k^ 
 
 '.;''■ - ':■ ■- .•. 
 
 
 I> « '-■'■ ^"^ ■..-. . 
 
 
 f ■ > ••e"''r ■;•■■ 
 
 
 m 
 
 mi 
 
 f' .'■►->'■:■.>-.. ;V« f-. 
 
 
 ''W^- 
 
Class. 
 Book_ 
 
 
 ■^j 
 y%^ 
 
 ()OP}Tigllt}^i 
 
 '^ f,0 
 
 ^ 
 
 COPnUCHT DEPOSm 
 
 / 
 
ARGUMENTS AND SPEECHES 
 
 OF 
 WILLIAM MAXWELL E\ ARTS 
 
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 NEW YORK • BOSTON - CHICAGO - DALLAS 
 ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 MACMILLAN & CO., Limited 
 
 LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA 
 MELBOURNE 
 
 THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd. 
 
 TORONTO 
 
WILLIAM MAXWELL KVARTS 
 
 From a portrait by William Morris Hunt, -painted in 1870. 
 
ARGUMENTS AND SPEECHES 
 
 OF 
 
 William Maxwell Evarts 
 
 EDITED, WITH AN INTRODUCTION, BY HIS SON 
 
 SHERMAN EVARTS 
 
 / 
 
 In Three Volumes 
 Vol. II 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 1919 
 
 All rights reserved 
 
Er9z 
 
 Copyright, 1919, by 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 Set up and printed. Publiahed September, 1919. 
 
 Goi 29 1S19 
 
 ©CI.A535504 
 
 ■vvvG 
 
•^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 CONTENTS OF VOLUME II 
 
 >i Professional Arguments 
 
 ^ PAGE 
 
 IX. Summing up to the jury for the defendant, May, 
 1875, in the case of Theodore Tilton against Henry 
 Ward Beecher ^ 
 
 X. Arguments before the Electoral Commission, Feb- 
 ruary, 1877, in the disputed Presidential Election 
 of 1876, on behalf of the Republican Party, on the 
 counting of the electoral votes of Florida, Loui- 
 siana and Oregon ^^^ 
 
 XL Argument in the Supreme Court of the United States 
 in the case of Farrington against Saunders — 
 December Term 1870. (Cotton Tax Case) 366 
 
 Political and Patriotic Speeches and Writings 
 
 I. Two articles published in "The New World " October 
 2 and 16, 1841, entitled "Mr. Webster's Position" 
 and " Mr. Tyler and the Whig Party " 399 
 
 II. Speech at the "Union" Meeting held in Castle 
 Garden New York, October 30, 1850. The Fugi- 
 tive Slave Law. (Castle Garden Speech) 420 
 
 III. An address to the People of the United States ad- 
 vocating the nomination of Daniel Webster for the 
 Presidency, adopted at a mass meeting in New 
 York, March 5, 1852 435 
 
 IV. Speech at the meeting in the "Broadway Taber- 
 nacle," New York, April 29. 1856, First Rei)ub- 
 lican Meeting in New York. (The Tabernacle 
 Speech) 442 
 
 V 
 
vi CONTEXTS 
 
 V. Speech at a mass meeting in the Academy of Music, 
 New York, October 22, 1856, under the auspices 
 of the Young Men's Repubhcan General Com- 
 mittee 455 
 
 VI. Speech at the Eighteenth Ward Repubhcan Festival, 
 
 February 22, 1860 479 
 
 VII. Speech at Auburn, X. Y., October 16, 1860, on the Is- 
 sues of the Day 488 
 
 VIII. Speech at the Great Union Meeting in Union Square, 
 
 New York, Saturday, April 20, 1861 529 
 
 IX. Speech at the Republican Union Festival, New Y^ork 
 
 February 22, 1862 533 
 
 X. Speech at Cooper Institute on political reform April 
 
 6, 1871 541 
 
 Speech at Convention held in Chickering Hall, New- 
 York, to nominate candidates for office in New 
 York City in opposition to Tammany Hall and the 
 Tweed Ring, October 20, 1871 557 
 
 Speech at Republican mass meeting held at Cooper 
 Institute October 25, 1871 560 
 
 Speech at mass meeting in Cooper Institute under the 
 auspices of the "Committee of Seventy," Novem- 
 ber 2, 1871 570 
 
 XI. Speech at mass meeting in Cooper Institute to protest 
 against the action of U. S. troops in Louisiana, 
 January 11, 1875 574 
 
 XII. Speech in Cooper Institute in the Hayes-Tilden pres- 
 idential campaign, November 1, 1876 585 
 
 Xni. Speech in Academy of Music in the Garfield-Hancock 
 
 presidential campaign, October 20, 1880 621 
 
PROFESSIONAL ARGUMENTS 
 
IX 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE JURY IN SUjVIMING UP FOR 
 THE DEFENDANT IN THE CASE OF THEO- 
 DORE TILTON AGAINST IIENIW JVARD 
 BEECUER 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The Beeclier Trial was the culmination of the most extraordinary 
 and widely discussed scandal of the last century. The action was 
 what is known in the law as an action for crim. con., the i)laintilf 
 setting his damages at $100,000. The defendant was the Rev. 
 Henry Ward Beecher, the famous pastor of Plymouth Church in 
 Brooklyn. 
 
 The plaintiff, Theodore Tilton, a younger man than Mr. 
 Beecher by some twenty-two years, had been from early manhood, 
 in some sense, a protege of Mr. Beecher 's and there had existed 
 between the two men relations of mutual affection and regard. 
 Mr. Tilton was a man of brilliant powers and had been a popular 
 and successful public lecturer on ethical, moral and religious topics. 
 He was also an author and journalist of considerable repute. As 
 a 5'oung man, Mr. Tilton had been assistant editor, under ]Mr. 
 Beecher, of "The Independent," an influential journal devoted 
 primarily to religious subjects. He succeeded to its chief editor- 
 ship, but in the latter part of 1870 was summarily dismissed by 
 the proprietor, Mr. Henry C. Bowen, and at the same time his 
 connection with the editorial staff of the "Brooklyn Union," a 
 paper of which Mr. Bowen was also i)roprietor, was severed. This 
 result, with its disastrous efi'ect upon the fortunes of Mr. Tilton, 
 was brought about very largely because of his attitude on social 
 and religious (pieslions that interested the pul)lic of that day and 
 also by reason of stories aHecting Mr. Tilton's private character 
 that had been brought to Mr. Bowen's attention. 
 
 From this point Mr. Tilton's fortunes and rej)utalioii st(';t(lil\' 
 declined and his connection with the i)ublic was largely maintained 
 through the editorshij) of a i)a])er known as "The Colden Age," 
 2 1 
 
2 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 established and carried on through the influence and financial aid 
 of his friends. 
 
 In the succeeding years there was much scandalous gossip and 
 whispered rumor in Brooklyn directed against Mr. Beecher, but 
 not till the autumn of 1872 did the accusations against him assume 
 any very definite shape or become a matter of public discussion. 
 The scandal burst forth in November of that year through an 
 article that appeared in a sensational sheet known as "WoodhuU 
 and Claflin's Weekly," published by Mrs. Victoria C. Woodhull 
 and her sister. Miss Tennie C. Claflin. These women had estab- 
 lished a brokerage office in Broad Street, New York, at the same 
 time posing as social reformers or social revolutionists, dispensing 
 all sorts of radical views subversive of established society; and it 
 was in connection with their attacks upon the marriage relation in 
 particular that they published this weekly paper. The article 
 contained very definite and detailed charges of immorality against 
 Mr. Beecher, and the evidence on the trial of this famous case 
 tended very clearly to show the responsibility of Mr. Tilton for 
 the substance of the statements made. 
 
 From that moment the scandal became common property and 
 was discussed and expatiated upon by the press of the country. 
 The parties involved in the scandal, and more particularly Mr. 
 Tilton and his friends added fuel to the flame by public statements 
 in the newspapers, and finally a committee of Plymouth Church 
 took the matter up and made an investigation of the charges as 
 then pressed by Mr. Tilton. The whole matter assumed the 
 proportions of a great public question and of serious public discus- 
 sion. 
 
 The situation as it existed during the years immediately pre- 
 ceding the trial was graphically described in the opening paragraphs 
 of Mr. Evarts's summing up. After referring to the great anxieties 
 and solicitudes of the advocate when he comes to present his 
 client's defence, Mr. Evarts continues : " If in a private cause, how- 
 ever momentous the interests, these sentiments and feelings may 
 justly agitate the mind of the advocate, how much more oppres- 
 sive are they when the matter in hand has to do with great public 
 interests and strong public passions, when the client has become 
 involved in all the eddies and currents of controversy between 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 3 
 
 men 's (jpinions, prejudices, foeliuf^s aiul in all the forms that make 
 up the eonnections and the sympathies of society and of life. Wliy, 
 it has l)een true in tiiis case from the time that the scanda' first 
 hurst upon public attention — it has been true in this case that, so 
 far from the individual case being considered upon its real facts, 
 so far from the individual being accused on his real character, so 
 far from the connected culprit, the lady, being judged of by that 
 measure that we wish to meet, that we may be so judged ourselves, 
 they have been made the personalities and the names upon which 
 all sorts of public controversy, of public contumely, of public dis- 
 cords liave turned. Questions of taste, of social ethics, of manners, 
 of morals, of religious forms and of religious faith, as affecting com- 
 munities, cities, forms of comnmnion, particular churches, partic- 
 ular circles of society, all have been tossed about in endless con- 
 troversy, in which these parties and the actual facts of their case 
 have really formed but little part. Everybody has been trying 
 everybody. Europe has been trying America. New York has 
 been trying Brookhni. The other cities and the rest of the coun- 
 try have been trjnng Brooklyn and New York, coupling them like 
 Herculaneum and Pompeii and Sodom and Gomorrah. All the 
 scoffers and the infidels have been trpng all the Christians. The 
 ancient church, mother of all dissenting denominations — the 
 Romish Church — ^has been trying Protestantism. The church of 
 dignity, and coming nearest to an establishment among Protestant 
 churches, has been trying all the forms of dissenters that have not 
 a ritual. And then the Presbyterians — ^they have been trying all 
 the more modern forms of dissenting sects; and then the Metho- 
 dists and the Baptists, each in turn have been trying the Congre- 
 gationalists, and then at last the Congregationalists have been 
 trying Plymouth Church." 
 
 The action was begun in the City Court of Brooklyn in August, 
 1874. It was called for trial January 5, 187.5. By January 11, a 
 jury was secured and the actual trial began. It proceeded without 
 interruption, the Court sitting five days in the week, until July 2 
 following, when the jury, unable to agree, was discharged. The 
 jury stood nine to three in favor of the defendant. As Mr. Evarts 
 said, commenting on Mr. Tilton's attitude in the case: — "If there 
 had been no question in this case affecting a great character, in 
 
4 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 which there was enhsted the interest of every honest man and 
 woman in Brooklyn, in the United States, in Christendom,— I 
 mean Mr. Beecher — if the fact of his purity had not been the 
 fundamental fact in this case, but the question had been, as it 
 might have been, between Mr. Tilton and one of his neighbors of 
 an equal importance in society, between neighboring farmers or 
 merchants or lawyers, however reputable and however dear to 
 them their credit was,— if a plaintiff, against such a defendant, had 
 brought a suit of this kind— the jury would not have sat five months 
 one month, one week, one day upon his case. * * * The 
 plaintiff would be laughed out of Court and he would not have had 
 as uncomfortable a record for the public in that short disposition 
 of the case as the five months' protraction of your patience and 
 indulgence has made for him here. " 
 
 Naturally, from the widespread public interest in the cause the 
 court room was crowded during the entire trial by an audience 
 made up of the adherents of one side or the other and of those whom 
 general curiosity had attracted to the scene. The trial was marked 
 throughout by manifestations of feeling on the part of the audience 
 which it was quite beyond the power of the Court wholly to re- 
 strain. As the last words fell from the lips of the orator in defence 
 of Mr. Beecher, the court room burst into a great volume of 
 applause that lasted fully a minute. 
 
 The Chief Justice of the Court, Hon. Joseph A. Neilson, pre- 
 sided at the trial. The plaintiff had secured as his leading counsel, 
 William A. Beach, eminent in the profession as an able trial lawyer, 
 with whom were associated W^illiam Fullerton, who was among the 
 leaders at the criminal bar, and Roger A. Pry or v^^ho had then but 
 recently come to practice his profession in New York. Messrs. 
 Morris and Pearsall, a well known firm in Brooklyn, were the 
 plaintiff's attorneys of record. Judge Morris of that firm also 
 took an active part in the trial. Mr. Evarts led for Mr. Beecher, 
 and with him were John K. Porter, Benjamin F. Tracy, John L. 
 Hill, Austin Abbott and Thomas G. Shearman, of the firm of 
 Shearman and Sterling, who appeared as attorneys of record for 
 the defendant. 
 
 As one reads the record of this famous trial, contained in three 
 large, closely printed volumes, one is impressed with the extremely 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 5 
 
 courteous beariug of the counsel towards their opponents iuul the 
 Court in the conduct of the case, and the proceedings were fre- 
 quently enlivened hy the witty encounters of the lawyers, in which 
 the wit was by no means confined to one side. One feature of Mr. 
 Evarts's conduct of this extraordinary trial was the subject of 
 remark at the time by the lawyers engaged, and by the Court, as 
 well as by the public: — this was the apparent ease with which he 
 bore the long and continuous mental and physical strain of the 
 trial under the heavy responsiljility that it involved. While at 
 one time or another some one of his associates or opponents was 
 absent, through indisposition of health, he remained throughout 
 always at his post, ready and alert. 
 
 The theory of the defence, while insisting upon the defendant's 
 absolute innocence of the charge, was that IMr. Beecher had been 
 the victim of a cunning plot and conspiracy on the part of Mr. 
 Tilton and his friends, in a spirit of hatred and revenge, to drive 
 Mr. Beecher from his great position of influence into dishonor and 
 ruin, and that the motive lay partially in the assumption that Mr. 
 Beecher had been largely responsible for the utter downfall that 
 Mr. Tilton had brought upon himself by his own conduct. 
 
 Aside from the able interlocutory debates on questions of evi- 
 dence, the case presents no important points of law that might be 
 of interest to the profession or the student, but its record will al- 
 ways remain as an extraordinary exhibition of human nature and 
 character, of human motives and conduct. As stated in a sub- 
 sequent note, the editor has found it necessary to omit a consid- 
 erable portion of this address which occupied eight court days in 
 its delivery. The lapse of time and the lack of present interest in 
 the case itself do not seem to have impaired the contemporary 
 estimate of iSIr. Evarts's summing up as a great and masterly 
 forensic effort. One sincere admirer of that day likens it to the 
 "historic arguments which made illustrious the Roman and the 
 British Bar." 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 First Day, May 27, 1875 
 May it please your Honor, and Gentlemen of the Jury: 
 Whatever diversities may present themselves in the trial of 
 a cause, as its texture and its color are woven to the comple- 
 tion of the picture, the solicitudes of the advocate know no 
 ebb, and they come to the flood when he is to present the 
 last plea for the defendant, and is to surrender his repre- 
 sentative capacity. These solicitudes are not personal. 
 No considerations of vanity or fame have anything to do 
 with his anxieties. All exhibitory or ostentatious speech 
 has always been foreign to forensic art. We deal with reali- 
 ties. We have to do with Hving men and women, and with 
 real, personal deeds. It is this that disquiets the advocate 
 when he comes to feel that the representation is to cease, and 
 all his faults and his failures are to come as penalties upon 
 the client, and he no longer can stand to interpose any shield 
 against his own influences. It was this that made Cicero 
 say — Cicero, easily at the head of all ancient, and easily 
 transcending all modern, reputations in our profession- 
 Cicero, after he had gained the credit of being the greatest 
 lawyer among orators and the greatest orator among law- 
 yers — Cicero, who had built up that credit which is now rep- 
 resented by his works on the shelves of every scholar, though 
 he be not a lawyer, of every lawyer, though he be not a 
 scholar — that led him to say, when he could not but confess 
 good grounds for confidence in himself: "I, notwithstanding 
 all this, declare, so may the gods be merciful to me, that I 
 never think of the time when I shall have to rise and speak 
 in defense of a chent that I am not only disturbed in mind, 
 but tremble in every limb of my body." 
 
 Ah! then it is that the fate of a client, as affected by the 
 
 6 
 
THE BERCHER TRIAL 7 
 
 faults, the defects, the omissions of the advocate, rest indeed 
 upon the mind of the hitter. Certainly, t^entlemen, there is 
 everything in this cause, as through the long i)eriod of the 
 trial it has been drawn out before you, that should make 
 everyone feel, not in this personal sense, but in this solici- 
 tude for the client, what he would desire, and what he misses 
 in himself. One would wish some of those fabulous ])owers 
 by which poetic invention has sought to eke out the infirmi- 
 ties of our feeble nature. One would wish for a hundred 
 eyes, to i)ry into every fold and crevice of this testimony, 
 and draw forth aptly and in season every fact, when it was 
 needed, and as it would be effectual. He would wish for a 
 hundred hands, that now he could hold up the whole mass 
 of it for its collective power upon your minds; and then that 
 he might divide, distribute, discriminate it, so that at some 
 finger's end there should always be each topic, each passage, 
 that could shed light or carry conviction. He would wish more 
 than these aids of instruments, that perceptive force which 
 could discern the merit and the efficacy of the vastly diffused 
 elements of the proof, and by unerring magnetism draw forth 
 from all, missing no single needle from any haystack with 
 which the field of the trial is strewn, when it was needed to 
 scratch the face of any ugly falsehood or prick the pompous 
 bubble of hypocrisy. He would wish that he had that jiower 
 of reason that could crush the obdurate mass of evidence, 
 separate the ore, and then, by an intellectual alchemy, 
 purge it of all the dross, and lose not one pennyweight of the 
 pure gold of truth, but seize that, and that alone, as sterling 
 coin for your circulation. And most of all would he wish 
 that moral power of distillalion that could deal with the 
 juices of this long fermentation, slrij) them of all discortlant 
 elements, reject all poisonous oils, all corrosive acids, all 
 heavy heat of passion and of ])rejudice, and ])resent to you 
 the pure, invigorating wine of honest sympathy for human 
 nature, of honest wannth for human justice. And then. 
 
8 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 he would wish for that greatest gift, eloquence — eloquence 
 which, overleaping even the short circuit between the voice 
 and the ear, speaks out from heart to heart as face answereth 
 to face, and, what a great thinker among mankind. Lord 
 Bacon, has said is more than eloquence, discretion of speech, 
 that no excitements, no perversions, no enlistments, no ani- 
 mosities should carry him beyond the duty to his client, to 
 justice, to truth, to his opponents, and to you. 
 
 If in a private cause, however momentous the interests, 
 these sentiments and feelings may justly agitate the mind of 
 the advocate, how much more oppressive are they when the 
 matter in hand has to do with great public interests and 
 strong public passions, when the cHent has become involved 
 in all the eddies and currents of controversy between men's 
 opinions, prejudices, feelings, and in all the forms that make 
 up the connections and the sympathies of society and of life. 
 Why, it has been true in this case from the time that the 
 scandal first burst upon public attention — it has been true 
 in this case that so far from the individual case upon its 
 real facts, so far from the individual accused on his real char- 
 acter, so far from the connected culprit, the lady, being 
 judged of by that measure that we wish to meet, that we may 
 be so judged ourselves, they have been made the personali- 
 ties and the names upon which all sorts of public contro- 
 versy, of public contumely, of public discords, have turned. 
 
 Questions of taste, of social ethics, of manners, of morals, of 
 rehgious forms and of religious faith, as affecting communi- 
 ties, cities, forms of communion, particular churches, par- 
 ticular circles of society, all have been tossed about in end- 
 less controversy, in which these parties and the actual facts 
 of their case have really formed but little part. Everybody 
 has been trying everybody. Europe has been trying Amer- 
 ica. New York has been trying Brooklyn. The other 
 cities and the rest of the country have been trying Brooklyn 
 and New York, coupling them like Herculaneum and Pom- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 9 
 
 peii and Sodom and Gomorrah. All the scoffers and the 
 infidels have been tryinj; all the Christians. The ancient 
 Church, mother of all dissenting' denominations — the 
 Romish Churcli — has been trying Protestantism. The 
 church of dif^nity, and coming nearest to an establishment 
 among Protestant churches, has been trying all the fonns 
 of dissenters that have not a ritual. And then the Pres- 
 byterians, — they have been trying all the more modern forms 
 of dissenting sects; and then the Methodists and the Bap- 
 tists, each in turn, have been trying the Congregationalists; 
 and then, at last, the Congregationalists have been trying 
 Plymouth Cliurch. 
 
 Well, we haven't any chance to be heard in this storm. 
 If they had formulas and propositions that, on the part of 
 Euro]H\ were to condemn our vulgar, uncivilized institu- 
 tions and society; and then if these different cities were to 
 trj' it on the question of whether it happened in Brooklyn, 
 and if it did, why that was enough; and then in the churches 
 — if men of absolute and fixed traditional faith said, ''Well, 
 the moment people undertook to be independent and care 
 more for practical morality, and practical charity, than for 
 orthodoxy of doctrine, and vain human aspiration, this is the 
 end of it all;" if these were to be the methods of accusation, 
 or imputation, of discussion and of conclusion, why, Mr. 
 Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, and the actual form and pressure 
 of the charge, are all enveloped in the dust of these whirl- 
 winds, and these forces determine the conclusions of men, 
 and not the actual weight and character of any particular 
 conduct or evidence. 
 
 Then, too, when you come to consider the defendant as 
 placed in the common attitude of the civil justice of the 
 country-, at once there was an inunense exi)ansion of the 
 jniblic expectation as to what could be done, or should be 
 done by such a man; how he could not safely rest ui)on 
 the proposition that guilt nmst be proved, and that he 
 
10 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 against whom it was not proved was discharged acquit and 
 innocent from human justice; and the proposition was taken 
 that unless he made affirmatively his innocence as clear 
 as it would appear, if he were innocent, at the judgment 
 day, the trial had failed of his purgation, and had left the 
 people a right to doubt about him. 
 
 Ah! if your honor please, to make these exactions of in- 
 quisition, as if it were the last judgment, and to furnish us 
 with none of the compelling processes, and none of the pene- 
 trating omniscience, and none of the all-loving charity which 
 belongs to God, is indeed a burden that cannot be borne. 
 All hmitations of authority in regard to witnesses; all rules 
 of law regulating testimony; of power to twist the consciences 
 of the wicked till they spoke the truth; to inform the in- 
 telligence of the honest so that they should speak the truth 
 with appropriateness, and with vigor, and with power; all 
 these limitations of human institutions, limitations upon 
 men, were all discarded in these irresponsible discussions, 
 and these rash exactions and conclusions which the public 
 and their organs felt themselves at liberty to exercise. 
 
 Now, take the point where the scandal became public, as 
 a scandal, as a matter of imputation, as a matter of curious 
 inspection, as a matter of wise deliberation, as a matter of 
 unimpassioned but yet one-sided conclusion, and see how, 
 by a reference to some of the general and yet well-recognized 
 points of this controversy, our loving client, Mr. Beecher, 
 has been exposed to judgments that have nothing to do with 
 him or the facts of the case. Well, where a scandal is pro- 
 mulgated, then at once there is a vast class of the community 
 that give it a ready and a free acceptance. Et otiosa credit 
 Neapolis, et omne vicinum opj)idnm. The idle profligates of 
 New York believed it, and of all this neighboring town. 
 And so, in every quarter where the wicked classes make their 
 meetings, and hold their gossips with a sneer and a smile, the 
 scandal was accepted. Why, that a man should err with a 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 11 
 
 woman, that a weakness of tlio flesh should yieUl to a temjila- 
 tion of the flesh, these classes said they had kno^^^l always 
 and everywhere, and they were glad tliat tlieir doctrines 
 and opinions were being accepted among the more serious 
 classes. 
 
 Others put it upon what they understood to be robust- 
 ness of ^Ir. Beeeher's frame. Well, now that is a ground 
 to put it upon that is very difficult to deal with; for we 
 cannot deny that he is a man, as he presents himself before 
 you, as you have studied his face and seen his figure. And 
 yet over and over again you have seen what professed to be 
 rational examinations of this inquiry that are really made to 
 depend, when put to the true analysis of what the argument 
 means, on this question of physical strength and tempera- 
 ment. Why, to be sure, that overthrows human virtue, hu- 
 man civilization, education, religion, morality, faith in men 
 and love for men, faith in God and love of God; it over- 
 throws them all. Why not? Man is an animal. Man is 
 an animal; and when you come to deal with the questions of 
 natural propensities, you must treat him as an animal. In 
 other words, gentlemen, this scandalous and wicked, and, 
 when stated, ridiculous and monstrous proposition is made, 
 that against an accusation of incontinence there is no defense 
 in our state of society except the proof of impotency. How 
 horrible! How wicked! And when pressed home to such 
 careless disputants, how shocking to their own sense of the 
 growth of society, of the beauty, the purity, the dignity of 
 human nature! "Thou hast made man a little lower than 
 tlie angels," is the doctrine of Christianity and of religion. 
 "Thou hast made man undistinguishable from the brutes," is 
 the projjosition of these profligate accusers and condenmers; 
 not of a particular man, not of a particular woman, but of all 
 the pretensions to virtue and all that makes us pride our- 
 selves upon living at an age which has inherited the great 
 civilization of all time, that has received the great gift of an 
 
12 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Incarnate God and the permanent possession of the insti- 
 stution of the Gospel. 
 
 Well, then, all sorts of volunteer disputants appear, at- 
 tacking and defending; and for the defenses or excuses, if 
 not for the attacks, all over the country, there was a sort of 
 responsibility, carelessly thrown upon the case and the per- 
 son of Mr. Beecher. The most extravagant of the apologies 
 for Mr. Beecher' s conduct was in a very well considered and 
 very well expressed letter pubhshed in one of the western 
 papers, said to have been from a lady, and doubtless it was 
 so. Without inquiring particularly, or even caring to in- 
 quire, whether there was any truth in the charge, this apol- 
 ogist seemed to think that for a man who had done so much 
 good, and who was still doing so much good, and was cap- 
 able of doing more good than ah the other preachers in the 
 country, as she expressed it, that a little aberration of this 
 kind, in the nature of a solace and a support for the immense 
 drain on his moral nature — it was not to be considered im- 
 probable, and instead of being excused should be justified. 
 
 Well, now, I have never heard anything quite as strong in 
 the way of partisanship as that, except in a curious anec- 
 dote of English political history. John Wilkes — Jack 
 Wilkes, as you have all heard of him — the great liberty 
 agitator of the time of George III, with his great wit, his 
 great audacity, gave much trouble to the court and the 
 ministry, and gained equal favor with the radicals and the 
 opponents of the ministry. He was a man of profligate 
 life, and, unluckily, he was a man of a very ugly counte- 
 nance, and, among other things, of a very indisputable ob- 
 liquity of vision. Well, parties ran high; all were for him or 
 against him; and all imputation upon his conduct, his 
 patriotism, his morality, or what not, were met by his 
 friends boldly and confidently; and two ladies in high life, 
 one of the Court party and one of the Liberty party, were 
 discussing with the heat and candor which belong to women's 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 1.'} 
 
 love of justice the respective merits and demerits of Wilkes, 
 and when the champion of Wilkes had i)ressed her adversary 
 to the wall on every question of politics, of taste, of morals, 
 of patriotism, and of public ilanger, the opi)onent of Wilkes 
 turns upon her ami says: "Well, you nuist admit that he 
 squints." "Yes," says the disputant, "but no more than a 
 man should." 
 
 Now, all these follies and frivolities through several years 
 of twilight, of darkness, of suspicions, and of doubts, have 
 been clustered around this controversy, and it was only 
 when we came into your ])resence, and with the authority 
 of the law, and with your candor and attention and pa- 
 tience and sense of duty, that we ever began to get at what 
 this real matter was, and to judge of its probability or its 
 imi^robability, its proof or its refutation, according to live 
 persons with real characters, and a crime defined and meas- 
 ured, that we ever had any real dealing with it, in any sense 
 that a rational man could consider deahng with it. 
 
 But then see how men have reasoned about the conduct 
 of this defendant while this imjmtation in the civil courts 
 was pending. How many men have been shocked that 
 Mr. Beecher should continue to preach and worship God 
 when Mr. Tilton had called him an adulterer, when Mr. 
 Tilton had spoken of him as a perjurer. They actually 
 undertook to shorten the divine commission under which he 
 acted, which was to preach the Gospel to every creature, 
 they adding "until men shall revile you and persecute you 
 and evil entreat you." Is that found in the apostolic commis- 
 sion.' Is that the character of even an humble clergyman like 
 honest Mr. Gay from Indiana, who, rather than sit (juiet 
 under the lewd teachings of this moral lecturer (turning to 
 Mr. Tilton), resisted him to his face, and has fulfilled his 
 duty at $400 a year as an humble preacher ever since, losing 
 his salary of $1,600 because he believed in the religion that 
 he professed, and in the duty of men of his profession, at 
 
14 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 least, to meet and grapple with spiritual wickedness in high 
 places. And then others say, "What a shocking thing it is 
 that Mrs. Beecher should attend this scandalous trial, where 
 she will be exposed to hearing so much evil said of one whom 
 she loves, even though he does not deserve her love!" And 
 actually so vulgar and vile are pharisaical judgments that 
 they undertake to shorten the marriage vows as well as the 
 apostolic commission, and when a woman has sworn at the 
 altar to "love, cherish, and to obey, for better for worse, 
 for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, till death us 
 do part," these people said an alternative limitation was in- 
 terposed — "or process shall be served upon you to come into 
 the city court of Brooklyn." 
 
 Now, I believe that all these follies and scurrilities have 
 wholly faded out of the public mind, of the public criticism, 
 of the public conscience, if conscience has anything to do 
 with them. I believe that when this great preacher comes 
 to give his account, at the last judgment, of the many tal- 
 ents that have been confided to him, the hard Judge named 
 in the parable will find no fault in him — that he did not bury 
 his talents in a napkin, even during the six months of the 
 Beecher trial. I know that the young hearts and consciences, 
 and old, obdurate sinful natures that in those six months 
 have been searched for and found, give more joy in heaven 
 than over all these good men that criticize, who have needed 
 never to experience repentance. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the first important period of publicity 
 grew out of the publication that was made by the Wood- 
 hull threat and the Woodhull newspaper. But, as by a law 
 of nature tolerably true even in morals, if we know enough 
 to watch and wait- — as by a law of nature the flood never 
 can rise higher than the fountain — that scandal did not very 
 much disturb the judgments or the opinions of what con- 
 stitute society, what constitute the manly and womanly 
 character of our communities. And the next promulga- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 15 
 
 tion that gave rise to anything like a popular or a consider- 
 able acceptance of responsil)ility in its source was the pro- 
 mulgation in the form of the Bacon letter, as it is called, 
 made by Mr. Tilton himself. 
 
 From that time to this, there being a responsible accuser, 
 in indefinite form to be sure, but yet in a manner that would 
 justify one standing in so responsible a position as Mr. 
 Beecher to desire and require investigation and ascertain- 
 ment, led promptly to an mimediate inquiry, in the only 
 manner which an honest submission to the principles of re- 
 ligious faith and of maintenance of the solemn tie of church 
 connections made possible. It was, that an accusation con- 
 necting the pastor of the church with one of its members in 
 improper relations should be examined by intelligent, well- 
 balanced minds, strong, definite, honest character, and 
 well-accredited and indisputable public faith. And a com- 
 mittee was appointed, having, I will venture to say, in your 
 judgment, in all men's judgments, as much of those valuable 
 traits of mind, character, and of public repute as the City of 
 Brookljai and the City of New York could furnish. An 
 inquiry was held; and those who knew most of the matter 
 were examined and cross-examined, and their respective 
 stories were compared, weighed, and a result arrived at. 
 Mr. Tilton maintained his accusation without stint in re- 
 spect to his own imputation, had it explored, had it reduced 
 or conformed by his own cross-examination. Mrs. Tilton, 
 obeying a duty, accommodated, as well as truth would per- 
 mit, to the divided sentiments and the divided obligations of 
 a wife and a woman, owing duties to herself, her children, 
 and to others that had to do with matters concerning which 
 she was to speak, her children, her pastor, gave an account 
 exonerating absolutely Mr. Beecher from all share in im- 
 proper sexual relations of any degree, vindicating herself, 
 saving the fame of her children, and of her husband even, 
 against this reproach, and at the same time declining or 
 
16 SPEECHES OF WTLLLUI ]VIAX^^T:LL EVARTS 
 
 avoiding, passing over, omitting any hostile exposures of 
 her husband's conduct, or any hostile exposures of his arts 
 and schemes and plans in the matter of this accusation. 
 
 Mr. Beecher was examined and cross-examined, and all 
 these papers have been before the community, before the 
 counsel for this plaintiff, before the court, so far as their 
 applicability under the rules of evidence made them im- 
 portant; and the unanimous judgment of these six men after 
 this examination was a disposition of the matter that should 
 have satisfied all honest imputations, all candid, all sin- 
 cere doubts. But before that was ended, the suit, discussed 
 and prearranged really before it began, was set at work, and 
 from that time onward we might have expected that the 
 public judgment and the public appeal to the forms of ju- 
 dicial investigation and its guarantees of completeness and 
 accuracy should have been submitted to. Instead of that 
 the plaintiff published a great argument, thro^\Ti out with- 
 out an adversary, — and his defender and faithful champion, 
 two others— all aimed at the wide public, full of threatenings 
 and slaughter, full of argument hoped to be considered un- 
 answerable, because there was no issue, and no tribunal be- 
 fore which they could be answered — these brave opponents 
 of a world in arms, like Wouter Van Twiller's ordnance in his 
 old Dutch fort, fro\sTiing defiance on an absent foe. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, at last we come to a direct submission 
 of the cause to the ordinary tribunals of justice. The plain- 
 tiff selects his form of action, makes his choice of the court 
 where he will bring it, provides himself with counsel; and 
 then the defendant is thus authoritatively brought under the 
 protection, as it has been throughout, to him, of judicial 
 methods, judicial impartiality, and all the guarantees that 
 our institutions furnish for the accused in the form of re- 
 sponsibility, have been made the limit and the scene of the 
 controversy that both these parties now must submit to the 
 result of. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAT. 17 
 
 No doubt the plaintiff enjoys a very considerable ad- 
 vantage in the ])reliniinary arrangement for the mainte- 
 nance of a legal contestation upon his part, and no doubt this 
 plaintiff has shown great wisdom and has enjoyed great 
 good fortime in the professional aid that he has called 
 around him. 
 
 An experienced, indefatigable, able, and intrepid attorney 
 and managing counsel, ]\Ir. Morris, familiar with all the 
 surroundings of this judicial scene; an accomplished and elo- 
 quent advocate whom we are glad to welcome to his share 
 of honor and of fortune in the competitions of our bar — I 
 mean General Pryor; and then these eminent lawyers who 
 lead for him, Mr. Beach and Mr. Fullerton, easily at the 
 head of the criminal practice of the State, foremost in all the 
 employments and honors of the profession, accustomed to 
 act together, lacking no resource of vigorous and bold, open 
 attack, no resort to the lawful strategies of arrangement and 
 surprise, lacking nothing that can make "the vigor and suc- 
 cess of the war come up to the sounding phrase of the mani- 
 festo," if it be possible. 
 
 Mr. Beecher, taking his choice as it was left to him from 
 what was not secured to his opponent, was obliged to con- 
 tent himself with the faithful, the earnest, the loving es- 
 pousal of his cause coming from our brother Shearman, a 
 friend who sticketh closer than a brother, if we can measure 
 the closeness with which brothers stick by Joseph Richards's 
 adherence to his sister; your foremost perhaps, certainly one 
 of the foremost, lawyers of Brooklyn, General Tracy, known 
 in public office, in private life, in i)olitical and social rela- 
 tions, and, in professional conduct, experience, and repute, 
 quite the peer of any lawyer in Brooklyn — and the lawyers 
 in Brooklyn are the peers of lawyers anywhere; and my 
 learned brother Porter and myself, coming with the disfavor 
 that belongs to foreigners, crossing the Bchring's Straits that 
 separate these two continents, but sharing that misfortune 
 with our learned brothers Beach and Fullerton. 
 
18 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And here we are now as we have been for five months. 
 We began when the weather was as cold and snowy as in the 
 stormy night which introduces the friendship of Moulton 
 and Beecher, and this trial has lasted until the sweltering 
 heats almost come up to those of that June morning when 
 Mrs. Moulton smothered the defendant's grief and despair 
 in an afghan. Samson Afghanistes, after that incident, Mr. 
 Beecher must be known as, to distinguish him from Samson 
 Agonistes, the plaintiff, who after laying his locks in the lap 
 of the Delilah Woodhull, and having his eyes put out by the 
 indignant frown of his countrymen and countrywomen, 
 found there was no role for him but that of the blind Samson 
 that should pull down the temple of his household, the tem- 
 ple of his society, the temple of his religion, upon his head, 
 and those of his wife and children. 
 
 Now, who are the accused? The defendant, Henry 
 Ward Beecher, and the partner of his guilt, if he be guilty, 
 Mrs. Elizabeth R. Tilton. For there is this, unluckily for 
 Mr. Tilton, about the crime of adultery, that it takes two 
 to commit it. As the lady said in the ball-room, — where the 
 light French phrases please the ear of society not over- 
 virtuous, that frowns at prayer-meetings and considers them 
 dangerous — as the lady said to the beau who had learned 
 more phrases than facts about human life, and who asked her 
 what was meant by faux pas, sl false step — she said she 
 didn't know exactly, but was quite sure it was not a pas 
 seul, a step that could be taken alone. 
 
 Now, that is the misfortune of Tilton. There was noth- 
 ing else Mr. Beecher could be accused of very well, and 
 some woman must be found to be made the partner in the 
 guilt, in the accusation, in the blasting prosecution, in the 
 infamy, in the wretchedness, of his prosecution; and if it 
 was a matter of indifference what woman was to be taken, 
 why should not a man give his own wife the preference? 
 True, there were these drawbacks about his wife; he knew 
 
THE IJEECTTER TRIAL 19 
 
 lier and slio knew him. He knew that she was as i)ure as 
 gold, that she was as chaste as snow, that she was as pious 
 as a saint, as loving to her husband as if she worshiped the 
 ground on which he trod, even when that ground was the 
 filthv mire in which she was fain to eat of the husks on which 
 the swine did feed. He knew that she adored her children; 
 that she loved every friend of his, because he or she was his 
 friend; that she loved all who needed aid and charity, and 
 sympathy, and were poor, and came from the highways and 
 hedges, because they were human and she was Christian. 
 All that he knew. He knows it now; he has sworn it hert'^ — 
 that she was, has been, and is as lovely a woman as human 
 nature and Divine grace can produce, and shall be hereafter 
 before the throne of God forever and forever. That he 
 knew; that he swore. But he had also sworn that he would 
 strike Mr. Beecher to the heart, for interfering with his 
 business interests, and taking part in his domestic discords 
 when brought to his notice — that he would pursue him to the 
 grave; and there was no means but this; and I suppose he 
 found his justification in poor Hamlet's bitter speech to poor 
 Ophelia: "And if thou marry I will give thee this plague 
 for thy do\\Ty: be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, 
 thou shall not escape calumny." 
 
 But Hamlet did not outrage human nature by saying that 
 she should not escape malicious calunmy from her own hus- 
 l)and that knew her goodness. 
 
 Now, Mr. Beecher, stripping off all impertinent traits for 
 this infjuiry, observing those proprieties which decline 
 unnecessarily to offer estinuites, however just, of great 
 u))ilities, great conduct, great life, great fame — let us look 
 at him, as the other inculjiated ])arty, as he stootl before the 
 accusation, as his character, his conduct, his repute, were 
 known by his neighbors, his fellow-citizens, the men, the 
 women, the children of Brooklyn. 
 
 In the first place, gentlenien, I shall receive your universal 
 
20 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and ready accord to the proposition that Mr. Beecher in this 
 community stood as a city set on a hill that cannot be hid, 
 and for twenty-five years had not removed the bounds of 
 his habitation, and had no opportunity of false and sudden 
 imposition upon strange communities who took rumor or 
 public report only for their estimate of hmi. Whatever he 
 was to the Christian world, whatever he was to Europe and 
 the United States, whatever he was to the Christian faith, 
 whatever he was to the moral schemes of our European and 
 American society, whatever he was to social and political 
 interests, all know and all understand that he was, to the 
 people of Brooklyn, a man about whom they had had as 
 many, as good, as sure, as prolonged tests of what he was as 
 it is possible in human affairs, unless one has the penetration 
 of the Divine inspection. All these tests Mr. Beecher had 
 been exposed to for the long period of his residence here. 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, you will find as we go on in this cause, and 
 as you take it up upon its facts and compare it with known 
 principles of human nature and human conduct, you will 
 find, at every stage of this business, that the attack is not 
 personal but against our society, against our morality, 
 against our religion. The attack is not that there are wolves 
 in sheep's clothing; that vicious men dissemble, and that 
 they hide themselves under the cloak of sanctity to prowl 
 on the society that they thus impose upon; that is not the 
 proposition ; that is not the issue that the Pantarch and the 
 priestess and the prophet of the new faith make. It is 
 that the favored, approved, tried, best results of this social 
 scheme of ours, which includes marriage, and of this re- 
 ligious faith of ours which adopts Christianity, is false to 
 the core; that the apostolic men and the saintly women 
 are delivered over to the lower indulgences; and that that 
 being proved, the scheme itself is discredited and ready 
 to be dissolved. It is that the good women, who remain 
 good afterwards, are good while they are committing 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 21 
 
 these faults; that the men tliat have every flower and fruit 
 of Christian love and Christian duty and Christian faith, 
 that are only greatest in our society because they are its 
 faithful, denying, unflinching servants of it in all things, that 
 they are wicked (if this be wicked), and that the only escape 
 from that conclusion is that the institutions of marriage and 
 religion as now constituted are themselves the responsible, 
 guilty causes of these alleged criminalities. 
 
 But, if Mr. Beecher was thus universally and absolutely 
 known in these his relations to your community, he was also 
 known in his person as a familiar and recognized object of 
 common knowledge — more, I will not say, than any man in 
 this city; but more than any man almost, by possibility, 
 in any community comes to be, among those who surround 
 hun. Mr. Beecher could never take a secret walk, or a secret 
 drive, or go in privacy to any photographic saloon or picture 
 gallery, to any place of assemblage, in any thoroughfare, 
 where, whether he knew anybody or not, there were not 
 eyes enough to see or ears enough to hear whatever he or she 
 could notice in his demeanor or his speech. Now, it is of 
 this man that this culpability with this woman, such as I 
 have described here, is alleged to occur here in the very scene 
 of their residence, and of this public observation to which I 
 have called your attention. I shall hereafter compare the 
 circumstances, the duration of the siege to this fortress and 
 of its possession, to see whether that comports any more 
 with these circumstances and situation of these ])arties than 
 the wicked character of the criminality does with their moral 
 and religious repute and conduct. 
 
 Now, who are the pursuers? These are the hunted parties, 
 Who are the pursuers? Mr. Tilton, Mr. Moulton and Mrs. 
 Moulton. The law gives the action only to the husband, 
 and ]Mr. Tilton is the plaintift"; but the combination, the 
 consultation, the plot, the scheme, the ])urpose, is but the 
 final stage of what has been the common ground of action of 
 
22 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Moulton and Tilton through the years of this transaction; 
 and Mrs. Moulton, in some sort cognizant of the operations 
 as they were going on, comes finally to choose the party, 
 whether she shall be counted with the pursued, or shall take 
 her stand with the pursuers, and she chooses the latter. A 
 great thing, a thing that no man can look at without pity, 
 that no man can estimate without charity; that no man can 
 find in his heart to carry to the account of personal fault or 
 even weakness more than is necessary when the common law 
 and the common experience of society has carried the blame 
 to the husband, and union with the husband, as covering 
 misfortune and the responsibility of the action. A mis- 
 fortune, a fate, which injunction of the Christian religion 
 attempted to secure women from when they were instructed 
 not to be yoked with unbelievers. "For what part hath he 
 that believeth with him that hath no belief." 
 
 But their sides are drawn; there the issue is made; and 
 now we are brought to consider what is the form and dimen- 
 sion of the guilt imputed. It is seduction, the seduction of 
 a married woman during the stage of life when she gives 
 children to her husband. Is there any greater crime than 
 that.^ Leave out the circumstances, if you please, of the 
 relation of the clergyman to his conmnmicants; leave out 
 the difference of age; leave out all the circumstances that 
 give heinousness to the crime from the paramour's relation 
 to his own family and his own wife, and take it as the act of 
 loose calculators upon the virtue of women, and put it even 
 against such a man as the crime that he has committed, is 
 there a greater crime? Is there a crime that is visited with 
 greater severity in the judgments of all moral, of all thought- 
 ful, of all kind men, whether they make pretensions to piety 
 or religion or not? 
 
 Ah ! gentlemen, this is the first clear discrimination that 
 you are to make between the accusation here and a general 
 imputation of sexual indulgence or sexual temptation which 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 23 
 
 has this or that degree of heinoiisness under its circuinstances, 
 and receives this or that degree of condemnation according 
 to the purity and the clearsightedness of the critics. But 
 this, the seduction of a virtuous, wise, discreet, child-bear- 
 ing mother in a happy and virtuous society, is a crime that 
 at least needs to be proved before people will admit that it 
 is probable. Ah ! if your honor please, dolus latet in gener- 
 alibus, it is when you have the abstract reasoning about 
 imaginary, undefined, immeasured crime that you can judge 
 at random whether a man would commit it or not. But 
 that is not what you are to do. You are to judge of this 
 crime, and are to solve in your minds when you come to test 
 the proofs, its compatibility with any pretensions of charac- 
 ter, of generosity, of charity, of pity, of love in the breast 
 that can compass the ruin of womankind. 
 
 Now, the plaintiff leaves no obscurity here; he has made 
 his charge. I will show you his reasons for making it as he 
 did. He thought he could commend it to probability by the 
 shape in which he worded it, for words are to him everything. 
 He has what is called an exchequer of words ; he banks upon 
 it, and never redeems any of them, and his stock as a banker 
 is inexhaustible. Or, to take another phrase from the same 
 master of language and of human nature, he is always able 
 to deliver a fine volley of words; but they are words, and I 
 don't know, according to the proverb, how many words it 
 takes to fill a bushel basket. Words which, if he can make 
 them dovetail together in sentences and syntax, and hover 
 long enough for him to close his lips and leave the stand, he 
 thinks will carry conviction ; but when I come to take up the 
 narrative of his accusation, if I don't show you that it never 
 came out of a woman's mouth to him, nor out of man's mouth 
 to Mr. Beecher, I will lose the case. I didn't, by a cross- 
 examination, seek to disturb one word of his own narrative, 
 which fills two columns of a newspaper. I knew when I 
 heard it all that the devil of lies had played the same trick 
 
24 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 with him that he always plays with his devotees. Their 
 falsehoods bring them into the accusation of the Divine in- 
 telligence, and the means it, by its mercy, has provided for 
 the moral government of the world, and then deliver over 
 the victims of the great temptation to the author of that 
 temptation, for the punishment which Divine justice pro- 
 vides for such cases. 
 
 Well, then, not only is this a seduction, but it is a seduc- 
 tion of many years meditation, prosecution, defeat, and final 
 triumph over a reluctant, weeping, unsympathizing, unre- 
 sponding partner of guilt. Well, is that a probable occupa- 
 tion of the time and mind and thoughts of the busiest man in 
 Brooklyn, the man whose energies are ever taxed in the open 
 day and before the eyes of all men to the uttermost, so that 
 the wonder is how one short life and one single energy can 
 pour out these fountains of spiritual life and gladness that 
 adorn this city with their freshness and flow over the whole 
 land? What becomes of all the maxims of human nature by 
 which we prevent evil by occupying with good? What be- 
 comes of Dr. Watts's familiar proposition that "Satan finds 
 some mischief still for idle hands to do?" What becomes 
 of the universal experience of society that these offenses 
 which do come and must come, however great the woe de- 
 nounced upon him by whom they come, that these offenses 
 are bred out of idleness and luxury and opportunity, and 
 allure men? Here again you have a feature of the accusa- 
 tion that flies right in the face of all the propositions by which 
 the idle and dissolute are always classed together, by which 
 the parent saves his son and protects his daughter by keep- 
 ing them out of the company of the idle, lest they, too, may 
 become dissolute. Why, if your honor please, gentlemen of 
 the jury, the intellectual traits that have framed this charge 
 are as contemptible as the moral, odious traits that have 
 prompted it. 
 
 Well, seduction, in its duration of four years, at last pro- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 25 
 
 duces adultery, and tliat continues for sixteen months. Well, 
 how great a crime that is! Within the sixtetMi months a 
 child is born. The nuiternal instinct of grief at the death of 
 the infant, and the maternal instinct of joy at a man-child 
 begotten during the period of adultery, begin and end this 
 domestic transaction. And what greater criminality is 
 there that can be framed for those, even if the odious features 
 of premeditated and ])rolonged seduction were excluded; 
 even if you found the parties involved by sudden tempta- 
 tion and by mutual attraction, and by overpowering pro- 
 pensities of evil; it is wicked, wicked as it can be, wicked in 
 heart, wicked in soul, wicked in hate to God, to society, to 
 human nature, wicked in everything. But all along there 
 attend hea\'^' shadows, deep stains of guilt, that give even 
 new horror to this terrible accusation, even if kept within the 
 sexual limits of fault. Impiety on both sides, blasphemy, 
 sacrilege, false witness, perjury — the whole decalogue is rent 
 asunder by a woman that is most lovely and most pure 
 throughout it all; and the man who has been through it all 
 and is now the greatest preacher of the Gospel of Love, the 
 greatest defender of the foundations of society, the greatest 
 cheerer and confirmer of the charities and beauties of the fam- 
 ily relation, the readiest advocate of everything that is good, 
 that is pure and of good report; a man that, when you ransack 
 his life by a cross-examination that entitled them to prove 
 against him corru])tions of any kind from In(liana])olis down, 
 goes from the stand unquestioned by audacious cross-ex- 
 aminers, who didn't hesitate to ask old Oliver Johnson 
 whether he didn't i)i(k out a strumpet in Canal Street and 
 take her to a bawdv-house in Mercer Street. 
 
 Now, you begin to see how, when a man begins by self- 
 worship as Tilton did — and which I will show you is the 
 source of all his woes — when he finds no greater than himself, 
 nothing that he can bow to with reverence and (icNotion — 
 when he finds that, he comes to the conclusion, almost nee- 
 
26 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 essarily, and it overmasters his conduct and his speech, 
 that he can impose his law of human action, his law of human 
 responsibility, his law of human duty, his tests of intellec- 
 tual fitness upon the rest of the world. And he then illus- 
 trates that short and pithy characterization of the quality 
 of folly and of its extreme duration: "The fool hath said in 
 his heart there is no God." There is no moral government 
 in this world that looks out for men. There is nothing that 
 keeps society together but constables and jails and hand- 
 cuffs. There is nothing that keeps virtue in women except 
 imprisonment in harems, and eunuchs for the matron's 
 care and duennas for the maiden's. This is the govern- 
 ment of the world that the doctrines and propositions 
 of this man's case must reduce you to; or else you must find 
 that while faith in human nature, and while humble de- 
 pendence upon Divine protection remain, as they now are, 
 the basis and the glory of our refined, free, yet virtuous and 
 strict society — so long as that relation of man to man, and 
 man to God continues — the features of this case, moral, intel- 
 lectual, and, as I shall show you hereafter, even circumstan- 
 tial, charge an impossible crime against impossible commis- 
 sion. 
 
 Recess of the Court 
 
 The incredibility of so flagrant and heinous an imputa- 
 tion upon two excellent people, as I am justified in pronounc- 
 ing both these parties, irrespective of the imputation under 
 consideration, was sought to be parried by this plaintiff, by 
 certain qualifying elements in their crime which approved 
 the act to the consciences of each. Well, there is another 
 blow, not at these individuals but at the schemes of morality, 
 of religion, of the theory of conscience and of duty. Make 
 it out once that good people can commit crimes and be good 
 in doing it, and in their consciences approving it, and in the 
 retrospect seeing no fault in it, and you have proved the first 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 27 
 
 tlarlin^ proposition of the wicked, that the distinction be- 
 tween evil and f^ood is mere matter of pretension and au- 
 thority. Ah! gentlemen, that is the final stage of dissolute 
 immorality in a man, in a city, in a comnuniity. When you 
 have reached that stage you have ex])osed yourself to that 
 final woe denounced in the Scri])tures, "Woe to him that 
 calls evil good, and good evil." Why woe to him? Why, 
 he insults the very majesty of heaven, he strikes at the very 
 authority of the moral governor of the world. Good men 
 may do wicked things; had men may do good things; but woe 
 to him that draws out of those instances and experiences of 
 human nature the final insult to the Deity, that there is no 
 distinction between good and evil. How can you renovate 
 society that adopts that i)roposition? How can you redeem 
 an individual soul that ado])ts that proposition? 
 
 Now, they say that this lady never did anything wrong 
 that she thought wrong at the time; never did anything — 
 Elizabeth never did — that her conscience did not approve. 
 She was always ])ure-minded; she hadn't a carnal inclination 
 in her frame; she didn't think she had violated her marriage 
 vows, and never discovered that she had connnitted an in- 
 jury to her husbaml until she read a novel, in which there 
 was no violation of marriage vow, and no adultery, and no 
 carnal sin of any kind, but an undue entanglement of the 
 affections for a priest, and an interference with the supreme 
 devotion to her husband in the management by the wife of 
 the household. Now, that is her notion of guilt laid down 
 to her by her husband; her charac-ter now, after the act, as 
 well as during the act, and before the act; and she is a wo- 
 man of strong intellect, an admirable, and a truthful critic, 
 accustomed to the best intellectual society; not frivolous 
 and weak, not valuing men for their earthly distinctions, 
 but for their high moral and intellectual characters; conde- 
 scending to those of low estate; saving women at the Bethel 
 by the hundreds from debauchery and vice; bringing her 
 
28 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 sheaves full of them to the Judgment Seat, that she has 
 saved. Her husband did her the honor to think that she was 
 still engaged in that Christian service at the moment he was 
 giving his evidence. 
 
 And then Mr. Beecher, he felt that if he had fallen — if he 
 had fallen at all, as Mr. Moulton puts it in a single passage 
 I shall call your attention to critically — he thanked God, at 
 least, that he had not sinned through lust; it was nothing 
 but love^ — beautiful, chaste, elevating, purifying, solacing 
 love; and if there had been any sexual intercourse between 
 them, it was merely circumstantial, as it were — a mere em- 
 phasized touch of the hand and kiss of the lips — making 
 their benevolence and good still more penetrating to the soul, 
 more grateful to God. And then it was such a solace and 
 a food to his mind, as Mr. Tilton reports it, and such a 
 strength to him in his labors for the conversion of sinners! 
 Well, he was an intellectual man. Tilton had at one time 
 thought he was a man of great intellect, greater even than 
 his own, but he had outlived that; but still his strength was 
 in his great moral qualities. There he was unsurpassed and 
 unsurpassable; there was his hold upon his worshippers; 
 that is what led them from the true admiration of the greater 
 intellect of Mr. Tilton. These great and warm sympathies 
 with mankind, this magnanimity, this generosity, this boyish 
 candor, and warmth and recklessness, — this was what made 
 Mr. Beecher greater than Greeley, and Sumner, and Tilton. 
 Well, now, you see, you add one thing more to make this 
 adultery, that was without lust on either side, and that was 
 this union between a saintly woman and an apostolic man, 
 without the least earthly sentiment, which has sometimes 
 been supposed to infect marriages a little. All you needed 
 was to give the sanction of religion and prayer to it, make 
 it, so to speak, a sacramental adultery, in the presence of 
 God and the holy angels, introduced by prayer and termin- 
 ated by prayer. 
 
THE BEECHER TRUL 29 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, look at the folly of the weaving of this 
 brain, that could expect his charge of adultery to be believed, 
 expect his charge of adultery to cease to be incredible, only 
 by the adultery being made immaculate, — cease to be a 
 violation of conscience only by its being a glorious exhibition 
 of the power of human love; and I shall show you hereafter 
 that thev could onlv make the connection and intercourse 
 j)Ossible by being allowed to dispense with all proof that it 
 ever occurred, or was legally demonstrable and by throwing 
 down all the rules of evidence, that deny hospitality to 
 charges of this nature. 
 
 Adultery, gentlemen, is a thing that touches the institu- 
 tion of marriage, and no consenting testimony of confessions 
 ever can break the bond. Children, and children's children 
 are interested, that their fortunes and their future shall not 
 be contaminated and despoiled by the vice in respect of 
 truthfulness of any of their ancestors. There must be a 
 proof as against them, binding on them, by people who saw 
 the conduct, the action, the communion, the opportunity, 
 the security, the subsequent evidence of the occurrence; and 
 then a court, and then a jury find that a fact has occurred 
 to which the law im])utes the consequences of the dissolution 
 of the marriage bond; and though it sheds a tear over the 
 innocent that are to suffer, it is a part of that moral govern- 
 ment of the world intended to secure obedience, to compel 
 regard for children, for those we love, the law that if the 
 father eats sour grapes the children's teeth shall be set on 
 edge. And didn't this woman know tliat.^ And didn't this 
 preacher know that? 
 
 Now, what is an occurrence that is against all human 
 experience, and all natural laws, whether physical, or mental, 
 or moral? Why, it is a miracle; that is what it is. That is 
 the definition of a miracle. So this is a miraculous adultery, 
 the like of which is described in none of the histories, nor the 
 symj)toms of it given in any of the philosophies. Nobody can 
 
30 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 guard against this kind of adultery coming into their families, 
 because it comes with the purest and best, who remain pure 
 and best all the while it is happening and after it is over. 
 
 Well, miracles need a good deal of testimony. That is 
 agreed, I think, from the beginning. Some writers thought 
 that no amount of testimony could prove a miracle, because 
 it accorded with human experience that man would lie, and 
 did not accord with human experience that miracles would 
 happen. Still that is dangerous ground. All agree though, 
 that for belief in a miracle, you must have good testimony, 
 enough of it, from pure lips, honest hearts, intelligent obser- 
 vation; and when men have laid down their lives on that 
 testimony, been torn by wild beasts, been roasted at the fires 
 of martyrdom, pierced with arrows, slain in defense of their 
 testimony and the truth, it is a miracle that men should go 
 through the act, unless they testified to truth, and we believe 
 their evidence. 
 
 Now, Ridentem discere verum quid vetai? We may some- 
 times illustrate truth with amusement. Not very long ago 
 Punch had a very pleasant colloquy and cartoon, giving a 
 conversation between a ritualistic curate of the English 
 Church and a Sunday-school boy, on the subject of miracles. 
 "My boy," says the clergyman, "what is a miracle?" and 
 the boy answered correctly, the first time, that he didn't 
 know. "Well, my lad, if you should wake up in the middle 
 of the night and see the sun shining, what would you say 
 that was? " Says the boy, " I should say it was the moon. " 
 "Well, but supposing a man should tell you that it was the 
 sun, what would you say then?" Says the boy, "I should 
 say he Hed." Well, with dignity and emotion, the curate 
 proceeds: "Suppose I, that never tell a lie, should say to you 
 that it was the sun, what should you say then?" "I should 
 say that you were drunk. " Well, now, that shows how hard 
 it is to prove a miracle. 
 
 Well, now, here we have a blazing sun of adultery in the 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 31 
 
 serene, religious light of the most saintly characters, testified 
 to by witnesses; and if you were asked, under these moral 
 conditions of miracles, what criticism would be made upon 
 the statement that this blazing sun of adultery was flaming 
 out of the very heavens of religious i)urity, what would you 
 say? Why, you would say that it was the moon, that noth- 
 ing inconsistent with chastity and purity could display itself 
 out of those heavens. Ah! but if Mr. Tilton comes along 
 and says: "But if /, Sir Marmaduke,* the husband of this 
 pious wife, the friend of this apostolic clergyman — if I say 
 to you that it is the blazing sun of adultery, what would you 
 say then?" I think you would say that he lied. And if 
 Mr. Moulton, Sir Philip Sidney, that never told a lie, if he 
 should say: "But if I, on the honor of Sir Philip Sidney and 
 my own combined, 7 say it is a blazing sun of adultery" — 
 you would say that he was drunk. But Punch's catechism 
 has given out, and we have another witness: "I, the wife ot 
 Sir Philip Sidney, I, the communicant of Henry Ward Beecher 
 the sisterly friend of Mrs. Tilton, I say it is the blazing sun 
 of adultery out of these pure heavens." What would you 
 say to that? Well, politeness, even in a boy, would make 
 him hesitate, but I think he would have to say (for he would 
 not give in to the miracle) — he would say, "Well, madam, I 
 think you must have been sunstruck and don't know the 
 moon from the sun." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is no greater contrariety in the prop- 
 ositions of the natural miracle and the sense of the boy thus 
 illustrated by a humorous story, than the contrariety be- 
 tween the firmament of the moral authoritv of this world, 
 fixed by the same Divine hand that set the courses of the 
 
 * In the course of llie trial there was read in eviilent-e a poem written and pul)- 
 lished by Mr. Tilton, entitled "Sir Marniaduke'.s Musings." Mr. Tilton testified 
 on Cross-examination that some of the sentiments expressed in these verses had 
 refereuc*' to his own experience in life. In answer to a (juesl'oii put lo him on Cross- 
 exaniiualion Mr. Tilton iiad said, "I think that Francis 1). .Moulton is the sncc-essor 
 of Sir I'hilip Sidney in all that is honorable, manly and magnilicenl in friendship." 
 
32 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 stars and divided the day and the night between the sun and 
 the moon, and the accusation here made by this plaintiff. 
 It is discriminated by as firm Hues as this natural arrange- 
 ment of the skies — just as impossible of derangement. What 
 is demanded from our belief is just as much a final and fatal 
 disorder as this transposition of the sun and the moon in 
 their natural reigns, as fixed by the Author of this material 
 frame on which we live. Nay more, He who made these 
 moral divisions meant that they should be more permanent 
 than the physical frame, for He said: "The heavens and the 
 earth shall pass away, but not one jot or tittle of my law shall 
 fail. " Now, that is a respectable authority, and the date of 
 the continuance of that law, and of responsibility under it, 
 is so remote that it is not worth our while to run our heads 
 against it. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, whenever you establish the proposition 
 that these breaches of external morality that threaten the 
 very fabric of society, the central point, the purity of the 
 family, can occur without preliminary moral degradation 
 and preparation — without being accompanied by any inflam- 
 mation of the low desires and the triumph of the flesh over 
 the spirit — can be practiced with the maintenance of all the 
 active benevolences and the exhibition of all the beautiful 
 virtues of life, you have struck a blow, not at Mr. Beecher, 
 not at Mrs. Tilton, but at your own wives and your own 
 daughters. Why do you rear them in the distinction be- 
 tween the wise and the foolish virgins, if the wise virgins, 
 with their lamps trimmed and burning, are to be left in the 
 outer darkness, and the wedding feast closed against them? 
 Why do you look at the growing beauty of face and form, 
 and feel safe? Because you observe and trust an equal 
 flowering of the immortal spirit, and find that her mother's 
 virtue shows itself in every disposition of the beautiful 
 maiden; that she loves charity, seeks the lowly, teaches the 
 ignorant, saves the abandoned, loves her father, loves her 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 33 
 
 mother, loves her brothers, loves her sisters, has her hands 
 full through days of constant and painful labors ai)i)ropriate 
 to her sex and condition, sleeps at night upon a pillow pre- 
 pared by prayer, and watched over by Him to whom the 
 prayer was addressed. What are all these things to you if 
 it is demonstrated bv the verdict in this trial that there is 
 no connection between the moral nature and the lewd, wicked 
 low, base prostitution of the body? And what do you think 
 of your wives, if this is so, as you have watched them through 
 fifteen years of marriage and of duty and found them to be 
 (as you knew them to be when you clasped hands with them 
 at the altar) pure, noble, intelligent, discreet, wise virgins as 
 you espoused them, and have found that they loved their 
 husbands to idolatry, loved their children with a devotion for 
 which there is no epithet and no comparison? Who ever 
 heard an illustration of a mother's love? Nobody can give 
 an equivalent for that. How often have other forms of hu- 
 man affection been dignified by comparing them in power 
 and intensity to a mother's love! But you find nothing to 
 compare a mother's love to; it is a prepossession that fills the 
 heart, satisfies the mind, shows to the widest experience that 
 there is nothing can be placed above it to illustrate it. 
 
 If with all this, and with your daily observation of the 
 course of life, the coming in and the going out of a woman, 
 the correspondence day by day during your absences, you 
 find out, some 4th of July morning, that a course of tempta- 
 tion, of solicitation, of coarse and vulgar contact with the 
 body, has prepared the way to a final adultery that has con- 
 tinued for sixteen months, would you not lose your faith in 
 religion, your faith in women, your faith in society, your faith 
 in human nature? Why, all the while it may be going on in 
 all our families, and nobody knows anything about it. What, 
 shall we then discard all this, shall we believe that these sins 
 come only by power against which no morality can guard, 
 that there is no necessary connection between character and 
 
34 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 conduct; that these sins do not come from within, but that 
 with all this purity they may arise? Character and fate, 
 the opinion of society all crush you and your family. What 
 will you believe? These idle and frivolous suggestions made 
 by the oaths of Mr. Tilton and of Mr. Moulton, or will you 
 look to higher authority? 
 
 Now, there was once a great authority in this world whose 
 brief sojourn in the flesh changed the nature of the world 
 and laid the foundations of that religion which we all profess, 
 and has redeemed man as an individual, raising him to glory 
 ever since, and has redeemed society from the vicious influ- 
 ences with which heathenism corrupted it, and raised it to its 
 present elevation. It was said of Him that he needed not, 
 as we all need, as you need — that He needed not that man 
 should testify of man, for He knew what was in man. Now, 
 what does he say on this subject? "For from within, out 
 of the heart of man proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, forni- 
 cations, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, 
 lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness; all 
 these come from within and defile a man." And that is the 
 basis on which you rest the Christian education which is to 
 preserve the chastity of your beautiful daughter against all 
 allurements and temptations, and you watch to see whether 
 in her conduct you find any beginning of uncertain steps out- 
 side the way in which she should go, and if you do not, but 
 find that all her steps are firm in the paths of the Gospel, you 
 have no fears. 
 
 Now, it did not use to be so with women or with men. 
 Are we to discard this life-giving, purifying, elevating senti- 
 ment on which our society has rested so well and so long, 
 which is to be extended by the benevolent labors of our mis- 
 sionaries and the generous contributions of all Christians of 
 all creeds, for the help of a sinking world? Are we to aban- 
 don these and go back to the old system of physical security? 
 I should think not. I would like to see the men that would 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 35 
 
 look tlicir wives and daughters in the face and tell them they 
 must go back to the tluennas for the maidens and to the 
 harem for the married women. And, as we are not princes, 
 and have no system in our equal society by which the fair 
 and the beautiful are crowded into the possession of the 
 princes and nobles of the world, whenever we undertake to 
 lose our faith in religion and virtue, in the equality and the 
 purity of women, we shall have to adopt some of those as- 
 sociated forms of protection by which combined efiforts may 
 furnish adequate security. We shall have to have a Wife 
 Deposit Company, where we can leave our wives during the 
 day, and we shall have to have some patent contrivance of 
 paramour-proof alarms by which we can be called to the res- 
 cue when the insidious undermining of this external virtue 
 (for there is nothing left in the world but external virtue) 
 begins. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this being the character of the crime, 
 and this being the dis])osition, conduct in general and repute 
 of the accused parties, let us see what the law requires to 
 meet its exactions in reference to such a suit as this. 
 
 And first, what is the nature of the suit ? It is what is called, 
 for shortness, a crim. con. action, by which an injured husband 
 is allowed to seek a verdict of the jury, and as a consequent 
 upon it, pecuniary damages for the invasion of his family, 
 the sacrifice of the purity of his wife, and the destruction of 
 the happiness of his household. The action is an anomaly 
 offensive to our civilization, and grew up only from a peculiar 
 condition of the English law in respect to divorce. Adher- 
 ing to the strictness of the Romish Church, which made 
 marriage a sacrament, and allowed it never to be terminated 
 except by the highest religious dispensation, the English 
 Church, the English nation, maintained the indissolubility 
 of the marriage relation for any cause except adultery, the 
 highest power in the country being the judge of that; in other 
 words, an act of Parliament being necessary for the dissolu- 
 
36 SPEECHES OF \\1LLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion, as the fiat of the Pope had been, while he remained the 
 spiritual head of all Europe. 
 
 Now, Parliament would grant this dissolution only for 
 adultery, and it would require the proof of that adultery, not 
 to be made in affidavits and depositions, confessions and 
 concurrence of wish and agreement, and failing to have it 
 wrought but by public trial through the authentic and trust- 
 worthy mode of determining questions of fact by the verdict 
 of a jury in a hostile, not collusive, suit, in which the husband 
 should have the means of drawing an adverse party, the 
 paramour, into the contestation. Then the rules of law, if 
 your honor please, in maintenance of this great policy of 
 society that there should be an open proof in fact, and not 
 by confessions of the act, upon which the marriage tie could 
 be dissolved and the family dispersed, maintained the prop- 
 osition that confessions alone were not adequate for the 
 maintenance of the issue; that the validity, that the security, 
 that the purity of the marriage relation, and its maintenance 
 in good credit, as an example to the rest, should not permit 
 of any destruction of it except by proof of the fact. 
 
 Now, the nature of the act being secret, and the more ele- 
 vated and civilized the society the more secret, proof of the 
 actual, final guilty contact, as of the body of the crime, was not 
 required, but proof of the body of the crime was required, proof 
 of conduct, proof of disposition, proof of adulterous purposes, 
 proof of entangled affections of sexual purpose, proof of open 
 or discovered behavior of some kind that showed the surren- 
 der of lustful desire and the prosecution of the purpose of its 
 indulgence, proof of the opportunity, by companionship, 
 drawing them away from virtuous and honest haunts and 
 scenes into relations which themselves carried imputation of 
 unlawful purpose, and of such length as gave opportunity, 
 and under such circumstances of supposed security as ren- 
 dered it justly a conclusion that the adulterous purposes that 
 had been manifested by previous external conduct and the 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 37 
 
 withdrawal from tlie paths of innocent and open companion- 
 ship into this or that situation foreign to the natural and 
 moral relations — following that, I say, opjiortunity of per- 
 sonal contact, with security, or opinion of security, were 
 adequate substitutes, or adequate methods of proof of the 
 body of the crime. It is a mistake to say that the body of the 
 crime is not required to be proved, in the same sense that the 
 body of the crime is required to be proved in all matters of ju- 
 dicial condemnation. The distinction is that from the 
 peculiar nature of the guilty act, the facts and circumstances 
 of external proof shall be of that consistency and force and un- 
 doubtful conclusion as carry the secret act as the consequence 
 of what has been openly seen and proved. 
 
 Now, these are the requirements of our law. These facts 
 thus proved, accompanjn'ng or supporting confessions — that 
 is, confessions of the party implicated in the suit (for con- 
 fessions of one party do not affect or conclude in the least 
 another) may make out an adequate ground for a verdict, 
 provided it is made manifest to the concurrent judgment of 
 all the jurymen that the things proved are not reasonably 
 compatible with any other conclusion than that of guilt. 
 Society, law, abhors this conclusion, and refrains from it 
 except when, bej^ond all reasonable doubt, and in the vary- 
 ing minds of twelve independent, honest men no other result 
 can be reached. jVIore than in any other case the law fears 
 here to strike in the dark. It has made one great concession, 
 that the mere fact need not be proved, if you prove the ap- 
 proaches to the act by ocular witnesses. Beyond that con- 
 cession it will not go; more than in all other issues of fact, 
 it is striking the absent and the innocent; it is injuring society 
 by aspersing and discouraging the institution of marriage; it 
 is unsettling the faith of man in woman, and of woman in 
 man; of parents in children, and of children in parents; and 
 the law will not strike the blow in the dark. More than in 
 any other case is the feeling of our humane law predominant; 
 
38 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 that it is better that ten cases of guilt should pass unpunished 
 than that one of innocence should be condemned. In other 
 cases the conviction of the innocent touches mainly him or 
 her, but in this case it strikes the absent, and the infants, 
 and wounds society in its tenderest point. 
 
 Now, in this country this action has never had any respect- 
 ability about it. Why.'* Because the basis that made it 
 respectable in England was wanting: that is, in England it 
 was a necessary step in the vindication of the husband's 
 right to have a divorce from the guilty wife. The method 
 of their law had provided this means of an open and adverse 
 trial, but in our country, in our State, divorce has always been 
 obtainable, not on any lighter cause than adultery, but upon 
 an issue framed in an equity court, in which the husband 
 and the wife themselves were parties, and the trial was be- 
 tween them, the man and the woman, and no crim. con. was 
 necessary. And honest men never had a desire to promulgate 
 their shame, their wives' shame, their children's blight. It was 
 only in the lower orders of society, where there was always a 
 suspicion of speculation and money seeking, that this action 
 found any hold in this American society. And it has at- 
 tracted the notice of political, moral, and religious thinkers in 
 England why it was that these were felt to be most discred- 
 itable actions, no matter what their result or their justifica- 
 tion in fact, and were wholly discarded in America, and they 
 found out the reason, and they now have opened their courts 
 of probate and divorce, equivalent to our equity jurisdiction, 
 to try the direct issue between husband and wife for a di- 
 vorce. And what have they done? They have said to these 
 parties, "If you don't want a divorce you can't have any 
 action for crim. con.', that is abolished. If you do want a 
 divorce you may also pursue the guilty paramour by joining 
 him in the suit, and if you establish your right to a divorce 
 you may have, as a consequence, a just judgment against 
 him in the way of punitive damages, but the money shall be 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 89 
 
 secured to the wife as long as she remains penitent and chaste." 
 Now, that, tliat is tlie treatment of the question that belongs 
 to an intelligent, moral community; and I look, as a conse- 
 quence of this suit, so rare in our ex])erience, to see our Leg- 
 islature ])urify our law and our courts in the same way. 
 
 Now, look you, a husband, although he has a guilty wife, 
 cannot get a divorce from her either in England or here, if 
 he is also a guilty husband, and he cannot ])ursue the para- 
 mour in England for debauching his wife unless he can get a 
 divorce from the wife; and therefore a guilty husband 
 does not find any encouragement for com])lainiug that his 
 wife has done an injury to him. Again, the law of divorce 
 has always been pure. It has said, and insisted upon it, 
 "We will allow no speculation on this subject at all, not an 
 instant of it. If you become possessed of knowledge of your 
 wife's guilt, then show your respect for the purity of mar- 
 riage, show your respect for yourself and your owti virtue, 
 show your vindication of the institution of marriage by re- 
 sorting openly to the law for relief; but if, from pity, or from 
 love, or from lust, you keep possession of the wife, one kiss 
 after your knowledge closes your com])laint. Condonation, 
 by which a husband advised of the injury to his marriage-bed 
 continues to cohabit with his wife, ends that business, and, 
 it is supposed, keeps that secret." 
 
 So you see, gentlemen, that there was not much basis for 
 an action of divorce on the part of this plaintiff against ]Mrs. 
 Tilton on anv view of the facts of her conduct. lie heard, 
 it is said, a very long and minute narrative, turned over in 
 the bed and kissed his wife; she became ])regnant, and 
 he lived with her four years. Now, gentlemen, nobody 
 ever brought a narrative of that kind into a court of justice 
 since the world began until now, never — I mean among civi- 
 lized and cultivated people. 
 
 Something has been said about the epithets that have been 
 applied to the parties and their coadjutors in this j)rosecu- 
 
40 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion. Well, now, epithets spring from a generalization of 
 facts, and never can be made until there has been a some- 
 what frequent or repetitious occurrence of the facts, in order 
 to get a generalization out of them. There is not an epithet 
 for this conduct whatever, for there has never been any other 
 instance of it. Never! Never! 
 
 But aside from that, gentlemen, I should not think of 
 bringing epithets to Brooklyn from New York, for a good 
 deal of trouble, I think, has come from these extravagant 
 epithets that the Brooklyn people use. They are very 
 strong, and I think really the best test for the public safety 
 that can be applied to our bridge between the two cities, 
 whenever it is completed, will be to send over a preliminary 
 train loaded with Brooklyn epithets. If the bridge can stand 
 that, it will bear any burden. But seriously, conduct like 
 that of this plaintiff upon his own showing (and no man can 
 complain of being judged out of his own mouth) is not in need 
 of any characterization. As Junius said once, with the pith 
 that characterized him, such a character as this plaintiff's 
 can escape censure only when it escapes observation. Now, 
 it may not be pleasant; men do not like — always like — to lie 
 in the bed that they have made for themselves, and they 
 sometimes, most unseasonably and at great inconvenience to 
 others, try to find a softer bed. But alas! in the search that 
 this plaintiff may make to get out of this uneasy bed in which 
 he lies, he has not the sympathizing follower with a pillow 
 behind him that he had on those other occasions.* 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if there had been no question in this case 
 affecting a great character, in which there was enlisted the 
 interest of every honest man and woman in Brooklyn, in the 
 United States, in Christendom — I mean Mr. Beecher — if 
 the fact of his purity had not been the fundamental fact in 
 
 * Reference is here made to an incident in Mr. Tilton's house testified to by one 
 of the household. The witness described one night when Mr. Tilton, followed by 
 Mrs. Tilton, carrying a pillow, occupied in succession the several bedrooms in the 
 house. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 41 
 
 this case, but tlie question iia<l been, as it miglit have been, 
 between Mr. Tilton and one of his neighbors of an equal 
 importance in society, between neigliborin*? farmers, or mer- 
 chants, or lawyers, however rei)utable and dear to them 
 their credit was, if a plaintiff, against such a defendant, had 
 brought a suit of this kind, the jury would not have sat five 
 months, one month, one week, one day, upon his case. They 
 would have said: "Well, if you could be so cool and quiet, 
 so generous and forgiving, so amicable in intercourse with 
 the adulterer, and receive so many aids and favors from 
 him, and above all if you could live with your wife four years, 
 we do not see any good reasons why we should trouble our- 
 selves much about your misfortunes; you have been tolerably 
 patient under them, and we guess in the long run it will be 
 just as well for you and Elizabeth and the children that you 
 should go on as you have begun, to the end." The plaintiff 
 would be laughed out of court, and he would not have had as 
 uncomfortable a record for the public in that short disposi- 
 tion of the case as the five months' protraction of your pa- 
 tience and of your indulgence has made for him here. Now, 
 our learned friends understood this perfectljs and the odious- 
 ness of tacking a money verdict on to this action of this 
 husband against this defendant, in respect to this disturb- 
 ance of his peace, if it were all believed, was so apparent 
 that they early disdained that. Some more noble passion 
 than the acquisition of gain after this long patience was nec- 
 essary, and my learned friends have found it in that very 
 mild and creditable Christian virtue, revenge. This is their 
 language — not for money, but revenge. 
 
