmony. The President's immediate assistants, as well as many other important officials, were drawn from army officers. At the beginning of the term they were his closest advisers^^ and constituted a sort of " Kitchen Cabinet. "^^ The traditional rights of congressmen in respect to appointments were at times disregarded in a way that no executive with experi- ence in political usages would have ventured. ^^ The slight- ing manner in which Charles A. Dana's claims to the collectorship of the port of New York were ignored un- doubtedly helped to create a most dangerous critic at a highly strategic point. ^' This policy of holding aloof from the councils of party managers did not long continue. The soldier President, most tenacious in carrying through his pet projects, soon felt the need of loyal supporters in Congress. Such adher- ents, in accordance with Grant's ideas of political fitness, should be rewarded for their devotion by the control of the federal patronage. The notorious congressional clique, of which Butler, Conkling, Cameron, Morton, and Chandler '' Cf. Hinsdale, Hist, of President's Cabinet, 207. ^ Rhodes, VI, 236-241; White, 337. " Badeau, 165, 169. " Badeau, 12-13, 158, 206; Wilson, 405 f. *° Hinsdale, 207. ^« See, for instance, Cullom, Recollections, 176. " Wilson, 406-409, 414-416. Wilson's opinion that Dana's opposition was disinterested and impersonal was not generally shared by con- temporaries. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 9 were the leading spirits, furnisiied the desired band of de- pendable administration men.^' One of the first of the schemes upon which Grant had set his heart was the purchase of San Domingo, "the beginning of an Iliad of woes" ^' for the party. From this unhappy expansion project grew the administration's open and ir- reparable break with Sumner, marked on the side of the supercilious, egoistical Senator by bitterly exaggerated de- nunciations of the President and his advisers, and on that of the headstrong, vindictive Executive and of his defenders by the summary removal of Motley from the English mis- sion and the displacement of Sumner as chairman of the committee on foreign affairs.'" Tosecure thevotes of carpet- bag senators for the annexation treaty by the appointment of a southerner, Judge Hoar was also forced out of the cab- inet.'i Senator Schurz's opposition to annexation marked the beginning of the differences between the administration and the influential leader of western reform sentiment.'^ The President's obstinate and unreasonable course in this matter also caused much dissatisfaction among some of his close supporters. Morton was opposed to his chief's efforts to force the Senate's acti6n on the treaty, foreseeing nothing but an ultimate defeat for the administration.'' Henry Wilson warned Grant that Motley's removal would "Rhodes, VI, 388 f.; Foulke, Morton, II, 265; Sherman, I, 474; Conkling, Conkling, 326. 2» White, 342. "> For detailed arguments on both sides of this controversy, see Pierce, Sumner, IV, 433 ff., and Badeau, chs. 23-24. An impartial summary is given by Rhodes, VI, 349-354, 362 f. For Sumner's view of the episode, see Sumner to Morrill, Sept. 8, 1870, Forum, XXIV, 406-408. " Cox, "How Judge Hoar Ceased to be Attorney-General," Atlantic Monthly, LXXVI, 162 ff.; Sumner to Bigelow, Aug. 7, 1870, Bigelow, Retrospection, IV, 402. '^Schurz to Grosvenor, Mar. 31, 1870, Schurz's Writings, I, 484; Schurz, III,307f. " Foulke, II, 151 n. For Senator J. S. Morrill's opposition and the favor with which it was received, see Forum, XXIV, 405 f . lO THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT be likely to injure the party in Massachusetts.'* Senator Cole, of California, a thick-and-thin organization man, wrote from the senate chamber, when the confirmation of Motley's successor was being held up, that the opposition was "in favor of Motley" and added naively, "Grant often forgets to act justly. He is not always a wise politician."'^ The Republican defeat in the New Hampshire state election in the spring of 187 1 was regarded as a direct protest against the administration's treatment of Sumner.'^ The San Domingo fiasco was, in a sense, the President's personal experiment, but in dealing with more pertinent issues upon which Republicans differed Grant was no more successful in promoting harmony. The passage of the tar- iff act of 1870, with the President's full approval, was a marked triumph for the protected interests.'' This was an especially vital issue for the party at this time since the sentiment for tariff reform among Republicans was coming to be widespread. In the Middle West there was a most persistent opposition to the continuance of the war duties." In this section administration papers, otherwise loyal, were avowed supporters of the free-trade movement,'' and prom- s' Wilson to Grant, July 5, 1870, Pierce, IV, 446. See also on the in- dignation of prominent Massachusetts Republicans at Motley's removal, Sumner to Morrill, Sept. 8, 1870, Forum, XXIV, 408. ^ Cole, Memoirs, 333. '« Pierce to Sumner, Mar. 15, 1871, Sumner MSS.; N. Y. Herald, Mar. 15, 187 1 ; Lyford, Rollins, 250. ^ Tarbell, Tariff in Our Times, 62. When in the fall of 1869 John Bigelow, then editor of the N. Y. Times, advised the President to recom- mend the removal of the war rates Grant replied: "Oh, we can't do anything of that kind. " Bigelow, IV, 317. =" Rhodes, VI, 278. Schurz, in denying that the Missouri Liberal movement of 1870 was a plot of the revenue reformers, declared that if the issue had been squarely on the tariff the majority against protec- tion would have been more than double that received by the Liberal candidates. Schurz' s Writings, II, 32 f. 39 Tarbell, 55; Nation, Mar. 3, 1870, p. 132; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Apr. 14, May 5, and passim 1871. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY II inent Republican congressmen reflected the views of their constituents on this question.^" Forty three of the Repub- lican members elected in 1870 were classed as tariff reform- ers. Thirty five of this number were from the Middle West.^^ Even among the administration organs in the East there were protests against the injustice of the existing system.^^ Advocates of civil service reform in Congress could get no better satisfaction from the administration. Leaders of the growing an ti -administration faction, like Schurz and Trumbull, gave their hearty support to this cause.^' Schurz, upon assuming his senatorial duties in 1869, thought that the "utter absurdity of our system of appointment to office has this time so glaringly demonstrated itself that even the dullest patriots begin to open their eyes to the necessity of a reform." For himself, he confided to a friend, he had "taken a solemn vow to pitch in for it next winter to the best of my ability. "^^ General Cox in the cabinet was an equally relentless foe of the prevailing system of appoint- ments.^^ But his efforts to take the offices under his juris- diction out of politics naturally aroused the bitterest hostility from party managers, like Cameron and Chandler, and when, in 1870, Grant failed to lend his support the " Rhodes, VI, 275-277; Tarbell, 67; Salter, 363, 364, 379, 383. Emery A. Storrs, of Chicago, a leading Republican "spellbinder" in the national campaigns of 1868-1884, was in 1870 a most pronounced advocate of free-trade. Adams, Storrs, 235 ff . "111., 8; Ohio, 7; Ind., 6; Iowa, 6; Mo., 3; Mich., 2; Minn., i; Wis., i; Kan., i. The Free-Trader, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 24, 1870. The list as given by the Free-Trader is reprinted in Evening Journal Almanac, 1871, p. 43. " For such examples, see N. Y. Times, Mar. 17, 1871; Boston Common- wealth, Feb. 4, 1 87 1. *> Bancroft-Dunning, Schurz' s Political Career, 317; White, 349, 376. ** Schurz to Taussig, Apr. 18, 1869, Schurz' s Writings, I, 483. *' For Cox's views, see his article, "Civil Service Reform" in North Am. Rev., Jan. 1871, pp. 81 ff. 12 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Secretary resigned. ^^ The President seemed mildly favor- able to the reform measure enacted the following year and" made some commendable efforts to secure its execution. But when the salutary innovation was assailed by the keenly interested machine politicians, he failed to give it the backing necessary to its permanent establishment.^^ Furthermore, most serious cause of dissension of all, the conservative Republicans' hope of a liberal southern policy was doomed to sad disappointment as the President came more and more under the influence of the radicals.^* Nevertheless the champions of amnesty and complete res- toration of home rule kept up the fight persistently, despite all administrative indifference or hostility. In the spring of 1870, when the radical managers sought to keep control of Georgia by a further interference in her internal affairs, a strong and successful opposition was made by the conservative senators, led by Trumbull*' and Schurz.^" In the session of 1870-71 the same group made a gallant stand against the Enforcement Act. And in the next ses- sion, when after the launching of the national Liberal movement even the radicals saw the expediency of conces- >^ions, they practically won their fight for general amnesty^ These policies, which created dissensions in official party circles, all tended to alienate the independent reform group " Opposition to fraudulent land claims also entered into Cox's trouble with the politicians. Ewing, Cox, 24 f . Cox claimed later that his resig- nation was due entirely to the failure of the President to sustain him in his efforts at civil service reform. See Cox to Sumner, Aug. 3, 1872, Sumner MSS. Forney wrote to Sumner (Oct. 20, 1870): "Cameron is here. ... He and Chandler have got Cox out of the Interior and got Delano in." Ihid. " Rhodes, VI, 387-390; Fish, 213. " Rhodes, VI, 390; WooUey, "Grant's Southern Policy" in Studies in Southern History and Politics, 182 flf. « White, 298-300; Cong. Globe, 41 Cong., 2 Sess., 1925 ff. '» Bancroft-Dunning, 319; Cong. Globe, 41 Cong., 2 Sess., 2061 ff. "White, 356-360; below, p. 176. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY I3 outside. Indeed, the militarist Executive was a sad dis- appointment to them from the outset. In the first place, his personal tastes and habits were most objectionable. His lack of social accomplishments,^^ his utter inability to speak in public,^' his close associations with financiers of ill-repute,^* and especially his dense ignorance of public affairs must have provoked the impatience, if not the open contempt, of men of their refinement and ability.** Policies did nothing to remove these unfavorable impressions. Instead of the independent progressive administration antic- ipated, they saw a strictly partisan conduct of affairs. The first acts showed how greatly they had been disappointed in their man,^* and later developments could but deepen their disapproval.*' George William Curtis, though the editor of a loyal administration journal, was so good an independent in spirit that he was forced to write in private correspondence in 1870: "I think the warmest friends of Grant feel that he has failed terribly as president — not from want of honesty or desire, but from want of tact and great ignorance."*' The presence of Hoar and Cox in the cabinet had been one of the few ties that held the inde- pendents to the administration.*^ Their early resignations, ^^ Letters of Mrs. J. G. Blaine, I, 48, 90; Badeau, 171-174. '' Badeau, 175 f. '^ (H. Adams) "The New York Gold Conspiracy" in Westminster Review, Oct., 1870, pp. 422 ff. " See, at a little later period, the statement of David A. Wells at the Union League Club in 1873, quoted in Austen, Tyler, 79. Professor Tyler's own observations on Grant in 1871 are much to the same effect. Ibid., 57-62. " Bigelow, IV, 263, 284 f.; Norton's Letters, I, 352; Nation, editorials, Mar. II, 18, 1869. " For a most unfavorable review of Grant's first year, see H. B. Adams, "The Session" in North Am. Rev., July 1870, pp. 29 flf. " Curtis to Norton, June 26, 1870, Gary, Curtis, 213. " Lowell wrote to Stephen in March, 1870, after a visit to Washing- ton: "He [Judge Hoar] and Mr. Cox struck me as the only really strong men in the Cabinet. " Lowell's Letters, H, 56 f. 14 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT virtual dismissals, showed the growing domination of the machine element and the lessening regard for reform sentiments. The action on the tariff seemed an especial challenge to the reformers. The forcing out of David A. Wells, a con- spicuous figure in the reform group, from the position of special revenue agent was resented as a victory for the protected interests in Congress.*" As a result the attacks on the citadel of protection became more persistent than ever. In 1870 the Free Trade League waged a most ag- gressive campaign. Lecturers were kept in the field in the East and Middle West and a great mass of literature was distributed. ^"^ Other measures, much less academic but more effective, were taken against the enemy. In April at a meeting of revenue reformers in Washington plans were laid, it was reported, to defeat prominent protectionist representatives.*^ The Liberal Republican campaign in Missouri that fall*' was in part a free-trade demonstration. Governor McClurg, the regular Republican candidate, was said to have been one of the objectionable high tariff men marked for defeat.*^ Grosvenor, of the Missouri Democrat, was an ardent free-trader (the author of the League's publication, "Does Protection Protect?"), and he put forward this issue so prominently in the Liberal program*^ that the New York Tribune characterized the whole Missouri movement as a free-trade conspiracy.** The tariff reformers ™ Nation, July 7, 1870, p. 2. Atkinson wrote to Sumner (Dec. i, 1870) of Cox's resignation: "I suppose Cox's retirement was forced . . because he is a free-trader. " Sumner MSS. ^' Fifth Report of the American Free Trade League, printed in N. Y. Herald, May 31, 1871; Brinkerhoff, Recollections, 190-205; Lloyd, I, 25. °^ N. Y. Evening Post and Chicago Tribune, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 7, 1870. s^Below, pp.28 ff. " N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 6, 1870. ^ White, 352; Brinkerhoff, 215. " N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 6, 7, 1870. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 1 5 were credited with the defeat of about a dozen Republican congressnaen that fall," and they planned to make the most of their power in pushing for an early reform measure. A meeting was held in New York soon after the election "to determine whether an effort may not with advantage be made to control the new House of Representatives by a union of Western Revenue Reform Republicans with Demo- crats."*^ Speaker Blaine, learning of the projected coali- tion in the House, promised to follow the wishes of the reformers in the composition of the committee on ways and means in case the free-traders would agree not to oppose his reelection to the speakership. The proposition was accepted by the New York conference.*' Blaine's manner of carrying out the agreement failed to satisfy the more pronounced reformers,'" while it caused alarm in protec- tionist circles.'^ The treatment of the civil service during the first two years could be nothing but a cause of offence to the independ- ents. The Springfield Republican said of Cox's resignation that the President dealt with high offices as if they were "a presidential perquisite to be given away upon his mere whim, without regard to the claims of the country. . . . He has simply allowed himself to manage public affairs, as if he were our master and not our steward."'^ A meeting of leading civil service reformers at New Haven, in Novem- ber, 1870, sent Cox a warm letter of appreciation." "iV.F. Tribune, Dec. 13, 1870. ^^ Idem; White, 353. «' White, 354; Brinkerhoff, 205. Of this gathering Godliin wrote thus enthusiastically to his wife: "All our people are in high spirits. The Lord is delivering the politicians into our hands." Ogden, Godkin, II, 100. ''"Springfield Weekly Republican, Apr. 19, 1872; Brinkerhoff, 207. For a more favorable view of Blaine's action, see White, 354. " See editorial in Philadelphia Press, Dec. 7, 1871. '^ Quoted in Merriam, Bowles, II, 129. See also on Cox's resignation, Nation, Oct. 13, 1870, p. 232. "Ogden, II, 95. 1 6 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Amnesty and enfranchisement for those disquaHfied under the Fourteenth Amendment or by state constitutions came to be a leading policy of the independents. They had supported the main features of the party's reconstruc- tion program, including the war amendments, but by 1870 they felt that the limits of legislative action in dealing with the southern problem had been reached. They were strongly opposed to the radical policy of continued coer- cion in the South for the purpose of retaining a party majority. When Georgia's case was before Congress the Nation denounced the tactics of the radicals, led by Butler and Morton, and commended the stand of the conservatives. "The South," it asserted, "ought now to be dropped by Congress. All that paper and words can do for it have been done. . . . Some men in Congress — notably Messrs. Trumbull and Schurz in the Senate — have urged all these considerations with a force and clearness which show that the statesmanship of earlier days is not extinct and that come what will the torrent of folly will never find us without strong manly thinkers to breast it."'* The same journal, a little later, maintained that the only way of ending the evils of negro and carpet-bag rule was to pass an act of general amnesty and leave every community to its normal action, allowing the intelligent portion of it to take its proper place. Most of the political talent and ex- perience of the South were possessed by the disfranchised whites and no settlement would be real which did not give them their natural influence.'^ The Springfield Republican considered Grant's "neglect to do anything important for the restoration of good feeling and loyalty at the South" the worst of his many mistakes.'^ The President's inept and undignified conduct, the dicta- tion of protected interests in tariff legislation, the prevalence " Nation, Apr. 28, 1870, p. 266. " Ibid., May 19, 1870, p. 314. '« Editorial in April, 1871, quoted in Merriam, II, 127. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 1 7 of scandalously unfit appointments, with the smothering of all serious attempts to establish an efficient merit system, and the continuation of a narrowly partisan and a cruelly unjust southern policy all tended inevitably to range the independent reformers with the opposition. Thus by 1871, when plans for the next national campaign were under consideration, the Republicans were confronted by serious factional divisions in all parts of the country. The various influences that have just been noted as tending to alienate both politicians and reformers all entered into this result. Peculiar aggravations existed in certain sec- tions, but in all there were to be found factions or leaders ready for revolt. A survey of conditions within the state organizations by 1871 will further support this conclusion. The Massachusetts organization was stirred to the depths by the attempted domination of General Benjanim F. Butler. As a leading member of the congressional clique with a strong, mysterious influence over Grant,'' this un- scrupulous, ever-pushing demagogue had soon secured the lion's share of the state patronage.'' In 1871, with the administration's backing and the support of the labor ele- ment, he put himself forward vigorously as a candidate for governor." The ensuing contest threatened to divide the party. Prominent Republicans issued a "manifesto" de- nouncing Butler's candidacy, and leading organs assailed his pretensions with much bitterness.'" But, contrary to "Hoar, I, 361 f.; Butler, Butler's Book, 853-855. Grant requested Badeau in 1870 to be sparing in his criticism of Butler in his military history. See Grant to Badeau, Oct. 23, 1870 and Badeau's comments on Grant's attitude towards Butler's military record. Badeau, 471 f. "Hoar, I, 362 f.; Pierce, IV, 498. ""The Butler Canvass" in North Am. Rev., Jan. 1872, pp. 147 ff.; Poore to Sumner, July 3, Sept. 13, 187 1, Sumner MSS. '» Rice to Sumner, Sept. 18, 1871, Sumner MSS; Robinson, " Warring- ton" Pen Portraits, 132-134, 439-450; Pierce, IV, 494 f.; Mass. Weekly Spy, Sept. I, 8, 15, 1871; iV. Y. Herald, Sept. 25, 1871. 3 1 8 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT expectation, Butler submitted with good grace to defeat in the state convention and the organization, much to the disappointment of the Democrats, remained united. ^^ In New Hampshire by 1870 open hostiHty to the "ma- chine," directed by E. H. Rollins and W. E. Chandler, staunch administration men, had developed over the dis- tribution of the patronage and the general conduct of party affairs in the state. *^ The factional differences in New York, the most conspic- uous and the most destructive to the party in the East, were promoted by Grant's unsteady policy towards the rival senators^ from this pivotal state. Fen ton, who had the support of the "Tammany Republicans,"^* at first enjoyed the President's favor and disposed of most of the offices.^* But in spite of all his adroitness, he soon lost to Conkling,*' who seems to have been a man after the Presi- dent's own heart.*' The first open trial of strength between the rival leaders came in the Senate in 1870 over the con- firmation of a close personal friend of the President for collector of the port of New York, for whom a Fenton man had been removed. Conkling now championed the ad- ministration, and after a heated debate, filled with scandal- ous personalities,^' he was sustained by a decisive vote. This appointment, a disgracefully unfit one,*' was followed " Hoar, I, 349; Boston Commonwealth, Sept. 30, 1871. "2 Lyford, 221-223, 232. ^ For excellent contemporary estimates of Fenton and Conkling, see Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 15, 1871. «< Members of the Republican organization in the City who were supposed to be in league with the ring. Nation, Oct. 20, 1870, p. 251; Alexander, Pol. Hist, of N. 7., Ill, 250 f. ** Conkling, 317, 329. "For Conkling's version of this, see his Cooper Institute speech (July 23, 1872) in N. Y. Times, July 24, 1872, and for Fenton's reply, see his speech of October 14, 1872, in N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 15, 1872. " Conkling, 326. " Stewart, Reminiscences, 255-257. " See Eaton's report, quoted in Rhodes, VI, 383 n. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 1 9 by a wholesale proscription of Fentonites.^" In the state convention that fall, Conkling, after being advised by the President,'' overcame the opposing faction by a free use of the patronage club.'^ In revenge, the Fenton men took an indifferent, if not hostile, attitude toward the party's state ticket.^' The next year, to strike directly at the strength of the opposition, the administrationists undertook the reorganization of the New York City central committee of which Greeley was chairman.'^ This was readily accom- plished through the all persuasive argument of the federal patronage and a committee entirely subservient to the Conklingites was secured.'^ But the old committee refused most emphatically to recognize the new city organization.'^ This factious strife culminated in the state convention of 1 87 1 with a complete victory for the administration forces. The main issues were the selection of a temporary chairman and the decision between the rival delegations from the City. After an exciting contest, the Conkling candidate was chosen chairman and the credentials committee made up accordingly. By the direct interference of Conkling, a compromise between the rival factions was prevented, and both were allowed to take part in the convention, but the reorganized committee only was to be recognized in future. Thereupon the Fenton-Greeley delegation left the hall in »» Eaton's report, in Rhodes, VI, 383n; Alexander, III, 250. " See Grant to Conkling, August 22, 1870, Conkling, 328. »2 Nation, Sept. 15, 1870, p. 162. »' Conkling, 330 f . »< N. Y. Times, Jan. 6, Apr. 18, 1871. "' N. Y. Evening Post, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 30, 1871. '* At a meeting of the old committee, Apr. 6, resolutions were adopted denouncing the state committee's action and refusing to submit to it. Greeley at that time offered a substitute resolution that the committee would submit for the good of the party, but it received little support. Resolutions were also offered at this time, but were not acted upon, condemning the leading administration policies and praising Senator Fenton's work in the custom-house investigation. N. Y. Times, Apr. 7, 1871. 20 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT g^eat wrath, and held an indignation meeting by them- selves. '' Among those participating in this seceding gath- ering were a considerable number who the next year took a prominent part in the Liberal revolt.'' The action of the convention completed the factional breach ; New York Re- publicans were now separated definitely into administration and an ti -administration wings.'' The time, however, was not yet ripe for a new party movement. The opposition wing gave the state ticket a moderate support^"" and the election, coming most opportunely for the administration just in the midst of the Tweed exposures, resulted in a good majority for the party.'"' Still the old differences remained ; the administration's organ continued to abuse the opposing leaders,'"^ and the "outs" attributed all their woes to the direct interference of the President in state politics."" There was no real assurance that Grant could carry the state in 1872. In Pennsylvania the Cameron-Curtin rivalry appears. Since the war, the contests of these leaders had kept their state organization perturbed.'"^ With the ascendancy of Cameron as a member of Grant's inner circle the followers of Curtin, who was then minister to Russia, were almost completely driven from office.'"' Thus in Pennsylvania, as " White, Autobiography, I, 164-167; Nation, Oct. 5, 1871, p. 217. " N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 29, 1871, gives a full account of the proceedings of the bolters. »' Cf. Nation, Oct. 19, 1871, p. 249; Fish to Washburne, Oct. 7, 1871, Washburne MSS. '■'"> N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 30, 1871. Greeley and leading Tammany Republicans took part at a Republican mass meeting in the City on October 25, N. Y. Times, Oct. 26, 1871. "1 Alexander, III, 275. "" See, for instance, the attack on Fenton in N. Y. Times, Nov. i6. 1871. 'M Blaine, II, 520. '" McClure, II, 203-217; S. A. Perveance to Washburne, Jan. 5, 25, i869,Washburne MSS. !» McClure, II, 270. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 21 in New York, a large and dangerous anti-administration faction was fostered. Outcasts though they were from presidential bounty, they were able at times to exert a decisive influence in state politics.'"* By 1871 Governor Geary, having broken with Cameron, was an outspoken critic of the administration, i"' and there was developing a marked opposition in all sections of the state.'"^ In the Middle West there was manifested a growing dis- content with the management and policies of the party and a marked tendency toward independent action. Ohio, as will appear,!"' was one of the chief centers of the inde- pendent movements of 1870-1871 which culminated in the calling of a national Liberal convention. Among the old and tried Republican leaders in Illinois and Wisconsin there was great dissatisfaction with the conduct of affairs at Wash- ington. i'" In 1871 Governor Palmer engaged, somewhat unreasonably, "1 in a controversy with the President over the use of federal troops during the Chicago fire,''^ which seems to have been a chief cause of his joining the Liberals the next year."' The leadership of Senator Zachariah Chandler, always a right-hand man of the administration, had produced bitter feeling among Michigan Republicans. Former leaders, like Austin Blair, dissatisfied with party management and embittered by long thwarted ambitions, were well prepared for a bolt."^ In Iowa, Senator Harlan, "'McClure, II, 257, 273. "" See interview in N. Y. Herald, Apr. 12, 1871. "s McClure, II, 333. i°» See below, p. 47. ""Greene, "Some Aspects of Politics in the Middle West," 72 f.; White, 344, 349; Morehouse, 97-99. "' See editorials in Atlantic Monthly, Jan., Feb., 1872, pp. 128, 255. "^ Palmer, Recollections, 366 ff.; Koerner to Trumbull, Dec. 28, 1871. Trumbull MSS. "3 Moses, Illinois, II, 813; CuUom, 192. '" Dilla, 99-101, 114-115, 123-127; Stocking, Rep. Party in Mich., 90; A. Williams to Sumner, Dec. 28, 1871, Sumner MSS. 22 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT an ardent and indiscriminate supporter of the administra- tion, was defeated for reelection in the winter of 1871-1872 under conditions of unusual personal bitterness.'" An opposition faction, led apparently by the ostracized ex- Senator E. G. Ross, was developing in Kansas."^ Senato- rial contests"' were also partially responsible for the trouble in this state. Nebraska Republicans had troubles of long standing. In 1870 a bolting faction, led by Senator Tipton, joined with the Democrats in opposing the reelection of a Republican governor, and the next year this governor was impeached and removed from office."' In California a sentiment of opposition to the administration office-hold- ing clique was developing within Republican ranks. "^i' In the South the partisan radical policy was fast driving native whites, whether of Democratic or Whig antecedents, into an opposition party, '^'' while disputes over the patronage were causing disturbances among the carpet-bagger politi- cians. In Texas, in 1869, with rival Republican candidates in the field, the administration came out openly for Davis, the radical, against Hamilton, the conservative. Federal officials who supported Hamilton were promptly removed. '^"^ Florida radicals were never harmonious ; they quarreled from the first over the distribution of federal and state offices. '^^ So badly were they divided in 1870 that the conservative opposition was able to gain a clear victory in the state elec- "* Brigham, Harlan, 260 ff.; Nation, Jan. 18, 1872, p. 34. "« Ross to Trumbull, Feb. 21, 1872, Trumbull MSS. '" Crawford, Kan. in the Sixties, 345-347. "» Watkins, Hist, oj Neb., Ill, 53-55, 62. "' F. M. Pixley to Trumbull, Dec. 22, 1871, Trumbull MSS. ^'' Cf. Hamilton, Reconstruction Period, 541. ^^ Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Tex., 267-282. N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 6, 1869. The Sumner MSS. for this year contain a number of letters from Texas radicals to Sumner, regarding the removal of conservative office-holders, and other campaign details. "■'' Davis, Reconstruction in Fla., 542, 610; Wallace, Carpet-bag Rule in Fla., 126. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 23 tion.^^ While sharp practices kept the carpet-bag crowd in office for the time being, it was evident that they could not much longer retain their grip on the state."^" Native Republicans in North Carolina, like the Helper brothers"^ and Daniel R. Goodloe,i^' were from the first opposed to the radical tendencies. Troubles over federal offices, as usual, seem to have aggravated the discontent.^^^ Georgia through radical abuses and dissensions had passed into the control of the Democrats in 1870.'^' The Republicans in Louisiana, where the abuses of carpet-bag and negro rule reached their height,^''' were contending in violently hostile factions. In 1871 the faction led by the notorious Governor Warmoth effected a coalition with the disfranchised Demo- crats against the "custom-house" administration faction. i'" The strife for leadership between their Senators divided the party in Mississippi. Senator Alcorn, though elected governor by the radicals in 1869,1'! was an ante-bellum resident and an old-line Whig; and he scornfully resented the pretentions to political ascendancy of General Ames, his carpet-bagger colleague. ^'-^ The opposition in South Caro- lina, composed of Democrats and conservative Republicans, in the "Union Reform" movement of 1870 made a hard but 1" Davis, 618 ff. i"/6ii.,629. '26 N. Y. Tribune, June 11, 1869, quoting Raleigh Standard; Bassett, Anti-Slavery Leaders in N. C, 27 f. 126 Worth to Goodloe, May 8, 1868, Correspondence of Jonathan Worth (Hamilton ed.), II, 1196; Hamilton, "The Election of 1872 in North Carolina" in South Atlantic Quart., XI, 144. •"Goodloe to Sumner, May 11, 1869, Sumner MSS.; Hamilton, "Election of 1872," 144; Bassett, 56. "8 Avery, Hist, of Ga., 468; the Sumner MSS. for 1869 contain much correspondence on the patronage squabbles in Georgia. 12' Cf. Rhodes, VII, 104. "0 Phelps, Louisiana, 369; Annual Cyclopedia, 1871, pp. 472-474; Fortier, Hist, of La., IV, 117. "1 Garner, Reconstruc. in Miss., 243, 246. "2 Ibid., 291. 24 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT unsuccessful attempt to wrest the state from utterly corrupt radical control.^'' In Alabama in 1870 the Democrats and Conservatives triumphed, largely owing to the dissensions between carpet-baggers and native Republicans.'^'^ It was, however, less the factional divisions in the lower South than the coalitions in the northern ex-Confederate and border states in 1869-70 that brought into being a new national party. Here the racial problem was less acute, and military control was therefore earlier withdrawn, facilitating the political overthrow of the radical minority.''^ In Arkansas the corrupt, violent, and proscriptive carpet- bag government ^'' aroused a factional opposition with which leading Democrats cooperated in the hope of securing universal amnesty and reform. In April 1869, certain members of the legislature, "old whigs and disaffected Republicans, ""' taking the name "Liberals," adopted res- olutions bitterly denouncing the state officers, repudiating the radicals as not truly representing the Republican party, and urging all citizens to aid the Liberals in purifying the party organization. i'* Democratic leaders, like Judges Watkins and English and A. H. Garland, favored a coalition with this Republican faction.'*' In October, Governor Clayton sought to forestall such a coalition by promising the earliest possible enfranchisement and a reform in expendi- ^'^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 681; Reynolds, Reconstruc. in S. Car., 139-150; O'Connor, O'Connor, 35-37. ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 15; ^XevaXng, Reconstruc. in Ala., -j^i. '■^ Cf. Hamilton, Reconstruction Period, 501 f. In Kentucky the open break in the party did not come until the state convention in March, 1872. Warden, Chase, 730 f.; Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 429. ''° See Hempstead, " Arkansas from 1861 to 1909 " in South in Building of the Nation, HI, 322-327. '" The characterization of the N. Y. Tribune. See editorial May 25, 1869. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1869, p. 30. "' Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 93. X LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 25 tures."" Nevertheless a permanent Liberal organization was formed in the same month."i In the election of 1870, as a result of the division of the Republicans, the Democrats made considerable gains and the Liberals elected nine mem- bers to the legislature."^ Thereafter two openly hostile Republican factions were recognized — the regulars or "minstrels" and the opposition "Liberals" or "brindles.""' The latter faction was the basis of the Liberal Republican party in the state in 1872.1" The President followed his usual course of removing from federal offices all supporters of the opposition."^ Another local movement which helped to prepare the way for a new national party was that of the Virginia "True Republicans" in 1869. In this state strong oppo- sition developed to the election of Wells, the radical provisional governor, by reason of his support of the dis- franchising clauses in the new constitution. He also in- curred the enmity of rivals in his own party."' The regular Republican convention nevertheless nominated him in March, whereupon the dissenters, led by William Mahone, effected a rival organization under the name of "True Republicans" and placed a ticket in the field headed by Gilbert C. Walker, then a moderate Republican but friendly with the Conservative leaders."' The Conserva- tives (the designation taken by the opposition in the state, "0 Harrell, 94; Annual Cyclopedia, 1869, p. 30. "1 Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 25. '*^ Ibid., 1870, p. 32. "'Harrell, 96; Johnson, "The Brooks-Baxter War" in Pubs, of Ark. Hist. Assoc, II, 122. i« Harrell, 123. "^Ibid.,iiii. i« Eckenrode, Pol. Hist, of Va. during Reconstruc, 116 f. "' Ibid., 1 19 f. Walker, originally a Douglas Democrat, was a native of Southern New York. He had served in the Union army and re- mained in Virginia after the war. See editorial in N. Y. Tribune, July 8, 1869; Smith, Executives of Va., 387. 26 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT including the Democrats, following the war), who had al- ready made nominations, reassembled in April and, after some opposition, decided to receive the resignations of their candidates and to take no further action. Later, in June, they issued an address urging support of the Walker ticket."' The coalition thus effected on the basis of opposition to white proscription and of political jealousy was most successful; the Walker ticket won by over 18,000, and the objectionable clause of the constitution was defeated by an overwhelming majority."' During the campaign the "True" faction maintained that they were loyal supporters of the ad- ministration, and the Conservative papers resented the efforts of northern Democratic organs to represent the result as a victory for their party. ^^^ For a time Grant seemed well disposed toward the new movement, ^^"^ but all the influence of radical leaders, like Boutwell, was brought to bear against this as against all other anti-proscriptive coalition move- ments.i*^ The Virginia movement was later held, probably with essential correctness, to be a real beginning of Liberal Republicanism.'^' Governor Walker was sup- ported for vice-president in the Cincinnati convention on the ground that he was "the first to make a successful Liberal '** Pearson, Readjuster Movement, 21; Eckenrode, 123 f.; Goode, Recollections, 100 f.; Massey, Autobiography, 42. The changed attitude of the Conservatives was due to the decision of the President to allow the disfranchising clauses of the constitution to be voted on separately. "'Eckenrode, 125; Annual Cyclopedia, 1869, p. 713. ''" See General Imboden's letter to N. Y. Tribune, May 22, 1869; also N. Y. Tribune editorial, July 16, 1869. 161 Washington Correspondent in ibid., Aug. 12, 1869. IK Ibid., July 15, 16, 1869; Boutwell to Sumner, July 19, 1869, Sumner MSS. Conkling in the Senate debate, in January, 1870, on the admission of Virginia said that the result of the election in that state was due to the mistaken notion that the administration favored the coali- tionists. Cong. Globe, 41 Cong., 2 sess., 383. 1" Goode {Recollections, loi) and Smith (Executives of Va., 387) in referring to the Walker faction at this time as "Liberal Republicans" are anticipating in name, at least. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 2/ movement, "1" and during the campaign of 1872 Walker and other Liberal leaders in Virginia took every opportunity to claim the honor of priority .1^^ But whatever its direct relations to the national opposition movement, the result of the Virginia coalition was most significant at the time as showing the trend of sentiment against the continu- ation of radical control. "The Virginia election," wrote John W. Forney, "is the worst blow we have had since the failure of impeachment. . . . There is great danger that we shall lose the whole South; and if so, we are gone in the North.""" The New York Herald interpreted this elec- tion to mean that the conservatives had "developed a new party organization, which, if followed up by the anti-radical elements throughout the Union, may soon give us the dominant national party of the future."^" A similar movement followed in Tennessee. Here the Republicans were divided into conservative and radical factions over the pressing question of the time and extent of the removal of political disabilities. In the election of 1869 the Democrats had an understanding with the conservative candidate, Senter, then acting governor, by which he was to have their full support in return for the exercise of his dis- cretionary power in allowing them to register. The re- sult was an overwhelming conservative triumph."* The '" N. Y. World, May i, 1872. '** See Walker's interview and speech at Fifth Avenue Conference, N. Y. Tribune, June 21, 22, 1872; report of Liberal mass meeting at Richmond, Richmond Whig and Advertiser, June 28, 1872. Senator Conlcling in a campaign speech in 1872 said that Liberal Republican movements had first been tried in Virginia, West Virginia and Tennessee. Conlding, 442. The Missouri Republican said (Oct. 30, 1871) that Walker, Senter (of Tenn.) and Brown (of Mo.) were all Liberal Re- publicans. "* Forney to Sumner, July 16, 1869, Sumner MSS. '" N. Y. Herald, July 8, 1869. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1869, pp. 662 f.; Folk, "Tennessee Since the War" in South in Building 0} the Nation, II, 537; Jones, "Reconstruction in Tennessee" in Why the Solid South? 214 f. 28 THE LIBEIfAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT next year, in the first state election under the new constitu- tion, the Democrats were firmly established in power."' In West Virginia in the campaign of 1870 the Democrats and conservatives, putting forward the plea of a "white man's party" and taking full advantage of a favorable interpretation of the Enforcement Act by a Democratic judge, were able to defeat the radicals.^^" It was in Missouri, however, that factional strife led most directly to a national Liberal movement. Party insurgency here was due partly to an oppressively prescriptive radical policy and partly to dissatisfaction over federal appoint- ments. Early in the war the Union party in Missouri was divided into definite radical and conservative fac- tions. '^^ The radicals, securing complete control of the constitutional convention of 1865, instituted a sweeping proscription of all those in any way concerned in the rebellion.i^^ Such a policy was opposed to the political interests as well as to the principles of conservative leaders. At St. Louis, in December, 1866, the more liberal element of the party, responding to the widespread complaints at the restrictive clauses, set on foot a movement for universal amnesty and enfranchisement.'*' B. Gratz Brown, origi- nally a Benton Democrat'^^ and in the front ranks of the Union and anti-slavery men during the war,"* took the lead in this opposition to radical policies. With the coming of Carl Schurz to St. Louis the next year the liberal cause in Missouri secured another efficient champion."* Schurz's views in this matter were known. In the last Republican ^^^ Annual Cydopedia, 1870, pp. 709 f. "» IHd., 751-753; Callahan, Hist, of W. Va., 167. i« Harding, "Missouri Party Struggles in the Civil War Period" in Rep. Am. Hist. Assoc, 1900, I, 98; Smith, Rollins, 34-38. "2 Harding, 102; Switzler, Hist, of Mo., 454-459, 464. ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 517; Switzler, 460. '" Switzler, 277. "* Harding, 97. 1* Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 517. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 29 national convention he had secured the adoption of a resolution favoring the removal of rebel disqualifications so soon as safe and practicable."' Within two years he was elected to the United States Senate, after a bitter contest with the radical "boss," Charles D. Drake, as the represen- tative of the liberal faction .1** By i87 QJJi£ differences over enfranrhisgm ent had divided the party in the stat e into distinct "Radic-al-^^-aadl^iLiberaLlljjdngs."^ The action of the state convention in August of that year precipitated the party's disruption. The Radicals, so their opponents said, had used most reprehensible tactics, packing the convention with their adherents by manipulat- ing the negro vote and by holding "snap" caucuses.^'" The main question before the convention was that of the amendments to the state constitution, then before the voters, for the removal of disabilities. ^''^ After a heated discussion, the Radical resolution, approving the submission of the amendments and declaring for enfranchisement "as soon as it can be done with safety to the State," was adopted by a majority of ninety seven over the Liberal substitute, declar- ing " unequivocally in favor of the adoption of the Constitu- tional Amendments." Thereupon the two hundred and fifty Liberals withdrew and organized a separate convention. An attempt by the regular convention to compose the dif- ferences by a conference committee failed, and the Liberals named a ticket of their own, headed by Gratz Brown for governor.!''' T>g_Jgf)prQl patranag«>— ar as another influence creating jji-Tirniinnn in thr Min'-iniiri nrcnni^fl-ti'^n WiUiam McKee, owner of the Missouri Democrat, the chief Republican organ i"Schurz, III,284f. ^^'^ Ibid., 292-301; Schurz's Writings, I, 473-481. «9 Switzler, 469. "» Schurz's Writings, I, 513 f. »" Switzler, 468 f . 1" Ibid., 470 f.; Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, pp. 519 f. 30 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT in the state, was so indignant at having his regular organiza- tion selections for federal positions passed over for the President's personal friends, who had no other claim on the party, that he championed the insurgent movement to show his power.i" The sentiment for tariff reform among Missouri Republicans, as already noted,"* was probably an additional factor of some weight in producing the Liberal bolt. The Democrats, kept in a hopeless minority through the operation of the test-oath clause, adopted at this time what was termed the "passive policy," an abstention for the time being from open party activity."^ In the campaign they heartily supported Brown, and their leading paper, the Missouri Republican, finally declared for the Liberal ticket.!'* _y The_M\ssQuxL£ampaigi)r-wzs conductednnosT'vigorously i gnH__ prniispH a ttpntinn t hrniighn u t the rniintiy .^''' The Liberals issued an address, written by Schurz, in which they unsparingly arraigned the Radicals for their illiberality, party trickery, and corruption in office; and claimed them- 1" McDonald, Hist, of Whiskey Ring, 28-32; W. M. Grosvenor's letter to N. Y. Herald (Nov. 17, 1875) on the history of the whiskey ring, also printed in McDonald, 39 ff. McKee, on the formation of the ring the following year, took his paper back to the administration side. Grosvenor, letter as above and quoted in McDonald, 40. "•Above, p. 14. 1" The Democratic members of the legislature recommended such a policy in March and it was officially proclaimed by the state committee in August. Switzler, 469 f.; Mo. Republican, Aug. 14, 1870. The Republican said editorially, June 30, that it thought that nine-tenths of the Democrats of the state were opposed to the naming of a ticket. 1'* At first the Republican was an unfavorable critic of the Liberal leaders, see editorials, Sept. 5, 6, 1870, but later it came out fully for Brown, editorials Sept. 29, Nov. 3, 1870. "' Brown wrote to J. R. Doolittle, Oct. 17, 1870, that they had a most bitter fight because it meant death to the "rings," and "because it has its ulterior significance." Doolittle Papers, copy in Mo. Historical Society Library and printed in Mo. Hist. Rev., XI, 11 f. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 3 1 selves to represent the true Republican party of Missouri."' Schurz_ at thejtar t evidently had hoped to prevent a break ^ith_J: hp ad mini stration. Before leaving the capitaTTo^ attend the state convention he had written to Grant a most conciliatory note in which he expressed regret over their differences on the San Domingo question and assured the President that the Senator's personal attitude had been misrepresented."^ Shortly after the convention, in a letter to Secretary Fish, he made this comment on the local situa- tion: "As to our bolt in Missouri, I send you our manifesto. It was a necessary thing."'*" Grant, however, could see nothing but party treason in the action of the Liberals."' The motives of the reformers he could not comprehend ; but he appreciated fully those of the politicians and put the bolters all in this class. '^^ He had had quite enough of bolting coalition movements and he brought to bear against the present one all the weight of administration disfavor. "I regard the movement headed by Carl Schurz, Brown, etc.," he wrote to the collector at St. Louis, "as similar to the Tennessee and Virginia movements intended to carry a portion of the Republican party over to the Democracy, and thus give them control. ... I hope you will see your way clear to give the regular ticket your support."'*' Fed- eral ofifiice-holders in Missouri were freely called upon for funds for the Radical cause and those adhering to the Lib- erals were promptly displaced.'*^ In explaining why he could not leave the state during the campaign, Schurz wrote 1" Schurz's Writings, I, 510 ff. "9 Schurz to Grant, July 17, 1870, ibid., 509. i*» Schurz to Fish, Sept. 11, 1870, ibid., 520. 181 Cf. White, ass- ise See Grosvenor's letter in N. Y. Herald, Nov. 17, 1875. i8« Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 520. I'* L. U. Reavis to Sumner, Dec. I, 1870, Sumner MSB. Senator Drake, in defending the President's action in the Senate, Dec. 16, 1870, declared: "I advised and asked for those removals, and would do it again. " Cong. Globe, 41 Cong., 3 Sess., 7. 32 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT to Senator Carpenter: "You do not seem to be aware that Grant has read me out of the RepubUcan party and is vigorously chopping off the heads of those who are suspected of sympathizing with me. Under such circumstances I have to fight right here. Had not Grant given himself into Drake's keeping and interfered in our affairs, we 'bolters' would have swept almost the whole Republican party with us. But the President fighting us (and fighting himself too), we have to work for we not only want to carry the State, but to carry it heavily. "So you may thank Grant for it if I have no time to devote to the outside world. Oh, there is much wisdom in high places.!"'*^ Despite all official interference in the campaign, the Lib- eral ticket was elected by over 40,000 majority and the suffrage amendments were adopted overwhelmingly. ^^^ The new congressional delegation was composed of four Democrats, three Radicals, and two Liberals.*^^ In the legislature the coalitionists had complete control, '^'^ the Democratic members alone having a majority on joint ballot. The Democrats secured the election of their candidate for speaker, and that of their redoubtable champion, F. P. Blair, Jr., to fill a vacancy in the United States Senate.^^' Schurz's speech in the Senate in December,^'" in which he presented an elaborate exposition and defense of the "Mis- souri movement," made it clear that his break with the 1*^ Schurz to Carpenter, Oct. 20, 1870, Schurz's Writings, I, 520 f. "* Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 521; Switzler, 468 f. ^^'' Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 521. '"The membership was as follows: Senate — Democrats 13; Fusion (elected by the united votes of Dems. and Libs.) 3; Liberals 6; Republi- cans 12. House — Dems. 77; Fus., 12; Libs. 20; Reps., 24. Switzler, 471. "' Ibid., 471 f.; Smith, Rollins, 56 f. !'» Schurz's Writings, II, 2 ff. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 33 administration was complete,"^ and that he regarded party ties very lightly. So by the end of the second year of Grant — the President of whom the Republicans had had such high expectations — the party was confronted by dissensions or actual divisions in every section of the country. The leading Democratic organ thus graphically and gleefully pictured the situation of the enemy: "Greeley and Fenton against Grant and Conkling, Butler and anti-Butler, Cameron and anti-Cam- eron, Sherman and anti-Sherman, Harlan and anti-Harlan, Schurz and haters of Schurz, Warmoth and Dunn, Hamilton and Davis — truly is not the Republican party a united band of brothers." "^ And an influential independent Republican editor warned the President that if he expected to be re- elected he should begin at once to make up with leaders like Sumner, Schurz, Trumbull, and Fenton, all of whom represented strong elements in the party .^^^ Other keen observers, of Republican affiliations, expressed similar sentiments in private correspondence.*'* 1" Senator Howe, of Wisconsin, wrote to Sumner (Oct. 25, 1870): "I fear Schurz is gone 'hook, line, bob and sinker.'" Sumner MSS. Schurz, in private conversation, thus defined his position in December, 1870: "I have taken my political life in my hand. I have resolved to act as if I were to end my career with this term in the Senate; to be in- dependent, true to my real convictions, and not hesitate to say and do what I think to be right on account of any regard for a reelection." Austen, Tyler, 53. i«2 N. Y. World, Sept. 30, 1871. 193 Cincinnati Commercial, May 3, 1871. "* Various letters to Sumner, preserved in the Sumner MSS., express such views: Bigelow wrote from Paris (Oct. 2, 1870) that every one told him that Grant could not be reelected; W. S. Robinson (Dec. 23, 1870) feared that the dissensions in Congress would lead to Republican defeat in 1872; George William Curtis (Jan. 14, 1871) thought that the party's supremacy was seriously threatened. If factional divisions in Congress and the state organizations were not soon healed "we are already beaten." Forney wrote (Aug. 24, 1871) : "There is no doubt in my mind that the Republican opposition to President Grant can defeat his reelection if organized under a separate flag.' ' But he was equally certain that it could not prevent his renomination. 4 34 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The weakening influence on the party of factional differ- ences in state organizations and of independent opposition to administration policies had been shown to some extent in the mid- term congressional elections of 1870, as usual a good test of the administration's standing before the coun- try. The Republican majority in the House was reduced from ninety eight in the Forty-first Congress to thirty seven in the Forty-second '^^ and the party lost in addition four senators. ^^^ The Democrats gained sixteen of their repre- sentatives in the four border states of Virginia, Tennessee, West Virginia and Missouri,'^' and their senators in Missouri, Tennessee, West Virginia, and North Carolina. With disappointed factions in nearly every state, whom no sufficient means was taken to conciliate, and with the independents agitating for reforms which were, for the most part, inadequately supported or opposed by the adminis- tration, opposition to the President's renomination was inevitable. During 1871 this opposition showed consider- able strength. The independent press was practically a unit in deprecat- ing an extension of the military politician rule. The New York Herald, viewing the political field "from our inde- pendent and impartial standpoint," presented a formidable catalogue of Grant's failures as administrator and party leader."^ The Nation thought that the President's in- terference to secure Sumner's removal would give "a serious, if not fatal, blow to General Grant's prospects of renomination. "''' This indiscretion, however, was trifling compared with the sins for which this journal held 1'* Evening Journal Alamanac, 1872, p. 48. "' lUd., 1870, p. 29, 1872, p. 43. "' Exclusive of the two Liberal Republican members from Mo. Farther south the Democrats gained seven. Other notable gains were the three New Hampshire members, five in Pa., and three in New York. "» N. Y. Herald, Jan. 6, 1871. See also editorial, Apr. 3, 1871. 199 Nation, Mar. 16, 1871, p. 172. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 35 the administration to account.^"" Bowles, after hesitating so long as he could in the vain hope of better things from the President ,^"1 came out with telling impeachments of Grant's fitness to uphold the party's principles and tradi- tions. The Republican party should have, he thought, a candidate "more in sympathy with its moral and intel- lectual tone, its reforming and progressive traditions, and more earnest, by temperament and associations, for the elevations and improvements in the offices of our govern- ment, and the character of its represenatatives which the people are so earnestly demanding, and the success of republican institutions so grievously needs." He was doubtful if a more suitable candidate could secure the nomination over Grant, but he pledged the Republican to work with those who were seeking that end.^"^ The Cin- cinnati Commerical predicted that after all the scandals and blunders that had thus far marked Grant's presidency there would soon be "evidences of a widespread conviction that he is the man whose candidacy in 1872 cannot be con- sidered endurable."^"' Factional opposition to the President's renomination was not lacking. Charles A. Dana in the Sun, almost from the start, had been condemning the administration's shortcom- ings with his peculiar virulence. ^"^ Governor Geary in his message to the Pennsylvania legislature took occasion to denounce the President's southern policy.'"^ Summer, resorting to bitterest denunciation, used all his powers of persuasion to convince his friends of Grant's utter unfitness for office and of the impossibility of his reelection.^"^ Gree- 2i>» Nation, June 8, 1871, p. 396. 2M Bowles to Colfax, Jan 2, 21, 1871, HolUster, Colfax, 360. 2<« Springfield Weekly Republican, Nov. 17, 187 1. 2<» Cincinnati Commercial, Mar. 18, 1871. 2M Wilson, 413 flf. 2<» N. Y. Herald, Jan. 6, 1871. ^'^ Sumner to Smith, Aug. 20, 28, Sept. 3, 1871, Frothingham, Smith, 318, 321, 323. See also Austen, Tyler, 54. 36 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ley's opposition to a second term for Grant will be noted presently in connection with the former's candidacy for the Republican nomination.^"' Unfortunately for the anti-Grant movement, it seemed impossible to find a candidate who could unite all the oppo- sition elements in the party. The Springfield Republican suggested as acceptable candidates Colfax, Boutwell and Hawley from those supporting the administration, and Adams, Greeley, Cox, Trumbull, Judge Davis, Gratz Brown, and Curtin, of those opposed to it. Any selection from this list, it contended, would provide a more available candidate and a far more capable president. "Indeed," it urged, "as it did not seem safe for the republicans to nominate any other than Grant in 1868, so it is hardly safe for it to renominate him now. It can elect next year almost any one of the men we have mentioned, more easily than it can reelect him, and with a better promise of beneficient results to the country. "2"^ Governor Geary of Pennsylvania, after his reelection in 1870, developed some presidential aspira- tions, which designing friends encouraged.^"^ But the Gov- ernor seems scarcely to have been of presidential caliber, and, despite his strength with the labor element,^'" his candidacy never became formidable. There was a consider- able sentiment, extending even to the independent element, to elevate Colfax to the first place,^" but the Vice-President, by all accounts, was loyal throughout to the head of his party.^'^ Certain of Greeley's especial admirers launched a boom for their favorite at this time which attained to some pro- ^°' See below. '^"^Springfield Weekly Republican, Nov. 17, 1871. ^0" McClure, II, 274. Geary finally gave Grant a "luke-warm sup- port. " Ibid., 277. "<'7Wd.,276. 2" HoUister, 348-355. 358-362. But for Godkin's most contemptuous opinion of Colfax, see Ogden, II, 102. 212 HoUister, 348-350, 355-358, 361-364; Austen, Tyler, 52. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 37 portions. Greeley had been a hearty supporter of Grant in 1868,21' and, in the main, had sustained the administra- tion's policies against its critics until after the state election of 1 87 1."* As a leading member of the Fen ton wing, he naturally was indignant over the use of the federal patron- age in New York.^'^ But he seems to have been most desirous that the party organization should not be broken up by factional strife.^" Early in 1871 a rather definite campaign was started to secure the Republican nomination for Greeley. Cassius M. Clay, at odds with the adminis- tration after his recall from the Russian mission,^'' declared for Greeley in January, either as the Republican or an independent candidate.^'* Theodore Tilton was another original Greeley man.^^' In April Greeley replied to the solicitations of a Kansas correspondent, who purported to speak for many Greeley supporters of that state, in a letter made public in May, that, while in future he desired never to be a candidate for any political position, he proposed "never to decline any duty or responsibility which my political friends shall see fit to devolve upon me and of which I shall be able to fulfill the obligations without neglecting ^" See, for instance, editorial in N. Y. Tribune, May 25, 1868. After the election Greeley had been mentioned for postmaster general. Nation, Nov. 12, 1868, p. 381. '^* IngersoU, Greeley, 512; editorial in N. Y. Tribune, June 21, 1870. 215 N. Y. Tribune, Nov. 10, 1870; Nov. 9, 22, 1871. ™ Reid to Bigelow, Apr. 10, 1871, Bigelow, IV, 488. In January, 1871, in a speech before the city general committee, after a cordial defence of the administration, he ventured "to suggest that General Grant will be far better qualified for that momentous trust in 1872 than he was in 1868." N. Y. Herald, Jan. 6, 1871. Later in the year the Tribune stated that while it was opposed to Grant's renomination, it would support him in that event. N. Y. Tribune, May 6, 1871. '" Clay, Memoirs, I, 451-459. 2'« Ibid., 502. 2" Halstead, "Breakfasts with Horace Greeley" in Cosmopolitan, XXXVI, 700-702. Greeley gave Tilton credit for "inventing" him as a candidate. See Greeley's letter in Golden Age, Aug. 12, 1871. 38 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT older and more imperative duties. "^^'' The issue peculiar to Greeley at this time was that of a single term for the president. He had long been an advocate of this " princi- ple, "^^i and he now brought it forward as a sufficient argu- ment against the propriety of Grant's renomination. In ■ his letter to his Kansas admirer he stated that he had "not yet formed a decided opinion as to the man who ought to be our next Republican candidate for President, but it seems to me advisable that he should be a steadfast, con- sistent believer in the good old Whig doctrine of one Presidential Term." Later in the year, when the Tribune's opposition to Grant became more open, Greeley made much of this argument.^^^ As regards the more widely agitated reform issues of the time, Greeley, the most conspicuous protectionist of his day, was most hostile to all efforts for tariff reduction, and neither in theory nor in practice had he stood for civil service reform ; but he had been the leader in his party from the first in the movement for general amnesty .^^' His position on this issue was especially em- phasized this year by his southern trip. In May he went to Houston, Texas, to deliver an address at the state fair, and took the opportunity to visit the principal southern cities. He was everywhere received well, generally with enthusiasm.^^* In his speeches on public affairs, he pled earnestly for the reconciliation of the sections and declared for immediate and universal amnesty .^^^ At a reception in New York on his return, given by political friends among whom the leaders of the Fenton faction were most promi- 22» N. Y. Tribune, May 30, 1871. ^^ See his article, "The One-Term Principle" in Galaxy, Oct. 1871, pp. 488 ff. '^ See editorials in N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 1 1, 16, 25, 1871. ^' Cf . Linn, Greeley, 217; Ross, "Horace Greeley and the South," 1865-1872, South Atlantic Quarterly, XVI, 325 ff. ^* N. Y. Tribune, May 15, 20, 23; June i, 1871 ; N. Y. Herald, May 22, 1871 ; Ross, "Horace Greeley and the South, 1865-1872, " 333 f . '^ N. Y. Tribune, May 22, 30, 1871. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 39 nent, he set forth at some length his views on southern conditions.^^' Following his southern trip, Greeley was fairly before the country as a candidate to succeed Grant. His particular supporters now declared themselves openly. Tilton's Golden Age^'' and Leslie's Newspaper^^ were most ardent advocates, and C. M. Clay, in a Fourth of July speech at Lexington and in October at the St. Louis fair, presented Greeley's claims as the candidate best fitted to deal with the problems before the country .^^^ Greeley's customary >vestern lecturing trip in the fall was spoken of in some quarters as a "presidential tour."^'" In Chicaga at a supper given in his honor by John Wentworth and Josiah B. Grinnell, both prominent in the Liberal movement the following year, Greeley's nomination by the Republicans was suggested.^'' Leading independent Republican papers also spoke of Greeley's nomination with favor.^'^ But the pretentions of the editor of the Tribune were frowned upon by fellow editors of the administration press. His views of the southern question were held to be mistaken and danger- ous, and in his relations with the opposition faction in New York he was charged with being merely a tool of Tammany politicians.^'' It may well be doubted if Greeley at this time had serious expectations of securing the Republican nomination. His public utterances on the subject certainly 226 iif_ Y. Herald, June 13, 1871; N. Y. World, same date. The speech is also printed in full in Greeley's Letters from Texas, etc. An assembly district "Greeley Club" was formed the same night. »' Golden Age, June 3, 24; July i, 15, 1871. ^'Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, July 15, 1871. '" Clay, I, 502 f ; Golden Age, July 15, 1871. '^'Sunday Mercury, quoted in N. Y. Times, Sept. 4, 1871; N. Y. World, same date. 2" N. Y. Herald, Sept. 13, 187 1. ^^'See, for instance, Cincinnati Commercial, Apr. 15, 20, 1871; Springfield Weekly Republican, June 16, 1871. For Bowles' high regard for Greeley at this time, see Hollister, 361. ™ N. Y. Times, June 8; Nov. 19, 23, 1871; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, ]une 2, 1871. 40 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT show no such attitude of mind,^'* and there is some evidence that in allowing his candidacy to be considered at all he was seeking merely to weaken Grant and to help to secure the nomination of a more desirable candidate, like Colfax.^'^ But whatever his motives, there can be no doubt that the movement started for Greeley at this time was an essential factor in his nomination by the Liberals the next year. It was soon evident that, no matter what candidate was put in the field against him, opposition to Grant's renomination was futile. The President being in full favor with the or- ganization, all of its powerful machinery was set in motion to insure a second term. The patronage was bestowed where it would do the most good, and federal officials were busily employed in seeing that the right sort of delegates were chosen in their districts. ^'^ The Republican organi- zation in the South was then, as it has been ever since, the useful servant of the administration.^'' Morton in advocat- ing Grant's renomination at a serenade given to the Senator in April set the example for the faithful.^'^ In some cases Republicans of advanced views and not in sympathy with many administrative policies, putting the continuation of their party's control above other considerations, made the best of the inevitable. George William Curtis, who was in many respects one in spirit with the independents,^^' had no illusions about Grant's shortcomings but felt, neverthe- less, that it was best that he should be renominated.^*" ^'' See his letter in Golden Age, Aug. 12, 1871, and his speech on his return from his southern trip, N. Y. World, June 13, 1871. 2»Hollister, 355, 361. ™ Cf. Nation, Sept. 14, 1871, p. 172. In July Senator Sherman wrote to his brother that Grant would be renominated. Sherman Letters, 232. '" See editorial in N. Y. World, July 3, 1871. 25« Foulke, II, 197. ^'' For a time evidently, Curtis was thinking strongly of supporting the opposition faction. Harper, House of Harper, 301. "" Curtis to Norton, Mar. 4, 1 87 1 , Cary, Curtis, 215; Curtis to Sumner, Jan. 19, July 28, 1871, Sumner MSS. LIBERAL FACTION IN UNION REPUBLICAN PARTY 4I Gerrit Smith, admitting the President's errors of judgment, considered his renomination absolutely necessary to pre- serve the results of the war by preventing that most-to-be- dreaded calamity of a Democratic rule.^^ Judge Hoar considered Grant "a pretty poor President, "^^ but his scruples and personal grievances were not sufficient to range him with the President's opponents.^^' Certain Republican members of Congress who at times showed strong reform tendencies and were known to be averse to many of the ways of the administration failed to take action to secure a more acceptable candidate.^" The administration forces, on their side, in view of the threatening dangers to the organization from factional division and independent opposition, made some efforts to promote unity and harmony by endorsing reform projects and by attempting to conciliate disaffected party leaders. General Grant, during his first term, while taking up readily enough with some of the most objectionable features of organization politics, seems to have acquired little of the skill and tact so essential to the true party leader. He was thoroughly disgusted with the factious majority in his first Congress, and thought, as he confided to his bosom friend, that fear of the Democrats was all that kept the party from losing the House,^^* but he apparently had no clear idea of leading and harmonizing his majority in their general policy. When he expected the resignation of his Secretary of State in 187 1, he thought that the country and party would be best served by the transfer of the Vice-President to that department.^^* He apparently had slight fears for 2 Ibid., Apr. 10, 30. »' Ibid., Apr. 22, 25. »» Ibid., Apr. 23. 99 Ibid., Apr. 26, 29. i»« Ibid., Apr. 27. loi Ibid., Apr. 30. i"2 Ibid., Apr. 19. lo' Ibid., Apr. 27, 30. iM Ibid., Apr. 30. ii» Ibid., May 3. 106 Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 25. Delaware had no delegates in the convention but George Alfred Townsend, who had gone to the conven- tion as a territorial delegate from the District of Columbia, acted for the State and cast her six votes. See his letter to the Philadelphia Press quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 10, 1872. 62 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT writer in a Chicago magazine strikingly called attention to this situation: "The men whose courage, eloquence, and statesmanship furnished the party with the means of its earliest victory are, with few exceptions, ob- noxious to the President, and are regularly belashed through the columns of his organs; while the party is led by men who first perceived the good- ness of the cause when it achieved success, or men always distrusted by the people supported by a few timid souls deterred by dread of change in political associations from plain political speaking.""" The surviving members of Lincoln's cabinet"* were on the side of the insurgents as were three of the four surviving Re- publican senators who had voted for Johnson's acquittal.^"' Sumner, while not openly committed to the Liberal cause, was generally reported to be a warm sympathizer."" Thus both prominent moderates and radicals among the original Republicans were joined in the new movement, along with a variegated band of political adventurers. A brief con- sideration of the chief supporters of the movement in the different sections of the country makes this clear. Throughout the Middle West there was a marked de- fection of veteran Republicans. In Ohio such men as Cox, Stallo, Hoadly and the Brinkerhoffs^" were arrayed against the administration. In Indiana George W. Julian"^ and "' Wheeler, "President Making" in the Lakeside Monthly, Mar. 1872. Cf. Greene, 73-76. Julian says, with evident rhetorical exaggeration, that "troops of the old Free-Soilers of 1848 and 1852" were in attend" ance at the Cincinnati Convention. Pol. Recollections, 337. '°* Chase, Welles and Blair. Seward apparently made no public declaration before his death in October. See Seward to Conkling, Aug. 12, Conkling, Conkling, 445. The N, Y. Tribune (Sept. 3, 1872) called especial attention to this support. '"'Trumbull, Ross and Fowler. Henderson was at first reported for the Liberals (see Wis. Weekly State Journal, May 7, 1872) but later in the year was the Republican candidate for governor of Missouri. ^'^0 Nation, Mar. 21, 1872, p. 177. '" Judge Brinkerhoff's letter to Stallo in February, strongly endorsing the new movement, is printed in Chicago Tribune, Feb. 12, 1872. ™ See his letter in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 25, 1872. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 63 John D. Defrees"' were likewise opposed to the old party. The defection in Illinois was still more pronounced. Of the leading ante-bellum Republicans, Trumbull, Browning, Davis, Palmer, Koerner, Swett, Herndon, four of the state ofiRcials under Yates and all but one of the existing officials were numbered with the opposition."^ Austin Blair, the war governor, and other prominent Republicans of that period led the bolters in Michigan."^ Minnesota adherents included such staunch free-soilers as Morton S. Wilkinson,"* Charles Sherwood,'^^ and, a little later, the erratic Ignatius Donnelly."^ Josiah B. Grinnell assured Sumner early in April that the ' old guard ' of Iowa were in the new move- ment, and that the best men of the party would be found at Cincinnati."' Senator Tipton of Nebraska, a radical "of approved and superabundant loyal ty"^^" when he entered the Senate in 1867, was foremost among the prominent Republicans of his state now in revolt. ^^^ In California, where the Liberal defection never reached threatening pro- portions, an administration paper commented thus on the designation of Frank M. Pixley as Liberal national commit- teeman: "Mr. Pixley was one of the most zealous and "' For Defrees' career, see ibid., Apr. 30; N. Y. Evening Post editorial, Apr. 26, 1872. He was at this time a resident of the District of Columbia and attended the Liberal Convention as a delegate from that territory. '" Greene, 73 f.; Moses, Illinois, II, 811; Lusk, Eighty Years of Illi- nois, 228. I'sDiila, 140. "« Holmes, III, 86. "' Ibid., 105. "' Donnelly's support had been sought by leaders of both parties in his state and he was apparently considering the Republican congres- sional nomination at one time. See letters during June and July 1872 in Donnelly MSS. See his letter in July, Chicago Tribune, July 18, 1872. "' Grinnell to Sumner, Apr. 9, 1872, Sumner MSS. Cf. on Liberal personnel in Iowa the list given in Clinton Age, Sept. 13, 1872, quoted in Haynes, Third Party Movements, 27. ■^n DeWitt, Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson, 174. i2iWatkins, III, 124. 64 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT efficient men in organizing the Republican party of Cali- fornia. He will now have a chance to show what he can do toward breaking it up."^^ But the Kansas Liberals with such promoters as Preston B. Plumb,"' Edmund G. Ross,i24 Marcus J. Parrott/^* Pardee Butler/^s Samuel J. Crawford,"^ Samuel N. Wood,^^^ and Charles Robinson"' could probably present the most imposing exhibit of dyed- in-the-wool free-soilers. In the East the movement showed equally notable converts. In New England no names had been more re- spected in Republican circles than those of F. W. Bird, Edward Atkinson, W. S. Robinson, Elizur Wright, F. B. Sanborn, and General Banks in Massachusetts,^'" Lafa- yette S. Foster, David Clark, Samuel C. Fessenden, and David A. Wells in Connecticut,^" and Henry O. Kent in New Hampshire. ^'^ New York Liberals could place along with the names of Greeley and Fenton those of Henry R. Selden, Henry A. Foster, William Dorsheimer, F. A. Conkling, Hiram Barney, D. C. Littlejohn, Thomas G. Alvord, and many others who "cradled" the party in the state."' In Pennsylvania the discontented found such 1^ San Francisco Evening Bulletin, May ii, 1872. See also on Pixley and his connection with Liberals, T. Gray to Trumbull, Apr. 7, 1872, Trumbull MSS. ^^ Connelly, Plumb, 224, 1-* Blackmar, Cyclopedia of Kan. Hist., II, 608 f. 125 7M., 11,444. 1-6 Ibid., I, 265; Wilder, 584. 12' Blackmar, Cyclopedia of Kan., I, 475 f. ^^lUd., 11,933. 1^' Blackmar, Robinson, 300. i'" See more complete list in the Mass. letter in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 19, 1872. Banks did not come out openly for the Liberals until August Nation, Aug. 8, 1872, p. 82. "1 See list of Conn. Liberal leaders in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 19, 25, 1872. I'^Lyford, Rollins, 291. "3 See list of signers of the N. Y. letter in A''. Y. Tribune, Mar. 30, and the long list of prominent N. Y. Liberals in N. Y. World, Sept. 2, 1872. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 65 leaders as A^K^J^cClure, John M. Hickman, David Bar- clay,!'^ and, later in the campaign, A. G. Curtin and Galusha A. Grow."* In the South prominent RepubHcans, many of them na- tives, were ranged on the Liberal side. A. W. Bradford of Maryland, who served as the "Union" governor during the years 1862-1865,1'* was the chief Liberal organizer in his state.**' Ex-Senator Joseph S. Fowler, originally a Brown- low supporter, *'* directed the insurgent forces in Tennes- see.*'" Franklin Stearns, the Virginia member of the Repub • lican national committee, was a delegate to the Cincinnati convention, along with Governor Walker and other former Republicans who had put through the coalition movement in 1869."" Senator Alcorn of Mississippi, Joseph E. Brown of Georgia, H. H. Helper and D. R. Goodloe of North Caro- lina, ex-Governors Pease and Hamilton, Senator Hamilton and Judge Stribling of Texas, C. M. Clay of Kentucky and James S. Rollins of Missouri were other notable examples of unionists or scalawags converted to liberalism."* But in addition to these respectable, and in many cases eminent, representatives, the new movement was hampered almost from the start by a set of supporters who could bring nothing but discredit upon any undertaking. The Liberal movement, inaugurated by the reformers, no sooner showed signs of success than the "practical" politicians schemed to exploit it for their own ends. As is always the case with '*" N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 19, 1872; McClure, Old Time Notes, II, 333. 13* Grow came out for the Liberals in August {Nation, Aug. 15, 1872. p. 97) and Curtin in September {ibid., Sept. 19, p. 177). '3« Scharf., Hist, of Md. Ill, 457, 461 ; Biog. Cyclopedia of Md., 33. '" N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 22, 25, 1872. 138 DeWitt, 534. 139 Fowler to Johnson, Feb. 9, 1872, Johnson MSS.; Chicago Tribune, Mar. II, 1872. "» N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 30, 1872. '"List of Southern Liberals in N. Y. World, Apr. 30, 1872; Fielder, Brown, 454; Smith, Rollins, 55. 6 66 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT such new party movements, disappointed office-seekers, members of broken rings and losing factions — political ad- venturers of all shades — hastened to join a chase which promised something in the way of the spoils of office. The large, if not determining, influence of differences over the distribution of patronage in bringing about the party revolt has already been explained."^ In not a few cases the dis- affection of some of the most active promoters of the new party movement can be traced directly to their disappoint- ment in failing to secure office, or to their resentment at removal from office when their faction had gone out of favor. Thus, to cite a few of many possible examples of this sort, the Tamanmy Republicans removed from the custom-house and other offices during the Fenton proscriptions, or whose candidacy for office had been thwarted by their connection with the anti-administration faction, led by that ubiquitous political soldier of fortune, John Cochrane, "^ constituted a conspicuous element of the promoters of the movement in New York and in that state's delegation to Cincinnati.^** George Wilkes, early among the opposition and active at Cincinnati, had been most deeply offended by the admin- istration's refusal to reward his services for the ticket by a foreign mission.^** James M. Scovel, the chief organizer of New Jersey Liberals,"^ had supported the Johnson faction '^^ See above, pp. 17 ff. "' Alexander, Pol. Hist, of N. Y. II, 272; III, 90, 92, 259. '■" See the long list of Tammany Republicans, including many re- moved from federal offices by Grant, in N. Y. Times editorial Apr. 15, 1872. The list of official delegates for New York in the convention con- tains the names of a number who had been removed from federal posi- tions during the Fenton proscriptions, and of others who were noto- riously disappointed office-seekers. Ibid., May 2; N. Y. Tribune, M-Hy 2, 1872. 1* Wilkes to Stanton, June 7, 1869, Sumner MSS.; Wilkes to Sumner, June 9, 12, 1869, May 15, 1870, ibid. "' Scovel to Sumner, Mar. 18, 1872, Sumner MSS.; N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 5, 1872 (item on N. J. Liberals). DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 67 in 1865 for tbe sake of the state patronage, but was later "reconverted" by the radicals."" Failing to get ofifice under Grant, after urgent solicitation, '** he had become, early in 1870, a bitter critic of the administration"' and took part with alacrity in the efforts to start a new party .1^° If the fight were won he trusted, as he confided to Sumner, that those would not be forgotten who had patiently borne the administration's scorn and persecution for the sake of " principle. ""1 J. M. Ashley, an active Ohio Liberal,"^ had been associated with the ultra-radicals in Congress; he had moved the impeachment of Johnson and had put forth every effort to work up a case against the President.^^' A little later, he had been intimately involved in land- speculation scandals, but, largely through Sumner's in- fluence, had been appointed governor of Montana territory by Grant. '°* His removal from that position late in 1869 had made him a bitter enemy of the administration. ^^^ In the South carpet-baggers whose factions had lost in the scramble for federal offices furnished most dubious recruits for a reform movement. Governor Warmoth and his predatory crowd in Louisiana, ^^* and the leading Liberals "' DeWitt, 79, 158. "s Scovel to Sumner, Feb. 5, 1870, Sumner MSS. "'Same to same, Feb. 7, 9, 1870; Mar. 11, 1871, ibid. "» Same to same, Nov. 28, 1871; Jan. 29, Feb. 12, 1872, ibid. '" Same to same, Mar. 21, 1872, ibid. 1'^ Ashley was reported to have brought to the Cincinnati convention a resolution on civil rights for the negroes, drawn by Sumner, N. Y. Tribune, May l, 1872 (item under "Convention Notes"). 163 DeWitt, 147, 152-157, 234. ^^ Nation, Sept. 12, 19, 1872, pp. 162, 178. "* Ashley to Sumner, Dec. 19, 1869, Sumner MSS. Ashley wrote Chase (Aug. 29, 1871) that if the latter was nominated (evidently by the Democrats) he would get a large Republican support. Chase MSS. '"On the abuses of Warmoth's government see Sage, "Reconstruc- tion in Louisiana" in Why the Solid South?, 403-410; Hamilton, Recon- struction Period, 272 ff. 68 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT in Arkansas!^' were typical of this class. There was ob- vious danger that supporters of this stripe might pervert the reformative purposes of the inchoate party. The attitude of the Democratic party was a matter of prime importance to the Liberal movement, which could not hope to succeed without some form of Democratic support.^^' And such support the Liberals might reasonably expect, for the Democrats, owing to the discredited condition of their party, had been unable to profit materially by the dissen- sions and mistakes of their opponents. Their failure to show, either in platform or candidates/^' any real change of heart in 1868, the unwise speeches"" of ex-Confederates like Davis and Stephens, the still more unwise violence of persons identified with the party in the South, "^ and the Democratic opposition to the Fifteenth Amendment, ^^^ all lent color to the oft-repeated charge that the Democracy was still unreconstructed. Under these unfavorable circumstances, certain of the more astute Democratic leaders concluded, even before 1872, that the party's best move was to renounce its past atti- tude toward the war and its results and make a new start. In the Montgomery County convention at Dayton, Ohio, May 18, 1871, Clement L. Vallandigham, the recognized '■" Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 33, 45, 109 f., 123-124. 1** The N. Y. Evening Post said in an editorial Mar. i, 1872: "In order to succeed the Liberal Republican candidates must have very nearly the full vote of the Democrats, and the chief labor of the opposi- tion canvass will now be to devise measures to unite them." ^^ Harper's Weekly, July 25, Aug. 8, 1868, and editorials in following issues during campaign. "» Editorial in N. Y. Herald, May 31, 1871; Hill, Hill, 353; Harper's Weekly, Apr. 22, June 17, 24, 1871. The Mo. Republican (Dem.) said (June 2, 1871) — "It would be difficult to imagine a more stupendous anachronism than the reappearance of Mr. JefTerson Davis upon the stump." "1 For charges of connection of the Ku Klux with the Democratic party, see editorials in Harper's Weekly, Apr. i, 15, Nov. 4, 1871. '*^ Cincinnati Commercial, Feb. 16, 1871. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 69 leader of the peace Democrats, secured the adoption of resor lutions fully accepting the war amendments."^ These resolutions were endorsed the next month, after a con- siderable contest,"* in the state convention. The platform, generally termed the " New Departure," was accepted by the later state conventions of the year"^ and by leading party organs."* The independent press, too, commended the Democrats for at last taking the step that had so long been urged upon them."' But though ridding itself to some extent of the odium of disloyalty, the party was still greatly hampered. Its repentance was held to be insincere while the old leaders remained in control."' The Tweed exposures in New York, characterized by the administration press as typical of Democratic rule,"' were a serious set-back; the party in this state, in particular, was saved from complete dis- credit only by the prompt and firm stand of such Democratic leaders as Tilden and O'Conor in opposing the ring.''" As the time for another national election approached it was thus natural that the Democrats, in view of their own im- potence and the growing dissatisfaction among their op- ponents, should regard some sort of combination with re- bellious Republicans as the most likely means of getting into power. The successful coalitions in the border states 163 Vallandigham, Vallandigham, 436-445. "* Powell, Dem. Party of Ohio, I, 197. Durbin Ward had made a similar proposal the previous year, but his speech did not attract such wide attention. Ward, Ward, 194 ff. ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1871, pp. 90, 392, 416, 482, 493, 517, 547, 556, 621, 775- >«« N. Y. World, June 2, 3, 1871; Vallandigham, 447 f. The Mo. Republican had strongly urged such a course a month before. See editorial Apr. 27, 1871. '^' See, for instance, Springfield Weekly Republican, May 26, June 9, June 30, 1871; Nation, June 8, 1871, p. 396. 168 See editorials in Harper's Weekly, June 3, 10, July 29, 1871. "' Ibid., Aug. 19, 26, Nov. 25; Mo. Democrat, Sept. 4, 20, 1871. ""Alexander, iii, 265-275. 70 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT in 1 869-1 870 had furnished precedents for such a policy on a wider scale, and sentiment in favor of some such al- liance was manifested in Democratic circles in 1871. The Connecticut state convention in January""^ and that of Pennsylvania in May"^ endorsed Schurz's position re- garding disfranchisement as sound Democratic doctrine, the resolutions of the former gathering referring to Schurz as "this eloquent leader of the reformers." After the gen- eral party defeat in the fall elections, leading Democratic papers advised, as the only means of defeating Grant, '^' a union of the opposition. Democrats and Liberal Repub- licans, in which their party should maintain its identity and be given its proportionate influence. But not a few influential Democrats thought it expedient for the party to play a still more humble r61e for the present. They advocated the "passive policy" — the plan that had worked so well in Missouri the previous year— refraining from all action until after the independent Republicans had placed a ticket in the field, and then, if the platform and ticket were acceptable, uniting with them for the overthrow of radicalism. The Missouri Republican came out strongly for this course in October, "^and, as the fall elections brought ^'"■Annual Cyclopedia, 1871, p. 232. i«JWd., 621. 1" N. Y. World, Nov. 18, 20, 24, 1871; western Democratic papers quoted in N. Y. Herald, Nov. 14, 1871; editorials in Harper's Weekly, Nov. II, 18, Dec. 9, 1871 discussing coalition sentiment. George Wilkes had a conference at Washington in December, 1871 with leading Demo- cratic congressmen who expressed favor for a coalition movement in which the "one term principle" and direct election should be leading issues. Spirit of the Times, Jan. 20, 1872; L. D. Campbell to Wilkes, Dec. 8, 1871, Sumner MSS.; Wilkes to Sumner, Dec. 9, 1871, ibid. '"See its editorial: "The Passive Proposition," October 23, 1871. The Republican continued to urge this course up to the time of the Cin- cinnati Convention. In an editorial, Oct. 30, 1871, The Republican said that a Democratic candidate would probably be defeated and the fourth consecutive defeat would destroy the party. It thought that the election of a Liberal Republican was the "most practicable" result to be expected. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 7 1 only continued defeat and discredit, a considerable senti- ment for it developed.''* The New York World, the lead- ing Democratic organ in the East, indignantly spurned the proposal. Such a policy would be contrary to the wishes of the masses of the party. Furthermore, the contention was false that the party was losing ground, for, on the con- trary, it had been steadily gaining since 1868 with the en- franchisement of the South. "^ However, as the fortunes of the new movement seemed constantly to improve and those of the Democrats to become more hopeless with con- tinuing defeats in the spring elections, there could be little doubt how the party would act in case the platform and candidates presented at Cincinnati were at all satis- factory. The Nevada Democratic state committee has- tened, on February 20, to advise the national committee and convention to unite with the Liberals "for mutual cooperation and action.""' Old-line Democrats in all parts of the country were ready to join in such a movement,"* and Democratic congressmen were reported to be a unit in favoring the endorsement of the Liberal nominees."' In the South the party sentiment seemed especially strong for a union of the opposition.**" The World, most jealous for 1'' Montgomery Blair's letter in N. Y. World, Dec. 8, 1871; Harper's Weekly, Dec. 16, 1871; Trumbull to Flagg, Jan. 10, 1872, Miss. Valley Hist. Rev. I, 106; Ross to Trumbull, Feb. 21, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Doolittle's letter, Jan. 13, 1872 in Southern Recorder, Feb. 6, 1872; Memphis Daily Appeal, Jan. 28, 29, 1872; Milwaukee News, Jan. 11, 1872; Iowa "Democratic leader'' in Burlington Hawk-Eye, Nov. 2, 1 87 1, quoted in Haynes, 23. The Mo. Republican said (Nov. 8) that the result of the fall elections was "not encouraging to the uncompro- mising Democratic heart." "«N. Y. World, Dec. 8, 1871. "''Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 567. '"See J. G. Jones to Trumbull, Feb. 24, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Brinkerhoff to Trumbull, Mar. 18, 1872, ibid. "' " Gath's" Washington letter in Chicago Tribune, Mar. 23, 1872. ^^i Memphis Daily Appeal, Jan. 18, Feb. i. Mar. 9, 1872; Southern Recorder, Feb. 6, 1872. 72 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT the integrity of its party's organization, deprecated at first any "dicker" between the Democrats and the Liberals^*' and continued for some time to treat the new movement coldly.^*^ But after the Cooper Institute meeting even the World declared that "If this great and spirited meeting is a foretaste of Cincinnati, the Democratic party can well afford to wait and watch. "'^^ The organizers of the Liberal movement, on their side, had no desire for an alliance with the Democratic party as such. Schurz, persistently distrustful of the Democrats,^*^ was greatly chagrined when they secured the fruits of the Liberal triumph in Missouri. ^^^ Governor Brown's speech immediately after the election was interpreted as commit- ting him to the Democrats,"^ and the subsequent election Df Frank Blair, of all men, to the United States Senate seemed to the administrationists indisputable proof that the Liberals were playing into the hands of the old enemy.^^' The other coalition victories in the border states were 1" N. Y. World, Dec. 22, 1871. i«2 Ibid., Feb. 24, Mar. 12, 1872. '*' Ibid., Apr. 13. The World admitted (Apr. 6) in praising the New york Liberal letter that its criticism had been too emphatic. ^^ See, for instance, Schurz's Writings, II, 66-69, 296-299. '** Bancroft-Dunning, 341. Schurz wrote to Grosvenor (Dec. 25, [872) when Blair was a candidate for reelection: "Blair's first election ^as the first blow that staggered the Liberal movement. You must have elt with me how severe that blow was. That election appearing as the irst fruit of our victory in Missouri deprived the movement of half of :he credit it deserved, and placed us on the defensive." Schurz's Writings, II, 449. '** Schurz to Grosvenor, Dec. 13, 1870, Schurz's Writings, II, 2. senator Drake said of Brown in the Senate, Dec. 16, 1870: "He has ;one to the Democracy and may the Lord have mercy on his soul!" Cong. Globe, 41 Cong., 3 Sess., Appendix, 5. See also Morton's speech )n Feb. 23, 1872. Cong. Globe, 42 Cong., 2 Sess., 1179. The Missouri Republican (Nov. 10, 1870) called the election of 1870 a "Democratic victory." "'Forney to Sumner, Oct. 24, 1871, Sumner MSS.; N. Y. Times, Vlar. 27, 1871. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 73 rightly looked upon as resulting in the Democratic in- terest.i*' It was thus natural that the Liberals should fear such gift-bringing allies. Bowles feared that the "ghost of Democracy" would keep Republicans from the movement and that it would be hard to establish a reform party unless the Democrats would "formally throw up the sponge. "'*' Following the example of the Ohio Liberals in the fall, the Liberals in New Hampshire and Connecticut refused to support the Democratic candidates in their state elections in February and March, in spite of earnest appeals from Democratic papers and leaders''" for such proofs of their good will. The leading Liberal organs justified this policy on the ground that defeat for the Democrats at this time would tend to precipitate the much-to-be-desired dis- solution of the old party and thus hasten the development of the new.''' The frequency and emphasis with which these papers reported the death and final interment of the ill-reputed organization of their prospective allies"'' show '" See Grant's letter to the revenue collector at St. Louis, Sept. 1870, Annual Cyclopedia, 1870, p. 520. '*« Bowles to Schurz, Mar. 22, 1872, Schurz's Writings, II, 353. Ignatius Donnelly in reply to a request for his advice on the proposed movement wrote that he had tried coalition with the Democrats in 1870 and had found a portion of them "intolerant, corrupt and treacherous" and he had "no faith in them." See his answer endorsed on the back of letter from W. L. Osborne, Apr. II, 1872, Donnelly MSS. "1 N. Y. World, Feb. 24, Mar. 22, 28, 1872; Doolittle to Trumbull, Mar. 18, 22, Trumbull MSS.; Bowles to Sumner, Mar. 18, 1872, Sumner MSS. !«' Chicago Tribune, Mar. 30, 1872; Springfield Weekly Republican, Mar. 29, 1872. Bowles' personal opinion of the result of Democratic defeat in Connecticut seems not to agree with this. See his letter to Schurz, Mar. 22, 1872, Schurz's Writings, II, 353. The Mo. Republican urged that the spring elections proved that the Democrats could not win in the national election and that the "passive" support of the Lib- eral ticket was the only hope of defeating the radicals. See editorials. Mar. 14, 18, Apr. 6, 1872. 132 See Chicago Tribune, Mar. 15, 24, Apr. 14, 1872; Springfield Weekly Republican, Mar. 15, 1872; Atlantic Monthly, Jan. 1872, p. 125. 74 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT how greatly they desired such a clearing of the political field. But that they realized that the party was still very much alive and capable of upsetting their plans was shown by their emphatic warning that the convention was for Republicans only and was not to be subject in any way to Democratic influence.'^' For a time, no doubt, Liberal organizers like Schurz had hoped to win over a large number, if not the bulk, of the Democrats to the reform party organization. Senator Chandler in a speech in the Senate on June lo, 1872, the last day of the session, charged, on what he called good authority, that early in November at a meeting in a New York hotel an agreement was entered into between "a dis- tinguished Democratic Senator and a distinguished Sen- ator who had formerly been a Republican, with Samuel J. Tilden and divers and sundry other Democrats that I could name, that a new party should be organized to be called the reform party." At this conference, Chandler contin- ued, it was thought advisable that the Democrats in the Senate should remain neutral during the session and allow the discontented Republicans to do the talking, "and that a certain Republican Senator, whom I will not name, should be the nominee of this new party. "^^* Fen ton of the Liberals and Casserly, Thurman, and Stevenson of the Democrats promptly denied all knowledge of any such agreement and Chandler refused to give the names of the senators concerned."^ While there is no definite evidence available, it seems likely that some conference was held between Democratic and Liberal leaders. Schurz was in New York in November''* and was probably the ex-Re- publican senator referred to by Chandler. But that any ^^'Springfield Weekly Republican, Apr. 5, 1872; N. Y. Evening Post, Apr. 15, 1872; Trumbull to Brinkerhoff, Mar. 20, 1872, Trumbull MSS. '" Cong. Globe, 42 Cong., 2 Sess., 4473. 1'* Idem. 1™ N. Y. Herald, Nov. 19, 1871. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 75 real assurance of the abandonment of the Democratic organization could have been given by a Democrat like Tilden is unthinkable.'" In some quarters, however, there was a desire to come out definitely from the old party and unite with the new reform organization. This sentiment was manifested in the forma- tion of the so-called Reunion and Reform Associations in 1 87 1. These associations were formed in connection with the independent movement started by Schurz and the Ohio reformers, in order to include liberally-inclined Democrats, these organizations being open to Liberal Republicans and "Liberal Democrats" alike. The reform organizations started in the South by Schurz in the fall of 1871 were of this character. The first of the associations was formed in Tennessee in October, their platform being substantially that of the Missouri Liberals. '^^ Some time later in the year, after being strongly urged by Schurz to take that step,''' the Cincinnati reformers widened their organiza- tion to include persons from all parties.^"" The Reunion and Reform Association was in entire sympathy with the Cincinnati convention, but, as that gathering was to be confined exclusively to Republicans, it was thought best to keep the movements separate until a new reform party in which all might unite was definitely established. A call was therefore issued in March from the headquarters of the Cincinnati association for a Reunion and Reform na- tional convention to meet at Cincinnati on the same day as the Liberals, but in another hall.^"' Mass meetings were I" The N. Y. Herald said editorially (Nov. 18, 1871) that it under- stood that Seymour and Tilden were much pleased with the new reform party project. "^Annml Cyclopedia, 187 1, p. 720 f. "9 Schurz to Cox, Oct. 14, 22, 1871, Schurz's Writings, II, 314 f. '°° See account in Cincinnati Commercial, quoted in N. Y. Herald, Apr. 28, 1872, of the formation of the Reunion and Reform Association. 2"i N. Y. Tribune, Mar. 30, 1872. 76 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT reported in a number of states in the South and West to select delegates to this all-party convention.^"^ The organ- ization was reported, in April, to be well-established in the South, but especially strong among Western Germans.^"' Certain influential Democratic papers in the South and West went so far as to urge the amalgamation of their organization in a new reform party, even to the surrender of its name.^"* The interest which the whole country appeared to take in the discussion of their probable candidates may well have flattered the promoters of the Liberal convention. The availability of a considerable number of public figures was carefully canvassed, furnishing the press with no end of useful "copy." Certain "perpetual" candidates were considered as a matter of course. Judge Chase, who had long had the presi- dency "on the brain, "^"^ after vainly hoping for the Demo- cratic nomination,^"* "pulled some wires" for that of the Liberals.^"' Some sort of an independent movement for Chase had been worked up in West Virginia,^"^ and in April a conference of Liberal Republicans and independ- ent Democrats met at Parkersburg and adopted resolu- tions instructing the Republican delegates to the Liberal 202 ^ Y. Tribune, Apr. 10, 25; Chicago Tribune, Apr. 22, 26, 1872. 203 ^_ Y. Herald, Apr. 28, 1872, quoting article in Cincinnati Com- mercial; editorial in N. Y. Evening Post, Apr. 19, 1872. ^"^ Madison Democrat, Apr. 3, 1872; Lakeside Monthly, Mar., 1872; Southern Recorder, Mar. 19, 1872. '^"^ Hoar, Autobiography, I, 282. ^^'^Halstead to Chase, Oct. 20, 1869, Chase Correspondence in Rep. Am. Hist. Assoc, 1902, II, 521 f.; Clay to Chase, Jan. 3, 1871, Chase MSS.; Fowler to Chase, Dec. 2, 1871, ibid.; also a number of letters from obscure correspondents in South and West, 1869-1871 in ibid. 2°' Hart, Chase, 413; Chase to Church, Mar. 26, 1872, Warden, Chase, 728; Chase to Ball, Apr. 8, 1872, ibid., 729. 2«8 Church to Chase, July 19, 1871, Chase MSS.; Citizens of Clay township to Chase, Dec. 7, 1871, ibid. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 77 convention and the Democratic delegates to the Reunion and Reform convention to work for Chase's nomination.^"' But the Judge's feeble health barred him from a contest in which he might otherwise have been a strong competitor."" Chase's colleague, Judge David Davis, proved a much more formidable contestant. Davis was a man of wealth, ambition and ability. He was nominally a Republican, but was without strong party convictions."