St. Paul daily globe., 1895-10-22
HIS STORY OF GARFIELDsS CON-
DUCT IN THE CONVENTION
OF 1850.
THE TRUTH PANIED HIM.
FOSTERS PART IN NEGLECTING
TO ACCEPT AID FROM
OTHER STATES.
Secret Conferences and Other I'm
derhand Work to Accomplish
GRrfield,s Nomination.

CHICAGO, Oct 21.-The following
is the text of Senator Sherman's ref
erence, in his memoirs, to the Re
publican national convention of 1880,
which nominated James A. Garfield
for the presidency-the reference
which has been the subject of some
newspaper discussion within the last
few days:
During the month of April delegates
were selected from the different con-
gresslonal districts of the state of
Ohio to attend the state convention to
meet on the 2Sth of that month. Prior
to the convention the question of NOM
lnation was the subject of discussion
In every district. The sentiment in
my favor was clearly expressed in
state. On the Sth Of April | wrote the
following letter to friend:
ckinley is still in Ohio, and 1
l have today written to him at Canton
covering the points you name. You
mad better write to him yourself giving
tne list OF appointments desired. There
is a, strong feeling that Garfield. in or
der to save his district, should go TO
the Chicago convention as a delegate.
He Is placed in a very awkward atti-
tude now. If this district should be
agalnst my nomination it would be at
ms part, or, what is worse, a want of
sincerity in my support. In view of
the past, this would be a very unfor-
tunate thing for him. This is deli
cate matter for me to take any part in,
and l leave 1t entirely to your good
Judgment and kind friendship
GARFIELD'S PROMISES.
Prior to the state convention I had
an interview with Gen. Garfield which
ne sought at my Office in the depart
ment, and he there expressed his earn
est desire to secure my nominal ton and
his wish to be a delegate at large, SO
that he might aid me effectively. He
had been chosen, with little or no oppo-
sItlon, United States senator to fill the
place of Thurman, whose term expired
March 4, 1881. had not a doubt Of the
support Of Gov. Foster, with whom I
had been in close correspondence, and
VINO expressed a strong desire for my
cally to name the four delegates at
large, and had implicit confidence that
these delegates would take the lead in
my behalf.
The state convention met on the
2Sth of April. The persons named by
the convention as delega ates-at-large
10 the national convention, to assem-
pie n IN Chicago on June 2, were William
No w. rins Hiennlson. ns James A. Garfield,
man, VINO We're instructed for me, a
resolution Of the convention express
ing the preference Of the Republicans
Oh ONO IN favor of my nomination
and recommending that the vote of
the state be cast for nae. The trend
or public sentiment, as shown by the
newspapers, indicated that Grant and
Blaine would each have a very strong
iolioWlng IN the national convention.
but that the contest between them
might lead to my nomination. After
the state convention it was generally
assumed that would receive the unit
"a 1n1n
1ty with the expression Of opinion bv
the convention. During this period
lew leading men, whose names / do
not care to mention, made combina-
agreed to disregard the preference de-
clared by the state convention. Dur-
ing the month Of May the feeling i'm
my Iavor increased and many of the
the Eastern states advocated my nom
1nation as q compromise Candidate
At this time was in constant commu-
nication @ with Gen. Garfield, by letters
both In Washington. On the 10th of
May he wrote me:
" think 1t will be a mistake for us
10 assume a division in the Ohio dele
thoush we We're of one mind, until
those delegates who are hostile to Won
refuse to act with us, and if we fail
to win them over the separation will
FATAL TO BLAINE.
The national convention met June
z, 1850. An effort was made by the
trends OF Gen. Grant to adopt the unit
rule, which would allow a majority of
each state to determine the vote of
the entire delegation. This was re-
Jected. Four days were occupied in
perfeeting the permanent organization
and the Romina ton of candidates for
president. During this time a minor
lty of nine Of the delegation of Ohio
Snnounced their determination to- vote
Ior Blaine: This was a fatal move for
Elaine and undoubtedly led to his de-
feat. Nearly four-fifths of the dele
cation. were in favor of my nomina-
tlon, in pursuance of the express
wishes Of the Ohio convention, but
they were all friendly to Blaine and
whenever it should have become an
parent that my nominati ton was i'm
practlca bic, the whole delegation could
easily nave been carried for him with
out division, and thus have secured
his nomination. The action of these
nlne delegates, who refused to carry
out the wishes of the state convention.
prevented the possibility of the vote Of
Ghlo ono be1ng cast for Mr.. Blaine. The
ioIly OF few men made cooperation
lmpracticable 1 received opposition in
Ohlo from his pretended friends. and
ne therefore lost the Ohio delegation.
Nanc NMnlch, ~, put for for this selection, would
failed to receive it.
DEFEAT OF SHERMAN.
The speech of Gen. Garfield nomina-
ting me has always been regarded as a
specimen of brilliant elouuence arelv
surpassed: The writer here gives q
portion Of Garf1eld's speech, and con-
tinues:
ON the first ballot nine of the Ohio
delegatidfl voted for Mr. Blaine. thirty
Iour Tor me and one for Edmunds The
general result was 304 for Grant, 2e4 for
Blaine, 95 fer Sherman, "a for Edmunds,
30 for Washbgrne, 10 for Window. The
vote of my friends would have nomin-
ated Blaine at any period of the con-
vention, bat under the conditions il
was Impossible to secure this vote to
either Blaine or Grant The final re-
suit was the selection of a new candi-
date and the nomination Of Garfield.
1t Is probable that If I had received the
united vote Of the Ohio delegation /
would have been nQ:ninas ted as my re-
lations with both Gen. Grant and Mr..
Blaine were of q friendly nature, but il
Is hardly worth while to comment on
What might have been. The course of
the Ohio delegation was the subject of
severe comment, and perhaps of un-
founded suspicious of perfidfty on the
part ef' some eff the delegates. The
moment the nomination was made I
sent the following dispatch to Garfield
at Chica go:
e" Washington, June g. 1880. = Hon.
James 4. Garfield, Chicago, ILL.,: l CON
gratulate you with all my heart upon
your noEafnebion as president of the
United States. You have saved the Re-
great peril, and assured the continued
success of Republican principles.
-" John Sherman