CHAPTER XXVII

TILDEN ONE VOTE SHORT

1876

After the election in 1875 the eyes of the national Democracy turned

toward Tilden as its inevitable candidate for President. He had not

only beaten a Canal ring, strengthened by remnants of the old Tweed

ring, but he had carried the State against the energies of a fairly

united Republican party. Moreover, he had become, in the opinion of

his friends, the embodiment of administrative reform, although he

suffered the embarrassment of a statesman who is suspected, rightly or

wrongly, of a willingness to purchase reform at any price.[1503] To

prove his right to be transferred from Albany to Washington he now

made his message to the Legislature a treatise upon national affairs.

[Footnote 1503: Tilden's policy of pardoning members of the Tweed ring

had become intolerable. "On an average about nine out of ten men who

were confessedly guilty of stealing were accepted as witnesses against

the other one man, until the time came when there was but one man

against whom any testimony could be used, and it was not considered

wise to try him. It was a shameful condition of affairs."--John D.

Townsend, _New York in Bondage_, p. 141.]

Dwelling at length upon the financiering of the Federal Government,

Tilden sought to account for the financial depression, and in pointing

to a remedy he advocated the prompt resumption of specie payment,

criticised the dread of imaginary evils, encouraged economy in

legislation, and analysed the federal system of taxation and

expenditure. Furthermore, he sought to cut loose from the discredited

past of his party, and in paying high tribute to the patriotism of the

South, he expressed the hope that its acceptance of the results of the

war might end forever the retribution visited upon it by the standing

menace of military force.[1504]

[Footnote 1504: Tilden's _Public Writings and Speeches_, Vol. 2, pp.

237-295.]

The result at Cincinnati increased the necessity for nominating Tilden

at St. Louis, since Wheeler's popularity would materially assist in

replacing New York among reliable Republican States. Nevertheless, the

predatory class who had felt the weight of Tilden's heavy hand

fomented a most formidable opposition at the State convention.[1505]

John Kelly deeply sympathised with the movement. He resented the

rivalry and independence of the Sage of Gramercy Park, and he did not

disguise his hostility. But Kelly's immediate need centred in the

exclusion of the Morrissey delegation, and when the Tilden lieutenants

proscribed it, the way was smoothed for the Governor's unanimous

endorsement with the gag of unit rule.

[Footnote 1505: The Democratic State convention was held at Utica,

April 26, 1876.]

The admission of Kelly's delegates, however, did not close the mouths

of Tilden's opponents.[1506]. Organs of the Canal ring continued to

urge Seymour or Church for President, maintaining that the

convention's action did not bind the delegation. Church supported this

interpretation of the declaration.[1507] But it remained for the

_Express_, the authorised organ of Tammany, to stigmatise Tilden. With

cruel particularity it referred to his many-sided conduct as counsel

and director in connection with the foreclosure and reorganisation of

certain railroads in Illinois, reciting details of the affair in a

manner highly prejudicial to his integrity as a lawyer and his

reputation as a man of wealth. "Of the weak points in Mr. Tilden's

railroad record," the editor suggestively added, "we know more than we

care to publish."[1508] It doubled the severity of the blow because

suit had been instituted to compel Tilden to account for the proceeds

of large amounts of bonds and stock, and instead of meeting the

allegations promptly he had sought and obtained delay. This seemed to

give colour to the indictment.

[Footnote 1506: "It is natural enough that the canal ring and its

followers, Tammany and its adherents, and that sort of Democrats who

are commonly called Bourbons, should labour to defeat the nomination

for high office of the man who represents everything that they oppose,

and opposes everything that they represent; but it will be a most

discouraging thing to every person who hopes for good at the hands of

the Democratic party if such opposition is permitted to prevail in its

councils. He has put his principles in practice in the most fearless

and resolute manner, and has made himself especially obnoxious to his

opponents as their hostility to him clearly shows."--New York _Evening

Post_ (editorial by William Cullen Bryant), May 26, 1876.]

[Footnote 1507: New York _Tribune_, June 17.]

[Footnote 1508: New York _Evening Express_, June 23, 1876.]

