USA > New York > History of the state of New York, political and governmental, Vol. II 1822-1864 > Part 29
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
Meantime Seward's great rival for the Presidency, Abraham Lincoln, was preparing to make his first visit to New York. The Young Men's Central Republican Union was desirous of seeing and hearing this anti- slavery champion of the west, and invited him to lecture in the great hall of Cooper Union, in New York City, on February 27. Lincoln realized that he would be on inspection and trial to determine his fitness for the Pres- idency, and he carefully prepared himself to create the best possible impression. It was a noteworthy audience, crowding the largest hall in New York with what the Tribune described as "the intellect and mental culture" of the city. Years afterward Greeley declared Lin- coln's lecture to have been the very best political address
438
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1860
he had ever listened to, and he had heard some of Web- ster's greatest. Indeed, few addresses have ever made a deeper or more favorable impression on the people of New York.
Two days later Seward spoke in the Senate on the ad- mission of Kansas. For that occasion he made the most scrupulous preparation. He was generally expected to be the Republican nominee for the Presidency, and he was the object of the most violent hatred of the south- erners. Of course he did not mean to curry favor with them. But he felt that he was misunderstood at the south and he aimed to make himself, if possible, rightly understood. Every Senator was in his seat, and the hall was crowded with Representatives and other important spectators. The result was a marvellous personal tri- umph for Seward. His tone was so temperate and reasonable and his logic so irrefragable that many who had been prejudiced against him by the radicalism of his Rochester speech became forthwith his warm sup- porters. On every hand it was felt that his chances of winning the Presidential nomination, and probably the election, had been so improved as to place him easily in the lead of all competitors. Yet there were those who lamented his decline from the standard of his "Higher law" and "Irrepressible conflict" utterances. The Abo- litionist leaders, Garrison and Wendell Phillips, com- pared his address with Webster's fatal seventh-of- March speech; and Greeley, while not condemning him, did not attempt to defend him from criticism and admitted that the stand he had taken would be puzzling and astonishing to many.
439
THE EVE OF WAR
1860]
A few weeks later the Democratic national conven- tion met at Charleston, South Carolina, on April 23, 1860. The contest was between the Douglas and anti- Douglas forces, and New York was regarded as holding the balance of power. There were, of course, contest- ing delegations from the State. Fernando Wood was there, definitely promising the foes of Douglas that his delegation would vote solidly with them if ad- mitted to the convention. The regulars or Softs, led by Dean Richmond, made their appeal to the Douglas men and intimated that they would support the "Little Giant," though they also kept on friendly terms with other candidates. Richmond had come to be more nearly than any other man the leader of the New York Democracy, Horatio Seymour for the time withholding himself. He was one of the chief railroad and steam- boat owners and managers of the State, and chairman of the Democratic State committee-a man of intellec- tual power and moral integrity, sound in judgment and resolute in purpose. With him at Charleston were August Belmont, Augustus Schell, Erastus Corning, Sanford E. Church, and other eminent business men of New York-a delegation of exceptionally high char- acter. In the end this delegation was seated and Fer- nando Wood's was excluded.
This gave Douglas a majority of the convention. But his opponents had a majority of the States and thus con- trolled the committee on resolutions, with the result that after five days of debate and delay a platform counter to Douglas's principles was reported. A sub- stitute was at once offered and a long and bitter debate
440
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1860
ensued, in which Edward Driggs, of Brooklyn, and John Cochrane, of New York, vainly strove for peace and harmony. Finally some fifty delegates from the cotton States seceded from the convention, leaving only 252 of the original 303 delegates. The question then arose whether the two-thirds rule required a candidate to receive, in order to be nominated, two-thirds of the original total of 303, or only two-thirds of the actual membership of 252-that is to say, 202, or 168. On this question New York was in a position to hold the bal- ance, and Dean Richmond was to say how that power of the State should be used. After careful deliberation he decided that the rule required two-thirds of the en- tire original membership. The doom of Douglas was thereby sealed so far as the Charleston convention was concerned. Nobody was nominated. Douglas's high- est vote was 15212. Dickinson's highest was 13. After eleven futile days the convention adjourned to reassem- ble at Baltimore on June 18.
