History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916, Part 50

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1104

USA > Indiana > History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916 > Part 50

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

"Sincerely your friend, "RUFUS MAGEE."

( 363 )

[CHAPTER XLVII.]

THE MEMORABLE CAMPAIGN OF 1896

PARTY ALIGNMENTS SWIFTLY CHANGED-STRANGE BEDFELLOWSHIP NATURAL SEQUENCE.

D URING the greater part of Claude Matthews's official life, first as Secretary of State, then as Governor, I happened to be a member of the board of trus- tees for the Institute for the Education of the Blind. To this position I was twice elected by the General Assembly. It devolved upon me, in the performance of official duty, to make monthly pilgrimages to the State Capital. Invariably on such occasions I made it a point to call on and enjoy a more or less protracted visit with Mr. Matthews. I re- call these visits with unalloyed pleasure. To me the delight thereof was heightened by the pleasing personality not only of himself, but also that of his efficient staff, his affable and accomplished niece, Miss Callie McMechen, and the genial, widely- known and ever obliging Myron D. King.

About the time Presidential possibilities in 1896 came under consideration I made one of my customary calls at Governor Matthews's office. The papers were at that time eager to discover and to exploit candidacies, real or fancied. The main object of the Democratic gold standard organs seems to have been that of bring- ing as many "favorite sons" into the race as possible-the more the merrier. Aspir- ations were aroused and encouraged with undisguised gusto. John R. Walsh's Chicago Chronicle appeared one day with a picture of Governor Matthews perched on a heavily loaded hay wagon, rake in hand, and a captivating smile on his hand- some face. It didn't take long to discover that the Presidential bee had been set to buzzing in the Governor's bonnet. Deli- cately, at first, I expatiated on the cunning and duplicity of scheming politicians in

pretending to boost Presidential candi- dates. I cited the experiences of Hen- dricks, McDonald and Gray. Observing that a recital of these experiences seemed to have no effect upon the Governor, I be- came more positive and emphatic in the denunciation of time-servers, sycophants, marplots and place-seekers in professing undying friendship for and devotion to men in office and in position to dole out favors of one sort or another. I knew of some of these gentry, these vipers, and I felt like expressing my contempt for them right then and there. In course of the conversation Governor Matthews told me what had been going on at the State Cap- ital and what was in contemplation. The program as mapped out then provided for a meeting of the State Central Committee and of prominent Democrats throughout the State for the purpose of formally pro- claiming Governor Matthews the choice of the Indiana Democracy for the Presidential nomination in 1896. The tempters and boosters had told the Governor that such action would entitle him to name the dele- gates to the national convention. The par- ty's choice for the Presidency, these seductive flatterers assured him, had al- ways been privileged to exercise such au- thority. This was news to me. In reply I told him no such authority had ever been accorded to or wielded by any Presidential aspirant since I had any part in Indiana politics, and that dated back to 1866. Furthermore, I said, no State committee in Indiana has ever presumed to declare anybody the party's choice for the Presi- dential nomination. That is the sole and exclusive prerogative of the State conven- tion. "That there may be no sort of mis- understanding in regard to these matters,

( 365 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

I want to say, tested and proved friend that you have repeatedly declared me to be, I shall oppose with all the power at my command the carrying out of any such program. If a meeting of the sort men- tioned is attempted to be held, I shall be there and make myself heard and under- stood-not that I am opposed to you, but that I don't propose to be a silent or acquiescent witness to any performance that can result in one thing only : your dis- comfiture and humiliation." The proposed meeting was never held, but the State Cen- tral Committee later on adopted resolu- tions commendatory of Governor Matthews as a Presidential quantity. The Governor persisted to the very last that "his friends" insisted that precedent gave him the right to name the delegates to the national con- vention.

Under date of January 10, 1896, Gov- ernor Matthews favored me with this in- formation: "The reports are now in from the district meetings and altogether went off well and with a good committee se- lected. On account of the resolutions adopted here last month at the meeting of Democrats I am gratified that so many of the conventions on the 8th en- dorsed the resolutions of the State Committee, all but three of the dis- tricts giving me a good send-off. These did not do so, ruling against the in- troduction of all resolutions. All that passed any resolutions, except your own district, gave me a very generous endorse- ment. I was just a little surprised at your district, owing to the chairman of the con- vention and the chairman of the committee on resolutions. I am glad all passed off so smoothly. We will soon know both place and the date of our national convention. For several reasons I am inclined to favor Cincinnati, but any place rather than New York. If the convention should be held in that city, no matter who the nominee or what the platform, they would be received with a certain suspicion in the South and West."