At St. Louis Tilden's opponents, headed by John Kelly, Augustus

Schell, and Erastus Corning, soon wore these insinuations

threadbare.[1509] To their further declaration that in order to succeed

in November the Democracy must have one October State and that Tilden

could not carry Indiana, Dorsheimer and Bigelow, the Governor's

spokesmen, replied that New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut could

elect Tilden without Indiana. The colossal assurance of this answer

characterised the convention's confidence in Tilden's strength. It

possessed the South, the East, and the West. Hancock might be the

favourite in Pennsylvania, Parker in New Jersey, Bayard in Delaware,

Allen in Ohio, and Hendricks in Indiana, but as delegates entered the

convention city the dense Tilden sentiment smothered them. Even

scandal did not appreciably weaken it.

[Footnote 1509: The National Democratic convention assembled on June 27

and 28.]

There was nothing mysterious about this strength. Tilden represented

success. Without him disaster threatened--with him victory seemed

certain. His achievement in administrative reform exaggerated

Republican failure; his grasp upon New York, the most vital State of

the North, magnified Democratic strength; his leadership, based upon

ideas and organisation, dwarfed political rivals; his acute legal

mind, leading to the largest rewards in the realm of law, captivated

business men; and his wealth, amassed in the field of railroad

organisation and litigation, could fill Democracy's exchequer. Thus

Tilden, standing less on the Democratic platform than on his own

record, held the commanding position in his party, and the talk of his

unpopularity or how he obtained wealth seemed to make as little

impression as his professed devotion to the Wilmot Proviso in 1847, or

his departure for a season from a lifelong pro-slavery record to bear

a prominent part in the Barnburners' revolt of 1848. Indeed, so

certain was Tilden of success that he did not ask for advices until

after the nomination. James C. Carter of the New York bar, who

happened at the time to be with him respecting legal matters, wondered

at his unconcern. On their return from an evening drive Carter

ventured to suggest that he would find telegrams announcing his

nomination. "Not until half-past nine," Tilden replied.[1510]

[Footnote 1510: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 1, p. 308.]

Nevertheless, the first call of States made the Tilden managers

shiver.[1511] Alabama divided its vote, Colorado caused a murmur of

disappointment, and the slump of Georgia and Illinois, with Missouri's

division, threatened them with heart-failure. The South wabbled, and

promised votes in the North found their way elsewhere. At the close of

the first roll-call Missouri asked if its vote could be changed, and

on receiving an affirmative answer, the Tilden men, pale with worried

excitement, awaited the result. A change to Hancock at that moment

would have been a serious calamity, for nearly one hundred votes

separated Tilden from the necessary two-thirds. When Missouri declared

for the New Yorker, however, the opportunity to turn the tide against

him was lost forever. The second ballot undoubtedly represented his

real strength.[1512] For second place Thomas A. Hendricks had no

opposition.

[Footnote 1511: Francis Kernan presented Tilden's name very

effectively.]

[Footnote 1512: First ballot. Necessary two-thirds, 492. Samuel J.

Tilden of New York, 404-1/2; Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana, 133-1/2;

Winfield Scott Hancock of Pennsylvania, 75; William Allen of Ohio, 56;

Thomas F. Bayard of Delaware, 27; Joel Parker of New Jersey, 18.

Second ballot: Tilden, 535; Hendricks, 60; Hancock, 59; Allen, 54;

Bayard, 11; Parker, 18; Thurman of Ohio, 2.]

The platform, prepared under the eye of Tilden by Manton Marble, the

accomplished editor of the _World_, advocated reform as its keynote

and made historic its vituperative arraignment of the party in power.

On the vital question of the currency it demanded the repeal of the

resumption clause of the Act of 1875, denouncing it as an hindrance to

the resumption of specie payment. The Republicans, wishing to avoid

too sharp a conflict with the soft money sentiment of the West, had

pledged the fulfilment of the Public Credit Act,[1513] approved March

18, 1869, "by a continuous and steady progress to specie payments."

Both declarations savoured of indefiniteness, but Hayes, in his letter

of acceptance (July 8), added greatly to his reputation for firmness

and decision of character in supplying the needed directness by

demanding the resumption of specie payment. On the other hand,

Tilden's letter (July 31) weakened the country's respect for him.[1514]

He had no sympathy for soft money, but in supporting the demand for a

repeal of the resumption clause he urged, in a long, indefinite

communication, the importance of preparation for resumption, ignoring

the fact that the Act of 1875 anticipated such precaution. Although

less prolix in his treatment of civil service reform, he was no less

indefinite. After describing recognised evils he failed to indicate

any practical remedy beyond the "conviction that no reform will be

complete and permanent until the Chief Executive is constitutionally

disqualified for re-election."[1515] Speaking of the character of the

men holding office his use of the word "usufruct" led to the derisive

appellation of "Old Usufruct Tilden."[1516] On civil service reform

Hayes was more specific. He declared against the use of official

patronage in elections and pledged himself not to be a candidate for a

second term.[1517]

[Footnote 1513: This act terminates as follows: "And the United States

also solemnly pledges its faith to make provision at the earliest

practicable period for the redemption of the United States notes in

coin."]