At Baltimore the New York delegation again domi- nated the situation, and Dean Richmond promised the Douglas men that it would stand with them to the end. When the question of admitting delegates from the seceding States arose, Sanford E. Church moved that it be referred to the committee on credentials-a proposal that mightily pleased the Douglas men,-but then New York voted against putting the resolution through with- out debate. At last Church permitted his motion to be modified so as to refer all contests about seats to the committee on credentials. Two days later that commit- tee made two reports, the majority being for seating the
441
THE EVE OF WAR
1860]
pro-Douglas contestants from Louisiana and Alabama as well as from districts in some other States, and the minority report favoring the anti-Douglas claimants. This put the New York men in an embarrassing pre- dicament, and they asked and obtained time for deliber- ation. Richmond wanted to admit the anti-Douglasites so as to unify the party, and then when the nomination of Douglas should become manifestly impossible to swing the Douglas vote to Horatio Seymour and nomi- nate him. But the Douglas men were opposed to such admissions, and if Richmond cast the vote of New York for them there would be no hope of securing the Douglas vote for Seymour.
In the end Richmond decided that New York's vote should be cast in favor of the majority report, excluding the seceders and admitting the Douglas delegates who claimed their seats. On the first ballot, in consequence, Douglas received 17312, while Dickinson had a half- vote and Horatio Seymour one vote-which latter was recorded notwithstanding a letter from Seymour posi- tively declining to be a candidate for either place on the ticket under any circumstances. The next ballot gave Douglas all the votes excepting about a dozen, though his total was only 1811/2, or 2012 less than was required for nomination under the rule adopted at Charleston. But Douglas was thereupon declared nominated by a special resolution which was adopted by viva voce vote. The seceding anti-Douglas dele- gates held a convention of their own and nominated John C. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, for President.
The further details of the great split of 1860 in the
442
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1860
Democratic party belong to the history of the nation rather than to that of New York. But we must recall here the course pursued by the New York Democrats after the Baltimore proceedings. Dickinson and his minority of the New York delegation, who had been practically gagged and bound in the convention by Dean Richmond, returned home breathing threatenings and slaughter. Dickinson went over to the support of Breckinridge against Douglas, and in a speech at a Breckinridge ratification meeting in New York de- nounced Richmond and his faction in some of the most violent language ever heard on such an occasion.
The Republican national convention met at Chicago on May 16, with 466 delegates from twenty-four States. Greeley declared it to be the most wise, able, and un- selfish body of delegates ever assembled. New York State was much in evidence through the activity of Seward's friends, who rented an entire hotel for their occupancy and organized imposing street parades. Gov- ernor Morgan, of New York, chairman of the Repub- lican national committee, called the convention to order; and among the delegates and managers were Thurlow Weed, Horace Greeley, George William Cur- tis-whose thrilling eloquence secured the adoption of a platform plank reaffirming the declaration that "all men are created equal,"-William M. Evarts, Henry J. Raymond, D. D. S. Brown, of Rochester-one of the foremost journalists of that part of the State,-and many other men of "light and leading."
Seward was at his home in Auburn. But his agents were so dominant at Chicago that his nomination
443
THE EVE OF WAR
1860]
seemed certain. Greeley telegraphed to the Tribune that it was practically assured. The great New York editor, by the way, failing to be chosen from his own State, was a delegate from Oregon. He for the first time made known his resolute opposition to Seward, and joined the forces of Edward Bates, of Missouri, with Lincoln for his second choice. Six years before, disappointed and exasperated at Seward's unwillingness to help him get the appointment of postmaster of New York, Greeley had written his famous letter declaring the "firm of Seward, Weed & Greeley" to be dissolved. But that personal quarrel between the two-or among the three-great men was not yet publicly known, and at Chicago in 1860 Greeley was supposed to be against Seward purely on grounds of the highest public policy, for which reason his opposition was the more for- midable.