^ He had been mentioned the preceding year as a most suitable conserva- tive for the Democrats to support, in case they selected a candidate of that type,^^^ and also as a possible coalition candidate.^i^ Now he was put forward by his supporters as the best man to unite the opposition to Grant. As a preliminary step apparently in securing the Liberal nomina- tion,^" he was named in February by the national conven- tion of the Labor party to head their ticket, with Governor Parker of New Jersey, a pronounced Democrat, as his running-mate."* Davis was very generally regarded, with 2°»iV. Y. Herald, Mar. 15, Apr. 20, 1871; Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 800. '"■" See Senator Hoar's opinion. Autobiography, I, 284. 2" Monroe, "The Hayes-Tilden Electoral Commission'' in Atlantic Monthly, LXXII, 528; Northrup, "A Grave Crisis in American His- tory" in Century, LXH, 927 f. 212 N. Y. Herald, Apr. 19, July 21, 1871. 213 Ibid., Oct. 14; Harper's Weekly, Oct. 28, 1871. ''^ On Davis' attitude towards the labor nomination, see Grinnell, Reminiscences, 196. The year before Davis had stated that he would accept the Democratic nomination if tendered him with any degree of unanimity. Interview in the Chicago Republican, quoted in N. Y. Herald, July 21, 1871. Henry Watterson in his letter to the Courier Journal from the Cincinnati convention wrote that the Democratic congressmen as a preliminary move to Davis' nomination got up a con- vention at Columbus of a "gang of execrable dead-beats . . . called Labor Reformers.'' Quoted in Chicago Tribune, May 9, 1872. Wilson says (Hist, of American People, V, 123) that the labor convention was "made up chiefly of trades union bosses and political free lances." ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 773 f.; Stanwood, Hist, of the Presi- dency, 335-338. 78 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT seeming truth, as the choice of the Democratic politicians.^'* The leading Democratic congressmen seem to have been committed to his candidacy^" and other prominent Dem- ocratic leaders were reported as working to the same end.'"' The "Bourbon" Chicago Times was the foremost Davis organ, "^ and Democratic papers all over the country, with but one notable exception, regarded the labor ticket as a suitable one for the coalition.^^" The New York World, in its solicitude for the dignity and integrity of the Demo- cratic organization, strongly opposed Judge Davis' candi- dacy and denounced the tactics of the " cabal of Democratic congressmen" who were backing the scheme. ^^' The lead- ing independent organs were most suspicious of any move that threatened the interference of the malign Democrats in their projects and served notice that Judge Davis, in his present company, would not do at all to lead the Liberal cause. ^^ ™ Trumbull to Koerner, Mar. 9, 1872, Koerner, Memoirs, II, 538; Scovel to Sumner, Mar. 18, 1872, Sumner MSS.; White to Trumbull, Mar. 17, 24, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Dubois to Trumbull, Apr. 18, 1872, ibid.; Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign" in Century Magazine, LXXV, 33. ''"See editorial in Leslie's Newspaper, Aug. 10, 1872; Wis. Weekly State Journal, Apr. 16, 1872. 218 McCIernand to Trumbull, Apr. 24, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Steiner, Johnson, 261. 21' Chicago Times editorials, Feb. 26, Mar. 7, 21, 1872, and following issues. 22« Milwaukee News, Feb. 25, 28, 1872; Madison Democrat, Feb. 27, 1872; Clinton (Iowa) Age, Mar. 8, 1872, cited in Haynes, 26; Southern Recorder, Mar. 19, 1872 (quoting papers from various parts of the South); Memphis Appeal, Feb. 17, 24, Mar. 11, 16, 1872; Washington Patriot, quoted in Memphis Appeal, Mar. 17, 1872. 221 N. Y. World, Mar. 14, 18, 19, Apr. 30, May i, 1872. '^Springfield Weekly Republican, Mar. 8, 1872; Chicago Tribune, Apr. 14, May i, 1872; N. Y. Evening Post, Apr. 23, 1872; Cincinnati Commercial and Cincinnati Volksblatt, cited in Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Apr. 30, 1872. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 79 From the beginning of an active agitation for a coalition in the preceding fall, certain of Greeley's admirers, par- ticularly in the West, had been bringing his name forward''" and after his declaration for the Liberals he had become one of the stock candidates of the press. ^* At first, with his pronounced antagonism to certain Democratic principles, Greeley seems to have been not at all enthusiastic about the coalition nomination. To a Democratic admirer who in October had suggested his candidacy, he protested: "I am not the man you need. Your party is mostly Free- trade, and I am a ferocious Protectionist. I have no doubt that I might be nominated and elected by your help, but it would place us all in a false position. . . . You must take some man like Gratz Brown, or Trumbull, or General Cox . . . and thus help to pacify and reunite our country anew."^'^ Again, in January, he returned this ultimatum to the labor people who were sounding him as to his desire for their support: "I heartily wish my name had never been connected with the presidency. I see plainly that it can only result in vexation and misapprehension. And I shall never shape and groove my opinions to make myself ac- ceptable to any party. As far as the labor party seems to' me right, I approve and commend its propositions, but no further for twenty offices. "^'^ This certainly has not the tone of the office-seeking maniac that Greeley has been so ^2' Clay, Memoirs, I, 503; Henry Reed's letters to Cincinnati Com- moner, quoted in Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Nov. 28, Dec. 5, 1871. ^ See, for instance, N. Y. Herald, Apr. 27, 30, 1872; Chicago Tribune, Apr. 29, 1872; Chicago Times, Apr. 27, 1872. The New York Times contained some attack on Greeley's candidacy in practically every issue during the month of April. See especially editorials, Apr. I, 11, 16, 21, 28, 29. The formation of "Horace Greeley Irish American Leagues" was reported in several wards of the city, N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 9, 1872; N. Y. Times, Apr. 10, 1872. Nast in his cartoon entitled " Cincinnatus" (Harper's Weekly, Feb. 10, 1872) forecasted Greeley's active candidacy. 226 Ingersoll, Greeley, 545 f . ™ Quoted in Springfield Weekly Republican, Jan. 12, 1872. 80 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT often represented. But as the bolt spread in the Republican ranks and the likelihood of success in union with the Demo- crats appeared reasonably assured, the veteran editor's life-long desire for political recognition^' seems to have overcome his discretion. He brushed lightly aside the criticism of his inconsistency in signing the New York call which strongly endorsed tariff reform. His signature, he held, while showing his general sympathy with the Liberal movement did not commit him to everything contained in its platform. He was just as strong a protectionist as ever; he desired simply that the convention leave this question to the decision of the people in the congressional districts — the position which the " Republican party has always main- tained."^' Greeley's position on the tariff question at this time foreshadowed a compromise in the convention.^' To the politicians, who were promoting a coalition move- ment in accordance with their own ideas, Greeley appeared most available as a candidate for vice-president with Davis,'^" ^' See on this characteristic, Blaine, Twenty Years of Cong., 11, 533; Rhodes, II, 72. ^* Editorials in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. i, 4, 1872. ^^' See comment of the Nation, Apr. 4, 1872, p. 209. See also Trum- bull's correspondence with Sinclair Tousey on the tariff question in April, 1872, Trumbull MSS. 230 pgfj-ees letter to Reid, mentioned in Ingersoll, 546 n.; McClure, II. 334 f. The Washington correspondent of the Savannah Republican wrote: "Horace Greeley may be given the second place on the Davis Reform ticket. Many Democrats say they will vote for Greeley, al- though they would prefer to have him at the head of the ticket . . . At present there seems to be no more available ticket for Liberal Re- publicans than Davis and Greeley." Quoted in Memphis Appeal, Mar. 23, 1872. W. S. Robinson wrote to Sumner (Mar. 18, 1872) that the plan to run Davis and Greeley was "absurd." Sumner MSS. The Chicago Tribune, on the contrary, in mentioning the report that Greeley was to be candidate for vice-president spoke of his qualifications with great praise. "Mr. Greeley's name would be the strongest and most popular that was ever submitted to the suffrage of the people for the Vice- Presidency." Chicago Tribune, Mar. 19, 1872. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 8 1 and Greeley and his backers were evidently well satisfied with the assignment of the second honor.^*^ In reply to a definite proposal of this sort made early in March by Davis' manager, Greeley responded: "Very good. But let us have no bargains, no trades, no understandings, except that the Cincinnati Convention shall nominate that ticket which can get most votes, and be composed of worthy, cap- able men. We must have nothing cut-and-dried, but the genuine voice of the people."^^^ Nothing could better show Greeley's political naivete, in spite of all his experience with conventions and campaigns, than such a statement to the sort of politicians in whose keeping his candidacy rested. "Favorite sons" were not lacking. Governor Brown in Missouri was reported to be exerting every influence at his command to become the national candidate of the move- ment which he had led so gloriously in his own state. ^'' Sumner's name seemed to many a source of peculiar strength, 2'^ but his failure to declare his position definitely before the convention precluded any active effort in his 2" McCIure, II, 334; Dana to Clay, Feb. 23, 1872, Clay, I, 589 f. Greeley wrote to Grinnell at Cincinnati: "Leave my name out of the question as a candidate. We ought to unite on Judge Davis of Illinois, the old friend of Mr. Lincoln." Grinnell, 224. The Washington Patriot said in its report of the first day of the convention: "Greeley prefers Davis to himself and is decidedly opposed to Adams." Patriot, May 2, 1872. '^ Greeley to Defrees, Mar. 10, 1872, Ingersoll, 546 n. ™J. A. Cochrane to C. C. Cook, Jan. 8, 1872, Chase MSS.; R. L. Lindsay to Trumbull, Jan. 19, 1872, Trumbull MSS. A conference of Liberal leaders in the interest of Brown was reported in Washington on April 2. Greeley was said to be the choice of the conferees for vice- president. N. Y. Times, Apr. 4, 1872. '^Springfield Weekly Republican, Apr. 26, 1872; Pierce, IV, 517; Bartlett to Apr. 21, 1872, Palfrey, Bartlett, 228. George Wilkes was a persistent Sumner advocate. See his editorials in Spirit of the Times, Jan. 20, Mar. 30, Apr. 20, 27, 1872. 7 82 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT behalf.^'' Men like Curtin of Pennsylvania, Cox of Ohio, and Governor Palmer of Illinois were mentioned from time to time, both for first and second place. The man in active public life whose candidacy made the widest appeal was Senator Lyman Trumbull. ^^^ In spite of the strong rivalry^" from Davis and Brown he had many loyal supporters all over the Middle West.^'* He also had strong friends among the independent Republicans in the East.239 Charles Francis Adams was undoubtedly the choice of the majority of the independent, reform element. In many respects Adams was an ideal candidate ; his integrity, experience in public affairs, liberal views, and freedom from '^ Pierce, IV, 527, 529. Wilkes claimed that Sumner told him a few days before the convention that he did not wish to have his name presented. Spirit of the Times, May 11, 1872. '^ During the winter Trumbull received letters from more or less prominent persons urging his availability as a coalition candidate. See Joseph Brown to Trumbull, Dec. 12, Jan. I2, 1872, Trumbull MSS. Other letters of the same sort are given in White, 375. Trumbull re- plied that his avowed candidacy at this time would injure his work for reform. Trumbull to Joseph Brown, Dec. 25, 1871, ibid. Trumbull expressed the view until shortly before the convention that it would be the best policy not to make nominations. Trumbull to Brinkerhoff, Mar. 20, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Trumbull to Fell, Apr. 11, 1872, Miss. Valley Hist. Rev. I, 108. ''*' On the rivalry of middle western candidates, see B. C. Cook to Trumbull, Mar. 21, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; White to Trumbull, Mar. 24, 1872; Trumbull to Palmer, Apr. 8, 1872, ibid.; Trumbull to White, Apr. 24, 1872, ibid.; Dubois to Trumbull, Apr. 18, 1872, ibid.; Cin- cinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Apr. 30, 1872. 2=8 Brinkerhoff to Trumbull, Feb. 8, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; Ross to Trumbull, Feb. 21, 1872, ibid.; Koerner to Trumbull, Apr. 5, 1872, ibid.; Dubois to Trumbull, Apr. 10, 1872, ibid.; Palmer to Trumbull, Apr. 13, 1872, ibid.; Magall to Trumbull, Apr. 16, 1872, ibid.; Chicago Tribune editorial Apr. 26, 1872. 239 Lewis to Trumbull, Feb. 26, 1872, Trumbull MSS.; White, 375. Leslie's Newspaper (Apr. 20, 1872) put as its first choice Trumbull and Walker. The N. Y. Sun was also favorable to Trumbull. C. D. Hay to Trumbull, Jan. 3, 1872, Trumbull MSS. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 83 recent party controversy, all fitted him to lead the new party movement.^''" The Nation, taking the stand that "the new candidate for the Presidency must be a first-rate man, a dis- tinguished man, a man versed in affairs, and who has filled places of trust and difficulty with ability and fidelity, and who is as well known for the soundness of his judgment and the good repute of his associates as for the purity of his own character,"^" put Adams at the head of its list of those hav- ing these qualifications.^*' The Springfield Republican was of the opinion that " the door is open wide enough when only Charles Francis Adams, Horace Greeley and Lyman Trum- bull are admitted to the list from which successful nomina- tions shall be made." While thinking highly of all these candidates, the Republican believed that Adams was the strongest, and that if the ticket was to be "double headed" Adams and Trumbull would present the most formidable combination.'*' Adams' candidacy also had the sympathy of eastern Democrats whose views were expressed by the World. Adams seemed to the World an entirely acceptable coalition candidate and it strongly in- timated that a candidate of his type only would receive the Democratic endorsement.'** He was almost the only avail- able candidate of Republican antecedents who would not put the Democrats on the defensive, requiring apolo- gies for his endorsement. His views ran counter to their party on no important question.'*^ "If our next Pres- 2<" Cf. Adams, Adams, 390. ^^ Nation, Apr. 25, 1872, p. 269. "^ Ibid., Mar. 21, p. 181; Apr. 25, p. 265. Cf. N. Y. Evening Post, Apr. 23, 1872. ^^Springfield Weekly Republican, Apr. 26, 1872. General W. F. Bartlett came out in the Republican with a strong letter for Adams, Apr. 10, which attracted wide attention. Palfrey, 226 f. 2** N. Y. World, Apr. 23, 1872. But it promised to support Brown, Trumbull or Davis if adopted by the party, ibid., Mar. 18, 23, Apr. 30, 1872. 2« Ibid., Apr. 27. 84 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ident is to be selected on the grounds of fitness," it urged, "no man in the country is so well entitled to the office as Mr. Adams; and we believe this would be the judgment of three-fourths of the American people. "^*^ Shortly before the Liberal convention Schurz was advised by leading eastern Democrats, like ex-Governor Randolph of New Jer- sey, Manton Marble of the World, and August Belmont, the chairman of the national committee, that Adams' nomi- ination would be the strongest possible and would insure the support of their party. ^^^ But Adams, in spite of his un- -questioned integrity and high qualifications in many ways, did not prove to be altogether invulnerable as a candidate. His policy during the Fenian raids was used at this time, as later, to alienate the Irish support.^** A couple of weeks before the convention he wrote to Wells of its possible action concerning himself in a rather cavalier manner^*' which v/as creditable to his political independence but likely to offend the dignity of the average delegate, even in a reform con- vention, and not likely to be fully appreciated by the average voter. The independent press gave its appreciation of his exalted sentiments,^^" and the World lauded the "high- toned, masculine letter . . . the effusion of a states- man who scorns to weigh duty against advantage, who can descend to no unworthy compliances, and who desires no office except as a free, unbought mark of trust in his char- acter."^" His opponents, on the other hand, seized the opportunity to expatiate on the unpopularity of the Adams family and the utter lack of availability as a coalition can- 2« N. Y. World, Apr. 24, 1872. ^" White, 373; Bancroft-Dunning, 344. 248 See correspondence in N. Y. World on this matter, Apr. 25-30, 1872; Madison Democrat, Apr. 26, 1872. 2*' Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 777; Springfield Weekly Republican, Apr. 26, 1872. ^"Nation, May 2, 1872, p. 281; Chicago Tribune, Apr. 26, 1872; Springfield Republican, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 30, 1872. 2" N. Y. World, Apr. 25, 1872. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERAL MOVEMENT 85 didate of this member of it.^*^ But in spite of these possible weaknesses from the politician's point of view, Adams con- tinued to be in the front rank of the possible candidates. On the eve of the convention the situation as regards candidates was this: the "slate" of the managing, schem- ing politicians, among both the Liberals and Democrats, was Davis and Greeley; to most of the reform group, and to the conservative eastern Democrats, Adams and a promi- nent middle western Liberal like Trumbull, Cox,'^'or Palmer seemed to be the ticket best representing the aims of the opposition. '^^ Washington Patriot, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 30, 1872; Chicago Times, Apr. 25, 1872; Albany Argus, Apr. 29, 1872; Madison Democrat, Apr. 26, 1872; Richmond Whig and Advertiser, Apr. 26, 1872. W. S. Robinson, the Boston correspondent of the Springfield Republican and a leading Massachusetts Liberal, wrote to Sumner (Apr. 9, 1872) that Adams' nomination "would in my judgment be a great mistake, for he and his family represent too much the anti-popular element — the sneering, sniffing element, which can never have permanent success in our politics.'' Sumner MSS. Cf. Bowles' comment on Adams' candidacy in the convention, below, ch. Ill, note 66. The N. Y. Times made good use of Adams' letter to cast discredit on the general character of the convention. See editorials, Apr. 25, 26, 27, 1872. 2''The N. Y. Evening Post thought General Cox the most ac- ceptable candidate for vice-president. See editorial on candidates, Apr. 23, 1872. CHAPTER III REFORMERS VERSUS POLITICIANS IN THE CINCINNATI CONVENTION The mass convention that assembled at Cincinnati was poriiposed of most diverse elements, representing as it did all shades of opposition to existing conditions. Impractical doctrinaires, constructive reformers, public men of tried integrity, and political intriguers long-exposed were all in evidence. 1 But with the exception of certain groups like some of the Davis recruits from Illinois, Warmoth's hench- men from Louisiana and the New York Tammany Re- publicans, the gathering was a respectable one and probably compared favorably with most national conventions.^ Bowles thought that there were fewer manufactured dele- gations than at Philadelphia in 1856 and no more than at Chicago in i860.' The Davis men from Central Illinois constituted the largest number of obtruding politicians. The Judge's managers provided transportation for all whom they could persuade to go to the convention in their can- didate's interest. Much Davis enthusiasm was stirred up in that part of the state and several hundred joined the 1 See Bowles' characterization in his letter from the convention, Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10 (all dates when not otherwise indicated are for the year 1872); Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign," in Cenlury Magazine, LXXXV, 30. 2 White, Trumbull, 380; Julian, Pol. Recollections, 337. The cor- respondent of the Nation, probably Godkin, wrote of the convention: "I doubt, indeed, whether a more respectable, honest, intelligent, public- spirited body of men has ever got together for a similar purpose." Nation, May 9, p. 303. ' Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. 86 REFORMERS VERSUS POLITICIANS 87 excursion.^ The New York and Pennsylvania delegations, a shrewd observer thought, contained more political expe- rience than all the rest of the convention put together.^ These political adepts, veterans of many a hard-fought cam- paign, directed by Senator Fen ton for New York and Colonel A. K. McClure for Pennsylvania, were planning, as generally understood at Cincinnati on the eve of the con- vention, to join their skill to the numerical strength of the forces for Davis and nominate that candidate, with Greeley or Curtin for the second place.' The boldness and pretentiousness with which these manipulators prepared to capture the convention brought upon them a decisive counter-stroke from the reform camp. Soon after reaching the convention city, four leading independent editors — Bowles, Halstead, White and Watter- son — met together for consultation and formed a fellow- ship for united action which came to be termed in the campaign the "great quadrilateral."' To these men Davis' candidacy, promoted as it was, seemed a complete trav- esty of the reforms for which they were working. In consultation on the evening of April 29 they determined not to support the politicians' ticket under any considera- tion, and this ultimatum was wired to their various papers to appear the next morning as editorial leaders. Fenton, as the recognized general of the Davis-Greeley forces, was promptly notified of this action. The Senator admitted that the attitude of the independent press would be fatal See Ross, "Horace Greeley and the South," South Atlantic Quarterly, XVI, 324 ff. '* Except with the German element. '' Cf. Springfield Republican, May 3; White's letter in Chicago Tribune, May 4. '* Cf. Watterson in Chicago Tribune, May 9. '' Bowles wrote that the political experience of the leaders in the New York and Pennsylvania delegations "gave them great advantage in dealing with the novices and theoretical devotees from other states. , . . The venerable Judge Selden from Rochester was almost power- less in the presence of so large a number of men more familiar with the machinery of parties." Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. Edward Atkinson, after failing to get a motion before the convention in its proper connection, remarked that "he was not familiar with the usages of Conventions." Report of the convention for May 2 in N. Y. Tribune, May 3. " Golden Age, May 11. It was charged that on the last ballot New Yorkers voted in the delegations of other states and unauthorized changes for Greeley were made. N. Y. Tribune, May 11 quoting Evening Post and giving Cochrane's letter denying the charges. See REFORMERS VERSUS POLITICIANS IO3 many times been the victim of the schemes of political managers; this time the "inside men" were for him and he won. The reformers, with characteristic petulence, were very- free in casting the blame on one another. The free-traders blamed the organizers of the convention for permitting protectionists to take part in it,'^ while they themselves were blamed for not making concessions on that subject in a way which would have insured their naming the candi- date.*" Schurz was criticized both for taking too con- spicuous a part in the proceedings and for not exerting a sufficiently strong influence privately in favor of some reform candidate.*' To the latter criticism he replied that though frequently told he might exert a decisive influence on the selection of candidates he had spurned to stoop to also N. Y. Times, May 7; correspondent in Evening Post, May 10, and Washington Patriot, May 4. The N. Y. Times charged (May 7) that Fenton had been working for Greeley all along, and that his support of Davis was only a blind. Bowles, however, held that Fenton had noth- ing to do with Greeley's nomination though he was at the bottom of the Davis movement. See his letter to the Cincinnati Commercial, May 4, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 6. Bowles wrote to Dawes (May 21): "Yes, Fenton was for Greeley in his way. But his way would have killed him. It was not the men of the Fenton stamp who nominated Greeley at all. . . . Fenton is neither a political idiot nor a political buccaneer, and Greeley was nominated by a combination of these two. The Theodore Tiltons and Frank Blairs, and not the Reuben E. Fen- tons, did the business.'' Merriam, Bowles, II, 212. The Evening Post said (Oct. 4) that most of the delegates were "as innocent as sucklings of any political manoeuvres," and that the politicians had captured them "like a bevy of quails under a net.'' "Judge Hoadly's speech, N. Y. Times, Aug. 24; Brinkerhoff, 217. "• Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. " Nation, May 9, p. 303, Nov. 23, p. 328. Bowles wrote from the convention, May l, that Schurz's open advocacy of Adams, Trumbull, or Cox "would insure immediate success.'' Springfield Weekly Re- publican, May 3. Joseph Pulitzer told Halstead years afterward that a word from Schurz would have routed Blair and Brown. Watterson, 39. 104 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT the r61e of president-maker,^^ and as a foreign -born citizen hestitated to take too prominent a part in such matters.^ Schurz, on his side, could take to task effectively the sort of reformer who, while speaking and writing for reforms and criticizing the failure of others to secure them, still would not give himself the trouble to attend a convention called in hope of bringing them about. ^' However, neither re- proaches nor excuses could alter the fact: the national Liberal convention had fallen into the snare of the fowler.*^ The Reunion, and Reform convention, with about two hundred delegates from eleven states, was called to order by Judge Stallo of Cincinnati on May 2 and formed a per- manent organization with Judge Ranney as president. ^^ It had been generally understood that this convention would endorse the Liberal convention's work if satisfactory. Some of the promoters had expected an invitation to unite with the main convention.^' The president's address denounced both of the old parties impartially and advo- cated a union of all reform elements regardless of past differences.^^ Resolutions presented in favor of Adams and of Trumbull were referred to the committee.^' The ^ Schurz to Bowles, May 11, Schurz' s Writings, II, 369. '' Schurz to Godkin, Nov. 23, ibid., 446 f. ^ Speech at Fifth Avenue Convention, June 20, N. Y. Tribune, June 21. '* The Liberals before adjournment appointed a national committee which organized with Ethan Allen of New York, one of Greeley's chief supporters in the convention, as chairman, and Daniel R. Goodloe of North Carolina as secretary. N. Y. Tribune, May 6. Senator Fenton was later chosen chairman of the Liberal congressional campaign com- mittee. Ibid., June 10. ™ Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 3. " Wisconsin Weekly State Journal, Apr. 16; Judge Collins' inter- view in N. Y. Herald, Apr. 28. *' Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 3. *' Idem. The resolution in favor of Trumbull (with a Southerner for vice-president) purported to be from "French speaking citizens repre- senting twenty- two states, and 300,000 voters,'' REFORMERS VERSUS POLITICIANS I05 platform was essentially the same as that of the Liberals, with the important exception of a declaration for a tariff for revenue only.'" Greeley's nomination came as a most un- welcome surprise to this gathering. Stallo denounced it as the result of treachery, declaring that the leaders of the Liberal convention lacked courage and honesty. He had hoped, he said, for harmonious action between the two conventions. °i The convention was undecided how to act and after empowering its executive committee to call another national convention, at a time and place to be determined by them, it adjourned sine die.'^ The further action of this group, as that of the other reformers, was uncertain. '" Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 7. "1 Idem. Stallo told a reporter before the convention that the western Germans desired Adams' nomination. In case Greeley was nominated or overrode the convention on the tariff issue Stallo wished to be counted out. N. Y. Herald, Apr. 28. ** Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 7. CHAPTER IV THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE Greeley's nomination at Cincinnati presented a serious and unexpected problem alike to the reformers and to the Democrats. It will be the purpose of this chapter to ex- plain the policy of the reformers both, prior to the meeting of the other national conventions, and during the campaign. The Cincinnati nominations were a hard blow to the re- formers in the Liberal movement, but, aside from the more extreme free-traders, they endeavored to make the best of their embarrassing situation. The journalistic ''quadri- lateral" quickly came to the conclusion that they had gone too far in promoting the convention to back out when it named candidates whom they had not openly opposed.' They tried to assume a confident attitude in presenting the results of the convention to their readers. Watterson ex- pressed the opinion that "Mr. Greeley has as many ele- ments of strength within himself — as many of what the candidates call 'running qualities' — as any candidate who ever asked the suffrage of the American people."^ Horace White wrote to his paper that "The opinion of the best judges this evening is that the ticket will sweep the country."' Bowles wired his assistants on the Republican to support the nominations but "not to gush."* Later, after reviewing the work of the convention and balancing the strong and the weak points of the ticket in a temperate, judicious • Cf. White, Trumbull, 384; Merriam, Bowles, II, 187. ^ Watterson's letter to the Courier-Journal, quoted in Chicago Trib- une, May 9. ^ Chicago Tribune, May 4. The Tribune's editorial next day on "The Political Outlook" asserted, "That Horace Greeley will be elected is beyond all doubt." ' Merriam, II, 187. 106 THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE 1 07 editorial, he frankly stated his disappointment at certain aspects of the situation, but concluded that while Greeley might be beaten, it would "not be an easy job."' Halstead made no secret of his disappointment at the defeat of the Adams-Trumbull ticket and at first gave the nominationp only a qualified support, but he carefully indicated the strong points of the Liberal candidates and was soon cham- pioning them with characteristic enthusiasm.^ Other prominent independents promptly accepted the ticket. Senator Trumbull at once sent his congratulations.' Governor Palmer promised Greeley 75,000 Republican votes in Illinois.' Judge Chase wrote to his old anti- slavery friend: "The country has recognized emphatically your worthiness and ability and public services, and I am personally gratified that the choice of the Convention fell upon one to whom I am in such thorough agreement upon the great questions of amnesty and currency."' F. W. Bird indignantly repudiated the insinuation that Greeley's nomi- nation had been secured by improper means.^" Schurz, the great Liberal organizer, withheld his final de- cision for some time. The outcome of the convention on which he had placed such high hopes of political regenera- tion filled him with sorrow and indignation. " I cannot yet think," he wrote a week later, "of the results of the Cincin- nati Convention without a pang."" His disappointment ' Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. See for similar expres- sions of confidence in private correspondence, Bowles to Schurz, May 8, Schurz' s Writings, II, 368; Bowles to Allen, May 11, Merriam, II, 210 f. « See editorials of Cincinnati Commercial, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 6, 7, 8, II. ' N. Y. Tribune, May 4, 7; Greeley to Trumbull, May 3, Trumbull MSS. See also Trumbull's friendly letter of advice, May 20, ibid., and Trumbull to Bryant, May 10, White, 386 f . « Schurz' s Writings, II, 366. » Letter of May 4 in N. Y. Tribune, May 7. "Boston Commonwealth, June i. See also his letter to Sumner, May 7. Sumner MSS. " Schurz to Bowles, May 11. Schurz' s Writings, II, 369. I08 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT and misgivings were reflected in his correspondence with the Liberal candidate in which the Senator's tone of superiority in condemning the politicians was matched by the editor's outspokenness in criticizing the reformers. Schurz, while professing the fullest confidence in Greeley's personal honesty, denounced the "huckstering" in the convention by the "politicians of the old stamp." The "appearance of political trickery," he was convinced, "could not fail to shake the whole moral basis of the movement."'^ The great mass of the Germans, who had formed such a strong element among the Liberals, were entirely alienated and he doubted if even he could rally them again. i' As to his own course, he was undecided. If the old moral force could be restored to the movement he would stop at no difficulties, but he doubted whether "those elements which in a moral sense formed the backbone of the movement" could be "brought into the foreground again so as to inspire confidence."" Greeley, in reply, spitefully de- nounced as "not Republicans, but frauds" the 'Revenue Reformers,' whom he desired Schurz to speak of in future as free-traders, since the other term was a "juggle." He expressed full confidence in his own success and advised Schurz not to be over hasty in his action. "I am con- fident," he wrote, "that the 'sober second thought' will bring us all into proper relations."'^ ^ Schurz to Greeley, May 6. Ibid., 363. " Ibid., 364-366. See also Schurz's letter of May 11, ibid., 371 f. » Ibid., 366-368. " Greeley to Schurz, May 8, Bancroft-Dunning, Schurz's Political Career, 350 f. In a letter, two days later, Greeley acknowledged his appreciation of Schurz's "position and services" and credited him with an intention "to do the right," though his "judgment on important points" differed from Greeley's. Schurz's Writings, II, 370 n. Some weeks later. White got Greeley to admit that he had been wrong in the tone which he had assumed toward Schurz, and to authorize a state- ment (in the Tribune) that he could not answer any more political letters. White to Schurz, June 9, ibid., 382. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE I09 The free-traders, East and West, were generally dis- affected. The Nation^^ and the Evening Post,^'^ with their strong free-trade and civil service convictions, found Greeley an utter impossibility. The opposition of these papers was stimulated by the hostility of the editors toward the Liberal candidate. Godkin had long regarded Greeley with deep contempt,*^ and Bryant and Godwin held him in detestation. 1' The German leaders and papers, as Schurz had informed Greeley, were almost unanimously estranged.^" Among the Ohio independents there was great dissatisfaction. After the adjournment of the con- vention the state's delegation, with some others, met at their Cincinnati headquarters, where the "bargain and sale" of the politicians was bitterly denounced by original Liberals like Judge Hoadly. Two or three members, including General Brinkerhoff, openly repudiated the ticket and re- signed from the state executive committee. Others, like Judge Spaulding, of Cleveland, would support the ticket as " May 9, pp. 297, 300. " May 7. isQgden, Godkin, I, 254-257, 292; II, 62. For Godkin's disgust at Greeley's nomination, see Godkin to Schurz, May 19, Schurz's Writings, II, 376. "Ogden, Godkin, I, 167 f.; Bryant to Trumbull, May 8, White, 386! Godwin to Schurz, May 28, ibid., 392. ^"Schurz wrote Greeley: "To the best of my information, my paper is to-day (May 6) the only German journal in the country that has come out for the ticket." He had received "piles of German papers which all sing the same song." Schurz's Writings, II, 365. The quotations in the N. Y. Tribune (May 7-1 1) show the hostility of the leading German papers. On May lo Schurz's WestUche Post was able to print favorable comments on the ticket from about twenty western German papers and a letter of endorsement from Gustave Koerner of Illinois. See N. Y. Tribune editorial. May ii. See also list in N. Y. Tribune, May 21. no THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT a choice of evils, and a few warmly defended the Liberal candidates.^' The prestige of the Liberal ticket was further weakened by the outcome of the senatorial election in Connecticut, where the Democrats and Liberal Republicans combined to reelect Senator Ferry over General Hawley, the choice of the Republican legislative caucus. ^^ Liberal and pro- Greeley Democratic papers, counting on Ferry's adhesion, hailed his election as a good omen for a triumphant coali- tion.^^ But soon after, when Senator Ferry declared his unswerving loyalty to the Republican party and ridiculed the Greeley movement as a "mere mid-summer madness,"^* the Republican press used the incident to disparage the pro- jected opposition.^* Immediately following their defeat at Cincinnati, both in platform and candidates, the reformers, with characteristic confidence in their power to inaugurate an effective political movement off-hand, were planning to put in the field a new ticket that should truly represent their ideas and their standards of statesmanship. The Reunion and Reform con- vention, as already noted, had provided for a national nom- inating convention of its own, and this action was approved by leading western Liberals who hoped that the Democrats *> Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 7; N. Y. Tribune, May 6. Judge Hoadly and General Brinkerhoff wrote cards next day (printed in the Cincinnati Commercial), expressing the hope that a suitable candi- date might be secured from one of the other conventions, especially that contemplated by the Reunion and Reform Association. N. Y. Tribune, May 6. ^* Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 222; Nation, May 16, 23, pp. 313, 330. ^' iV. Y. Tribune, May 15, 16; Chicago Tribune, May 16; Milwaukee News, May 10; Mo. Republican, May 16, 22. ^ N. Y. Times, May 24; editorial in N. Y. Tribune, May 25; Schurz to Greeley, May 18, Schurz's Writings, II, 374. 2=^ Editorial in N. Y. Times, May 24. See also editorial in N. Y. World, May 27. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE III would endorse the ticket thus to be presented.^^ Schurz thought that the bulk of the Germans would "probably flock to the Reunion and Reform Associations."^' In view of the increasing probability of a second Liberal ticket with a candidate more likely to appeal to the Democratic convention, Schurz hinted strongly to Greeley that it would be the part of wisdom for the latter to withdraw from the field. ^^ But the practical-minded Tribune chief did not intend to surrender the long-desired prize at the whim of visionary reformers. The outlook all over the country, he replied with some heat, was favorable. The Democratic convention was "far more likely to adopt and ratify the Cincinnati ticket" than Schurz was "to support it heartily," and he was determined to "accept unconditionally. "^^ So much dissatisfaction with the candidate, in a "party" without traditions or organization, made inevitable the con- sideration of another nomination. The first definite move in this direction came not from the middle western reform associations but from the members of the Free-Trade League in the East, acting evidently upon the suggestion of the Evening Post that the selections this time should not run the risk of the "dangerous machinery of a convention," but be left instead to an assembly of "notables."'" Late in May, a circular was issued "in behalf of the American Free-Trade League, and friends of a Revenue Tariff who have associated or cooperated with it." They deemed it their duty "to protest in the most emphatic manner against the betrayal of the Cause of Reform by the recent Convention at Cincinnati." By the packing of the convention with '^ Letters of Hoadly and Brinkerhoff to Cincinnati Commercial, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 6; Cincinnati Courier and Cincinnati Volksfreund, quoted in ibid.. May 8, 9. 2' Schurz to Greeley, May 6. Schurz' s Writings, II, 366. 28 Schurz to Greeley, May 18, ibid., 373-376. " Greeley to Schurz, May 20, ibid., 377. ="> Schurz to Godkin, May 20, ibid., 378. 112 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT those unfriendly to tariff reform — who had no right to be represented there — protection had triumphed, "and by the nomination of Horace Greeley on this platform they made the abandonment of principle too conspicuous to be mis- taken." Free-traders were, therefore, absolved from any further support of the movement. But, although the cause of reform had been betrayed in the convention, there was still hope of accomplishing much by the election of tariff reformers to Congress. Accordingly, all similarly minded were exhorted to make tariff reform the chief issue, and to organize clubs for that end in every county, and thus de- feat the politicians. To give a public expression to these views, a call was appended for a meeting at Steinway Hall on May 30, to be presided over by Bryant and addressed by such reformers as Wells and Atkinson.'' The Ohio reformers responded in a letter (dated May 27) expressing most hearty agreement with the step taken by the League, and urged that it be followed up by prompt and emphatic action to oppose the election of either Grant or Greeley. They suggested that the forthcoming meeting either nominate new candidates itself or call another meet- ing, to be held not later than June 27, for that purpose. The signers, headed by Cox, Hoadly, and Stallo, pledged themselves to support any candidate who would represent truly the Reunion and Reform platform.'^ The Tribune complained that the Ohioans had put an interpretation upon the meeting which had not yet been given it by its originators.'' The Steinway Hall meeting was well attended, whether from mere curiosity, as the Tribune unkindly suggested, or from more serious motives. The free-trade leaders from " A''. Y. Tribune, May 27. The circular was signed by Bryant, Sands, Minturn, Lloyd, Sterne and other prominent members of the League. '* Ibid., May 30. This letter was read at the Steinway Hall meeting. '' Idem. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE II 3 the City and New England did all the talking.'* Bryant presided, and speeches were made by Professor Perry, of Williams College, Wells, Atkinson, Simon Sterne'^ and Lloyd. Both Adams and Greeley were applauded when their names were mentioned'* but the sentiment of the partici- pants was uncompromisingly hostile to the Cincinnati convention and all its works. Wells was the only speaker who did not openly declare his intention to bolt, and he said that he had "been in the woods" ever since the conven- tion. The others denounced in strong and picturesque rhetoric the trickery of the politicians, and, rejecting both Grant and Greeley, held that the free-traders should seek a standard-bearer of their own. Atkinson suggested as a suitable candidate C. F. Adams of Massachusetts, Groes- beck or Cox of Ohio, and, probably out of courtesy to the venerable chairman, Bryant of New York.'^ Before adjourning the meeting adopted resolutions denouncing the work of the Cincinnati convention, pie dging themselves to continue the reform agitation, and empowering the chair- man to appoint a committee to aid if possible in securing the nomination of acceptable reform candidates.'' Such a committee composed of some of the most active free- '* Prominent representatives from both parties, like John A. Dix, Charles O'Conor, and John N. Griswold, were on the list of vice-presi- dents but none of them were present. N. Y. Times, May 31. " Sterne claimed that he was the only regular Democrat taking part in the meeting. "The Tribune's account of the meeting (May 31) made much of the demonstration for its candidate, but the Evening Post (June 4) claimed that Greeley claqueurs of a not very respectable sort were scattered through the audience, but that the real enthusiasm was for Adams. Atkinson wrote to Sumner (June l) that the marked feature of the meeting was the enthusiasm shown for Adams at every mention of his name. Sumner MSS. '' Bryant considered it necessary to issue a card Quly 8) stating that the mention of his name as a presidential candidate was "absurd." Godwin, Bryant, II, 323 f. ^N. Y. Tribune, May 31; Evening Post, May 31, June 4. 114 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT traders of the City was at once named.'^ But definite action looking to a new ticket was delayed until the assur- ance of Grant's unanimous renomination by the Republi- cans removed the last hope of a more acceptable candidate from that party. Though the regular Republicans ridiculed and belittled the Liberal defection,*" there was much anxiety in admin- istration circles as to the course of politics, preceding and after the Cincinnati convention. No efforts, financial, managerial, or oratorical were spared to elect the party ticket in the "Spring States."*^ As a counterstroke to the Liberal meeting in Cooper Institute,^ Grant's supporters in the City, acting with his approval and assistance," had taken the unprecedented step of calling a mass meeting, April 17, to endorse the administration. General Sickles appeared as the chief apologist, and letters of endorsement from Republican congressional delegations were presented." In April when C. F. Adams was being discussed as the probable Liberal candidate, he was offered, through Senator Conkling, the Republican nomination for vice-president.^ "Everything political, English and American," wrote Mrs. Blaine to her son on May i, "seems to be in a sort of "J. J. Cisco was chairman, Sands, Minturn, Pell and Lloyd were among the members. N. Y. Tribune, May 31. ^^ See typical editorials in the 5orfo« .4 dzier/wer, Jan. 30, Apr. i and Blaine's reassuring letter to his son. Mar. 6, Hamilton, Blaine 298. Grant predicted in a letter to Washburne, May 26, that the Liberal ticket would not be kept in the field. He thought that Greeley's nomi- nation had "apparently harmonized the [Republican] party by getting out of it the 'soreheads' and knaves who made all the trouble because they could not control." Grant, Letters to a Friend, 69. ^' Lyford, Rollins, 266-270; Oberholtzer, Cooke, II, 352. " See above, p. 59 f. « Porter to Clews, Apr. 17, 19, Clews, Twenty Eight Years in Wall Street, 319 f. " N. Y. Times, Apr. i8; N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 18; Nation, Apr. 25, p. 265. ** Adams, Adams, 392, THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE II5 snarl. Things, I believe, will all come out right. Your father was so impressed with the fatal influence which any concession on the part of Mr. Fish would have on our po- litical situation, that he went in to talk over matters with him Sunday evening. Was there till a very late hour."^^ And again, a fortnight later, she wrote : "And just now people are constantly coming to him [Speaker Blaine] to talk on the presidential question. What can be done with the situation, occupies all heads, and some few good people put their hearts over the bars."^' Some of Sumner's Republi- can friends besought him, before and after the Liberal con- vention, not to abandon the party.*' But, in spite of all fears for the outcome, there was no serious movement within the party to put up a new candidate. With the advantage of his position, as before noted,*' Grant's renomination was inevitable*" and after the Liberal convention probably none of the leading opponents of the administration, ex- cept Sumner, expected a different result. Up to the time of the assembling of the Republican con- vention, Sumner's course in the campaign had remained in doubt. He was known to be friendly to the Liberal move- ment, and it was reported in March that he was to preside over its convention.^i In an interview he spoke highly of the aims and personnel of the approaching gathering,^^ and even went so far, in private, as to draft resolutions for its * Hamilton, Blaine, 300. " Mrs. Blaine's Letters, I, 126. *^ Bowen to Sumner, Feb., Sumner MSS.; Wilson to Sumner, Mar. 17, ibid, (regretting the "terrible fact" that they are to take different sides in the campaign); Forney to Sumner, May 13, ibid. Other ap- peals of this sort mentioned in Pierce, Sumner, IV, 520. *' See above, p. 40. '" See editorial in the Boston Advertiser, Mar. 29, on the general lack of opposition to the selection of Grant delegates. " Chicago Tribune, Mar. 16; Nation, Mar. 21, p. 177. '2 Chicago Tribune, Mar. 23. Il6 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT platform.^' But the most urgent entreaties from close personal friends who were going into the movement failed to bring him out openly for the Liberal cause.^* After the convention, he pointed out Greeley's strong quaHties but otherwise remained non-committal.^* He seems still to have had a fatuous hope of defeating Grant's renomination.*' In a speech in the Senate on May 31, just before the Re- publican convention, while some of the delegates thereto were in the galleries, he made a last desperate effort to overthrow the President by a rhetorical onslaught. This "philippic of the classic type" was a passionate arraignment of Grant ■on well-nigh all the charges of public and private misdoings that had ever been brought against him. A wide range of history, not to mention the Bible, Virgil, Juvenal, and Shakespeare, was traversed to illustrate and substantiate his case, and Stanton's dying condemnation of the General was dramatically invoked.*' The speech was answered three 5' Those concerning equality before the law and the finality of the war amendments. The resolutions were brought to the convention by F. W. Bird. Pierce, IV, 519. Liberal leaders hoped to win Sumner by an emphatic pronouncement on these matters. Wells to Trumbull, Apr. 22, Trumbull MSS.; Wells to Sumner, Apr. 14, Sumner MSS.; Atkinson to Sumner, Apr. 11, ibid. Sumner evidently wrote a letter in iVIarch to a radical friend in Louisiana to influence Republicans of that state to go for the Liberals. Greeley obtained this letter and desired to make it public. T. W. Conway to Sumner, Apr. 2, Sumner MSS. " See letters to Sumner from the following in the Sumner MSS. : Bowles, Mar. 9, 30, Apr. 14; Scovel, Mar. 22; Reid, Mar. 28; Wilkes, Apr. 5; Barney, Apr. 6; Robinson, Apr. 9; Bird, Apr. n; White, Apr. 13; Atkinson, Apr. 8, 11, 13; Wells, Apr. 14. See summary of these letters in Pierce, IV, 516. 5' Pierce, IV, 519. ^ Ibid., 515, 519. A telegram, dated May 22, from Arkansas Re- publicans asking if the report was true that Sumner had come out for Greeley, is endorsed on the back in Sumner's handwriting and was evidently his reply: "I wait action of Philadelphia Convention hoping for norainati (sic) that will unite Republican party which Grant cannot, Charles Sumner." Sumner MSS. "Sumner's Works, XV, 83-171; Pierce, IV, 523-526; Cong. Globe,- 42 Cong., 2 Sess., 41 10 fF; Nation, June 6, p. 366. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE II7 days later, in language equally vigorous and personal, if less classical, by such able advocates as Logan and Carpenter, who fully reassured the friends of the administration.