On the day before the State convention I called on him to ascertain whether he still believed that precedent gave him the right to name the delegates. Replying in the affirmative, I said to him: "Now, Gov- ernor, a seat in a national convention has no longer any especial attraction for me, but since you have seen fit to give credence to the false assertions of your pretended boosters, I have decided to become a can- didate for delegate from my district at to- night's caucus. You scan the papers in the morning and see who is elected. I'll not call here tomorrow. If you read that I am chosen, you will probably want to see me. You'll find me at the Grand Hotel." He found me where indicated. The vote for delegate stood a little better than three to one in my favor. We had a pleasant lit- tle chat, in the course of which I indicated unreservedly that as Indiana Democracy's choice he would have my unqualified sup- port, but at no time during the conversa- tion did I delude him with any expression or statement that could have made him believe that I regarded his nomination at Chicago as at all probable.

A careful study of the situation made it entirely clear to my mind that Indiana would not furnish the Democratic nominee for the Presidency in 1896. Events amply vindicated this conclusion. At no time during the balloting did he receive more than seven over and above Indiana's thir- ty instructed votes. After it was all over we met and had a heart to heart talk. With tears in his eyes and quivering voice he told me how humiliated he felt that he had permitted himself to be belied, deceived and bamboozled by a lot of designing poli- ticians whose sinister purposes had by passing events been made entirely clear to him. Over and over he expressed the hope that I had forgiven him for whatever unpleasantness might have been associated with this affair. Said he, "You are the one man in the entire State who has been ab- solutely truthful, outspoken and candid with me throughout this contest. I want

( 366 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

to feel assured of your unstinted friend- ship. How I do wish I had listened to you instead of those who in moments of weak- ness overwhelmed me with their deceptive representations and assurances and their hypocritical professions." In subsequent letters he left no doubt in my mind as to the genuineness and sincerity of this ' utterance.

The Democratic State Convention for 1896 was called to order in Tomlinson Hall, Indianapolis, June 24, by Chairman Ster- ling R. Holt. The Committee on Perma- nent Organization, through its chairman, Captain W. J. Hilligoss of Muncie, recom- mended as presiding officer for the day Senator Robert C. Bell of Fort Wayne, and as principal secretary, Lincoln Dixon of North Vernon. The recommendations of the committee were unanimously concurred in with applause.

Vice-Presidents-John C. Gorman, H. J. Feltus, John Hieb, Chester H. Faulkner, James J. Smiley, William Merrill, W. J. Buckingham, Dr. E. J. Puckett, Michael A. Ryan, Elwood Gray, Milo W. Barnes, J. W. Nusbaum, Judge George Burson.

Assistant Secretaries-George B. Ash- by, John Johnson, J. T. Wurshing, George B. Tebbs, H. B. Martin, Walter S. Cham- bers, John Paskens, E. E. Cox, J. O. Behymer, James P. Simon, Emmett Mul- holland, James A. Barnes, Samuel Gorrell.

Committee on Resolutions-William M. Blakely, J. H. Fowler, Samuel B. Voyles, William S. Holman, Cyrus F. McNutt, James W. Henderson, William D. Bynum, John P. France, C. F. S. Neal, J. F. Gal- laher, D. A. Wood, Edward O'Rourke, Daniel McDonald.

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS.

At Large Jason B. Brown of Seymour and John B. Stoll of South Bend. Contingents- David S. Gooding of Greenfield and W. C. Dur- borow of Cass county.

1. James Huron, Vanderburg county.

2. William L. Slinkard, Greene.

3. George B. McIntyre, Floyd.

4. Nicholas Cornet, Ripley.

5. Delano E. Williamson, Putnam.

6. George W. Pigman, Clinton.

7. C. A. N. Crearalt, Marion.

8. B. H. Campbell, Madison.

9. William C. Smith, Carroll.

10. Daniel E. Kelly, Porter.

11. Meredith E. Kidd, Wabash.

12. Frank B. Van Auken, Steuben.

13. Henry A. Barnhart, Fulton.

DELEGATES TO NATIONAL CONVENTION.

At Large-Daniel W. Voorhees, David Turpie, James McCabe, G. V. Menzies.

Alternates-John E. Lamb, D. F. Utter, Cap- tain John C. Nelson, C. K. Thorpe.