When nominations were called for Seward's name was presented by William M. Evarts and was greeted with much enthusiasm; and on the first ballot Seward led with 1731/2 of the 233 votes needed for nomination, . Lincoln being second with 102. On the second ballot Seward had 1841/2 and Lincoln 181. On the third Seward retained nearly his full strength, having 180 votes ; but there were large accessions to Lincoln, who at the end of the roll-call lacked only 11/2 of the neces- sary number and was thereupon nominated as the result of changes. William M. Evarts, on behalf of Seward's supporters, moved in a tactful speech to make the choice unanimous. But the New Yorkers were so disappointed and demoralized that they declined the offer of being
444
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1860
permitted to name the Vice-Presidential candidate. They had not given that question consideration, their ambition having been "aut Caesar, aut nullus." Greeley was exultant and was widely credited with the defeat of Seward. John D. Defrees, of Indiana, declared that "Greeley slaughtered Seward and saved the party." Weed shed actual tears of grief, if not of rage. Seward himself was momentarily stunned on the receipt of the news at Auburn. Then, summoning up his heroic spirit, he walked across to the office of the chief local paper and personally penned an editorial paragraph heartily commending and praising the convention and its work. He felt defeat deeply, however, and expressed a long- ing for the return to private life which he anticipated- but was not to have-on the next fourth of March.
After these stormy national conventions, in each of which New York played so conspicuous a part, came the State contests for the Governorship and other offices. Between the Democratic factions there was an irreme- diable breach, which no attempts were made to heal. Dickinson and the Hards, comprising such eminent and respected men as Charles O'Conor, John A. Dix, and Greene C. Bronson, committed themselves to the sup- port of Breckinridge for President and nominated for Governor James T. Brady, one of the foremost lawyers of the metropolis. The Softs rallied around Horatio Seymour as their leader, approved the candidacy of Douglas, recognized Fernando Wood's faction on equal terms with Tammany Hall, and named for Governor William Kelly, of Hudson-a farmer of fine ability and high character, who had served in the State Senate and
445
THE EVE OF WAR
1860]
had been a follower of Van Buren in the Free Soil movement. The Softs also formed a fusion with the Constitutional Union party, which had nominated Bell and Everett for President and Vice-President and of which in New York the chief leaders were Washington Hunt, formerly Governor; William Kent, son of the great Chancellor; William Duer, and James Brooks. These two parties named a joint Electoral ticket con- sisting of both Softs and Unionists.
The State convention of the Republicans was held a week later than that of the Softs, and was marked with exultation over the Democratic schism as well as the hearty union of the Republican forces. Seward's friends exhibited no soreness, but worked cordially with those who had opposed them. Governor Morgan was renominated by acclamation, and Robert Campbell was named for Lieutenant-Governor. The Chicago plat- form and candidates were heartily approved, and a notable company of Presidential Electors was selected without controversy. The Electors-at-large were Wil- liam Cullen Bryant, formerly a radical Democrat, and James O. Putnam, who had been a Clay and Webster Whig and a Millard Fillmore Know-Nothing.
The campaign throughout the State was vigorously conducted, especially by the Republicans. Marching clubs of "Wide-awakes" for torchlight demonstrations were innumerable and ubiquitous, and the voice of the spellbinder was heard in the land. Seward was the speaker whom men most desired to hear, but his most notable addresses were made in the western States. The foremost local orator was Henry Ward Beecher, who
446
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1860
used the pulpit of Plymouth Church for the delivery of powerful political sermons surpassing stump speeches in vote-getting power. It was, said Greeley, "a struggle as intense, as vehement, and as energetic as had ever been known." The result was decisive. Lincoln car- ried the State by 362,646 votes to 312,510 for the Demo- cratic Electors who were supported by all three factions -Douglas, Breckinridge, and Bell. For Governor, Edwin D. Morgan had 358,272; William Kelly, Soft Democrat, 294,812; James T. Brady, Hard Democrat, 19,841. A proposed constitutional amendment grant- ing the suffrage to negroes on equal terms with whites was defeated by 197,503 for and 337,984 against. In the Assembly the Republicans secured 93 and the Democrats 35. Thus it was that the State made ready for the "irrepressible conflict."
