1856.
RETURN TO AMERICA—NOMINATION AND ELECTION TO THE
PRESIDENCY—SIGNIFICANCE OF MR. BUCHANAN’S ELECTION IN RESPECT TO
THE SECTIONAL QUESTIONS—PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr. Buchanan arrived at New York in the latter part of April, 1856,
and there met with a public reception from the authorities and
people of the city, which evinced the interest that now began to be
everywhere manifested in him as the probable future President. With
what feelings he himself regarded the prospect of his nomination by
his party, and his election, has appeared from his unreserved
communications with his friends. That he did not make efforts to
secure the nomination will presently appear upon other testimony
than his own. He reached Wheatland in the last week of April, and
there he remained a very quiet observer of what was taking place in
the political world. Before he left England, he had been informed
that a Democratic convention of his own State had unanimously
declared him to be the first choice of the Pennsylvania Democrats
for the Presidency. To this he had made no formal or public
response; but on the 8th of June he was waited upon by a committee
from this convention, and he then addressed them as follows:
GENTLEMEN:—
I thank you, with all my heart, for the kind terms in which, under
a resolution of the late Democratic State Convention, you have
informed me that I am “their unanimous choice for the next
Presidency.”
When the proceedings of your convention reached me in a foreign
land, they excited emotions of gratitude which I might in vain
attempt to express. This was not because the Democracy of my
much-loved State had by their own spontaneous movement placed me
in nomination for the Presidency, an honor which I had not sought,
but because this nomination constitutes of itself the highest
evidence that, after a long course of public services, my public
conduct has been approved by those to whom I am indebted, under
Providence, for all the offices and honors I have ever enjoyed. In
success and in defeat, in the sunshine and in the storm, they have
ever been the same kind friends to me, and I value their continued
confidence and good opinion far above the highest official honors
of my country.
The duties of the President, whomsoever he may be, have been
clearly and ably indicated by the admirable resolutions of the
convention which you have just presented to me, and all of which,
without reference to those merely personal to myself, I heartily
adopt. Indeed, they met my cordial approbation from the moment
when I first perused them on the other side of the Atlantic. They
constitute a platform broad, national, and conservative, and one
eminently worthy of the Democracy of our great and good old State.
These resolutions, carried into execution with inflexibility and
perseverance, precluding all hope of changes, and yet in a kindly
spirit, will ere long allay the dangerous excitement which has for
some years prevailed on the subject of domestic slavery, and again
unite all portions of our common country in the ancient bonds of
brotherly affection, under the flag of the Constitution and the
Union.
The Democratic National Convention assembled at Cincinnati soon
afterwards, and from a gentleman who was present, although not a
member of the body—my friend, Mr. S. L. M. Barlow of New York—I have
received an account of what took place, which I prefer to quote
rather than to give one of my own, which could only be compiled from
the public journals of the time:
In February, 1856, I was in London, with a portion of my family,
and had lodgings at Fenton’s Hotel, St. James Street. Shortly
after I reached London, Mr. Buchanan, who was then our minister at
the court of St. James, gave up his own residence and came to the
same hotel with us, where for some weeks he remained, taking his
meals in our rooms. I had known Mr. Buchanan for some years, but
never intimately until this time. During my stay in London, I
became much interested in his nomination for the Presidency, and
frequently spoke to him about the action of the National
Democratic Convention to be held in Cincinnati in June, 1856, and
expressed to him the hope that he would be the nominee of the
party. He said that so great an honor could hardly be expected to
fall to his lot, as he had made little effort to secure the
nomination, and his absence for so long a time from home had
prevented any organization of his friends to that end, save what
Mr. Slidell in Louisiana, Mr. Schell in New York, and his own
nearest political friends in Pennsylvania, had been able to
effect, and that he thought it very unlikely that he could receive
the nomination. After a few weeks in London, Mr. Buchanan joined
us in a visit to the continent, remaining in Paris about ten days,
and he then embarked for the United States.
I returned to New York in the early part of May, and shortly
afterwards went to Cincinnati, upon business connected with an
unfinished railroad, in which I was interested, and as the day for
the meeting of the convention approached, I was surprised to find
a lack of all organization on behalf of the friends of Mr.
Buchanan, and was satisfied that his nomination was impossible,
unless earnest efforts to that end were made, and at once.
I had taken a large dwelling-house in Cincinnati for my own
temporary use, and shortly before the meeting of the convention, I
wrote to my political friends in Washington who were friendly to
him, telling them the condition of things, and that unless they
came to Cincinnati without delay, I thought Mr. Buchanan stood no
chance for the nomination. Among others I wrote to Mr. Slidell,
Mr. Benjamin, Mr. James A. Bayard, and Mr. Bright, all of whom
were then in the United States Senate. I promised them
accommodations at my house, and, much to my gratification, they
all answered that they would make up a party and come to
Cincinnati, to reach there the day before the meeting of the
convention. Before the time of their arrival, prominent Democrats
from all sections of the country had reached Cincinnati, and the
friends of Mr. Douglas were very prominent in asserting his claims
to the nomination, through thoroughly organized and noisy
committees.