1. J. R. Goodwin, Evansville. W. B. McCormick, Newburg.

2. John H. O'Neil, Washington. W. A. Cullop, Vincennes.

3. George H. Voight, Jeffersonville. Albert P. Fenn, Tell City.

4. John Overmyer, North Vernon. Joel H. Matlock, Brownstown.

5. Ebenezer Henderson, Martinsville. Samuel L. McGregor, Brazil.

6. D. W. Andre, Connersville. U. S. Jackson, Greenfield.

7. John P. Frenzel, Indianapolis. Will E. English, Indianapolis.

8. William A. Humphrey, Portland. R. S. Gregory, Muncie.

9. D. W. Simons, Covington. Eli Marvin, Frankfort.

10. James Murdock, Lafayette. Jonas M. Loutman, Hammond.

11. Samuel E. Cook, Huntington. John T. Strange, Marion.

12. Henry Colerick, Fort Wayne. James Washburne, Columbia City.

13. John B. Stoll, South Bend. Preston F. Miles, Milford.

Upon the conclusion of the reading of the committee's report on the selection of delegates at large to the national conven- tion, Judge J. C. Branyan of Huntington mounted a chair and asked that the name of John G. Shanklin be substituted for that of Major Menzies, as the Major was an advocate of the gold standard. Mr. Shanklin advanced to the platform and stated that he believed the substitution should not be made, as Major Menzies had agreed to stand by the dictates of the con- vention and begged leave to withdraw. This was met with cries of disapproval and Major Winfrey of the First district

( 367 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

asked that Major Menzies give the conven- tion an idea as to how he stood on the 16 to 1 proposition. The roll-call for substitu- tion began and it was evident that the Evansville man would be substituted when Judge Richardson of Pike county appeared on the stage and demanded as Mr. Shank- lin's friend and personal representative that the roll-call be stopped, saying that Mr. Shanklin's name was not before the convention. There were protests, but Chairman Holt said: "There being but one name before the convention now, the question is on the adoption of the report." The report was adopted by a close vote.

When it had been ascertained that the committee on permanent organization had selected John B. Stoll as one of the electors at large, he at once proceeded to make an earnest effort to have the name of his friend, Judge David S. Gooding, substi- tuted. Reason assigned was that he (Stoll) had been chosen a delegate to the national convention and that, believing in a fair division of honors, it was but simple justice that the veteran campaigner, Judge Good- ing, be placed at the head of the electoral ticket. The chairman refused to re-con- vene the committee and so the desired change was not made, much to the regret of Mr. Stoll.

PLATFORM DECLARATIONS.

The main planks of the platform as re- ported by the committee and adopted . by the convention read thus:

"Resolved, That we reaffirm our adher- ence to and faith in the Democratic doc- trine of bi-metallism by the free and unre- stricted coinage of both silver and gold, as primary money, at the ratio of 16 to 1, without waiting the co-operation of Great Britain or any other foreign power, all such coinage to be full legal tender in the payment of all debts, private and public.

"We are opposed to the redemption and final cancellation of United States notes (greenbacks) or any other notes or cer- tificates issued by the United States to circulate as money, such redemption and

cancellation necessarily involving an in- crease of the public debt by the issue of bonds and the reduction of currency.

"We demand a sufficient, stable volume of money-gold, silver and paper-to meet the requirements of our ever-growing population and the constant increase of our productive interests.

"We demand that obligations of the Gov- . ernment, of every form, be paid and re- deemed, in conformity with the laws under which they were issued, in coin, gold and silver, at the option of the Government of the United States, and not at the option of the creditor.

"To the gallant survivors of the army of the Union, to the widows and children of those deceased, we tender our steadfast regard and gratitude. We favor the prompt adjustment, the punctual and regu- lar payment of all pensions as the same accrue. We believe that the pension is a vested right. We heartily indorse the rule of Commissioner Murphy that no name shall be arbitrarily dropped from the rolls, and the fact of enlistment and service should be deemed conclusive evidence against prior disease or disability.

"That we do most earnestly sympathize with the people of the island of Cuba in their gallant struggle against the Spanish monarchy, for freedom and independence. We believe that public war exists in Cuba and that the parties thereto ought to be accorded all the rights of belligerents.

"The Democratic party is the faithful and consistent adherent of that great prin- ciple of popular government known as per- sonal liberty of the citizen and oppose intolerance of whatever character, and especially oppose any attempt to control the habits of the people where such habits are consistent with the public order and general welfare.

"The comfort and convenience of all the inhabitants of the State require good roads. We are, therefore, in favor of such legislation as will serve to stimulate the enterprise of the people to the end that such roads may be constructed.