** Sumner's "philippic" was generally looked upon as a spe- cial plea against Grant's renomination by a man nursing a personal grievance,*' and while it furnished abundant cam- paign material of a sort it was utterly futile at so late a day against the solid administration ranks at Philadelphia.'" The convention there being wholly controlled by the " machine", '1 a unanimous and enthusiastic support of the President was abundantly manifested. In the open- ing session eulogistic speeches of the good campaign sort were made by Logan, Gerrit Smith, Morton, Oglesby, and others who all took for granted General Grant's unan- imous renomination.*^ The nomination itself was staged with all the proper effects.*' The substitution of Senator Henry Wilson for Colfax, after a considerable contest, was made at the wish of the President.** Colfax had been '* Cong. Globe, 42 Cong., 2 Sess., Appendix, 522-530, 548-563; Flower, Carpenter, 395-401. '" Cf. Storey, Sumner, 415; N. Y. Herald, June 3; Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, June 11; Curtis to Sumner, June 5, Sumner MSS.; Robinson to Sumner, June 24, Robinson, "Warrington," 354 f.; Lippincotts Mag- azine, Sept., pp. 352-355. Curtis wrote Norton (June 30) that the speech was "unpardonable." Cary, Curtis, 230. *" The Springfield Republican (weekly, June 21) said that Sumner had made a serious mistake in not making his speech before the Cincinnati convention. See to the same effect, Atlantic Monthly, Aug., pp. 253 f.; Nation, June 13, p. 381; Pierce, IV, 527. «' The Nation's correspondent wrote that the convention's work was "so thoroughly cut and dried that it was impossible to be in any way excited over its progress to completion." Nation, June 13, p. 388. *^ Proceedings of the Phila. Con., 10 ff. " CuUom, Recollections, 174. The Nation (June 13, p. 381) said that the nomination was made "with much elaborate 'enthusiasm.' " "White, 393; Austen, Tyler, 74. Bowles wrote to Colfax, Apr. 5: "I find a growing conviction that the people who are running the 'ma- chine' mean to slaughter you at Philadelphia." HoUister, Colfax, 371. Il8 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT opposed by Cameron and had aroused the enmity of Wash- ington newspaper men,^^ while the nomination of the pop- ular Massachusetts leader was considered an appropriate offset in his state to Sumner's defection and a good bid for the labor vote.^^ From the standpoint of the good of the party organization,*' as well as from that of personal fit- ness, as it later proved,'^ the change was wise. Colfax apparently took his defeat in good part.*' The organiza- tion, relieved of the disturbing independents, was well united for the campaign. Bowles, with his usual fairness, wrote from the convention : "The republican national con- vention is claimed by its friends and conceded by its foes, to have proved a great success. Its close to-day was on the whole as brilliant as its opening yesterday."'" And the Republican in its editorial comment admitted that "At present the omens are certainly with Philadelphia."'' The renomination of Grant on a platform clearly endors- ing protection,'^ afforded the tariff reformers no comfort." If they were to have a ticket to their liking they must act at once. Some of the more zealous and less reasonable among them had still hoped for a new ticket after the Steinway Hall conference.'^ But the more practical mem- bers of the 61ite, like Schurz, Bowles, and White, had now '^Hollister, 373; Nation, June 13, p. 387. •' Hollister, 373; Nation, June 13, p. 381. "' Cf. Nation, June 13, p. 381; "Warrington's" letter in Springfield Weekly Republican, June 21. «8 Cf. CuUora, 175. «9 Hollister, 375. ''"Springfield Weekly Republican, June 14. "■ Idem. '^ Stanwood, Hist, of the Presidency, 347. " Cf. editorial in Springfield Weekly Repvblican, June 14. "See, for instance, Atkinson to Sumner, June I, Sumner MSS. Wells wrote to Trumbull (June 15) that the coming conference might have an "important influence" though he did not explain in just what way. Trumbull MSS. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE II9 come to the conclusion that the nomination by the free- traders of a new candidate like Adams would simply split up the opposition. They favored Greeley's election in preference to Grant's, and realized that the only hope of such an outcome was in the union of all of the opposition. This they knew would be impossible so long as there was any chance of a new ticket; and the best plan seemed to be the calling of a conference in which all elements of the op- position should be represented to ascertain the relative strength of the Greeley and the anti-Greeley forces. By this means, they thought, some of the extreme free-traders even might be led to support Greeley as the only avail- able opposition candidate.'* Schurz, having received as- surances of Greeley's good intentions and of his deep re- spect for the great Liberal mentor,'* was gradually adapting himself to the idea of supporting the leader whom fate and the politicians had given the cause at Cincinnati." Now he wanted, instead of his "assembly of notables," this all- opposition conference of Democrats and Greeley Liberals as well as of pronounced reformers.'* The invitations were to be issued by the leading free- traders in pursuance of the action of the Steinway Hall meeting." On June 6, the day of Grant's renomination, letters were sent out from New York City, signed by Schurz, Cox, Bryant, Ottendorfer, and Jacob Brinkerhoff, to "Schurz to Grosvenor, June 5, Schurz's Writings, II, 379-381; White to Trumbull, June 13, Trumbull MSS. " White to Schurz, June 9, 15, Schurz's Writings, II, 382 f. " In his letter to Greeley of May 1 1 he was giving advice about the letter of acceptance. Ibid., $72. In his letter of Junes to Grosvenor he said that if he tried to accept the ticket then "the words would stick in my throat." But he would do his best "when the issues are finally made up." Ibid., 381. " Nation editorial, June 27, p. 416. See also Governor Randolph's speech in the New Jersey Democratic state convention on the origin of the Fifth Avenue gathering. N. Y. Tribune, June 27. " Nation, June 13, p. 381; see above, p. 113. 120 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT about two hundred Liberals and Democrats in all parts of the country, inviting them to meet in conference at the Fifth Avenue Hotel on June 20 "for the purpose of con- sultation, and to take such action as the situation of things may require." The committee professed to deem it neces- sary that all the elements of opposition be united for a common effort in the presidential election.'" Youthful members of the Free Trade League, especially the Lloyd brothers, were most active in making the arrangements. '^ Nevertheless the New York Tribune, assuming that the aim of the conference would be to consider the best means of uniting the opposition, and that it could reach but one conclusion — the necessity of supporting Greeley to defeat Grant — showed an entirely friendly attitude.*^ About one hundred persons from twenty states attended the Fifth Avenue meeting. '^ The Tribune analyzed the gathering as thirty Greeley men, fifteen "violent anti- Greeley men" and the rest "open to conviction."'* The leading independents from New England, New York, and the Middle West were all on hand.'' Among the prom- inent Democrats in attendance were ex-Governor Pills- bury of Maine, ex-Governor English of Connecticut, ex- Governor Randolph and Senator Stockton of New Jersey, ex-Secretary Stuart of Virginia, ex-Governor Graham of ^"Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 779. Copies of this letter are in both the Sumner and the Trumbull MSS. The notice was given a con- spicuous place in the New York dailies. «' Lloyd, Lloyd, I, 33, 37. ^ N. Y. Tribune editorials, June 15, 18, 20; Reid's comment on Wat- terson's article in Century Magazine, LXXXV, 44. ^ N. Y. Tribune, June 21. Seven southern states were represented. ** Ibid., June 22. ** The Tribune claimed (June 22) that a large number of young men from the City were brought in to applaud the speakers of the Free Trade League. Cox was chairman, Bryant vice-president and H. D. Lloyd secretary. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE 121 North Carolina, B. H. Hill and H. W. Hillard of Georgia.^' Probably the most pronounced Greeley men present were William Dorsheimer of New York and J. B. Grinnell of lowa.*^ Senator Fenton was stopping at the hotel and his rooms were filled with politicians to whom reports were brought from time to time of what was going forward in the convention, although the proceedings were supposed to be entirely secret.*' It was soon apparent that the conferees were overwhelm- ingly opposed to the launching of a new ticket. Senator Trumbull opened the formal discussion with a strong plea for a union on Greeley as the only hopeful means of de- feating Grant.*' To get more directly the sentiment of the different sections represented, the states were called upon in alphabetical order. The responses indicated clearly the general situation: the southern Liberals and Democrats were solidly and enthusiastically for Greeley; the promoters of the Liberal movement in the Middle West, with the ex- ception of certain prominent German leaders and ultra- free-traders, would support the Cincinnati ticket; of the eastern representatives, all but one or two Democrats and all of the Liberals not connected with the League advocated union under the Greeley banner. But the pronounced free-traders of New England, New York, and Ohio were as hostile as ever to the proposed mis-alliance.'" Schurz made the last and most notable speech of the con- ference. He showed conclusively that it was now too late to think of a more acceptable ticket. Such a ticket would not be endorsed by the Democratic convention, and their only hope of defeating Grant was in uniting on the candi- ™ See list in ibid., June 21. '' The Tribune said (June 18) that so far as it knew none of the " prom- nent friends" of Greeley had been invited. " Ibid., June 22. ^^ Ibid., June 21; White, 391. "' N. Y. Tribune, June 21, 22; Evening Post, June 25. 122 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT dates that they had in the field. Personally, he con- fessed frankly, he would have favored a "more conserva- tive ticket," but he "felt at this time with such public interests at stake, men must seek, not personal ideas, but practical good, and the nearest practical good they could accomplish." The foremost of the "public considerations" which determined his course at this time, he said, was the situation at the South. The people of that section were manifesting a desire for a thorough reconciliation through this movement. They felt that the Liberal movement meant for them enfranchisement and freedom from further oppressions. Under no circumstances could he take a step which would aid in continuing the present oppressive administration and in repelling the sincere advance toward a reconciliation of the sections.^' To his reform friends, who were inclined to carp at him for supporting a man like Greeley, he gave the same explanation of his course — the exigencies of the South. ^^ He was entirely correct in hold- ing that the only hope of defeating the Republicans and of hastening full home rule at the South was in uniting the opposition solidly upon the Liberal ticket. No one was more disappointed at the outcome of the Cincinnati con- vention, but, with his convictions regarding the tendencies of the present administration, his most honorable course was to play the game to the finish. At any rate, it was not for the visionary, inefficient doctrinaries to upbraid him for " Summary of speech in N. Y. Tribune, June 21. For a critical and not altogether fair review of it, see Nation, June 27, pp. 413, 416. '2 Schurz to Godkin, June 23, Schurz's Writings, II, 384. Schurz, years later, made this statement regarding his policy in this confer- ence : "I realized that it was a fine chance to make a protest and a declaration of principles, but loyalty to the bolting South forced me to support Greeley.'' Lloyd, I, 35. For a reflective estimate by a con- temporary of the influence of Schurz's speech, see Brinkerhoff, Recol- lections, 220. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE 1 23 inconsistency. If, as Schurz cuttingly told them,^' they had gone to Cincinnati and expended only a portion of the energy there that they were now devoting to protesting against the convention's action, they might have saved the day. The resolutions submitted to the conference by Parke Godwin, a reformer of the type to which Schurz referred, furnish an excellent example of the advanced reforms de- manded by this group and of their wholly unworkable plans. The chief of Godwin's demands were: a reorgan- ization of the finances with a revenue tariff and a return to specie payments; a thorough reform of the civil service; a substitution for the corrupt and oligarchical national convention of "spontaneous nominations," and the direct election of president and vice-president; the abolition of the franking privilege; that since the Liberal candidates lacked the requisite qualifications to deal with the great problems that would confront the next adminis- tration, there be substituted for them Charles Francis Adams and William S. Groesbeck; and finally, that the persons present should pledge themselves to labor with all their might for the success of this new ticket. To give unity to their efforts and to distinguish them from other political organizations, they were to "assume the name of the American Democratic-Republican party. "''' No action was taken on Godwin's resolutions, but after the conference the radical free-traders made a demonstra- tion hardly less quixotic. Following Schurz's speech. Cox sought to restore good feeling among the reformers by urging them, since it was likely that they would act to- gether either in the present campaign or in future ones, not to indulge in extreme criticisms that must tend to '' See his opening remarks in his speech at the conference, N. Y. Tribune, June 21. ** Ibid., June 22. 124 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT embarrass their hearty and harmonious cooperation.'* A resolution was then adopted to adjourn the conference sine die, "without any further expression of opinion than those had from the individual members."'^ But as the delegates were leaving, Judge Stallo announced a meeting next day of those opposed to the present action.'' This rump convention was attended by only about twenty-five, more than half of whom were from New York or Ohio.'^ With all inharmonious elements excluded, their unanimity was perfect; they could denounce protectionists to their hearts' content. Resolutions were adopted containing an emphatic statement of the reforms called for in the Missouri Liberal platform, and strongly condemning both Grant and Greeley. As an especial shot at politicians and existing parties, one of their resolutions declared "That undue de- votion to party has already greatly damaged the republic, and we now engage ourselves to discountenance, in every possible way, the despotism of party organization, and the abject submission of voters to the dictates of party poli- ticians." Not satisfied with the declaration of their prin- ciples, they proceeded to nominate a ticket of their own with William S. Groesbeck, of Ohio, a prominent independent Democrat, for president, and Frederick Law Olmsted, the " N. Y. Tribvne June 21. ■* Idem. " Idem. '* The N. Y. Tribune (June 22) gives a list of twenty-two of the "most prominent." The best known names were Ottendorfer, Lloyd, Seamon, Sterne, and Bacon of New York; Atkinson of Massachusetts; Dexter, Oliver, Stallo, and Collins of Ohio. Cox left after a vain at- tempt to dissuade the meeting from taking any action that would further disorganize the opposition. The Springfield Weekly Republican (June 28) said that these men were the least influential of those participating in the Fifth Avenue conference. The Chicago Tribune (June 25) said that the second conference was composed of six Democrats and eight Republicans, the latter being "respectable gentlemen, indeed, but too transcendental for this age of the world." THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE I25 noted New York artist, for vice-president." The adminis- tration press spoke with great respect of the new ticket/"" welcoming any movement that promised a further division of the opposition, while the Bourbon Chicago Times warmly advocated Groesbeck's endorsement by the Democrats."' But the reformers' ticket had but a brief existence. The next day Olmsted issued a card declining the honor,"^ and about a month later, Groesbeck came out for Greeley.'"' Thus, in spite of its failure to conciliate all of the reform- ers,'"^ the Fifth Avenue conference had most favorable results for Greeley. The Liberals were united in his support so far as that could be brought about.'"^ The con- ference had afforded the opportunity for the great Liberal leader, Schurz, to come out squarely for the Cincinnati " iV. Y. Tribune, June 22; Lloyd, I, 36. For an appreciative esti- mate of the work of this gathering, see Nation, June 27, p. 413. "» See editorials in the N. Y. Times, June 22, and the Albany Evening Journal, June 22. 1°' Chicago Times, June 24. i<» N. Y. Tribune, June 24. ^"^ Ibid., July 30; Nation, Aug. 1, p. 65. Greeley wrote to Glancy Jones, June 27: "I would not crowd Groesbeck. He will be all right." Jones, Jones, II, 154. "" The Evening Post (June 25) deplored the lack of enthusiasm for reform shown by the southerners and thought that "the meeting fur- nished a rather disheartening illustration of the partisan condition of politics, and of the profound want of respect even among those calling themselves reformers, for the animating spirit of reform, in other words, principle." The Nation strongly criticized Schurz for going over to Greeley. See editorial, June 27, p. 416. Henry D. Lloyd wrote, June 24, that the reformers made a great mistake in following Schurz and not striking out for themselves. "We tried once more to unite fire and gun- powder without an explosion and succeeded as well as we deserved." Lloyd, I, 37. "* Cf . Springfield Weekly Republican, June 28; Atlantic Monthly, Aug., p. 255. 126 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ticket.'"* Greeley's paper could see nothing but good to the cause of its candidate from the independent demonstration. It considered very lightly the defection of the Free Trade Leaguers "who went to Cincinnati thoroughly convinced that the salvation of the country depended upon the im- mediate abolition of the duty on pig iron, a mere economic question, a question of detail for a ways and means com- mittee."'"' But the Tribune was greatly rejoiced at the overwhelming sentiment expressed for the Liberal candi- dates and particularly the pledges of support, which the occasion had called forth, from Schurz and Trumbull. "The meeting has harmonized the discordant element and largely conquered the discontent. To-day the Liberal movement is united and confident with Lyman Trumbull and Carl Schurz at its head."'"' The sentiments expressed in the Fifth Avenue confer- ence foreshadowed the action of the reform group of the Liberals. The editorial "quadrilateral" supported Greeley faithfully throughout the campaign.'"' The Springfield Republican, the most discriminating of their journals, de- clared at the outset that it was not a "Greeley organ" and that "while celebrating his many and great virtues, it will not conceal his few and conspicuous vices. It will strive to present him as he is, and to contrast him with Gen. Grant as he is, and not to paint either as he is not.""" Bowles, in the main, seems to have lived up to this ideal of campaign "* The Christian Union (June 26, p. 10) observed: "Indeed, it looks to us ... as if the conference had come together — ^like the famous German dwarfs of the fairy story, to hump their backs to form a bridge upon which their countryman, good Carl Schurz, could walk over to Mr. Greeley. He is safe over !" Cf. Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign," 41. "' N. Y. Tribune, June 26. '"* IMd., June 21. ""See editorial on "The Independent Press" in Golden Age, Nov. 9. "» Springfield Weekly Republican, June 14. THE LIBERALS AND THEIR CANDIDATE 127 journalism remarkably well."' Schurz"^ and Trumbull"' both entered actively into the campaign, and made a num- ber of effective speeches. Those of the former were, as his biographers put it, "naturally against Grant rather than for Greeley. "1" But he rendered good service to the cause where it was sorely needed — among the German element — and won the deep gratitude of the Liberal candidate."^ Other prominent independents, like Grosvenor in Mis- souri,"^ Koerner in Illinois,"' Brinkerhoff in Ohio,"* Judge Selden in New York,"' and Bird in Massachusetts,'^" were among the active Liberal campaigners. Judge Chase throughout the campaign expressed his preference for Greeley whenever he had opportunity.'^' Sumner, as will be noted, '^ came out for Greeley rather late in the campaign. On the other side, the Nation,^'^^ the Evening Post^^'^ and the Atlantic Monthly^^^ supported Grant, frankly as a choice '" Cf. Merriam, II, 193. "2 See his St. Louis speech of July 22, in his Writings, II, 392 ff. Greeley wrote to Glancy Jones soon after the Fifth Avenue conference (June 24): "Do not distrust Schurz. He is all right." Jones, Jones, 11, 154- 1" White, 394-399- 1" Bancroft- Dunning, Schurz' s Political Career, 352. "* Greeley to Schurz, Nov. 10. Schurz's Writings, II, 443. '"> See his speech at the Fifth Avenue conference in N. Y. Tribune, June 21. "' Koerner, Memoirs, II, 560 ff. "s Brinkerhoff, 222. "' Campaign speeches in N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 19, Oct. 21. 120 Nation, Aug. 29, p. 129; Oct. 24, p. 258. ™ Schuckers, Chase, 593; Warden, Chase, 734; Hooper to Sumner, July 2, Sumner MSS. Galusha A. Grow's biographers say that Grow "gave Greeley his moral but not his active support.'' DuBois and Mathews, Grow, 274. 122 See below, p. I55- "^Nation, June 27, pp. 414, 416; July 11, p. 20; Aug. 15, p. 100; Aug. 22, p. 116; Oct. 17, p. 244. 1" Evening Post editorial, Oct. 25. ^'^ Atlantic Monthly, July, p. 127 f.; Aug., p. 256. 128 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT of evils. The German press was, for the most part, never reconciled to Greeley. ^^^ Matthews ^' and Hoadly^^* went back to the Republicans. Stallo refused to vote for either candidate,"^ and Cox would take no part in the canvass, as he considered that there must be a complete reorganiza- tion of parties before the needed reforms could be secured.^'" The bulk of the New England independents,'^^ especially the "Adams men," and practically all of the leading mem- bers of the Free Trade League''^ in New York finally op- posed the Liberal ticket. ^^ Statements of German editors in the Fifth Avenue conference, N. Y. Tribune, June 21; Stoats Zeitung, quoted in ibid., Sept. 7, 20; Evening Post, Oct. i. 12' Warden, 732; N. Y. Times, Aug. 3. '2' Campaign speech, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 26. '^^ St. Louis speech, quoted in Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, Sept. 24. "" Cox to Sumner, Aug. 3, Sumner MSS. '^' See editorials criticizing the attitude of the independents in the Springfield Weekly Republican, June 28, Oct. 18; Robinson, " Warring- ton," 136, 354, 355, 357; Adams, Adams, 392. An excellent statement of the point of view and ideas of the New England independents is given in the speech of C. F. Adams, Jr., at Quincy, Sept. 30, and printed in the Springfield Weekly Republican, Oct. 4. ^^ Mahlon Sands, the secretary of the League, in a letter to the World, Nov. 8, wrote: " I do not know of a single free-trade delegate to Cincinnati from this State, with the exceptions above stated [Selden and Dorsheimer] who voted for Mr. Greeley or even said a word in his favor." N. Y. World, Nov. 11. CHAPTER V THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION From the more or less definite assurance of Democratic leaders/ the Liberals, when they went into their national convention, were relying on the support of that party. Had they named a relatively unobjectionable candidate there could have been little doubt of a harmonious coalition, but the outcome at Cincinnati unsettled the situation. Greeley, while on most issues as much on common ground with the Democrats as any pronounced Republican would have been, had by his peculiar style of journalism tended to give an exaggerated emphasis to his opposition.^ But the party had made too great calculations on the movement and done too much to promote it to withdraw easily at this late day. Their main reliance of carrying the election had • John Van Buren, Governor Hoffman's secretary, assured Wells in a letter, April 20: "One thing rely upon — you need do nothing at Cincinnati except with reference to drawing Republicans into the movement. Disregard the Democrats. The movement of that side will take care of itself. There will be no cheating nor holding back on their side. They will go over in bulk and with a will." Quoted by Wells to Trumbull, Apr. 22, Trumbull MSS., and by Trumbull to White, Apr. 24, White, Trumbull, 379. See also letters of Marble and Belmont to Schurz, Apr. 23, White, 373. 2 Cf. Blsiine, Twenty Years of Cong., II, 524; Rhodes, VI, 430 f. R. B. Hayes wrote in his diary. May 6, that if the Democrats adopted Greeley they might win by a large majority, but he thought that an attempt to secure his endorsement would cause a dissent in the party that would make possible Grant's reelection. Williams, Hayes, I, 367. Grant wrote to Washburne, May 26: "I predict that Greeley will not even be a candidate when the election comes off. The Democrats are not going to take him, and his following in the Republican ranks is not sufficient to make up an electoral ticket, nor is it composed of respectability enough to put on such a ticket. " Grant, Letters to a Friend, 69. 10 129 130 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT been in uniting with the discontented Republicans, and they were well assured that this element would support Grant rather than a straight Democratic candidate.' Under these circumstances, the party's leaders would not act precipitately. A. K. McClure, after the Liberal nom- inations had been made, ''was surprised to find before mid- night that a number of the Democratic leaders there sent out instructions to their States to hold themselves in readi- ness to accept the Liberal Republican ticket."* The Demo- cratic national committee met in New York a few days later and fixed the time and place for their national conven- tion, but took no further action.^ The most prompt and unanimous endorsement of Greeley came from the South. The abuses of radical rule were felt, of course, most grievously in this section, and there now seems to have been little confidence in the Democratic party, acting alone, as an agent of deliverance. Greeley's sym- pathetic and conciliatory attitude toward the South since the close of the war had done much to counteract the resent- ment at his course in the past and to create a kindly feeling for him in that section.* And certain southern leaders, who had no enthusiasm or respect for Greeley himself, accepted his candidacy as a possible opportunity for the South to extricate herself from her discredited position.' Prominent Democratic leaders all over the South early declared for coalition' and by far the greater number of influential south- 3 Blaine, II, 525. * McClure, Old Time Notes, II, 336. ' Some of the members, in newspaper interviews, commented on the political outlook in their states. Chicago Tribune, May 9. ^ Cf. Blaine, II, 525; Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign," 40; Ross, "Horace Greeley and the South, 1865-1872." 'Lamar to Rumelin, May 6, July 15, Mayes, Lamar, 170 f. 'See letters in Greenville Enterprise, May 29; Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 119; Harrell's letter in N. Y. World, May 14; B. H. Hill's speech at Atlanta in June, Hill, Hill, 350 ff. See also IngersoU, Greeley, 547 and an editorial in the Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION I3I ern papers advocated that policy.' Roger Pryor, returning from a southern trip a couple of weeks after the Liberal convention, reported that the southern delegates would come to the Democratic convention solidly for Greeley.'" The only marked opposition from this section developed in Georgia, where the Stephens brothers and Robert Toombs bitterly opposed an endorsement of Greeley, but even here the coalition sentiment prevailed." In the West, with the exception of the German element of the party, the Liberal nominations were, on the whole, apparently well received. Henry Watterson, the Demo- cratic member of the "quadrilateral" of editors, in his report of the convention to his Courier- Journal, made a strong plea for Democratic endorsement. Greeley's ex- ceptional 'running qualities' were set forth at length, and the impotence of the Democrats acting by themselves was warningly emphasized. "No man in himself," Watterson had the audacity to assert, "could possess fewer objection- able traits to the Democrats, who will take him, if they take the movement which put him in the field, with real enthu- siasm." It would have required no little effort, he was convinced, to overcome the Democratic prejudice for a candidate like Adams or Trumbull, but despite all the poli- ticians, the masses of the Democrats would "go it with a whoop" for Greeley. In spite of this assurance, however, ° See editorials in the Southern Recorder, May 7, 21; Greenville Enter- prise, May 8, 15; Charleston Courier, quoted in the Greenville Enterprise, May 22; Richmond Whig and Advertiser, May 10, quoting a dozen Vir- ginia papers all conditionally for Greeley; lists of southern papers supporting the Liberal ticket in N. Y. Tribune, May 10, 11, 18, and in the Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10. The N. Y. World, with its strong anti-Greeley bias, thus analyzed the southern press (May 14): S. C, Tenn., and Mo. enthusiastically and almost unanimously for Greeley; Ga., N. C., La., Md., Del. for a straight Democratic ticket; Va., Ala., Ky. divided. '" Quoted in San Francisco Evening Bulletin, May 22. "Avery, Ga., 501; Hill, 65, 350 ff.; Phillips, Toombs, 267. 132 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Watterson made his final appeal to expediency. "On the whole, the Democracy cannot do better than to prepare to support them [Greeley and Brown], for it requires but little foresight to see that it is that or four more years of Grant and Grantism, misrule at the North and bayonet rule at the South, with no end of dangerous possibilities. "'' Wil- liam Allen, of Ohio, the old Jacksonian war-horse, was no less enamored of the editor of the Tribune. "From the beginning of the movement," he told a reporter, " I con- sidered Greeley of all candidates named, the one around whom the masses of the Democratic party could most easily rally, and they would with rare exceptions rally around him, and elect him, if the leaders pursued the part of wis- dom by avoiding a nomination at Baltimore."" Certain leading party organs of the Middle West hoisted the Liberal ticket immediately, subject to the action of their national convention," and only two influential sheets stood out up to the last against a coalition. ^^ The way in which Demo- cratic sentiment rapidly came around to the Liberal candi- dates is well shown in Wisconsin. The foremost Demo- cratic paper in that state (the Milwaukee News) was at first strongly inclined to think that the Democrats would make separate nominations,^^ but it requested to be informed of the party sentiment in all sections of the state." The result of its canvass, reported a week later, was that all but four of the Democratic papers in the state were favor- 12 Watterson's letter printed in Chicago Tribune, May 9. " Interview in Cincinnati Enquirer, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 14. " Besides the Courier- Journal, the Missouri Republican, May 4, and the Cincinnati Enquirer, St. Louis Times, and Indianapolis Sentinel, quoted in the N. Y. Tribune, May 10 and in the N. Y. Herald, May 11. The Madison Democrat (May 4) put Greeley and Brown at the head of its column under the caption, "Reform Candidates." " Chicago Times and Detroit Free Press, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 18. 16 Milwaukee News, May 4. "Ibid., May 5. THE DEMOCRATIC -LIBERAL COALITION 1 33 able to coalition, and of the members of the central com- mittee expressing an opinion, four were for Greeley, two opposed. The letters received were about five to one for the Liberal candidates, and in nearly every case a willing- ness was expressed to abide by the action of the national convention.'* In Michigan a meeting of the Democratic association at Detroit, May 21, declared in favor of "har- monizing the action of the Liberal Republican and Demo- cratic parties in the coming election. "'' Some time before the Baltimore convention, the predominant sentiment of the western Democratic leaders was for united action.^" A few recalcitrants, like Daniel Voorhees,^' of Indiana, were not sufiScient to counteract this tendency. But the real Democratic opposition to Greeley came from the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and especially Delaware in which the spirit of Bourbon De- mocracy seems at this time to have been most pronounced. The Washington Patriot, which claimed to be the official party organ, complained bitterly at first that Greeley's administration would be certain to be radical^ and that there would be no advantage in changing from one set of Republican managers to another, but it refrained from ad- vising the party as to the course it should follow.^ The next month it left the matter to the national convention whose decision would be "obligatory."^ The New York World was by far the strongest and most persistent oppo- " Milwaukee News, May 12. In less than a fortnight (May 24) this paper was strongly advocating the acceptance of the Liberal candidates and platform. " Dilla, Politics of Mich., 138; N. Y. Tribune, May 25. 2° Kerr to Trumbull, June 16, Trumbull MSS.; Nation, June 20, p. 397- ^' See account of his opposition speech in Congress in N. Y. World May 14 and his speech at Terre Haute, reported in JV. Y. Tribune, May 27. ^ Washington Patriot, May 8, 9. ^ Ibid., June 19. 134 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT nent of coalition. For a decade past the World had been contending with its Republican rival with all the bitter personalities that characterized the journalism of the period and had never failed to denounce the ideas and hold up to ridicule the political aspirations of the editor of the Tribune. It seemed, therefore, like carrying the plea of party expediency too far to ask this organ of conservative Democracy to champion the candidacy of Horace Greeley. Marble, in the South at the time of the nomination, wired his paper to oppose Greeley ,^^ and this it proceeded to do in the most thorough manner. His nomination was greeted as that of "the most conspicuous and heated opponent of the Democratic party that could be found in the whole country. "^^ The paper promised to be bound by the action of the Democratic national convention, but in the mean- time pledged itself to do everything that it could to prevent Greeley's endorsement.^* The World thus became the centre of the anti-coalition sentiment, collecting and dis- playing expressions of Democratic opposition to the Liberal ticket from all over the country .^^ But its own contribu- tions to this end surpassed them all. The epithets of abuse that Greeley had so freely hurled against the Democrats in times past were reprinted from old Tribune files,^' while his present overtures to the party were contemptuously ridi- culed.^' The Tribune's support of certain radical southern measures and its opposition to the Missouri Liberal movement ^'i So stated in World editorial. May 25. 26 Ibid., May 4. 2» Ibid., May 7. 2' For examples, see ibid., May 11, 27, June 5. 2' Ibid., June 6. The World declared (June 7) that by the time of the Baltimore convention not much of Greeley's record would remain to be canvassed by the Republican papers, and that Democrats should not be moved by anything Republicans could say against him in the remainder of the canvass, if the convention accepted him. '^ Ibid., May 23, 28. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION 1 35 of 1 870 were used to alienate conservative northern support.^" A still less exalted line of argument was that in the distribu- tion of ofifices by Greeley the Democrats would fare but slimly.'' Greeley's availability was challenged; he had always proved a weak candidate, and his election for presi- dent was utterly unthinkable.''' He was not the sort of candidate that a discriminating voter — least of all a discrim- inating Democrat — could support. "Wherever in any city of the State you find a ring organ, you find a supporter of Mr. Greeley, a candidate for whom the honest, thinking mass of Democrats could no more vote than a Jew could be persuaded to eat pork, or the Union League Club to hang upon its walls a portrait of Jefferson Davis."'' The World's recalcitrant attitude was roundly denounced by Democratic papers eager for coalition, a considerable number of them charging it with working deliberately in the interest of Grant." In the New York Democratic state convention. May 15, which attracted wide attention,'^ the influence of the pro-Greeley, machine element prevailed. The Cincinnati platform was heartily endorsed, and, while a resolution to instruct for Greeley and Brown was tabled, it was understood that the delegation would vote as a unit 30 World, May 27, 30, June 12. "The World said editorially (June 15) that if there was any possi- bility of Greeley's election he ought to give assurances that he would appoint a full Democratic cabinet, no more than the interior department, at most, should be conceded to the Liberals. But (it said) it was generally understood that Greeley desired Adams for the state depart- ment, Fenton for the treasury, Trumbull for attorney general, possibly Montgomery Blair for postmaster general, and John Cochrane for col- lector of the port of New York. '2 Ibid., May 15, 24, 29. '' Ibid., May 18. Cf. Ibid., May 20, 29. '* Ibid., May 22, 25, 29 (quoting charges of this sort); Richmond Whig and Advertiser, May 14; Mo. Republican, June 6; St. Louis Times, quoted in People's Tribune, May 29. ^ See Chicago Tribune, May 17. 136 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT for the Liberal candidates.'^ The more eminent represen- tatives of the party in the state were left ofT the delegation, which was composed largely of the ring element.^' Even Belmont, though the national chairman, was not given a vote, by reason, as he claimed, of his supposed connection with the World?^ The World charged that the convention's action was in accordance with a bargain between the Tam- many-Fenton Republicans and the ring Democrats, by which, after Greeley's nomination was secured at Cincinnati, he was to be endorsed by the Democrats of the state, and in return the Republican legislature was to stifle reform measures in order to give Governor Hoffman the opportunity to gain sufficient prestige by his vetoes to win the senator- ship.^' The true party sentiment in the state was held to be strongly antagonistic to Greeley.'*" But the leading Democrats in New York, however much chagrin they might feel at the miscarriage of their plans, considered that the best policy now was to go on with the coalition program. August Belmont, who had served faith- fully for the past dozen years as the national chairman, wrote that while Greeley was to him "the most objection- able person whom the Liberals could select," he was of the opinion that the best policy now was to endorse the Liberal candidates and platform. He thought, too, that this was the general sentiment of the party in the state.^' Samuel J. Tilden thought that the movement had been so long en- couraged by Democratic leaders and that the party had ^ N. Y. Tribune, May 16; Albany Argus, May 16. ^ Cf. Alexander, Political Hist, of N. Y., Ill, 287-289. ''Belmont to WooUey, May 21, reprinted in N. Y. World, June 8, from Cincinnati Enquirer. =" Ibid., May 17. The Nation (May 30, p. 345) thought that, while Greeley could not be a party to such a scheme, the character of his sup- porters and of the managers of the Democratic state convention, as well as the course of events thus far, lent color to such a story. " N. Y. World, May 18, 25. « Belmont to Woolley, May 21, N. Y. World, June 8. THE DEMOCRATIC -LIBERAL COALITION 1 37 come SO to count upon it that it was too late for them to back out.''^ Veteran Democrats like Horatio Seymour^ and Fernando Wood" also came over to Greeley before the Baltimore convention. But there were some old-time lead- ers who found it hard or impossible to support their erst- while vilifier. Thus John J. Taylor, a dominant leader of the party in his section of the state, whose congressional career had been cut short by his support of the Kansas- Nebraska bill,*^ protested strongly, in a letter to Tilden, against the proposed action. Greeley's endorsement, he was certain, would so divide the Democrats as to cause defeat when success was within their reach "by a judicious nomination either wholly Democratic or partly and princi- pally Liberal Republican." He thought that the party might well unite on Trumbull, Adams, Davis, Cox, and even, in last resort, Sumner; but he feared that he could not maintain his self-respect and vote for Greeley. Taylor suggested as a most acceptable combination, in case a straight Democratic ticket seemed inadvisable, Trumbull with a reform Democrat, like Tilden himself, as running mate. He was not too much of a "Bourbon" to support "with pleasure" a ticket of that sort. "I care nothing for the issues that are passed," he concluded earnestly, if not altogether ingenuously, "but Mr. Greeley is directly against *^ Tilden to Casserly, July 3, Tilden, Letters, I, 310. In declining to act as a vice-president of the Steinway Hall meeting Tilden had stated that he preferred Greeley to Grant. Tilden to Sands, May 29, ibid., 304- ■•' N. Y. Tribune, May 21. Greeley wrote to Glancy Jones, June 24: "Tilden is heartily with us and at work. So is Hancock. So is Sey- mour." Jones, Jones, W, 154. « Wood to Sumner, June 29, Sumner MSS. *^ Alexander, II, 250. In 1858 when Taylor was the Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor, the Tribune said editorially (Sept. 17, 1858) that, after the discredit that Taylor had gained by his support of the Nebraska bill, it would be disappointed if he did not run behind his ticket. 138 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT US upon the great living issues, those issues which began with our government and must last as long as it lasts. He has not besides the qualities that fit for the presidency, but others which would make him the prey of the designing and corrupt."*' All the persuasions of life-long political friends could not bring Charles O'Conor, at this time or later, to sup- port a former political foe whom he regarded as a "tender- hearted Moloch, whose life-long mission of hate has filled the land with fratricidal slaughter of the white race," and whose "chief passion" was a "love of ^clat.""*^ But such protesting voices,*^ like that of the World, were drowned amid the general cry of the politicians for success at any price. In the Pennsylvania state convention. May 30-31, there was considerable sentiment shown, especially by the dele- gates representing Democratic strongholds, for a straight party nomination at Baltimore,*^ and their resolutions con- tained the steadfast party declaration that "the Democracy of Pennsylvania can find no better platform upon which to stand than the great leading principles enunciated in the inaugural address of President JefTerson and the farewell address of the immortal Jackson; upon these two great state papers we plant ourselves and enter the contest of 1872."^° But a considerable majority of the delegates present were for Greeley and a majority of those selected for the national convention were known to favor coalition.^' * Taylor to Tilden, July 13. Tilden, Letters, I, 306 f . For similar sentiments, see J. W. Harper to Marble, Aug. 12, Harper, House of Harper, 305; Wheeler, Sixty Years of American Life, 96. "O'Conor to Tilden, Aug. 24, Bigelow, Tilden, I, 218. " In Massachusetts Robert C. Winthrop, who had never before supported a Republican ticket, declared for Grant in preference to Greeley. See Winthrop to Clifford, Aug. 8, Winthrop, Winthrop, 278. " N. Y. Tribune, May 31. ^"Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 664. " iV. Y. Tribune, June i. See also Jones to Chase, June 20, Chase MSS. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION I39 The Bourbons were greatly in evidence in the New Jersey convention, June 26, and tried, amid much excitement, to put through a resolution declaring against the nomination at Baltimore of any but a Democratic candidate. But after a conciliatory speech from ex-Governor Randolph, who explained the utter failure of the attempts since the Liberal convention to secure a more acceptable coalition candidate and urged the support of Greeley as the certain and only means of overthrowing Grant, resolutions of qualified ap- proval for the Cincinnati platform were adopted without dissent, and the state committee was instructed to unite with any other organization opposed to the present admin- istration. ^^ Still the Bourbon spirit found some expression; the state's delegation was divided.^' In Delaware, however, appeared the most pronounced exhibition of Bourbonism. In that state there had been no Liberal organization, and the Democrats had no sympathy with the movement. Senator T. F. Bayard, one of the fore- most leaders of the national as of the state Democracy, was decidedly opposed to the party's supporting a candidate from outside its own ranks.^^ The state convention, June 11, would commit itself to no platform beyond "the Declara- tion of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, desiring alone to regulate its action thereby." The war amendments were declared to be illegally adopted, "and the state of Delaware having rejected them, as a sovereign state, is not morally bound by them." To remove all doubt as to their attitude regarding the national ticket, they pledged themselves "to leave no honorable means un- '^ N. Y. Tribune, June 27; N. Y. Times, June 27. " The iV. Y. Times said (June 27) that Greeley would probably have the full support of the state's delegation, though he would not begin to poll the full party vote in the state, but in the Baltimore convention only a half of the delegation proved to be in favor of the Liberal candi- date. Proceedings of the Dem. Nat. Con. at Baltimore, 66. " Spencer, Bayard, 58. 140 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT tried to elevate to the chief magistracy of the republic a- true exponent of Democratic principles."^ But Delaware was alone in her hopeless insensibility to the appeal of party expediency. Some time before the Baltimore convention it was apparent that the Liberal ticket would be taken over with practical unanimity. Of the thirty Democratic state conventions held during May and June, twenty-six instructed for a coalition or by their resolutions favored such a policy.^' The Washington Patriot, shortly before the national convention, bowing to the inevitable, urged a union on the Liberal ticket as a choice of evils.^' Toward the end of June even the World was "reluctantly constrained to believe that the endorse- ment of Greeley at Baltimore is one of the absurd possibili- ties of American politics." Such action, it was confident, "would not represent the Democratic party but only its trading politicians. "^^ In the Baltimore convention, which was by no means representative of the best and strongest elements of the party ,^^ the machinery was all prepared for putting through the Liberal platform and candidates with the greatest show of unanimity and enthusiasm. Belmont's opening speech was an apology for the step that the party was about to ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 235; N. Y. Tribune, June 12. ^ The four not committing themselves in this way were La., Md., and Pa., not taking definite action, and Del., openly hostile. See re- ports of the conventions under the respective states in Annual Cyclo- pedia, 1872. " Washington Patriot, July I, 3, 8. 6' N. Y. World, June 25. '' The correspondent of the Nation wrote (July 18, p. 40): "A higher general average of intelligence and character was, I think, discernible at Philadelphia than here; and, indeed, there was no very successful representation of that intellectually able class which may be called the legal-minded constitutional Democracy, as distinguished from the negro-hating and office-seeking Democracy. " THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION I4I take/" and ex-Senator Doolittle as permanent chairman was well fitted to put on the humiliating program with the least embarrassment and friction. *' The resolutions committee reported the Cincinnati platform verbatim, the chairman urging that it had already been adopted by all but four state conventions.'^ The opposition to the report was ably presented by Senator Bayard. The Liberal platform, he argued, contained many things that the Democrats re- spected and adhered to, but likewise much that they desired to modify and correct. The party should go before the country with its own statement of the issues of the day, and not slavishly follow the sentiments of another organization. In this position, he asserted, he was voicing the unanimous conviction of the party in Delaware.^^ In reply, M. P. O'Connor ,^^ of South Carolina, and Judge Reagan,'* of Texas, feelingly urged a full acceptance of the Liberal platform as the only salvation for their section. The report was adopted by a vote of 670 to 62.'' The Liberal nominees were en- dorsed with like facility, Greeley receiving on the first ballot 686 votes to 38 for other candidates and 8 blank," and Brown meeting with still less opposition.'* ^^ Proceedings Baltimore Convention, 3-5. *i Cf. Nation, July 18, pp. 38 f. For Doolittle's speech, see Proceed- ings, 16-20. *2 Proceedings, 41. " Ibid., 45-48. ** Ibid., 48-50; O'Connor, O'Connor, 56-60. °* Proceedings, 51. «« Ibid., 53. The opposition came from N. J., Pa., Del., W. Va., Ga., Fta., Miss., Mo., and Ore. Delaware's vote in the negative was greeted with hisses. Ibid., 54. Greeley wrote to a friend, July 16, that, while the endorsement of the Liberal ticket had been a foregone conclusion, he was astonished that the Democrats should accept the platform. Benton, Greeley on Lincoln, etc., 226 f. " Proceedings, 66. The votes for other candidates were James A. Bayard, 15 (Del., 6; N. J., 9); Jeremiah S. Black, 21 (Pa.); William S. Groesbeck, 2 (W. Va.). The blanks were: Fla., 2; Ga., 4; W. Va., 2. •' Ibid., 67. John W. Stevenson, of Kentucky, received 6 votes from Delaware, and 13 were blank (Fla., 2; N. J., 9; W. Va., 2). Both nominations were confirmed unanimously. Ibid., 67, 71. 142 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT State coalitions were effected with equal success. In the states electing their officials this year, separate conventions were usually called by the allied organizations to meet at the same time and in the same city, and the negotiations between them were conducted by a conference committee, the proceedings in some cases being closed with a joint ratification meeting.^' In most cases the candidates were apportioned between the two parties without any serious friction.'" It was noticeable, however, that in states where the Democrats were relatively strong they appropriated the lion's share of the offices, while in Republican strong- holds the Liberals were allowed the first places on the tick- ets." The list of gubernatorial nominees that the coalition- ists put in the field was truly imposing. Of the Liberals, Francis W. Bird in Massachusetts (after the withdrawal of Sumner, the first choice), Gustave Koerner in Illinois, and Austin Blair in Michigan; and of the Democrats, Francis Kernan in New York, Charles R. Buckalew in *" For accounts of such joint conventions, see Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 13; N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 5, 6; Koerner, Memoirs, II, 560-562; Dilla, 140 f.; Wilder, Annals of Kansas, 583-585; Gue, History of Iowa, III, 50. '" In Louisiana and Arkansas there was considerable disagreement over the fusion tickets, but the matter was later adjusted in each case. Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 28, 477-481; Harrell, 145. The Georgia Liberals asked to have a representative of their faction placed on the electoral ticket, but the Democrats refused. Avery, 502. The Mo. Republican (Sept. 2) deprecated the illiberal policy of the Democrats in certain counties in the composition of their local tickets, but later (Oct. 5) declared that cases of this sort were fewer than might have been expected. A circular sent out from Connecticut Democratic headquar- ters to party workers gave this advice: "Be liberal in the distribution of offices to the Liberal Republicans; give them their full share with a view to bind them for future operations." Quoted in San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Oct. 8. " Thus in N. Y., Pa., Ind., and Mo. old-line Democrats headed the fusion tickets, while in Mass., Vt., 111., Mich., and Kan. the honor was accorded to a Liberal. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION I43 Pennsylvania, and Thomas A. Hendricks in Indiana, were all notable figures in the political annals of the period. The state forces of the coalition were thus harmoniously organ- ized for the activities of the campaign. The formal preliminaries of cooperation with the Liberals had now been arranged by the active leaders of the Democ- racy. It remained to be seen whether the rank and file of the party would carry out the bargain at the polls. From the outset, the attitude that the Democratic voters would assume towards their life-long enemy, now become their regular candidate, had been recognized on all sides as the decisive factor in the campaign. The Republicans ac- cordingly did their best in the press and on the stump to excite the traditional Democratic prejudice against Greeley. Their congressional campaign committee busied a corps of workers in culling from the files of the Tribune the choicest specimens of editorial abuse. '^ Of the ammunition thus supplied the administration organs made copious use against the coalition forces." Considerations of this sort rendered it impossible for a few leading Democrats to give Greeley a hearty support, even as the regular party candidate. Man- ton Marble relinquished his editorship of the World during the campaign in order that this leading party organ, after a preliminary expression of protest, ^^ might give a fairly cordial support to the coalition. The Sage of Deerfield with difficulty brought himself to speak for a candidate '2 Detroit Post and Tribune, Chandler, 315; Chicago Tribune, June 30. " For examples of the use of such material, see N. Y. Times, July 19; Harper's Weekly, Aug. 3; Boston Commonwealth, July 13; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 31; Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, June 18; Kan. Commonwealth, July 10, 12. See also on Greeley and the Demo- crats from a Republican viewpoint, Blaine, Political Discussions, no; Booth, Speeches, 147 ff.; Conkling's campaign speech, printed in N. V. Times, July 24. For the attempt of New York Republicans to draw off Democratic votes by naming an old-time leader of that party for governor, see below, p. 179. "See its editorial of July 11. 144 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT whose abuse of the party had been "so gross, "'^ and many- humbler Democrats must have shared his repugnance. But even Bourbons, Hke Voorhees^^ and Bayard,^' recognizing their obHgations to the regular party ticket, finally took the stump; and heroic efforts were made to give the best appearance to a humiliating situation. The Democratic voter was assured that Greeley's past denunciations of their party were merely the sounding utterances of a partisan editor in the heat of a forgotten conflict, ex- ploded shells to be disregarded.'^ Bayard, using a more congenial argument, reminded the Delaware irreconcil- ables of the cooperation of the Liberals with the Demo- crats in the past Congress, and urged that only by coalition in the present canvass could the Democrats hope to end federal tyranny at the South.'' Against the fear that coalition might mean an abandonment of principles, the faithful were assured that no Democratic principle could suffer through Greeley's success since the chief places in the cabinet and other important offices would go to true representatives of their party. ^^ Indeed the prospect that the Democrats would gain greatly by the anticipated reor- ganization of parties was much emphasized . The Democratic '^ Seymour to Tilden, Oct. 3. " But for you and Kernan, " he wrote, "I should not move this fall, as it is, I will do what I can." Tilden, Letters, I, 311. '^ Ingersoll, 566 f. '' Spencer, 58. '* Cox, Three Decades of Federal Legislation, 627; Julian, Later Speeches, 16. " Spencer, 164-166. For a similar argument, see an editorial in the People's Tribune, Oct. 16. Seymour, in private correspondence, justi- fied Democratic support of Greeley on the ground that he could "be made use of in drawing negroes out of office." Seymour to Tilden, Oct. 3, Tilden, Letters, I, 311. *" See, for instance, editorials in N. Y. World, July 17, Oct. 30. There was much discussion over the composition of Greeley's cabinet. It was widely reported that Seymour was to be secretary of state. See New York correspondent in the Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, May 31. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION 1 45 party, it was conceded, had been greatly weakened, but the impending break-up of the Republican organization would enable it to become one of the great parties of the future.*^ Such arguments for coalition, predicated upon the prospect of its success, might hold reluctant Democrats so long as the prospect remained bright. But in October, when the tide was clearly against the coalition, ^^ the Democratic voters seemed not unlikely to drift with it, and most fervent ap- peals were addressed to them from both Democratic and Liberal quarters to rally to their candidates and still save the day.'' The N. Y. Sun (quoted in Springfield Weekly Republican, Aug. 2) sug- gested this combination: state, Charles Francis Adams, Mass.; treas- ury, Sanford E. Church, N. Y.; war, John M. Palmer, 111.; navy, Austin Blair, Mich.; interior, James B. Beck, Ky.; postmaster-general, Richard Taylor, La.; attorney-general, William S. Groesbeck, Ohio. J. R. Doolittle predicted in a letter to Sumner (July 24) that Greeley would select for his secretary of state a man like Buckalew, Hendricks, or Sumner himself. Sumner MSS. In his speech at Portland, Maine, in August, Greeley said distinctly that in case of his election he would not confine his appointments to Republicans. N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 16; IngersoU, 649. " The California Liberal national committeeman issued a circular in which he argued that the Democrats would not absorb the Liberals, but that the election of Greeley would lead to the breaking up of the Republican party, and that the Liberals and Democrats would con- stitute the two great parties of the future. A copy of this circular is in the Sumner MSS. «2 See below p. 182. "See editorials in N. Y. World, Oct. 30, 31, Nov. i, 4; Washington Patriot, Oct. 24; Milwaukee News, Oct. 20; Chicago Tribune, Oct. 22; Springfield Weekly Republican, Oct. 25; Leslie's Newspaper, Nov. 2; Spirit of the Times, Oct. 12; Mo. Republican, Oct. 28. The N. Y. Tri- bune (editorial Oct. 26) declared that if the liberal ticket got the full Democratic vote there was no doubt of its success, but that if ten per cent stayed away from the polls defeat was equally certain. It vividly pictured the present low state of the party and its hopeless future, and solemnly warned Democratic voters: "Opportunities neglected are opportunities no more. Democrats who vote their party of no account in 1872 will hardly find it to vote for or against in 1876. " 146 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The common opinion that the Democratic leaders in the main were faithful to their obligations under the party com- pact,^* finds support in an examination of the character and personnel of the organized opposition that arose within the party. Some time before the Democratic national convention, an agitation was started for a representation of "true Democrats" at Baltimore who in case the regular convention endorsed the Liberal candidates should put a genuine Democratic ticket in the field. ^' Such a rival gathering, with a small attendance and not very creditable leadership, was held at Baltimore. Resolutions were adopted denouncing the action of the national convention, and declaring for states' rights and strict construction. Provision was made for the formation of a national organ- ization and the calling of a convention on September 3 at Louisville. ^^ In the meantime, the candidates of the Labor Reform party having withdrawn, negotiations were entered into by certain of their leaders with the "straight- out" Democrats. '' At a convention of one wing of the labor party, in August, it was decided to recommend Charles O'Conor of New York and Senator Saulsbury of Delaware to the Louisville convention as suitable candidates, and a committee was appointed to confer with the "straight-out" convention on the best measures to be taken for a successful campaign.'* The Louisville convention assembled on the appointed day with a good attendance. A platform was adopted declaring for states' rights and strict construction and a recognition of the interests of labor, and denouncing pro- tection and monopoly. Charles O'Conor, who had written ^ See Rhodes, VI, 433; Ingersoll, 562. ^ Circular, quoted in the N. Y. World, July 3. " Proceedings reported in the N. Y. Tribune, July 9-1 1. " N. Y. Herald, July 27, 30. «« N. Y. World, Aug. 23. THE DEMOCRATIC-LIBERAL COALITION I47 a letter to the convention setting forth his ideas of govern- ment and politics in general, was named for president with John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts for vice-president.*' Both candidates promptly decUned, but their "party" re- fused to recognize such an action and placed itself in the ridiculous position of supporting candidates against their expressed wishes.^" The "straight-outs" made pretenses of carrying on an active canvass in a number of states, and their doings were given an exaggerated prominence by the Republican press. In twenty-three states they had elec- toral tickets'^ and in three'^ state tickets as well. Conven- tions, mass meetings, and campaign organizations of this fac- tion were reported from time to time from various sections.'^ The character of the "straight-out" leaders, with a few exceptions, was not such as to make the movement a protest worthy of respect. The chief promoter of the Louisville convention was Colonel Blanton Duncan of Kentucky who after discrediting himself with the Confederacy had become a turn-coat.'^ In the campaign of 1876 he was an ardent *' McKee, Conventions and Platforms, 147 f.; Stanwood, Hist, of the Preiideracy, 349-351; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 4.-6; Chicago Times, Sept. /^-6. '" Chicago Times, Sept. 14, Oct. 10; Pomeroy's Democrat, Oct. 5, 12, 26. O'Conor wrote to Tilden, Aug. 24: "To hold an office charged with the dispensation of extensive patronage, not the world's mass of vanity would tempt me. Of course I will not be a candidate. " Bigelow, Tilden, I, 218. '' Stanwood, Hist, of Presidency, 352. '^ Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. See Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 39I1 397. 538; Dilla, 142. In New York a state ticket was not named out of deference to Apollo Hall which favored Kernan, the Democratic- Liberal candidate for governor. Pomeroy's Democrat, Oct. 6. ^^ Albany Evening Journal, Aug. 12; Chicago Times, Aug. 17, 19, 21, 23, 30, Sept. 16, 20, 23, 27, Oct. 19; N. Y. Times, Sept. 21; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Nov. i, 5; Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, Sept. 24; San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Oct. 23; Wilder, 580, 586; Davis, Politi- cal Conventions of Cal., 320; Avery, 502. '* Chicago Tribune, Aug. 9; N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 13. 148 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT green -backer.'^ The leading organs in the North were Storey's Chicago Times, "Brick" Pomeroy's Democrat, and other notorious copperhead papers about New York City.'^ The main support of the faction in the East was James O'Brien's Apollo Hall organization in New York.'' In the South the leading adherents, while in many cases eminently respectable, were of the extreme irreconcilables who had been doing so much to injure their party ever since the war, men like Alexander Stephens, Hershel V. Johnson, and Henry A. Wise.'^ It was repeatedly charged by the coali- tionists that the whole "straight-out" movement was but an administration decoy for discontented, unwary Demo- cratic voters, and there seem to have been some grounds for such a charge. The statement was widely made, with- out convincing contradiction, that the faction's literature was sent out under the franks of Republican congressmen and distributed by Republican office holders acting under the direction of the Republican congressional campaign committee, '^ and, in one state at least, the Republican lead- ers went still further in securing support for a movement whose whole tendency was to divide and weaken the opposi- tion.^"" The open affiliation of prominent "straight-outs" '* Industrial Age, Sept. 16, 1876. "* See a partial list of these papers in N. Y. Times, Aug. 2. *' N. Y. World, Aug. 28; Pomeroy's Democrat, Oct. 6. "Avery, 502; Wis. Weekly State Journal, Aug. 27. Stephens had a high opinion of Grant and his policies. See Crawford, "What the Vice-President of the Confederacy thought of General Grant. " Inde- pendent, LIX, 679 ff. '' iV. Y. Herald, Aug. 22; Chicago Tribune, Aug. 20, 21; N. Y. Trib- une, Aug. 13. ""Hamilton, "The Election of 1872 in North Carolina" in South Atlantic Quarterly, XI, 151. See also the Elmira Gazette's statement regarding the movement in southern New York, quoted in the N. Y. World, Sept. 3. Senator Morton was charged w'*^h being in consulta- tion with the managers of the Louisville convention, but he denied any knowledge of their doings. Foulke, Morton, II, 265. THE DEMOCRATIC -LIBERAL COALITION I49 with the Republicans the next year and the appointment of some of them to federal offices seemed to Democratic papers to be conclusive evidence of the truth of their charges.'"' '"'For references to such cases, see N. Y. World, Jan. 3, 1873; Mil- waukee News, May 24, 1873; Madison Democrat, Jan. 3, 1873; Mil- waukee Sentinel, Jan. 28, 1873. CHAPTER VI THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 8/2 The campaign of 1872 was primarily one of personalities. Probably no previous national campaign had been conducted so largely on the basis of personal abuse and misrepresenta- tion.' The efforts of the Liberals to break up the old party made the Republicans most bitter toward that element of the opposition, and the politicians who largely controlled the Liberal movement after Greeley's nomination found their readiest and most congenial arguments in the abuse of the President and his advisers. All impartial, or in any degree fair-minded, observers admitted the disgraceful perversions of the canvass. "We designed it to be a campaign of ideas, and it became a campaign of personalities," Schurz wailed shortly after the election.^ "The amount of lying done in the present Presidential canvass," the New York Observer thought, "is fearful to contemplate. And the persistence in it, after its exposure and refutation, is more fearful still. We have watched eight successive campaigns, and we are quite sure for total depravity, this beats them all."' Simi- larly the Nation, in prefacing a long list of picturesque cam- paign epithets, expressed the opinion that "The campaign work is a shower of mud to a far greater extent than that of ' Professor Jesse Macy says ("The Scientific Spirit in Politics,'' Am. Pol. Sc. Rev. XI, 3) that "The campaign of 1872 seemed to exemplify the new [scientific] spirit." But such a spirit in this canvass, as the following account should show, was altogether more seeming than real. * Schurz to White, about Nov. 15, Schurz' s Writings, II, 444. ' N. Y. Observer, Sept. 26. The Christian Advocate the same week (Sept. 26) commented: "The pending political canvass is distinguished for its personalities which in violence, recklessness of the truth and impertinent intermeddling with the private affairs of the parties assailed, are unprecedented and simply scandalous." 150 THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 I5I any other campaign within our remembrance. "* In accept- ing a renomination to Congress, on the last day of July, James A. Garfield declared : "The battle has already begun in a spirit of unusual violence, and bids fair to be as fierce and disreputable in the spirit in which it is carried on as any we have ever witnessed. "^ Bayard Taylor wrote from Switzer- land in September: "How glad I am to be away from home this summer! I can even smell the stench and feel the venom of the campaign at this distance, and there are few features of it which do not create disgust. "^ The character- ization of a presidential campaign by a political writer in the preceding March seems most prophetic and aptly descrip- tive of the ensuing contest: "A presidential campaign is a discussion with sticks; nobody reasons, everybody lies as hard as ever he can, and the forces are in the nature of clubs. When the war opens, it is presumed that recruiting is over for this time, that the facts of the case and the rhetoric of the statesmen have adjusted voters to their places in oppos- ing ranks, nothing remains but to see who can make the most noise and demolish the most character. "^ The press contributed greatly to this work of calumny and misrepresentation. Political journalism with such editors as Wilbur Story, Donn Piatt and "Brick" Pomeroy was not likely to be over-scrupulous, and the editors of the leading party organs fell about as low as these pariahs of the press. Whitelaw Reid, who assumed the management of the Tribune upon Greeley's nomination, wrote that the policy of this paper in the campaign was to be "aggressive,"* and he followed out this aim most consistently, regardless ' Nation, Aug. 8, p. 83. ' Garfield's Works (Hinsdale ed.), II, 34. * Taylor and Scudder, Taylor, II, 595. R. C. Winthrop wrote, Aug. 16, "The canvass thus far strikes me as the most disgusting one in American history." Winthrop, Winthrop, 279. ' Wheeler, "President-Making" in Lakeside Monthly, March, p. 242. * Reid to Sumner, May 16, Sumner MSS. 152 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT of other considerations.^ The New York Times, the leading administration organ in the East, under the editorship of Louis Jennings, then as always a British citizen, resorted to personal abuse and a perversion of facts to a degree that with fair-minded readers should have tended in great meas- ure to destroy the reputation for probity which it had gained the previous year in the crusade against the ring.^" No- thing better can be said for the tactics of the leading Dem- ocratic journals like the New York World and the Wash- ington Patriot. The minor organs all over the country, while not so skillfully libelous and vituperative, tried hard to make up for it by greater violence of expression.^' The New York Herald, which in its exclusive r61e of sensational journalism could afford to keep aloof from strict party alle- giance, declared that the abusive journalism of 1872 closely resembled that of thirty years earlier, caricatured by Dick- ens in Martin Chuzzlewit.'^ A considerable number of re- ligious papers took an active part in the canvass, usually in support of the Republican ticket, often with as great zeal and as blind partisanship as the regular organs." There ^ For a criticism of the Tribune's policy, see Nation, July 25, p. 50. "See editorial, "A Crime in Journalism," in Springfield Weekly Republican, Aug. 2. " This is borne out by an examination of a considerable number of such papers. The Maryland Union's reference to the President (July 18) as "that ambitious and utterly depraved horse-jockey who now oscillates between the White House and Long Branch'' would be hard to beat in abusive political journalism. ^ N. Y. Herald, Sept. 20. " For a good summary of the position of the religious press in the campaign, see Central Presbyterian, Oct. 9. For examples of such support of Grant, see editorials in Christian Union, May 15, June 12, July 10; Independent, passim; Advance, Oct. 31; Christian Adcovate, Aug. i, 8, Nov. 14; Zion's Herald, quoted in Madison Democrat, May 13. Certain regular Republican organs made much of the support of Grant by the religious press, see Milwaukee Sentinel, May 28, Oct. 22; Kan. Com- monwealth, June 30. Tilton's Golden Age was the leading religious paper THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 53 was a large output of campaign pamphlets attacking candi- dates with more or less humorous burlesque, or with still more humorous pretensions at historical discussion." The pencil of the cartoonist was employed as never before in a national campaign to supplement the pen of the political writer. The celebrated Thomas Nast in Harper's Weekly, in his zeal to please flattering administration leaders,'^ dis- torted the physiques and morals of the prominent Liberals and Democrats with an indiscrimination that called forth earnest but vain protests from the editor. '' Matt Morgan, late of the Tomahawk, whom Leslie brought from England to rival Nast,'' while less artistic and pointed, was even more brutal and malignant in his caricatures of the President and his advisers.'* Campaign oratory as usual was supplied in great abun- dance. The administration rallied all of its forces for the contest. The senatorial clique were constantly in the front rank and members of the cabinet saw much active service." Speaker Blaine, after securing his own state in September, moved on to the western battle-field.^" Henry Wilson as vice-presidential candidate, with his long political experience and qualities of popular appeal, was a most active and effect- supporting Greeley. The N. Y. Herald (Aug. 18) said of its attitude in the campaign: "The Golden Age is mild in religion, but balances it by being fiercely political." " See, for instance. Chamberlain, Issiies of 1872; Welch, That Con- vention; Budlong, President Greeley, etc.; Cross, Modern Ulysses. " Paine, Nast, 221-227. ^^ Ibid., 216-218, 243, 244. " Ibid., 227. '* Idem. See examples of Morgan cartoons in Leslie's Newspaper, May 4, July 13, Aug. 3, 17, Sept. 7, 14, 28. For contemporary criticism of Nast and Morgan, see "Greeley Among the Artists," in Nation, Nov. 14, p. 310; Atlantic Monthly, May, 642 f; Christian Union, May 15. "Conkling, Conkling, 435-448; Foulke, Morton, II, 255-268; De- troit Post and Tribune, Chandler, 312-316; Flower, Carpenter, 271 ff.; Ingersoll, Greeley, 563. ^0 Hamilton, Blaine, 274-276, 302; Ingersoll, 563. 154 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ive campaigner, lending strength to the party at some of its weakest points.^^ A great host of congressmen, state offi- cials, and lesser federal office-holders were at the command of the national committee. Colfax's attitude in the campaign was a matter of con- siderable interest and concern. The coalition press rep- resented that he was cherishing a grievance against the administration, and his failure to give any aid to the cause during the early canvass occasioned considerable anxiety among the Republican managers. Finally, in August, in re- sponse to urgent appeals from Senator Chandler, who rep- resented that the Vice-President's silence was being used to injure the ticket, he made a number of speeches in his state, but, in marked contrast to the usual personalities of this campaign, at all times refraining from attacks on his old friend Greeley .^^ In accordance with the prevailing custom, the President took no active part in the canvass. " My judgment is," he wrote Conkling, "that it will he better that I should not attend any convention or political meeting during the campaign. It has been done, so far as I remember, by but two Presidential candidates heretofore, and both of them were public speakers, and both were beaten. I am no speaker, and don't want to be beaten."'^ The President's estimate of his weakness as a public speaker was not exaggerated, and the party lost nothing by his abstention. His brief attempts at speeches, made at non-political gatherings during the summer, as re- ported,^* hardly made good sense, to say nothing of being effective. Most of the time was passed quietly at his sum- mer house in Long Branch. In a newspaper interview he asserted most characteristically that he had consented to " Nason, Wilson, 410-413; Atlantic Monthly, Aug., p. 255. On Wilson's skill as a politician, Hoar, Autobiography, I, 218. 'i* HoUister, Colfax, 377, 378, 381. 2" Grant to Conkling, July 15, Conkling, 435. 2* See N. Y. World, Aug. 7; Chicago Tribune, Sept. 22. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 55 run for a second time with reluctance, but that he had been so abused that he desired to see if the majority of the peo- ple were still with him, or if they credited his detractors and slanderers.^* The Liberal cause did not lack for able and distinguished defenders. Though many of the independents had left the Liberals after the Cincinnati convention, the coalition had the support of some of the best campaigners of the Re- publican party in years past, as well as practically all of the leading Democrats. Prominent senators like Schurz, Trum- bull, and Tipton, and old-time campaigners like Banks, Ju- lian, Doolittle, and McClure were certain of a large and attentive hearing.^^ Summer was slow in giving public support to the coalition, though after his outburst against Grant there was no possi- bility of his acting with the Republicans. He went so far in private as to send Greeley suggestions concerning his letter of acceptance,^' but failed for some time to pronounce himself openly .^^ Finally, on July 29, in response to a letter of inquiry from colored voters, he came out fully in support of Greeley.'" Sumner's open defection, being that of one who had so personified the radical cause, was bitterly denounced by the Republicans'" and received with corre- sponding satisfaction by the coalitionists.'^ "Mr. Sum- ner," wrote Greeley, "you know that I thank you for your 2s N. Y. Herald, Aug. 6. 2s Cf. IngersoU, 562. " Ashley to Sumner, July 15, Sumner MSS. 2' Early in July Sumner was strongly urged by coalition leaders to declare for Greeley. See Doolittle to Sumner, July 13, Sumner MSS. and C. A. Henland to Sumner, July 13, ibid. His colored friend, Frederick Douglass, in a letter on July 5, suggested that Sumner take no part in the campaign, ibid. " Sumner's Works, XV, 175-195. '"Ibid., 196-201; N. Y. Times, Aug. 3; Sumner to Smith, Aug. 6, 7; Frothingham, Smith, 327; Harper's Weekly, Aug. 17. 8' Pierce, Sumner, IV, 531; N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 2, 5. 156 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT noble letter. "^^ Sumner was now urgently besought both by Democratic and Liberal leaders to make at least a few speeches especially in the Maine canvass.^' But owing to his enfeebled health and his impending departure for Europe, he confined his further efforts to an address which was given to the press late in August.'* The vice-presidential candidate of the coalitionists, in contrast to the administration's candidate, proved to be no help as a campaigner, but quite the opposite. Gratz Brown had made much trouble for the Liberals in the convention. In the campaign, in spite of his good union record and his prestige as an original Liberal governor, he proved a heavy drag on the ticket. Coming East in August to attend a class banquet at Yale, he made a speech in extremely bad taste in criticism of things eastern and ended up by getting intoxicated.'^ Brown's former intemperate habits were a matter of common knowledge and had been urged against his candidacy at Cincinnati. '* The Springfield Republican now demanded that Brown be withdrawn from the ticket and a man like Groesbeck, Cox, Trumbull, or Hancock sub- stituted.'' Brown promptly secured a testimonial from Missouri officials and other prominent citizens as to his good habits while governor,'' but the mischief was done, from this time on his candidacy was never treated seriously by the administration press, and his supporters were placed constantly on the defensive. The stories of Grant's public intoxication, at once set afloat by the coalitionists," appar- ^^ Greeley to Sumner, July 31, Sumner MSS. " See letters from Allen, July 30; Doolittle, Aug. 2, 6; Sinclair, Aug. 10; Schell, Aug. 10; White, Aug. 12; Lang, Aug. 20 in Sumner MSS. ^ Sumner's Works, XV, 208-254; Pierce, IV, 534., ^ Nation, Aug. 8, 22, pp. 82, 114. =" Springfield Weekly Republican, May 10, Aug. 2. " Ibid., Aug. 2, 9. '* Ibid., Aug. 23. '^ Ibid., Aug. 2; Winthrop, Winthrop, 280. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1872 157 ently did not help matters for them, as charges had been made too indiscriminately against the President to give addi- tional ones, whether well founded or not, any weight with the public. Greeley met the demands of a most trying presidential candidacy surprisingly well. As has been seen, he acted in harmony with the most influential Democratic leaders, and, after a transient fit of impatience, with independents like Schurz. His overtrustfulness of political advisers,*" which would not unlikely have weakened his administration had he been elected, tended to prevent discord in the coalition organization. He was tireless in consultations and in attention to campaign details, maintaining a hopeful spirit which he seems to have been able to impart to those about him.*' Greeley was not troubled by the conventional restraints imposed at this time upon presidential candidates. In August he made some non-political speeches in Rhode Island and in his native state of New Hampshire, followed by real political speeches in the Maine canvass.*^ The follow- ing month, when it was all too evident that the tide was set- ting against the Liberals, their candidate made a remarkable tour of the "October States," speaking in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana, everywhere to large crowds.** On the whole, Greeley was a great success as a campaigner. His co-workers seem to have been highly elated at the powers he developed on the stump," and the Liberal organs expressed unfeigned admiration.*^ More "McClure, Old Time Notes, II, 338; White to Schurz, June 9, Schurz's Writings, II, 382. " Grinnell, Reminiscences, 225; Barnum, Recollections, 768. « N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 13, 14, 16; Ingersoll, 564, 645-650. «iV. Y. Tribune, Sept. 19-30; Ingersoll, 565-571, 650-664. "Zabriski, Greeley, 292; Grinnell, 225; Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign," 42; Halstead, "Horace Greeley" in Cosmopolitan, VIH, 465. *^ Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 27; Chicago Tribune, Sept. 27. 158 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT impartial observers also paid tribute to Greeley's campaign oratory.** The administration press was, of course, greatly concerned at the impropriety of a presidential candidate's traveling about the country speaking in his own behalf, and likened Greeley's tour to Johnson's "swing around the circle."*' The ultra-conservative New Englander, Robert C. Winthrop, thus voiced his disgust: "Greeley travels about in his white coat like the Candidate in the worst of old Roman days, soliciting votes for himself and playing hum- ble to the multitude, in a style never before exhibited by a Presidential aspirant. It is loathsome beyond expression to any one who respects or loves his country."*^ But im- proper or not, there was no question of the eagerness of the people to see and hear the famous editor of the Tribune. The demonstrations with which the Liberal candidate was received all along his route were so pronounced as to create some uneasiness at Republican headquarters, even at a time when Grant's reelection had seemed assured.*^ A novel feature introduced into the campaign speaking was that of women campaigners. The woman's movement was decidedly aggressive this year, representatives of the Equal Rights Association attending the different national conventions with the purpose of getting their cause en- dorsed. The Cincinnati and Baltimore conventions refused to recognize the issue, but the Republicans expressed their sympathy in a rather non-committal plank. For this action, and because Grant had appointed postmistresses and Wilson was an avowed sympathizer with the cause, the * N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23, 29; Joseph Choate quoted by Reid, in Century, LXXXV, 44. " Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Sept. 24; Atlantic Monthly, Nov., P- 639- *' Winthrop to , Aug. 16, Winthrop, 279. *' Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, II, 534. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 59 Association gave its support to the Republican ticket.^" The leaders of the Association received a small subsidy from the Republican national committee, and they held a num- ber of mass meetings, addressed by their most persuasive speakers.*^ To ofifset this unusual campaign attraction, women orators were also secured for the Liberal cause.^^ In the work of all these various classes of campaigners there was little appeal to reason and intelligence; the cam- paign was in no sense one of "education. " Constant efforts were made to arouse passion and prejudice and both sides resorted to about all the tricks known to American politics for misleading and confusing the average voter. The writings and speeches of the campaign abounded in "charges," — "libellous accusations brought against the candidates of the opposite party."*' The extended list of Grant's short-comings in Sumner's "Philippic" furnished a convenient summary which was freely augmented and embel- lished by the coalitionist editors and speakers; and Greeley's erratic policies and personal eccentricities furnished an easy mark for the denunciation and ridicule of his opponents. It is profitless to perpetuate the reckless criminations and recriminations that were exchanged between the rival camps, but sufifice it to say that the President was a corrupt, de- bauched tyrant," and that Greeley was everything discredi- table from a near traitor to a complete fool.*^ The lesser '"Harper, Anthony, I, 415-419; Stanton and others, Hist, of Woman Suffrage, II, 517-520. "Harper, I, 420-422; Golden Age, Oct. 12; Stanton, History of Wo- man Suffrage, 520. *2 See, for instance, N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 26. '^ Ostrogorski, Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties, II, 337- " N. Y. World editorials, July 18, Aug. 7, 19; Chicago Tribune, July 29; Cross, Modern Ulysses; Garland, Grant, 417; Spirit of the Times, June I. '' N. Y. Times in nearly every issue through the campaign; Kan. Commonwealth, Aug. 18; Chamberlain, Issues of 1872; Budlong, Pres- l60 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT candidates were disposed of indiscriminately, when no more specific personal accusations were at hand, as respectively "feeders at the public crib" and "soreheads." A favorite form of personal argument was that furnished by a contrast of the characters and careers of the rival candidates for pres- ident. Viewed from the one side, Greeley was "the man ' of the pen . . . the genius of peace," the champion of reform and the reconciler of the North and South, while Grant was "the man of the sword . . . the genius of war," the instigator of a military rule and of administrative corruption and the oppressor of the South.*^ From the other side appeared Grant, the man of action, the savior of the union, and the steady and efficient administrator towering above Greeley, the mere theorist with all sorts of imprac- ticable and revolutionary ideas, unstable in a crisis, and subject to the influence of unscrupulous, designing friends.'' From the long-standing factional fights that had given rise to the Liberal bolt in many of the states, the inter- changes of personal abuse in the local canvasses seem to have been, if anything, still more numerous and bitter than in the national.'* ident Greeley, etc. ; Conkling's New York speech, N. Y. Tribune, July 24. See a summary of some of the most extreme "charges'' against Greeley in the editorial "Does Calumny Pay?" in N. Y. Tribune, Nov. 22. Everett P. Wheeler says that he and many other Democrats finally voted for Greeley as a protest against the abuse with which he was assailed. Sixty Years of American Life, 97. ''Ward, Ward, 289 f.; Schurz's Writings, II, 429-435; Sumner, Works, XV, 211-213; Nat. Quart. Rev., June, pp. 105 ff.; Chicago Tribune, June 6, July 18. N. Y. World, Oct. 28; B. F. Perry's article in Greenville Enterprise, July 10; Spirit of the Titties, Aug. 24; N. Y. Sun, quoted in People's Tribune, May 29. " Old and New, Sept., pp. 257 ff.; North Am. Rev., Oct., pp. 416 ff.; Booth, Speeches, 153; Adams, Storrs, 259-278; Conkling's New York speech, July 23. N. Y. Times, July 24 and in Conkling, Conkling, 436 ff.; Harper's Weekly, Aug. 24; Mo. Democrat, July 3. *'See Julian, Pol. Recollections, 342 f.; Dilla, Politics of Mich., 144; Foulke, II, 257-264; Watkins, Neb., Ill, 127; Callahan, W. Fo., 241; Herrick, Phelps, 39; Clay, Memoirs, I, 275 f. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1872 161 To attract the unreasoning voter there was a resort to "hoopla" campaigning. The coalitionists sought to take advantage of the personal emphasis in the campaign and carry their candidate safely through on a wave of popular excitement. It was freely predicted that the campaign would be another one of song and laughter, in which Greeley's white hat and coat would take the place of the log cabin.*' The paraphernalia for such a demonstration was abundantly pro- vided and the Republicans responded with counter demon- strations. Lampooning campaign songs were furnished by both sides in unlimited number.^" Greeley hats and other distinctive campaign insignia were much in evidence.*' Hilarious mass-meetings with parades in which strongly- phrased transparencies bore a conspicuous part were made to appeal to the voter's emotions and prejudices.^^ Cam- paign clubs were especially numerous, the formation of such organizations being constantly reported by both parties as " iV. Y. Herald, May 5, 6; Chicago Tribune, May 12; Cincinnati Commercial, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 7. '""A Singing Campaign" in Nation, Oct. 10, pp; 231 flf.; N. Y. Herald, July 29, Aug. 2; Chicago Tribune, July 9, Piatt, Autobiography, 64 f.; Mo. Democrat, Aug. 7, 9, 25, 28, Sept. 11 °' Andrews, Own Time, 74. Entliusiastic Greeley supporters donned white hats at Cincinnati immediately after the nomination. N. Y. Tribune, May 6. '2 The following were some of the legends appearing on the trans- parencies at a mass meeting in Richmond: "The Farmer of Chappaqua in Nt)v. next will ditch our lands and drain off the carpet-baggers." " Dr. Greeley our over-seer for the next four years — hog and hominy plenty then." . . . " We go for a wood chopper in preference to a horse jockey." "The country wants grubbing. Farmer Greeley slings a healthy axe," — and the never-failing slogan — "The pen is mightier than the sword." Richmond Whig and Advertiser, June 28. See also the account of a Democratic-Liberal mass meeting at Jefferson City, Mo. in People's Tribune, Oct. 9. 1 62 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT a convincing proof of healthy activity.*' "Chappaqua Farmers," "Wood-Choppers," "Liberal Guards," and "Greeley Veterans" were opposed by "Tanners Clubs" and "Grant Invincibles," and "Ida Greeley Grays" vied with "Nelly Grant Blues." In a campaign turning mainly on the picturesque qualities of the rival candidates, the Lib- erals would unquestionably have had a great advantage, but, as some of the un-excitable journals pointed out, the day of hard-cider campaigns was long passed.** The attempts of both parties to set off a "bomb shell" during the campaign were equally ineffective. In July, a small Republican paper in southern New York brought for- ward the so-called Carmichael letters to prove that Greeley had been a party to some sort of bargain with the Democra- tic leaders prior to his nomination.** The story, with all sorts of exaggerated interpretations, was copied by admin- istration papers from one end of the country to the other,** while it was characterized by the coalition press as merely another "Roorback." For a time the story seems to have made some impression, but failure to back it up with documentary proof soon caused it to fall flat.*' In the Credit Mobilier affair the coalitionists might have exploited a real live scandal if they could have fully laid bare the facts. '^^ Chicago Tribune, July 8, 9, 15, 18; passim; N. Y. Tribune, May 20; N. Y. Times, Aug. 8, 15; Richmond Whig and Advertiser, June 14, Sept. 23; Kan. Commonwealth, July 21, Aug. 18; San Francisco Evening Bulletin, July 24, 25, 26; Oct. 24, 25. For an account of the formation of a club in this campaign which had a permanent existence, see Wight, Payne, 24. '' Nation, May 30, p. 345; Evening Post, June 7. *' See summary of the charges in Evening Post, July 19. The paper making the "exposure" was the Binghamton Republican. '"See Albany Evening Journal, July 10-29; Boston Advertiser, July 18, 24; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, July 26; Wis. Weekly State Journal, July 30; 5/. Paul Weekly Press, Aug. i; Kan. Commonwealth, July 9; Minneapolis Evening News, July 17, 25. " Springfield Weekly Republican, Aug. 2. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 163 Letters appearing to implicate prominent Republicans in bribery were published in the New York Sun early in September,^* and considerable prominence was given to the charges by the Democratic-Liberal press during the remain- der of the campaign.'' But too many groundless charges were afloat and the Sun in particular had "cried wolf" too often to have the public very deeply impressed by a new ex- posure from that source.'" Leading Liberal papers even expressed doubt at first as to the authenticity of the letters.'^ The accused persons denied promptly and emphatically all connection with the enterprise, in a way which served very nicely the purposes of the campaign, but occasioned some of them no little embarrassment in the subsequent congres- sional investigation.''^ But the charges as made by the coali- tion press were far from exact. Prominent Democrats as well as Republicans later proved to be implicated. Racial interests and prejudices were appealed to in this campaign to a most unfortunate extent. The negro voter, as a new and uncertain element in national politics, was the subject of unusual solicitude, getting more recogni- tion than he has ever had since. Both parties made direct and earnest appeals for the race's support. Speakers for the radical cause reminded them of their great debt to the Republican party for freedom and political and civil rights, and warned them that the triumph of Greeley and the Dem- «8 Reprinted in TV. Y. World, Sept. 6; N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 7. *' N. Y. World, and N. Y. Tribune, Sept.-Oct. passim; Washington Patriot, Sept. 17, 23; Chicago Tribune, Sept. 7, 9, 12, 14. See on the efforts of Liberal papers to get the facts of this case, Townsend, Wash- ington, Outside and Inside, 401 fif. See Greeley's discussion of the ex- posure in his Indianapolis speech, Sept. 23, N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 24. '" Cf. Nation, Sept. 26, p. 194. " Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 6. The N. Y. Tribune in reprinting the charges from the Sun (Sept. 7) said editorially that they published them "with all possible reserve." "i Crawford, Credit Mobilier, iii f.; Hollister, 384; Hamilton, Blaine, 276-287. 1 64 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ocrats would mean the overthrow of the war amendments and the inauguration of a racial conflict in which the negroes would be at the mercy of the Ku Klux." This augument was summed up by Douglass in the striking figure: "The Republican party is the ship and all else is the sea."''* Shortly before the election, the Republican congressional campaign committee issued a circular to the southern ne- groes, urging them to go to the polls and offer their votes and, if they were interfered with in any way, to take the names of their assailants and justice would be meted out later by the Republican Congress and administration. ''' The coalitionists, on their side, appealed to the negro voter to support their cause out of gratitude for the great services of Greeley and Sumner to their race.'^ Grant was accused of slighting their people at home and insulting them abroad in his dealings with Hayti.'^ The race, as such, took a prominent part in the campaign. In April a colored national convention for the purpose of considering the best interests of the negroes had met at New Orleans with representatives from fourteen states. There was a considerable sentiment in this gathering for following Sumner and Greeley into the Liberal organization, but, largely through the influence of their chairman, Frederick Douglass, they endorsed the administration and pledged support to the nominees of the Philadelphia convention.^' The Cincinnati convention had a considerable number of " N. Y. Herald, Aug. l6; N. Y. Tribune, July i8, 23, 25, Aug. i (re- ports of campaign speeches in N. C. and Va.). "Washington, Douglass, 286; Harper's Weekly (editorial), June 22. '5 N. Y. Herald, Oct, 29. ™ Richmond Whig and Advertiser, Sept. 3; Greenville Enterprise, ]u\y 10; N. Y. Herald, July 28 (report of N. C. campaign); Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 133; Sumner's Works, XV, 177. " Sumner's Works, XV, 178; N. Y. Herald, Aug. 16 (report of Cooper Institute negro debate). ''* Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 775; New Orleans Republican, Apr. U-13; Douglass, Life and Times, 507 {. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 65 colored delegates from the South. '^ The Republican con- vention boasted nearly one hundred negro members, who were shown all respect and accorded a patient hearing when they desired to express their sentiments.*" A colored na- tional Liberal convention was held at Louisville in September and the coalition candidates and platform were formally en- dorsed and a national executive committee appointed.*^ Both parties had colored speakers and the activities of negro state and city organizations and the position of negro papers were reported from various parts of the country.*^ No less than fifteen colored candidates were put in nomination for state offices in the South, in all cases but one by the Repub- licans.^ Frederick Douglass, the most conspicuous represen- tative of his race, was accorded the high honor of heading the Republican electoral ticket in New York, and subse- quently of acting as messenger to carry his state's vote to Washington.^ After the election, it was reported that a serious effort was being made to secure a cabinet position for a colored leader.*^ All in all, as the Springfield Republican put it, "Sambo" was "trumps in politics this year. "*^ " N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 26, 30, May 3. *° Springfield Weekly Republican, June 14; Nation, June 13, p. 387. " JV. Y. Herald, Sept. 27. The N. Y. Herald said of a joint debate between colored orators at Cooper Institute in August: "Throughout the proceedings there was a display of ignorance, bigotry, and ruffianism revolting to those who have been taught to believe that the ballot is the palladium of our liberties." N. Y. Herald, Aug. 17. See the issue of Aug. 16 for a full account of this meeting, and also the comment by the Liberal participant in Saunders to Sumner, Aug. 20, Sumner MSS. '^Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 497, 783; N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 29; San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Aug. 12, 13; Hamilton, "The Election of 1872 in North Carolina," in South Atlantic Quart., XI, 151; Saunders to Sumner, Aug. 20, 1872, Sumner MSS. *' The negro candidates were in Ark., La., and S. C.Annuul Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 25, 481, 736, 737; Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 140. A negro was nominated as a Republican elector in Maryland, but later withdrew to support Greeley. Maryland Union, May 9, July 18. " Douglass, 508 f. ** Springfield Weekly Republican, Nov. 15. 88 Ibid., June 14. I66 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Shamelessly open bids were made for the support of other racial elements. The coalitionists represented that Henry Wilson's former Know Nothing connection was clear evi- dence of his hostility to all foreign-born citizens.^' Greeley's life-long friendliness to the Irish was counted upon to give the bulk of that vote to the Liberal candidate. ^^ But the Germans were the race most appealed to by both sides. This element, as previously noted, had in large numbers been alienated from the administration and had regarded with much favor the new independent reform movement. Greeley, however, with his views on sumptuary legislation and on the tariff, was most objectionable to many Germans, who found Grant, with all his short-comings, a preferable candidate.'' An unfortunately large emphasis in the can- vass was given by both sides to the attitude of the Germans as a distinct element in the population.'" " N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 21, 22, 26, 31, Sept. 2; Chicago Tribune, July 20. For Wilson's reply, see Nason, 413. An army order issued by Grant excluding Jewish traders was used to prejudice that race against the President. N. Y. World, Aug. 7; Washington Patriot, Aug. 24; Leslie's Newspaper, Oct. 19. *' Leslie's Newspaper, Aug. 24. "See above, p. 108. Greeley wrote to Schurz, May 8: "Of course the most of the Germans dislike me, not so much that I am a Protec- tionist as that I am a Total Abstinence man. They will not vote for me so generally as they would have voted for Adams or Trumbull." Bancroft-Dunning, Schurz' s Political Career, 350. '" In the Baltimore convention Governor Hoffman dramatically presented what purported to be the " manifesto'' of 15,000 New York Germans calling for Greeley's endorsement, N. Y. Tribune, July 11; Proceedings Bait. Con., 56. A "German National Convention," repre- senting twenty-four states and under the auspices of certain German- American Associations was held in New York City, Oct. 24, at which resolutions were adopted condemning the coalition and pledging their best efforts to elect Grant and Wilson. N. Y. Herald, Oct. 25. Schurz addressed large German mass meetings in Chicago and New York, N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 12, Oct. 2. See also references to the German vote in Illinois in Hay's letters to Reid, Aug. i, 4, Thayer, Hay, I, 344 f. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 67 Still more reprehensible than the racial appeals were those made to sectarian prejudice. The most marked appeal of this sort was in the state canvass in New York where the Catholic connection of the coalition candidate for gov- ernor raised a storm of bigoted opposition from administra- tion organs, both secular and religious. ^^ The anti-Catholic argument was later used to some extent against the national Liberal ticket in different parts of the country.