GUBERNATORIAL BATTLES
I
The Democratic leaders in Indiana approached the campaign of 1900 with a
feeling of considerable pessimism. The disaffected element which had
left the party in 1896 on the money issue had not yet returned to the
fold, and it seemed improbable that the white-heat enthusiasm of Mr.
Bryan’s following in his first campaign could be maintained. The
election of 1898 had brought no rift in the clouds, and the party in
power seemed hopelessly entrenched. With conditions prosperous, our
armies but recently victorious, our possessions increased through the
acquisition of Porto Rico and the Philippines, with all the pomp and
circumstances of a national triumph with an enemy waving the flag, the
Democratic party was about to make its appeal to the people on an
abstract question of political morals. We were to discuss the wrongs of
a people thousands of miles distant, of another race and color, of whom
hundreds of thousands of Americans had never heard. And while these
wrongs could not inevitably react upon our own people the practical
politician and psychologist of the stump was painfully conscious of the
difficulty of making that point sufficiently impressive. Under these
circumstances there was no great demand for places on the state ticket,
and as late as the first of May no one had manifested any desire to lead
the party as its candidate for governor. About the first of May, Frank
B. Burke announced his candidacy. He was in many respects one of the
most remarkable men in the political history of the state, at times
under the proper inspiration thrillingly eloquent, courageous as a lion,
and possessed of a personality that endeared him to friend and foe
alike. As United States district attorney under Cleveland he had won the
admiration of the bench and bar and made an impression upon the people
in the streets. But with all his splendid qualities he was lacking in
one of the essentials of safe leadership--he was utterly deficient in
tact and always preferred a fight to a compromise. In brief he was a
genius with all that that sometimes implies of weakness.
At that time I was writing editorials on _The Sentinel_, and, being one
of Burke’s youthful idolaters, I wrote a fervent editorial eulogy on the
day of his announcement and took it to Samuel E. Morss, the editor and
former consul-general to Paris, for his approval. He read it with
evident amusement and tactfully suggested that while Mr. Burke was a
brilliant and able man, there might be other candidates and it would not
be advisable for _The Sentinel_ to take such a pronounced stand that
early. I did not know at the time, being scarcely out of my teens, that
the “organization” forces were bending every effort to persuade Mr. Kern
to enter the lists. The first choice of the organization was Mayor
Taggart, who persisted in his refusal to make the race. It was then that
the politicians turned to Kern.
Independent of politicians associated with what may be described as “the
organization” were scores of Democrats throughout the state, personal
friends and admirers of Mr. Kern, who were insisting that he become a
candidate. He had made up his mind definitely that he would not. Aside
from the unattractiveness of the political prospects he had personal
reasons for preferring to stay out. But with the announcement of Burke,
who was not popular with the “organization,” and the resulting necessity
for an early challenge of his candidacy, the forces at that time
predominate in the Democratic party in the state centered with practical
unanimity upon Kern.
On the evening of May 15 _The Indianapolis News_ carried the item that
“Last night influential Democrats were in conference at the home of
Samuel E. Morss, editor of _The Sentinel_, until after midnight, and it
is taken for granted that they were discussing the platform on which
Kern will conduct his campaign.”
It was not the first time that newspapers have misinterpreted the
purpose of a conference of
[Illustration: KERN’S SPEAKING POSTURE
Taken while addressing the people at the monument, Indianapolis, by
Leslie Nagley, staff photographer, _Indianapolis Times_]
politicians. Mr. Morss, who aspired to be something of a Warrick, and
whose ability and prestige as the editor of the state organ of his party
gave him considerable influence in party councils determined to force
the issue upon Kern, and with that in view he invited about twenty
prominent party leaders to a dinner at his home. Among those invited was
Mr. Kern. The victim of the dinner tenaciously held out against the
insistence of his friends, until toward midnight he was being charged
with being a party ingrate for his refusal to respond to the demand. It
had been the hope of Mr. Morss that a formal announcement could be
prepared that night for _The Sentinel_ of the following morning, but it
was not until the party broke up and Mr. Kern had been followed into the
street with importunities that he finally agreed to be a candidate. It
was then too late to prepare a formal announcement, but the wily Morss,
in probable fear of a recantation on the morrow, took the precaution to
announce in the paper the next morning that “in answer to a direct
question,” Mr. Kern had said that he would be a candidate. On the
following day he did prepare a short formal statement announcing his
candidacy.
