CHAPTER XXIX

THE TILDEN RÉGIME ROUTED

1877

The result at Rochester, so unsatisfactory to a large body of

influential men to whom the President represented the most patriotic

Republicanism, was followed at Albany by a movement no less

disappointing to a large element of the Democratic party.[1588] In

their zeal to punish crime Secretary of State Bigelow and

Attorney-General Fairchild had made themselves excessively obnoxious

to the predatory statesmen of the canal ring, who now proposed to

destroy the Tilden régime. Back of them stood John Kelly, eager to

become the master, and determined to accomplish what he had failed to

do at St. Louis.

[Footnote 1588: The Democratic State convention met at Albany on

October 3, 1877.]

As if indifferent to the contest Bigelow had remained in Europe with

Tilden, and Fairchild, weary of the nervous strain of office-holding,

refused to make an open canvass for the extension of his official

life. Nevertheless, the friends of reform understood the importance of

renominating the old ticket. It had stood for the interest of the

people. Whatever doubt might have clouded the public mind as to

Tilden's sincerity as an ardent, unselfish reformer, Republicans as

well as Democrats knew that Bigelow and Fairchild represented an

uncompromising hostility to public plunderers, and that their work, if

then discontinued, must be shorn of much of its utility. Their friends

understood, also, the importance of controlling the temporary

organisation of the convention, otherwise all would be lost.

The result of the Presidential struggle had seriously weakened Tilden.

In the larger field of action he had displayed a timid, vacillating

character, and the boldest leaders of his party felt that in the final

test as a candidate he lost because he hesitated. Besides, the

immediate prospect of power had disappeared. Although Democrats talked

of "the great Presidential crime," and seemed to have their eyes and

minds fastened on offices and other evidences of victory, they

realised deep in their hearts that Hayes was President for four years,

and that new conditions and new men might be existent in 1880.

Moreover, many Democratic leaders who could not be classed as selfish,

felt that Tilden, in securing the advantageous position of a reformer,

had misrepresented the real Democratic spirit and purpose in the

State. They deeply resented his course in calling about him, to the

exclusion of recognised and experienced party advisers, men whom he

could influence, who owed their distinction to his favour, and who

were consequently devoted to his fortunes. Upon some of these he

relied to secure Republican sympathy, while he depended upon

Democratic discipline to gain the full support of his party. If events

favoured his designs and the exigencies of an exciting Presidential

election concealed hostility, these conditions did not placate his

opponents, who began plotting his downfall the moment the great

historic contest ended. This opposition could be approximately

measured by the fact that the entire party press of the State, with

three exceptions, disclosed a distinct dislike of his methods.[1589]

[Footnote 1589: New York _Tribune_, September 1, 1877.]

Nevertheless, Tilden's friends held control. Governor Robinson, an

executive of remarkable force, sensitively obedient to principles of

honest government and bold in his utterances, remained at the head of

a devoted band which had hitherto found its career marked by triumph

after triumph, and whose influence was still powerful enough to rally

to its standard new men of strength as well as old leaders flushed

with recent victories. Robinson's courageous words especially engaged

the attention of thoughtful Democrats. He did not need to give reasons

for the opposition to John Bigelow, or the grievance against Charles

S. Fairchild, whose court docket sufficiently exposed the antagonism

between canal contractors and the faithful prosecutor. But in his

fascinating manner he told the story of the Attorney-General's heroic

firmness in refusing to release Tweed.[1590] In Robinson's opinion the

vicious classes, whose purposes discovered themselves in the

depredations of rings and weakness for plunder, were arrayed against

the better element of the party which had temporarily deprived the

wrong-doers of power, and he appealed to his friends to rescue

administrative reform from threatened defeat.

[Footnote 1590: "The man who has been the most effective organiser of

corruption strikes boldly for release. He is arrayed as an element in

the combination which attacks the Governor and Democratic State

officers, and which seeks to reverse their policy."--Albany _Argus_,

October 4, 1877.]

