In his political controversies, d.i.c.kinson acted on the principle that an opponent is necessarily a blockhead or a scoundrel. But there was little or no truth in his severe arraignment. Richmond"s purpose was plainly to nominate Horatio Seymour if it could be done with the consent of the Northwestern States, and his sudden affection for a two-thirds rule came from a determination to prolong the convention until it yielded consent. At no time did he intend leaving Douglas for any one other than Seymour. On the other hand, d.i.c.kinson had always favoured slavery.[568] Neither the Wilmot Proviso nor the repeal of the Missouri Compromise disturbed him. What slavery demanded he granted; what freedom sought he denounced. His belief that the South would support him for a compromise candidate in return for his fidelity became an hallucination. It showed itself at Cincinnati in 1852 when he antagonised Marcy; and his position in 1860 was even less advantageous. Nevertheless, d.i.c.kinson nursed his delusion until the guns at Fort Sumter disclosed the real design of Yancey and the men in whom he had confided.
[Footnote 568: "The obduracy, the consistency of Mr. d.i.c.kinson"s Democracy are of the most marked type. Ever since he changed his vote from Van Buren to Polk, with such hearty alacrity in the Baltimore convention of 1844, he has promptly yielded to every requisition which the Southern Democracy has made upon their Northern allies. All along through the stormy years when the star of the Wilmot Proviso was in the ascendant, and when Wright and Dix bowed to the gale, and even Marcy and Bronson bent before it, d.i.c.kinson, on the floor of the Senate, stood erect and immovable."--New York _Tribune_, July 4, 1860.]
CHAPTER XXIII
RAYMOND, GREELEY, AND WEED
1860
It was impossible that the defeat of Seward at Chicago, so unexpected, and so far-reaching in its effect, should be encountered without some attempt to fix the responsibility. To Thurlow Weed"s sorrow[569] was added the mortification of defeat. He had staked everything upon success, and, although he doubtless wished to avoid any unseemly demonstration of disappointment, the rankling wound goaded him into a desire to relieve himself of any lack of precaution. Henry J. Raymond scarcely divided the responsibility of management; but his newspaper, which had spoken for Seward, shared in the loss of prestige, while the _Tribune_, his great rival in metropolitan journalism, disclosed between the lines of a.s.sumed modesty an exultant att.i.tude.
[Footnote 569: "Mr. Weed was for a time completely unnerved by the result. He even shed tears over the defeat of his old friend."--Thurlow Weed Barnes, _Life of Thurlow Weed_, Vol. 2, p. 271.
"After the joy of Lincoln"s nomination had subsided," wrote Leonard Swett of Chicago, "Judge Davis and I called upon Mr. Weed. This was the first time either of us had met him. He did not talk angrily as to the result, nor did he complain of any one. Confessing with much feeling to the great disappointment of his life, he said, "I hoped to make my friend, Mr. Seward, President, and I thought I could serve my country in so doing." He was a larger man intellectually than I antic.i.p.ated, and of finer fibre. There was in him an element of gentleness and a large humanity which won me, and I was pleased no less than surprised."--_Ibid._, Vol. 2, p. 292.]
Greeley had played a very important part in the historic convention.
The press gave him full credit for his activity, and he admitted it in his jubilant letter to Pike; but after returning to New York he seemed to think it wise to minimise his influence, claiming that the result would have been the same had he remained at home. "The fact that the four conspicuous doubtful States of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Illinois," he wrote, "unanimously testified that they could not be carried for Seward was decisive. Against this Malakoff the most brilliant evolutions of political strategy could not avail."[570] This two-column article, modestly concealing his own work, might not have led to an editorial war between the three great Republican editors of the State, had not Greeley, in the exordium of a speech, published in the _Tribune_ of May 23, exceeded the limits of human endurance. "The past is dead," he said. "Let the dead past bury it, and let the mourners, if they will, go about the streets."