 Well I never knew a jury that would like to be made an 
 instrument of revenge. If they were to heal an honest 
 man's injury, they would do it; but to help him to a revenge- 
 ful assault upon another is not creditable. We pardon even 
 the savageness of an enemy that, under ])rovocation, takes 
 vengeance in his own hands; but we do not pardon much 
 
42 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 • 
 
 men who lend thenselves as instruments to the vengeance of 
 injured parties — not much. If a man shoots an enemy for 
 a great injury, sometimes he escapes condemnation when 
 strictness of law would take his life; but I think that if he 
 hires another man to murder his enemy, the hired assassin 
 is not considered an institution of society whose neck is to 
 be saved from the gallows. So here, if vengeance, if injury, 
 if destruction is the whole motive and purpose of this suit, 
 you will not lend yourselves to it. And you will understand 
 that this is an issue in which the question is whether Mr. 
 Beecher, who stood for this whole country in the height and 
 extremity of our perils and disasters against all England, and 
 stood alone, and faced the frowns and jeers and "cat-calls" 
 and "chaff" of great crowds of English gentlemen of the 
 better classes, and faced them dowTi in the name of the United 
 States, who stood alone in England, and aroused, encouraged, 
 developed, and amassed a power in our favor that no single 
 mind or voice ever did since the world began — whether he is 
 of that base, low, coarse, lewd fibre of soul and grossness of 
 body that will enable this aristocracy of England to return 
 the triumph they have had to submit to by saying, "You 
 sent us the noblest, strongest, most courageous, most ade- 
 quate man, and subdued us, but you have discovered that 
 his courage was not of the soul of purity from love, from faith, 
 from duty, but the mere effrontery of a voluptuary and an 
 adulterer. " 
 
 Whether you are to say by your verdict of this man, who, 
 ever since this trial has been progressing, has sat in your 
 presence, of whom every stranger, humble or famous, that 
 has visited the court-room during the trial has desired the 
 acquaintance, the grasp of his hand, the recognition of his 
 autograph, the knowledge of his person as a man, that not 
 only they but you and all men should exclude him from com- 
 panionship — for, I repeat, however lightly, however care- 
 lessly, however grossly people may talk about different forms 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 43 
 
 • 
 
 of incontinence and irregularity, nobody can qualify, nobody 
 cantoleratea ])renieditated and persistent seduction of a mar- 
 ried woman, and a continuous defilement of the marriage bed. 
 Ah! gentlemen, we must look this crime in its face. Why, 
 there is not a sailor in AYapj^ing, with a strumpet on either 
 knee, badgered and beaten in the debauches of long voyages 
 and fre(iuent ])orts, but that, if a comrade should venture to 
 suggest to him that he had seduced the daughter of an old 
 shipmate, or the wife of a young comrade, he would bury his 
 sheath-knife in the heart of his accuser. There has never 
 been a coarse and vulgar debauchee voluptuary, that would 
 flaunt his wealth and his vices in the face of our citizens here 
 or in New York, and ride the four-in-hand of his new riches 
 packed with courtesans, but who, if one of his boon compan- 
 ions should accuse him of seducing the companion of his 
 daughter, the wife of his friend who had been trusted to his 
 care — but who would send a bullet through the heart of his 
 accuser. No, there are no coarse and vulgar voluptuaries, 
 however lightly they may deal with incontinence, and how- 
 ever much they feel at liberty to poach on the manors that 
 are not confided to their care, that either in practice or ac- 
 cusation will tolerate any such charge as this that you are 
 asked to find by your verdict against ]Mr. Beecher. And 
 your verdict for six cents finds it as much as if it was for $100,- 
 000. This is not a case in which, as in some of these libel 
 suits, they don't want to hold that any editor has kept within 
 the bounds of politeness, and they don't want to show that 
 the plaintiff's character was worth nothing. No, no; the 
 issue is a vital one; your verdict is for the plaintiff or for the 
 defendant. It passes upon this issue. There is not any 
 other crime with which he is charged. There are no ciualify- 
 ing circumstances about it. If he is not guilty of all that I 
 have described to you, he is not guilty of anything. That 
 is the i)lainli{f's own figuring of the dimensions, the inci- 
 dents, iht' traits of the crime. 
 
44 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 We may consider ourselves prepared now to look at the 
 question of circumstantial evidence, which may be very 
 briefly disposed of. Now, what is circumstantial evidence? 
 It is the evidence of direct witnesses to certain facts, which 
 are thus directly proved, and from which, as definitely and 
 accurately ascertained, you infer, within legitimate prin- 
 ciples of reasoning, and by test of common sense, that what 
 is alleged as the necessary conclusion from them is such 
 necessary conclusion. I refer, if your Honor please, to an 
 authority in our Court of Appeals: the case of the People 
 vs. Bennett (N. Y. R., vol. 49, p. 144). The principles of 
 circumstantial evidence — 
 
 In determining a question of fact from circumstantial evidence, 
 there are two general rules to be observed: (1) The hypothesis of 
 delinquency or guilt should flow naturally from the facts .proved, 
 and be consistent with them all. (2) The evidence must be such as 
 to exclude to a moral certainty every hypothesis but that of his 
 guilt of the offense imputed to him; or, in other words, the 'facts 
 proved must all be consistent with, and point to his guilt not only, 
 but they must be inconsistent with his innocence. 
 
 Accordingly, in reference to a case of this kind, where 
 under circumstances of lewd intercourse, parties at a tavern, 
 much more at a brothel, are found to be shut up in the same 
 room, locked or otherwise secured; and the preliminaries 
 have been shown of engaged affections, of lewd desires, 
 adulterous purpose; why, there is circumstantial evidence 
 which justifies a conclusion that in this security, and these 
 circumstances of seclusion, the act of adultery may have oc- 
 curred, must have occurred. All these things are to be 
 guarded. The cases are very careful about even such circum- 
 stances. But all agree, as indeed common sense agrees, that 
 when there is no circumstantial evidence by extraneous wit- 
 nesses, of ear or eye, of such relations, either tending to or 
 presuming the act which makes the guilt, or afterwards which 
 confirms the character of the supposed act by subsequent 
 
THE BEECHER TRIM. 45 
 
 lewdness and attempts to commit the act — where no evidence 
 of that kind is present, that is the end of circumstantial 
 evidence. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the i^laintiff has not failed to })resent 
 proofs that shoukl carry some conclusion of guilt from any 
 want of research. He tlidn't hesitate to i)ut the power of 
 the law u])on Joseph Richards to make him come here and 
 regret that he could not give you any valual)le information. 
 He did not hesitate, in his searching, when he brought from 
 the wards of a pauper hospital a lying, drunken woman to 
 say that she heard Mr. Beecher say to Elizabeth Tilton: 
 "How do you feel.'^" and she replied: "Dear father," or 
 "father, dear, so, so." Well, I don't know — I should think 
 "so, so," at best, was an indifl'erent sort of feeling as com- 
 patible with a variety of things besides adultery. They 
 don't reject trivial testimom', because they brought Brasher 
 to testify that, as he was going fishing along one of the pub- 
 lic streets, between 7 and 8 o'clock in the morning, when the 
 sun was shining bright, he saw — would you believe it.'* — 
 in open day, as the approximate act of adultery, Mr. Beecher 
 standing on the doorsteps, having pulled the bell, and wait- 
 ing for somebody to come to him. 
 
 Now, this matter of Brasher — who was a well-known 
 gentleman, whose whole demeanor on the stand before you 
 is a very good illustration of the perseverance, intrepidity, 
 and indefatigaV)lcncss of our friend, Judge Morris, in search- 
 ing for evidence. Now, ^Ir. Brasher was a man who was 
 well known to be very fond of fishing, and so fond of fish- 
 ing, that when the tide served, no matter what hour of 
 nigiit it was, he was very likely to go a-fishing, and so 
 he sometimes went at 2 o'clock in the morning, 3 o'clock 
 in the morning, 4 o'clock in the morning. Now, there 
 goes around a story in Brooklyn that Mr. Brasher saw 
 Mr. Beecher, either in coming out of or going in at 
 Mrs. Tilton's house, when he was going fishing. Well, 
 
46 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 now, there is something — Beecher going there at 2 o'clock 
 in the morning, coming away at 2 o'clock in the morning — 
 still more extraordinary. Either way about the same thing. 
 Brasher is summoned as a witness here, with an immense 
 flourish. He didn't know what he was to prove; he never 
 saw what he had to do with it; but he had seen Mr. Beecher 
 at that doorstep when he was going fishing, but the difficulty 
 is, if the tide served, he went fishing at all hours. He would 
 as lieve go fishing at 8 o'clock as at 2; I think he would 
 rather, and the only morning on which he had seen Mr. 
 Beecher in any vicinity to this doorstep was the morning 
 when the tide served at 8 o'clock, and not at 2 o'clock, when 
 he was going fishing. Now, you, of course, saw the predica- 
 ment of our learned friend, if I may call him so, when this 
 capsheaf of circumstantial evidence, approximate act of un- 
 seasonable hour, of midnight prowling, scaling the walls that 
 inclosed this beauty, and Brasher saying that at 8 o'clock 
 he saw him standing there, that he remained there still 
 while Brasher passed by, and showed conclusively that he 
 was not coming away, and was waiting for the bell to be 
 answered. Well, if he had been coming away it would not 
 have been much; and what is more, there was not any 
 evidence that Mrs. Tilton was in the house, or that Mr. 
 Tilton was not in the house, or what Mr. Beecher went for, 
 or anything else. The trouble was that the tide didn't 
 serve for their evidence that day, and if the tide had served, 
 why then the time of Mr. Beecher' s going and the tide for 
 the fishing would not have concurred, and time and tide 
 wait for no man. 
 
 Now, the value of Mr. Richards's evidence — is it any- 
 thing? The service of all circumstantial evidence, when pro- 
 duced by a witness, is to produce upon you the impression 
 that would have been produced if you had seen the thing he 
 speaks of. Now, there are two ways to find out what im- 
 pression that would have upon you. One is the statement 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 47 
 
 of what the thing was tliat he saw, and, second, the im- 
 pression that it made upon him when he saw it, and as he 
 saw it. AVell, he makes the most unhicky prelude, for the 
 great circmnstantial evidence on which this case, so far as 
 proof of the act is to turn, is that he begins by apologizing 
 to the court, and the jury as part of the court, before he 
 would tell what he saw, that he regrets to say that unless he 
 is suffered first to tell what he heard from other people about 
 other matters, what he saw will prove to be of no conse- 
 quence. Well, that is a very strange thing. I never heard 
 of any witness — witnesses ought to come free from bias. 
 What under heaven have they to do with what the impres- 
 sion of their testimony was or should be. They are called 
 to state what they did see. The law doesn't allow anj^body 
 to state what they heard, and the poor man says, "Well, 
 now, I am here, and I suppose, therefore, I am here for 
 something, and really I shall make a fool of myself for com- 
 ing here to say nothing unless I am allowed to state the cir- 
 cumstances that made me think there might be something 
 in it." Well, we will dispense with that. Now, that is the 
 first test, out of his owti mouth, of what impression and 
 weight and power there was in evidence in what he saw, and 
 that is that there was not any, I don't think you need to 
 worry much about what he saw, when he tells you there is 
 nothing in it to begin with. Well, then, he goes on and tells 
 it, and I don't know exactly the phrase, but he saw Mr. 
 Beecher as he suddenly opened the parlor door, where Mrs. 
 Tilton and Mr. Beecher were conversing — Richards knows 
 nothing of it, except, perhaps, he had been told they were 
 dowTi there; he saw his sister withdrawing from what I 
 think is called proximity to ]Mr. Beecher — moving away from 
 him, and that she colored a little. Well, I don't think that 
 that comes up to the rule that it must be an act that not 
 only points to adulterous connection, but is inconsistent 
 with anything else. It does not strike me so. How did it 
 
48 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 strike Richards? He went in and kissed his sister, and 
 sahited her, and shook hands with Mr. Beecher, and talked 
 with him, and then went off about his business ! 
 
 Now, in either way that it was evidence of an adultery that 
 had taken place, or an adultery that was going on towards 
 its comsummation then and there, you will very easily see 
 that, whatever had happened or did happen, it didn't make 
 much of an impression on Richards, for he shook hands 
 with the man and saluted his sister, and then went about his 
 business, and shut the door or left it open— I don't know 
 that he says which he did — and never thought it worth 
 while to mention the circumstance to his sister, his only 
 sister — her only brother, and their mother a widow. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, as I said about the attitude of the plain- 
 tiff in this case, there is no generalization of such conduct of 
 Richards as enables me to apply an adjective to it. It 
 never happened before. I don't think that, after his ex- 
 ample, it will ever happen again. 
 
 I read from the case of Freeman vs. Freeman, in the 31st 
 of Wisconsin, page 246, where the rules of all these matters 
 of circumstantial evidence are laid down. Speaking of 
 circumstantial evidence, the Court says: 
 
 All the circumstances are fairly and fully explained and shown to 
 have been incident to some other object or design, and not to have 
 been brought about for the purpose or with a view of perpetrating 
 the offense with which the plaintiff is charged (which was adultery). 
 And in this connection the Court cannot forbear to remark that the 
 character of a minister of the Gospel whose reputation in all re- 
 spects, except so far as it may have become involved by the un- 
 fortunate matter in controversy, appears to be fair, goes a great 
 way to explain the facts, if indeed any explanation of them can be 
 thought to be necessary. Nor can the Court refrain from the ob- 
 servation that the good character which the plaintiff appears gen- 
 erally to have borne, both before and since the time the offense is 
 alleged to have been committed, is a most significant circumstance 
 in her favor. If found guilty, the Court would be required to be- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 49 
 
 lieve that from a life of purity and fidelity she turned sudtlenly to 
 one of depravity and vice, and then as suddenly again returned to 
 her former virtuous ways. Sueh a circumstance is highly im- 
 prohahle, and seldom or never occurs. There is not a scintilla of 
 proof of prior misconduct or conjugal infidelity, and her subse- 
 quent behavior appears to have been innocent and not the subject 
 of the slightest suspicion. It was suggested by Ix)rd Stowell in 
 IVilliams vs. Williams, as possibly "a less laudable motive" for 
 instituting the proceeding that it might have been for the purpose 
 of "trying the experiment of how little proof will be accepted as 
 sufficient" to sustain the charge of adultery. A similar remark 
 might, and with greater propriety perhaps, be ventured here, that 
 the bringing forward of this charge, more than seven years after 
 the occurrence is alleged to have taken place, and during all which 
 time the husband seems to have had no thought of the infidelity of 
 the wife, is to try the experiment of how little proof will be ac- 
 cepted as sufficient to raise a suspicion of her infidelity. 
 
 I have trespassed abeady on j^our honor's indulgence. 
 
 Second Day, May 28, 1875 
 
 May it ])lease your Honor and Gentlemen of the Jury: 
 I was asking your attention to what the law requires as an 
 entirely indispensable element of producing that legal 
 certainty without which no judgment is allowed to be pro- 
 nounced by the verdict of a jury, on questions of this crim- 
 inality and of these large relations to the interests of society 
 and extensive influence upon the liapj)iness of others; and 
 I had asked your assent to the proposition that this case 
 was utterly bare of all those facts of conduct, as seen and 
 observed, which led to the conviction that there had grown 
 uj) in the hearts anil affections of these people those vicious 
 purposes which lead to wicked acts; none of that evidence 
 which shows the external circumstances of misconduct or 
 deviation from |)roprieties; none even of that addiction to 
 one another's private society, which is marked as having 
 some secret and wicked purpose; and there are none of tlie 
 
 5 
 
50 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 occasions proved in any sense in which such a purpose may 
 have been indulged or gratified, or from which any conclu- 
 sion to that effect can be drawn. 
 
 Now, I have to consider some general relations of Mr. 
 Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, which are in undisputed proof, 
 which form quite as much a part of the case of the defendant, 
 and of our theory of the association between them, its mo- 
 tives, its character, its traits, its action, as they possibly can 
 do, in regard to the plaintiff's view. This was a habit of 
 such social intimacy as belongs to a relation of a clergyman 
 and a parishioner, though a married woman, provided there 
 are the external indications which lead to that intimacy, 
 and provided you find in the character of the parties, in their 
 moral and intellectual nature, as separated from the subject 
 in dispute, the attractions on the one side and the other, 
 that at once account for and justify such degree of intimacy. 
 
 Now, I call your attention in the first place, on this 
 general question of amount and form and frequency of as- 
 sociation, to the fact that it proceeds almost entirely from the 
 defendant's own testimony. The number of visits during 
 the many years of confessed mtimacy and constant regard, 
 is represented as coming perhaps to once in from three to 
 six weeks; every one of these visits in the ordinary hours of 
 day, day in the sense of forenoon, for us who dine as we 
 usually do, at 6 o'clock, every one of them. There is not 
 a witness, a servant, an inmate of the family, Mr. Tilton 
 himself, there is not one witness who pretends there was a 
 visit in the evening, in the sense of a private call; some social 
 entertainment, some invitations, some set occasions, amount- 
 ing, I think, to nothing very definite, and certainly very 
 few in number, that were fixed for an evening, of course, 
 if Mr. Beecher was present, showed his presence in the 
 evening; but then it was in a crowd, it was in a company, it 
 was in the parlors. 
 
 Now, in regard to any visits of Mrs. Tilton to Mr. Beech- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 51 
 
 er's house, there is no evidence at all that any such instance 
 occurred. Mr. Beecher says, whether or no Mrs. Tilton 
 was at tlie house on the 10th of October, he doesn't know; 
 and my learned friend doesn't ask him whether he saw her. 
 She might have been at his house without his seeing her. 
 They don't press any further in any of these inquiries. 
 We show by him that he has no recollection of seeing her 
 there, or of any occurrence of any kind which should note it 
 in his memory, or produce to your knowledge any such fact; 
 a fact that would have been wholly unimportant in itself, 
 except as giving external evidence that would support the 
 possibility of guilty conduct, if proof other and additional 
 were given ; for to say that the visit of a married lady of the 
 parish, in the daytime, at the house of her clergyman, is a 
 suspicious act, would shock not only the sense of decency, 
 but the sense of fairness, and intellectually the common sense 
 of every man. 
 
 Now, what beyond these visits, that ran through these 
 years, occurring, as Mr. Beecher states them — and he is the 
 only witness to them, and if he spoke falsely he could be 
 contradicted by servants — if the view that he seeks to pre- 
 sent to you, that he only strolled around there in the fore- 
 noons as a part of the solace and the recreation of a walk, 
 and spent there say up to half an hour or so, from five 
 minutes up to half an hour, in a call of regard, of affection, 
 of intimacy, if that could be contradicted it would be. We 
 are not to suppose that this plaintiff and his household, 
 consisting of five servants, five children, and grown in- 
 mates, besides himself and his wife, is so unwatched, un- 
 remembered, unprotected in the observation of all who saw 
 as that, if this general pro])osition of Mr. Beecher that his 
 visits in point of time, in point of direction, in point of cir- 
 cumstance, were altogether and wholly of the character 
 that I have thus given to them — you are not to sup])ose 
 that this plaintiff is not able to contradict. Wliether he is 
 
52 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 able to contradict or not, absence of contradiction does not 
 affect the purpose and result of the contradiction. What is 
 uncontradicted, whether it be because it is absolutely un- 
 contradictable or because misfortune has prevented its 
 contradiction is, in a court of justice, the whole proof 
 proved on the point. 
 
 Now, beyond this, what are the seductive arts, and what 
 the corrupting influences that this visitor used.'* Why, 
 there seems to have been what in the end came to a somewhat 
 bulky collection of octavos, from the Brampton Lectures on 
 the Divinity of Christ to the religious novel of which Mr. 
 Beecher was the author. Well, when octavos are presented, 
 and when the title page contains the inscription of the giver, 
 even if the nature of the gift is of the suspicious character of 
 the Brampton Lecturers on the Divinity of Christ, still the 
 element of secrecy, of amulet, of love charm, seems to be 
 wanting on account of the bulk and the publicity of the 
 transaction. Then there were some flowers — flowers sent to 
 the chamber of a woman in confinement, flowers sent to the 
 parlor of a lady living in her own house, flowers the sight 
 of which gladdened the eyes of everybody within the house, 
 and whose perfume betrayed their presence to every comer. 
 Now, when a man has a garden and a farm, and when, 
 as Mr. Beecher says, he was in the habit of strewing these 
 flowers thick through the pathways of his parishioners, in 
 their domestic life, I do not think that you will find much 
 evidence of corrupt, of adulterous purpose in the mere fact 
 that these flowers, once, twice, three times perhaps, made 
 the subject of evidence, and in the chaste and beautiful 
 and open form in which the testimony has disclosed them, 
 will affect your minds with circumstantial evidence tending, 
 as the law books say, to adultery, and incompatible with 
 anything else. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I call your attention to the aflBrmative 
 proof of the absolute want of fact in this intercourse, on 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 53 
 
 wliich to raise suspicions and inferences, from what is an 
 aflSrniative fact, that there were constant observers, that 
 there were watchful observers, that there were jealous ob- 
 servers, that there were hostile and malignant observers, 
 that watched these persons — the wife and the clergyman — 
 during these 3'ears. You will remember a little item of proof 
 in which Mr. Judson gave evidence, that at a lunch at Del- 
 monico's Mr. Tilton introduced subjects of gossip or sus- 
 picion about this, that, and the other person; for the general 
 subject and the general indulgence of words and speech on 
 such subjects does not seem to have been foreign to Mr. 
 Tilton's disposition; and Mr. Judson says to him: "Well, 
 there is one thing certain, at least, Mr. Beecher has not been 
 involved or suspected of any irregularities towards women"; 
 and Mr. Tilton says : "I have lost my faith in man." Well, 
 that is a pleasant form of meeting an imputation upon a 
 friend — this was in 1865 — a pastor, a visitor at his family, a 
 man that for years he had been telling that a little woman at 
 his house loved him dearly; and Mr. Judson pressing it 
 again, Mr. Tilton still rephes: "I have lost my faith in 
 man," and for a third time this solemn, hypocritical "I 
 dare not made to wait upon I would," is repeated by this 
 stalwart man. Well, Mr. Judson, an intimate friend of 
 Mr. Tilton, also a friend or acquaintance at least, of Mr. 
 Beecher, and a believer in him — he doesn't like these cow- 
 ardly threats of malice and envy, and instead of allowing the 
 subject to breed the mischief it was intended to breed, he 
 brings it to the light at once, and has it smothered forever. 
 A very wise man has said: "Suspicions that the mind of 
 itself gathers are but buzzes, but suspicions that are arti- 
 ficially nourished and put into men's heads by the tales and 
 whisperings of others have stings." He had read the 
 Proverbs, too (in his youth), and he knew — and he lived uj) 
 to it — "Where there is no wood the fire goeth out; and where 
 there is no tale-bearer there is an end of strife." And he 
 
54 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 took care that these fires should not lack fuel, and that these 
 strifes should never miss a tale-bearer. But Mr. Judson goes 
 at once to Mr. Beecher— goes to Mr. Beecher and tells him 
 what Tilton has said, and Mr. Beecher seeks Mr. Tilton and 
 calls him to an account, and Mr. Tilton denies it, abhors it, 
 and does two things — one to Mr. Beecher — he writes him a 
 letter that has been read to you, and one to Judson; finding 
 him again, he says, "I thought you were my friend"; "I 
 am your friend, but I am also a friend of Mr. Beecher." 
 "Well," Tilton repeats, "I thought you were my friend." 
 What was there in the knowledge of Judson that entitled 
 this tale-bearer and strife-maker to think that Judson, be- 
 cause he favored him with his acquaintance, and, if you 
 please, with his good feeling, would become a willing par- 
 ticipant in what in every right thinking mind, in every 
 honest heart, is condemned as the vilest and basest employ- 
 ment to which any man, any one, man or woman, can 
 stoop.'* 
 
 When the assassin faces his enemy or at least runs the risk 
 of the resistance of weapon by weapon and force by force, 
 or braves discovery and the opportunities of proof, and, so, 
 exposure to punishment, it is still the basest form of enmity 
 that is known — I mean of that deadly enmity that seeks de- 
 struction of the life. But that assassination by the slow 
 poison of calumny, secretly infused into every vein of the 
 society in which the calumniated character moves and is 
 known, that is a baser and viler form of assassination. It 
 has every degree of cowardice, every amount of malice, 
 every wickedness of purpose, and every mischief of result. 
 Great characters, known characters, strong characters can 
 resist it, but it is for us, gentlemen of the jury, for you and 
 for me, to protect men in the common level of life, like our- 
 selves, from such calumniation. A wave that would be 
 dashed to pieces on the quarterdeck of a man-of-war may 
 swamp her cock-boat and destroy the lives that are in it. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 55 
 
 All \hv pelting willi wliicli Mr, Bcocher lias hri'ii followed 
 through years and years has produced no effect upon him. 
 
 But calumny, calunmy, gentlemen of the Jury, lakes its 
 effect on those against whom it is aimed just in proportion 
 as their general character and life are hid from observation 
 and untested by great op])ortunities or trial. Now, gentle- 
 men, we might as well start here w^ith understanding the char- 
 acter, not of Theodore Tilton — he has not introduced a new 
 character into human affairs — men of these evil dispositions, 
 men of this wicked conduct, have lived long before him. 
 This union of open and outward display, this pretension, 
 this self-satisfaction that Mr, Tilton and Mr. Moulton ex- 
 hibit themselves before vou as clad in — are the verv traits 
 that are associated in all conspiracies. Why, the com- 
 panions, the instruments, the agents of Catiline were of the 
 same kind . They were long ago described — these men, Tilton 
 and Moulton — by a great advocate much better than I could 
 describe them, although what he said was two thousand 
 years ago, and of others: Hi pueri, tarn leyidi ac delicati, 
 non solum amare et amari, neqiie cantare et saltare, sed eiiam 
 sicas vibrare, et spargere venena didicerunt; these youths, 
 so jaunty and so slick, not only ])racticed the arts of freely 
 loving and freely being loved, nor the graces of an airy 
 rhetoric and a bold gesticulation, but also have learned to 
 ply the dagger of the assassin and scatter the poisons of 
 calumniators. 
 
 It is very well to think with com])lacency, as Mr. Tilton 
 obviously does, of the showy, the brilliant, the accomplished, 
 the gratifying traits that make the showy external of base 
 motives, base conduct, and w icked purposes, but he has not 
 the credit of l)eing the model and type. Such men have 
 lived always, and always will live; and they have been 
 understood always, and always wull be understood. Far 
 be it from me to disturb his com])lacency; if it were ever 
 valuable to him it is more valuable now than ever. Home 
 
56 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM IVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Tooke said that he didn't see why a man should not thank 
 God for his self-conceit as well as any other of the good gifts 
 of Providence, and it certainly does carry a man through the 
 world with a pretty high head, and with considerable en- 
 joyment which is lost by the modest and pure. 
 
 Now what passions of our kind are there that we can trace 
 motives to, for I may as well apply the criticism at this earliest 
 instance of malignancy and hypocrisy as at any other. You 
 don't need to eat a whole loaf of bread to know that it is 
 sour. A wise man eschews further experience of that batch. 
 But some people will keep on eating and eating, thinking 
 that the sourness has not struck in; that it has not, at least, 
 reached the bottom crust, and that you may get a little 
 healthful nourishment, and you had better not discard the 
 bread until you have had a full trial of it. Well, if you take 
 a loaf of sour bread in your stomach, you will be apt to find 
 out enough about that indigestible fabric not to try another. 
 
 Now, envy, as we call it, in its true sense as it is used by the 
 classic dramatists, and in the Holy Scripture, either in the 
 Old or the New Testament, is the counter passion to love 
 and charity in the sense of the embrace in brotherhood of all 
 mankind. "Envy frets itself because of the prosperity of 
 others and pines at their superiority." It finds its com- 
 placency, it finds its occupation, it finds its goading im- 
 pulses in the destruction of that prosperity and the abase- 
 ment of that superiority. Emulation, which is the noble 
 competition and the great and beneficent influence that 
 great characters have on those who are their contemporaries 
 or who follow them, is turned into the wicked passion of 
 envy. And, as the very essence of love is that it delights in 
 the happiness of others for others' sake, as, when you come 
 to the sexual relations, the love of marriage is distinguished 
 from meretricious love by that distinction, that the love is 
 of the person loved, and beautified, and glorified in your 
 affections, and in meretricious connections it is the gratifica- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 57 
 
 tion of selfish appetite, regardless of whatever degree of 
 misery and ruin is inflicted upon the object of the mere- 
 tricious love. So envy, the hatred of men, is the great 
 wicked master passion, as love is the great, noble, sacred 
 passion of our nature, beginning when the infant with a smile 
 recognizes its mother, growing till the youth takes the bride 
 by the hand to the altar, ending for this life only when the 
 wife is laid in the grave; and through all, expanded, purified, 
 intensified, elevated, until, at last, it is lost in the univer- 
 sality of the sea of love, not because it is any less intense, 
 nor that it has lost its lustre, but simply because it has 
 faded, as the stars fade in the morning in the full blazonry 
 of the sun's illumination. 
 
 Now, where does envy or malice tend, and do its ravages 
 cease with its single first object, or does it grow like other 
 passions upon what it feeds on? Does it extend through the 
 whole frame of the moral, the intellectual, the industrious 
 working of the man? Why, if your eye be single with this 
 true passion of love and duty, your whole body shall be full 
 of light. But if your eye be evil, your whole body shall be 
 full of darkness; and how great is that darkness! The 
 ancients have a stem maxim marking the absoluteness of 
 the dominion of this evil passion in few words, but which 
 leaves nothing else to be said about it — "Invidiafestos dies 
 noil egit." Envy, malice, keeps no holiday. And Theodore 
 Tilton spent Christmas in forging a weapon that he says he 
 meant to strike Mr. Beecher to the heart with, and New 
 Years in preparing what he himself calls in his writing, "a 
 New Year's present to Mr. Bowen." 
 
 Well, talk of confessions, talk of indications of character, 
 of pur})ose of nature; it is a by-word, "Actions display the 
 man." Treatment of himself, by himself, in his own des- 
 cription of himself, leaves nothing to be said of him by others. 
 You don't need to search the heart of a man who boasts of 
 his malignity, and takes credit from its horrors. Nor do 
 
58 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 you need to measure the conduct of such men with such char- 
 acters, and think how far they will go, and where they will 
 stop, or that this, or that, is too much. No wise man 
 thinks any more of this credulity, this incaution toward 
 such characters, the heart of whom is understood, than he 
 does of measuring the depth to which a vulture will dip its 
 beak in the heart blood of its prey, or how manifold or how 
 merciless shall be the coil and the crush of the serpent when 
 it entwines its victim. Let men who wish to run these ex- 
 periments with reptile characters in animal nature try them. 
 Let men who wish to, run these risks with the wickedness of 
 the heart, when that is confessed. I read to you the list of 
 evil that comes out of an evil heart as given by one who 
 knew what was in man. 
 
 Now, having cautioned Judson never to assume to be his 
 friend further, and never speak to him again, he wrote Mr. 
 Beecher this letter: 
 
 Midnight. 
 
 Brooklyn, November 30, 1865. 
 
 Rev. Hentiy Ward Beecher — ^My Dear Friend: Returning 
 home late to-night I cannot go to bed without writing you a letter. 
 Twice I have been forced to appear as your antagonist before the 
 public, the occasions five years apart. After the first time I am 
 sure our friendship, instead of being maimed, was strengthened. 
 After this last, if I may guess your heart by knowing mine, I 
 am sure the old love waxes instead of wanes. 
 
 That was when the quarrel about the peaceful tendencies 
 of Mr. Beecher was fresh, and when for some charity that 
 had been extended to the fallen foes among our country- 
 men by Mr. Beecher, he was condemned with an exhaustive 
 vituperation scarcely equalled by the secular press. 
 
 Two or three days ago, I know not how impelled, I took out of 
 its hiding-place your sweet and precious letter written to me from 
 England, containing an affectionate message which you wished 
 should live and testify after your death. To-night I have been 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 59 
 
 thinking that in case I should die first, which is equally probable, 
 I ought to leave in your hand my last will and testament of recip- 
 rocated love. INIy friend, from my boyhood up you have been 
 what no other man has been, what no other man can be. While 
 I was a student, the influence of your mind on mine was greater 
 than all books, all teachers. The intimacy with which you hon- 
 ored me for twelve years has been, next to my wife and family, the 
 chief affection of my life. By you I was baptized; by you, mar- 
 ried; you are my minister, teacher, father, brother, friend, com- 
 panion. The debt I owe you I can never pay. My religious life, 
 my intellectual development, my open door of opportunity for 
 labor, for public reputation — all these, my dear friend, I owe in so 
 great a degree to your own kindness that my gratitude cannot be 
 written in words, but must be expressed in love. 
 
 Then, what hours we have had together! What arm-in-arm 
 wanderings about the streets ! What hunts for pictures and books! 
 What mutual revelations and communings! What interming- 
 lings of mirth, of tears, of prayers! 
 
 The more I think back upon this friendship, the more am I 
 convinced that not your public position, not your fame, not your 
 genius, but just your affection has been the secret of the bond 
 between us. For, whether you had been high or low, great or 
 common, I believe that my heart, knowing its mate, would have 
 loved you exactly the same. Now, therefore, I want to say that 
 if, either long ago or lately, any word of mine, whether spoken or 
 printed, whether public or private, has given you pain, I beg you 
 to blot it from your memory, and to write your forgiveness in its 
 place. jMoreover, if I should die, leaving you alive, I ask you to 
 love my children for their father's sake, who has taught them to 
 reverence you and to regard you as the man of men. 
 
 One thing more; my religious experiences have never been more 
 refreshing than during the last year. Never before have I had 
 such fair and winning thoughts of the other life. With these 
 thoughts you stand connected in a strange and beautiful way. I 
 believe human friendship outlasts human life. Our friendship is 
 yet of the earth, earthy; but it shall one day stand uplifted above 
 mortality, safe, without a scar or flaw, without a breath to blot 
 or a suspicion to endanger it. 
 
60 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Meanwhile, O, my friend, may our Father in Heaven bless you 
 on the earth, guide you, strengthen you, illumine you, and at last 
 crown you with the everlasting crown. And, now, good night; 
 and sweet be your dreams of your unworthy but eternal friend, 
 
 Theodore Tilton, 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you understand what words are worth, 
 written or spoken, from this man. When, three days before, 
 his slanderous tongue had spoken mischief, and a common 
 acquaintance of Mr. Beecher, the recipient of his leasings, 
 asked this, at least, about Mr. Beecher — "that there never 
 have been any suggestions against his morality in respect of 
 women," and Theodore Tilton, with the thrice-acted pomp 
 of duty to friendship, and fidelity to truth, which forbade to 
 say what was true, said, "I have lost my faith in man," 
 and when asked what point there was in that in regard to 
 Mr. Beecher — "I have lost my faith in man," and a third 
 time pressed, "I have lost my faith in man," and then, at 
 midnight, in order that it might be preserved after he is 
 dead, if he should die suddenly or take poison — what poison 
 would operate!^ — preserves this record. Are such characters 
 new.'* They are not common. We should have got out of 
 this world into another if the staple of our society were 
 made up of such characters. No; "a serpent heart hid 
 in a flowery face" is a character as old at least as Shakes- 
 peare, and thus preserved by him. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is nothing in all this unless it 
 seems to you to rest, as it does to me, on a correct, intelli- 
 gent, candid, and not uncharitable estimate of this plaintiff's 
 character as disclosed by his own evidence. Such I believe 
 it to be; such the juxtaposition that we are able to make of 
 things said in private and demonstrations made in public, 
 shows you the character. It shows you its discords; it 
 shows you its main current of purpose and of blood; it is 
 the character. And it shows you more. It shows you 
 that, when you are dealing with a disputed question of a 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 61 
 
 particular line of conduct or incident or relation, between 
 two men, if you can only get hold of enough of their respec- 
 tive characters you can tell whether one or the other con- 
 struction of the controversy is to determine, comports with 
 the characters as disclosed, outside of the particular con- 
 troversy, of one or the other. 
 
 Truth comi)orts with, agrees with, every fact — physical, 
 moral, and s])iritual — in the world. Error may confuse; 
 error may distort; but be sure that there is no one truth 
 that is not comi)atible with every other truth in the material 
 creation or the moral relations. Sometimes by fortunately 
 or skillfully acquiring facts enough to see whether the par- 
 ticular fact will comport with them, the cross-examiner is 
 enabled to baffle the false purpose of a witness. Why what 
 is cross-examination, in its subtle, penetrating power? Some 
 think it is to exhibit the infirmity of memory, and the inex- 
 actness of expression by words, and that a great feat is ac- 
 complished when, by asking a witness to tell a long con- 
 versation over two or three times, the witty and profound 
 cross-examiner has demonstrated that the thing cannot be 
 done. "Well, everybody of any sense knew it before. How 
 often did the counsel exhibit to you their inability — and I 
 don't refer now to my learned opponents any more than to 
 ourselves, the counsel before you — their inability to repeat, 
 after a ten minutes' interruption by a legal discussion, the 
 very question that had been asked before the discussion 
 began, and was allowed to be repeated, and before your 
 eyes, and without the least shame or annoyance, we asked 
 that the stenogra])her might read the question because we 
 could not repeat it. Now, with such a confession of this 
 common trait between witty and profound cross-examiners 
 and commonplace untrained memories, it does not seem to 
 me a very great triumj)!! of cross-examination to exhibit 
 this incapacity. Indeed, if the rote was followed com- 
 pletely in the second relation, it would show that it was 
 
62 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 learned by heart — had been committed to memory. But 
 when cross-examination, ignorant at the start or imper- 
 fectly instructed, undertakes to demonstrate the improba- 
 bihty, the falsehood, of an immediate statement bj^ showing 
 its incompatibility with facts that shall be arrayed around 
 it, and how it will not comport with them, then it is that 
 the cross-examiner follows this great rule and principle of 
 truth, that truth, if truth, will match all round, with mate- 
 rial facts, with moral qualities; but if it be false it won't; 
 and if that triumph in the cause of justice, in the service of 
 truth, follows the employment of the trained art of the 
 lawyer, it is a great and beneficent result; but if confusion 
 of error, contumely on the weakness of memory, laughter 
 at the indifferent mental qualities of this or that witness, is 
 the only result of cross-examination, it may answer to an 
 immediate purpose, but it does not serve justice or promote 
 truth. 
 
 Now, I will give you two amusing incidents of how truth 
 will comport with all truth, however remote it may seem. 
 It was amusing enough when it happened, and my learned 
 friend Judge Porter has called it to your attention. When 
 Mr. Tilton wished to convict Bessie Turner of a lie with a 
 circumstance, he gave you as a reason that her story was 
 false, and his was true, about his speech in regard to his 
 gray hairs going in sorrow to the grave, that he had not any 
 gray hairs at that time. Well, that shows that he put the 
 question of whether Bessie or he told a lie on that fact. 
 That was the test; and he thought he knew about the gray 
 hairs in his head, or at any rate, if he didn't nobody else 
 did ; but Bessie had combed his head ; Bessie had told you 
 how frequently she had combed his head, and I find that 
 people who don't grow the gray hairs are quite as likely to 
 see them as those who do. But he had forgotten — and, 
 indeed, he does not believe in the verbal inspiration of the 
 Scriptures — he had forgotten that it is written, "Thou canst 
 
THE BEECHER TRI.\L 63 
 
 not make one hair white or black;" even under oath you 
 cannot do that. Ah! but he had forgotten more than that; 
 he had forgotten that even the liairs of the most worthless 
 heads are all numbered. When the truth comes to light in 
 his own letter, written three j'ears before, when he told his 
 wife, "Gray hairs since our marriage have stolen upon us," 
 he shows you what there is in my suggestion that truth 
 matches all the truth in the world, and that a lie does not. 
 Bessie's statement nuitched all round, and liis broke at 
 the first attempted connection. 
 
 "Well, we have another witness, a Mr. Martin, and he 
 thought, inexperienced in the practice of truth or in the 
 arts of falsehood, that if he told a story in words, and there 
 was not anybody to contradict him, or at any rate, if it was 
 only words against words, that he could do some damage to 
 Mrs. Tilton by his testimony gained in a friendly intercourse 
 with her; and so he told you that he and she being too warm 
 in the room up stairs, went down, about half past two in the 
 afternoon, to sit on the piazza to get cool. Well, now, there 
 is a matter that does not seem to have much to do with the 
 solar system per se, by itself; but you have got to match all 
 around, and truth does it without an effort, and falsehood 
 never; and so he was sho\Mi that the sun blazed there in 
 that July afternoon, with the thermometer among the nine- 
 ties, and yet they had gone there and sat because it was a 
 cool place! Well, that looks a little as it he had run against 
 the solar system, doesn't it? But what is that to an in- 
 genious mind like Martin's? Genius shows itself when 
 most hard pressed, and its extempore efforts are somethnes 
 its greatest; so he said, i)utting down this captious notion 
 of sunshine, "Why, there was a brick wall on the side of the 
 j)iazza of the neighboring house that extended out its 
 deep embrasure and kept us from the sun." It looked a 
 little, then, as if the solar system was not, after all, to tri- 
 umph; but we brought an occupant of tin- house and they 
 
64 SPEECHES OF ^\aLLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 sent a surveyor, and there was no brick wall there. Now, 
 sometimes men run their heads against a brick wall; but 
 the trouble with this Mr. Martin was, that he dashed his 
 brains out for the want of a brick wall. A. B. Martin: A 
 Broiled Martin! Well, when he comes on the stand again 
 he will study the solar system, and also brick masonry. 
 
 Now, as we go on we shall find many illustrations of this 
 antagonism which corrects falsehood; and it proves some- 
 thing more, and we might as well start here with under- 
 standing that. This is not the first cause that has ever 
 been tried; these are not the first witnesses that have testi- 
 fied and been tested. It is not the first time that the learned 
 Judge and my experienced opponents, or even ourselves, 
 have had to observe and lament the diflBculties and the 
 weakness of testimony, and lawyers have hardened their 
 experience into a maxim which the law follows, and instructs 
 juries to follow, and which the conscience and the common 
 sense of jurors impels them, compels them, to follow. It 
 is, in the brevity of the law maxim in Latin, falsus in uno, 
 falsus in omnibus; satisfy yourself that a man is false in one 
 thing, and you must judge him false in others. When a 
 man tells you with his own mouth that he has lied through 
 a series of statements under a motive, and then that in 
 another series of statements, under another motive, he does 
 not lie, you have, in your common sense, one question for 
 him: "How shall we trust a lying tongue to tell us when it 
 lies?" Now, wouldnot that be nice, to have a man come and 
 say, "I lied then, and then, and then, under a motive; I 
 now come here and tell the truth." "Well, have you any 
 motive here .^" "Oh! yes; I mean to strike Beecher to the 
 heart; I mean to drive him out of Plymouth Church; I 
 mean to pursue him to the grave." Well, that is enough — 
 a motive. Now, would you feel like sensible men if you 
 should base a verdict upon that testimony; allowing such 
 a man to pick and choose for you the things that are true, 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 65 
 
 and taking them on his saying so? There is an end of that; 
 and, iinhickHIy, Moulton and Tilton are on the same plat- 
 form, for that matter. ]\Iouhon has given you the series 
 of his falsehoods, and he now gives you the series of his 
 statements, and you have got to let his tongue choose; his 
 motives you have in his statement that he would have the 
 life of Beecher, that he would destroy him, and all the villi- 
 iying epithets that one man can bestow upon another have 
 been used by him on the stand and under oath. 
 
 If your honor please, in this cause we do not need to 
 trust to the maxim so firmly established, so wisely con- 
 sidered, carrying such conviction, both to the legal and 
 common understanding, as "falsus in ujio,falsus in omnibus." 
 The record in this case in its whole web of hj^Docrisy, of 
 false statement, of prevarication, on their own showing, 
 requires us only to take this, the converse of the proposi- 
 tion, "falsus in omnibus, falsus in uno." You have one 
 question to determine, whether the truth is spoken about 
 it, and they have showTi themselves false in everything: in 
 character, in conduct, in concealments, in prevarications, 
 in spoken falsehoods, in written falsehoods. All! gentle- 
 men, it is a terrible thing to have the length of a trial, and 
 the methods of the law unfold a tissue and a web of false 
 character, the woof and warp of which are all false. And 
 then vou are asked to believe that in that texture, in that 
 tapestry, there is at least one thread of truth. They say 
 to us, ''Falsus in omnibus, verus in uno"; false in all else, 
 true at least in one thing; for it is not in human nature not 
 at some time to speak the truth, and this is the occasion. 
 
 But I said to you that the affirmative force of the negative 
 proof is itself immense, when you are satisfied of the oppor- 
 tunities; and I digressed to exhibit you the attitude, as 
 early as 1865, of Mr. Tilton as a watcher in his own house- 
 hold, and as a watcher of his wife. Let me show you a 
 little of his condition of mind about Mr. Beecher as a visitor 
 
66 SPEECHES OP WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and an inmate of his household — as an inmate of his house, 
 and a friend of his wife — from another statement of his in 
 writing : 
 About ten or eleven years ago, 
 
 and this was written in 1872, or thereabouts, it carries it 
 back to 1862: 
 
 About ten or eleven years ago Henry C. Bowen, for whom I 
 was then working as a subordinate in "The Independent" office, 
 told me one evening, while crossing Fulton Ferry, that Henry 
 Ward Beecher was guilty of adultery, a practice begun in Indian- 
 apolis and continued in Brooklyn. 
 
 That was in 1862. It had run some years at that time. 
 
 Between the years 1860 and 1870 Mr. Bowen repeated the accu- 
 sation not less than a hundred times— (so it had not slipped his 
 mind)— frequently exhibiting the deep sense of a personal injury, 
 and sometimes saying that if he was so minded he could drive 
 Mr. Beecher from Plymouth pulpit. 
 
 Now, either Mr. Tilton believed Mr. Bowen or he didn't, 
 or else Mr. Bowen never said so, and I am sure I don't know 
 how we are to find out the latter. Mr. Tilton has said so 
 here. He has said so on the stand in some degree. Mr. 
 Bowen, their witness, was not asked by them the question, 
 to purge himself of this imputed conversation and conduct. 
 But, in respect of Mr. Tilton, we may fairly assume that, as 
 against him, we may suppose that he had heard these stories, 
 for he has said so. Now, either he believed them or he 
 didn't. If he did believe them, you see that Mr. Beecher 
 and Mrs. Tilton were under a pretty sharp observation, 
 don't you.? A husband, a rival, a man who hated Beecher, 
 and who either loved or didn't love his wife; and he, why, 
 he would watch. If he loved her he would watch; if he 
 didn't love her he would watch. And he conies here and 
 tells you that up to July, the day when his wife made some 
 
THE HKE( HER TRIAL 67 
 
 sort of a coiiunimicatioii to him, which we shall examiiu' on 
 its own merits liereafter so far as it is the subject of evidence 
 — until that time he made her an idol in his head. If there 
 was nothing wrong between ]\Ir. Beecher and his wife, if 
 there was nothing ^\Tong in his visits and his rides — and 
 we have shown you that in 1870, in the winter, when Mr. 
 Beecher had driven Mrs. Tilton out once behind a pair of 
 horses and a buggy in the park, and had been thanked by 
 Mrs. Morse, and encouraged by the great good it had done 
 Elizabeth, and by the invitation of Mrs. Morse he went 
 there a week afterward to give her another ride behind the 
 same s])anking team, that he found Mr. Tilton there, and 
 the invitation was given, of course, as it would have been 
 whether he was there or not, and Mrs. Tilton having some 
 reason that disinclined her, he (Tilton) urged her to go. 
 So you have the misconduct evidence, that after that time, 
 which was two years after the adultery, or the second year 
 after the adulter}^ began, while it was going on, before it 
 was discontinued, he had not observed anything, or, if he 
 had, his conduct was not candid and open, was it.^ He 
 won't take that alternative. If he does he contradicts his 
 oath that he had no suspicion or idea. Now, you will see, 
 then, that the material circumstances of this alleged seduc- 
 tion and alleged adultery are just as inconsistent with all 
 the external circumstances of life in which these parties were 
 placed, and the observation to which they were exposed, as 
 the moral incompatibility of wicked conduct with religious 
 character and pure morality. Now, how can you get over 
 that? 
 
 Why, if your honor please, it is one of the singular, })erliaps 
 unfortunate, traits in the manners and morals and everyday 
 reasoning of the English people and ourselves, that we have 
 not a single word to describe the husband of an unfaithful 
 wife, that is not inspired with the bitterest contempt and 
 contumely for the husband. There are two words — and 
 
68 SPEECHES OF WnXIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 that it may not be supposed that my memory fails me in 
 the exactness of the definition, I will read them to you, gen- 
 tlemen of the jury. Now, as a plain matter-of-fact definition 
 of the word "cuckold," this is accurate: "The husband of an 
 adulteress"; and then the adjective "cuckoldy," "having 
 the qualities of a cuckold, mean, sneaking"; and then we 
 have an ancient word, not much in use, as indeed the word 
 "cuckold" is not in use, because the occasion for it does not 
 occur in our society. Wittol describes a cuckold as "a man 
 who knows his wife's infidelity and submits to it — a tame 
 cuckold." Now, that shows either a coarse or barbarous feel- 
 ing, which may, perhaps, account for it. I don't sympa- 
 thize; I have no desire to sympathize in any such contumely, 
 but it shows the strong sense of our people, whether it has 
 grown up here or at the birth of English manliness before 
 our removal thence from England, and you will find in every 
 language, the German, the Italian, the French, having the 
 same civilization and the same Christian religion, the same 
 contumelious aspersion of the husband. Now, what does that 
 mean? Why, it means that the victims of such injuries are 
 simple, silly, blind, indifferent, carried away by affection to 
 an absurd obfuscation of their observation, and that when the 
 evil finally happens, as it must in its approaches have been 
 noticeable, and if noticed or unnoticed, making no impres- 
 sion — either way the character is contemptible; and to call 
 a man a cuckold (which is sunply the husband of an adulter- 
 ess), carries contumely and aspersion. Well, there is not 
 any other name in the language for him; there is no other 
 word that expresses that condition of the relation of a hus- 
 band to a violated marriage except that word. 
 
 Now, the Roman law, if your honor please, was not so 
 indulgent as merely to visit with contumely the husbands of 
 violated marriages. They had a law in Rome — for the 
 Romans were a virtuous people, the chastity of the Roman 
 matrons and of the Roman maids was equal to that of any 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 69 
 
 nation, and the f^randeur and power of that society, even 
 without a pure reli<;ion, shows how much can be built if 
 the corner-stone of the family is maintained by sentiments 
 of honor and reverence. The lenones, or pimps, or pander- 
 ers, or procurers, were watched and punished; the crime of 
 lenocinhnn was visited with heavy ])unishments. That 
 parents should prostitute their daughters, or owners their 
 female slaves, or husbands their wives, was treated as an 
 evil that must be watched and punished; and the Lex Julia 
 De AduUcriis provided that any husband who kept or took 
 l)ack a wife caught in adultery should be classed as a lenoc- 
 inant or panderer, and punished as such. It was a con- 
 dition of the family that was pessimi exempli, of most dan- 
 gerous influence upon society. If the Roman matronage 
 was still to include in their pure roll of honor prostituted 
 wives, wives that violated the marriage vow, where was the 
 honor of the matronage? If young wives entering into 
 matronage were to see that the power of public opinion, 
 and the virtue of that noble state, was disfigured by the 
 j^resence of wives still cherished by husbands with knowledge 
 of their infidelity, however creditable it might be to the 
 extraordinary charity and affection of the particular husband, 
 it was subversive of the institution, and should not be 
 allowed. 
 
 Now, if you honor please, and gentlemen of the Jury, I 
 have not the least idea that Mr. Tilton is exposed, on any 
 facts in his own famil3% to the least imputation of either this 
 contumelious opprobrium of the English phrases or this 
 darker condemnation of the Roman law. I wish to save 
 him from both — from either — and I think I shall succeed; 
 l)ut he stood on a very perilous edge, and he has got as far 
 down the precipice as he could get of his own movements. 
 And I present, as an utter imi)r<)l)ability (not going (|uite as 
 dee]) into the founda lions of morals and character as those 
 I have suggested about a jiure wife and noble woman), but. 
 
70 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I put it to you, that it is a moral improbability of the highest 
 grade that Theodore Tilt on has suffered this disgrace in his 
 family. He is a man of large intelligence; he is a man of 
 active doubts and fears and suspicions. He is a man not 
 inexperienced in the wicked ways of the world. He has had, 
 year after year, an inculcation into his mind that Mr. 
 Beecher was a dangerous visitor in the families of the pure- 
 minded women of Brooklyn; and he has encouraged, has 
 observed, has been pleased with the visits of Mr. Beecher. 
 He has seen his wife by night and by day; he has seen her in 
 the privacy which the law says that even the great interests 
 of Justice never should invade; he has seen into her soul; he 
 looked into her eyes with love or hate, with suspicion or fear, 
 during these many years of the seduction and adultery. He 
 has watched Mr. Beecher in his comings in and his goings 
 out; he has talked in restaurants about his want of faith in 
 Mr. Beecher, and has set other people to watching, and 
 thinking, and suspecting; and, now, in two households, such 
 as Mr. Beecher's and Mr. Tilton's — in two houses such as 
 theirs, in the relations possibly more public than when 
 covered by those roofs, there has not come one fact in evi- 
 dence against them; there didn't enter one doubt, one fault, 
 one fear into Theodore Tilton's heart. Well, I don't think 
 you were able to find any evidence of it. Nobody else 
 could, if he could not. I don't think you will. 
 
 Why, gentlemen, consider what it is to have had such 
 vigilant, vindictive, persevering, intrepid, audacious, and 
 trained hounds after a man; and then to see the petty, 
 trivial, contemptible, external evidence produced as cir- 
 cumstantial, or as proof of the facts! Why, gentlemen, we 
 all understand the difference between suspicions, or asper- 
 sions, or evidence, not coming against a man because sus- 
 picion has not once been opened, but it ivas opened in Mr. 
 Tilton's mind, and kept alive by Mr. Bowen through ten 
 years. He watched and watched, and he saw that Mr. 
 
THE BEECHER TIUAL 71 
 
 Beecher was ])ure, and he know liis wife was. That is the 
 result. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if, in your grain trade a broker came to 
 you and gave you a handful from a cargo of wheat, and you 
 saw it full of weevil and of rust, and he asks you to buy it, 
 you say: "You expect me to buy a cargo of wheat of which 
 that is a sample.^ Why, a man wouldn't take it as a gift. 
 What is the price?" "Full market price." "Well, you 
 must take me for a fool." " But," the broker says, " perhaps 
 you had better wait and let me tell you. That is all the 
 weevil and the rust there is in the whole cargo. Buy it at 
 any price." 
 
 Now, that is what has happened here. He brought you 
 the samples, and it is the sample that is scrai)ed from the 
 whole life of Henry Ward Beecher. Had not Tilton written 
 of violence enough, of vehemence enough, of particulars 
 enough, identified in that New Year's gift he prepared for 
 Mr. Bowen, in which he described the debaucheries and 
 wicked adulteries and rapes of Henry Ward Beecher.' Why 
 didn't they prove something.' Why didn't they show any 
 proximate traits of conduct or character leading to doubt or 
 suspicion.' But I don't put it upon that; I put it upon the 
 question, (turning to Tilton) Why do you dare to say, as 
 you do say, and I think truthfully — I certainly hope truth- 
 fully for your character — that until July you had not a 
 doubt, or a fear, or a fault, or a suspicion, in regard to the 
 intercourse of Mr. Beecher with your family — how can you 
 sav that and not feel that vou have forced vourself into the 
 dilennna of choosing whether you take the contumely of the 
 English opprobrium or the dark stain of the Roman con- 
 denmation.' 
 
 Recess of the Court 
 
 But we are not left, gentlemen, on this question of external 
 facts and direct testimony, to mere conclusions from its 
 absence and the absence of witnesses. A witness was 
 
72 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 finally brought, no doubt a most estimable person, of intel- 
 ligence and truthfulness — whether any mistakes intervened 
 in her testimony or not, it is quite unimportant, either to the 
 cause or to this just expression of confidence in her, for me 
 to inquire — and that was the old family half servant, half 
 friend, Katy McDonald, who had gone i*i and out with that 
 family from 1855, onwards from the marriage to the end, 
 and, now, at present, occupied, I take it, in some way, in 
 connection with Mrs. Tilton's household, a servant or friend, 
 coming to them from her relations to his father's family, 
 devoted to him, descending to him, devoted to the children 
 as his children, no doubt recognizing and feeling the beauty 
 of the wife's character, and having the natural sentiments of 
 an honest heart, exerted in her favor; but still she belongs 
 to the father's side of the house, and in the break of the 
 family, and in the criminations and recriminations that 
 proceed between them, and in the outgoings of her sym- 
 pathies, and in the adhesion of her fidelity, she stands now 
 with the father and his children, as in his care; and she, 
 called for a purpose of no great importance, showing that 
 their vigilance omits nothing, is wholly silent on the question 
 of whether there occurred anything from the time of the 
 marriage in 1855 to the household break in 1874, that could 
 indicate either evil desires, loose conduct, erring purpose on 
 the part of the wife, or impropriety of visit, in time, in 
 length, in respect to occasion, on the part of Mr. Beecher, 
 within that house — not a word. You find, then, in the 
 absence of all the other servants — for we have called none of 
 them; none of them have adhered to us; none of them are 
 within our control, and yet there were servants running 
 through that family, five at a time, during all these years, 
 their whereabouts, their accessibility not brought into doubt, 
 and not one of them is brought. Finally, the intelligent, 
 experienced, sober, sedate, observation and judgment of this 
 excellent woman, Katy McDonald, is brought before you, 
 
11 IE BEECHER TRIAL 73 
 
 and the reason that nothing is said is tliat nolhinir existed in 
 fact and in truth to be said. 
 
 Now, you must deal willi tliis matter as helween man and 
 man, and accordinf;: to the ordinary ruk\s of Imman nature. 
 You are men with the quaHties of intelli^^'uce, tlie senti- 
 ments of heart and the experience of life that l)elongs to men, 
 and you are to judge of a man and a woman, and to judge of 
 famihes, and to judge of actual, practical, daily life, in the 
 face and eyes, and on the level of the society of Brooklyn. 
 You are to judge of witnesses and the absence of witnesses; 
 you are to judge of the frivolity of testimony as it is ])ro- 
 duced, and the absence of any more weighty testimony 
 which could be ])roduced, should be produced, always will 
 be produced if there is any fact at the bottom to warrant it 
 and give it growth. 
 
 These men (INFr. Beecher and Mr. Tilton), this woman 
 (Mrs. Tilton), are to be judged of as men and a woman of 
 our day, of our society, of our daily life, so far as external 
 relations go. They are to be judged fairly; they are to be 
 judged justly. ^Yhen individual differences, from the 
 common traits of life, whether in intellect, in character, in 
 ideas, in habits of thought, or habits of expression, come to 
 be scrutinized and weighed, each man, each woman is en- 
 titled to be considered fairly, according to the texture and 
 quality of their outi nature, so far as they are developed on 
 the testimony, although it differs from your nature, or my 
 nature. That is fairness; but at the bottom we must judge 
 them as men and women. If they are angels, we have no 
 mode of judging about their conduct. If Mrs. Tilton is all 
 spirit and no body, and Mr. Tilton is all body and no spirit, 
 we haven't any mode of judging such abnormal characters. 
 We assume that intelligence, education, experience, on the 
 l)art of Mr. Tilton, expose him to our judgment as of a man 
 thus having his faculties, large by nature, sharpened by 
 education, hardened by experience with the world; and it is 
 
74 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 — and I put it in the utmost good faith to you, as I have all 
 my illustration and my argument on the question of the 
 probabilities of his having been a deceived husband — I put 
 it to you that it is one of the greatest improbabilities in 
 respect to his intellect, in respect to his character, in respect 
 to his experience, in respect to his life, that it is possible to 
 impute to another. I could almost as soon expect to con- 
 vince myself that he is not six feet high, that he has not a 
 beautiful rhetoric and accomplished taste, and educated 
 faculty of rhetoric and of speech, as to convince myself that 
 with this power of intellect, and with the traits of heart that 
 this evidence displays, and with the sharpening of all the 
 observations and elements of judgment that treat of this 
 domestic calamity of an invaded household, that he should 
 have been its victim. There is no satire and no sarcasm 
 about it. My point is that there has never been a reason 
 for his suspicion, that there never has been a fault on the 
 part of the wife, that he is not the husband of an adulteress. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, laying out of view, then, the trivial and 
 feeble and worthless evidence that bears upon the question 
 of the guilt or the innocence of two excellent people, what 
 is there in the ordinary experience of mankind on these 
 questions, or on the maxims of safety and security that the 
 law and common justice have provided for such contro- 
 versies — what is there left to inquire about .f^ 
 
 I think, as I have said, that but for the great ultimate 
 fact of the question of the vindication of Mr. Beecher against 
 this impeachment, there would be no further inquiry. I 
 think the intelligence and the experience of every juryman 
 were appalled at the poverty of a judicial examination, when 
 the plaintiff rested, that had simply reproduced the pam- 
 phlets of last Summer, and the words that flowed from their 
 mouths; but yet you were kept in expectation, that Mr. 
 Beecher, who knew all, and who, if he came upon the stand, 
 even if he did not fear God, might fear man and his punish- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 75 
 
 ments, would not be a witness; they said he never would 
 come upon the stand; three oaths of witnesses were too many 
 to be breasted by a man that was to tell a lie. They were 
 altogether too many; but they were not too many to be 
 breasted by a man who knew the truth, and was going to 
 tell it. If you watch the tortuous courses of the evidence as 
 drawn hither and thither, of Mr. Moulton and Mr. Tilton, 
 vou will find that there has been a very great ingenuity 
 exercised to avoid misstatements that carried imputations 
 of consciousness of falsehood, when any such statement ran 
 against two witnesses that could speak and contradict the 
 same thing; for the law of perjury, which refuses that a con- 
 viction should take place for false oath, by the oath of one 
 witness speaking the contrary under oath, allows the judg- 
 ment to come if there be two witnesses, and the jury believe 
 the two against the one. And so, day after day, this un- 
 happy human nature of ours showed its qualities, so discredit- 
 able to it, in the bravado, and defiance of Mr. Beecher to 
 come upon the stand; and then, when he came upon the 
 stand, I will agree that most of that sentiment slunk away, 
 and, without waiting for his testimony, they knew that he 
 would speak the truth, and that the truth was innocence. 
 But you heard him testify, you heard him cross-examined, 
 and had also heard the immense expectations of what cross- 
 examination was to do. Well, it was as able, it was as 
 discreet, it was as vigorous, it was as skillful, it was as in- 
 trepid, it was as comprehensive, it was as penetrating, it 
 was as severe, as is possible in the nature of cross-examina- 
 tion, by any forensic powers that our comnmnity furnishes. 
 And then they said, "Oh, wait for the rebuttal"; these men 
 have kept back the damning facts, in order that Beecher 
 might have put himself in their power, giving his oaths and 
 his denials. Well, he had; he had put himself in their power 
 if there was any truth or facts or witnesses to speak against 
 him. Mr. Bell and Mr. Bowen gave testimony which, in its 
 
76 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 volume, and in its application, was as valuable to this de- 
 fendant's case as any witness that was produced on our side, 
 as I shall show you. 
 
 And leaving them out, why, a string of people about the 
 relative positions of Mr. Tilton, Mrs. Woodhull and her 
 sister in the Commune procession, filled out the body of the 
 rebuttal. Well, it was never a matter of any consequence 
 what relative positions these people held among themselves 
 in that procession. Honest witnesses, certainly witnesses 
 with whom we had nothing to do, were clear of the opinion, 
 are clear of the opinion, wrote the next day in the news- 
 paper statements of it, published to all the world, of 
 the relation of these processionists on that march. Others 
 come and give you a tangled maze, reduced, finally, on the 
 part of the great political leader who nominated Mrs. Wood- 
 hull for the Presidency, to the final conclusion that all he 
 could say in respect of the march, or its order, was that the 
 procession marched. The Chief -Marshal said that he saw 
 them both, Tilton and Mrs. Woodhull, and her sister. Miss 
 Claflin, not connected in the way that our witnesses said, 
 but so that when as he marched at the head of the proces- 
 sion and turned around, he can take in all their persons at 
 a glance of his eye; and Mr. Tilton and Mr. — the Pantarch 
 — Andrews, he swore that they were not in sight of one 
 another. Now, do you believe that the Chief-Marshal, by 
 turning around could see them in the same glance of his 
 eye, and in the same division of the procession, as he 
 said — for he was not on horseback, he was not mounted, 
 he could not see any further than anybody else — and 
 that Mr. Tilton and Mr. Andrews, and Mrs. Woodhull did 
 not know where each were in that procession? Well, I 
 don't know that the Chief-Marshall was right. I have no 
 doubt he was entirely honest. It is difficult to say who is 
 right about all that. But the only merit of this contro- 
 versy about the relative and accurate positions and relations, 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 77 
 
 i.s on a cjuestion of veracity, or on a (jueslion ol' cxjxjsnro to 
 contracliciion and contrariety witliout there being any want 
 of veracity on either side. The great ])oint on wliicli tliat 
 evidence was introduced by us was to show that Mr. Tilton 
 and these ladies in that communion or association, that had 
 been introduced into the case by Mr. Tilton's evidence — 
 the i)laintiff's evidence, not personally, ])erhaps, but the 
 evidence on his side — carried it so far that they sympathized 
 in public principles, and included in that sympathy the 
 procession in honor of the Comnume, which had the history 
 that it had; and included in its history the murder of the 
 Chief-Justice of France and the Archbishop of Paris. 
 
 It is seldom, if your honor please, that our profession 
 has, in the experiences and exposures of life, so noble a 
 sacrifice as was there made by the Chief-Justice of France. 
 Held like the head of the clergy, the Archbishop of Paris, 
 among the hostages of this mob; they, the mob, the Com- 
 mune, desired the Chief -Just ice to be a bearer to the govern- 
 ment at Versailles of their desire for some terms of capitula- 
 tion and surrender, on his pledge that he would return if 
 terms satisfactory to them were not accorded to them. He 
 said, "Xo, I cannot go on that errand. The Government 
 of Versailles will not recognize any obligation to a mob like 
 vou. Thev will never allow me to return; it cannot be that 
 they will allow me to return. No power of my will, no 
 adhesion to my promise, no protestation can ever save me 
 and the cause of truth and faith among men, from the con- 
 demnation that I have violated my pledge and my honor. 
 I cannot go because I cannot return." And he submitted 
 to the slaughter, and showed what a lawyer can do at the 
 post of honor, and duty, and in maintenance of his own 
 honor, and, more im])ortant still, of faith in human nature 
 that there are men that can keep a j^romise. The clergy, 
 from the time of the Apostles down, have had the crowns 
 of martyrdom widely dislributetl among them; and in 
 
78 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 modern times, it has been the singular honor, when martyr- 
 doms, when cruelties, when the fierce hatreds against religion 
 and morality have been subdued by the prevalence of reli- 
 gion and mercy — it has been the singular honor of the Cath- 
 olic Archbishops of Paris to furnish within our time two mar- 
 tyrs to their religion. I am as much a Protestant by birth, 
 by education, by conviction, as anybody, but I would like 
 to see in the rivalry between the old Church and all the 
 branches of the new, and then among all the branches of the 
 new, an emulation of Christian faith, duty, courage, hope, 
 and labor. That is my view of the advantage of emulation 
 among good men. 
 
 Well, this procession was in honor of the Commune, that 
 had made these sacrifices of the noble men of France. I 
 am not to dispute the freedom of conscience, the freedom of 
 thought, the independence of action, that belong to men 
 having the courage of their opinions and manifesting them. 
 I question nobody's motives in the procession, provided only 
 they accept the facts, and have the courage to stand by them. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this cause must be explored, in what 
 constitutes the great volume of the evidence, almost entirely, 
 as it seems to me, within the sphere of moral evidence. No 
 doubt, some tests are necessary, on legal principles, as to 
 the degree of credibility of the witnesses, as compared with 
 one another; or, on particular points of evidence, where they 
 may differ. And, gentlemen, I shall assume for the wit- 
 nesses upon our side no different measure of moral or legal 
 test for your belief in them than I accord to the witnesses of 
 the other side. Errors of memory are as likely to happen to 
 witnesses on one side of a cause as to witnesses on the other 
 side of the cause. Errors of memory are likely to happen 
 even among intelligent witnesses and conscientious wit- 
 nesses. Nor, shall I presume that, because Mr. Tilton is 
 plaintiff and maintains his theory, that his evidence is to be 
 probed or tested, or in advance accepted, less favorably than 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 79 
 
 Mr. Boocher's. I ])ropose to test him and Mr. Moiilloii, 
 and Mrs. Monlton, by the same rnles of candor, of jnstiee, 
 of pood sense, as I ask to have apphed to any of the witnesses 
 on our side. But. tluit inclu(k\s the question of character, 
 not as involved in the controversy, for that woukl decide tlie 
 controversy in advance, but as exhibited by Hfe, and con- 
 duct, and maintained in repute, as shown by them in motive, 
 in candor, in intelliiience, in accuracy, in good faith, on the 
 stand during the trial. And, then, I propose that each, 
 witnesses for us and witnesses against us, should be com- 
 pared in your judgments, for the diminution, or the confirma- 
 tion of your confidence in them, to the contradicting or the 
 supporting of the evidence, of testimony, given by witnesses 
 in support of either one or the other in this controversy. 
 
 The theory of the plaintiff is this, that up to the breaking 
 oyt of this matter of difference between him and Mr. Beecher, 
 or up to a date some six months preceding, his wife and he 
 held such relations to each other and to their children and 
 to the family as were properly described as an ideally happy 
 home. But I won't hold to epithets — that, up to that time, 
 the sentiments, the feelings, the conduct of each as known to 
 each, their feelings toward each other as expressed, their 
 daily life as seen to the most inmost insi)ection, was such as 
 belongs to a family in accord, of elevated character and 
 conduct and of hai)py sentiments toward each other; that 
 the only intrusion, the only rupture, the only discord, the 
 only dissonance, came from the seducer, and through his 
 debauchery; that under (to be sure, they must admit) circum- 
 stances of grave import in the affairs of Mr. Tilton, uncon- 
 nected with this disturbance of domestic hapj)iness — I mean, 
 the disasters which he came to, as between him and his 
 «'mj)loyer and in regard to his employments, his prospects, 
 his livelihood, his fortunes, and his good repute — in connec- 
 tion, I say, with these disasters and this situation which had 
 no relation to the intervention of Mr. Beecher — in connec- 
 
80 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion with them, it became suitable in protection of the good 
 name of his wife, and the fair name of his children, that he 
 should come into relations with Mr. Beecher to guard against 
 the casualty of a controversy between Mr. Beecher and Mr. 
 Bowen, insensibly and thoughtlessly drawing into it this 
 aspersion and this disgrace to his family; that thereupon all 
 the purposes of all the interviews was to secure that result 
 of secrecy. To be sure he had no idea that Mr. Beecher 
 would on his own account desire to explode and expose the 
 matter. He was quite sure that his wife was nervous and 
 sensitive as to any exposure coming from her; and in respect 
 to himself, why he would have "lost confidence in human 
 nature" if he didn't suppose he would want to keep it secret. 
 So you have then, thereafter, when the secret is known to 
 these persons, on their own theory, the most ponderous sys- 
 tem of machinery to keep the secret, the most extensive and 
 elaborate reduction of it to writing, apology, and defense, 
 accusation, argument, reasoning, all put into the permanent 
 form of writing, and then a judicious, to be sure, and cir- 
 cumspect communication by Mr. Tilton to a handful of 
 friends, or those who he thought ought to know about it, in 
 order to secure the secret; that then there came to be a 
 necessity of suppressing or humoring to the result of preven- 
 ting any hostile promulgation — I mean, the publication in 
 the interest of the opposite opinions of society and religion 
 of this exposure of the conduct of good, excellent people; 
 and that then there came to be a prolonged, a manifold, 
 diversified, intricate series of confidences, efforts, plots, 
 falsehoods, to keep the secret that had thus been commu- 
 nicated and had run down the streets like water; that, in that, 
 there came to be the necessity of a compulsory association 
 by Mr. Tilton, and by Mr. Moulton, as his coadjutor, and 
 by Mrs. Moulton as the wife, with persons whose association, 
 as it runs through this evidence, as produced by the plaintiff, 
 is denounced by him and his witnesses as discreditable in a 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 81 
 
 very high degree; that that pohcy, judicious, dehberatc, 
 circumspect as it was, failed, and there came to be an out- 
 burst of the Woodhull and Claflin i)romulgation in the end 
 of 1872; that, then, it was necessary to have new devices and 
 new conferences to put the secret back again wliere it was 
 before the enginery for its suppression, ending in the result 
 of its explosion, was first constructed; that this sup])ression 
 was approached, success was again frustrated, and, finally, 
 duty compelled Mr. Tilton to reverse the policy of saving 
 his wife and children and commencing their destruction; 
 that all the while Mr. Beecher, as he ran along as party to 
 these confidences, these conferences, and these plans, was 
 leading a life and exliibiting lines of action and conduct 
 which were in the nature of circumstantial, or argumentative 
 confession; that in regard to the collateral or interior ar- 
 rangements which s])rung out of suspicious accusations, 
 examinations on the West charges, or on the inquiries con- 
 cerning Mr. Tilton's continued membership of the Religious 
 Society of Plymouth Church and its responsibility for him, 
 and during the council called by the neighboring and sister 
 churches from the general denomination; and then in the 
 intolerable wit of Dr. Bacon, which galled Mr. Tilton, came 
 the final and definite promulgation of the scandal of the 
 Bacon letter, followed then by the formal, sworn accusation 
 of Mr. Tilton, by the evidence contradicting, refuting, sup- 
 pressing it, and relieving Mr. Beecher, and then by the 
 bold, irresponsible, unmeasured accusation of the public 
 press after the trial was over by the long, elaborate papers of 
 Mr. Moulton and Mr. Tilton. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this is their theory. They thought that 
 the boldness, the heinousness, the elaborateness, the circum- 
 stantiality of the charge, including picked items of evidence, 
 selected pieces of Mr. Beecher's handwriting, re-enforced by 
 a foul accusation that had nothing to do with the relations 
 of Mr. Beecher and ]\Irs. Tilton (except in the way of black- 
 
82 SPEECHES OF \M:LLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ening his character and preparing pubHc behef to beheve 
 him a scoundrel and a debauchee) I mean the Proctor im- 
 putation, was thrown into the elaborate denunciations of 
 Mr. Moulton under the counsel of a wise adviser, as he was 
 regarded, and with the purpose to strike death in the public 
 judgment, forestalled, excluded, derided, the question of 
 resistance, of inquiry, and of truth. 
 
 Out of all this heat there came a viper, as when that 
 reptile fastened upon the hand of St. Paul, but the Apostle 
 shook it into the flames, and the barbarians looked to see 
 that he should have swollen with the poison or fallen down 
 suddenly, for they thought that he was a murderer that 
 vengeance had pursued in the form of a viper. But when 
 they had waited a long time, and the Apostle showed no 
 change, they changed their mind and in the same rudeness 
 of superstition they said, "He is a God." The viper did 
 as little execution on the physical life of the Apostle and 
 came to as speedy a death himself as the malignity of this 
 poisoning of the life blood of character has accomplished 
 upon Mr. Beecher. It was a terrible trial, a terrible ordeal. 
 No man could wish to be exposed to it. But, nevertheless, 
 when the best test came, better than the oath and the 
 judgment of jurymen, however conscientious and however 
 intelligent, under the limits of testimony, which after all is 
 but ragged and piecemeal compared with the knowledge of 
 a man's life by men who have known him always; when the 
 Christian men and women that knew Mr. Beecher for twenty- 
 five years see him in their houses, and in his and their church, 
 and see him in the world in all his labors and all his conduct, 
 when they without dissent confirmed his virtue, and their 
 virtue quite as much, by their judgment, they had shown the 
 difference between Christian men and women and barbarians. 
 For they did not wait to see whether he would have swollen 
 under the poison, or whether he would fall down suddenly. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 8:5 
 
 for tlioy kiH'w lio was not a inurderer, and they did not fear 
 the vij^er or his poison. 
 
 Now, ^entkMnen, the general theory of the defendant's case 
 is this: that the rehitions of Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Tilloii 
 were, in the judgment, feehng, and aj^jprehension of both of 
 them, as Mr. Beecher understood while those relations were 
 growing u]) and going on, entirely moral, faithful, true, 
 wholly above suspicion on the i)art of others, as they were 
 wholly free from susjiicion that there could be misconstruc- 
 tion on their own part. Both these peo]3le recognized the 
 duty not to be led willingly into temptation, both recog- 
 nized the external duty of avoiding the appearance of evil, 
 and neither of them imagined that in either carelessness or 
 attraction there was anything that was not as open as the 
 day, and that was not as clear in the inspiring motives, and 
 in the actual sentiments, developed in that intimacy, as 
 the best and severest judgment could require; then, that by 
 what was a revelation to Mr. Beecher, the desertion by the 
 wife, in the month of December, of her husband's house and 
 his protection, and an appeal to the judgment of the pastor 
 and so, gladly, of his wife, on his suggestion, and then of the 
 church, if that should be thought advisable (in respect to 
 which Deacon Bell was consulted), there came to be a 
 very- distinct and very lamentable occasion to discover the 
 household not to have been happy, and growing faults, and 
 growing discords, and growing opprobriums, and growing 
 dangers, such as to require a definite course of action to 
 dissolve that family for temporary and restricted opportuni- 
 ties of safety to the wife, and of hope for correction, remon- 
 strance for the husband; that that matter came to an end, 
 so far as Mr. Beecher was concerned — so far as it was an 
 element of duty or of consultation with him, or on his part : 
 that then there came to be a new and etjually sudden, and 
 equally unexpected, and equally iniintelligible assault ui)on 
 him in the name of Theodore Tilton, brought to him by Mr. 
 
84 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAX^\TLL EVARTS 
 
 Bowen on the 26th of December, in which, with all the pride 
 of an emperor, Mr. Tilton required Mr. Beecher to quit 
 further obedience to the duty of preaching and to leave 
 Brooklyn. That came to an end so far as Mr. Beecher, or 
 so far as disturbing him, was concerned, in about five min- 
 utes after it was communicated. That was the end of that, 
 and he neither inquired nor cared what wild inflammation of 
 enmity or of suspicion had started this arrogance or this 
 malice of Mr. Tilton. The testimony leaves all this undis- 
 puted, that he did not move a hair's-breadth or seek for an 
 interview with anybody; and when my friend Mr. Fullerton, 
 thinking he was going to put a poser to him, said, "Then you 
 settled down on your indignation did you, all that week.'*" 
 Mr. Beecher answered, "No, I settled down on my work"; 
 and that is exactly what he did, and that he has done always 
 at every stage of this matter. 
 
 There has not been an interruption, whether with alarm 
 mainly for others — mainly for Tilton and his family, or dis- 
 turbance or appreciation of the turmoils and bewilderments 
 that would grow out of irresponsible and unregulated med- 
 dhng by people in other folks affairs — none of these have in- 
 terrupted a sermon, a prayer-meeting, a pastoral duty, a 
 public service, or a night's rest. That when in the same 
 week of the 26th, on the 30th of December, Mr. Tilton 
 opened to him grounds of complaint which he had against 
 him, which were serious and excited serious commiseration 
 for the disasters that had fallen upon the family, the pros- 
 pects, the fortunes, and the livelihood of these persons, for 
 whom everything from the beginning to the end shows that 
 Mr. Beecher felt a great regard, and, although he might not 
 approve Mr. Tilton, a great responsibility and anxiety for 
 his restoration; that thereupon Mr. Tilton's character and 
 life, as Mr. Beecher had rashly misconstrued it on insuffi- 
 cient evidence, was restored by the asseverations and the 
 intimate knowledge of Mr. Moulton concerning it, and any 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 85 
 
 part that Mr. Beecher had taken in either increasing, or con- 
 firming, or assuring ]Mr. Bowen's resentment, condemnation, 
 and dismissal of ]Mr. Tilton, became the occasion of self- 
 reproach to Mr. Beecher. 
 
