USA > New York > History of the state of New York, political and governmental, Vol. IV 1896-1920 > Part 15
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
Indications pointed to the nomination of Prendergast for Governor when the Progressives met in Syracuse on
219
THE PROGRESSIVE SCHISM
1912]
September 5. Davenport was temporary and Straus permanent chairman. Though Prendergast had con- sented to run with the understanding that he should have a unanimous nomination and Roosevelt had given his approval, no sooner had Prendergast reached Syracuse than he found Hotchkiss, who had been made State chairman by him, cool toward his candidacy. In a conference on the night of the 5th, a long and intimate friendship between the two men came to an end. Hotchkiss denied that he wished to be a candidate, but, in spite of his earlier urgency that Prendergast should run, presented to him in darkest colors all the objec- tions that might be made to his candidacy. Woodruff, who represented to the idealists in the movement unregenerate political machinery, was working for Prendergast. Hotchkiss also represented that Prender- gast's investigations of charitable institutions in New York City, which had brought him in conflict with some Roman Catholic authorities, would hurt him, and that on the other hand he would lose votes because he was himself a Roman Catholic.12 When the nomina- tions were in order Prendergast's name was presented, and then, although Hotchkiss took the platform and declared that he could not be a candidate, his friends insisted on nominating him. Just as the vote was about to be taken to decide between the two rivals, John G. McGee, known as "Suspender Jack" McGee, pro- posed that they all unite on Oscar S. Straus. Straus from the chair attempted to prevent a stampede, but
12New York Times, September 2, 7, 1912; Statement of Mr. Prendergast to the writer.
220
[1912
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
the crowd took up the suggestion and with a burst of enthusiasm, singing "Onward, Christian Soldiers," made him the candidate.13
Roosevelt's secession left the conservatives in undis- puted control of the Republican State convention, held in Saratoga on September 25. William D. Guthrie was temporary and Edgar T. Brackett permanent chairman. Josiah T. Newcomb attempted to secure more radical declarations with regard to workmen's compensation and primary reform than the platform committee had reported, and also to commit the party to the direct election of United States Senators, but was overwhelmingly defeated. The platform approved Taft's administration, reaffirmed the conservative prin- ciples promulgated in the spring, arraigned Dix with great severity, apparently under the impression that his administration could be made the chief issue in the State, proposed State inspection of city police forces, favored a Constitutional convention as the proper method of meeting progressive demands for social betterment in orderly fashion, and advocated a referen- dum on woman suffrage. The universal respect felt for Straus prompted some suggestions that the Repub- licans should nominate him and so insure Democratic defeat in the State, but after Straus had announced that he was ready to accept any indorsement that included
13The ticket was: Governor, Oscar S. Straus, New York; Lieutenant- Governor, Frederick M. Davenport, Oneida; Secretary of State, Homer D. Call, Onondaga; Comptroller, Horatio C. King, Kings; Attorney-General, John Palmieri, Kings; Treasurer, Ernest Cawcroft, Chautauqua; State Engi- neer, Ora Miner Leland, Tompkins; Judges of the Court of Appeals, Carlos C. Alden, Erie, and George W. Kirchwey, New York.
221
THE PROGRESSIVE SCHISM
1912]
the acceptance of his platform as well as himself, it was clear that there could be no union of forces committed to such divergent doctrines as government under a written Constitution and the setting aside of constitu- tional law by popular vote wherever in any particular case it chanced to run counter to popular opinion or prejudice.14 The Republicans therefore abandoned all thought of union on Straus.
The two leading candidates for Governor were ex-Speaker Wadsworth and Job E. Hedges. Wads- worth was the tried champion of the organization and enjoyed the favor of Barnes, but Barnes in this conven- tion kept much in the background and the opinion of the delegates was left to manifest itself free from control. Hedges's strength was based on his personal popularity, gained through years of campaign speak- ing. His gift of sardonic humor never failed to delight an audience, though the public, which finds it hard to take a humorist seriously, was often led to think of him as a jester and disregard unduly his real abilities and serious purposes. Hedges was not favored by the majority of the organization leaders, but had made a personal campaign through the State and entered the convention with the largest single following, based chiefly on the favor of individual delegates. On the night before the nomination a concentration on Charles S. Whitman seemed possible, but it was prevented by objections that this would drag into politics the pending prosecution of Police Lieutenant Charles Becker and others for the murder of the informing gambler, Her-
14New York Tribune, September 24, 1912.
