The New York herald., 1874-08-31

be elected II nominated. This opinion he says,
''did not spring from any personal prejudice In his
favor for my acquaintance with him was very
slight, and had not seen him in many years. On
the other hand, / felt strong political and per-
sonal friendship for the democratic candidates.
At the outset there would have been some feeling
OF opposition to him in the democratic ranks, but
that would have passed away as the character OF
the political Issue made itself clear"
From biographical point OF view the interest
Of that memorable attempt relates rather to the
political integrity and consistency of Mr.. Chase
than to the public consequences which might have
followed his election. Superhcally 1t seemed an
UNFIT and lncongruous thing thar one OF the most
eminent leaders Of the republican party should
have been willing TO accept democratic nomina-
tion for the Presidency. great handle was made
OF 1t by mob-courtlng partsans to convict Mr..
Chase OF nordlnate ambition, and Willingness to
barter his principles for political promotion.
The accusation was wholly unjust, as this volume
proves by supernuous abundance OF testimony.
The truth is that Mr.. Chase had no hand In
the effort to nominate him from beginning to end.
1t was popular movement started by the HERALD
without his or anybody's completely, and the sur
prislng progress 1t made was due entirely 10 the
public sense OF its fitness. Mr.. Chase had always
been decided democrat on every question except
that OF slavery and negro suffrage, and this differ
ence resulted from his stricter logic In carrying
out democratic principle. He stood immovably
by his position on these questions In every
attempt made to sound him previous to the meet
Ing and during the sessions OF the New York Con-
venton in 1868. Governor Seymour's testimony
s emphatic as to the absence OF
all intrigue. In the letter already quoted
from Mr.. Seymour says:-"While hts name was
thus brought into the discussions OF democratic
cOu w M wi m
on the part Of any democratic delegate, to my
knowledge. think first suggested the propriety
or his nomination, II the contingency should
arise which would make It expedient; and fire.
quently presented to other delegates the reasons
In iavor Of it, Yet in no way had any communi-
cation with him, directly or indirectly, nor did
ever hear that he looked upon his nomination
as probable or desirable. We thought he
could not reject 1t, II 1t was made on
the ground i have suggested" In reply
to Mr.. Bemonts letter, already alluded to-
the Chief Justice wrote, May 80, 1868 81 beg you
to believe me, for say it in all sincerity, that do
not desire the office OF President nor nomination
for itn His confidential letters to intimate friends
were of the same tenor. To one OF them, after the
adjournment Of the Convention, he wrote :-"Un-
der all the pressure which preceded the Conven-
ton steadily maintained my own adhesion to the
doctrines of universal suffrage and the recognition
OF the new constitutions as accomplished facts.n
full disclosure OF the secret history that move
ment is q complete vindication of the purity, con-
sstency and propriety Of every part Of Mr. Chase's
conduct in relation to it. We have dwelt at such
length on this topic that we cannot enter
into the details OF any other, although the i'm
pulse is strong to say something of the course OF
the Chief Justice in the celebrated impeachment
trial, which drew upon him all the batteries OF
abuse OF the republican party. His judicial firm
ness on that occasion Is OF the prOudest chap.
ters of his life; and even Charles Sumner, who
resolutely withstood him, and after one of his
rulings cried out, "Alas, poor Chase ~ lived to
say that the conduct OF the Chief Justice during
that trial "was one Of his n0Dest titles to fame"
We commend this interesting volume to all stu
dents OF our history as containing much valuable
Information which is not accessible in any other
1Orm.