 But more than all, that Mr. Tilton complained then, that 
 there had been bred in the affections of his wife a strong 
 attachment and a conflicting feeling as between Mr. Beecher 
 and her husband, that had qualified, had reduced, had dis- 
 paraged the absolute devotion and the unquestioning sub- 
 mission that had formed the whole fabric of their marriage 
 before; and then that this lady had, either by some con- 
 fusion of mind, or by some unhappy subordination to a 
 wicked purpose, to make peace with her husband, been led 
 into making an extraordinary- accusation of himself. I do 
 not take up the details of interviews or of statements until 
 I come to them directly upon the testimony; but we shall 
 see that under the impulses (which were pressed upon him 
 and developed and exaggerated by these parties) of commis- 
 eration toward the family suffering these unhappy disasters, 
 and of self-rei)roach for any share, either in these external 
 matters, or, more seriously, in the unconscious and careless 
 and thoughtless progress of a woman's attraction beyond the 
 duty of undivided submission to the husband and sj^ecial 
 devotion to him, ]\Ir. Beecher was led to concur in the great 
 duty, as well as the unmixed interest, that there should be 
 a reparation for the broken fortunes of this family as far as 
 justice and truth, kindly and liberally measured by affection 
 on his part, should carry him; and above all, there should 
 be an exclusion from the jmblic eye of these unhappy dis- 
 sensions in the family and of any connection of himself, 
 however innocent, as their cause; that thereafter, what was 
 called a '"policy of silence," which he su])posed was an hon- 
 est, an open, an upright purpose in good faith to secure the 
 ])rotection of this family, as it was pressed u])on him by Mr. 
 Tilton as the sole object of his resort to him, and l)y Mr. 
 
86 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Moulton, as Mr. Tilton's agent and friend, as the first duty, 
 the indispensable duty to precede, or make possible, the 
 restoration of the external fortunes of Mr. Tilton ; that under 
 that everything that was done, everything that was said, 
 everything that failed to be done, everything that failed to 
 be said on his part, was subordinate to, was in good faith 
 conformed to, was a necessary and faithful maintenance of, 
 his duty as pledged, and as supported by every moral and 
 religious consideration. Then, that all the efforts in regard 
 to the improvement of the affairs of Mr. Tilton, to the es- 
 tablishment of a paper for him, and in regard to pecuniary 
 assistance, were all faithful, honest, and just efforts, liberal 
 if you please, growing out of an exaggerated sense of duty 
 and responsibility on Mr. Beecher's part, but still, in accord 
 with his whole nature in all that he has ever done, all his 
 life — that all these efforts, which have been turned into 
 arguments and evidences of consciousness of guilt, to be 
 suppressed or brought out from this husband and his friend, 
 by a party involved in guilt, were all of this elevated, 
 straightforward, plainly intelligible character and motive; 
 that all anxieties, that all efforts, in any form, were simply 
 to maintain unbroken, against strangely inexplicable and 
 adverse influences, as we now look at them — to maintain 
 unbroken this good faith and this promise and prospect of 
 restored domestic confidence and improved business rela- 
 tions of this family. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the range of this evidence opened itself 
 under the plaintiff's introduction and presentation of his 
 case. This fact was adultery, which usually is open to the 
 proofs of the nature that I have proposed to you, and which, 
 when it could with such confirmatory confessions as, under 
 a just scrutiny, may be accepted and trusted, could take but 
 a very short time, was made, under their lead, to consume 
 many weeks, to involve an examination of Mr. Tilton him- 
 self, that covered, I believe, in the direct form, over eight 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 87 
 
 days, and of course involved a considerable consumption of 
 time in cross-examination; that on the part of Mr. Moulton 
 covered many days, and on the part of other witnesses took 
 a considerable time, and involved an examination of all 
 these lines of conduct, and all of them exposed to you, and 
 presented under the oath of the plaintiff, and of his support- 
 ing witnesses in maintenance of his theory of the case. 
 
 Our duty involved us in the necessity — for we could not 
 stand upon points of law, or appeals to the arrest of irrele- 
 vant inquiries which went beyond any of the actual and 
 substantial evidence that could support any verdict, what- 
 ever your conclusions might be upon them, without being 
 exposed to the imputation of excluding Mr. Tilton's evi- 
 dence, or of excluding some inquiry that might suppress the 
 truth, — our duty involved us in the necessity of meeting 
 the plaintiff's evidence by that which we have presented to 
 you. We never, gentlemen, have given any evidence in 
 this case by itself for the purpose, of itself, and by itself, of 
 aspersing, depreciating, or injuring Mr. Tilton, outside of 
 the relations to the proofs of the accusation here. Nor 
 have we given one word of testimony with the purpose of 
 affecting what is called the question of damages that should 
 be recoverable against Mr. Beecher, by showing, as is per- 
 mitted by the law, and as, in many cases, may be proper 
 when there is a contest involving money sought on one side, 
 and money sought to be saved on the other — we never have 
 given one word of testimony with any such purposes as that. 
 All our evidence has been to meet the false views of the con- 
 dition of that family in respect of peace and happiness; the 
 false statement that any disturbance of that peace or happi- 
 ness came from the intrusion of Mr. Beecher, or any other 
 seducer; the false view that the complaints against Mr. 
 Beecher grew out of that interference; the false pretension 
 that Mr. Tilton owed his disasters, in respect of Mr. Bowen 
 and his employments, to any malignant influence of Mr. 
 
88 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Beecher, instead of to his own damaged reputation and his own 
 misconduct; and such necessary disclosures bearing on that 
 question as grew out of Mrs. Tilton's resistance to further re- 
 proaches, and further disgraces, and further oppressions from 
 the misconduct of her husband. That the pretenses of Mr. 
 Tilton that there was no selfish or sordid motive and object in 
 the impressions, and the false impressions, which he desired to 
 produce upon Mr. Beecher's mind, in order to secure his aid, 
 his commiseration, his good disposition toward him, that 
 those pretenses, I say, of the want of a sordid interest upon 
 Mr. Tilton's part, had no foundation; and, as we go into 
 the details (it is not worth while now to anticipate them — it 
 would be a useless consuming of time) of the motive and 
 the character, as pretended on the part of this plaintiff, of 
 his associations and his efforts with Mrs. Woodhull, whatever 
 they may have been, we shall find that the pretense that 
 they were excited, were measured, were directed by any 
 interests or any relations of Mr. Beecher's, is equally false; 
 that those relations, whether they were suitable or unsuit- 
 able, whether the lady is of a character, and her house of a 
 repute that made the visits of Mr. Tilton, of Mr. Moulton, 
 and of Mrs. Moulton suitable or not, did not grow out of, 
 and were not measured and numbered by, any interest or any 
 feelings or wishes of Mr. Beecher; that in regard to the 
 measures and efforts by which money came into Mr. Tilton's 
 pocket, all the pretenses that those measures and movements 
 were but for the just collection of a conceded debt, so far 
 as Bowen was concerned, were untrue; and that, in respect 
 to the contributions to Miss Bessie Turner's support at 
 her boarding-school in Ohio, the pretense that they were in 
 Mr. Beecher's interest for the suppression of a scandal against 
 him, were equally false; that there was in her removal the 
 object of the protection of Mr. Tilton's reputation, against 
 her knowledge and her probable evidence, if occasion should 
 arise, and that Mr. Beecher's relations to the matter began 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 89 
 
 and ended with the idea suggested to liini that Mr. Tilton's 
 means did not permit him to bear the expense of this meas- 
 ure to which he resorted; that, when tliere came to be either 
 an actual resort to pecuniary contributions, to make up a 
 fund to carry along the enterj)rise that had been founded, 
 by the friends of Mr. Tilton and Mr. Moulton, without any 
 contribution by Mr. Beecher— I mean "The Golden Age" — 
 and when it came to the point where it was represented by 
 Mr. Moulton that without a considerable sum of money, 
 some thousands of dollars at least, the enterprise must come 
 to an end, but if tided over this period, it might hope for an 
 established prosperity, and when a generous friend of Mr. Til- 
 ton had been ready to furnish the means, and had impressed 
 Mr. Moulton with her munificence, but when that high 
 sense of honor and delicacy which characterizes Mr. Tilton 
 made it unsuitable that he should accept such friendship, 
 that then Mr. Beecher, under these motives, and only these 
 motives, of endeavoring, of professing, of desiring, to do all 
 that reasonably, or unreasonably, could be asked from gener- 
 osity and friendship, gave the contribution that has been put 
 in evidence before vou. 
 
 Now, in running out those lines in counter movement to 
 their production of those lines of evidence, there has come 
 necessarily into display a large area of Mr. Tilton's conduct, 
 concerning which he originally gave his views as true, con- 
 cerning which we endeavored by cross-examination to give 
 at least a reasonable statement of what the truth really was, 
 but concerning which it became our duty, by evidence ex- 
 posing his conduct, of certainly a not very agreeable char- 
 acter with certain unnamed ladies, and the real length and 
 breadth of his admiration of the character and the principles 
 of Mrs. Woodhull and her new dispensation, to traverse and 
 collect from the region which we traversed a combination, 
 a variety, a weight, a power of damnatory evidence which 
 has, in your judgment, not with any complacency to my 
 
90 SPEECHES OF ^MLLIAM ]VL\X^ATLL EVARTS 
 
 client, or my client's counsel, put this matter upon the foot- 
 ing of truth. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, in regard to the antecedent period, be- 
 fore we come to the first movements of actual opening im- 
 portant relations to this controversy, I mean the month of 
 December, 1870. Now perhaps all that I need to add here 
 to what I have already laid down as the length and breadth 
 and utmost scope and impression of the evidence of such 
 relations as existed between Mrs. Tilton and Mr. Beecher — 
 I need, I say, perhaps only to add to that, that no love-letters 
 of any kind have been offered or pretended to exist between 
 these parties, Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, during the whole 
 period of their acquaintance down to this very month of 
 December, 1870. Not one letter. All the letters of an 
 inculpatory character that have been produced in this case, 
 of written communications between the paramour and the 
 wife, have been letters written bv Mr. Beecher after the 
 accusation, and the whole apparatus and machinery of the 
 December and Januarv and Februarv interviews had been 
 through with, or while they were going on, openly left by 
 the wife, as she left everything when she left the house, 
 exposed, and her taking with her, as her husband said, noth- 
 ing but his love and good will, which she still had. And in 
 respect to the letters to Mr. Beecher from Mrs. Tilton, they 
 were all after the explosion, all during the period of arrange- 
 ment, or after the period of reconciliation, and all, so far as 
 my memory goes, made as deposits in the hands of Mr. 
 Moulton. 
 
 Well, now, that is a very odd state of things. They were 
 letters begun after the situation has been made public by the 
 husband and his friends, and we actually have had, I think, 
 not much on this trial. Still, I cannot say what my learned 
 friend may think his duty and the truth of the case may call 
 upon him to say in his behalf when he follows me; but I 
 think not much on this trial, but in some publications that 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 91 
 
 are part of the piihlif history of the case. Some of these 
 letters liave l^een made the occasion of the basest and vul- 
 garest interpretation, such as I am sure Mr. Tilton in his 
 senses couUl never have imputed to liis wife, for he lias said 
 to you, there was nothing lewd could ])ossihly find a lurking 
 place in the heart or the life of Elizabeth Tilton. And on 
 the part of Mr. Beecher these subsequent letters have been 
 made the imputation against him of gross and coarse, vulgar 
 equivoques, that were introduced to the notice of an exas- 
 perated husband, and of a largely exj)erienced friend, in 
 matters of common life (Mr. Moulton), and first have their 
 appearance in the life or the writings of Henry Ward Beecher 
 in these subsequent letters. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, this proves, as all such efforts do prove 
 when tested, evitlence in favor of these parties. Rightly 
 explored, sensibly and naturally read, there is nothing in 
 them but the most elevated ex])ression of feeling and purity. 
 But if there is in these letters these coarse, loose, lewd ex- 
 halations from the heart of Elizabeth Tilton, what becomes 
 of the theory, the comprehensive, and, as I believe, the 
 honest testimony that Mr. Tilton has borne to the absolute 
 purity of her thoughts as well as of her heart — what becomes 
 of the generous, simple, complete, all-com])rehensive con- 
 firmation of this purity of mind and of heart which ]Mrs. 
 Bradshaw, their witness, has given, in a phrase of singular 
 power, when, in addition to her delicacy, her morality, her 
 piety, her devoted love to her husl)and and her children 
 which this lady said remained unbroken down to the time 
 she spoke of, 1872, she added that she was the cleanest 
 minded woman that .she ever knew. And, how of ]SIrs. 
 Ovington's estimate of this friend and sister, of whose purity, 
 whose piety, whose words of love and affection and duty to 
 her neighbors and her household Mrs. Ovington had so rich 
 an experience in her watchings and ministrations, her visits 
 in the sickness in her familv, whether of herself or her hus- 
 
92 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 band — she, Mrs. Ovington, as honest, as open, as clear- 
 minded a woman as ever Hved; but Mrs. Ovington has no 
 idea that EHzabeth Tilton is not in all these regards up to 
 all the imaginations of men or poets, of the dignity and ele- 
 vation of her sex. Ah, what a terrible imputation upon the 
 plaintiff, if he now presents, or if, under his instructions and 
 inspiration, the learned counsel, taking these instructions 
 and inspirations from him, imputes obscenity, vulgarity, 
 as the hidden meaning of the innocent expressions of these 
 letters, which, as I say, show themselves as envoys into the 
 exasperated camp of the husband, and in her answer as 
 delivered to the keeping of the mutual friend. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is another general proposition to 
 which I wish to call your attention, and which the experience 
 of judges and of lawyers, and, I think, the experience of 
 common life, will show you carries great significance. There 
 is not any evidence that is brought into this case, after I have 
 left the area of what may be called circumstantial evidence, 
 but which comes to nothng; there is not any evidence that 
 comes into the case that does not have its origin, not while 
 either seduction or adultery is going on, but long after both 
 had come to an end, and long after both, if they ever existed, 
 had been discovered. There is not a word, an act, a move- 
 ment, a construction upon Mr. Beecher's conduct that does 
 not have its origin subsequent to the 29th day of December, 
 1870. Everything having the first pretense of any such evi- 
 dence originates on the 30th day of December, and not one 
 word of evidence produced out of the mouths of the witnesses, 
 repeating what they say, came from his, that didn't have 
 its birth after and upon the voluntary, the exacting require- 
 ment that Mr. Beecher should be careful not, by any heats of 
 controversy with other people, to impair the security or 
 the honor of Mr. Tilton's family. Confessedly every word 
 that is produced here as coming from Mr. Beecher's mouth 
 has come after and under the benevolent purpose of suppress- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 93 
 
 inj:^ the approacli of suspicion, or of coiiil)ination, of a breatli 
 against tlie fame of his wife and diilciren. Nor, in respect of 
 Mr. Moulton, except as brought into being as between one 
 who confides and one in whom he confides, upon their own 
 showing, nothing ever passed from Mr. Beecher to either of 
 them under that confidence that betrays guilt or conscious- 
 ness of guilt; but much did pass that ])roc'eeded warm from 
 his heart, in sym])athy for the condition, in love for the 
 afflicted parties, and in an effort to relieve and restore; and 
 all that comes to be the subject of evidence before you 
 comes from the mouths of men who avow that the utter- 
 ances of Mr. Beecher and the freedom of confidence and of 
 confidants grew out of the demand, the entreaty of Mr. Til- 
 ton that his wife, who was the subject — no matter who the 
 subject was, for that we are not now discussing — should 
 be protected, and of Mr. Moulton, that thej'^ were bound 
 by their efforts to repair the mischief that had overtaken 
 with such rapid and complete disaster the external circum- 
 stances of Mr. Tilton. Now, I deal with their own show- 
 ing, and that introduction doesn't attract confidence. 
 
 Another most extraordinary and vmiversal trait of this 
 evidence is that it all comes, every bit of it, out of the Moul- 
 ton mansion, and none out from the house of Mr. Tilton — 
 none, I mean, of any extent or measure, — and the only ex- 
 ceptions are of the interviews at Mr. Tilton's house which 
 grew out of arrangements made through Moulton. Now, 
 there in the ^Moulton house is the hotbed in which this 
 testimony has been raised. You look for facts; you look 
 for conduct to arise in the domestic establishments of the 
 two parties to crinn'nality of this kind, and during the time 
 that the alleged familiarity and the guilty connection sub- 
 sisted; but, as I have shown you, there is not a particle of 
 proof that does not have its birth after it was all over, do<\s 
 not spring out of confidence, in the interests of the family 
 that was injured, and of co-operation in the friendship that 
 
94 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAX\^"ELL EVARTS 
 
 was proffered by Moulton for the restoration of the broken 
 fortune, and none of it that does not come out of the Moul- 
 ton household in the person of its head, and of its familiar 
 guest, who there had his lodgings, not often perhaps, but his 
 meals certainly, for, as Mrs. Morse says in one of her letters, 
 in Elizabeth's broken circumstances he could not find at 
 home food sufficient for the nourishment of his brain. 
 
 • Third Day, June 1, 1875 
 
 // Your Honor please, and Genilemen of the Jury: 
 
 Before coming to the first movements in the opening 
 drama of this false accusation, I had endeavored to lay before 
 you the situation of the parties as disclosed in their character, 
 in their conduct, and upon the evidence, as preparing you 
 and your judgment for a just estimate of these movements 
 as they shall come to be portrayed before you; and I do not 
 know that I have omitted any incident or trait of particular 
 import in regard to the relations of Mr. Beecher and Mrs. 
 Tilton, and Mr. Tilton and Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Beecher, 
 (for with Moulton there were no relations on the part of Mr. 
 Beecher, or on his part to Mr. Beecher, antecedent to these 
 first movements) except this single item and element of 
 proof which was adduced upon the cross-examination of the 
 witness Bowen. It appears by his testimony, and undis- 
 puted, that as an incident or attendant of the actual inter- 
 views and intercourse which make the first approaches to 
 this drama — I mean the interviews and intercourse in the 
 middle of December which arose upon the wife's movement 
 of flight from her husband's cruelty, disgraces, and oppres- 
 sions—it was drawn out that Mr. Beecher referred Mr. 
 Bowen to Mrs. Beecher and to certain letters of Mrs. Tilton 
 that were in her custody. 
 
 Now, I do not anticipate at all the scene or the transaction 
 of this attempted separation of Mrs. Tilton from her husband, 
 but I call your attention to the significance of this merely 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 95 
 
 incidental statement, that Mr. Beecher referred J\lr. Bowen 
 to his (Mr. Beecher's) wife, as either the correspondent of 
 Mrs. Tilton regarding these troubles, or the depository of 
 his letters received from ]\Irs. Tilton. There has been an 
 aspect attempted to be insinuated into this cause that the 
 antecedent relations between Mrs. Tilton and Mr. Beecher 
 were of a nature, consciously on his part, to preclude or dis- 
 courage any intelligence of his wife on the subject; and yet 
 here you find when Mr. Beecher was cross-examined, whether 
 there were any letters received by him from Mrs. Tilton dur- 
 ing the period antecedent to December, 1870, he answered 
 that there were letters that had been searched for and found, 
 and were in the possession of his wife, or of his counsel — 
 found in the possession of his wife, and perhaps now in the 
 possession of his counsel. Well, my learned friends had 
 access, by the methods of the law, to those letters. They 
 had a fund and a field for ex})loration there which was worth 
 their while, if this husband had imparted to them any facts 
 or any soimd opinion of the guilt of his wife; but they drew 
 out no such letters; they sought for no such letters, in any 
 sense that would bind them to their production, and they 
 did not produce them. But it was reserved for Mr. Bowen, 
 their witness, to let you further into the contemporary^ fact 
 at the time of these occurrences, that Mr. Beecher, in the 
 end of December, referred ]\Ir. Bowen to his wife for her 
 intelligence and her views of the situation as between Mrs. 
 Tilton and her husband, ]Mr. Tilton, and stated to him that 
 she had letters received from Mrs. Tilton during the ante- 
 cedent absence of Mrs. Tilton at Marietta. So you have, 
 gentlemen, when you come to the beginning of this move- 
 ment between the parties, no reason to think, no reason to 
 fear, no reason to suspect, that there had been any conscious- 
 ness, any concealment, any manoeuvering, any change of the 
 ordinary rule of that household, that all the correspondence 
 of Mr. Beecher passed first through his wife's hands. 
 
96 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there are two important matters of 
 dealing, matters of situation, and of feeling growing out of 
 the dealing and situation, which precede the time when the 
 accusation is first made, and Mr. Beecher and Mr. Tilton 
 first meet at its making and at his response to the charge. 
 That occurred on the 30th of December, as we all remember. 
 But there are two matters of fact, important in their bearing, 
 that form a large part of the conscious knowledge of both 
 parties at that meeting, which are presented in directly 
 opposite views by the theory of the plaintiff and by the 
 theory of the defendant, and in regard to which I challenge 
 any answer from the learned and skillful advocate who is to 
 follow me, to the propositions that I shall make. 
 
 It is, that in regard to both these preliminary inquiries, 
 the theory of the plaintiff, important, necessary to sustain 
 the subsequent proposition to this theory, is not only utterly 
 refuted by the evidence, but consciously false in his own knowl- 
 edge, and the first of the series of impositions upon your intelli- 
 gence and your consciousness that he expected to practice 
 through the forms of law and evidence. These two matters 
 that I refer to are first the actual character and position of the 
 first promulgation, not publicly, but outside the walls of Mr. 
 Tilton's household, of there being domestic discord, and an 
 occasion to appeal for assistance; I mean the situation 
 which is rightly described as the flight of the wife from the 
 home of the husband, and an attempt to receive aid and 
 advice and protection from the cruel circumstances in 
 which she was placed. The second is to the real situation of 
 Mr. Tilton's personal, pecuniary, business fortunes, as 
 they stood at and before the 30th of December. 
 
 In regard to the first proposition, about the wife, Mr. 
 Morris in his opening lays down this as the rule and view 
 that they propose. Referring to the letter of January 1, 
 1871, which they regard as in the nature of a letter of con- 
 trition, betraying guilt, Mr. Morris lays down to you and 
 the court these views: 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 97 
 
 I presume that my learned friend upon the other side will have 
 some explanation — at least I hope so — but I have never been able 
 yet to discover one. But at the time that this letter was written 
 Mr. Tilton's family had not been broken u]); he was living with 
 his family, and although his contract with Mr. Bowcn was ended, 
 and his loss of the position as editor had taken place, it was en- 
 tirely without the influence of the defendant, and therefore furn- 
 ished no cause and no reason for this great grief which was mani- 
 fested. * * * It is claimed, and has been claimed, that the 
 feeling that produced that letter [that is, Moulton's memorandum 
 of grief on Beecher's part] was brought about by the advice which 
 Mr. Beecher had given Mrs. Tilton to separate from her husband. 
 The jjoint that I wish to call your attention to in this connection 
 is this: that the advice, if ever given at all, was not given until 
 after the l27th of January, 1871, as the documentary evidence that 
 we shall introduce before you will conclusively establish. Es- 
 pecially, you have the strange anomaly of the defendant's mourn- 
 ing over wrongs not yet committed, if they were wrongs; over acts 
 not yet done. 
 
 And so Mr. Tilton, on his direct examination, denies that 
 there was anything in the wa\' of separation, and of serious 
 incompatibility of temper or of views of their domestic 
 relations. 
 
 (f. ]\Ir. Tilton, from the time you were married until your wife 
 left you, as you have stated, about the 8th of July, 1874, was there 
 any separation of home or residence between you other than such 
 as happened by journeys or engagements that took you apart? .1. 
 No, Sir. Perhaps I should qualify tliat answer by saying that in 
 the early part of December, 1870, Mrs. Tilton went two or three 
 days to her mother's house, at her mother's request, and came 
 back again. ... It has since been called a .sej)aration. I did 
 not regard it so at the time. I wi.sh to be entirely accurate in my 
 answer. 
 
 Q. It was a separation in the sen.se of her being away from the 
 house, and at her mother's, a certain period of lime? .1. Two or 
 three days, I think. 
 
98 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, not only in these two direct forms of the counsel's 
 proposition, and of the plaintiff's own testimony, but all 
 through, as an incidental light or an incidental observation 
 was cast upon this preliminary situation, it was wholly to 
 the point and effect that that amounted to nothing, that 
 there was no reality in it, and that the pretense on the part 
 of the defendant that there had been a serious, although 
 perfectly justifiable — an important, though wholly suitable 
 — intervention on the part of Mr. Beecher and his wife in 
 the affairs of Mr. and Mrs. Tilton as between themselves — 
 I say the proposition on our part that there had been, 
 was treated as an afterthought and a subterfuge. In the 
 light of the evidence, gentlemen, what becomes of this view 
 of the plaintiff; and as it was a matter within his own con- 
 scious knowledge, as it had produced its rankling effect 
 within his own breast, and had been an urgent motive with 
 him in his conduct during this unhappy period of the end 
 of the year 1870 and the beginning of the year 1871, what 
 becomes of your faith, if the foundations of the cause are 
 thus laid in falsehood, and in conscious falsehood? 
 
 Now, the evidence is very plain on Mr. Beecher 's part, and 
 he is uncontradicted, and he is supported by Bessie Turner, 
 and finally in the most remarkable way by Mr. Bowen and 
 Mr. Bell, their witnesses. It appears that there came upon 
 Mr, Beecher in the beginning or the middle of the month of 
 December, 1870, as a thunderbolt out of a clear sky, in- 
 timation of a terrible condition of injury, of contumely 
 towards the wife, and of profligacy and cruelty on the part 
 of the husband. Is there any doubt about it.'' Of the 
 principal fact, and of the strange incident within the house- 
 hold that led to it, you can have no doubt. Of the principal 
 fact that Mrs. Tilton deserted her husband's house, resorted 
 to the protection of a mother little in a condition to afford 
 protection either of support or of guidance to this unhappy 
 woman, and that immediately thereupon the resort of Mrs. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 90 
 
 IVIorst', tlie niollior, hy and \\illi llio connirreiuo, if not the 
 y)roniptiii^, of Mrs. Tilton, was to Mr. Booche'r, and the f^irl 
 Bessie Tnrner was the niesseiififer by which the knowledge 
 was conveyed, and tlie invitation as well, to the meeting of 
 the unJiapjiy wife and her mother; that thereupon Mr. 
 Beecher went to Mrs. Morse's, and, after a brief interview 
 which filled his heart with anguish, he referred them to his 
 wife as the better person for advice to a wife and a mother, 
 in regard to so unhappy and so sudden a revelation; and 
 that Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Beecher went together; and the 
 interviews passed, the greater ])art of them in private with 
 Mrs. Beecher, on the part of Mrs. Tilton or of Mrs. Morse; 
 and the deliberation into which ^NFr. Bell, the deacon of the 
 church, was called; and then a final conclusion, which, by a 
 happy circumstance, came to be preserved, so far as ^Mr. 
 Beecher's final concurrence or share of it was concerned, in 
 the shape of a slip, which he handed his wife, as you remem- 
 ber, because he was engaged with compan3% and could not 
 accompany her or talk with her. 
 
 Now, Mr. Bowen, coming as a witness for quite other pur- 
 poses, in the interest of this plaintiff, and talking in the main 
 upon quite other matters, of importance, as we think, in 
 support of our views of this case, shed a flood of light upon 
 this business. As a part of the conversation on the ^Oth of 
 December, after Bowen had o])ened to Mr. Beecher the 
 budget of scandals, and reproaches, and complaints against 
 IVIr. Tilton which were crowded into his magazine, and which 
 he had already considered and decided upon as involving 
 the necessity of an absolute rupture between him and Tilton, 
 Mr. Beecher introduces the corroboration of certain impu- 
 tations he had heard, asking Mr. Bowen if he had heard of 
 any difficulties, or of the situation of difficulty in Mr. Til- 
 ton's family, to which Mr. Bowen answered that he had not. 
 And then there is disclosed to Mr. Bowen what was immedi- 
 ately recent in occurrence and in memory with Mr. Beecher, 
 
100 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 this whole transaction of the flight of the wife from her hus- 
 band, an appeal to him and Mrs. Beecher, an examination of 
 the case, the result of their views, and the reference to Mrs. 
 Beecher as the person having most knowledge and having 
 had the largest participation in the matter — and she had had. 
 
 You will remember in the evidence how there was a long 
 interview between Mrs. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton at the 
 house of Mrs. Morse at which Mr. Beecher was not present; 
 and the views and opinions of this clear-sighted and watchful 
 woman, Mrs. Beecher, were there formed; and when Mr. 
 Bowen went to her, no doubt they were expressed to him. 
 Mr. Bowen had a reluctance to visit Mrs. Beecher, for he 
 seems, in common with Mr. Tilton, to be one of the men that 
 Mrs. Beecher had seen through and discountenanced as 
 visitors at her house for many years; and Mr. Bowen did not 
 look with any great complacency on the interview with Mrs. 
 Beecher, who had seen through him, and made him under- 
 stand that she saw through him. But Mr. Beecher said, 
 "No hostilities, no unpleasantness or fear of it, need prevent 
 you. Mrs. Beecher will receive you; I will speak to her on 
 the subject." And Mr. Bowen goes and talks it all over; 
 and whether he sees the letters or not that had been received 
 and were in the custody of Mrs. Beecher at that time, I 
 don't know; but he had an o}:)portunity to do so; there was 
 nothing secret about it. 
 
 And then Mr. Beecher resorted to Mr. Bell, a deacon of 
 the church, a man of intelligence and of integrity, a man to be 
 resorted to by the pastor, or by any parishioner, in case of 
 difficulties of this kind arising that gave a right to resort to 
 the advice and the guidance of the fellowship of the church. 
 He tells you that Mr. Beecher then laid before him the whole 
 situation and took his advice. We had endeavored to prove 
 it by Mr. Beecher, We desired to prove it. We thought 
 we had a right to prove it. But, the rules of evidence as 
 administered by the learned Court under that division which 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 101 
 
 pcimils proof lo one side in aid of tlieir views and excludes it 
 from tlie otlier side because it is in their favor, a rule of law 
 well founded, excluded it on our j)art. And when we tried 
 to ]irove it by IMr. liell when he was first on the stand the 
 same just ap])lication of the same just rule of evidence as it 
 was construed to be a})i)licable by the learned Court ex- 
 cluded that testimony on our ])art. And, finally, they re- 
 called ^fr. Bell, and having- found that they had no ri<;l)t to 
 examine him as to one point that a])parently they had called 
 hhn to, they did ^o into a com])lete proof, on their examina- 
 tion, which wt' (lid not object to, of this entire evidence that 
 they had twice excluded from us, in our earnest efforts to 
 prove it, Xow. that advice, that evidence is plain: 
 
 He stated to nie — that is, Mr. Beecher stated to Mr. Bell — that 
 he had been sent for by Mrs. Tiltoii to consult in regard to 
 the position of domestic affairs in her own household; that she 
 had left her husband and was then at Mrs. Morse's, her mother's; 
 that she was in great trouble and great anxiety; that the conduct 
 of her hu.sband had been in a great many ways very severe, very 
 cruel, and everything but what (I was going to say) a decent man's 
 conduct ought to l)e to a woman. He stated that Mr. Tilton's con- 
 duct in regard to other matters, in regard to licentiousness, was very 
 low. He stated that he had been called upon by a young girl — he 
 did not mention any name — a young girl who had been in Mr. Til- 
 ton's family — and she had related to him circumstances occurring 
 in the family, in the household, by Mr. Tilton, which were exceed- 
 ingly licentious. He stated — ^I presume I need not go into the 
 circumstances of the statement; I have sufficiently indicated what 
 it was. He stated that, at last, Mrs. Tilton had been forced to 
 fly from her home; that she had done so, and had gone to Mrs. 
 Mor.se 's; that she had sent, then, for him, to advise with him as 
 to what course she should pursue; that he had consulted Mrs. 
 Beecher on the subject, and that they thought— both thought 
 that it was better that they should mention the fad to some mem- 
 ber of the church, so that they might not go into the matter with- 
 out \]\r whole church (with the whole church, it should Kc) being 
 
102 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM IVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ignorant of this proceeding, or what advice they might give, might 
 tender to Mrs. Tilton. 
 
 They had, therefore, called for me, not so much to take my ad- 
 vice as to inform me of the facts that were occurring, and inform 
 me of what advice they proposed to give, if any, to Mrs. Tilton. 
 He asked me then — ^or said then, that he proposed to hand the 
 matter over to Mrs. Beecher, that it was a matter a lady could 
 manage better than a gentleman, and Mrs. Beecher intended by 
 his suggestion to go and see Mrs. Tilton the next day. The 
 question was particularly as to what advice Mrs. Beecher should 
 give Mrs. Tilton; I don't know whether from Mrs. Beecher or from 
 him, the question came up about a permanent separation — that is, 
 Mr. Bell says, "I don't know whether it was from Mrs. Beecher 
 or from Mr. Beecher," that the question came up and was pre- 
 sented to Mr. Bell, but from one or the other that suggestion was 
 made, of a permanent separation between Mr. and Mrs. Tilton. — ■ 
 
 "And Mr. Beecher asked me what I thought of that. I said, 
 in answer, 'Of course nothing else can be possible; it is impossible 
 for Mrs. Tilton to live another day with Mr. Tilton on such facts 
 as you have presented to me.' Then Mr. Beecher asked me if I 
 thought it would be well to call in any of the ladies of the church. 
 I said unquestionably not; it was a matter of great delicacy; it 
 was a matter far more easily managed by a few than by many, and 
 it would be exceedingly harmful to bring it into the church, or 
 even hand it over to any ladies unofficially, and that it was certain 
 that the best management of the case would be to have it left in 
 his own hands and those of Mrs. Beecher." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you have in the touching narrative of 
 Bessie Turner as to the midnight flight from the house, when 
 this wife goes domi in her stocking feet to the door, puts on 
 her shoes there, and at one o'clock at night seeks protection 
 against her husband's treatment, and of her prudence and 
 consideration that she rejected Bessie Turner's wish to go 
 herself with her, and requned her to return and retire into 
 her bed with the children, and look after them through the 
 night, and then Bessie's following the next morning and 
 taking the children with her, and then this interview and 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 103 
 
 then this consultation, you have a direct, and plenary, an<l 
 indisputable proof of the defendant's i)roj)Osition of the firs I 
 movement of complaint heinj^- of the wife against the hus- 
 band, and of tliat gravity that it disclosed his i)rofligacy and 
 his cruelty, and that it meditated protection permanently, 
 or at least until separation, tried, should have put the wife 
 in her true position before the public and the clnu'ch, and 
 put the husband under the corrective, it might be hoped, 
 influence of a declared exi)osure of the wickedness of his 
 household — you can have no doubt of that. 
 
 AVhat was Mr. Beecher's written memorandum handed to 
 his wife as the final result of his reflection after his conference 
 with Mrs. Beecher.'' 
 
 I incline to think that your view is right, and that a separation 
 and a settlement of support will be wisest, and that in his present 
 desperate state her presence near him is far more likely to produce 
 hatred than her absence. 
 
 Now, did this impress itself upon Mr. Tilton as a grave 
 interference in his affairs.^ Did he acquiesce in it or did he 
 resent it.^ Did it rankle in his heart .^ Did he lay it up as a 
 blow at the integrity of his household and the respectability 
 of the name and fame of his family on the part of Mr. and 
 Mrs. Beecher that was to be resented and punished? Ah, 
 it is said that we use grave words of imputation when we 
 charge conspiracy to defame Mr. Beecher, as if that were a 
 word pregnant with terril)le meaning. And it is not a trivial 
 term. Now, let me show you how Mr. Tilton viewed this 
 interference in his family in December upon this appeal of 
 his wife as included in a letter that he brought in the hand- 
 writing and with the signature of his wife to Dr. Storrs in 
 December, 1872. It is a letter that will come into view in 
 reference to the first sentence of it, as it has been made llic 
 subject of frequent remarks in respect to that part of it. 
 But the sentence immediately following shows whether or 
 
104 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 no this separation was a phantom, a figment, an afterthought, 
 a subterfuge, a casual occurrence without significance, for 
 he makes his wife say in this letter to Dr. Storrs — no more 
 her truth or her feeling, or her opinion than the first sen- 
 tence — but he makes his wife say, after saying: 
 
 In July, 1870, prompted by my duty, I informed my husband 
 that H. W. Beecher, my friend and pastor, had solicited me to be 
 a wife to him, together with all this implied. Six months after- 
 ward my husband felt impelled by the circumstances of a con- 
 spiracy against him in which Mrs. Beecher had taken part, to have 
 an interview with Mr. Beecher. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there you have in writing, in form, that 
 the compelling motive of the interview of December with 
 Mr. Beecher was the conspiracy in which Mrs. Beecher had 
 taken part against him and his family, for I discard all notion 
 that it is anything but new evidence how Mrs. Tilton is made 
 by this husband to express his sentiments at his pleasure. 
 Did Mrs. Tilton think it was a conspiracy on the part of 
 Mr. and Mrs. Beecher against the peace of the Tilton family 
 when she had left her house and resorted to her mother for 
 protection, and sent for Mr. and Mrs. Beecher for their 
 advice and aid.'^ Did she think it a conspiracy of theirs in 
 which she, Mrs. Tilton, was the first mover, the first source 
 and origin of any impression or any knowledge that there 
 was any situation that needed to be taken up and disposed of? 
 No, I have read you at once Mr. Tilton's firm written state- 
 ment that the interview he held with Mr. Beecher on the 
 30th of December was impelled by the circumstances of a 
 conspiracy against him in which Mrs. Beecher had taken 
 part; and then in the letter that this same husband, Mr. 
 Tilton, gives to Mr. Moulton in his wife's handwriting, and 
 over his wife's signature, in which she is made to approve 
 and applaud her husband's conduct, she says : 
 
 You have risked so much as he has been sacrificed for others 
 ever since the conspiracy began against him two years ago. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 105 
 
 And Mr. Tilton in the "Trno Story" says: 
 
 Mrs. Morse once went to a lawyer in Brooklyn and with a plaus- 
 ible air, consulted him about a divorce between my wife and me. 
 It is sufficient to say in reference to my case with Mr. Bowen and 
 Mr. Beecher, and to the case of each against the other, that she 
 (Mrs. Morse) made a careful and malicious use of the few facts in 
 her possession and of the many fancies which these engendered in 
 her diseased and unhappy mind. ^Nlrs. Morse, in plotting her 
 insane mischief, chose a confederate for a brief time in Mrs. H. 
 W. Beecher, another lady of abnormal type, whose peculiarities 
 having less aggravation, are also less pardonable than Mrs. Morse's. 
 For 11 years Mrs. Beecher and I have not been on speaking terms, 
 nor have I ever had so relentless an enemy. 
 
 Well, she was a truthful one anyhow. She never received 
 any confidences from him. She never valued anything that 
 would come from his mouth, and she never was deceived by 
 any discrepancy between his face and heart, Mr. Storrs 
 giving the narrative, and an important narrative, and Mr. 
 Storrs was Mr. Tilton's best friend, next best to Moulton — 
 no, standing in equal rank with Moulton — the man he would 
 have gone to as his agent and his confidant, and the manager 
 of his affairs with Bowen and of his interviews with Beecher, 
 on his own statement, if he had only happened to meet him 
 instead of ]\Ioulton. Now% I am afraid to trust even that 
 hypothetical view of Mr. Tilton. But if it were so, how un- 
 fortunate that Mr. Tilton did not find in the confidence of 
 a friend the intelligence and also the integrity and i)ractical 
 good sense of :\rr. Charles Storrs. But Mr. Storrs says on 
 that: 
 
 "He rose and said he wanted me to go right round to Frank 
 Moulton's with him." 
 
 Now, this was the 2d day of January— the 2d day of 
 January, 1871 — right after all these interviews that I am 
 coming to: 
 
106 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Q. Did you go? A. I did. 
 
 Q. With him? A. Yes, Sir. 
 
 Q. Did you have any conversation on your way there? A. We 
 did. 
 
 Q. What was it? A. I asked him what the trouble was. Well, 
 he said that Mr. Beecher, Mrs. Beecher, and Mrs. Morse had been 
 talking against him to Mr. Bowen and influencing him against 
 him, and he also said that they had influenced his wife against 
 him. 
 
 Now, that was the friend of whom in this very interview 
 he says that "it was mere chance whether I had not taken 
 him instead of Mr. Moulton." And he said, "I want you 
 to go right round and see Mr. Moulton." 
 
 They started, and they did see him; and Mr. Storrs tells 
 you a good many other things that occurred that day that 
 explode the whole fabric of the false charge against Mr. 
 Beecher, as you will see when I come to direct your attention 
 to it — explode it then and there on the second day of Jan- 
 uary, while it was all fresh; put it upon the footing that we 
 say it stands upon both in respect of fact and in respect even 
 of this false charge or erroneous charge on the part of Mr. 
 Tilton. I am now dealing with the plenary proof that this 
 discord in the family, that this flight of the wife, that this 
 appeal to Mr. Beecher, that this intervention of advice and 
 consultation and of responsibility was the moving cause of 
 the hatred, of the reproach, the charge that he made against 
 Mr. Beecher. I have it under his own words, for you do 
 not doubt that these letters that he brought to Dr. Storrs 
 and that he handed to Mr. Moulton from his wife were his 
 letters, approved by him, if not, as I think very plainly, 
 written by him; and as to this statement of Mr. Storrs, I 
 do not need to say anything more on the subject, except to 
 say that when Mr. Tilton is recalled to the stand on rebuttal 
 this entirely new matter that we had introduced from Mr. 
 Storrs of this pregnant consequence that I have read to you 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 107 
 
 is not contradicted by Mr. Tilton at all. Was it not im- 
 l)ortani? l>()cs not our view exclude his view? Does not 
 our view falsify his view? Does not our view convict him 
 of wilful, ])uri)osed contrivance of evidence against the 
 truth to beguile your judgment and mislead your verdict? 
 
 Now, iinmediat(>ly on his wife's return, or very soon, there 
 occurs the misfortune of her miscarriage and serious illness. 
 That began on the twenty-fourth of Deceml)er, and the next 
 movement originated also in the troubles of ^fr. Tilton, 
 whoUv in the troubles of INlr. Tilton, and wholly in troubles 
 in which Mr. Beecher had nothing whatever to do until they 
 were forced upon ]\Ir. Beecher's attention by what was con- 
 sichTCfl undoubtedly^ a very bold and a very wise act by Mr. 
 Tilton. On Saturday previously, on the 24th of that month, 
 Mr. Tilton having been deposed from his place as editor of 
 "The Independent," and having received, in lieu of that 
 eminent and permanent position, contracts of employment, 
 contracts which gave Mr. Bowen complete command over 
 the durability and circumstances of terminating the relation 
 instanter, that l)eing the situation just established and osten- 
 sibly and presumably to be secure for some two or five years, 
 — two years in the case of one paper, and five in the other, 
 — Mr. Oliver Johnson, then a companion in employment on 
 "The Independent," intimates to :\Ir. Tilton that Mr. 
 Bowen had heard stories, and was considering them, preju- 
 dicial to his character, and he had better see Bowen. ]\Ir. 
 Bowen didn't want to see him; Mr. Bowen had not asked 
 an interview with Mr. Tilton; ^Tr. Bowen had not advis<Ml 
 Mr. Johnson that he wanted to see Mr. 'IMlton. but Mr, 
 Bowen had talked with his nuinaging editor, Mr. Johnson, 
 on the subject of these imputations upon the character of 
 Mr. Tilton and I Ik- necessity of ternu'nating his relations 
 with '"I'he Iiuh'pendent," and Mr. Jolnison, not in betrayal 
 of conlidcnce, bnl as a friend of Mr. Tilton, as he was, 
 brought it to the notice of Mr. Tilton and advised him to 
 
108 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 see Mr. Bowen and force some open consideration between 
 them of these causes of complaint. 
 
 The result of that is that when an attempt had been made 
 at an interview earlier, Christmas, as a day of leisure, was 
 assigned for an interview, and Mr. Tilton attended at Mr. 
 Bowen's house with Mr. Oliver Johnson, and then Mr. 
 Bowen informed Mr. Tilton of the stories against his char- 
 acter which had come to his knowledge. Briefly it is thus, 
 and indisputably thus, whether in the testimony of Mr. 
 Bowen, in the testimony of Mr. Oliver Johnson, or in the 
 testimony of Mr. Tilton himself, that Mr. Bowen had had 
 no suspicions, had received no intimation, had heard no 
 rumors prejudicial to Mr. Tilton prior to the time he had 
 dissolved the connection as editor. And when that was 
 announced in public, when it was seen that this great throne, 
 that this lofty crown, that this powerful sceptre, was no 
 longer in the hands of the king, but that they had all been 
 resigned, and another king that had new views, at any rate 
 not the personal interest in the question that Mr. Tilton 
 would have had, was announced, then the stories came to 
 Mr. Bowen. What are his figures.^ They came in clouds, 
 they came in an avalanche; they came from near by and 
 they came from afar off — the story from the ante-room of 
 "The Union" office, the story from Winsted, and the story 
 from the Northwest; the story of an intrigue with a woman 
 in fashionable life — everything as Mr. Tilton admits (it is 
 all admitted), came to his knowledge in the sense of impu- 
 tation or information. 
 
 Well, now, I am not talking of the truthfulness of these 
 imputations; I have never gone into them any further than 
 was necessary to show the situation to be such as it was pre- 
 tended on Mr. Til ton's part it was not, but what manifestly 
 it was, that there had come to be such a knowledge on Mr. 
 Bowen's part of misconduct on the part of Tilton, and such 
 a basis of fact, such a definiteness of name, and place, and 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 109 
 
 circuiiLslaiRv, as luudc il, al least, the subject of inquiry, 
 and resjionsihle inquiry, and of necessary action on Mr. 
 Bowen's part. That being so, this movement became an 
 im])ortant element in this false accusation, and in all the 
 surroundings of gloom, of malignant calumny, that have 
 attended Mr. Tilton's course toward Mr. Beecher through 
 years. 
 
 I have shown you the interference in his family that he 
 stigmatizes as a conspiracy, as proceeding from relentless 
 foes, as being such as to com])el him to come into such a 
 controversy as he did come into with Mr. Beecher. 
 
 Now, here there are, in regard to this matter, two prop- 
 ositions on the part of this plaintiff which he deems it 
 important that you should accept as proved, and which you 
 should stand u]:)on as the foundation stones for your footing 
 when 3-0U come down to consider the interview of the 30th 
 of December. He says that at the time of that interview, 
 first, he was in no disaster, and secondly, that Mr. Beecher 
 had nothing to do with it; that the pretense on Mr. Beecher 's 
 part of his having rashly, inconsiderately, uncharitably, 
 taken for granted that the imputations against Mr. Tilton 
 were well-founded, and joined, and aided in, and supported, 
 Mr. Bowen's ill-construction of his conduct, and the severe 
 decisive action in striking, at a blow, character, property, 
 livelihood, family, everything, so that at the end of the 
 week, when this interview was held, the 30th of December, 
 there was no more deplorable condition of what had been a 
 proud, a haughty, a self-confident, a high-headed attitude, 
 demeanor, walk, and conversation inUhis community, so 
 that he was "lying stripped and bleeding on the sidewalk," 
 to use his own phrase to Sam Wilkeson, a pitiable object, 
 and needing aid from anybody that jH-ofessed friendshij)— 
 all this in their case, in their evidence as produced by this 
 plaintiff himself, and by the witness, Moulton, by whom 
 they have attempted to supj^ort the plaintiff's evidence 
 
110 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 before you, all this notion has no foundation. He was a 
 man of comfortable and assured property; nay, up to the 
 30th of December he was in possession of contracts which 
 gave him a securer and a better position than that of editor, 
 which gave him $15,000 a year, as he has attempted to 
 impose upon your understanding — not very successfully on 
 his own testimony to be sure, and we shattered to atoms the 
 whole fabric of that view by the testimony on our part — 
 that it was not until late on the night of the 31st, when the 
 chimes of St. Ann's were ringing out the old year and ringing 
 in the new year, that the first notion came to him that any 
 moth had corrupted the garment of his pride. It is of the 
 gravest importance to this plaintiff that he should strike out 
 this state of facts as within the consciousness of himself and 
 Mr. Beecher, and as a matter of substance and of fact, at 
 the time of the decisive interview of December 30, 1870. 
 
 Well, what are we to say on this subject now? Why, 
 gentlemen, I shall not weary you nor myself by long observa- 
 tion upon the general mass of this evidence on that point, 
 for it is all one way. Now, gentlemen, I asked Mr. Tilton 
 if, after the interview with Bowen on the 27th day of De- 
 cember, he didn't go to his house, exhibit great distress, and 
 say that he was ruined, and then, by conduct pursued there, 
 indicate the extremity of his disaster and the extremity of 
 his resort for means to fight off the further completion, the 
 hopeless consummation of it. No. As usual, he wants to 
 have a circumstance to fortify his statement, and he says, 
 "I was not ruined"; and through a long direct examination 
 they made it appear that he was worth some $30,000 or 
 $35,000, all made up in this way : — Speaking of the beginning 
 of 1871, he says: 
 
 I owned a house, in which I Uved, No. 174 Livingston Street, 
 which with its library, furniture, and pictures, I suppose was valued 
 at about $25,000. I owned a piece of property in Llewellyn Park, 
 New Jersey, valued at about $10,000. I owned a share of "The 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 111 
 
 New York Tribune," valued I think, at that time, at a httle more 
 than $10,000. I owned a small farm out West, in Iowa, valued 
 at about $1,500. I owned a piece of land, a little fragment of it, 
 near Prospect Park, in this city, valued at about $1,000. 
 
 Then he gives his mortgages, and then the fact that 
 "The Tribune" stock had been assigned to his father. But 
 counting all that up, it comes to this in the end, that he 
 had a house and furniture, whatever it might be worth, 
 which brought him no income; that he had about $4,000 
 on deposit with the firm of Woodruff & Robinson, which 
 was drawing, I suppose, 4 or 5 per cent interest, whatever 
 rate they made up the account at; that he had a fragment 
 of land near Prospect Park, which produced — assessments; 
 a farm in Iowa, which had the usual crop of wild land taxes; 
 and the Llew'ellyn Park property, which ended in having 
 been got for advertising and having been turned over to 
 his particular friend, Franklin Woodruff, as an additional 
 security for the mortgage of $7,500 upon his house. Now, 
 there is another friend that sticketh closer — to his property — ■ 
 than a brother. I never saw such a set of friends as the man 
 has about him! Help him! help him! Why, all his prop- 
 erty comes to nothing. It amounts to nothing. That is no 
 imputation upon Mr. Tilton, no reproach. The reproach 
 is in the false and shallow^ attempt to impose upon your 
 understanding that he was a man of income and property; 
 and the attempt ends, as I say, in this Llewellyn Park 
 property, saleable never, sold never, coming to be needed, 
 in the generous estimate of one of his best friends, as a fur- 
 ther support to a lien of $7,500 on his Livingston street house. 
 Any income.^ Oh, no, no income from anything. The 
 Tribune Stock belonged to his father, and it so remained. 
 No income from anything. And I proved to you, out of 
 his own mouth, I think, that from the 1st of January, 1871, 
 down to the time that he stood before you, with the excep- 
 tion of what he might have picked up in one of his broken 
 
112 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and discredited lecture tours that he took in 1872-3, didn't 
 he? (Addressing Mr. Tracy.) 
 
 Mr. Tracy: 1871-72. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Only in 1871-72.? 
 
 Mr. Tracy: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Well, he made some money then in 1871- 
 72 but none in 1872-73, and I proved by him that all the 
 money that he had had and that he had spent was the 
 $4,000 that was in the hands of Woodruff & Robinson to 
 start with, the $7,000 that he had got out of Bowen in the 
 manner that you now pretty well understand and will still 
 better understand after I have remarked upon it, the money 
 to pay Bessie Turner's schooling, paid by Mr. Beecher, and 
 the $5,000 that Mr. Beecher had also contributed to "The 
 Golden Age" in its necessity; excepting that Mr. Moulton, 
 Mr. Franklin Woodruff, Mr. J. P. Robinson, Mr. Mason, and 
 Mr. South wick had made up a contribution, to the same 
 object to which Mr. Beecher gave $5,000 in its necessity, 
 of $12,000, one half of which was consumed, and the other 
 half returned to these munificent donors out of the money 
 that he got from Bowen. 
 
 Gentlemen, how do we stand now upon the question 
 whether in the middle of the week of December that closed 
 that year Mr. Tilton had come to an absolute prostration 
 of his affairs, and was convulsively scrambling out of the 
 flood that was overwhelming him, and seizing upon every 
 straw, even upon a woman's hand, careless whether he 
 drowned her with himself, provided he saw the last chances 
 of her feeble aid saving him — what shall we say about that? 
 He carries it, as I say, with a high head through his direct 
 examination. "Nothing!" Why, we had just made the 
 bargains; there was not any trouble; we had talked, to be 
 sure, and he had said, when I had thrown out an intimation 
 that he had better run after Mr. Beecher and let me go — I 
 sent him on that scent, and we had combined in a great 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 113 
 
 move, that Bowen said would he successful, to drive Beecher 
 from further editing- the rival ne\vspaj)er, "The Christian 
 Union," and that would take efVeet in twelve hours, and 
 that he and I- Bowen and I — should be masters of the 
 situation, clear of a rival and clear of a hated enemy, an 
 enemy, if an enemy, because we had injured him, an enemy 
 hated, if hated (and I do not doubt that Mr. Beeeher was 
 hated by these men), because ]Mr. Beecher knew that thev 
 had injured him. 
 
 Now, to be sure, when on the cross-examination — or, 
 indeed, on the direct, but more fully on the cross — it was 
 made to apjjcar that the vigor and success of that war against 
 Mr. Beecher that was conmienced on Christmas did not 
 come up to the sounding phrase of the manifesto, and all 
 that had come of it, although what had occurred had not 
 been displayed to you as it now is, for Tilton could not si)eak 
 of it, and Bowen was not called — what had occurred be- 
 tween Mr. Beecher and j\Ir. Bowen — when it was proved 
 that on the next day after ]\Ir. Bowen carried this missive 
 that was to hurl Mr. Beecher from his pulpit and from his 
 editorial chair, and to drive him from Brooklvn, when it 
 was given in evidence that all that had happened between 
 the joint actors in that brave act was that the next time 
 they met, which was the next day, Mr. Bowen. with a 
 countenance livid with rage, and with greater excitement 
 than Mr. Tilton supposed it possible for him, or any man 
 perhaps, to exhibit, shook his fist in Mr. Tilton's face and 
 said to him: 
 
 If you ever mention that 1 was uii ally, that I was a conspirator, 
 that I ever knew or heard of that letter that you wrote and I 
 carried to Beecher, I will cashier you; I will drive you out of the 
 office; I will call a policeman and turn you into the street. 
 
 When that was proved it was ])retty ev^ident that ]\Ir. 
 Tilton flid not stand on velvet with Mr. Bowen on the 27th 
 
114 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 day of December, and that is the last time they ever met, 
 as I understand the testimony of Mr. Tihon. 
 
 Now, don't you think, on his own showing, when he went 
 home on that Tuesday, that he did feel he was ruined? 
 Bowen and Johnson had told him that he was going to be 
 turned out unless he arrested the hand. A contrivance, 
 exhausting malice and reaching all prospect of ever being 
 supported by proof and carrying any practical results, had 
 been the only scheme that he could suggest for his temporary 
 salvation. That petard had been fired by this engineer, 
 and who was hoisted by it, Beecher or he, Bowen's interview 
 with him, as testified to by himself, shows you. Now, 
 don't you think that he knew that he was ruined? I am 
 bringing to you the evidence hereafter, but, on his own 
 showing, you know that he was ruined. You know that he 
 knew he was ruined, and you know that he swore that he 
 was not ruined, but was in the proud possession of this long 
 assured career with Mr. Bowen on "The Independent" 
 and "The Brooklyn Union," and the $15,000 a year. Now, 
 gentlemen, I am not dealing with this witness and this plain- 
 tiff on captious criticisms, of which best remembered 
 words or conversations, or obscure and incidental facts are 
 the basis. I am dealing with him upon the very basis of 
 his cause, upon the very basis of our defense, and I show 
 you at every step in it, that he invents, contrives shallow 
 and foolish pretenses that, looked at by themselves, won't 
 stand the penetration and the discomfiture of a truthful 
 interpretation of his own testimony. 
 
 But, when you remember the evidence of that excellent, 
 candid, simple, straightforward woman, Mrs. Mitchell, the 
 nurse, and when she tells you what went on in that house- 
 hold during the three days after his accomplished ruin, 
 after he had brought it into the family, up to the time when 
 he had prevailed upon that sick, that feeble, that hysterical 
 woman, standing, upon the evidence, between a swoon 
 
TIIK HEECIIER TIUAL 115 
 
 and a f?asp, you donl doul)! lliat he was ruined, and he 
 knew lie was ruined, and that his resort to Bowen's hatred 
 of Beecher instead of saving liini had hopekvssly plunged 
 him deeper, and that now he must contrive some a])proaeh, 
 some operation upon Henry Ward Beecher that should 
 not attempt to intimidate him, that should not attempt to 
 antagonize him, that should not attempt to affront him, 
 but should come around that great, generous, magnanimous 
 heart of his, which IVIr. Tilton has testified made his (i)oint- 
 ing to iNIr. Beecher) greatness, and distinguished him from 
 all other men. He has told you that the way to get aid, 
 the sympathy, everything in respect of sentiment and effort 
 that one man could do for another out of Mr. Beecher was 
 to make him think that he had done you a wrong, however 
 slight, and that it was in that w^ay that men did impose 
 u})on him, and that if they knew him as well as Mr. Tilton 
 difl they would impose upon him a great deal more — all that 
 I have laid out in these generalities of testimony which so 
 try the patience — not of you, gentlemen of the jury, for you 
 imderstand them— but of the all-wise critics of the press that 
 wondered when I was going to prove Mr. Beecher innocent, 
 and let alone these generalities of proof. 
 
 It is a generality of proof for Mr. Tilton to disclose to 
 you that the way to get hold of ]\Ir. Beecher is through his 
 heart; that the way to get hold of his heart is through an 
 impression that an injury has been done by him; that men 
 who understand that practice it upon him, and if they knew 
 as much about it as he, Tilton, does, thej' would practice 
 it a good deal more. Now, that is a generality that covers 
 the whole malicious scheme to w^ork out of the tenderness 
 of heart and the tenderness of conscience of Henry Ward 
 Beecher that moral evidence, as they call it, that he must 
 have done something very WTong because a man of the world, 
 a gambler, a profligate, a Sir Philip Sidney, or Sir Marma- 
 duke would not ruffle a feather unless it was three years' 
 seduction and two years' adultery. 
 
116 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Ah, gentlemen, a sad thing it is for us, in this civilization of 
 ours, if you are to argue the magnitude of an unknown offense 
 by the rep-ch of generous, of solicitous chagrin, regret, remorse, 
 compunction that will flow out even of the woundings of the 
 feelings, much more of a serious interference with the domestic 
 condition and with the external prosperity of one of a family 
 standing in the relations of friendship. I do not know how 
 to express my scorn of this reduction of human nature to 
 coarse and vulgar standards by which the lowest and the 
 coarsest are to impose their natiu'e upon all grades of char- 
 acter, of conduct, which we are striving, by education, by 
 religion, by all the humanities, to raise higher and higher 
 toward heaven. Our system is — and how wonderfully suc- 
 cessful it has been — to raise a mortal to the skies; theirs to 
 drag an angel down; and it is under those two opposing 
 forces and estimates of human character, human conduct, 
 and human destiny, that the division takes place before you. 
 Cowper, who besides being the most instructive and religious 
 moral poet of our language, and the sweetest composer of 
 devotional hymns familiar to us all, has the credit of having 
 written the wittiest, the most laughter-moving verses of our 
 tongue also; but, besides John Gilpin, he also had a touch of 
 humor in some other matters, and having occasion to ex- 
 hibit the pranks that the parishioners practiced upon a tithe- 
 collecting clergyman in England, he concludes the coarse 
 jokes of the farmers and the miserable sufferings of the 
 clergyman in this pithy statement : 
 
 Oh, why were farmers made so coarse, 
 Or parsons made so fine? 
 A kick that would not hurt a horse 
 May kill a sound divine. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, when they talk of agitation of mind 
 and feeling and compunction, they are dragging you down 
 from an elevated, purified, Christianized frame and fabric 
 
«r> 
 
 THE BEECHER TRIAL 117 
 
 of character and mind and licart, to compare him with the 
 groveling and coarse sentiments and feeHngs of men with- 
 out character, without conchict, without aspiration, and 
 without hope in the world; and they who are without hope 
 in the world are without God in the world. 
 
 Now, Mrs. Mitchell says that Mr. Tilton was back and 
 forth with Mr. jNIoulton with his papers, with his interviews 
 with his wife in the sick chamber — for the wife could not 
 leave it — against her remonstrances, against her fears, 
 against her duty, but what could she do against the husband 
 and the husband's friend?- — and that the result of all that was, 
 as you know, the procurement of a certain paper on the 
 29th, which is Thursday, which was used on the 30th, 
 which is Friday-. And Bessie Turner tells you the same 
 thing, and the distress was so great that Bessie Turner, 
 seeing it, sank dowTi, as it were, and swooned in the sick 
 room at these terrible demonstrations of Mr. Tilton's lament- 
 ings, and bewailed the woe of that family thus openly de- 
 clared, and Mr. Tilton tells you himself that he told his 
 wife of his troubles, whatever they were, and he told her 
 on the 30th, before the 30th, before the 29th, when he got 
 this accusatory note from her (its contents, its character I 
 shall make so plain to you that you won't really feel you 
 have lost anj'thing by its wilful destruction), that he got 
 from her that note on the 29th as the means of an interview 
 with Mr. Beecher, or to be used in an interview with INIr. 
 Beecher which did take j)lace on the 30th, because she was 
 distressed in mind — at what.^ That these troubles with 
 Mr. Bowen, and an enhancement or exaggeration of them 
 between Mr. Bowen and Mr. Beecher, would bring into 
 display or action this connected trouble in her house, what- 
 ever it was — you have his own telling of it; I am only telling 
 what his confession on his part is — that his troubles, and 
 the dangers, and the difficulties, and the fears and anxieties 
 that surrounded them were llie topic of conversation be- 
 
118 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tween himself and his wife, as indeed Mrs. Mitchell has 
 plainly told you; and what does Frank Moulton tell you 
 about it? He thinks he was there once. Not more than 
 once, I think. 
 Mr. Shearman: Twice. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: And he doesn't know whether the woman 
 was sick; he could not remember; it made no impression on 
 him; she might have been sick, and, very likely, was sick. 
 Well, now, gentlemen, what do you think of a man's memory 
 that could go into that sick chamber, and see that woman 
 lying on her bed, and all this turmoil (for the nurse says he 
 was in the chamber over and over again) — all this turmoil 
 going on, conferring with Mr. Tilton in his own house and 
 elsewhere, cooperating, suggesting, requiring, demanding, the 
 agency of the wife to be invoked, and tell you coolly that a 
 note, that he had from her desiring the return of this impor- 
 tant paper, he cannot remember; thinks she must have given 
 it to him, but whether she did or not, he doesn't know; and 
 he doesn't know whether she was sick or not. Well, gentle- 
 men, there is nothing like command of your faculties; that is 
 a great merit in a man; and as memory is one of the faculties, 
 I suppose it is a good thing to have conmiand of your 
 memory. Memory, ]Mr. Moulton and such witnesses think, 
 is a very good servant, but a very bad master. 
 
 You may remember the delicious wit of one of the conver- 
 sations in Sheridan's "School for Scandal," where the bright 
 coterie of men and women that never overvalued their 
 neighbors, were commenting upon Miss Vermilion s beauty, 
 and Mrs. Candor says: "She has a very fresh complexion." 
 "Yes," says Lady Teazle, "when it is freshly put on." 
 "Well, but then it must be natural," says Mrs, Candor, "for 
 I have seen it come and go." "Yes," says Lady Teazle, 
 "come at night and go in the morning." "And, what is 
 more," says Sir Benjamin, "her maid can fetch and carry 
 it. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 119 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, the testimony of these witnesses 
 was very fresh when it was freshly put on, and you could see 
 it come and go. Three hvmdred and five things we wanted to 
 know that Mr. Moulton did not recollect; and I don't think 
 it would be too much to say that you could sometimes al- 
 most see IMr. Tilton fetch and carry their memories. Ah! 
 gentlemen, you have been but dull witnesses of these wit- 
 nesses if you need anybody to explain to you the character 
 and the system of their testimony. Not remember that the 
 woman was sick; not remember whether he got that note 
 from her hands; not remember that he was there once; not 
 remember whether she was in bed, or not; whether she wrote 
 it in bed, nor any of these little items of proof! They didn't 
 know that we had an honest, an intelligent, and a candid wit- 
 ness who told you what she knew and what she remembered, 
 and it fitted with every proof in this case; whereas their 
 testimony is at variance in all these shadowings by which 
 they attempted to detract from the scenes and occurrences 
 of that week; at variance with the whole moral force, with 
 the whole necessary aspect of this situation. 
 
 Suffice it, then, gentlemen, to say that on this testimony 
 you know and feel that Mr. Tilton was ruined, and he knew 
 it; that he so acted, and that all his movements with his 
 wife, and toward Mr. Beecher, were governed by that 
 knowledge, and were contrived in order to repair the ruin or 
 build anew the structure after it was hopelessly irreparable. 
 
 Now, there is one thing that Mr. Tilton and Mr. Moulton 
 agree about — that during all this preliminarj^ period the onlj'^ 
 thing in the way of accusation, in the way of imputation, in 
 the way of detraction, in the way of calumny — the only 
 thing that they pretend is that Mr. Tilton had given birth to 
 the charge of improper solicitations. Well, now Mr. Bo wen 
 comes in, a witness called by themselves, and says they called 
 him for the purpose of showing that Mr. Beecher didn't take 
 part in the movements, conclusions, decisions and actions 
 
120 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 on his part in regard to Mr. Tilton's relations to "The Inde- 
 pendent"; I will leave that for the moment. I take him 
 now on his statement that he told Mr. Tilton on the 26th of 
 December, in that Christmas interview that preceded his 
 carrying the note to Mr. Beecher for him, and in Mr, Tilton's 
 name, that he should sever his entire connection with "The 
 Independent," and with the other newspaper, and he gives 
 as a reason why Mr. Beecher didn't influence him toward 
 that decision, that he had completely decided before he saw 
 Mr. Beecher. Well, if you take the story for its own working 
 one way, you must let it work the other also. You have 
 proved by your own witnesses, and not left it for me to argue 
 from Mr. Tilton's own statement, though that would have 
 been enough, what occurred between him and Mr. Bowen on 
 the 27th — you have proved by your own witness that on the 
 26th of December you knew you were ruined; that the ax 
 was to fall; and when your last despairing effort to charge 
 the attack upon Mr. Beecher and save yourself had failed, 
 as you knew it had when Mr. Bowen shook his fist in your 
 face on the 27th, you knew the ax had fallen — absolutely 
 fallen. 
 
 Recess of the Court. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Another element important to be brought 
 into view as bearing upon the conscious knowledge and feel- 
 ing of Mr. Beecher and of Mr. Tilton when they first came 
 into one another's presence on the 30th, grows out of the real 
 gravity, weight, and substance of these imputations against 
 Mr. Tilton's morality, which had come to Mr. Bowen's 
 knowledge, and were made the occasion of his deliberation, 
 decision, and its announcement to Mr. Tilton. Now, that 
 these topics and incidents included the Winsted affair, and 
 the dealing with a woman in the office of "The Independent " 
 or "The Brooklyn Union," there can be no doubt, upon 
 Mr. Tilton's own testimony. His mode of disposing of them 
 you have heard. He has no difficulty in brushing away, 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 121 
 
 while it merely depends upon the turn of phrases, either 
 these or any other facts; but the difficulty is that when the 
 facts return, they return not only with the force of proving 
 themselves, but of discrediting him. If he admitted the 
 truth, then the character of the facts would have been all 
 that was to be gathered of import from their e\ndence; but if 
 he denies them, if he misrepresents them, and they are facts 
 within his own knowledge, then when our duty brings back in 
 a shape not to be contradicted, not capable of being dis- 
 paraged, these ugly facts that he had swept away by the 
 breath of his mouth, then the facts come back, proving him 
 to have been false, deliberately, consciously false. And how 
 many times have these blows to be given — not to the fabric 
 of the testimony, but to the character — the ingrained char- 
 acter of the witness, and the plaintiff — before they tell to its 
 destruction? Why, gentlemen of the jury, if witnesses are 
 to be believed in their own case, under the operation of the 
 bitterest and the most hateful passions, by their confession, 
 that ever actuated men, they must at least carry a clear 
 tablet for their testimony, and not have it disfigured by 
 obliterations and double texts. 
 
 Now, this matter about the charges brought to Bowen's 
 notice, to the prejudice of Tilton, were regarded by Tilton 
 and his counsel as important, if true, and grave, on their 
 bearing upon what became a jirincipal question with them, 
 and has been made a principal question with them, and 
 which I shall consider on its owti merits, and that is, as 
 bearing on the question of whether Mr. Bowen owed Mr. 
 Tilton any money for suddenly abrogating the contracts 
 and dismissing him. The contracts provided that at his will 
 he might dismiss him without cause, but then upon a penalty 
 of paying six months' salary, or compensation, which 
 amounted in the aggregate for the two papers to $7,000. 
 Verv well. But if his character was unworthv, his conduct 
 unsuitable to the position of an editor of a religious print, if 
 
122 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 his personal credit and conduct were such as to justify, nay, 
 to demand dismissal, why then Bowen was discharged by law, 
 in conscience, from any responsibility whatever for the 
 sudden and summary termination of the relation. And 
 that was the situation. Bowen understood it so. Bowen 
 never departed from that position until, under certain in- 
 fluences which attended the final arbitration and the "Tri- 
 partite Agreement, " he surrendered that position and closed 
 at once the pecuniary and the other controversies in which he 
 had become involved. 
 
 Well, we have, then, as a sample of these stories, thus to be 
 tested whether there was solidity in them, this Winsted 
 affair, which I shall spend a few moments upon. But in it 
 you have not only evidence of the gravity of the imputations, 
 but you have evidence of the lightness with which Mr. 
 Tilton's oath deals with such questions. It was charged that 
 in public rumor, public fame, at Winsted, Mr. Tilton's 
 conduct with a lady there on the occasion of his delivering 
 his lecture, had been unseemly, immoral, and profligate. 
 Very well. Now, he does not prove that it was; that I will 
 agree; but the rumor was of that kind. Mr. Tilton knew 
 everything that had occurred. What did he do about it.^* 
 Nothing in it; a mere child — a sick child at that — put upon 
 him by his wife because she could not go, and this girl 
 would like to go, and that it was a shameful, scurrilous 
 calumny against him and against her, and had no real founda- 
 tion. Well, it occurred toward the end, I think, of Decem- 
 ber, 1869, and it had been sharp enough in its impression to 
 occasion the writing of a letter of inquiry to him while it was 
 fresh, and he had written an answer, and that answer we 
 have, and that answer was written, I think, on the 9th or 
 10th, or 8th, of January, 1870. There had been a casual 
 misdating of it, you will remember — "1869," by that com- 
 mon error by which, at the first of January of a new year, we 
 are very apt to put the date of the old year. Well, that 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 123 
 
 helped him a Httk' while. He said that in 1870 this Winsted 
 affair, the knowledge of which had been thus brought to Mr. 
 Bowen's attention, was an old affair; it had happened years 
 before; there was nothing in it; a little school girl, young. 
 
 Well, when I got hold of this letter, that "1869," you know, 
 helped him a little. If this was written January, 18G9, then 
 it would have been December, 18G8, that it hapjiened; but I 
 probed the matter and got from him, finally, by reference to 
 the memoranda of engagements, I having the means always 
 of holding him to the truth, that that letter of his was written 
 on the 8th of January, 1870, and within two or three weeks 
 after the transaction occurred; and in that letter he repre- 
 sents this little bit of a girl as shockingly disproportionate in 
 size to the magnitude of the scandal and that if there had 
 been anything observed, it must have been an intrusion; 
 disgraceful to anybody that was witness to any such fact. 
 
 Well, if ]Mr. Tilton had told the story as it was, or reason- 
 ably so, there would have been no occasion for our going into 
 it as a matter of fact. Its only importance to us was as an 
 element, substantial in its character, in Mr. Bowmen's judg- 
 ment, and his action, and as showing that Bowen had solid 
 grounds for his opinions, and, in his opinion at least, for the 
 course he took with Mr. Tilton, and if so, that he did not owe 
 him the $7,000, and that as to its being an honest debt, pay- 
 able, demandable on its own merits, and finally collected on 
 its own merits, there was nothing in that idea; that it was got 
 by that outside pressure which may not be blackmail, but 
 which is utterly disreputable, utterly contemptible, and 
 which the judgment of this conmiunity, in its length and its 
 breadth — I mean not merely of these great cities but of this 
 whole great country of ours — pronounces at once as the vilest 
 mode of extorting money, from the fears of reputable ])e()i)le 
 against ])ul)]ic defamation; and the less there is of fact and 
 truth in llic .sii])i)()sed charges, the more sensitive is the un- 
 sullied repute against this public detraction. Antl it was not 
 
124 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 desirable that Mr. Tilton and Mr. Moulton should have it 
 proved against them that they extracted and coerced the 
 payment of money from Bowen under the threat, "unless 
 you pay I publish these scandals, " and therefore they desired 
 to make it appear that Bowen had no defense, and he knew 
 he had no defense, and had always admitted he had no 
 defense. Well, they made very little progress in that, for 
 Tilton and Moulton both stated to you that Bowen said he 
 didn't owe anything. Now, we are obliged to go into this 
 matter of the Winsted affair, disagreeable to all, and how does 
 it turn out? Why, that this lady was of the age of some 17 or 
 
 18. 
 
 Mr. Tracy: Twenty-two. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Twenty-two years, weighed 150 pounds or 
 so, people took her for 27 or 28, twice as large as Mrs. Tilton, 
 it was stated; and so the idea of the little sick school-girl 
 that could not support the scandal, and that it must break 
 down therefore of its own weight, wholly disappears. Well, 
 now, gentlemen, didn't he know about that? And yet the 
 letter he wrote to Hastings, and the story he told, was a very 
 different matter from this; and then the disclosure of the 
 innocent — if they be innocent — relations that he held to this 
 young woman in the privacy of the room is such as may make 
 no impression on your mind, perhaps, of impropriety; and the 
 shamelessness with which he disclosed it, and takes virtue to 
 himself for his want of sensitiveness on its impropriety, may 
 make no impression upon you; but I think this plaintiff and 
 this cause would give all the evidence that they have given 
 before you in five months, if they could show a journey be- 
 tween Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton up to Winsted, and the 
 occupation of one room, reading Milton, and lying on the 
 same bed, in half undress, and so repeatedly seen and dis- 
 closed and exposed by witnesses, that no man can question 
 either the intelligence, the integrity, or the candor of. They 
 are no parties to this litigation. They are sensible, respect- 
 
THE BEECIIKR TRIAL U5 
 
 able business men of Winsted, and yon do not sympathize 
 with cross-examinations that l)rin^ out no disreputable 
 facts, but are disre])utable questions when there is no fact to 
 justify tliem. You would not like it if you went to Winsted 
 or to Boston, to haye inquiries of injurious inputation that 
 jurymen ex]:)ect to harbor on the idea that there had been 
 something; of that kind, or counsel would not ask the question. 
 No; jurymen do not sym])athize with that mode of disparag- 
 ing witnesses, that puts the depreciation in the question and 
 misses it in the answer. Now, there is nothing in it, perhaps, 
 and I haye not the least desire, either directly or indirectly, 
 to carry any imputation of a serious character in regard to 
 this young person, but I do put it to you that the circum- 
 stances justified the rumor, justified the discredit of Mr. 
 Tilton, and that his oaths on the subject show him to be 
 unworthy of credit in any matter that he chooses to put his 
 own interi)retation and his own eyidence upon. 
 
 Now we come to the Bo\^en and Beecher interview, so far 
 as I haye not already disposed of it, in its relevancy and 
 a])plication to the principal issue here, and which I now ask 
 some little attention to. ^Nlr. Beecher is the sole witness to 
 that interview, up to the point of the introduction of the 
 rebuttal evidence of the plaintiff, which brings AEr. Bowen on 
 the stand. Now, see the attitude in which Mr. Tilton places 
 himself in regard to that missive, and see the judgment that 
 he exposes himself to, when the only conclusion in regard to 
 Mr. Beecher, to affect him, is not the sending or the forging 
 of the weapon, l)ut the manner in which he receives it. 
 Tilton tells you that Mr. Bowen was running on with this 
 tirade against him, somehow or other it became appro])riate 
 for himself to introduce an insinuation or an accusation 
 against Mr. Beecher in respect to his own, Mr. Tiltcm's 
 family, and that that accusation was not in the least dis- 
 creditable to his wife, or his children's fame, but an accusa- 
 tion against Mr. Beecher, to wit: that Mr. Beeciier Iiad 
 
126 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 made improper advances or improper proposals to his (Mr. 
 Tilton's) wife; that thereupon Mr. Bowen, either then giving, 
 or before that having given the catalogue of Mr. Beecher's 
 profligacy, from Indianapolis down, the terror and the dan- 
 ger he was to all the people of Brooklyn, Mr. Tilton's quite 
 moderate suggestion that he had been guilty of these im- 
 proper advances, immediately eclipsed, in Bowen 's mind, all 
 this horrible scheme and system of profligacy that he had 
 been enlarging upon; Bowen thought, no doubt, to himself: 
 "Now, here is something that looks as if there was some- 
 thing to it. I have been dealing in this cloudy calumny and 
 nobody has heeded what I said : but, really, now, this young 
 man — he has got something that is not too incredible, and 
 that as he gives his own wife as the object, to be sure, 
 saving her innocence, his credit, and the fame of his chil- 
 dren — really now there is something. It is your duty, 
 Mr. Tilton, to arrest this long career of profligacy, to 
 stem this tide of adultery, to restrict this wide-spreading 
 seduction. You have got a fact. Use it." 
 
 "Well, but Mr. Bowen, you have been talking about facts 
 that were a thousand times as great as this little fact of 
 mine. Why don't you use some of your facts?" "Oh, a 
 sense of honor restrains me. Mr. Beecher and I have come 
 to a settlement, and all things are ended between us." Why 
 hadn't he thought of that sense of honor before he told Mr. 
 Tilton of those infamous aspersions of Mr. Beecher.^ I 
 think his sense of honor comes and goes, and you can see 
 people fetch and carry it. But anyhow, he did, and that 
 was enough for Tilton, because Tilton saw the point of 
 honor at once. At once Bowen recoiled. "I will not ask 
 you to be guilty of a breach of honor; far be it from me." 
 "How shall we arrange it then?" "Why, you open the 
 matter by this insinuation about your wife, and that will 
 open the question of Beecher's moral character in general, 
 and then I shall be relieved upon the point of honor, and 
 
THE BEECHER TRLVL 127 
 
 will back you up." Well, now, was there ever a more fitly 
 adjusted contrivance between "two men of honor" to main- 
 tain their honor? And yet, when they tell you their own story 
 of it, they wonder that people didn't think it as honorable 
 as it seemed to them. "Now," says Bowen, "You write a 
 letter, an open letter, and I will carry it;" and, as Tilton 
 says, it was their joint act — their joint act. Said I to Mr. 
 Tilton, "What was your object.^ What did you expect to 
 accomplish.^" "I expected," said he — "My object was, to 
 strike him to the heart! I expected to accomplish his ex- 
 pulsion from his church and from Brooklyn within twelve 
 hours." Bowen said, "He can't stay twelve hours under 
 that letter." "Put in," says Bowen, "nothing definite; 
 but put in: — for reasons expliciily known to him;" and they 
 altered the draft and put that in — an appeal to Mr. Beech- 
 er's consciousness, hoping that when he saw "Theodore 
 Tilton" signed to that, he would pack up his trunk and go. 
 
