THE HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST.
Nomination of R. B. Hayes for President--His Fitness for the
Responsible Office--Political Shrewdness of Samuel J. Tilden, His
Opponent--I Enter Actively Into the Canvass in Ohio and Other States
--Frauds in the South--Requested by General Grant to Go to New
Orleans and Witness the Canvassing of the Vote of Louisiana--
Departure for the South--Personnel of the Republican and Democratic
"Visitors"--Report of the Returning Board--My Letter to Governor
Hayes from New Orleans--President Grant's Last Message to Congress
--Letter from President Hayes--Request to Become his Secretary of
the Treasury.
The Republican national convention of 1876 met at Cincinnati on
the 14th of June of that year. After the usual organization the
following eight nominations for President were made: Blaine,
Morton, Conkling, Bristow, Hayes, Hartranft, Wheeler and Jewell.
The total number of delegates was 754. Blaine was greatly in the
lead, receiving on the first ballot 285 votes, some from nearly
every state. Morton received 124, Bristow 113, Conkling 99, Hayes
61, Hartranft 58, Jewell 11, and Wheeler 3. There were 7 ballots,
in which Blaine steadily held his vote and slightly gained, receiving
on the final ballot 351 votes. The vote for Hayes increased at
each ballot until on the seventh ballot he received 384 votes, a
majority over all.
Undoubtedly Blaine was the favorite of the convention, but the
antagonisms that existed between him and Conkling probably defeated
his nomination. I still believe that the nomination of Hayes was
not only the safest, but the strongest, that could be made. The
long possession of power by the Republicans naturally produced
rivalries that greatly affected the election of anyone who had been
constantly prominent in public life, like Blaine, Conkling and
Morton. Hayes had growing qualities, and in every respect was
worthy of the high position of President. He had been a soldier,
a Member of Congress, thrice elected as Governor of Ohio, an
admirable executive officer, and his public and private record was
beyond question. He was not an aggressive man, although firm in
his opinions and faithful in his friendships. Among all the public
men with whom I have been brought in contact, I have known none
who was freer from personal objection, whose character was more
stainless, who was better adapted for a high executive office, than
Rutherford B. Hayes.
Governor Hayes wrote me the following letter in recognition of my
aid in his nomination.
"Columbus, O., June 19, 1876.
"My Dear Sir:--I trust you will never regret the important action
you took in the inauguration and carrying out of the movement which
resulted in my nomination. I write these few words to assure you
that I appreciate, and am gratified for, what you did.
"My kindest regards to Mrs. Sherman.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman."
His opponent, Samuel J. Tilden, was a man of singular political
sagacity, of great shrewdness, a money-making man, who professed
to represent, and perhaps did represent, as fairly as anyone, the
ideas of the New York politicians of the school of Van Buren and
Marcy. I knew Mr. Tilden personally and very favorably, as we were
members of a board of railroad directors which frequently met. He
seemed to take pleasure in talking with me about political events,
and especially of the famous New York politicians, of whom Silas
Wright and Mr. Van Buren were his favorites. He had acquired great
wealth as the attorney of corporations, and was undoubtedly a man
of marked ability and sagacity. He had taken an active part in
defeating the corruption of Tweed in New York politics. He had
been elected governor of the State of New York, as the candidate
of reform and honesty in politics.
The long and important session of Congress adjourned on the 15th
of August. It had been the arena for long debates, mostly on
political topics growing out of reconstruction, and financial
measures heretofore referred to. The pending presidential contest
also excited much debate in both Houses. The administration of
General Grant had not been entirely satisfactory, and the long
continuance of the Republican party in power was an element of
weakness. The complaints, unavoidable in the most honest
administration, and the disappointments of office-seekers, placed
that party on the defensive. The south had, by reconstruction,
been practically restored to political power, and the body of the
negroes had been substantially disfranchised, though legally entitled
to the suffrage. Riots and crimes of every degree were committed
in the south, notably in Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida.
Organized mobs and violence had deterred many from voting, and in
some cases had prevented even the semblance of a free election.
