He and Cleveland were both made the targets of flagrant scandals, and
when the Cleveland scandal was sent to Blaine in the early part of
the contest, instead of peremptorily forbidding its use as a campaign
factor, as would have been most wise, he sent it to his national
committee, and it was given publicity. The Blaine scandal was sent
to Cleveland early in the fight, and he at once gave notice to those
in charge of his campaign that any personal scandals against Blaine
should not have the sanction of the Democratic organization. Blaine
never would have committed such a mistake if he had been managing a
Presidential campaign for another, and had he been such responsible
manager, he never would have permitted a libel suit to be instituted
against a newspaper publisher for any scandal, however false and
malignant. He was a man of intense earnestness, and the intensity of
his interest in his own election for the Presidency unbalanced his
judgment and made him often the creature of impulse when he should have
been most dispassionate and philosophical. The scandals did not affect
a thousand votes out of the many millions cast for President, and
Blaine suffered vastly more than Cleveland, because he dignified the
scandal against himself by legal proceedings for defamation. The fact
that he voluntarily discontinued the suit after the election is the
best evidence of the error committed against himself.
Charles A. Dana, then editor of the New York _Sun_, became estranged
from Mr. Cleveland the year before the Presidential election of 1884.
He had earnestly supported Cleveland for Governor in 1882, but when a
movement was made by Mr. Manning to organize the State for Cleveland
in 1884 Dana was implacable in his opposition. I met him several times
before Cleveland was nominated, and he always discussed the question
with an unusual degree of acrimony. He believed that Cleveland was not
available; that he was unworthy of the position, and that if nominated
he would be overwhelmingly defeated. He gave me no reason for his
changed relations with Cleveland, and I did not learn the true cause
until after Cleveland had been elected President.
Soon after Cleveland’s nomination I was spending a few days at
Saratoga, and was watching Dana’s paper with much interest, for he was
very much disgruntled. He did not at first declare himself aggressively
against Cleveland’s election, but one morning at Saratoga, in taking up
the Sun, I found one of Dana’s terrible deliverances against Cleveland,
that left no possible chance for a reconciliation. I telegraphed to
Mr. Dana and asked him to meet me at his office at three o’clock that
afternoon, and called there on my way home. Mr. Dana had gone too far
to recede, but I tried to temper his bitterness, as I thought it would
do great harm, not only to Cleveland, but to his own newspaper as well,
then one of the most prosperous in the country.
Mr. Dana was petulant and violent in his expressions against Cleveland,
and said that he had decided to support General Butler, who was the
candidate of the Labor-Socialistic element, and who, he said, would
receive not less than 25,000 votes in New York City. I told him that
Butler might receive 2500, and if there were 25,000 disgruntled
Democrats who wanted to defeat Cleveland, they would certainly vote for
Blaine.
The result was about as I had predicted. Butler received only a few
thousand votes, and Dana and his following, while ostensibly supporting
Butler, voted squarely for Blaine. Dana’s paper was the most aggressive
of all the anti-Cleveland newspapers in the country, and it doubtless
exerted great influence, but not sufficient to lose Cleveland the State.
Charles A. Dana was the ablest editor ever developed by American
journalism. Horace Greeley was more pungent and telling in his
political articles, and Henry Watterson is more brilliant, but Charles
A. Dana was the strongest editorial writer this country has ever
produced. He was versatile, powerful, and elegant, but an unfortunate
personal estrangement made him the bitterest of Cleveland’s enemies,
and paved the way for the _Sun_ to be transformed from an out-and-out
Tammany organ to the most aggressive of Republican organs.
It was not until I met Cleveland at Albany, soon after his election,
that I learned the cause of the estrangement between Cleveland and
Dana, and the statement given by Mr. Cleveland was subsequently
confirmed by Mr. Dana. Dana had very earnestly supported Cleveland’s
nomination and election for Governor in 1882, and after the election
he wrote a personal letter to Cleveland asking the appointment of a
friend to the position of Adjutant-General. His chief purpose was to
give a position on the staff to his son, Paul Dana, who is now his
successor in the editorial chair. Cleveland received that letter as he
received thousands of other letters recommending appointments, instead
of recognizing the claim Mr. Dana had upon him for the courtesy of an
answer. Beecher had a candidate for the same position, and Cleveland
gave it to Beecher’s man without any explanation whatever to Dana, who
felt that he had been discourteously treated by Cleveland.