The Governor was not unmindful of his weakness. Besides Tilden's loss

of prestige, the renomination of the old ticket encountered the

objection of a third term, aroused the personal antagonism of hundreds

of men who had suffered because of its zeal, and arrayed against it

all other influences that had become hostile to Tilden through envy or

otherwise during his active management of the party. Moreover, he

understood the cunning of John Kelly and the intrigue of his

lieutenants. Knowing that contesting delegations excluded precincts

from taking part in the temporary organisation, these men had sought

to weaken Tilden by creating fictitious contests in counties loyal to

him, thus offsetting John Morrissey's contest against Tammany. It was

a desperate struggle, and the only gleam of light that opened a way to

Tilden's continued success came from the action of the State

Committee, which gave David B. Hill of Chemung 19 votes for temporary

chairman to 14 for Clarkson N. Potter of New York. The victory,

ordinarily meaning the control of the Committee on Credentials,

restored hope if not confidence.

Hill was the friend of Robinson. Although his name had not then become

a household word, he was by no means unknown throughout the State. He

had come into public life as city attorney in 1864 at the age of

twenty-one, and had shown political instincts for the most part

admirable. Of those to go to the Assembly in 1871 to aid in the work

of judicial purification, Hill was suggested by O'Conor and Tilden as

one of the trustworthy lawyers, and in February, 1872, when the

legislative committee began its investigation into the charges

presented by the Bar Association against Judges Barnard, Cardozo,

Ingraham, and McCunn with a view to their impeachment, Hill sat by the

side of Tilden. It was recognised that he belonged to the coterie of

able men who stood at the front of the reform movement.

His personal habits, too, commended him. He seems to have been

absolved from the love of wine, and if the love of a good woman did

not win him, he created a substantial home among his books, and worked

while others feasted. He talked easily, he learned readily, and with

the earnestness of one who inherited an ambition for public life he

carefully equipped himself for a political as well as a professional

career. He had a robust, straightforward nature. Men liked his

courage, his earnestness, his effectiveness as a debater, and his

declared purposes which were thoroughly in unison with the spirit of

his party. But it was his boldness, tempered with firmness, which

justified Robinson in singling him out for chairman. Still, the

courage exhibited as a presiding officer in one of the stormiest

conventions that ever assembled in the Empire State did not win him

distinction.

The Kelly opposition raised no question of principle. The platform

denounced the defeat of Tilden as due to fraud, applauded Hayes for

his Southern policy, declared for reapportionment of the State, and

bitterly assailed railroad subsidies. But it had no words of

unkindness for Tilden and Robinson. Indeed, with a most sublime

display of hypocrisy, Kelly pointed with pride to the fruits of their

administrations, made illustrious by canal reforms, economy, and the

relentless prosecution of profligate boards and swindling contractors,

and vied with the apostles of administrative reform in calling them

"fearless" and "honest," and in repudiating the suggestion of desiring

other directing spirits. His only issue involved candidates. Should it

be the old ticket or a new one? Should it be Bigelow for a third term,

or Beach, the choice of the ring? In opposing the old ticket several

delegates extended their hostility only to Bigelow; others included

the attorney-general. Only a few demanded an entire change. But

Tammany and the Canal ring tactfully combined these various elements

with a skill never before excelled in a State convention. Their

programme, sugar-coated with an alleged affection for Tilden, was

arranged to satisfy the whim of each delegate, while Robinson's

policy, heavily freighted with well doing, encountered the odium of a

third-term ticket.

Nevertheless, the Governor's control of the chairmanship assured him

victory unless Hill yielded too much. But Kelly was cunning and quick.

After accepting Hill without dissent, he introduced a resolution

providing that the convention select the committee on contested seats.

To appoint this committee was the prerogative of the chairman, and

Hill, following Cornell's bold ruling in 1871, could have refused to

put the motion. When he hesitated delegates sprang to their feet and

enthroned pandemonium.[1591] During the cyclone of epithets and

invective John Morrissey for the last time opposed John Kelly in a

State convention. His shattered health, which had already changed

every lineament of a face that successfully resisted the blows of

Yankee Sullivan and John C. Heenan, poorly equipped him for the

prolonged strain of such an encounter, but he threw his envenomed

adjectives with the skill of a quoit-pitcher.