I entered actively into this canvass, more so than in any previous
one. Three days before the adjournment, I made my opening speech
at Marietta, Ohio, in which I discussed fully the dangers of the
restoration of the Democratic party to power, the probability of
their failure to enforce the constitutional amendments, and the
protection of the rights of the freedmen. I claimed that the
election of Mr. Tilden would result in the virtual nullification
of the constitutional amendments, and amount to a practical
restoration to power of the old Democratic party. The revival of
the rebel claims, the refunding of the cotton tax, and the damages
done to rebels, were fully commented upon, as were the outrages
committed upon freedmen during the second administration of General
Grant, the organization of Ku-Klux Klans, and the White League,
and the boldness with which the laws were disregarded in the south.
It is difficult now to realize the condition of public affairs in
all the states then lately in rebellion. The people of the south
are certainly entitled to the highest credit for the great change
that has recently been made in the government of their states, but
it cannot be denied that during the ten years after the war their
condition bordered on the despotism of mob rule and violence.
Financial questions, no doubt, entered into the canvass, but in
this respect Governor Tilden and Governor Hayes did not materially
differ, while public opinion in the southern states was almost a
unit in favor of the larger use of paper money. Their bankrupt
condition made this policy almost universal there.
I continued until the day of election to make speeches, not only
in Ohio, but in several of the states. I engaged in a joint debate
with Senator Voorhees, of Indiana, at Columbia City, in that state,
in September, which probably had more fun and humor in it than
argument. It so happened that appointments were made for each of
us at Columbia City, on the same day, and the managers of the two
parties concluded that they would have a joint debate, and arranged
for it, to which we both assented. There was a great crowd, and
besides Mr. Voorhees and myself, "Blue Jeans" Williams, the candidate
for governor, was to open the meeting in his peculiar way, to which,
as it would not at all interfere with our debate, I did not object.
The debate was fully reported in the Chicago "Inter-Ocean," and is
a very graphic specimen of popular debates in which each side claims
to be the victor. I think it would be safe to say that from the
close of Congress until the day of election I spoke on nearly every
week day in some one of the five or six states which I visited.
The result of the presidential election in November, 1876, was
extremely doubtful. It was soon asserted that the majority either
way would be very small, and that the probabilities were that Mr.
Tilden was elected. Zachariah Chandler, chairman of the national
Republican committee, however, confidently telegraphed, on the
morning after the election, that Hayes was elected by a majority
of one in the electoral college. Further reports developed that
on account of intimidation, frauds and violence, committed in the
election in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Florida, the vote of
each of those states was doubtful, and could only be ascertained
by the reports of the returning boards. All of their electoral
votes were needed to give Hayes the majority of one. Both parties
claimed in each of the states a majority of the popular vote. In
the heated state of political feeling in those states, it was a
matter of grave doubt whether the count of the vote might not result
in violence, tumult or war. On the evening of November 11, I
received from President Grant the following telegram:
"Philadelphia, Pa., November 11, 1876.
"Received at Mansfield, O., 8:35 p. m.
"Senator John Sherman.
"I would be much pleased if you would join other parties, who have
already accepted same invitation, to go to New Orleans to witness
the canvassing of the vote of Louisiana.
"U. S. Grant."
I replied that I would go as soon as practicable, and received the
following answer:
"Washington, D. C., November 12, 1876.
"Received at Mansfield, O., 4 p. m.
"Hon. John Sherman.
"Unless you can reach there by Friday morning it will be too late.
"U. S. Grant."
I at once started for New Orleans, stopping on the way at Columbus
to confer with Governor Hayes, who said he wished I would go to
New Orleans, and witness the count, but expressed, in the strongest
possible language, his opposition to any movement on the part of
anyone to influence the action of the returning board in his favor.
He said that if Mr. Tilden was elected he desired him by all means
to have the office. I proceeded to Cincinnati, where I met some
of the gentlemen whom General Grant had requested to witness the
count. When we arrived in New Orleans I found far less excitement
in respect to the count than in Ohio. I there met the other
gentlemen who had been, like myself, invited by General Grant.
They were Messrs. Stanley Matthews, Ohio; J. A. Garfield, Ohio; E.
W. Stoughton, New York; J. H. Van Alen, New York; Wm. D. Kelley,
Pennsylvania; Job E. Stevenson, Ohio; Eugene Hale, Maine; J. M.