[Footnote 1514: "Tilden's letter was a disappointment to those who had

studied his words and acts as Governor."--Rhodes, _History of the

United States_, Vol. 7, p. 216.]

[Footnote 1515: Appleton's _Cyclopædia_, 1876, p. 790.]

[Footnote 1516: "The public interest in an honest, skilful performance

of official trust must not be sacrificed to the usufruct of the

incumbents."--Appleton's _Cyclopædia_, 1876, p. 790.]

[Footnote 1517: _Ibid._, p. 783.]

If Conkling had been balked in his desire to nominate Cornell, Tilden

was not less baffled a week later in his effort to promote William

Dorsheimer, his special friend. His genius for organisation had

smoothed the way for harmony at Saratoga.[1518] Kelly and Morrissey

settled their differences in advance, the platform created no

discussion, and the appointment of electors-at-large provoked little

criticism; but when Tilden's lieutenants proposed Dorsheimer for

governor the convention revolted. It noisily demanded a Democrat, and

in the stampede that followed Clarkson N. Potter, backed by Tammany

and the Canal ring, rapidly accumulated strength despite Tilden's

personal opposition. To all of Tilden's friends vital objections

seemed to be raised. Dorsheimer could not command a solid Democratic

vote; Robinson favoured high canal tolls and cultivated Republican

affiliations; Manton Marble remained unpopular because the _World_

changed front in 1868; and Starbuck of Jefferson did not attract

Independents. For once Tilden had plainly been deceived as to his

strength. Furthermore, the convention, divided in its attention

between speeches for Potter and demands for Seymour, was beyond his

control. Nevertheless, as the delegates in their stentorian insistence

upon a "Democrat" became more and more furious for Seymour, the Tilden

managers, to head off the alarming sentiment for Potter, adroitly

increased the volume of the demand for the Oneidan. It was known that

Seymour had refused the use of his name. Telegrams to Kernan and

letters to the president of the convention alleged indisposition and

"obstacles which I cannot overcome."[1519] But the convention,

conscious that the former governor had before changed his mind under

similar circumstances, closed its ears to his entreaties, and amidst

the most vociferous cheering nominated him by acclamation. The next

morning, with equal unanimity, it renominated Dorsheimer for

lieutenant-governor.

[Footnote 1518: The Democratic State convention convened on August 30.]

[Footnote 1519: Utica _Herald_, August 31, 1876.]

A few days later Seymour, pleading mental inability to perform the

duties of the office, put himself out of the race.[1520] This gave

Tilden opportunity to re-form his lines, and upon the convention's

reassembling (September 13) Robinson easily won.[1521]

[Footnote 1520: For Seymour's letter, see New York papers of September

5.]

[Footnote 1521: The ballot stood: Potter, 106-1/2; Robinson, 192-1/2;

scattering, 59. Necessary to a choice, 191. Before its announcement

changes gave Robinson 243-1/2.

The ticket was as follows: Governor, Lucius Robinson, Chemung;

Lieutenant-Governor, William Dorsheimer, Erie; Court of Appeals,

Robert Earl, Herkimer; Canal Commissioner, Darius A. Ogden, Yates;

Prison Inspector, Robert H. Anderson, Kings.]

Democratic factions likewise buried their differences in New York

City, Kelly and Morrissey uniting upon Smith Ely for mayor. The

Republicans nominated John A. Dix. Thus was the municipal struggle in

the metropolis, for the first time in many years, confined within

strict party lines.[1522]

[Footnote 1522: On March 15, several disaffected Democrats met at

Syracuse and organised a Greenback party, which opposed the resumption

of specie payment and favoured legal tender notes as the standard of

value. A second convention, held in New York City on June 1, selected

four delegates-at-large to the Democratic national convention, and a

third, meeting at Albany on September 26, nominated Richard M. Griffin

for governor. Other State nominations were made by the Prohibitionists,

Albert J. Groo being selected for governor.]

