USA > New York > History of the state of New York, political and governmental, Vol. IV 1896-1920 > Part 7
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
GEORGE BRINTOM MCCLELLAN
George Brintom McClellan, mayor of New York; born at Dresden, Saxony, November 23, 1865; graduated from Prince- ton, 1886; reporter on the staff of several New York dailies; admitted to the bar, 1892; president of the board of aldermen, New York City, 1893-1894; representative in congress, 1895- 1903; mayor of Greater New York, 1903-1909.
NATHAN STRAUS
Nathan Straus, merchant; born Rhenish Bavaria Jan. 21, 1848; came to U. S. with family, 1854; attended school in Talbotson, Ga .; went to New York, 1865; partner R. H. Macy's department store New York and Abraham & Straus, Brooklyn until 1914 when he retired; originated and maintained at his own expense laboratory and system of distribution of pasteur- ized milk for the poor of New York City; distributed coal to poor of New York, winter of 1892-1893; in panic of 1893-1894 maintained a system of lodging houses for the homeless; during winter of 1914-1915 served 1,135,371 penny meals from his milk depot; sold his steam yacht Siciliana in 1915 and gave proceeds for the feeding of war orphans; appointed by secre- tary Josephus C. Daniels member of commission to investigate charges of improper conditions on the hospital ship, Solace ; reported charges unfounded.
97
1904]
ODELL IN CONTROL
before Parker resigned suggested that Cullen, a Democratic Supreme Court Justice assigned to the Court of Appeals, should be promoted, and that at the same time William E. Werner, a Republican, the other Judge sitting by assignment, should be nominated by both parties for the second elective vacancy.17 In pursuance of this plan Governor Odell on September 2 appointed Cullen Chief-Judge, and the State conven- tion approved the policy by nominating both Cullen and Werner for full terms.
The convention indorsed Roosevelt and the Chicago platform, commended the "firm resolution, abiding common sense, and strict integrity" of the Odell administration, and favored the continued development of the indirect tax system as the greatest step onward in the history of the commonwealth for relief from taxation.
17New York Tribune, July 29, 1904.
CHAPTER VII JUDGE PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS 1904
C ONSERVATIVES looking for the reestablish- ment of a "sane and safe" Democracy began a year before the national convention to talk of nominating Cleveland. The Brooklyn Eagle was active in this movement until Cleveland, on November 25, 1903, wrote to St. Clair McKelway positively refusing to bè a candidate.1 Then they turned to Alton B. Parker.
Although Parker had rejected Hill's advice to run for Governor, after Coler's defeat Hill set to work to groom the Chief-Judge for the Presidency. Danforth was sent south to work up sentiment for him as a conservative Democrat who could bring all wings of the party together.2 But all reference to his views on free silver was carefully avoided. The Democracy, having twice followed Bryan to defeat, was ready for a conservative, but the radicals were still too powerful to be squarely challenged on the financial issue. Hill could not win even New York without a struggle.
1Brooklyn Eagle, November 27, 1903.
2New York Tribune, May 24, 1904.
98
99
1904]
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
William R. Hearst, the owner of the New York American, put himself into the field, and with the aid of much agitation in his newspapers gained a consider- able following throughout the country, though he was unable to get any significant support in the State organization. A more serious problem was presented by the opposition of Charles F. Murphy, who first brought forward the name of Mayor McClellan as New York's candidate and, when that failed to receive sup- port, concentrated his energies on resistance to Parker instructions.
At the State convention in Albany on April 18, presided over by George Raines, who had presented the platform favoring the seizure of the coal mines two years before, a thoroughly conservative platform declaring for State rights and no centralization was adopted. All reference to the silver question was care- fully excluded. Hill had wanted to make some con- cession to radicalism in order to conciliate Bryan, but Parker's influence prevented this. By a vote of 301 to 140 the delegation was instructed for Parker. The minority vote came from Tammany and the Ninth district of Kings, which was in revolt against the leadership of McCarren, at the moment Hill's ally at war with Tammany. Hill refused to give Tammany any representation among the delegates-at-large unless Murphy would withdraw his opposition to instructions. Murphy stood firmly against this, until in deference to Parker Hill conceded full representation to Tammany despite its obstructive stand. The delegates-at-large were Hill, Edward Murphy, Jr., George Ehret of New
100
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
York, and James W. Ridgway of Brooklyn.3 Incident- ally, John Raines, Republican President pro tem. of the Senate and brother of the chairman of the convention, sitting in a box, viewed the proceedings of the conven- tion with interest and at times apparently with grim satisfaction.
