Chapter 28

[108]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 56.

[109]Ibid., p. 97.

[110]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 98.

[111]Ibid., p. 99.

[112]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 113.

[113]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 175.

[114]H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 165.

[115]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 126.

[116]Ibid., p. 127.

[117]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 129.

[118]Washington Hunt, 214,614; Horatio Seymour, 214,352.—Civil List, State of New York(1887), p. 166.

[119]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 189.

[120]Horace Greeley,Recollections of a Busy Life, pp. 138, 139.

[121]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 190.

[122]"The Whigs held the Senate by only two majority, and when the day for electing a United States senator arrived, sixteen Whigs voted for Fish, and fifteen Democrats voted for as many different candidates, so that the Fish Whigs could not double over upon them. James W. Beekman, a Whig senator of New York City, who claimed that Fish had fallen too much under the control of Weed, voted for Francis Granger. Upon a motion to adjourn, Beekman voted 'yes' with the Democrats, creating a tie, which the lieutenant-governor broke by also voting in the affirmative. The Whigs then waited for a few weeks, but one morning, when two Democrats were in New York City, they sprung a resolution to go into an election, and, after an unbroken struggle of fourteen hours, Fish was elected. The exultant cannon of the victors startled the city from its slumbers, and convinced the Silver-Grays that the Woolly Heads still held the capitol."—H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 172.

[123]J.E. Cabot,Life of Emerson, p. 578. Emerson's address at Concord, May 3, 1851.

[124]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 163.

[125]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 185.

[126]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 196.

[127]"When Fillmore withdrew from the presidential office, the general sentiment proclaimed that he had filled the place with ability and honour. He was strictly temperate, industrious, orderly, and of an integrity above suspicion. If Northern people did not approve the fugitive slave law, they at least looked upon it with toleration. It is quite true, however, that after-opinion has been unkind to Fillmore. The judgment on him was made up at a time when the fugitive slave law had become detestable, and he was remembered only for his signature and vigorous execution of it."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, pp. 297, 301.

[128]"It was certain that Mr. Dickinson could not carry New York.... Governor Marcy was strongly urged in many quarters, and it was thought the State might be carried by him; but many were of the opinion that his friends kept his name prominently before the public with the hope of obtaining a cabinet appointment for him and thus securing the influence of that section of the New York Democracy to which he belonged. This was precisely the result that followed."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 266.

[129]"I could not consent to a nomination here without incurring the imputation of unfaithfully executing the trust committed to me by my constituents—without turning my back on an old and valued friend. Nothing that could be offered me—not even the highest position in the Government, the office of President of the United States—could compensate me for such a desertion of my trust."—Daniel S. Dickinson,Letters and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 370.

[130]H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 181.

[131]"Marcy held the war portfolio under Polk, but his conduct of the office had not added to his reputation, for it had galled the Administration to have the signal victories of the Mexican War won by Whig generals, and it was currently believed that the War Minister had shared in the endeavour to thwart some of the plans of Scott and Taylor."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, pp. 246-7."The conflict became terrific, until, when the ballots had run up to within one of fifty, the Virginia nominee was announced as the choice of the convention."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 268.

"The conflict became terrific, until, when the ballots had run up to within one of fifty, the Virginia nominee was announced as the choice of the convention."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 268.

[132]"Seymour was among the most effective and eloquent platform orators in New York. Less electrical than John Van Buren, he was more persuasive; less witty, he was more logical; less sarcastic, he was more candid; less denunciatory of antagonists, he was more convincing to opponents. These two remarkable men had little in common except lofty ambition and rare mental and social gifts. Their salient characteristics were widely dissimilar. Seymour was conciliatory, and cultivated peace. Van Buren was aggressive, and coveted war."—H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 178.

[133]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 218.

[134]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 188."Many thought: the voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. Seward was the political juggler, or Mephistopheles, as some called him, and the result was regarded as his triumph."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 262. "Some of the prominent Whig newspapers of Georgia declined to sustain Scott, because his election would mean Free-soilism and Sewardism. An address was issued on July 3 by Alexander H. Stephens, Robert Toombs, and five other Whig representatives, in which they flatly refused to support Scott because he was 'the favourite candidate of the Free Soil wing of the Whig party.'"—Ibid., p. 262.