The contest for the nomination was one-sided. All the organization
forces were with Kern. He and Burke attended a number of county
conventions, and the latter made many warm admirers by the remarkable
eloquence with which he assailed the imperialism of the hour. Mr. Kern
found himself in the position of being “the machine candidate” and had
to stand the brunt of that. At the eleventh hour, with all the delegates
in Indianapolis and a large part of them crowded into the corridors of
the Grand Hotel, a new element was injected into the situation, when
Benjamin F. Shively, who had been the nominee in 1896, entered the lobby
and was greeted with great enthusiasm. He had made a brilliant canvass
four years before. A man of imposing presence, tall and slender, and
dressed that night in a light gray suit which served to accentuate his
physical advantages, it is not surprising that his appearance carried
with it the suggestion of a third candidate. The fact that he went to
his room immediately and into conference and refused to be interviewed
gave color to the rumors afloat that he would be a candidate. This was
set at rest, however, on the morrow, when the chairman of the convention
read a letter from Shively positively removing himself from
consideration. It required one ballot to nominate and Kern was an easy
victor. It was in moving that the nomination be made unanimous that
Burke thrilled the convention with what was perhaps the most moving bit
of oratory ever heard in Indiana.
It is needless here to review the campaign which followed. It began with
imperialism, the paramount issue following Mr. Bryan’s remarkable
arraignment in his speech of acceptance at Indianapolis, but other
issues such as the tariff and the trusts soon entered, and throughout
the campaign Kern discussed them all together with state issues that now
have no historic interest. The only incident of special interest was the
attempt of the Republican papers to create divisions in the Democracy by
circulating the report that the friends of Kern were engaged in an
effort to trade off Bryan for him. This, of course, was a peculiarly
mean and malicious falsehood and was denounced by Kern as “an atrocious
lie.” It is true that Kern did run a little ahead of the national
ticket, but this was due to local conditions, personal friendships, and
the fact that some conservative Democrats who had left the party in 1896
and did not vote the national ticket in 1900 voted for Kern. The entire
ticket was defeated--Kern had made his sacrifice and it was not to be
his last.
II
Before describing Mr. Kern’s second race for governor in 1904 it is
necessary to a proper appreciation of his political character to refer
to a few events of the intervening four years, one of which served to
definitely fix his political status not only in Indiana but in the
nation. While his tendencies had always been progressive and his
instincts had always impelled him to battle for the under dog, we have
seen that the startling, revolutionary incidents of the national
convention of 1896 had momentarily threatened to divert him from his
natural course. He had not comprehended instantly the momentous meaning
of that revolution. And while his party loyalty had never wavered he had
been ranked among Indiana politicians as a conservative. He had become a
warm supporter of Mr. Bryan before the campaign of 1900, but henceforth
he was to burn all bridges behind him and stand forth quite frankly not
only as a progressive, but as a radical. In doing so, however, he was
inclined at all times to hold forth the olive branch to those who had
left the party in 1896.
