[* No one is better qualified than Robert G. Ingersoll to talk
about Senator Sherman's book and the questions it raises in political
history. Mr. Ingersoll was for years a resident of Washington and
a next-door neighbor to Mr. Sherman; he was for an even longer period
the intimate personal friend of James G. Blaine; he knew Garfield
from almost daily contact, and of the Republican National Conventions
concerning which Senator Sherman has raised points of controversy
Mr. Ingersoll can say, as the North Carolinian said of the Confederacy:
"Part of whom I am which."
He placed Blaine's name before the convention at Cincinnati in
1876. He made the first of the three great nominating speeches in
convention history, Conkling and Garfield making the others in 1880.
The figure of the Plumed Knight which Mr. Ingersoll created to
characterize Mr. Blaine is part of the latter's memory. At Chicago,
four years later, when Garfield, dazed by the irresistible doubt
of the convention, was on the point of refusing that in the acceptance
of which he had no voluntary part, Ingersoll was the adviser who
showed him that duty to Sherman required no such action.]
_Question_. What do you think of Senator Sherman's book--especially
the part about Garfield?
_Answer_. Of course, I have only read a few extracts from Mr.
Sherman's reminiscences, but I am perfectly satisfied that the
Senator is mistaken about Garfield's course. The truth is that
Garfield captured the convention by his course from day to day,
and especially by the speech he made for Sherman. After that
speech, and it was a good one, the best Garfield ever made, the
convention said, "Speak for yourself, John."
It was perfectly apparent that if the Blaine and Sherman forces
should try to unite, Grant would be nominated. It had to be Grant
or a new man, and that man was Garfield. It all came about without
Garfield's help, except in the way I have said. Garfield even went
so far as to declare that under no circumstances could he accept,
because he was for Sherman, and honestly for him. He told me that
he would not allow his name to go before the convention. Just
before he was nominated I wrote him a note in which I said he was
about to be nominated, and that he must not decline. I am perfectly
satisfied that he acted with perfect honor, and that he did his
best for Sherman.
_Question_. Mr. Sherman expresses the opinion that if he had had
the "moral strength" of the Ohio delegation in his support he would
have been nominated?
_Answer_. We all know that while Senator Sherman had many friends,
and that while many thought he would make an excellent President,
still there was but little enthusiasm among his followers. Sherman
had the respect of the party, but hardly the love.
_Question_. In his book the Senator expresses the opinion that he
was quite close to the nomination in 1888, when Mr. Quay was for
him. Do you think that is so, Mr. Ingersoll?
_Answer_. I think Mr. Sherman had a much better chance in 1888
than in 1880, but as a matter of fact, he never came within hailing
distance of success at any time. He is not of the nature to sway
great bodies of men. He lacks the power to impress himself upon
others to such an extent as to make friends of enemies and devotees
of friends. Mr. Sherman has had a remarkable career, and I think
that he ought to be satisfied with what he has achieved.
_Question_. Mr. Ingersoll, what do you think defeated Blaine for
the nomination in 1876?
_Answer_. On the first day of the convention at Cincinnati it was
known that Blaine was the leading candidate. All of the enthusiasm
was for him. It was soon known that Conkling, Bristow or Morton
could not be nominated, and that in all probability Blaine would
succeed. The fact that Blaine had been attacked by vertigo, or
had suffered from a stroke of apoplexy, gave an argument to those
who opposed him, and this was used with great effect. After Blaine
was put in nomination, and before any vote was taken, the convention
adjourned, and during the night a great deal of work was done.
The Michigan delegation was turned inside out and the Blaine forces
raided in several States. Hayes, the dark horse, suddenly developed
speed, and the scattered forces rallied to his support. I have
always thought that if a ballot could have been taken on the day
Blaine was put in nomination he would have succeeded, and yet he
might have been defeated for the nomination anyway.
Blaine had the warmest friends and the bitterest enemies of any
man in the party. People either loved or hated him. He had no
milk-and-water friends and no milk-and-water enemies.
_Question_. If Blaine had been nominated at Cincinnati in 1876
would he have made a stronger candidate than Hayes did?
_Answer_. If he had been nominated then, I believe that he would
have been triumphantly elected. Mr. Blaine's worst enemies would
not have supported Tilden, and thousands of moderate Democrats
would have given their votes to Blaine.
_Question_. Mr. Ingersoll, do you think that Mr. Blaine wanted
the nomination in 1884, when he got it?
_Answer_. In 1883, Mr. Blaine told me that he did not want the
nomination. I said to him: "Is that honest?" He replied that he
did not want it, that he was tired of the whole business. I said:
"If you do not want it; if you have really reached that conclusion,
then I think you will get it." He laughed, and again said: "I do
not want it." I believe that he spoke exactly as he then felt.
_Question_. What do you think defeated Mr. Blaine at the polls in
1884?
_Answer_. Blaine was a splendid manager for another man, a great
natural organizer, and when acting for others made no mistake; but
he did not manage his own campaign with ability. He made a succession
of mistakes. His suit against the Indianapolis editor; his letter
about the ownership of certain stocks; his reply to Burchard and
the preachers, in which he said that history showed the church
could get along without the state, but the state could not get
along without the church, and this in reply to the "Rum, Romanism and
Rebellion" nonsense; and last, but not least, his speech to the
millionaires in New York--all of these things weakened him. As a
matter of fact many Catholics were going to support Blaine, but
when they saw him fooling with the Protestant clergy, and accepting
the speech of Burchard, they instantly turned against him. If he
had never met Burchard, I think he would have been elected. His
career was something like that of Mr. Clay; he was the most popular
man of his party and yet----
_Question_. How do you account for Mr. Blaine's action in allowing
his name to go before the convention at Minneapolis in 1892?
_Answer_. In 1892, Mr. Blaine was a sick man, almost worn out; he
was not his former self, and he was influenced by others. He seemed
to have lost his intuition; he was misled, yet in spite of all
defeats, no name will create among Republicans greater enthusiasm
than that of James G. Blaine. Millions are still his devoted,
unselfish and enthusiastic friends and defenders.
--_The Globe-Democrat_, St. Louis, October 27, 1895.