 Well, we are coming nearer to the proceedings of the 
 Ku-Klux than we ever expected to be in these civilized 
 communities. "Put in," says Bowen, "leave your pulpit, 
 quit the editing of The Christian Union." "Well, no," 
 says Tilton, "we have got enough in." Now, Bowen did 
 not think there was enough in, provided Beecher was not 
 driven out of the rival newspaper; but still, I suppose he con- 
 cluded that if he left Plymouth Church, and left Brooklyn, 
 I)robably he would not continue to edit "The Christian 
 Union." Well, now, the missive is forged; now the messen- 
 ger is charged; and now Bowen, if he has not got Beecher, 
 has got Tilton— got him, got hhn— body and soul. He lias 
 got, under his signature, a bold, defiant, blackmail letter 
 against Mr. Beecher; and, although the space between 
 Bowen's house and Beecher's house is not very long, yet 
 there was time enough to lead Bowen to reflect that perhajjs 
 it woulfl be as well to seal up that letter and not carry it open ; 
 and he did so. We got that much of truth, at least, out of 
 
128 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Bowen's lips and from his tongue, the moisture that closed 
 that letter. That is plain; there is no denymg that. Well, 
 Bowen goes there and hands it to Beecher. Beeeher opened 
 it, and read it, and he did not fall down dead, but, on his own 
 view of it, turned to Bowen and said, "Why, this is sheer 
 insanity; the man is crazy." That was enough for Bowen. 
 He knew that that appeal, "for reasons explicitly known to 
 yourself," did not carry any consciousness to Mr. Beecher, 
 and that what Tilton had told him had disappeared like the 
 baseless fabric of a vision; and then he felt, "I had Tilton 
 before; now, I have got him with the evidence that his charge 
 is false; for I have delivered it to the man against whom it 
 came as suddenly as a stroke of lightning; I know he was 
 unprepared, I know now that this was an arrogant, a grave, 
 a deliberate challenge to him, which, if the reasons 'explic- 
 itly known to himself that were suggested by Tilton to me 
 had existed, would have immediately brought some confu- 
 sion to the face, some tremor to the lips, some perplexity to 
 the understanding." And is it not so? 
 
 If you, or you, sir, knew that you had been living in adult- 
 ery for sixteen months with Theodore Tilton's wife, and 
 somebody suddenly brought you a letter written and signed 
 by the husband, appealing to your consciousness of some 
 relation to him that should suggest and justify that demand, 
 don't you think it would make some impression on you.'^ 
 All the evidence shows, and it is a part of the plaintiff's case, 
 that no intimation whatever, proceeding from Mrs. Tilton, 
 or proceeding from Mr. Tilton, had ever brought to Mr. 
 Beecher's knowledge the fact that this terrible guilt, pro- 
 longed, persistent, inexplicable, had become known to the 
 injured husband; and Bowen who had been only that very 
 day unrolling to Tilton the enormity of Beecher's profligacy 
 and the Christian duty of arresting it, and had seized upon 
 Tilton's suggestion that he at least had an effort to be pro- 
 fligate to charge against Beecher — seized it and carried it 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 129 
 
 there, looked at Mr. Beecher as he read the letter, heard his 
 answer, and at once concluded: "Whatever Mrs. Tilton 
 may have said to JNlr. Tilton, whatever jealousy may have 
 invented, or hatred magnified in Tilton's breast, there is 
 nothing in Beecher's consciousness that makes the color 
 come or go in his open countenance, that is coursed as imme- 
 diately by every tell-tale flow of blood as a young maiden's 
 in the flush of health." Ah ! Mr. Bowen had not lived in vain. 
 He knows something about false charges; he has seen the 
 ways of this wicked world; and he saw that instead of that 
 charge relieving him of the rivalry of "The Christian Union" 
 or crushing the antagonism of Beecher to him or to Tilton, 
 all that had happened was that Beecher was in possession of 
 this conclusive proof of Mr. Tilton's enmity and malignity. 
 Ah! Bowen must have rubbed the hands of his understand- 
 ing and chuckled over his forethought in having closed that 
 letter; for if it had remained unclosed, Mr. Beecher would 
 have had the same evidence against him, Bowen, that he 
 had against Tilton. 
 
 Now, Bowen says that Mr. Beecher treated it, so far as 
 any spontaneous expression of his, Beecher's, own went, 
 even more contemptuously than by this statement which he 
 made that the man was crazy. Bowen says that he put it into 
 his pocket, and did not show anything at all, and that Bowen 
 then said to him, "Well, what do you think about that let- 
 ter?" and then Mr. Beecher said, "W^hy, this is sheer insan- 
 ity; the man is crazy." I think Mr. Bowen does his sagacity 
 an injustice. I think the same wit that closed the letter 
 with his mouth would not open it also with his mouth, or 
 show any interest in it, or that he was a messenger that was 
 expected to l)ring an answer; and I think Mr. Beecher's 
 statement, therefore, is more conformable to the probabilities 
 and to the character of Bowen. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, these little differences in the memory of 
 witnesses come to nothing. The real question was, when you 
 
 10 
 
130 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 had heard from Mr. Beecher that narrative, when Mr. 
 Bowen comes, brought in here to speak to the same inter- 
 view — the real question was, and you watched for it, and 
 we on our side watched for it — whether he should put a dif- 
 ferent complexion upon the transaction, whether he should 
 show confusion on Mr. Beecher's part, tremor, solicitude, 
 anxiety, entreaty; and he did not. He said Mr. Beecher 
 treated it with contempt, showed no solicitude. Bowen 
 does not remember that he said to Mr. Beecher when Mr. 
 Beecher said this spontaneously, "Oh, I don't know any- 
 thing about the letter; I only brought it here." 
 
 Ah! but gentlemen, that was the very attitude he had pre- 
 pared for himself by closing the letter, that very attitude to 
 be able to say, I don't know anything about the letter. 
 That is all he had done it for; and rely upon it, he preserved 
 that advantage after he had seen the way the lion received 
 the insult of a less noble animal. You may rely upon it that 
 Bowen, who meant to keep out of the reach of the lion's paw, 
 and not to have his precious head crushed between the lion's 
 jaws, didn't think it worth his while to thrust it in when he 
 saw that he had kept it out, and that the lion was by no 
 means tame. 
 
 Ah ! Mr. Bowen ! Mr. Bowen ! Men must be judged by their 
 character; and whatever uncertainties there may be about 
 yours, they do not touch your calculations about your safety 
 and advantage, that you displayed hereby your caution in 
 not carrying an open letter. Then Mr. Beecher, according 
 to Mr. Bowen, as would be very natural — Bowen does not 
 say he told him he knew what was in the letter, or had any 
 suspicion of it, or was any party to it, but he thought he had 
 to move Mr. Beecher to talk about that letter. Well, he 
 admits that Mr. Beecher said to him on that motion of his 
 the same thing that Mr. Beecher testifies that he said spon- 
 taneously; that they agree about. But then, Mr. Beecher 
 said, according to Mr. Bowen (and here there does not seem 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 131 
 
 to be any very particular difl'erence) — Mr. Beecher said, 
 *'WelK sir, do you eoiiie liere as a friend, or how do you 
 come?" Did that look as if Mr. Beecher cared how he 
 came.^ But he wanted to know how he came. "Oh!" says 
 Bowen, "as a friend; oh, as a friend, by all means!" Now, 
 if Mr. Beecher could have heard the conversation between 
 Tilton and Bowen about an hour before, that took place in 
 Bo wen's parlor, what would he have thought of Bowen? 
 You have heard them both. Well, the trouble about this 
 conference at which only two are present, and both of the 
 same way of thinking, is, that when you have too many of 
 them, and you are the constant party, with changing part- 
 ners, and you profess to be of the same way of thinking all 
 the while with each partner that you are with, when you 
 get them together, that is the trouble. Ah ! that is the nitro- 
 glycerine that blows up the whole concern. Innocent, 
 harmless acids and alkalies, oils and powders, if you will 
 only keep them apart; but if you get them together they do 
 play the mischief with the best laid foundations and the 
 most honorable characters. 
 
 Only think of it. Bowen, that with Tilton an hour before 
 had been so sensitive to his own, Bowen's honor, that he 
 could not suggest anything, move anything, towards ar- 
 raigning Mr. Beecher, but said that Tilton might and he 
 would back him up, and they together would drive Beecher 
 out in twelve hours; he beards the lion in his den and the lion 
 says to him, "Sir, how do you come here? Do you come as 
 my friend?" "Oh, certainly, certainly;" and while he 
 was not willing to admit, as Mr. Beecher had stated, that 
 he grew more and more friendly all through the interview, 
 yet he admits that it began friendly, ended friendly, con- 
 tinued friendly, and the only reason it didn't grow was that 
 it was without variation or shadow of turning. 
 
 Well, what a pity it is, at several times during the long, 
 tortuous course of these slimy calumnies, these contemptible 
 
132 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 hatreds, that you could not have got three or four of these 
 people together, and had them put their interviews together. 
 That is the miscalculation about the resources of the Divine 
 provision for the administration of justice among men, form- 
 ing a part of the moral government of the world. These 
 two conspirators, Moulton and Tilton, Bowen and Tilton, 
 when they are together, think that no eye overlooks their 
 machinations and no ear overhears their plottings; as if 
 human justice and the moral government of the world had 
 no other power of overseeing and of overhearing than pene- 
 trating the particular privacy in which they are dealing. 
 Shallow, ignorant, foolish calculations thus rebuked by the 
 great prophet and poet of the Hebrews, "Ye fools, when will 
 ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? 
 He that formed the eye, shall he not see?" 
 
 Here, in this little juxtaposition of these two interviews — 
 within an hour of each other— between Tilton and Bowen, 
 and Bowen and Beecher, the resources, easy resources of 
 that justice which is but a part of the moral government of 
 the world, shows you that men can be overheard, and their 
 privacy can be penetrated by the sight, when they think 
 they are alone. Now, if nothing had happened to Beecher 
 from the transaction of the 26th of December, a good deal 
 had happened to Bowen and a good deal to Tilton. Bowen 
 saw the necessity of his rapid retreat from his companion- 
 ship with Tilton, and he left no doubt in Tilton's mind of 
 what the result of the interview between Bowen and Beecher 
 was, nor of what his, Tilton's, fate at Bowen's hands was to 
 be. We have a very graphic description of it by Mr. Til- 
 ton, and Mr. Bowen was not called upon to contradict it by 
 our learned friends. 
 
 Now, the staple of the further conversation between 
 Bowen and Beecher was this: — Bowen was slow to remember 
 it, but it all came. There is not a word wanting in his cross- 
 examination and direct examination together to corroborate 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 133 
 
 and sustain every word of INIr. Beeeher's testimony in regard 
 to that interview; and I call upon you to notice it, not 
 merely because it gives an absolute confirmation of the spirit 
 and character of the interview, but because it corroborates 
 the strength and accuracy of Mr. Beeeher's memory. 
 
 Mr. Beecher has displayed to you the conversation about 
 Mr. Tilton's profligacy, or the rumors of it, as they had come 
 to Bowen, that he had heard nothing of them — Bowen hadn't 
 — until after he had deposed Tilton from the editorship of 
 "The Independent"; that then they came in, came like an 
 avalanche, came from here and there, from the West and 
 from the North, and that they were horrible; and then that 
 he, Mr. Beecher, said, "Well, I have heard about Mr. Tilton 
 myself," and within a very short time, Bowen says Beecher 
 asked him if he knew anything about any troubles in Mr. 
 Tilton's family. "No," says Bowen, "no; I have heard 
 nothing of any consequence about any troubles in his 
 family." Well, I am sure I don't know that he had. I 
 have nothing but Mr. Tilton's word for it that he told him 
 anything against Mr. Beecher in their conversation. Mr. 
 Bowen, on a further direct examination by his own side of 
 the case, the side that called him, is made to answer that at 
 the time of the signing of the "Tripartite Agreement" he 
 had never heard of any imputations against Mr. Beecher in 
 respect to Mr. Tilton's family. That is in 1872. He says 
 that he never had heard that Mr. Tilton had made any 
 charges against Mr. Beecher. They had an object in asking 
 that question, and he favored that object by his answer; 
 but the difficulty is that when you get an answer into a case 
 you cannot get it out, and it is competent for both sides to 
 comment U])on it. Now, then, Mr. Beecher proceeded to tell 
 him about the flight of Mrs. Tilton from her husband's roof; 
 the resort to her mother, Mrs. Morse, their joint resort to 
 him and Mrs. Beecher, and the advice and the grounds of 
 the application, and of the flight of the wife, the Bessie 
 
134 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Turner matter, other intrigues with ladies of more distinction 
 and credit, and Mr. Beecher concurred in the opinion of Mr. 
 Bowen that it would not do to have Mr. Tilton at all con- 
 nected with "The Independent." 
 
 Now the point about Mr. Bowen is that he had really 
 made up his mind the day before, and so all these statements 
 of Mr. Beecher, which he admits were made to him, con- 
 curred in that view, tended to that result, really produced 
 no impression upon him, because his mind, self-poised, had 
 already determined it. But he agreed on a question I put 
 him that there was nothing in what Mr. Beecher said that 
 tended to unsettle his decision, and he had said, too, that 
 although he had substantially made up his mind, and had 
 substantially informed Mr. Tilton on the 26th of December 
 that he was going to discharge him, yet he had not abso- 
 lutely. And then, in the next colunm he said that he had, 
 absolutely, and so you have those insensible vibrations of a 
 great mind between absolute and semi-absolute determina- 
 tion. Why, the touch of a child will rock a great bowlder 
 that is poised in that way, and I should think that what Mr 
 Beecher said might tend to the absolute, and dispose of the 
 semi-absolute determination. Well, gentlemen, you all 
 understand that interview. It was of the kind that Mr. 
 Beecher states, and Mr. Bowen absolutely confirms it. 
 We have got into a curious question of where the conversa- 
 tion took place, arid which is right about that, an unim- 
 portant consideration, as there is an entire agreement that 
 the nature of the interview was that Mr. Beecher did not 
 care that (snapping his fingers) for the missive, and showed 
 it. Mr. Bowen cared everything for having it appear that 
 he had nothing to do with the missive, and Mr. Bowen was 
 friendly, and friendly, and friendly, and glad to find that if 
 he had not succeeded in triumphing over Mr. Beecher, he had 
 at least successfully concealed from him the deadly enmity 
 and hatred that he felt for him, and he came back rubbing 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 135 
 
 liis hands again, figuratively, to Mr. Eggleston who was wait- 
 ing for him, and said, "Mr. Beeeher is delighted that Mr. 
 Tilton is discharged" — is, in the present tense. "And he 
 is your friend, and my friend, and he has told me stories 
 about Tilton" — "horrible stories," Eggleston says — "and 
 our compact and our amity is complete." 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I don't know whether Tilton has mis- 
 represented Bowen in that previous interview between him- 
 self and Mr. Bowen, or not, and I don't know that we ever 
 shall know, for by the very terms of the proposition it is only 
 the statements of the two about each other that we shall ever 
 get at. Mr. Tilton's statement of the interview stands as 
 the truth in this cause. It is uncontradicted and furnishes, 
 so far as that enters into the estimate of the feelings and rela- 
 tions of Mr. Tilton and Mr. Beeeher, and Mr. Tilton and Mr. 
 Bowen, and Mr. Beeeher, the evidence on the subject — I 
 mean of these calumnies against Mr. Beeeher, the animosity 
 of ]Mr. Bowen, and the subjugation by the strong mind of 
 Bowen of the weaker character, Tilton, to his, Bowen's ob- 
 jects. Mr. Bowen contradicts distinctly Mr. Tilton on the 
 question of his discharge as then determined upon, and then 
 communicated, and he contradicts him further by saying to 
 you that on the morning of Saturday of that week, he in- 
 formed him of his then present and actual discharge. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have occasion to ask your attention to 
 the vast value of these two facts — by the evidence of the 
 plaintiff out of his own mouth, out of other witnesses, so far 
 as they could show collateral support to it— these two propo- 
 sitions of there being this action of the wife contemplating 
 separation, resort to the pastor, this dealing by the pastor 
 with it, openly, clearly, decisively, and this second i)oint 
 of the dealing between Mr. Beeeher and Mr. Bowen 
 whereby Mr. Beeeher espoused the view which Mr. Bowen 
 communicated about Tilton's character, and the necessary 
 action of Mr. Bowen in regard to it, corroborated, assisted; 
 
136 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 conformed, secured, and aided by his disclosures of this con- 
 jugal discord and of this personal profligacy with Bessie 
 Turner and with others. 
 
 Gentlemen, you are full grown men. Some people think 
 that if they come into a jury-box they are to lose all their 
 common sense, all the elasticity of their understanding, all 
 their personal knowledge and views of human nature and of 
 human conduct, and take up a dry and formal following of 
 testimony as it may be long drawn out before them. Why, 
 gentlemen, you are here because you are practical men, be- 
 cause you know something of our common nature, because 
 you come from the bosom of the very society in which these 
 parties moved, and in which their action is taken, and by 
 which it is to be judged. All the number of witnesses that 
 would prove to you that the moon was made of green cheese 
 would not justify you in bringing in a verdict that it was 
 made of green cheese, not in the least. It would justify 
 you in bringing in a verdict that the witnesses were made of 
 green cheese. 
 
 Now, I ask you this — do you believe that there could be a 
 relation of paramour and mistress between a man eminent 
 in society and a woman the wife of a man prominent in so- 
 ciety, and moving in the circles of social intercourse, of re- 
 ligious association, of public notice, that belonged to these 
 people and these their respective families — do you believe 
 that that relation between paramour and mistress could have 
 continued for eighteen months, and then, by chance — much 
 more if by confession or communication from the wife — come 
 to the knowledge of the husband and then, everything being 
 lovely and quiet between them, so that there was no out- 
 break there — do you think the wife and mistress would have 
 left the paramour six months unadvised that somebody else 
 knew of it, that that somebody was the husband, and that 
 husband the hater on independent grounds of the paramour? 
 Do you think so? Did you ever hear anything like that, 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 137 
 
 that would lead a woman that had that degree of affection 
 and submission to a man, that she would not warn him 
 against the unguarded course of his life toward this family, 
 that would expose him to the observation, to the condemna- 
 tion, to the resentment of the husband? That would be a 
 new chapter in human character, and I think if it could be 
 understood as a natural and probable sequel of these illicit 
 relations, and of their discovery, that it might tend to dis- 
 courage the ventures that men make in that direction. No, 
 gentlemen, common sense discards that. 
 
 Well, if a wife, conscious of this final, deepest guilt of a 
 woman as toward her husband — conscious of the long course 
 of seduction concealed from him, and of the long pollution 
 of the marriage bed and contamination of the offspring by a 
 stain, had confessed and found a forgiving husband ready to 
 conceal, unwilling to resent against the injurer — do you 
 think that that wife, with that knowledge of her own con- 
 duct and of her husband's privity to it, will be the first to 
 pick a quarrel, and desert the shelter of that roof? What 
 roof could be so hospitable to her guilt as that? What 
 shelter against discovery, against publicity, against ruin so 
 safe as that? What could break the tacit or the actual com- 
 pact of immunity, of secrecy, of restored and continued love 
 on the part of the husband to the fallen and penitent wife so 
 necessarily, so absolutely, as the wife's desertion of the home 
 and accusation of the husband of profligacy? 
 
 Well, gentlemen, if you can imagine that a wife so situa- 
 ted, so sensitive, so morbid on the question of secrecy, could 
 rush out of that house, and accuse her husband when he 
 knew of her profligacy, you must have some strange views 
 of human nature, and if we can not try these people as hu- 
 man beings we cannot try them at all. But, do you think 
 she would go to the paramour and the pastor, and if she did, 
 do you think he would turn her over to his wife, and his 
 wife this woman (turning to Mrs. Beecher), this matron who 
 
138 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 makes the name of matron all the more noble that she is so 
 conspicuous in its roll of honor, this woman that saw enough 
 into the eyes of Theodore Tilton eleven years before to 
 banish him from her house, and enough into the eyes of 
 Henry C. Bowen to keep him from crossing her threshold? 
 Do you think that Henry Ward Beecher would turn over his 
 mistress to his wife for her to examine, with all the power 
 that a woman knows to apply to a false woman? Now, you 
 may think that is natural, and you may think it is safe, and 
 you may think that out of these two women being shut up, 
 Mrs. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, there came nothing but ad- 
 vice to quit the husband, brave him, to sustain her purity. 
 You may think so. I would not like to have any client of 
 mine convicted of any crime like this, but I assure you, 
 gentlemen, if he has to be convicted I would like to have him 
 convicted on evidence like this, for the evidence answers 
 the conviction and convicts the tribunal that condemns. 
 
 Look, now, at the enormous value of the dealing which Mr. 
 Beecher exhibited to the Bowen missile, proceeding from the 
 bow and the skillful archery of Mr. Tilton. Take Bowen's 
 statement; was there ever greater unconcern, was there 
 ever greater indifference, ever stronger, more definite brav- 
 ing of it than Mr. Beecher's treatment of the missive and his 
 treatment of the man? Was there any yielding? Was 
 there any entreaty of Mr. Bowen? No. All Mr. Beecher 
 wanted to know was, "Whether you came here, Mr. Bowen, 
 coupled with, conscious of, in complicity with this insane, 
 mad contumely of Mr. Tilton?" If Mr. Bowen had said, 
 "I did; I suggested it, I urged it, I am going to back it up," 
 then Mr. Beecher would have faced them both, and he has 
 faced them both ever since. But neither Bowen nor Tilton 
 has faced him. I can imagine no possible construction of 
 human conduct that would treat this charge, this demand, 
 under Mr. Tilton's own signature, as Mr. Beecher treated 
 it, if there had been the least consciousness of those guilty 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 139 
 
 relations. What did he do? He talked with Mr. Bowen 
 as long as Mr. Bowen chose to talk, and then Mr. Bowen 
 went about his business, and ]Mr. Beecher never troubled 
 himself in the least, never sought Mr. Tilton, never sent a 
 friend to see him, never thought of the subject further, and 
 waited to see what anybody would have to say or to do about 
 it. Well, gentlemen, we might, I think, consider all at- 
 tempts to convict ]Mr. Beecher of this crime, upon moral 
 evidence, as substantially ended by these penetrating 
 thrusts into his very soul that this evidence has given to 
 him, and you read on its unruffled mirror the placidity of 
 innocence which forbids you to imagine guilt. 
 
 Are you to take an alternative proposition, that he is an 
 old offender, full of wickedness.' Well, there you run against 
 a thousand improbabilities, not to say impossibilities. You 
 run against what, even in the case of a single instance of 
 guilt, is really a moral impossibility. Is there nothing, then, 
 in the wisdom of the Great Master that when you are judg- 
 ing of moral character you are to judge by the conduct of 
 the life.' Is there nothing in the proposition that men do 
 not gather grapes of thorns, and figs of thistles.' Do you 
 plant thistles to raise figs, and thorns to expect a vintage 
 from? What greater vintage of Christian beneficence and 
 activity has ever been poured out into the wine-vats of a 
 nation than the life of Henry Ward Beecher has furnished? 
 And, yet, all these grapes are gathered from this thorn tree, 
 and are gathered still. If, under this fig tree, men could not 
 repose, what beneficent shelter has ever been reared in the 
 human character and human conduct for the confidence and 
 the safety of one's fellow men? And, yet, this is but a 
 prickly thistle bush that everybody that ever approached 
 must have been wounded by, and yet nobody has found it 
 out. This long course of wickedness has run in a parallel 
 stream through his life, and divided it between its nuiddy 
 waters and its crystal flow, so that those who stood on cither 
 
140 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 bank proclaimed it vile or healthful as they happened to be 
 on one bank or the other. Why, gentlemen, if you will not 
 take philosophy, and the great teachings of the Scriptures, 
 on these subjects, let us understand, as we all do, that the 
 generosity of character, openess of nature, warmth of heart, 
 universal sympathy by which every child is his friend, by 
 which every woman reveres him, every man confides in him, 
 is inconsistent with the course of profligacy that hardens the 
 heart. Who knew better than Burns, the poet,— an au- 
 thority on misfortune — as a man in respect of his morality, 
 who set aside all former teachings and says to the youth 
 whom he would guide through life : 
 
 A sacred, pure, and well-placed love, 
 
 Luxuriantly indulge it; 
 But ever scorn the illicit role, 
 
 Tho' naething should divulge it. 
 
 I waive the quantum of the sin, 
 
 The hazard of concealing; 
 But, oh, it hardens a' within, 
 
 And petrifies the feeling. 
 
 And yet a warm and generous fountain of beneficent acts 
 and sympathetic nature, as Mr. Tilton describes it, that was 
 thrown open to the imposition of ill design, and accessible 
 to the appeals of friendship, remains the uncontaminated and 
 the unhardened nature of this defendant. So now, so always 
 in your opinion, in the opinion of everybody that ever knew 
 him or saw him; and all these monstrous absurdities that 
 defy the faith in man and the faith in God that holds the 
 world together, you are to establish in order to save the credit 
 of the oaths of a few witnesses. 
 
 I come now, gentlemen, to the first meeting of the in- 
 jured husband and the adulterer after the alleged discovery 
 of the guilt. Six months after an alleged communication of 
 some kind prejudicial to Mr. Beech er's relation to Mrs. 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL lU 
 
 Tilton and to tho honor of hi.s inUTCoursc witli Mr. Tilton's 
 family, these two men are brou.ylil together; and 1 lln'nk, 
 gentlemen, tliat yon will in advance agree with me that this 
 interview carries more importance in its real occurences, if 
 you can get at them, than any otiier inteviews. If there was 
 any accusation made at all, it was made then, and what was 
 made then was the accusation that existed, either in imagina- 
 tion or had been produced by invention, or had any basis of 
 nu'stake or any solid support of truth. Whichever your 
 theory may be on which you finally rest, whatever the ac- 
 cusation was, or was to be, as an honest accusation it w-as 
 then and there made. Whatever of confessions, w^hatever 
 of concession, whatever of acquiescence on the part of the 
 accused ever took place, took jjlace then and there, and there 
 was the period, then and there was the situation, then and 
 there the aspects of the matter all around, that, if you can 
 get at the truth, will be worth more to you than any long- 
 drawTi party-colored piece-meal aspects, and intercourse of 
 the years afterward. Now, about that I don't think there 
 will be any dispute. 
 
 What had Mr. Tilton done on his own showing in respect 
 to that proposed interview before it occurred.'' He had got 
 from his wife as he says, and as apparently is true, a paper 
 written in her own hand, of some character and purport — 
 that is admitted. lie had got it by efforts in that sick room, 
 persisted in day after day, against the remonstrances of the 
 nurse, and that jiaper he obtained on the 29th, on Thursday, 
 and kept it unshown, he says, to anybody till the night of the 
 30th. Now, what would you give to have that paper.'' It 
 has been destroyed. Who destroyed it.^ Theodore Tilton. 
 Who gave it to hini to destroy.^ Francis D. Monlton. 
 When? They both swear, not giving day and month and 
 year, but with relation to another event, "Immediately 
 after the 'Tripartite Agreement.' " What justification was 
 there for Francis I). Moulton "immediately after the 'Trip- 
 
142 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 artite Agreement' " to give to Theodore Tilton that paper to 
 destroy? Ah! gentlemen, they all swear, all these people, 
 that there was not any agreement, nor any connection, nor 
 any idea in reference to the destruction of the papers with 
 the "Tripartite Agreement," or the arbitration. All our 
 witnesses swear the other way; Claflin, Freeland, Storrs, 
 and Wilkeson all swear that there was an agreement that all 
 the papers should be destroyed. Now, I have got the oath 
 of Mr. Moulton and the oath of Mr. Tilton, that immedi- 
 ately after that Mr. Moulton handed to Mr. Tilton the 
 papers to be destroyed, and I have got the oath of Mr. 
 Moulton that he told Mr, Beecher that he would keep that 
 paper tied to the other, and that they never should be sep- 
 arated, and should be kept together for his protection. 
 
 Ah ! gentlemen, you have a self-confessed, absolute treach- 
 ery, and absolute conviction of their falsehood; you have 
 got them both. Their conduct shows in their ready seizure 
 of an opportunity given by that compact, to destroy all, 
 to hurry to destruction this one, and then, in order to explain 
 their possession of all the others to use them against Mr. 
 Beecher when he wanted this one for himself of all others in 
 the world, they say there was not anything said about 
 destruction of papers, and there was no right to destroy 
 any papers. Where is your promise that the two papers 
 should be kept together? Ah ! gentlemen, what did Moulton 
 tell Charles Storrs about this unilateral saving of papers? 
 Charles Storrs was asked what Mr. Moulton said about 
 burning the papers, and he says that Sam Wilkeson had seen 
 him, or written him that he wanted him to be sure to burn 
 Mr. Beecher's "apology," and all the papers, and Mr. 
 Moulton says: "Of course I burned all the papers," and he 
 laughed, and he says, "Mr. Beecher thinks I have," and then 
 he says: "If Sam W^ilkeson thinks I have burned all the 
 papers he is mistaken. What would Theodore do with his 
 trouble?" And when Mr. Moulton is recalled he doesn't 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 14S 
 
 deny a word of that. Now, don't you believe that it was a 
 part of the arrangement that peace was conchided all around, 
 and that all the papers were to be destroyed; and don't 
 you believe that this man hastened to destroy the paper that 
 we want, and that we miss? If truth would be on their side 
 from it, so much the better for them, so much the less reason 
 for their destroying it. So you needn't worry yourselves 
 that they have lost anything by its being put out of exist- 
 ence. Ah! how they jumped at the idea that, now, this 
 pledge of Mr. Moulton would justify the destruction of all 
 the papers, and that the treacherous wickedness of Mr. 
 IVIoulton, self-confessed in act, that he did destroy one, sep- 
 arated it from the rest, and his production here of the rest, 
 that he did save the rest, and then his sneering remark to Mr. 
 Storrs: "Oh I I have burned all the papers, of course," and 
 he laughed, and then he says, "Mr. Beecher thinks I have"; 
 and then he says, "If Sam Wilkeson thinks I have burned 
 all the papers, he is mistaken. What would Theodore do 
 with his trouble?" What of the trouble tha the was using 
 heretofore and means to use hereafter? "Now, Theodore 
 and I have only burned that one paper." 
 
 Fourth Day, June 2, 1875 
 
 // Your Honor please, and Gentlemen of the Jury: 
 
 We may perhai)s consider for a few moments in advance 
 what would be the probable attitude, what the tone, what 
 the temper, what the method of accusation, and what the 
 reception of the accusation that would, on the known proof 
 of human character and human conduct, mark the first inter- 
 view between the accusing husband and the guilty adulterer. 
 Nay, more, if the accusation were to proceed upon the in- 
 fonnation conveyed to the unsuspecting husband by the 
 corruj)ted or uncorrupted wife — I mean the adulteress — you 
 would like to see what, upon these recognized principles of 
 human character and human conduct, would be the terms, 
 
144 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the attendant circumstances, the emotions with which this 
 dreadful fact was first disclosed by the confiding wife to the 
 unsuspecting husband. 
 
 Is adultery in a reputable family, in a respectable connec- 
 tion of society, and with a woman of even the ordinary 
 traits of purity, of intelligence, of piety, and of domestic 
 affections, a commonplace occurrence? Is it to be treated 
 like a cut of the finger or a bruised brow? Is there anything 
 that more upturns the deepest feehngs of the husband and of 
 the wife, when, brought by the urgency of conscience, guilt 
 is disclosed, pardon is begged, and either the wife is slain by 
 her husband or is pardoned by his superhuman charity? 
 What tears, what sobs, what solemn silence, what deep con- 
 trition, what conflicting, convulsive emotions, fill the hus- 
 band's heart and show themselves in conflicting exhibition 
 of his purpose, and finally of his conclusion! And then, 
 when the injured husband meets his friend, the corrupter of 
 his wife, the destroyer of his own honor, the defiler of his 
 marriage bed, and the shame and disgrace of his children, 
 and his children's children; when a husband thus outraged, 
 of whom it is said by a wise man, that I have had frequent 
 occasion to refer to, not much in repute doubtless with the 
 new dispensations, that get direct revelations from heaven 
 through mediumistic fits — Solomon says that "jealousy is 
 the rage of a man"; and when two such parties come to- 
 gether, you may imagine that if there be at the bottom either 
 information on the part of the accuser, mistaken if you 
 jjlease, certainly if well-founded and conscious guilt on the 
 part of the accused, that you will have a scene that cannot 
 be handled by any mere conception and preparation before- 
 hand. Nature will, will show itself in such an interview, if 
 the great and central fact exists, either as a truth, or as a 
 conviction on one side, that of the accuser. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I shall satisfy you upon a mere read- 
 ing of this plaintiff's story of that interview, rightly inter- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 145 
 
 preted, hy that knowlod^'o of human affairs whiV-li you possess 
 and that knowlod^'e of his diaractor and of Mr. Beecher's 
 which you liave pained in tliis trial, that that narrative, upon 
 its own reading, is a self-exposed and self-convicted inven- 
 tion, framed hy that degree of cunning that believes in words, 
 their instrumentality, their rhetorical connection. 
 
 This plaintiff understood that the wife's confessions, if 
 there had been any, could not be made the subject of evi- 
 dence against Mr. Beecher. Our law convicts parties on 
 tlieir own confessions, not on the confessions of others. 
 This idle word al)out Elizabeth's confession, or Mrs. 
 Tilton's confession, that has been dragged in })y ]\Ioulton 
 and Tilton as often as might be during their protracted evi- 
 dence, is a solecism in terms. It was an accusation of 
 another, never a confession of her own. 
 
 I will show you — what you supposed to be cunning on the 
 part of this inventor of this story, to cover his disgrace in 
 l)ringing to light the shame of his wife that he had once par- 
 doned, to make it probable and possible that such a woman 
 could be in such a guilt — that he has covered it w4th incon- 
 sistencies with human nature that make the whole story 
 incredible and self-contradictory. He knew that the con- 
 fessions, I say, of a wufe could not be given in evidence; he 
 knew, too, that confidential intercourse between the husband 
 and the wife (although the laws of evidence were so much 
 relaxed, as it was held l)y the Court, as to permit the husband 
 to testify against the wife, or against the defentiant, in the 
 wife's cause) — that the law did not permit the statement of 
 anything that passed between him and his wife. He knew 
 that the only mode in which he could bring to your notice, 
 as having occurred between himself and his wife, what it 
 suited his purjjose to pro])ose to you as having occurred, 
 was by weaving it into a recital or narrative that he should 
 repeat to Mr. Beecher; and then he thought: "Now I have 
 an opportunity to weave the web of my metapliysical argu- 
 11 
 
146 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ment, that a woman that was good and pious, and that loved 
 me, and that still loves me, could be led into what all the 
 world considers as betrayal of the husband, prostitution of 
 herself, desertion of a mother's duty to children, and an 
 abandonment of everything that makes up good character 
 and conduct and pure fame, and yet remain unsullied in her 
 conscience and untouched in her purity. So, too, I can 
 weave into it an explanation of how a good man and a great 
 man can find in conscience, and in religion, and in duty, a 
 provocative and a support to a course of conduct that, in the 
 general judgment of mankind, would be, must be considered 
 as base, as vile, as injurious to all the interests of society, as 
 fatal to the fame of everybody and everything that the good 
 and great man valued, as it is possible to portray even in the 
 imagination of a poet, in the conduct of a wicked man. I 
 thus," he said, "by the enchantment of my words and the 
 prettiness of my sentiment will gild this awful guilt with what 
 will make it credible, or else it can never be believed." And 
 there he is, the victim of his own shallow philosophy. 
 
 You will observe, gentlemen, that as we have led up to 
 this interview we have shown you the occasion of Mr. Til- 
 ton's resentments against Mr. and Mrs. Beecher's inter- 
 ference with his domestic peace and credit. We have shown 
 you his deep ground of resentment against Mr. Bowen, and 
 his deep sense of folly of his attack upon Mr. Beecher, and 
 of the ruin that had come from it, in destroying the only 
 counterbalancing influence against Bowen's absolute con- 
 demnation that the wit of man could suggest : the support — 
 the recurrence to the support of Mr. Beecher. 
 
 Now, we will show you by the traits of this matter of the 
 30th of December, in all its stages, that the great effort was 
 to find some means by which the audacious attack of the 
 26th upon Mr. Beecher, and its absolute recoil, could be dis- 
 placed from his mind and put out of the way. Why, gentle- 
 men, you would suppose that the first feeling of Mr. Tilton, 
 
THE BEECIIEH TRIAL 147 
 
 if lie liad sullVred this injury, and Mr. Beeclicr was ^uilly, 
 no inatttM' whether his purjwse was to ruin INIr. Beecher or 
 wlietlier his ])urpose was to coerce ]\Ir. Beecher into cooi)(M'a- 
 tion for his — Mr. Tilton's, — restitution, that he should follow 
 up that attack, wliose siij^port had not yet been disclosed, 
 excei)t in the consciousness of Mr. Beecher, if the cause 
 existed — by the open, by the vehement, by the damnatory 
 accusation, and give the adulterer the choice, to take his ruin 
 or become his servant; and so any man woidd have dealt 
 with any man if there had been any fact ui)on which to rest. 
 On the contrary, on the showing and admission of Tilton 
 and Moulton, and more, upon the absolute and necessary 
 conclusion from the facts that they state, the whole object 
 of this interview was to undo the mischief that had been 
 done, not to Beecher but to Tilton, by the attack — joint 
 attack of Bowen and Tilton in the missive of the 26th. 
 
 Before I am through with the close examination of this 
 day's proceedings, the 30th. of December, I shall have occa- 
 sion to point out to you, step by step, how' wholly inconsis- 
 tent with the theory and with the charge, and wuth there 
 being any truth in the charge, as now proposed, of adultery, 
 is everything that came out of the mouth of Mr. Moulton, 
 out of the mouth of Mr. Tilton, out of the mouth of Mr. 
 Beecher upon that day. 
 
 I take up now the evidence of Mr. Moulton as it attaches 
 itself to the preliminary walk from Mr. Beecher's house to 
 Mr. Moulton's, where Mr. Beecher was to expect to meet 
 Mr. Tilton. He says to Mr. Beecher, in the house of the 
 latter : 
 
 Mr. Theodore Tilton is at my house and wishes to see you. 
 
 The answer of ]\Ir. Beecher is perfectly natural and un- 
 concerned : 
 
 "This is P>iday night; this is prayer-meeting night; I cannot go 
 to see him." 
 
148 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 "Well," I said; "He wants to see you with regard to your rela- 
 tions with his family and with regard to the letter he has sent to 
 you through Mr. Bo wen." 
 
 Well, Mr. Beecher knew perfectly well that his relations to 
 Mr. Tilton's family, in those terrible scenes in which he had 
 been engaged by Mrs. Tilton's appeal, a fortnight before, 
 and in the deliberations and in the advice, and in the fact that 
 Mrs. Tilton had gone back and doubtless had conveyed to her 
 husband everything that had occurred on Mrs. Tilton's 
 part, and on his, and that in this patched-up amity between 
 them they were perhaps, neither of them, certainly not Mr. 
 Tilton, disposed to look with equanimity and patience upon 
 this intervention of Mr. and Mrs. Beecher in their domestic 
 affairs^he knew perfectly well that there was a just right of 
 Mr. Tilton to desire to speak to him concerning those 
 affairs. 
 
 He knew, also, that Mr. Tilton had sent him that letter 
 on the 26th, and he knew that Tilton, if there was any 
 reason for sending that letter, which had not shown itself, 
 certainly, in any consciousness as betrayed by Mr. Beecher, 
 might very well want to say something about that; in other 
 words, Mr. Beecher saw and knew that on these two points 
 of his and his wife's intervention in the domestic affairs upon 
 the invitation of Mrs. Tilton and Mrs. Tilton's mother, of 
 this moody, passionate, willful, capricious man, Mr. Tilton, 
 and the strange attack followed by the strange (in connection 
 with that attack), interview with Mr. Bowen and the ruin of 
 Mr. Tilton in his relation to his employer, his employment, 
 and his livelihood, which Mr. Bowen had announced to him 
 (Mr. Beecher) — he knew that the situation in which Mr. 
 Tilton and his family found themselves was grave, was 
 serious, was calamitous. And when Mr. Moulton said to 
 him, "These are the two topics on which Mr. Tilton wishes 
 to see you, " Mi-. Beecher, with that sensitiveness of sympathy 
 and that prof useness of magnanimity, saw at once that it was 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL US) 
 
 his duty to accede to this not unreasonable api)ointnient. 
 Now, look at it, "He wants to see you" — these are the first 
 words of Mr. ]VIoulton — "in regard to your relations with his 
 family, and with regard to the letter that he has sent you 
 through ]\Ir. Bowen." Now, leaving out all irrelevant 
 matter, you will see how Moulton was in the common 
 purpose of inflaming Mr. Beecher against Mr. Bowen and 
 attracting him to friendship for Mr. Tilton. 
 
 And we walked along together and I told him what Mr. Bowen 
 had said to Mr. Tilton concerning his (Beecher's) adultery. I 
 told him that Mr. Bowen had charged him with adulteries, in the 
 presence of Mr. Tilton and Oliver Johnson. 
 
 Now, did that look like an honest interview between an 
 accusing husband and a guilty paramour concerning Mrs. 
 Tilton's guilt and concerning Mr. Beecher's injury to Mr. 
 Tilton, and a proper introduction to the sentiments, the 
 purposes in that interview that must have influenced Mr. 
 Tilton, unless he was either more or less than man? Oh no, 
 this confidential friend wanted to propitiate the mind of Mr. 
 Beecher in advance to the friendship that Mr. Tilton 
 needed from him, by showing him how wicked Mr. Bowen 
 had been, and how that letter of the 26th, which ]\Ir. jNIoulton 
 had told him was the reason of the interview, had proceeded 
 from — Bowen's wicked, unrestrained imputation against 
 him — Mr. Beecher— and that what that letter meant "for 
 reasons best known to yourself" — or — "well known to your- 
 self" meant the consciousness of the adulteries that INIr. 
 Bowen had treasured up and had infused into Mr. Tilton, 
 animating his zeal for public morality and his duty for i)urity 
 in the households of Brooklyn. Mr. Moulton weiglis his 
 words and chooses his topics for the object. Now, Mr. 
 Beecher said that was singular; when Bowen brought him 
 that letter he pledged his friendship to him. Well, what 
 that was you have seen. Bowen said he came as a friend 
 
150 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and continued a friend. He did not inform him that he had 
 told Tilton any such thing. No, he had stuck the letter to- 
 gether so that Mr. Beecher should not even know that he 
 knew what was in that, and he told him furthermore — now, 
 look at how these traits show there was no guilt in Mr. 
 Beecher's mind, no accountability, no fear of his resentments 
 on any other grounds than these: — "And he told him further- 
 more that he had sympathized with Mr. Bowen in the stories 
 told him against Tilton; that Mr. Bowen told him some 
 stories against Tilton and that he had sympathized with 
 them. " Now, those are the topics, those are the interests in 
 Mr. Moulton's mind, those are the thoughts in Mr. Beecher's 
 mind — "Tilton finds that Bowen has been using that in- 
 terview with me contrary to what was the declared purpose 
 and confederation between Bowen and Tilton, and I find — I, 
 Beecher, find, from this gentleman's statement, that Bowen's 
 slanders, for which I have the utmost contempt, as I have 
 trampled them under my feet for years — that those have 
 been inspired into this young man's mind and he, in his 
 extremity, has been made the tool of Bowen, and Bowen sent 
 that blow and the recoil has killed Tilton. " 
 
 Now, that is the way they came together. Out of the 
 fullness of the heart the mouth speaketh, even when the 
 heart is small and the mouth is large, as in Moulton's case. 
 Now, that is all on the topics that were to be the subject of 
 consideration. There was something said about the weather, 
 and an avowal by Mr. Moulton that he was not a Christian, 
 which was uncalled for under the circumstances. He was 
 not pushed into it as St. Peter was when he stood before the 
 fire and warmed his hands. It was a voluntary avowal, in 
 a Christian city, that he was not a Christian and was a 
 heathen. But thinking that that alone would not recom- 
 mend him to a Christian minister, he said: "Now, as the 
 best pledge of any friendship I can frame and propose to you, 
 I will show you how a heathen can serve you." And what- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 151 
 
 ever else may be said, and proved, and eharged about 
 Moulton's ineonsistencies and his treaehery, he has never 
 been unfaithful to that pledge; he has shown you how a 
 heathen ean serve a Christian minister. But we know that, 
 from the time of the Apostles, when they stoned them and 
 burned them over the fire, and imprisoned them in dungeons, 
 and tortured them in boiling lead — we know how the heathen 
 liked to serve Christian ministers, and Moulton told this 
 man that he would show him how he would serve him. And 
 perhaps Mr. Beecher has found out. You have, at any rate. 
 Now we get to the house, and the husband is before the 
 seducer and the paramour. Now we have a narrative un- 
 interrupted that fills about three columns, I should think, of 
 a newspaper, and it is a full rationale of this case as pro- 
 pounded by Mr. Tilton, intended to introduce what he 
 proposes to your common sense as an actual interview be- 
 tween himself and his wife, and an actual interview between 
 himself and the paramour. x\nd you will see whether you 
 think it will stand the test of common sense and of common 
 decency in respect to either. But you will see now how he 
 betrays himself. What he wanted, what was uppermost, 
 what was the object, was to get out of the terror and the 
 destruction of Mr. Beecher's resentment against hun for that 
 letter. And so, forgetting all his own wrongs, forgetting the 
 tortures and disgraces, and pity for his wife, and pity for his 
 children, and all the flood of passions, good and bad, that 
 overflow and boil over in a man the first time he meets the 
 adulterer that has ruined everything that is dear to him, he 
 begins by going at what Moulton has gone at — this letter, 
 and Bowen's accusations of Mr. Beecher. Now, he savs to 
 begin with, and to be carried along, I supj)ose, with his nar- 
 rative, "I cannot undertake to repeat accurately, that is to 
 say, I will not attempt to give the words, except at certain 
 points, because what was said was mostly said by me, and 
 I have no special gift at recalling words." Then he goes on 
 
152 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and gives you, I say, a narrative, three columns of a news- 
 paper. "I can better recall what he said than what I said. " 
 Well, I should think so, because he says Mr. Beecher did not 
 say anything. No doubt, you can better remember what a 
 man said when he said nothing than what another man said 
 when he talked half an hour. "I began in this way — I am 
 entirely accurate as to the first words spoken, and they were 
 these." Now we have a start-off between an infuriated 
 husband and a guilty paramour, each knowing the truth 
 about the other. 
 
 " I said : ' I presume, sir, that you received from me a few days ago, 
 through Mr. Bowen, a letter demanding your retirement from your 
 pulpit, and from the City of Brooklyn.?' He said: 'I did.' I 
 then said to him, ' I have called you here to-night in order to say to 
 you that you may consider that letter unwritten, unsent, blotted 
 out, no longer in existence.'" 
 
 And on Mr. Tilton's cross-examination I draw from him 
 that that was the absolute purpose, the perfect desire to get 
 it possible, as between him and Mr. Beecher in regard to Mr. 
 Beecher's feelings toward him, as if that wicked and impudent 
 letter had never been written. Beecher's friendliness to 
 him was what he was aiming at, and did aim at all through 
 that week, and on his own showing what a strange position, 
 if he had the least idea of these relations between Mr. Beecher 
 and his wife that he now parades. His position would be 
 this: "I wanted to be sure of Mr. Beecher's feelings toward 
 me. I knew he loved my wife, but I didn't know how he felt 
 toward me." And he meant to find out. '"I thank you,' 
 he said. I replied: 'Your thanks should not go to me, but 
 to Elizabeth. It is in her behalf that I hold this interview, 
 and whatever I shall say here, or in consequence of this meet- 
 ing, is, not for your sake, nor for my sake, but for her sake.' 
 I then asked him whether Mr. Moulton had shown to him a 
 statement which Elizabeth had written. ... He said 
 that Mr. Moulton had shown him no statement. I then 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 153 
 
 said, *Do you not, then, iiiuler.slaiul the object of this in- 
 terview?' " AVclI, he ought to by this time, because Mr. 
 Tilton had told liim. "'I have called you hereto-night in 
 order to say to you that I wanted the letter I sent to you 
 blotted out.' 'I do,' said he, 'in general terms.'" Those 
 were the general tenns that Moulton had expressed to him — 
 it was about his relations to his family, and about that letter. 
 "I then replied, 'you should understand it more specifically.' " 
 Now, look at the cool way in which this rhetorician opens the 
 deepest passions and resentments of human nature. "You 
 should understand it more specifically. I will read to you a 
 statement which Elizabeth has made. Mr. ^loulton has 
 the original; I have a copy; I will read you the copy." 
 Now, Mr. Beecher knew that he was an adulterer if there 
 had been any adultery, and that Mrs. Tilton was the partner 
 in his guilt, and that she had made a statement; and that this 
 letter and the troubles in his family that Mr. Moulton has 
 spoken of as calling for this interview with Mr. Tilton, 
 were of that grave matter; didn't he.^ Didn't he know it 
 then, if there was anything.^ You must judge. I tell you 
 he did. If there was any fact, he knew it. If there had been 
 a disclosure, he knew it. If Mrs. Tilton had accused him, 
 he knew it. If Mr. Tilton had a charge of those facts, he 
 knew it; and he knew if he had any charge, if those facts were 
 true, it was of those facts. Now, see how the man meets it. 
 He said, cool as a cucumber about this statement, while ^Ir. 
 Tilton " was searching for the copy which I had made of Mrs. 
 Tilton's paper, he said to me: 'Before reading that, Theo- 
 dore, I wish you would tell me what Bowen has been saving 
 against me.' " Well, now, between this lion of a husband and 
 this consciously guilty man, could there be anything more 
 ludicrous than this.' "You ought to hear Elizabeth's state- 
 ment; I will search for that"; and there was some delay. 
 Mr. Beecher says: "Well, Theodore, before you read that I 
 wish you would tell me what Bowen has been saying against 
 
154 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 me." Well, how did the husband meet it? How did he 
 meet it? Why, he says: "I replied to him that I had not 
 summoned him to the interview for the purpose of discussing 
 with him Mr. Bowen's affairs, but that he should go to Mr. 
 Bowen himself. Nevertheless, as he asked me the question, 
 I would say that Mr. Bowen in an interview with me on the 
 preceding day had made a statement that" — now, we have 
 got it as in quotation marks — that — see, Tilton wanted to 
 get in as early as possible what Bowen had had to do with that 
 letter, that it was Bowen's calumnies, if they were calum- 
 nies that were at the bottom of it — "you have been guilty of 
 adulteries with numerous members of your congregation ever 
 since your Indianapolis pastorate, all down through these 
 twenty-five years ; that you were not a safe man to dwell in a 
 Christian community; that he knows numerous cases where 
 you have shipwrecked the happiness of Christian homes; 
 that he has determined you shall no longer edit 'The Chris- 
 tian Union.' " 
 
 You see Bowen, with his zeal for morality and religion, and 
 exposing the turpitude of this Christian man that was thus 
 ravaging the sheepfolds of Brooklyn, and had been for 
 twenty-five years, to Bowen's knowledge! Well, didn't that 
 rather make him an accessory before the fact to the ruin of 
 all these Brooklyn people? Mr. Bowen, even, with that 
 Christian indignation, had brought it to the point that it was 
 determined "you shall no longer edit 'The Christian Union.' " 
 That is the first thing; "that you shall no longer speak in 
 Plymouth Church; and he says distinctly" — Now, you have 
 the moral sentiments from Bowen; he doesn't mean to be 
 mistaken — "that you are a wolf in the fold, and that you 
 should be extirpated." Well, now, he is very bold about 
 Bowen's feelings toward Beecher. He didn't wish to amelio- 
 rate Beecher's feelings toward Bowen; that is plain. He 
 didn't take the means of finding out or securing friendliness 
 on Beecher's part to Bowen. Oh, no. Truth, truth governs 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 155 
 
 this pari ol' tlu-' coniViviicc. "Mr. Beecher said" — and 
 whenever Mr. Beeelier says anything;', yt)u will see tliat it is 
 perfectly natural for an honest man that knew what his 
 own character and condition was, and cared not for the 
 niali^ner — "^Ir. Beecher said thai it was a matter of 
 amazement to him that Mr. Bowen should have so s])oken; 
 'for,' said he. 'when Mr. I^owen delivered to me your letter 
 demandinji" my retirement from the puli)it., he appeared to he 
 friendly, and offered me his friendly services in the matter.'" 
 Well, if Mr. Tilton had had any dou])t al)Out the trick that 
 Bowen had played him at that interview, he now had his 
 mind disalnised of that doubt. 
 
 I then said to him that I had joined with Mr. Bowen at the be- 
 ginning of the week in making that demand upon him to retire; 
 that I had written that letter at Mr. Bowen's suggestion; that Mr. 
 Bowen had retjuested that such a letter should be written, and had 
 said that the reason why lie could not write it himself was that in 
 the preceding February — that is February, 1870 — he, Bowen, had 
 iiad a reconciliation with Mr. Beecher, and that Mr. Beecher had 
 begged his pardon, and had bent himself on the floor and wept, 
 and Afr. Bowen liad freely granted him forgiveness for the crimes 
 he had committed. 
 
 Good heavens! Ibjw came Mr. BowiMi to be gifted with 
 the power of absolution for sin? All these adulteries whicli 
 Mr. Beecher had been commitling for twenty-five years, 
 ravaging the flocks, and was still i)erpetrating, all forgiven! 
 
 That he, Bowen, had freely granted him forgiveness for the 
 crimes he had committed, and ^Fr. Howen said, in view of having 
 granted that forgiveness, he could not initiate proceedings against 
 Mr. Beecher, but if I would initiate them by sending such a chal- 
 lenge, he (Bowen) would sustain that demand, and in the interest of 
 morality and religion expel Mr. Beecher from his pulpit and from 
 the city. That he furthermore had said that he, Bowen, had it in 
 his power at any time to drive Heecher out of Brooklyn within 
 twelve hours. 
 
156 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Well, Mr. Beeeher didn't trouble himself at all about the 
 substance of these accusations. His reply now, as before, 
 was of amazement that a man could talk in that fashion. 
 
 Mr. Beeeher again spoke of his astonishment that Mr. Bowen 
 should have said such things to him^ — or to me (Mr. Tilton corrects 
 himself) — on Monday, and then have expressed himself in a 
 friendly way, as Mr. Beeeher described it, on the occasion of de- 
 livering the letter. 
 
 Well, these twenty-five years of adulteries, drowned out 
 by the pardon of Bowen, then passed very much out of 
 consideration and don't seem to have troubled anybody's 
 mind since. It has been printed in the papers in the form 
 of a letter from Mr. Tilton to Mr. Bowen. You don't find 
 anything printed from Bowen — there is nothing from Bowen 
 that does not come through Tilton. People have read it and 
 yet the wolf goes on, not in sheep's clothing any more, of 
 course, because the sheep's clothing has been stripped off, 
 but he goes on, not only with absolution for the past, from 
 Bowen, but indulgence for the future from the same great 
 ecclesiastical authority. 
 
 Now, after this cool, quiet introduction which Mr. Tilton 
 flattered himself was so artful for the purpose which he had, 
 of throwing on Bowen all that letter, and inflaming Beeeher 
 against Bowen and drawing him towards himself, he then 
 goes on and gives the reason he had come to this interview 
 with Mr. Beeeher. Now, mark how he confirms our 
 statement and belies his own, as to what passed between him 
 and his wife during this week. 
 
 I then told Mr. Beeeher that after I had had this interview with 
 Mr. Bowen I had narrated the substance of it to my wife; that 
 my wife was ill, and this intelligence filled her with profound dis- 
 tress ; and that she had instantly said to me that it was a violation 
 of my pledge and promise to her, made in the preceding Summer, 
 that I would never do the Rev. Henry Ward Beeeher any harm, 
 or ever assist in any exposure of his secret to the public. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 157 
 
 Well, T tliink Mr. Tilton's conduct was ratlicr open to that 
 criticism of liis wife, if lie had ])lc(l<;c(l himself that he 
 wouldn't do any harm to Henry Ward Beecher. lie had 
 told you that his animating motive when he wrote that letter 
 to Mr. Beecher was to strike him to the heart, and to drive 
 him out of Brooklyn in twelve hours, and he thou^dit he 
 would do it by that letter; so it looks a little as if he had 
 violated a pledge, if he had made one. So there is nothing 
 that any of these peoi)le do at any step that they do not have 
 to avow is infamous in motive and in its violation of every 
 pledge. She said to me: "If Mr. Bowen makes a war u])on 
 Mr. Beecher, and if you" — now, Mr. Bowen had not 
 shown any disposition to make war upon Mr, Beecher except 
 so far as Tilton would carry it on — "and if you join in it, and 
 ]Mr. lieecher retires from his pidpit, as he must under such 
 an attack" — that is the poor wife's notion, if under the at- 
 tack of Bowen of these advdteries of twenty-five years he re- 
 tires, as he must — "everybody will, sooner or later, know the 
 reason why, and that," said she to me, "will be to my 
 shame, and to the children's shame, and T cannot endure it." 
 Well, now, how do you suppose that topic, thus brought uj) 
 suddenly, with all its horrid meaning to a guilty soul, was re- 
 ceived by Mr. Beecher, and how was it treated bv Tilton? I 
 am taking Mr. Tilton's story; he cannot complain of that. 
 When he had said this, made this inciflental reference, "Mr. 
 Beecher then asked me what I meant by speaking in that 
 wav of Elizabeth and her shame." "Whv, what is all this.' 
 Your wife? vour children? T understand thus far: vou have 
 been talking about that letter and about Bo wen's charge of 
 'adulteries.' Vou told me that you were fumbling for a 
 statement that you were going to read to me, but now you 
 have said something al)out Elizabeth and 'her shame.' 
 now that, that, that, is something that T would like to hear 
 about. What is that?" 
 
 "He asked me," says Mr. Tilton, "what I meant l)y speaking in 
 
158 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 that way of Elizabeth and her shame; so I then read to him a copy 
 of Mrs. Tilton's confession, a copy which I had made in the early 
 part of the evening; the original of which was in Mr. Moulton's 
 possession." 
 
 Well, I objected and asked for the paper. He said the 
 paper was destroyed. "When was it destroyed.'^" "It was 
 destroyed by Mrs. Tilton's own hand." "The copy you 
 took, I mean?" "The copy was destroyed that evening 
 during the interview; the original was destroyed two years 
 later by Mrs. Tilton, in my presence." "Is that the one 
 that Mr. Moulton speaks of in his testimony as having 
 been destroyed?" "Yes, Sir." Then Mr. Fullerton asks, 
 "Destroyed immediately after the 'Tripartite Agreement' 
 was signed?" Mr. Fullerton knew when it was destroyed. 
 "Yes, Sir; after the 'Tripartite Agreement' was signed, at 
 Mr. Moulton's house," that paper was destroyed. Well, he 
 read the paper whatever it was. He says: 
 
 After I read to him, then he lifted his hand as if he were about to 
 speak, and I said, "No, Sir; hear me through, and speak then." 
 
 And then gentlemen, we had a most extraordinary occur- 
 rence here right under the eye of the Court, and in the face 
 of the jiny. I objected, under a well settled rule of evidence, 
 as I supposed, to allowing parties that had destroyed the 
 vital paper willfully, to undertake to give evidence of its 
 contents; and the law^ does not allow that. The law under- 
 stands that a paper must speak for itself, and provides that 
 people shall not be allowed to destroy it and substitute their 
 memory or their invention. My learned friends with great 
 ability, which, indeed, characterizes all their forensic inter- 
 locutory arguments — Mr. Fullerton and Mr. Beach both^ — 
 argued that that rule could not apply, because the paper was 
 destroyed with Mr. Beecher's concurrence, that night, with 
 his concurrence, before his face, by Mr. Tilton, and the orig- 
 inal afterward, with his concurrence. Well, that has not 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 159 
 
 been proved. I said, "It will he time enough to put it upon 
 that ground, to get a right to give parole evidence of that 
 paper, when you have proved ]Mr. Beecher's concurrence," 
 but they argued and argued tliat it was not fraudulent, and 
 that the proof was admissible, although the destruction was 
 purposed; for their argument was that it was tlone as a delib- 
 erate act and upon the concurrent purpose of Mr. Tilton 
 and Mr. Beecher then, that night, and some concurrence of 
 Mr. Beecher afterward, two years afterward, though that, 
 of course, they had not then given any proof of. I brought 
 the authorities and read them, that even a destruction that 
 was not fraudulent, if it was purposed, would not permit the 
 introduction of secondary evidence by the person who pur- 
 posely destroyed the paper, because the interests of the ad- 
 ministration of justice could not be exposed to the question 
 whether it was fraudulent or not; but it was onlv when acci- 
 dent or mistake had caused the destruction of a paper, that 
 parole evidence or secondary evidence of its contents coukl 
 be given; and would you believe it, when that discussion 
 was over and this paper had not been permitted to be de- 
 tailed by his tongue, and he had heard this argument of his 
 counsel that it had been purposely destroyed with Mr. 
 Beecher's concurrence, and therefore the testimony ought 
 to be allowed, and that the books did not allow that distinc- 
 tion, but allowed the distinction of the accidental destruc- 
 tion — would you believe it the next moment that he opened 
 his mouth on the witness-stand, after this discussion, he 
 threw his counsel bodilv overboard before vour eves, crushed 
 their argument that the destruction was ])ur])osed and with 
 Mr. Beecher's concurrence, and said that in the heat of his 
 presentation of this case to Mr. 15eecher he had inadver- 
 tently ])icked this paper to pieces, and found he had de- 
 stroyed this copy of the confession ! 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that was done before your eyes, under 
 the ready wit and th e short reckoning of Mr. Tilton, that if 
 
160 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 he did put his counsel to the open shame of arguing, upon 
 his previous instructions, that the paper had been destroyed 
 purposely and with Mr. Beecher's concurrence, he at least 
 would help his cause, as he thought, and invent an inad- 
 vertent, mistaken, unintentional destruction. Well, it did 
 not answer the purpose. It didn't remove my objection, 
 because the original had been destroyed; and it did not sat- 
 isfy the ground of his Honor's exclusion, which was another 
 point. So much for that wriggling of a witness and a party 
 out of one scrape into another. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, we come to this plaintiff's (the husband 
 of an adulteress) narrative to the paramour of his wife of the 
 wife's statement to him. Mrs. Tilton's confessions are not 
 permitted to be given in evidence and have not been given 
 in evidence in this cause from anybody. Mr. Tilton was 
 not allowed to give them because it would be infidelity to 
 confidential communications from a wife. Nobody else has 
 given them; nobody else could be allowed to give them; and 
 yet you have a long narrative that, at first view, looks as if 
 it was a statement by a witness of what she confessed; but 
 you will see at once the difference, when it is only what he 
 fold Mr. Beecher, as what she had confessed, that has been 
 permitted to be given in evidence, not tending to prove that 
 it was true, not permitted to have that influence on your 
 minds, because it would be equally a part of his statemeiit to 
 the paramour, whether it were true or not, wouldn't it? It 
 would be an enginery to probe the paramour's conscience, 
 and to alarm him into an admission, whether it was true or 
 not. If a husband, suspecting a paramour, seizes him un- 
 awares, and invents a confession of his wife and puts it to 
 the paramour to see how the paramour will deal with it, 
 why, he uses a weapon the effect of which on the paramour 
 will be the same whether his wife has confessed or not, if the 
 paramour knows it is true. Many a case of that kind is 
 found in the books. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 161 
 
 The force of all this permitted testimony of what passed 
 between Mr. Beecher and Mr. Tilton is to bind Mr. Beecher 
 by what he tloes; not to prove tlie trnth of the statements 
 that are made to him by .Air. Tilton. And you will see at 
 once the difference. I could cross-examine Mr. Tilton as to 
 whether or no he told Mr. Beecher all this rij^marole, if I 
 had thought it worth my while, but I could not cross-examine 
 hun as to what passed between him and his wife. I could 
 not explore the secrets of that interview and draw out from 
 his unwilling mouth, perhaps, against his will, the truth of 
 what passed betw^een himself and his \^^fe; because he had 
 not been allowed to swear what passed between himself and 
 his wife, and I could not occupy a field by cross-examination 
 that had not been opened. The same objection to making a 
 husband, or allowing a husband, to reveal confidential pass- 
 ages between himself and his wife, would have excluded my 
 cross-examination as to the actual occurrence between them, 
 just as much as it excluded his direct testimony. Therefore, 
 you will see that this matter of whatever passed on that July 
 night between Mr. Tilton and his wife remains wholly unex- 
 plored; no affirmative direct evidence has been permitted to 
 be given of it; my side of the case has been excluded from 
 probing, from testing, from convicting of falsehood and of 
 folly, the story of any such interview. 
 
 But as a part of this interview between the husband and 
 the paramour, this becomes a subject to be commented 
 upon, and is invaluable. This is the husband's reproduction 
 of what he alleges was an interview between his guilty wife 
 and himself on the occasion of his becoming first informed of 
 the guilt of the wife, and when he had had no suspicion up 
 to the moment of the interview. 
 
 Now, you would suppose that a woman thai had made uj) 
 her mind to tell her husband of such a course of life, as this 
 woman is said to have admitted to her husband, would have 
 had some emotion; there would have been a sob or a tear; 
 
 12 
 
162 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 there would have been a justification, a deprecation, a sub- 
 jection to his mercy on the part of the wife in her own be- 
 half. Can you figure to yourself, in our circle of society and 
 on the level of these people, saying nothing of the particular 
 delicate traits of Mrs. Tilton, her severe notions about the 
 least approach of unchastity, her severe condemnation of all 
 immorality in others, her hatred, her abhorrence of any 
 approach or exhibition of the fallen condition of woman, her 
 sister, which excited such feeling in her that, while other 
 people were patient and courteous and embraced with kisses, 
 Mrs. Woodhull in her presence, as Mr. Tilton tells you him- 
 self, whenever his wife and Mrs. Woodhull were in the same 
 room their eyes flashed fire at one another — do you suppose 
 such a woman, that had dragged her body through the pros- 
 titution of sixteen months, and through the longer indigni- 
 ties of the coarse approaches of three years before — to be 
 sure one incredibility shuts out another; the whole thing is 
 so incredible that you cannot reason upon its ever having 
 occurred, but his theory is that it had occurred — do you 
 suppose that a woman whose eyes flashed fire whenever they 
 lit upon Mrs. Woodhull's face, could have, under the power 
 of conscience, made a long confession of her guilt, of the facts 
 if it was innocent adultery, of the disreputable facts that, 
 unexplained, looked a little against a woman certainly, and 
 had the narrative begin and go on as this one does? 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, a witness that is not to be contradicted, 
 when he tells this narrative can make it match, perhaps, in 
 words, but the folly of expecting to have it match human 
 nature, in the judgment of men, in the judgment of women, 
 in the judgment of a jury, is utterly incalculable and pre- 
 posterous! The idea entering into the shallowest pate, 
 unless it was a shallow pate inflated by self-conceit, that he 
 could make credible an interview between husband and wife, 
 that the very stones of the street would cry out against as a 
 libel on human nature, a hbel upon a woman that could say 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 163 
 
 It, and a lihol upon a man that could licar it! Now, see how 
 the wife he^dns. 
 Mr. Tilton says: 
 
 "I told yir. Beecher that in the early part of July previous to 
 that interview (that is, July previous to this December), Mrs. 
 Tilton had come home unexpectedly from the coimtrj' and had 
 said to me that the object of her return was to communicate to me 
 a secret that had been long resting upon her mind like a burden"- — 
 these are her words, figurative, you see, rhetorical— " which she 
 wished to throw off" — cool, quiet — "that she had on several previ- 
 ous occasions come almost to the point of making such a statement 
 to me" — statement; no confession, no notion that she was going to 
 make a confession, but a statement — "and once in particular 
 while on a sick-bed, but that she had never until then, having been 
 restored to health" — well, she had been in health before, and the 
 time she most thought of it was when she was sick — "she had 
 never until then, having been restored to health, been brought 
 quite to the point of courage — the disclosure." 
 
 Now, was there ever a cooler adulteress lying by the side 
 of a husband in a marriage-bed, and introducing the shame- 
 ful narrative that burns into the soul of a woman, and she a 
 woman whose eyes flashed fire at the presence of impurity? 
 Ah! Mr. Tilton, you can invent speecht^s for Tiltons; you 
 cannot invent them for women! "That before she would 
 announce to me what the secret was" — vou see it was not 
 anything of hers, nor that he suspected that she had any- 
 thing to do with it — ^"she exacted from me a pledge that I 
 would do no harm to the person concerning whom the 
 secret was to be told." A unilateral secret, ol)viously, for it 
 only related to one person; no connection with this living 
 soul and body that lay l)y his side, and was talking to him. 
 
 "And, furthermore, that I would not communicate to that i)er- 
 son that she had made such a revelation to me" — no confession — 
 "because, as she said, she wished to inform him of that revelation 
 herself." 
 
164 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, not much notion of confession to Mr. 
 Tilton; the word didn't occur; not much notion of conscious- 
 ness of guilt on her part, the sin of unchastity and pollution 
 of body, and you remember her letters that my learned 
 brother exposed to you with such effective demonstration 
 as the anatomist exhibits over the torn frame of a subject. 
 And Tilton was as cool as she. 
 
 "I had given to her this pledge," and that you might not doubt 
 how sacred it was, and solemn: "my word of honor that I would 
 neither disclose her secret" — that is, the secret she was going to 
 tell — "whatever it might be, nor would I injure the person con- 
 cerning whom it was to be told." 
 
 So they keep it up, and you see, gentlemen, now we don't 
 need to talk about these things, the impossibility of such a 
 beginning, not in respect to the memory of words, but in the 
 very imperishable principles of human nature and human 
 character, puts to flight all solicitude about believing any- 
 thing that comes after; and when you have a living witness 
 and a credible man, Mr. Beecher, who tells you that all this 
 folly never was produced in his hearing, and gives you a 
 perfectly rational explanation of what was said to him as 
 coming from the wife, which is perfectly consistent with this 
 telling of the story about a third person that didn't involve 
 the wife's character or her conduct, to wit, a withdrawal of 
 her affections, and, if you please, the further statement of 
 rejected addresses — when you have a living witness that 
 testifies along the live current of human nature and human 
 conduct, you then can understand how this witness has fixed 
 the real traits of any communication or statement as not 
 being a confession on the part of the wife, but an accusation 
 of another, of being something to be told injurious to another, 
 and not to excite animosity on the husband's part against 
 that other, nor even to be made the subject of communica- 
 tion to him, because the lady wished to be the medium of 
 communication to him herself. Well, now, we have got 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 165 
 
 sonic third i)ers()iK nhoiil whom somclliiiii;' is to he tohl 
 whicli has not started a tear or a sob on tlie part of tlio wife; 
 nor has it agitated a suspicion or a doubt on the jKirt of the 
 husband. And then slie <^oes on just as coolly; and now 
 listen : 
 
 That she then said to nie that il was a secret between herself and 
 the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher. 
 
 Well, she put in his full title, so that there might be no mis- 
 take of the person; and, then, to guard against further mis- 
 constructions, she adds, "her pastor." Well, gentlemen, 
 Mr. and Mrs. Tilton knew Mr. Beecher, and they knew he 
 was the pastor of riymouth Church; and when an agonized 
 wife, under the power of conscience, is going to tell of her 
 seduction, of her prostitution, she would tell of it wouldn't 
 she? She would humble herself in the i)illows of the bed 
 and, with sobs and tears and dishevelled hair, tell the sad 
 story of her shame. She would not ])ut in "Rev. Henry 
 Ward Beecher, my pastor," as the first thing she said on the 
 subject. Now, see how she recalls to him; just see how she 
 talked to him there that night: "That as I was well aware," 
 that is, that she said to him— he doesn't say he was aware, 
 but she said, "Now, as j'ou are well aware, my husband," 
 "there had been during a long course of years a friendship 
 between herself and her pastor." She wishes to recall to 
 his nu'nd the general traits and features of this business and 
 relation, so that it won't seem improbable to him that she 
 has committed adultery with a man in the moon. 
 
 "This friendsliip, contrary to my expectation, had been," she 
 say.s— well, that was fair to throw that in — "had been in later 
 years more than friendship. It had been love; that it had been 
 more than love." 
 
 See how I he climax rises with the rhetoric thai Ijclongs to 
 the pa.ssion of the heart. 
 
 "That it had been sexual intimacy; that lliis sexual intimacy 
 
166 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 had begun shortly after the death of her son Paul" — well, that is a 
 queer way of speaking of little Paul to the father — ''her son Paul; 
 that she had been in a tender frame of mind consequent upon that 
 bereavement." 
 
 Now, you know, having got at the fact of the adultery, it 
 is to be made reasonable by connecting it, naturally, with 
 sentiments, and feelings, and a situation of the woman's 
 mind that tends to adultery, of course. You must have the 
 proximate situation to make the adultery natural; and any- 
 body can see that a mother, having lost a child, turns her 
 attention to adultery, of course. Of course we all under- 
 stand that. That being granted, it is vain to reason against 
 the rest. However, she does a little more. 
 
 "That she had received much consolation during that shadow on 
 our house from her pastor; that she had made a visit to his house 
 while she was still suffering from that sorrow- — " 
 
 All in the name of the dead Paul that this adultery is jus- 
 tified, and there, on the 10th of October — you see we have 
 the date; the date is important; we must get it somewhere; 
 the law requires some particular time and place, and now 
 we have got it. Only think of it, of a woman under the 
 influence of conscience, and stirred by the deepest passions 
 of her sex, or of our nature, having the precision of mind 
 equal to that of my learned brother Morris in drawing this 
 declaration of stating the time and place at Mr. Beecher's 
 house on the 10th day of October, 1868. Now, it could not 
 have been for the purpose of having a suit brought, because 
 she had exacted a pledge, and he had given it on his honor, 
 that he would not do or say anything about the matter she 
 was going to tell him. 
 
 Still suffering from that sorrow, and that there, on the 10th of 
 October, 1868, she had surrendered her body to him in sexual em- 
 brace; that she had repeated such an act on the following Saturday 
 evening at her own residence. 
 
THE BEECH ER TIUXL 167 
 
 A queer way of talking to her liiishand, and for fear there 
 should be douht, as tliey had uioved from time to tiuie from 
 one house to another, she adds, "lier own residence, 174 
 Livingston Street"; "that she had consequent upon those 
 two occasions" — look at the rationale of it; "consequent 
 upon those two occasions." Not subsequent. Oh, no! 
 Tlu-re is a logic of connection. AVell, as we have a very good 
 maxim that it is only the first step that costs, I think the 
 two steps did justify the reasoning that the rest followeil. 
 
 Consequent upon those two occasions, repeated such acts at 
 various times, at his residence and at hers, and at other places. 
 
 She does not seem to have disclosed the other places. 
 WTiat would our friends have given for the other places? 
 Ah! gentlemen, these other places! There were other 
 places, mind you, or this was a lie, and the same woman that 
 told you with such precision that it was at her residence, 
 174 Livingston Street, would have at least given a clew that 
 could have been followed out to find the other places. They 
 could have proved them if they had proof, but they had not 
 any proof of these places, Mr. Beecher's house, or hers, any 
 more on this trial than they had of the other places; and, if 
 they had not any proof of the other places, Mr. Tilton 
 thought, on the whole, that there might be more danger of 
 alibi if he had given equal precision to the other dates and 
 the other places that the woman had mentioned — that he 
 said she mentioned. "Such act of sexual intercourse re- 
 peated." Repeated such acts. Now, she didn't wish to be 
 misunderstood. Repeated such acts, she saitl; so she 
 repeated such acts of sexual intercour.se, continuing from the 
 fall of 1SG8 to the sjmng of 1870. 
 
 "That in July, 1870, she had made" — now, this is not a part of 
 her narrative, liut it comes in here — "that in July, 1870. she made 
 a confession to me in detail of those acts; tiiat she had given to nie 
 also, during that recital, many of the reasonings by her pastor com- 
 
168 SPEECHES OF WILLIAJVI MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 municated to her to change what were her original scruples against 
 such a sexual intimacy." 
 
 Only think of it ! A woman thirty-five years old that had 
 had six children, one of them lately dead, that speaks of a 
 woman's feeling about chastity, a wife's feeling about chas- 
 tity, a mother's feeling about chastity, and the pollution of 
 the marriage bed in her own house, which the French law in 
 terms says justifies the husband in slaying her on the spot — 
 and they are not supposed to be a sensitive people on these 
 matters — this woman speaks of that as her original scruples 
 against sexual intercourse. Good heavens! We shall have 
 to ask the maidens when they stand at the foot of the altar 
 whether they have any scruples about sexual intimacy with 
 other men than their husbands, and our wives — w^e want to 
 know how they feel on this delicate question of casuistry, 
 this domestic question, about which opinions differ, that 
 has so much to be said on the one side and the other for it, 
 to know what their scruples were. Ah ! these insidious Chris- 
 tian instructions of Mr. Beecher that removed her scruples 
 about prostitution and adultery and bastardy in her family. 
 Ah, he must have preached with a power to conscience and 
 intelligence that he has not exhibited of late if he could 
 reduce this nature of woman to scruples, and then puff them 
 away w^ith the breath of his mouth. Now, I thought that it 
 was a little steep, to use a slang expression, when she said 
 that she told him that her pastor, for reasons, had induced 
 her to change her original scruples. I broke in there — I 
 could not stand it: 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Mr. Tilton, do I understand that this is what you 
 said to Mr. Beecher.' 
 
 I began to see that I had got him in a grasp that he never 
 could escape from, but that I must hold him by a new twist 
 of the cord that he needn't jump from it. He answered: 
 "Precisely, sir." Well, pretty good for a single word. 
 
THE I{KK( IIKH TRIAL Ki!) 
 
 Well, now he ^oes on and gives the reasons, and you see they 
 carry conviction to every ])iir(>-niindcd woman: 
 
 "That she had in the early stages of their friendship" — now, the 
 woman was not unwarned — "been greatly distressed at rumors 
 concerning Mr. Beecher's moral integrity." 
 
 Well, now, every rumor has been traced to Mr. Tilton 
 thus far. Mr. Tilton repeats to Mr. Bowen; Mr. Tilton 
 writes to Mr. Bowen what he says Mr. Bowen said to him, 
 but Mr. Bowen has never come out and said he said it, but 
 you will see how the dreadful alternative that I put to this 
 man of knowledge about Mr. Beecher, if there was any 
 truth of any kind, comes out of his own figment, to be sure, 
 out of his own necessity to make, by a figment, a story that 
 he thinks credible. 
 
 "That she had in the early stages of their friendship" — Mr. 
 Beecher's and her own — "been greatly distressed at rumors con- 
 cerning Mr. Beecher's moral integrity." 
 
 Why should she have been distressed about a matter 
 that, as it turned out, was only a scruple of an over scrupu- 
 lous woman, and that when the vile pollution had been per- 
 l)etrated and continued had not touched her vet, and for a 
 year afterward, with the notion tliat she had violated her 
 marriage vows. Ah, this is too extraordinary. "She was 
 distressed at rumors concerning Mr. Beecher's moral integ- 
 rity; that she wished to show hhn" — now comes the justifi- 
 cation — comes this shrewd, as this party thinks it, invention 
 of his to make you swallow this adultery as not involving any 
 want of innocence on I lie p;ni of his wife. How nol)le her 
 motives now, having heard and been distressed by rumors of 
 Mr. Beecher's immoralities with women! 
 
 She wished to show to him that tliere was a woman who was 
 superior to the silly flatteries with which many ladies in his congre- 
 gation had courted his society. 
 
170 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 His society! What does society mean in that connection, 
 of his known immoraHties and the silly women — ^the rumors 
 of his immoralities and the silly women that had courted his 
 society? 
 