Tuttle, Iowa; J. W. Chapman, Iowa; W. R. Smith, Iowa; W. A. McGrew,
Iowa; Sidney Clarke, Kansas; C. B. Farwell, Illinois; Abner Taylor,
Illinois; S. R. Haven, Illinois; J. M. Beardsley, Illinois; John
Coburn, Indiana; Will Cumback, Indiana; C. Irving Ditty, Maryland.
At New Orleans I was for the first time introduced to the members
of the returning board, who, under the laws of Louisiana, were
required to verify the count and whose return was final. We met
also a large number of gentlemen who were there at the request of
the national Democratic committee to perform the same duty that
had been imposed upon us by General Grant. These gentlemen were
John M. Palmer, Illinois; Lyman Trumbull, Illinois; William R.
Morrison, Illinois; Samuel J. Randall, Pennsylvania; A. G. Curtin,
Pennsylvania; William Bigler, Pennsylvania; J. R. Doolittle,
Wisconsin; George R. Smith, Wisconsin; J. E. McDonald, Indiana;
George W. Julian, Indiana; M. D. Manson, Indiana; John Love, Indiana;
Henry Watterson, Kentucky; J. W. Stevenson, Kentucky; Henry D.
McHenry, Kentucky; Oswald Ottendorfer, New York; J. B. Stallo,
Ohio; Lewis V. Bogy, Missouri; James O. Brodhead, Missouri; C.
Gibson, Missouri; John Lee Carroll, Maryland; William T. Hamilton,
Maryland; W. G. Sumner, Connecticut; P. H. Watson, Ohio; F. R.
Coudert, New York.
Before my arrival a correspondence had occurred between what was
called the Democratic visitors and the Republican visitors in regard
to our respective duties. This correspondence, all of which was
reported to President Grant, resulted in the attendance of a certain
number of each of the bodies of visitors at each session of the
returning board, and thus a constant surveillance of the proceedings
of the board was had. At the same time we received from the
returning board the following letter:
"State of Louisiana, Office Board of Returning-Officers,}
"New Orleans, November 18, 1876. }
"Sir:--At a meeting of the board of returning-officers, held this
day, the following preamble and resolution, introduced by General
Thomas C. Anderson, was unanimously adopted, viz:
"Whereas, This board has learned with satisfaction that distinguished
gentlemen of national reputation from other States, some at the
request of the President of the United States, and some at the
request of the national executive committee of the Democratic party
are present in this city with a view to witness the proceedings of
this board in canvassing and compiling the returns of the recent
election in this state for presidential electors, in order that
the public opinion of the country may be satisfied as to the truth
of the result and the fairness of the means by which it may have
been attained; and whereas, this board recognizes the importance
which may attach to the result of their proceedings, and that the
public mind should be convinced of its justice by a knowledge of
the facts on which it may be based, therefore, be it
_Resolved_, That this board does hereby cordially invite and request
five gentlemen from each of the two bodies named, to be selected
by themselves respectively, to attend and be present at the meetings
of the board while engaged in the discharge of its duties, under
the law, in canvassing and compiling the returns, and ascertaining
and declaring the result of said election for presidential electors,
in their capacity as private citizens of eminent reputation and
high character, and as spectators and witnesses of the proceedings
in that behalf of this board.
"J. Madison Wells,
"Chairman Board of Returning-Officers.
"Hon. John Sherman, St. Charles Hotel, New Orleans."
On the same day I answered in behalf of my associates as follows:
"St. Charles Hotel, }
"New Orleans, November 18, 1876.}
"Sir:--I have received your note of to-day, with a copy of the
resolution of the board of returning-officers of the State of
Louisiana, and have communicated the invitation contained in it to
the gentlemen who are here at the request of the President of the
United States to witness the canvassing of the vote at the recent
election in this state for presidential electors, and am instructed
by them to inform you of their acceptance of the invitation, and
that they will designate a committee of five of their number to
attend the meetings of the board. And I take this occasion to
express my thanks for the courteous terms of this invitation, my
deep sense of the importance of your proceedings, and my confident
hope that they will be so conducted as to convince the public mind
of the justice of your finding.
