Part 41

The battle between Cleveland and Harrison was very earnestly contested, and it will be remembered as the only instance in which the party of power was defeated when the country was prosperous. The McKinley Tariff bill had largely increased protection to our manufactures, but without materially increasing wages. The result was an unusual number of labor strikes, the most notable of which was that of Homestead at the Carnegie works, and the Republicans suffered very generally throughout the country by the loss of industrial votes.

The following table presents the popular and electoral vote of 1892:

══════════════╤═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╦═══════════════════════════ │ POPULAR VOTE. ║ ELECTORAL VOTE. ├──────────┬─────────┬─────────┬───────────┬──────────────╫──────────┬────────┬─────── STATES. │ Grover │Benjamin │James B. │ John │ Simon ║Cleveland │Harrison│Weaver │Cleveland,│Harrison,│ Weaver, │ Bidwell, │ Wing, ║ and │ and │ and │New York. │Indiana. │ Iowa. │California.│Massachusetts.║Stevenson.│ Reid. │Field. ──────────────┼──────────┼─────────┼─────────┼───────────┼──────────────╫──────────┼────────┼─────── Alabama │ 138,138 │ 9,197│ 85,181│ 239 │ ―――― ║ 11 │ ―― │ ―― Arkansas │ 87,834 │ 46,884│ 11,831│ 113 │ ―――― ║ 8 │ ―― │ ―― California │ 117,908 │ 117,618│ 25,226│ 8,056 │ ―――― ║ 8 │ 1 │ ―― Colorado │ ―――――― │ 38,620│ 53,584│ 1,638 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ ―― │ 4 Connecticut │ 82,395 │ 77,025│ 806│ 4,025 │ 329 ║ 6 │ ―― │ ―― Delaware │ 18,581 │ 18,083│ 13│ 565 │ ―――― ║ 3 │ ―― │ ―― Florida │ 30,143 │ ―――――― │ 4,843│ 475 │ ―――― ║ 4 │ ―― │ ―― Georgia │ 129,361 │ 48,305│ 42,937│ 988 │ ―――― ║ 13 │ ―― │ ―― Idaho │ ―――――― │ 8,599│ 10,520│ 288 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ ―― │ 3 Illinois │ 426,281 │ 399,288│ 22,207│ 25,870 │ ―――― ║ 24 │ ―― │ ―― Indiana │ 262,740 │ 255,615│ 22,208│ 13,050 │ ―――― ║ 15 │ ―― │ ―― Iowa │ 196,367 │ 219,795│ 20,595│ 6,402 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 13 │ ―― Kansas │ ―――――― │ 157,237│ 163,111│ 4,539 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ ―― │ 10 Kentucky │ 175,461 │ 135,441│ 23,500│ 6,442 │ ―――― ║ 13 │ ―― │ ―― Louisiana │ 87,922 │ 13,281│ 13,282│ ―――― │ ―――― ║ 8 │ ―― │ ―― Maine │ 48,044 │ 62,931│ 2,381│ 3,062 │ 336 ║ ―― │ 6 │ ―― Maryland │ 113,866 │ 92,736│ 796│ 5,877 │ 27 ║ 8 │ ―― │ ―― Massachusetts │ 176,813 │ 202,814│ 3,210│ 1,539 │ 649 ║ ―― │ 15 │ ―― Michigan │ 202,296 │ 222,708│ 19,892│ 14,069 │ ―――― ║ 5 │ 9 │ ―― Minnesota │ 100,920 │ 122,823│ 29,313│ 12,182 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 9 │ ―― Mississippi │ 40,237 │ 1,406│ 10,256│ 910 │ ―――― ║ 9 │ ―― │ ―― Missouri │ 268,398 │ 226,918│ 41,213│ 4,331 │ ―――― ║ 17 │ ―― │ ―― Montana │ 17,581 │ 18,851│ 7,334│ 549 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 3 │ ―― Nebraska │ 24,943 │ 87,227│ 83,134│ 4,902 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 8 │ ―― Nevada │ 714 │ 2,811│ 7,204│ 89 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ ―― │ 3 New Hampshire │ 42,081 │ 45,658│ 292│ 1,297 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 4 │ ―― New Jersey │ 171,042 │ 156,068│ 969│ 8,131 │ 1,337 ║ 10 │ ―― │ ―― New York │ 654,868 │ 609,350│ 16,429│ 38,190 │ 17,956 ║ 36 │ ―― │ ―― North Carolina│ 132,951 │ 100,342│ 44,736│ 2,636 │ ―――― ║ 11 │ ―― │ ―― North Dakota │ ―――――― │ 17,519│ 17,700│ 899 │ ―――― ║ 1 │ 1 │ 1 Ohio │ 404,115 │ 405,187│ 14,850│ 26,012 │ ―――― ║ 1 │ 22 │ ―― Oregon │ 14,243 │ 35,002│ 26,965│ 2,281 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 3 │ 1 Pennsylvania │ 452,264 │ 516,011│ 8,714│ 25,123 │ 898 ║ ―― │ 32 │ ―― Rhode Island │ 24,335 │ 26,972│ 228│ 1,654 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 4 │ ―― South Carolina│ 54,692 │ 13,345│ 2,407│ ―――― │ ―――― ║ 9 │ ―― │ ―― South Dakota │ 9,081 │ 34,888│ 26,544│ ―――― │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 4 │ ―― Tennessee │ 138,874 │ 100,331│ 23,447│ 4,851 │ ―――― ║ 12 │ ―― │ ―― Texas │ 239,148 │ 81,444│ 99,688│ 2,165 │ ―――― ║ 15 │ ―― │ ―― Vermont │ 16,325 │ 37,992│ 43│ 1,415 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 4 │ ―― Virginia │ 163,977 │ 113,262│ 12,275│ 2,738 │ ―――― ║ 12 │ ―― │ ―― Washington │ 29,802 │ 36,460│ 19,165│ 2,542 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 4 │ ―― West Virginia │ 84,467 │ 80,293│ 4,166│ 2,145 │ ―――― ║ 6 │ ―― │ ―― Wisconsin │ 177,335 │ 170,791│ 9,909│ 13,132 │ ―――― ║ 12 │ ―― │ ―― Wyoming │ ―――――― │ 8,454│ 7,722│ 530 │ ―――― ║ ―― │ 3 │ ―― ├──────────┼─────────┼─────────┼───────────┼──────────────╫──────────┼────────┼─────── Totals │5,556,543 │5,175,582│1,040,886│ 255,841 │ 21,532 ║ 277 │ 145 │ 22 ══════════════╧══════════╧═════════╧═════════╧═══════════╧══════════════╩══════════╧════════╧═══════