 "That she wished to demonstrate the honor and the dignity of 
 her sex ; that she had done so in her own thought, until finally she 
 had been persuaded by him, that as their love was proper and not 
 wrong" — well, that seemed to be taken for granted, that the love 
 of a married man with a married woman, the wife of another man, 
 that that was all right, and, "therefore it followed that any ex- 
 pression of that love, whether by the shake of the hand, or the kiss 
 of the lips, or even bodily intercourse, since it was all the expression 
 of that which in itself was not wrong, therefore that bodily inter- 
 course was not wrong." 
 
 Well, now, that involved sentence of metaphysical reason- 
 ing is almost as long and faulty as some that the newspapers 
 impute to me in my argument. How natural for a woman 
 lying in bed by her husband, and talking about her own 
 adultery to a man who had never heard of it before. How 
 interesting it must have been that, if he had got to accept the 
 fact, at least his reason was not going to be imposed upon 
 if he should understand how it happened. 
 
 Recess of the Court. 
 
 She proceeded with her exegesis of this adultery after 
 saying that step by step, a shake of the hand, a kiss of the 
 lips, or bodily intercourse, since it was the expression of 
 that which in itself was not wrong, therefore that bodily 
 intercourse was not wrong. 
 
 "That she had said to me that Mr. Beecher had professed to her 
 a greater love than he had ever shown to any woman in his life; 
 that she and I both knew that for years his home had not been a 
 happy one; that his wife had not been a satisfactory wife to him; 
 that she wished — that he wished — (that is a correction; 'she' does 
 not belong there) that he wished to find in her (Elizabeth) the con- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 171 
 
 solation, the help to his mind, and the solace of life which had been 
 denied to him by the unfortunate marriage at home." 
 
 Well, what becomes of the twenty-five years of adultery 
 and debauchery that had run on, from Indianapolis down? 
 On this story, this was the first real resort to happiness in 
 marriage which Mr. Beecher had felt at liberty to assume. 
 Late in life, at the age of fifty-six, after he had had nine 
 children, and while he had some six or eight grandchildren, 
 and had fair daughters-in-law about hhn, and a wife that he 
 had been faithful to from the time they were both seventeen 
 years of age, he thought that his dutj' required him now to 
 find consolation, reward for a virtuous Hfe, help to his mind — 
 for his mind and his soul were devoted to the service of God, 
 and anything that could am])lify the great powers for truth 
 and Christianity that he was endowed with was of course a 
 duty — and the solace of life which had been denied to him by 
 the unfortunate marriage at home, a marriage now, at this 
 date, of a continuance, I suppose, of some thirty years. 
 
 Mr. Porter: Thirty-five. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Thirty-five years. Well, what a revela- 
 tion it was to him; what a revelation to Mr. Beecher at the 
 age of fifty-six, that this unprosperous, unfruitful marriage 
 of his had been a penance and a drain upon his powers, and 
 that now his duty required him to find that suj^port for his 
 future labors that should continue his beneficence in this 
 world! Now, wo have the narrative of the wife continued: 
 
 "That he had made these arguments to her during the early 
 years of their friendship." 
 
 Now, the early years of their friendship carried them 
 back to 18G3 and 1864, and 1865. He began at the beginning. 
 But these convincing arguments (that when she had really 
 relished their true moral force and religious beauty, carried 
 away all scruples — and I shall read to you from this same 
 husband, plaint ifl', witness's mouth — in the retrosj)ect 
 
172 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 seemed to her to make it all for the glory of God) she had 
 not taken without inspection and without resistance. 
 
 "That he had made these arguments to her during the early years 
 of their friendship, and she had steadfastly resisted; that he had 
 many times fondled her to the degree that it required on her part 
 almost bodily resistance to be rid of him." 
 
 Now, here was a woman that did not believe in these argu- 
 ments, at this time, of the early years. She had steadfastly 
 resisted. Her mind had not been overpowered, nor her 
 conscience corrupted, nor her instincts of chastity dead- 
 ened; but yet through this period he had fondled her, and 
 pressed his coarse, polluted touch to the point that it re- 
 quired almost violence to resist. Now, this is the narrative, 
 this is the course; and this was as coolly delivered by this 
 chaste woman, and as coolly received by this husband, as if 
 the narrative had been about a persistent search for any of the 
 trinkets or gewgaws of dress, through the shops of the city. 
 Now, gentlemen, what sort of a figure, in any rank of life, 
 would a woman make in setting up her chastity as having 
 been overpowered by violence in the final consummation of 
 ruin by force, that began by telling the Court and jury that 
 she, through a series of years, had been fondled so that it re- 
 quired bodily resistance to preserve her virtue? I do not 
 think that we lawyers, or you jurymen, or the Judge on the 
 bench, would listen long to a story of violent consummation 
 against chastity, that had been preceded by years of violent 
 fondling; and yet this rhetorician thinks that he has put a 
 white robe of chastity over his wife by putting such a narra- 
 tive into her mouth, that he has covered Mr. Beecher with 
 the double guilt of paramour and mistress, and made his 
 wife a saint. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this plaintiff was a little unlucky in his 
 assortment of the two occasions on which this prostitution 
 of his wife occurred, on the theory of absence of desire, and 
 
THE BEECHKH I HIAI, 173 
 
 absence of consent, and al)sence of cooperation, or enjoy- 
 ment in (lie ^Miill, in j)utting llu' first snrrender, not at licr 
 own house, but at j\Ir. Heeclier's. How did the woman ^'et 
 there? Was slie carried in lier sleej) from 174 Livin^'ston 
 Street, to l'-24 ('ohiml)ia Ilciijjhts? She was not in the habit 
 of going there. There is not any cviih'nce that she was 
 there on the lOth. There was no reason for her going; and 
 yet this silly reasoner, her husband, has made an uncon- 
 senting. reluctant, submissive i)r()stitulion, attended by tlie 
 wife's resort to the unaccustometl i)lace of meeting. You 
 can judge as well as I whether that comports very well with 
 the theory ui)on which this j)rostitution of the wife is pre- 
 sented. But that theory is the only theory, that statement 
 is the only form and manner and circumstance of this adul- 
 tery that is ])retended by the ])laintifF: And now: ""That 
 after her final surrender during the period of her sorrow," 
 — now this is all oyer again; this is what by the i)laintift"s 
 testimony she told her husband — 
 
 "during the period of her sorrow, in October, 1868, he had then 
 many times solicited her, when she had refused; that the occasions 
 of her yieldin*,' her b(xly to him had not been numerous, but that 
 his solicitations had been freciuent and urgent, and sometimes al- 
 most violent." 
 
 And so wc have this renewed condition of a woman who was 
 ))urc of heart, utterly free from any low or degrading im- 
 pulses, and that i)ut her fault, if at all, upon being over- 
 ])owered by piety and duty to the Church and to (lod, 
 telling you this continued story, after the fir.st .sacrifice, that 
 this resistance of her instincts, resistance of her conscience, 
 resistance of her wonum's nature, continued, and was con- 
 stantly overcome, or nearly o\-ercome, but sometimes 
 triumphed; and all this goes on, and not a suggestion or a 
 comj)Iaint of any kind, of any degree. Well, there was tiuu' 
 for meditation, wasn't there? She was shut uj) in her own 
 house with these loveK cinhhcii of hers, and watching over 
 
174 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 them and their unfolding beauty and purity. She was 
 taking care of these redeemed women of the Bethel, and saw 
 the misery and the wretchedness that this debauchery had 
 wrought in their hearts, their families, their souls; and 
 that religion, the Christian religion, was the only redeeming 
 influence, and that it was adequate; and yet, without hav- 
 ing any of the evil impulses of the heart, or any of the carnal 
 urgency of the flesh, she carried on this concurrent stream 
 of prostitution of her body to a hypocritical religious teacher! 
 This is the way Mr. Tilton makes adultery easy; this is the 
 shape in which he makes it pure; this is the verbal protec- 
 tion against the sin and stain and ruin of those acts which 
 strike at the very heart of the female character. 
 
 Now, where did her conscience wake up? It never waked 
 up on the subject of adultery, not certainly for a year after- 
 ward, as I shall show you : 
 
 "That she made this confession to me" (and that is the first time 
 that the word occurs) "because the sense of deceitfulness in her 
 mind was a pain to her conscience." 
 
 Well, she had a conscience, a sensitive conscience. She 
 saw that somehow or other the thing must be wrong. She 
 knew the seventh commandment which forbade adultery. 
 She knew the tenth commandment, which forbade a man to 
 covet another man's wife; and that would seem to be plain, 
 but that didn't touch her; no, no, nothing in that; but there 
 was a sort of concealment about this that pained her con- 
 science. 
 
 "That she had gone away from home in the spring" (she repeated 
 all this to her husband) "parting from me under a cloud, as I 
 knew." 
 
 That she said. He wanted all these things to be in evi- 
 dence; there was no way of getting them in evidence — his 
 own views of how he would like to have this thing displayed 
 before the public. "And that I had written to her"— now 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 175 
 
 listen to this; she tells her husband all these things, that he 
 knew — 
 
 "And that I had written to her in her absence a letter, saying that 
 unless she told me the truth, that it" she ever lied to me as she had 
 done in reference to a few minor matters, that I never again could 
 hold her in any respect." 
 
 Well, now, what an extraordinary thing. After the day 
 and the night that the woman was talking to him she had 
 never had the least suspicion of anything wrong about it — 
 nothing; yet she was moved in conscience by a feeling that 
 there was a little du];)licity, a little double-dealing in having 
 two bed-fellows at the same time; that, to a mind sensitive 
 to truth and openness, produced a sense of uneasiness; and 
 besides he savs: 
 
 "That I had wTitten to her in her absence a letter, saying that 
 unless she told me the truth, that if she ever lied to me" — this is 
 his own language, in his own letter, to his own wife, if there is any 
 word of truth in this, that she repeats to him — "If she ever lied to 
 me as she had done in reference to a few minor matters, that I 
 never could hold her in any respect." 
 
 Ah, gentlemen, what was that letter? What is this mode 
 of an ideal happiness undisturbed up to July, when this 
 statement was made between this man and his wife, in which 
 he had written to her a letter that if she lied to him as she 
 had in a few minor matters, he would not hold her in respect? 
 He thinks it a shame that the obligation of forensic duty 
 should require us to point out falsehoods, and describe them 
 as falsehoods, but he thinks it consistent with an ideally 
 ha])i)y home that a husband should write to a wife: "If you 
 ever lie to me as you have done, I won't hold you in respect. " 
 Ah, gentlemen, long stories require considerable power of 
 reasoning as well as memory when they are all falsehoods, 
 and every now and then there peeps out a self -convict ion of 
 the utter incongruity with the whole fabric of his case, of his 
 
176 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 own little touches of nature and woman's nature, as he thinks 
 it, that he throws in. Now, what an admirable character for 
 a novel this would make. How all the good people of Europe 
 and America, how all Christendom (to use the plaintiff's 
 favorite phrase) would admire the penetration that had seen 
 further into human nature than the inspiration which had 
 made the Saviour say, "All these evil things come out of the 
 heart"; that had spoken with greater authority in regard to 
 sin than the great author of the rules of human conduct 
 proclaimed from Mt. Sinai; who had heedlessly, rashly, 
 foolishly undertaken to say, "Thou shalt not commit 
 adultery," when he had made it evident that piety and duty 
 left the heart and soul unsullied under the pollution of the 
 body. But still, lying: that was wrong. That letter had 
 rankled in her thought and heart. But for that letter this 
 poor woman never would have awakened this side of the 
 judgment seat to a knowledge of the sin of adultery. 
 
 "That had rankled in her thought that she felt that she never 
 could look me honestly in the face again until she made a full 
 and free confession; that she had come down from the country on 
 purpose to make it." 
 
 And now I suppose there is a little break, and the wife 
 stops here, though this witness doesn't make any break, and 
 he goes on, then, to describe to Mr. Beecher: 
 
 "And that she had made with great modesty, and delicacy and 
 womanly feeling, without giving evidence that the great fact which 
 she confessed was wrong, but that the wrong which she wished to 
 throw from her mind was mainly the necessary deceit with which 
 she had hitherto concealed it from her husband." 
 
 Now, the husband says, referring to his statement to Mr. 
 Beecher: 
 
 "It was a long story. I told him from a little memorandum 
 which I had made of dates and matters, extracts from letters — a 
 little memorandum made on the back of the white envelope un- 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 177 
 
 adflressed in wliidi Mrs. Tillon's statement that evening had l)een 
 lodged; I hatl made a memorandum of dates and of letters." 
 
 Well, he doesn't seem to have referred to anv dates or 
 letters, and he had made that memorandum, not with any 
 letters or facts or records before him, hut in the few minutes 
 that elapsed after ]\lr. INFouIton left the house to go for Mr. 
 Beecher until he got back. In other words he was going to 
 deliver an adtlress, an address to Mr. Henry Ward Beecher, 
 and he reduced to the form of notes the heads and points of 
 his argument. Well, Mr. Moulton, the sexton, was sent to 
 bring in his audience. 
 
 What a silly story! Now, look at it — this narrative of six- 
 teen months adultery, of three years seduction of all this 
 fondling and resistance and final prostitution. "She had 
 stated with great modesty and delicacy and womanly feeling." 
 Well, there was no emotion about it; that is plain. She had 
 played this difficult fantasia w^ith all the skill of a practiced 
 musician. She had told this narrative with all the delicacy 
 of touch and sentiment that belonged to a novelist speaking 
 of a third person, and you are to take that as a real narrative 
 of a real occurrence, between a real wife and a real husband ! 
 
 Now he goes on and fills the space between July and Dec- 
 ember with her absences from tow^n, her visit out West at 
 Marietta; that she had returned from the West a few weeks 
 previous to this interview,! think, about the 1st of December; 
 that shortly after her return, or almost the first conspicuous 
 incident that happened to h(T husband since her return, was 
 the interview "which I had had w^ith Mr. Bowen on the 26th 
 of December, which had resulted in my demand upon Mr, 
 Beecher that he should retire from the pulpit." Now, you 
 see the Bowen matter comes in. But for Bowen, but for the 
 destruction of his j)ecuniary interests, this narrative, this 
 pretensi(jn, this use of a domestic occurrence of .some kind 
 between husband and wife toward j\Ir. Beecher would never 
 have been resorted to. Six months passed by. The wife 
 
 13 
 
178 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 never intimated to Mr. Beeeher, although at her request he 
 called and visited her in her illness in August after, and 
 prayed with her; she had not mentioned to Mr. Beeeher that 
 she had told her husband anything. Mr. Tilton had not 
 sought Mr. Beeeher, or made any complaint against Mr. 
 Beeeher, and here he draws in affirmatively and voluntarily 
 the trouble with Bowen as the cause, the occasion, the op- 
 portunity, the reason of this matter ever having been 
 brought to Mr. Beecher's notice. Well, you can under- 
 stand how, after his sending this notice to Mr. Beeeher and 
 finding the destruction of his relation with Mr. Bowen, it 
 did come to be brought in, and that is a part of our case. 
 Now he accounts for it as arising out of that fact. 
 
 "I told him that I had informed Mrs. Tilton of what I had done 
 with Mr. Bowen, and that she received the intelligence with an ex- 
 pression of heartbreak and grief. I told him in regard to the state- 
 ment which she had written" — 
 
 He didn't call it a "confession" which she had written — a 
 statement that she had written; it was the one that he read; 
 and yet they find it convenient in giving their evidence al- 
 ways to call it a "confession" of hers — we shall show you — 
 you don't doubt what it was. It was an accusation — this 
 paper. I don't mean that she had even told her husband, 
 but this paper was an accusation against Mr. Beeeher — 
 
 "that in regard to the statement which she had written, that it had 
 come about in this way. She had asked me, as soon as I had in- 
 formed her of the letter that I had written through Mr. Bowen; 
 she had asked me immediately to send for Mr. Beeeher, and to 
 hold an interview with him in her sick chamber, that she might 
 hear me say to him that the letter should be withdrawn — that is 
 the Bowen letter — that she might hear with her own ears, im- 
 mediately, and before he should have any time to be troubled about 
 it." 
 
 What an extraordinary proposition of a woman caught in 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 170 
 
 adultery — desiring her husband to send for the paramour, and 
 tell him, in her i)resence, that that letter must not worry 
 him; and to do it quick, so that the paramour need not be 
 troubled about it! Well, that did not strike Tilt on as at all 
 unsuitable, in itself, so far as the object and subject went, for 
 that was the object of his interview — his interview with 
 Beecher. 
 
 "That though I had joined with Mr. Bowen in demanding jSIr. 
 Beecher's retirement from the pulpit, for my wife's sake and for 
 the word of honor which I had pledged to her to do ]\[r. Beecher no 
 harm, that I should send for him, and that she should hearme, im- 
 mediately and A\'ithout delay, take back that letter and assure Mr. 
 Beecher that I would not unite with Mr. Bowen in making any 
 assault upon him or in demanding him to quit the pulpit or the 
 city. I told ^Iv. Beecher furthermore that I had refused to ac- 
 quiesce in ]Mrs. Tilton's request that such a personal interview 
 should be held between him and me in my wife's sick chamber; I 
 told him that she had insisted four or five times on this very thing, 
 that Mr. Beecher should be saved from being worried about this 
 letter that had been delivered to him, until finally she begged me 
 to be the bearer of a letter to him; that I had then declined that; 
 that finally she asked me if I could not devise some method which 
 would not be humiliating to my pride to have an interview with 
 him — a friendly interview — as friendly as possible" (he corrects him- 
 self), "and, after thinking the matter over, that I had said to her 
 that if she would agree I would request Mr. Moulton to bring about 
 suchan interview between ]\[r. Beecherand myself. Shesaidshe was 
 only too happy to hear me say so, and she wrote a statement, to 
 which I have referred, to be the basis of an interview between Mr. 
 Beecher and myself, which Mr, Moulton should bring about, and 
 she wrote it on the 29th of December." 
 
 Mr. Evarts intervenes again: 
 
 Q. Is this what you told Mr. Beecher? A. Yes, sir. Toward 
 the close of the story I again reminded him of the object for which 
 I had sent for him, which object was that though I had commun- 
 icated to him through Bowen a demand for his retirement from the 
 pulpit, yet that at my wife's earnest entreaty I revoke<l that de- 
 
180 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 mand, and for my wife's sake, and not for my own, I pledged him 
 my word that I would not assist Mr. Bowen in the hostility which 
 he had meditated against Mr. Beech er." 
 
 Mr. Beecher did not ask for his friendship, for his coopera- 
 tion, for his espousal of his cause against Bowen. Mr. 
 Beecher had not shown any fear of Bowen or the need of any 
 fortification or protection against Mr. Bowen; and this 
 husband, after introducing the narrative that his object 
 was to get rid of any injurious feeling that Mr. Beecher might 
 have by reason of his having sent that challenge of the 26th, 
 closed it by volunteering to say, "Now the object of all this 
 Mr. Beecher, is to have you understand that, though I did 
 send that challenge which I now have revoked, I am not 
 going to cooperate with Mr. Bowen in any of his movements 
 against you, " and I pledged him my word, without his asking 
 it, that I would not assist Mr. Bowen in the hostility which he 
 had meditated against Mr. Beecher. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that about ends the narrative. 
 
 This you are soberly asked to believe as a just statement of 
 a communication between husband and wife, and of a com- 
 munication between the husband and the paramour. I will 
 venture to say that whether you regard that portion of it 
 which undertakes to produce a woman's treatment to her 
 husband, or a husband's treatment to the paramour; 
 whether you undertake to weigh and estimate the manner in 
 which a good woman is led away, or the length and breadth, 
 the weight and value of the argument by which a woman's 
 virtue is overcome by the tongue of man, it is the veriest 
 trash that was ever written or printed. There is not a novel- 
 ist that would not be ridiculed from Dan to Beersheba, if, 
 wicked in purpose and wilful in malice against the good 
 principles and conduct of society, he had used his art to make 
 adultery easy and palatable and pious. Why, gentlemen,the 
 merest trifle of the yellow-covered literature of Paris or New 
 York that is made for the coarse appetites and for the coarse 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 181 
 
 intelH<?enoe and for the vilo morality of the evil classes has 
 not anything as bad and vulgar and pointless as all this trash. 
 And what is the reason of this invention? It is because on 
 the conduct of the people, their characters, on the wife's in- 
 tellectual and moral character, as still sworn to (it is impos- 
 sible to be believed unless it is immaculate), because under 
 all the conditions of external observation to which they have 
 been subjected there could be no reliance uj)on the contact 
 of the body ever having taken place, except by this fictitious 
 presentation of it, to carry a sort of notion with you that 
 there has been some proof of it as coming from somebody who 
 saw and knew it. 
 
 AVhy, gentlemen, what sort of adultery is that which is no 
 contact of the body and no pollution of the soul.-^ Call it 
 unilateral adultery! Why is it adultery? It is wholly 
 transcendental. It begins nowhere, ends nowhere, rests 
 upon no basis. 
 
 But "transcendental" is a long word, and those who use 
 it most cannot give any very precise definition of it. Twenty- 
 five years ago it came into great vogue under the lead of a 
 great thinker now famous, Mr. Emerson, and got into 
 the language of young women and of young students, and the 
 clergymen talked about it, but still the question was what 
 "transcendental" meant. Well, on one of the Mississippi 
 River steamboats, when a parcel of eminent divines were 
 returning from a general convention of the Presbyterian 
 Church, they were in a high discussion about orthodoxy, 
 and the old faith and transcendentalism, and a layman who 
 enjoyed their conversation, one of the lay delegates returning 
 with them, still felt a little puzzled about what "transcen- 
 dental " and "transcendentalism " meant. So he ventured to 
 ask tlie divine in whom he had the greatest confidence — 
 "I hear you use this word 'transcendental' and 'transcenden- 
 talism,'" now, what does it mean?" "Well," says the 
 doctor of divinity, "that is a (question that is more easily 
 
182 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 asked than answered." But they were passing by a bluff 
 on the river. Says he, "Do you see that bhiff here on the 
 river .f*" "Yes." "Do you see how pierced it is with 
 swallows' holes .f^" "Yes, I see that." "Well, now," says 
 the clergyman, "you take away all the bluff and leave noth- 
 ing but swallows' holes, and that is 'transcendentalism.'" 
 
 Now, you understand what transcendental adultery is. 
 Take away pollution of the soul, prostitution of intellect, 
 defilement of body, and that is transcendental adultery. 
 Nothing but the swallows' holes left; nothing of the earth, 
 earthy; all transcendental. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, let us see what invention is used here. 
 After the cross-examination, on the redirect, my learned 
 friends thought it would be worth while for Mr. Tilton to 
 explain a little what he means by this notion that his wife 
 was so pure, and never violated her marriage vows, and all 
 that he had been swearing to, and they asked him if he 
 couldn't give us a little information, the same as this lay- 
 man wanted of the doctor of divinity about transcendental- 
 ism. It was a pretty long question by Mr. Fullerton, and 
 Mr. Tilton's first answer is, " Well, Sir, that is a sad question." 
 "Well.'*" says his examiner, and Mr. Tilton proceeds: 
 
 "I can answer only my own judgments of her behavior, not for 
 other people's opinions. You must remember. Sir, that I knew 
 Elizabeth when I was ten years old; that I became her confessed 
 lover at sixteen; that I was married to her at twenty; and that, 
 for fifteen years of her married life, I held her in my reverence per- 
 haps almost to the point of making her an idol of my worship." 
 
 The idols are spoken of, you know, in the Scriptures as 
 lying gods, and he has written to her a letter telling her that 
 if she continued to lie he should not ideally worship her. He 
 proceeds : 
 
 "And when she came to her downfall, it was the necessity of my 
 own heart — " 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 183 
 
 That was not KlizabetJi's narrative, then, tliai slie liad told 
 him, how she had preserved her purity and merely lost her 
 niatronage — 
 
 "It was the necessity of my o\\ti heart — I must find some excuse 
 for her; other people might blame, but I nnist pardon her. I found 
 that excuse in the fact that she had been wrapped up in her re- 
 ligious teacher and guide; she had surrendered her convictions to 
 him; she followed his beck and lead trustingly; she would go after 
 him like one blinde<l." 
 
 That is the reason, I suppose, she went up to his houjse. 
 
 "I think she sinned her sin as one in a trance." 
 
 So my idea that she had been carried from Livingston-st. 
 to Columbia Heights in her sleep was not so much out of the 
 way, after all. Her husband thought she had done it all in a 
 trance. 
 
 " I don't think she was a free agent. I think she would have done 
 his bidding if, like the heathen priest in the Hindoo-land, he had 
 bade her fling her child into the Ganges or cast herself under the 
 Juggernaut. That was my excuse for Elizabeth." 
 
 Good Heavens! We had supposed that this w^as Eliza- 
 beth's narrative that she had detailed to you, and that you 
 had repeated to ]\Ir. Beecher. Now, gentlemen, that shows 
 you where all this talk came from. Then, after some dis- 
 cussion between us, the matter comes back in this way: 
 
 "Well, go on and answer the question, Mr. Tilton. In what way 
 did she maintain her innocence in the presence of her mother?" 
 
 By way of showing her guilt they introduce evidence of her 
 innocence. 
 
 "She always used to say. Sir, she was not to be judged, either l)y 
 her mother or l)y me, but by Gotl. She believed CJod would judge 
 her tenderly. She said she loved God, aud she didn't believe that 
 God would have permitted her to enter into those relations if they 
 had been sinful." 
 
184 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 So you see the last consummation of impiety coming from 
 Mr, Tilton's lips, for we don't know that it ever came from 
 anybody else's — is that God was responsible for this ! 
 
 "She didn't believe God would have permitted her to enter into 
 those relations if they had been sinful." 
 
 She thought God was mistaken in propounding the Seventh 
 Commandment from Mount Sinai. 
 
 "And she said particularly that neither her mother nor I had 
 made it the business of our lives to understand what was right and 
 wrong as Mr. Beecher did; that Mr. Beecher was a clergyman; 
 that he was a great and holy man ; that he had repeatedly assured 
 her that their relationship was not sinful, and she didn't see how 
 it could be sinful; that he had told her that love had various ex- 
 pressions; that one expression was the shake of the hand, another 
 expression was the kiss of the lips, another was sexual intercourse, 
 and it made very little difference what the expression was. If 
 that love was right, the love itself made rightful or justified by the 
 various expressions of it, and that she believed before God that her 
 love for Mr. Beecher was right, and therefore she didn't see how 
 any of the various expressions of it could be sinful. She said she 
 rested on Mr. Beecher's authority for that, that he had told her so 
 over and over again." 
 
 Well, well, gentlemen, that is Mr. Tilton's mode of over- 
 throwing the Decalogue and defending adultery. It is as 
 old as any of the falsehoods of the devil; it is as shallow and 
 contemptible as any of the silly efforts of a country clown to 
 overcome the instinctive virtue of an honest milkmaid; and 
 the milkmaids have slapped the clowns' faces ever since the 
 world began, when they have approached them with any 
 such folly as that. But it is for the conspicuous clergjnnan, 
 that deals not in abstractions, not in dogmas, but in practical 
 faith, by works of morality, of charity, of duty, of the eleva- 
 tion and beatification of life, it is for him to have uttered all 
 this driveling and contemptible nonsense in the ear of a 
 woman who, besides the instincts of chastity as great as any 
 
THE BEECHER TRLVL 185 
 
 woman ever had, her husband says, liad been educated into 
 the very saintHness of heart, and accompanied it with practi- 
 cal charity for the erring and the fallen— a woman that had 
 an intellect that made her the companion of all the literary 
 and moral studies and pursuits and speculations of her hus- 
 band, and who had the companionship of all the eminent men 
 that made up the circle of his friendships — it was for him to 
 utter this and for her to yield, and without a consciousness of 
 sin or a violation of conscience, to what the milkmaid throws 
 in the face of the booby that talks to her! 
 
 Now, gentlemen, when the necessary case of this plaintiff 
 requires that he should propitiate your understandings and 
 obtain your verdict to a particular fact that has no external 
 proof whatever, and that you know violates all that the in- 
 tellect, the morality, the instincts of all our elevated. Chris- 
 tianized, as well as natural characters demand in conduct, 
 to ask you to accept this story is to ask you to make your- 
 selves accomplices of this frivolity, and to be as great boobies 
 as he displays himself in your presence to be. Why, gentle- 
 men, from Indianapolis down, Mr. Beecher has been a 
 preacher of active and actual beneficence; has been a con- 
 demner of all the wicked passions, all the sensual indulgences, 
 of all the coarse and vulgar sins. My learned brother, 
 Morris, who does not lack a flow of invective and contumely, 
 when his cause recjuired it, could not make out a sufficient 
 volume of imputation and of condemnation without quoting 
 against this defendant a long and eloquent, vehement, living 
 invective against the sin of incontinency that he had de- 
 livered years ago to young men, and that has done more to 
 save young men throughout this country than any utter- 
 ances of any other mouth in it. 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, my learned friends can gain nothing over 
 us in the scourging that they will administer to ]Mr. Beecher, 
 if they will only prove him guilty. If iliey ask us to go one 
 mile with them in their invective against him, proved guilty, 
 
186 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 we will go with them twain. If they ask us to strip him of 
 the cloak of his hypocrisy, we will tear the coat and every 
 fragment of his clothing from him. If they ask us, and 
 they prove him guilty, that he should be smitten on one 
 cheek, we will turn the other to them, and deliver up his 
 whole body to be beaten with many stripes. But we do re- 
 quire that, driven from external evidence, and groping in 
 the region of moral evidence, they will at least show us the 
 moral evidence that carries down into this severity of punish- 
 ment so great and noble a character as, but for this imputa- 
 tion, and until it is proved, this defendant has shown to all 
 the world. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, before I proceed any further it is but 
 fair that I should lay before you Mr. Beecher's account of 
 the interview, and you will see whether any violence is done 
 in that to the great lines of human character, or the particu- 
 lar lineaments in the character of these individuals that is 
 demanded for belief in the plaintiff's story. I pass over 
 everything except the interview itself. When Mr. Moulton 
 had brought Mr. Beecher to his, Mr. Moulton's house, Mr. 
 Moulton said: 
 
 "Mr. Tilton is in the room above the parlor, front room, waiting 
 for you." I said to him^ — wishing a witness, believing that we 
 were going to have a business discussion — I said to him, "I would 
 rather you would go up with me, Mr. Moulton." He said, "You 
 had better see Mr. Tilton alone." 
 
 Now, Mr. Moulton, on his rebuttal, I believe, says that that 
 was not said; but these incidental differences of statement 
 come to nothing. We go for the substance of things. 
 
 He (Mr. Tilton) pointed to a chair and asked me to sit down, 
 which I did, near the door. He drew out from his pocket a little 
 paper, very much that shape (producing a piece of paper about 
 five inches by three), just about that size, a little narrower, and, 
 on sitting down, said: "I have requested," or "I have summoned 
 you," I think he said, "to this interview on matters of importance. 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL . 187 
 
 I suppose that you received from me, by Mr. Bo wen, a letter de- 
 manding your resignation and departure from Brooklyn." "Yes," 
 I told him "I had received it." 
 
 So they agree that that was the topic. Mr. Beecher 
 proceeds : 
 
 He said, " I wish now to recall that letter, and I wish you to 
 consider it as not written. It was a grand thing to write that 
 letter; it would have been grander if I had not." 
 
 Now, what a happy condition a man is in when whatever 
 he does is grand, and if he hadn't done it it would have been 
 grander. I have never known such elevation in this life 
 before. Whatever you do is sure to be grand, but if you 
 hadn't done it it would have been grander! Well, Mr. 
 Beecher says: 
 
 He then began to allude to Mr. Bowen, the bearer of that letter, 
 and to Mr. Bow en's treatment of him, not going into it in any 
 considerable detail, but characterizing it as very base and treach- 
 erous. He then charged me with having an understanding with 
 Mr. Bowen in these matters, and furthering them — I am not using 
 his language, but only the substance of the things urged upon 
 me by him — that I had accepted injurious stories of him, and that 
 I had reported them again, that I had advised against him, and 
 much more to that purport, which I cannot recall in detail. I 
 think at this point I was disposed to make some explanation, when 
 he warned me to be silent, and I was silent. And then he pro- 
 ceeded to say that I had not only injured him in his business rela- 
 tions and in his reputation and prospects, but that I had also insin- 
 uated myself into his family, and under a cover of friendship I 
 had wrought him a worse mischief there. He said that 1 had in 
 a sense superseded him, and taken his place, so that in matters of 
 religious doctrine, and in matters of bringing up his children, and 
 of the househokl, his wife looked to me rather than him; that I 
 had caused her to transfer her affections from him in an inordi- 
 nate measure; that in consequence of the conditions which had 
 sprung up by reason of my conduct, his family had well nigh been 
 destroyed; that I had suffered my wife and his mother-in-law to 
 conspire for the separation of the family; — 
 
188 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And I have shown you, gentlemen, Mr. Tilton's charge 
 that that was a conspiracy of Mrs. Beecher and Mrs. Morse — 
 
 "that I had corrupted Ehzabeth, teachmg her to he, to deceive 
 him, and hide under fair appearances her friendship for me; that 
 he had married her one of the simplest and purest women he ever 
 knew, and that under my influence she had become deceitful and 
 untrustworthy. He said that I, that had tied the knot in the 
 sanctuary of God, by which they were to be bound together in an 
 inseparable love, had also reached out my hand to untie that knot, 
 and to loose them one from the other. He then went on to say 
 that not only had I done this, but that I had made overtures to 
 her of an improper character; and again I expressed some surprise, 
 probably by my attitude — I don't recollect that I talked — but he 
 drew from his pocket a strip of paper about like that (describing 
 it), and read to me what purported to be a statement of his wife 
 to him that Mr. Beecher had sollicited her to become his wife, to 
 all the intents and purposes which were signified by that term, or 
 substantially that. He said the statement which he had just 
 read — very recently; — she had done it the day before, on the 
 29th, after the Bowen trouble needed some assistance and aid; 
 that he had for shame and for pride's sake burned up the original, 
 and that now he would tear up the only copy that there was in 
 existence, that there should never be a line or letter against 
 the reputation of his wife; and with that he took the fragments in 
 his hand and stepped to the side of the room and threw them down. 
 "And now," said he, turning to me, "I wish you to verify these 
 charges by going down and seeing Elizabeth yourself; she is 
 waiting for you at my house." I said — that last blow staggered 
 me — reading something in his wife's name — I said to him; "Mr. 
 Tilton, this is a dream. She never could have made in writing a 
 statement so untrue." Said he, "It is but a few blocks off; go 
 down to her yourself." I turned and went out of the door, and 
 walked down stairs, meeting Mr. Moulton at the foot of the stairs. 
 He said to me — without a word from Mr. Beecher — "he took his 
 hat and overcoat" — at any ratis, he went out. 
 
 Q. Did you in any manner invite Mr. Moulton to go with you 
 to Mrs. Tilton's? A. No, sir; I didn't want him. 
 
THE BEECHER TRL\L 180 
 
 Q. Did you in any manner inform him before he asked you 
 whether you were going to Mrs. Tilton's, that you were going 
 there? A. I did not. 
 
 Q. Now, he attended you to the door, did he? A. He did, and 
 he went in. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, before I go to the interview with Mrs. 
 Tilt on at the house of I\Ir. Tilton, I want to bring your at- 
 tention to the part of Mr. Tilton's testimony that has to do 
 with this matter, so that his own story may be told. Now, 
 after Mr. Tilton's statement of what he said to Mr. Beecher, 
 Mr. Tilton says : 
 
 At the close of the narrative Mr. Beecher sat in his chair, and 
 I thouglit he was about to speak. I waited a moment. His face 
 and his head and his neck were bloodred, and I feared for the mo- 
 ment that there would be some accident to him. He burst out 
 with these words: "Theodore, I am in a dream; this is Dante's 
 Inferno." 
 
 And that is the waj^ Mr. Tilton tries to cover up with a 
 classical reference what w\is his real statement — "This is all 
 a dream." Ah, Mr. Tilton told Mr. Moulton that night, 
 when Mr. ]\Ioulton came back from accompanying Mr. 
 Beecher down to Mrs. Tilton's, that w^hat Mr. Beecher did 
 sav was, "Theodore, this is all a dream." It was not anv- 
 thing about Dante's "Inferno" then. But INIr. Tilton told 
 another man, only three days afterward, w^hat it was Mr. 
 lieecher said when he had got through with his, Tilton's 
 narrative to him, and mark how it concurs. He gave on the 
 2nd day of January, to his friend Storrs, a narrative of how 
 the matter went on between him and Mr. Beecher. He told 
 him how he had sent for Mr. Beecher to Mr. JMoullon's 
 house, and that Mr. Beecher came there, and when he came 
 there he made this charge against him of impro])er proj)osi- 
 tions to his wife, and he said Mr. Beecher seemed to be 
 astonished, and said that could not be so, and Mr. Tilton 
 made a motion as though he was taking something out of his 
 
190 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 pocket, and said — that is, he made it when he was talking 
 with Mr. Storrs, suiting the gesture to the word : 
 
 'I took out a piece of paper'; I forget whether he said he read it 
 or gave it to Mr. Beecher to read, and he said Mr. Beecher seemed 
 surprised and said that could not be so because it was not true. 
 
 Two days after, having said that night that all that Mr. 
 Beecher said was, "This is all a dream," he told his friend 
 Storrs exactly what Mr. Beecher had said, and then he goes 
 on to tell Mr. Storrs what Tilton had said to Mr. Beecher, — 
 that he had said that Elizabeth could not have said so, 
 because it was not true, and then Mr. Tilton says to Mr. 
 Storrs that he said to Mr. Beecher: "Well, if you don't be- 
 lieve it, go and ask Elizabeth"; and he said that Mr. Beecher 
 did go and see his wife, and got from her a retraction that 
 there never had been any improper proposals, "and when I 
 found it out I was very angry, and told Mr. Moulton, 
 and he was very angry." 
 
 Well, I have no doubt that he was angry that he had got 
 into the same position with Mr. Beecher by the result of 
 that night's accusation, and Mr. Beecher facing it, that he 
 had got into on the preceding Monday, the 26th, in respect 
 to his missive sent through Mr. Bowen. Ah! gentlemen, 
 when you undertake to assassinate a man in a dark alley, 
 and the man is unwounded, and all that has happened is 
 that there is evidence of an attempt to assassinate him, you 
 have not gained much by that movement; and when this 
 second weapon of assassination, sharpened on the 29t.h, had 
 been used to pierce Mr. Beecher's breast on the night of the 
 30th, and all that he had said was, "Theodore this is all a 
 dream; Ehzabeth cannot have said so, because it is not true"; 
 and this man, thinking that he could hold his wife's heart- 
 strings at least for a single night, says to him, "If you doubt 
 it, go and ask her"; and he goes and asks her, and brings 
 back the evidence that the husband has forged, through the 
 unwilling hand of the wife, a false accusation that has been 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 191 
 
 withdrawn, he doesn't feel, when he finds it out, that he has 
 made any more by that second attempt at assassination 
 than he had hy the first. 
 
 Now% gentlemen, we may as well fix this. He told Mr. 
 Belcher in 1872 that he had had an interview with Mr. 
 Beecher at Mr. Moidton's house, and that at that interview 
 he charged ]Mr. Beecher with the act, and read him this let- 
 ter, Mrs. Tilton's letter — that is, the letter of improper 
 solicitations. 
 
 I then asked him how Mr. Beecher acted on that occasion. 
 He said he was astonished and confounded, and said that it was 
 false, and that the woman must be crazy. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I have, under the hand of this plain- 
 tiff himself, a narrative. Under Mr. Tilton's own hand, in 
 the "True Story," he says: 
 
 As a further statement, still more unwillingly opened, yet nec- 
 essarj' to an explanation of the subsequent complication of cir- 
 cumstances, I must say that in the summer of 1870, a few months 
 after I had undertaken, in addition to editing The Independent, to 
 edit also The Brooklyn Union, Mrs. Elizabeth Tilton, my wife, 
 made to me a communication concerning Mr. Beecher — 
 
 not a confession; exactly what I have shown you out of his 
 own lips was the truth, that she had made him a statement, 
 in his judgment and in hers, as she told the story to him that 
 night, only in the third person — 
 
 a communication conceniing ^Fr. Beecher, which (to use her own 
 words, lest I wrong him by using mine) she afterward noted down 
 in a memorandum as follows: "Mr. Henry Ward Beecher, my 
 friend and pastor, solicited me to be a wife to him, together with 
 all that this iinj)]ics." I l)orrow the above facts from my wife's 
 handwriting, and forbid myself from pausing at this point either 
 t(j blacken it with an epithet, or to lighten it with an explanation. 
 
 Now, that was read to Mr. Beecher, and on Friday even- 
 ing, as Mrs. Tilton's statement: 
 
i92 SPEECHES OF Y^TLLIAM MAX\\'ELL EVART§ 
 
 December 30. — I went to Mr. ^loiilton's house. Mr. Moulton 
 went after ^Mr. Beecher and brought him. This was early in the 
 evening, Mr. Beecher leaving his prayer-meeting, usual on that 
 night, to go without his leadership. My intendew was with Mr. 
 Beecher alone. I read to him my wife's letter, and said to him 
 what I shall not here repeat. He sat like a statue under my brief 
 remarks — (three columns of a newspaper we have here, and Mr. 
 Beecher's narrative comprises it within, within one column) — my 
 brief remarks, and at the close he bowed to me and said, "this is 
 all a dream." He affected to disbeheve that Mrs. Tilton had 
 wTitten the letter, and denied everA'thing with a royal negative. 
 I then said, "It is but a few squares to my house; and ask Mrs, 
 Tilton for yourself whether or not she wrote the letter." He went 
 and returned in half an hour. I did not see him. 
 
 Now, he read this note to Mr. Belcher: 
 
 ^Ir. Tilton came too, and read me what purported to be a note 
 from his wife, a letter from his wife to him, in which he stated Mr. 
 Beecher had made a proposition to her, during Mr. Tilton's absence 
 to become a wife to him, and all that that implied; and I said to 
 Mr. Tilton when he read me that paper, "Is that paper in Mrs. 
 Tilton's hand^Titing?" and he said, "No, it is a copy." I asked 
 where the original was, and he said Frank Moulton had it. 
 
 Now, I want to read you, under the light of those actual 
 statements, by Mr. Tilton to witnesses, when the thing was 
 fresh in his mind, and under the light of his former state- 
 ment, under the light of what he characterized as a story 
 that should put the thing right, what he now says when he 
 washes to put a somewhat different view of the visit of Mr. 
 Beecher to ^Irs. Tilton; he says after his saying "this is 
 all a dream" — -after Mr. Beecher saying that, that he (Til- 
 ton) said to him: 
 
 "You are free to retire." He rose and walked towards the door, 
 as if he were going out, without saying a word. Then he sud- 
 denly turned, and, looking me in the face, he said, "May I go 
 once again, and for the last time, to see Elizabeth?" I instantly 
 answered "No," and then *"Yes." 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 193 
 
 And tlu'ii he says he can tell why he did that, and he is 
 allowed to. Then he goes on to state what he farther said, 
 and does not give his reasons: 
 
 "But in going to see Elizal)eth, see to it, sir, that you do not chide 
 her for the confession that she has made. She is at home sick, 
 broken-hearted. I charge you that you visit upon her no re- 
 proach for confessing to her husband; or, if you smite her with a 
 word, I will smite you in a tenfold degree. I have hitherto spared 
 your life when I had power to destroy it. I spare it now for Eliza- 
 beth's sake; but if you reproach her I will smite your name before 
 all the world." 
 
 Now, on the cross-examination I got out of him a very 
 clear concurrence with Mr. Beecher and with his own record 
 in the "True Story," and with his own present fresh recol- 
 lection, as he gave it to Mr. Storrs two days afterward. I 
 said to him: 
 
 Now, Mr. Tilton, do you remember Mr. Beecher expressing a 
 doubt as to whether Mrs. Tilton had written any such paper? A. 
 No, sir; he never intimated any such thing. 
 
 Q. You are quite sure of that.' A. No, sir; I am quite certain. 
 
 Q. Now, don't j'ou remember that on an expression of doubt or 
 .surpri.se concerning Mrs. Tilton having written any such papers 
 that — and I stopped — you had no original before you.^ .1. Xo, 
 sir. 
 
 He had not anything in her handwriting that he could 
 show Mr. Beecher that she had written; he didn't mean to 
 have, as I will show you when I conmient upon the planned 
 arrangement. I then said to him: 
 
 Now, don't you remember that on an expression of doubt or 
 surprise concerning Mrs. Tilton's having written any such paper 
 as that, you then said to him, "It is but a few squares to my house; 
 go and ask Mrs. Tilton for yourself whether or not she wrote that 
 letter," and his answer is: "Ah, but that was my suggestion, and 
 not his." 
 
 14 
 
194 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAX^VELL EVARTS 
 
 Gentlemen, there is some virtue in cross-examination. 
 
 In answer to an expression that you describe as surprise, did 
 you say, 'It is but a few squares to my house; go and ask Mrs. 
 Tilton for yourself whether or not she wrote that letter?' A. 
 Well, I may, perhaps, have used some such expression as that; 1 
 don't remember, but it was not in reference to any doubt. 
 
 Q. Well, no matter, you used the expression.'' A. But only as 
 to surprise. 
 
 Q. Now, thereupon, did he indicate a purpose of going? 
 
 Did anything happen that made him think he was going? 
 Mr. Tilton had made that suggestion to him. 
 
 Q. Now, thereupon, did he indicate a purpose of going? A. 
 He went staggering down stairs. 
 
 Q. Did he indicate to you a purpose of going to your house? A. 
 No, sir; lie didn't say anything on the subject that I remember 
 now. 
 
 Q. Didn't you know that he was going to your house then? 
 A. I presumed he would go; I don't remember that he said he was 
 going. 
 
 Q. I ask you if he didn't indicate to you, so that you understood 
 him, that he was going then and there to your house? and finally 
 the answer is: He and Moulton went out together, and I under- 
 stood they went to my house, and afterwards I learned that they 
 did so. 
 
 Fifth Day, June 3, 1875 
 
 As you have no doubt, gentlemen, upon the absolute 
 certainty and the voluminous concurrence of the evidence, 
 what the slip of paper that was in the possession of ]\Ir. 
 Tilton that night, and from which he read to Mr. Beecher, 
 was, I now wish to ask your attention to its character, as 
 comporting with the interview in the version that ]\lr. 
 Tilton has given of it. Mr. Beecher has told you w^hat it 
 contained; he heard it read. Mr. Tilton and Mr. Moulton 
 on being recalled, have not either of them given you a dif- 
 ferent statement of what it contained. Mr. Tilton is asked 
 
TIIK MKKCIIKH THIAL 105 
 
 the negative, "Was il so?" and lie says, "No, (|iiile a dif- 
 ferent statement;" hut what the difl'erent statement was he 
 did not tell you; and ^\v. Moulton had had the eopy — thai 
 is, the original, for it was only the eo])y that Mr. Tilton had 
 — had had the original in his i)ossession from the 301 h of 
 Deeember, 1870, to innnediately after the "Tripartite 
 Agreement," in A])ril, 187'-2,an(l he had opportunities enough, 
 and firmness of memory enough, to reproduee that little 
 sli]) of paper, in its contents, after that long period of medi- 
 tation and examination of it. He could tell vou word for 
 word the speech that ^Nlr. Tilton made when he introduced 
 Victoria Woodhull to the good graces of a New York audi- 
 ence, although he hatl never looked at any report of it since. 
 He could do that. Now, it was \astly important for this 
 j^rosecution to show this i)a])er to have been something 
 different from what Mr. Beecher's memory gave it, from 
 what the "True Story" gave it, from what Mr. Tilton's 
 statement to Mr. Charles Storrs, two days afterwards, gave 
 it, from what he gave it in subsequent interviews in 1872, to 
 Mr. Southwick, to iNFr. Schultz, to Mr. Hannan, and Mr. 
 McKelway. AVhy didn't they do it? Did any scruples of 
 accommodation, or invention of evidence, restrain them? 
 It is vital to their case. Without a contradiction of this 
 paper and its contents, without a substitution, in your 
 acceptance, and in the truth, upon accredited evidence, that 
 it was something else, their case is gone. Ah, gentlemen, 
 if they had sworn to a different reading of that paper, it 
 would have been willful, deliberate, and conscious statement, 
 an<l there was too much of written and recorded evidence, 
 as well as the oaths of numerous witnesses, to repel llu' sub- 
 stitution; and the lips of these men have not been opened 
 and never will be opened, to sul)stitul<' new reading for that 
 paper. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that being the character of the wife's 
 accusation, that Mr. Beecher had proposed to her to be a 
 
196 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL E\ ARTS 
 
 wife to him with all that that implies, you will see how utterly 
 it is at variance with the long narrative of seduction, of 
 adultery, of prostitution, and of justification of prostitution, 
 that he has delivered in your hearing. Where would you 
 put it, a wife's confirmation, that Mr. Beecher's attention 
 even may be drawn? Would you put it as a climax after 
 that long narrative, that in addition to all this, all this 
 adultery, "Mr. Beecher has proposed to me to be everything 
 to him that a wife is;" indecent propositions as a climax to 
 the history of sixteen months' adultery. Now, where did this 
 slip of paper come in? Mr. Tilton in his direct examination, 
 would start off, as it were, in that part of his interview that 
 took up his grievance after he had got through with the 
 conciliation of Mr. Beecher, and with the vituperation of 
 Mr. Bowen, as if this slip might have been — and you would 
 perhaps naturally infer that it was — the mode in which he 
 introduced his narrative of his wife's affairs. But on the 
 cross examination I called attention to this question of stage 
 and relation to the narrative. I ask him: 
 
 Had you this memorandum before you, made as you have now 
 stated, when you went on with this discourse with him that you 
 have given? A. I cannot say it was a discourse. 
 
 Q. Well, address? A. No, sir; it was not an address; it was 
 a statement. 
 
 Q. Well, a statement to him? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. It was internipted by him, was it? A. I remember his 
 making a little attempt to interrupt at one time, and I told him 
 to hear me to the end; there was practically no interruption on 
 his part. 
 
 Q. What form of demonstration did you recognize as an attempt 
 to interrupt you? A. I thought he was going to speak. 
 
 Q. He made a motion as if he was going to speak? A. I don't 
 distinctly remember it. 
 
 Q. Something you treated as a purpose of speaking? A. Yes, 
 
 sir. 
 
 Q. At what stage of your statement was that purpose inter- 
 
I'llK MKKCIIKIJ IHIAI- 197 
 
 nipted; (h) you reineinbcr? .1. 1 think it wns at the conclusion 
 of my reading Mrs. Tilton's roiiiessioii. 
 
 Q. This Httle paper which you had on thai table? A. Yes, sir; 
 that is niy present recollection. 
 
 Q. Did you lead that at the outset of your statement to him? 
 A. I read that; it was not the first of the interview; the first part 
 of the interview, as I remember, was my reference to his having 
 received ;i letter. 
 
 Q. Oh, well, I agree; but after you got through that, after you 
 had got ui)on the matter of his relations with your wife, was the 
 reading of tiie paper the first thing that was done? A. I don't 
 renicniber whether that was at the very beginning, or whether it 
 was somewhere in its proper place in the narrative; that I do 
 not recall at the present moment. 
 
 Q. Then how did you arrest that purpose? A. I said, "Hear 
 me to the end." 
 
 Q. Now, do you remember INFr. Beecher expressing a doubt, or 
 intimating a doubt, as to whether Mrs. Tilton had written any 
 sucii paper? 
 
 And then we go on with what I repeated to you j^esterday, 
 and he admits that it was a surprise, and that thereupon, on 
 that intimation of surprise at the paper, he said to him: 
 
 It is but a few squares to my house. Go and ask Mrs. Tilton 
 yourself w hether or not she wrote that letter. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that shows you that on his own reproduc- 
 tion of this interview he brought this paper in as the climax 
 and clincher, the height, the front of his charges, led up to by 
 what had gone before, and this the damning proof, as well 
 as imputation upon what he expected to touch the conscience 
 and humiliate the pride, by this expos»u*e of the unlawful 
 purposes of Mr. Bccchcr. Now, what sort of a climax was 
 that for his narrative? W\\\ sec how (excellent ly ii fits into 
 ^Ir. lieeclicr's uarra1i\(' ol" how I he ciiargc. and course of 
 relations with his family, was presented l)y Mi-. Tilton to 
 jVlr. Beeciier. upon Ihal. I uom'I repeal (he whoh- inter- 
 
198 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 view, but only its heads, after he came upon the subjects of 
 his family: 
 
 It was about the Bowen matters; advising against him; saying 
 that I had not only injured him in his business, in his reputation 
 and prospects, but had insinuated myself into his family, super- 
 seded him, taken his place; in matters of religious doctrine, bring- 
 ing up the children, the household, his wife looked to me rather 
 than to him; caused her to transfer her affections in an inordinate 
 measure; that in consequence of the difference which had sprung 
 up by reason of my conduct, his family had been well-nigh de- 
 stroyed; I had suffered my wife and his mother-in-law to conspire 
 for the separation of the family; that I had corrupted Elizabeth, 
 teaching her to lie, to deceive; and he went on to say that not 
 only had I done this, but that I had made overtures to her of an 
 improper character; and again I expressed some surprise (exactly 
 what Tilton says) ; he drew the paper and read it, and then it was, 
 turning to me, he said, "I wish you to verify these charges by 
 going down and seeing Elizabeth yourself; she is waiting for you 
 at my house." 
 
 Was there ever a more conclusive test of what the course, 
 what the measure, what the length, the breadth, the severity, 
 of the imputations against Mr. Beecher were, when you have 
 permanently, wholly unequivocal, and wholly indisputable 
 evidence of what the written climax was. Proof can go no 
 further. This fiction that I have read to you, so con- 
 temptible and frivolous in itself, is utterly knocked in the 
 head by this firm feature of the evidence that is produced 
 before you, and is shown to have been the climax which 
 arrested Mr. Beecher's attention, which struck him with 
 surprise; for all the rhetorical and inflated propositions 
 which, on Mr. Beecher's statement, Mr. Tilton had given 
 him, of interference with his family and conspiracy of his 
 wife and Mrs. Morse, and all those things, produced no 
 serious impression upon him then. He considered them the 
 exaggerations, perhaps the honest imputations, of a man 
 placed in a most distressing position by his own conduct 
 
THK liEECHKH THIAL 199 
 
 toward his family; but they aj^ree that the moment this 
 lady's name was brought in as tlie sj)onsor for an imputa- 
 tion, ]\Ir. Beecher, whose resjiect, whose regard, whose affec- 
 tion toward this lady had been the growtli of many years' 
 knowledge of her and association with her, at once produced 
 the imjiression on him, "Why, this indeed is, as it were, a 
 thunderbolt from a clear sky; this, this is something that a 
 man may well wonder at, if such an imputation as that is 
 made." Well, now take the confessed answer to that: 
 "Elizabeth cannot have said that, because it is not true," 
 and the recognition of the justice of that impression on Mr. 
 Beecher's ])art, by the husband's concession: "Go and ask 
 her; she will tell you." No, gentlemen, there is no escap- 
 ing, from your imfailing confidence in the character of this 
 pa])er, that is displayed in every form of evidence, with no 
 contradiction, no substitution, with a destruction of it by 
 the parties that never could have faced it in Court one 
 moment, and ke])t their footing before this jury. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, before I advert any more fully to the 
 magnitude of this evidence in regard to this ])aper and its 
 final blow to the pretensions of an accusation of immorality 
 beyond that, I will go with you to the interview that, on the 
 suggestion and invitation of Mr. Tilton, took ])lace between 
 Mr. Beecher and his wife. Whatever criticism there may 
 be as to there being any diversity of form and circumstance 
 and words in which this interview was brought about, as a 
 consequence of the interview between the husband and the 
 paramour, there can be no doubt whatever that the inter- 
 view between the adulteress and the ])aramour, or between 
 the honest wife and the falsely accused, ui)right clergyman 
 did take place that night, and did take ])lace between them 
 alone, and did take ])lace upon the suggestion or acquies- 
 cence of the husband, and when lie remainetl absent from 
 liis house — his own home. Now, there is a fact upon which 
 you can repose, and wlijilcvcr arc tli<> just inferences from 
 
200 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL E\ ARTS 
 
 that fact you will draw, and you will not be disturbed in 
 your logic and your reason and your responsible deductions 
 by any flimsy or frivolous feelings or views about these 
 particular people. You will judge of this fixed fact and all 
 that led to it, and what occurred during it, and what came 
 after it, according to your knowledge of human character, of 
 human feelings, of human conduct under these grave and 
 pressing circumstances of external relations. Think of it; 
 think of it on Tilton's theory — think of it on the view that 
 your own verdict is expected to sustain, that this man, Mr. 
 Beecher, had, through years of seduction and impure so- 
 licitation and fondling, finally triumphed over the bodily 
 chastity of this woman, and defiled and polluted the bed of 
 this plaintiff, the husband, for sixteen months, and that the 
 woman lay almost at the point of doom, sick, sorrowing in 
 her bed, and the husband invites the paramour to visit her 
 in her chamber alone. It was as few steps for him to accom- 
 pany Mr. Beecher as it was for Mr, Beecher to go. He had 
 seen some unseemliness in bringing about an interview 
 between Mr. Beecher and his wife, this wife and himself, 
 Mr. Tilton, where there was to be only the kindly purposes 
 of saving Mr. Beecher from being worried about the Tilton- 
 Bowen letter that had been sent him. And now he opens 
 his wife's chamber to the visit of the declared, convicted 
 adulterer; for, if there had been a charge, if there had been 
 truth in the charge, if there had been an idea or notion on 
 Tilton's part that there was truth in the charge, he knew the 
 length and breadth, and he either doubted it himself as a 
 dream, or he believed it as one of the most horrid realities 
 that ever confronts mortal man in his experience of life; and 
 he says: "Go down and see Elizabeth." Now, we won't 
 say whether "She is expecting you at the house" be or be 
 not a part of that final arrangement in its expressions. 
 That depends, perhaps, wholly on Mr. Beecher's statement 
 of it, that first, that simple clause. 
 
TIIK BEEC^ITKR THIAT, 201 
 
 Take il on any n ii-w , and yon have an inxilalion lo a 
 paramour from a Imsband thai is wholly inconsislciil with 
 human character, would have heen as intolerahle to the 
 paramour as it should have heen lo lh(> husl)an(l. How 
 would the guilty uian have acted under that im})utation, 
 and confronted with the confession of the wife? Would he 
 have desired lo meet the woman under I liose circumstances, 
 and to furnish the final proof against liimself hy the result 
 of that interview, if lie had known tliat he was guilty, known 
 that the wife was guilty, and known that the husband knew 
 they were both guilty? So that, on that mere fact in dis])ute, 
 you see tliat it is capable of conciliation with the ])rcceding 
 character of the interview^ only by assuming the character 
 that AFr. Beecher gives to the interview, and discarding that 
 that ]\Ir. Tilton now gives to the interview. Only by making 
 it — only })y its l)eing comjiatible with the view of the inter- 
 view that Tilton gave on the second day after to INIr. Charles 
 Storrs — only as com])atible witli the statement of the inter- 
 view as given in the "True Story," only with the interview 
 as stated to Belcher, and Southwick, and Schultz, and 
 Harman, and McKelway; only with Tilton's version as 
 stereoty])ed and preserved in manifold hnpressions, and as 
 now given in your hearing — with only the credit and guar- 
 anty that belongs to his sj)oken words, when he has de- 
 termined out of the rankling irritation of his vanity tliat 
 Dr. Bacon's witty references to Shakes])eare had excited 
 him lo carry out what had been a baffled purpo.se for years, 
 baffled by truth, a j)urpose to strike Mr. Beecher to the 
 heart, and a final, deliberate weighing of the.se two alter- 
 nati\('s of whether he would submit to the wounded vanity 
 that Dr. Bacon's goads made wince, or whether he would 
 j)iill down the temple of his household on the heads of his 
 wife and his children. \\'iiat abnormal, what monstrous 
 character and nature is this that considers himsi'lf driven 
 into a l«-rrilti<' Italaneini; of alternati\'es whether he shall beai- 
 
i202 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the jests of Dr. Bacon in his own character and sensibihties, 
 or whether, as he expressed it, he shall smash Elizabeth and 
 ruin the fame of his children! I have never heard of any 
 moral construction in any history that was written to be 
 believed, I have never heard of any narrative of real life, or 
 any philosophy of human character, that pretended to present 
 a sane mind treating these two alternatives of personal irri- 
 tation, and of final destruction of the happiness of those dear 
 to a man, as making a measuring cast of duty, as to which 
 course he should pursue. 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, when Mr. Beecher goes to the foot 
 of the stairs, Mr. Moulton is there. He knows nothing of 
 what has occurred up-stairs; that is, by having been present, 
 or by having had it reported to him, and whatever conscious- 
 ness of knowledge he then exhibits of the course of that 
 evening as proposed and planned, he got beforehand in lay- 
 ing out the scheme, and got from Mr. Tilton. And he says 
 to Mr. Beecher, "Are you going down to Mrs. Tilton's?" 
 before Mr. Beecher opens his mouth. How did that get 
 into Mr. Moulton's head? And then, more extraordinary 
 still, when Mr. Beecher answered that he was, Mr. Moulton 
 said, "I will go with you." Well, Mr. Beecher wasn't a 
 stranger in Brooklyn. He knew the way to Mr. Tilton's 
 house, and he was not afraid to walk the streets of Brooklyn 
 at nine o'clock at night, or half-past nine, in this most 
 reputable and orderly portion of it — on the Brooklyn 
 Heights. And how do you account for it that Moulton 
 wanted to accompany Beecher.'^ 
 
 Now, let me agree that Mr. Beecher is supposed, or repre- 
 sented, by Mr. Moulton to have said that something may 
 have passed which let him know that Mr. Beecher was 
 going to Mrs. Tilton's, what reason was there for Moulton's 
 going? I will show you the plan of that night after I get 
 through with it; but bear that in mind. They go; and 
 when they reach the door, and the fact is known that Mr. 
 
THE liEECHEH IHIAI. -^03 
 
 IJocclicr lias got there, and gone in, and gone diiecll}', and 
 has liad no op])orlunil y lo s])eak witli, eonsnlt with, mediate 
 with, anybody else, Mr. ]M()ulton has diseharged liis pre- 
 arranged part of tliat coneerted lrej)anning of Mr. Beeeher; 
 and he only asks of him that when he returns lie will stoj) at 
 his house, and ]\Ir. Beeeher aequiesces in the suggestion; 
 and Moulton knew he had the word of an honest man, and 
 that Mr. Beeeher would do so, and he went there. IMr. 
 Beeeher has the door opened for him by the housekeeper, 
 not the servant or maid that attends the tloor, but this house- 
 keeper, this jMiss Dennis that had taken the head of the 
 table and put Mrs. Tilton at the side when she and Bessie 
 Turner had returned from Marietta. 
 
 AVithout inquiry, Mr. Beeeher is told that ]\Irs. Tilton is 
 upstairs in her room and Mr. Beeeher will find her there, 
 and he goes up and knoeks at the door. The nurse, the 
 monthly nurse, Mrs. Mitchell, opens it from within, and she 
 knows nothing, and is no party to any preconcert, but she 
 knew Mr. Beeeher very well, and she knew that a woman, a 
 member of Mr. Beecher's church, sick and sorrowing in the 
 domestic troubles that had been urged upon her in reference 
 to Mr. Tilton's difficulties with Bowen, and his livelihood, 
 was to receive a visit from her pastor, Mr. Beeeher, and she 
 needed no explanation concerning the visit of a clergyman 
 to so sick a woman as INIrs. Tilton was, in her esteem, and if 
 it occurred at the hour of nine or half past nine in the 
 evening it was conclusive evidence, instinctively j)resenting 
 itself to her mind, that the clergyman had been sent for from 
 a recognition of the precarious condition of the ])atient; and 
 she left the room as every nurse would leave the room, as every 
 member even of a family would leave the room, when the 
 clergyman approaches the sick bed of a ])arishioner and com- 
 municant. Nor had she any fear that the mind of the pa- 
 tient would be nilllcd or disturbed, or the duties of protec- 
 tion of health that were confided to her, the nurse, shoukl 
 
■^04 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 interfere with this visit of the clergyman to the bedside. 
 She was a rehgious woman herself, though not of Mr. 
 Beecher's congregation, and she knew that the peace that 
 comes from the Gospel of Christ at the hands of a pastor 
 does not endanger the nervous system, or expose to excite- 
 ment a sick woman. And so, during that interview, lasting 
 as it may have done half an hour or an hour, no matter what, 
 or no matter how trustworthy the measures of time that 
 witnesses give about matters that they do not attend to, in 
 that regard she had no uneasiness, and she was justified by 
 the result, for, when hearing the door close after Mr. Beecher 
 as he left the house, she retin-ned to her patient's bedside, 
 she found her entirely tranquil and at ease. Nothing had 
 occurred, gentlemen, in that interview with Mr. Beecher, 
 to disturb the conscience or harass the feelings of Mrs. Til- 
 ton, and the nurse tells you that she went to sleep, and then 
 the nurse retired, at her accustomed ])lace by her side, and 
 went to sleep herself. 
 
 All, what volumes this testimony, acceptable to our own 
 appreciations of what the interview^ would be if it were com- 
 porting with the character of Mr. Beecher and Mrs. Tilton, 
 and if it comports with the evidence of Mr. Beecher as to 
 what did actually occur. We all accept the evidence of the 
 nurse as necessarily true, as naturally true, at least, and it 
 speaks volumes as to what the interview was, and whether 
 its results were to quiet the uneasy feelings of a woman 
 that had yielded under the goading pressure of a husband to 
 mend his matters with the world, to put even into the form 
 of a written paper a charge untrue against a man whom she 
 had respected and revered, and how under some sort of 
 reparation, at least some sort of purging of herself from 
 wicked purpose in what she had done, some sort of restora- 
 tion in the good opinion of this good man, had come from 
 that interview; her mind was at ease; she had repaired her 
 wrong; she had redressed an evil communication that was 
 
THE HKKC'IlKn IKIAL ^5 
 
 false, jind well lui^hl slic slcoj) by the side of her nurse, in 
 tluil i)e;ue of eonscience thai had heen administered to lier, 
 and thai her snbstantially truthful nature had yiehled to. 
 
 Now. tliere is but one witness to that interview -Mr. 
 Beeeher — and you must deteruiine wliether it is true, and it 
 is true as eomin^' from a man of intelligenee and of truth- 
 fuhiess so far as all the rest of liis character is concerned, 
 and if it is not true it is deliberate and wilful invention and 
 perjury. "\\)u nuist judge, — for it does not need to rest 
 upon his evidence, — whether it is not sustained by the true 
 interpretation of all that passed before and all that followed 
 afterward. 
 
 But this is the statement. He found her lying on a bed 
 dressed in i)ure white. 
 
 Mrs. Tilton was dressed in pure white, and her face as white as 
 the bed, lying a little above a level, reclining on pillows, her hands 
 palm to pahn on her breast in a very natural way. I drew a 
 chair; I sat down in it. 
 
 (^. Did she acco.st you in any way before she spoke? A. Not 
 at all; her eyes were closed. 
 
 Now, INfr. Beecher's memory was better than Mr. ]MouI- 
 lon's. He knew this lady was sick, and he recognized it; 
 and he has produced a picture to you which, besides its ex- 
 treme pathos and ])athetic conformity to truth, shows you 
 that the visit of Mr. Beecher was not un])repared for. The 
 dra])ery of the couch and the drapery of the sick woman 
 were all arranged in the ])urity of snow, at that late hour of 
 the day, as in a woman of true feeling wotdd be expected 
 upon the intrusion even of a clergyman: 
 
 She was as one dead, and yet she was living. I sat down by her 
 side, and said to her, ''Elizabeth, I have just seen your husband, 
 and had a long interview with him. He has been making many 
 .statements to me an<l charges, and he has sent me to you in respect 
 to some of them thai ymi sliould verify them." I then said, "lie 
 has charged me with alienating your atfeetions fioiu him. lie has 
 
206 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 charged me that I have corrupted your simpUcity aud your truth- 
 fulness. He has charged me with attempting improprieties. . . . 
 Are these things so, Ehzabeth?" She — there was the faintest 
 quiver, and tears trickled down her cheek, but no answer. I said 
 to her, "He says that you have charged me, Elizabeth, with mak- 
 ing improper advances. Have you stated all these things and 
 made the charges?" And she opened her eyes and said: "My 
 friend, I could not help it." "Couldn't help it, Elizabeth! Why 
 couldn't you help it? You know that these things are not true." 
 "Oh, Mr. Beecher," said she, "I was wearied out; I have been 
 wearied out with his importunities. He made me think that if I 
 would confess love to you it would help him to confess to me his 
 alien affections." "But," I said to her, "Elizabeth, this is a charge 
 of attempting improper things. You know that is not true." 
 "Yes, it is not true," she says, "but what can I do?" "Do! You 
 can take it back agam." She hesitated, and I did not understand 
 her hesitation; and he proceeds: "Why can you not take it back? 
 It is not true." She said something about she would be willing 
 to do it, if it could be done without injury to her husband, which I 
 did not at all understand. "But," said I, "you ought to give me 
 a written retraction of that charge." She said she was willing to 
 do anything if I would not use it against her husband. I said, 
 "Give me paper." She pointed to the secretary in the other room, 
 which stood between the windows. I went there; I knew it, and 
 took from the secretary some note paper, pen and ink. I brought 
 them to the bedside. She raised herself up a little and wrote the 
 first part of the retraction. She signed it. 
 
 I will read you, gentlemen, what she wrote: 
 
 December 30, 1870. 
 Wearied with importunity and weakened by sickness, I gave a 
 letter inculpating my friend, Henry Ward Beecher, under assur- 
 ances that that would remove all difficulties between me and my 
 husband. That letter I now revoke. I was persuaded to it, 
 almost forced, when I was in a weakened state of mind. I regret 
 it and recall its statements. 
 
 E. R. T, 
 
THE BEECHRR TRIAL 207 
 
 'I'lu'ii w<' asked Mr. BcocIut: 
 
 Q. During the writing, Mr. IJeoclicr, did you in any manner 
 dictate or suggest any ol" the language used? A. No, sir; I sug- 
 gested that she ought — in the beginning I suggested that she ought 
 to make a recall of those charges that should cover them. . . . 
 She read it over herself. She looked it over and then held out 
 her pen for some more ink, which I had in ray hand, and added 
 this: 
 
 "I desire to say explicitly, Mr. Beecher has never offered any 
 improper solicitations, but has always treated me in a manner 
 becoming a Christian and a gentlemen. 
 
 Elizabeth R. Tilton." 
 
 Q. Did you during this conversation, Mr. Beecher, say anything 
 to Mrs. Tilton as to the form and manner in which injury might 
 come to you from this charge? A. I did. 
 
 Q. \Miat was it? A. When she spoke as objecting that it woidd 
 make difficulty between her and her husband, I said to her that 
 there should be no difficulty of that kind, so far as I was concerned, 
 and I desired this in no sense as an offensive thing; some 
 rumor of this might come to mischief-makers, it might get into 
 the church, there might, in the future, be a call upon me, and that 
 I wished something in my possession that in any such exigency as 
 that would be a defense — in substance that. ... I said to 
 her that it was not an injury to me that she had done, alone; that 
 no woman could make such a statement without injuring herself, 
 and that it would be an injury both to herself and to her children 
 should it be brought out and believed. . . . There was some 
 little conversation further — I spoke some — I am afraid with sever- 
 ity, sometimes; and in the converse preceding, and when I went 
 away, I felt very sorrowful; I was sorry that I had said so, and 
 I said so to her that I hoped my visit would be one for peace, 
 and that it would not be the means of throwing her back in her 
 sickness, and some other kind expressions. 
 
 Now, ^cnticincn, you have an imnu'diato written paper 
 coining from the wife spontaneously on her part, or, if you 
 believe that Mr. Beecher aided or assisted in any degree in 
 the form and nuinner of the statement, coming from his 
 
208 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 recent knowledge of the nature and form and degree of the 
 charge, and you have here, immediately, a note that shows 
 conclusively to the commonest understanding that the charge 
 was of improper solicitations. Why, good heavens! gentle- 
 men, if the charge had been the prostitution of her body and 
 adultery, why would Mr. Beecher or this woman have had 
 this idea in their heads that the gravamen, injurious to Mr. 
 Beecher, was the charge of improper advances, as involving 
 immorality of purpose, equal, so far as intent goes, and 
 desire, to the consummation of the wickedness, if it had not 
 been the charge that over her name had been made at that 
 interview? We do not need to wander far nor compare 
 texts. Against the parties that destroyed the paper, there 
 could be no evidence except its magical restoration from 
 the flames, that could refute and confront their present 
 pretension that it was anything else than a charge of 
 improper solicitations, so absolutely, so immediately, so 
 clearly, as this correction and retraction of the charge; and 
 when she found that the generality of the first part that she 
 had written did not describe the letter so, but that the letter 
 itself would need to be read with the first part, she then saw 
 the deficiency, and added the final words. That she had not 
 said affirmatively before; she had withdrawn the letter but 
 only that, and you would need the letter to know what she 
 had withdrawn, as it then stood, and so, for she never 
 wanted that letter that she had written to see light, she 
 makes the paper complete, adding: 
 
 I desire to say explicitly Mr. Beecher has never offered any 
 improper solicitations, but has always treated me in a manner 
 becoming a Christian and a gentleman. 
 
 Now, that paper I have read to you was put in evidence by 
 this plaintiff, and being in evidence, his wife's statement 
 brought by him, it reads, according to its natural import, 
 against him by all the laws of evidence; but it was competent 
 for him to falsify the statement of fact concerning himself 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 200 
 
 lliat is included in liis wife's Icllcr liml he |)r()diices in evi- 
 dence. U) wit. *'^^ea^ied willi iniporl unities 1 j>ave a letter 
 in<ul|)atin^" my friend Henry Ward l?eecher under assurances 
 that that wouhl remove all difficulties between me and my 
 husband; I was persuaded to it, ahuost forced," and he has 
 not contradicted one word of these iin|)ulations against him 
 as to the means and the method by which the first letter was 
 obtained. What do you think of that, gentlemen? It is not 
 the fault of the counsel, that we all know. He guides him- 
 self, and he does not always know what is important to deny 
 and what to confess. It stands, then, upon their own evi- 
 dence, as an extorted accusation against Mr. Beecher, re- 
 tracted on the first remonstrance, retracted without coercive 
 measures, retracted peacefidly and with ease to conscience. 
 Now, gentlemen, let us see what courts think of women 
 and their confessions (if you please to call this so, but it was 
 an accusation of a third person, Mr. Beecher, not a confession 
 that was extorted). I read from the case of Derby vs. Derby 
 in 21 New Jersey Equity, 36: 
 
 \Miere from the facts in the case it was evident that the defend- 
 ant, the wife, was not a resolute, strongminded woman, but of a 
 yielding, unresisting nature, and on the other hand, that the plain- 
 tiff, the husband, was a man of decided will, strong, resolute and 
 violent, who knew the value of energy and violent attitude in 
 overruling more timid minds, and where the wife was sunnnoned 
 into his, the husband's, room to execute a paper which contained 
 a confession of her adultery, and which was in his handwriting, 
 and she was urged by him to sign it, in a room locked up with him 
 alone, held that such a written confession, although formally swoni 
 to before an authorized officer, shovdd have no weight as evidence 
 of adultery. 
 
 Judge Neilsox: Mr. Evarts, that was an acti(m for di- 
 vorce, I l)elieve, was if not? 
 
 Mr. Evahts: An action for divorce. Chancellor Za])ris- 
 kie, one of the most eminent Chancellors of New J«'rsey, 
 
 15 
 
210 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 speaks of this paper that I referred to, and I read from his 
 opinion in the case: 
 
 It is the written confession of the defendant herself, and not 
 only signed by her but sworn to before a Master of the Court. 
 It was written and read to her by her husband and again read by 
 the Master before she signed it, and he testifies that he cautioned 
 her against signing or swearing to it if the contents were not true. 
 This confession does not admit her guilt, but admits that she met 
 Palmer on the Dean Richmond by appointment; that Palmer 
 took a stateroom in the name of Mr. Derby (that is her husband), 
 and that they both occupied it during the night. 
 
 That is, it does not say that she committed adultery, but 
 it says that she went by appointment with a paramour on a 
 North River boat, and that the paramour took a stateroom 
 in her husband's name and that both occupied it all night. 
 
 And these facts are sufficient to sustain the charge of adultery, 
 and while it is possible that a man and a woman of their ages might 
 occupy the same room for a night without guilt, yet the presump- 
 tion is strong against them, and in this Court it would, unless 
 clearly explained, be always sufficient to sustain the adultery. 
 These facts, if the confession is believed to have been fairly ob- 
 tained and understandingly made, are sufficient to support it, so 
 that this Court may found its judgment upon it. 
 
 These are the facts of assignation, false pretenses of her 
 husband, etc. The Court then has to take up the question of 
 the language of the confession, and says : 
 
 The language of the confession, although it does not say, "I 
 committed adultery," says, "I did so and so," and it was read to 
 her and explained to her before the Master, and she signed it and 
 swore to it. 
 
 Chancellor Zal:)riskie seems to understand something of the 
 terrible subjugation of a married woman's will, for he says : 
 
 Married women, we know, constantly sign deeds against their 
 judgment and wishes, only to gratify the requisitions of their hus- 
 
THE BEECHKR TRIAL 211 
 
 bands, and to avoid the discomfort and annoyance which a refusal 
 would cause, and solemnly acknowledge before an officer, on a 
 private examination, that it is done of their own free will. The 
 step taken by Mrs. Derby was only one degree beyond this, and 
 that consisted in this, that she did not only part with property, 
 but acknowledged facts which might disgrace and ruin her for 
 life. But if she did it under the assurances that the facts admitted 
 did not compromise her she might have done so; yet it is an ac- 
 knowledgment that few women in their senses would have made 
 if not true, and in order to believe it in her case, it is necessary to 
 be first convinced that she was, hy the differences in their nature, or 
 by circumstances, under the control of her husband. From the 
 facts in the case, the conclusion is unavoidable tliat she was not a 
 resolute, strong-nnnded woman, but of a yielding, unresisting 
 nature. She never else could have borne the treatment to which 
 for years she had been subjected by her husband. On the other 
 hand, Derby appears to be a man of decided will, strong, resolute, 
 and violent, and knows the value of energy and violent attitude 
 in overruling more timid minds. 
 
 That confession did not convict the wife nor i)rocure u 
 release for the husband from the bonds of matrimony. 
 
 In the case of Curtis vs. Curtis, in 2 Swaby & Tristram, the 
 wife 
 
 made repeated confessions under no other coercion than the fear 
 that her husband, who was unsettled in mind, would get insane if 
 she refused. Held an abundant explanation, and divorce granted 
 in favor of the wife. 
 
 ^^'lli(•h would have been precluded, if there had been any faith 
 put in confessions thus gained from her. Ah, gentlemen, 
 this institution of nuirriage, framed in our nature, built 
 up in our ci\alization, studied, contemplated, understood by 
 the jurisprudence of ages, is a .solid and real institution, 
 and for its great benefits, and as a necessary part of life, it 
 carries not only tlie fact of the wife's subordination to the 
 husbanfl, but of the merciful interpretation of that subordi- 
 nation whicli sensible, instructed men ever accord in i)ractical 
 
'iU SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 life, and which the judges pronounce from the bench, and the 
 juries confirm by verdicts. Now, gentlemen, you may think 
 that in our advanced civilization, when so much of independ- 
 ence is assumed for women, and so entire equality is accorded 
 to them in feeling and sentiment by their husbands and by 
 the world, that the old rule of the common law interpreting 
 this institution of marriage, by which a wife never was held 
 responsible to the law, or subject to punishment, for any 
 crime committed by her in the presence and under the in- 
 fluence of her husband, was one of those traits of human na- 
 ture belonging to ruder ages and to past times; but, gentle- 
 men, in our Court of Appeals and in the highest tribunals of 
 England, within the last few years, there is an explicit re- 
 cognition of these principles. Let me read you a case, 
 "Michael Tarpley" — this was in the year 1871, was it not, 
 Mr. Abbot? 
 