[Footnote 1591: "How the Kelly faction got control of the Democratic

convention and used it for the supposed benefit of Kelly is hardly

worth trying to tell. A description of the intrigues of a parcel of

vulgar tricksters is neither edifying nor entertaining reading."--The

_Nation_, October 11, 1877.]

Distributed about the hall were William Purcell, DeWitt C. West,

George M. Beebe, John D. Townsend, and other Tammany talkers, who had

a special aptitude for knockdown personalities which the metropolitan

side of a Democratic convention never failed to understand. Their loud

voices, elementary arguments, and simple quotations neither strained

the ears nor puzzled the heads of the audience, while their jibes and

jokes, unmistakable in meaning, sounded familiar and friendly.

Townsend, a lawyer of some prominence and counsel for Kelly, was an

effective and somewhat overbearing speaker, who had the advantage of

being sure of everything, and as he poured out his eloquence in

language of unmeasured condemnation of Morrissey, he held attention if

he did not enlighten with distracting novelty.

Morrissey admitted he was wild in his youth, adding in a tone of

sincere penitence that if he could live his life over he would change

many things for which he was very sorry. "But no one, not even Tweed

who hates me," he exclaimed, pointing his finger across the aisle in

the direction of Kelly, "ever accused me of being a thief."

Morrissey's grammar was a failure. He clipped his words, repeated his

phrases, and lacked the poise of a public speaker, but his opponents

did not fail to understand what he meant. His eloquence was like that

of an Indian, its power being in its sententiousness, which probably

came from a limited vocabulary.

At the opening of the convention Robinson's forces had a clear

majority,[1592] but in the presence of superior generalship, which

forced a roll-call before the settlement of contests, Tammany and the

Canal ring, by a vote of 169 to 114, passed into control. To Tilden's

friends it came as the death knell of hope, while their opponents,

wild with delight, turned the convention into a jubilee. "This is the

first Democratic triumph in the Democratic party since 1873," said

Jarvis Lord of Monroe. "It lets in the old set."[1593]

[Footnote 1592: New York _Tribune_, October 4, 1877.]

[Footnote 1593: New York _Tribune_, October 4.

"The defeat of Bigelow and Fairchild will be the triumph of the

reactionists who think that the golden era of the State was in the

days before thieves were chastised and driven out of the Capital and

State House."--Albany _Argus_, October 4, 1877.]

The adoption of the Credentials Committee's report seated Tammany,

made Clarkson N. Potter permanent chairman, and turned over the party

machine. Pursuing their victory the conquerors likewise nominated a

new ticket.[1594] Quarter was neither asked nor offered. Robinson had

squarely raised the issue that refusal to continue the old officials

would be repudiation of reform, and his friends, as firmly united in

defeat as in victory, voted with a calm indifference to the threats of

the allied power of canal ring and municipal corruptionists. Indeed,

their boast of going down with colours flying supplemented the

vigorous remark of the Governor that there could be no compromise with

Tweed and canal thieves.[1595]

[Footnote 1594: Secretary of State, Allen C. Beach, Jefferson;

Comptroller, Frederick P. Olcott, Albany; Treasurer, James Mackin,

Dutchess; Attorney-General, Augustus Schoonmaker, Jr., Ulster;

Engineer, Horatio Seymour, Jr., Oneida.

On October 6, a convention of Labor Reformers, held at Troy, nominated

a State ticket with John J. Junio for Secretary of State. The

Prohibition and Greenback parties also nominated State officers, Henry

Hagner and Francis E. Spinner being their candidates for secretary of

state. The Social Democrats likewise presented a ticket with James

McIntosh at its head.]

[Footnote 1595: New York _Tribune_, October 4.]