[Footnote 570: New York _Tribune_, May 22, 1860.]
The exultant sentences exasperated Raymond, who held the opinion which generally obtained among New York Republican leaders, that Greeley"s persistent hostility was not only responsible for Seward"s defeat, but that under the guise of loyalty to the party"s highest interests he had been insidious and revengeful, and Raymond believed it needed only a bold and loud-spoken accusation against him to fill the mind of the public with his guilt. In this spirit he wrote a stinging reply. "With the generosity which belongs to his nature, and which a feeling not unlike remorse may have stimulated into unwonted activity," said this American Junius, "Mr. Greeley awards to others the credit which belongs transcendently to himself. The main work of the Chicago convention was the defeat of Governor Seward, and in that endeavour Mr. Greeley laboured harder, and did tenfold more, than the whole family of Blairs, together with all the gubernatorial candidates, to whom he modestly hands over the honours of the effective campaign. Mr.
Greeley had special qualifications, as well as a special love, for this task. For twenty years he had been sustaining the political principles and vindicating the political conduct of Mr. Seward through the columns of the most influential political newspaper in the country. His voice was potential precisely where Governor Seward was strongest, because it was supposed to be that of a friend, strong in his personal attachment and devotion, and driven into opposition on this occasion solely by the despairing conviction that the welfare of the country and the triumph of the Republican cause demanded the sacrifice. For more than six months Mr. Greeley had been preparing the way for this consummation. He was in Chicago several days before the meeting of the convention and he devoted every hour of the interval to the most steady and relentless prosecution of the main business which took him thither.
"While it was known to some that nearly six years ago he had privately, but distinctly, repudiated all further political friendship for and alliance with Governor Seward, for the avowed reason that Governor Seward had never aided or advised his elevation to office, no use was made of this knowledge in quarters where it would have disarmed the deadly effect of his pretended friendship for the man upon whom he was thus deliberately wreaking the long h.o.a.rded revenge of a disappointed office-seeker.... Being thus stimulated by a hatred he had secretly cherished for years, protected by the forbearance of those whom he a.s.sailed, and strong in the confidence of those upon whom he sought to operate, it is not strange that Mr. Greeley"s efforts should have been crowned with success. But it is perfectly safe to say that no other man--certainly no one occupying a position less favourable for such an a.s.sault--could possibly have accomplished that result."[571]
[Footnote 571: New York _Times_, May 25, 1860.]
Raymond"s letter produced a profound impression. It excited the astonishment and incredulity of every one. He had made a distinct charge that Greeley"s opposition was the revenge of a disappointed office-seeker, and the public, resenting the imputation, demanded the evidence. Greeley himself echoed the prayer by a blast from his silver trumpet which added to the interest as well as to the excitement.
"This carefully drawn indictment," he said, "contains a very artful mixture of truth and misrepresentation. No intelligent reader of the _Tribune_ has for months been left in doubt of the fact that I deemed the nomination of Governor Seward for President at this time unwise and unsafe; and none can fail to understand that I did my best at Chicago to prevent that nomination. My account of "Last Week at Chicago" is explicit on that point. True, I do not believe my influence was so controlling as the defeated are disposed to represent it, but this is not material to the issue. It is agreed that I did what I could.
"It is not true--it is grossly untrue--that at Chicago I commended myself to the confidence of delegates "by professions of regard and the most zealous friendship for Governor Seward, but presented defeat, _even in New York_, as the inevitable result of his nomination." The very reverse of this is the truth. I made no professions before the nomination, as I have uttered no lamentations since. It was the simple duty of each delegate to do just whatever was best for the Republican cause, regardless of personal considerations. And this is exactly what I did.... As to New York, I think I was at least a hundred times asked whether Governor Seward could carry this State;[572] and I am sure I uniformly responded affirmatively, urging delegates to consider the New York delegation the highest authority on that point as I was strenuously urging that the delegations from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, and Illinois must be regarded as authority as to who could and who could not carry their respective States.
[Footnote 572: "At Chicago, Seward encountered the opposition from his own State of such powerful leaders as Greeley, Dudley Field, Bryant, and Wadsworth. The first two were on the ground and very busy. The two latter sent pungent letters that were circulated among the delegates from the various States. The main point of the attack was that Seward could not carry New York. Soon after the adjournment of the convention, William Curtis Noyes, a delegate, told me that a careful canva.s.s of the New York delegation showed that nearly one-fourth of its members believed it was extremely doubtful if Seward could obtain a majority at the polls in that State."--H.B. Stanton, _Random Recollections_, pp. 214-15. "Perhaps the main stumbling block over which he fell in the convention was Thurlow Weed."--_Ibid._, p. 215.]
"Mr. Raymond proceeds to state that I had, "in November, 1854, privately but distinctly repudiated all further political friendship for and alliance with Governor Seward, and menaced him with hostility wherever it could be made most effective; for the avowed reason that Governor Seward had never advised my elevation to office," &c. This is a very grave charge, and, being dated "Auburn, Tuesday, May 22, 1860,"
and written by one who was there expressly and avowedly to console with Governor Seward on his defeat and denounce me as its author, it is impossible not to see that Governor Seward is its responsible source. I, therefore, call on him for the private letter which I did write him in November, 1854, that I may print it verbatim in the _Tribune_, and let every reader judge how far it sustains the charges which his mouthpiece bases thereon. I maintain that it does not sustain them; but I have no copy of the letter, and I cannot discuss its contents while it remains in the hands of my adversaries, to be used at their discretion. I leave to others all judgment as to the unauthorised use which has already been made of this private and confidential letter, only remarking that this is by no means the first time it has been employed to like purpose. I have heard of its contents being dispensed to members of Congress from Governor Seward"s dinner-table; I have seen articles based on it paraded in the columns of such devoted champions of Governor Seward"s principles and aims as the Boston _Courier_. It is fit that the New York _Times_ should follow in their footsteps; but I, who am thus fired on from an ambush, demand that the letter shall no longer be thus employed. Let me have the letter and it shall appear verbatim in every edition of the _Tribune_. Meantime, I only say that, when I fully decided that I would no longer be devoted to Governor Seward"s personal fortunes, it seemed due to candour and fair dealing that I should privately but in all frankness apprise him of the fact. It was not possible that I could in any way be profited by writing that letter; I well understood that it involved an abdication of all hopes of political advancement; yet it seemed due to my own character that the letter should be written. Of course I never dreamed that it could be published, or used as it already has been; but no matter--let us have the letter in print, and let the public judge between its writer and his open and covert a.s.sailants. At all events I ask no favour and fear no open hostility.
"There are those who will at all events believe that my opposition to Governor Seward"s nomination was impelled by personal considerations; and among these I should expect to find the Hon. Henry J. Raymond.
With these I have no time for controversy; in their eyes I desire no vindication. But there is another and far larger cla.s.s who will realise that the obstacles to Governor Seward"s election were in no degree of my creation, and that their removal was utterly beyond my powers. The whole course of the _Tribune_ has tended to facilitate the elevation to the Presidency of a statesman cherishing the p.r.o.nounced anti-slavery views of Governor Seward; it is only on questions of finance and public economy that there has been any perceptible divergence between us. Those anti-democratic voters of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, and Illinois, who could not be induced to vote for Governor Seward, have derived their notions of him in some measure from the _Times_, but in no measure from the _Tribune_. The delegations from those States, with the candidates for governor in Pennsylvania and Indiana, whose representations and remonstrances rendered the nomination of Governor Seward, in the eyes of all intelligent, impartial observers, a clear act of political suicide, were nowise instructed or impelled by me. They acted on views deliberately formed long before they came to Chicago. It is not my part to vindicate them; but whoever says they were influenced by me, other than I was by them, does them the grossest injustice.