One of the notable features of the foregoing table is in the fact that both Republicans and Democrats fused with the Weaver or People’s party in different States. No votes were cast for Cleveland in Colorado, Kansas, North Dakota, and Wyoming, and none were cast for Harrison in Florida, and only a nominal vote given him in Alabama and Mississippi. The general political disturbance of the country may be understood when it is remembered that Weaver received near a million votes for President, while the Prohibition candidate kept the vote of that party up to its highest point.

Cleveland and Jackson are the only Presidential candidates in the history of the Republic who made three consecutive contests for the place, carried a popular plurality or majority each time, and increased it at each successive contest, and both were defeated in one battle, although receiving a larger popular vote than the successful competitor.

THE McKINLEY-BRYAN CONTEST

1896

Cleveland and Harrison were cast in the same mould of statesmanship, differing only in degree, and they had some important qualities in common. Both stood for a better political system than was acceptable to their respective parties, and both regarded public duty as paramount to political or individual interests. They are the only two men of the nation each of whom retired from the Presidency defeated by the other. Both were vastly in advance of the dominant sentiment of their followers in the support of civil service reform. Neither of them was accomplished as a national politician. They never could have nominated themselves for President by political manipulation, nor could they have mastered the intricacies inevitable in the management of a great national contest. They employed none of the arts which have been common among public men to popularize themselves, and both were called to the leadership of their respective parties in Presidential battles because they were wanted rather than because they wanted the place. Both were regarded as unsympathetic by the ardent political leaders of their parties when it came to the distribution of administration patronage, and yet no two Presidents were ever more pronounced in their devotion to their party faith.