The campaign, although a prolonged and intensely exciting one,

developed no striking incidents. Democratic orators repeated Marble's

rhetorical arraignment of the Republican party, and the Democratic

press iterated and reiterated its symmetrical, burning sentences.

Marble's platform, besides being the most vitriolic, had the

distinction of being the longest in the history of national

conventions. Copies of it printed in half a dozen languages seemed to

spring up as plentifully as weeds in a wheatfield. Every cross-roads

in the State became a centre for its distribution. It pilloried

Grant's administration, giving in chronological order a list of his

unwise acts, the names and sins of his unfaithful appointees, and a

series of reasons why Tilden, the Reformer, could alone restore the

Republic to its pristine purity. It was a dangerous document because

history substantially affirmed its statement of facts, while the

rhythm of its periods and the attractiveness of its typography invited

the reader.[1523]

[Footnote 1523: Appleton's _Cyclopædia_, 1876, pp. 785, 786.]

Conkling, because of ill-health, limited his activity in the canvass

to one address.[1524] It was calmer than usual, but it shone with

sparkles of sarcasm and bristled with covert allusions readily

understood. It was noticeable, too, that he made no reference to Hayes

or to Wheeler. Nevertheless, party associates from whom he had

radically differed pronounced it a model of partisan oratory and the

most conclusive review of the political situation. He admitted the

corruption indicated by Marble, attributing it chiefly to the war

which incited speculative passion in all the activities of life, its

ill consequences not being confined exclusively to public affairs. In

contrasting the management of the two parties, he disclosed under

Buchanan a loss on each thousand dollars collected and disbursed of

six dollars and ninety-eight cents against forty cents during Grant's

first term and twenty-six cents during the three years of his second,

while current expenses under Buchanan amounted to one dollar and

ninety cents per capita to one dollar and seventy cents under Grant.

In ten years, he added, $800,000,000 of the debt had been paid,

nearly $50,000,000 of interest saved yearly, and the taxes reduced

$262,000,000 per annum.

[Footnote 1524: Delivered at Utica, October 3. See New York papers,

October 4.]

Of civil service reform Conkling said nothing. He made a clear, sharp

issue on the resumption of specie payment, however, showing that the

demand for a repeal of the Act's most important feature was a bid for

the votes of soft-money advocates. The Southern question assumed even

greater importance. Tilden depended for success upon the Southern

States plus New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. This was

Dorsheimer's argument, put with characteristic grace and force at St.

Louis. The North had cause to fear, it was argued, if a solid South,

strengthened by States controlled by the great majorities in and about

New York City, could elect a President. The charge that Tilden

intended indemnifying the South and assuming the Confederate debt

increased the anxiety. Conkling's reference to the repayment of direct

taxes, the refund of the cotton tax, and the liquidation of Southern

claims mounted so high into the hundreds of millions that Tilden

deemed it prudent to issue a letter pledging an enforcement of the

Constitutional Amendments and resistance to such monetary demands.

Personal criticism of Tilden exploited his war record, his reputation

as a railroad wrecker, and his evasion of the income tax.[1525] The

accusation of "railroad wrecking" was scarcely sustained, but his

income tax was destined to bring him trouble. Nast kept his pencil

busy. One cartoon, displaying Tilden emptying a large barrel of

greenbacks into the ballot box, summed up the issues as follows: "The

shot-gun policy South, the barrel policy North;" "The solid South and

the solid Tammany;" "Tilden's war record--defeating the tax

collector." George William Curtis asserted that the Democrats of South

Carolina meant to carry the State for Tilden by means of "the shot

gun," declaring that "Jefferson Davis and the secessionists merely

endeavoured to enforce with bayonets the doctrines of Mr.

Tilden."[1526]

[Footnote 1525: It was claimed that in 1862 Tilden had a net income of

$89,000. He made oath to $7,118, and afterward acknowledged receiving

$20,000 in the Terre Haute Railroad case. He alleged that this covered

the work of several years. Moreover, that his income-producing

property was largely in railroad stocks, bonds, and other securities

on which the tax was deducted by the companies before the interest and

dividends were paid.--Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 232; see

also, _Nation_, September 22, 1876.]

[Footnote 1526: _Harper's Weekly_, 1876, pp. 828, 885, 906, 907.]