This apparently disastrous result encouraged the hope that

Republicans, in spite of Conkling's indiscretion at Rochester, might

profit by it as they did in 1871. Upon the surface Republican

differences did not indicate bitterness. Except in the newspapers no

organised opposition to the Senator had appeared, and the only mass

meeting called to protest against the action of the Rochester

convention appealed for harmony and endorsed the Republican

candidates.[1596] Even Curtis, the principal speaker, although

indulging in some trenchant criticism, limited his remarks to a

defence of the Administration. Nevertheless, the presence of William

J. Bacon, congressman from the Oneida district, who voiced an intense

admiration for the President and his policies, emphasised the fact

that the Senator's home people had elected a Hayes Republican. Indeed,

the Senator deemed it essential to establish an organ, and in October

(1877) the publication of the Utica _Republican_ began under the

guidance of Lewis Lawrence, an intimate friend. It lived less than two

years, but while it survived it reflected the thoughts and feelings of

its sponsor.[1597]

[Footnote 1596: This meeting was held in New York City on October 10.

See New York papers of the 11th.]

[Footnote 1597: "The Utica _Republican_ is an aggressive sheet. It

calls George William Curtis 'the Apostle of Swash.'"--New York

_Tribune_, October 27.]

The campaign presented several confusing peculiarities. Governor

Robinson in his letter to a Tammany meeting refused to mention the

Democratic candidates, and Tilden, after returning from Europe,

expressed the belief in his serenade speech that "any nominations that

did not promise coöperation in the reform policy which I had the

honour to inaugurate and which Governor Robinson is consummating will

be disowned by the Democratic masses."[1598] This was a body-blow to

the Ring. Its well-directed aim also struck the ticket with telling

effect, for its election involved the discontinuance of Fairchild's

spirited canal prosecutions. On the other hand, the adoption of the

recent amendment, substituting for the canal commission a

superintendent of public works to be appointed by the Governor, made

the election of Olcott and Seymour especially desirable, since it

would give Robinson and his reforms stronger support than Tilden had

in the State board. Yet it could not be denied that the success of the

Albany ticket would be construed as a defeat of Tilden's ascendency.

[Footnote 1598: _Ibid._, November 2.]

Similar confusion possessed the Republican mind. A large body of men,

resenting the Rochester convention's covert condemnation of the

President's policies, hesitated to vote for candidates whose victory

would be attributed to Republican opposition to the Administration.

This singular political situation made a very languid State campaign.

An extra session of Congress called Conkling to Washington, Tilden

retired to Gramercy Park, the German-Independent organisation limited

its canvass to the metropolis, and the candidates of neither ticket

got a patient hearing. Other causes contributed to the Republican

dulness. Old leaders became inactive and government officials refused

to give money because of their interpretation of the President's civil

service order, while rawness and indifference made newer leaders

inefficient. After the October collapse in Ohio conditions became

hopelessly discouraging.[1599] The tide set more heavily in favour of

the Democracy, and each discordant Republican element, increasing its

distrust, practically ceased work lest the other profit by it.

[Footnote 1599: Democrats elected a governor by 22,520 plurality and

carried the Legislature by forty on joint ballot.--Appleton's

_Cyclopædia_, 1877, p. 621.]

Nevertheless, the hunt for State senators, involving the election of a

United States Senator in 1879, provoked animated contests which

centred about the candidacy of John Morrissey, whom Republicans and

the combined anti-Tammany factions backed with spirit. Morrissey had

carried the Tweed district for senator in 1874, and the taunt that no

other neighbourhood would elect a notorious gambler and graduate of

the prize-ring goaded him into opposing Augustus Schell in one of the

fashionable districts of the metropolis. Schell had the advantage of

wealth, influence, long residence in the precinct, and the

enthusiastic support of Kelly, who turned the contest into a battle

for the prestige of victory. For the moment the fierceness of the

fight excited the hopes of Republicans that the State might be

carried, and to spread the influence of the warring Democratic

factions into all sections of the commonwealth, Republican journals

made a combined attack upon Allen C. Beach.