^^ Of all the travesties on reasonable and honorable political delibera- tions which this campaign presented, this was the most disgraceful. In the presentation of the more definite and formal cam- paign arguments, it was inevitable, after the over-running of the Liberal ranks by the politicians and the consequent personal trend of the canvass, that reforms which had been foremost considerations with the organizers of the Liberal movement should be largely subordinated. Thus in the cases of two of the chief reforms, those of the tariff and the civil service, the non-committal plank and the nomination of the leading champion of protection had largely destroyed the one and Greeley's political associations rendered him a most inappropriate exponent of the other.'' But there was some pretense that the movement was still continuing in the direction of these reforms. Soon after the convention, Gree- ley pledged himself, in accordance with his theory of con- " See articles by Eugene Lawrence and Nast cartoons bearing on this issue in Harper's Weekly, Oct. 12, 26, Nov. 2; the (Chicago) Standard, Nov. 7; Christian Advocate, Sept. 19; N. Y. World, Sept. 9, 16, Nov. 4; N. Y. Times, Sept. 9; N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 30; Hay to Reid, Aug. 1, Thayer, I, 343. ^ See, for instance, editorial referring to sectarian opposition to Greeley in Madison Democrat, Oct. 22, '' Cf. Atlantic Monthly, Oct., p. 510. The Nation said of the civil service issue (Aug. 15, p. 100): "Although the opposition to Grant has largely drawn its ammunition from the record of his shortcomings with regard to the civil service, civil-service reform is hardly mentioned in the Greeley canvass." 1 68 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT gressional determination, to sign a free-trade measure if one were passed, ^^ and his supporters defended this disposal of the question as the best possible at the time.^' Even the free-trade World could find reasons for supporting Greeley in preference to Grant on this issue. '^ But the contradic- tory position in which the coalition was placed on the tariff issue was humorously evinced by the appeal made to the manufacturers by a leading Democratic paper of the North West to support Greeley on the ground that he had faith- fully championed their cause for forty years. '^ An anti-monopoly argument in which the opposition could attack the administration more effectively was that regarding abuses in the public land grants. The Republi- can policy in the matter was arraigned in a manner which should have appealed strongly to the western farmer in this period of discontent. '^ Civil service auguments consisted largely of a denuncia- tion of patronage abuses under Grant, which, bad enough at best, were magnified to the fullest extent and portrayed in the darkest colors.'' As an escape from such intolerable conditions competent sponsors, like Schurz, professed to have confidence in a real reform of the service under Greeley. ^°'' But the failure of the Liberal candidate to take any especial " Interview in N. Y. Sun, quoted in Memorial to Greeley, 227. See also Greeley's emphatic declaration to the same effect in his speech at Easton, Pa., Sept. 28. Quoted in White, Trumbull, 401. '' See, for instance, Milwaukee News, Mar. 20 (commending Greeley's position before the convention); Springfield Weekly Republican, June 28; Ward, Ward, 259; Pelzer, Dodge, 251; Schurz' s Writings, II, 433. » N. Y. World, July 23. " Milwaukee News, Sept. 15. •* Julian, Later Speeches, 24; Pelzer, 251. "Spencer, Bayard, 167-173; White, 395-399. i"" Schurz' s Writings, II, 434 f. Schurz had had correspondence with Greeley on this subject (a portion of which he read in the speech just cited) and had been otherwise assured of the Liberal candidate's good intentions toward the civil service. See ibid., 372, 382-383, 385-386, THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 69 interest in this reform in the past (although a specialist in promoting reforms which gained his interest) and his close association in party organization with some of the most dis- creditable spoilsmen of his day"' lent strength to the con- tention of the President's defenders that Greeley's accession to the presidency would give free rein to a new wholesale spoils system. 1°^ The administrationists took the offensive in pushing to the front the financial issue. Full credit was taken to their party in this field for the steady payment of the national debt, the maintenance of good credit, and the fall in the gold premium, with an honest, efficient and economical adminis- tration making possible a reduction of taxes. '"^ The time- honored prosperity argument was much played upon. The country had never been more prosperous, it was claimed: there were few failures, credit was good, and everything was booming, — "the hum of prosperous industry rises from every section and mercantile confidence reigns supreme."'"* The Republican party was, of course, mainly responsible for all these blessings. "And I do say," declared John A. Logan, after a panegyric on the material greatness of the United States, "that you never saw such rapid progress and development until the Republican party came into power. . . . In voting for Grant you vote for prosperity, for peace, for civilization, for Christianity, for the grandest glory that ever shone around a republic in the history of the 391-392. George Wilkes, in his Spirit of the Times, gave chief emphasis to the "One-Term Principle" throughout the canvass, and blamed the coalition leaders for not giving more attention to this issue. "" In his correspondence with Schurz (letter of July 8) Greeley warmly defended his political associates. Ihid., II, 390. ^'^ North Am. Rev., Oct., p. 419; Nation, Aug. 15, p. 100; Harper's Weekly, Sept. 7. '"' Conkling's speech, July 23, N. Y. Tribune, July 24; Garfield's Works, II, 38; Williams, Hayes, I, 369 f.; Old and New, Oct. pp. 385 f.; Boutwell's speech, July 17, Nation, July 25, pp. 49 f. '<" North Am. Rev., Oct., p. 417. 1 70 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT world. ""^ With another four years of "Grant's steady- hand on the helm," an enthusiastic organ predicted, the country would "reach a development unparalleled in mod- ern times-''^"* But all of this unparalleled prosperity would be threatened, argued the Republicans, if the Democratic- Liberal combination secured control.'"' Greeley's erratic utterances on the conduct of the national finances were all carefully analyzed, and the conclusion was reached that he would seek to put them all in practice simultaneously. There was also, they feared, a grave danger from Democratic influence of a repudiation of the national debt.'"^ Business interests were held to be alarmed at the mere possibility of the success of such reckless financiers, and the attitude of leading capitalists did show unmistakably that their sympa- thies were with the administration. Lest there should still be any doubt as to the position of "the interests" in the campaign, a circular was issued on October i6, in New York City, signed by some of the most prominent capitalists and business firms in the metropolis, calling attention to the ap- preciable reduction of the public debt as well as in taxation during the past four years and concluding with this strong testimonial for the President: "A careful consideration of these results of prudent and faithful administration of the National Treasury induce the undersigned to express the confident belief that the general welfare of the country, the interests of its commerce and trade, and the consequent stability of its public securities, would be best promoted by "" Dawson, Logan, 205 f. Cf. for similar expressions, Foulke, II, 267 f.; Martyn, Dodge, 282. '<* Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, Sept. 3. "" A Republican campaign speaker at Easton, Pa. predicted that if Greeley was elected all the furnace fires in the Lehigh Valley would soon be extinguished. Quoted in While, 401. '"* Conkling's speech, iV. Y. Tribune, ]\i\y 2^; Williams, I, 373; North Am. Rev., Oct., p. 419 f.; Old and New, Oct., p. 388; Minneapolis Eve- ning News, June 24. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 17I the reelection of General Grant to the office of President of the United States, "i"' The coalitionists did their best to extricate themselves from their discredited position on this issue. Financial dis- turbances were denounced as tricks of Wall Street, aided by the Treasury Department, to deceive the unwary voter."" The World held that Greeley had always been such a pro- nounced friend of capitalist and monopoly interests that it could not support him now if it were not for his pledge to leave these policies to congressional determination.^" In his speeches in September, Greeley devoted much effort to ex- plaining away the charges concerning his financial vagaries. In his remarks before the Cincinnati chamber of commerce and the Indianapolis board of trade he discussed current financial problems with a soundness and conservatism suited to reassure the most careful financier."^ Other Liberal speakers strongly defended their candidate's financial or- thodoxy,"' and in their turn attacked the administration's financial policies."^ But however many weaknesses might be exposed in the existing system, it was hard to overcome the arguments of big crops and the "full dinner pail." In appealing to the labor vote the Greeley men were on much safer ground. Their candidate had been a life-long friend of the labor interest, and a pioneer champion of labor "9 N. Y. Times, Oct. 16; Clews, Twenty Eight Years of Wall Street, 325-326. "° Milwaukee News, Aug. 16. 1" N. Y. World, Aug. 9. "2 N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 23, 27. See editorial comments in N. Y. World, Sept. 23; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23; Nation, Sept. 26, p. 194. "' See Banks' speech at Portland, Sept. i, iV. Y. Tribune, Sept. 2. It was reported that Banks was to address the capitalists of the city from the steps of the Exchange in New York about August 20, but there is no report in the newspapers of such a meeting. See N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 12; Nation, Aug. 15, p. 97. '" For instance, Senator Fenton's speech at Albany, July 18, Argus, July 19. 172 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT organization."* The vote of this element, with the failure of their party to put a separate ticket in the field, was con- sidered most doubtful,"* and many direct appeals were made to it by both sides. Greeley was presented as a self-made man, always a hard worker himself and the true friend of other workers. The laborer must in gratitude, as well as in self-interest, support such a fellow-laborer and steadfast supporter."^ In San Francisco opposition to the Chinese was utilized by the Liberal speakers as an argument for their ticket."* The Republicans, on their side, could boast no less a representative of labor than Henry Wilson, the "Na- tick Cobbler," who in Congress had been a leading promoter of the eight-hour movement."^ The characteristic argu- ment was made that in the critical conditions then existing between capital and labor,'^" the only safe course was in allowing the all-wise Republican party to investigate the question and secure laws that would afford justice to both "^ Ingersoll, 444; Beveridge, "Horace Greeley and the Cause of Labor," at Greeley Anniversary of Typographical Union, No. 6; Com- mons, " Horace Greeley and the Working Class Origins of the Republican Party," Political Science Quarterly, XXIV, 468 ff.; Parton, Greeley, 290-292, 301-312. "6 Cf. N. Y. Herald, Aug. 9. "' Chicago Tribune, May 12, June 8; Milwaukee News, Nov. 5; Springfield Weekly Republican, Aug. 16; Cincinnati Commercial, quoted in N. Y. Tribune, May 1 1 ; San Francisco Kvening Bulletin (reports of speeches) Sept. 12; Golden Age, May 11; Nevi Orleans Republican, May 4, 17; Mo. Republican, Aug. i; Ward, Ward, 267; O'Connor, O'Connor, 344. Henry George in his San Francisco Evening Post was an ardent supporter of Greeley. George, George, 239-240. For Greeley's discussion of his attitude toward labor in his campaign tour, see speech at Jeffersonville, Indiana, N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 24; Memorial to Greeley, 212 f. "' San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Sept. 12. "' Julian and Banks of the Liberals were also leading champions of this measure. See McNeill, Labor Movement, 130. ^^ This was the summer of the big strikes in New York City, ibid., 143. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 73 sides. '^' The Republicans in their state platforms in certain cases also made a direct bid for the labor vote.^^^ But, as in the other two national campaigns of the recon- struction period, the war and its results furnished the chief lines of argument. Morton had declared in the Senate the year before that the great issue in '72 would be the mainte- nance of the results of the war,'^' and so moderate a partisan as George William Curtis wrote in June that Grant was pit- ted "against every kind of Democratic, rebellious, Ku Klux, discontented, hopeful, and unreasonable feeling.""'' The Republican leaders, seeing their administration on the de- fensive at so many points, resorted to the "bloody shirt" "issue with a vengeance. Their speakers fought the war over at great length and in all its horrors."* Their party's great accomplishments in suppressing the rebellion and the necessity of its continuance in power were constantly em- phasized. Greeley was now denounced as an original seces- sionist in theory, and his attitude during war and reconstruc- tion was represented as decidedly favorable to the southern cause."' His conciliatory appeals to the South in his cam- paign speeches were interpreted by his opponents in the same way. He was seriously charged with a purpose to pen- sion southern soldiers, to pay the confederate debt, and to '*' See editorial in Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, June 18. ^^ Ann-ual Cyclopedia, 1872, pp. 656, 663; Dilla, 143. The Mass. Liberals also adopted a resolution strongly endorsing the cause of labor. Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 503. In Pennsylvania Buckalew agreed to be the candidate of the Labor Party for governor in case he received the Democratic nomination but he was defeated in the Labor convention by nine votes. Ibid., 665. '23Foulke, n, 193. ^* Curtis to Norton, June 30, Gary, Curtis, 230. 126 See editorial on the Maine canvass in N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23. See also on this feature of the Republican canvass, Lakeside Monthly, Dec, p. 468. i2»Foulke, n, 263; Flower, Carpenter, 2'/i; Conkling's speech, iV. Y. Tribune, July 24; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Oct. 8; Kan. Com- monwealth, Aug. 18, Sept. 15; Dilla, 144. 174 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT appoint to his cabinet confederate leaders like Raphael Semmes.'^' Radical papers and speakers, North and South, predicted, in the event of the election of the coalition ticket, the restoration to power of the rebel leaders with probable future attempts at secession and the certain undoing of much of the beneficent work of reconstruction. ^'^ The Republicans sought also to utilize the war issue in a more positive manner. A convention of soldiers and sailors organized by General Burnside, more successful as a politician than as a soldier, met at Pittsburgh in September and passed resolutions endorsing the Republican platform and candidates. ^^' A loyal eastern organ thought this gathering was "one of the largest and most imposing of the presidential year.""" Though apparently so fearful of former secessionists, when supporting Greeley, the Republicans welcomed to their own side influential leaders of that element. John A. Mosby, whose part in the war was not the least objectionable, was a leading worker for Grant in Virginia."' In opposition to the Republican war argument, the coali- tionists put forward as their chief issue a plea for the recon- '" Springfield Weekly Republican, Aug. i6; N. Y. World, Aug. 12, Sept. 3 (replying to such charges); San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Oct. 14; Conkling's speech, N. Y. Tribune, July 24; N. Y. Times, July 22,25,31, Aug. 12, 14, 30, 31. "8 Flower, Carpenter, 273; Williams, I, 373; Mayes, Lamar, 172; Adams, Storrs, 286; Orcutt, Burrows, 137-143; Forbes to Sumner, Aug. 10, Forbes, Letters, II, 178-183; North Am. Rev., Oct., pp. 420 ff.; Old and New, Sept., p. 373, Oct., pp. 381 ff.; Milwaukee Weekly Sentinel, Aug. 27; Wis. Weekly State Journal, Aug. 13; San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Oct. 15; Harper's Weekly, June 8, 29, July 20, Aug. 24, 31, Oct. 12, 19 and passim; Mo. Democrat, June 28; Minneapolis Evening News, June 10, 18, 25, July 20, Aug. 19. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 783; JV. F. Tribune, Sept. 18; N. Y. Times, Sept. 18, 19. A meeting of the Republican veterans of New- York State was reported in October, Albany Evening Journal, Oct. 3. ''" Borion Advertiser, Sept. 20. "'See Mosby, "Personal Recollections of General Grant," in Mun- sey's Magazine, XLIV, 762; Mosby's letter in N. Y. Times, May 25. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 75 ciliation of the North and the South by the complete removal of disabilities and a union of both sections for common re- forms under the Liberal banner. The Liberal movement in its inception in the border states had sought primarily to oppose the radical reconstruction policy, and in his letter accepting the Cincinnati nomination Greeley made the har- monization of the sections the keynote of his candidacy: "I accept your nomination, in the confident trust that the masses of our countrymen North and South are eager to clasp hands across the bloody chasm which has too long divided them, forgetting that they have been enemies in the joyous consciousness that they are and must henceforth re- main brethren. "''^ As other reform issues proved to a great extent inexpedient!^^ and the Republicans emphasized the disloyalty issue, the coalitionists adopted reconciliation as their great watch-word.'^* Greeley made this his central theme during his western trip, presenting his pleas for the burying of past differences with great effectiveness. ''* Other speakers for the Liberals forcefully contrasted the radical reconstruction policy with that for which their candidate stood. !'^ This line of argument was emphasized especially in the South where the abuses of the carpet-bag rule, fos- 132 Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 778. Greeley wrote to Ignatius Donnelly, Aug. 29, that he wished "the canvass to turn on present rather than past issues." Donnelly MSS. 133 "This was the one doctrine upon which the parties to the Alliance could most readily coalesce." Blaine, II, 531. '*• See on the predominance of this issue, N. Y. World, July 13, Sept. 26; Washington Patriot, July 13; Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 20; Golden Age, Oct. 12; N. Y. Herald, Sept. ^o; Mo. Republican, Aug. 3. The Liberal campaign pamphlet, "Mr. Greeley's Record on the Questions of Amnesty and Reconstruction from the Hour of Gen. Lee's Surrender," gives extracts from Greeley's editorials and speeches bear- ing on amnesty and reconciliation. •35 See selections from his speeches in Ingersoll, 650-663; and N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 19-30. ™Schurz's Writings, II, 395-401, 437-439) O'Connor, O'Connor, 333-344; Spencer, Bayard, 202 &.; Ward, Ward, 259 ff., 275 f. 176 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT tered by a radical administration, were set over against the sympathetic and conciliatory attitude of the Liberal candi- date, ever since the close of the war, and the avowed aims of the Liberal party.^'^ Some of the arguments that the radical campaigners in the North employed most frequently against Greeley were strongly urged in his favor at the South. '^' The amnesty bill of May 22, 1872, passed evidently under pressure of the Liberal opposition, 1^' leaving only a few hun- dred under disabilities,"" considerably weakened the Liber- als' favorite issue. Their opponents held that the great weapon of the coalition was but a "spiked gun""i and they also charged that "reconciliation" was anyway but an acci- dental issue suggested by Greeley's happy phrase and that it had not been emphasized by the organizers of the move- ment."^ But, considering the limited range of the policies upon which the coalitionists could unite heartily and the "'See Richmond Whig and Advertiser, June 28, Aug. 16, Sept. 3; Greenville Enterprise, May 15, 29, July lo, 31; Maryland Union, July 25; N. Y. Herald, July 13, reporting speeches at mass meeting at Welden, N. C, July 12. During his speech at this meeting Senator Tipton of Nebraska shook hands with Senator Ransom as a symbol of the desire of the Liberals for reconciliation. "* See, for instance, quotations from old files of Tribune showing Greeley's attitude toward peaceful secession in Southern Recorder, May 21. A constant radical charge against Greeley was his signing of Davis' bond. In Richmond the bond was lithographed for distribution as a Liberal campaign document, N. Y. World, May 23. '™ Cf. editorial in Chicago Tribune, May 24; White, 359; N. Y. Herald editorial. May 24. "" Rhodes (VI, 329) on the authority of the N. Y. Tribune, says between three hundred and five hundred. Blaine II, 513 says "not exceeding seven hundred and fifty in all." Conkling in his New York speech, July 23, declared: "Every rebel votes, and every rebel may hold office now, except Jefferson Davis and less than two hundred others who still spurn forgiveness." N. Y. Times, July 24. "' See editorial in Kan. Commonwealth, May 24. Cf. Conkling's speech cited above. '*2 See editorials in Harper's Weekly, Oct. 12, and Cincinnati Semi- Weekly Gazette, Oct. 22. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 77 growing dissatisfaction with the radical southern poUcy, the issue upon which Greeley and his supporters elected to rest their case was probably the strongest one available. During the early part of the canvass, before the first trial of strength, the advantage seemed to be with the coalition- ists. The apparently successful union of the two organiza- tions after the Democratic convention greatly increased the confidence of the Greeleyites.'^ Sumner's letter, late in July, was expected to win over many negroes and prominent anti-slavery men."^ The administration leaders were for a time most apprehensive of the result. In July the Repub- lican national chairman sent urgent telegrams to the leader of the woman's movement to meet him in Washington for a conference and later informed her that the committee at the time had been "panic-stricken" over the outlook."^ About the same time, R. B. Hayes admitted in the privacy of his diary: "I must say that I have just now a feeling that Greeley will be elected. ""° M. R. Waite wrote from Switz- erland that he was beginning to feel "nervous about politics at home.""' Another European sojourner, General Sher- man, thought that Grant would be reelected, "though several shrewd judges insist that Greeley will be our next President,"'*' and his more politically-minded brother could give no better assurance than that the "whole canvass is so extraordinary, that no result can be anticipated.""' "' Shortly before the convention Chase expressed the opinion that not ten per cent of the Democrats would oppose Greeley while many Republicans would support him. Hooper to Sumner, July 2, Sumner MSS. See also Doolittle's optimistic letter to Sumner, July 13, ibid. "^ Banks to Sumner, Aug. 2, ibid. '•"Harper, I, 421. '" Entry of July 17. Williams, I, 368. "' Waite to Washburne, July 18, Washburne MSS. ' 148 ^ -p Sherman to J. Sherman, July 16, Sherman Letters, 337. "' J. Sherman to W. T. Sherman, Aug. 4, ibid., 339. See also on the supposed uncertainty of the result, Oberholtzer, Cooke, H, 353. 178 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The North Carolina state election, coming on August i, was considered a most significant trial of strength. Both sides put forth every effort to secure the moral advantage of a victory in this first contest.'*" The canvass was bitterly and vigorously carried on from start to finish. Both or- ganizations sent their strongest campaigners to the state, and the meetings were reported with great detail all over the country.'" The first returns from the state election fa- vored the coalitionists and there was great jubilation in Democratic-Liberal circles. The election of their national ticket, they boasted, was now fully assured, the Republi- cans, by making such desperate efforts to carry the state, having shown that it was necessary for their success in No- vember.'*^ These rejoicings proved to be premature and unwarranted as the final returns gave the state to the Repub- licans by a close but safe majority."' This election, em- phasized in the popular mind far beyond its real importance, was apparently the turning-point in the campaign. The fortunes of the coalition, steadily mounting up to this time, show a perceptible decline during the remainder of the canvass.'** Republican confidence was greatly revived by their success in the first skirmish. Hayes now thought Grant's reelection quite certain,'** and the President him- i'» Nation, Aug. i, p. 65; Greeley to Trumbull, July 5, Trumbull MSS. '"Hamilton, "Campaign of 1872 in North Carolina" in South Atlantic Quart., XI, 148. I'^N. Y. World, Aug. 2; N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 2; Mo. Republican, Aug. 2. The N. Y. Herald of the same date stated that if the apparent success of the opposition in North Carolina proved correct it would be generally regarded as settling the presidential contest. See also Hay to Reid, Aug. 4, Thayer, I, 345 f.; Trumbull to Donnelly, Aug. 3, Don- nelly MSS. ™ Nation, Aug. 15, p. 97. ■" Cf. Reid's comment on Watterson's article in Century Magazine, LXXXV, 44; N. Y. Herald editorial, Aug. 25; Nation, Aug. 29, p. 129; Hudson, Random Recollections, 43-45. «6 Williams, I, 368. THE POLITICAI^ CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 79 self would concede no northern state to his opponent.'^ The shrewd Doctor Holmes, writing to Motley late in August, after protesting that his opinion was not "worth two cents," very accurately predicted that from this time on the move- ment for Greeley would be a "diminuendo" and that for Grant a " crescendo. "^^'' Nevertheless the result was still generally regarded as in doubt. The Atlantic Monthly in its September issue said: "The election is as doubtful as any that the present genera- tion of voters can remember. "^^* In the New York State Republican convention, on August 21, the strength of the coalition seemed so formidable'^' that a counterstroke was deemed advisable. Through the management of Thurlow Weed and Henry Clews, the venerable Democrat, General John A. Dix, was nominated for governor. 1^° Dix consented to run only after the personal solicitation of the President."' "* Grant to Washburne, Aug. 26, Grant, Letters to a Friend, 72. "' Morse, Holmes, II, 195. See also for the growing assurance of Grant's supporters, Rollins to Porter, Aug. 22, Lyford, Rollins, 289 f.; Luckey to Washburne, Aug. 30, Washburne MSS.; Winthrop to , Sept. 2, Winthrop, 280; Curtis to Norton, early Sept., Gary, 231; Young to Pryor, Sept. 16, Pryor, My Day, 352. ^*' Atlantic Monthly, Sept., p. 383. J. R. Doolittle wrote to Donnelly, August 23, " I look upon the Greeley election as a thing almost certain." Donnelly MSS. 159 E. D. Morgan, the Republican national chairman, wrote to Dix, Aug. i: "I have on all proper occasions told our friends to nominate for Governor some one of the distinguished gentlemen known as Reform Democrats. I have believed that we can do better with such a nomination than with a Republican. ... I am anxious for the success of Grant and Wilson, and I am disposed to adopt such proper measures as will make success reasonably sure." Dix, Dix, II, 174. i*" Clews, Twenty Eight Years of Wall Street, 297-303; Dix, II, 175; Barnes, Weed, 485; Nation, Aug. 29, p. 130. Dix had come out for Grant in July and had evidently been in close touch with Republican leaders for some time. See his letter in N. Y. Times, Aug. 4; Morgan to Dix, Aug. I, Dix, II, 174. After his nomination the N. Y. Times referred to Dix as a "Democrat." See editorial, Aug. 22. "' Clews, 304 f. l8o THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT There was considerable uncertainty regarding New England owing to factional differences and the regard for Greeley in that section. 1,^^ A report that Senator Wilson had conceded New Hampshire to the enemy was widely circulated. ''' The next test/^^ however, in the "September States," Vermont and Maine, showed that the Republicans were at least maintaining their old strongholds. After active can- vasses, both their tickets secured decided majorities, i** and the coalition organs in vain sought to explain away the real result.'^" But the decisive struggle remained to be fought out in the j" October States," Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana and Neb- raska. The conditions in local politics seemed to give the coalitionists an excellent chance to retrieve themselves in these pivotal states. In Pennsylvania the Republican can- didate for governor was accused of complicity in frauds and a portion of the party, led by Forney and his Press, refused to support the ticket.^'' The defection of ex-Governor Curtin to the coalitionists in September,'*^ after the admin- istration had vainly endeavored to keep his support,'^' was another hard blow to the state organization. Grant wrote i«2 Lyford, 280-292. 1" Rollins to Porter, Aug. 22, ibid., 289 f. 1" In the West Virginia state election, on August 22, both candidates for governor were Democrats, one running independently. Annual Cyclopedia, 1872, p. 801. «5 Nation, Aug. 22, Sept. 5, 12, pp. 114, 145, 161; Dingley, Dinghy, 98. 1™ See N. Y. World, Sept. 10; Golden Age, Sept. 14; Spirit of the Times, Sept. 14. In a letter to a friend, Sept. 10, Greeley confessed: "Just now the skies look dark; a month hence they may be brighter; but in any case I shall be what I am, and shall have less care out of than in office." Benton, Greeley on Lincoln, etc., 229. "' McClure, II, 341-346; Chicago Tribune, June 13; Springfield Weekly Republican, Sept. 13; Nation, Apr. 11, 18, pp. 234, 250, Oct. 3, pp. 209 f. Philadelphia Press, quoted in Washington Patriot, July 4. 168 Nation, Sept. 26, p. 193. '" Randall to Sumner, Aug. 8, Sumner MSS.; Grant to Washburne, Aug. 26, Grant, Letters to a Friend, 71; McClure, II, 328. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1872 18I that Curtin's defection would probably lose them the state in October."" In Ohio, an original Liberal stronghold, the state campaign was well organized and hard fought on both sides.''' Indiana was the scene of a desperate political duel between the long-time rivals Morton and Hendricks. As the political future of both of these veteran party leaders was thought to hinge on this contest there could be no ques- tion of its thoroughness and bitterness."' Senator Tipton's leadership in Nebraska was counted on to swing that state for the Liberals."' The leaders of both national organizations fully recog- nized the crucial character of the October elections. Greeley in June had advised against the adoption of a free-trade plank by the Democratic national convention as likely to endanger the state ticket in Pennsylvania."^ A private report from Republican headquarters in September stated that, while results thus far had favored the party, reverses in the October elections might defeat the national ticket. " Defeat in one of those states would endanger Grant, defeat in two of them would probably elect Greeley." An analysis of the situation in the different October states showed con- siderable cause for Republican anxiety."' The coalition press also maintained that the success of their ticket in two of these states would settle the national election."^ Sec- •'" Grant to Washburne, Aug. 26, Grant, Letters to a Friend, 71. 1" Brinkerhoff, Recollections, 221; Smith, Rep. Party in Ohio, I, 305. '™Foulke, II, 257; Holcombe and Skinner, Hendricks, 305; JV. Y. Herald, Aug. 16 (political correspondence from Indianapolis). Morton wrote to Blaine, July 22: "The contest here will be hard fought and most bitter, and we shall require all the assistance possible." Hamilton, Blaine, 302. "5 Nation, Oct. 10, p. 225. "* Greeley to Jones, June 24, Jones, Jones, II, 154. '" Glidden to Washburne, Sept. 15, Washburne MSB. 1™ N. Y. World, Oct. 7; N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 4. John Hay wrote to Reid Aug. i from Springfield, 111.: "If we carry Pennsylvania and Indiana the prospects here will be vastly increased." Thayer, I, 344. l82 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT retary Fish wrote on the eve of the election that he was "very hopeful," but "not without anxieties. "^'^ The fears of the administrationists proved not to be well founded. The October elections, with slight exceptions, went for the Republicans in a most substantial manner. Slight opposition gains here and there^'^ detracted in no way from the conclusiveness of the general result. ^^' No reason now remained to doubt the final outcome. i^" Cer- tain coalition papers continued to encourage the faithful by factitious arguments and their national and state committees issued hopeful bulletins exhorting the party to greater ac- tivity,'^' but the figures were not to be mistaken. Liberals were now exhorted by Republican papers to return to the party fold ; their efforts to form a new party, they were as- sured, had been a complete failure, and all that they could expect to do now would be simply to aid the old Demo- cratic party.'^^ 1" Fish to Washburne, Oct. 7, Washburne MSS. "^ Such as Hendricks' election in Indiana. i"Cf. Nation, Oct. 17, p. 241. "" The N. Y. World (Oct. 10) and the Springfield Republican (Oct. 11) practically admitted that there was slight hope of Greeley's election. Colonel McClure wrote to the Philadelphia Press that he considered the doubtful states as hopelessly lost, quoted in the Cincinnati Semi- Weekly Gazette, Oct. 18. For private opinions on the finality- of the result, see Sherman Letters, 339; Winthrop, 280; Motley, Correspondence, II> 355- Greeley was apparently well aware of the significance of the result in the October states. See Watterson, "Humor and Tragedy of the Greeley Campaign," 42. Greeley to a Lady Friend, Oct. 14, Benton, Greeley on Lincoln, etc., 234. "Straw votes" in four eastern colleges, Yale, Amherst, Brown and Wesleyan, were overwhelmingly for Grant. See reports in Wis. Weekly State Journal, Oct. 29, and Springfield Weekly Republican, Oct. 25, Nov. i. '" For addresses of the national and state committees, see N. Y. Trib- une, Oct. 10, 15, 16, 17, 19. For hopeful editorials, see ibid., Oct. 9, 10, 24, 28; Chicago Tribune, Oct. n; Madison Democrat, Oct. 14; Mo. Republican, Oct. 10; editorials quoted in Nation, Oct. 17, p. 241. 1'* See editorials in Albany Evening Journal, Oct. 10; Kan. Common- wealth, Oct. 19; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Oct. 25. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 83 There was thus nothing surprising in the final result, ex- cept in the magnitude of the coalition's defeat.'^ Greeley carried no northern state and but six of the border and south- ern states. Virginia, West Virginia, Arkansas and Alabama, all of which had been wrested from radical control in state elections, went for the Republican national ticket. Mary- land was kept in the Liberal column by less than a thousand while Delaware was lost to Grant by about the same ma- jority. New Jersey went Republican for the first time in a national election. Greeley's native state of New Hamp- shire, which had seemed so enthusiastic over her son's can- didacy at first, repudiated him in the end by nearly six thousand. New York, claimed for the coalitionists up to the very last,'^^ rolled up a majority against them of 53,000, and Pennsylvania, which seemed so doubtful in October, now topped the Republican column with a majority of 137,000. There was the same relative result throughout the North. 186 The analysis of all the factors entering into the deter- mination of this, as of any other national campaign, is a hopeless task. At best only some of the more important in- fluences can be definitely established. Such a search must, of course, go much farther into the conduct and influences of the campaign than a mere consideration of the issues presented by the participants and other statements fur- nished for the consumption of the contemporary public. The campaign managers of the period left few records of •*' The Boston Advertiser on the day of the election (Nov. 5) estimated the electoral vote thus: Grant, 209, Greeley, 93, doubtful, 64, including New York and New Jersey. is^Fenton to Trumbull, Oct. 21, Trumbull MSS. A correspondent of the N. Y. Herald, (Oct. 30), after what was claimed to be a careful canvass, estimated that Grant would have a majority of 14,600 in the state and Kernan, the coalition candidate for governor, 7,000. i^'Stanwood, Hist, oj Presidency, 352; McKee, Nat. Conventions and Platforms, 159. 184 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT their activities, but some observations of things behind the scenes may now be taken. In the first place, the Republican ticket was backed by a powerful organization with a large army of zealous workers. Party machinery was more highly developed than it had ever been in the past,'*^ and where local weaknesses appeared special efforts were made to strengthen the organization at these points. ^'^ The congressional campaign committee, organized by Senator Chandler and James M. Edmunds, proved now a most efficient auxiliary of the national com- mittee.'*^ In the federal office-holders all over the country the Republicans had a faithful band of workers who could be called on at any time and for any needed service. Many of these officials seem to have devoted a good portion of their time during the campaign to raising funds, organizing clubs, speaking on the stump, and writing for party newspapers.'*' A large number of government employees, it was charged, were kept busy at the Republican headquarters in Wash- ington in sending out franked documents and doing other work for the congressional campaign committee. ''" In Maine federal officials were accused of "colonizing" voters in the navy yards.''' But by far the most offensive parti- sanship among Republican office-holders occurred in the southern elections. In some cases federal officials in this section openly devoted their time to party activities which extended to making arrests under the Enforcement Act, "' Cf. Kleeberg, Formation of the Rep. Party, 205, 217-18, 227. The Lakeside Monthly said editorially (Dec, p. 471) that the result of the election was a triumph for party discipline and organization. '" See, for instance, Lyford, 289. 188 Detroit Post and Tribune, Chandler, 314 f. '*' Joyce, Checkered Life, 168 f.; McDonald, Whiskey Ring, 42, 51, 327; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23 (on activity of federal officials in the Maine election); N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 25 (printing assessment letter sent to a revenue collector by the congressional committee). 190 Washington Patriot, Aug. 7. '»' N. Y. World, Sept. 10. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 85 colonizing negroes, and interfering at the polls."^ With a capable organization to lay the campaign plans and such willing workers to execute them the administration began with a big advantage. The coalitionists, on the contrary, lacked efficient organ- ization. Their papers were constantly exhorting them to organize more fully and systematically, and after the Lib- eral defeats in the fall elections their campaign methods were criticized.'*' In the midst of the canvass one of their speakers wrote: "Never knew so good a cause so badly handled. His [Greeley's] chiefs of organization incompe- tent, and the whole campaign left to fight its own way, with- out generals or captains. "^'^ Another influence working for the Republicans and against the coalition was that of the financial interests. Grant and the Republican organization were most intimately connected with the captains of Wall Street. The President had an especial weakness for millionaires and had never been slow to accept their favors.''* It was due chiefly to the ex- ertions of Henry Clews, William E. Dodge and other New York capitalists that the mass meeting had been called in April to endorse the administration. '^^ Ex-Senator E. D. Morgan, a prominent financier and a cousin of J. P. Morgan of Drexel, Morgan & Co.,"' was this year the national chair- man and William E. Chandler, who had been most successful in raising large campaign funds in the past, was the secretary and chief collector.''^ Jay Cooke's company was by far the 1'^ Hamilton, "The Election of 1872 in North Carolina" in South Atlantic Quart., XI, 148 f. ; Fleming, Reconstruc. in Ala., 755; Davis, Reconstriic. in Fla., 640 f. 19' A^. Y. Tribune, Sept. 10; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23; Golden Age, Sept. 14; People's Tribune, Sept. 4. "* O'Connor, 71. Cf. editorial in Lakeside Monthly, Dec, p. 471. "5 Rhodes, VI, 383 f. "'Clews, 315; Martyn, Dodge, 282. '" Hovey, Morgan, 65. "« Oberholtzer, Cooke, II, 69-71, 352. l86 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT largest contributor. Cooke, who was a close friend of the President/'' had very practical and direct interests to serve. The previous year his syndicate had secured a government loan,^"" and during the campaign he was negotiating for another installment.'"' He was also in the midst of his Northern Pacific promotion, for which the aid of the ad- ministration and Congress was so essential.'"^ The firm's contributions, beginning with $io,000 for the spring election in New Hampshire, evidently totaled over $40,000.''" Sec- retary Robeson was allowed $10,000 for the New Jersey campaign, for the sake of his influence in securing the n^vy account for the firm."^ Special contributions were made to secure doubtful congressional districts. A request of this sort from Speaker Blaine was acceded to by Cooke's brother for the reason that the firm was not yet through its fights in Congress and that the Speaker was a "formidable power for good or evil and he has a wide future before him. "'"^ When in September prices on Wall Street suddenly fell and a panic threatened, the firm greatly aided the treasury department in making a "flank movement on the bears. ""^ Lesser financial interests were freely called upon for tribute. The chairman of the New York state committee in October sent out circulars to the national banks, stating that "this com- mittee has determined not to make assessments on Federal or State officers as has been usual heretofore, and, therefore, 1'' Oberholtzer, Cooke II, 454 f., 471. Cooke was also a close friend of Vice-President Colfax, whom he had urged to resign and enter the employ of the Northern Pacific in 1871. Ibid.., 230. ^o" Ibid., 265-283. ^°' Ibid., 353. Boutwell divided this loan the next year between the Cooke- Rothschild syndicate and the Morton-Morgan syndicate, Hovey, 77- 2i>2 Oberholtzer, II, 165, 178-181, 354. "' Ibid., 357. 2»* Idem. ^"^ Ibid., 354. =«» Ibid., 354-356. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF I872 I87 we have to rely upon such contributions as they together with other friends of the cause may please to make. "^"^ Many business men undoubtedly had real apprehensions as to the evils which would follow the election of the coalition ticket. The "Greeley scare," in addition to the usual dis- turbing influences of a presidential year, was depressing bond sales and business interests in general. To many these con- ditions seemed but a foretaste of what was in store if a finan- cier like Greeley should become head of the government.^"' The coalition, recognizing their great financial handicap, in being out of favor with these sources of large campaign funds, made some efforts to conciliate "the interests." Whitelaw Reid wrote to Jay Cooke, in June, with such a purpose. The promoter was assured that the Liberals in the resolution in their platform regarding public land grants for railroads had said nothing "calculated to interfere with the franchise of the Northern Pacific, or public confidence in it. They simply protest against the further grants of land for such purposes and pledge themselves to oppose them. For this it seems to me you ought to be greatly obliged since it prevents your lands from being cheapened in the market by undue competition.""" But this rather dubious interpretation of a reform declaration seems to have been unavailing. Certain wealthy individuals^'" with political 2»' Washington Patriot, Oct. 25; Nation, Oct. 24, p. 258. 2»s Oberholtzer, II, 389; J. M. S. Williams to Sumner, July 15, Sum- ner MSS.; Veteran Journalist, "Personal Reminiscences of Horace Greeley," Bookman, XIII, 130; Pierce, IV, 544. 209 Oberholtzer, II, 353. 21" The N. Y. Times in a feature article the day before the election (Nov. 4) published a list of contributions to the coalition campaign fund totaling $219,500, and estimated that the entire amount received would be about $300,000. Among the leading contributors in this list were Senator Sprague of Rhode Island and his brother with $15,000 and $33,- 000 respectively; John E. Williams and brother. New York bankers, |i5,ooo; A. T. Stewart $10,000; M. O. Roberts $10,000; John Coch- rane $8,000; and Greeley and the Tribune $12,000. George Wilkes 1 88 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT ambitions backed the Liberal cause, but, in the main, the moneyed men were found on the other side.^'"" Thus with both federal office-holders and the "interests" to draw upon, the "sinews of war" were controlled by the administrationists. Their funds were expended most liber- ally. The congressional campaign committee spent $30,000 in procuring extracts from Greeley's speeches and writings for the press.^" In the preliminary state elections no expense was allowed to stand in the way of a full vote of confidence.^^' The coalitionists, on the contrary, were at times hard put to it for the necessary funds.^^' The impossibility of reconciling large numbers of Demo- ctratic voters to Greeley's candidacy was probably decisive in bringing about the overwhelming defeat of the coalition ticket. Most of the Democratic leaders carried out their part of the compact faithfully, if not cheerfully, but the rank and file of the party recognized no such obligation. In all parts of the country, both contemporary observations and recent critical studies reveal the same general situation in the Democratic party, such an antipathy on the part of many old-line members to their candidate as even the hope claimed that he bet $20,000 on Greeley which he would not withdraw for fear of hurting the cause. Spirit of the Times, Nov. 9. Stewart, according to the Times article, contributed also to the Grant fund. It was reported early in the canvass that he had given $25,000 to the Liberals, but this he later denied, and represented that he was entirely friendly to Grant. Boutwell, Reminiscences, II, 205 f. 2"''' Greeley wrote to a friend, Sept. 11, "The Grant folks are full of money, and are using it with effect." Benton, Greeley on Lincoln, etc., 231. 2" Detroit Post and Tribune, Chandler, 315. «'2 Oberholtzer, II, 352, 353, 356; Hamilton, "Election of 1872 in N. C." in South Atlantic Quart., XI, 148; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23. "' N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23. (Editorial comment on the Maine state election.) THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1 872 1 89 of the defeat of the Republicans could not remove.^'* A com- parison of the returns of this with previous elections shows conclusively that large numbers of Democrats stayed away from the polls or refrained from voting for the national ticket. In the states voting both in 1868 and i872,"5 the Republican vote in the latter year increased 343,000, while the coalition vote decreased from that of the Democrats by 90,000.^'^ 21* N. Y. Herald, Sept. 23, Nov. 25; N. Y. World, Oct. 28, Nov. 9; Washington Patriot, Nov. 7; Milwaukee News, Nov. 8; Clay, I, 510; Julian, 348; Hay to Reid, Aug. I, commenting on Democratic bolts in Illinois, Thayer, I, 344. Johnston-Woodburn, Pol. Hist., II, 587 {.; Powell, Dem. Party of Ohio, I, 201; Dilla, 146 f.; Hamilton, "The Election of 1872 in North Carolina," South Atlantic Quart., XI, 148, 151 ; Fleming, Reconstruc. in Ala., 754; Haynes, Third Party Movements, 28-29; Alexander, Pol. Hist. 0} N. Y., Ill, 300, 302 f.; Conrad, Hist, of Del., I, 225. ^'* That is excluding Virginia, Florida, Mississsippi and Texas in both cases. 2'° Stanwood, Hist, of the Presidency, 328, 351. A comparison of the vote in this election in strong Democratic sections in states where the opposition to the coalition was especially pronounced with that of previous elections shows a considerable defection in the party vote: In Delaware the vote for Greeley was 1 1.2 per cent less of the total vote than that for Seymour in 1868, and 7.7 per cent less of the total than the vote for governor in 1870. In Maryland the coalition vote for president was 5.4 per cent less of the total than that for governor and 12.9 per cent less than the percentage of the vote cast for Seymour. In three New Jersey counties (Hudson, Sussex and Warren) the fore- going basis of comparison gives a decrease of 5.2 per cent from the presidential election of '68 and 7.1 per cent from the gubernatorial of '71. In four strongly Democratic counties in Pennsylvania (Berks, Mon- roe, Northampton and Pike) the decrease from the national election of '68 was 6.7 per cent and that from the state election in October '72, 7 per cent. The figures are taken in each case from the Evening Journal Almanac for 1873. In all the states electing governors in 1872, with the exception of New York, the Democratic or coalition candidate for that office ran better than Greeley. In New York the plurality of the Re- 190 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The fundamental explanation of the " tidal wave " of 1872 simmers down to this, — that the country had confidence in Grant and his administration, and did not wish at this time of readjustment from the great war to risk a doubtful ex- periment. All the charges that could be brought against the General were with great masses of voters more than off- set by his fame as the great military hero.^" The freedman, the new element in the electorate, had been taught to look upon Grant and the Republican party as their only salva- tion. ^^^ The past administration, in spite of all abuses, had been in many respects fairly efificient.^^' Times were still good, and the average voter was not greatly concerned over reform projects that seemed largely theoretical.^^" There was, to be sure, a growing unrest with existing conditions, especially in the West, which was soon to assert itself in a manner most disastrous to the Republicans, but the Liberals had failed to unite this opposition sentiment. Greeley, in con- trast to Grant, was a most uncertain quantity. During his many years in the public gaze, in spite of the wide influence which he exerted, he had gained the reputation, which could not now be overcome, of a man of erratic, unstable qualities. And the political conjunction by which he had become a candidate was regarded by many as particularly suspicious. The Democratic party was still thought to be unreconstruc- ted, and with the passions of the war still so warm it took no great stretch of the imagination to see in the party's sud- den acceptance of its old vilifier a plot to get into office and publican candidate for governor was less than two thousand greater than that for Grant and the sectarian issue in the state canvass would more than account for that difference. ^" Cf . editorial in N. Y. Herald, May 8; Garland, Grant, 419-421; Linn, Greeley, 252; Albert E. Pillsbury (a Mass. Liberal) in Memorial to Greeley, 74. 