[134]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 188.

"Many thought: the voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. Seward was the political juggler, or Mephistopheles, as some called him, and the result was regarded as his triumph."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 262. "Some of the prominent Whig newspapers of Georgia declined to sustain Scott, because his election would mean Free-soilism and Sewardism. An address was issued on July 3 by Alexander H. Stephens, Robert Toombs, and five other Whig representatives, in which they flatly refused to support Scott because he was 'the favourite candidate of the Free Soil wing of the Whig party.'"—Ibid., p. 262.

[135]New YorkTribune, October, 1852.

[136]Seward's Works, Vol. 3, p. 416. Date of letter, June 26, 1852.

[137]"The argument of thePost, that the Democratic candidate and platform were really more favourable to liberty than the Whig, was somewhat strained; the editor failed to look the situation squarely in the face. He was, however, acting in perfect harmony with the prominent New York Democrats who had, four years previously, bolted the regular nomination. Salmon P. Chase, although still a Democrat, would not support Pierce, but gave his adherence to the Free-soil nominations, and tried hard, though in vain, to bring to their support his former New York associates."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, pp. 264-65.

[138]John A. Dix spoke in the New England and the Middle States. From October 11 to 29 he made thirteen speeches "in the great canvass which is upon us."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, pp. 269, 271.

[139]Horatio Seymour, 264,121; Washington Hunt, 241,525.—Civil List, State of New York(1887), p. 166.

[140]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 219.

[141]"Seymour resisted the Barnburner revolt of 1847, and supported Cass for President in 1848. But he warmly espoused the movement to reunite the party the next year. He was in advance of Marcy in that direction. Seymour pushed forward, while Marcy hung back. Seymour rather liked the Barnburners, except John Van Buren, of whom he was quite jealous and somewhat afraid. But Marcy, after the experiences of 1847 and 1848, denounced them in hard terms, until Seymour and the Free-soil Democrats began talking of him for President in 1852, when the wily old Regency tactician mellowed toward them. Nothing was wanted to carry Marcy clear over except the hostility of Dickinson, who stood in his way to the White House. This he soon encountered, which reconciled him to the Barnburners."—H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 177.

[142]Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 271.

[143]Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 272.

[144]"To satisfy the greatest number was the aim of the President, to whom this problem became the subject of serious thoughts and many councils; and although the whole Cabinet, as finally announced, was published in the newspapers one week before the inauguration, Pierce did not really decide who should be secretary of state until he had actually been one day in office, for up to the morning of March 5, that portfolio had not been offered to Marcy."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 389.

[145]"The President offered Dix the mission to France. The time fixed was early in the summer of that year. Meanwhile passage was taken for Havre, preparations for a four years' residence abroad were made, and every arrangement was completed which an anticipated absence from home renders necessary. But political intrigue was instantly resumed, and again with complete success. The opposition now came, or appears to have come, mainly from certain Southern politicians. Charges were made—such, for example, as this: that General Dix was an Abolitionist, and that the Administration would be untrue to the South by allowing a man of that extreme and fanatical party to represent it abroad.... But though these insinuations were repelled, the influence was too strong to be resisted. In fact, the place was wanted for an eminent gentleman from Virginia."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, pp. 273, 274, 275.

[146]New YorkTribune, September 27, 1853.

[147]New YorkTribune, September 27, 1853.

[148]Ibid., September 26, 1853.

[149]New YorkTribune, September 26, 1853.

[150]Ibid., October 24, 1853.

[151]"With advancing years Mr. Conkling's temperament changed slightly. The exactions of legal life, and, to some extent, the needs of his political experience, apparently estranged him from the masses, although he was naturally one of the most approachable of men."—Alfred R. Conkling,The Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, pp. 203, 204.

[152]New YorkTribune, October 6, 1853.

[153]New YorkTribune, October 8, 1853.

[154]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 221.

[155]Ibid., p. 222.

[156]James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 453.

[157]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 220.

[158]James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 1, p. 453.

[159]Gideon Welles,Lincoln and Seward, p. 68.

[160]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 222.