In the December following the election he was given an opportunity to
develop his point of view, and under circumstances calculated to attract
national attention. It was the occasion of the annual dinner given by
the Jefferson Club of Lincoln, Nebraska, to Mr. Bryan, an event of the
greatest political significance. While several speakers of national
prominence were on the program, “the eloquent and stalwart Democratic
leader of Indiana,” as he was described by _The Omaha World-Herald_, was
easily the feature of the evening aside from the guest of honor. By
attending the dinner he had conclusively cast his political fortunes
with that of the great Commoner, and in his speech of this occasion he
left no doubt as to his position. Beginning with a reference to the
natural conservatism of the Indiana Democracy and the policy of
Hendricks to always conciliate party differences when it could be done
without a compromise of principles, he continued:
“But while the Democratic party of Indiana is still the
conservative party it was in the days of Hendricks, ready now as
then to strive to find common ground upon which all Democrats who
believe in constitutional government may stand in coming conflicts,
it is to-day holding no parley with deserters. Its ears are closed
against words of advice gratuitously offered by alleged Democrats
who vote the Republican ticket, or by those who in the struggle of
1900 withheld both voice and vote from the cause of the people and
could see in that mighty contest only ‘a painful and distressing
situation.’
“During the next four years the best thought and most conscientious
effort of Democratic leadership should be exerted to bring about
complete harmony within our ranks, and a perfect union of all
forces opposed to the revolutionary schemes of the party in power.
“In this intervening period the work of organization and education
should not be neglected, but should be carried on in every precinct
of the union. There is no occasion for crimination or recrimination
as between Democrats, but there should always be a generous and
patriotic rivalry as to who will render the most effective service
in the work of building up the party organization and
strengthening the party lines for the coming conflict.”
Referring then in terms of commendation of the action of men like Olney,
Cockran and Watterson in returning to the party in the campaign of 1900,
he continued:
“And these men, and all others who had faltered in the campaign of
1896 because of economic questions involved, received a most royal
welcome on their return to the Democratic household. It is in no
spirit of bitterness that I add that there were a few men, once
prominent in the Democratic ranks, who in the midst of all the
stirring scenes of this mighty contest remained unmoved and silent,
except that now and then they took occasion to furnish aid and
comfort to the enemy by making public denial that they were in
sympathy with the cause of the people. For the sake of the future
welfare of the party I shall attempt no harsh criticism of the
course of these gentlemen, but I will not forbear saying here and
everywhere that alleged Democrats who could not afford to stand
with Bryan, Cockran and Watterson in a contest between imperialism
and republicanism, between tariff for revenue and protection,
between monopoly and the people, and between plutocracy and
democracy, need not be surprised if any gratuitous counsel which
they may seek to thrust upon the millions of loyal Democrats who
fought the good fight and kept the faith shall fall upon reluctant
ears.”
Continuing he predicted that the fight in 1904 would be based upon the
demand “that the encroachments of the great financial and industrial
monopolies upon the rights of the people shall cease and that
legislation shall be enacted that will strip them of the power to
control the political destiny of the nation.” He followed this with a
bitter denunciation of these powerful interests for their brazen resort
to coercion and intimidation in both the campaigns of 1896 and 1900, and
concluded with a tribute to Mr. Bryan which carried a prophecy:
“I want to say to all men who are interesting themselves in party
organization or reorganization that any attempt in any quarter, at
any time, to belittle the splendid and heroic service rendered in
1896 and 1900 by that magnificent leader and tribune of the
people--William Jennings Bryan--or to cast stigma or reproach upon
him, in any degree, however slight, will meet with stern and quick
rebuke from the millions of Democrats who followed his banner in
those memorable contests.”
The speech of Kern aroused his hearers to a high pitch of enthusiasm,
and called forth comment and speculation in political circles over the
country. The Washington correspondent of _The Indianapolis Journal_
interpreted the speech to mean that the speaker “has been selected by
Colonel Bryan as his choice for the presidential nomination in 1904,”
and said “Kern must now be reckoned among the possible candidates for
the presidential nomination four years hence.”