218 Cf. Old and New, Sept., p. 373, Nov., p. 631; Wallace, Carpet-Bag Rule in Fla., 216. 2" Cf. North Am. Rev., Oct., pp. 417-419; Lippincott's, Sept., p. 355. 22» Cf. Lippincott's Sept., pp. 356 f. THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OF 1872 I9I subsequently to restore something of the ante-bellum condi- tions.^^i But, on their side, many of the Democrats did not trust their candidate. The party was nominally united, but the Bourbon element, North and South, could not be recon- ciled.''^* The result, then, can only be accounted for as a vote of confidence in Grant, either as a first choice, or, as with many, a choice of evils. As an ardent Democratic cam- paigner explained: "The majority was so astonishingly large, that it leaves no room for disconsolacy, that circum- stances might have made it different. It was a clear Grant victory."*^^ ^^' For a recent justification of this attitude by a thoughtful contem- porary, see Wilson, Dana, 429 f. The Missouri Republican (Nov. 6) attributed the result to the failure of the Democrats to follow out fully the "passive policy." Edward Dicey thought that if the Liberals had not joined with the distrusted Democratic party and had named a more suitable candidate they might have formed a new party. See his article in the Fortnightly Review, Dec. 1874, p. 629. ^^22 By this statement of Greeley's weaknesses as a candidate there is no intention to imply that some other coalition candidate could have beaten Grant, as some contemporary observers have held (see Hoar, Autobiography, I, 284; White, Trumbull, 402). The weak points of the other candidates for the Liberal nomination have already been noted and, under the circumstances, it does not seem likely that any of them could have succeeded. There has probably been a tendency to exag- gerate Greeley's unavailability as compared with other possible candi- dates. In the South, for instance, he had some peculiar elements of strength. See Ross, "Horace Greeley and the South, 1865-1872." 223 O'Connor, 74. CHAPTER VII THE LATER ACTIVITIES OF THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN FACTION In most accounts of the politics of the seventies the Lib- eral Republicans, as a distinct group, drop out of the nar- rative after the disastrous "Greeley campaign. "' It is true that during the next four years the Liberal national organization had only a nominal existence, and that in some sections the party ceased to have, or really never had, a distinct local organization; but in other regions it was able in this period to keep together a following which ex- erted a considerable, at times a decisive, influence in state and local elections. A knowledge of this later activity of the Liberals is necessary for a clear understanding of the different character of the movement in different sections, and of the influence which it exerted on political parties. In treating this period, the activities of the Liberals in Congress will be first considered, next the position of the faction in state politics, and finally its connection with the national campaign of 1876, which marked the extinction of the Liberals as a separately organized faction. I. THE LIBERALS IN CONGRESS, 1873-1876 In the last session of the Forty Second Congress, begin- ning in December, 1872, the policy of the Liberal members^ '■ Since this was written Dr. Haynes in his Third Party Movements since the Civil War has treated briefly certain phases of this period of Liberal activity. ^ The classification of members varies in different places but the fol- lowing lists, gathered from the World, Tribune, and Evening Journal Almanacs for 1873 and McPherson's Hand-Book of Politics for 1874, seem to include all who were at any time during the Forty- Second Congress identified with the Liberal faction. The dates of the 192 LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 1 93 was watched with much interest for an indication of the faction's future ahgnment. The administration leaders, in the presence of their great victory, were in no mood to deal leniently with the bolters. This unconciliatory at- titude was shown in the Senate early in the session when Cameron, after moving for an adjournment, refused to allow Sumner and Fenton to deliver the eulogistic remarks which they had prepared in memory of their deceased candi- date.' In selecting committees the Republican senators! completely ignored the Liberals, excluding them by thej wording of their call from participating in the caucus.*' The Liberal senators, of course, lost their chairmanships, and it now rested with the Democrats whether they should have any committee representation. The chief vacancies at the disposal of the Democrats were in the foreign rela- tions, finance and judiciary committees on which Schurz, Fenton and Trumbull had been serving. After inviting the Liberals to a consultation, the Democratic senators de- cided to keep their own men on the finance and the judiciary committees, but from foreign relations Senator Casserly in- sisted on withdrawing in favor of Schurz. The other Liberal senators were given places on minor committees.^ The question of the relation of the Liberal senators to the Democratic party was thus raised. Tipton and Rice at- tended the Democratic caucus and expressed an intention of acting with that party in future.* But the other Liberal senators were emphatic in declaring their independence of expiration of the senators' terms are indicated. Trumbull (111.), '73; Rice (Ark.), '73; Sumner (Mass.), '75; Sprague (R. I.), '75; Fenton (N. Y.), '75; Schurz (Mo.), '75; Tipton (Neb.), '75; West(La.), '77; Hamilton (Tex.), '77. Representatives — -Banks (Mass.) ;Blair (Mich.); Dodds (Ohio); Farnsworth (III.); Goodrich (N. Y.); Morphis, (Miss.). ' N. Y. Herald, Dec. 4, 1872; Cong. Globe, 42Cong., 3 Sess., 14. ■■ N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 6, 1872; Pierce, Sumner, IV, 549. ' N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 6, 1872; N. Y. World, Dec. 6, 1872. « N. Y. World, Dec. 6, 1872. 14 194 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT both the old parties.' Schurz, before accepting the com- mittee assignment tendered by the Democratic caucus, wrote to Senator Thurman expressing an appreciation of the honor, but explaining clearly that he did not wish to commit himself to any party. During the last campaign he had constantly disavowed any intention to join the Democratic party and his position was still the same. He stood on the Missouri platform; and he would support or oppose the administration accordingly as its policies were likely to advance or retard those ends. Thurman replied at once that he was instructed by the Democratic senators to say that they had understood Schurz's position and did not consider the proposed arrangement a surrender of principle either by him or them. With this understanding Schurz accepted the assignment.' In the House, where committee assignments were made at the beginning of a new term and could be changed only by a suspension of the rules, it would have been difificult to oust the Liberal chairmen. The majority of the members were disinclined to making changes of that sort in the last session. A test vote came early in the session — December 2 — when General Banks offered his resignation as chairman of foreign affairs on the ground that the House should be represented by one more unreservedly committed to its policies. But by a vote of 76-59 the House refused to ac- cept his resignation.^ This vote seems to have been re- garded as a final disposal of the question of the reorganiza- tion of committees.'" ' N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 6, 1872. ^Ibid., Dec. 7; N. Y. World, Dec. 7, 1872. ° Cong. Globe, 42 Cong., 3 Sess., 10 f. " Butler was reported as seeking to put through a resolution to have the Liberals removed as the heads of committees, but it was said that most of the Republicans thought that the vote on Banks settled the matter. N. Y. Tribune, Dec. 9, 10, 1872. The Cincinnati Semi- Weekly Gazette (Dec. 6, 1872) thought that Banks' retention was a mis- take. So long as the Liberals opposed the administration, it held, they should be treated like opponents. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 1 95 On the leading measures involving reform issues in this session the action of the majority of the Liberal members was not especially creditable. In the Credit Mobilier investigation Goodrich dissented from the opinion of the majority of the judiciary committee, that a member could not be expelled for an act committed before his term of office;" but Farnsworth made a strong plea in defence of the implicated members. '^ The connection of the Liberals with the "salary grab" was decidedly open to criticism. Four Liberal senators and one representative supported the act, and but three senators and none of the representatives returned their back pay.^^ In the election of 1872 none of the Liberal members were returned to the Forty Third Congress," but five new mem- bers were classified as Liberals. ^^ Alarmed by the resiilts of the state elections in 1873, the administration leaders in the Senate were ready to make terms with the Liberals at the opening of the new Congress. In their caucus it was suggested that Schurz, Sumner and Fenton be restored to their old party standing, but Conkling argued that some guarantee of their action in the future should first be exacted." Subsequently the Liberals, though " Cong. Globe, 42 Cong., 3 Sess., 1655. " Ibid., Appendix, 127-131. " McPherson, Hand-Book of Politics for 1874, pp. 18-20. The N. Y. Tribune (Aug. 5, 1873) gives a detailed table of the vote and of the disposal of the back pay, as does also the N. Y. World, Aug. 26, 1873. Farnsworth divided his share among the counties of his district — an action that was much criticized. See N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 2, 1873, mentioning resolutions of a farmers' meeting in Illinois. " Banks and Goodrich were defeated for reelection and Blair for governor. World Almanac, 1873, pp. 39, 41, 54. " World Almanac, 1873, pp. 79-80. In addition a Liberal member was returned from the 9th Ind. district, but he lost on a contest. £»««- ing Journal Almanac, iSy^, pp. 45, 54; iftid, 1874, p. 37; Cong. Record, 43 Cong., I Sess., 97. The Liberal member from La. was not seated until the end of the session. McPherson, Hand-Book for 1876, p. 2 n. « N. Y. World, Dec. 3, 4. i873- 196 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT they did not enter the caucus, were continued by the Re- pubHcans in the places that had been given them by the Democrats.'^ Schurz, during the remainder of his term, ad- hered strictly to his independent position ; '^ Sumner's career ended before he became committed on partisan issues; and the rest of the Liberal senators gradually drifted to one or the other of the old parties. ^^ The Liberal representa- tives elected in 1872 were, in the main, identified during their term with the Democrats.^" In 1874 two of the Liberal members were reelected as regular Democrats.^' A dozen other members, classified as "Liberal," "Independent," or "Reform," in nearly every case secured their election through Democratic support. With two exceptions the Liberals and Independents in the Forty Fourth Congress acted with the Democrats.^ " N.Y. World Dec. 5. Tipton was now acting with the Democrats. The Mass. Weekly Spy, a strong administration paper, said (Dec. 12, 1873) that the action of the Republican caucus marked the complete healing of the Liberal breach. The Liberal senators, it explained, did not come back as penitents and no pledges were exacted from them, their past services being a sufficient security. "See Bancroft-Dunning, Schurz' s Pol. Career, 356-361; Schurz' s Writings, II, 450-472. 473-534; HI. 1 15-152. " West and Sprague are classed as Republicans by the World Almanac of 1874, but Sprague is still designated " Liberal" by the Evening Journal Almanac. Hamilton is termed "Independent" by the World Almanac for 1875, "Liberal" by the Evening Journal. McPherson (in his Hand- Book for 1876) in the last session of the 43rd Congress classifies Hamil- ton, Schurz, Tipton and Fenton merely as "Independents.'' But, in the main, Schurz was independent of both organizations, Tipton favored the Democrats and the rest the Republicans. 2» McPherson, Hand-Book for 1876. ^' Whitehouse of N. Y. and Banning of Ohio. ^^ The Cincinnati Commercial said that fourteen Liberals and Inde- pendents in the present House, with the exception of Prof. Seelye and General Banks of Massachusetts, had voted systematically with the Democrats. Editorial, Oct. 18, 1876. Banks was suggested by Liberal papers as a most suitable coalition candidate for speaker. See Madison Democrat, Nov. 7, 1874, quoting Chicago Tribune. But, as the Cincin- LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS I97 2. THE SOUTH In the South the Liberal Republicans, as a distinct organi- zation, had never been very important, and after the national campaign they merged readily with the old parties. Only here and there some sign of the organization is to be noted. In Mississippi the lieutenant-governor and state treasurer elected in 1872 were classed as Liberals.^ In Louisiana some sort of organization was kept up, and the Liberals were specially mentioned in the call for the Democratic state convention in 1874. There were only a few Liberals in the convention who had not yet gone over to the Democrats, but to secure the full support of the element concessions were made to them in the platform. ^^ The Congress- man-at-large elected from Arkansas in 1872 — a carpet- bagger recruit of Senator Rice^* — was nominally a Liberal, but was soon identified with the Democrats in Congress.^* Frederick G. Bromberg, a leading Alabama Liberal, was sent to Congress in 1873 by Democratic support. For a time he acted independently but before the end of his term he was committed to the Democratic party .^' Governor Walker, of Virginia, who had led the pioneer Liberal move- ment in 1869, was elected to Congress by the Conservatives nati Commercial pointed out (Nov. 9, 1874), the Liberals could not expect any such concession as the Democrats now had a sufficient majority without them. The Democrats with their large majority not only did not elect a Liberal Speaker, but they were not very free in giving them committee assignments. The N. Y. Tribune's Washington corres- pondent predicted (Dec. 22, 1875) that Speaker Kerr's policy in this regard would alienate the Liberals. See also Milwaukee Sentinel (Dec. 27, 1875) predicting that the Liberal representatives would be driven back to the Republican party. ''' World Almanac for 1873, p. 44. =« N. Y. World, Sept. 3, 1874. ^^ Harrell, Brooks and Baxter War, 142. 2« Evening Journal Almanac for 1874 classes him as a Democrat. " Memorial Record of Ala., IL 515. Bromberg signed the address of the Democratic congressmen in 1875. 198 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT in 1874 ^nd reelected by the Democrats. ^^ There was no room in the South at this time for any organization but the radicals and conservatives — the Republicans and the Demo- crats. The Liberal movement so far as the South was con- cerned was but a phase in the consolidation of all the con- servative elements in support of the Democratic party. The campaign of 1872 was the culmination of the move- ment, begun about 1869, of dissatisfied Republicans over to the conservative opposition. 3. THE WEST Throughout the West the period of Grant's second ad- ministration was one of party disorganization. One of the manifestations of the heated agrarian and anti-monop- oly agitations of these years was the formation of "inde- pendent" parties as a means for securing the desired re- forms.^' Much the same reforms had been sought unsuc- cessfully in the Liberal movement, and in many cases the same men who had been most active in organizing the initial bolt from the Republican party were the promoters of the new reform party in their state. The Liberal state and local organizations, both by direct coalitions with the new movements and by their influence in securing Democratic cooperation, largely made possible the successes that these independent parties achieved. But the general result of this pooling of the opposition interests in the West, to which the Liberals — intentionally or otherwise — contributed de- cidedly, was to better the position of the Democracy. The Ohio independent demonstration of 1873, largely an outgrowth of the Liberal and the Reunion and Reform move- ^' Smith, Executives of Va., 388. '''For a general account of these parties, see Buclc, "Independent Parties in the Western States" in Turner Essays in American History (reprinted in Buck, Granger Movement, 80-102); Haynes, Third Party Movements, ch. VI. Haynes thinks that these parties "grew up con- temporaneously with" the Liberal Movement "but largely independent of it." Third Party Movements, 48. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 1 99 ments 051871-1872 , was of unusual interest, attracting nation- wide attention. Ohio had been an original centre of the reform agitation leading up to the national Liberal move- ment, and in the region about Cincinnati, in particular, the Liberals had shown decided strength.'" Following the elec- tion of 1 872 , there was much sentiment among Ohio independ- ents, of both Republican and Democratic antecedents, for the formation of a new reform party. A conference of leading Liberals and Democrats was held at Columbus, on Novem- ber 15, to decide on the future policy of the opposition forces. An address on the result of the late election signed by the allied chairmen was presented by Senator Tburman and the Democratic participants all seemed to desire a contin- uation of the alliance. But the recommendation of the Liberal committee that the opposition unite in one organiza- tion to be called the "Liberal party" came to nought. Ardent Liberals demanded that the Democrats abandon their organization, while Senator Thurman made it clear that the old-time leaders of his party would never consent to such a step.'' The coalition was therefore continued for a time on the old basis.'^ "> Cf. Williams, Hayes, I, 369. That the Liberal gains in this section were large is shown by a comparison of the vote for president in Hamil- ton County in 1872 with that for governor in 1871 and president in 1868. See Evening Journal Almanac for 1873, p. 106. The Cincinnati Com- mercial in 1874 (editorial. May 22) said of the Liberal Republican party in Hamilton Co. that it had been "more tenderly nurtured here than in any other quarter of the globe." '' Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Nov. 19, 1872. There was evi- dently considerable opposition in the Democratic party in the state to Thurman's stand. See editorial in ibid., Nov. 26, and the Cincinnati Enquirer and other Democratic papers, quoted in ibid., Dec. 3. 32 In the Cincinnati city election in the spring of 1873 the Democrats and Liberals, after considerable negotiations and wranglings, agreed on a coalition ticket which was subsequently elected. Cincinnati Com- mercial, Mar. 7, 29, Apr. 8, 1873. In the Ohio constitutional convention of 1873 there were 7 Liberal Republican members in a body of 105. N. Y. World, May 7, 1873. 200 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT At first it was the intention of the Liberals to act with the Democrats in the state election of 1873. The two com- mittees met and decided to call their separate conventions at the same time and place.'^ But an independent Demo- cratic movement in June gave the Liberals an opportunity to act independently of the regular parties. This was the so-called "Allen County Democracy" Aroused over the refusal of their congressman to return his back pay and over the many other evidences of corruption in the old parties, they decided at their county convention at Lima, June 16, to start a reform party of their own, and called a mass convention to meet at Columbus, July 30, for that purpose.^* Brinkerhoff, as the Liberal chairman, now issued a call for his convention to meet with the Allen County reformers.'^ Favorable responses from prominent Lib- eral Republicans and from those who were now termed "Liberal Democrats" came from all parts of the state.'' Democrats who had been in the Reunion and Reform Asso- ciation naturally went into the movement,^' and even some prominent Democrats of the Bourbon type, evidently des- pairing of the old party, hastened to become charter mem- bers.^ Both of the regular organizations were bitterly ^' N. Y. Tribune, May 24, 1873. ^ Cincinnati Commercial, June 18, 1873. ^ Ibid., July 2. ^* Ibid., July 26, 29, 1873; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, July i, 25, 1873. ^' William S. Groesbeck, while refusing to act as the independents' candidate for governor, expressed hearty sympathy with the movement and made public a letter to a New York friend in which he character- ized the old Democratic party as "spoiled," and suggested the formation of a new party to be termed the "Liberal Democracy." Cincinnati Commercial, July 26; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, July 29. This letter was widely quoted. See criticism in N. Y. World, July 30, 1873. '* George E. Pugh, a leader in the Vallandigham campaign of 1863, and Thomas Ewing were the most prominent representatives of this class in the new movement. Powell, Dem. Party of Ohio, I, 218. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 201 opposed to this unsettling element in state politics.'" The Liberals held a preliminary convention on the morning of the day set for the regular independent mass convention and formally decided to unite with the independent Democrats.^" The resolutions of the independent Democratic-Liberal gathering, while reflecting to a considerable extent the dis- satisfaction and unrest of the period, show the tempering control of the conservative Democrats: the abuses in both the old parties, which had now outlived their usefulness, were denounced and the duty of independent voting as- serted ; the reduction of the functions of government to the minimum was advocated, as well as "home government in all local affairs"; all grants, subsidies and special favors to corporations were condemned and a tariff for revenue only demanded. The nominations, headed by Judge Isaac Col- lins — a former pronounced Democrat but prominent in the Reunion and Reform movement — for governor, were di- vided equally between the Democrats and Liberals.^* '' For the Republican attitude, see especially the editorials in the Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette. It charged (July 8) that the Liberals were seeking simply to secure a balance in the legislature, so that they might sell out in the senatorial election, and it called the leaders of the People's party "the Phfirisees" (Aug. 8). The Kan. Commonwealth (Aug. 7) said that the Allen County Liberal coalition was "the 'Mis- souri movement' over again, minus the enthusiasm and brains that characterized the latter." For the Democratic opposition, see Cin- cinnati Enquirer, quoted in Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, July 4, 8, 1873; N. Y. World, July 18, 29, 1873. See also denunciations of the Ohio Liberals in the N. Y. Herald, Aug. i, 1873, and Nation, July 31, 1873, P- 65. A resolution was offered in the Democratic Cuyahoga County convention for "dissolution of the partnership heretofore ex- isting with the Liberals," but it was not adopted. Cincinnati Com- mercial, Aug. 6, 1873. ^» Cincinnati Commercial, July 31, 1873. «' Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, pp. 609 f ; Brinkerhoff, Recollections, 223. The detailed proceedings of the convention are given in Cincinnati Commercial, July 31, 1873, and Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Aug. i, 1873- 202 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The new organization, adopting the name of "People's Party," made a vigorous canvass,^^ though the leaders stated frankly that they did not expect to win in their first effort.*' The Liberal press and organization bore the brunt of the battle." A special appeal was made to the labor vote in the campaign. Labor organizations had issued calls for the convention,*^ and their leaders were active in that gathering*' and in the local organizations of the new party .*^ *2 See circular of state chairman in Cincinnati Commercial, Aug. 15, 1873, and accounts of mass meetings in ibid., Aug. 5, 18, 22, 29, Sept. 29 and passim. " See Judge Collins' statement to that effect, quoted in ibid., Sept. 6, and editorial in ibid., Oct. 11. But Liberal papers thought that the movement might be the beginning of a national reform party. Cin- cinnati Commercial, July 8, 29, Oct. 13, 1873; Chicago Tribune, Aug. i, 1873- ■" Brinkerhoff had established a paper, the Ohio Liberal, as an organ of his party, and had built up a good organization. Brinkerhoff, 222 f. The Cincinnati Commercial and the Cincinnati Volksblatt gave strong support to the movement. Liberals like Brinkerhoff and Hassaurek were leading campaign speakers. The Commercial throughout the cam- paign referred to the independent party as the "Liberals," though Hassaurek had declared in the Columbus convention: "The Liberal Republicans have pronounced their own funeral oration. They met this morning just for the purpose of saying that the Liberal Republi- cans as a party organization has passed away. We are Liberal Republicans no longer." Cincinnati Commercial, July 31, 1873. Cox, Stallo, and Jacob Brinkerhoff supported the movement. See letters in ibid., Aug. 5, Sept. 14. ^ So stated in Brinkerhoff's call. Cincinnati Commercial, July 2, 1873. ** The representatives of labor organizations in the convention by unanimous consent were given special representation on committees. Cincinnati Commercial, July 31. One plank of the platform declared "That it is the duty of government to repeal all laws that favor capital to the prejudice of labor." Ewing addressed the delegates as " Demo- crats, Liberals, Workingmen, and Independents." " See notice of ratification of the ticket by a labor organization, ibid., Aug. 3, and of the nomination of a labor leader for the legislature, ibid., Aug. 26. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 2O3 Democratic leaders in the independent convention had sug- gested that the regular convention of their party might adopt the "reform" ticket.''^ But that party was resolved to have nothing to do with its unfaithful members and al- lies and named a straight Democratic ticket headed by the old Jacksonian leader, William Allen. ''^ A proposal to endorse one of the independent candidates was most in- dignantly spurned.^" The Republican organization was now most anxious to win back its seceded members. A former Liberal was placed on the state ticket^' and direct appeals were made to that element in the campaign.*^ The Liberals were especially hostile to the old-time Democratic leaders whose refusal to disband their organization was preventing the formation of a united opposition party ;^' but the result of the new movement was simply to strengthen the position of this element. The independent ticket drew enough Republican votes to enable Allen to secure the governor- ship and his son-in-law, Senator Thurman, to retain his seat." ''* See E wing's speech in the convention. Ibid., Aug. 31. <9 Powell, Dem. Party of Ohio, I, 221 f. '" Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Aug. 8, 1873. '' Cincinnati Commercial, May 22, 1873. *2 See Noyes' speech of acceptance in ihid.. May 22, 1873; editorial in Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Aug. 12, 1873; Noyes' campaign speech in ibid., Aug. 26, 1873. " See editorials deprecating continuance of a Liberal coalition with the Democrats and insisting that that party should disband. Cin- cinnati Commercial, July 24, 27, 28, Aug. 6, 1873; Chicago Tribune, Aug. I, 7, 8, 1873. The Commercial desired Thurman's defeat for the Senate by reason of his "reactionary" attitude in refusing to give up the old organization (editorial July 29, 1873), and the same paper (Oct. 12) thought that while the success of the Republican state ticket would not much change conditions, the election of Allen would cause false hopes of a national party revival and retard the formation of a new opposition party. " The independent ticket polled a little over 10,000 votes, over 4,000 coming from Hamilton county. World Almanac, 1874, p. 43. In the 204 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT In Indiana in the spring of 1873 there was a movement for the formation of a new party by the union of all opposition elements. Leading Democrats expressed a willingness to give up their organization and to unite with Liberals and reformers in a new party.^* There was no state election this year, and apparently no definite action was taken. The Michigan coalition was continued harmonious- ly.^^ A call for a state judicial convention was signed by the chairmen of both the Democratic and the Liberal committees. The convention acted with entire harmony nominating an independent Republican, Judge Christiancy, who was later endorsed by the regular Republicans.^' In the Kansas legislative elections the "Independents" and "Farmers," who included the Liberals,^* secured enough members to elect a reform candidate to the Senate.*^ The California Liberal Republican organization,'" apparently Legislature four members were classed as "Independents." At least one of these was a Liberal. Chicago Tribune, Oct. 18, 1873 (reporting election of a Liberal in Cuyahoga Co.). A number of influences entered into the Democratic victory, such as the exposures in Congress and the panic, but the independent vote seems to have enabled Allen to pull through. '* Chicago Tribune, Washington correspondence on Hendricks' at- titude, Mar. 24, 1873, and editorial, ibid., Mar. 25. Hendricks, in a card in the Indianapolis Sentinel (quoted ibid., Apr. 16), said that he desired the common action of all elements of the opposition, but was not certain whether that could be best brought about by the existing organi- zations or by the formation of a new party. He thought that the action of the Democratic and Liberal organizations in the various states would suggest the best plan to be followed. ^ Detroit Free Press, Mar. 6, 1873, quoted in Dilla, Politics of Mich., 148. " Dilla, 148 f. " The Kan. Commonwealth (Nov. 13, 1873) classified the Farmers and Independents as Republicans and "Democrats and Liberals." *' The Liberals had one senator, five representatives and a clerk in the House. Wilder, Annals of Kan., 635-637. Ex-Governor J. M. Har- vey was elected senator. P. B. Plumb, a leading Greeley supporter, was Harvey's nearest rival. Wilder, 638 f. «» A meeting of Democrats and Liberals was held in San Francisco soon after the election of 1872 (November 14) in reponse to a call LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 205 never very strong, became the "Liberal Reform Party" in 1873.^' This and other independent, anti-monopoly organizations acted with the Democrats in the main in the local elections*'' and the combination was able to organize the legislature,^ and control the election of the United States senators, an independent and a Democrat.** In the formation of the anti-monopoly parties in the "Granger States" the Liberal leaders took a prominent part. In Illinois the Liberal members of the legislature at first maintained a separate organization** but leading Liberals soon helped to organize the "Independent" farmers' and anti-monopoly party.** In the fall local elections the in- dependents carried a large majority of the counties.*' for a meeting "for the purpose of effecting a reorganization of the Demo- cratic and Liberal Party upon a firm basis." Apparently no definite action was taken. San Francisco Evening Bulletin, Nov. 15, 1872. " Ibid., July 15, 1873. «2 Ibid., Mar. 13, July 26, 29, Aug. 19, 20, Sept. 11, Oct. 10. °' Ibid., Dec. 3, 4. A former Liberal was elected speaker of the house. ^ Ibid., Dec. 20, 23. Booth, the independent elected, had been a strong supporter of Grant in 1872. The 5MMe/in held (May 15, 1875) that the California " Independent" party of 1875 was in no sense a con- tinuation of the Liberal Republican movement. ^' See their protest against Oglesby's election to the Senate, Chicago Tribune, Jan. 22, 1873. The Liberals had six members in the Senate and fifteen in the House. Idem. "^ The editors of the Industrial Age of Chicago, one of the leading organs of the Granger movement and of the Independent party in Illinois, were Liberals. The Milwaukee Sentinel remarked sarcastically (Apr. 9, 1873) that " The alacrity with which certain ' liberal ' newspapers and 'liberal' demagogues in Illinois have jumped astride of the farmers' movement against monopolies is edifying to behold." Horace White wrote to Ignatius Donnelly (July 23) regarding the prospects for the formation of a general anti-monopoly party. Donnelly MSS. *' The Chicago Tribune (Nov. 19, 1873) thus summarized the result of the election: Farmers and Anti-Monopoly 52 counties Republicans 16 Democrats 20 " Independent 13 " 206 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT In the Minnesota state campaign all of the opposition elements, Democrats, Liberals, and Anti-Monopolists were united on a single ticket. A farmers' anti-monopoly party was organized largely through the efforts of Ignatius Don- nelly, a late Liberal, who now sought to utilize the Patrons of Husbandry for promoting a new political organization.^* The anti-monopolists put up a ticket composed of Demo- crats, a regular Republican, and a Liberal (for lieutenant governor).^' This combination was endorsed by the state convention called jointly by "the Democrats and Liberal Republicans."'" Party lines among the opposition seem to have been pretty much effaced for the time being. County conventions were variously referred to as "Liberals and Anti- Monopolists" and "Democrats and Liberals. "'1 The Dem- ocratic attitude toward their allies was most respectful and cordial. Their leading organ never lost an opportunity to compliment the Liberals and to point out the harmony of interests between the Liberals and Anti-Monopolists and the Democratic party." The Minnesota coalitionists elected one of the candidates on their state ticket, and, considering their lack of adequate resources and their inefficient organi- zation, they made surprising inroads on the usual Republican vote.'' '* Saby, Railroad Legislation in Minn., 122. For the divergent opinions of the Granger leaders regarding Donnelly's scheme for a new party see letters in Farmer's Union, Aug. 2, 23, 30, 1873. The Donnelly papers for 1873 contain a large number of letters responding favorably to Don- nelly's inquiry regarding the sentiment in different parts of the state toward the movement. Among the correspondents are such prominent Liberals as W. W. Mayo, S. M. Wilson, Samuel Mayall, and Ara Barton. ™ St. Paul Weekly Press, Sept. 11, 1873. ''"Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 511; St. Paul Weekly Pioneer, Oct. 3, 1873. Donnelly wrote the next year that he and "scores of other Liberal Republicans" were members of this convention. Donnelly to L. E. Fisher, Apr. i, 1874, Donnelly MSS. " See reports in St. Paul Weekly Pioneer, throughout the campaign. " See especially, editorials in ibid., Apr. i, July 11, Aug. 8, Sept. 11. " See editorial in Industrial Age, Nov. 15, 1873. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 207 In Iowa the leading Liberals were active in the new Anti-Monopoly party, which for the time being absorbed the Democratic organization.'^ In this hidebound Republi- can state the new movement, in spite of most inadequate resources, made a good showing, especially in the local elections.'* But by far the most successful coalition of the Liberals with the Democrats in the West took place in Wisconsin. Here the Democrats sought deliberately and skilfully to retain the Liberals. Upon the advice of Democratic leaders, a Liberal was supported as the minority candidate for United States senator.'" The party's leading organ was most zealous in seeking continued cooperation with the Liberals. "The signs of the times," it urged early in the year, "make it alike the interest and duty of democrats and liberal republicans to thoroughly consolidate their organiza- tion and push forward with united effort and unflinching faith in the future."" The utterances of Liberal leaders in "J. B. Grinnell and other Liberals were prominent in the Des Moines Anti-Monopoly Convention. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 14, 1873. It was reported that a motion to determine whether Democrats or Liberals predominated in the convention was lost. Milwaukee Sentinel, Aug. 14, 1873. The Milwaukee Sentinel said (Aug. 15, 1873) that the convention "was begotten of a sort of incestuous connection between Democracy and Liberalism." Republican papers of the state predicted that most of the Liberals would be back with the old party this year. See Cedar Rapids Republican, quoted in Chicago Tribune, Aug. 15, 1873. The Chicago Tribune referred to the opposition party in the state throughout the campaign as "the Liberals." See political reports from the state in the issues of Oct. 14, 16, 17, 20, 1873. '* See editorial in Industrial Age, Nov. 15, 1873. In the lower house of the legislature there were 51 Republicans to 49 " Democrats, Liberals, independents, anti-monopolists." Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 382. ™ Milwaukee News, Jan. 23, 1873. The Liberals had four assembly- men and two senators. The Republicans refused to give the Liberal senators committee assignments and they were given places by the Democrats. All of the Liberals but one senator acted with the Demo- crats. Ibid., Jan. 1 1, 14, 22. " Ibid., Mar. 20. 208 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT different parts of the country were quoted with great respect.'* The failure of the Democrats in Ohio and New York to continue the alliance was greatly deplored/^ while the successful coalition in Connecticut was held up as an example for the western opposition to emulate.*" In the spring county and city elections the coalition was well maintained, the "Liberal-Democratic" and "Democratic- Liberal," tickets, in which the candidates were fairly ap- portioned between the allies, meeting with marked success. *i Republican papers were certain that the Liberals were com- ing back to the old party,'^ but there was little evidence of such a tendency. In the main the opposition in the state was united and well prepared to conduct a reform, anti- monopoly movement in the fall.*' In the state campaign, waged over the predominant anti-monopoly issue, the coali- tion policy met with a signal triumph. The call for a con- vention of "all Democrats, Liberal Republicans, and other electors of Wisconsin, friendly to genuine reform through equal and impartial legislation, honesty in office, and rigid economy in the administration of affairs" was signed jointly by the members of both the Democratic and the Liberal state committees.** In the convention*^ the Lib- eral element was very prominent and was accorded two places on the state ticket, the nominee for attorney general, ™ Milwaukee News, Mar. i6, 28, Apr. 16. " Ibid., Nov. 26; Madison Democrat, July 31, Oct. 10, 1873. '° Milwaukee News, Apr. 9, 1873; May II, 1875; Madison Democrat, Apr. 8, 1873. " Milwaukee News, Mar. 29, Apr. I, 2, 3, 5, 20, 23; Madison Democrat, Mar. 29, Apr. 2, 1873. '^ See editorials in Milwaukee Sentinel, Apr. 2, June 5, 7, 1873. *' Cf. editorials in Milwaukee News, May 15, Aug. 21, 1873. " Ibid., Aug. 30, 31 ; Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 775. ** The " Reform Convention," which met at Milwaukee under the leadership of Dr. O. W. Wight the day before the coalition convention, after a conference, united with the Democratic-Liberals in a "People's Reform Convention,'' Milwaukee News, Sept. 25, 1873. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 209 A. Scott Sloan, being the Liberal state chairman.** The opposition was officially termed the "People's Party," but the candidates, especially for local offices, were still referred to by Democratic papers as "Liberal Democratic,"*^ and a mass meeting to be addressed by a prominent Liberal was announced as a "Liberal Republican Rally."'* The election brought the coalition complete success. The state ticket was elected by about 15,000 and the combined op- position had a majority of twelve in the legislature.*' The Democratic leaders and organs for the most part showed much tactful restraint, holding that the victory was not for their party alone but for all the elements of reform in the state, and a Bourbon member who hastened to rejoice over the revival of the old party was rebuked.'" "This is no petty personal victory," one Democratic paper explained, "no small partisan triumph. The victors are not Demo- crats alone, nor Liberal Republicans, nor Germans, nor Grangers nor Farmers; they are all these combined."" *° For detailed proceedings of the convention, see ibid., Sept. 25; Milwaukee Sentinel, Sept. 25, 1873. The other Liberal on the ticket was Prof. Searing, the candidate for superintendent of schools, "who had done good service for Greeley last fall." Wis. Weekly State Journal, Sept. 30, 1873. " See, for instance, the list of assembly nominations so headed in Madison Democrat, Oct. 27, 1873. «« Ibid., Oct. 29. " The report of the election in the Annual Cyclopedia for 1873 (p. 776) states that it "resulted in the success of the Democratic and Liberal Republican ticket." According to this authority two senators and eight assemblymen were "Liberals." '° Madison Democrat, Nov. 10, 1873. The N. Y. World announced (Nov. 5, 1873): — "'we have . . . carried Wisconsin." " Madison Democrat, Nov. 10, 1873. Alexander Mitchell of Mil- waukee wrote to Ignatius Donnelly (Nov. 8) that the result in Wiscon- sin must be as pleasing to Donnelly as to the "Democrats and Re- formers" in Wisconsin. Donnelly MSS. S. S. Cox of New York wrote (Nov. 12), congratulating Donnelly on the outcome of the western elections, and attributing the result to the farmers' movement. Ibid. 2IO THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Thus, throughout the West independent opposition parties developed in 1873, in all of which the Liberals constituted the leading or an influential element. ^^ And in every case except Ohio these organizations acted in union with the Democrats. That party could afford to view the general situation with complacency.'' In the Democratic "land-slide" of 1874, by which the national House of Representatives and many state offices came again into the party's control, the Liberal influence, especially in the West, either in close alliance with the Democrats or in the independent movements, was an im- portant factor. In Ohio the former Liberal vote was largely absorbed by the Democrats, contributing greatly to the election of their local, state, and congressional tickets.'^ Indiana Liberal leaders seem now to have been '^ The Chicago Tribune (Aug. 8, 1874) said editorially that the Liberal movement "failed in the Presidential election, but under one name or another it has continued to achieve success, ever since. Here it has been called Liberal Republican, and there Reform; elsewhere Independ- ent, and elsewhere by a still different name. But wherever the old orthodox, straight-jacketed Republican party has been defeated, it has been defeated by men advocating the principles enunciated by the Liberal Republican convention of 1872." ™ The Milwaukee News (Oct. 19, 1873) summed up the situation thus: "We welcome the result in California, the result in Iowa, the result in Ohio, the result in Oregon as one. They all indicate the overthrow of the rascally corrupt administration faction of the Republican party. Names are nothing. When we get that party definitely beaten we will agree on new names, if they shall be desired, and on a platform, and measures of government. Until then let the opposition fight under such various banners as they may adopt, according to their locality and pros- pects of success. . . . We call it People's Reform in Wisconsin. They call it Democratic in Ohio. They call it Anti-Monopoly in Iowa. They call it Independent in California. The movement is one. The victory is one — Let us all rejoice." "See editorials in Cincinnati Commercial, Apr. 7, 1874; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Oct. 16, 27, 1874; N. Y. World, Sept. 24, 1874 (report of the political situation in Northern Ohio). These statements as to the support of the Democratic ticket by the Liberals seem to be LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 211 identified with the Democrats,'^ though a few of the more radical were in the Independent party.'* The Michigan Liberal leaders organized a "National Reform Party" this year.'' The new organization failed to coalesce fully with the Democrats, but a number of candidates were endorsed by the two organizations, acting separately, and the com- bined opposition made remarkable gains. '^ In Illinois the more radical of the Liberal element went into the Inde- pendent party," but the most influential leaders who had been concerned in the movement joined the old parties, the more eminent going with the Democrats.'"" In the cam- paign special appeals were made to the Liberal vote.'"' well borne out by the vote in Hamilton Co. Tribune Almanac, 1875, p. 76. Banning, the Liberal congressman from the Cincinnati district, was renominated by the Democrats and declared his firm adherence to that party. Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Sept. 11, 1874. J- M. Ashley was defeated for the Democratic nomination in the Toledo dis- trict. Milwaukee Sentinel, Aug. 20, 1874. '* See correspondence from Indianapolis on the political situation in the state in Chicago Tribune, July 13, 1874. The activities of a " Demo- cratic-Liberal" county convention in the state were noted. Ibid., Aug. 3. John E. Neff, the Democratic candidate for secretary of state, had been a Liberal candidate for Congress in 1872. "• See, for instance, references to Frank C. Johnson, a former Liberal, as a member of the Independent party in Indiana. Industrial Age, June 20, 27, Oct. 24, 1874. " Dilla, 155 f. "'Ibid., 156-172; Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, pp. 557-559. The op- position secured three congressmen, all gains, and reduced the Repub- lican majority in the legislature to ten. ''Bennett (Politics and Politicians of Chicago, 185) says that "Out of the scattered remnant of the Liberal movement was formed the Anti- Monopoly party." Cf. to the same effect, Lusk, Eighty Years of Il- linois, 242. A considerable number of Liberals took an active part in the Independent conventions of this year. Industrial Age, May 6, 16, June 13, 1874; Moses, III., II, 824. '"» Koerner, Memoirs, II, 591; Bennett, 185. "" See statement of C. H. McCormick, the Democratic state chair- man, that an invitation had been given to the Liberals to consult with the Democratic committee. Industrial Age, July 25, 1874. The call 212 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT The candidate for superintendent of public instruction supported by both the Democrats and Independents was elected, ^"^ and a coalition of these organizations was able to organize the new legislature.'"^ The "Democratic-Lib- eral" organization was continued in Minnesota with large gains in the legislature, though no congressman was se- cured.'"* The Wisconsin coalition was continued under the designation of "Reform." To maintain cordial feel- ing and to prevent defection, the congressional candidates were divided equally between the Democrats and the Lib- erals.'"^ But there was a considerable falling off in the opposition vote and the coalition lost the legislature.'"^ Kansas Liberals were leading spirits in the opposition "In- dependent Reform Party," which secured a member of Congress.'"' Even in Iowa, the "Vermont of the West," the Democrats and Liberals under the name "Anti-Monop- for the Democratic state convention, addressed "To the Democracy, Liberals, and other opponents of the Republican party," was specially endorsed by a large number of leading Liberals. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 19, 1874. The Liberal element was prominent in the convention over which Governor Palmer presided. Ibid., Aug. 27; Koerner, II, 591. Farnsworth and Le Moyne (former Liberals) were Democratic- Independent candidates for Congress. "* Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, p. 404. '"' Chicago Tribune, Jan. 5, 8, 9, 1875. E. M. Haines, a former Lib- eral, now an Independent, was elected speaker of the house. 1°* The state convention was termed Democratic-Liberal. 5/. Paul Weekly Press, Oct. i, 1874; Chicago Tribune, Sept. 24, 1874. The Re- publicans secured a majority in the legislature of only three. Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, p. 565. There was some dissension between the lead- ers of the two elements of the coalition, but the representatives of both in the legislature favored a union of the opposition. Donnelly to Fisher, Apr. I, 1874; Fisher to Donnelly, Apr. 22, 1874, Donnelly MSS. i<» Milwaukee News, Sept. 18, Oct. 3, Dec. 30, 1874. '^"^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, p. 811. "' Wilder, 646, 648, 655, 656; Kan. Commonwealth, Aug. 6, 7, 1874. There were two Liberals on the state ticket and M. J. Parrott, the Liberal state chairman, was an unsuccessful candidate for Congress. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 2I3 oly" were able to elect a congressman.^"^ Missouri was the only state where the independents acted with the Re- publicans.'"' The Liberals and Democrats had continued to act together in local elections in 1873,"° but the reaction- ary and extreme partisan attitude of the Democratic lead- ers, with the state safely in their control, tended to alienate their allies.'" In 1874 the reform "People's Party" was supported by the Republicans and Liberals."- Schurz supported the movement vigorously, and it was generally understood that success would mean his reelection to the Senate."' The Democrats, however, were triumphant by a large majority."^ The defeat of four regular Republican candidates for the United States Senate, including two of the President's closest advisers, early in 1875, was accomplished by the combined opposition of the Democrats and Liberals in the legislatures. In Michigan a small group of discontented Republicans united with the Democrats and Liberals for the defeat of that valiant leader of the senatorial clique, Zach Chandler, electing Judge Christiancy, a conservative ^"'Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, pp. 4i8f. A correspondent to the Chicago Tribune (Aug. 18, 1874) from Dubuque said of the situation in one of the congressional districts that the Democrats and Liberals were well united, and that one of the leading candidates for the coalition nomination was "a thoroughgoing Liberal- Republican." "" The success of the Democratic state ticket in Oregon was due to the votes taken from the Republicans by the Independent party. Chicago Tribune, July 8, 1874. ""See report of the election of the ticket of the "Democrats and Liberals" in the St. Louis city election. Madison Democrat, Apr. 3, 1873- "' See Schurz to Grosvenor, Dec. 25, 1872, Schurz's Writings, II, 449. "2 Editorial in St. Paul Weekly Press, Oct. i, 1874. ^^^ Idem; Chicago Tribune, Sept. 12, 22, 1874; Madison Democrat, Sept. 24, 1874. ^^* Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, p. 579. 214 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT in high favor with the coaHtionists."