Like Sanford E. Church, Beach was a courteous, good-natured

politician, who tried to keep company with a canal ring and keep his

reputation above reproach. But his character did not refine under the

tests imposed upon it. His policy of seeming to know nothing had

resulted in doubling the cost of canal repairs during his four years

in office. A careful analysis of his record showed that only once did

he vote against the most extravagant demands of the predatory

contractors. This did not prove him guilty of corruption, "but when as

the steady servant of the canal ring," it was asked, "he voted

thousands and thousands of dollars, sometimes at the rate of a hundred

thousand a day, into the pockets of men whom he knew to be thieves,

and on claims which he must have known were full of fraud, was he not

lending himself to corruption?"[1600] This charge his opponents

circulated through many daily and scores of weekly papers, making the

weakness of his character appear more objectionable.

[Footnote 1600: New York _Tribune_, November 3, 1877.]

To these attacks Beach affected an indifference which he did not

really feel, for the pride of a candidate who desires the respect of

his neighbours is not flattered by their distrust of his integrity.

Church had felt the iron enter his soul, and had Tilden and the

reformers rearoused the moral awakening that refused to tolerate the

Chief Justice in 1874, Beach must have fallen the victim of his

partiality to a coterie of political associates willing to benefit at

the expense of his ruin. As it was he received a plurality of 11,000,

while Seymour and Olcott, his associates upon the ticket, obtained

35,000 and 36,000 respectively.[1601]

[Footnote 1601: Total vote of John J. Junio (Labour Reformer), 20,282;

Henry Hagner (Prohibitionist), 7,230; John McIntosh (Social Democrat),

1,799; Francis E. Spinner (Greenback), 997.--Appleton's _Cyclopædia_,

1877, p. 566.]

The election of State senators in which Conkling had so vital an

interest exhibited the work of influential Hayes Republicans, who,

openly desiring his destruction, defeated his candidates in Brooklyn,

Rochester, and Utica.[1602] Nevertheless, by carrying eighteen of the

thirty-two districts he saved fighting ground for himself in the

succeeding year.[1603] Indeed, he was able to point to the popular vote

and declare that he was as strong in New York as the President was in

Ohio. It was known, too, that if Morrissey survived, the Senator would

profit by the prize-fighter's remarkable majority of nearly 4,000 over

Augustus Schell, a victory which ranked as the crowning achievement of

the senatorial campaign.[1604] But Morrissey, prostrated by his

exertions, did not live to reciprocate. He spent the winter in Florida

and the early spring in Saratoga. Finally, after the loss of speech,

his right arm, which had so severely punished Yankee Sullivan, became

paralysed, and on May 1 (1878) Lieutenant-governor Dorsheimer

announced his death to the Senate. "It is doubtful," added a colleague

in eulogy, "if such boldness and daring in political annals were ever

shown as he displayed in his last canvass."[1605]

[Footnote 1602: "We elected our district attorney by 2,336 majority,

but the candidate for State senator, who was known to represent

Senator Conkling, although personally popular and most deserving, was

beaten by 1,133.... It is fair to say that the unpopularity of the

federal office-holders, who are Mr. Conkling's most zealous

supporters, is in part the cause of this remarkable result." Interview

of Ellis H. Roberts.--New York _Tribune_, November 10, 1877.

"The energies of all the opposition to me were concentrated upon that

district. I believe Tammany and the lofty coterie of Republican

gentlemen in this city (New York) threw money into my district to

carry it against me.... Had we been sufficiently aroused and sagacious

we could have defeated this manoeuvre, but we found out too late. We

sent the tickets to the polls, in the ward in which I live, at

daylight, as did the Democrats. Not one of our tickets was found at

the polls. They were all thrown into the canal." Interview with

Conkling.--New York _Herald_, November 9, 1877.]

[Footnote 1603: The Legislature of 1878 had in the Senate: 18

Republicans, 13 Democrats, 1 Independent; in the Assembly: 66

Republicans, 61 Democrats, 1 Independent.]

[Footnote 1604: Tammany elected its entire county ticket. Its majority

for the State ticket was 30,520.]

[Footnote 1605: New York _Times_, May 2, 1878.]

A Political History of the State of New York, Volumes 1-3 · 第 29 / 38 章