"I wished first of all to succeed; next, to strengthen and establish our struggling brethren in the border slave States. If it had seemed to me possible to obtain one more vote in the doubtful States for Governor Seward than for any one else, I should have struggled for him as ardently as I did against him, even though I had known that the Raymonds who hang about our party were to be his trusted counsellors and I inflexibly shut out from his confidence and favour. If there be any who do not believe this, I neither desire their friendship nor deprecate their hostility."[573]
[Footnote 573: New York _Tribune_, June 2, 1860.]
Greeley"s demand for his letter did not meet with swift response. It was made on June 2. When Seward pa.s.sed through New York on his way to Washington on the 8th, a friend of Greeley waited upon him, but he had nothing for the _Tribune_. Days multiplied into a week, and still nothing came. Finally, on June 13, Greeley received it through the hands of Thurlow Weed and published it on the 14th. It bore date "New York, Sat.u.r.day evening, November 11, 1854," and was addressed simply to "Governor Seward." Its great length consigned it to nonpareil in strange contrast to the long primer type of the editorial page, but its publication became the sensation of the hour. To this day its fine thought-shading is regarded the best ill.u.s.tration of Greeley"s matchless prose.
"The election is over," he says, "and its results sufficiently ascertained. It seems to me a fitting time to announce to you the dissolution of the political firm of Seward, Weed & Greeley, by the withdrawal of the junior partner--said withdrawal to take effect on the morning after the first Tuesday in February next. And, as it may seem a great presumption in me to a.s.sume that any such firm exists, especially since the public was advised, rather more than a year ago, by an editorial rescript in the _Evening Journal_, formally reading me out of the Whig party, that I was esteemed no longer either useful or ornamental in the concern, you will, I am sure, indulge me in some reminiscences which seem to befit the occasion.
"I was a poor young printer and editor of a literary journal--a very active and bitter Whig in a small way, but not seeking to be known out of my own ward committee--when, after the great political revulsion of 1837, I was one day called to the City Hotel, where two strangers introduced themselves as Thurlow Weed and Lewis Benedict, of Albany.
They told me that a cheap campaign paper of a peculiar stamp at Albany had been resolved on, and that I had been selected to edit it. The announcement might well be deemed flattering by one who had never even sought the notice of the great, and who was not known as a partisan writer, and I eagerly embraced their proposals. They asked me to fix my salary for the year; I named $1,000, which they agreed to; and I did the work required to the best of my ability. It was work that made no figure and created no sensation; but I loved it and did it well.
When it was done you were Governor, dispensing offices worth $3000 to $20,000 per year to your friends and compatriots, and I returned to my garret and my crust, and my desperate battle with pecuniary obligations heaped upon me by bad partners in business and the disastrous events of 1837. I believe it did not then occur to me that some of these abundant places might have been offered to me without injustice; I now think it should have occurred to you. If it did occur to me, I was not the man to ask you for it; I think that should not have been necessary. I only remember that no friend at Albany inquired as to my pecuniary circ.u.mstances; that your friend (but not mine), Robert C. Wetmore, was one of the chief dispensers of your patronage here; and that such devoted compatriots as A.H. Wells and John Hooks were lifted by you out of pauperism into independence, as I am glad I was not; and yet an inquiry from you as to my needs and means at that time would have been timely, and held ever in grateful remembrance.
"In the Harrison campaign of 1840 I was again designated to edit a campaign paper. I published it as well, and ought to have made something by it, in spite of its extremely low price; my extreme poverty was the main reason why I did not. It compelled me to hire presswork, mailing, etc., done by the job, and high charges for extra work nearly ate me up. At the close I was still without property and in debt, but this paper had rather improved my position.
"Now came the great scramble of the swell mob of c.o.o.n minstrels and cider suckers at Washington--I not being counted in. Several regiments of them went on from this city; but no one of the whole crowd--though I say it who should not--had done so much toward General Harrison"s nomination and election as yours respectfully. I asked nothing, expected nothing; _but you_, Governor Seward, _ought to have asked that I be postmaster of New York_. Your asking would have been in vain; but it would have been an act of grace neither wasted nor undeserved.