 Mr. Abbot: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: In London, Michael Tarpley, giving the 
 name of Terrill, applied to a jeweler, representing that he 
 wished to make a gift to his wife, and induced the jeweler to 
 send by a clerk a quantity of diamond ornaments to a house 
 in a highly respectable neighborhood in London, which he 
 (Tarpley) had rented shortly before the transaction, and 
 immediately after the transaction vacated. The house door 
 was opened to the shopman by Michael Tarpley, and he 
 excused to the shopman the absence of the servant, who, it 
 appears, had been sent on an errand to a fictitious person by 
 Michael Tarpley's wife, Martha. When the wares had been 
 displayed to Michael Tarpley and his wife, Michael sent his 
 wife from the room, ostensibly to call her sister, who, how- 
 ever, if there really were such a person, seems not to have 
 been in the house. The wife left the room, but presently 
 returned, saying her sister would come, and then stepping 
 quickly behind the shopman (that is, the wife), she placed a 
 handkerchief saturatexi with something over his mouth, 
 
THE IJKECHEI? IIUAL 213 
 
 MicluR^l Tarpley seizing liiiii by the throat, and tlie woman, 
 for an instant shaken off, again applying the handkercliief 
 to his face. The shopman, after an interval of unconscious- 
 ness, discovered himself bound with strajis. Michael Tarpley 
 then stood over him, threatened him, and blindfolded his 
 eyes. The shopman then heard Michael say, "Quick, Lucy, 
 bring my hat, " and heard him leave the room, etc.. Michael 
 escaped arrest. The woman was arrested and tried for that 
 robbery, and she was acquitted by the judgment of the 
 p]nglish law because what she had done she had done in the 
 presence and presumedly undei* the powder of her husband; 
 and, althougli they had disputations afterward in the House 
 of Lords as to whether that presumi)tion should have that 
 degree of force or there should be some additional evidence 
 beyond presence, of power exercised at the moment, yet that 
 stands as the most recent inquiry into the English law^ on this 
 subject, and the Parliament of England, with that example 
 before it, and the subject called to its attention, has not 
 altered the law, but has refused to do so. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you understand how it is that this law of 
 ours, which is not a tyrant, which is not merciless, which 
 does not delight in destruction, l)ut i)rotects innocence, how 
 this law of ours appreciates the situation of a woman toward 
 her husband. Ah, gentlemen, and you now see the wisdom of 
 our law in not permitting even this great interest of justice to 
 interfere with the institution of marriage by allowing wives to 
 testify for their husbands against others, because the ])r)nci- 
 ples of human nature do not i)ermit the interests of others to 
 be exposed to the power of the husband in procuring a wife's 
 oath. And they do not allow her to testify agaiuHt her 
 liusband, because the law, that makes marriage what it is. 
 and refuses release from it excej^t upon grounds incom])atibl<' 
 with its endurance and its usefulness as an institution, does 
 not subject wives to be overpowered, and their fidelity to 
 truth l)rought into that terrible choice, between fidelity to an 
 
214 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 oath and fidelity to a husband; between swearing, not with 
 their Hves in their hands, because death is nothing compared 
 with the torments and oppressions which through the follow- 
 ing life will crush and degrade the spirit and make wretched 
 the life of a woman that has chosen in that sad alternative, 
 to swear to the truth against her husband; the law does not 
 give her a divorce from that misery; the law leaves her to lie 
 in his bosom, to sit at his table, to watch him in sickness, to 
 adhere to him by necessity, and it does not tear assunder 
 human nature by divided allegiance to two great institutions 
 which society rests upon, and both of which it must sustain; 
 and it solves the question by determining that neither shall 
 the interests of third persons be affected by the concurring 
 oath of the wife with the husband, nor the wife's life and the 
 institution of marriage be disconcerted and broken by a 
 choice between divided allegiance. Society chooses for her 
 and says: "You are the wife, and public justice shall not 
 place you on the witness-stand. " 
 
 Now, if your honor please, to see what our own courts say 
 on this great question of husband and wife, I read now from 
 the case of Cassin vs. Delaney, in the 1st of Daly's Common 
 Pleas Reports, page 225. I necessarily revert to this report 
 to show the facts (reading) : 
 
 The proof, on the trial before the referee, showed that the plain- 
 tiff was first arrested on the 20th of November, at the instance of 
 the defendant, Lawrence Delaney; that he was imprisoned for 
 that night, and in the morning, on being brought before the Police 
 Justice, was discharged, because it appeared that the money which 
 it was alleged the plaintiff had embezzled did not belong to the 
 defendant Lawrence, but was the property of his wife. He there- 
 fore went for her, and she came before the Justice and made her 
 complaint for the embezzlement. The plaintiff, being still in the 
 court room, was informed by the Justice that he could not depart 
 until he gave bail for his appearance on the charge. 
 
 That is to say, the husband of a wife having made a 
 
THE HKl'XHKIi TRIAL '215 
 
 coinplaint criminally of ombezzlcnicnt of propiTly, it lurned 
 out lliat it was Iiis wife's proiioity and not his, and she was 
 sent for, therefore, by her own oath to make that supporting' 
 contribution to the efficacy of the criminal char^^e. Tlie 
 charge turned out unfoimded; at any rate, it was disnu'ssed, 
 and the party there accused brought his action for malicious 
 prosecution and false im])risonment against husband and 
 wife; and in the Court of Appeals, in the 38th of New York 
 Rei)orts, page 179, the ciuestion w^as considered (reading): 
 
 ^^^lere a prosecution is maliciously instituted by a husband and 
 wile, the latter acting in the presence and by the direction of the hus- 
 i)and, is she personally liable for damages in such action? . . . 
 The authorities are clear that when a tort or a felony of any 
 inferior degree is committed by the wife, in the presence and by the 
 direction of her husband, she is not personally liable. To exempt 
 her from liability both of these concurrent circumstances must 
 exist, to wit, the presence and the command of the husband. An 
 offense by his direction, but not in his presence, does not exempt 
 her from liability; nor does his presence, if unaccompanied by 
 his direction. His presence furnishes evidence and affords a pre- 
 sumption of his direction; but it is not conclusive, and the truth 
 may be estabhshed by competent evidence. 
 
 And it appeared on the proofs that the referee excluded cer- 
 tain evidence, and a new^ trial should be ordered because he 
 excluded evidence. But the jirinciples are laid down, so that 
 there is nothing inadequate, nothing that has been super- 
 seded by the growing civilization of our times. Indeed, al- 
 though there may have been some hazardous (I think dan- 
 gerous) innovation upon the defenses of marriage, yet our 
 law in its justice has never varied in its toleration of this sub- 
 jection of the wife to the husband, even to this apparent 
 peril to the enforcement of criminal justice. 
 
 Now, Mr. Beecher goes back, goes into Mr. Moultou's 
 house, sees Mr. Moulton, and does not see IVIr. Tilton. and 
 does not say anything to Mr. Moulton excei)t that he has 
 
216 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 been there, and in a moment says lie will go home. Well, 
 would you believe it? Mr. Moulton says he will go home 
 with him. Well, Mr. Beecher knew the way home. Mr. 
 Beech er didn't ask Mr. Moulton to go home with him. How 
 happened it that Mr. Moulton went home with him.^ He 
 wasn't any friend of Mr. Beecher's, he had not any relations 
 with him. His services that night were on the retainer of 
 Mr. Tilton as cooperating with him in some common purpose 
 that they had; and why should not Mr. Beecher go to his 
 house alone? It was then about ten o'clock, apparently. So 
 far as any evidence goes that was about the hour. But Mr. 
 Moulton says: "I will go home with you "; and so he saw him 
 home, and saw that he didn't resort to anybody else, that he 
 didn't have the benefit of any other than "heathen" friend- 
 ship, that that night at least should be got through with the 
 impression upon Mr. Beecher's sensibility, and a presenta- 
 tion to his reflections of these grave, these wonderful facts 
 that came upon the heart and the mind of this sympathetic, 
 this simple-minded, this guileless man, indeed with astonish- 
 ment and dismay. For he was a man that looked at the 
 heart, and looked at the character, and looked at the nature 
 of things between this husband and this wife that could have 
 been going on, and on, and on, till this reduction of the wife's 
 truthfulness and this subjugation to the husband's wicked 
 will had come to that pass that she could make a false charge 
 to help his circumstances, and to make peace between her and 
 him, and delude herself with the foolish notion that that bene- 
 fit could be accomplished and no harm come to others. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, a flood of light is let in upon the actual 
 relations of this husband and wife, of the absolute and abject 
 submissiveness of that wife in the sense of religion, in the 
 sense of fidelity to the husband, in the sense of duty, in the 
 love of her husband, in the faith and hope that sometime and 
 somehow, if she would cling to him and obey him, and honor 
 him and serve him, till death them should part, there might 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 217 
 
 be a Iiope at last that she had redeemed tlie soul she so 
 much loved, and should see the fruits of her suffering and her 
 ahjectness in the salvation for the long, immortal life that 
 should rejoice her forever and ever, for she was a woman of 
 an absolute piety. She believed in the realities of religion. 
 It was a distress to her soul that her Saviour should l)e put 
 to an open shame before her eyes by the crucifixion and scorn 
 that her husband had written her years before. She did be- 
 lieve in the divine nature of the Saviour, and in the solemn 
 menace, shall I call it? — in the solemn effort, finally, for 
 salvation of all, of the solemn statement: "He that dolli 
 not confess me before men, him will I not conf(\ss before my 
 Father in Heaven." And a woman that carried through 
 years of Christian duty and of Christian submission to a 
 man, these realities of faith, showed what they would bring 
 her to do, even if she should forget almost her own duties 
 to herself, to her sex, to her human nature, to truth. I say 
 the incidents and correspondence of those solemn interviews 
 between her husband and herself in January and Februarys 
 1868, showed you how this woman would assume upon her 
 innocent soul almost the unutterable sin, almost the unut- 
 terable shame, if so be that in her confession of sentimental 
 weakness, of emotion, she nn'ght be in some degree able to 
 smooth the path of her husband in recovery from wickedness 
 to virtue; and how the greatness of her soul, how the beauty 
 of her piety and the manifestations of her wifely love did for 
 the time being triumph over the coarse nature, turn back 
 the vulgar appetites, and ennoble the broken, ruined frame 
 of a once Christian character. Ah! gentlemen, those let- 
 ters, read to you by my learned associate, show you what a 
 wife that loves her husband, and believes in the solenmities 
 of religion, and thinks that the sufi'erings of this life are but 
 for a season, compared with that eternal weight of glory that 
 attends salvation — what she can do to save her husband. 
 Now, gentlemen, we are i)repared to understand, for tiie 
 
218 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 future, other questions than the immediate one as to the 
 power of husbands over wives, and without much necessity 
 of recurring to this general subject, which I have thus forti- 
 fied by the solemn conchisions and the dehberate judgments 
 of the jurisprudence that has grown up through ages, and 
 which forms the basis of our administration of justice. 
 
 Mr. Tilton saw Mr. Moulton immediately after Mr. Moul- 
 ton's return to his (Moulton's) house. He had no conversa- 
 tion with him before Mr. Beecher and he left the house; and 
 he says in answer to a question : 
 
 Mr. Tilton told me that after he had spoken to Mr. Beecher, INIr. 
 Beecher said: 'This is all a dream, Theodore,' something like that. 
 I then asked him : 'do you say that that is all the answer that Mr. 
 Beecher made?' and he said that that was all the answer that Mr. 
 Beecher made. T remember that, sir; that is all I remember.' 
 
 Now, to go on with that night — that solemn night — Mr. 
 Tilton goes home. He says, either in the letter which he 
 procured from his wife or in his own explicit testimony, that 
 he found her in distress, and carries through his evidence 
 this view of the later occurrences of that evening: that 
 returning to his home, without any inquiry on his part, and 
 without any solicitude or interest, his wife puts in his pos- 
 session, before retiring for the night, a statement, called 
 here the recantation of the retraction, but its real nature 
 I shall expose to you, and what was the course of things: 
 
 December 30, 1870 — midnight. 
 My Dear Husband: I desire to leave with you before going to 
 sleep a statement that Mr. Henry Ward Beecher called upon me 
 this evening, asked me if I would defend him against an accusation 
 in a council of ministers, and I replied solenmly that I would in 
 case the accuser was any other person than my husband. He 
 (II. W. B.) dictated a letter, which I copied as my own, to be used 
 liy him as against any other accuser except my husband. This 
 letter was designed to vindicate Mr. Beecher against all persons 
 save only yourself. I was ready to give him this letter, because 
 
TIIK ItKKniKH THIAI. i>19 
 
 lie said, witli pain, thai my letter in your hands iuldressed to him, 
 dated December h^J), had struck him dciul, and ended his useful- 
 ness. You and I hoth are pledged to do our best to avoid publicity. 
 God grant a speedy end to all further anxieties. Affectionately, 
 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 Now, he is giving a statement, of his, but I can read that 
 just as well after I read to you Mrs. Mitelieirs. She tells 
 you the story of his approach to that sick chamber and that 
 sick woman. He says, in this story of his, immediately fol- 
 lowing his statement that he liad sent Mr. Beecher down: 
 
 Shortly after he left I left; on reaching home I found that Mrs. 
 Tilton, who was then seriously ill and in bed, was agitated and 
 distressed. 
 
 And then he gives the narrative of what passed, and how 
 slie voluntarily resumed her pen and ink, and wrote the 
 following statement. Resumed her pen and ink; she had 
 her pen and ink to write the Beecher retraction. No doubt 
 about that, and she resumed her pen and ink to write this 
 recantation. 
 
 Recess of the Court. 
 
 Now, we have a witness to whose credit no observations of 
 mine need to add anything. The simple, honest character 
 of this experienced woman, Mrs. Mitchell, attracts atten- 
 tion to what she says. She is uncontradicted by any testi- 
 mony, and all these external facts observed by lier, and 
 rehearsed l)y her, must carry their impression with us. 
 Imaginations about evidence are not to be indulged in. I 
 have not asked you to detract one jot or tittle from the 
 testimony of Mr. ]Moulton, or of Mr. Tilton, except upon 
 th<' grounds that I have given you, out of their own mouths, 
 and in the conflict that is raised between them and inde- 
 pendent, disinterested, competent witnesses, who, whenever 
 there conuvs a point of importance, where their testimonv is 
 
no SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 to be compared with Mr. Moiilton's or Mr. Tilton's, con- 
 tradict them, as a matter of course. 
 
 On the return of Mr. Tilton, he has said he found his wife 
 agitated, and has carried the whole impression that, she put 
 vohmtarily in his hands, as a reparation of some wrong she 
 had done, what is called the recantation of the retraction, 
 and which I have read to you. The nurse says: 
 
 Q. Did you know of his return, and how first did you know of 
 it? A. The first I knew of it, I was awakened in my sleep. 
 
 Q. Where were you sleeping? . A. With Mrs. Tilton. 
 
 Q. Before you went to sleep had Mrs. Tilton gone to sleep, or 
 not? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What excited your attention, or what awakened you? A. 
 A whispering or buzzing sound. Mr. Tilton was talking to his 
 wife; I could not tell how; he was dowai by the side of the bed, 
 talking and whispering very earnestly; and it awakened me, and 
 I said to Mr. Tilton: 'Mr. Tilton, this will never do; Mrs. Tilton 
 must not be disturbed so.' She seemed to be very much agitated. 
 
 Then she cautions Mrs. Tilton against the danger of her tak- 
 ing cold, and the result is that, upon the suggestion either of 
 Mrs. Tilton or Mr. Tilton, the nurse left the side of Mrs. 
 Tilton, (Mr, Tilton withdrew from the room to enable her to 
 put on her wrapper), and went and sat down in his study; 
 and while she was there she heard, during a period which 
 she describes as may be an hour, the angry tones of the 
 husband, and the entreaties of the wife, and the walking to 
 and fro, and then he comes into the study and takes pen 
 and ink, and goes into his wife's room, and comes out again 
 soon after; and the nurse goes back to her patient, and she 
 finds her in great agitation. 
 
 Q. In what condition did you find Mrs. Tilton when you re- 
 turned? A. She appeared and seemed as though she had been 
 weeping; she appeared to be very much agitated, and I stroked 
 her head and tried to pacify her, and I tried to calm her. 
 
 Q. How long did you thus treat her? A. For nearly an hour, 
 as near as I can remember. 
 
THK HKIXUKK TRIAL lil 
 
 (}. Was her condition snch as rcqnircd lliis Irciilnicnl? .1. Yes 
 bir; she was veiy nervons. 
 
 Q. Did she then go to sleep? .1. She did, after a time. 
 
 And Ihc nurse took lior pla('<' by her side, and also sought 
 rejjose. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you see how coni])letely false is INIr. Til- 
 ton's ])resentation of this occurrence, not in any niisrecol- 
 lection of words or misrecital of conversation, hut in the 
 whole moral, natural features of the transaction his object 
 is to throw u])on the interview between his wife and Mr. 
 Beecher the credit of agitation, of coercion, of falsification 
 in the letter then written, and to throw upon what occurred 
 between his wife and himself, on his return, the traits of 
 spontaneous statement of what she had been brought to do 
 by the overwhelming influence of Mr. Beecher, and for a 
 special purpose, and her desire before she went to sleep — 
 meant to carry meaning, before she could sleep, before her 
 conscience could be quieted, before she could venture to 
 seek protection in her sleep, from Divine guardianship — she 
 \\'ished to ])ut in his hands the truthful restatement of the 
 matter. Well, gentlemen, these attendant circumstances 
 that give force and character to the act itself, we none of us 
 underestinuite. AVe want to know what the truth is on that 
 subject. I have given you the truth from ^Trs. Mitchell as 
 to the calm composure in which she found Mrs, l^ilton when 
 she returned to her chamber after ]\Ir. Beecher had left it; 
 that there was no nervous agitation, no need of the soothing 
 of the nerves then; and now I have sho\ATi you that so far 
 from Mrs. Tilton's^' having the spontaneous movement to 
 make any new statement, give any new letter, redress any 
 injury, correct any falsehood, she was calmly slee])ing. with 
 a quiet conscience, and \\vv jiurse beside her also asleep, with 
 no solicitud<'s for her coiidilion, in the jX'aceful frame of 
 mind in wliich she found her after Mr. Beecher was there. 
 Then we have there the first blow to vour belief in the 
 
222 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 character, in the spontaneity, in the freedom from the hus- 
 band's coercion of this third paper, from the wife, obtained — 
 the second that night, the third in the series. If you beheve 
 the nurse you beheve that Mr. Tilton, anxious to learn what 
 had been the result of the interview that he had invited 
 between his wife and Mr. Beecher, and from which he ex- 
 [)ected an adherence to the terms of the imputation of im- 
 proper advances, wakens her and learns that she has retracted 
 it, and that she has put the giving of it on the grounds, the 
 truth of which was so well known to him, that she had been 
 wearied by importunity, and weakened by sickness, and 
 yielded to persuasion, almost to force. And then, alas! he 
 found, much to his consternation, no doubt, that he was in 
 precisely the same position in regard to Mr. Beecher, from 
 this new movement toward him, in his wife's name, that he 
 had been placed in the preceding Christmas Day, by under- 
 taking to send upon Bowen's responsibility the missive, 
 which Bowen had seen had no power against Mr. Beecher, 
 and had merely placed him in the possession of the fact that 
 he, Tilton, had desired to strike a blow — the malice without 
 the power. But here was a more terrible situation for Mr. 
 Tilton than that. 
 
 (A short paragraph in the arginiient as reported is here omitted. 
 The diction is so faulty and involved either through fault in de- 
 livery or in reporting as to make the idea somewhat obscure. But 
 the continuity and force of the argument are not disturbed by 
 the omission.) 
 
 Now, Mr. Tilton found that all this arrangement to affect 
 Mr. Beecher, lost the support that he had invited and 
 counted upon from the interview with his wife. The inter- 
 view with the wife had placed in Mr. Beecher's hands her 
 own statement of the falsity of the imputation of improper 
 advances, and of the motives and influences that had at- 
 tended its framing and its presentation, and, alas, that sim- 
 ple and necessary treatment of the subject by the retraction, 
 
THE BEECIIER TRIAL 523 
 
 nltlioii<j:li nol (Icsiufiu'd in [\\v wife's will, nor ikhmKmI or wished 
 for on Air. Boecher's part, to prove a weajxm aj^jainsf Mr. 
 Tilton, or to he used against him, nevertlieless was now a 
 wife's eonfession indeed, of wron^' on her part, of tlie false 
 charge drawn out of her by her Iiushand's niahce to Beeclier, 
 or the sordidness of his needs in respect to his business af- 
 fairs, that made him clutch at even an unlawful weapon to 
 save himself from ruin. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, do you believe that story that the nurse 
 tells, or don't you? There has been no contradiction of Mrs. 
 Alitchell by either Mr. Moulton or Mr. Tilton, in any respect, 
 on their return to the stand — not in any respect. We have 
 not been told that he did not find his wife asleep; we have 
 not been tohl anything to the contrary of Mrs. Mitchell's 
 statements, excei)t that in the preceding week he did not say 
 he was a ruined man; so they have not left IVIrs. Mitchell 
 out of their minds; they have conned her testimony, and 
 culled one i)oint in which they could contradict her, and that 
 was in his direct examination, was it (to Mr. Abbot), or did 
 he repeat it in his rebuttal? And that was quite unneces- 
 sary to be brought into his rebuttal, because he had said in 
 his direct that he had not said he w^as a ruined man. But he 
 could have said that his wife was not asleep when he got 
 liome; he could have said that this private interview with her 
 did not occur, and that the nurse was not waiting out in t lu- 
 st udy, and that he did not go in there and get pen, ink, and 
 pa])er, and taken them into his wife's room, after angry 
 tones on his ])art, and entreaty on hers; and we have nol a 
 word on that subject from this witness, this ])laintiff. ^^■e 
 nmst therefore a(;cei)t it as absolute truth. Therefore you 
 see how this letter of midnight of the .SOth was got by direct. 
 })roved, coercion, by her husband's power over a sick, a 
 nervous, an afflicted woman, abject in sj)iril, and in the 
 extremity ol" disaster and fear for the livelihood of hersell' 
 and her children. Now, in a letter that Mr. Tilton carried 
 to Dr. Storrs, written for the puri)o.se: 
 
224 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Late the same evening, Mr. B. came to me (that is Mr. Beecher) 
 (lying very sick at the time) and filling me with distress, saying 
 that I had ruined him, and wanting to know if I meant to appear 
 against him. This I certainly did not mean to do, and the thought 
 was agonizing to me. I then signed a paper which he wrote, to 
 clear him in case of a trial. In this instance, as in most others, 
 when absorbed by one great interest or feeling, the harmony of 
 my mind is entirely disturbed, and I find on reflection that this 
 paper was so drawn as to place me most unjustly against my 
 husband and on the side of Mr. Beecher. So in order to repair so 
 cruel a blow to my long-suffering husband, I wrote an explanation 
 of the first paper and my signature. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have no hesitation in reading to you let- 
 ters that Mr. Tilton gets from his wife, and carries for his 
 purpose to other people, as being his acts, and but the tunes 
 that he plays upon the nature and compliance of his wife. 
 I take it, then, that you understand fully the occurrences 
 of that night, and I have only to ask you to carry back from 
 the proof, from the exact character of coercion under which 
 the last letter, of midnight of the 30th, was extorted from 
 Mrs. Tilton, to the period of the 28th and 29th in wdiich 
 Moulton and Tilton were storming in her sick chamber, 
 arguing, representing, influencing, coercing that woman, 
 under which they obtained the first paper of charge to be 
 used to get an interview with Mr. Beecher, and as the 
 basis of the interview with Mr. Beecher to show him that 
 the wife had this responsibility. You will observe, too, that 
 when you have a course of action, and its result ]:>roved, on 
 the 30th, between this husband and this wife, and you have 
 a similar situation, a similar effort, a similar presence, a 
 similar persistency and importunity carried through three 
 times, you know that the same coercion, producing the same 
 results, was applied to get the charge of the 29th that was 
 used to get the explanation of the retraction of the charge 
 of the 30th. You see then that when Mr. Beecher in as- 
 tonishment, asks this woman as she lay there: "How 
 
THE BEECHER TRTAT. 225 
 
 could you do this?" — nol hocausc il would injure uio, Mr. 
 Beecher, not for this or that reason, but on the simple and 
 direct appeal twice or thrice repeated" — How could you do 
 this, Elizabeth, when it was not true?" That was the awful 
 state of things in jNIr. Beecher's mind, of the moral ruin, or 
 of the mental weakness that had made a woman tliat he 
 respected, antl admired, and loved — in the sense that he has 
 described to you, and which he does not seek to disparage 
 or conceal — how she coidd have done it when it was not true. 
 And then she tells him, not that she thought it was true, not 
 thai there had been anything between them that could be 
 of equivocal import, and that she believed was true for the 
 moment — nothing of the kind; but "How could I help it.' 
 The importunity, weariness, sickness, disaster, and my rela- 
 tions to the husband" — which she did not need to repeat to 
 Mr. Beecher, because he had been led into a full acknowledg- 
 ment of them during her resort to him and his wife in the 
 preceding weeks of the same month — "and the assurance 
 that this t.em])orary contrivance for immediate use would 
 put an end to all trou})le between me and uiy husl)and; that 
 was the reason — not to hurt you l)ut to aid him, and me, as 
 his subject and submissive wife." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you will see that as ]Mr. Tilton makes 
 his w^ife say — and say, I have no doubt, truly — in this letter 
 to Dr. Storrs, when Jier attention is drawn to one point she 
 is absorl)ed in it, and tiiinks of nothing else. "When," 
 she says, "my husband importuned me for something to be 
 used usel'iiiiy lor him, 1 gave it, and not to injure you. Now. 
 you say it will injure you, why, I take it back. The truth 
 is there is nothing in it as you know, and I put the nuitter 
 as il should be." Alas! if il could lia\-e been so, and only 
 so, but when Mr. 'i'ilt<^n returns, lie says, "Why, thai is all 
 very well, it' you please, but there is more than thai in what 
 you have said. ^ ou have disclosed to Mr. Beechei- thai I 
 have got from you by force, by persuasion, and by fraud, 
 
 16 
 
226 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 a false charge against him, and that puts in his hands a true 
 charge against me."- "Well, that is not my desire or my 
 purpose, and so I give you an explanation, not a retraction 
 of what I have given to Mr. Beecher, not a falsification, but 
 an explanation of it, that I only mean it as an extinction of 
 my charge that I gave you against him, and not as a source 
 and origin of any charge against you. It is to protect him 
 against you; this is to cover Mr. Beecher against this pois- 
 oned arrow of falsehood that I gave to you, by giving him 
 the shield of truth against all the world; but I did not mean 
 that it should be a weapon against you, nor to be used 
 against you." Well, there wasn't any danger of its being 
 used against Mr. Tilton by Mr. Beecher, if you can be- 
 lieve Mr. Tilton that the last thing that he desired was to 
 have this controversy between Mr. Beecher and himself, 
 concerning anything that touched his wife's character or 
 honor brought to light. Now, the explanation, you will 
 observe, does not deny the statement in the retraction. It 
 only says: 
 
 I wish to give a statement that Mr. Beecher called upon me, 
 and asked me if I would defend him against any accusation in a 
 council of ministers, and I replied solemnly that I would, in case 
 the accuser was any other person than my husband. Mr. Beecher 
 dictated a letter, which I copied as my own, to be used by him as 
 against any other accuser except my husband. This letter was 
 designed to vindicate Mr. Beecher against all other persons, save 
 only yourself. 
 
 Now, it does not say that she had given him a false vindi- 
 cation, a false defense, only that if there came to be an 
 issue between Mr. Tilton as accuser — her husband as accuser 
 — she did not intend in advance to espouse hostility to her 
 husband, to disarm, disable him in advance; in other words, 
 she did not intend to take the attitude of a wife betraying, 
 reviling, disgracing her husband. Well, we know how for- 
 eign to any traits of this woman's character, putting herself 
 
THE BKECHEK I'lUAI. 227 
 
 in wilful oi)iK)silioii lo the interests or feelings of her liiishaiid 
 was. Now, we Iiave very elear e\i(lence that it was tliis 
 seeond element of the retraetion, of antagonism to him, that 
 created Mr. Tilton's hostility. I read now from his state- 
 ment to Mr. Belcher: 
 
 After speaking- of his resentment against JSIr. lieecher for getting 
 this paper did he state any reason wliy that was so? A. i'liat it 
 made him a])pear, made the husband ap])ear as in antagonism 
 with his wife, and made Mr. Tilton appear as though he had been 
 making a false charge. 
 
 And Mr. Moulton gave the same reason to ]Mr. 'J'racy 
 when Mr. Tracy and ]Mr. Moulton were talking together in 
 November or Decendjer, 187'2, and Mr. Tracy could not see 
 why a man should not be allowed to get a retraction from a 
 false charge. Mr. Moulton pointed out to him: 
 
 The retraction is something more than a mere retraction. It 
 implies that Mr. Tilton coerced the letter from his wife, and that 
 was what gave offense to Mr. Tilton. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have read to you the language of that 
 slip of paper as jiroduced by Mr. Tilton in the narrative that 
 he gives, as repeated by himself two days after it was first 
 read to Mr. Beecher when Mr. Tilton told Charles Storrs 
 what it was, and I have corroborated and re-enforced that 
 view by every form and degree of supporting evidence from 
 numerous witnesses that the requirements of full satisfac- 
 tion in your minds could demand. We are right always in 
 understanding that it is what is ])roved that is to carry down 
 the presumed innocence of a defendant ; and I ask you now 
 whether that being so, that the charge then was of improper 
 advances and nothing else, untrue as that was, you don't at 
 once see that all possibility of the interview having carried 
 an imputation of actual guilt of this immense area and 
 heinousness that is charged, and which is the measure, if 
 there be any measure at all — is wholly inc(nnj)atible with it? 
 
228 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if that is not the true view; if this retrac- 
 tion, written by the woman who made the charge, doesn't 
 prove it; if this solemn, formal statement, called the "True 
 Story," in which the w^ords are given, and which he says he 
 copies as his wife's statement, and neither adds to, nor takes 
 from, by any comment of his own — if that is not the charge, 
 and the whole charge, why don't you prove something else? 
 Why don't you show it? Why did you destroy the paper as 
 soon as you had a chance? 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the responsibility of this suppression of 
 truth, if the truth be not fully disclosed, this destruction of 
 evidence, is perfectly well understood. Here is the paper 
 which, if preserved, would maintain its identity, and for that 
 point, at least, in the interview would be before your eyes 
 and mine exactly as it was then, and there were two copies 
 of it. One Tilton destroyed, and the other, after having 
 been kept and studied, promised to be tied faithfully to the 
 retraction, and never parted with without Mr. Beecher's 
 consent, was destroyed. Well, now, will they say, "Why, 
 the retraction was the paper that you were interested in 
 having preserved?" Indeed? That is so, is it? The re- 
 traction and the charge measure each other, and both to- 
 gether didn't admit of difference of construction or argu- 
 ment of invention, of falsehood, of treacherous memory 
 and misrepresentation. 
 
 Ah! gentlemen, we understand in courts of justice the 
 spoliation of evidence; we understand the destruction, the 
 concealment of decisive and important instruments of con- 
 viction. We have frequent occasions to apply this in regard 
 to crimes, of violence committed by weapons. We want the 
 weapons, and if there is a pistol and a bullet, a pistol found 
 in the accused's hands, and a bullet found in the victim's 
 heart, we want to see the two things, and, whether they fit or 
 not, before we will charge the accused with having sent that 
 bullet to the death of the victim from his pistol. 
 
THE REEriTKTi IRIAL 220 
 
 Now, suppose llireo iiu'ii Icavo ct)!!!!!!!)!! Iiaimls of (lissi])a- 
 tion or of ^ainhlin^', t'ririuls, if you i)l<,'as(', of the friendship 
 that belongs lo such conijKinions a I least, companions in 
 imniorahty, companions in revelries, companions in the 
 knowledfje of each other's ijuiit , and they leave their common 
 haunt, and by a quarrel one of them is slain by a pistol 
 shot, and the question is which of those companions, if either, 
 dealt the blow. And fleeing, as they well may, one returns 
 by crafty provision to give succor to the wounded man, takes 
 the role of proclaiming the murder, and the precaution of 
 extracting the bullet and keeping it. And now, when the 
 fleeing companion, under the attraction of pursuit and suspi- 
 cions from his fleeing, is put U])on trial, and the witness swears 
 that the deadly assault came from the accused, and not from 
 himself, and that he extracted the bullet and it was too large 
 for his pistol, and fitted the ])istol of the accused, then will 
 the accused's defenders ask, "AVhere is the bullet.^ It was 
 last in your hands. AVhere is the bullet?" "Oh! but I 
 measured the bullet, and tried the bullet. It would not go 
 into my pistol; you see it could not have come out of it; but 
 it would go into his, and just fitted it." '"Yes, but where is 
 the bullet? " "Ah ! " says he, " I kept it ; and after a while, 
 being satisfied, and having kept the measurement and tried 
 it, I melted it up." "You melted it up?" And then tlie 
 Judge says to the prosecution, "Where is the bullet?" and 
 the jury say, "Where is the l)ullet?" "Oh! I melted it U]). 
 I have several witnesses that will })rove the dimensions of it;" 
 and the answer is, "You cannot u.se your mouth for a bullet- 
 mold to take away the life of the accused. Who killed the 
 man — that we don't know; but that bullet would have told, 
 and that bullet was in your possession and was destroyetl by 
 you." And tlien another witness says after he has left the 
 stand: "We made a plaster mold of that bullet while it was 
 in this man's possession, and if the bullet has been melted 
 up the mold is here, antl now we will sec which of the pistols 
 
230 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the bullet matches, and which of the doubtful authors of the 
 crime that bullet is now to slay." And then this mold, 
 proved and proved over and over again as being the measure 
 of the bullet, is made to reproduce it in its leaden form, cast 
 in the mold, and it fits the pistol of the witness and saves the 
 life of the accused. 
 
 Ah, gentlemen, you want the missile of that night. You 
 have had the solemn pledge of Moulton that it never should 
 be destroyed while anything else remained to be the method, 
 the occasion, the instrument of doubt, or imputation, or, of 
 fear, and it has been destroyed, and until that missile is 
 proved to have been of the nature, of the form, of the effect, 
 that is to convict, or aid in convicting Mr. Beecher — until 
 that is produced you refuse to the spoliators of evidence the 
 ability to make their mouths reproduce it. But when, be- 
 sides, we bring you the very mold that was taken of it on 
 the very night that it was used, in the retraction which was 
 framed aroimd it, and when we produce the measure and the 
 impression of the bullet, of the missile as given by the wit- 
 ness now seeking to slay, two days afterwards, to his bosom 
 friend Storrs, and when we read it under his own hand in the 
 narrative of the story that he framed, and bind it and clamp 
 it and clinch it by the testimony of five witnesses to whom the 
 same dimensions have been given, and no witness has pre- 
 tended that any other dimensions have ever been given for it, 
 and at this trial no other dimensions have been given for it, 
 you have not any doubt, any more than in the case of open 
 violence thati proposed to you, that the witness should change 
 places with the prisoner at the bar, and receive the punish- 
 ment that belongs to the crime, the crime now of moral as- 
 sassination as meditated and attempted. 
 
 I repose with entire confidence upon the proposition that 
 I laid down to you in advance of my examination of the 
 occurrences of the 30th of December, that if a charge of this 
 guilt was not made then, and a confession of this guilt was 
 
THE BEECHER TIUAL 231 
 
 not iiiatle then, never was the charge made and never the 
 confession made. There is no disj)ule that there was no 
 confession on Mr. Beecher's ])art. There is no disj)ute of 
 what his conduct was; that he ck'nied it, that lie pronounced 
 it wholly untrue and impossible of having ])roceeded out of 
 the mouth of Elizabeth Tilton; that he faced the alleged 
 authority, ])rocured the retraction, went about his business, 
 and, though attended by Moulton to his house that night, 
 had no occasion to depart from the position which he had 
 forced — a confession from them — and which they repeated 
 over and over again afterward in their dealings with others; 
 that the charge, whatever it was, was no longer insisted upon 
 by Mrs. Tilton, and the test that Mr. Tilton had proposed 
 to him, of reference to her, had failed. Now, they asked 
 Mr. Moulton — "Let me ask you was anything said as to the 
 substance" — this is as between Moulton and Beecher when 
 Moulton was attending him to Beecher's owii house. 
 
 Q. Let me ask you, was anything said as to the substance of the 
 interview between Mr. Beecher and Mr. Tilton, when you were 
 not present? That is, the interview that he was talking of. A. 
 Why, he told me that Tilton had told him of the confession of his 
 wife to him. 
 
 Q. Repeat what he said. A. Mr. Beecher told me that Tilton 
 told him that Elizabeth had confessed, and read to him what 
 either was a confession or a copy of a confession by Elizabeth, of 
 sexual intercourse between them, and he told me that Theodore 
 had told him of the reasons for sending to him the letter through 
 Mr. Bowen. 
 
 Well, now, Mr. Moulton had that very letter, that had 
 been read by a coj)y that m'ght to Mr. Beecher, in his own 
 jKK'ket at that moment. And, see how he puts it: he doesn't 
 put it U])on any notion that Mr. Beecher had repeated the 
 language of the letter. He makes him call it, as they call it 
 always themselves, after the organization of the plan to 
 prosecute Mr. Beecher, a "confession." But liial is his 
 
232 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 account of the matter, and that is the only account of it. If 
 there had been any truth in it, he coukl have been asked to 
 give you the words of that letter, because he had the original 
 at the very moment that he says this conversation was had, 
 and why didn't they ask him that? 
 
 Q. What conversation did you have, if any, on the way to the 
 house? A. Well, it was nothing but a repetition of the other 
 conversation about Bo wen, and he asked nie to be friendly to him. 
 I said I would be. 
 
 Q. Repeat as near as you can. A. He said he wanted me to be 
 a friend to him in this terrible business. 
 
 Q. Did you part with him at his own house? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 So that is the end of that interview. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, when the paper was sought to be proved 
 on their side, I objected, on the ground that having destroyed 
 a paper they had no right themselves to manufacture it over 
 again. The learned Judge did not sustain that proposition, 
 or did not rule upon it, but rejected the evidence from Mr. 
 Tilton's mouth, as a confidential communication from the 
 wife to the husband. 
 
 Judge Neilson: I think I put it on both grounds. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Well, I didn't understand that your honor 
 necessarily passed upon the other ground. We gave, then, 
 the contents of the paper, and that gave them the right to 
 give the contents; and the disposition of the confidential 
 communication between the husband and wife did not apply 
 to a letter put in Moulton's hands and kept in his hands 
 nearly two years. No; not a bit of it. The reason that they 
 did not give it was that they must give it as Mr. Beecher 
 gave it, as the "True Story" gave it, as the statements to 
 Charles Storrs, to Belcher, to Schultz, to Southwick, to 
 Harman, and to McKelway gave it, or face the charge of 
 perjury on the central fact, proved on them by their hand- 
 writing and by a cloud of witnesses. It was not so much 
 conscience that made cowards of them about this missive — 
 
TIIK HEKCIIKli TRIAL i^iS 
 
 this luissk' — as the fear of men's jiuij^nnents; and as I have in- 
 cheated to you. you will find a tortuous ])alh fohowed l)y 
 either of these witnesses to avoid, on a material fact, an issue 
 with fwoupriixht witnesses against them. 
 
 iNoTE: Yielding to important practical considerations, it has 
 seemed advisable to omit, at this point, a large part of this 
 necessarily long address to the jury, taking from the report the 
 closing words of Mr. Evarts. The interested reader or student of 
 this intensely interesting trial may be referred to the verbatim re- 
 port, published at the time in three large volumes. It must suffice 
 here to indicate only, in the briefest possible way, the topics dis- 
 cussed by the advocate in the remaining three days of the address. 
 
 There was a mass of evidence in the case directly bearing upon 
 the conduct of the parties involved and the several communica- 
 tions between them, after this night of December .'30, 1870, and 
 during the succeeding three years up to a short time before this 
 prosecution was instituted, in August. 1874. Mr. Tilton had as 
 his adviser and friend ]\rr. Moulton, in whom, after the scenes of 
 December ,'30, 1870, Mr. Beecher was also led to confide. INIr. 
 Moulton became known and universally spoken of, at the time of 
 the .scandal and during the trial, as the "nuitual friend." The 
 evidence shows that through his persuasion and argument, upon one 
 pretext or another, all of the letters and written connnunications 
 between the jjarties were placed in his custody under his j)ledge 
 that all should be inseparably kept together or else that all should 
 at .some future time be destroyed. Through the same persuasion, 
 all subsequent letters and communications were dej)osited with 
 the "nmtual friend," under the like pledge. The evidence is also 
 dear and undisputed that the j)er.soiuil relations between Mr. 
 Heecher and Mr. Tilton were brought back to an attitude of friend- 
 liness, and that Mr. Heecher's financial and other aid was given 
 to reestablish, if it were possible, Mr. Tilton in his fortune and 
 position before the public, that had come to such great disaster, 
 through his dismissal by Mr. Howen and through his own mis- 
 conduct. 
 
 Mr. Evarts, in tlic rciii;iiii(icr of his argument, which would 
 occupy more than two hundred printed j)ages, takes up in his- 
 
284 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 torical sequence all this subsequent conduct of the parties. In 
 his descriptions, based upon and taken from the evidence of the 
 case, of the interviews between Mr. Moulton and Mr. Beecher, 
 that were continuous in the days immediately following December 
 30, 1870, and in his interpretation of the evidence, the advocate 
 displays his keen and penetrating insight into the phases of human 
 nature that the trial had portrayed. His convincing interpreta- 
 tion of these interviews and of various letters and statements, 
 which were claimed by the plaintiff to be incriminating evidence 
 against Mr. Beecher of the guilt charged in the prosecution, shows, 
 by a clear and candid analysis, that they were not only consistent 
 with complete innocence of the charge, but were wholly and 
 absurdly inconsistent with guilt. 
 
 The argument as a whole tends, with convincing force, to dem- 
 onstrate the utter falsity of the accusation against Mr. Beecher 
 and of the stories told at the trial by the chief witnesses against 
 him, not only by showing the contradiction on important ques- 
 tions of fact by disinterested and unimpeachable testimony, but 
 by exposing the preposterous absurdity of the stories themselves, 
 that rendered them wholly unworthy of belief, even on the assump- 
 tion of guilt. 
 
 On the last day of his argument IVlr. Evarts makes a complete 
 defence and vindication of his associate Mr. Tracy, whose pro- 
 fessional conduct in taking up Mr. Beecher 's defence had been 
 assailed by their opponents at the trial. 
 
 The closing utterances of this great forensic achievement 
 follow.] 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this survey of the evidence, no doubt 
 more cursory in some topics than could have been desired, 
 has yet brought before you, as I trust with entire candor on 
 my part, a very considerable survey of the general bulk and 
 force and true logical effect, as it has been presented. It is, 
 of course, on the ])art of the defendant, a defense against 
 charges which are to be proved against him, and which 
 stand for naught until they are proved. And the evidence, 
 therefore, is mainly in contravening and confuting false or 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 28.') 
 
 mistaken evidence a^ain.sl liini, or sucli suhstantive facts if 
 there is need oF explanation, always adding' the ^reat ])urf,'a- 
 tion of the defendant l>y his own mouth, submitting himself 
 to your observation, your criticism, your jud^'ment, and to 
 the cross-examination of our learned opponents under all 
 the su^'^'estions which Mr. Tilton and Mr, Moulton can 
 furnish from the long association and observation, neither 
 honest nor good-natured, to which they have subjected him 
 for these several years. 
 
 I do not hesitate to sav that, whatever criticisms mav be 
 made against incompleteness of memory or misconception 
 of isolated and incidental facts, if any such criticisms can 
 be made, the cross-examination does not reduce the direct 
 examination, and that the direct examination is as am- 
 ple, as clear, as definite, a denial of every form and degree 
 of impure conduct with this lady as it is possible for lan- 
 guage to furnish. And you know that this witness, of all 
 others, knows what the truth is, and he knows that his story 
 is not unchallenged, that it is not secure against the miscon- 
 structions of men's minds, and of men's tongues, for it is in 
 the face not of witnesses who know the facts, but in the face 
 of witnesses who have not hesitated to present to you out of 
 IVlr. Beecher's mouth what thev call contrarv statements and 
 confessions. And, therefore, I have presented to you this 
 man of great intelligence, of an absolute integrity — save so 
 far as this very matter is inquired nobody questions it — and 
 I have seen no evidence of double dealing, or of prevarication, 
 or of falsehood in any of the acts or acquiescences of Mr. 
 Beecher, that are brought in evidence against him. And 
 Iktc he stands with the absolute right to your credit, and 
 with no escape from that credit, exce])t your absolute con- 
 viction of him as a perjurer, exj)Osiug himself to the punish- 
 ment of men. Now, many a man has been frightened from 
 the truth by fearing the falsehoods of ])eople against hiui. 
 But Mr. ]ie<'cher has stood throughout this matter, con- 
 
236 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 fident in his conscience and its approval, confident in his 
 faith in God, confident in truth, and ready to take at the 
 hands of false witnesses, if need be, punishment of men, but 
 not willing to tell a lie to his own conscience, or to God, or to 
 refrain from the truth in any respect. And when a man 
 thus presents himself as the sole witness knowing of the 
 facts, and as a man with unquestioned character for truth 
 and duty in every department of life, and through the long 
 series of years that he has lived in the notice and under the 
 burning criticism of men, there is nothing in our trust of 
 justice if that does not end, as matter of evidence, this case. 
 But, when we find against him, only, as I have said to you, 
 evidence, not of a physical and direct observation of the 
 senses, but remote moral reasonings from the strength of 
 the phrases in his letters, that degrees of solicitude, of com- 
 punction, of self-reproach, of commiseration of distress, are 
 to be turned into evidences of definite and heinous guilt, 
 when we find that that is the only resource and only pre- 
 tense, why, we at once see that all the prolixity, and all the 
 ingenuity of argument that has been resorted to on our part, 
 really we should have been saved from, whenever it came to 
 be admitted that there was no evidence of impropriety of 
 conduct between these people, and that there was nothing 
 in the direct form of admission of the guilt or form of the 
 crime charged. 
 
 It is their flight from the common level of common sense 
 and actual evidence into this remote region of argument of a 
 moral nature which the law rejects, that has led us in this 
 long chase of exposure which has satisfied your minds, and 
 the minds of all those who intelligently have watched the 
 course of this trial, that the true force of moral evidence is 
 an absolute exclusion of the possibility of guilt, and an 
 absolute and definite exaltation of the character of Mr. 
 Beecher, as a man of these sentiments, of honor and of 
 duty that have filled him with anguish, that has embittered 
 
THE BEECIIEK IHIAL '237 
 
 life, (liat \\r should have Ix-cii \cd into an oxposiiro and an 
 injury of 11k> liaj)|)ini>ss ol" a I'aniily by his liccdlossncss and 
 inuttontion. 
 
 Now, ^ontlemon, a jury l)r()u,ulil in any (h)uhtful issue, 
 c\(Mi. or hahmct' of Ivstiniony, lo a (k-lcrniinalion wliicli 
 carries a verdict for one side or the other, and if it I)e 
 a verdict tliat carries to the (h'feated i)arly an injury or a 
 loss, so that the measure of benefit to one is distinctly uieas- 
 ured also hy injury or loss, or de])rivation to the other, finds 
 itself under some stress. But here you have observed, 
 from the outset, that the ordinary distraction which mi^dit 
 divide the sentiments and feelings of a jury, so far us senti- 
 ments and feelings might be indulged by honest men in re- 
 gard to a decision of the truth, are here wholly absent; for in 
 giving your verdict for the defendant Mr. Beecher, you give 
 a verdict of safety and of honor to the two families of Mr. 
 Beecher and of ^Ir. Tilton. You ujjhold the wife, you save 
 the family of Mr. Tilton, and you save him in his permanent 
 and definite honor. 
 
 Alas! von cannot save him in his truthfulness, for he has 
 told oi)posing stories on every definite and important fact 
 ill this cause. Your verdict then, for tlie defendant, is a 
 \-erdict of safetv and honor to evervbody whose safety and 
 honor Iiaxc been involved in tliis long examination. Your 
 verdict for the phiintifi" strikes into the heart of his wife, and 
 lo the dcslniclion of his children; breaks the heart of this 
 noble wife of Mi. Heecher, and destroys the hap])iness and 
 honor of llial family: strikes a blow al llic credit of our 
 comnumities; brings dishonor ui)on the name of our Chris- 
 tian religion, however we may ))e divided in sects, or senti- 
 ments, or creeds; and, in fad. is a blow at tlu' dignity atid 
 credit of huiiiaii nature and the civilization and j)nrily of 
 Anieiie.in life. And \(ni are asked to do that in the absence 
 of a single item of proof of crime comnnlted. upon the abso- 
 lute iiiid direct exliauslioii •)f llic possibility of his guilt by 
 
238 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the only person who knows all about it that the law permits 
 to testify, and upon affirmative evidence shaken and re- 
 duced both in the credit of the witnesses, Mr. Moulton, Mr. 
 Tilton, and the feeble supporting evidence of Mrs. Moulton, 
 and met on great facts, not only by the discredit of the 
 speakers, on their side of the testimony, but the direct refuta- 
 tion of the facts themselves, by witnesses who are obliged, 
 on their own statement of the matter, to confess a line of 
 statement under the most responsible obligations to speak 
 the truth, and under the most direct forms of asseveration 
 through a series of years, that there is not a word of truth in 
 the present charge; and of course whatever of loose and vague 
 perplexity or obscurity might be left in the mind of any man, 
 in this jury or out of this jury, there is not any doubt of 
 what the duty is under the rules of law that require you in 
 finding an affirmative verdict for this plaintiff, a verdict 
 against this defendant, to put it upon affirmative proof that 
 excludes from your mind a reasonable doubt of the innocence 
 of this defendant. And in that state of duty and of law, and 
 on this state of evidence which I apprehend must necessarily 
 command from you, each one of you, an absolute conviction 
 of the actual and complete innocence of Mr. Beecher, and an 
 actual conviction (with whatever charity you may choose to 
 cover the faults of the accusers or their supporting witnesses) 
 that this accusation and this support of it in your case is in 
 the nature of a conspiracy growing, and growing, and grow- 
 ing, having no desperate purposes at the first but in continual 
 disappointment of the objects that they expected to ac- 
 complish by their frustration, by the perversity and folly of 
 Mr. Tilton, has finally come to an accusation against the 
 honor and the moral life of this great man. You cannot 
 doubt, you do not doubt, but if any one of you does doubt, 
 that doubt itself must give the verdict for Mr. Beecher. 
 
 And, now, gentlemen, character is always felt to be, in diffi- 
 cult and uncertain inquiries, an object of most solicitous 
 
THE BEECHER TRIAL 239 
 
 interest on the part of every jud^e, and every tribunal, and 
 every juryman that lias passed upon it. Ah! how sad is the 
 condition of a stranger and a foreigner who comes to be 
 brought into question and put on trial in a land where he is 
 found alone, with no knowledge of his jiast character, no 
 friend to judge him as belongs to his people, and their cus- 
 toms, and their nature! And how benevolently the English 
 law provided for this sad condition of the stranger that was 
 put on trial, l)y giving him the best support possible, in filling 
 the jury one-half with men of his own country, that, at least, 
 he might not be judged by men all foreigners to him, and he 
 might have in the knowledge of one-half of the jury some 
 means of restoring what he missed by being put on trial in a 
 strange land where nobody knew him, or his surroundings, 
 or his character. 
 
 Now, sometimes character is spoken of as a matter that is 
 to be thrown in as a weight in doubtful situations. I prefer 
 to find in character that direct means of refuting false evi- 
 dence, upon the eternal principles of truth, that every fact 
 matches every other fact; and when a particular course of 
 conduct and of crime is imputed against a stranger and you 
 know nothing of his past life — or an obscure person — and 
 nothing can l)e learned, how solicitous a iurv are to see if thev 
 can eke out of the evidence something that will stand in- 
 stead of this knowledge that they miss, so that they can have 
 the sup})ort of feeling that the conviction that they feel 
 bound to give is not at variance and not at violence with his 
 character. It is on that principle that character, when 
 known and understood, and not open to mistake, when the 
 vice and fault is of the heart and nature, when it goes 
 through years of destruction and depravity, as this charge (if 
 there be any truth in it) does go for Mr. Beecher, that you 
 want to know whether it matches his character. If it 
 matclies, it will fit somewhere. If it doesn't fit anywhere, 
 it does not match. And when the whole case against a man 
 
240 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 is not of witnesses who have seen a murder, or seen the 
 approaches of adulterous lewdness, or seen the opportunities 
 and seen the deviation from proprieties and secrecy, then it is 
 all moral evidence that he said so, or that it is to be drawn 
 from his letters— the question is: Does it match? Why, the 
 housewife, when she wishes to match a garment, either in 
 color or in texture, has no difficulty in determining that 
 crimson and scarlet do not match with purple or white, or 
 that woolen fibre does not show itself to have come oil the 
 same piece with the linen texture. And when you have this 
 character woven in lineaments that no man doubts of, and 
 this life in its whole period from boyhood to the present day, 
 open and public and generous and kind, elevated, noble, and 
 true, you do not need to spend much time in finding out that 
 the scarlet guilt of adultery, and the coarse, selfish pursuits of 
 seduction do not match with the generous heart, the loving 
 kindness, and the nobility of Henry Ward Beecher. 
 
 But then they say, too, "Ah! but all this long association, 
 and all this simplicity of imposition, and all this difficulty of 
 extrication, and all this entanglement of the sequences — 
 that does not match with Mr. Beecher's intelligence." 
 Well, gentlemen, it matches with all the knowledge that you 
 have of him in regard to his worldly wisdom, or his suspicion 
 of others, or his harboring evil constructions of any man. 
 Up to the very end of his testimony, he overflows with kind- 
 ness toward all his accusers, and with charity for every evil 
 falsehood they have spoken about him. Ah! gentlemen, it 
 does match with Mr, Beecher, as it is apt to match, I am 
 sorry to say, with so many good men when they come into 
 the toils of ill-disposed, contriving, managing, plotting 
 enemies. Why, if your Honor please, it long ago was but 
 the expression in an epigram of this recognized principle of 
 human nature : 
 
 Tam saepe nostrum decipi Fabnlluni quid miraris, Olle? Bonus 
 homo semper est tyro. 
 
THE BEErilElt TRIAL 241 
 
 Wliy do you wonder. Olliis, thai [\\c cxccllfiil Falmllus is so 
 often deceived by fraudulent impositions upon liini? The good 
 man is always a schoolboy to the arts of fraud. 
 
 And such is the experience of human nature. And who 
 would wish to lose innocence l)y becoming" thus the victim of 
 imposition till he liad lost faith in human nature? No, Mr. 
 Bceclier will be a sclioolboy to the arts of fraud, hereafter as 
 heretofore. It does match with his nature, which all men 
 know, anil which has been described in a sinf>le word by 
 witnesses here, "that he is a great boy." 
 
 Now, Mr. Tilton, gentlemen, presents to you an extraordi- 
 nary character in the common sphere of everyday life to 
 which we are accustomed, and yet notliing can be clearer 
 than that all the imputations we are forced to make against 
 him, his motives, his evidence, are quite in consonance with 
 I lis chai-acter. Wliile ]\Ir. Beecher has gone on from his 
 earlv marriage and his earlv labors in the life of a man who 
 has constantly worked, and worked for the good of others, 
 and has taken, without arrogance and without pride, such 
 meed of ])oi)ular approval or the enthusiasm of his friends as 
 followed from his conduct, you find that Mr. Tilton, begin- 
 ning in the same faith, with the same piety, started upon the 
 same career with the support of that most useful aid, a wife 
 of e(|ual or greater piety, wrapt u]) in Christian faith and 
 Christian duty as the end and object of life, while he pursued 
 that ])atli and was favored by the friendshij), l)y the earnest 
 and enthusiastic suj)port in his rising career, of Mr. Beecher, 
 that, finally, he comes, in the arrogance of his nature, and 
 extravagance of his selfishness and egotism, to discard all 
 these pri!icij)al and supi)orting elements of useful life, to 
 r<'ject Moses and the pr()])hets, to trample upon ('hrist and 
 the a|)ostles, lo treal wilh cfjual scorn and contumely the 
 thunders of Sinai in I he commandments and the comi)assions 
 of Calvar\- as the (le[)endence for human hope, and on and on 
 in what is i-egarded by feeble intellects as an exaltation of 
 
 17 
 
242 SPEECHES OF ^\aLLIAM MAX^^^LL EVARTS 
 
 independence and of manhood, and it ends in this proud 
 career which rejects priestcraft and reHgion and the bonds 
 of society and the duties of Hfe, in taking out his tablets in 
 the salon of Mrs. Woodhull to record the revelations made in 
 a mediumistic fit ! 
 
 Such, gentlemen, is that career. And whenever the ego- 
 tism which is the preference of one's self before everything 
 else, which is defined to be "a passionate love for self, leading 
 a man to consider everything as connected with his own 
 person, and to prefer hunself to everything in the world," 
 when a man becomes thus a worshipper of himself, when he 
 has rejected faith and worship of a Divine Being, when he 
 degrades himself in his relations to society, he puts himself 
 almost in the condition of one morally insane, and he never 
 is, by the immutable laws of our being, left to stand still on 
 that plane of self -worship. If he does not hold on to the 
 exaltations of the spirit he drops lower and lower in the 
 degradations of the body. The moral government of this 
 world is not permitted to stand upon a defiance of the 
 sanctions by which virtue and faith and piety have their 
 place in that moral government, and assume and preserve 
 for every counter-passion of selfishness and degradation the 
 same position in the moral world that is taken for the good 
 and the faithful and the true. And thus it has long ago been 
 noticed by those who study the exhibitions of human nature 
 in its morbid forms that "Egotism, adopted as the rule 
 and the guide, depraves and destroys the moral nature." 
 
 "Notwithstanding the prejudices to the contrary," says a great 
 writer on this moral deformity, "there is a disorder of mind in 
 which, without illusion, delusion, or hallucination, the symptoms 
 are mainly exhibited in a perversion of those mental faculties which 
 are usually called the active and moral powers, the feelings, affec- 
 tions, propensities, temper, habits, and conduct. The affective 
 life of the individual is profoundly deranged, and this derange- 
 ment shows itself in what he feels, desires, and does. He has no 
 
TIIK HEKCIIEU TIUAI- 243 
 
 capacity t)f true moral fcdiii};. All his impulses and desires, to 
 which lie yields without check, are egoistic. His c-onduct appears 
 to be governed by immoral motives, which are cherished and 
 ol)eyed without any evident desire to resist them. There is an 
 amazing moral insensibility. The intelligence is often acute 
 enough, being not affected otherwise than in being tainted by the 
 morbid feelings, under the influence of which the persons think 
 and act. Indeed, they often display an extraordinary ingenuity 
 in explaining, excusing, or justifying their behavior, exaggerating 
 this, ignoring that, and .so coloring the whole as to make themselves 
 ap|)ear the victims of misrepresentation and persecution. Their 
 mental resources seem to be greater sometimes than when they 
 were well, and they reason more acutely, apparently, becau.se all 
 their intellectual faculties are applied to the justification and grati- 
 fication of their selfish desires. Moreover, the reason has lost 
 control over the passions and actions, so that the person can neither 
 subdue the former nor abstain from the latter, however incon- 
 sistent they may be with the duties and obligations of his relations 
 in life, however disastrous to himself and however much wrong 
 they may inflict upon those who are the nearest and should be the 
 dearest to him. He is incapable of following a regular pursuit in 
 life, of recognizing the ordinary rules of |)rudence and self-interest, 
 of appreciating the injury to him.self which his conduct is. He is 
 as distrustful of others as he is untrustworthy himself. He can- 
 not be brought to see the culpability of his conduct, which he 
 persistently denies, excuses, or justifies; has no sincere wish to do 
 better. His aft'ective nature is jjrofoundly deranged, and its affini- 
 ties are for such evil gratifications as must lead to further degen- 
 eration and finally render him a diseased element which nmst 
 either be got rid of out of the social organization or be sequestrated 
 and made harmless in it. His alienated desires betoken a real 
 alienation of nature." 
 
 Now, this morbid sclf-worsbip with which Mr, Tiltoii has 
 elevated binisclf above the rcsti-aints of religion, of mor- 
 ality, of duty to wife and ('hildrcn, and to .society, wherever 
 there was put in comjx'tition even the infliction of a i)ang 
 to lii.s self-aj)i)lau.se, is the final and conclusive exj)lication of 
 
244 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAX^yELL EVARTS 
 
 how what seems so strange in his career finds in it the natural 
 develoi)ment of moral ahenation from faith and duty, which 
 finally brings confusion of ideas as to what duty and morality 
 are, and ends in the evil gratification of the selfish appetites, 
 regardless of any disaster to those who are nearest, and, in 
 the language of this wTiter, should be the dearest to him. 
 
 And, now, gentlemen, there is nothing new in this, if we 
 will only admit the solemnity, the sincerity, the Divine 
 authority, of the great oracles of our religion. Mr. Tilton 
 gratified himself by sonorous verses that described his down- 
 fall, but there is, on higher authority, and in much simpler 
 phrase, a beautiful description of the downfall, accompanied 
 with the moral reason whv it exists : 
 
 "Now, he who heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them, I 
 will liken to the wise man that built his house upon a rock, and 
 the rain descended and the floods came and the winds blew and 
 beat upon the house, and it fell not, for it was founded upon a 
 rock." 
 
 Did ever the rains descend, and the floods come, and the 
 winds blow about the fabric of a man's character and life 
 as now for these four years upon the character and life of 
 Henry Ward Beecher? And does not every one know that 
 the reason the structure did not fall was that it was built 
 upon a rock of faithful belief in the sayings of the Founder of 
 our religion and of faithful adhesion in the work of his life, to 
 those sayings? 
 
 "And he that heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them not, 
 I will liken him to the foolish man who built his house upon the 
 sand, and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds 
 blew and beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall 
 thereof." 
 
 Your verdict, as all things true must match, will match 
 that decision, made for all such men for all time and under 
 all circumstances. Indeed, a more apt, a more impressive 
 
THE BEECH KH THIAI^ '24.5 
 
 instance in tlic e.\i)crienc(' o\' huniaii lilV. Ilial \\v who said 
 these words needed nol that man shonid testify of man, for 
 He knew what was in man, was never fnrnished in tliis 
 world than in tliis eom|)arison between this defenchint, whose 
 life and character were bnilt npon a rock by hearing and 
 doimj the sayings of Christ, and this life and character (tnrn- 
 in^ to Ml". Tilton) that dared to try the experiment of hear- 
 ing and doing them not. 
 
 And now, if yonr honor please, we mnst acknowledge with 
 respectfnl deference the disposition and the order of this 
 solemn trial, so interesting to these parties, to this com- 
 mnnity, to all the present life in Christendom, to all the 
 fntnre of history, and to acknowledge that if there be anv 
 miscarriage of jnstice, yonr skirts will be clear of it; and also 
 to admit that in the actnal experiences of the conrse of things 
 in the trial, the anxieties and solicit ndes that made ns nrgent 
 to have the limits secured by definite orders of the Court, 
 under the assignment of ])articulars of the charge, have 
 proved to be unnecessary, for we have not had any evidence 
 at all of any time or i)lace, by any witnesses going outside 
 of the charge, and none, as I think, within it. 
 
 And you, gentlemen, have done yonr duty as faithfully as 
 citizens ever do it. You have been taken from yonr em- 
 ployments, yonr j)rofits, and in some instances, perhaps, in 
 .some degree from your livelihoods, and every day and every 
 hour, from the beginning to the end, you have given to the 
 witnesses and to the counsel the honor of your patient, in- 
 terested, indulgent attention; and in your verdict you will 
 find, and ire shall find with joy, that truth matches all round, 
 and your verdict will b(> no <'Xception. 
 
X 
 
 ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE ELECTORAL COM- 
 MISSION IN THE DISPUTED PRESIDEN- 
 TIAL ELECTION OF 1876. 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The presidential canvass of 1876 was conducted with great heat 
 and bitterness and the result of the election was a matter of grave 
 dispute. Each political party made claim to the electoral vote, in 
 whole or in part, in four States, viz., Florida, Louisiana, South Caro- 
 lina and Oregon and from each of these there were forwarded to the 
 seat of Government at Washington opposing certificates, with the 
 claim of authenticity as establishing the choice of electors and their 
 respective votes for President and Vice-President. In the case of 
 Florida there were three such certificates, one on its face purporting 
 to establish the election of Republican electors and their votes for 
 the Republican candidates and the other two with similar purport 
 in regard to the Democratic electors and their votes for the Demo- 
 cratic candidates. In the case of Louisiana there were two certi- 
 ficates on behalf of the Republicans and one in favor of the Demo- 
 crats. From Oregon there came two certificates, one giving three 
 electoral votes for the Republican candidates and the other giving 
 one of the three electoral votes of that State to the Democratic 
 candidates and but two to the Republicans. In the case of South 
 Carolina there were two certificates, one in favor of the Republi- 
 cans and the other in favor of the Democrats. The electoral votes 
 of these four States were as follows: Florida was entitled to four 
 votes, Louisiana to eight, Oregon to three and South Carolina to 
 seven, making a total of twenty-two electoral votes in dispute. 
 The total number of electoral votes was 369, and, without count- 
 ing the votes of these disputed States, the Democratic candidates 
 had received 184 votes or within one of a majority. The situation, 
 then, was such that if only one of the electoral votes in dispute 
 were counted for the Democratic candidates they would have been 
 
 ^46 
 
THE DISriTKI) I'HESIDENTIAL ELECTION 247 
 
 (loclarod elected as President and Vice-President for the ensuing 
 four years, while, on the other hand, it was essential to the sealing 
 of the Republican candidates that the entire vote of all the disputed 
 States should be counted as cast for them. 
 
 The situation thus presented liad not been provided for by the 
 Constitution or by any eongre.ssional action under the Constitu- 
 tion, nor did the history of presidential electoral counts furnish any 
 precedents by which Congress could be guided in this critical 
 juncture. There was great popular excitement, and much wild 
 talk was indulged in of seating the next President by violence and 
 a revolutionary uprising of the adherents of one side or the other. 
 Fortunately, calmer and wiser counsels prevailed, the result of 
 which was the passage of the act of Congress known as the Elec- 
 toral Commission Act. 
 
 Its official title was "An act to provide for and regulate the 
 counting of votes for President and Vice-President, and the decision 
 of questions arising thereon, for the term commencing March 4, 
 anno Domini eighteen hundred and seventy-seven." By this act 
 a Commission was formed comjjosed of fifteen members consti- 
 tuted in the following manner: The Senate was to elect five 
 senators and the House of Representatives five members of that 
 body to be members of the Commission and the act designated 
 five Associate Justices of the Supreme Court to be the other five 
 members. In regard to the five Associate Justices who were to 
 sit on the Commission the act provided that "On the Tuesday 
 next preceding the first Thursday in February, anno Domini 
 eighteen hundred and .seventy-seven, or as .soon thereafter as may 
 be, the As.sociate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, now assigned to the first, third, eight and ninth circuits, 
 shall select, in such manner as a majority of them .shall deem 
 fit, another of the Associate Justices of said Court, which five 
 persons shall be members of said Commi.ssion; and the person 
 longest in commission of .said five Justices shall be the president of 
 said Commission." The personnel of the Commis.sion as thus 
 formed was as follows: Mr. Justice Clillord (who was ex-officio 
 jjrcsident), Mr. Justice Miller, Mr. Justice Field, Mr. Justice Strong 
 and Mr. Justice Jiradley, from the Supreme Court; Senators Ed- 
 numds, Morton, Frelinghuyscn, Thurman and I^ivard, from the 
 
248 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM IVIAXWELL E\ ARTS 
 
 Senate; and Representatives Payne, Hunton, Abbott, Garfield 
 and Hoar from the House. 
 
 The act provided for the assembly of the Senate and House in 
 joint session on the first Thursday of February, 1877, being Febru- 
 ary first, for the purpose of opening the certificates from the several 
 States and counting the electoral vote. Opportunity was given 
 under the terms of the act to interpose objections in WTiting to the 
 acceptance of a certificate and the counting of the vote therein 
 contained in any given case; and in the case of a State from which 
 but one certificate had been received, no objection to its being 
 counted could prevail unless such objection were sustained by the 
 vote of both Houses of Congress voting separately. In the case, 
 however, of any State from which more than one return or certifi- 
 cate had been received the act provided that in such case, upon 
 objections made, all the certificates and papers should be sub- 
 mitted to the Electoral Commission for its judgment and decision 
 as to which was the true and lawful electoral vote of such State, 
 the decision of this tribunal to be final unless overruled by the vote 
 of both Houses of Congress voting separately. The political 
 complexion of the two Houses of Congress was such, the Senate 
 being overwhelmingly Republican and the House overwhelmingly 
 Democratic, that no objection to the counting of any given elec- 
 toral vote could prevail and it would be impossible to overrule by 
 the separate vote of the two Houses any decision of the Electoral 
 Commission. 
 
 The method of j)rocedure in the counting of the vote was to take 
 up the certificates that had been received in alphabetical order of 
 States, beginning with Alabama, and make a final disposition of 
 the matter in regard to each State before proceeding further with 
 the count. The two Houses met in joint session on February 1, 
 and the count proceeded without interruption or objection until 
 the State of Florida was reached. The several certificates from 
 Florida were read, objections in writing to each certificate, signed 
 by the required number of Senators and Representatives, were 
 presented and read and the matter was forthwith transmitted to 
 the Electoral Commission for decision. After argument by the 
 objectors and counsel on each side the Commission rendered its 
 decision on February 9, and on the 12th. at the joint session of the 
 
I'lIK DlSl'lTKl) IM{KS1I)I:NTIAL KLKCTION IV.) 
 
 two Houses, llie vote of Florida was couulrd for (lie Hopiiblicau 
 candidates in accordance with the decision of the Connnission. 
 The count then proceeded in tlie presence of the two Houses of 
 Congress without interruption until the State of Louisiana was 
 reached, when the several returns from that State were read and, 
 with all the objections, were forthwith submitted to the Commis- 
 sion. That body rendered its decision in the Louisiana case on 
 February l(i. and on the 20th the count jjroceeded in the presence 
 of the two Houses. The case of Oregon was reached on February 
 ^l and was immediately submitted to the Commission which ren- 
 dered its decision on the ^.'Jd. The case of South Carolina was 
 reached on February 26 and submitted on that day to the Com- 
 mission. The following day the matter was argued and the deci- 
 sion of the Commission rendered. The count by the two Houses 
 then proceeded and, after some futile efforts at delay, was finally 
 concluded at four o'clock in the morning of Friday, March 2, 1877. 
 The result of the count as announced by the presiding officer was 
 to give 1!SJ electoral votes to the Republican candidates, Messrs. 
 Hayes and Wheeler, who were thereupon declared elected Presi- 
 dent and Vice-President for the four years beginning on March 
 4, 1877. 
 
 The decision of the Commission in all of the cases that came be- 
 fore it was based upon the broad general princi[)les that, in the proc- 
 ess of choosing a President under the Constitution, there was a 
 distinct line of demarcation between those functions in the process 
 attributed by the Constitution to the States and those that came 
 within the i)rovince of the Federal (Jovernment, and that beyond 
 this boundary line the two Houses of Congress assembled for the 
 purpo.se of opening the certificates and counting the votes; and 
 con.se(|uently the Connnission, as having no greater powers than 
 those conferred upon the two Hou.ses of Congress under the Con- 
 stitution, could not be permitted to i)a.ss. Under the Con.stitution 
 the great political transaction of choosing a President, so far as 
 the casting of the votes of the individual cili/.ens, the canva.ss of 
 the votes, and the determination and declaration of the result of 
 such canvass were concerned, had been placed under the exclusive 
 and plenary jurisdiction of the several States, acting subject to 
 such rules as had been estaiilished bv Congress to ensiu-e a liciieral 
 
250 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 uniformity throughout the country as to time and method of pro- 
 cedure of the several persons chosen as presidential electors. The 
 two Houses of Congress, assembled for the completion of the trans- 
 action by ascertaining from the returns to the seat of Government 
 the number of electoral votes cast for the several candidates, would 
 be transcending the powers and duties and rights accorded them 
 in the transaction if they should be permitted to inquire into the 
 conduct of the election in any given State or of the accredited 
 State functionaries in the election itseK and the canvass of the 
 vote. As expressed at the time, Congress could not go behind the 
 returns, an application of the Democratic doctrine of Federal 
 non-interference with State rights that did not find a ready ac- 
 ceptance from the Democrats. 
 
 Each case coming before the Commission for decision was pre- 
 sented and argued by one or more of the objectors to the several 
 certificates and also by counsel retained in the interest of the two 
 political parties. The counsel engaged on the part of the Demo- 
 crats, and appearing at some time or another in the proceedings 
 before the Commission, were Messrs. Charles O'Conor, Jeremiah 
 S. Black, Richard T. Merrick, Ashbel Green, William C. WTiitney, 
 George Hoadly, Matt H. Carpenter, Lyman Trumbull and John 
 A. Campbell. 
 
 Mr. Evarts had been retained as leading counsel for the Repub- 
 hcan party and associated with him were Messrs. Edwin W. Stough- 
 ton of New York, and Stanley Matthews and Samuel Shellabarger 
 of Ohio. Mr. Evarts delivered the arguments that follow in the 
 cases of Florida, Louisiana and Oregon. In the case of South Car- 
 olina the counsel for the Republicans were content to submit the 
 matter to the Commission without argument. 
 
THE FLORIDA CASE 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Of the three certificates of the electoral vote of Florida opened 
 l)y tlie president of the Senate and submitted to the Electoral 
 Commission for adjudication, that designated as certificate number 
 1, signed by the then Governor of the State, was regular in form 
 and on its face complied with all constitutional requirements. This 
 gave the electoral vote of Florida to the Republican candidates, 
 Hayes and Wheeler. Neither of the other two certificates, both 
 of which certified to the choice of Democratic electors and gave 
 the vote of Florida to Tilden and Hendricks, appeared to conform 
 to constitutional rcfjuirements. Certificate number '2, dated De- 
 cember 6, 1876, the day on which the presidential electors were by 
 law to cast their votes, was a certificate signed by the Attorney 
 General of the State and, as he describes himself in the certificate, 
 "as such one of the members of the board of State canvassers of 
 the State of Florida." The certificate stated that, by the authen- 
 tic returns of the State board of canvassers, the Democratic electors 
 had been chosen, and this was accompanied by the oaths of office 
 of the four persons thus claiming to be the electors chosen, together 
 with certificates of the vote cast by them for Tilden and Hendricks. 
 
 Certificate number 3 was still more irregular and embraced a re- 
 cital of the judicial and legislative proceedings in Florida, subse- 
 cjuent to and growing out of the election, by which the Democratic 
 managers had sought to bring the count of Florida's vote into the 
 Democratic column. These proceedings were briefly as follows: 
 On December 6, 1876, and immediately before the Republican 
 electors had cast their votes, a proceeding in the nature of quo 
 uarrantu was instituted against them in the Circuit Court of the 
 State, on the relation of the Democratic electors to try the title 
 to the office of presidential electors, which resulted in a determina- 
 tion of the Court on January 25, 1877, that the persons nominated 
 on the Democratic ticket were the duly chosen presidential electors. 
 These persons had already, on December (i. voted as electors and 
 
252 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL E\'ARTS 
 
 their votes had been certified to by the Attorney General as stated 
 above. 
 
 The election in P'lorida had been a national presidential election, 
 and also one for State officials, and while the original canvass had 
 returned the Republican candidate for Governor, Governor Stearns, 
 to succeed himself, a re-canvass was ordered through a proceed- 
 ing in the Florida Courts brought by the Democratic candidate 
 which resulted in seating the Democratic candidate as Governor, 
 viz.. Governor Drew, who took office on January 1, 1877. When 
 the Florida legislature had convened, an act was passed on Januarj^ 
 17 "to procure a legal canvass of the electoral vote of the State of 
 Florida as cast at the election held on the 7th day of November, 
 A. D. 1876," and on January 26 a further act of the legislature was 
 passed, declaring that Democratic presidential electors had, accord- 
 ing to this new canvass of the votes, been duly chosen. Certificate 
 number 3, signed by Governor Drew, January 26, 1877, recited the 
 above facts and was accompanied with copies of the acts of the 
 Florida legislature referred to, and a copy of the returns under the 
 new canvass and a certfficate of the Democratic electors as to their 
 proceedings and vote in the preceding December. 
 
 The objections to certificate number 1, conveniently called the 
 Hayes certificate, interposed by the Democrats, referred to all 
 these proceedings and also to the report of, and the evidence taken 
 by, the committee that had been appointed by the House of Rep- 
 resentatives to investigate the election in Florida, which report 
 had been submitted, with all the evidence, about February 1, 1877. 
 There was also interposed, independently of the principal objec- 
 tions to the Hayes certificate, an objection to the eligibility to the 
 office of one of the Hayes electors named Humphreys. 
 
 All of these papers coming before the Commission, that is, the 
 three certificates and accompanying papers and objections thereto, 
 and the several objectors having been heard, upon an oral presenta- 
 tion under the rules of the Commission, the question immediately 
 arose, upon inquiry put to counsel, as to what evidence if any should 
 be considered by the Commission in support of the several certifi- 
 cates. The question became formulated in the adoption by the 
 Commission of the following motion of Mr. Justice Miller: "That 
 counsel be allowed two hours on each side to discuss the question 
 
THE DISIMTKD rHKSIDKXTIAL KI.KCTION -^oS 
 
 Avhether any evidonce will ho coiisidcrod hy llic ('oininissioii tliat 
 was not submilted lo the two Houses by the president of the Senate 
 and if so, what evidence can properly be considered, and alsothe 
 (juestion, AVhat is the evidence now l)efore the Commission?" 
 
 In the interlocutory discussion preceding this ruling of the Com- 
 mission, ^[r. O'Conor had presented and read a menorandum of 
 what the Democratic counsel expected to offer in evidence to break 
 down the Rej)ublican certificate and supi)ort those of the Demo- 
 crats. This embraced all the transactions in Florida referred to in 
 certificate number 3 and also the wholly extrinsic evidence taken 
 l)y the Congressional Investigating Connnittee. The extravagant 
 claim had also been made by Judge Black that all these matters 
 were already before the Commission as evidence by reason of the 
 reference to them in certificate number 8, and in the objections 
 made to certificate number 1. 
 
 This very important question as thus stated in the ruling of the 
 Commission was, though preliminary to the main determination, 
 crucial in its character, and as such was elaborately argued by the 
 respective counsel. Mr. Merrick and Judge Black opened on be- 
 half of the Democrats. They were followed by Mr. Matthews, 
 ]Mr. Stoughton and ^Nlr. Evarts in reply for the Rejiublicans, and 
 the argument was closed by Mr. O'Conor. The decision of the 
 Commission is a matter of history. By a vote of eight to seven the 
 Commission determined not to receive any e\idence that was not 
 submitted by the president of the Senate to the two Houses of 
 Congress in joint convention with the different certificates, except 
 such as related to the eligibility of Humphreys. On February 5, 
 1877, Mr. Evarts made the following argument on this branch of 
 the Florida case. 
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 Mr. ['resident and gentlemen of the Coinniissioii: The 
 order of the Commission inviting the attention of counsel 
 lays out for their consideration three t()])ics: 
 
 First, whether, under the ])0\vers posse.ssed by the Com- 
 mission, any evidence Ix'vond that disclosed in I lie Ihicc 
 certificates from the State of Florida, which were opened by 
 
254 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the president of the Senate in the presence of the two Houses 
 of Congress and, under the authority of the recent act of 
 Congress, are transmitted to this Commission, can be re- 
 ceived; 
 
 Second, if any can be received, what that evidence is; and 
 
 Third, what evidence other than these certificates, if any, 
 is now before the Commission. 
 