Mr. Dana gave no open sign of his disappointment, but some time after
Cleveland’s inauguration, when it became known that Dana felt grieved
at the Governor, some mutual friends intervened and proposed to
Cleveland that he should invite Dana to join with some acquaintances
at the Executive Mansion. To this Cleveland readily assented. Dana was
informed that Cleveland would tender such an invitation if it would
be accepted, and he promptly assented. Cleveland then became involved
in the pressing duties of the Legislature, and allowed the session
to close without extending the promised and expected invitation to
Dana. Mr. Cleveland told me that he was entirely to blame for neglect
in both instances, as Dana would doubtless have been satisfied if he
had courteously informed him of his convictions which required him to
appoint another for Adjutant-General; and he had no excuse to offer but
that of neglect for not inviting Dana to dinner.
Dana naturally assumed that Cleveland had given him deliberate affront,
and Cleveland could make no satisfactory explanation. As Governor and
as President he was first of all devoted to his official duties, which
he discharged with rare fidelity, and he gave little time even to the
common courtesies which most Governors and Presidents would recognize
as justly belonging to their friends. Efforts were made to conciliate
Dana, but he never would discuss the question, and he sacrificed half
the circulation of his paper in the campaign of 1884 in his battle
against Cleveland. When Cleveland’s election was announced, and the
Republicans were disposed to dispute the vote of New York, Dana came
out boldly and declared that Cleveland was elected and that no violent
measures should be tolerated to deprive him of the honor conferred upon
him by the people.
It is quite possible that Dana got even with Cleveland in 1888. His
paper gave a nominal support to Cleveland, but did more damage to the
Cleveland cause than any other newspaper in the country by subtle
and persistent attacks upon the administration and the party, though
never exhibiting on the surface a trace of personal hostility to
the President. The _Sun_ was then the organ of Tammany, and Tammany
certainly defeated Cleveland in 1888 by giving the State to Harrison,
when Hill, the Democratic candidate for Governor on the same ticket,
was elected by nearly 20,000. It is not a strained conclusion that Dana
defeated Cleveland’s re-election in 1888. The estrangement between Dana
and Cleveland continued, as they never met or had any intercourse.
Blaine’s nomination was possible in 1888 when Harrison was made the
candidate, but after hesitating for three days, during which time he
freely conferred by cable with his friends, as he was then in Europe,
he finally decided to decline.
His belief that he was fated not to be President was not weakened by
advancing age, and his final assent to the use of his name in 1892, at
the Minneapolis convention that renominated Harrison, was the first
exhibition of decay in one who had been a giant among the giants in
the most eventful history of the Republic. He had been a possibly
successful candidate in four national conventions; had once been
nominated and defeated, and it was a sad spectacle to see him, like a
great oak with its green boughs fall and its heart corroding from the
storms of many winters, broken in a tempest of political resentments
and in a struggle that had not so much as a silver lining to the cloud
of despair that hung over him. His nomination was hopeless; his defeat,
if nominated, inevitable, and thus ended the life tragedy of one of the
ablest, bravest, and most beloved of our public men.
THE HARRISON-CLEVELAND CONTEST
1888
The Democratic National Convention of 1888 met at St. Louis on June 5,
and it was the most perfunctory body of the kind I have ever witnessed.
I never saw a national political body so entirely devoid of enthusiasm;
yet it was entirely fixed in its purpose to renominate President
Cleveland. He appealed strongly to the convictions and judgment of the
party, but not to its affection or enthusiasm. He was nominated by
a unanimous vote without the formality of a ballot, and it had been
settled long before the convention met that the sturdy old Roman of
Ohio, ex-Senator Thurman, should be the candidate for the second place,
as Vice-President Hendricks had died in office.