[161]"After the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act, it would seem as if the course of the opposition were plain. That the different elements of opposition should be fused into one complete whole seemed political wisdom. That course involved the formation of a new party and was urged warmly and persistently by many newspapers, but by none with such telling influence as by the New YorkTribune. It had likewise the countenance of Chase, Sumner, and Wade. There were three elements that must be united—the Whigs, the Free-soilers, and the Anti-Nebraska Democrats. The Whigs were the most numerous body and as those at the North, to a man, had opposed the repeal of the Missouri Compromise they thought, with some quality of reason, that the fight might well be made under their banner and with their name. For the organisation of a party was not the work of a day. Why, then, go to all this trouble, when a complete organisation is at hand ready for use? This view of the situation was ably argued by the New YorkTimes, and was supported by Senator Seward. As the New York Senator had a position of influence superior to any one who had opposed the Kansas-Nebraska bill, strenuous efforts were made to get his adhesion to a new party movement, but they were without avail. 'Seward hangs fire,' wrote Dr. Bailey. 'He agrees with Thurlow Weed.'—(Bailey to J.S. Pike, May 30, 1854,First Blows of the Civil War, p. 237.) 'We are not yet ready for a great national convention at Buffalo or elsewhere,' wrote Seward to Theodore Parker; 'it would bring together only the old veterans. The States are the places for activity just now.'—(Life of Seward, Vol. 2, p. 232.) Yet many Whigs who were not devoted to machine politics saw clearly that a new party must be formed under a new name. They differed, however, in regard to their bond of union. Some wished to go to the country with simplyRepeal of the Kansas-Nebraska actinscribed on their banner. Others wished to plant themselves squarely on prohibition of slavery in all the territories. Still others preferred the resolve that not another slave State should be admitted into the Union. Yet after all, the time seemed ripe for the formation of a party whose cardinal principle might be summed up as opposition to the extension of slavery."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 2, p. 45-7.

[162]New YorkEvening Post, February 11, 1854.

[163]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 226."Mr. Greeley called upon me at the Astor House and asked if I did not think that the time and circumstances were favourable to his nomination. I replied that I did not think the time and circumstances favourable to his election, if nominated, but that my friends had lost control of the state convention. This answer perplexed him, but a few words of explanation made it quite clear. Admitting that he had brought the people up to the point of accepting a temperance candidate for governor, I remarked that another aspirant had 'stolen his thunder.' In other words, while he had shaken the temperance bush, Myron H. Clark would catch the bird. I informed Mr. Greeley that Know-Nothing or 'Choctaw' lodges had been secretly organised throughout the State, by means of which many delegates for Mr. Clark had been secured. Mr. Greeley saw that the 'slate' had been broken, and cheerfully relinquished the idea of being nominated. But a few days afterwards Mr. Greeley came to Albany, and said in an abrupt but not unfriendly way, 'Is there any objection to my running for lieutenant-governor?'... After a little more conversation, Mr. Greeley became entirely satisfied that a nomination for lieutenant-governor was not desirable, and left me in good spirits."—Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 226.

[163]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 226.

"Mr. Greeley called upon me at the Astor House and asked if I did not think that the time and circumstances were favourable to his nomination. I replied that I did not think the time and circumstances favourable to his election, if nominated, but that my friends had lost control of the state convention. This answer perplexed him, but a few words of explanation made it quite clear. Admitting that he had brought the people up to the point of accepting a temperance candidate for governor, I remarked that another aspirant had 'stolen his thunder.' In other words, while he had shaken the temperance bush, Myron H. Clark would catch the bird. I informed Mr. Greeley that Know-Nothing or 'Choctaw' lodges had been secretly organised throughout the State, by means of which many delegates for Mr. Clark had been secured. Mr. Greeley saw that the 'slate' had been broken, and cheerfully relinquished the idea of being nominated. But a few days afterwards Mr. Greeley came to Albany, and said in an abrupt but not unfriendly way, 'Is there any objection to my running for lieutenant-governor?'... After a little more conversation, Mr. Greeley became entirely satisfied that a nomination for lieutenant-governor was not desirable, and left me in good spirits."—Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 226.

[164]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 2, p. 227.

[165]Ibid., p. 280.

[166]In a letter to Charles A. Dana, dated March 2, 1856, Greeley indicates his feeling toward Raymond. "Have we got to surrender a page of the nextWeeklyto Raymond's bore of an address?" he says, referring to the Pittsburgh convention's appeal. "The man who could inflict six columns on a long-suffering public, on such an occasion, cannot possibly know enough to write an address."