 I will dispose of the last question in the order of the Com- 
 mission first. It requires but brief attention to express our 
 views sufficiently, and will, I think, require but little con- 
 sideration, in point of time, however important it may be in 
 substance, from the Commission. 
 
 It is suggested that certain packages of papers which were 
 borne into the presence of the Commission by the messenger 
 that brought the certificates and objections are already evi- 
 dence in the possession of the Commission. AVhat those 
 packages contain, what degree of authenticity, or what scope 
 of efficacy is to be imputed to or claimed for them as particu- 
 lar matters of evidence and particular forms of proof, is un- 
 known to us and unknown to the Commission. The prop- 
 osition upon which it is claimed that this evidence, what- 
 ever it may be — subject, undoubtedly, to discussion and to 
 rejection by the Commission as not pertinent and not im- 
 portant and not authentic — the proposition is that, being 
 mentioned in one of the objections interposed against the 
 first certificate as matter on which the objection was founded, 
 instead of being a warrant as it were to the objector which 
 he vouches, he, the objector, thereby makes it a part of the 
 evidence before the Commission; and our learned friend, 
 Judge Black, has proposed that, except as against objectors 
 who prevail in their arts and efforts in common-law courts 
 and whom he has been polite enough to designate as "snap- 
 peradoes,'' this evidence is, by authentic principles of juris- 
 prudence, made evidence by this attachment to this objec- 
 tion. He instances the case of a bill in equity which may 
 
THE DISPUTED PHESIDEXTIAL ELECTION Zoo 
 
 append oxhihits and which, of course, brink's the exhibits, 
 as a j>art of itself, into tlie possession of tlie court. But 
 that, thereby, they were made evidence any more than his 
 bill, except ui>on such wei^dit as should be imputed to them 
 by the answer of the defendant admitting, or not denying, 
 or establishing a rule of necessary contradiction by two wit- 
 nesses, instead of one, I have never heard that the plaintifi" 
 made the exliibits evidence in the cause by appending them 
 to his bill. 
 
 Now, the provisions of the recent act that at all touch 
 this matter are very few. In the first place, the objections 
 are not conclusive of anything. They bind nobody. They 
 are merely the occasion upon which the reference to this 
 Conmiission arises. If there be no objection, the case pro- 
 vided for the exercise of your authority is not produced. If 
 the objection is made, however inartificial or imperfect, the 
 case has arisen; but that the objection narrows and limits 
 and provides the issue or affects the controversy upon which 
 your jurisdiction attaches, is a pure fabrication out of utterly 
 unsubstantial and immaterial suggestions in the law. Cer- 
 tainly, if volunteer objectors on one side and the other were 
 permitted to lay down the issues, and adduce the evidence, and 
 make up the packages of the evidence, it would be a strange 
 commitnent of your great authority to casual, to rash, to 
 disingenuous suggestion. 
 
 So much, I think, entirely disposes of the question of 
 whether there is any evidence here. The other question, as 
 to whether evidence in the possession of either or both of the 
 Houses of C ongress, in the shape of committees' reports or 
 conclusions of either of those great bodies, in any form, is 
 transmissible, and may be proposed to this Commission and 
 maybe acce])ted and received by it after it is unfolded, after it 
 is understood, after the i)aper is scrutinized and is opposed, is 
 a question that is but a subordinate i)art of the main (pies- 
 tion, whether any evidence beyond the certificates can be 
 received. 
 
256 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I wish to preclude, at the outset, anything that should 
 carry for a moment the impression that there has been over- 
 passed by some stroke of astuteness or of diligence the ques- 
 tion of what you can receive and what you must reject. I 
 find myself, then, unimpeded in the inquiry, as open to me 
 as it is open to you, whether any evidence can be received, 
 and, if any, what, beyond the certificates opened by the 
 president of the Senate. On that question I shall think it 
 quite attentive to the instruction of the Commission and 
 much more suitable to a practical and definite discussion 
 and a practical and definite determination by this Commis- 
 sion, that whatever of general principles, and however far- 
 reaching the decision on those general principles in this 
 matter of evidence may be, the evidence that is now actually 
 proposed should be taken as the apparent limit of the in- 
 quiry whether evidence should be received, not from any 
 particular defect as to form or manner of profter, but as to 
 whether it falls within evidence that may be received extra- 
 neous to, in addition to, the certificates opened by the presi- 
 dent of the Senate. I am enabled by the memorandum 
 presented by the learned counsel, jVIr. O' Conor, which is 
 found on the forty-second page of the Congressional Record 
 of yesterday, to present the quality and character, the office 
 and effort, of extraneous evidence that it is supposed might 
 be, within the powers of this Commission, received and en- 
 tertained by it. 
 
 In the first place, he excludes from the area of considera- 
 tion one of the certificates, to wit, that which contains the 
 vote of the Tilden electors; for that they need no extrinsic 
 proof, and it is mentioned only that it may be excluded. 
 Then, secondly, there are statements concerning the quo 
 warranto suit in Florida, commenced on the 6th of December 
 and ending on the 25th of January. In regard to that the 
 record is supposed to contain in itself the particular means 
 of its use according to established rules of jurisprudence 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ^57 
 
 as a record or as an aiitliorily. It 15 suggested in respect to 
 that, therefore, that extraneous ])roof only would need to 
 ri^ach the point of the precise hour of the day on the 6th of 
 December on which the writ connnencing that action was 
 served, and on our part perhaps proof that an appeal had 
 been taken from that judgment and is still pending. 
 
 Then are enumerated some other matters that require 
 no proof, as it is supposed. Again, the acts of the legislature 
 mentioned are i)ublic acts and matters of record; and it is 
 su])posed that they are regularly before the Commission, so 
 far at least as they appear in the third certificate, by virtue 
 of that transmission, and besides I suppose that they are 
 matters of public record as the action of the legislature of 
 the State. 
 
 We come now to the following: 
 
 Fifthly. The only matters which the Tildeu electors desire to 
 lay before the Commission b}^ evidence actually extrinsic will now 
 be stated. 
 
 1. The board of State canvassers, acting on certain erroneous 
 views when making their canvass, by which the Hayes electors 
 appeared to be chosen, rejected wholly the returns from the 
 county of Manatee and parts of returns from each of the follow- 
 ing counties — 
 
 Naming them. 
 
 In doing so the said State board acted without jurisdiction, as 
 the circuit and supreme courts in Florida decided. 
 
 That is, by their recent judgments in mandamus and quo 
 ivarranio. 
 
 "It was by overruling and setting aside as not warranted by 
 law these rejections, that the courts of Florida reached their re- 
 spective conclusions that INIr. Drew was elected governor, that 
 the Hayes electors were usurpers, and that the Tilden electors 
 were duly chosen. No evidence that in any view could be called 
 extrinsic is believed to be ne<'dfiil in order to estahlish the con- 
 
 16 
 
258 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 elusions relied upon l)y the Tilden electors, except duly auLhen- 
 ticated copies of the State canvass, and of the returns from the 
 above named four counties, one wholly and others in part rejected 
 by said State canvassers." 
 
 Mr. O'Conor: That is your canvass that you rely on. 
 Mr. Evarts: So I understand. I was reading your lan- 
 guage. 
 
 And of the returns from the above-named four counties, one 
 wholly and others in part rejected by said State canvassers. 
 
 It is proposed, therefore, as the matter extraneous that it 
 is desired to introduce, and that it is claimed is open to your 
 consideration, not that the certificate of Governor Steams 
 falsifies the fact he was to certifv; not that it falsifies the rec- 
 ord that makes the basis of the fact which he was to certify ; 
 but that the record at the time on which, by law, he was to 
 base his certificate, departing from which his certificate 
 would be false, is itself to be penetrated or surmounted by 
 extraneous proof, showing that by matters of substance oc- 
 curring in the progress of the election itself errors or frauds 
 intervened. This means that somewhere in the steps of the 
 election between the deposit of the ballots in the boxes at 
 the precincts and the original computation of the contents 
 of those boxes there, and the submission to a correct canvass 
 in a county of the precincts thus canvassed at their own 
 ballot-boxes, or between the returns of the county canvass 
 to the State canvassers, or in the action of the State can- 
 vassers in the final computation of the aggregates to ascer- 
 tain the plurality of votes as for one or the other candidate, 
 and so declare the result of the election, frauds or mistakes 
 occurred. In other words, that in the process of the election 
 itself, from stage to stage, on the very matter of right and 
 on the question of the title de jure there has occurred matter 
 of judicial consideration which should be inquired into here. 
 For I need not say that, however simple and however limited 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 259 
 
 the step to be taken l)ehiiid llie reeord of the final State can- 
 vass, to serve the needs and to acconipHsh the justice as pro- 
 posed by tlie learned counsel for the objectors against the 
 Hayes certificate, the principle ui)ou whicli this evidence is 
 offered, if their occasions required it, if justice required it, if 
 the powers of this commission tolerated it, would carry the 
 scrutiny and the evidence to whatever point this complete 
 correction or evisceration of the final canvass would demand. 
 
 I am at once, therefore, relieved from any discussion as 
 practical in this case, except so far as illustration or argument 
 may make it useful, pro or con, of any consideration whether 
 a governor's certificate could be attacked as itself being not 
 a governor's certificate, but a forgery. That is not going 
 behind the governor's certificate. That is going in front of 
 the governor's certificate and breaking it down as no gover- 
 nor's certificate. That is not the question you are to con- 
 sider here. There is certainly no reason, on principle, that 
 when a governor's certificate is required for any solenmity 
 or conclusiveness of authentication, a forged paper should 
 be protected because it is called a governor's certificate. 
 Neither does their offer of i)roof suggest any debate as to 
 whether the fact to be certified by the governor, the substance that 
 his certificate is to authenticate, can be made the subject of 
 extraneous evidence with a view to show that the fact to be 
 certified is discordant with the certificate, and that the fact 
 nmst i>revail over the interpolated false certificate of the 
 fact. 
 
 There can be no cs(ai)e from this criticism on their otter 
 of ])roof, unless our learned 0])ponents ask your assent to a 
 claim that when the act of Congress requires the governor's 
 certificate as to the list of ])ersons that have been aj)i)ointed 
 electors it requires from the governor a certificate that every 
 stage and step of tlx' ])rocess of the election has been honest 
 and true and clear and lawful and effectual, and free from 
 all exception of fraud. Unless you make tluit the fact to be 
 
260 SPEECHES OF AVILLIAM ]VL\XWELL EVARTS 
 
 certified by the governor, you lay no basis for introducing 
 evidence of discord between the fact to be certified and the 
 fact that has been certified. Without disguise, therefore, 
 the proposition is that, whether or no there might be occa- 
 sion for extraneous proof to falsify a governor's certificate 
 on the ground of its own spurious character, or on the ground 
 of its falsely setting forth the fact professed to be stated, 
 and admitting the governor's certificate to be genuine, and 
 admitting the final canvass, duly filed and recorded, to 
 be in accord with the certificate, this Commission stands at 
 the same stage of inquiry and with the same right to investi- 
 gate the election itself to the bottom as a judicial court exer- 
 cising the familiar jurisdiction of quo warranto. 
 
 There is also a suggestion that extraneous proofs may be 
 necessary on the point "that Mr. Humphreys, one of the 
 Hayes electors, held office under the United States"; and, 
 in our behalf, it is then suggested by the learned counsel that 
 we might need to introduce evidence that he had resigned. 
 The interposition of this objection was a surprise to us; for 
 it was a matter of inquiry before the Florida State canvass- 
 ing-board on the 4th day of December, 1876, antecedent to 
 the completion of the final and conclusive canvass. The evi- 
 dence thus taken I am able to read from page 32 of the Con- 
 gressional Record of Saturday, in the report of the minority 
 of the House Committee: 
 
 Extract from Testimony before the Florida State Canvass- 
 ixG-BoARD, Monday, December 4, 1876. 
 
 Frederick C. Humyhreys sworn for the Republicans. Examined 
 
 by the Chairman : 
 
 Question. Are you shipping commissioner for the port of Pen- 
 sacola? Ansicer: I am not. 
 
 Q. Were you at one time? A. I was. 
 
 Q. At what time? A. Previous to the 7th of November. 
 
 Q. What time did you resign? A. The acceptance of my res- 
 
THE DISPITED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ^201 
 
 ignation was received by me from Judge Woods about a week or 
 ten days before the day of election, which I have on file in my office. 
 I did not think of its being questioned, or I would have had it here. 
 He stated in his letter to me that the collector of customs would 
 perform the duties of the office, and the collector of customs has 
 since done so. 
 
 On the nature of an objection for disqualification as a sub- 
 ject of proof before the two Houses or the president of the 
 Senate, in their attribution of authority under the clause of 
 the Constitution governing their joint meeting, a word needs 
 to be said; and I will attempt at the same time to answer the 
 inquiry made very pertinently and forcibly by Mr. Com- 
 missioner Thurman the other day. 
 
 There is, as I understand the matter (and I w^ill not antici- 
 pate a discussion that must come later in this argument), a 
 consideration in the first place of w^hether the Houses of Con- 
 gress in the matter of the count, at the time of the meeting 
 for the constitutional duty of opening and counting the votes, 
 have any power by law for any intervention or any methods of 
 extraneous proof. \ATiatever may be thought as to whether 
 disqualifications of this nature w^ere proper for the scrutiny 
 of the votes to be counted, and however proper it might have 
 been for Congress to provide by law for the production of 
 extraneous proof in that transaction, and for the manner in 
 which it might be adduced and considered, there is no act of 
 Congress on the subject. Our proposition is that, at that 
 stage of the transaction of the election, the two Houses can- 
 not entertain any subject of extraneous proof. The process 
 of counting must go on. If a disqualified elector has passed 
 the observation of the voters in the State, passed the obser- 
 vation of any sentinels or safeguards that may have been 
 provided in the State law; when these are all overpassed and 
 the vote stands on the presentation and authentication of 
 the Constitution — that is, upon the certificate of the electors 
 themselves and of the governor — it nuist stand unchallenge- 
 
262 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 able and unimpeachable in the count. Of course, the pro- 
 vision of means of inquiry at that stage by Congress, if they 
 had thought fit to provide means, would have involved the 
 delays of such inquiry, the proof of the alleged infirmity in 
 the elector, and the counter-proof of its removal, all matters 
 ordinarily manageable, perhaps in point of time not leading 
 to much prolixity, but still, in supposable cases, involving 
 contradiction of witnesses and discussion as to the effect of 
 testimony which would involve delay. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Thurman asked this question: "Sup- 
 pose that the electoral vote, when opened, disclosed the fact 
 that the four electors were then present members of Congress, 
 and had been such members at the time of appointment as 
 electors, what then?" That involves an element, you will 
 perceive, that is not touched by the considerations that be- 
 long to proof. That impeachment of qualification in the 
 electors supposed is of occular and personal observation at 
 all times by the President of the Senate and by the two 
 Houses of Congress, and is of record at the Capitol. But 
 if the instance is merely that of a member of Congress not 
 presently a member and thus involving extraneous proof of 
 his retirement from the ojQBce in season to qualify him for ap- 
 pointment as elector, then the case falls back into the class of 
 cases which I have just considered, where there has been no 
 provision for extraneous proof, and where the office accorded 
 to the governor's certificate cannot be over passed without 
 extraneous proof. There is, as we suppose, no safe rule, ex- 
 cept to say that this injunction laid upon the States, that 
 they shall not appoint the excluded persons, does not execute 
 itself under the Constitution, and if unexecuted in the laws 
 of the State, is only to be executed by laws of Congress pro- 
 viding the means and time and place for proof and deter- 
 mination on the fact of disqualification. This is all that I 
 need to say on the question of personal disqualification. 
 
 I have said that this Commission cannot receive evidence 
 
THE Disri TKl) PHESIDEXTIAL ELECTION 263 
 
 in addition to the certificates, of the nature of that which is 
 offered; that is, evidence that goes behind tlie State's record 
 of its eh^ction, which lias been certified by the governor as 
 resuhing in the aj^pointment of these electors. One reason 
 of this proi)osition, and on which sufficiently it rests, is that 
 that is a judicial intjuiry into the very matter of right, the 
 title to office. Tliis inquiry accepts the prevalence of the 
 formal, the certificated, the recorded title of the electors, 
 antl proposes then to investigate as inter partes, as a matter 
 of right, which of two competing lists of electors is really 
 elected on an honest and searching canvass and scrutiny of 
 the State election. It undertakes a function that is judicial; 
 and the powers for its exercise are attempted to be evoked by 
 their necessity for the exercise of the function assumed. 
 What are adequate means ? Adequate means for that judicial 
 investigation are plenary means. No means are adequate 
 for that inquiry that are not plenary. But no plenary judi- 
 cial ])owers, no ])lenary powers for inquiry into fact and de- 
 termination of law judicially, can be communicated by Con- 
 gress except to tribunals that are courts inferior to the Su- 
 j)reme Court, and that are filled by judges api)ointed by the 
 President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. 
 Will any lawyer, expert or inexpert, mention a topic or meth- 
 od of judicature, of juris])rudence, that involves the pos- 
 session of means of larger reach and a more complete control 
 of powers than the trial of a quo warranto for an office that is 
 to search an election? But not only is it beyond the power 
 of Congress to transfer to this Commission the powers of a 
 court of this ])lenary reach and efficienc}-, l)ut on the topic 
 of quo icarranto to try the title of an office they would find a 
 fiuhject of jurisdiction in regard to which the Constitution 
 had interposed an insurmountable barrier to its devolution 
 on a court like this. The quo warranto is a matter and an 
 action of the common law. It involves as matter of right 
 the introduction of a jury into its methods of trial. No title 
 
261 SPEECHES OF ^VILLIAM IMAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 to ofiice on a contested election was ever tried without a jury. 
 The seventh article of amendments to the Constitution re- 
 quires that in suits at common law the right of trial by jury 
 shall be preserved, and their verdict shall never be re-ex- 
 amined in any court of the United States except by the rules 
 of the common law. 
 
 I may ask your attention, in connection with the topic 
 that I last discussed, and in pertinent relation to the present, 
 to the case of Groome vs. Gwijnn, in 43 Maryland Reports, 
 572, especially at page 624. This case shows that this argu- 
 ment, that a duty attributed by law or the Constitution 
 must carry to itself, in the functionary charged with its ex- 
 ercise, all the powers necessary, upon the ground that the 
 duty must involve the powers, finds no place in our jurispru- 
 dence; the argument is the other way. If the functionary, 
 if the Commission has not been clothed with the necessary 
 faculties, then the duty is not accorded or, the means of its 
 exercise not being furnished, it cannot be discharged. There 
 the governor had, by the State constitution, the power to 
 determine a contest for the elective oflBce of attorney general 
 of the State of Maryland. The governor, finding by his own 
 inspection of the constitution that he lacked the means of 
 carrying out the scrutiny that must decide, held that he 
 could not exercise it and he would not exercise it, unless 
 compelled by judicial authority. The court of appeals, on 
 an application for a mandamus to compel the governor to 
 give the certificate to the candidate appearing to be elected 
 by the canvass, held that he was vested by the constitution 
 with an authority to decide the contest, but that the laws of 
 Maryland had not executed the constitution by furnishing 
 him with powers to perform the duty assigned to him, and 
 that the mandamus must go against hhn to compel him to 
 deliver the certificate to the candidate that, on the fraudulent 
 election, was returned as having the plurality of votes. 
 Thus the preliminary contest before the governor that might 
 
THE DISPT'TEI) PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 265 
 
 have been efftrtiial to redress the frauds of the election, was 
 defeated for want of necessarj' legislation. The contest 
 could only he had under the judicial powers of the State 
 lodged in the Courts, and in the shape of quo icarrmito on a 
 suit against the inducted candidate that the governor might 
 or would have decided not to be entitled to take the office. 
 I find in this act of 1877 no such purpose in the arrange- 
 ment of this Commission or its endowment with powers as 
 to make it a Court under the Constitution. I find no aj)- 
 pointment of these judges to this Court under the powers 
 of the Constitution. I find no means provided for writs 
 and their enforcement, nor for the methods of trial that 
 must belong to a discussion on a quo icarranto. Now, I 
 understand that the proponents of this proof lay out as the 
 nature and the limit of j'our inquiries, of your duties and 
 your powers, that of judicial investigation upon quo xoarranto. 
 Mr. Representative Field assigned to you what he described 
 as "powers at least as great as of a court on quo warranto," 
 and, of course, in that nature. ^Ir. Merrick claimed the 
 same. Judge Black did not in terms, yet in assigning the 
 nature and the searching character of the transaction that you 
 are to enter upon, gave it that character and implied that 
 demand. The brief handed in by Mr. Green, in the praise 
 of which I am happy to join with his learned associates, 
 makes the claim distinctly that you are not adequate as a 
 revising canvassing-board, but you must have the powers 
 of a court on quo warranto. And why this claim if anything 
 less magnificent and anything less intolerable could have 
 been found sufficient area for your action as desired.^ It is 
 because in the methods and machinery of elections, as they 
 insist, the steps are onward, from one canvass to the next, 
 and if you are made only a superior canvassing-board to 
 determine whether Governor Stearns's certificate that these 
 electors were appointed is valid, and you arc nothing but a 
 returning-board, surmounting the final returning-board to 
 
266 SPEECHES OF AVILLIAM IVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 see whether their returns justified that certificate, that, at 
 once, you must find that it does, that the de facto title and 
 possession are complete, and that nothing but a jurisdiction 
 that concedes the de facto title and possession can begin, can 
 find the case for beginning, the consideration of the question 
 of right. This quo warranto suit in the Florida Court, if it 
 becomes a subject of evidence, declares absolutely, on the 
 petition of the Tilden electors, that the Hayes electors are 
 in possession of the faculty, the oflSce, or whatever it may be, 
 and are exercising it, and they ask that an inquiry may then 
 proceed in due course of law to inquire whether that posses- 
 sion and that exercise, as matter of right, between them and 
 the Hayes electors, are or are not according to law and truth. 
 
 And the Commission will be good enough to look at an act, 
 not reprinted in the little collection of the acts so usefully 
 laid before us, of February 2, 1872, in the laws of Florida, 
 in relation to the proceeding upon writs of quo warranto. 
 The general statute of procedure excludes any possible writ 
 of quo warranto except by the State through the action of the 
 attorney general, and this quo warranto suit begins by evi- 
 dence that the attorney general refused to bring the writ 
 for the State, and that led to an inquiry how it happened 
 that it was brought at all, and to the discovery of this law 
 of 1872, providing that when the attorney general refuses, 
 then the claimants may make themselves relators and use 
 the name of the State; but in such case the suit is a mere 
 private suit, that is good between the parties, but does not 
 affect the State. It is in terms so provided, and it is pro- 
 vided that the judgment shall not be a bar to a subsequent 
 suit by the attorney general in the public right. So much 
 to explain that situation. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradlp^y: Will you give us the page 
 of the session laws? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Page 28 of the session laws of 1872. 
 
 There is but one other point that I wish to call to the at- 
 
THE DISriTEl) TKESIDENJIAI. EEECTION ^^G7 
 
 leiiLion of tlio C'oiiiiiiis.sion in llic Icji^ishiliou of Florida, for I 
 can spend no \'\u\v to rohearse the slat tiles. On page o.S of 
 the i)ani])liKl I hat has been printed for the use of the Com- 
 mission there are found sections 31 and 32. One is a pro- 
 vision that — 
 
 The secretiiry of state shall make and transmit to each person 
 chosen to any State office immediately after flic canvass — 
 
 showing that tlie canvass as completed is the basis of the 
 State's authentication of the right of every State officer — 
 
 a certificate showinu the number of votes cast for each person, 
 which certificate shall be prima facie evidence of his election to 
 such office. 
 
 That gives him the office. 
 
 Subsequent inquiry is as to the final right. Then section 
 32: 
 
 When any person shall be elected to the oflSce of elector of 
 President and Vice-President, or Representative in Congress, the 
 governor shall make out, sign, and cause to be sealed with the 
 seal of the State, and transmit to such person a certificate of his 
 election. 
 
 That is the State's final designation of the person that has 
 been api)ointed an elector under the Constitution of the 
 T'nited States. Had these contestants any such authentica- 
 tion of their right, and have they ])ro])Osed any such evi- 
 dence of right as in existence on the Cth day of December.^ 
 Have they questioned the completeness of the Hayes elec- 
 tors' warrant to attend and discharge their duty that clothes 
 the vote when cast with the complete qualification under the 
 State laws and the State's action.^ We have the governor's 
 certificate— and he is the very person that j)assed officially 
 upon that (picstion which furnishes the authority to the elect- 
 ors to meet and act — that this is the list of the electors ap- 
 pointed. Onniia prrrsioinnifnr rife (ida; but tlx'rc is no 
 
268 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 presumption needed here. These certificates under the State 
 law form no part of the return to the president of the Senate ; 
 but when the same governor executes under Federal law the 
 same duty and upon the same evidence as under State law, 
 we have in his certificate, now here, adequate authentication 
 of the completion of the transaction by which the State 
 appointed the Hayes electors. 
 
 Now we come to consider the general doctrine as to what 
 the powers are, and what the arrangement and disposi- 
 tion of those powers are, under the Constitution of the United 
 States, in the transaction of choosing a President. In the 
 first place, the only transaction of choosing a President be- 
 gins with the deposit, so to speak, in the Federal urn of the 
 votes of certain persons named and described in the Con- 
 stitution as electors. From the moment of that deposit the 
 sealed vote lies protected against destruction or corruption 
 in the deposit provided for it, the possession of Federal 
 officers in Federal offices. The only other step, after that, 
 is the opening of those votes and their counting. All 
 that precedes the deposit of the votes by electors relates to 
 their acquisition of the qualifications which the Constitution 
 prescribes. Those qualifications are nothing but appoint- 
 ment hy the State, and with that the act of Congress and the 
 Federal Constitution, with due reverence to State authority, 
 do not interfere. It has been provided under a rule of pru- 
 dence that the electors shall all be appointed on the same day 
 in all the States. It has been provided that they shall meet 
 and cast their votes on the same day. The latter provision 
 fixes a duty in the transaction of voting for President. The 
 other is the only intrusion upon State authority in the abso- 
 lute choice of the time and manner of appointment; Congress 
 may prescribe that the time of voting shall be the same in 
 all the States, and Congress has so prescribed. 
 
 What are we to gather in respect to the stage of this trans- 
 action which is the deposit of the Federal vote for President 
 
THE DISPITKI) T'RKSIDKNTIAL EIIXTIOX ?69 
 
 l)y the ciiialifiod electors? It is tlieir own vote. They are 
 not delegates to cast a vote according to the instruction of 
 their State. They are not deputized to perform the will of 
 another. They are voters that exercise a free choice and 
 authority to vote, or refrain from voting, and to vote for 
 whom they please; and from the moment that their vote is 
 sealed and sent forward toward the seat of Government no 
 power in a State can touch it, arrest it, reverse it, corrupt it, 
 retract it. Nothing remains to be done except count it, and 
 count it as it was deposited. The wisdom of the secret ballot 
 and of its repose in the possession of the president of the Senate 
 secures the object, ut nihil innovetur. The vote is to be opened 
 and counted, in contemplation of law, as freshly as if it had 
 been counted on the day it was cast, in the State. 
 
 These electors, at our present election three hundred and 
 sixty-nine citizens in number, not being marked and designa- 
 ted by any but political methods, are by the Constitution 
 made dependent for their qualification upon the action of 
 the State. If the State does not act there are no qualified 
 electors. If the State does act, whatever is the be-all and 
 the end-all of the State's action up to the time that the vote is 
 cast is the be-all and the end-all of the qualification of the 
 elector, and he is then a qualified elector tIe])Ositing his vote 
 to accomplish its pur])ose, and to be counted when the votes 
 are collected. 
 
 Our ancestors, whom we revere — let us not at the same 
 time despoil them of their right to our reverence — were not 
 wanting either in forecast or in circumspection in this pro- 
 vision. P^very solicitude, every safeguard that a not very 
 credulous view of human nature could exact for the supremacy 
 of the Constitution in this supreme transaction under it was 
 ])rovided. At the bottom of everything was a determination 
 that this business should proceed to fill the office; that that 
 terror of monarchies and of re])ublics alike, a vacant or a 
 disi)uted succession to the occui)ancy of llu- Chief Magis- 
 tracy, should not })Ossil)ly exist. 
 
270 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Let me find for you those constitutional limitations ui)on 
 the supposed quo warranto procedures that were to cover in- 
 vestigations into thirteen or thirty-eight States before the 
 votes could be counted. Why, the second substituted election, 
 on the failure of the first, must end by the 4th of March. 
 What room is there to interpolate quo warranto proceeding 
 in any stage from the deposit in the primary ballot-box in 
 the State up to the counting of the votes which declares a 
 President elected, or the failure to elect, upon which the 
 States resume their control through their delegates in the 
 lower House of Congress upon the basis of State equality? 
 The substituted election must come to an end by the 4th 
 of March; and whoever introduces judicial quo warranto any- 
 where in the transaction introduces a process of retardation, 
 of baffling, obscuring, of defrauding, of defeating the election, 
 and gives to the Senate, by mere delay, the present filling of 
 the presidency with an acting officer and compels a new elec- 
 tion. That much for delay. Now it is an absolutely novel 
 proposition that judicial power can put its little finger into the 
 political transaction of choosing anybody to an elective office. 
 
 The bringing into office a President, bringing into office 
 a governor, bringing into office any of the necessary agents of 
 the frame and structure of the State, without which in pres- 
 ent action it will be enfeebled and may fail, is a political 
 action from beginning to end. It comes to furnish a sub- 
 ject of judicial post hac investigation only after it has been 
 completed. If judges are to intrude and courts with their 
 proceedings at the various stages that are to be passed in 
 the business of filling the office, so that there shall be no va- 
 cant and no disputed succession de facto, who does not see 
 that you introduce the means of defrauding and defeating 
 the political action entirely, and turning it into a discussion 
 of the mere right that shall leave the office vacant till the 
 mere right is determined.^ 
 
 It is an absolute novelty, unknown in the States, unknown 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAT. ELECTION 271 
 
 in tlic nation, ihal judicial inquiries can Ix' interposed to stop 
 the political action thai leads up to the filling of office. Tlie 
 interest of the State is that the oliice shall he filled. Filling 
 it is the exercise of a political right, the discharge of a politi- 
 cal duty. Such safeguards as can be thrown about the 
 ballot-box, about the first canvass, the second canvass, the 
 third canvass, the final canvass in the States, about the final 
 counting before the two Houses, and that shall not retard 
 or defeat the progress to the necessary end, are provided. 
 These are provided; these are useful; but you do not step 
 with a judicial investigation into a ballot-box upon a sugges- 
 tion that it has been stufTed, and stop the election till that 
 quo warranto is taken; and then when you get to the first 
 canvasser stop his count from going on, because it is a false 
 count, and have a court decide, and so with the county can- 
 vassers, stop their transaction in the rapid progress to the 
 result aimed at, to wit, filling the office, with a quo warranto 
 there, and then in the State canvass, and then here. It is 
 an absolute novelty. No judicial action has ever been ac- 
 cepted and followed except the mandamus to compel officers 
 to act, nothing else. That was not retarding; that was 
 ascertaining; that was compelling; that was discarding de- 
 lays on the question of right. 
 
 In our Supreme Court in New York, not very many years 
 ago, an attempt was made to obtain an injunction against 
 inspectors canvassing votes, the primary deposit in the ballot- 
 box of their election-district, because they had been sworn 
 on the directory and not on the Bible. They had no right 
 to discharge their function without taking an official oath, 
 the preliminary oath. The Court refused it necessarily. 
 However much this irregularity nn'ght find play and place 
 in a quo ivarranto investigation of the whole transaction, 
 piecemeal inquiry cannot be made and no injunction of a 
 Court can intrude into the course of the political action 
 (jf an election. 
 
272 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 The position that I have assigned to the States is the ap- 
 pointment as they please. Now, let me call your attention 
 to a provision in the act of Congress, the application of 
 which may not have occurred to your observation. It is 
 provided in the act that if the State shall have failed to ap- 
 point on the day for appointment, it may make a subsequent 
 appointment as the legislature may please. It was not in- 
 tended, then, that the process of finding out whether there 
 had been an election or not should, by its method and its 
 regular action, be exposed to frustration. Even the failure 
 itself, disclosed by the political canvass, was the basis on 
 which the State was renewedly to exercise its right in time 
 for transmission here. Now, you have in this act of Congress 
 a provision which shows that they recognized that the meth- 
 od of progress and result was to be cherished above all 
 others that its success might end in time to confer the quah- 
 fications or its failure in time that the substituted appoint- 
 ment reserved to the States should be accomplished. 
 
 But now it is said that a failure of election may be retarded 
 in its declaration so as to deprive the State of its power to 
 act on that failure, and it is said that by the act of Congress 
 the contemplated ascertainment may involve judicial pro- 
 ceedings in the State. Why, if there be anything that in 
 election laws is provided in every State, it is that there shall 
 be no reconsideration, no steps backward, no delays except 
 of ministerial and apparently easy duty; and if discretion is 
 given, by departures from that general policy in particular 
 States, it is always found to have its origin in a motive of 
 correcting a special mischief for which it is framed, some ab- 
 normal condition of the body-politic that requires a departure 
 from the general method of absolute ministerial transaction. 
 Our proposition, as has been laid down so well by my learned 
 associates, is that, under the State law of Florida, that is the 
 method, that is the purpose, that is the action, and that 
 every step and stage of that action, rightly or wrongly, hon- 
 
THE DISPITED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 273 
 
 estly or dishonestly, jiurely or fraudulently, has conferred 
 qualifications such as the Federal Constitution requires in 
 the appointment by the State through the methods that it 
 had provided. 
 
 If support were needed for the point that the line of de- 
 marcation between the inception of the Federal authority 
 and the culmination and consummation of the State's action 
 precludes an inquiry, at the furthest, beyond the facts certi- 
 fied as of record and the accuracy of the certificate, it is to 
 be found in the legislation ])roposed in the Congress of 1800, 
 when the wisdom was still of the fathers. Enlightened by 
 their experience of the working of the great scheme they had 
 framed, it was declared that the demarcation should be ob- 
 served, and that the powers should not include nor be deemed 
 to include any inquiry into the votes as cast in the States. 
 
 The novelty, as I have said, of the situation produces 
 strange results. Never before has there been the retarda- 
 tion of the political transaction of counting an election, and 
 to accomplish that almost a miracle has been needed, for 
 the Sim and the moon have been made to stand still much 
 longer than they did for Joshua in the conflict in Judaea. 
 You will find that an attempt to bring judges — I do not 
 now speak of judges in the official capacity that some portion 
 of this bench occupy in the Supreme Court, but I mean judges 
 in the nature of judicial function and its exercise — into the 
 working of this scheme of popular sovereignty in its political 
 action, will make it as intolerable in its working, will so de- 
 fraud and defeat the popular will, by the nature and neces- 
 sary consequences of the judicial intervention, that, at last, 
 the government of the judges will have superseded the sov- 
 ereignty of the people, and there will be no cure, no recourse 
 but that which the children of Israel had, to pray for a king. 
 
 10 
 
THE FLORIDA CASE 
 
 ARGUMENT ON THE PRINCIPAL QUESTION 
 
 Upon the decision of the Commission, Umiting the evidence that 
 would be considered in the Florida case and after taking testimony 
 on the question of the eligibility of the elector Humphreys, the 
 argument proceeded on the principal question of what certificate 
 should be adjudged the true return to be counted as the vote of 
 Florida. Mr. George Hoadly and Mr. Ashbel Green opened the 
 argument for the Democrats; Mr. Shellabarger and Mr. Evarts 
 addressed the Commission in reply, and the argument was closed 
 by Mr. Merrick. The arguments of counsel on the main question 
 began and ended on February 8, 1877. Mr. Evarts spoke as fol- 
 lows on this branch of the case : 
 
 Mr. President, and gentlemen of the Commission: The 
 wisdom of the method and order of this examination ado])- 
 ted by the Commission has fully proved itself in its execution. 
 The intelligent and experienced and learned minds acting 
 in the Commission saw at once that the decisive lines of the 
 controversy were to be determined upon the limitation of 
 their powers and the limitation of the subjects and the means 
 for producing those subjects upon which those powers were 
 to act. In the full discussion accorded to counsel, and in the 
 deliberations of the Commission extended during the periods 
 of their private session, the result is disclosed in this form and 
 to this effect, that this Commission will receive no evidence, 
 and will merely inspect the certificates that the Constitution 
 and the laws of the United States have authorized for trans- 
 mission, and, as such, received by the President of the Senate, 
 have been opened to the two Houses, save in one particular, 
 that in aiding them to inspect these certificates, and, within 
 the limits of the information there disclosed, determine and 
 advise the two Houses of Congress how many and what 
 
 274 
 
THE DISIMIKD rUKSIDENTIAL KLKC'IIOX '275 
 
 voles shall 1)(' counted for ilio Stale of Florida, it will re('oi\(' 
 evidence touching; the eligibility of one of the named electors 
 appointed. In that determination 1 do not understand the 
 Commission to have over])assed the (juestiou. what the effect 
 is as to the acceptance or rejection of a vote thus challenged 
 for ineligil)ilily. hut to have decided that on that point thev 
 will receive the evidence that may he offered in order that 
 they may determine in the first ])lace whether ui)on the facts 
 the exce])tion taken to Humphreys' vote is maintainable; 
 and secondly, whether, if maintainahle and maintained uj)on 
 the facts, the methods of the Constitution and the dutv now 
 ])resently being discharged jiermit of any rejection from the 
 certificated vote transmitted and opened of the vote of an 
 elector upon that ground. 
 
 I will first deal with the (piestion of fact. I call the at- 
 tention of the Commission to the proposition that the ])oint 
 of exce])tion under the Constitution, the matter proposed 
 of disqualification under the Constitution, is shnply this: 
 that at the time of his appointment he filled an office of 
 honor or emolument under the I nited States. I except to 
 the mode of proof as to its effect when it stops where it did, 
 that was used by the excepting ])arty to his qualification, 
 that they used a connnission of the date of 187'2 and proved 
 no occupation of the office later than August, 187(). I under- 
 stand that when, under the certificate of a governor, the 
 vote of a State is in the very process of counting, to be (jues- 
 tioned in the presence of the two Houses of Congress, no 
 exception that shall proceed lor its pros|)erity upon the 
 power of the exceptor t<j find an old commission and then 
 take advantage of the unreadiness or want of notice that the 
 exception was to be raised is admissible, to argue from the 
 ancient ca.se that all things renuun as they were until con- 
 tradicted. The danger of that proposition in a transaction 
 of this nature can be at once discerned. Ld whosoever will 
 take up the biiiilin of pi-()\iiig llial on llic 7IJi (la\- of XoNcni- 
 
276 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ber one of these certified electors having the warrant of the 
 seal and authority of the State as having been elected was 
 disqualified for that election, he must prove it down to and 
 as of that day. But when the proof stops there, the neighbor, 
 the friend, the lawyer whose dealings are to fill out with 
 living effect the dead commission, stops with his necessary 
 proof in the month of August, you have failed to find that 
 actual possession and use of the office, even presumptively, 
 beyond the date, for no reason was given in the witness's 
 evidence why his knowledge stopped there unless the action 
 of the oflScer stopped there. You must dispose of this ques- 
 tion of fact upon some method of strictness suitable to the 
 nature of the transaction in which you are engaged and suit- 
 able to the exercise of the duty, not under an organized and 
 arranged Commission like this, but as an ordinary discharge 
 of constitutional duty by the two Houses in their joint con- 
 vention ; and I submit that there is no claim, the proof there 
 stopping, that it is to be regarded as a challenge which re- 
 quires the fact that he was in oJ0Bce on the 7th of November 
 to be presumed. 
 
 I now come to the counter-proof, supposing that that step 
 is passed; and the counter-proof, not challenged inform, 
 comes to this: that early in October Humphreys resigned, 
 in writing, his ofiice to the circuit judge of that circuit, and 
 received from him an acceptance of the resignation, such 
 judge proceeding to instruct him to turn over whatever of 
 public means for the exercise of the ofiice he held to the 
 collector of customs, who would discharge the office, such 
 judge at the same time advising the collector of the accepted 
 resignation and of the devolution of the oflBce upon him, 
 followed by the evidence of Mr. Humphreys that thereafter, 
 from the early day in October, he himself discharged no part 
 of its duties and held out no professions of capacity to dis- 
 charge them, and moreover that the collector from that time 
 thenceforth until after the period of inquiry, the 7th of No- 
 
THK DIsriTED PKESIDEN'I'IAL KI.IK I ION ^277 
 
 vemher, and perliaps till now. ofC'Ui)ie(l the office and dis- 
 charged its duties. 
 
 Upon this plenary and ap|>arently conclusive proof, an 
 objection is made that as the ai)pointnient was made by the 
 circuit court, the resignation could only be made to and re- 
 ceived bv the Court in session, and that no such session 
 having taken place, witliin the meaning of the Constitution 
 of the United States wliich prescribes as a qualification for 
 an elector that he should not exercise an office under the 
 United States, Mr. Humphreys was an officer of the United 
 States on the 7th dav of November. Now, this office had 
 no term whatever prescribed by statute; it had no enlarge- 
 ment by necessity or by prescription beyond the present 
 will of resignation. The office itself was secured for the 
 public by no clause requiring it to be occupied and exercised 
 until a successor w^as qualified. There w^as no need of 
 the office being refilled. The act took care of the service 
 by prescribing that when there was no officer of this kind the 
 collector should discharge the duty of this act of Congress. 
 
 Upon that state of law, in view of the existing legislation 
 of Congress on the subject of resignations to which I shall 
 call your attention, is it to be pretended for a moment that 
 there was any power to hold an occupant of that office to the 
 performance of its duties one moment beyond his will? Can 
 it be pretended that, beyond the necessity of the conveyance 
 of the resignation as determining that will, executed and 
 placed in the power of the authority thus made its depositary, 
 he could be held under any law, if there had been any, or 
 his sureties under any law or jurisprudence enforcing the 
 obligations of sureties, for the failure to perform acts or to 
 do duties after his office was thus resigned? 
 
 Besides, look at the nature of this disqualification as pro- 
 posed to the voters in the State of Florida and those who 
 profluce the candidates and name them to be voted for. Is 
 the title, the paj)t'r-tillt' back in the arclnNcs of courts or 
 
278 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 offices, to be searched for by electors in determining wlietlier 
 their fellow-citizen, Mr. Hiunphreys, shall receive their votes? 
 They know who are in the possession and in the exercise of 
 offices under the Government of the United States by their 
 action, by their public possession and exercise of office; and 
 now when Mr. Humphreys, to the knowledge of his neighbors 
 in Pensacola and the community throughout the State of 
 Florida, is out of his office, and its constant duties are per- 
 formed bv another from and after the date in October, are 
 they to lose the effect of their suffrage by the production of 
 a certificate that in 1872 he held the office? I think not. 
 
 I have said I would ask your attention to the only pro- 
 visions in the statutes of the United States that bring their 
 bearing upon the question of resignation; and they are found 
 at three pages of this volume — 233, 251, and 277. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: Xre you quoting by pages 
 or sections? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Pages. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: The Revised Statutes? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Yes. They relate only to resignations of 
 military' officers or enlisted soldiers in the nature of desertion. 
 Now, under a scheme of law that from the foundation of 
 the Government until now has never lifted finger to restrict 
 the right of citizens to retire from office at their mere will, 
 who shall say that within the property of this electoral qual- 
 ification and this count of it on this evidence any question is 
 to be made? 
 
 But the authorities seem to be very clear as to the right 
 of resigning without even acceptance. In section 260 of 
 Mr. McCrary's book I read : 
 
 Where the law reduires an officer resigning to do so by a writ- 
 ten resignation — 
 
THE DISITTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 570 
 
 Where tlic law in tcnns rtHiiiircs an officer resigning to do 
 so by a written resignation — 
 
 to be sent to the governor, it is not necessary that the governor 
 should signify his acceptance of a resignation to make it valid. 
 The tenure of office, in such a case, does not depend upon the 
 will of the executive, but of the incumbent. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: Is not that a case where 
 the law expressly ])rovides that the office may be resigned 
 by the party by a written resignation without any accept- 
 ance? 
 
 ^Ir. Evarts: I have not examined the law. 
 
 Mr. Com:viissioxer Abbott: I think you will find it so. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: It is spoken of as a law which requires a 
 resignation in writing. This careful commentator quotes it 
 as a law that requires "an officer resigning to do so by a 
 written resignation." 
 
 A civil officer has the absolute right to resign his office at 
 pleasure, and it is not within the power of the executive to com- 
 pel him to remain in office. 
 
 And the authorities for this are given in the first volume of 
 ]\IcLean's Reports, page 51 "2, where that learned judge says: 
 
 There can be no doubt that a civil officer has a right to resign 
 his office at pleasure; and it is not in the power of the executive 
 to compel him to remain in office. It is only necessary that the 
 resignation should be received to take effect; and this does not 
 depend upon the acceptance <jr rejection of the resignation by 
 the President. And if Fogg had resigned absolutely and uncon- 
 ditionally, I should have no doubt that the defendant could not 
 be held bound subsequently as his surety. 
 
 This was a (picstion of suretyship. There is a case in 
 California, The People vs. Porter, (J California Reports, 27. 
 "Resignation of office" is the head-note. "A resignation is 
 effectual without its acceptance Ijy the a])j)ointing power." 
 
280 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 You will observe that under this condition of law, all the 
 circumstances of this office making its application a neces- 
 sary result from the nature of the office and the tenure not 
 limited in any way, all that was necessary was to make a 
 permanent vacation of the office, evidenced by the conduct 
 of the resigning officer, and followed not necessarily by any 
 necessary proof, but if followed by the public possession and 
 discharge of the office by another, it took the officer out of 
 his place within the disqualification or qualification concern- 
 ing it. 
 
 I might refer to a very important proposition made by Mr. 
 Manager Hoar on the impeachment of Mr. Belknap, found 
 on page 62 of the Record, volume 4, part 7, of this Congress, 
 the two concluding paragraphs on the first column of that 
 page. I will not occupy time by reading them; but it was 
 there laid down by the authority of the House of Representa- 
 tives through their managers that in this country the accept- 
 ance of a resignation was not essential to vacate office, and 
 that the English authorities to the contrary turned upon the 
 peculiarity of their laws and their system which exacted 
 maintenance of office against the will of an officer. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Hoar: With the exception there 
 stated, that of the class of offices which a person could be 
 compelled by mandamus to accept. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: So I understood; but that was drawn from 
 the English cases. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Hoar: And the early New England 
 cases. The office of constable a person could be compelled 
 by mandamus to accept. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: But there it was I believe contended, cer- 
 tainly it is matter of public knowledge and history, that in 
 the United States service there are no such civil officers; 
 and no pretense of any such obligation has been set forth. 
 We have been satisfied to rest upon the working maxim of 
 our politics that none resign. 
 
THE DISPrTEI) rUESIDENTIAL ELECTION 281 
 
 Now, I will consider, and very briefly, tiie (juestion of 
 ineligibility made apparent by proof aliiuide, as bearing 
 upon the question whether the vote is to be omitted in the 
 count. That question, if not open for discussion, will never- 
 theless occupy me but a very brief period, and I must as- 
 sume that it is open, that there has been no determination 
 that ineligibility made to appear by extraneous proof would 
 lead to the rejection of the vote. This clause of the Con- 
 stitution, which simply prescribes an exclusion from the 
 office of elector, left open to the ap])ointment of the States, 
 of persons filling seats in Congress or occupying office under 
 the United States, is a clause of the Constitution not execut- 
 ing itself and not executed by law; and when, therefore, in 
 the presence of the two Houses, the transaction commences 
 of counting the presidential votes, no objection of that kind 
 can be heard or entertained, because Congress has not filled 
 out the legislation necessary to provide the means of adduc- 
 ing proof in advance, one way and the other, and the effect 
 that is to be given to the presence of a disqualified elector. 
 Let me call your attention to a case of the greatest weight in 
 all our discussions of matters before the Supreme Court — 
 the case of Groves vs. Slaughter, in 15 Peters; I read from page 
 500. Look at that question as it was presented. The Con- 
 stitution of Mississip])i contained this provision: 
 
 The introduction of slaves into this State as merchandise or 
 for sale shall he i)rohibited from and after the 1st day of May, 
 1833. 
 
 After tliat date they were imported for sale; they were 
 sold; and the buyer gave his notes for the price; and the 
 question was whether the notes could be collectetl. The 
 Courts of Mississippi held that they could not; and the 
 Supreme Court of the Ignited States, with but two dissent- 
 ing judges, held that the constitution <lid not execute ilself 
 and that until legislation was i)r()\i(led that was to have that 
 
282 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 effect, it was not executed. The Court had the advantage 
 in their decision of the arguments of the ablest men at the 
 bar; Mr. Clay and Mr. Webster both appeared in this case 
 and other very eminent lawyers. At pages 500 and 501, 
 Mr. Justice Thompson, giving the opinion of the Court, said : 
 
 Admitting the constitution is mandatory upon the legislature, 
 and that they have neglected their duty in not carrying it into 
 execution, it can have no effect upon the construction of this 
 article. Legislative provision is indispensable to carry into effect 
 the object of this prohibition. It requires the sanction of 
 penalties to effect this object. How is a violation of this prohi- 
 bition to be punished? Admitting it would be a misdemeanor, 
 punishable by fine, this would be entirely inadequate to the full 
 execution of the object intended to be accomplished. Wliat will 
 become of the slaves thus introduced.'' Will they become free 
 immediately upon their introduction or do they become forfeited 
 to the State? These are cjuestions not easily answered. And 
 although these difficulties may be removed by subsequent legis- 
 lation, yet they are proper circumstances to be taken into con- 
 sideration when we are inquiring into the intention of the con- 
 vention in thus framing this article. It is unreasonable to 
 suppose that, if this prohibition was intended, fer se, to operate 
 without any legislative aid, there would not have been some 
 guards and checks thrown around it to secure its execution. 
 
 Now, suppose this injunction of the Constitution is man- 
 datory on the States not to appoint as electors those who are 
 within the prescribed disqualification. Congress has not 
 undertaken to execute it; the States have not undertaken to 
 execute any procedure by which votes for disqualified persons 
 shall cause the failure of the vote of the State. They have 
 provided no means; none have been exercised here; and I 
 submit to this Commission that, laying dowTi, as you must, 
 a rule that is suitable to the ordinary and orderly and unre- 
 tarded progress of the proceedings of the two Houses, when 
 the President of the Senate opens the certificates, and, deal- 
 ing only with the certificates as your judgment about evi- 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDEMTAL ELECTION 28;J 
 
 (lence is thev must deal unless iu I his i)articular, vou must 
 hold thai in this ])ai'tic'ular also, unless there be statutory 
 ])rovisions of the United States or of the State purging the 
 lists, you must eount the vote that the State sends forward 
 and that its governor certifies, where there is no question of 
 objection of any other nature, which, of course, the case now 
 being considered contains. You are undertaking to deal, 
 in the process of counting the vote, with a question to be 
 settled by fact antecedent to the a])i)ointment, and you are 
 exposed to a final and irrevocable rejection of a vote from 
 the mere casual impression or uncertainty of evidence. 
 
 This subject, then, being rejected from a further consider- 
 ation, I understand there is no matter left but for the execu- 
 tion bv this Commission of the dutv accorded to it bv the 
 act of Congress inider which it is organized, to determine out 
 of the materials of these three certificates what and how 
 many votes are to be counted for the State of Florida. 
 
 The first certificate is subject to no criticism. You have 
 rejected all means whatever of questioning it by evidence as 
 to what occurred before the vote was cast, before the vote 
 was certified by the governor, or after either of those parts 
 of the transaction up to the time of the counting. No fact 
 can intervene. This vote, then, is to be counted, not be- 
 cause it is the best that is seen, but bv the absolute fullness 
 of its title in complying with all the laws that have been im- 
 posed by Congress concerning the complete verification of a 
 certificate. The fact certified is not gainsaid by proof, for 
 it is excluded. There was no offer of jjroof between the fact 
 of the canvass closed and recorded and the governor's certif- 
 icate. 
 
 This certificate then includes, with every degree of cer- 
 tainty and assurance, the votes of the State of Florida, and 
 there are four votes here, and there is room for no more. To 
 make it, therefore, of any practical imi)ortance in the further 
 discussion, there nuist be apparent on the two other certifi- 
 
284 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 cates either such disparagement of the first or such authenti- 
 city in the latter as should displace the one and substitute 
 the other, or there must be such production of rival and com- 
 peting certificates as leaves the Commission to rest in doubt 
 and uncertainty as to which votes are to be counted. 
 
 Now, as you will not allow evidence outside of this first 
 certificate as bearing directly upon its actual aflfirmative au- 
 thenticity and sufficiency, you will not allow any evidence 
 collaterally on the mere presentation or support of any other 
 certificate. If another certificate comes here that, by its 
 own credit, is made superior to ours, it displaces it. If it is 
 made equal to ours, then there are two certificates, and then 
 you must determine which of the two, or whether either, is 
 entitled to consideration. That leads me to ask attention 
 to these other certificates, so called. By the only certificate 
 that relates to an apparent act in the election of President of 
 the United States on the part of the State of Florida, it is 
 shown to have been wholly without authority of law, and 
 this second certificate, so far from competing with the first 
 or disparaging the first, confirms it in all respects ; in the first 
 place negatively, for it wants the certificate of the executive 
 that is prescribed; in the second place, by an entirely super- 
 fluous and worthless paper, so far as the Constitution and 
 laws of the United States are concerned and so far as the 
 laws of Florida are concerned, of an attorney general of that 
 State, having no more power or authority to certify anything 
 about the election than the commander of the militia of the 
 State, carrying therefore on its face no invitation to your 
 hospitality and excluding itself from consideration by its 
 being wholly without legal support in the laws of Florida and 
 wholly unrecognized under the Constitution and laws of the 
 United States. 
 
 But if you treat it as a paper, read it for what it says. It 
 shows you that the recorded canvass as it lay in the secretary 
 of state's office was the only transaction in that election that 
 
Tin; DISPITKI) I'HESTDENTIAL ELECTIOX 285 
 
 the governor of the State hy its hiws eould eertify to, and 
 that his eertifieate rested upon that fact and could not l)e 
 questioned for reason of its not observing the executive 
 duty. Let me ask your attention to the true result of this 
 certificate, as was well and firndv stated hv niv associate, 
 Mr. Stoughton, when he said that it showed that it would 
 have l)een a ^•iolation of duty on the part of the governor of 
 the State of Florida to have certified or looked at anything 
 else, provided you take this attorney general's certificate of 
 what the law is. He describes himself as an attorney general, 
 and by virtue of that office, one of the members of the board 
 of State canvassers of the State of Florida, and he undertakes 
 to certify "that, by the authentic returns of the votes cast 
 in the several counties of the State of Florida. . . . said 
 returns" — that is, the county returns — ^"being on file in the 
 office of the secretary of state, and seen and considered by me 
 as such member of the board of State canvassers of the said 
 State of Florida, it a])pearsand is showTi " that the four gentle- 
 men named "were chosen the four electors of President and 
 Vice-President of the United States." 
 
 And I do further certify that, under the act of the legislature 
 of the State of Florida estabhshing said board of State canvassers, 
 no i)rovision has been enacted, nor is any such provision contained 
 in tlie statute law of this State, whereby the result shown and 
 aj)pearing by said returns — 
 
 That is, the county returns — 
 
 to said board of State canvassers can be certified to the executive 
 of the said State. 
 
 If that is not as complete an exclusion of the possibility of 
 there being any reliance or resort by the laws of Fh)ri(la on 
 the part of theexecutive to any of this evidence, these returns, 
 or any part of them, what could sup])ly such a conclusion.^ 
 And when you h)ok at the hiw of Florida already brought to 
 the attention of the Commission, you find that, as a part 
 and the final paii of the transaction of ap|)ointing electors, 
 
286 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the canvassers having made their report, it is the governor's 
 duty thereupon to issue his certificate to the electors thus 
 shown to be elected, which is the final warrant l)y the State 
 of Florida of their appointment and the justification of their 
 action in voting, 
 
 I come now to a third certificate, so called, and we are to 
 proceed to inquire whether there is anything on that which 
 disparages or overtops the paramount authority of the first 
 certificate. In regard to this certificate, I say that it is a 
 paper having no warrant whatever under the Constitution 
 or laws of the United States or of the State of Florida — ^I 
 mean the laws of the State of Florida as they existed when 
 the appointment was completed and when the vote was cast 
 and certified and transmitted here. It is a posthumous cer- 
 tificate of post-morte7n action, never proceeding from any 
 vital or living college of electors, but only by the galvanic 
 agency of interested party purpose, taking effect after the 
 whole transaction was ended. I submit to your honors, 
 without making any imputation as between political parties, 
 that the inspection of this certificate shows that, the transac- 
 tion having gone on and been completed within the purview 
 of the Constitution and the laws of the United States and the 
 laws of the State of Florida, a government, coming into being 
 on the subsequent 1st of January by the change of political 
 parties, undertakes to undo what has already been done. 
 
 That proposes (without offense to the arrangement of the 
 two parties in this transaction) that one party was in posses- 
 sion of power during the procedure of the transaction and 
 was succeeded by a change of party. It would be just the 
 same if the reverse situation in the names of the parties were 
 concerned. If it can be done, then all the care and all the 
 wisdom and all the contrivances that are to make this trans- 
 action in the States final at some point, certifiable at some 
 point, and in some manner and by some officer, are to go for 
 nothing, if when there are new officers, new interests, new 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 287 
 
 legislators, l)y tillu'r or all l\\v j)o\vers of the changed govern- 
 ment, the vote that has been deposited can he corrupted, 
 subtracted, obscured, or substituted; if the legislature, 
 governor, judiciary, all enter into the transaction that is to 
 substitute for the de])osited vote of the State a vote that 
 they presently seek to deposit, or that its efficacy, if not 
 adequate for its o\vn counting, shall displace the counting 
 of the coni])leted transaction. 
 
 This certificate, opened by the President of the Senate, 
 and by that mere act therefore laid before the Houses of 
 Congress, and transmitted here, when the contents are opened 
 and read, is shown to be no certificate under the Constitution 
 of the United States or the act of Congress or the laws of 
 Florida in existence at the time of the casting of the 
 electoral vote of that State within its borders. It is, 
 under the aspect and the cover of a certificate, transmitted 
 to the President of the Senate, connected with the election, 
 made the vehicle of cariying into the physical presence and 
 power of the two Houses, and thus of this Commission, what 
 is utterly nugatory, utterly ineffectual, utterly unauthorized 
 by any provision of the Constitution. You cannot count 
 that, then, as an electoral vote. Nobody ])retends that that 
 certificate, coming here on the 31st of January, reciting 
 legislation not completed, I think, until the '■2Gth, and some 
 quo warranto judgment referred to that was terminatetl on 
 the 23(1 or ITtli — the dates are utterly immaterial — is a 
 I)aper that the President of the Senate was by the Constitu- 
 tion recjuired to receive. It is not a ])aper that is a certified 
 vote of a State. It is not a paper that can carry any means 
 of furnishing you with the vote of the State to be counted. 
 So in respect of evidence it is wholly without authority. It 
 will be observed that the certificate of Governor Drew, by 
 public knowledge shown to have come into his office on the 
 1st of January or later perha|)s, but the term of his office 
 dales from then, underlnkcs by antliorily of an act passed 
 
288 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 January 17, 1877, which had ordered a new "canvass of the 
 returns of said votes on file," which canvass "was, on the 
 19th day of January, made according to the laws of the State 
 and the interpretation thereof by the supreme court," to 
 recite that four gentlemen named "were duly determined, 
 declared, and certified" — that is, by these canvassers taking 
 up the transaction in January under a law passed in January, 
 and making a scrutiny ending on the 17th — "to have been 
 elected electors of President and Vice-President of the United 
 States for the State of Florida" at the past election in No- 
 vember, "as shown by said returns"; and it further recites 
 that — 
 
 In a proceeding on the part of the State of Florida by informa- 
 tion in the nature of quo warranto wherein the said Robert 
 Bullock, Robert B. Hilton, Wilkinson Call, and James E. Young 
 were relators, and Charles H. Pearce, Frederick C. Humphreys, 
 William H. Holden, and Thomas W. Long were respondents, the 
 circuit court of this State for the second judicial circuit, after 
 full consideration of the law and the proofs produced on behalf 
 of the parties respectively, by its judgment determined that said 
 relators were at said election, in fact and in law, elected such 
 electors as against the said respondents and all other persons: 
 
 Now, therefore, and also in pursuance of an act of the legisla- 
 ture entitled "An act to declare and establish the appointment 
 by the State of Florida of electors of President and Vice-President 
 of the United States," approved January 26, A. D. 1877, I, 
 George F. Drew, governor of the State of Florida, do hereby 
 make and certify the following list of the names of the said 
 electors chosen, appointed, and declared as aforesaid, to wit: 
 
 The certificate required was a certificate to be delivered 
 to the college of electors at or before the day, and that is the 
 only certificate which can have any force; and here we have a 
 certificate of a governor who was not governor at that time. 
 
 Then, besides, we have all that is here stated, absolutely 
 post hac, subsequent to the transaction, and only allowed tO' 
 present itself on the 31st day of January just past, to have 
 
THE DISPUTED TRESTDEXTTAL ELECTION 289 
 
 some influoiKv upon the transiu'lion lliat had bcrn (•()iiii)l('tefl 
 and l)oen certified; and that when the two competing certifi- 
 cates of tlie rival electors had been finished and jilaced in 
 possession of the President of the Senate long before this 
 authority arose. What becomes of the authority in Con- 
 gress, exercised under the Constitution, to say that the votes 
 shall all l)e delivered on the part of the States on the same 
 day? Is not that a substantive provision? Is not that a 
 hold that Congress by the Constitution was given concern- 
 ing the deposit of the electoral vote? Certainly it was. 
 What becomes of the provision of the act of Congress, justified 
 by the Constitution, that the elections or other methods of 
 appointment that the State may use shall be on the same 
 day? What does it mean? Does it mean anything? Did 
 our fathers trifle upon question of punctilio and order? No. 
 If it means anything, it means that it must be done on one 
 day, that it shall not be undone on any other day. It is to 
 be done on one day; it is to be finished on one day; and they 
 would laugh at the triviality of the wisdom of their succes- 
 sors in the great places of the Constitution, the Senate, and 
 the House and the great judges of the land, if on the first 
 occasion that it became necessary or at all effectual to undo, 
 it should be held as constitutional law that when it was pro- 
 vided it should all be done on one dav, that meant that after 
 what was done was known, and after the importance of un- 
 doing it was understood, and after the change of parties or 
 the ambition of human nature made it im])ortant to undo 
 in separate j)arcels and at various times what had been sup- 
 posed to have been concluded and made sacred in the de})osit 
 that the Constitution had assigned for a finished transaction, 
 that courts, that legislatures, that governors remote from 
 responsibility, or seconded in their transgressions by the 
 opinion of parly and tiie applause of political interests, 
 should have the fingering of every vote for President until 
 the counting was concluded. 
 
 20 
 
290 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM 1VL4XWELL EVARTS 
 
 What are the prodigious claims here? That by a lawsuit, 
 and a lawsuit in a State court, begun and ended it may be 
 afterward, begun if you please before but ended afterward, 
 by virtue of that transaction the State's completed vote is to 
 be retrieved and reversed; and that when a justice's court of 
 the first instance has so decided, as my learned brother, Mr. 
 Green, has said, the courts of the United States make a low 
 obeisance to Mr. Justice White, and say, "That is the end 
 of the law; that is the ^a^ of the State." Well, supposing 
 that we had succeeded in counting a President in under quo 
 warranto, justified under the Constitution and the laws as 
 they now are or that shall be opened by legislation to the 
 tribunals of the country, and suppose that then a quo war- 
 ranto is started to prove that the President in his seat should 
 be dislodged because some of the votes counted for him were 
 not by de jure electors, and then it is proposed that the deci- 
 sion of the State court is "the be-all and the end-all" of that 
 inquiry; that whichever of these candidates takes his seat as 
 President of the United States in a situation of evenly bal- 
 anced elections, his continued possession of the Federal office is 
 upon the judgment 'post hue of a State court that holds, when- 
 ever a quo warranto comes to an end by due procedure of 
 their laws, that the title of the President that acquired the 
 count of the votes of Ohio or of New York was a miscount, a 
 count of spurious votes, so held and determined by the State 
 in the independence of its judiciary passing upon the ques- 
 tion. WTiat sort of a government, what sort of a presidency, 
 what sort of muniments and protections of regularity and 
 permanence of authority under the Constitution are pro- 
 vided by a scheme of perpetual four years' dependence 
 upon a quo loarranto in the State of Nevada or of Florida? 
 You then must never lose sight of the matter, that you are to 
 advise what votes and how many shall be counted by the two 
 Houses that stand in a present duty, never intended by the 
 Constitution to be interrupted by a day or by an hour. When 
 
THE DISITTKI) IMUISIDKNTIAL ELECTION '201 
 
 you liavo tU'li-niiiiu'd that ovidoiico sliall not invade llic 
 regularity of tlie finislied Iransaetion of the State or defeat 
 the regularity of the certifiealion under tlie acts of Congress 
 at the time wlien the votes are seaU'd uj) in their packages 
 and transmitted — when you have (k'termined that that 
 shall not be invaded by extraneous evidence, you have de- 
 termined as bv a double decision that it shall not be invatled, 
 dis])araged, or ex])Osed to any question by a mere certificate 
 that is its own agent and author and volunteer in disturb- 
 ance of the comiting of the votes. 
 
THE LOUISIANA CASE 
 NOTE 
 
 The State of Louisiana, during the reconstruction period follow- 
 ing the Civil War, fell into a condition of politics approaching an- 
 archy. The resistance of the native white population to the new 
 order of things was more marked by turbulence and lawlessness 
 than in any of the other States of the South. At the time of the 
 Presidential election of 1876 both the Republican and Democratic 
 parties claimed the right of possession and control of the State 
 government. The de facto governor, the nominee of the Republi- 
 can party, was William P. Kellogg. Recognized by every depart- 
 ment of the Federal Government and sustained in his occupation 
 of the oflSce by the military forces of the United States, Kellogg 
 was the actual governor of the State, exercising all the functions 
 of the office. This was also the case of the other offices of the State 
 Government; they were all in the possession and control of the 
 Republicans. The Democrats had made vigorous claim to the 
 governorship and had even inaugurated their candidate, John 
 McEnery, into office, and while the Democrats had been obliged 
 to surrender the possession of the government of the State to the 
 Republicans McEnery continued to claim the governorship de jure. 
 
 In this situation of political affairs there were forwarded to the 
 seat of Government three sets of papers purporting to be certificates 
 of the electoral vote of the State. Certificate number 1, appearing 
 on its face to be in every way regular and authentic, was signed by 
 Governor Kellogg, and certified to the electoral vote of the State 
 as having been cast for the Republican candidates. Certificate 
 number 2 was signed by John McEnery described as Governor of 
 the State of Louisiana, and gave the vote of Louisiana to the 
 Democrats, through the action of the Democratic candidates for 
 electors claiming to have been duly elected and casting their votes 
 as electors on the day prescribed by the Federal law. Certificate 
 number 3 was similar in form and contents to certificate number 1 
 and had been forwarded to the seat of government subsequently 
 to certificate nuniber I tg correct some supposed formal error in 
 
 292 
 
THE DISIMTKI) PHKSIDKNTIAL KLECTIOX 293 
 
 the first certificate. Tlie fact was, however, known to but few 
 persons at the time, that certificate number .'? was far more vuhier- 
 able than certificate number 1. 
 
 The objections to certificates numbers 1 and .'{, interposed by the 
 Democrats, were many and were for the most part directed to- 
 wards the conduct of the election and of the returning board of 
 Louisiana that had charge of the canvass of the votes. The au- 
 thority and jurisdiction of the returning board had been conferred 
 l)y the various statutes passed by the Louisiana legislature. These 
 statutes were in some state of confusion as to their ultimate efl'ect, 
 owing to repealing clauses in the several acts and the adoption by 
 the State of a revision of the statutes in 1870. 
 
 These objections were in substance as follows: 
 
 1. That the government of Louisiana was not republican in form. 
 
 'i. That Kellogg was not governor. 
 
 8. That at the time of the election there was no law of the State 
 directing the appointment of electors. 
 
 4. That so much of the election law which was in force as related 
 to the returning board was unconstitutional and void. 
 
 5. That the board was not constituted according to law, having 
 only four members of one political party, when there should have 
 been five members of different political parties. 
 
 6. That the board had acted fraudulently in their methods of 
 counting the votes, in discarding some returns and in counting 
 others and in other specified ways in the performance of their duties 
 as a board. 
 
 7. That two of the electors certified by Kellogg were ineligible 
 at the time of the election, by holding office under the Government 
 of the United Stales; and that others were ineligible by holding 
 State offices, and that Kellogg could not legally certify himself as 
 an elector. 
 
 The objections to certificate number 2, interposed by the Rei)ubli- 
 cans were brief and to the point. They were in substance that 
 there was no evidence that the persons named in the certificate as 
 electors had been appointed in such manner as the legislature had 
 directed, and that there was conclusive evidence that the persons 
 named had not been so ai)[)ointed; that there was no evidence that 
 McKiiery, who signed liic certificate, was at any time governor of 
 
294 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the State and that the evidence was conchisive that Kellogg was 
 such governor at the time of the election and of signing the several 
 certificates. 
 
 After the several objectors had been heard, the argument of coun- 
 sel on behalf of the Democrats was opened by Mr. Matt H. Car- 
 penter of Wisconsin. He was followed by Mr. Lyman Trumbull 
 who presented in an extended argument the several offers of evi- 
 dence to be submitted to the Commission in support of the Demo- 
 cratic objections. They were followed in the order named by Mr. 
 Stoughton, Mr. Shellabarger and Mr. Evarts in behalf of the Re- 
 publicans, and the argument was closed by Mr. John A. Campbell 
 of Louisiana in behalf of the Democrats. In accord with the prin- 
 ciple that had controlled in the Florida case, the Commission ex- 
 cluded all consideration of the evidence offered and decided that 
 the vote of Louisiana should be counted for the Republican candi- 
 dates. On February 15, 1877, Mr. Evarts delivered the argument 
 that follows: 
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Mr. President and gentlemen of the Com- 
 mission: The general subject of controversy before the 
 Commission is, how this Commission, under the powers con- 
 ferred upon it and in discharge of the duty confided to it by 
 the act of Congress under which it is organized, shall advise 
 the two Houses of Congress, in the discharge of their duty 
 under the Constitution of the United States in counting the 
 votes for President and Vice-President, what votes shall be 
 counted for the State of Louisiana. The Constitution has 
 undertaken to determine that the State shall have the power 
 to appoint electors as its legislature may direct, and no au- 
 thority or argument can disparage or overreach that right 
 of the State. That right is in the State. It is not a gift 
 from the Federal Government, for there was no Federal 
 Government to give it. It is not carved out of any fund of 
 power and right that the Federal Government possessed, for 
 the Federal Government had no general fund of power or 
 right out of which it could carve a gift to a State. The 
 
THE DISriiTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ^05 
 
 State of Louisiana stands in tliis behalf as one of the original 
 thirteen States stood. Whatever was the right of one of 
 the original thirteen States in the election of Washington, is 
 the right of Louisiana now in the election of a President. 
 And, therefore, it is not to be measured as a gift, not to be 
 measured by its relation to any general fund of authority on 
 the subject that the United States had and which it has 
 limited, but as one of the original conditions, one of the origi- 
 nal limitations, one of the original distributions of power 
 out of which and by which combined comes the Govern- 
 ment of the Ignited States and exists the government of each 
 State as a member of the Union. 
 
 This topic at once leads us to consider wherein the Consti- 
 tution of the Ignited States has established and how it has 
 distrilnited the authority of choosing a President of the 
 Ignited States, what part of it is administered and adminis- 
 trable as the action of the Federal Government, and what 
 part of it is administered and administrable as a part of the 
 State action in the matter. On the terms of the Constitu- 
 tion is this demarkation to be drawn and adhered to? And 
 in this regard, as well as in every other respect of power, are 
 the maxims of the Constitution as to construction concern- 
 ing the line drawn to be observed as well as in any other? 
 The Government confers nothing upon the States. The 
 Government comes into existence by and through the States 
 and their people. The location of authority is primarily in 
 the State, and is in the General Government only by its 
 allotment in the terms of the Constitution. There is, there- 
 fore, the same method of construction and interpretation in 
 drawing the line and in maintaining its defenses in this 
 nuitter of the election of President as in all others. What- 
 ever the Federal Government has in this nuitter of the elec- 
 tion of a President, it has by force of terms in the Constitu- 
 tion; an<l whatever the State has, it has upon the same terms; 
 and tluii the ninlli .ind tenlli articles of the amendments 
 
296 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 made soon after the adoption of the Constitution apply, 
 that there is to be no disparagement of rights that are re- 
 served by rights that are conferred, and that whatever is 
 not conferred upon the Federal Government by this Con- 
 stitution, and is not forbidden to the States, is reserved to 
 the States or to the people. 
 
 It is not for me to repeat the arguments made by my 
 learned associates so well, and by me, so far as I could aid 
 them, in the general discussions which were presented under 
 the Florida case. These general propositions were that the 
 whole matter of creating the elector belonged to the State; 
 the whole matter of ascertaining, accrediting, setting for- 
 ward with credentials, belonged to the State so far as the 
 text of the Constitution read; and that whatever the statute 
 of 1792 had sought to prescribe in the matter of these creden- 
 tials was directory and for the convenience and instruction 
 of the body that was to count the votes, as to the fact of the 
 action of each State; that the elector was not an officer of 
 the State; that in no very considerable sense could he be 
 treated as an officer of the United States; that he was an 
 elector, having the right under the Constitution of the United 
 States to vote for President, and that he was a representa- 
 tive elector, and was to be measured only to discern whether 
 he was deputized to act as an agent or whether he was ac- 
 credited with the voting power to vote as an elector having 
 the suffrage in his hands. To say that he is a representative 
 elector because he comes to be the elector in representation 
 of a participation in the government of a State, comes to 
 nothing more than to say that you, members of the two 
 Houses of Congress, are representative legislators. You are 
 representative legislators. You are legislators in a Govern- 
 ment resting upon the will of the people and on its communi- 
 cated authority to you as representatives; but you are not 
 deputies to derive your instructions and authority from a 
 principal at home. You are representatives of the legisla- 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAE ELECTION 297 
 
 tivo autliorily, lodged llicorolically in the i)eoi)le, and in the 
 theory of representation possessed by you in the same plen- 
 ary power that the j)eople themselves would have exercised 
 
 it. 
 
 It was then announced as our proposition, that after the 
 appointment of the elector, the vote, and the title to vote, 
 and the exercise of the right, and j)erformance of the duty, to 
 vote on the i)art of th.e elector had come under the exclusive 
 dominion, of the Federal Constitution; the representation, 
 so far as it entered into the creation of the title and the con- 
 ferring of authority, had been exhausted. 
 
 In the Florida case, as here, these considerations had their 
 weight and were accepted or declined by the different mem- 
 bers of the Commission, according to their estimate of the 
 Constitution and laws of their country. In that case, as in 
 this, there were present before this Commission matters of 
 consideration, about whicli, as ojien entirely for your in- 
 spection and necessarily forming a part of your determina- 
 tion, there was no question — I mean the papers that were 
 opened Ijy the President of the Senate, according to the 
 Constitution, in the presence of the two Houses of Congress. 
 They are before you under the law of 1877, as they were be- 
 fore that assemblage in that presence under the Constitution 
 without the law of 1877, and now the question as to what 
 more is or can ])e before you is a ({uestion under the law of 
 1877, as interpreted by its own terms in the light of the 
 Constitution of the United States. It has passed beyond 
 dispute; we did not dispute it in the Florida case; and, if we 
 are to receive the intimation of Mr. Justice Bradley, it has 
 passed beyond dispute in your own deliberations, as receiving 
 the concurrence of all, that you have the powers that the 
 two Houses have in the act and transaction of counting the 
 votes, and no other i)owers; not that you have the powers 
 that the two Houses of Congress together or separately have 
 as the legislature of the country; not that you have any of 
 
298 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the powers that either of them separately has in respect to 
 what is accorded to either of them separately in the Consti- 
 tution outside of legislative power. 
 
 You have no particle of any authority that is lodged in the 
 two Houses of Congress under any of the general grants of au- 
 thority to them as the legislature or to either of them sep- 
 arately, except what is granted by the Constitution within 
 the very terms of this article, that the transaction being 
 completed in the States and they having forwarded their 
 votes hither under such authenticity as entitles them to the 
 first reception and brings them into the presence of the two 
 Houses of Congress that their contents may be disclosed and 
 acted upon, whatever action thereupon proceeds by the two 
 Houses there met or by the two Houses separating in the 
 discharge of and in the continued exercise of the function of 
 counting the votes, this is passed over to you that your ad- 
 vice may be given to them, as it would proceed out of their 
 original, their independent deliberations and construction 
 if they had limited themselves to the conduct of the counting 
 of the votes in the simple terms of the Constitution^ They 
 then proceed to count. They count the votes. Having 
 made a law unto themselves, which they cannot transcend 
 without its repeal, this instruction as to what votes ought to 
 be counted under the Constitution of the United States they 
 will act upon as determining what votes under that Consti- 
 tution ought to be counted unless their united judgment 
 shall contravene this great authority they have given to you. 
 
 We insisted, therefore, in the Florida case that one great 
 consideration in determining what the powers of Congress 
 were in this mere procedure was what the nature of the pro- 
 cedure was, what the constitutional objects and solicitudes 
 in providing for the transaction had indicated as the will of 
 the people when they adopted the Constitution of the United 
 States, and we were met by very learned and very authorita- 
 tive statements from very eminent lawyers. 
 
THE DISPTTED PREs^IDEXTIAL ELECTION 290 
 
 Mr. Field, in Ix^iialt" of llu' House of Ileprcsontaiives, 
 proposed to \()U lluil you had at least the ])Owers of a court 
 on quo irarranlo. Mr. O'Conor, with that accuracy and 
 precision and acce])tance of all logical results that ])roceed 
 from his statements, demanded the same authority; insisted 
 that otherwise the correction of frauds, the redress of vio- 
 lence, the curhiuij; of excesses of authority would l)e remedi- 
 less, and yet in their nature being festering wounds in the 
 body-])olitic would work its ruin. 
 
 Those tlemands we met; those demands we answered. 
 And now, without one particle of change in the law, the Con- 
 stitution, or the area of this debate, we are told by the re- 
 sponsible rej)resentatives of the Houses of Congress through 
 their objections and by the eminent counsel that have thus 
 far put forth their ])ositions, that you have no judicial power 
 whatever; that we were quite right about that; there could 
 not be any judicial j)ower outside of tlie courts inferior to the 
 Supreme Court, the judges whereof were appointed by the 
 President and confirmed by the Senate, and holding their 
 offices for life upon a stated com])ensation. Why might w'e 
 not have been saved the former discussion if we are to enter 
 upon this with any great trust in its soundness or its per- 
 manence? Obedience to the conclusions of this Commission 
 as rcfpiiring this shifting of ground in our favor would be a 
 respectable support for the manneuver, but I have not heard 
 that assigned as the reason why tlie argument in the Florida 
 case was abandoned and an independent and inconsistent 
 one proposed here. 
 
