New-York tribune., 1903-02-01


field and held inviolate since. 1t was read oy
two or three of Garfed's close friends one OF
whom we have named and they always p'ns
If It had been possible to give II TO 'he pun" "
tip,e II would have appeared so manly ana kinois'
go able and friendly. full OF good sense tha' Is
the basis of craftsmanship. that it would nave oes
a State paper of high consequence-eveh the sea"I
Of reconciliation. Grant. however. was IN 'ie ~.
v,hen the letter was written and reachen its "e2
tination Garfield did not give 1t to the puohc. ~
might have changed the course OF history. E
loss of IL NAV well be accounted pubic nlisior.-
rne It does not seem to have oeen any oii'
fault that il was withheld. 1T was private letter
written with magnanimous candor IN 'ne iuS' VI
controversy. =,
On, other ynoint of almost secret history should
be placed fully in the possession OF the public IL
is the inner story of the campaign whicn JoH'
Sherman and James g. Blaine worked tosethef
with Presidential purposes candidates against
Grant and both disappointed ~ was
Thought for time by Grants "oid guard as
those who rallied for him for the third ana 'ast
time were calIed-that the great caFtain "ouiu
sweep .hc country almost without meeting strong
opposition. There two m m who headed COZ
umns against the third term movement because
they believed it would be fatal policy and doom
the party to defeat-John Sherman and James O.
Elaine. The personal feeling of both anti-thr1
term candidates most cordial coward General
Grant and each had admiration and Difference for
HIM The antagonism to the alleged ambition
in the third term association of Conkling. Logan.
Cameron and others.
There for a time some rivalry Of actual lead
ership r the opposition To the third term between
Sherman ard Blaine. Their mutual friends ad-
vised meeting and they net in Philadelphia and
had long. intensely earnest and thorough con-
sutation. both entirely of the Importance
to themselves and others of the decision they
reached At length Blaine said he did not care to
make the fight. 1t dstasteful TO him to do II,
charges
vas fighting Grant himself, and doing it for per-
sonal reasons. He preferred to abandon the strug-
gle The peril was that, a. the issues were made.
there was danger that the government would be
turned the Democratic party, and that
would be disastrous-misht cost the country
generation of progress. Sherman said the third
term could be beaten, and he would fight it TO
finish. f he had to do it alone. Blane's idea had
been that the two should withdraw. Shermans
resolution to so on made the third term issue at
Chicago unavoidable. and Blans concluded to stay
in the field. and at the end threw his support to
General Sherman and Robert T. Lincoln This
was a curious complication Mr.. Blaine and
John Sherman did agree tc the right of
Sherman TO run for the Presidency. and they dis
agreed to the result f1 case they withdrew.
Each was inclined to think he could nominated
If the other withdrew and took the brunt OF the
charge of the Grant guard, which was mastering
formidably.
Those who have said so often and with so much
assurance that General Sherman would have re-
fused the Presidency under ali circumstances are
probably mistaken; but as there is 10 yay Of set
tlemen by authority. 1t is not worth while TO dis
cuss the possibilities. This much may be con-
hdently said-that if General Sherman had been
convinced it his duty be President. he could
not have refused the Office though perfectly sin
cere and. so far as he was concerned. resolute in
the preference not to seek carry if he could
honorably help it, that burden More than this.
General and Senator Sherman were faithful in
their attachment each other Neither could
have been induced to compete with the other for
the Presidency. The General always laughed at
John as politician. and loved him all the same.
and john loved the General. and held that his poll
ties, whatever it was. should be treated as a very
good joke
Senator Sherman in error in one respect. and
that was in holding that Garfield was blame
for his own nomination. The fact Sherman
fully realized that if the contest had been
reduced to a decision whether Grant himself
should be nominated Grant would have been the
nominee. That all the while sure. The same
result might and in all probability would have
happened If the contest had been narrowed down
to Grant and Blaine.
The reason for the long struggle made by the
Grant guard was the conviction of the leaders that
when the break enough Blaine and Sherman
men would go over to Grant to nominate him; and
that so. If the break had been made to either
Blaine Sherman. Garfield was another prop
osition. and his honor was not involved. He had
duty Of destiny then and there. He headed the
column against Conklng, divided the applause with
him. captivated the audience with his powerful
eoquence Conkling also did, such i'm
posing figure of manhood and was of nature 50
kindly and noble that when the rush for him
it was irresistible--the whole Blaine vote,
with the exception of one delegate from Virginia,
going to Garfield. The only way beat the third
term that taken and it not the defeat of
Grant
The fatal distraction of New-York. coming later.
general disaster that broke at last the line
of Republican victories after the war, and the
Garfield letter to Grant might have saved the
situation and made peace; but Garfield could
and others did not give 10 the press his private
letter to Grant. 1t might have placated
Conkng. Perhaps the time may when the
sons of tie second of our martyr Presidents will
give the letter. that healing message of
good will and plain truth to the people. and. if il
could have been known. might have prevented the
murderous act of an unworthy and insignificant
seeker for office. who imagined he entitled to
favor: not that their fathers memory needs vind-
cation. but that it is due the United States that
history, which is the memory OF nations. should
permit the effacement of that chspter-a lesson
of peace and coed will.