[167]"I was a member of the first anti-Nebraska or Republican State Convention, which met at Saratoga Springs in September; but Messrs. Weed and Seward for a while stood aloof from the movement, preferring to be still regarded as Whigs."—Horace Greeley,Recollections of a Busy Life, p. 314.

[168]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 234.

[169]Myron H. Clark, 156,804; Horatio Seymour, 156,495; Daniel Ullman, 122,282; Green C. Bronson, 33,850.—Civil List, State of New York(1887), p. 166.

[170]H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 164. John W. Taylor served twenty consecutive years in Congress—a longer continuous service than any New York successor. Taylor also bears the proud distinction of being the only speaker from New York. Twice he was honoured as the successor of Henry Clay. He died at the home of his daughter in Cleveland, Ohio, in September, 1854, at the age of seventy, leaving a place in history strongly marked.

[171]New YorkTimes, June 1, 1854.

[172]New YorkEvening Post, May 23, 1854.

[173]"There is about as much infidelity among Whigs at Albany as was expected; perhaps a little more. But there is also a counteracting agency in the other party, it is said, which promises to be an equilibrium."—F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 243.

[174]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 243.

[175]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 243.

[176]Ibid., p. 251.

[177]Ibid., p. 245.

[178]Ibid., p. 246.

[179]Spring'sKansas, p. 44; see also, Sara Robinson,Kansas, p. 27.

[180]"He never became unduly excited about slavery. He had no sympathy for the religious or sentimental side of abolitionism, nor was he moved by the words of the philanthropists, preachers, or poets by whom the agitation was set ablaze and persistently fanned. He probably regarded it as an evil of less magnitude than several others that threatened the country."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 338.

[181]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 256. For full speech, seeSeward's Works, Vol. 4, p. 225.

[182]Diary of R.H. Dana, C.F. Adams,Life of Dana, Vol. 1, p. 348.

[183]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 258.

[184]Ibid., p. 259.

[185]James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 2, p. 69. See also p. 68. "Seward," says the historian, "had the position, the ability and the character necessary for the leadership of a new party. He was the idol of the anti-slavery Whigs.... Perhaps his sympathies were heartily enlisted in the movement for a new party and he was held back by Thurlow Weed. Perhaps he would have felt less trammelled had not his senatorship been at stake in the fall election. The fact is, however, that the Republican movement in the West and New England received no word of encouragement from him. He did not make a speech, even in the State of New York, during the campaign. His care and attention were engrossed in seeing that members of the Legislature were elected who would vote for him for senator." On July 27, 1854, the New YorkIndependentasked: "Shall we have a new party? The leaders for such a party do not appear. Seward adheres to the Whig party." In the New YorkTribuneof November 9, Greeley asserted that "the man who should have impelled and guided the general uprising of the free States is W.H. Seward."

[186]New YorkWeekly Tribune, February 2, 1856.

[187]Parke Godwin,Life of Bryant, Vol. 2, p. 88.

[188]New YorkIndependent, March 26, 1856.

[189]New YorkIndependent, February 7, 1856.

[190]New YorkTimes, February 1, 1856.

[191]Report of Committee on Territories, U.S. Senate, March 12, 1856.

[192]New YorkIndependent, May 1, 1856, Letters from Washington.

[193]James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 2, p. 130.

[194]New YorkTimes, April 9, 1856.

[195]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 270.

[196]Statement of William H. Seward, Jr., to the Author.

[197]This speech was made on June 24, 1856.

[198]Gideon Welles,Lincoln and Seward, p. 23. "I am sorry to hear the remark," said the late Chief Justice Chase, "for while I would strain a point to oblige Mr. Seward, I feel under no obligations to do anything for the special benefit of Mr. Weed. The two are not and never can be one to me."—Ibid., p. 23.

[199]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 270.

[200]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 277.

[201]Ibid., p. 277.

[202]Ibid., p. 277.

[203]H.B. Stanton,Random Recollections, p. 194.

[204]Letters of April 7, 1856.

[205]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 278.