222
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1912
man Rosenthal.15 The first ballot was: Hedges, 360; Wadsworth, 268; William S. Bennet, 140; William H. Daniels, 62; Harvey D. Hinman, 49; Edgar T. Brackett, 46; Patrick W. Cullinan, 27; Egbert E. Woodbury, 34; Charles S. Whitman, 17; Charles A. Schieren, 7. The second ballot stood: Hedges, 384; Wadsworth, 290; Bennet, 88; Daniels, 61; Hinman, 55; Brackett, 50; Woodbury, 21; F. S. Witherbee, 6. On the third ballot Bennet threw his vote to Hedges and started a break that resulted in his unanimous nomination. Wadsworth gracefully acceded to the demand that he take second place. In the hope of getting a fusion ticket with the Democrats for the two vacancies in the Court of Appeals, the Republicans made only one nomination, that of Frank H. Hiscock, and empowered a committee to make the second. As the Democrats declined this invitation the committee afterward nominated Emory A. Chase of Catskill.16
Governor Dix desired a renomination and eagerly proclaimed himself a progressive, in harmony with the popular drift. But he failed to carry conviction with Democrats who distrusted Tammany and who were convinced that after the Republican and Progressive exhibitions of unbossed nominations the Democracy must also "let the people rule" in its convention. The
15New York Tribune, September 25, 1912.
16The ticket was: Governor, Job E. Hedges, New York; Lieutenant- Governor, James W. Wadsworth, Jr., Livingston; Secretary of State, Francis M. Hugo, Jefferson; Comptroller, William D. Cunningham, Ulster; Treas- urer, William Archer, Westchester; Attorney-General, Meier Steinbrink, Kings; State Engineer, Frank M. Williams, Orange; Judges of the Court of Appeals, Frank H. Hiscock, Onondaga, and Emory A. Chase, Greene.
223
THE PROGRESSIVE SCHISM
1912]
New York World announced that it would not support any candidate for Governor who stood for Murphy and that it would consider Dix such a candidate.17 Wilson used his influence discreetly, but none the less effect- ively, against Dix, and, at a meeting in Syracuse on September 12, pointedly rebuffed efforts to draw him into conference with Dix and to parade him and photograph him with Murphy.18
Just before the meeting of the State convention, in Syracuse on October 1, Wilson issued a statement demanding a "free and unbossed" convention in New York, and saying: "I believe it is ready to choose a progressive man of a kind to be his own master and to adopt a platform to which men of progressive prin- ciples everywhere can heartily subscribe, if only it be left free from personal control of any sort."19
Murphy was favorably disposed to Dix and had the votes to control the convention, but, as a correspondent of the New York Times put it: "A political boss if careful enough is perfectly capable of conducting an apparently unbossed convention"20; and that, according to this correspondent, is what Murphy did. Daniel F. Cohalan urged him to stand by Dix, arguing that he could be elected with the divided opposition and would thus add to Murphy's prestige. The Tammany leader sounded the county chairmen for evidence of a favor- able disposition toward Dix, but found little encourage- ment, for 42 out of 47 county chairmen in a meeting
17Heaton, The Story of a Page, p. 349.
18New York Times, September 13, 1912.
19New York Times, September 30, 1912. 20New York Times, October 2, 1912.
224
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1912
declared against the Governor's renomination. So Murphy determined to keep his hands off rather than antagonize Wilson, for whose views O'Gorman was prepared if necessary to make a fight.21 Martin H. Glynn was temporary and Alton B. Parker permanent chairman of the convention. Frank H. Mott made a minority report attacking Parker for being out of harmony with Wilson and Bryan, and was supported by Mayor John K. Sague of Poughkeepsie. Parker hotly defended himself, declaring : "I am a Progressive Democrat." The platform attacked the Republican tariff and especially Taft's vetoes of Democratic revision of some schedules, enthusiastically praised Dix, declaring that the promises of the Rochester plat- form of two years before had been redeemed, and claimed credit for amendments to the labor law and for initiating the constitutional amendment for workmen's compensation and for submitting the Woman Suffrage amendment. Thomas Mott Osborne attacked the plat- form, declaring that the Rochester promises had not been redeemed and taunting the convention with its praise of Dix. "If the indorsement," he said, "repre- sents the sense of this convention, why is Governor Dix to be thrown overboard?" Wagner took the floor to defend Murphy, denounced Osborne as a "sorehead," and provoked the latter to shout "Liar!" which threat- ened to plunge the convention into disorder. But Mur- phy restrained his friends with orders to "cut out the rough stuff."22
21New York Times, October 1, 1912.
22New York Tribune, October 3, 1912.
