The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-07-11
NICOLAYS SHARP REPLY TO MCCLURE.
LIncoIn's Private Secretary Asks tho
Editor Some Hard Questions.
Facts Which Seem to Prove that
Lincoln Favored hamIin.
This Latest Chapter Goes Far To-
wards Ending the Controversy.

WASHINGTON July lV-MT. JOun IT, MIC
olay, President Lincoln's private secretary,
has addressed the following open letter to
Col. A. K. Mcclure Of the Philadelphia
Times:
81 will not reply to your personal abuse.
1t proves nothing but your rage and wound
ed vanity at being exposed in gross histori-
cal misstatement
you asserted that President Lincoln op-
posed the denomination Of Hannibal Ham
lin for Vice President. Irefuted that asser-
tion by calling attention to the written rec
ord wherein Lincoln In his own bandwrit-
Ing, explicitly states the contrary. You now
reassert your statement, or. to put 1t in other
words, you accuse President Lincoln of act
Ing low political deceit, and with his own
hand writing deliberate lie. The country
will not believe the monstrous implication. a
"Allow me to restate the facts. l was at
the Baltimore Convention as a spectator
The chairman Of the Illinois delegation, the
Hon. b. G. Cook, had conversation with
me about the course OF certain disaffected
leaders in Illinois. That conversation | re-
ported to the President in letter to Major
Hay, my assistant private secretary, In part
as follows:
"'Wbat transpired at home and what he
has heard from several sources have made
Cook suspicious that SWEET may be untrue to
Ou6 VI Luo oIIdWS WuiCu lcdQ nlu
to this belief is that SWEET has telegraphed
here, urging the Illinois delegation to go for
Holt. Cook wants to know confidentlally
whether SWEET is all right. whether, in urg-
ing Holt for Vice President, he reflects the
Presidents wishes, whether the President
the score Of policy, or whether he wishes not
even to interfere by confidential indica-
tion.'
Upon this letter President Lincoln made
the following endorsement in his own hand
writing:
"'Sweit is unquestionably all right. Mr..
Holt is good man, but had not heard or
thought of him for V. p. Wish not 10 inter-
fere about V. P. Cannot interfere about
platform-c0nvention must judge for ITSELF.
This written evidence is quoted in our
history, and no amount of denial or assertion
to the contrary can overturn it,
I'm trying to evade its force, you assert
that Lincoln called you to Washington aud
urged the nomination of Johnson, and that
you returned to Baltimore to work aud vote
in obedience to that request against your
personal predictions. Let us examine this
claim. The official proceedings Of the con-
yention shows that you were one of the four
delegates at large from Pennsylvania, the
others being Simon Cameron, w. w. Ket-
chum, M. b. Lowery, while the list of dis
trlct delegates contains the names of many
other eminent Pennsylvanians. The pro-
ceedtngs also show that you acted an en-
tirely minor part. You were member of
the committee on organization and presented
its report, recommending the permanent
ot1cerS who were elected. With that pre-
sentatiCn your service and influence ended
so far as can be gathered from the proceed
ings; Ot other Pennsylvania delegates VIM.
w. ketchum was one of the vice presidents
Of the convention. E. Mcpherson was on the
committee on credentials, A. III. Reeder on
the committee on organization, M. B. Low
cry ON the committee on resolutions. 5. +.
wilson on the committee on rules and order
OF business, S. A. Puryiance on the national
committee, while Gen. Simon Cameron held
tne leading Important post of chairman of
the pennsylvania delegation.
30 again, among those who made motions
and speeches. were Cameron, Thaddeus Stew
ems, A. I'll. Reeder, c. A. Walborn, Galusha
A. Grow and Nj. B. Lowery; but beyond the
presentation of the routine report have men
toned, your name did not give forth the
squeak OF the smallest mouse. Is it probable
that Lincoln among all these men would have
called you alone to receive his secret instruc-
tiOnS?
1t is matter of public history that Simon
cameron was more prominent and efficient
than any other Pennsylvania in the move
ment men, In that state to give Lincoln second
Term, and that on the 14sh of January, 1864
ne transmitted to the President the written
request of every Union member of the Penn
SSylvanla legislature to accept a nomination.
In ms, s, ana ms subsequent open and unvary-
ing support, left no doubt of Cameron's atti-
tude. How was it with you? / find among
Llncoln's papers the following letter from
you:
FRANKLIN REPOSITORY OFFICE.
- CHAMBERSBURG, Pa. May 2, 1864.
Iolr-I nave been amazed to see it intimated
IN one or two journals that am not cordially in
favor Of your denomination. l shall not notice the
lntlmatl0ns than to assure you that you will have
no more cordial, earnest or faithful supporter in
the Baltimore convention than your obedient ser.
'ails, .ing, a., ,,,, "a. X. MCCLURE.
That is, only month before the Balti.
more convention. you felt called upon to
personally protest against accusations Of
party disloyalty. But this is not all. When
the time came to make the nominations for
vice President, Simon Cameron, Chairman
OF the pennsylvania delegation, and one of
the earliest and most persistent friends of
Lincoln, himself nominated Hannibal Ham
lin for Vice President, while the whole vote
OF fennsylVania was, ON the first ballot.
cast for Hamlin's nomination. So also the
Illinois delegation cast its entire vote for
Hamlln on the first ballot. Does it stand to
reason that Lincoln called upon You to de-
sert Aamlin and nominate johnson. and
gave no lntimation of this desire to the
chairman of the PENNSYLVANIA delegation
and OF the Illinois delegation?
ana once more: Is 1t probable that IL
Lincoln had desired the nomination of John
son he would have allowed SWEET, 'one of the
Presidents most intimate friends to urge
the nomination of Holt? Dare you venture
the assertion that Lincoln was deceiying
Cameron, deceiving Cook, carrying on a Sc
cret intrigue against HamliD, and another
secret intrigue against Holt, and that, on
top of the whole, he was writing a deliber-
ate lie to us? That may be your conception
OF Abraham Lincoln, but it Is not mine
mat may be your system Of politics, but 1t
was not his.
John G. NIcoLAY."