One thing the speech did do--it put Kern to the fore, in the minds of
the masses, as the chief lieutenant of Mr. Bryan in Indiana, and he was
destined to hold this position until his death. It thoroughly
established him in the leadership of the masses of the party, and when
the state convention met in 1902 he was chosen to deliver the “keynote”
speech. This address, harmonizing in spirit with that at Lincoln, dealt
with the problems of imperialism, the destruction of the Boer republics
through the connivance of the national administration, the ship subsidy
measure for which Senator Fairbanks, a candidate for re-election, had
voted, the Dingley law and the trusts. It was in this speech that he
touched upon one of the scandals of the Spanish-American war--the
wholesale distribution of officers’ commissions among the sons of the
rich and the politically influential without regard to qualification.
Fifteen years later and in private conversation I heard him discussing
this scandal and in language indicative of the sincerity of his disgust.
After referring in his speech to an attempt by the son of an Indiana
millionaire, who had been thus honored and had afterward left the
Democratic party, he said:
“I reflected as I listened to his tirade, delivered with all the
zeal of a new convert and the malice of an apostate, that the
Democratic party is the soldiers’ truest friend; that when the war
with Spain was inaugurated the Democratic party believed that the
soldiers who for years had served their country and endured the
hardships of drill and camp life on the frontier, looking forward
to a promotion--the soldiers’ only reward of merit--should receive
the commissions of captain and lieutenant, which were about to be
distributed with a lavish hand. Those brave boys had waited long
and served their country faithfully, and now hopefully looked for
recognition, but while they were in the trenches and on the march a
force in the rear was at work against them. The sons of
millionaires, senators and congressmen--men with a political pull,
who had never seen an hour of military service, were preferred, and
received the commissions, and the soldier boys waited on, and in
the ranks, fought on and won new glory and honor for their
country.”
This speech was published as a campaign document and scattered broadcast
over the state. On the stump that fall Mr. Kern participated in his
sixteenth campaign, in demand all over the state. No Democrat stood
higher in Indiana; no Indiana Democrat stood so high in party circles in
the country. Such was his political status when the forces began to line
up for the campaign of 1904.
III
In the late winter of 1903 there was a general feeling of optimism among
Democrats everywhere. The greater portion of the men who had left the
party in 1896 had returned to the fold. The bitterness incidental to
their leaving had been mellowed by time. Mr. Roosevelt, who had
succeeded to the Presidency on the assassination of McKinley, had never
been popular with the working forces of his party, and in the role of
the proverbial bull in the china shop he was keeping business in such a
state of constant agitation that there was a general feeling that this
element, which had been the most potential enemy of the Democratic party
in the two previous presidential campaigns, would take revenge upon him
by throwing its influence to the Democracy. Mr. Bryan had made it clear
that he would not be a candidate, thus leaving the field clear for other
men. Acting upon the theory that a man unknown in national politics
would probably possess more strength than one with a record to defend,
and that this man should be found in the state of New York, an
organization was perfected to urge the nomination of Alton B. Parker, an
able lawyer, with an unblemished political career, and a distinguished
record as a jurist. The majority of the Indiana leaders took kindly to
the suggestion, even the venerable David Turpie breaking his rule of
silence to bestow upon it his hearty commendation. The candidacy of
Judge Parker made a personal appeal to Mr. Kern. While in Europe in 1895
he had stopped for some time at the same hotel in London where the New
York lawyer was staying, and a personal friendship had resulted which
had been strengthened by occasional meetings in the nine years
intervening. Thus it was that he had become a strong partisan of the
Parker candidacy.