[206]Fernando Wood was a Quaker and a Philadelphian by birth. In early youth he became a cigarmaker, then a tobacco dealer, and later a grocer. At Harrisburg, his first introduction to politics resulted in a fist-fight with a state senator who was still on the floor when Wood left the bar-room. Then he went to New York, and, in 1840, was elected to Congress at the age of twenty-eight. Wood had a fascinating personality. He was tall and shapely, his handsome features and keen blue eyes were made the more attractive by an abundance of light hair which fell carelessly over a high, broad forehead. But, as a politician, he was as false as his capacity would allow him to be, having no hesitation, either from principle or fear, to say or do anything that served his purpose. He has been called the successor of Aaron Burr and the predecessor of William M. Tweed. In 1858, he organised Mozart Hall, a Democratic society opposed to Tammany.

[207]Thurlow Weed Barnes,Life of Thurlow Weed, Vol. 1, p. 153.

[208]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 140.

[209]Horatio Seymour used the same argument with great effect. "Another tie which has heretofore held our country together has been disbanded, and from its ruins has sprung a political organisation trusting for its success to sectional prejudices. It excludes from its councils the people of nearly one-half of the Union; it seeks a triumph over one-half our country. The battle-fields of Yorktown, of Camden, of New Orleans, are unrepresented in their conventions; and no delegates speak for the States where rest the remains of Washington, Jefferson, Marion, Sumter, or Morgan, or of the later hero, Jackson. They cherish more bitter hatred of their own countrymen than they have ever shown towards the enemies of our land. If the language they hold this day had been used eighty years since, we should not have thrown off the British yoke; our national constitution would not have been formed; and if their spirit of hatred continues, our Constitution and Government will cease to exist."—Seymour at Springfield, Mass., July 4, 1856. Cook and Knox,Public Record of Horatio Seymour, p. 2."John A. Dix supported the Democratic candidates in the canvass of 1856; he did not, however, take an active part in the contest."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 319.

"John A. Dix supported the Democratic candidates in the canvass of 1856; he did not, however, take an active part in the contest."—Morgan Dix,Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 319.

[210]Edward Cary,Life of George William Curtis, p. 113; New YorkWeekly Tribune, August 16, 1856.

[211]Ibid., August 16, 1856.

[212]John A. King, 264,400; Amasa J. Parker, 198,616; Erastus Brooks, 130,870.—Civil List, State of New York(1887), p. 166.

[213]This debate occurred December 22, 1857.

[214]Alfred R. Conkling,Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling, p. 77.

[215]James S. Pike,First Blows of the Civil War, p. 379.

[216]Warden,Life of Chase, p. 343.

[217]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 351.

[218]Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 48.

[219]F.W. Seward,Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 352.

[220]New YorkDaily Tribune, October 27, 1858."Few speeches from the stump have attracted so great attention or exerted so great an influence. The eminence of the man combined with the startling character of the doctrine to make it engross the public mind. Republicans looked upon the doctrine announced as the well-weighed conclusion of a profound thinker and of a man of wide experience, who united the political philosopher with the practical politician. It is not probable that Lincoln's 'house divided against itself' speech had any influence in bringing Seward to this position. He would at this time have scorned the notion of borrowing ideas from Lincoln; and had he studied the progress of the Illinois canvass, he must have seen that the declaration did not meet with general favour. In February of this year there had been bodied forth in Seward the politician. Now, a far-seeing statesman spoke. One was compared to Webster's 7th-of-March speech,—the other was commended by the Abolitionists."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 2, pp. 344-5.

[220]New YorkDaily Tribune, October 27, 1858.

"Few speeches from the stump have attracted so great attention or exerted so great an influence. The eminence of the man combined with the startling character of the doctrine to make it engross the public mind. Republicans looked upon the doctrine announced as the well-weighed conclusion of a profound thinker and of a man of wide experience, who united the political philosopher with the practical politician. It is not probable that Lincoln's 'house divided against itself' speech had any influence in bringing Seward to this position. He would at this time have scorned the notion of borrowing ideas from Lincoln; and had he studied the progress of the Illinois canvass, he must have seen that the declaration did not meet with general favour. In February of this year there had been bodied forth in Seward the politician. Now, a far-seeing statesman spoke. One was compared to Webster's 7th-of-March speech,—the other was commended by the Abolitionists."—James F. Rhodes,History of the United States, Vol. 2, pp. 344-5.

Back to Index Next