Bryan on April 23 spoke in Chicago attacking the Parker movement, declaring that there was not a line in the New York platform "written in behalf of the people, not a line that will excite criticism in Wall Street," and saying: "I am sanguine enough to believe that I can prove to every unbiased mind that Judge Parker is not a fit man to be nominated, either by the Democratic party or by any other party that stands for honesty or fair dealing in politics."4 Nevertheless the desire of southern and western Democrats for eastern Electoral votes carried many who sympathized with his views into the Parker camp, and when the Democratic national convention assembled in St. Louis on July 6 little doubt remained of Parker's nomination. Murphy talked McClellan and told the westerners that Parker's nomination would imperil New York, though Tam- many's opposition to a New York candidate had been discounted by its attitude toward Tilden and later toward Cleveland. Murphy himself under the unit rule was forced to vote for Parker. Bryan made a test of strength in a fight for the Hearst and against the John P. Hopkins delegation from Illinois, on the ground that the latter was the product of high-handed
3New York Tribune, April 19, 1904.
4New York Tribune, April 24, 1904.
101
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
1904]
fraud.5 But he was defeated, 647 to 299. On no other question could he gather even so large a vote.
A sub-committee of the platform committee, of which Hill was a member, prepared a plank saying that the discoveries of gold had contributed to the main- tenance of a money standard no longer open to question, removing that issue from the field of political conten- tion. In the full committee Bryan sought to learn how Parker stood toward silver, but Hill as his spokesman professed entire ignorance on the subject. "Do you mean to say," asked Bryan, "that you don't know Judge Parker's financial views?" and Hill answered : "I mean just that." The committee by a vote of 35 to 15 struck out Hill's plank and decided to maintain silence on the money question. The Bryan men in return consented to the elimination of a plank favoring an income tax and another for public ownership of railroads.6 The platform as agreed upon was adopted without opposi- tion. It declared for tariff revision and the enforce- ment of anti-trust laws, and was emphatic in its con- demnation of "executive usurpation" and the exercise by Roosevelt of "arbitrary" powers. In presenting Parker's name, Martin W. Littleton said: "If you ask why he has been silent, I tell you it is because he does not claim to be master of the Democratic party, but is content to be its servant."7 In a speech on behalf of Senator Francis M. Cockrell of Missouri, Bryan referred to Black's militant phrases in nominating
5New York Tribune, July 8, 1904.
6New York Tribune, July 8 and 9, 1904.
7New York Tribune, July 9, 1904.
102
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
Roosevelt, and at the same time took a fling at Judge Parker, saying: "Give us a pilot who will guide the Democratic ship from militarism, the Scylla of mili- tarism, without wrecking her upon the Charybdis of commercialism."8
The irreconcilable Bryan vote divided between Hearst and Cockrell, and Parker was nominated on the first ballot. The vote after changes was: Parker, 679; Hearst, 181; Cockrell, 42; Olney, 38; Edward C. Wall, 27; George Gray, 12; John Sharp Williams, 8; George B. McClellan, 3; Nelson A. Miles, 3; Charles A. Towne, 2; Robert E. Pattison, 4; Bird S. Coler, 1. The nomination for Vice-President went to the vener- able Henry G. Davis of West Virginia, a wealthy coal operator and long a United States Senator.
Until after the platform that avoided the money issue had been adopted and the nomination made, Parker pre- served absolute silence. He was nominated in the early morning of Sunday, July 9. That same morning, in an article entitled "Insane and Unsafe," the New York Times declared that he could never be elected on Bryan's platform. Pointing out that the convention expressly refused to declare for gold, thereby confessing that the Democracy was not cured of the free silver craze, the Times continued : "He must at once declare, sound money Democrats will demand that he declare, that the gold monetary standard, as now established by law, is permanent and no longer open to question." "Better another term of Roosevelt, better Roosevelt in- definitely, than one term of a President of a party which
8New York World, July 10, 1904.