[Illustration: WILLIAM McKINLEY]

Cleveland was a Democrat all through from hat to boots; Harrison was equally positive as a Republican, and both held to the better teachings of their parties in the better days. Cleveland was a Jackson Democrat, Harrison a Lincoln Republican, and neither took to the modern political frills which sacrifice the substance of conviction to glittering shadows to protect political degeneracy. Cleveland was the more positive in purpose and bolder in action; Harrison was probably the stronger intellectual force, with greater aptness in adaptability to political movements, and both were thoroughly honest, tireless in devotion to duty, and sincerely patriotic. Both were exemplars of public and private purity, alike in home and trust, and the prattle of “Baby McKee” and of “Little Ruth” would at any time call either to forgetfulness of the honors and cares of State. Both finally retired from the Presidency, leaving records as Chief Magistrates which will ever shed rich lustre upon the annals of the Republic.

Cleveland’s second administration fell upon troublous times. The country was about to enter upon a severe season of industrial and business depression, that no political power nor the wisest legislation could have prevented. The products of our farms had reached the minimum of value. Debts were steadily increasing, labor was largely unemployed, and consumption of the necessaries of life was reduced to the lowest standard. The McKinley tariff of 1890 had given excessive protection to our industries, but that only stimulated production while it narrowed the markets for our products, and it was not surprising when silver reached the point that made a dollar worth only 50 cents, that the free silver theory should attract the hopeless debtor class by the promise of paying their obligations practically with one-half the money they had borrowed.

Both parties were severely honeycombed with the cheap-money theory, and although Cleveland had a Democratic Congress and was able, after the most exhaustive effort, to halt the continued purchase of silver for coinage, it was the last and only achievement he attained with the aid of Congress to better our financial system. It was most fortunate for the country that in this fearful peril to our national credit Grover Cleveland was President of the United States. He stood impregnable as the rock of Gibraltar when the fierce waves of repudiation surged against him from both parties, and when the West and South appeared to be practically unanimous in demanding cheap money, while even the more stable business and financial States of the North were greatly divided on the issue. Just as the peril to our national honor increased Cleveland’s determination and courage to maintain the right increased with it, and he finally braved a howling repudiation Congress by a demand for gold bonds to sustain Government credit with notice that, if refused by Congress, whereby a loss of many millions would be forced upon the country, he would sell bonds, as then authorized by law, to any extent necessary to maintain the most scrupulous faith of the nation.

Congress refused and Cleveland stood grandly alone with Congress against him, and saved the Republic from a stain of dishonor that would have been ineffaceable. This was a vastly more heroic act than Jackson’s throttling of nullification, as Jackson was sustained by the patriotic devotion to the Union. Another record of his administration that stands out among the heroic of Presidential actions was his promptness and courage in meeting the Chicago riots when the commerce of the nation was interrupted by lawlessness. In a single order issued by Cleveland directing public peace to be maintained and commerce permitted to go on uninterrupted by the strong arm of national power he effaced forever the last lingering dregs of States’ rights that would make a great Commonwealth the prey of the lawless with the National Government powerless to interfere. The Governor of Illinois was in hearty and open sympathy with the lawless, and refused the protection to public peace and to commerce that was his sworn duty to give, and the civil authorities of Chicago were the mere plaything of the mob.

These two acts of Grover Cleveland will go into history as among the most heroic and self-sacrificing acts of any of our long line of Presidents. Harrison would doubtless have met both of these emergencies as Cleveland did, but Cleveland had to brave the overwhelming prejudices of his own party to discharge the duty, while Harrison would have been heartily and unitedly sustained by his party in meeting the Chicago issue, and would have had the majority of his party followers in sympathy with him in maintaining the national credit. Cleveland retired from his second term of the Presidency with his party very generally alienated from him, and yet he had not in any material degree departed from the Democratic platform on which he was re-elected. He was not in any measure an apostate, but he stood resolutely where his party had planted him, while his party apostatized and became his bitterest foe.

No administration can command the support of the country when industry and trade are severely depressed. It matters not what may be the true cause of financial, commercial, and industrial revulsion; it is always charged to the policy of the party in power, and Cleveland could not escape political disaster because of conditions which he had no more part in producing than he had in creating the stars when they first sang together. The mid-administration elections of 1894 resulted in the most disastrous defeat the Democracy had ever suffered, and the cheap-money heresy rapidly grew in strength, disintegrating both the old parties until the question of maintaining national credit became one of the gravest ever presented to the people, with the single exception of the secession that caused our civil war.