[Illustration: BENJAMIN HARRISON]
Patrick A. Collins, of Massachusetts, was permanent president of the
body, and there were no questions of rules or party policy to excite
discussion. Cleveland’s nomination was unanimous, and on the single
ballot for Vice-President, Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio, had 690 votes
to 105 for Isaac B. Gray, of Indiana, and 25 for John C. Black, of
Illinois. The following platform was unanimously adopted:
The Democratic party of the United States, in national convention
assembled, renews the pledge of its fidelity to Democratic faith,
and reaffirms the platform adopted by its representatives in the
convention of 1884, and endorses the views expressed by President
Cleveland in his last earnest message to Congress as the correct
interpretation of that platform upon the question of tariff reduction;
and also endorses the efforts of our Democratic representatives in
Congress to secure a reduction of excessive taxation.
Chief among its principles of party faith are the maintenance of an
indissoluble union of free and indestructible States, now about to
enter upon its second century of unexampled progress and renown;
devotion to a plan of government regulated by a written Constitution
strictly specifying every granted power and expressly reserving to
the States or people the entire ungranted residue of power; the
encouragement of a jealous popular vigilance, directed to all who
have been chosen for brief terms to enact and execute the laws and
are charged with the duty of preserving peace, insuring equality, and
establishing justice.
The Democratic party welcomes an exacting scrutiny of the
administration of the Executive power which, four years ago, was
committed to its trusts in the election of Grover Cleveland, President
of the United States; but it challenges the most searching inquiry
concerning its fidelity and devotion to the pledges which then
invited the suffrages of the people. During a most critical period of
our financial affairs, resulting from over-taxation, the anomalous
condition of our currency, and a public debt unmatured, it has, by
the adoption of a wise and conservative policy, not only averted a
disaster, but greatly promoted the prosperity of the people. It has
reversed the improvident and unwise policy of the Republican party
touching the public domain, and has reclaimed from corporations and
syndicates, alien and domestic, and restored to the people nearly one
hundred millions of acres of valuable land to be sacredly held as
homesteads for our citizens.
While carefully guarding the interests of the taxpayers and conforming
strictly to the principles of justice and equity, it has paid out more
for pensions and bounties to the soldiers and sailors of the Republic
than was ever paid before during an equal period.
It has adopted and consistently pursued a firm and prudent foreign
policy, preserving peace with all nations, while scrupulously
maintaining all the rights and interests of our own Government and
people at home and abroad. The exclusion from our shores of Chinese
laborers has been effectually secured under the provision of a
treaty the operation of which has been postponed by the action of a
Republican majority in the Senate.
Honest reform in the civil service has been inaugurated and maintained
by President Cleveland, and he has brought the public service to the
highest standard of efficiency, not only by rule and precept, but by
the example of his own untiring and unselfish administration of public
affairs.
In every branch and department of the Government under Democratic
control the rights and welfare of all the people have been guarded and
defended; every public interest has been protected, and the equality
of all our citizens before the law, without regard to race or color,
has been steadfastly maintained.
Upon its record thus exhibited, and upon a pledge of a continuance
to the people of these benefits, the Democracy invokes a renewal of
popular trust by the re-election of a Chief Magistrate who has been
faithful, able, and prudent. We invoke, in addition to that trust, the
transfer also to the Democracy of the entire legislative power.
The Republican party controlling the Senate and resisting in both
houses of Congress a reformation of unjust and unequal tax laws which
have outlasted the necessities of war and are now undermining the
abundance of a long peace, denies to the people equality before the
law, and the fairness and the justice which are their right. Thus the
cry of American labor for a better share in the rewards of industry is
stifled with false pretences, enterprise is fettered and bound down to
home markets, capital is discouraged with doubt, and unequal, unjust
laws can neither be properly amended nor repealed. The Democratic
party will continue with all the power confided to it the struggle
to reform these laws, in accordance with the pledges of its last
platform, endorsed at the ballot-box by the suffrages of the people.