Tilden displayed a stoical indifference to these personal attacks. He

made no speeches, he rarely exhibited himself to the public, and he

kept his own counsels. His adroit, mysterious movements recalled the

methods but not the conceit of Aaron Burr. Although Abram S. Hewitt,

chairman of the Democratic National Committee, managed the campaign

with skill, Tilden relied largely upon his own shrewdness, displacing

old leaders for new ones, and making it clear to the country that he

ranked with Martin Van Buren as a great political manager. As he swept

onward like a conquering Marlborough, inspiring his party with

confidence and his opponents with fear, events favoured his designs.

The Belknap exposures, the Whiskey ring suits, the Babcock trial,

alarming and disgusting the country, inclined public opinion toward a

change which was expressed in the word "reform." A combination of

propitious circumstances within the State, in nowise indebted to his

sagacity or assistance, also increased his strength. The collapse of

the Tweed and Canal rings justly gave him great prestige, but no

reason existed why the extinguishment of the State war debt and the

limitations of canal expenditures to canal revenues should add to his

laurels, for the canal amendment to the Constitution was passed and

the payment of the war debt practically accomplished before he took

office. Nevertheless, the resulting decrease of the State budget by

nearly one-half, being coincident with his term of office, added

prodigiously to his fame.[1527] Indeed, he seemed to be the darling of

Fortune, and on November 7, exactly according to his calculation, he

carried New York,[1528] New Jersey, Connecticut, and Indiana. But

Republicans claimed South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana.

[Footnote 1527: "The amount of the State tax for 1876 was

$8,529,174.32, against $14,206,680.61 in 1875, and $15,727,482.08 in

1874." Appleton's _Cyclopædia_, 1876, p. 598.]

[Footnote 1528: Tilden, plurality, 32,742; Robinson, 30,460. Groo,

total vote, 3,412 (Prohibitionist); Griffin, 1,436 (Greenback).

Congress, 17 Republicans, 16 Democrats. Assembly, 71 Republicans, 57

Democrats. Ely's majority for mayor of New York City, 53,517. Tilden's

majority in New York City, 53,682.

Republican losses occurred chiefly in the Hudson River and western

counties. Elbridge G. Spaulding of Buffalo, and Levi P. Morton of New

York, were defeated for Congress.]

In the historic dispute which led to a division of the solid South,

partisan papers revelled in threats, and rumours indicated danger of

mob violence. To prevent fraud prominent citizens in the North,

appointed to represent each political party, watched the canvassing

boards in the three disputed States, and although it subsequently

developed that distinguished New Yorkers resorted to bribery,[1529] the

legal canvassing boards finally certified the electoral votes to Hayes

and Wheeler. On December 6 the official count in all the States gave

Hayes 185 votes and Tilden 184. The Democrats, deeply disturbed by the

action of the Returning Boards, now displayed a temper that resembled

the spirit preceding the civil war. Threats were openly made that

Hayes should never be inaugurated. The Louisville _Courier Journal_

announced that "if they (our people) will rise in their might, and

will send 100,000 petitioners to Washington to present their memorial

in person, there will be no usurpation and no civil war."[1530] A

prominent ex-Confederate in Congress talked of 145,000 well

disciplined Southern troops who were ready to fight.[1531] Because the

President prudently strengthened the military forces about Washington

he was charged with the design of installing Hayes with the aid of the

army.

[Footnote 1529: Manton Marble visited Florida. On November 22, under

the _sobriquet_ "Moses," he telegraphed in cipher to William T.

Pelton, Tilden's nephew, then domiciled in Tilden's home at 15

Gramercy Park: "Have just received proposition to hand over a Tilden

decision of Board and certificate of Governor for $200,000." Pelton

thought it too much, and Marble again telegraphed that one Elector

could be secured for $50,000. Pelton replied that he "could not draw

until the vote of the Elector was received." On December 5, Marble

wired: "Proposition failed.... Tell Tilden to saddle Blackstone."

Smith M. Weed visited South Carolina. On November 16, without the use

of cipher or _sobriquet_, he telegraphed Henry Havermeyer: "Board

demand $75,000 for two or three electors." Later in the day he added:

"Looks now as though $75,000 would secure all seven votes." The next

day he wired: "Press everywhere. No certainty here. Simply a hope." On

November 18, he announced: "Majority of Board secured. Cost $80,000.