JAMES WATSON GERARD
James Watson Gerard, lawyer and diplomat; born, Geneseo, N. Y., 1867; graduated from Columbia university, 1890; New York law school, 1892; admitted to the bar in 1892 and began practicing in New York City; chairman of the democratic cam- paign committee of New York county for four years; elected associate justice of the supreme court of New York, 1st district, for the term running from 1908 to 1921 but resigned in July, 1913 upon being appointed by President Wilson as ambassador extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Germany; re- called upon breaking off of diplomatic relations on February 3, 1917; retired from diplomatic service July 17, 1917; democratic nominee for United States senate while absent at Berlin, 1914.
225
THE PROGRESSIVE SCHISM
1912]
Though it was well understood that Dix was to be set aside, he led on the first ballot, which stood: Dix, 147; Sulzer, 126; Glynn, 46; George H. Burd, 28; F. B. Harrison, 21 ; H. A. Metz, 17; William Sohmer, 1. The Tammany vote was widely scattered. Murphy ostentatiously "took off the bridle himself and turned the delegates loose"23 by asking to be excused from voting. But the most conspicuous of his old lieuten- ants voted for Dix. The second ballot showed no material change. On the third ballot Sulzer took the lead, the vote being: Dix, 87; Sulzer, 195; Glynn, 45; Burd, 9; Harrison, 21; Metz, 26; Wagner, 3; O'Gorman, 1; Victor J. Dowling, 4; W. B. Ellison, J. W. Gerard, G. W. Batten, 1 each. At the beginning of the fourth ballot Murphy suggested to his followers that they take their cue from Albany and, when Dix's name was withdrawn and Albany threw its vote for Sulzer, the end came. The only objection to making the nomination unanimous was that of three delegates from Cayuga, led by Osborne. Murphy kept in his own hands the two most important offices for the control of the State's business administration by nomi- nating Sohmer for Comptroller and Bensel for State Engineer.24
Sulzer's candidacy was received with mixed feelings by the reformers in the party. He had been in general
23New York Times, October 4, 1912.
24The ticket was: Governor, William Sulzer, New York; Lieutenant- Governor, Martin H. Glynn, Albany; Secretary of State, Mitchell May, Kings; Comptroller, William Sohmer, New York; Treasurer, John J. Ken- nedy, Erie; Attorney-General, Thomas Carmody, Yates; State Engineer, John A. Bensel, New York; Judges of Court of Appeals, William H. Cudde- back, Erie, and John W. Hogan, Onondaga.
226
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1912
a faithful Tammany man, and from that point of view was objectionable to those who sought the overthrow of Murphy. But he so far controlled his own district that he had been able to defy Tammany and secure an election to Congress even when the organization was hostile to him. He had, moreover, never been able, despite his early obedience as Speaker, to get Tammany to back him in his repeated candidacies for Governor. This failure was attributed less to Tammany's distrust of his loyalty than to its not taking him seriously. He was unstable, erratic in speech and manner, and vainly proud of a fancied resemblance to Clay that made him the object of frequent newspaper ridicule as "Henry Clay Sulzer." In Congress, however, he had worked effectively for industrial and social reforms and he had a strong hold on the radical and labor vote.
While the bitterness between Republicans and the Progressives led them in their national campaign to devote themselves largely to warring with each other to the neglect of the Democrats, in the State the Repub- licans avoided all attacks upon Straus and concentrated their fight upon Tammany and the Dix administration. As the campaign drew to a close it became clear that Roosevelt's hopes of invading the southern States or making serious inroads on the Democrats anywhere were vain. But it also became clear that he had split the Republican party pretty nearly in halves. The optimism of both Taft and Hedges was equal to all demands upon it. But nothing less than an overwhelm- ing Democratic victory could be expected, and the most serious task of the Republicans in New York was to
227
THE PROGRESSIVE SCHISM
1912]
hold their party in second place. This they succeeded in doing when in more than one habitually Republican State the party was temporarily relegated to the com- pany of the minor organizations. Taft received only 8 Electoral votes, those of Vermont and Utah, Roose- velt received 88, those of Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Washington, and 11 from
California. Wilson received the other 435. The popular vote, however, showed no such overwhelming sentiment for Wilson. He received 6,286,214 votes, or 122,892 fewer than were given to Bryan in 1908. Taft received 3,483,922 and Roosevelt 4,126,120, a combined vote smaller by 68,964 than that given to Taft in 1908. Despite Roosevelt's appeal to radicalism, which might have been expected to cut down the Socialist strength, the vote for Debs showed the astonishing increase in four years from 420,820 to 897,071. Vice-President Sherman died on October 30, and the Republican Electors gave their complimentary vote to Nicholas Murray Butler.