CHAPTER XXIX THE WAR GOVERNOR
T HERE was no exaggeration in Governor Mor- gan's remark at the beginning of his annual mes- sage on January 2, 1861, that the Legislature-the Eighty-fourth-was meeting in circumstances of more than usual interest; or in his reference to the State of New York as an empire of nearly four millions of peo- ple, imperial in all its proportions and with interests the most varied and hopes the most exalted. The ma- terial greatness of the State was impressive. The cen- sus of 1860 credited it with 3,880,727 inhabitants. Of these New York county had 813,662; Kings, 279,122; Erie, 141,971; Albany, 113,916; Oneida, 105,200, and Monroe 100,648. No other county had as many as 100,000. But the one county of New York had more than twenty per cent., and the six counties named had approximately forty per cent. of the whole population. Comparably great was the political importance of the State because of its numerous representation in Con- gress and in the Electoral College, so that it was as- sumed to be the certain rule that as New York went in a national election so went the Union. Such indeed had long been the rule at all close national elections, and such very frequently has been the rule since.
In the Legislature of 1861 the Senate remained un-
447
448
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1861
changed from the preceding year. The assembly again made DeWitt C. Littlejohn its Speaker, and Hanson C. Risley was chosen to be its Clerk. The Governor's mes- sage, in addition to a practical review of the various departmental interests of the State, dwelt at length upon the evils of too great multiplicity of laws and of heed- less and needless legislation, and urged the Legislature to avoid such evils and also the evils of local and special legislation. It also gave much attention, in a grave, brave, and resolute spirit, to the question of the secession of the slave States, which was already actually occur- ring. In this Mr. Morgan unmistakably foreshadowed the notable services he was about to render as the great "War Governor" of New York.
The words of the message were at once conciliatory and resolute. He urged that New York should set to the nation an example of moderation, interposing no barrier against any just and honorable settlement of the quarrel between south and north, offering hostility to none but friendship to all, and cordially uniting with the other States "in proclaiming and enforcing a determination that the Constitution shall be honored and the Union of the States be preserved."
Fernando Wood, a rabid southern sympathizer, tried to respond to this paper a few days later by sending a message to the Common Council of New York, of which city he was than Mayor, advocating that the metropolis follow the example of the southern States and secede both from the State of New York and from the United States. The Common Council applauded this astounding lucubration and had it printed in tract
EDWIN D. MORGAN
Edwin D. Morgan, 23rd governor (1859-62) ; born at Wash- ington, Mass., February 8, 1811; business man; alderman of New York City, 1849; member state senate, 1850-53; state com- missioner of immigration, 1855-58; governor, 1859-62; major general of volunteers in Union army from September 28, 1861, to January 1, 1863; elected to U. S. senate and served from March 4, 1863, to March 3, 1869; unsuccessful candidate for reelection to senate in 1875; defeated for governor in 1876; died in New York City, February 14, 1883.
FERNANDO WOOD
Fernando Wood; born in Philadelphia, Pa., June 14, 1812; moved with his father to New York in 1820; engaged in busi- ness as a shipping merchant and retired in 1850; three times elected mayor of New York. 1855-1856, 1857-1858 and 1861- 1862; elected to the 27th congress (1841-1843) and served also in the 38th (1863-1865) ; reelected to the 40th and the six suc- ceeding congresses, serving from March 4, 1867, to March 3, 1881. He was reelected to the 47th congress but died at Hot Springs, Ark., February 14, 1881, before the new congress convened.
449
THE WAR GOVERNOR
1861]
form for the widest possible distribution among the people, apparently in the crazy hope of thus inciting insurrection in New York in sympathy with that in South Carolina-for the very day after Wood de- livered the message the South Carolina forces fired upon the vessel-the "Star of the West"-that was con- veying supplies to Fort Sumter.
The retort of the Legislature was prompt and ex- plicit. It adopted on January 11 concurrent resolu- tions pledging New York to the loyal support of the national government and offering the President what- ever aid in men and money might be needed to enable him to enforce the laws and uphold the authority of the government. The resolutions added: "In the de- fense of the Union, which has conferred prosperity and happiness upon the American people, renewing the pledge given and redeemed by our fathers, we are ready to devote our fortunes, our lives, and our sacred honor."
The commercial spirit of New York, while loyal, was strongly inclined toward compromise with the south to avert war. A huge petition signed by thou- sands of business men of all parts of the State was sent to Congress, praying for the enactment of some meas- ure which would restore harmony and maintain peace. A great meeting of merchants of New York City on January 18 adopted a memorial to Congress urging compromise. Millard Fillmore and three thousand others in Buffalo signed a similar memorial. Reso- lutions were received by the Governor from the Leg- islature of Virginia inviting New York to send Com- missioners to a Peace conference at Washington on Feb-
450
[1861
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
ruary 4. Though voting to accept the invitation the Legislature made it quite clear that in doing so it did not recede in the least from the position already taken on January 11. The Commissioners appointed by the Legislature were David Dudley Field, William C. Noyes, James S. Wadsworth, A. B. James, Francis Granger, Erastus Corning, Greene C. Bronson, Wil- liam E. Dodge, John A. King, and John E. Wool. The conference was, of course, entirely futile.
Still another attempt was made at compromise. A mass-meeting was held in New York on January 28, which was addressed by leading men of both parties and which appointed three Commissioners to confer unofficially with representatives of the seceding States in regard to "measures best calculated to restore the peace and integrity of this Union." But in the next morning's papers was an item of news that made all the oratory of the big meeting seem flat and vapid. John A. Dix, veteran Democratic politician and friend of compromise and of the maintenance of the rights of the south to the fullest constitutional extent, had been made Secretary of the Treasury in Buchanan's cabinet. One of the officials of his department, in New Orleans, reported that an insurgent movement was in progress and that there was danger of an attack upon the Federal offices in that city, and asked for instruc- tions. Dix telegraphed in reply : "If anyone attempts to haul down the American flag, shoot him on the spot!" In a twinkling that patriotic order of the brave and loyal New Yorker became one of the watchwords of the whole north.
451
THE WAR GOVERNOR
1861]
Next, on the following day, was the famous Tweddle Hall convention at Albany, with four delegates from each Assembly district representing all factions of the Democratic party. Sanford E. Church called it to order; Amasa J. Parker was permanent chairman; Horatio Seymour, William Kelly, Reuben H. Wal- worth (formerly Chancellor), and George W. Clinton (son of DeWitt Clinton) were among the speakers. Some justified the secession of the southern States, and applauded it. Some denied and scouted the power of the national government to prevent secession. Some advocated peaceful dissolution of the Union. Ex- Chancellor Walworth expressed the view that civil war could not restore the Union, but would forever prevent its restoration. Seymour declared that the sole ques- tion was whether there should be compromise first and no war, or war first and then compromise.
George W. Clinton took a different tone. He was a Hard, who had trained with Daniel S. Dickinson and John A. Dix, had been a Hard candidate (de- feated) for Lieutenant-Governor, and had supported the Breckinridge ticket in 1860. But the boom of the guns from Charleston harbor affected him as it had affected Dix. "There is," he declared, "no such thing as legal secession-it is rebellion ! I hate trea- son. While I abhor coercion, in one sense, as war, I wish to preserve the dignity of the govern- ment of these United States." But in spite of Clinton's patriotic words the convention demanded that the ques- tion of compromise with the south be submitted to a popular vote.
452
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1861
The two houses of the Legislature on February 18 held a joint session in order to receive the President- elect, Lincoln, who then visited Albany. The Presi- dent pro tempore of the Senate, Andrew J. Colvin, pre- sided, and Lincoln made a brief address void of politi- cal significance.
During this session occurred a notable conflict over the election of a United States Senator to succeed Seward, who had been selected to be Secretary of State in Lincoln's cabinet. There were three leading can- didates. One was Horace Greeley, who sought the place as the candidate opposed to the "bossism" of Weed, and who had a strong following on that issue. Another, put forward by Weed, was William M. Evarts, who had risen to the foremost rank at the bar and had been a conspicuous delegate to the Republican national convention of 1860, but who had never held political office. The third was Ira Harris, who had had a long career in the Legislature and on the bench of the Supreme Court, and was highly esteemed for both ability and character. At the outset Evarts and Greeley were about equal in strength. On the first ballot in the caucus they received 42 and 40 votes re- spectively, Harris 20, and 13 were scattering. For several more ballots Greeley led with from 42 to 47, while Evarts fell to 39. There was every prospect that on the eighth ballot enough of the Harris men would come over to Greeley to give him the victory. Thus confronted with defeat Weed quickly gave orders for Evarts's votes to be swung en masse to Harris, which was done, and with 60 votes to Greeley's 49 Harris
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.