Page:Appletons' Cyclopædia of American Biography (1892, volume 3).djvu/165

Rh support slowly but steadily grew until on the seventh ballot the opposition to Mr. Blaine, who had been the leading candidate, concentrated upon Hayes, and gave him the nomination, which, on motion of William P. Frye, of Maine, was made unanimous. In his letter of acceptance, dated 8 July, 1876, Mr. Hayes laid especial stress upon three points, civil-service reform, the currency, and the pacification of the south. As to the civil service, he denounced the use of public offices for the purpose of rewarding party services, and especially for services rendered to party leaders, as destroying the independence of the separate departments of the government, as leading directly to extravagance and official incapacity, and as a temptation to dishonesty. He declared that a reform, &ldquo;thorough, radical, and complete,&rdquo; should lead us back to the principles and practices of the founders of the government, who &ldquo;neither expected nor desired from the public officer any partisan service,&rdquo; who meant &ldquo;that public officers should owe their whole service to the government and to the people,&rdquo; and that &ldquo;the officer should be secure in his tenure as long as his personal character remained untarnished, and the performance of his duties satisfactory.&rdquo; As to the currency, he regarded &ldquo;all the laws of the United States relating to the payment of the public indebtedness, the legal-tender notes included, as constituting a pledge and moral obligation of the government, which must in good faith be kept.&rdquo; He therefore insisted upon as early as possible a resumption of specie payments, pledging himself to &ldquo;approve every appropriate measure to accomplish the desired end,&rdquo; and to &ldquo;oppose any step backward.&rdquo; As to the pacification of the south, he pointed out, as the first necessity, &ldquo;an intelligent and honest administration of the government, which will protect all classes of citizens in all their political and private rights.&rdquo; He deprecated &ldquo;a division of political parties resting merely upon distinctions of race, or upon sectional lines,&rdquo; as always unfortunate and apt to become disastrous. He expressed the hope that with &ldquo;a hearty and generous recognition of the rights of all by all,&rdquo; it would be &ldquo;practicable to promote, by the influence of all legitimate agencies of the general government, the efforts of the people of those states to obtain for themselves the blessings of honest and capable local government.&rdquo; He also declared his &ldquo;inflexible purpose,&rdquo; if elected, not to be a candidate for election to a second term.

The Democrats nominated for the presidency Samuel J. Tilden, who, having, as governor of New York, won the reputation of a reformer, attracted the support of many Republicans who were dissatisfied with their party. The result of the election became the subject of acrimonious dispute. Both parties claimed to have carried the states of Louisiana, South Carolina, and Florida. Each charged fraud upon the other, the Republicans affirming that Republican voters, especially colored men, all over the south had been deprived of their rights by intimidation or actual force, and that ballot-boxes had been foully dealt with, and the Democrats insisting that their candidates in Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina had received a majority of the votes actually cast, and that the Republican canvassing boards were preparing to falsify the result in making up the returns. The friends of both the candidates for the presidency sent prominent men into the states in dispute, for the purpose of watching the proceedings of the canvassing boards. The attitude maintained by Mr. Hayes personally was illustrated by a letter addressed to John Sherman at New Orleans,

which was brought to light by a subsequent congressional investigation. It was dated at Columbus, Ohio, 27 Nov., 1876, and said: &ldquo;I am greatly obliged for your letter of the 23d. You feel, I am sure, as I do about this whole business. A fair election would have given us about forty electoral votes at the south &mdash; at least that many. But we are not to allow our friends to defeat one outrage and fraud by another. There must be nothing crooked on our part. Let Mr. Tilden have the place by violence, intimidation, and fraud, rather than undertake to prevent it by means that will not bear the severest scrutiny.&rdquo; The canvassing boards of the states in question declared the Republican electors chosen, which gave Mr. Hayes a majority of one vote in the electoral college, and the certificates of these results were sent to Washington by the governors of the states. But the Democrats persisted in charging fraud; and other sets of certificates, certifying the Democratic electors to have been elected, arrived at Washington. To avoid a deadlock, which might have happened if the canvass of the electoral votes had been left to the two houses of congress (the senate having a Republican and the house of representatives a Democratic majority), an act, advocated by members of both parties, was passed to refer all contested cases to a commission composed of five senators, five representatives, and five judges of the supreme court; the decision of this commission to be final, unless set aside by a concurrent vote of the two houses of congress. The commission, refusing to go behind the certificates of the governors, decided in each contested case by a vote of eight to seven in favor of the Republican electors, beginning with Florida on 7 Feb., and Rutherford B. Hayes was at last, on 2 March, declared duly elected president of the United States. Thus ended the long and painful suspense. The decision was generally acquiesced in, and the popular excitement subsided quickly.

President Hayes was inaugurated on 5 March, 1877. In his inaugural address he substantially restated the principles and views of policy set forth in his letter of acceptance, adding that, while the president of necessity owes his election to the suffrage and zealous labors of a party, he should be always mindful that &ldquo;he serves his party best who serves his country best,&rdquo; and declaring also, referring to the contested election, that the general acceptance of the settlement by the two great parties of a dispute, &ldquo;in regard to which good men differ as to the facts and the law, no less than as to the proper course to be pursued in solving the question in controversy,&rdquo; was an &ldquo;occasion for general rejoicing.&rdquo; The cabinet that he appointed consisted of William M. Evarts, secretary of state; John Sherman, secretary of the treasury; George W. McCrary, secretary of war; Richard W. Thompson, secretary of the navy; David M. Key, postmaster-general; Charles Devens, attorney-general; and Carl Schurz, secretary of the interior. The administration began under very unfavorable circumstances, as general business stagnation and severe distress had prevailed throughout the country since the crash of 1873. As soon as the cabinet was organized, the new president addressed himself to the composition of difficulties in several southern states. He had given evidence of his conciliatory disposition by taking into his cabinet a prominent citizen of the south who had been an officer in the Confederate army and had actively opposed his election. In both South Carolina and Louisiana there were two sets of state officers and two legislatures, one