* The election of 1874, culminating in Chandler's defeat, "marks the high- tide of Democratic ... or at least of anti-Republican suc- cess" in Michigan during the Reconstruction period."' A bitter contest between rival Republican candidates in Wisconsin gave the opposition an opportunity for a similar move in that state. The Democratic organ urged a union of "Democrats, Liberals, and Reformers in the Legisla- ture" with the bolting Republicans, if a candidate of satis- factory views could be agreed upon."' Such a candidate was found in Angu& Cameron, an independent Republican and a former Democrat, and Senator Matt Carpenter, another member of the President's inner circle, was retired."' The Republicans regarded Cameron's election as a real party defeat."' In Minnesota the tactics of the coali- tionists forced the Republicans to abandon the regular organization candidate and to elect as a compromise Judge McMillan, a conservative Repubhcan, long out of active politics. 1^" The Democrats and Liberals had at first sup- "* Dilla, 174-179. Stocking, Rep. Party in Mich., 124; Detroit Post and Tribune, Chandler, 338. The Madison Democrat (Jan. 23, 1875) said of the result: "The Liberal Democrats of Michigan deserve high praise for rising in this instance above mere party considerations and uniting with the handful of anti-Chandler Republicans in the election of such a man as Judge Christiancy.'' "6 Dilla, 179. "' Milwaukee News, Jan. 23, 1875. "'The News said of Cameron's election (Feb. 4, 1875): "There is immense jubilation among all Democrats and Liberals." All of the Liberal members supported Cameron. Ibid., Feb. 6. See also on this coalition victory, editorials in Madison Democrat, Feb. 4, 1875; 5/. Paul Weekly Pioneer, Feb. 12, 1875. "' The Milwaukee Sentinel declared (Feb. 4, 1875): "The Democrats have hit the Republican party of Wisconsin a hard blow in defeating Senator Carpenter. . . . We believe we crowed over the result of the election in Wisconsin in the fall. We take it all back — it was a Democratic victory." '2» Holmes, Minn., IV, 70 f. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 215 ported the Liberal leader, Donnelly,''" but later united upon an independent Democrat, planning to hold out until they could make an arrangement with bolting Republicans. '^^ Upon overtures by the Liberal ex-Senator Wilkinson, the Republicans hastened to abandon their caucus nominee. '^^ In Nebraska, Senator Tipton was succeeded by another Liberal, A. S. gaddock, who had the support of the Democ- rats and independents.'^* The cooperation of the Liberals and independents with the Democrats was somewhat disturbed in 1875 by the in- jection of the greenback issue. The opposition in the West especially was divided over this issue. The reform People's party in Ohio in 1873 was not agreed on the subject and decided not to pronounce definitely on it, much to the dis- satisfaction of the leading Liberal and the conservative Democratic elements."* The Independent parties in In- diana and Illinois in 1874 were committed to inflation,'^' and the Democratic organizations of Indiana and Ohio strongly leaned in the same direction. '^^ The Illinois Democrats were saved from following in this course, it was claimed, by the influential Liberals who had joined with them.'^* The inflationist issue was squarely presented in the Ohio state campaign of 1875, when the Democratic "1 St. Paul Weekly Pioneer, Feb. 12, 1875. 122 The St. Paul Weekly Pioneer (Democratic) said (Feb. 19, 1875): "The Liberal- Democrats propose to stick to Lochren (the independent Democratic candidate) until an acceptable candidate can be found who can draw ten or twelve votes from the Republican side." 123 Holmes, IV, 70. '"Watkins, Neb. Ill, 147 f. Paddock at first maintained an inde- pendent attitude on certain matters, as the southern question and the tariff, but joined the Republican caucus. Ibid., 149 f. 126 See the expressions of opinion on this issue at the Cincinnati mass meeting, in Cincinnati Commercial, Aug. 5, 1873. i2» Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, pp. 403, 413. ^" Ibid., pp. 415, 667. '28 See editorial in Chicago Tribune, Aug. 28, 1874. 2l6 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Governor Allen on an inflationist platform was opposed by ex-Governor Hayes. "^ The action of the Democrats on the currency question drove the great mass of the Lib- eral element of the state to the Republicans. The Liberal organs and leaders, almost without exception, supported Hayes."" Schurz was prevailed upon to return from Europe to take part in this campaign which was regarded as a most critical test of the currency question. ''' He and Grosvenor, as representatives of the original Liberal reformers, made a vigorous and effective series of speeches. "^ Schurz main- tained that he was not speaking in the interest of the Re- publican party, but simply in that of an honest currency."' The Liberal influence seems to have been decisive in defeating the Democratic candidate and his "rag-money" propaganda."^ But farther west the more radical Liberals ^'^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1875, pp. 606 f. "° N. Y. World, July 15, 1875; Boston Weekly Advertiser, July 15, 1875; Milwaukee Sentinel, Sept. 28, 1875; Cincinnati Commercial throughout the campaign. Halstead's Commercial, Hassaurek's Volks- blatt and Brinkerhoff's Ohio Liberal, all supported Hayes. The Com- mercial estimated (July 17, 1875) that two thirds of those voting the independent ticket in 1873 would now support Hayes. "' Schurz's Writings, HI, 157-160; Bancroft-Dunning, Schurz's Pol. Career, 363; Cincinnati Commercial, Sept. 22, 1875. '^'^ Schurz's Writings, HI, 161-215; Cincinnati Commercial, Sept. 28, 1875; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 28, 1875; St. Paul Weekly Pioneer Press, Aug. 20, 1875. "^Schurz's Writings, IH, 163. J'^WickoflF to Schurz, Oct. 26, 1875, ibid., 217; C. F. Adams, Jr. to Schurz, Oct. 13, 187s, ibid., 215; Bowles to Halstead, Oct. 19, 1875, Merriam, Bowles, H, 348; N. Y. Herald editorial, Oct. 14, 1875. The Ohio Liberal said of the result: " It is evident now to every one that the Liberals of Ohio are the balance of power in the politics of the State. That party, in 1876, which expects to carry Ohio must have the Liberal vote, and that vote will be cast for the party which most nearly repre- sents Liberal principles." Quoted in Cincinnati Commercial, Nov. 5, 1875. Hamilton County which gave the Democratic candidate for secretary of state in 1874 a plurality of 4,637, went for Hayes by 1,295. Evening Journal Almanac, 1876, p. 74. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 217 were prominent"^ in the "Greenback" parties which de- veloped in 1875-1876, and these parties, drawing a large part of their membership from the Republicans, like the other independent movements, worked in the Democratic interest. ''* Thus, up to the presidential year, 1876, the independent movements in the West, in which the Liberal Republicans took such an influential part, were a decided aid in the re- juvenation of the Democracy. There were some reverses in 1875, as was to be expected after a "landslide," but in the main, the opposition in this section was well hold- ing its ground.!'" "' See proceedings of state and local conventions of the " Independent Reform" party in Kansas in 1876 in which Liberals took an active part. Kan. Commonwealth, July 28; Aug. 26, Oct. 27, 1876. In Minnesota, Donnelly, Ayres, and Sherwood were leaders in the Independent (Green- back) party. Industrial Age, Sept. 23, 1876. In a Greenback conven- tion at Grand Rapids, Michigan, in August, 1876, former Liberals were prominent. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 4, 1876. The state convention of the Independent (Greenback) party in Iowa in 1876, according to the Iowa State Register (May 19, 1876), was composed "mainly of former Democrats and Liberals," quoted in Haynes, 154. The Greenback candidate for governor in Iowa in 1877 was a former Liberal, ibid., 156. Liberals, as already stated, were leaders in the Independent parties in Indiana and Illinois. "* Dilla, 200; Chicago Tribune editorials, Oct. 16, 25, 1876 (comment- ing on state canvasses in Indiana and Illinois). '" The Democratic-Liberal coalition in Wisconsin was continued in 1875 (under the name of "Reform party"), the state ticket was re- nominated and all reelected but the candidate for governor. Mil- waukee News, July I, 17, 22; Aug. 8, Sept. 9, 12, 1875; Annual Cyclo- pedia, 1875, pp. 763 f. The Democrats and National Reformers in Michigan united on the same candidates this year. Dilla, 183. In Minnesota a Liberal was named for lieutenant governor by the Demo- cratic convention. Chicago Tribune, July 8, 1875. "The Democrats, Liberal Republicans, and Anti-Monopolists of the State of Iowa" continued to act together in 1875. Chicago Tribune, June 25, 1875. The Milwaukee Sentinel (June 26, 1875) characterized the Iowa oppo- sition as the "three witches." The Independent party in California (whose connections with the Liberals, as already pointed out, was not 2l8 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT 4. THE EAST In the East, with the early withdrawal of a large portion of the independent reform group, the Liberal activities, for the most part, degenerated into the schemings of predatory politicians to secure favors from one or the other of the old parties. In the South the desire for home-rule was driving all of the conservatives into the opposition; in the West there were sincere, if erratic, efforts at economic reforms of which the Liberal and other independent political move- ments were an expression; but in the East in this period there was no such widespread popular zeal for independent political action. In New England the Liberal organizations were continued in several states. In New Hampshire, where the usual closeness of the vote gave an independent movement an especial significance,'^^ the Liberals held a state convention in the spring of 1873 attended largely by members of the state committee. Candidates for state, district and county offices were nominated.'^' It was charged that the organ- ization was working in the interest of the Democrats to throw the election into the legislature."" The Liberal ticket secured less than 700 votes out of a total of 67,000, with but three members of the lower house, and the Repub- licans carried the state by a narrow majority."' The next year the Liberal organization was abandoned, and the most prominent members acted in future with the Democrats, the party being referred to for a time as "Democratic- very direct) by running a separate ticket enabled the straight Demo- cratic candidates to win by a good plurality. Annual Cyclopedia, 1875, pp. 99-101. "' See Lyford, Rollins, 11. ^^^ Ibid., 294; Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 533. Leaders of the late Labor Reform party took part in this convention. "» See editorials in Chicago Tribune, Feb. 20, 1873, and Milwaukee Sentinel, Mar. 14, 1873. ^^'^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 534; Lyford, 299. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 219 Liberal."!^ The Connecticut Democratic-Liberal coali- tion proved most successful in carrying elections. ^^ The Liberals were well represented in the state convention of 1873, one of their number was made temporary chairman, and the candidates for lieutenant-governor and treasurer were taken from Liberal ranks.'" The successful canvass of this year"* was repeated in the three following years, the Liberal officials being kept on the ticket, and special pains being taken in other ways to conciliate that element."* The Liberal members in the legislature acted with the Demo- crats, and one of their number was chosen speaker in 1875."' The year before the legislature had chosen a Liberal for one "- N. Y. Tribune, Mar. 11, 1874. The Democrats carried the state in 1874 and the Liberal vote may have contributed to that result. "' See reference to the cordial attitude of the Democrats toward the Liberals in that state in the campaign of 1872. Above, ch. V, note 59. ^'"Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 239; A'. F. Tribune, Feb. 20, 1873; N. Y. World, Feb. 20, 1873. The principles of the Cincinnati platform were reaffirmed and Greeley was eulogized in the resolutions. For the most cordial and conciliatory attitude of the Democrats toward their Liberal allies in the campaign, see the quotations from the Connecticut Democratic papers in the N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 2, 1873. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 240. The N. Y. World considered the election of the Democratic-Liberal state ticket of great significance. Editorial, Apr. 8, 1873. About a dozen town officials were classed as "Liberals." See list in Mass. Weekly Spy, Oct. 17, 1873. ^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1874, pp. 240 f; 1875, pp. 218 f.; 1876, pp. 205 f. The N. Y. Tribune in reporting the success of the coalition ticket in 1874 said (Apr. 7): "The Union between the Democrats and Liberals in this state has been fostered by the conciliatory utterances of the lead- ing Democratic newspapers and the disposition to give the Liberals recognition in the nominations. In consequence of this, the Liberals have everywhere acted in concert with the Democrats, and will have a fair sprinkling of representatives in both branches of the legislature." The Hartford Times said that the success of the ticket in 1875 was aided materially by the Liberals whose aid had been welcomed and recognized by nominations for state offices and for the legislature where they would be well represented. "The Radicals abuse the Liberals, the Democrats are proud to act with them." Quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 15, 1875. '" N. Y. Tribune, May 6, 1875. 220 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT of the judges of the Superior Court."' Prominent Liberals were named for Congress, in normally Republican dis- tricts,"' and D. A. Wells was spoken of for United States senator in 1874.'^° Massachusetts Liberals did not call a convention in 1873, and finally decided not even to issue an address.'*^ The campaign of 1874 in Massachusetts with its election of independent congressmen and retirement of objectionable politicians was regarded as a decided triumph for the element who had revolted in 1872.1*^ The next year C. F. Adams was supported for the United States Senate by the Democrats and independent Republicans,^^' and later in the year the leading Liberals issued an address formally uniting with the Democrats. ^^■' The Liberal ele- ment was represented in the Democratic state convention that year and given two places on the ticket.^^^ »« N. Y. World, June 12, 1874. "9 Judge Foster in 1875 and D. A. Wells in 1876. The World (Apr. 7, 1875) attributed Foster's defeat to the apathy of the Liberals. ''"Also in 1876, but apparently always by Liberal or independent papers. See N. Y. World, May 7, 1874; N. Y. Tribune, Apr. 11, 1876. ^'' They had at first intended to issue an address setting forth their views. N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 17, Oct. n, 1873. General Banks was elected to the state senate this year as an independent. Mass. Weekly Spy, Oct. 31, Nov. 7, 1873. '^^ Merriam, II, 273. A widespread Republican defection was threat- ened this year in case of the success of Banks for the gubernatorial nom- ination. Norton to Lowell, Mar. 13, 1874, Norton, Letters, II, 37. The Boston Advertiser urged C. F. Adams for Sumner's successor. Weekly Advertiser, Mar. 19, 1874. "■' Chicago Tribune, Jan. 21, 1875. ^^' Annual Cyclopedia, 1875, p. 477. '*' Ibid., p. 478; Mass. Weekly Spy, Sept. 24, 1875. W. F. Bartlett, the Liberal who was named for lieutenant governor, finally declined. Palfrey, Sort/e«, 276; Merriam, II, 347 f. A " National Union Party" was organized in Boston in 1875 with General Banks as the chief mover, but it apparently never secured a following. Annual Cyclopedia, 1875, p. 477; Nation, Aug. 26, 1875, p. 125. A Liberal county convention was reported at Bangor, Maine, in 1873, with a small attendance. N. Y. World, Aug. 15, 1873. No Liberal activities, after 1872, in Ver- mont or Rhode Island have been noted. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 221 Pennsylvania Democrats seem not to have taken a very tactful course toward their Liberal recruits. The old- time leaders of the party were put forward in a most un- compromising fashion."' But, for all that, the Liberals were more in sympathy with the Democrats than with the administration party in the state and probably contributed considerably to Democratic success in 1874, especially in the local and congressional elections."^ In 1875, however, the inflationist policy of the Democrats here, as in Ohio, completely alienated the best portion of the Liberals."^ The New York Liberals maintained a separate organiza- tion down to the campaign of 1876, and at times controlled enough votes to hold a balance between the regular parties. But, for the most part, the organization had degenerated into a band of politicians whose chief aim was to extort patronage or other recognition from one or the other of the old parties, and to drive the best bargains before they re- turned to party regularity.'^' Chief among these political traders was John Cochrane, the chairman of the state com- mittee. In 1873 Cochrane's band of political guerrillas began their manoeuvring with an invitation to the Democratic commit- tee to unite with the Liberals in issuing their call for a "'Editorials in iV. Y. Herald, Aug. 29, 1873; Philadelphia Enquirer, Nov. 9, 1874. '" Philadelphia Enquirer, Nov. 9, 1874. 's'iV. Y. Tribune, Sept. 23, 1875; Mass. Weekly Spy, Oct. i, 1875. The Democratic convention this year in its resolutions "cordially invite the Liberal Republicans and all other men, without regard to past party affiliation, to cooperate with us." Annual Cyclopedia, 1875, p. 618. Colonel McClure was the only representative of his faction in the legis- lature. McClure, Old Time Notes, II, 359. "' The N. Y. Herald well characterized the organization (Sept. 24, 1875) as "A kind of blackmailing business, a combination of office-seek- ers who meant to strike either side for place and to keep on striking until they were all provided." See also criticisms of Cochrane's policy in Cincinnati Commercial, Sept. 11, 22, 1873. 222 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT State convention. 1^° The Democratic committee had no thought of such an aUiance,"^ but considered the advisa- bility of increasing the delegation from each assembly dis- trict from one to three so that the Liberals might have a better chance to be represented in the convention. The committee was divided as to the wisdom of this proposal and it was not adopted."^ There was much dissatisfaction in the party, especially up-state, with the committee's de- cision, as it was regarded as highly expedient to retain the Liberal vote which in some sections seemed of respectable size.^^ In some counties Liberal delegates were chosen by the Democratic conventions.'" In the Democratic state convention there were a considerable number of former Liberals, who were welcomed by the chairman but given to understand that henceforth the coalition was to be on a strictly Democratic basis.'** The platform recognized in the Liberals "worthy coadjutors," invited their coopera- tion in seeking reforms,'** and, as a more direct bid for votes, renominated Thomas Raines, the Liberal state treasurer.'*' But the Liberal committee decided to hold their own convention, explaining in their call that the needed ™ N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 25, 1873. '" See the World's indignant editorial on Cochrane's proposition. Aug. 26, 1873. The World was opposed to continuing an alliance with the Liberal organization as such. See editorials, Nov. 9, 1872, June 27, 1873. «2N. Y. World, Sept. i, 3, 4, 1873; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 4, 1873. The amendment was apparently defeated through the influence of John Kelly who feared that it would aid the Apollo Hall faction in the City. '" Democratic papers quoted in N. Y. World, Aug. 25, Sept. 3, 1873, and in N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 4, 6, 1873; Albany Argus, Sept. 2, 3, 1873. The Argus (Sept. 2) chided the World for its injustice to "Our Liberal Allies." 1" N. Y. Herald, Sept. 29, 1873. '^^ Argus, Oct. 3, 1873; N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 3, 1873. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 550. ^" Argus, Oct. 3, 1873. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 223 reforms could not be expected from the Republicans "identi- fied with public abuses" nor from the Democrats "whose state committee has refused to unite with us in repressing them."'*^ The convention, after listening to long speeches and adopting resolutions denouncing the evils of the time and expressing their zeal for reform, endorsed the Demo- cratic candidates with the exception of those for comp- troller and prison-inspector, for whom they substituted the Republican nominees.'*' In the election the Democratic candidates supported by the Liberals were elected by plural- ities of from 10,000 to 14,000; while the Republican- Liberal nominees won by about 4,000.''° It was clear, as all sides had to admit, that, with the old parties in the state so evenly matched, the Liberals held the balance of power.'" General Cochrane and kindred spirits would doubtless have been content to hold this balance as long as it promised to yield spoils, but Liberals with more ability and a higher ambition were anxious to get back into regular party lines; and most of them took advantage of the state and congres- sional elections of 1874 to make this transition. At a pre- liminary conference of the leading Liberals in May it was finally decided that the Liberals would "in the future as in the past keep their organization intact," and that the com- mittee should call a state convention."^ Their convention met early in September, before the other conventions, ob- viously to secure some advantage from one of the regular 168 N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 12, 1873. ^^^ Annual Cyclopedia, 1873, p. 551; N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 9, 1873. There were 164 delegates in attendance from 22 counties. ^''"Evening Journal Almanac, 1874, pp. 71-73. Local Democratic tickets were quite generally endorsed by the Liberals. World, Oct. 21, 27, 28, Nov. 3, 1873. "liV. Y. Tribune, Nov. 15, 1873; N. Y. Herald, same date; World, same date. The Democratic committee was held largely responsible for the result by its failure to increase the representation in the con- vention. ^rgMi, Nov. 13, 1873; W^orM, Nov. 18, 1873. "2 A^. Y. Tribune, May 11, 14, 1874. 224 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT organizations. Fenton at this time seems to have had some understanding with the machine element of the Democrats, who were seeking to secure Judge Church's nomination in place of Tilden, and there was an effort to have the Judge endorsed by the Liberal convention as a means of forcing him upon the Democrats. But opposition to this policy developed in the convention, and it adjourned to a later date.^" The former Liberals were well represented in the Democratic convention, and the platform praised "the independence and patriotism of the Liberal Republicans who, preferring principles to party," would now unite with the Democrats. The Liberals claimed, as a condition of the union, the lieutenant governorship, and William Dorsheimer, one of the most able of the Liberal element in the state, was selected over the regular Democratic aspirant.'^'' No less than eight Democratic congressional nominations were also tendered to Liberals.*'* On the other side, prominent Liberals rejoined the Republicans.*'* During the campaign the predominant Liberal sentiment was considered to be for the Democratic ticket headed by Tilden. The adjourned Liberal convention had taken no definite action, but there was much sentiment expressed for endorsing the Demo- 1" Alexander, Pol. Hist. 0/ iV. 7., Ill, 312; Bigelow, Tilden, I, 221, 222, 225, 336; N. Y. Herald, Sept. 9, 10, 1874; World, Sept. 10, 1874. 1" World, Sept. 18, 1874; N. Y. Tribune, same date. The call for the convention was issued to "the Democratic and Liberal Republican electors.'' World, Aug. 22, 1874. The World headed its account of the convention "unanimous nominations by Democrats and Liberals." '" World, Oct. 23, 28, 29, 1874. Two of these candidates subse- quently declined the nominations, and of the remaining six, four were elected. '™ Such as Depew, Hiscock, and Merritt. Fenton's position was in doubt. His speech at the Liberal convention was entirely non-committal and it was charged that he was seeking to secure the election of enough Liberals to the legislature to bargain with one of the parties for his re- turn to the Senate. N. Y. Herald, Sept. 10, 1874; Nation, Sept. 10, 1874, p. 164. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 225 cratic nominees.''' The opposition was now referred to as " Democratic-Liberals"!'* and special appeals were made by Tilden's supporters to the latter element.''" The cam- paign of 1874 marked the end of the New York Liberals as a faction with any capable or reputable leaders and with any certain voting strength. There was apparently little to be gained by holding together the disintegrating following and some of the local organizations were op- posed to meeting the expenses of primaries. The efforts of Cochranites to secure state patronage had been most disappointing, though they had secured a few city positions through an alliance with Mayor Havemeyer.'*" The Evening Post remarked that the organization had been "kept alive solely to see what it could make. Now, how- ever, it has obtained everything that it can get from Demo- crats and Republicans and may as well be disbanded."'*' But the hard-fought state election of 1875 gave a re- newed importance to Cochrane's little band whose following was eagerly sought after by both parties. The Republicans for the first time now made open bids for Liberal support.'*^ >" World, Sept. 30, 1874. The N. Y. Herald, Oct. 15, 1874 said the N. Y. Liberals had largely merged with the Democrats. '" The World so designated the ticket throughout the campaign. A campaign lithograph of Tilden was labelled "Democratic and Liberal Candidate for Governor.'' See reproduction in Buckman, Tilden Unmasked, 72. 179 y^/orld, Aug. 21, Oct. 12, 31, 1874. The iV. V. Tribune favored Tilden, see editorial Sept. 18, 1874; Reid to Bigelow, Nov. 7, 1874, Bigelow, Retrospection, V, 170. "» N. Y. Herald, June 2, 1874; N. Y. Tribune, May 11, 1874. 1'' Evening Post, Sept. 24, 1875. The Liberals secured four assembly- men and two senators, but as the Democrats had a majority on joint ballot without them, they were not able to "hold the balance." See World, Dec. 11, 1874. The Liberal members, however, held a separate caucus and named candidates, ibid., Jan. 6, 1875. 1*2 The Springfield Republican predicted that the Liberal "leaders'' in New York would sell out their vote to the Republicans and "be unable to deliver the goods." Quoted in N. Y. Tribune, Aug. 11, 1875. l5 226 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT Their call was worded to include all straying members who would return,'*' and such bolters as appeared in the conven- tion were cordially welcomed. General Merritt, a Liberal who had returned to the party the previous year, was named for state treasurer.'*^ Fenton, whose reconciliation with the President had been reported some time previous,"* was now able to act with the Republicans as they had, in his opinion, become "liberalized."'*^ The "Democratic- Liberal" state convention also named a Liberal candidate,'*^ and Liberal organizations in various parts of the state pledged their continued support of Tilden's reform work.'** In the Liberal state convention the Governor's policy was formally endorsed, and strong efforts were made to secure a coalition on the state ticket.'*' But this was prevented by Cochrane,"" who openly opposed the Democrats and ad- vocated a reunion of the Republican factions."' It was evident that the New York Liberals were far from unified, and would soon split up between the old parties. The Tribune said on the eve of the Republican convention (Sept. 8) that there was "every disposition to extend a hand to the Liberals," and that "there was little doubt that almost any place on the state ticket might have been theirs had they chosen to ask for it.'' "3 N. Y. Tribune, Aug. I2, 1875. '*^ N. Y. Tribune, Sept. 9, 1875. ^^ Fenton lunched with the President in August. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 20, 1875. '™ See his letter to the Republican state chairman in N. Y. Tribune, Oct. 9, 1875. "' For inspector of state prisons. His nomination was urged "chiefly in recognition of the Liberals." World, Sept. 18, 1875. 188 j\r Y. Tribune, Sept. 23, 1875. The Tribune strongly favored the Democratic ticket. See editorials, Oct. 29, 30, 1875. 189 World, Tribune, Herald, Sept. 23, 1875. "» N. Y. Times, Sept. 23, 1875. 191 jsj Y. correspondent of Chicago Journal, quoted in Wis. State Journal, July 27, 1875. Ethan Allen was said to be willing to join the Republicans if he could secure office from them and prominent up-state Liberals were returning to the old parties. Idem; N. Y. Herald, Oct. 17, 1875- LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 227 5. THE LIBERALS IN THE CAMPAIGN OF 1 876 The Strength of the Democratic party, both numerically and morally, in 1876 was vastly superior to what it had been four years before. Many factors contributed to its in- creased vitality, such as the anti-monopoly movements in the West, the financial depression, and the numerous and widespread abuses uncovered in the Republican administra- tion. But, as the foregoing review of local conditions has shown, considerable weight must be given to the influence of the Liberal element, both in adding directly to the Demo- cratic vote and jn increasing the party's reputation for loyalty and integrity. The party had not in all cases shown a sufficiently conciliatory and tactful attitude to- ward the exacting allies, and in some states the dominance of the Bourbon element had frightened away the new- comers, but, in the main, the influence of the Republican bolters of 1872 had worked decidedly for Democratic suc- cess. Republicans viewed with no little anxiety the increasing success of the coalition, especially in the election of 1874, and tried to attract back their seceded members. In- dependent leaders, like Schurz, were referred to in a re- spectful and even appreciative manner by the administra- tion press."^ The bugaboo of the old unreconstructed Democracy was still utilized. The coalition, it was held, instead of advancing the Liberal cause, was simply aiding the old-time Bourbon Democrats to reintrench themselves in office.^^' After all, the best way of securing real reforms, the Liberals were reminded, was in the good old party and their return before the next presidential election was con- i»2 See Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Dec. 29, 1874; St. Paul Weekly Pioneer-Press, Aug. 20, 1875, Apr. 20, 1876. 193 Milwaukee Sentinel, May 23, 1874, June 8, 1875; Cincinnati Semi-Weekly Gazette, Nov. 20, 1874. 228 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT fidently predicted.^'* Henry Wilson, in an interview in the spring of 1875, confessed frankly that the party had made a great blunder in forcing out the Liberals in '72, and that now all conciliatory measures possible should be adopted to get them back, though he realized that some were hopelessly lost to the Democrats.!'* Even the President took pains to make peace with Liberal leaders.''* The independent leaders who had started the national Liberal movement, and whom their organs still designated as "Liberals," planned to make an attempt in 1876 to re- trieve what they had lost in 1872.1" To Halstead and Bowles, the chief editorial champions of the cause of the independents, E. B. Washburne, as the regular Republi- can candidate, had seemed for a time the best possibility;''' but they soon came back to their first love, C. F. Adams.'" "' Wis. State Journal, Dec. 8, 1874, July 27, 1875; Milwaukee Senti- nel, May 16, 1874; St. Paul Weekly Pioneer-Press, Oct. i, 1875; Boston Weekly Advertiser, July 22, 1875. 195 Interview in N. Y. Tribune, June 5, 1875, and letter replying to criticism of his statements in Boston Weekly Advertiser, July i, 1875. In April Wilson was reported as saying to F. A. Conkling that the Liberal Republicans held the political balance of power and they would decide the presidential election of 1876. N. Y. Sun, quoted in Industrial Age, May i, 1875. i'* Grant appeared in company with the leader of the New York City Liberals and a close friend of Fenton's when he paid a visit to the city in June, 1874, and it was reported that he had made up with the Senator. N. Y. Herald, June 7, 1874. His lunch with the Senator a year later was taken as a sign of complete reconciliation. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 20, 1875. In December, 1874, the President offered a position in the Baltimore custom-house to A. W. Bradford, the leading Liberal of the state. N. Y. World, Dec. 28, 1874, "' Cf. Schurzto Grosvenor, July 16, 1875, Schurz's Writings, III, I55f. "'W. H. Huntington to Bigelow, Oct. 17, 1874, Bigelow, Retro- spection, V, 167. i9» Bowles, to Halstead, Oct. 19, 1875, Mar. 4, 1876, Merriam, II, 348 f; Chicago Tribune, May 3, 1875 (reprinting Halstead's interview in N. Y. Sun); Cincinnati Commercial, May 8, 1875; see also Bancroft- Dunning, 361 f. LATER ACTIVITIES OF LIBERAL REPUBLICANS 229 A council of the independents to consider their future ac- tion was held, under the guise of a banquet to Schurz, in New York City in April, 1875.^*"' Schurz advised that the independents agree upon some plan of concerted action for the approaching campaign. 2"' The independents now had high hopes of concessions from the Republicans if the party reverses continued, and the fall election in Ohio was con- sidered a good test of party strength. But much as the reformers desired to have the old organization at their mercy, they felt compelled, in view of the inflationist platform of the Democrats, to lend a decisive support to the Republican ticket.="» In the national campaign the independents were deter- mined to support none but an approved reform candi- date. As their ultimatum to the regular parties, the "Independents" or "Liberals," as they were variously termed, under the management of Schurz and Bowles,'"" held a conference in New York, in May, 1876, which was watched with much attention by the politicians of both parties. Candidates were not discussed by name, but the statement in their address of the sort of candidates that the independents would not support restricted the choice to a very small group.^"* It was generally understood that Bristow — respected by the reformers for his work against the whiskey ring^"' of the suggested Republican candidates, "0 Schurz to H. A. Brown, Apr. 16, 1875, Schurz' s Writings, III, 153. 2»i N. y. World, Apr. 28, 1875. 2°" So stated in Cincinnati Commercial editorial, June 2, 1876. ^™ See Schurz's letters to Bowles and others on the subject. Writ- ings, III, 21^-220, 22,0 I., 232 f., 233-239. The invitation to the con- ference, signed by Bryant, Woolsey, Bullock, White, and Schurz, is given in ihid., 228 f. ^"^ Ibid., 240-248; Annual Cyclopedia, 1876, pp. 779 f. '^'"' Bowles to Halstead, Mar. 4, 1876, Merriam, II, 349; Schurz- Bristow correspondence, Schurz's Writings, III, 220, 221, 226. 230 THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT and Tilden, of the Democratic possibilities, were strongly favored.^"* The national Liberal organization after 1872 had appar- ently had no existence except in the occasional statements of Ethan Allen, its national chairman. ^"^ But with the approach of another national campaign, Allen saw fit to revive his old dignity and summon a national conference which met at New York on May 9, with representatives from about thirty states. It was determined that a na- tional Liberal convention should be held at Philadelphia on July 26, but since the Liberals did not favor "causeless independent action," it was provided that, if, after the reg- ular conventions, one or both of the old parties in the judg- ment of the national chairman had responded to the prin- ciples and aims of the Liberal Republican organization "both in measures and men" Allen was authorized to annul the call.2»8 In the campaign much attention was given to the at- titude of the former Liberals. There was a considerable representation of ex-Liberals in both of the national conven- tions.^"^ The nomination by both parties of candidates with strong reform tendencies divided the independent sup- port. The inflationist views of the Democratic candidate for vice-president decided some for the Republicans,*'" 2* For accounts of the meeting and lists of the leading participants, see Annual Cyclopedia, 1876, pp. 779 f. ; Merriam, Bowles, II, 254; Bancroft-Dunning, 367; N. Y. Herald, May 16, 17, 1876; N. Y. Trib- une, same dates; Chicago Tribune, same dates; Cincinnati Commercial, same dates and June 14 (gives list of those taking part or endorsing the movement); Koerner, II, 599-602. "' See interviews with Allen in N. Y. Herald, Aug. i, Sept. 6, 1873. 2iff_. ; suggested candidates, 76^. ; national convention, 86f . ; divi- sions shown in Fifth Avenue conference, 126^.; coalition with Democrats in campaign of 1872, I40_^. ; influence after 1872, ig2ff.\ in the South, 197/.; in the West, 198; in the East, 218; in campaign of 1876, 230^.; reunion of Liberals with the old parties, 231, 235/. See also Cincinnati conven- tion, Democratic-Liberal coali- tion, independent reformers. Liberal Republican party. See Liberal Republican move- ment, Democratic-Liberal coali- tion. "Liberals," a Republican faction in Missouri, 29. Littlejohn, D. C, 64. Lloyd, H. D., free-trader in Cin- cinnati convention, Sgn., gon.; on Greeley's nomination, 99; in Steinway Hall meeting, 113; and Fifth Avenue conference, 120, I25n. Logan, J. A., and Grant's renom- ination, 53; replies to Sumner, 117; in Philadelphia conven- tion, 117; in campaign of 1872, i69f- Louisiana, Republican factions in, 23; Liberals in 1874, 197. Louisville, convention of Straight- Outs, 146/. Lowell, J. R., quoted, 6, 13M. McClure, A. K., member of Cur- tin faction in Pennsylvania, 7, 44; declines federal appoint- ment, 44; a Liberal organizer, 65; in the Cincinnati conven- tion, 87; on Democratic sup- port of Greeley, 130; in the campaign of 1872, 155. McClurg, Governor, of Missouri, 14. McKee, William, 29/. McMillan, S. J. R., 214, Mahone, William, 25. Marble, Manton, advises Liberals to nominate Adams, 84; op- poses Democratic endorsement of Greeley, 134; refuses to sup- port Greeley, 143. Massachusetts, Republican fac- tions in, 17/.; coalition after 1872, 220, 233. Matthews, Stanley, leader of Cin- cinnati reformers in 187 1, 47; in Cincinnati convention, 91; in the campaign of 1872, 128. Merritt, E. A., 226. Michigan, Republican factions in, 21; coalition after 1872, 204, 214; National Reform party in, 211. Middle West, favors tariff reform, 10/.; Republican disaffection in, 21; sentiment for national Liberal convention in, 57,^. Liberal influence after 1872 in, I98#. Milwaukee Neias, 132/. Minnesota, coalition in after 1872, 206, 212, 214/. "Minstrels," Republican faction in Arkansas, 25. Mississippi, Republican factions in, 23; Liberal officials elected in 197. Missouri call for Liberal conven- tion, 51; responses to, 55#. Missouri Democrat, an advocate of reform, 4; supports Liberal fac- tion in 1870, 30; returns to the Republicans, 30M. Missouri Liberal movement, 14, 28jf.; coalition of Liberals with Republicans in 1874, 213. Missouri Republican, supports Lib- eral ticket in 1870, 30. INDEX 263 Morgan, E. D., Republican na- tional chairman, 185. Morgan, Matt, 153. Morrill, J. S., 42, 53. Morrill, L. M., 53. Morton, O. P., member of the congressional clique, 8; opposed to San Domingo policy, 9; criticized by Nation, 16; and Grant's renomination, 40; seeks to conciliate opposition in the party, 43/.; in Philadelphia convention, 117; in campaign of 1872, 173, 181. Mosby, J. A., 174. Motley, J. L., 9. Nashville, Schurz's speech at, 48/. Nast, Thomas, 153. Nation, a reform organ, 3; on the southern question in 1870, 16; arraignment of Grant's admin- istration, 34/.; opposed to new party in 1870, 45; approves Cin- cinnati convention, 55; favors Adams for Liberal candidate, 83; opposes Greeley, 109, 127; on the character of the cam- paign of 1872, 150/.; attitude toward western anti-monopoly movements, 238^. See also Godkin. National Reform party — in Mich- igan in 1874, 211. National Union movement, 2. Nebraska, Republican factions in, 22 ; in the campaign of 1872, 181; elects Liberal senator in 1875, Negroes, in the campaign of 1872, I63#. Nevada, Democratic convention advocates union with Liberals, 71- "New Departure" of the Demo- cratic party, 69. New Hampshire, Republican de- feat in, in 1871, 10; Republican factions in, 18; attempt to unite factions, 44; in the campaign of 1872, 73, 114, 180, 183; coali- tion after 1872, 218. New Jersey, Democratic opposi- tion to Greeley in, 139, 183. New York, Republican factions in, i&ff.; rival delegations in Cincinnati convention, 89^.; Democratic attitude toward Greeley in, 133-138; Dix nom- inated for governor by the Republicans, 179; Liberals after 1872, 221/.; return to the old parties, 235. New York Herald, critic of Grant, in 1871, 34; on political journal- ism in 1872, 152. New York Observer, on character of the campaign of 1872, 150. New York Times, in the campaign of 1872, 152. New York Tribune, and Fifth Avenue conference, 112,120,126; in the campaign of 1872, 143, 151. See also Greeley. North American Review, an advo- cate of reforms, 3. North Carolina, Republican fac- tions in, 23; state election of 1872, 178/. O'Brien, James, 148. O'Conor, Charles, opposes Tweed Ring, 69; refuses to support Greeley, 138; nominated for president by the Straight-Outs, 146/.; declines, 147. O'Connor, M. P., in Baltimore convention, 141; quoted, 191. "October States," election of 1872, in 180/. Oglesby, R. J., 117. Ohio, Republican factions in, 21; independent movements in 1871, 47/., 75/.; independents in opposed to Greeley, 109, 112; Liberals and Democrats after 1872, 199; Liberals join inde- pendent Democrats in 1873, 201; Liberals vote with Democrats in 1874, 210; support Republi- can candidate in 1875, on cur- rency issue, 216. Olmsted, F. L., 124/. One presidential term issue, advo- cated by Greeley, 38; Sumner's resolution on, 54; in Liberal platform, 96. Ottendorfer, Oswald, 3, 119. 264 INDEX Paddock, A. S., 215. Palmer, J. M,, controversy with Grant, 21; a Liberal, 63; and the Liberal nomination, 82, 85; supports Greeley, 107. Parker, Joel, 77. Parrott, M. J., 64, 212M. "Passive policy," followed by Missouri Democrats in 1870, 30; advocated for Democratic party in 1871, 70. Patriot (Washington), on Demo- cratic endorsement of Greeley, 133; urges coalition with the Liberals, 140; in the campaign of 1872, 152. Pennsylvania, Republican factions in, 20/., 44; Democratic opposi- tion to Greeley in, 138; election of 1872 in, i8o_^.; coalition in after 1872, 221. Pease, Governor, of Texas, 65. People's party, in Ohio, 202/.; in Missouri, 213. Perry, A. L., 113. Philadelphia, convention of Re- publicans in in 1872, 117/. "Philippic," Sumner's, 159. Piatt, Donn, 151. Pillsbury, Governor, of Maine, 120. Pixley, F. M., 63. Plumb, P. B., 64. Politicians, and Liberal move- ment, 65/., 218. Pomeroy, S. C. ("Brick"), 148, 151- Pomeroy's Democrat, a Straight- Out organ, 148. Pryor, Roger, 131. "Quadrilateral" of independent editors, oppose Davis in Cin- cinnati convention, 87; and Adams, 96; support Greeley, 106. Racial appeals, in campaign of 1872, i63#. Radical Republican reconstruc- tion policy, 5, 12. "Radicals," Republican faction in Missouri, 29. Raines, Thomas, 222. Randolph, T. F., advises Liber- als to nominate Adams, 84; in the Fifth Avenue conference, 120; advocates endorsement of Greeley, 139. Ranney, R. P., 104. Reagan, J. H., 141. Reconciliation issue, in campaign of 1872, I74#. Reconstruction, political parties during, i. Reform Associations, established by Schurz, in 1871, 50. Reid, Whitelaw, in the Cincinnati convention, 94; in the campaign of 1872, 151, 187. Religious press, in the campaign of 1872, 152. Republican party, a sectional party, I ; disintegrating tenden- cies following Civil War, if.; in the campaign of 1868, 5; fac- tional divisions in 1871, Ijff.; condition at the close of 1871, 44; attitude toward Cincinnati convention, 114; national con- vention, 117/.; and Straight- Out Democrats, 148/.; cairies North Carolina, 178; successful in the "September States," 180; secures "October States," 181/.; extent of success in 1872, 183; organization in the campaign, 184/.; work of congressional campaign committee, 184; and the financial interests in 1872, 185^.; attempt to win back Liberals after 1874, 227; part of Liberals reunite with, 231, Reunion and Reform Associations, origin and aim, 75/.; conven- tion of, 104/., no; and the Ger- man vote, in: and Ohio inde- pendent Democrats in 1873, 198, 200. Rice, B. F., 193, 197. Robeson, G. M., 186. Robinson, Charles, 64. Robinson, Lucius, 234. Robinson, W. S. ("'Warrington"), 64, 85K. Rollins, E. H., 18. Rollins, J. S., 51, 65. INDEX 265 Roosevelt, Theodore, quoted, 3. Ross, E. G., 22, 64. Rump of Fifth Avenue confer- ence, 124. Sanborn, F. B., 64. San Domingo annexation project, 9- Saulsbury, Eli, 146. Schurz, Carl, an independent journalist, 4; a member of the Free Trade League, 5; opposes San Domingo project, 9; for civil service reform, 11; opposes coercion of Georgia, 12; praised by Nation in 1870, 16; leader of Liberal faction in Missouri, 28/.; in Missouri Liberal campaign of 1870, 30/.; seeks to conciliate Grant, 31; complete break with the administration, 32; chief promoter of a national Liberal movement, 46^'.; advises Jeffer- son City convention, 51; ad- dresses Cooper Institute meet- ingi 59) praised by Democratic state conventions in 187 1, 70; distrusts Democrats, 72; in Cincinnati convention, 92/., 103; disappointment at outcome of the convention, 107; corre- spondence with Greeley, 108, III, 119; opposed to second Liberal candidate, 118/.; and the Fifth Avenue conference, 119, 121/.; in campaign of 1872, 127,150, 155, 168; in Senate after 1872, 193, 195; opposes inflation in Ohio, 216; and presidential candidates in 1876, 229; sup- ports Hayes, 231; appointed to the cabinet, 236. Scovel, J. M., 66/. Sectarian issue, in campaign of 1872, 167. Sedgwick, A. G., 3. Selden, H. R., a Liberal leader, 64; in Cincinnati convention, 91, I02W. ; in campaign of 1872, 127. Senter, D. C, 27. Semmes, Raphael, 174. "September States," Republican success in, 180. Seymour, Horatio, 137, 143/., 234. Sherman, W. T., 177. Sherman, John, 43, 51, 177. Sherwood, Charles, 63. Sickles, D. E., 114. Sloan, A. S., 209. Smith, Gerrit, 41, 117. Soldiers' and Sailors' Republican convention, at Pittsburgh in 1872, 174. South, development of an opposi- tion party in, 22; sentiment for new party in 1870, 46; selection of Liberal delegates in, 60/.; and Greeley, 121, 130/.; ap- pealed to by Liberals in cam- paign of 1872, 175/.; character of liberal movement in, 197. Spaulding, R. P., 109. "Spring States," election of 1872 in, 114. Springfield Republican, a reform paper, 3; on Cox's resignation, 15; criticizes Grant's southern policy, 16; on available Repub- lican candidates, 36; favors Adams for Liberal nomination, 83; in campaign of 1872, 126/., 156, 165; in campaign of 1876, 233«- See also Bowles. Staats Zeiiung (New York), 3. Stallo, J. B., a Liberal sympa- thizer, 62; in Reunion and Re- form convention, 104; signs letter to Steinway Hall meeting, 1 12 ; in Fifth Avenue conference, 124; in campaign of 1872, 128; supports Ohio independent movement in 1873, 202n. Stanton, E. M., 116. Stearns, Franklin, 65. Steinway Hall meeting, wiff. Stephens, A. H., discredits Demo- crats, 68; opposes Greeley's endorsement, 131; supports Straight-Outs, 148. Stephens, Linton, 131. Sterne, Simon, 113. Stevenson, J. E., 74. Stockton, J. P., 120. Storey, Wilbur, 148, 151. Straight-Out Democrats, move- ment of in 1872, 146/. Stribling, Judge, of Texas, 65. 266 INDEX Stuart, A. H. H., 120. Sumner, Charles, break with Grant over San Domingo, 9; opposes Grant's renomination, 35; efforts to conciliate, 42/.; and a Liberal party, 52; urged not to leave Republicans, 115; doubt as to position, 115/.; ' ' Philippic ' ' against Grant, 116/.; in campaign of 1872, 127, 155/-; in the Senate after 1872, 193. 195- Sun (New York), criticism of Grant, 35; and Credit Mobilier, 163. Swett, Leonard, 63. Tammany Republicans, support Fenton, 18; and the Liberal movement, 66; support Greeley in Cincinnati convention, 88; bargain with ring Democrats, 136. Tariff reform movement, sup- ported by independent reform- ers, 5, 14/.; sentiment for among Republicans, 10/.; effort for in Cincinnati convention, 93jf.; issue in campaign of 1872, 167/. See also American Free Trade League, Free-Traders. Taylor, Bayard, quoted, 151. Taylor, J. J., on Democratic ob- jection to Greeley, 137/. Tennessee, coalition movement in, 27/- Texas, Republican factions in, 22. Thurman, A. G., and Liberal senators, 194; opposed to new party, 199; reelected to Senate, 203. Tilden, S. J., opposes Tweed Ring, 69 ; and Democratic-Liberal coaHtion, 74, 136; Liberal sup- port of in 1874, 224/.; and the independents in 1876, 230. Tilton, Theodore, 37, 91. Tipton, T. W., leader of Republi- can faction in Nebraska, 22; a Liberal leader, 63; in the cam- paign of 1872, 181; joins Demo- crats, 193. Toombs, Robert, 131. Tousey, Sinclair, 94. "True Republican" movement in Virginia, 25/. Trumbull, Lyman, supports civil service reform, 11; opposes coercion of Georgia, 12; praised by Nation in 1870, 16; suggested for Republican presidential nomination, 36; and formation of a Liberal party, 52; charged with seeking Liberal nomina- tion, 54; addresses Cooper Insti- tute meeting, 59; denies exist- ence of a Democratic-Liberal plot, 74; and Liberal nomination 82, 85; contest of supporters with Davis delegates, 89, 98; strength in Cincinnati conven- tion, 97/.; resolution for in Reunion and Reform conven- tion, 104; supports Greeley, 107; in Fifth Avenue confer- ence, 121; in campaign of 1872, 127, 155; considered forTilden's cabinet, 236. Tweed Ring exposures, and the Democrats, 69. "Union Reform" movement in South Carolina, 23/. Union Republican party. See Re- publican party. Vallandigham, C. L., and Demo- cratic "New Departure," 68/. Voorhees, Daniel, 133, 144. Walker, G. C, "True Republican" candidate for governor in Vir- ginia, 25; opposes Grant's southern policy, 50; a Liberal, 65; becomes a IDemocrat, 197/. Warmoth, H. C, 23, 67/. Washburne, E. B., 228. Watkins, Judge, of Arkansas, 24. Watterson, Henry, member of the editorial "Quadrilateral," 87; supports Greeley, 106; advo- cates Democratic endorsement of Greeley, 131/. Weed, Thurlow, 179. Wells, D. A., reform writer, 3; member of Free Trade League, 5; dismissal as revenue agent, INDEX 267 14; a Liberal organizer, 64; in Cincinnati convention, 94/.; in Steinway Hall meeting, 113; mentioned for senator, 220; nominated for Congress, 233; considered for Tilden's cabinet, 236. Wells, H. H., 25. Wentworth, John, 39. West, party disorganization in after 1872, 198. West Virginia, coalition move- ment in 1870, 28. Westliche Post, 4. White, Horace, an independent journalist, 4; member of Free Trade League, 5; member of editorial "Quadrilateral," 87; opposes a second Liberal nom- ination, 118/.; supports Greeley, 106. See also Chicago Tribune. Wilkes, George, 66. Wilkinson, M. S., 63, 215. Wilkinson, Samuel, 92. Wilson, Henry, on political effects of Motley's removal, 9/.; tries to make peace in Republican party, 43; and the renomination of Grant, 53; nominated for vice- president, 117; in the campaign of 1872, 153/., 158, 166, 172, 180; on the influence of the Liberals, 228. Winthrop, R. C, 158. Wisconsin, coalition in after 1872, 207-209, 212, 214, 233«. Wise, H. A., 148. Women campaigners, in 1872, 158/. Wood, Fernando, 137. Wood, S. N., 64. World (New York), on Repub- lican factions in 1871, 33; op- poses ' ' passive policy, " 71; opposes Davis' candidacy, 78; favors Adams for Liberal nom- inee, 83; opposes Democratic endorsement of Greeley, I33#.; in the campaign of 1872, 152, 168, 171. Wright, Elizur, 64.