 Now, what is the power.^ It is what is called a legislative 
 j)Ower that is supposed to reside in this Commission in de- 
 termining how it should ad vi.se that the votes should be 
 counted, it being a legislative power in the two Houses. 
 Now, there are quite as many constitutional objections to a 
 legislative ])ower vested in this Commission or a legislative 
 power resting in the two Hou.ses of Congress in the matter of 
 
300 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 counting the votes, as there are to any other form or descrip- 
 tion of power. The legislative power, the great principal 
 power of the Government, is vested in those Houses when 
 they act in such concurrence as the Constitution requires 
 before any legislation is effected. It is not, therefore, in 
 that sense that our learned friends attribute legislative power 
 either to the two Houses or to you. It is in the sense of a 
 political power, of political action in a political transaction, 
 and those are the limits that we had assigned in our argu- 
 ment of the Florida case to any possible powers of the two 
 Houses, to wit, that in a transaction of election which starts 
 from the primary polling-places and proceeds to the point of 
 developing and accrediting the elector up to the scrutiny, 
 so far as it is open here, and the counting of the electoral 
 votes (not of votes /or electors, but votes of electors), it was 
 all a part in the series of movements that had for their pur- 
 pose the transaction of the political act of bringing into 
 office a President of the United States; and that the two 
 Houses of Congress, under the Constitution as it reads, must 
 discharge, when the President of the Senate opened the cer- 
 tificates, that duty on those certificates alone, unless by some 
 prior legislation of Congress — putting in execution, and thus 
 interpreting, some other powers that they assumed to possess, 
 in their construction of the Constitution — Congress had 
 provided legal means for the exercise of such further powers. 
 The terms of this act carefully observed the limitation that 
 this act was not to be interpreted as carrying any congres- 
 sional powers that were determined and created by the act 
 or any interpretation to be put upon it in its own terms, but 
 that this act was to carry only such powers as were in the 
 two Houses under existing law, and as solely determinable by 
 the Constitution and existing law. 
 
 As a primary consideration, then, as in the Florida case, 
 it is to be determined not as an abstract question. Let me 
 ask the Commission to consider that it is to determine, not 
 
THE DISPITKI) ri{KSII)KNTIAL ELECTION 301 
 
 wliat hvpotlu'tical proofs might he received, Imi wliat i)roofs 
 within tlie offers are riglitfiilly to he received and added to 
 tile elements and t'nnds of ])roof which the papers opened hy 
 the Vresiik^it of the Senate themselves disclose. 
 
 What then is the offer of ])roof, not in its details, bnt in 
 its principles? What is the state of proof as ])resente(l on 
 the certificates in aid or sn]:)plement or contradiction of 
 which this proof aliunde is to be introduced? The first certifi- 
 cate contains in itself ever^- certainty and every conclusive 
 credential that the laws and the Constitution of the United 
 States or of the State of Louisiana prescribe. This certifi- 
 cate also discloses a special state of facts concerning two of 
 the electors who cast their votes ; I mean Levissee and Brew- 
 ster; this special state of facts, that being among the electors 
 that were voted for and that were covered by the governor's 
 certificate, when the electoral college met they were not in 
 attendance; that the statute prescribed that their attendance 
 should be waited for until four o'clock in the afternoon of the 
 day, and that for non-attendance by itself and of itself alone 
 on the part of any person chosen or accredited by the action 
 of the State authorities, the vacancy thus created should be 
 filled by the acting electors; that at that moment, on that 
 fact, the college of electors proceeded and chose these same 
 men, wlio thereafter on that title took their seats in the elec- 
 toral college and voted, and are to be counted or disparaged 
 on that showing, to wit, the entire showing of this certificate 
 opened by the President of the Senate. 
 
 Beyond that there is not in this argument about evidence 
 :iny ])arHrular circumstance that I care to call attention to 
 in regard lo that first certificate; nor do I need certainly to 
 make any addition to the o})servations already made to dis- 
 cuss the sec(md certificate at all. 
 
 What j)roof, tlicn, is offered? I now proceed to discuss 
 it as matter of proof as to its a])plication and where its effect, 
 if at all, is to ]>v ex])ected. 
 
302 SPEECHES OF AVIELIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 In tlie first place, the offers of jjroof do not seek, any of 
 them, to disparage the truth of that certificate; I mean its 
 truth as made up of the elements of the governor's certifica- 
 tion of the fact in the State's action that he is to certify, nor 
 any impeachment of the transaction which by the certificate 
 is shown to have taken place in the election. No proof 
 offered touches that space in the transaction, or questions 
 the governor's right to certify, his right by being governor to 
 certify, or that the fact in the culminating and recorded 
 result of the election in the State comports with the fact 
 that he did so, nor on the point that Brewster and Levissee 
 came into the electoral college on the transaction preserved 
 in the minutes of the electoral college as presented here. If 
 we look at the offers of proof, we see that at once. So far 
 from introducing, therefore, any element of proof that is to 
 separate the governor's certificate from the thing certified, 
 or that is to disparage the governor's right under the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, these offers of proof expressly 
 concede that condition of things, and plant themselves 
 wholly upon something antecedent in the State's transaction 
 to this action of the governor, and which is the occasion of 
 this action of the governor, to wit, the action in the State 
 which produces the recorded result on which the governor 
 must certify. 
 
 In the first place, we are saved any question, and I think 
 we might have been saved any argument, about Governor 
 Kellogg's being a de facto governor, filling the office and per- 
 forming its duties, for they offer under their first head to 
 prove '"that said Kellogg was governor de facto of said State 
 during the months of November and December, A. D. 1876." 
 Then, when you come to other offers concerning the dis- 
 qualification of Levissee and of Brewster, found on the seven- 
 teenth page, you will observe that there is not the least 
 proposition that on the 6th day of December, when these two 
 men came into the office of elector by the choice of the elec- 
 
THE DISPTTED PRESIDEXTTAL ELECTION 303 
 
 toral college filling the vacancies, they were nnrler any dis- 
 fliialification wliatever. The i)roposition is — I read now 
 from what is called the fourth i)roposition — 
 
 That on the 7th day of Noveinhcr, A. D. 1870, A. B. I^vissee, 
 who was one of the pretended college of electors of the State of 
 Louisiana, . . . was at the liuie of such election a court coui- 
 inissioner of the circuit court of the United States for the district 
 of Louisiana. 
 
 And for Brewster in the same way. The oflFer of proof, 
 then, falls entirely short of dis])ara<>ing their ca])acity to re- 
 ceive an election on the 6tli day of December, and the proof 
 does not offer to contradict the transaction by which they 
 came in through the vote of the electoral college as displayed 
 in the certificate. 
 
 Now, in regard to the substantive matters of proof, so far 
 from being obliged to rest upon the proposition that there is 
 no offer to intervene with proof between the recorded result 
 of the election and the governor's certificate to that result, 
 as producing these electors and no others, the offers of proof 
 are affirmative in their propositions that that state of facts 
 does exist, and is part of the things that they are able 
 and ready to prove. I ask attention to this principal offer 
 of proof, which is, I suppose, the one on page 13, the last 
 paragraph but one on the page: 
 
 And the .said returning-hoard, in further pursuance and execu- 
 tion of said unlawful conil)ination and conspiracy, knowinii;ly, 
 willfully, falsely, and fraudulently did make a certificate and 
 return to the secretary of state that said Kelloj,'^, Burch, Joseph, 
 Sheldon, Marks, Levissee, Brewster, and Joffrion had received 
 majorities of all the legal votes cast at said election of Novem- 
 ber 7, 1876, for presidential electors, they then and there well 
 knowing that the said McEnery, Wickliffe, St. Martin, Poche, 
 De Blanc, Seay, Cohh, and Cro.^^s had received majorities of all 
 the votes cast at said election for prcsitlential electors, and were 
 duly elected as the presidential electors of said State. 
 
304 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And that the said returning-board, in making said statement, 
 certificate, and return to the secretary of state, were not deceived 
 nor mistaken in the premises, but knowingly, willfully, and 
 fraudulently made what they well knew when they made it was 
 a false and fraudulent statement, certificate, and return; and that 
 the said false and fraudulent statement, certificate and return, 
 made by said returning-board to the secretary of state in that 
 behalf, was made by the members of said returning-board in pur- 
 suance and execution of, and only in pursuance and execution of, 
 said unlawful combination and conspiracy. 
 
 We have, then, in the offers of proof a recognition of the 
 fact that the governor's certificate in number 1 is by the 
 acting governor of the State; that it is of a fact which 
 has been deliberately produced and made of record in the 
 proper oflBce of that State; that by the authority intrusted 
 with that final act of canvass and certification these elect- 
 ors did receive a majority of the legal votes in the State 
 of Louisana; that that was done mala fide and fraudulently. 
 It was then done. The act w^as consummated. You are 
 relieved, therefore, from any disturbance of this definite and 
 limited proposition of whether it is competent for the two 
 Houses of Congress to penetrate the action of the State and 
 determine, first, whether it conforms to the real facts of the 
 election as deducible through successive steps from the de- 
 posit of the votes in the ballot-box; and secondly, whether, 
 though conforming to legal authority, it has been a corrupt, 
 mala fide transaction. 
 
 It is necessary for us, then, before we can approach defi- 
 nitely the consideration of whether any of this proof can be 
 offered, to understand at least what the laws of Louisiana 
 are; not that it will follow that we have any right here to 
 consider the conformity of the action of the canvassers or 
 any of the subordinate functionaries in the election or of the 
 voters themselves to that law, but that we may see at least 
 upon what state of statutory enactments these objectors 
 seek to base their question of the action had in these subor- 
 dinate departments of the transaction. 
 
THE DISPITEI) PRESIDEXTIAI. ELECTION .'^05 
 
 I confess to an inal>ility to understand flial tliero should 
 really exist any confusion on this subject as to what the stat- 
 utory enactments in force — I mean on their face — were. 
 This election, as it took ])lace on the 7th of November, in the 
 ])riuiary deposit of the votes, was concluded later in the year 
 l)v the final result of the canvass certified and recorded. 
 Some confusion. T am afraid, has been made out of the at- 
 tempt to shorten a little the re])rint, so useful in all ])articu- 
 lars. made under the direction of the Commission. I have 
 before me the session laws of 1868. In the acts of that ses- 
 sion are found two independt^nt acts on independent subjects, 
 both of which were in force until either or both of them were 
 repealed. They were not inconsistent; and they were not 
 in pari materia, unless so far as that some portion of an enact- 
 ment that might have been included in a general law, and 
 was not. was included in the sjiecial or particular law to which 
 I shall call attention. The first of these acts is found at 
 page 218 of the session laws and is numbered 164. Its title 
 is "Relative to elections in the State of Louisiana and to en- 
 force article 103 of the Constitution of the State." 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Tiiurman: AYhere is that in this 
 pamphlet which has been printed for us? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I do not think it is there. Subsequent 
 laws that are supposed to have taken its place have been 
 printed, but this has not been printed at all. A portion of 
 the revised statutes is printed, and someliody has put at the 
 top of it "laws of 1868." It is not a print of any part of the 
 law of 1868. It is a reproduction of certain sections of the 
 revised statutes which were passed in 1870. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Arrot: It was stated to us that this 
 revision aiul the law of 18(>S were precisely the same. . 
 
 ]Mr. Evarts: I will proceed with my argument, if you 
 please, because my object is to show exactly how the thing 
 does run. 'i'liat law printed on that page is not any part of 
 the law (liat I \\n\v asked your attention to thus far; it is 
 
 21 
 
306 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 not a reproduction of that; it has nothing to do with it. 
 There is another law of 1868. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley : That law is a general elec- 
 tion law. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: A general election law to enforce article 
 103 of the Constitution. On page 245, No. 193, is another 
 law, of which I will read the title, to wit: "Relative to 
 presidential electors. " That is a short act. It contains in 
 its first section an attribution of the conduct of their elec- 
 tion to the provisions of the general election law: 
 
 And such election shall be held and conducted in the manner 
 and form provided by law for general State elections. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Mr. Evarts, while you are 
 on that, I wish to ask a question for information. I have 
 tried to get hold of those acts of 1868 for about twenty-four 
 hours, but have been unable to do so. Does that first sec- 
 tion commence in this way: "In every year in which," etc.? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: It does. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: And the thirty-fifth sec- 
 tion of the act of 1868 is in the same terms exactly. These 
 two are copies of one another, are they not? I wish to as- 
 certain that fact. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I will look. The thirty -fifth section of the 
 act of 1868? 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: No; that comes into the act of 1870, if at 
 all. There is nothing of the kind in the act of 1868. There 
 is section 32 of the act of 1868, which I will read. I will 
 read not section 35, but section 32, which relates to the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Edmunds: Which of these two acts 
 do you read from? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: The general election law of 1868, which 
 begins on page 218 of the session laws of that year. 
 
IHi: DISrUTED PRESIDENTIAT. ELECTION 307 
 
 Mlv. C'u.M.MI.SSlONEH Till H.MAN : Wluit is tllC (lillc of it? 
 
 Mk. Evarts: It is the IDtli of Octol)or, 18G8. Tliis is 
 section 3'"2, wliieli is probably the section to which Mr. Justice 
 Bradley had reference. 
 
 That in every year in which an election shall he held lor electors 
 of President and Vice-President of the United States, such elec- 
 tion shall be held on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in 
 the month of November, in accordance with the act of the Congress 
 of the United States approved January 23, 1845, and such election 
 shall be held and conducted in the manner and form provided by 
 law for general State elections. 
 
 Which is, I believe, an accurate statement. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: An exact coi)y. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: It is identical with the first section of the 
 presidential-electors statute. Now, in this presidential-elec- 
 tors act there are two provisions which do bear on the 
 questions which we are to discuss as to the proper method 
 of carrying on, certifying, and canvassing the election held 
 last November. There is no doubt about that, if thev were 
 in force, and I will ask attention to them. The first is sec- 
 tion 4 on page 245 of the session laws of 1868: 
 
 Immediately after the receipt of a return from each parish, or 
 on the fourth ^Monday of November if the returns should not 
 sooner arrive, the governor, in the presence of the secretary of 
 state, the attorney-general, a district judge of the district in which 
 the seat of government may be established, or any two of them, 
 shall examine the returns and ascertain therefrom the seven per- 
 sons who have been duly elected electors. 
 
 Then there are certain administrative provisions which 
 are not im])ortant. 
 
 Then section 8 on the same page. 
 
 Mr, Commissioner Bradley: It speaks of ".seven ])cr- 
 sons" thcr(>. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: That word is there; the State then was 
 entitled to seven electors. I'hc eighth section is: 
 
308 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 If any one or more of the electors chosen by the people shall 
 fail from any cause whatever to attend at the appointed place at 
 the hour of four p. m. of the day prescribed for their meeting, it 
 shall be the duty of the other electors immediately to proceed to 
 ballot to supply such vacancy or vacancies. 
 
 Our learned and ingenious friend, Mr. Carpenter, brought 
 your honors to this result from his discussion, that it was 
 wholly immaterial to the practical result in this case whether 
 you hold that the law was repealed or whether you hold that 
 it was in force; he contending that, if it was repealed so as 
 to carry down the canvassing section, and therefore make 
 the canvas proper by this canvassing-board — I mean in 
 respect to its authority — then section 8, being carried down, 
 the power to fill vacancies did not exist, and two vacancies 
 were therefore left in the college of electors, which, as he said, 
 would be enough for his purpose, and which is true; two 
 vacancies are enough, perhaps one. But we are under no 
 such alternative as that. By the subsequent laws, the can- 
 vassing section was repealed, and by no subsequent laws 
 was the rest of the electoral act affected. That is a prop- 
 osition which at once liberates us and this Commission from 
 any confusion or from any resort to either of the horns of 
 the dilemma. 
 
 On what does our proposition rest.^^ — for it needs but to be 
 stated to be understood, and the laws need but to be pointed 
 out to carry the evidence of what the existing state of law 
 was in Louisiana in 1876. There came about in 1870 a 
 revision of the statutes of the State of Louisiana, not a re- 
 peal, not a re-enactment, but a revision of the laws that were 
 or were understood to be in force, in regard to which the 
 fiat of the legislature was to be impressed upon them that 
 they were the laws in force, a transaction entirely similar to 
 that which took place in Congress in the production of the 
 Revised Statutes of the United States, under which we now 
 are. In this revision which I read from, a book published 
 in 1876— 
 
THE DISPITED PlfESIDEXriAE ELECTION :{0i) 
 
 Mh. Commissioner Bradley: T liavc the original. 
 
 ^lu. P^ARTs: We shall he greatly obliged to you if we 
 can get the ]Kiges from that. My friend who provided this 
 book could not find the other in the library; we were obliged 
 to resort to this; but the sections, as I understand, are the 
 same. I shall be very glad to refer to that volume instead 
 of this for those two laws, and I will give the citations as 
 they shall be determined; but for the purpose of my present 
 argument, without giving pages, I can now say how the mat- 
 ter stood on these revised statutes. In the first place, there 
 was a statute entitled "Elections," and it was, we will 
 assume, the statute of 1868. So far as I know, there is 
 nothing to be said on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Edmunds: You mean by that, that 
 there is a head in the revised statutes "Elections"? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: A head in the revised statutes called "Elec- 
 tions." I will now give the page, to avoid confusion, that 
 is found in this edition of the revised statutes of Louisiana 
 l>rinted in the year they were passed, in 1870. It is page 
 272, and it is headed in the margin by these figures, " 1868, 
 218," which means this law that I have read. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Garfield. The same reference that 
 vou made to the session acts of 1868. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: The same reference. Then there comes, 
 after exhausting, I believe, the general provisions about elec- 
 tions, grouped under this general title of "Elections," a 
 statute concerning contested elections, which in the same 
 manner is referred to as a statute of 1865, page 408. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Edmunds: Is that in the same title.' 
 
 Mr. Evarts: The same title. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Under the same title, but 
 at the end. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Exhausting the general election law, you 
 then come into an indej)endent subject, and that is "Con- 
 tested Elections," and there is r(>])rinted another law not 
 
310 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM JVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 material for us to consider, but it is reprinted and referred to 
 as a law already in existence. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Thurman: Are you reading from 
 the revised statutes of 1870? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I am; and the edition of 1870, which is 
 the proper one to refer to. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Thurman: Was that passed as 
 one act? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Passed as one act. Then we have another 
 title in these revised statutes separated by one hundred 
 pages, and indeed the arrangement is, I think, alphabetical, 
 and the title of this section of the revised statutes is "Presi- 
 dential Electors." That is at page 550. It begins by 
 reciting the acts of Congress, and then it proceeds in ten sec- 
 tions, numbered from 2823 to 2832, which contain the elec- 
 tion law, and the heading in the margin of this is "1868, 
 245." Nine of the sections, to 2831 inclusive, are embraced 
 in that notation, and in fact in the act of 1868 section 2832 
 is noted as a section proceeding from the act of 1855, 481, 
 and is simply, "when a new parish shall be established, it 
 shall form a part of the district to which it belonged previous 
 to its change of organization." 
 
 Those two laws, being for our purposes as the two laws of 
 1868, were in force when these revised statutes came into 
 operation, unless by actual repeal, or by the methods of 
 legislation which operate repeal, before these revised stat- 
 utes went into operation, a repeal of one or the other of them 
 in some part had taken place. These were passed on the 
 14th day of March, 1870; and on the 16th day of March, 1870, 
 a law was passed, which was printed and is to be found in the 
 first edition of this compilation which .is without a cover, and I 
 will refer to the act of 1870 itself in pursuance of my previous 
 intention. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Edmunds: Is there any law or 
 provision of the constitution in Louisiana which provides 
 
THE DISrUTED PHESIDENTIAL KI.ECTION .'HI 
 
 ^nMiorally at what time acts passed at a session shall take 
 efl'ect? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: 1 tlo not know whether there is or not. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: These acts that we refer 
 to, all declare the time when thev shall take effect. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I do not nnderstand that there is any 
 general provision, and as a matter of fact the general declara- 
 tion of the acts is that they shall take effect from and after 
 their passage. There was passed in 1870, on the IGth day of 
 March, an act which is found in the session laws of 1870, at 
 page 145; it is numbered 100. I will read the title of this 
 act : 
 
 To regulate the conduct and to uuiiutain the freedom and 
 purity of election; to prescribe the mode of making and designate 
 the officers who shall make the returns thereof; to prevent fraud, 
 violence, intimitiation, etc.; limiting the powers and duties of 
 sheriffs; and to enforce article 108 of the Constitution. 
 
 The title of this act is the same as that of the election act 
 of 1868 in its general purpose to regulate elections and en- 
 force article 103 of the Constitution. This act provides, 
 at section 54: 
 
 That the governor, the lieutenant-governor, the secretary of 
 state, and John Lynch, and T. C. Anderson, or a majority of them, 
 shall be the returning-officers for all elections in this State. 
 
 There is no other description and no limitation; they are 
 "the returning-officers for all elections in this State''; and 
 there is at section 85, the final section of the act, this re- 
 pealing clause: 
 
 That all laws or parts of laws contrary to the provisions of this 
 act, and all laws relating to the same subject-matter, are hereby 
 repealed; and this act shall take effect from and after its passage. 
 
 \Miat went down under tiiat repeal? In the first place, 
 U])on general principles, all of the revised statutes that was 
 on I tic tillc ol' " i^Icclions" and enforciuL^ liiis aiiiclc of I lie 
 
312 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM JVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Constitution, No. 103, and all parts of other laws that were 
 within the purview of the conduct of elections, any election 
 held in that State, and no other parts of such laws, were re- 
 pealed by that section. You have, then, in the general start 
 of the first section of the act, a provision "that all elections 
 for State, parish, and judicial officers, members of the general 
 assembly, and for members of Congress, shall be held on the 
 first Monday in November; and said elections shall be styled 
 the general elections. They shall be held in the manner and 
 form, and subject to the regulations hereinafter prescribed, 
 and in no other." 
 
 Then the provisions go on. Section 35 of this act, which 
 is the number which was in Mr. Justice Bradley's mind, is 
 the equivalent of section 32 in the general election act of 
 1868, and is identical with section 1 of the electoral act of 
 1868. It is reproduced here as section 35; so that we have 
 a provision that all general elections so called shall take place 
 on the first Monday of November; that an election for 
 electors shall take place on the first Tuesday after the first 
 Monday in November, according to the provision of the 
 act of Congress; and then, in a section coming after the de- 
 scription of general elections, and after the section that has 
 relation to presidential electors, you have the fifty-fourth 
 section, which provides that the canvassing-board there 
 provided "Shall be the returning-officers," not for all gen- 
 eral elections, but "for all elections held in this State," 
 covering by necessary statutory construction the elections 
 that had been mentioned preceding, some of which were 
 called elections of State ofiicers, members of Congress, etc., 
 and called general elections, and one which was called a pres- 
 idential election. 
 
 The election of 1872 was held under that law. Did any- 
 body in the State of Louisiana conceive that the governor 
 was to canvass? Some question was raised about whether 
 the act of 1872, which was passed on the 20th of November, 
 
THE DISPITED rUESIDKNTIAL ELECTION 313 
 
 providing anotlior roturning-board, was in operation; but 
 the courts of the State, in the authorities that have been 
 proposed for your honors' consideration by my learned as- 
 sociates, disposed of tliis question as to who were the re- 
 turning-board and the canvassing-board, being one and the 
 same thing, on Xovem})er, 187'-2, })rior to the 2()th of Novem- 
 ber of that year. Therefore the wliok' operation of this act 
 of 1870, in repeal of this or that ]:)ortion of the independent 
 acts — the general-election act and the i)residential electors' 
 act — was not an act concerning their election, but concern- 
 ing their discharge of their duties; giving them nothing but 
 the State apparatus, unvaried except in a canvassing-board. 
 Now what the canvassing-board of 1868 for general elections 
 was, I have not stopped to inquire; whether it was the same 
 governor or not, it is not material here. Now comes the 
 act of 1872, which is reproduced. 
 
 jNTr. ( Ommissioner Bradley: Right here is a matter 
 which I wish to understand. The digest of the statutes, 
 made innnediately after the revision and published in Jan- 
 uary, 1871, contains these two titles which the revision does, 
 the title "Elections" and the title "Presidential Electors." 
 The digest was made by John Ray, under the direction of 
 the committee of revision; and in that digest, under the 
 head of "Elections," he inserts the act of 1870 instead of the 
 act of 18G8, and under the head of "Presidential Electors" 
 inserts the same title that the revision contained, with the 
 exception that the section establishing the returning-board 
 replaces the original canvass. This seems to indicate the 
 opinion of ilie profession at that time as to the state of the 
 law. What effect it would have, I do not know. 
 
 Mr. Evart.s: In other words, what we now contend for. 
 that the .section which gave a .special canvassing-board for 
 presidential electors was repealed by the act of 1S70, and llic 
 rest of the statute, and which had nothing to do willi their 
 election but only with their conduct as electors after thev 
 
314 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM IVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 were elected, was left standing; and Mr. Justice Bradley 
 enables me to refer to a digest of the statutes of Louisiana. 
 In volume 2 of that digest, at page 356, is found the electoral 
 law, and it is attributed under its various sections to the 
 acts on which it is supposed to rest. The first section is at- 
 tributed to the act of 1870, page 145. This is substantially 
 the same section as is found in the act of 1868. Then the 
 second section is attributed to the act of 1868, page 245; 
 the third the same. The fourth, which is the provision of a 
 returning-board, takes the section that makes the governor, 
 the lieutenant-governor, the secretary of state, John Lynch, 
 and T. C. Anderson, the returning-board, and attributes that 
 to the act of 1870, page 145. And then it goes on, resum- 
 ing at the fifth section its attribution to the act of 1868, 
 page 245, and in the sixth section is reproduced the provision 
 about electors filling their vacancies. This act is found on 
 page 355 and page 358 of the second volume of this digest, 
 published under the authority of the State in 1870. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bayard: Does it contain no memo- 
 randum of the date when it was passed .-* 
 
 Mr. Evarts : I have stated that these sections which are 
 thus digested are each referred to their appropriate origin- 
 ating statute. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Here is the act under which 
 the digest was made, Mr. Evarts, showing that it had a 
 quasi-authority. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: It is very apparent that this is no new con- 
 struction that we are putting upon the force of the repeahng 
 act. It is the published construction, in the authorized 
 publication of the statutes in the form of a digest, followed 
 by the courts, and accepted by the profession. The novelty 
 is in the stress that now here for the first time seeks to pro- 
 duce a collapse of statutory law in order to destroy an 
 election. Did any of those eminent lawyers that attended 
 in New Orleans through the month of November suggest to 
 
THE DISPUTED PUESIDENTIAL ELECTION 315 
 
 GoN'eriior Kollo^'^' to canvass these votes for ])residential 
 electors? And now the vice, the fault, the irremediable 
 wound of this election is that Governor Kellogg did not can- 
 vass them! 
 
 The act of 1872 takes up this whole subject and substi- 
 tutes itself for the act of 1870 and repeals all existing regu- 
 lations that i)roperly are in the very matter of conduct and 
 regulation of elections in general, and all special provisions 
 found in any other act that are at variance with the imposi- 
 tion of its form, its methods, and its agents on all elections 
 held in the State. But the act of 1870 had already excluded 
 the section of the electoral law that related to canvass, and 
 excluded that alone, and left standing the clause that re- 
 lates to the conduct of the electoral college, among other 
 things, in filling vacancies. 
 
 Now, I have satisfied your honors that not only was it 
 wholly immaterial which of Mr. Carpenter's views you 
 adopted, but it was immaterial that you adopted them both, 
 for the subsequent legislation had left the matter in this 
 shape, that the canvassing-board for all elections had been 
 applied to presidential elections, and the conduct of the elec- 
 toral college, after it was elected, in its transaction under the 
 laws of the State and of the United States, was left wholly 
 untouched, as it well might be. What change could you 
 have made, what change was needed.^ That is not the point; 
 but the point is that the legislature had suppressed presi- 
 dential elections by having no law under which they could 
 be conducted. Well, if there is any State that in the elec- 
 tion of 1872 or in anticipation of the election of 187G has 
 had the attention of all its citizens, all its lawyers, all its 
 judges, all its politicians, all its honest men attracted to it, 
 it is the State of Louisiana; and they all thought that they 
 could elect presidential electors, and one political party 
 was perfectly convinced that it had, and the other political 
 party was j)erfectly convinced that it had, antl the only (pies- 
 
316 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion was which of the two sets produced by this birth was the 
 genuine child. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Frelinghuysen: Mr. Evarts, did 
 you refer to the act authorizing the revision? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I beg pardon. That is in the first vohime of 
 the digest. It is an act passed on the 16th of March, 1870, 
 the very day this act was passed: 
 
 That John Ray be, and is hereby appointed, and authorized to 
 compile a digest of the statutes of the State of general character 
 from the acts passed at the present session of the general assembly, 
 including the act of revision, and to superintend the printing, and 
 that such digests and codes be stereotj^jed and printed as required, 
 etc. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Morton: Was there a provision 
 requiring that digest to be subsequently submitted to the 
 legislature before it went into force? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I think not. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: There was not. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I cannot say without looking at the act, 
 because this is only one section of the act that answers the 
 purpose of advertising the book. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: It was submitted to the 
 committee of revision. The act required that, and that was 
 
 all. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: It was to be submitted to the committee of 
 revision, Mr. Justice Bradley suggests, of that session which 
 conducted this whole matter. Here is a little act, which is 
 at page 80 of the session laws of 1870, "An act giving prece- 
 dence in authority to all the other acts and joint resolutions 
 passed by the general assembly at this session over the acts 
 known as 'the revision of the statutes, and of the civil code 
 and code of practice,' when there exists any conflict in the 
 provisions of said acts and revisions." I think nothing 
 could be made clearer than that. 
 
 We have, then, the proposition that our act of 1870 was 
 
THE DISPUTED rKESIDEX'llAI. ELECTIOxX 317 
 
 passed two days after the revision — enough of itself to amend 
 it. They did not pass an unaniendahle revision. Thev 
 passed a revision that when it eanie into foree had all the 
 dilapidation which has been aeeoini)lished in its frame 
 by all the legislation of that session of 1870. Such pro- 
 visions are necessary. Something similar to that was the 
 arrangement in which your recent great work of revision 
 was carried on. This law, then, as to what its text is, is 
 understood: Whatever there is in the election law of Louis- 
 iana that governs, gives authority in, prescribes methods of 
 the election of others in that State, applies to the presiden- 
 tial electors' elections, and nothing that reaches the conduct 
 of the electors after their election is different from the act 
 as it stood in 1868. 
 
 In the act of 1872, which governed, of course, the election 
 of 1876, there are provisions, mainly of sections 3 and 26, 
 which include the powers, and prescribe the methods of 
 their execution, accorded to this returning-board ; and those 
 powers were exercisable according to the law of Louisiana 
 and exercisable in reference to the election of electors just 
 as well as in regard to any other officers of the State; and 
 in regard to their exercise in respect to the election of presi- 
 dential electors the Government of the United States had 
 no more i)ower and authority than it had in regard to any 
 other election in that State. Why should it.^ It would 
 have been verj^ easy to have inserted in the Constitution of 
 the United States a provision which, while it fixed in the 
 frame of the government the j)ower of election in the States, 
 had made Congress the judges of the elections, of the re- 
 turns, and of the certificates of electors. That might have 
 been done; but if it had been done, all that had been done 
 by the convention up to that time would have been amiulled, 
 for the independence of the State's tran.saction would have 
 been subjected to the i)olitical authority of the United States, 
 ungoverned by any paramount dominion over it; and our 
 
318 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ancestors that would not let the little finger of Federal in- 
 fluence be inserted into the State election by having a Fed- 
 eral ofiicer voted for by it, is now laying the thickness of a 
 hand on the State election by judging of the election, the 
 qualifications, and the returns. 
 
 I ask the eminent lawyers who are to stand by their propo- 
 sition, if there is one particle of power possessed by the 
 Houses of Congress, or that was ever exercised by them in the 
 experience of this Government, in searching the elections, the 
 returns, and the qualifications of members of Congress, that 
 falls within the whole range of this proposition of proof? 
 Is it not offered to you as the measure and the means and 
 the resort of your inspection of the Louisiana election of 
 electors? Could you do anything more? Where do you 
 get the right to do what you do about members of Congress ? 
 You could not get it by mere parliamentary law; and the 
 framers of the Constitution put it in that there might be no 
 doubt about it; for the jurisdiction of Parliament to judge 
 of the qualifications of its members is a resident and remain- 
 ing part of its authority as the great court of the realm. 
 For, according to the principles of the common law, the exe- 
 cution of a writ is to be determined bv the court where it is 
 returnable; and when the Crown issues its writ to the bur- 
 gesses and shires it is returnable in Parliament, and Parlia- 
 ment judges of the return. But w^hen you are making a 
 complex frame of government and distributing authority 
 between the States and the General Government, you must 
 determine exactly how far the States are to have authority 
 on the subject of this election of members of Congress and 
 how much is to belong to the Federal Government. In 
 other words, while the States are allowed to provide for the 
 election of Congressmen and while the suffrage is measured 
 out by the Constitution to be the same that they accord to 
 the lower house of representatives in the States, yet there is 
 secured to Congress the power of making and altering those 
 
TirE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 310 
 
 regulations; and this final political power acts, irresponsible 
 for the exercise of its will; will governed by duty, if you 
 j)lease, but will not controlled by. any authority of law. 
 And now it is gravely jiretended here, not in terms — for the 
 ett'rontery of the pro])osition would afi'right the lawj'er that 
 made it — but on the basis of that ofi'er of j)roof they ask you 
 to ascribe to the two Houses of Congress, when met to count 
 the vote, with the President of the Senate in the chair, 
 precisely the same power in extent, in measure, in uncon- 
 trolled execution, that is attributed to the election of mem- 
 bers of Congress. 
 
 Whv did not the wise framers of the Constitution sav so 
 if they meant that? x\nd how could they anticipate that the 
 whole s])irit and purpose of excluding Federal authority in 
 the choice and the election and tlie certification of the choice 
 of electors should be perverted into the monstrous claim that 
 an uncontrolled political authority rests in the two Houses 
 of Congress to sift and sift, discard, discount, destroy the 
 election, and make such men as it chooses, or annul the vote 
 of a State when it will answer the purpose, as it will here 
 upon this pretension of authority? 
 
 If any further elucidation of my general views is needed, 
 I must respectfully ask attention to the reported arguments 
 of Mr. Matthews and myself in the Florida case. 
 
 I now come to consider the verj' matter of the proof 
 offered. How about these Federal disqualifications? We 
 talked about that subject in the Florida case. It so hap- 
 pened that the proofs which were allowed provisionally did 
 not raise the fpiestion there; but our proj)ositions are un- 
 changed. In the al>sence of congressional regulation furn- 
 ishing the appropriate, adequate, seasonable means to purge 
 the lists that the governor has certified, on the Federal dis- 
 (|Ualifications that should discard an elector, the two Houses, 
 met in the i)resence of the President of the Senate, cannot 
 wx^cute the Constitution; and you can do no more. They 
 
320 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 are elected; they are acting; they are certifying, for there 
 is nothing in that idea of the subject at all that a man 
 made ineligible cannot be elected. You might as well say 
 that the forbidden fruit could not be eaten because it was for- 
 bidden. I ask attention to an authority of great weight, the 
 supreme court of Pennsylvania, where Gibson, justice, gives 
 the opinion before he was chief justice in 11 Sergeant & 
 Rawle's Reports, page 411. I cannot detail the particular 
 circumstances of the case; but these observations are in 
 point in that case and are important here. It is the case of 
 Baird vs. The Bank of Washington: 
 
 The bank was governed by thirteen directors, five of whom were 
 competent to the business of ordinary discounts, but nothing less 
 than a majority of the whole number constituted a quonmi for 
 transacting any other business. At the meeting of the 11th of 
 August, just spoken of, only seven members, including George 
 Baird, were present, when the vote was taken; so that if he were 
 not a director, either de facto or de jure, there was at that moment 
 not a quorum present, and hence a question as to the validity of 
 his appointment is thought to be material. As has been just said, 
 to constitute a quorum competent to fill vacancies or transact 
 any other business than that of ordinary discounts required a 
 majority of the whole number of the directors; and this gentleman 
 was elected at a meeting at which only five were present, so that 
 originally his election was unquestionably invalid. And this 
 brings us to the first question, whether he is to be considered as an 
 officer de facto, or as an usurper. The judge who tried the cause 
 was of opinion that his election was not merely irregular as to 
 time, place, or notice of it, and therefore voidable, but that it was 
 absolutely void; and that he was an unauthorized agent, who could 
 do no act to bind the bank; in other words, that he was an usurper. 
 
 In analogy to the distinction between judicial proceedings that 
 are absolutely void for want of jurisdiction and those that are 
 only voidable for irregularity, there is something extremely plaus- 
 ible in this opinion. Still, however, it will be found that the ques- 
 tion does not depend on whether the appointment is void or only 
 voidable, or whether it emanated from an authority which had 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 321 
 
 full power to make it; but whether tlie officer has come in under 
 color of right or in open contempt of all right whatever. {The 
 King vs. Leslie, Ans. Kep., 163; S. C, 2 Strs., 190.) This distinc- 
 tion runs through all the cases. Where an abbot or parson, in- 
 ducted erroneously, and having made a grant or obligation, is 
 afterward deprived of his benefice, this shall bind; but the deed of 
 one who usurps before installation or induction, or who enters 
 and occupies in the time of vacation without election or presen- 
 tation, is void. So, if one occupies as abbot of his own head, 
 without installation or induction, his deed shall not bind the house. 
 
 McEnary acted "of his own head"; doubtless a very good 
 head, but "of his own head" and nothing else, and the 
 electors named on the second certificate were hurried to ex- 
 ecute on the 6tli of December an office into which they had 
 not been inducted, into which they had not been installed, 
 did it "of their ow^n head"; but they might have been 
 prompted. You can put ideas into one's head; nevertheless 
 it is his own head that he acts upon. 
 
 In the case at bar, the Court put the matter on the ground that 
 five directors did not constitute a board for any other business 
 than that of ordinary discounts; and that, having no right to go 
 into an election at all, their act could not give color of right. IJut 
 in Harris vs. Jays, Cro. Eliz., 609, it was conceded that the Queen's 
 auditor and surveyor had not the right to appoint the steward for 
 the manor in fiuestion; yet it was resolved that a steward ap- 
 pointed by him was an officer de facto, and that his acts were good. 
 This is exactly in point. The incjuiry then is, was there the color of 
 an election in Mr. Haird's case? He was elected by the very body 
 in which the right to elect was vested, the only thing wanting to 
 the ])erfcct validity of the act being the presence of two or more 
 electors. IJut the presence of tiiese would not have changed 
 the board to another and a distinct body; it would still have been 
 the president and directors of the Hank of AVashington. It is 
 impossible, therefore, to say that Mr. Baird usurped the oflice 
 without the seml)lance of right. 
 
 22 
 
322 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now this clause in the judge's opinion I ask particular at- 
 tention to : 
 
 This principle of colorable election holds not only in regard to 
 the right of electing, but also of being elected. A person indispu- 
 putably ineligible may be an officer de facto by color of election 
 (Knight vs. The Corporation of Wells, Lutw., 508). So even where 
 the office was not vacant, but there was an existing officer de jure 
 at the time. 
 
 Perhaps this is the only authority on this subject that I 
 shall need to add to those that were adduced in the argument 
 on the Florida case and that have been presented by my 
 learned associate in this. 
 
 Now suppose that Levissee and Brewster were each of 
 them ineligible. They are elected, they are inducted; they 
 are in execution of the office, and the State is not to be 
 stripped in an execution that is satisfactory to itself by ex- 
 traneous evidence adduced at the moment of counting the 
 votes, that a man was ineligible. Congress must give that 
 consequence by some legislation and some mode of determi- 
 nation, or it cannot arise. 
 
 But here these men are in by the election to fill vacancies. 
 Well, the Oregon brief, contrived not only a double but a 
 treble debt to pay, comes up again to prove that when an 
 ineligible person is elected there has been no election, and 
 from that it is argued that when one out of eight fails to be 
 elected, then there has failed to be an election within the 
 sense that a legislature may fill the place; and then, to make 
 all this applicable to the existing state of law in Louisiana, 
 you are asked to believe, you are asked to hold, against all the 
 authorities, that an elector ineligible is not elected, and that 
 if he has not been elected there is not a vacancy in the college; 
 when one State has said, "Our method of filling any vacancy 
 that shall happen for any cause, any defect of full numbers 
 that shall show itself at 4 o'clock for any reason, is that it 
 shall be filled by the State of Louisiana in this way, that those 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 3^23 
 
 who have been chosen and attend sliall fill the i)lace, " this 
 cannot avail. What more do we need to say? We arrive at 
 the same result. Our learned friends, so precise in language, 
 hold that there not being a vacancy, that an office not being 
 vacant, that there being no vacancy in an office, is equivalent 
 to the office not having been filled; that if it has not been 
 filled it is not vacant. That is the proposition: if it has not 
 been filled, it is not vacant. 
 
 Now, an office is either vacant or full. There are no terms 
 in law between those two qiudifications of being vacant or 
 full. It is not half full; it is not full with an embryo that 
 may grow; it is full or it is vacant. The Constitution of 
 the United States provides that in the case of a vacancy 
 in the representative force of a State in Congress the 
 (iovernor shall issue writs to fill the vacancy. That 
 l)hrase is used. In 1837, at a special session of Congress, 
 commencing I think in Se])tember, some States had no 
 Kepresentatives elected for that Congress. Congress began 
 usually in December. There was time enough to elect them 
 to send them in season, and have the freshest choice of the 
 l)eople. The governor of Mississippi, not desiring that 
 State to be unrepresented in that important special session, 
 issued his writs for a special election to fill the vacancy. 
 Was there a vacancy or not? Certainly our learned friends 
 would have found out a void vacancy in that case. Nobody 
 had jierceived it. Messrs. Gholson and Claiborne were re- 
 turned, and the question came up on their qualification , on 
 the validity of the election, within the power doubtless of 
 Congress; and the House held that they were duly elected, 
 and gave them seats for the full term. They concluded in 
 Mississippi that they would have another election for the rest 
 of the term, and they sent up other persons chosen in Novem- 
 ber at the regular election. So in December we had a nevy 
 choice of Congressmen, and it was concluded I think therj 
 that the adniission of them for the whole Congress w^s 
 erroneous, 
 
324 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Mr. Matthews : The House rescinded the former resolu- 
 tion, and refused to allow the newly elected members to come 
 in, on the ground that the people had been misled as to the 
 time of the election. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: They held them only to be entitled to fill the 
 vacancy, and they did not admit the new people, because 
 they were judges of the whole matter, and concluded that it 
 was better to have another election. What ha])pened then is 
 unimportant; but you can have no better case than that. 
 This is to be found, I think, in the volume of Contested 
 Elections of 1834 to 1865, page 9, and in the fifth volume of 
 the Congressional Globe, pages 80 to 96, and Appendix, 
 page 85. 
 
 Now, then, we say in regard to the Federal disqualifica- 
 tion, no proof can reach the point, none is offered that 
 touches the point, none would be admissible if it did touch 
 the point, because of the want of legislation or of means of 
 ascertaining it. 
 
 I now come to the question of State disqualification. 
 The Constitution of this State of Louisiana has a provision : 
 
 No person shall hold or exercise at the same time more than 
 one office of trust or profit except that of justice of the peace or 
 notary public. 
 
 Governor Kellogg was governor; Governor Kellogg was 
 elector. Some of these other electors held minor offices, it 
 is said. Proof of this fact is offered in regard to the others 
 in order that State disqualification may now be inquired 
 into and verified in the counting of the vote here. There 
 are sufficient answers to this. Let us look at another clause 
 of this Constitution which provides some other disqualifica- 
 tions : 
 
 Art. 99. The following persons shall be prohibited from 
 voting and holding any office: All persons who shall have been 
 convicted of treason, perjury, forgery, bribery, or other crime pun- 
 ishable in the penitentiary, and persons under interdiction; all 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDEX'IIAL ELECTION S25 
 
 persons wlio are estopped from claiming the right of snffrage by 
 al>jnring their allegiance to the United States Government, or by 
 notorionsly le\ying war against it, or adhering to its enemies, 
 giving them aid or comfort, bnt who have not expatriated them- 
 selves nor have been convicted. 
 
 So on with a numerous list of disqualifications for holdiuir 
 any office in the State. Suppose an imputation were made 
 against an elector, in the certified forwarded lists by the elec- 
 toral college and authenticated by the governor, of any of 
 these disqualifications, could vou trv it? Certainlv not. 
 It is a judicial incjuiry. 
 
 But this oflHce of elector, say Mr. Trumbull and Mr. 
 Carpenter, is not a State office. It is not a State office; he is 
 an elector, a representative elector. When he comes into 
 office he holds the office under the Constitution of the 
 United States, and he acquires the office by the action of the 
 State, the function, the right to vote. He is a representative 
 elector. This clause of the Constitution does not say that no 
 officer under that State shall hold a Federal office. The 
 Courts of that State have settled the question that it not 
 only means State officers, but it means constitutional officers. 
 They have not hampered all future legislation of that State 
 with the inconvenience of never having a man a member of 
 two charitable boards, as one of these electors is charged to 
 have been. They have not hampered the future legislation 
 of that State in the trammels of providing that a citizen shall 
 be made useful in no two occupations, employments, or com- 
 missions; but it is constitutional officers that it applies to; 
 and I ask attention to the cases in .5 Louisiana Annual Re- 
 ports, 155; () Louisiana Annual Reports, 175. The case in ■ 
 25 Louisiana Annual U('])orts, 138, 1 think was referred to by 
 Mr. Shellabarger. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Tiiurman: Do you mean to l)e under- 
 stood as admitting that an elector is an officer at all, cither 
 Federal or State? 
 
3^6 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I do not think he is. Certainly he is not a 
 State officer. I do not think he is an officer. I think he is a 
 voter, having quahfications, and his office is of the same 
 kind with the office of a citizen who is an elector, so called 
 in the constitutions of most of the States, but whose qualifica- 
 tions are primary. This is a representative elector and the 
 moment the representative credentials are closed and ac- 
 corded to him, he is then an elector. In other words, he is 
 not a State officer. 
 
 Therefore, there seems to be nothing in that proposition 
 which should produce proof, because proof would be entirely 
 ineffectual, first, for the reason that the inhibition does not 
 prevail; secondly, for the reason, which would apply to the 
 supervisor as well, that there is no provision by any legisla- 
 tion of Congress that can give this action of the two Houses, 
 either in their joint assembly or in this Commission with the 
 rights accorded to it, jurisdiction over the question of fact 
 involved in abuses or violations of the State constitution ; 
 and, further, for the reason, insisted on already, that these 
 provisions of the State constitution do not touch the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, which, while it was careful to ex- 
 clude Federal intervention of office-holders, was not guilty of 
 the folly of saying that no State should accredit as its elector 
 an honored citizen who filled in the affections of the people 
 and the authority of the State a place of trust. If anything, 
 it was desired that these electors should be State notables, 
 men who had the adhesion of their fellow-citizens; and to say 
 that we must take the residuum of public character and of 
 public interest and of public repute after all the State 
 offices are filled, from constable to governor, from whence 
 we cannot have an elector, is imputing a folly to the framers 
 of our Constitution that they are not open to and which can- 
 not be forced upon them by State legislation. 
 
 Governor Ingersoll of Connecticut heads the electoral 
 choice of that State. Every man honors him as a representa- 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 827 
 
 tive of his State. He is Governor. He certifies to himself. 
 He discharges a governor's duly to certify to whomsoever 
 the people choose. He does not make himself an elector. 
 He certifies npon the recorded evidence, as John Adams de- 
 clared that he was President of the United States by the 
 count of the votes. 
 
 This being so, we come to the primary cjuestion of interest 
 to the public, of interest to all citizens, of interest to every 
 man who loves his country, every man who loves its Con- 
 stitution in its spirit of being popular government, obedient 
 to law; and I am at a loss to see that anything that I have to 
 say on this subject should approve itself to one portion of this 
 Commission and be unpalatable to another by reason of any 
 political adhesions of one side or the other. I shall say noth- 
 ing that I would not say as a citizen holding the common 
 ground with all of you who are citizens first and partisans 
 afterward. 
 
 When I talk of the mischiefs in the State of Lousiana, 
 which are attempted to be curbed and robbed of their rapine 
 by the energetic laws of that State, I do not understand that 
 to any man, because his inclinations or his convictions in- 
 cline him in favor of the elevation of Governor Tilden, I am to 
 impute that he looks with less horror upon that subjugation 
 of the suffrage, that degradation of citizenship, that confu- 
 sion of society, that subversion of the Constitution than I do. 
 He only wishes that it should be curbed and redressed by law. 
 And when I speak of the frauds as charged — for I nmst speak 
 of them as charged at this stage of the business, for they have 
 not been proved at all— when I speak of them as charged, 
 involving falsification, oppression, false counting, forgery, 
 conspiracy, every shade of the crimen falsi, am I to be charged 
 in this presence or any other with having more complacency 
 even in the lowest grade of this vice than those who uphold 
 their correction and desire that they shall be frustrated, 
 when I demand that it shall be done bv law? 
 
328 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 That is my demand. Is it a partisan demand? It is the 
 same demand that is made in respect to the gross afflictions 
 which every citizen feels as beaten by the same stripes that 
 were inflicted on the backs of those poor, unbefriended 
 negroes. That is citizenship; it is not partisanship. And 
 when this other vice is added to violence, together ruling the 
 evil in the world — violence and fraud — when that other form 
 is corrupting and afflicting our citizenship, I feel it as bearing 
 a full share of the common shame, whether it be inflicted by 
 the relentless and shameless tyranny of the New York dy- 
 nasty or by the alleged frauds of the Louisiana dynasty. 
 But why is it that fraud is so detestable? Why is it that the 
 law searches for it as with candles and condemns it when it is 
 brought into judgment? Because it is but another form of 
 violence — Fraiis aeqiiiqyaratur vi. That is the reason why the 
 violence that ravishes is no more heinous than the fraud that 
 secretly purloins the virtue and the fame of American 
 citizenship. 
 
 We do not wish to be told that fraud is worse than violence. 
 Its vice is that it robs the act of that consent on which its 
 freedom depends, to the same effect as violence does. Fraud 
 is compared, as in a simile, to the principal evil, itself de- 
 scribed as violence. Here all agree that under the great 
 national transactions that closed the war and under the ex- 
 perience of the condition of society in Louisiana thereafter 
 there was exhibited, not indeed a continuation of armed 
 revolt against the Government, but far from the repose that 
 belongs to peace. There were these outbreaks of a bastard 
 and seditious soldiery, the authors of which, by the laws of 
 war, while flagrant, would all be hanged in either camp. 
 What was the scene? Was it revolt? Was it peace? It 
 was that more dangerous condition of the body-pohtic which, 
 unprobed and uncured, must breed a conflagration both of 
 civil and domestic war. ''Nee tumultus 7iec quies; quale 
 magni metus et magnae irae silentium est," 
 
THE DISPrTEO I'RESIDENTIAL ELECTION .'520 
 
 It is that l)rot)diii<;' silonce of prejjaralioii w liich is to tlcter- 
 iiiiiu' wlietlior oiitbioak shall assert, or whether fear reduced 
 to despair shall surrender, liberty; and to that state of things 
 the independent action of the State of Louisiana was directed. 
 It was to them a real state of things. It was not a state of 
 things to be smiled at at a distance, whichever side the smile 
 came from. It was the brooding of great fear and great 
 wrong over a whole po])ulation, and they undertook to put 
 it into the framework of their Constitution that— The ])rivi- 
 lege of free suffrage shall be suj)])orted by laws regulating 
 elections and ])rohibitiug under adequate penalties all undue 
 influence thereon from power, bribery, tumult, or other im- 
 pro])er practice. 
 
 In pursuance of that duty, imposed upon the legislature by 
 the same indejiendent right, dealing with an actual situation, 
 the legislature imdertook to support the free suffrage, and 
 in their judgment, in the choice they nuide, who can control 
 them? Shall the proud purity of New York City judge of 
 the means to be used in Louisiana.^ Shall the saint-protected 
 postures of Senators and Representatives and judges and 
 advocates judge in the silence of this court room of the 
 means? No. There is but one limit to the means; I mean 
 one limit to be im])o.sed outside that State, under that clause 
 of the Constitution, none in the State, except that these 
 means should be adequate, appropriate, and seasonable, and 
 they might be used. 
 
 Now, eminent statesmen and lawyers say that, when these 
 methods in this law prescribed are resorted to by a State to 
 save itself from the ruin of civil and domestic war, it prevents 
 the State from being considered re|)ublican; and the demon- 
 stration and the proof of what was republican government 
 advanced by the learned counsel. Judge Trumbull, was that 
 if a government needed to be supi)orted by arms, it was not 
 republican. Well, was our Government a monarchy, be- 
 cause we had to sujjport it by arms through lour years of 
 
330 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 civil war? What else did support it? What else prevented 
 the pillars of this court room crushing the judges in their 
 office? What but armed men, servants of the civil power, 
 citizens in arms supporting their Government because they 
 loved it; and they loved it because it was republican. I 
 think that the quod erat demonstrandum does not come by that 
 process. 
 
 What is the proof offered? what in principle, what in 
 nature? How far is it within the disposition of the offers 
 made in the Florida case? The offer there was to show that, 
 though the governor's certificate was conformed to the re- 
 corded canvass of the final State authority, and there was 
 no room for intervening proof between them, yet behind the 
 canvass a resort to simple and record facts would show that 
 the returning-officers acted without jurisdiction. That was 
 the principle of the offer. Will any one say that the act of 
 officers without jurisdiction is a mild and moderate form of 
 defective authority, compared with which fraud was a more 
 evident and more palpable defeat of such action? By no 
 means. When, therefore, you had an offer to produce by 
 proof the county returns in Florida, in order to base on that 
 fact an argument that the action of the canvassing-board on 
 those returns, wherein it assumed to redress or rearrange 
 them, was without jurisdiction, it carried every possible 
 legal and constitutional ground of proof that can be con- 
 ceived. Let me show that I speak by the card, when I refer 
 to the very accurate statement of his proposed proof by Mr. 
 O'Conor, found on page 44 of the Congressional Record of 
 February 4 : 
 
 In so doing — 
 
 That is, stating what they did in respect to the manipula- 
 tions of the county returns — 
 
 In so doing the said State board acted without jurisdiction, as 
 the circuit and supreme courts of Florida decided. It was by 
 
tHE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 381 
 
 overruling and setting aside as not warranted by law these rejec- 
 tions that the courts of Florida reached their respective conclu- 
 sions that ]\Ir. Drew was elected governor, that the Hayes electors 
 were usurpers, and that the Tilden electors were duly chosen. No 
 evidence that in any view could be called extrinsic is believed to 
 be needful in order to establish the conclusions relied upon by the 
 Tilden electors, except duly authenticated copies of the State 
 canvass — 
 
 That is, "the erroneous canvass," as Mr. O'Conor con- 
 sidered it — 
 
 And of the returns from the above-named four counties, one 
 wholly and others in part rejected by said State canvassers. 
 
 In order to show that their return rested on action be- 
 hind it that was without jurisdiction. Well, one ground 
 covers all. Extra vires, without law, without authority, is as 
 much a condemnation, if the proof will sustain it, as it is 
 possible to suggest. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Thurman: Mr. Evarts, allow me to 
 suggest to you that, if a majority of the Commission thought 
 the Florida statute authorized what was done, then the 
 introduction of proof would have been improper; and there- 
 fore it does not follow, because an argument was made that 
 the board exceeded its jurisdiction in throwing out votes, 
 that this Commission so held, for a decision that the true 
 interpretation of the statute w^ould justify what they did 
 made it immaterial to inquire what the motive was. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: I can only say that the offer of proof was 
 offered only on that ground, only on the single ground, and 
 the grounds here are of that nature and of the nature of fraud 
 or mala fides in the transaction itself, which last I shall con- 
 sider. 
 
 Mr. O'Conor, as was to be expected from his clear relish of 
 legal propositions, understood that that involved in ])rinciplc 
 going behind the returns at the jhjIIs, and he argued that 
 our objections to that were of that somewhat disfavored 
 
332 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 complexion of its being inconvenient to go into those proofs. 
 He did not, as I think, correctly appreciate our position; but 
 he did not deny that if he were allowed to adduce that proof, 
 we had a right, on the principles on which he was allowed to 
 introduce it, to go to the bottom of every precinct poll, and 
 he met the difficulty of time and resources for it by saying 
 that the Commission here might temper that jurisdiction by 
 going as far as they found it convenient, and then stopping; 
 that, I suppose, if they found themselves getting beyond 
 their depth they might swim ashore, and leave to drown the 
 candidate that at that stage of the water found it over his 
 head. But here our friend, Mr. Carpenter, proposes another 
 solution, that the fact that they have not time to do the 
 thing is not a reason for concluding that perhaps it is not one 
 of the duties assigned to you, but simply affords a reason for 
 peremptory adjournment; that the thing had better be un- 
 done than done; and there is no choice but one way or the 
 other; for, if anything, these proffers go into the whole un- 
 traversed sea of action, jurisdiction based on the action 
 of subordinate officers in the conduct of the election on days, 
 on forms, on the facts that must appear, and the proofs 
 that must show the facts to give jurisdiction, and you are 
 turned into a supervising court that takes up the transac- 
 tions of a special jurisdiction by certiorari to search it, and see 
 whether the jurisdictional facts existed; whether they existed 
 in throwing out this poll, that poll, the other poll; and 
 whether, when it is rectified, the object being to produce only 
 then a prima facie officer, you have been discharging the 
 duty that the Constitution imposed upon you, or whether it 
 rested on the governor and the canvassing-board to deter- 
 mine. 
 
 Well, now, the fraud, in the sense of mala fides, of return- 
 ing-officers or canvassing-boards is extraneous fact, is fact 
 that does not vitiate as much as being ultra vires does or can. 
 It is more opprobrious in epithet; it is more damnable in its 
 morality; but in its legality it is a step lower than ultra vires. 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 333 
 
 Now let us look at once aiul hricfly at the very i)roi)Osilion 
 as to the ri^'hl to irouhle llie Slate's elections, whether they 
 have been honest, whether they have been wise, whether they 
 have been careful, whether they have been i)rosperous. 
 Supposing that the Constitution had given the casting of the 
 electoral votes of a State to the governor of that State; he 
 should be Ihe r<»pres<'ntative elector; he should throw the 
 votes that were distributed to the po])ulation of that State; 
 what right would you have had to inquire beyond the single 
 l)oint who is governor, who is governor dc facto, who is the 
 governor governing the State at the time that he enters upon 
 that transaction? Could you inquire whether he had been 
 fraudulently elected, whether in his election the liberties of 
 the jieople had been suppressed, whether he was in by a 
 frautlulent conspiracy by which he bought his office, whether 
 he had taken part in the plots that had subverted the suffrage 
 and falsified the action of the people? You could not. It is 
 enough for you that the governor who governs is the man 
 who is to represent the electoral votes of that State. What 
 other right have you in regard to electors in inquiring into the 
 facts by which the State has transacted the business of 
 bringing into existence electors de facto? I submit, on 
 principle none whatever. And on this question of fraud or 
 mala fide.s or o])i)ression, ui)on what possil)le i)rincij)le can 
 you enter into that intjuiry? Who does not see that if you 
 give the great power of the Federal I'nion a judgment in the 
 matter of how the State has ])erformed its dutv vou jrive the 
 judgment that the wolf had ovvv the coiiducl of the iamb, 
 and can trace the vice in lh.it conduct to any remoteness of 
 relation that vou choose? 
 
 « 
 
 I apprehend that uolhing is sounder and safer than this, 
 that we are to redress these mischiefs by law and the C\)n- 
 stituti(m, although fraud may make u> recoil from lis touch, 
 and although violence may make us shudder al ils degrada- 
 tion of the American name. I havelieaid thai fraud \iliates 
 
334 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 everything, and it is spoken of here as if it did it of its own 
 force; that every factum in which an ingredient of fraud en- 
 tered thereby became infectum, and so the bane always bred 
 its antidote. Fraud would not be so dangerous an element 
 if that were so. I have heard that the liberties of the people 
 are to be paramount in every particular juncture, and that 
 laws, and constitutions, and courts, and the permanence of 
 the system of justice, and the truth that will endure, are all 
 to be thrown aside upon the mere intrusion of this afflictive 
 element of fraud, and that this course alone will secure their 
 liberties to the United States and their people. We have 
 a maxim of the law, and of social ethics and philosophy, that 
 goes behind all this: Misera est servitus, uhi jus vagum aut 
 incertum. There is no condition of a people so abject as 
 where the law does not rest upon firm foundation, and its 
 lines are not certainly drawn. 
 
 In the pressure of particular considerations that affect the 
 sympathies and the conscience, this is always the appeal. 
 What, it is said, is a constitution compared with human in- 
 terests and human liberty? Nothing, to be sure, except that 
 all our social interests, and all our liberties rest on law and 
 the Constitution. These are not the deity, but they are the 
 shrine, without whose shelter no human worshipper can 
 detain the goddess from the skies. 
 
 Now, for these poor people of Louisiana, if the Federal 
 power now undertakes to thwart, to uproot this scheme of 
 energetic law to preserve society there from destruction, and 
 leaves these unbefriended, uneducated, simple black people 
 to the fate from which the State strove hard to save them — I 
 say that you will have made them, by that action, the victims 
 of your Constitution, for your Constitution gave them suf- 
 frage, and they are to be slaughtered for having the gift found 
 in their hands. I say that you make them the sacrifices to 
 the triumph of the Government over the rebellion. I say 
 that such self-abasement of the pQ\Yers of this Goyer^meRt is 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 'Mo 
 
 beyond all euro. It teaehes the sad lesson that the American 
 people, in the attempt to make good the largeness of its 
 promise and to work out the glory of its proud manifesto of 
 freedom and equality before the law, finds itself thwarted 
 by the exhibition of violence in this turbulent po])ulation, 
 and forced, with its own hand, to crush the methods of law 
 by which the State has sought, alas! how vainly, to curb and 
 redress this menace and this mischief to its honor and its 
 peace. 
 
THE OREGON CASE 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The question in dispute in the Oregon case differed materially 
 from the main contest in the preceding cases of Florida and Louisi- 
 ana, in that it did not involve in the least any consideration of the 
 conduct of the election itself in that State. There was no question 
 of the fairness of the election; there was no imputation of fraud 
 or intimidation in the election or in the proceedings and conduct of 
 the returning-board. The decision of the Commission, as to which 
 of the two certificates from Oregon was to be counted, hinged upon 
 the question of the eligibility of one of the Republican electors, 
 and involved the deliberate failure of the governor of the state, in 
 the performance of his duty, in the matter of certification under the 
 law of Oregon and the law of Congress. Admittedly, the three per- 
 sons named as Republican electors received a clear majority of the 
 votes cast at the election. On the ground, however, that one of 
 these persons was at the time of the election ineligible to hold the 
 office of elector, by reason of his being a postmaster, the governor 
 issued certificates to the other two Republican electors and to one, 
 Cronin, a Democrat, who had not received a majority of votes and 
 had not been elected. The governor of the State was a Democrat 
 and was clearly influenced in his actions by wholly partisan mo- 
 tives to secure at least one electoral vote from Oregon for the 
 Democrats. 
 
 The proceedings which resulted in two certificates from Oregon 
 were briefly as follows : The certificates issued by the governor were 
 all delivered to Cronin the Democratic candidate for elector. He 
 refused to deliver to the two Republican electors the certificates 
 that had been issued to them. The two Republican electors, 
 Cartwright andOdell byname, thereupon met at the time appointed 
 by the statute to perform their duties as electors. Watts, the 
 other Republican elector presented his resignation as an elector 
 on the ground that at the time of the election he was ineligible. 
 His disability had subsequently been removed through his sur- 
 render and resignation of the office of postmaster. His resigna- 
 
 336 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 337 
 
 tion as elector was accepted and, to fill the vacancy thus made in 
 the electoral college, the other two electors, pursuant to the laws of 
 Oregon, chose Watts as the third elector. The three electors then 
 l)roceeded in the function of their office as electors and cast their 
 votes for tiie Republican candidates, Hayes and Wheeler. 
 
 While this was going on, Cronin undertook to establish another 
 college of electors, by declaring two vacancies in the college, through 
 the refusal of (^artwright and Odell to act with him. These va- 
 cancies in this fictitious electoral college were filled by the choice 
 of two Democrats, Messrs. Miller and Parker. These three then 
 j)roceeded to cast their votes, tw'o of them voting for Hayes and 
 Wheeler and one for Tilden and Hendricks. 
 
 In default of the governor's certificate, which had been withheld, 
 the Republican electors attached to the certificate of their vote 
 their affidavit of the facts and a certified copj' of the official returns 
 of the election then on file in the oflSce of the secretary of state of 
 the State of Oregon, showing the election of the three persons 
 named as electors, and they also attached to this certificate the 
 minutes of the proceedings of the electoral college. 
 
 The governor's certificate, that accompanied the certificate of 
 those claiming to be the electors under the leadership of Cronin, 
 was not in accord wuth the law of Oregon that recpiired the governor 
 to give certificates to those receiving the highest number of votes. 
 Under this law the governor's plain duty was to give his certificate 
 to the three persons voted for as Republican electors. The gov- 
 ernor, in his eft'ort to evade the requirement of the statute, stated in 
 his certificate the number of votes received l)y Odell, Cartwright 
 and Cronin with the additional statement, "being the highest num- 
 ber of votes cast at said election for persons eligible under the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, to be ap])ointed electors of Presi- 
 dent and Vice-President of the United States." 
 
 This was in brief the situation presented by the papers before 
 the Commission. After argument by Mr. (leorge Iloadly in open- 
 ing tlie case for the Democrats and by Mr. Stanley Matthews on 
 behalf of the Republicans, the Commission pioceeded to take tes- 
 timony on the (jucslion of Mr. Walls's incumbency of the office 
 of postmaster and of his resignation therefrom. ]Mr. Evarts then 
 concluded the argument in behalf of the Republicans in the argu- 
 
 23 
 
338 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ment that follows. Mr. Merrick on behalf of the Democrats fol- 
 lowed Mr. Evarts in the final argument in the case. 
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Com- 
 mission, In assigning at the outset of this discussion the 
 dividing line between the authority of the Government of 
 the United States, by any legislation that it might think 
 adequate and desirable, or in execution of the constitutional 
 power of counting the votes without any legislation on the 
 subject, and the authority of the respective States — the line 
 that divided what belonged to the State and what might be 
 the subject of inquiry to the Federal Government, observing 
 constitutional limits on the one side and the other — the 
 counsel for the objectors with whom I am associated laid 
 down the proposition that the ultimate fact under the laws 
 of the State in completion of the election by the certification 
 of boards or oflBcers charged with the completion of the final 
 canvass was a point beyond which, in looking into the trans- 
 actions of the State, the Federal Government could not go. 
 We laid down at the same time the further proposition that 
 this conclusion of the State's action was the principal fact 
 that under the legislation of Congress was made the subject 
 of any lawful certification, and that as that principal fact 
 could not be overreached by any previous inquiry into the 
 transaction of the State, so that principal fact could not be 
 disparaged or falsified by any congressional authority exer- 
 cised in certification of that fact. 
 
 The proposition as we then laid it down for Florida, we 
 adhered to in the case of Louisiana; and the proposition as 
 thus laid down we adhere to in the case of Oregon. We find 
 in Oregon, as in Florida or Louisiana, that by its laws there 
 is some final ministerial ca^nvass, which, completed, shows 
 what the election was; and we need only to look into the laws 
 of this State, as of the other States, to see whether the appar- 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 339 
 
 ent canvassing-board was one tliat liad such aiitliority under 
 the laws of the State. 
 
 We have also asserted and adhered to but one proposition 
 as to the powers and duties of this Commission. From the 
 first and until now we have discarded any notion that you 
 were a court or could exercise the powers of a court in inquir- 
 ing into the actual facts of an election in the States. Not so, 
 however, with the learned coimsel who from time to time in 
 the different stages of this matter have appeared as our op- 
 ponents. The whole proposition as to Florida, on their part, 
 was based upon the idea that you were a court, with the 
 powers in quo loarranto of a court, and were controlled in Ihe 
 exercise of those powers by no other consideration than 
 seemed to you just in their exercise and as any other court 
 would l)e governed in such exercise. The logic of that argu- 
 ment was accepted that if you had not that penetrating and 
 purging j)Ower of a court, looking for and producing the very 
 right of the matter as the election itself should disclose it, 
 then our i)roposition that the evidence upon which we rested 
 as the result of the State's action in producing electors in 
 Florida was the "be-all and the end-all," unless some subse- 
 (juent movement in lliat State might have displaced it. 
 
 When, then, we came to Louisiana — which differed not at 
 all I'roiii Florida in the principles of law ai)j)lical)le to it on 
 this point of the State's authority and the jwint of iiKjuiry 
 which rejx'llcd any further incjuisition on your i)art the 
 ])rincii)les then avowed were that the idea of your being a 
 court witli ])()W('rs in 7//0 //'a;T«///o was wholly inadmissil)le, 
 wholly inadmissible in the nature of llic transaction, wholly 
 inadmissible from Hie impassable barriers inter])ose<l by th<* 
 C'onst it nt ion. Indeed, (liese j)r<)p().sitions which we had 
 laid down in IIm" Florida case, the sui)|)<)ii of these proj)osi- 
 tions in reason and authority, were all adopted and enforced 
 as the doctrine of our opponents in the Louisiana case. 
 
 Now when we come to this case, even with more force and 
 
340 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 earnestness and with a greater reach and exhaustion of argu- 
 ment and authority, every proposition that either in the 
 Florida or in the Louisiana case we contended for, upon this 
 point, is avowed, is defended, is insisted upon by our oppo- 
 nents. Nor will it do for our learned friends to put their ac- 
 ceptance of these propositions upon the mere concession that 
 this Commission has so decided and that further debate is 
 inappropriate and unwarrantable. They have themselves 
 in a prolonged discussion maintained, as matter of law and 
 upon authority, not only the position that we took as to the 
 action of a State bringing an elector into the execution of his 
 power as an elector, but, as I understand the accomplished 
 and experienced lawyer who yesterday presented the argu- 
 ment of our opponents, such a person is, until quo warranto, 
 until certiorari, until some form of judicial contestation dis- 
 turbs his position, not only a de facto but also a de jure repre- 
 sentative of the office. 
 
 Never having had a doubt that before many weeks had 
 passed, the general judgment of the profession of this country 
 would sustain these positions that we espoused, and that 
 have been sanctioned by this Commission, I must yet confess 
 that I did not expect so signal and immediate a confirmation 
 of that expectation as the present and explicit avowal, 
 espousal, and maintenance of these positions by our learned 
 opponents, and I welcome this as a great and valuable aid in 
 furnishing an answer to the irresponsible and rash comments 
 that have been made in various relations, and especially in 
 the public press, upon these controverted points of law, 
 which have formed the material of the forensic discussions 
 before this Commission and of its decisions. 
 
 I understand that in securing that unanimity of the pro- 
 fession so desirable in a community accustomed to look upon 
 the latv as the principal safeguard of the welfare of the state, 
 this adherence of our opponents will go far to check any 
 rising disposition to further public contest on the subject. 
 
THE DISPUTED i'RESIDENTIAL ELECTIOX 3^1 
 
 You have decided questions of constitutional law; you have 
 decided them in the presence of ^reat agitations of the people, 
 and vou have decided them in a wav that will establish them 
 firm and sure princi])les in the future, when agitations shall 
 take other complexions and be pushed in the interest of 
 other parties. By what you have done, by what you shall 
 do, the principles of the Constitution and the maintenance 
 of the laws of this country in the great transaction of a presi- 
 dential election are made certain, intelligible, rational, and 
 sound. 
 
 Now in Oregon it is very ])lain that an election was held 
 and through all its stages was conducted with an entire ob- 
 servance of the requirements of law, with an entire accept- 
 ance on the part of the whole i)opulation of the election and 
 its result, up to the last stage of it, with every step unques- 
 tioned in its integrity, its justice, and its conformity to law. 
 The result reached by the authentic canvass of the votes, by 
 the proper authority, and in the proper presence, showed on 
 each side the vote for electors, according to law, being upon 
 genei'al ticket, that three on the one side ran even with each 
 other, three on the other side even with each other, except 
 by the casual and unim])ortant disparity of a few votes as 
 between the several candidates on the same ticket. All 
 that has disturbed this result has occurred after the comj)le- 
 tion of the election and its certification as com])leted by the 
 proper authority, after the final canvass and its certification 
 by the officer of state charged with the duty of canvassing 
 and certifying. That canvass remains of record now in the 
 secretary of states office, undisturbed, undisputed, un((ues- 
 tioned. That is the fact ujion which the title of the electors 
 for President and Vice-President for the State of Oregon 
 rests. Thereafter there remains nothing to be done on the 
 part of any official of that State, under the terms of the Con- 
 stitution of the United States nothing whatever, and under 
 the law of Congress there remains but one act to bej>erformed, 
 
342 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 to wit, the provision by the executive of the State and the 
 dehvery, to the electoral college that was elected, of triple 
 certificates to accompany as a formal authentication the 
 action of the electoral college. All that our learned friends 
 urge as arguments upon what they consider an improvident, 
 an unsound, and dangerous doctrine on our part, but urged 
 only in anticipation of hearing our views, is that this result of 
 the canvass of an election made matter of record according 
 to the laws of a State might be falsified, might be perverted, 
 might be destroyed by the process of certification, if we 
 should hold that the form was greater than the substance. 
 All these hypothetical suggestions are now brought in play 
 as actual transactions occurring in the State of Oregon ; and 
 now the pretension that certification is paramount to the 
 thing certified, not amendable by the thing certified, not 
 amendable by the record which is the thing to be certified — 
 all those propositions proceed from our opponents as their 
 champions. They have not changed places with us, for we 
 never occupied any such position. They have, however, 
 assumed the propositions, from time to time, which were 
 necessary and suitable for the particular occasions on which 
 they used them. It has been convenient, as it seems to us, 
 for this representation of diverse sentiments and opinions at 
 different times, that they have not been presented by the 
 same counsel. We have a change in the advocates attend- 
 ing a change in the propositions. 
 
 First, let us understand what is presented, in the shape of 
 evidence, that bears upon the construction of what is con- 
 tained in the certificates which are plenary evidence before 
 you, they having been opened and transmitted by the Presi- 
 dent of the Senate. It is that Mr. Watts, holding a small 
 post-office of the fourth class in the State of Oregon, appoint- 
 ed years before, was discharging the duties of that office on 
 the 7th of November; that on the 14th of November he re- 
 signed his office, and his resignation was accepted; that 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 343 
 
 thereafter tlie Dej^artiuent accepted the charge of the office 
 and coiKhicted it from tliat time forward, and that, as matter 
 of fact, the office itself was changed from the place of busi- 
 ness of Watts, the postmaster who resigned, to the place of 
 business of the officer designated to take his place, Mr. Hill, 
 having a drugstore, and then becoming immediately assist- 
 ant postmaster under the special agent, and in due course of 
 time receiving a commission as postmaster in full. Then 
 IVIr, "NVatts, whenever you come to consider, if you do, the 
 question of whether he could be appointed an elector on the 
 6th of December, on his refusal to act upon his prior ap- 
 pointment, is unmistakably placed before you in the position 
 of a postmaster who had resigned, and who had received 
 from the Post-Office Department the acceptance of the trust 
 that he had laid aside, which thenceforth was conducted by 
 the Department itself imder its agents. 
 
 I do not think that I need now to re-argue in the least 
 either the question of ineligibility as justifying proof, or 
 the question of whether an ineligible candidate is vested 
 with an office until by some determination he is excluded 
 from it. "\Miatever we said that received the assent of this 
 Commission in the former arguments needs not to be re- 
 peated. Whatever was said that did not receive the assent 
 of this Commission will be of no service in that regard if it 
 be repeated. I shall, therefore, proceed with the inquirv 
 into the validity of the vote of the three electors in the first 
 certificate, as it rests upon the evidence in your possession 
 I)roceeding from the State, delivered into the hands of the 
 President of the Senate, and opened before the two Houses 
 of Congress, and now deposited with you as evidence for 
 you to regard. 
 
 What, then, does this certificate No. 1 contain? I ask 
 your attention to the parts of it that I shall now designate. 
 I ask attention to the certificate of the electors, commencing 
 at the foot of i)age .'J of the i)rinted paper. It is their cer- 
 tificate of the votes that they cast. 
 
344 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM IVIAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 United States of America, 
 
 State of Oregon, County of Marion, ss. : 
 
 We, W. H. Odell, J. C. Cartwright, and J. W. Watts, electors of 
 President and Vice-President of the United States for the State 
 of Oregon, duly elected and appointed in the year A. D. 1876, pur- 
 suant to the laws of the United States, and in the manner directed 
 by the laws of the State of Oregon, do hereby certify that at a meet- 
 ing held by us at Salem, the seat of government in and for the 
 State of Oregon, on Wednesday, the 6th day of December, A. D. 
 1876, for the purpose of casting our votes for President and Vice- 
 President of the United States — 
 
 A vote was duly taken, by ballot, for President of the United 
 States, in distinct ballots for President only, with the following 
 result : The whole number of votes cast for President of the United 
 States was three (3) votes. 
 
 That the only person voted for for President of the United States 
 was Rutherford B. Hayes, of Ohio. 
 
 That for President of the United States Rutheri'ord B. Hayes, 
 of Ohio, received three (3) votes. 
 
 In testimony whereof we have hereunto set our hands on the 
 hrst Wednesday of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
 eight hundred and seventy-six. 
 
 W. H. Odell. 
 
 J. C. Cartwright. 
 
 J. W. Watts. 
 
 That is all that the Constitution of the United States 
 requires. The twelfth article of the amendment is: 
 
 The electors shall meet in their respective States and vote by 
 ballot for President and Vice-President; . . . they shall name 
 in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct 
 ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall 
 make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all 
 persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for 
 each; which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed 
 to the seat of Government of the United States, directed to the 
 President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the 
 presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the 
 certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 345 
 
 Tlial, tluMi, is a (Hs{'liar<i:c of tlie entire constitutional 
 duty, and with lln> full certification of its discharge that the 
 Constitution requires. AVhat duty has been added by the 
 act of Congress to be performed by the college of electors in 
 this behalf? In the one hundred and thirty-eighth section of 
 your revision this is their duty: 
 
 The electors shall make and sign three certificates of all the votes 
 given by them, eacli of which certificates shall contain two tlistinct 
 lists, one of the votes for President and the other of the votes for 
 Vice-President, and shall annex to each of the certificates one of 
 the lists of the electors which shall have been furnished to thembj' 
 direction of the executive of the State. 
 
 This pa])er contains no such list, we will suppose; but is 
 it a failure of duty on the part of the electors? Is there even 
 a presumi)tion that they have received such paper, and have 
 omitted to include it in their return? By no means. If 
 any default, any imperfection in the duty of those electors 
 is to be charged, it must be based on the fact that the exe- 
 cutive furnished that college with the list as the act of Con- 
 gress required the executive to do, and that they have omit- 
 ted it; and wc find as a part of the minutes of this electoral 
 college a statement as to this matter of fact, whether that 
 college was ever furnished with any of the lists that the exec- 
 utive of the State was trusted by the act of Congress to 
 furnish. They make out a sworn statement before a proper 
 magistrate, whose authority to administer the oath is cer- 
 tified by the secretary of state as a proper officer for that 
 l)urpose: 
 
 United States of America, 
 
 State of Oregon, County of Multnomah, ss.: 
 We, J. C. Cartwriglit, W. H. