USA > New York > History of the state of New York, political and governmental, Vol. II 1822-1864 > Part 26
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).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38
[1852
the Fugitive Slave law the Union had been saved from dissolution.
The Democratic national convention had met in Bal- timore a fortnight earlier, with two New York men, William L. Marcy and Daniel S. Dickinson, among the candidates ; the others supported for the nomination were Lewis Cass, James Buchanan, and Stephen A. Douglas. Of the New York delegation 23 were for Marcy and 13 for Cass-Dickinson having none, but hoping to be chosen with southern votes when it should become obvious that no leading candidate could win. Horatio Seymour was the leader of Marcy's forces, and kept them well in hand through many ballots. On the thirty-fourth ballot some of them deserted to Dickinson, who also received the votes of Virginia. At that Dick- inson, who was himself a delegate, made a diplomatic speech protesting that he could not be considered a can- didate so long as Cass, to whom he was pledged, was before the convention. Of course had Cass's name been withdrawn Dickinson would have been released from his allegiance. The struggle continued without pros- pect of a decision. Marcy received his highest vote, 97, on the forty-fifth ballot. Seymour then led the New York delegation out for a conference, and proposed that all vote solidly for Marcy, but the protests were so many and so strong that he withdrew his motion, and thus Marcy's chance was gone. On the forty-ninth bal- lot there was a sudden and overwhelming turning to Franklin Pierce, who was nominated. The platform unequivocally pledged the party to support of the Fugi- tive Slave law.
.
391
THE FALL OF THE WHIGS
1852]
The Free Soil Democrats held their convention at Pittsburgh and nominated John P. Hale for President on an aggressive anti-slavery platform.
Seymour's championship of Marcy at the Baltimore convention, and the consequent elimination of Dickin- son, provoked an attempt at reprisals in the Democratic State convention, which was held at Syracuse on Sep- tember 1. Seymour was a candidate for Governor, and Dickinson marshalled all the available forces against him, putting forward John P. Beekman, of New York City. In this course Dickinson had the powerful aid of John Van Buren. But the two, and all their allies, were no match for Horatio Seymour, who whether in diplo- macy or in outright war was at that time the most for- midable leader in the New York Democracy. On the first ballot Seymour had 59 votes to Beekman's 7, with many others scattering, and on the second ballot he was nominated. Sanford E. Church was nominated for Lieutenant-Governor, and the national platform of the Baltimore convention was ratified.
The Whigs held their State convention at Syracuse three weeks later, and renominated Governor Hunt with practically no contest. His administration had been generally satisfactory and there was no cause for dropping him, though his later inclination to follow Fillmore's policy on the slavery question had alienated some of the anti-slavery Whigs. William Kent, a worthy son of the illustrious Chancellor, was nominated for Lieutenant-Governor. The platform sought to evade direct declaration on the great issue of the day by merely saying that "an honest acquiescence in the ac-
392
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1852
tion of the late national convention upon all subjects legitimately before it" was the duty of every Whig. Naturally, if any anti-slavery Whig was taxed with thus approving the Fugitive Slave law he could say that that matter was not legitimately before the convention and therefore he did not have to acquiesce in it!
Minthorne Tompkins was put in nomination by the Free Soil party.
The Whigs were from the outset doomed to defeat in State and nation. The platform damned the party. Seward and Greeley openly and violently denounced it, while supporting the candidates who stood upon it. The result of the election was overwhelming. Pierce car- ried twenty-seven States and Scott only four. In New York the figures were: Pierce, 262,083 ; Scott, 234,882; Hale, 25,329. On the Governorship the vote was little less unfavorable for the Whigs; Seymour was elected by 264,121 to 241,525 for Hunt and 19,661 for Tomp- kins. The Senate was tied, each party having 16, but in the Assembly the Democrats had more than two mem- bers to one-86 to 42. The Democrats elected twenty- one Representatives in Congress, the Whigs ten, and the Free Soilers and Land Reformers one each. Among the Representatives were William M. Tweed, after- ward the "boss" of Tammany Hall; Russell Sage, the financier ; Reuben E. Fenton, afterward Governor; and Gerrit Smith, the flaming apostle of the Abolitionist cause, who was returned from a district that gave Pierce and Seymour a strong majority-a noteworthy tribute to his personality.
It has been said that General Scott was the only man
1852]
THE FALL OF THE WHIGS
393
in the United States who was surprised at the result of the election. Certainly the Whig leaders of New York were not surprised. Greeley kept up a bold front in the Tribune but privately confessed impending defeat, while Weed openly admitted that the case was hopeless. Indeed, the result was logical. A large part of the country was tired of the slavery issue and welcomed a chance to lay it, as they vainly thought, to rest. An- other large part was disgusted with the pro-slavery atti- tude of the Whigs and would not support their ticket. Moreover, there was dissension among the Whigs, while the Democrats were united. In such fashion New York and the United States came to the end of an epoch.
CHAPTER XXV THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
H ORATIO SEYMOUR entered upon his first administration in 1853 with abundant reason, apparently, for satisfaction with the political situation. His party had recovered national power by an overwhelming majority, and the signs of the times gave promise of its continued ascendancy. Himself the leader of the Hunkers, he had been the champion of Marcy, whom the Barnburners had taken for their own, and he had thus effected a reunion of the Democratic party. True, that reunion was destined soon rudely to be ended. But for the time it seemed firmly established, and there was a pardonable note of confidence in Sey- mour's message. The Seventy-sixth Legislature met on January 4, 1853, with the Senate organization remain- ing unchanged and with a Democratic organization of the Assembly. The Speaker was William H. Ludlow, of Suffolk county, and the Clerk was John S. Nafew. Among the members were Walter L. Sessions, of Chau- tauqua, and DeWitt C. Littlejohn, of Oswego, both afterward prominent in State affairs.
The message was typical of the man-eloquent, schol- arly, statesmanlike. Congratulatory reference was made to the World's Fair in New York, the Crystal Palace for which was then being built. The evils of
394
*
395
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
1853]
the canal debt and the crisis caused by the decision of the unconstitutionality of the act authorizing the nine millions loan were discussed at length. The Governor urged that the honor of the State required it to refund the money that had been paid for the canal certificates thus declared invalid, and to pay for the work done under the contracts that had been let. Being himself an advocate of the canal system, he urged that steps be taken, by other means, to complete the Genesee Valley and Black River canals and the enlargement of the Erie canal. He expressed dissent from the then current fear that the competition of the railroads, at that time made free, would impair the business of the canals. But if such should prove the case he believed the canals would still be of immense value in controlling the rates of transportation. In response to his recommendation the Legislature adopted a constitutional amendment pro- viding for the payment of the canal debt and for the prosecution of the works named by the Governor. This amendment was again passed by the next Legislature and was approved by the people and became part of the Constitution in 1854.
A special message was sent in on April 5, urging the need of immediate action for the improvement of the Erie and Oswego canals. On April 13 the Legislature adjourned without day, but an hour later a proclama- tion was issued calling it back in special session the next day. A message was then delivered to it chiding it for adjourning with its necessary business not done. No provision had been made for many of the necessary ex- penses of the government, for the support of the char-
396
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1853
itable institutions, or for the annual tax bill in New York City. Public faith required that these and other things be done. Grave charges had been made, just before adjournment, against one of the Canal Commis- sioners, which Seymour thought should be immediately investigated and disposed of. The Legislature then took a recess until May 24, when it met and continued its session until July 21.
Meantime trouble was brewing. President Pierce wanted a New York man in his cabinet, and before he was inaugurated selected John A. Dix for the Secre- taryship of State. He sent for Dix and offered him the appointment, which was accepted. Whereupon a howl arose from the Hunkers, who regarded Dix as little better than an Abolitionist, so that Pierce was com- pelled to send for him again and ask him to give up the place and accept instead that of Minister to France, which Dix accommodatingly did. Next Pierce turned to Marcy, but for the sake of prudence let nothing be known publicly about the new selection until after his own inauguration. Then his appointment of Marcy to be head of his cabinet and Dix to be Minister to France, while Dickinson got only the Collectorship of the Port of New York, opened the floodgates of Hunker wrath.
So when the Democratic State convention met at Syracuse in mid-September the party was again rent asunder. Contesting delegations presented themselves for thirty-six seats, or enough to hold the balance of power between the two wings of the party and control the convention. The whole gathering degenerated into a mob. Two chairmen were declared elected, both took
.
397
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
1853]
their places on the same platform, and two conventions were conducted in the same hall, each trying to suppress the other with sheer force of lung-power. When the stage of exhaustion was reached a recess was taken, with the understanding that upon reassembling the contests would be decided by vote of all the uncontested dele- gates. But after the recess the Hunkers did not return. Realizing that the Barnburners had the majority, they went to another hall and held a bolting convention. They denounced the Barnburners, endorsed the Balti- more platform, approved the Canal amendment to the State Constitution, complimented Daniel S. Dickinson, ignored Governor Seymour, and nominated a set of State officers. Among the latter were George W. Clin- ton, of Buffalo, son of DeWitt Clinton, for Secretary of State, and James T. Brady, of New York, one of the foremost lawyers of the day, for Attorney-General.
When the Barnburners reassembled at the close of the recess they sent word to the Hunkers that they were ready to proceed with the convention according to agreement. The Hunkers refused to return on the ground that their lives would not be safe among such ruffians. The Barnburners, at the suggestion of John Van Buren, then adjourned until the next day in order to give passions time to cool. Meantime Governor Sey- mour took a hand in the fight. He was doubly inter- ested, first in preserving the unity of the party and sec- ond in securing the support of both factions for his canal policy. So he spent that entire night in confer- ence with Barnburner leaders, and by morning had attained his end. The convention met, approved Sey-
398
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1853
mour's administration and the Canal amendment, and nominated State officers in opposition to those named by the Hunkers, with the exception of Charles H. Rug- gles, of Poughkeepsie, and Hiram Denio, of Utica, can- didates for the Court of Appeals, of which tribunal both were already Judges. Their high attainments and character well entitled them to reelection, and the Barnburners set an admirable example in thus except- ing judicial officers from partisan contention and endorsing the Hunker nominees.
Between the two factions there was little difference in principles. They were in exact agreement on the chief question of the day, that of slavery. But the Hunkers wanted to wreak revenge on the Barnburners and to embarrass and discredit, so far as possible, the ad- ministrations of President Pierce and Governor Sey- mour, against both of whom they bore a grudge solely because of the appointments of Barnburners to office. A new nomenclature for the factions was adopted. The Hunkers were called "Hardshells," commonly abbre- viated into "Hards," because they claimed never to have altered their principles; while the Barnburners were called "Softshells" or "Softs" because they were accused of being trimmers for the sake of popular favor. Dick- inson was the chieftain of the Hards, and Seymour of the Softs. The latter faction was undoubtedly the "reg- ular" one. It had held the regular convention, while the Hards had bolted. It had the recognition of the national and State administrations. It also included Tammany Hall, the dominant power in the Democratic party in New York City. Yet the Hunkers persisted in
.
399
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS 1
1853]
regarding themselves as the regulars and the Softs as bolters and traitors.
The national administration presently took a hand in the conflict. Charles O'Conor was the United States District Attorney in New York and Greene C. Bronson was Collector of the Port, both holding their commis- sions from President Pierce. When the Softs organized a great ratification meeting at Tammany Hall and in- vited those two officials to attend and speak, they indig- nantly refused, writing latters scathingly denouncing the Softs. The sequel was that Bronson was dismissed from the Collectorship and O'Conor was compelled to resign his office. This use of the Federal whip in State affairs caused bitter resentment and intensified the en- mity between the factions.
The Whigs held a late convention that year, on Oc- tober 5. Ex-Governor Hunt was its chairman, and de- spite the defeat of the year before a spirit of hopeful- ness prevailed because of the division in the Democratic ranks. They nominated Elias W. Leavenworth for Secretary of State; the brilliant Ogden Hoffman for Attorney-General (young Roscoe Conkling, afterward United States Senator, making his first political appear- ance as an aspirant to that place) ; James M. Cook for Comptroller; and Elbridge G. Spaulding for Treas- urer.
The success of the Whigs was assured from the begin- ning, but solely because of the Democratic spirit. On the Court of Appeals ticket, owing to the cooperation of the two factions, the Democrats carried the State by a majority of nearly 14,000. But on all other offices the
400
[1853-4
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Whigs won. For Secretary of State, Leavenworth, Whig, had 160,553 votes; Verplanck, Soft, 96,137; Clinton, Hard, 90,835; and Sedgwick, Free Democrat, 14,985. For Attorney-General, Hoffman, Whig, had 166,165; Grover, Soft, 97,156; Brady, Hard, 92,512; and Jay, Free Democrat, 16,221. With some of their other candidates the Hards did better. The average vote on all (except the Court of Appeals Judges) was : Whigs, 161,933; Softs, 96,698; Hards, 95,529. In the Legislature the result was : Senate-23 Whigs, 7 Hards, 2 Softs; Assembly-78 Whigs, 24 Hards, 24 Softs, 2 Free Democrats. The surprising and significant fea- ture of the contest was the closeness of the vote between the Hards and Softs. Never were contending factions more evenly balanced. Never did a bolting faction, with national and State administrations actively arrayed against it, make so formidable a showing as did the Hards. .
So the Whigs, though moribund, returned to power in the Seventy-seventh Legislature, which met on Janu- ary 3, 1854. Hugh J. Hastings was made Clerk of the Senate, and among the members of that body were Eras- tus Brooks, of New York; William H. Robertson, of Westchester county; Zenas Clark, and Myron H. Clark, the last-named being reelected. In the Assembly Robert H. Pruyn, of Albany, was elected Speaker, and Richard U. Sherman Clerk. Among the members from New York were George DeWitt Clinton and Frederick A. Conkling.
Governor Seymour's message began with an elaborate review of the political history of the State as a stimu-
.
HIRAM DENIO
Hiram Denio. judge court of appeals; born, Rome, N. Y., May 21, 1799; lawyer; district attorney of Oneida county, 1825-1834; circuit judge fifth district, 1834-1838; judge of the court of appeals, 1853-66; died in Utica, N. Y., November 5, 1871.
401
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
1854]
lus to zeal and devotion in the public service. He made a number of non-partisan recommendations, which were acted upon. One, highly commendable, was that the supervision of the public schools be taken from the Secretary of State and vested in an independent officer, and the Legislature accordingly provided for the crea- tion of the office of Superintendent of Public Instruc- tion. Another recommendation was that the Canal amendment to the Constitution be repassed, which was done.
A third recommendation was that some action be taken to abate the evils of intemperance and the abuses of the liquor trade. The law already forbade the sale of intoxicating liquors in quantities of less than five gal- lons, excepting in licensed inns with real hotel accom- modations for guests and in grocery stores where the liquor was not to be drunk on the premises. The Legis- lature, in response to the Governor's suggestion, passed a most stringent bill providing for arbitrary search and seizure on omnibus warrants, for the confiscation and destruction of the liquor seized, and for practically compelling persons arrested to testify against them- selves under penalty of contempt of court. Seymour promptly vetoed this drastic measure in an elaborate paper condemning it as inquisitorial, oppressive, confis- catory, and in gross violation of the Bill of Rights. It was not passed over his veto.
The Legislature adjourned without day on April 17.
Meantime at Washington the great battle over the Kansas-Nebraska bill was in progress, with Senator Seward leading the anti-slavery forces. Stephen A.
402
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1854
Douglas had introduced the measure affirming that the Compromise legislation of 1850 had repealed the Mis- souri Compromise. Thereupon party lines were ig- nored for a new division into "Nebraskans" and "Anti- Nebraskans," Free Soil Democrats affiliating cordially with anti-slavery Whigs under the leadership of Seward, whose closing speech in the great debate was one of the most impressive ever delivered in the Senate of the United States. Echoes from Washington rever- berated through New York and roused the State as it had seldom been roused on any occasion. Individuals, churches, and civic bodies all over the State deluged Washington with protests and petitions against the bill. Henry Ward Beecher, then rising to fame as the fore- most pulpit and platform orator in America, electrified vast mass-meetings with his passionate appeals for human freedom. Seward scanned the prospect aright. "The storm that is rising," he said, "is one such as this country has never yet seen. The struggle will go on, but it will be a struggle for the whole American people." Out in the woods at Jackson, Michigan, on July 6, a State convention of Free Soil Democrats, anti-slavery Whigs, and others began the organization of what pres- ently became the Republican party.