Send one parcel of $65,000; one of $10,000; one of $5,000. All to be

in $1000 or $500 bills. Have cash ready to reach Baltimore Sunday

night." Pelton met Weed at Baltimore without the money and both went

to New York to secure it. Meantime, the canvassing board reported in

favour of Hayes.

Pelton also corresponded with one J.N.H. Patrick, who telegraphed from

Oregon: "Must purchase Republican elector to recognise and act with

the Democrat, and secure vote to prevent trouble. Deposit $10,000 to

my credit." Pelton replied: "If you will make obligation contingent on

result in March it will be done." Patrick said fee could not be made

contingent, whereupon $8,000 was deposited on January 1, 1877, to his

credit, but too late to complete the transaction.

When these telegrams, translated by the New York _Tribune_, were

investigated by the Potter Congressional committee in January, 1879,

Marble testified that he transmitted them simply "as danger signals";

Weed admitted and attempted to justify; Pelton accepted the full

responsibility, intending, he said, to get the money of Edward Cooper;

Cooper testified that the telegram requesting $80,000 sent to

Baltimore was his first knowledge of Pelton's activity; that he

immediately informed Tilden, who recalled his nephew and put a stop to

negotiations. Tilden swore that "no offer, no negotiation in behalf of

any member of any Returning Board was ever entertained by me, or by my

authority, or with my sanction.... There never was a moment in which I

ever entertained any idea of seeking to obtain those certificates by

any venal inducement, any promise of money or office, to the men who

had them to grant or dispose of. My purpose on that subject was

perfectly distinct, invariable, and it was generally assumed by all my

friends without discussion. It may have sometimes been expressed and

whenever the slightest occasion arose for it to be discussed, it was

expressed. It was never deviated from in word or act."--Testimony in

relation to Cipher Telegraphic Dispatches, pp. 200-274; see also,

Bigelow's _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, pp. 180-223.]

[Footnote 1530: From an editorial signed by Henry Watterson, January 8,

1877.]

[Footnote 1531: Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. 7, p.

243.]

On the other hand, Republicans believed Tilden endeavoured to buy the

presidency. Although nothing was then known of Marble's and Weed's

efforts to tamper with the canvassing boards of South Carolina and

Florida, the disposition to "steal" a vote in Oregon, which clearly

belonged to Hayes, deprived Tilden's cause of its moral weight.

Indeed, so strongly did sentiment run against him that the _Nation_

"lost nearly three thousand subscribers for refusing to believe that

Mr. Hayes could honourably accept the presidency."[1532]

[Footnote 1532: The _Nation_, June 25, 1885.]

When Congress opened the Democrats, being in control of the House,

desired to continue the joint rule of February, 1865, directing that

"no electoral vote objected to shall be counted except by the

concurrent votes of the two Houses." This would elect Tilden. On the

other hand, the Republicans, holding that the joint rule expired with

the Congress adopting it, insisted that, inasmuch as the canvass by

Congress at all previous elections had been confined exclusively to

opening the certificates of each State, sent to Washington under the

official seal of the respective governors, the Vice-President should

open and count the electoral votes and declare the result, the members

of the two Houses acting simply as witnesses. This would elect Hayes.

To many and especially to President Grant this controversy seemed full

of danger, to avert which if possible Congress adopted a resolution

providing for a committee of fourteen, equally divided between the

Senate and House, "to report without delay such a measure as may in

their judgment be best calculated to accomplish the desired

end."[1533] On January 18 (1877) this committee reported a bill

providing that where two or more returns had been received from a

State such returns should be referred to an Electoral Commission

composed of five senators, five members of the House, and five

justices of the Supreme Court, who should decide any question

submitted to it touching the return from any State, and that such

decision should stand unless rejected by the concurrent votes of the

two Houses. By tacit agreement the Senate was to name three

Republicans and two Democrats, and the House three Democrats and two

Republicans, while the Bill itself appointed Justices Clifford,

Miller, Field, and Strong, a majority of whom were authorised to

select a fifth justice.[1534]

[Footnote 1533: Upon this committee Conkling was substituted in place

of Logan, detained at home. Abram S. Hewitt was one of the House

appointees.]

[Footnote 1534: Clifford and Field were accounted Democrats, and Miller

and Strong, Republicans.]