"I soon after started the _Tribune_, because I was urged to do so by certain of your friends, and because such a paper was needed here. I was promised certain pecuniary aid in so doing; it might have been given me without cost or risk to any one. All I ever had was a loan by piecemeal of $1000, from James Coggeshall. G.o.d bless his honoured memory! I did not ask for this, and I think it is the one sole case in which I ever received a pecuniary favour from a political a.s.sociate. I am very thankful that he did not die till it was fully repaid.
"And let me here honour one grateful recollection. When the Whig party under your rule had offices to give, my name was never thought of; but when in "42-"43, we were hopelessly out of power, I was honoured with the nomination for state printer. When we came again to have a state printer to elect, as well as nominate, the place went to Weed, as it ought. Yet it was worth something to know that there was once a time when it was not deemed too great a sacrifice to recognise me as belonging to your household. If a new office had not since been created on purpose to give its valuable patronage to H.J. Raymond and enable St. John to show forth his _Times_ as the organ of the Whig state administration, I should have been still more grateful.
"In 1848 your star again rose, and my warmest hopes were realised in your election to the Senate. I was no longer needy, and had no more claim than desire to be recognised by General Taylor. I think I had some claim to forbearance from you. What I received thereupon was a most humiliating lecture in the shape of a decision in the libel case of Redfield and Pringle, and an obligation to publish it in my own and the other journal of our supposed firm. I thought and still think this lecture needlessly cruel and mortifying. The plaintiffs, after using my columns to the extent of their needs or desires, stopped writing and called on me for the name of their a.s.sailant. I proffered it to them--a thoroughly responsible man. They refused to accept it unless it should prove to be one of the four or five first men in Batavia!--when they had known from the first who it was, and that it was neither of them. They would not accept that which they had demanded; they sued me instead for money, and money you were at liberty to give them to their heart"s content. I do not think you _were_ at liberty to humiliate me in the eyes of my own and your public as you did. I think you exalted your own judicial sternness and fearlessness unduly at my expense. I think you had a better occasion for the display of these qualities when Webb threw himself entirely upon you for a pardon which he had done all a man could do to demerit.
His paper is paying you for it now.
"I have publicly set forth my view of your and our duty with respect to fusion, Nebraska, and party designations. I will not repeat any of that. I have referred also to Weed"s reading me out of the Whig party--my crime being, in this as in some other things, that of doing to-day what more politic persons will not be ready to do till to-morrow.
"Let me speak of the late canva.s.s. I was once sent to Congress for ninety days merely to enable Jim Brooks to secure a seat therein for four years. _I think I never hinted to any human being that I would have liked to be put forward for any place._ But James W. White (you hardly know how good and true a man he is) started my name for Congress, and Brooks" packed delegation thought I could help him through; so I was put on behind him. But this last spring, after the Nebraska question had created a new state of things at the North, one or two personal friends, of no political consideration, suggested my name as a candidate for governor, and I did not discourage them. Soon, the persons who were afterward mainly instrumental in nominating Clark came about me, and asked if I could secure the Know-Nothing vote. I told them I neither could nor would touch it; on the contrary, I loathed and repelled it. Thereupon they turned upon Clark.
"I said nothing, did nothing. A hundred people asked me who should be run for governor. I sometimes indicated Patterson; I never hinted at my own name. But by and by Weed came down, and called me to him, to tell me why he could not support me for governor. I had never asked nor counted on his support.
"I am sure Weed did not mean to humiliate me; but he did it. The upshot of his discourse (very cautiously stated) was this: If I were a candidate for governor, I should beat not myself only, but you.
