The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-10-13
FRsExAx, IAnEs O., Georgia. republican. is in

81 b
Is against third term and has no idea
that Grant win be renominated Thinks that
the period OF the war the weaker he Ss.
comes In his hold on the good will OF the pe0-
PIE. cannot now possibly see any reason Tor the
take II Tor gran led that such necessity would re-
Qulre him TO support him.
GARFIELD. JAMES A.. Hiram. Ohio, republican,
is not committed FOR or against third term,
and does not know but what IL might be ex-
pedient 80 reAominate Grant. Al present be
neither thinks Grant nor the party nave the least
thought OF third term; out what might possibly
occur between now anu 1876 to change circum.
stances ne could not anticipate. IL deserved
GIDDNGs DE WIrr c., Texas, democrat, has
about As much love Tor a third Term as the demo-
GLOVER, John IA. Missouri, democrat, Is against
third term and q proiongation OF republican
GoocH, D. w., Massachusetts. republican. l
cannot Imagine such political condition OF
Grant. He is opposed to q third term, and it is
very douD Iul whether lie would support Grant II
GUNoKEI, LEWIS B., ohio, republican, is op-
posed 70 third term. Under no circumstances
would he vote LOT Grant II again presented 10 the
people Tor President.
GUNTHER, THOMAS M, Arkansas, republican.
Couldn't express an opinion.
HALEY, JOHN, Idaho, democrat could not sup
him II he could. HH4
HAGAss, J. MARSHALL, West Virginia. republic
slderS IL wise, and would support Grant II again
the choice OF the Republican Convention.
HALE, EUGENE, Maine, republican. In the event
OF GRANTS denomination, winch ne could only con-
celve as an absolute necessity he would support
HIM undoubtedly.
not tell whether he was IN favor OF u third term
until the reasons for and against II had been
presented. Neither could he tell what the party
would do two years hence, or whether he would
support Grant. ra
HANCOCK, JOHN, Texas, democrat. The democ-
racy OF Texas IL against third term for any man.
anu II Washington were to come among us ike
another Lazarus ne would not get the compliment
HARMER ALFRED c., Pennsylvania republican.
II the party should, in an emergency, find him the
most available candidate, there Is no doubt he
would be heartily supported, including his own
HARRIS. BENJAMIN W., Massachusetts,, republ-
can, cannot conceive OF the condition OF affairs
ever being such as TO warrant the mention OF
Grants name again, but does not see any reason
for positively asserting now what he will or will
not do years hence.
HARRIS, HENRY R., Georgia, democrat 1t
would not be consistent Tor democrat to advo-
cate u third term.
enough OF the workings Of Grants admlnistra-
ton In Virginia to oppose a third term, independ-
ent OF the example OF partisans In times past.
HARRISON, H. H., Tennessee. republican. Put
ME down as against ta.rd TERM ana as against
the candidate or third term, whether Grant or
hArcHEr, ROBERT A.. Missouri, democrat. Not
by damned sight. one term for republican adj
mihistration with mixed schools aud civil rights
ought 10 make every democrat rise up In earnest
Thank God we Will not nave Greeley 20 oppose
Grant II ne Is run again.
does not see anything dreadful In third term Tor
Grant II the party choose to renomlnate him. II he
was popular enough to be renominated-whicn ID
douDtlul-ne would be deserving OF his support.
RAVENS, HARRISON E., Missouri republican. II
Grant should be ren0minated 1t would be Tor such
reasons that every republican would support htnI
dierent about the subject and Will leave IL to the
VIII OF the majority as the safer plan, prelerrng to
I'm tod Inn RI q aar1Yr1 40 lanA
HAwLEY, JOHN b., ILLINOIS, republican. The
question OF thlrd term can only be involved IN
Tor over two years 1t all just precseiy W
shall stand In that day o. Judgment Will be deter
mined Dy my adherence 70 the iaith OF the party.
favor OF . third term put cannot say whether the
party viii renominate Grant. Would support him,
HxzELroN, GERRY w., Columbus. Wis. republi-
can. 1t was rather q serious question to answer
what one would 90 IN the event OF Grants renomi-
nation, and hoped the occasion would never arise
when ne would have to meet the issue.
HAzELT0N, JOHN W., Mullica Hill, n. j., repu olican,
Is pledged 70 DO al IN his power to discourage
third term and neither thinks the party wOui1 re-
nominate Grant nor tnat ne could carry New Jersey
under any circumstances He could not support
HENDEE GEORGE W., Vermont, republican, has
never thought enough about the suoJec5 TO give a
decided answer for or against third term. not
believing he would ever be called upon to deltbe-
rate whether he would support Grant or not
HERNDoN. WILLIAM s., texas, democrat. There
u
term Is either possible or probable. 1t is against
all che traditions OF the past.
HERsEY, SAMUEL F., Bangor, Me-, republican, Is
against the denomination Of Grant
HEREFORD. FRANK, West Virginia, democrat
the prolongatton OF mans services over two
terms Is against the fundamental principles OF de-
mocracy, and Can have no countenance from him,
whoever Ii the candidate
HoAR, GEORGE F. Massachusetts republican.
Never thought It worth while to think abont
third term LOT anybody, for the reason that the
matter Is not worth II, such thing being abso-
Grant, and even II 1t were attempted, six months
before the Convention met combinations would be
made upsettlng every well LAID plan Of his friends.
So fixed Is the popular prejudice against third
term that am sure that when the time comes TO
imous choice OF the delegates upon some strong
man. As TO what he would do II Grant was renOm-
mated was not matter for consideration now.
HODGES, ASA, Al kansas, republican. Grant Is
strong among the republicans In Arkansas, and, II
he should be the best man IN the opinion OF the
party 10 lead II next time, ne would not object to
supporting him.
HOLMAN, WILLIAM s, Indiana, democrat, is op-
posed to third term, and THINKS the continuance
In ONCE or republican partisanS mas greatly dis
tressed the country, notably the recent financial
panic.
opposed to q third term and is very certain Mas
sachusetts would never depart from the respected
precedent established BY Washington. He does
not thlnk the party would care to have Grant, but
what the c0nceit OF the General may lead him to
do Is something to speculate about In the future.
tie THINKS ne Is Immensely popular Win the people
and 1t Will be mortltying to find he Is mistaken.
He could not count upon his support
HosKINs, George G., New YORK, republican; One
OF six years would DE wise, and he would favor
It'll presented IN the form OF proposed constitu-
tt0nal amendment nsuch an amendment was not
passed and Grant should be the nominee OF the
party under such circumstances as would seem TO
justify departure from the precedent already es-
tabllshed he would support him.
HOU6HTON, SHERMAN O., San Jose, CAL, republic
can. Under any extreme emergency which might
justify 1t he would stand by his party, but he dld
not apprehend being placed In such a position.
HOWE, ALBERT r., Mississippi, republican, does
not care whether Grant Is renOminated or not,
and does not know now whether he would support
him II candidate.
HUBBELL, JAY A., Michigan, republican. does
not favor third term, and IL OF opinion the story
oi Grants greatness and aointy VIII not bear re-
peatlng again. 1t was threadbare at the last eec-
ZION, and none knew 1t better than the republican
leaders. Does not know what ne would do II
Grant was renominated.
HUTTON, EPPA. Virginia, democrat. The people
OF Virginia are unconditionaiiy opposed to third
term. -
HUNTER, MOTION O., Indiana, republican, will
favor one term OF six years. and cannot now say
what he would do If the republican party desired