The vote of New York for President was: Wilson, 655,573; Taft, 455,487; Roosevelt, 390,093; Debs (Socialist), 63,434; Chafin (Prohibitionist), 19,455; Reimer (Socialist Labor), 4,273. Wilson's vote was about 12,000 smaller than that given to Bryan in 1908, while the Debs vote nearly doubled. Sulzer carried the State by 205,454 over Hedges. The vote was: Sulzer, 649,559; Hedges, 444,105; Straus, 393,183; Charles E. Russell (Socialist), 56,917; T. A. MacNicholl (Prohibitionist), 18,990; John Hall (Socialist Labor), 4,461. The rest of the Democratic
228
[1912
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
State ticket and the judiciary ticket were elected by pluralities ranging from 171,109 to 215,223. The Democrats elected 31 Congressmen, the Republicans 11, and the Progressives 1. The Senate stood: Demo- crats, 33; Republicans, 17; Republican-Progressive, 1. The Assembly stood: Democrats, 103; Republicans, 43; Progressives, 4. Alfred E. Smith of New York was elected Speaker.
CHAPTER XIV THE TRAGEDY OF SULZER
1913-1914
I F MURPHY believed he could maintain with Sulzer such comparatively comfortable relations as he had held with Dix, he did not have to wait until inauguration to learn his mistake. Sulzer took himself seriously as Governor, considered that he was chosen by the people to be the party leader, and at once began to take active interest in patronage and adminis- tration. According to his own story, Sulzer's first difference with Murphy came in December, 1912,1 when the Tammany leader rebuked him for "butting in" with regard to some contracts to be let by a State department. Sulzer replied that he was going to be Governor, and Murphy retorted, "Like hell you are."
In his first message the Governor urged reform and economy, the substitution of a single Highway Commis- sioner for Dix's mixed board, popular election of United States Senators, and an ambitious program of social legislation. Despite Democratic protests, he appointed a commission headed by John N. Carlisle to investigate the administrative departments in search of any abuses that they might have sheltered under
1New York Evening Mail, October 20, 21, 1913.
229
230
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1913
Dix. The position of Executive Auditor was created for the purpose of giving to John A. Hennessy, a New York newspaperman, whom he wished to have asso- ciated with him in his administration, the right of entry and examination into every department of the State government. He appointed Hennessy and made George W. Blake, another journalist, examiner to inquire into the conduct of State prisons. When asked if he had Murphy's consent to his investigations he answered: "I am the Democratic leader of the State of New York. The people decreed it at the polls and I stand on the verdict. I cannot succeed in doing what I want to do as Governor unless I am the leader. If any Democrat wants to challenge that, let him come out in the open and the people will decide."2
Murphy did not at first come out in the open, but he took good care to hold the Governor in check. His hold on the Legislature was firm. Alfred E. Smith, the Speaker, and Robert F. Wagner, the President pro tem. of the Senate, were both faithful Tammany men. Sulzer could look for no help from Republicans, who were led in the Senate by Elon R. Brown and in the Assembly by Harold J. Hinman, a lieutenant of Barnes. Neither had any disposition to encourage insurgency against traditional political organization. The only obstacle that Murphy met in organizing his forces was the refusal of Lieutenant-Governor Glynn to appoint Stephen J. Stilwell chairman of the Senate judiciary
2New York Times, January 3, 1913.
231
THE TRAGEDY OF SULZER
1913]
committee.3 Soon after, charges of bribery were made against Stilwell, and though Tammany rallied to his support and prevented his expulsion he was convicted on a criminal charge in May and sent to State prison.
Sulzer, though trying to follow an independent pro- gram in legislation and to carry on investigations into departmental corruption, sought to conciliate Tam- many with liberal patronage and was reproached in many quarters for following in the pathway of Dix. He wanted to appoint Henry Morgenthau chairman of the Public Service commission in the First district, but Murphy wanted his friend, John Galvin, and in the Second district favored George M. Palmer for chair- man and Patrick E. McCabe for associate. Sulzer finally compromised on Edward E. McCall, Supreme Court Justice, in place of Morganthau, but refused to appoint either Palmer or McCabe. Despite Murphy's objections, he displaced C. Gordon Reel, Highway Commissioner; Joseph F. Scott, Superintendent of Prisons, and H. W. Hoefer, State Architect, as a result of the findings made by his agents. He charged that Murphy insisted on the appointment of James E. Gaff- ney, a Tammany contractor and business associate of Murphy, if he was determined to remove Reel, and that he was repeatedly threatened: "It will be Gaffney or war."4 Murphy denied that he asked for Gaffney's appointment.5 Murphy also refused to accept the Governor's plan for a sweeping Direct Nominations
3New York Times, January 3, 1913.
