The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-11-25

disappcintmeut With Grant In isTi and
during the first part Of ts17 was indeed keen.
n led 70 q national movement for reform.
The dissffoction led In 1871 20 revolt againnt
Grant In his own party, which 10 known
~ the LIberal Republican movement.
AZ Mr.. Rhodes reminds us, the o
ment really began In 1870 In Missouri. where
The Republican party split on the question
OF removing tho political disability Of men
who had aided with che South during the
civil war. n where the wing favoring
rcenfranchiscmens was successful In tho
eutumn election OF that year. Assuming
the name Of Liberal Republicans, many
citizens Of Missouri INST in convention &C
Jcffersou City ON January "a, ls71, and In
vited all Republicans who were opposed
70 tho Grant Administration and In favor
Of reform TO meet In mass convention &C
Cincinnati on the first Wednesday OF the
following May. Mr.. Rhodes records that
the movement received vigorous support
from the Chicago Tribune, tho Cincinnati
Commercial and the Springfield Republican,
and q moro guarded approval from the
Nation end the New York Evening Post.
The Louisville Courisr-J Journal Demo-
cratic) ave enthusiastic, and the New
York World conditional, support. Later
In the year Greeley OF tho New York Tribxwe
signed the response OF the Liberal Republic
oaps OF the East 70 the Western invitation.
Previously Gen. Coz and Judges Matthews,
Hoadley and Stallo OF Ohio had announced
their adhesion to the movement. a. did In
March Senator Trumbull OF Illinois and
in April Gov. Blair Of Michigan and Gov.
Palmer OF Illinois. In Massachusetts, Frank
Bird, Edward Atkinson and Gen.. W. F.
Bartlett were favorable. 4 mass meeting
ED on April II. 1872, In Cooper Institute
emphasized the growing importance Of the
movement. I'VE believe" said the Nation,
shat this was the most densely packed
meeting which ever met there. Senator
Trumbull and Schurs were the speakers.
Trumbull made q strong, clear but UNI
adorned statement OF the charges brought
by the promoters of the new movement
against the Administration: and Schurz
employed what the Nction called that
powerful and telling rhetoric Of which he
il now the greatest master in America
As appearances pointed to a triumph OF
the Liberal Republicans in the approach
ing election disappointed politicians made
haste to join them. For example, the as
oendency OF Conkling in New York drove
his rival Fenton into the ranks OF the OPP
position, where the latter worked In harmony
with his close political friend and asso-
ciate Greeley. The preoOnvention canvass
showed that the men who were to meet
together in Cincinnati would agree In
this declaration OF principles on every
thing except the tariff. Thus the can
did tte, rather Than the platform, was the
matter Of chief concern. It soon became
evident that those who inspired the noblest
part of the movement could support con-
sistently either Sumner, Trumbull or Charles
Francis Adams. Failing health practically
forbade the first OF these from being seri-
ously considered. So the enlightened
choice Law between Trumbull and Adams.
Trumbun's true place was in the Senate,
but Adams possessed executive ability
and all other requirements as well. He was
undoubtedly the strongest candidate that
could DO named. the one most feared by
the supporters of Grant and most acceptable
10 the Democratic. II Is well known that
the Cincinnati convention was managed
by newspaper editors, and that these,
influenced probably by esprit de corps,
ultimately decided on nominating Greeley,
although Adams. on tho first ballot, had
2os, against i41 for Greeley, and although
Schury, who presided. left the chair to urge
the Missouri delegation to cast their vote
for Adams. Even on the sixth ballot Adams
received s24 to GreeIcy's $40, but then there
was a rush 10 the rising man. Delegation
after delegation changed it's vote, and on
the final announcement the result was
Greeley $50 and Adams 1877.
1t Is our authors deliberate conviction,
and be is not alone n it, that Greeley's
was a preposterous nomination. Thor
oughly honest himself, Greeley had never
theless been long associated with the worst
set OF politicians in New York outside OF
the Tammany ring. The Cincinnati con
vention was made the dupe OF the very
methods against which its assembling was
a protest. Not only was Greeley nominated
for the Presidency, but he dictated the
platform resolution on the only point at
issue, the tariff, which the convention
Welded and, although itself anxious for
tariff reform. proceeded to nominate the
most extreme protectionist then living.
Dir. Rhodes goes on to remind us that
Grants attitude toward civil service re-
form, which, in ths minds OF Independents,
had become a capital issue, was more
friendly than Greeley's. Grant bad periods
OF faith when he made sincere endeavors
in the cause. In January, 1872. George
William Curtis wrote from Washington:
"The President is fully In earnest about
the civil service, though his friends ire
ferring undoubtedly TO the dominant
Senatorial clique and to Butlerl are bitterly
hostile" On the other hand, a real civil
service reform convention nominated, as
was pointed out at the time, "a gentleman
whose whole nature revolts against tests,
who hates the very name of discipline
who despises all training and has a low
opinion OF experience M whose life has
been in a large measure devoted to the
RloriicatiDn In all human concerns OF the
Rule OF Thumb" On only one Of the three
cardinal points. namely, the policy to be
pursued toward the South, was Greeley
In sympathy with the promoters Of the
Liberal-RepubliCsn movement. Even here
his agreement had not been complete. for
though strongly in favor OF universal
amnesty he had no less ardently advocated
the enforcement and Ku-Klux bills.
Halstead, White, Bowles and Watterson
were g~rievously disappointed at the result