"John Sherman.
"Hon. J. Madison Wells."
A similar invitation was extended to the Democratic visitors, and
substantially the same reply made. The returning board then
proceeded to perform its duty under the law. At each session the
Republican and Democratic visitors were present, and I neither know
of nor have ever heard of any act being done or testimony taken by
the board except in the presence of committees of the two bodies
of visitors. The proceedings of the returning board were reported
for each body of visitors and for the returning board, and all the
evidence taken was not only delivered in the presence of the two
visiting bodies, but was reported to the President and was published
by Congress. Whatever opinions may be expressed as to the correctness
of the findings of the returning board, there can be no doubt that
its proceedings were open, fair and impartial. The board arrived
at the conclusion that the Republican electors received a majority
of the votes cast in Louisiana at that election, and were entitled
to cast the vote of the state for President of the United States.
During the great excitement over this controversy, and also over
that in South Carolina and Florida, exaggerated statements, without
the slightest foundation, of frauds and improper conduct on the
part of the returning officers were made and published. As to the
action of the returning board of Louisiana, I feel bound now, after
a long lapse of time, to repeat what was reported to General Grant
by the Republican visitors, that it made a fair, honest and impartial
return of the result of the election. In concluding our report we
said:
"The proof of violence and intimidation and armed disturbance in
many other parishes, is of the same general character, although
more general and decisive, as to the five parishes particularly
referred to. In the others, these causes prevailed at particular
polling places, at many of which the Republican vote was, to a
considerable extent, prevented.
"We hope to be able to furnish full copies of all testimony taken
by the board, that the justice of its conclusions may be appreciated.
It is a tribunal, from which there can be no appeal, and, in view
of the possible consequences of its adjudication, we have closely
observed its proceedings and have carefully weighed the force of
a large mass of the testimony upon which that adjudication has been
reached.
"The members of the board, acting under oath, were bound by law,
if convinced by the testimony that riot, tumult, acts of violence,
or armed disturbance did materially interfere with the purity and
freedom of election at any poll or voting place, or did materially
change the result of the election thereat, to reject the votes thus
cast, and exclude them from their final return. Of the effect of
such testimony, the board was sole and final judge, and if, in
reaching a conclusion, it exercised good faith and was guided by
an honest desire to do justice, its determination should be respected,
even if, upon like proof, a different conclusion might have been
reached by other tribunals or persons.
"To guard the purity of the ballot; to protect the citizen in the
free and peaceful exercise of his right to vote; to secure him
against violence, intimidation, outrage, and especially murder,
when he attempts to perform his duty, should be the desire of all
men, and the aim of every representative government. If political
success shall be attained by such violent and terrible means as
were resorted to in many parishes in Louisiana, complaint should
not be made if the votes thus obtained are denounced by judicial
tribunals and all honest men as illegal and void."
Pending the action of the board I wrote to Governor Hayes the
following letter, giving a general view of the testimony:
"State of Louisiana, Executive Department,}
"New Orleans, November 23, 1876. }
"My Dear Sir:--I have not written you sooner, for the progress of
our visitation will be known to you through the papers sooner than
from my letters, and the telegraph office here is more public than
a sheriff's sale. We sometimes hear of private telegrams before
they are delivered. The action of the returning board has thus
far been open and fair and only confirms the general result known
before. We are now approaching the contested parishes. To five
of them, viz: Baton Rouge, East and West Feliciana, Morehouse and
Ouachita, the evidence of intimidation is so well made out on paper
that no man can doubt as to the just exclusion of their vote. In
these parishes alone we ought to have a majority of 7,000, but
under the law the entire return must be excluded of all election
districts where intimidation has affected or changed the result.
If this is done the result will give the Hayes electors majorities
aggregating 24,111, and the Tilden electors 22,633, but in almost
every parish the official return varies somewhat from the stated
majorities, and thus far slightly reduces the Republican majority.