4Jay W. Forrest and James Malcolm, Tammany's Treason: Impeachment of Governor William Sulzer, p. 59 et seq.
5New York Times, March 18, 1913.
232
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1913
law, which abolished the State convention. The Legis- lature did, however, pass a Full Crew law for railroad trains, which the Governor signed, and an act reorgan- izing the Highway department with a single head. Before the middle of March relations were so strained that Murphy refused to attend a birthday dinner in Sulzer's honor, at which Henry Morganthau told the Governor it was time for him to have his "wishbone converted into a backbone," for he would need it, and said : "We look to you to be Governor of the Empire State and not to be the agent of undisclosed principals who hide themselves from public view."6 Nevertheless, Sulzer and Murphy continued to have meetings, largely through the instrumentality of McCall, in the endeavor to reach an understanding, until April 13, when they had a final interview at Murphy's house-according to Murphy by the Governor's seeking, and according to the Governor through the urgency of Norman E. Mack. There they came to a definite break. Sulzer warned the Tammany leader that he would wreck the party if he persisted in shielding grafters and in violating plat- form pledges, and Murphy retorted that Sulzer was an ingrate, whom he would disgrace and destroy. Sulzer, after thinking over his helplessness to accomplish any- thing, wrote out his resignation, but later determined to stand to his guns.7
If he at all understood the weapons for personal attack at Murphy's command, fear for himself did not turn him from his course. From that time he took an
6New York Times, March 20, 1913.
7Forrest and Malcolm, Tammany's Treason, p. 71 et seq.
233
THE TRAGEDY OF SULZER
1913]
aggressive stand and sought no compromise with his enemies. The Legislature refused to pass his Primary - bill, but instead twice sent him the Blauvelt bill, a measure retaining the State convention, which the Governor vetoed, declaring it to be a betrayal of the people. He also vetoed a bill for a special election, to be held on June 3, on the question of calling a Constitu- tional convention. As soon as the Legislature adjourned on May 3 the Governor started his campaign for direct nominations. Greatly to his disappointment, Glynn, who had been urging him on in the matter, refused to take a place on the committee organized to promote direct nominations. Sulzer made speeches in the prin- cipal cities of the State and called the Legislature in special session on June 16 to put through the measure.
Meanwhile his foes attacked his character. They brought forward a story of unprofessional conduct as a lawyer years before in Vermont, and then sought to dis- credit him through a breach of promise suit, but to no avail. Then Murphy used the special session to delve into the Governor's campaign expenses, a subject which he had apparently from the first held in reserve, fortified as he was with complete knowledge of the cam- paign management gathered by his agent, who had been in Sulzer's confidence. He proceeded by increasing the power of the Frawley committee, which had been created at the regular session to investigate the State institutions. The Constitution forbade the special session to deal with any subject not recommended by the Governor. Taking advantage of Sulzer's recom- mendation of amendment to the Corrupt Practices act,
234
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1913
Senator George F. Thompson, a Republican, on June 25 moved that "the whole subject of any wrongful or unlawful influence," and of receipts and expenditures of candidates for offices filled by the electors of the whole State, be referred to the Frawley committee. This was held to arm the committee with the power to go into the Governor's receipts and expenditures, although Sulzer disputed it and tried to prevent the committee from getting some of the evidence that was afterward used against him. But the Attorney-General held that the committee was acting within its powers.
Meanwhile Murphy and his friends were subjected to heavy fire. Hennessy and Blake revealed wide- spread abuses. Sulzer declared : "Their reports staggered me, and believe me, it takes something to stagger me: There was graft, graft everywhere, nor any man to stop it."8 Stilwell was convicted of bribery and Justice Daniel F. Cohalan, one of Murphy's friends and advisers, was put on trial before the Legislature on charges brought by John A. Connolly, who testified that Cohalan, before he was a Judge, demanded 55 per cent. of the profits of contracts obtained from the city for Connolly, that Cohalan received $3,940 for his influ- ence, and that Cohalan had afterward repaid this to him when he and his friends complained to Murphy. Subsequently, he swore, he sought Cohalan's aid to get a public office and gave Cohalan his note for $4,000 for his influence. Cohalan's defense was that he sub- mitted to blackmail when he returned the $3,940, which he had received legitimately, and that the note was
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.