A consultation was held at my house, the evening before the
meeting of the convention, and it was evident that if the New York
delegation, represented by Mr. Dean Richmond and his associates,
who were known as the “Softs,” secured seats, that the nomination
of Mr. Douglas was inevitable. The other branch of the New York
Democrats, who called themselves “Hards,” was represented by Mr.
Schell as the head of that organization.
When the convention was organized, Senator James A. Bayard, of
Delaware, was made chairman of the Committee on Credentials, and
to that committee was referred the claims of the two rival
Democratic delegations from New York. The remainder of that day,
and much of the night following, were passed in the earnest and
noisy presentation of the claims of these two factions to be
represented in the convention, each to the exclusion of the other,
and it was soon discovered that a majority of this committee was
in favor of the “Soft,” or Douglas delegation. A minority of this
committee, headed by Mr. Bayard, favored the admission of one-half
of the delegates of each branch of the party, so that the vote of
New York in the convention might be thereby equally divided
between Mr. Douglas and Mr. Buchanan. The preparation of the
minority report to this end occupied all the night, and it was not
completed until nine o’clock of the following morning, the hour of
the meeting of the convention. So soon as we could copy this
report, I took it to Mr. Bayard, the convention being already in
session.
On the presentation of the majority, or Douglas report, it was
moved by the friends of Mr. Buchanan that the minority report
should be substituted, and this motion, after a close vote, was
adopted by the convention. As was foreseen, by thus neutralizing
the vote of New York, dividing it between the two candidates, Mr.
Buchanan retained sufficient strength to secure the nomination,
which was then speedily made. There can be little doubt that this
result was achieved almost wholly by the efforts of the friends of
Mr. Buchanan, who were induced at the last moment to come to
Cincinnati. Our house became the headquarters of all the friends
of Mr. Buchanan. Every move that was made emanated from some one
of the gentlemen there present, and but for their presence and
active cooperation, there is little doubt that Mr. Douglas would
have been nominated upon the first ballot after organization.
Mr. Slidell was naturally the leader of the friends of Mr.
Buchanan. His calmness, shrewdness and earnest friendship for Mr.
Buchanan were recognized by all, and whatever he advised was
promptly assented to. At his request, I was present at all
interviews with the delegates from all parts of the country, which
preceded Mr. Buchanan’s actual nomination. I heard all that was
said on these occasions, and when the news of the nomination came
from the convention to our headquarters, Mr. Slidell at once said
to me: “Now, you will bear me witness, that in all that has taken
place, I have made no promises, and am under no commitments on
behalf of Mr. Buchanan to anybody. He takes this place without
obligations to any section of the country, or to any individual.
He is as free to do as as he sees fit as man ever was. Some of his
friends deserve recognition, and at the proper time I shall say so
to him, and I think he will be governed by my suggestions, but if
he should not be, no one can find fault, as I have made no
promises.”
After the election, at the request of Mr. Buchanan, I met him on
the occasion of his first visit to Washington, before the
inauguration. I went to his room with Mr. Slidell. He had then
seen no one in Washington. In this first interview, Mr. Slidell
repeated to him, almost verbatim, the language which he had used
to me in Cincinnati, as to the President being entirely free and
uncommitted by any promise or obligation of any sort, made to
anybody, previous to his nomination.
I do not know that the matters to which I have alluded will be of
any interest to you, but I have recalled them with much pleasure
as showing, contrary to the generally received opinion as to Mr.
Buchanan’s shrewdness as a politician and “wire-puller,” that when
he left London, there was no organization or pretence of
organization in his favor, that could be considered effective or
likely to be useful, outside of the efforts of a few personal
friends in the South, in Pennsylvania and New York; and before he
returned to America, he evidently saw that he had little chance of
success before the convention. The same marked absence of
organization, and of all political machine-work, was evident up to
the day before the meeting of the convention, when the friends of
Mr. Buchanan, whom I had thus suddenly called together, made their
appearance in Cincinnati.
Mr. Buchanan’s opposition to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise
left him without support from the ultra Southern leaders, many of
whom believed that Mr. Douglas would be less difficult to manage
than Mr. Buchanan. Louisiana was controlled through the personal
influence of Messrs. Slidell and Benjamin, and Virginia was from
the beginning in favor of Mr. Buchanan’s nomination. Apart from
these States, the South was for Pierce or Douglas. Mr. Buchanan’s
strength was from the North, but it was unorganized.
To that time, no one had undertaken to speak for him. There were
no headquarters where his friends could meet even for
consultation. There was no leader—no one whose opinions upon
questions of policy were controlling, and but for this almost
accidental combination of his friends in Cincinnati, it was
apparent that Mr. Buchanan could not have been nominated, simply
because of this utter lack of that ordinary preliminary
organization necessary to success, which was by his opponents
alleged to be the foundation of his strength, but which in fact
was wholly without existence.
Mr. Slidell undertook this task, and before the meeting of the
convention Mr. Buchanan’s success was assured.[27]
Footnote 27:
The prominence given by Mr. Barlow to Mr. Slidell, as an active
and earnest friend of Mr. Buchanan, led me to ask him to add a
sketch of that distinguished man; and I have been at the greater
pains to show the strong friendship that subsisted between Mr.
Buchanan and Mr. Slidell, because, as will be seen hereafter, when
the secession troubles of the last year of Mr. Buchanan’s
administration came on, this friendship was one of the first
sacrifices made by him to his public duty, for he did not allow it
to influence his course in the slightest degree; and although he
had to accept with pain the alienation which Mr. Slidell and all
his other Southern friends, in the ardor of their feelings, deemed
unavoidable, he accepted it as one of the sad necessities of his
position and of the time. I think he and Mr. Slidell never met,
after the month of January, 1861. The following is Mr. Barlow’s
sketch of John Slidell:—
“He was born in the city of New York in 1795; was graduated at
Columbia College in 1810, and entered commercial life, which he
soon abandoned for the study of the law. He removed to Louisiana
in 1825, and was shortly afterwards admitted to the bar of that
State. In 1829 he was appointed United States district attorney
for the Louisiana district by President Jackson, and from that
time took an active part in the politics of the State. He was soon
recognized, not only as one of the ablest and most careful
lawyers, but as the practical political head of the Democratic
party of the Southwest.
“In 1842 he was elected to Congress from the New Orleans district.
In 1845 he was appointed by President Polk as minister to Mexico.
This mission was foredoomed to failure. The annexation of Texas
made a war with Mexico inevitable, but the broad sense shown by
Mr. Slidell in his despatches from Mexico was fully recognized by
the administration of President Polk, and his views were
maintained, and his advice was followed, to the time of the
breaking out of hostilities.
“In 1853 he was elected to the United States Senate to fill an
unexpired term, and in 1854 was again elected for a full term,
which had not expired when the secession of Louisiana in 1861 put
it at an end.
“He was shortly afterwards sent to France as a commissioner on
behalf of the Confederate States. On his voyage to that country he
was taken from the British steamer ‘Trent,’ and was imprisoned at
Fort Warren in Boston Harbor. His release by President Lincoln,
under the advice of Mr. Seward, will be remembered as one of the
most exciting and important incidents in the early history of the
war. He remained in Paris as the Commissioner of the Confederate
States until the termination of the rebellion, and during that
period was probably the most active and effective agent of the
Confederacy abroad.
“His influence with the government of Louis Napoleon was very
great, and at one time, chiefly through his persuasion, the
emperor, as Mr. Slidell believed, had determined to recognize the
Confederacy; but fortunately this political mistake was averted by
the great victory gained by General McClellan over the Confederate
army at Antietam.
“In 1835 Mr. Slidell was married to Miss Mathilde deLande, of an
old Creole family of Louisiana. He died at Cowes in England in
1871. His pure personal character, his indomitable and coercive
will, his undoubted courage, and his cool and deliberate good
sense gave him a high place among the advisers of the Confederate
cause from its earliest organization to its final collapse.
“One of his most striking characteristics, for which he was noted
through life, was his unswerving fidelity to his political
friends. From the lowest in the ranks to those of the highest
station, who were his allies and advocates, not one was forgotten
when political victory was secured, and no complaint was ever
justly made against him for forgetfulness of those through whom
his own political career was established, or to whom, through his
influence, the success of his political friends was achieved.
“With strangers Mr. Slidell’s manners were reserved, and at times
even haughty, but to those who were admitted to the privacy of his
domestic life, or who once gained his confidence in politics, he
was most genial, gracious, and engaging.”
When officially informed of his nomination by a committee, Mr.
Buchanan, on the 16th of June (1856), made this simple and
straightforward answer:
I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication
of the 13th inst., informing me officially of my nomination by the
Democratic National Convention, recently held at Cincinnati, as a
candidate for the office of President of the United States. I
shall not attempt to express the grateful feelings which I
entertain towards my Democratic fellow-citizens for having deemed
me worthy of this—the highest political honor on earth—an honor
such as no other people have the power to bestow. Deeply sensible
of the vast and varied responsibility attached to the station,
especially at the present crisis in our affairs, I have carefully
refrained from seeking the nomination, either by word or by deed.
Now that it has been offered by the Democratic party, I accept it
with diffidence in my own abilities, but with an humble trust
that, in the event of my election, Divine Providence may enable me
to discharge my duty in such a manner as to allay domestic strife,
preserve peace and friendship with foreign nations, and promote
the best interests of the Republic.
In accepting the nomination, I need scarcely say that I accept, in
the same spirit, the resolutions constituting the platform of
principles erected by the convention. To this platform I intend to
conform myself throughout the canvass, believing that I have no
right, as the candidate of the Democratic party, by answering
interrogatories, to present new and different issues before the
people.
In all Presidential elections which have occurred for the past fifty
years, the State election in Pennsylvania, occurring in the autumn
before the election of a President, has been regarded as of great
importance. The Republican party was now in the field, with General
Fremont as its candidate, and with the advantage which it had
derived in all the free States from the consequences of the repeal
of the Missouri Compromise, the passage of the so-called
“Kansas-Nebraska Act,” which had been followed in Kansas by an
internecine contest between pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers. A
brutal personal assault upon Senator Sumner, of Massachusetts, by a
rash and foolish Southerner, had added fuel to the already kindled
sectional flame of Northern feeling. The precise political issue
between the Democratic and Republican parties, so far as it related
to slavery, concerned of course slavery in the Territories. It was
apparent that if the Republicans should gain the State of
Pennsylvania in the State election of October, there was a very
strong probability, rather a moral certainty, that the electoral
votes of all the free States in the Presidential election would be
obtained by that party, while there was no probability that it would
prevail in a single slave-holding State. The political issue,
therefore, was whether the sectional division of the free and the
slave States in the election of a President was to come then, or
whether it was to be averted. The State election in Pennsylvania, in
October, turned in favor of the Democrats. Her twenty-seven
electoral votes were thus morally certain to be given to Mr.
Buchanan in the Presidential election. In the interval, a large body
of his friends and neighbors assembled at Wheatland, and called him
out. His remarks, never before printed, are now extant in his
handwriting. He said:
MY FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS:—
I am glad to see you and to receive and reciprocate your
congratulations upon the triumph of the Democrats in Pennsylvania
and Indiana.
It is my sober and solemn conviction that Mr. Fillmore uttered the
words of soberness and truth when he declared that if the Northern
sectional party should succeed, it would lead inevitably to the
destruction of this beautiful fabric reared by our forefathers,
cemented by their blood, and bequeathed to us as a priceless
inheritance.
The people of the North seem to have forgotten the warning of the
Father of his Country against geographical parties. And by far the
most dangerous of all such parties is that of a combined North
against a combined South on the question of slavery. This is no
mere political question—no question addressing itself to the
material interests of men. It rises far higher. With the South it
is a question of self-preservation, of personal security around
the family altar, of life or of death. The Southern people still
cherish a love for the Union; but what to them is even our blessed
confederacy, the wisest and the best form of government ever
devised by man, if they cannot enjoy its blessings and its
benefits without being in constant alarm for their wives and
children.
The storm of abolition against the South has been gathering for
almost a quarter of a century. It had been increasing by every
various form of agitation which fanaticism could devise. We had
reached the crisis. The danger was imminent. Republicanism was
sweeping over the North like a tornado. It appeared to be
resistless in its course. The blessed Union of these States—the
last hope for human liberty on earth—appeared to be tottering on
its base. Had Pennsylvania yielded, had she become an abolition
State, without a special interposition of Divine Providence, we
should have been precipitated into the yawning gulf of
dissolution. But she stood erect and firm as her own Alleghanies.
She breasted the storm and drove it back. The night is departing,
and the roseate and propitious morn now breaking upon us promises
a long day of peace and prosperity for our country. To secure
this, all we of the North have to do is to permit our Southern
neighbors to manage their own domestic affairs, as they permit us
to manage ours. It is merely to adopt the golden rule, and do
unto them as we would they should do unto us, in the like
circumstances. All they ask from us is simply to let them alone.
This is the whole spirit and essence of the much abused Cincinnati
platform. This does no more than adopt the doctrine which is the
very root of all our institutions, and recognize the right of a
majority of the people of a Territory, when about to enter the
Union as a State, to decide for themselves whether domestic
slavery shall or shall not exist among them. This is not to favor
the extension of slavery, but simply to deny the right of an
abolitionist in Massachusetts or Vermont to prescribe to the
people of Kansas what they shall or shall not do in regard to this
question.
Who contests the principle that the will of the majority shall
govern? What genuine republican of any party can deny this? The
opposition have never met this question fairly. Within a brief
period, the people of this country will condemn their own folly
for suffering the assertion of so plain and elementary a principle
of all popular governments to have endangered our blessed
Constitution and Union, which owe their origin to this very
principle.
I congratulate you, my friends and neighbors, that peace has been
restored to Kansas. As a Pennsylvanian I rejoice that this good
work has been accomplished by two sons of our good old mother
State, God bless her! We have reason to be proud of Colonel Geary
and General Smith. We shall hear no more of bleeding Kansas. There
will be no more shrieks for her unhappy destiny. The people of
this fine country, protected from external violence and internal
commotion, will decide the question of slavery for themselves, and
then slide gracefully into the Union and become one of the sisters
in our great Confederacy.
Indeed, viewed in the eye of sober reason, this Kansas question is
one of the most absurd of all the Proteus-like forms which
abolition fanaticism has ever assumed to divide and distract the
country. And why do I say this? Kansas might enter the Union with
a free constitution to-day, and once admitted, no human power
known to the Constitution could prevent her from establishing
slavery to-morrow. No free-soiler has ever even contended that she
would not possess this power.
The result of the election shows, with great distinctness, the
following facts: 1st. That Mr. Buchanan was chosen President,
because he received the electoral votes of the five free States of
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, Illinois and California (62 in
all), and that without them he could not have been elected. 2d. That
his Southern vote (that of every slave-holding State excepting
Maryland) was partly given to him because of his conservative
opinions and position, and partly because the candidate for the
Vice-Presidency, Mr. Breckinridge, was a Southern man. 3d. That
General Fremont received the electoral vote of no Southern State,
and that this was due partly to the character of the Republican
party and its Northern tone, and partly to the fact that the
Republican candidate for the Vice Presidency (Mr. Dayton, of New
Jersey), was a citizen of a non-slaveholding State. General Fremont
himself was nominally a citizen of California. This election,
therefore, foreshadowed the sectional division which would be almost
certain to happen in the next one, if the four years of Mr.
Buchanan’s administration should not witness a subsidence in the
sectional feelings between the North and the South. It would only be
necessary for the Republicans to wrest from the Democratic party the
five free States which had voted for Mr. Buchanan, and they would
elect the President in 1860. Whether this was to happen, would
depend upon the ability of the Democratic party to avoid a rupture
into factions that would themselves be representatives of
irreconcilable dogmas on the subject of slavery in the Territories.
Hence it is that Mr. Buchanan’s course as President, for the three
first years of his term, is to be judged, with reference to the
responsibility that was upon him to so conduct the Government as to
disarm, if possible, the antagonism of section to section. His
administration of affairs after the election of Mr. Lincoln is to be
judged simply by his duty as the Executive, in the most
extraordinary and anomalous crisis in which the country had ever
been placed.
I take from the multitude of private letters written or received
during and after the election, a few of the most interesting:—
[FROM THE HON. JAMES MACGREGOR.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 20, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
I am, indeed, very happy to receive to-day the decision with
regard to you at Cincinnati, and God grant the result be as
successful as I wish. The feeling in this house, and I am sure in
the country, is, I believe firmly, such as you could wish. I wish
that miserable dispute about Central America were dissipated; for
my part, I believe that if not only Central America, but all
Spanish America, south of California, were possessed and governed
by an Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-American race, the more would the
progress of civilization, the progress of industry and commerce,
and the happiness of mankind be advanced.
I went over to Paris a few days after you left for Havre. Saw much
of Mr. Mason, Mr. Corbin and Mr. Childs. The latter drew me a most
able statement relative to the disputes with America, which I made
good use of, on my return, with Lord Palmerston.
You will observe that even the meretricious _Times_, which I send
you a copy of, is coming to be more reasonable; although I cannot
trust that journal, which, I believe, was truly characterized by
O’Connell, in the House of Commons, as representing “the sagacity
of the rat and the morality of a harlot.” I write in great haste
for the post; but believe me always, and with my very kindest
regards to Miss Lane,
Faithfully yours,
J. MACGREGOR.
[TO WILLIAM B. REED, ESQ.]
Monday Morning, July 7, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
I return Mr. Stevenson’s letter with thanks. He appears to be “a
marvellous proper man.” There never was a more unfounded falsehood
than that of my connection with the bargain, or alleged bargain.
At the time I was a young member of Congress, not on terms of
intimacy with either Jackson or Clay. It is true I admired both,
and wished to see the one President and the other Secretary of
State; and after Mr. Clay had been instructed by the Kentucky
legislature to vote for Jackson, I believed my wish would be
accomplished. It must have been then that I had the conversation
with Mr. Clay, in Letcher’s room, to which Colton refers, for I
declare I have not the least trace on my memory of any such
conversation. Had I known anything of the previous history of
Jackson and Clay, I could not have believed it possible that the
former would appoint the latter Secretary. A conversation of a few
minutes with Jackson on the street on a cold and stormy day of
December, fully related by me in 1827, and a meeting with Mr. Clay
in Letcher’s room, and a conversation perfectly harmless as
stated, have brought me into serious difficulties.
Your friend, very respectfully,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
[TO THE HON. JAMES C. DOBBIN.[28].]
BEDFORD SPRINGS, August 20, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
Your favor of the 13th instant did not reach me at the Bedford
Springs until I was about leaving, hence the delay of my answer. I
did not reach home until the night before the last.
I congratulate you, with all my heart, on the result of your
election. The population of the old North State is steady and
conservative. Of it you may be justly proud. The Southern States
now promise to be a unit at the approaching Presidential election.
Maryland is still considered doubtful, but the changes in our
favor have been great within the last three weeks. The letters of
Messrs. Pierce and Pratt have had a happy effect.
I am glad to learn that our foreign affairs are assuming a
favorable aspect. I most heartily approved of the dismissal of Mr.
Crampton, and would have been quite as well satisfied had he been
sent home in the last autumn. About the present condition of the
Central American questions I knew nothing until the receipt of
your letter, except from the revelations in the British
Parliament, which I know, from experience, are not reliable. Mr.
Dallas said nothing to me about his instructions or the views of
the President, and, of course, I did not solicit his confidence.
The question of the Bay Islands is too clear for serious doubt.
Lord Aberdeen, the purest and most just of British statesmen, when
premier gave it up, as is shown by my correspondence with the
State Department, and it is highly probable Great Britain may make
a virtue of necessity, and surrender these islands to Honduras to
whom they clearly belong.
I am glad to learn that the President enjoys good health,
notwithstanding the fatigue, troubles, and responsibility incident
to his position. I concur with you in opinion as to the character
of his manly and excellent address on the receipt of the
intelligence from Cincinnati. It was no more than what might have
been expected from him by all who knew him. My aspirations for the
Presidency had all died four years ago, and I never felt the
slightest personal interest in securing the nomination. It was
easy to foresee the impending crisis, and that the Union itself
might depend on the result of the election. In this view, whilst
we all have everything near and dear to us of a political
character at stake, the President of all men has the deepest
interest in the result. My election, so far as I am personally
concerned is a very small matter; but as identified with the
leading measures of his administration, the preservation of the
Constitution and the Union, and the maintenance of the equality of
the States, and of the right of the people of a Territory to
decide the question of slavery for themselves, in their
constitution, before entering the Union, it is a subject of vast
and transcendant importance.
Most cordially reciprocating your friendly sentiments towards
myself, and wishing you all the blessings which you can desire, I
remain, as ever, very respectfully,
Your friend,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
Footnote 28:
Secretary of the Navy under President Pierce.
[TO NAHUM CAPEN, ESQ., OF BOSTON.]
WHEATLAND, August 27, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
On my return from Bedford Springs on Monday night, I found your
favor of the 22d instant, and your manuscript. The latter I have
endeavored to find the time to read with care, but this has been
impossible. I have, therefore, only been able to glance over it.
It is written with characteristic ability, and that portion of it
which gives extracts from my speeches has been prepared with much
labor and discrimination. I have not seen the manuscript of any
biography of mine before publication, nor have I read any one of
them since, and this simply because I did not choose to be
identified with any of them.
For my own part, I consider that all incidental questions are
comparatively of little importance in the Presidential question,
when compared with the grand and appalling issue of union or
disunion. Should Fremont be elected, he must receive 149 Northern
electoral votes at the least, and the outlawry proclaimed by the
Republican convention at Philadelphia against fifteen Southern
States will be ratified by the people of the North. The
consequence will be _immediate_ and inevitable. In this region,
the battle is fought mainly on this issue. We have so often cried
“wolf,” that now, when the wolf is at the door, it is difficult to
make the people believe it; but yet the sense of danger is slowly
and surely making its way in this region.
After reflection and consultation, I stated in my letter of
acceptance substantially, that I would make no issues beyond the
platform, and have, therefore, avoided giving my sanction to any
publication containing opinions with which I might be identified,
and prove unsatisfactory to some portions of the Union. I must
continue to stand on this ground. Had it not been for this cause,
I should have embraced your kind offer, and asked you to prepare a
biography for me, and furnished the materials. Indeed, I often
thought of this.
I am deeply and gratefully sensible of your friendship, and
therefore most reluctantly adopt the course towards you which I
have done to all other friends under like circumstances.
In the cursory glance I have been able to take of your manuscript,
I observed one or two errors. In page 37 of No. 1, my allusion was
to Mrs. Adams, and not to Mrs. Jackson. I entered college at the
age of sixteen, not of fourteen, having been previously prepared
for the Junior class. It is not the fact that I accepted no
compensation for trying the widow’s cause. “Millions for defence,
but not a cent for tribute,” was not original with me.
I am so surrounded, I regret I cannot write more, and still more
deeply regret that my omission to sanction your very able
manuscript may give you pain. I sincerely wish you had referred it
to the National Committee, or to the committee in your own State.
We are fighting the battle in this State almost solely _on the
great issue_, with energy and confidence. I do not think there is
any reason to apprehend the result, certainly none at the
Presidential election, so far as Pennsylvania is concerned.
In haste, I remain always, very respectfully, your friend,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
[TO WILLIAM B. REED, ESQ.]
WHEATLAND, September 8, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
I have received your favor of the 5th inst. I do not recollect the
names of the two members of the Society of Friends to whom you
refer; but should you deem it important, I can, with some trouble,
find the original letter. I have no doubt Dr. Parrish was one of
them. He, William Wharton and Joseph Foulke were the three
gentlemen referred to in my remarks on the 25th April, 1836, in
presenting the petition of the Society of Friends against the
admission of Arkansas, etc. They not only acquiesced in my course,
but requested me to procure for them a number of copies of the
_National Intelligencer_ containing my remarks, and left
Washington entirely satisfied. (Vide the volume of the Register of
Debates, to which you refer, pages 1277 and 1278.)
I cannot procure the _London Quarterly_ in Lancaster. I took the
Reviews in England, but neglected to order them since my return. I
have no doubt it does me great injustice. I was so popular
personally in England, that whenever I appeared at public dinners,
etc., I was enthusiastically cheered; but now they are all for
Fremont ......, and a dissolution of the Union.
I am gratified that you have sent me Mr. Stevenson’s letter. I
have no doubt he is a gentleman of fastidious honor as well as
much ability. Although a patient and much-enduring man, I have
never had patience about “the bargain and sale story.” So far as I
am concerned, it all arose from the misapprehension by General
Jackson of as innocent a conversation on the street, on my part,
as I ever had with any person. I cannot charge myself even with
the slightest imprudence. And then, as a rebutter, a conversation
equally innocent, in Letcher’s room, about the particulars of
which I have no more recollection than if it had never taken
place. Still, I have not the least doubt it has been stated
accurately; because it is just what I would have said under the
circumstances, and in entire ignorance of the nature of the
personal relations between General Jackson and Mr. Clay. Blair’s
exposé has fallen dead, so far as I can learn.
(Private and confidential.) WHEATLAND, September 14, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
I have at length found, and now enclose, the letter to which you
refer. I have very often spoken in the Senate on the subject of
slavery in the different forms which the question has assumed, but
have not the time at the present moment to look over the debates.
I have recently received a letter from Governor Wright, of
Indiana, who informs me it would be of great importance in that
State should the _National Intelligencer_ come out in favor of the
Democratic candidates. He had heard, as we have done, that such
was the intention of its editors, after the adjournment of
Congress. But they have at length come out in favor of Fremont. I
say this, because they scout the idea that the Union would be in
danger from his election...... Better they had at once raised the
Republican flag. This opinion they have expressed, notwithstanding
I am in the daily receipt of letters from the South, which are
truly alarming, and these from gentlemen who formerly opposed both
nullification and disunion. They say explicitly that the election
of Fremont involves the dissolution of the Union, and this
immediately. They allege that they are now looking on calmly for
the North to decide their fate. When I say from the South, I refer
to the States south of the Potomac. These evidences of public
determination first commenced in the extreme South; but now the
same calm and determined spirit appears to pervade Virginia.
Indeed, the most alarming letter I have received has been from
Virginia, and this, too, from a prudent, tranquil and able man,
who has for some years been out of public life from his own
choice. The remarks of the _National Intelligencer_ will either
serve to delude the Northern people, or the Southrons are
insincere. God save the Union! I do not wish to survive it.
From your friend, very respectfully,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
P.S.—I refer to the article in the _Intelligencer_ of the 11th
instant, headed, “The Balance Wheels of the Government.” One
gentleman informs me that the men who were our contemporaries when
the States lived in peace with each other, before the slavery
excitement commenced, have passed away, and they have been
succeeded by a new generation, who have grown up pending the
slavery agitation. He says that they have been constantly assailed
by the North, and now have as much hatred for the people of New
England as the latter have for them; and many now deem that it
would be for the mutual advantage of all parties to have a
Southern Confederation, in which they can live at peace. I have
received such communications with regret and astonishment.
[TO A CITIZEN OF CALIFORNIA.]
WHEATLAND, near LANCASTER, PENN., Sept. 17, 1856.
SIR:—
I have received numerous communications from sources in
California, entitled to high regard, in reference to the
proposed Pacific Railroad. As it would be impossible for me to
answer them all, I deem it most proper and respectful to
address you a general answer in your official capacity. In
performing this duty to the citizens of California, I act in
perfect consistency with the self-imposed restriction
contained in my letter accepting the nomination for the
Presidency, not to answer interrogatories raising new and
different issues from those presented by the Cincinnati
convention, because that convention has itself adopted a
resolution in favor of this great work. I, then, desire to
state briefly that, concurring with the convention, I am
decidedly favorable to the construction of the Pacific
Railroad; and I derive the authority to do this from the
constitutional power “to declare war,” and the constitutional
duty “to repel invasions.” In my judgment, Congress possess
the same power to make appropriations for the construction of
this road, strictly for the purpose of national defence, that
they have to erect fortifications at the mouth of the harbor
of San Francisco. Indeed, the necessity, with a view to repel
foreign invasion from California, is as great in the one case
as in the other. Neither will there be danger from the
precedent, for it is almost impossible to conceive that any
case attended by such extraordinary and unprecedented
circumstances can ever again occur in our history.
Yours very respectfully,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
To B. F. WASHINGTON, Esq., Chairman of the Democratic State
Central Committee of California.
[TO JOSHUA BATES, ESQ., LONDON.]
WHEATLAND, near LANCASTER, Nov. 6, 1856.
MR DEAR SIR:—
I received in due time your kind congratulatory letter of the 10th
July, which I should have immediately answered had I been able to
express a decided opinion as to the result of the Presidential
election. It was one of the most severe political struggles
through which we have ever passed. The preachers and fanatics of
New England had excited the people to such a degree on the slavery
questions, that they generally prayed and preached against me from
their pulpits on Sunday last, throughout that land of “isms.” Your
information from Massachusetts was entirely unfounded—Boston is a
sad place. In that city they have re-elected to Congress a
factious fanatic, ...... who, in a public speech, said that we
must have an anti-slavery Constitution, an anti-slavery Bible, and
an anti-slavery God.
Whilst the British press, by their violent attacks, did me much
good service, I very much regretted their hostile publications,
because it was and is my sincere desire to cultivate the most
friendly relations with that country. The _Times_ does England
much injury, at least in foreign nations; it has made the English
unpopular throughout the continent, and keeps alive the ancient
prejudice which still exists in large portions of our country. In
very many of the Democratic papers, throughout the late canvass,
beautiful extracts from the _Thunderer_, the _Chronicle_, and
other English journals, were kept standing at the head of their
columns. But enough of this. I most sincerely hope the Central
American questions may be settled before the 4th of March. I know
nothing of their condition at present. I never doubted in regard
to the true construction of the treaty, nor did I ever consider it
doubtful. The purest and the wisest statesmen I met in England
agreed with me in regard to the construction of the treaty. If we
are to be as good friends as I desire we may be, your government
ought to be careful to select the proper man as minister, and not
send us some government pet simply because they have no other
provision for him. I have said much to Lord Clarendon on this
subject before I had the slightest idea of becoming President. By
the bye, I like his lordship personally very much, as well as Lord
Palmerston. They are both agreeable and witty companions, as well
as great statesmen. I should like them much better, however, if
their friendly feelings were a little stronger for this country. I
have no doubt they both, as you say, expressed their satisfaction
at the prospect of my becoming President. This was, however, at an
early day. They have probably since changed their opinion. I have
been a good deal quizzed by private friends since I came home,
[because] I spoke in strong and warm terms of the kindness and
civility which had been extended to me in England, and of the vast
importance to both countries and to the world that friendly
feelings between the two countries should be cherished by the
governments and people of each. How often have the articles from
British newspapers been cast up to me as a comment upon my
remarks. They have, however, produced no effect upon my feelings.
I was delighted to see Sir Henry Holland, and to gossip with him
about valued friends and acquaintances on the other side of the
water. Please to remember me very kindly to Mrs. Bates, and Miss
Lane desires me to present her warm regards to you both. It is
long since I have heard from Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence.
From your friend, very respectfully,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
[FROM THE HON. EDWARD EVERETT.]
BOSTON, Dec, 8th, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
....... I can hardly congratulate you on your election, first,
because I did not vote for you (unless upon the theory that every
vote given to Fillmore was in effect given to you), and second,
because I fear that to be chosen President is not a thing upon
which a friend is to be congratulated, in the present state of the
country.
You have my best wishes, however, for a prosperous administration.
I devoutly hope that you will be able to check the progress of
sectional feeling. The policy of the present administration has
greatly impaired (as you are well aware) the conservative feeling
of the North, has annihilated the Whig party, and seriously
weakened the Democratic party in all the free States.
Though much opposed to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, we
could have stood that, but the subsequent events in Kansas gave us
the _coup de grace_. Those events, and the assault on Mr. Sumner,
gave its formidable character and strength to the Republican
nomination. You can do nothing directly to prevent the occurrence
of events like the assault, but you may, even in advance of the
4th of March, do much to bring about a better state of things in
Kansas, and prevent the enemies of the Constitution from
continuing to make capital out of it.
I am, dear sir, with much regard and sincere good wishes,
Very truly yours,
EDWARD EVERETT.
[TO THE HON. JOHN Y. MASON.]
WHEATLAND, near LANCASTER, December 29, 1856.
MY DEAR SIR:—
Ere this can reach Paris, you will doubtless have received my
letter to Miss Wight. I shall not repeat what I have said to her,
because such is the pressure now upon me that I have scarce time
to say my prayers. This I can say in perfect good faith, that the
man don’t live whom it would afford me greater pleasure to serve
than yourself. In this spirit I have determined that you shall not
be disturbed during the next year, no matter what may be the
pressure upon me. I am not committed, either directly or
indirectly, to any human being for any appointment, but yet I
cannot mistake the strong current of public opinion in favor of
changing public functionaries, both abroad and at home, who have
served a reasonable time. They say, and that, too, with
considerable force, that if the officers under a preceding
Democratic administration shall be continued by a succeeding
administration of the same political character, this must
necessarily destroy the party. This, perhaps, ought not to be so,
but we cannot change human nature.
The great object of my administration will be to arrest, if
possible, the agitation of the slavery question at the North, and
to destroy sectional parties. Should a kind Providence enable me
to succeed in my efforts to restore harmony to the Union, I shall
feel that I have not lived in vain.
I beg of you to say nothing to any of your colleagues in Europe
about your continuance in office during the next year. Had it been
announced I had informed you, in answer to Miss Wight, that you
should continue indefinitely in office, this would have done both
you and myself injury. We know not what may transpire in 1857, and
therefore, in reference to the mission after that period, I can
say nothing. “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.”
Even if I had the time, I could not communicate any news to you
which you will not see in the papers. The pressure for office
will be nearly as great as though I had succeeded a Whig
administration.
With my kind and affectionate regards to Mrs. Mason and your
excellent family, and cordially wishing you and them many a happy
Christmas and many a prosperous New Year, I remain, always,
Very respectfully your friend,
JAMES BUCHANAN.
P.S.—In reading over my letter, I find it is quite too cold in
reference to Mary Ann, and therefore I beg to send her my love.