The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-10-24
IN REFERENCE TO GARFIELD.
QUOTATIONS FROM SENATOR
SHERMAN'S MEMOIRS LATE
LY ISSUED.
GARFIELD ACCUSED OF INSIN-
CERITY
The Martyred Presidents Nomination in
1880 Had Been Agreed Upon Before
the onvention-Sherman Tricked
Out of the Nomination.


Chicago, Oct. 21.-The following is a
synopsis of Senator Sherman's reference
in his memoirs to the Republican Ma
tional convention of 1880, which nomi-
mated Garfield for the presidency, the ref
erence to which has been the subject
of some newspaper discussion within the
past few days:
During the month of April delegates
were selected from different congression-
nj districts of the State OF Ohio to at
tend the State convention to meet on the
18th of that month. Prior to the con-
vention the question of the nomination
was the subject of the discussion in
every district. The sentiment in my favor
was clearly expressed in nearly every
county or district of the State. On the
Sth of April l wrote the following letter
to q friend:
Mckinley is still in Ohio, and l pre-
sumo viii be there for some days. |
have written him ut Canton, covering the
points you name. You had better write
to him yourself, giving the list of appoint
ments' desired
There is Il strong feeling that Gar
held, in order to save his district should
so to the Chicago convention as a dele
gate. lie is placed in Il very awkward
attitude now. If this district should be
against my nomination it would be at
tributed to either want of influence on
ms part, or, what is worse, want of
sincerity in my support. In view of the
past this would be very unfortunate
thing for him. This is delicate matter
for me to take part in, and leave it en-
tirely to your good judgment and kind
friendship"
While in Ohio | had consultation at
Columbus with Governor Foster, ex-Gov-
ernor Dennison and number of other
personal friends, all of whom expressed
great confidence that by the time the
State convention met the friendly feel
ing in favor of Blaine in some of the
districts of Ohio would be waived in def
erence to the wish of the great majority.
In that event, in case my nomination
should prove impracticable, the whole
delegation could be very easily changed
to Mr.. Blaine.
AS to General Grant. though he had
many warm personal friends in Ohio,
yet on account of objections to third
term very few desired his nomination.
Prior to the State convention | had
an interview with General Garfield.
which he sought at my office in the de-
partment, and he there expressed his
earnest desire to secure my nomination
and his wish to be n delegate at large,
so that he might aid me effectively
had not doubt of the support of Govern
or Foster, with whom had been in close
correspondence, and who expressed a
strong desire for my nomination. / was
permitted to name the four delegates at
large and had implicit confidence that
these delegates would take the lead i'm
my behalf. The State convention met
on the 2Sth of April and expressed the
preference of the Republicans of Ohio
for my nomination and recommended
that vote by State be cast for me. On
the 10th of May Garfield wrote me:
Il think it will be mistake for us to
assume division in the Ohio delegation.
We should meet and act as though we
were of one mind until those delegates
who are hostile to you refuse to act with
us, and If we fail to win them over, the
separation will be their act, not ours"
Inc National convention met June 2,
IoSO. -four days were occupied in per-
fecting the permanent organization and
the nomination of candidates for pres
ident. During this time minority of
nine of the delegation of Ohio announced
their determination to vote for Blaine.
This was a fatal move for Blaine and
undoubtedly led to his defeat Nearly
four-fifths of the delegation were in favor
or my nomination in pursuance of the
express wishes of the Ohio convention.
but they were all friendly to Blaine and
whenever it should have become appar-
ent that my nomination was impractica-
BILE the whole delegation could easily
nave been carried for him without n d.
vision. and he thus would have secured
the nomination. The action of the nine
delegates who refused to carry out the
wishes of the State convention, prevent
ed the possibility of the vote of Ohio
being cast for Mr.. Blaine.
The speech of General Garfield nomina-
ting me has always been regarded as a
specimen Of brilliant eloquence rarely ex-
pressed. On the first ballot nine of the
| Ohio delegation voted for Mr.. Blaine
~ for me and one for Edmunds. The
vote of my friends would have nominated
Blaine at any period of the convention,
but under the conditions then existing, it
was Impossible to secure this vote to
either Blaine or Grant. The final re-
| suit was the selection of a new candidate
and the nomination of Garfield.
1t is probable that if had received
the united vote Of the Ohio delegation,
L Woulu nave been nominated as my re-
lations with both General Grant and Mr..
Blaine were Of friendly character, but
it is hardly worth while to comment on
what might have been.
The course of the Ohio delegation was
the source of much comment and per-
haps of unfounded suspicious of perfidy
on the part of some of the delegates.
The moment the nomination was made
L sent Garfield my congratulations.
In time | became thoroughly advised
of what occurred at the Chicago conyen-
ton and had become thoroughly recon-
ciled to the result, though frequently af-
forwards | heard incidents and details
which occasioned me great pain and
which seemed to establish the want of
sincerity on the part of some of the del
egates and tended to show that for some
time before the meeting of the conven-
ton the nomination of General Garfield
had been aRrppd unon