The Wilson Tariff bill was passed with protective features sufficiently liberal to maintain our industries with the enlarged markets it would have produced for American products, but it was assailed as one of the chief causes of our industrial depression, and it became an important factor in the election of McKinley in 1896. It is now demonstrated before the close of the McKinley administration, that the protective features of the Wilson bill were more than equal to the necessities of the present. New and unexpected conditions brought this country suddenly to a policy of expansion in territory and trade, and to-day we have hardly an industry that really needs protection if it can have free markets for its products.

Cleveland was bitterly assailed as unfriendly to a liberal pension policy for our soldiers. He came into his second term in the midst of a tidal wave of pension profligacy. Private pensions were passed by the hundreds in Congress usually without debate, and often with only a small fraction of a quorum present. Cleveland vetoed a number of these bills, and I cannot recall one vetoed private pension bill that was passed over his veto, although there may have been a very few.

I happened to witness a painful exhibition of the cowardice of Congressmen in meeting the pension question after Cleveland had vetoed a bill greatly enlarging our pension system. On the morning of the day that the veto was to be taken in the House to sustain the veto or pass the bill, notwithstanding the objections of the President, I called upon Speaker Carlisle in his room in the Capitol, and there found him in earnest consultation with twelve or fifteen leading Democratic Congressmen. There was grave danger that the bill would pass over the veto, although certainly not one-third of the members of the House believed that the bill was just. The question discussed at that conference was who of the Democratic leaders could afford to take the floor in defence of the veto. All heartily approved of it, but only two of all those present expressed his willingness to come to the front and stand for the right. Governor Curtin, then a member of the House, had the courage to say that as the friend of the true soldier he would defend the veto on the floor, and while every one present agreed with him, a majority of them declared that it was a necessity, for their own safety at home, to vote for the bill. It was only by the greatest effort that the veto was sustained for want of a two-thirds vote, although a decided majority of the House voted for the bill.

Such were the conditions in which the people entered upon the memorable contest of 1896. Governor McKinley and Speaker Reed took the lead early in the race for the Republican nomination for President, and McKinley was most fortunate in having his Warwick in Mark A. Hanna, of Ohio, who conducted the McKinley battle on the same lines that Samuel J. Tilden conducted the contest for his nomination in 1876. His fight was won by well-organized and earnestly directed contests in every debatable State, and for a year or more before the convention met Hanna was tireless in his work. He had a strong candidate in McKinley; a man of blameless character, of admitted ability, a champion of protection, a soldier who had carried his musket as a private in the flame of battle, and possessing many attributes of personal popularity. Reed in his rough way fought his battle more heroically than wisely, and was finally unhorsed at the close of the contest by McKinley sweeping some of the New England States from him. That defeated Reed, and McKinley’s nomination was assured.

On only one point did Hanna seriously miscalculate the lines of safety. He saw the cheap-money and repudiation issue formidable on every side and in both parties, and he decided that McKinley should be nominated for President on a platform that straddled the money issue in a cowardly way. In order to give the cue to the party on the money issue, he called the Republican State Convention of Ohio to meet on the 11th of March, 1896, and that convention adopted the following money plank, intended to be the McKinley platform:

“We contend for honest money; for a currency of gold, silver, and paper with which to measure our exchanges, that shall be as sound as the Government and as untarnished as its honor, and to that end we favor bimetallism, and demand the use of both gold and silver as standard money, either in accordance with a ratio to be fixed by an international agreement, if that can be obtained, or under such restrictions and such provisions, to be determined by legislation, as will secure the maintenance of the parities of value of the two metals so that the purchasing and debt-paying power of the dollar, whether of silver, gold, or paper, shall be at all times equal.”

The Ohio money plank was generally accepted by the Republicans of the West as a cunning straddle, that would hold the cheap-money Republicans, whose devotion to protection made them willing to yield something on the money question, but it was severely criticised by a number of the ablest Republicans of the East, and before the convention met it became evident that the friends of an emphatic honest-money plank were likely to dominate the body.