When doubt as to the three Southern States precipitated itself into

the result of the election, Tilden exhibited characteristic diligence

and secrecy. He avoided public statements, but he scrutinised the

returns with the acumen exhibited in securing the Tweed evidence, and

left no flaw unchallenged in the title of his opponent. After the

action of the canvassing boards he contended that the joint rule of

1865 must govern, and in the study of the subject he devoted more than

a month to the preparation of a complete history of electoral counts,

showing it to have been the unbroken usage for Congress and not the

President of the Senate to count the vote.[1535] Moreover, early in the

session of Congress he prepared two resolutions which raised the

issue, and urged his friends in the leadership of the House to take no

further step until the great constitutional battle had been fought

along that line, assuring them of his readiness to accept all the

responsibility of the outcome. To appraise the country of the

strength of this position he also prepared an extended brief which

Governor Robinson incorporated as a part of his inaugural message on

January 1, 1877.[1536]

[Footnote 1535: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 60.]

[Footnote 1536: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, pp. 67-74.]

Tilden first learned of the proposed Electoral Commission Bill on

January 14. Abram S. Hewitt brought the information, saying that

Bayard and Thurman of the Senate, being absolutely committed to it,

would concur in reporting it whatever Tilden's action.[1537] Tilden,

resenting the secrecy of its preparation as unwise and essentially

undemocratic, declined to give it his approval.[1538] In his later

telegrams to Hewitt he expressed the belief that "We should stand on

the Constitution and the settled practice;" that "the other side,

having no way but by usurpation, will have greater troubles than we,

unless relieved by some agreement;" that "the only way of getting

accessions in the Senate is by the House standing firm;" that "we are

over-pressed by exaggerated fears;" and that "no information is here

which could justify an abandonment of the Constitution and practice of

the government, and of the rights of the two Houses and of the

people." To his friends who urged that time pressed, he exclaimed:

"There is time enough. It is a month before the count."

Representations of the danger of a collision with the Executive met

his scorn. "It is a panic of pacificators," he said. "Why surrender

before the battle for fear of having to surrender after the

battle?"[1539]

[Footnote 1537: Manton Marble to the New York _Sun_, August 5, 1878.]

[Footnote 1538: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 76.]

[Footnote 1539: _Ibid._, pp. 76, 79, 80.]

In view of his resentment of the secrecy which characterised the

preparation of the Electoral Commission Bill, one wonders that Tilden

made no appeal directly to the people, demanding that his party stand

firm to "the settled practice" and allow Republicans peaceably to

inaugurate Hayes "by usurpation" rather than "relieve them by some

agreement." His telegrams to congressmen could not be published, and

few if any one knew him as the author of the discussion in Robinson's

inaugural. The _Times_ thought "the old Governor's hand is to be seen

in the new Governor's message,"[1540] but the _Nation_ expressed doubt

about it.[1541] A ringing proclamation over his own signature, however,

would have been known before sunset to every Democratic voter in the

land. Blaine told Bigelow a year or two later that if the Democrats

had been firm, the Republicans would have backed down.[1542] Tilden's

silence certainly dampened his party's enthusiasm. It recalled, too,

his failure to assail the Tweed ring until the _Times'_ disclosure

made its destruction inevitable.

[Footnote 1540: New York _Times_, January 2, 1877.]

[Footnote 1541: January 4.]

[Footnote 1542: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 74, note.]

Bigelow, reflecting Tilden's thought, charged that in accepting the

plan of an Electoral Commission Thurman and Bayard were influenced by

presidential ambition, and that prominent congressmen could not regard

with satisfaction the triumph of a candidate who had been in nowise

indebted to them for his nomination or success at the polls.[1543] On

the other hand, Blaine says the Democrats favoured the Commission

because Davis, who affiliated with the Democratic party and had

preferred Tilden to Hayes, was to be chosen for the fifth justice. The

Maine statesman adds, without giving his authority, that Hewitt

advanced this as one of the arguments to induce Tilden to approve the

bill.[1544] In his history of the Hewitt-Tilden interview Marble makes

no mention of Davis' selection, nor does Bigelow refer to Tilden's

knowledge of it. Nevertheless, the strength disclosed for the bill

sustains Blaine's suggestion, since every Democrat of national

reputation in both Houses supported it. The measure passed the Senate

on January 24 and the House on the 26th,[1545] but an unlooked-for

event quickly destroyed Democratic calculations and expectations, for

on January 25, too late for the party to recede with dignity or with

honour, the Democrats of the Illinois Legislature elected Davis by two

majority to the United States Senate in place of John A. Logan.