"Resolved, That this convention fully and cordially indorses the course and action of Senator Voorhees and Senator Turpie in the Senate of the United States as having been at all times true and loyal to the in- terests of our State and country, and as having been distinguished by signal ability and success in the discharge of the duties

( 368 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

of their high position, and we tender the Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees, the faithful and long-tried friend of the people, our sincere sympathies in the severe illness from which he has suffered, with our heartfelt wishes for his early and complete recovery. "Resolved, That we indorse the admin- istration of Hon. Claude Matthews, Gov- ernor of Indiana, as having been wise, prudent and patriotic, and that his prac- tical ability, his executive genius and ca- pacity for public affairs, as well as his high personal integrity and character and his popularity with the people all show him to be well worthy of higher honors.

"We therefore earnestly commend him, in full confidence of success at the election, to the Democracy of the United States as a candidate for the Presidency. And the delegates from Indiana to the national convention are hereby instructed to cast their votes in his favor for President, first, last and all the time, and to use all honor- able efforts to secure his nomination.

"The thirty delegates selected to repre- sent the Democracy of Indiana in the Chicago national convention are instructed to vote as a unit upon all questions involv- ing platform or candidates in that conven- tion."

THE TICKET NOMINATED.

When nominations for Governor were announced to be in order, the Ninth district presented the name of James M. Sellers of Montgomery. The Thirteenth district put in nomination Benjamin F. Shively of South Bend. The Seventh district named ex-Congressman George W. Cooper of Columbus. The Second district proposed John G. Shanklin of Evansville, who promptly withdrew his name and in a few eloquently worded sentences seconded the nomination of Mr. Shively. Before the roll- call had brought forth responses from four counties, Mr. Sellers withdrew his name. The roll-call showed the nomina- tion of Mr. Shively by a large majority, and before the result of the ballot could be announced Mr. Cooper, who was the choice of the gold standard delegates, withdrew his name, and in a singularly happy speech moved that the nomination of Mr. Shively be declared the unanimous

action of the convention. It was so ordered. Loud and persistent calls brought Mr. Shively upon the platform. He was accorded a most enthusiastic ovation, to which he responded in a speech of rare felicity and choice diction.

For Lientenant-Governor, Captain John C. Lawler of Washington county, Michael Sweeney of Dubois county, General F. E. McGinley of Lafayette, and ex-Congress- man George W. Cooper of Columbus were proposed. The latter at once forbade the use of his name in that connection. On the first ballot Captain Lawler was shown to have come within six votes of the nom- ination. After a number of counties had been called on the second ballot, Mr. Sweeney and General McGinley withdrew their names and Captain Lawler was nom- inated by acclamation.

Three names were proposed for Secre- tary of State: Samuel M. Ralston of Lebanon, Charles W. Welman of Sullivan and John G. Offut of Trafalgar. Ralston was nominated on the first ballot by the decisive vote of 1,020 1-3. to 473 1-3 for Welman and 245 1-3 for Offut. Ralston's nomination was made unanimous.

Joseph T. Fanning of Indianapolis, W. H. Ernst of Bluffton, Jerome Herff of Peru and Alvin H. Allen of Madison were put in nomination for State Anditor. Fanning was nominated on the first ballot. He re- ceived 9741/2 votes, Ernst 3611/2, Herff 2611/2, Allen 144.

Allen W. Clark of Greensburg and C. W. Bridges of Indianapolis were proposed for State Treasurer, but before balloting began their names were withdrawn and, on mo- tion of Judge David S. Gooding, Morgan Chandler of Greenfield was nominated by acclamation.

For Attorney-General, J. G. McNutt of Terre Haute was nominated on the first ballot. He received 1,222 votes to 405 for C. J. Kollmeyer of Columbus and 119 for C. H. Hartford.

Henry Warrum of Indianapolis was nominated for Supreme Court Reporter on

( 369 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

the second ballot over Sidney R. Moon of Rochester and H. G. Yergen of Henry county.

FOR JUDGES OF THE APPELLATE COURT.

Edwin A. Taylor, First district.

Theodore P. Davis, Second district. Frank E. Gavin, Third district.

Orlando J. Lotz, Fourth district.

George E. Ross, Fifth district.

STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE.

(Elected at District Conventions in January.)