The Republican National Convention met at St. Louis on the 16th of June. There was little or no dispute as to who would be nominated for President, as a decided majority of the delegates came there for the purpose of nominating McKinley. Charles W. Fairbanks, of Indiana, was temporary chairman and present Senator John M. Thurston, of Nebraska, permanent president. The struggle over the money plank of the platform kept the convention in idleness until the third day, when an agreement was reached in favor of the gold standard. There has been some dispute recently as to who made Hanna adopt the gold platform. There were many and very earnest consultations in St. Louis before an agreement with Hanna could be reached, and it was finally accomplished by a number of able members of the body deciding that they would notify Hanna, giving him one hour to accept the gold-standard platform, or they would carry it into the convention and compel McKinley’s friends to meet the issue in open debate. I was at the same hotel, on the same floor with Hanna, and knew just when that proposition was sent to him, and knew also that in little over half an hour he agreed to the demand of the gold-standard Republicans, and it was then adopted without a contest. When the platform was reported, Senator Teller, of Colorado, who led the Silver Republicans, and who was a member of the committee on resolutions, offered the following as a substitute for the money plank of the platform:

“The Republican party favors the use of both gold and silver as equal standard money, and pledges its power to secure the free, unrestricted, and independent coinage of gold and silver at our mints at the ratio of 16 parts of silver to 1 of gold.”

Senator Teller delivered an earnest and able argument in support of his substitute, but it was rejected by 818-1/2 votes to 105-1/2. A separate vote was also had on the financial plank as reported by the majority, and it was adopted by 812-1/2 to 110-1/2. When the platform was adopted, Senator Cannon, of Utah, presented a protest against the money plank of the platform, after which thirty-four delegates from the Western States, including Senators Teller and Cannon, withdrew from the convention. There was only one ballot for President, as follows:

William McKinley, Ohio 661-1/2 Thomas B. Reed, Me. 84-1/2 Matthew S. Quay, Pa. 61-1/2 Levi P. Morton, N. Y. 58 William B. Allison, Ia. 35-1/2 J. Donald Cameron, Pa. 1 Blank 4

The nomination of Garret A. Hobart, of New Jersey, for Vice-President was made on the 1st ballot by the following vote:

Garret A. Hobart, N. J. 535-1/2 Henry Clay Evans, Tenn. 277-1/2 Morgan J. Bulkeley, Conn. 39 James A. Walker, Va. 24 Charles E. Lippitt, R. I. 8 Thomas B. Reed, Maine 3 Chauncey M. Depew, N. Y. 3 John M. Thurston, Neb. 2 Fred D. Grant, N. Y. 2 Levi P. Morton, N. Y. 1

The nominations of McKinley and Hobart were made unanimous with the wildest enthusiasm. The following is the Republican platform as adopted by the convention:

The Republicans of the United States, assembled by their representatives in national convention, appealing for the popular and historical justification of their claims to the matchless achievements of the thirty years of Republican rule, earnestly and confidently address themselves to the awakened intelligence, experience, and conscience of their countrymen in the following declaration of facts and principles:

For the first time since the Civil War the American people have witnessed the calamitous consequences of full and unrestricted Democratic control of the Government. It has been a record of unparalleled incapacity, dishonor, and disaster. In administrative management it has ruthlessly sacrificed indispensable revenue, entailed an unceasing deficit, eked out ordinary current expenses with borrowed money, piled up the public debt by $262,000,000 in time of peace, forced an adverse balance of trade, kept a perpetual menace hanging over the redemption fund, pawned American credit to alien syndicates, and reversed all the measures and results of successful Republican rule.

In the broad effect of its policy it has precipitated panic, blighted industry and trade with prolonged depression, closed factories, reduced work and wages, halted enterprise, and crippled American production while stimulating foreign production for the American market. Every consideration of public safety and individual interest demands that the Government shall be rescued from the hands of those who have shown themselves incapable of conducting it without disaster at home and dishonor abroad, and shall be restored to the party which for thirty years administered it with unequalled success and prosperity, and in this connection we heartily endorse the wisdom, the patriotism, and the success of the administration of President Harrison.

We renew and emphasize our allegiance to the policy of protection as the bulwark of American industrial independence and the foundation of American development and prosperity. This true American policy taxes foreign products and encourages home industry; it puts the burden of revenue on foreign goods; it secures the American market for the American producer; it upholds the American standard of wages for the American workingman; it puts the factory by the side of the farm, and makes the American farmer less dependent on foreign demand and price; it diffuses general thrift, and founds the strength of all on the strength of each. In its reasonable application it is just, fair, and impartial, equally opposed to foreign control and domestic monopoly, to sectional discrimination and individual favoritism.