But Judge Parker was not to have the Indiana delegation without a
contest. William Randolph Hearst, the journalist, and a
multi-millionaire, became a candidate and immediately set to work with
the liberal use of money to build up a strong organization in every
state. Perhaps we shall never know how much was spent, but if as much
money was expended elsewhere as in Indiana a liberal fortune was
squandered. At no time did Mr. Bryan manifest the slightest interest in
Hearst’s candidacy, and it was well known that he looked with
considerable distrust upon the sincerity of the editor’s progressive
protestations. He was able to appeal, however, to many locally
influential Democrats who were attracted by his radicalism, and had not
failed to be impressed with the support given Mr. Bryan in his papers at
a time when few metropolitan papers were not picturing the Nebraskan as
an anarchist and a repudiationist. These sincere men--and among them
were many who were then and afterward among Mr. Kern’s most valued
personal and political friends--were augmented by the sordid and
disreputable element of the larger centers of population. Agents
authorized to spend money lavishly were sent out over the state to
capture the delegations to the state convention that was to meet in May
for the exclusive purpose of electing delegates to the national
convention. The result was the creation of an intense feeling.
In the state delegate convention the contest was bitter, the speakers on
both sides being interrupted with jeers and insults. Mr. Kern, who had
taken a positive position for Parker, while addressing the convention in
his behalf, was interrupted with the threat--“You need never ask for
anything again.” Thoroughly aroused, he replied that “threats like that
from men higher up in the Hearst crowd have been made, but I have no
fear of Hearst or the Hearst papers.” The convention resulted in the
selection of a Parker delegation, but the contest left behind some
bitter scars. The prospects of the party in Indiana had been
compromised.
This might have been smoothed over before the election but for the
incidents in the national convention, the insulting attitude toward Mr.
Bryan, the advertisement of the rejection of all his suggestions, the
blatant anti-Bryan attitude of some of the Parker forces, and all
climaxed by the telegram of Judge Parker after his nomination declaring
that he would run only with the distinct understanding that he stood for
the gold standard. No Indiana Democrat will ever forget the stunning
effect of that telegram when it was flashed upon the bulletins. It
practically assured the state to the Republicans, for it was interpreted
by the rank and file of Mr. Bryan’s followers as a direct insult to
their idol.
Such was the situation, misunderstood by few, as the convention
approached in August for the nomination of a state ticket. The dearth of
aspirants for places on the ticket told the story. No one expressed the
slightest desire for the gubernatorial nomination, and again, as had
come to be its wont, the party turned to Kern.
To all such suggestions he gave a stern denial--and yet he finally
agreed to make his second sacrifice. It was the fashion among his
enemies during his lifetime to refer to Mr. Kern as a persistent office
seeker, a “perpetual candidate,” when, as a matter of historic truth, he
seldom sought a nomination and in most instances was forced by
tremendous pressure from his party to accept nominations his judgment
warned him against.
He became a candidate for governor in 1904 on the earnest personal
request of Judge Parker, the presidential nominee of his party.
Having always understood this to be the case, I personally appealed to
Judge Parker for the facts, and the following letter to me definitely
settles the matter:
“My first acquaintance with John Kern began in London in 1895. We
both happened to be stopping at the same hotel, and, as we knew
about each other, we soon came together and formed a friendship
that I always treasured.
“The story that you have heard from time to time, as you stated,
that I requested Mr. Kern to accept the nomination for governor of
Indiana in 1904 is quite true. But I did this only after seeing
quite a number of the leading Democrats of the state. Without
exception, these men said that Mr. Kern would be the very strongest
man that the party could nominate. But some of them, and I think it
is no exaggeration to say that all of them were of the opinion that
he would much prefer not to make the race. Reaching the conclusion
that his nomination would strengthen the party in the state, I
telegraphed him, asking him to visit me, which he did, at my home.
After discussing the party situation in the state with him, as I
had with many others from the state, I told him that without
exception every man I had seen from Indiana had said that he would
be the strongest nominee that the party could find, and hence I
ventured to urge him to accept the nomination if the convention
should, as I believed it would, tender it to him unanimously. The
result you know.”
Having responded to the personal request, which as a good party man he
considered a command from the commanding officer of his party in that
campaign, Mr. Kern plunged into the campaign with his usual zeal and
made a thorough canvass of the state. The extent of the Republican
landslide that year is a matter of history. Kern had made his second
sacrifice.