103
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
1904]
confesses itself to be still insane and unsafe."9 The World also called on Parker to repudiate the evasion as the alternative to giving Roosevelt a walkover.10 Judge Parker, from his country home at Esopus, as soon as he had read the news that his supporters had evaded the question about his financial views, sent this telegram to the convention :
"Hon. William F. Sheehan, Hotel Jefferson, St. Louis, Mo .- I regard the gold standard as firmly and irrevocably established and shall act accordingly if the action of the convention to-day shall be ratified by the people. As the platform is silent on the subject my view should be made known to the convention, and if it prove to be unsatisfactory to the majority I request you to decline the nomination for me at once so that another may be nominated before adjournment. "ALTON B. PARKER."
It was too late for the convention to make another nomination, even if it had been so disposed. The Bryan men were furious, and charged that they had been tricked. Hill, in the face of his earlier pro- fessions of ignorance, stated: "I do say that no intelli- gent delegate, or State delegation, voted for Judge Parker without knowing exactly where Judge Parker stood."11 After long debate among the leaders the convention agreed, by a vote of 794 to 191, to reply to the Judge that the platform was silent on the money question because it was not an issue and that there was nothing in the views declared by him that precluded him from running. This was the only possible course,
9New York Times, July 9, 1904.
10New York World, July 9, 1904.
11New York Tribune, July 10, 1904.
1
104
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
for a hopeless conflict would have followed an attempt either to remake the platform or to choose a new candi- date.
The telegram was enthusiastically received by the conservative Democrats of New York, who saw in Parker their long-sought leader, ready to waive a nomination for his convictions. In a pæan of praise entitled "A Man at Last," the New York Evening Post declared: "Nothing so fine is known in our political annals."12 Parker's judicial position furnished reason for him to maintain silence until his actual nomination forced a declaration, and he had not understood that his financial views were subject to any reasonable doubt; but the course of Hill is difficult to explain, unless it be that he thought Parker would and could remain through the campaign in an equivocal position on the money question.
The Democratic factions were in a turmoil over their State ticket until the last moment. After some talk about DeLancey Nicoll and Daniel S. Lamont, the independent Democrats, led by the New York Times, favored Edward M. Shepard for Governor.13 Tam- many and the anti-McCarren faction in Brooklyn, led by James Shevlin, supported George M. Palmer of Schoharie, with Shepard as a second choice. They were bitterly opposed to the candidacy of Grout, who in the City Comptroller's office had been displacing Tammany office-holders with McCarren adherents.14
12New York Evening Post, July 11, 1904.
13New York Times, September 1, 18, 1904.
14New York Times, June 24, 1904.
105
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
1904]
William Travers Jerome seemed a possibility for a time, and Hill conferred with him, but found him unwilling to give any assurances as to how he would treat the organization. Hill and McCarren then settled on Grout, after Hill found that Stanchfield was unacceptable to his allies.15
Meanwhile Joseph Pulitzer, alarmed by the lagging of the campaign and the ineffectiveness of the candi- date's apparent judicial aloofness, urged Parker to put aside the politicians and take the control of the situation himself.
The State convention met at Saratoga on September 20. William B. Hornblower was chosen temporary chairman and Cord Meyer, chairman of the State committee, appointed Charles F. Murphy
and McCarren as a committee to conduct him to the chair. Murphy showed the bitterness of his feeling by remain- ing in his seat and refusing to act with McCarren. Duncan Campbell Lee was permanent chairman. The independents earnestly urged Shepard upon Hill, who replied that Shepard had no delegation to stand sponsor for him, and asked how he could be expected to nomi- nate a man when the majority from his own county protested against him. That ended the Shepard move- ment.16
Murphy maintained his stand against Grout, but up to noon on the 21st the newspapers reported that Hill and McCarren could and would nominate him. Then at the last minute the leaders agreed upon Justice
15New York Times, September 17, 19, 1904.
16New York Tribune, September 21, 1904.
