The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-07-10
Living Cavilers in Most Unseemly
Discussion Of Statesmen
Dead and Gone.
Did Lincoln Favor Hamlin or John
son as Vice-Presidential
Candidate.
John q. Nlcolay Makes Reply to Col. A. X
McClure's Discourteous Editorial
in His Paper.

WASHINGTON, July 9.-John G. Nicolay to-
day addressed an open letter to Col. Nc
Clure, editor of tho Philadelphia Times, re-
plying to the latest editorial on the subject
of Linooln's preference, as to the vice
presidential nominee, Hnmlin or Johnson.
Nicolay says in part that he was at ths Bal
timOre convention as a spectator. b. G.
Cook, chairman Of the Illinois delegation,
had conversation with him about this
course or certain disaftectsd leaders in Illi-
nois. That conversation Nicolay reported
to the president in letter to Maj. Hay, as
sistant private secretary. What he had
heard had made Cook Suspicious that Leon
ard Swett might be untrue to Lincoln. One
of tho straws which led to this belief was
that SWEET had telegraphed to Baltimore
urging the Illinois delegation to 90 for
Holt. Cook wanted to know con-
tidentinlly whether, in urging Holt for the
Weep presidency, SWEET reflected the presi-
dents wish, whether Che president had any
preference. or whether he wished not oven
to interfere by confidential indication.
Upon this letter President Lincoln made
the following Endorsement in his own hand
writing: "Swett is unquestionably all right.
Mr.. Holt ia good man, but had not heard
or thought of him for vice-presidsnt. I
wish not to Interfere about president.
Cannot interfere about platform. Conven-
tion must judge for ITSELF"
"This written evidonce,'' says Nicolny,
t'cannot be turned. In trying to evade its
force you assert that Lincoln called you to
Washington and urged the nomination
of johnson, and that you returned
to Baltimore to work and vote in
obedience to that request against
your personal rredilections. The proceed
ings Of the convention show that you acted
an entirely minor part Is it probable that
Lincoln, among all other mcn in tho Penn
Bylvania delegation (Simon Cameron,
Thaddeus Stevens. A. H. Reeder. Galusha
A. Grow and others) would have called you
alone to receive bis Instructions? II ia a
matter of public history that Simon Came
ron was more prominent and efficient than
any other Pennsylvnnian i'll the movement
in that state to give Lincoln a second
term, and that on the 14th of January, 1864
he transmitted to the president the written
request OF every union member OF the
Pennsylvania legislature to accept renomi-
nation. This and his subsequent opsn and
eron's attitude. How was it with you?''
Nicolay then quotes letter from Mcclure
to President Lincoln, May 2, 1864, protest;
papers that he (McClure) was not cordially
in favor Of Lincoln's renomlnation and as-
suring him of cordial support, and con-
tinues: THAT was only month before the
convention. You felt called upon to per
sonally protest against accusations OF party
disloyalty. But this is not nll. When the
time came to make nominations for vics-
president Simon Cameron, chairman of the
Pennsylvania delegation, and one of the
earliest and most persistent friends Of Lin
coin, himself nominated Hannibal Hsmlir
for vioe-president, while the whole vote Of
Pennsylvania was, on the first ballot cast fol
Hamlin's denomination. So also the Hi
nois delegation cast it's entire voso for Ham
lin on the first ballot. Does it stand te
reason that Lincoln called upon you to de
sort Hamlin and nominate johnson. ani
gave no intimAtion Of this desire to tn,
chairmen of the Pennsylvania and Illinois
delegations? Dare you venture the ssser.
tion that Lincoln was deceiving Cameron
deceiving Cook, carrying on a secret in
trigue against Hamlin, and another secre
intrigue against Holt, and that on top o
the whole he was writing deliberate lie t.
us? That may be your conception of Abra
ham Lincoln, but II is not mine."