"The vote of each disputed parish has thus far been laid aside,
and among them two parishes where a most foolish blunder, or
something worse, was made in omitting from the Republican tickets
the names of all the electors but the two Senatorial and one district
elector. The Democrats claim this will lose over 2,000 votes, but
our friends, whose information we have generally found confirmed,
say it will lose us at most 1,193 votes. The law seems conclusive
that the defective ballots cannot be counted for any electors but
those named on the ticket; though it is conclusively shown that
the remaining electors were omitted by reason of the mistaken idea
that the district could only vote for one elector. The whole
trouble has grown out of the fact that in these two parishes a
candidate for district judge was not named on the ticket printed
by the state committee. We undertook to correct this by printing
new tickets, which were voted in those parishes. The result of
this blunder will leave the poll so close as to render it probable
that one or more of the Tilden electors would have a majority.
"There are other parishes where the organized intimidation was not
so general as in the parishes named, though in single election
precincts it was effective. These parishes, where formal protests
have been filed, are Bienville, Bossier, Caldwell, Franklin, Grant,
Iberia, Lincoln, Richland and Sabine. How far the proof in these
parishes will sustain the protests we cannot judge till the evidence
is heard before the returning board.
"We are now collecting the testimony as to the bulldozed parishes.
It seems more like the history of hell than of civilized and
Christian communities. The means adopted are almost incredible,
but were fearfully effective upon an ignorant and superstitious
people. That you would have received at a fair election a large
majority in Louisiana, no honest man can question; that you did
not receive a majority is equally clear. But that intimidation of
the very kind and nature provided against by the Louisiana law did
enter into and control the election, in more election polls than
would change the result and give you the vote, I believe as firmly
as that I write this. The difficulty of gathering this testimony
and putting it in the legal form has been very great, but I believe
has been fully met.
"The whole case rests upon the action of the returning board. I
have carefully observed them, and have formed a high opinion of
Governor Wells and Colonel Anderson. They are firm, judicious,
and, as far as I can judge, thoroughly honest and conscientious.
They are personally familiar with the nature and degree of intimidation
in Louisiana. They can see that the intimidation, as organized,
was with a view of throwing out Republican parishes rather than
endangering Democratic parishes. Our little party is now dividing
out the disputed parishes, with the view of a careful examination
of every paper and detail. Many are impatient of the delay, and
some have gone home. We will probably be able to keep about ten
here. We have incurred some liabilities for reporting, printing,
etc., but hope the Republican national committee will make this
good. If not, we must provide for it ourselves. We are in good
hope and spirit. Not wishing the return in your favor, unless it
is clear that it ought to be so, and not willing to be cheated out
of it, or to be 'bulldozed' or intimidated, the truth is palpable
that you ought to have the vote of Louisiana, and we believe that
you will have ti, by an honest and fair return, according to the
letter and spirit of the law of Louisiana.
"Very truly yours,
"John Sherman."
To this General Hayes responded as follows:
"Columbus, O., November 27, 1876.
"My Dear Sir:--I am greatly obliged to you for your letter of the
23rd. You feel, I am sure, as I do about this whole business. A
fair election would have given us about forty electoral votes at
the south--at least that many. But we are not to allow our friends
to defeat one outrage and fraud by another. There must be nothing
crooked on our part. Let Mr. Tilden have the place by violence,
intimidation and fraud, rather than undertake to prevent it by
means that will not bear the severest scrutiny.
"I appreciate the work doing by the Republicans who have gone south,
and am especially proud of the acknowledged honorable conduct of
those from Ohio. The Democrats make a mistake in sending so many
ex-Republicans. New converts are proverbially bitter and unfair
towards those they have recently left.
"I trust you will soon reach the end of the work, and be able to
return in health and safety.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes."
I met Governor Hayes on my return and his conversation was to the
same effect, that he wished no doubtful votes and would greatly
prefer to have Mr. Tilden serve as President if there was any doubt
about his (Hayes') election. The Republican visitors did not return
until after the meeting of Congress at its regular session on the
4th of December, 1876.
President Grant, in the beginning of his annual message of that
date, said:
"In submitting my eighth and last message to Congress, it seems
proper that I should refer to, and in some degree recapitulate,
the events and official acts of the past eight years.