106
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
D-Cady Herrick of Albany. This change has been attributed to the intervention of Judge Parker and to a statement to Hill by William F. Sheehan after consul- tation by telephone with Parker that, if they persisted in nominating Grout as they had the votes to do, he would say to the convention that Judge Parker's friends would not consider Grout's candidacy to be in his in- terest, owing to Tammany's hostile attitude.17 Judge Parker, however, has denied taking any hand against Grout. His sole exertion of influence on the conven- tion was respecting the judicial nominations. When he read in a newspaper that Hill planned to nominate Herrick for Chief-Judge, he sent a special messenger to Hill with a letter urging the naming of Cullen and Werner in deference to a policy that he had long advo- cated. In thus sidetracking Herrick he might have been indirectly responsible for the abandonment of Grout; for Hill might have felt it expedient after Her- rick's name had been brought to public attention to place him somewhere on the ticket.18 At any rate Herrick offered a convenient escape from a bitter con- test. On the other hand Hill is reported to have inti- mated to several friends three days before the nomina- tion that it would go to Herrick. Though Herrick had been the leader of the anti-Hill faction in Albany, Hill presented his name to the convention, which nominated him by acclamation. What the motives and circum- stances were that controlled his mysterious methods in this convention, so far as is known Hill never disclosed.
17New York Tribune, September 22, 1904.
18Statement of Judge Parker to the writer, May 11 and 25, 1921.
107
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
1904]
For Judge of the Court of Appeals Hill was reluctant to nominate Cullen, whose decision had rebuked the Dutchess county election transaction of 1891, and he was more reluctant to nominate Werner because Cun- neen demanded the place. Parker, however, thought it was his party's duty to meet the Republican offer of a non-partisan judicial ticket, and after attempts had been made to break up the plan by suggesting to Cullen that he run for Governor, which he refused to do,19 Parker's letter left Hill no choice but to nominate the two Judges, though he told its bearers that the message was embarrassing.20
The platform declared that the paramount and over- whelming issue in State affairs was between official honesty and official corruption. It arraigned the one man power of Odell acting as chairman of a political machine in violation of his sworn obligation as a servant of the whole people. "For the first time in its history," it said, "the Empire State has a Governor whose personal integrity rests under widespread sus- picion." No proof was offered then, or by speakers in the campaign, to justify any such charge, and the leading Democratic newspapers rebuked the platform makers for it.
The Democrats entered the campaign with confidence.
19Interview with Judge Cullen, New York World, September 11, 1904. 20The ticket was: Governor, D-Cady Herrick, Albany; Lieutenant-Gov- ernor, Francis Burton Harrison, New York; Comptroller, George Hall, St. Lawrence; Treasurer, William Muench, Onondaga; Attorney-General, John Cunneen, Erie; State Engineer, Thomas H. Stryker, Oneida; Chief-Judge of the Court of Appeals, Edgar M. Cullen, Kings; Associate-Judge of the Court of Appeals, William E. Werner, Monroe.
108
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
They expected the great corporations, which had been offended by Roosevelt's trust prosecutions, to rally to Parker. The Northern Securities decision, it was hoped, would cause James J. Hill and others similarly affected to throw moral and financial support to Parker.21 But these hopes failed to materialize.
Parker turned to the plain people. He particularly centered his fire on George B. Cortelyou, who had left the Department of Commerce and Labor to become chairman of the Republican national committee. He charged that money was being extorted from corpora- tions, and his newspaper supporters, particularly the New York Times and Brooklyn Eagle, went even farther, declaring that corporation secrets obtained by Cortelyou as Secretary of Commerce and Labor were made available for purposes of blackmail. Roosevelt squarely denied the charge. The Republicans took up the gage and demanded proof of a single instance of extortion, or of any contribution that carried with it any lien on his administration. Parker could not fur- nish details, and he turned from the point to discussion of the ethics of corporation contributions in general. On this popular sentiment reacted against him. The subsequent revelation that in the last days of the cam- paign, when the Republicans feared the result in New York, a large sum had been raised by E. H. Harriman and others, who contributed to the State campaign through Depew, was seized upon as proof of the charges. But this did not touch the issue of blackmail
21New York Times, August 9, 1904.