Of all the industrious freemen of our land, the immense majority,
including every tiller of the soil, gain no advantage from excessive
tax laws, but the price of nearly everything they buy is increased
by the favoritism of an unequal system of tax legislation. All
unnecessary taxation is unjust taxation. It is repugnant to the creed
of Democracy that by such taxation the cost of the necessaries of
life should be unjustifiably increased to all our people. Judged by
Democratic principles, the interests of the people are betrayed when,
by unnecessary taxation, trusts and combinations are permitted to
exist which, while unduly enriching the few that combine, rob the
body of our citizens by depriving them of the benefits of natural
competition. Every Democratic rule of governmental action is violated
when, through unnecessary taxation, a vast sum of money, far beyond
the needs of an economical administration, is drawn from the people
and the channels of trade, and accumulated as a demoralizing surplus
in the national Treasury. The money now lying idle in the Federal
Treasury, resulting from superfluous taxation, amounts to more than
one hundred and twenty-five million dollars, and the surplus collected
is reaching the sum of more than sixty millions annually. Debauched
by this immense temptation, the remedy of the Republican party is to
meet and exhaust by extravagant appropriations and expenses, whether
constitutional or not, the accumulation of extravagant taxation. The
Democratic policy is to enforce frugality in public expense, and to
abolish unnecessary taxation. Our established domestic industries and
enterprises should not, and need not, be endangered by the reduction
and correction of the burdens of taxation. On the contrary, a fair
and careful revision of our tax laws, with due allowance for the
difference between the wages of American and foreign labor, must
promote and encourage every branch of such industries and enterprises,
by giving them assurance of extended market and steady and continuous
operations in the interests of American labor, which should in no
event be neglected. The revision of our tax laws contemplated by
the Democratic party should promote the advantage of such labor, by
cheapening the cost of the necessaries of life in the home of every
workman, and at the same time securing to him steady and remunerative
employment. Upon this question of tariff reform, so closely concerning
every phase of our national life, and upon every question involved
in the problem of good government, the Democratic party submits
its principles and professions to the intelligent suffrages of the
American people.
_Resolved_, That this convention hereby endorses and recommends the
early passage of the bill for the reduction of the revenue now pending
in the House of Representatives.
_Resolved_, That a just and liberal policy should be pursued in
reference to the Territories; that right of self-government is
inherent in the people, and guaranteed under the Constitution; that
the Territories of Washington, Dakota, Montana, and New Mexico are,
by virtue of population and development, entitled to admission into
the Union as States, and we unqualifiedly condemn the course of the
Republican party in refusing Statehood and self-government to their
people.
_Resolved_, That we express our cordial sympathy with the struggling
people of all nations, in their efforts to secure for themselves the
inestimable blessings of self-government, and civil and religious
liberty, and we especially declare our sympathy with the efforts of
those noble patriots who, led by Gladstone and Parnell, have conducted
their grand and peaceful contest for home rule in Ireland.
The Republican convention met at Chicago on the 19th of June, with
M. M. Estee, of California, as permanent president. It was assumed
by the friends of Blaine in Pennsylvania, and generally throughout
the country, that he did not desire to be nominated as the Republican
candidate for President. Pennsylvania, where Blaine’s friends were
largely in the ascendency, declared in favor of Senator Sherman, of
Ohio. Senator Quay was at the head of his delegation, with instructions
from the State convention to support Sherman, and ex-Governor Hastings,
then Adjutant-General, presented the name of Sherman to the convention
in the name of Pennsylvania.
Blaine was in Europe, and while he evidently did not desire to confess
himself a candidate, he seemed unwilling then to make his declination
peremptory, as he had done in two letters long before the convention
met. His hesitation delayed the action of the convention several days,
but finally he authorized the withdrawal of his name from the list of
candidates, and a very earnest contest was made between the friends
of Sherman, Gresham, Alger, and Harrison. Governor Alger was largely
supported by the commercial delegates from the South, and Sherman and
his friends bitterly complained that the Southern delegates had been
corruptly diverted from the Sherman ranks. Gresham represented the more
conservative Republican element. He was not a radical politician, as
was shown by his support of Cleveland in 1892, but while conservative
with Mugwump flavor, it was evident from the demonstrations made in
Chicago during the convention that the labor elements of the country
were very strongly in sympathy with him, although his own delegation
was against him.
Depew was only an ornamental candidate, and was brimful of humor as he
mingled with the delegates and spectators. He knew that the Grangers
of the West would no more vote for him than they would for the Czar
of Russia, but his State had declared for him with great unanimity,
and he was very cordially supported by a number of friends outside of
New York. It soon became evident that Sherman could not succeed, as
he reached his highest vote on the 2d ballot and steadily declined
thereafter, while Harrison increased on every ballot from the first to
the eighth, when he was nominated by a large majority. The following
are the several ballots for President:
═══════════════════════════╤══════╤═══════╤══════╤═══════╤══════╤══════╤════════╤════════
│First.│Second.│Third.│Fourth.│Fifth.│Sixth.│Seventh.│ Eighth.