1. John W. Spencer, Evansville.

2. Parks M. Martin, Spencer.

3. Richard H. Willett, Leavenworth.

4. Joel Matlock, Brownstown.

5. Frank A. Horner, Brazil.

6. K. M. Hord, Shelbyville.

7. Thomas Taggart, Indianapolis.

8. J. J. Netterville, Anderson.

9. W. H. Johnson, Crawfordsville.

10. William H. Blackstock, Lafayette.

11. Rufus Magee, Logansport.

12. Thomas R. Marshall, Columbia City.

13. Peter J. Kruyer, Plymouth.

Sterling R. Holt, chairman, Indianapolis.

The campaign in Indiana was vigorous- ly conducted on both sides. In the earlier part the enthusiasm ran higher on the Democratic side of the house than on the Republican. By and by it became apparent that the possession of abundant campaign funds was helping the Republicans amaz- ingly. The Democrats had very little money at their command. Democratic disaffection on account of the money ques- tion was felt quite keenly, especially in the cities and larger towns. The situation was greatly aggravated by the resignation of Sterling R. Holt as chairman of the State committee. Like many other Democrats at Indianapolis, he identified himself with the gold standard forces. Parks M. Mar- tin of the Second district was substituted. It was a good selection. He had very much to do to make up for time lost while Mr. Holt was hesitating as to whether he should hold on or step down and out. When he found he couldn't be in sympathy with the party on what was made the par- amount issue, he did the proper thing by resigning the chairmanship. As a matter

of course he came in for a good deal of censure and some abuse, but that was to be expected. So many people labor under the delusion that politics has nothing in common with conscience.

Toward the latter part of the campaign the Populists favorable to the election of Mr. Bryan made overtures to the Demo- crats to unite on the support of one electoral ticket. In view of their developed strength they were neither backward nor overly modest in naming conditions under which they would withdraw their electoral ticket and support a fusion ticket. They wanted five Democrats taken off and five Populists substituted. Some Democrats objected to this rather vehemently. I was unable to see anything particularly objec- tionable to such an arrangement. Thirty thousand votes were worth considering in an emergency like this, and I made haste to announce my willingness to step down and out and let some Populist take my place. But for some reason that never was explained to me insistence was made that I should stay on and Jason B. Brown, my associate elector at large, get off. When the time for consummating the deal came I proceeded to Indianapolis to sacrifice myself. Upon arriving at the Grand Hotel I found there my associate elector at large, ex-Congressman Jason B. Brown. He was furious and swore like a trooper. He didn't want to get off and I couldn't see any reason why he should be made to get off when I was more than willing to make room for a Populist. I did my utmost to pacify him, but he was not to be reconciled. I felt quite confident that in the end Jason would have his way. My plan was to make a speech to the State Central Committee that would satisfy the members thereof that Jason was much better suited to head a Demo-Populist electoral ticket than myself. He was an out-and-out champion of 16 to 1, while I was simply a conserva- tive bi-metallist. Well, I delivered my speech, anything but populistic in tone or sentiment. To my amazement the decision

( 370 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

to take Jason off and keep me on was de- clared to be irrevocable. So on I stayed, and in November meekly and complacently marched up to the political slaughter- house, as Henry Watterson was wont to say.

THE FUSION ELECTORAL TICKET.

As agreed upon by the Democratic and Populist State Committees, the Bryan electoral ticket was composed of ten Demo- crats and five Populists. This is the amal- gamated list:

At Large John B. Stoll, Parda D. Drain.

1. James W. Henson.

2. Elisha A. Riggins.

3. George B. McIntyre.

4. Townsend Cope.

5. Delano E. Williamson.

6. George W. Pigman.

7. Maurice Donnelly.

8. Bartlett H. Campbell.

9. William C. Smith.

10. James W. Pierce.

11. Meredith H. Kidd.

12. Frank P. Van Auken.

13. John S. Bender.

Bryan came into the State and aroused unbounded enthusiasm. He drew immense crowds wherever he engaged to speak. Mr. Shively, the nominee for Governor, a very effective campaigner, also had large and enthusiastic meetings throughout the State. For some unexplained reason the middle-of-the-road Populists persisted in keeping their State ticket in the field. This explains the difference between the vote for Bryan and the vote for Shively and the other candidates on the State ticket.

The figures here given tell the story of the political battle of 1896 in Indiana :

FOR PRESIDENT.

William Mckinley, Republican. .323,754 William J. Bryan, Democrat and Populist. 305,753 Joshua Levering, Prohibitionist. 3,056

Charles E. Bentley, National Prohibitionist 2,268

Charles H. Matchett, Social Labor 329 John M. Palmer, Gold Democrat. 2,145

FOR GOVERNOR.

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916, Part 50

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926 Publication date: 1917 Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co. Number of Pages: 1104

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1104