109
PARKER LEADS THE DEMOCRATS
1904]
that so aroused Roosevelt and on which no evidence was ever brought forward. Harriman's complaint in his letter to Sidney Webster was that his service had not been appreciated. The revelation did bear, how- ever, on the influence that prevented the success of Odell's plan to retire Depew from the United States Senate.22
In the State campaign the Democrats attacked the Republican administration of the canals, especially dwelling on statements made by Attorney-General Cunneen that despite his resistance his Republican col- leagues on the Canal board had paid for the excavation of hardpan as rock. They carried through the State samples of disintegrated hardpan, and told the voters that this earth was what Higgins had paid rock prices for. It was answered that hardpan that could not be plowed was by uniform practice in the engineering profession classed as rock, and that hardpan, even though it might require blasting, would disintegrate after exposure to the air. Reputable Democratic news- papers immediately acknowledged the complete vindi- cation of Higgins.23 Herrick in turn was attacked as a political Judge, who after going on the bench had been condemned for continuing actively to manage the organization of his political faction, by newspapers that later supported his candidacy for Governor.24
The election brought unexpectedly sweeping victory to the Republicans. Roosevelt was overwhelmingly
22New York Times, October 1, 1904; New York Tribune, November 1, 5, 6, 7, 1904.
23Quotations in New York Tribune, November 1, 1904.
24New York Tribune, September 22, 23, 24, 26, 1904.
110
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904
elected. He had 336 Electoral votes to Parker's 140. He carried New York by 175,552 plurality. The vote was : Roosevelt, 859,533; Parker, 683,981; Debs (Social Democrat), 36,883; Swallow (Prohibition), 20,787; Corrigan (Socialist Labor), 9,127; Watson (Populist), 7,459. Higgins won by a plurality of 80,560. The vote was: Higgins, 813,264; Herrick,
732,704; Thomas Prendergast (Social Democrat), 36,259; John McKee (Prohibition), 20,568; Daniel DeLeon (Socialist Labor), 8,976; Alfred J. Bolton (Populist), 6,015. The Republicans won 26 of the 37 Congressmen, 36 of the 50 Senators, and 104 of the 150 Assemblymen. Nixon was elected Speaker for his sev- enth and last term. His untimely death before the close of this term terminated the career of one of the strong- est political figures in the history of the State.
CHAPTER VIII ODELL OVERTHROWN
1904-1905
T HE Republican victory brought Odell, now apparently in complete control of the organiza- tion, face to face with the Senatorial problem. Black wanted Depew's place and had an enthusiastic following among Odell's friends in the New York Congressional delegation, who had come to be spoken of, from a humorously named dining coterie, as the "Tapeworm Club." Depew before election believed the Republican organization was committed to him.1 But when the time for the line-up came Odell was understood to favor Black. His preference was not the result of objection to Depew, but of his alliance with Black and political exigencies, which called for a Senator in sympathy with him and se- lected by him to maintain the leadership that he had taken over from Platt. He also later said that he acted at the request of the President. Platt aggressively favored Depew. It was generally believed that Odell's decision would be controlling. The Black men fully counted on his decision in their favor until the end of
1Statement of Mr. Depew to the writer, June 15, 1917.
111
112
POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[1904-5
December, when he suddenly abandoned the fight and said that he would support Depew.2 Wallace T. Foote of Port Henry, one of Black's closest friends, quoted Odell as explaining that he could not go for Black with- out breaking with his best friend, who was understood by Foote to be E. H. Harriman.3 However this may have been, Depew had claims founded on the friendship of a large group of financiers who had rendered invalu- able assistance in the preceding campaign. With the ex- ception of William Rockefeller, who favored Black, 4 the great financial powers were active on behalf of De- pew. He had the loyal support of a host of personal friends throughout the State and nation, as well as the passive favor of many of the organization leaders who were counted for Black. William Barnes, Jr., who made a canvass of the Legislature, informed Depew that Odell could not get within ten votes of a majority for Black.5 Odell afterward said that he stood by Black un- til many of Black's ostensible friends had deserted him, and he doubted if he could have elected Black if he had persisted. Many men who were prepared under organization direction to vote for Black, persisted in saying to Odell that they really wanted to support Depew. 6 While the struggle was going on attempts
2New York World and Tribune, December 30, 1904.
3Statement by Mr. Foote to the writer in 1905. See also statement of the New York World, a supporter of Depew, on December 30, 1904, that on the night before the settlement Odell had told Black's friends that he would not finally decide until he had talked with one man, and that he then conferred with Harriman, who urged union on Depew.
4Statement of Mr. Odell to the writer, June 25, 1917.
5Statement of Mr. Depew to the writer, June 15, 1917.
6Statement of Mr. Odell to the writer, June 25, 1917.
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.