───────────────────────────┼──────┼───────┼──────┼───────┼──────┼──────┼────────┼────────
John Sherman, Ohio │ 229 │ 249 │ 244 │ 235 │ 224 │ 244 │ 231 │ 118
Walter Q. Gresham, Ind. │ 111 │ 108 │ 123 │ 98 │ 87 │ 91 │ 91 │ 59
Chauncey M. Depew, N. Y. │ 99 │ 99 │ 91 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
Russell A. Alger, Mich. │ 84 │ 116 │ 122 │ 135 │ 142 │ 137 │ 120 │ 100
Benjamin Harrison, Ind. │ 80 │ 91 │ 94 │ 217 │ 213 │ 231 │ 278 │ 544
William B. Allison, Iowa │ 72 │ 75 │ 88 │ 88 │ 99 │ 73 │ 76 │ ――
James G. Blaine, Me. │ 35 │ 33 │ 35 │ 42 │ 48 │ 40 │ 15 │ 5
John J. Ingalls, Kan. │ 28 │ 16 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
Jere. M. Rusk, Wis. │ 25 │ 20 │ 16 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
William W. Phelps, N. J. │ 25 │ 18 │ 5 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
E. H. Fitler, Pa. │ 24 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
Robert T. Lincoln, Ill. │ 3 │ 2 │ 2 │ 1 │ ―― │ ―― │ 2 │ ――
William McKinley, Jr., Ohio│ 2 │ 3 │ 8 │ 11 │ 14 │ 12 │ 16 │ 4
Samuel F. Miller, Iowa │ ―― │ ―― │ 2 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
Frederick Douglass │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ 1 │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――
J. B. Foraker, Ohio │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ 1 │ ―― │ 1 │ 1 │ ――
Frederick D. Grant, N. Y. │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ 1 │ ―― │ ――
Creed Haymond, Cal. │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ 1 │ ――
═══════════════════════════╧══════╧═══════╧══════╧═══════╧══════╧══════╧════════╧════════
One ballot was had for Vice-President, as follows:
Levi P. Morton, N. Y. 591
Walter Wm. Phelps. N. J. 119
Wm. O. Bradley, Ky. 103
Blanche K. Bruce (col.), Miss. 11
Walter F. Thomas, Texas 1
The nomination of Morton was made unanimous. The following platform was
unanimously adopted:
The Republicans of the United States, assembled by their delegates in
national convention, pause on the threshold of their proceedings to
honor the memory of their first great leader, the immortal champion
of liberty and the rights of the people, Abraham Lincoln, and to
cover also with wreaths of imperishable remembrance and gratitude the
heroic names of our later leaders, who have more recently been called
away from our councils—Grant, Garfield, Arthur, Logan, Conkling.
May their memories be faithfully cherished. We also recall with our
greetings and with prayer for his recovery, the name of one of our
living heroes, whose memory will be treasured in the history both of
Republicans and of the Republic, the name of that noble soldier and
favorite child of victory, Philip H. Sheridan.
In the spirit of these great leaders, and of our own devotion to
human liberty, and with that hostility to all forms of despotism and
oppression which is the fundamental idea of the Republican party, we
send fraternal congratulations to our fellow-Americans of Brazil upon
their great act of emancipation, which completed the abolition of
slavery throughout the two American continents. We earnestly hope that
we may soon congratulate our fellow-citizens of Irish birth upon the
peaceful recovery of home rule for Ireland.
We reaffirm our unswerving devotion to the national Constitution and
to the indissoluble union of the States; to the autonomy reserved
to the States under the Constitution; to the personal rights and
liberties of citizens in all the States and Territories in the Union,
and especially to the supreme and sovereign right of every lawful
citizen, rich or poor, native or foreign-born, white or black, to
cast one free ballot in public elections, and to have that ballot
duly counted. We hold the free and honest popular ballot and the just
and equal representation of all the people to be the foundation of
our republican Government, and demand effective legislation to secure
the integrity and purity of elections, which are the fountains of
public authority. We charge that the present administration and the
Democratic majority in Congress owe their existence to the suppression
of the ballot by a criminal nullification of the Constitution and laws
of the United States.