Probably a greater surprise never occurred in American political

history. It gave Davis an opportunity, on the ground of obvious

impropriety, to avoid what he neither sought nor desired, and narrowed

the choice of a fifth justice to out-and-out Republicans, thus

settling the election of Hayes. "The drop in the countenance of Abram

S. Hewitt," said a writer who informed Tilden's representative of

Davis' transfer from the Supreme Court to the Senate, "made it plain

that he appreciated its full significance."[1546] Bigelow could not

understand why Davis did not serve on the Commission unless his

"declination was one of the conditions of his election," adding that

"it was supposed by many that Morton and others engineered the

agreement of Davis' appointment with full knowledge that he would not

serve."[1547] This cynical comment betrayed Tilden's knowledge of

"things hoped for," and accounts for his final acquiescence in the

Commission, since Davis and a certainty were far better than a fight

and possible failure.

[Footnote 1543: _Ibid._, p. 63.]

[Footnote 1544: Blaine, _Twenty Tears of Congress_, Vol. 2, p. 584.

Morrison of Illinois declared that Davis' "most intimate friends,

among whom I may count myself, don't know to-day whether he favored

Tilden or Hayes. He didn't vote at all."--_Century Magazine_, October,

1901, p. 928.]

[Footnote 1545: Senate: For, 26 Democrats, 21 Republicans; against, 16

Republicans, 1 Democrat. House: For, 160 Democrats, 31 Republicans;

against, 69 Republicans, 17 Democrats.]

[Footnote 1546: _Century Magazine_, October, 1901, p. 933.]

[Footnote 1547: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 64, note.]

Another dagger-thrust that penetrated the home in Gramercy Park was

Conkling's exclusion from the Electoral Commission. Of all the members

of the famous committee the Senator had borne the most useful part in

framing the measure, and his appointment to the Commission was

naturally expected to follow.[1548] His biographer states that he

declined to serve.[1549] "If this be correct," says Rhodes, "he shirked

a grave duty."[1550] Bigelow charges the omission to the Senator's

belief "that the vote of Louisiana rightfully belonged to Mr. Tilden,"

and volunteers the information "that Conkling had agreed to address

the Commission in opposition to its counting Louisiana for

Hayes."[1551] Conkling's absence from the Senate when the Louisiana

vote was taken corroborates Bigelow,[1552] and supports the general

opinion which obtained at the time, that the Republicans, suspecting

Conkling of believing Tilden entitled to the presidency, intentionally

ignored him in the make-up of the Commission.[1553] The reason for

Conkling's failure subsequently to address the Commission in

opposition to counting Louisiana for Hayes nowhere explicitly appears.

"Various explanations are in circulation," writes Bigelow, "but I have

not been able to determine which of them all had the demerit of

securing his silence."[1554]

[Footnote 1548: "General Grant sent for Senator Conkling, and said with

deep earnestness: 'This matter is a serious one, and the people feel

it very deeply. I think this Electoral Commission ought to be

appointed.' Conkling answered: 'Mr. President, Senator Morton' (who

was then the acknowledged leader of the Senate), 'is opposed to it and

opposed to your efforts; but if you wish the Commission carried, I can

help do it.' Grant said: 'I wish it done.'"--George W. Childs,

_Recollections_, pp. 79, 80.]

[Footnote 1549: Conkling, _Life of Conkling_, p. 521.]

[Footnote 1550: Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. 7, p.

263.]

[Footnote 1551: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 84.]

[Footnote 1552: "In all his political official life the most important

vote which he [Conkling] has been or can be called upon to give--that

upon the Louisiana electoral question--he evaded."--_Harper's Weekly_,

February 8, 1879.]

[Footnote 1553: "He [Conkling] was at the time most suspected by the

Republicans, who feared that his admitted dislike to Hayes would cause

him to favour a bill which would secure the return of Tilden."--Thomas

V. Cooper and Hector T. Fenton, _American Politics_, p. 230; see also,

Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. 7, p. 263.]

[Footnote 1554: Bigelow, _Life of Tilden_, Vol. 2, p. 84.

"Mr. Conkling felt that neither Mr. Tilden nor Mr. Hayes should be

inaugurated."--Conkling, _Life of Conkling_, p. 528.]

A Political History of the State of New York, Volumes 1-3 · 第 27 / 38 章