Perhaps that was true. But as I had in no manner solicited his or your support, I thought this might have been said to my friends rather than to me. I suspect it is true that I could not have been elected governor as a Whig. But had he and you been favourable, there would have been a party in the State ere this which could and would have elected me to _any_ post, without injuring itself or endangering your re-election.
"It was in vain that I urged that I had in no manner asked a nomination. At length I was nettled by his language--well intended, but _very_ cutting as addressed by him to me--to say, in substance, "Well, then, make Patterson governor, and try my name for lieutenant.
To lose this place is a matter of no importance; and we can see whether I am really so odious."
"I should have hated to serve as lieutenant-governor, but I should have gloried in running for the post. I want to have my enemies all upon me at once; am tired of fighting them piecemeal. And, though I should have been beaten in the canva.s.s, I know that my running would have helped the ticket, and helped my paper.
"It was thought best to let the matter take another course. No other name could have been put on the ticket so bitterly humbling to me as that which was selected. The nomination was given to Raymond; the fight left to me. And, Governor Seward, _I have made it_, though it be conceited in me to say so. Even Weed has not been (I speak of his paper) hearty in this contest, while the journal of the Whig lieutenant-governor has taken care of its own interests and let the canva.s.s take care of itself, as it early declared it would do. That journal has (because of its milk-and-water course) some twenty thousand subscribers in this city and its suburbs, and of these twenty thousand, I venture to say more voted for Ullman and Scroggs than for Clark and Raymond; the _Tribune_ (also because of its character) has but eight thousand subscribers within the same radius, and I venture to say that of its habitual readers, nine-tenths voted for Clark and Raymond--very few for Ullman and Scroggs. I had to bear the brunt of the contest....
"Governor Seward, I know that some of your most cherished friends think me a great obstacle to your advancement; that John Schoolcraft, for one, insists that you and Weed should not be identified with me. I trust, after a time, you will not be. I trust I shall never be found in opposition to you; I have no further wish than to glide out of the newspaper world as quietly and as speedily as possible, join my family in Europe, and, if possible, stay there quite a time--long enough to cool my fevered brain and renovate my over-tasked energies. All I ask is that we shall be counted even on the morning after the first Tuesday in February, as aforesaid, and that I may thereafter take such course as seems best without reference to the past.
"You have done me acts of valued kindness in the line of your profession; let me close with the a.s.surance that these will ever be gratefully remembered by Yours, Horace Greeley."[574]
[Footnote 574: New York _Tribune_, June 14, 1860.]
At the time Seward received this letter he regarded it as only a pa.s.sing cloud-shadow. "To-day I have a long letter from Greeley, full of sharp, p.r.i.c.king thorns," he wrote Weed. "I judge, as we might indeed well know from his n.o.bleness of disposition, that he has no idea of saying or doing anything wrong or unkind; but it is sad to see him so unhappy. Will there be a vacancy in the Board of Regents this winter? Could one be made at the close of the session? Could he have it? Raymond"s nomination and election is hard for him to bear."[575]
Two or three weeks later, after a call at the _Tribune_ office, Seward again wrote Weed, suggesting that "Greeley"s despondency is overwhelming, and seems to be aggravated by the loss of subscribers.
But below this is chagrin at the failure to obtain official position."[576] With such inquiries and comments Seward put the famous letter away.[577]
[Footnote 575: F.W. Seward, _Life of W.H. Seward_, Vol. 2, p. 239.]
[Footnote 576: _Ibid._, p. 240.]
[Footnote 577: "My personal relations with Governor Seward were wholly unchanged by this letter. We met frequently and cordially after it was written, and we very freely conferred and co-operated during the long struggle in Congress for Kansas and Free Labour. He understood as well as I did that my position with regard to him, though more independent than it had been, was nowise hostile, and that I was as ready to support his advancement as that of any other statesman, whenever my judgment should tell me that the public good required it. I was not his adversary, but my own and my country"s freeman."--Horace Greeley, _Recollections of a Busy Life_, p. 321.]