"It was my fortune, or misfortune, to be called to the office of
Chief Executive without any previous political training. From the
age of seventeen I had never even witnessed the excitement attending
a presidential campaign but twice antecedent to my own candidacy,
and at but one of them was I eligible as a voter. Under such
circumstances it is but reasonable to suppose that errors of judgment
must have occurred. Even had they not, differences of opinion
between the Executive, bound by an oath to the strict performance
of his duties, and writers and debaters must have arisen. It is
not necessarily evidence of blunder on the part of the Executive
because there are these differences of views. Mistakes have been
made, as all can see and I admit, but, it seems to me, oftener in
the selections made of the assistants appointed to aid in carrying
out the various duties of administering the government, in nearly
every case selected without a personal acquaintance with the
appointee, but upon recommendations of the representatives chosen
directly by the people. It is impossible, where so many trusts
are to be allotted, that the right parties should be chosen in
every instance. History shows that no administration, from the
time of Washington to the present, has been free from these mistakes.
But I leave comparison to history, claiming only that I have acted
in every instance from a conscientious desire to do what was right,
constitutional within the law, and for the very best interests of
the whole people. Failures have been errors of judgment, not of
intent."
This modest statement by General Grant was appreciated by Congress
and by the country. No one doubted the sincerity and patriotism
of the President. His modest confession of errors did not in the
slightest degree impair the universal confidence in him.
On the 18th of January, 1877, Mr. Edmunds, of the select committee
of the Senate on the counting of electoral votes, submitted a report
in writing with an accompanying bill. It was, with one exception,
signed by the members of the committees of the two Houses without
distinction of party. The bill provided in full detail a prescribed
manner for counting the electoral vote. It was adopted by both
Houses and voted for by a great majority, but, believing that it
was extra constitutional, I, with other Republicans, did not vote
for it. The history of the electoral commission provided for in
this bill is part of the history of the country, and it is not
necessary to here enter into it in detail. It is sufficient to
say that it resulted in the counting of the votes of Louisiana,
South Carolina and Florida for Mr. Hayes, electing him President
by a majority of one vote. I took an active part in the debates
on the questions involved and gave in detail my view of the action
of the returning board of Louisiana.
During this period I received a number of personal letters from
Governor Hayes, some of which may be of interest:
"Columbus, O., December 25, 1876.
"My Dear Sir:--I have your esteemed favor, and have also met Judge
Taft and Governor Dennison. There will not be the slightest
difficulty growing out of the matter you refer to. You know my
general course of conduct. It has always seemed to me wisest, in
case of decided antagonisms among friends, not to take sides--to
heal by compromise, not to aggravate, etc., etc. I wish _you_ to
feel authorized to speak in pretty decided terms for me whenever
it seems advisable--to do this not by reason of specific authority
to do it, but from your knowledge of my general methods of action.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman, etc., etc."
"Columbus, O., January 5, 1877.
"My Dear Sir:--I have your note of the 3rd. I do not wish to
influence the action of our friends, and do not volunteer opinions.
But _you_ have a right to my opinion. I believe the Vice President
alone has the constitutional power to count the votes and declare
the result. Everything in the nature of a contest as to electoral
votes is an affair of the states. The rest is a mere ministerial
duty. Therefore it is not right, in my judgment, for Congress to
interfere.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman, U. S. S."
"Columbus, O., February 15, 1877.
"My Dear Sir:--I have two letters from you since I last wrote. It
if becomes my duty to make a cabinet I want your views fully and
specifically. If possible a personal interview would be extremely
desirable. Boynton writes to Smith that an assurance of my views
on the southern question, which are truly set forth in my letter,
with such additions as I could properly make, would be useful. I
prefer to make no new declarations. But you may say if you deem
it advisable that you _know_ that I will stand by the friendly and
encouraging words of that letter and by all that they imply. You
cannot express that too strongly.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman."
"Columbus, O., February 16, 1877.
"My Dear Sir:--If the issue of the contest is in our favor I shall
want to see you at once if it is at all practicable. Don't you
want to visit Mansfield? I can meet you there or here--or possibly
at a point east of there.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman."
"Columbus, O., February 19, 1877.
"My Dear Sir:--The more I think of it the more difficult it seems
for me to get ready to come to Washington before Wednesday or
Thursday of next week. I must fix affairs at Fremont, and cannot
begin it until I know the result. Why can't friends be sent or
come here?
"It seems to me proper now to say that I am extremely desirous that
you should take the treasury department. Aside from my own personal
preference, there are many and controlling reasons why I should
ask you to do this. It will satisfy friends here in Ohio. I
understand Governor Morton and our friends in Washington like it.
The country will approve it. You are by all odds the best fitted
for it of any man in the nation. Your resignation from the Senate
will be a great loss to that body, but it will cause no serious
dissensions or difficulty in Ohio. Do not say no until I have had
a full conference with you. There is no reason why you should not
visit Ohio as soon as you can be spared from Washington. Of course
the public will know of our meeting. But they will be gratified
to know it. No possible harm can come of it. I should have said
all this before, but I did not want to embarrass you in your action
on the presidential question.
"Sincerely,
"R. B. Hayes.
"Hon. John Sherman."
(Telegram.)
"Columbus, O., February 20, 1877.
"Hon. John Sherman.
"I will be greatly obliged if you can come to Columbus, but will
meet you at Zanesville if you think it important.
"R. B. Hayes."
"Columbus, O., February 28, 1877.
"Hon. John Sherman, Washington, D. C.
"Dear Sir:--Governor Hayes will be obliged to you if you will be
kind enough to speak to Mr. Evarts with respect to his acceptance
of the place in the cabinet referred to in the interview with you
last week. It was the governor's intention to make this request
at that time, and he may have done so, but not being quite sure of
the fact, desires me to write you with reference to it.
"Yours very respectfully,
"W. K. Rogers, Secretary."
President Hayes frequently, in personal conversation and in writing,
had expressed a strong desire that I should become the Secretary
of the Treasury. I was disinclined to accept this position, as I
was content to serve my constituents in the Senate. It was not
until after his urgent request in his letter of February 19, 1877,
that I seriously considered his desire that I should accept that
office. I went to Columbus to ascertain the views of the legislature,
and whether there would be any difficulty in selecting a Republican
to my place in the Senate. Having found that there would not be,
I, with reluctance, accepted his offer. Stanley Matthews was
elected on the 21st of March to serve out my unexpired term, which
ended on the 3rd of March, 1879.
President Hayes arrived at Washington a few days before the 4th of
March and was my guest until he was inaugurated as President. The
4th day of March was on Sunday, and to avoid any questions about
an interregnum, he was sworn into office on that day, but took the
formal oath on the next day, the 5th of March, and made his inaugural
address. He nominated the members of his cabinet to the Senate
and they were promptly confirmed.
I received many letters of congratulation and encouragement in
assuming the duties of Secretary of the Treasury, two of which I
insert:
"New York, March 6, 1877.
"My Dear Mr. Secretary:--Allow me to congratulate you on having
been selected by President Hayes to administer the financial affairs
of the nation.
"I deem it a happy augury that the President's choice of members
of his cabinet has fallen upon men who have made their mark as
statesmen, and whose advent to power will, I feel convinced,
inaugurate an era of prosperity for our country.
"With yourself at the head of the treasury department, there is no
fear of public credit being shaken and commercial interests imperiled
by crude and experimental legislation.
"With great respect, I remain, my dear Mr. Sherman,
"Very truly your friend,
"Cyrus W. Field.
"Hon. John Sherman, Washington."
"Consulate General of the United States for Great Britain and
Ireland,}
"London, E. C., March 12, 1877.}
"The Hon. John Sherman, Secretary of the Treasury.
"My Dear Sir:--When I begin to write to you, I am reminded of what
General Sherman said, in my hearing, to General Grant, after the
latter was made General in Chief: 'I cannot congratulate you; the
responsibility is too great.' You have certainly succeeded to the
most difficult post in the government, one in whose successful
administration Americans abroad feel an especial interest, for no
department is more important to foreigners or more discussed by
them.
"It may not be unsatisfactory to you to know that Americans--both
those long domiciled here and those in transit--applaud the
appointment of the new Chief of the Treasury.
"I beg to offer my best wishes and belief that the reputation he
has already achieved in the Senate will be increased in the cabinet;
and to say how glad I was that the unanimity of his late compeers
showed that they were of the same mind.
"With great respect, I am, my dear sir,
"Very faithfully yours,
"Adam Badeau."