Of the New York Representatives in Congress, all the Whigs opposed the Kansas-Nebraska bill. So did twelve of the Democrats, among them Reuben E. Fen- ton, Russell Sage, and Rufus W. Peckham ; while nine, led by William M. Tweed, supported it. John Van Buren was furious against it, and Marcy was so strong in opposition that he wished to resign from the cabinet;
*
403
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
1854]
he was persuaded by his friends to remain. Generally the Hards were in favor of the bill and the Softs against it.
The Hards made no attempt at reunion with the Softs, but summoned their own State convention, which met on July 12. It approved the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the Canal amendment, and the Excise bill which Gov- ernor Seymour had vetoed; denounced the President's meddling in New York politics, and, to emphasize the latter point, nominated for Governor Greene C. Bron- son, whom Pierce had removed from the Collectorship. Mr. Bronson had served with distinction in the Legis- lature, as Attorney-General, as Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court, and as a Judge of the Court of Appeals, and was universally respected-though in approving the Kansas-Nebraska bill he was inconsistent with his record.
The Softs held their convention early in September and found themselves much divided over the Kansas- Nebraska bill. John Cochrane wrote the platform, ap- proving Seymour's administration. The plank on the slavery question made mischief. At the dictation of Federal officials it was drafted so as to be against the bill in theory but in favor of it in practice. This was received by the convention with cold silence. Then Preston King proposed a substitute squarely condemn- ing the bill as a breach of faith and a violation of the spirit of Christian civilization. His eloquent speech aroused a large minority of the convention to enthusi- asm, while the majority sat silent and sullen. On a vote, under the compulsion of the Federal lash the sub-
404
[1854
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
stitute was laid on the table. At that Preston King arose and left the hall, followed by a hundred others who could not stomach the offensive bill. Little more than half of the original convention was left when Sey- mour was renominated for Governor, with William H. Ludlow for Lieutenant-Governor.
A fortnight later the Whigs held their convention. Horace Greeley was an eager candidate on a platform of opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska bill and advocacy of a liquor prohibition law resembling that of Maine. When he went to Thurlow Weed for aid in his canvass, however, that astute leader told him frankly that he did not believe his nomination would be possible; that he- Weed-had lost control of the party machine; and that Myron H. Clark was almost certain to be nominated. That forecast was fulfilled, Clark winning on the third ballot. He was a man of comparatively little culture but of much native shrewdness and ability, intense in his advocacy of prohibition of the liquor trade, and also wedded to the Native American movement. On the slavery question he was a follower of Seward. He was the author of the drastic Excise bill which Governor Seymour had vetoed, and it was expected that upon that issue he would rally the temperance reformers of the State to his support.
There was some hesitation over the choice of a can- didate for Lieutenant-Governor until the name of Henry J. Raymond was proposed, when he was at once nominated with enthusiasm. This gave mortal offense to Greeley and had far-reaching effects. Greeley was sore at being himself beaten for the Governorship, and
405
THE WAR OF HARDS AND SOFTS
1854]
to have his personal, journalistic, and political rival named for the second place on the ticket was adding in- sult to injury. He blamed Weed for it, though unjustly, for Weed had not thought of Raymond until someone else suggested him and the convention was stampeded for him. But Greeley nursed his grievance, which con- tributed in no small degree to his opposition to Seward's nomination for the Presidency in 1860.
Meantime there had been held at Saratoga in mid- August an Anti-Nebraska convention, led by Greeley, Raymond, John Alsop King, and Moses H. Grinnell. It made no nominations, but adjourned to meet again after the conventions of the various parties. Reassem- bling at Auburn on September 26, it ratified the Whig nominations and platform. The State Temperance con- vention did the same, and the Free Democrats agreed to support Clark. All this, support was attracted by the Whig platform, which was as bravely outspoken against the extension of slavery as former utterances had been cowardly and temporizing, and which also spoke strongly for temperance. Horace Greeley, despite his pique against Weed, declared it to be a noble platform. Roscoe Conkling, who was one of the vice-presidents of the Whig convention, referred to the Republican organization in Michigan and declared that this New York body was a part of that same Republican party. There was indeed some thought of formally making such a declaration, but it was finally deemed expedient to retain the old name for the campaign.
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.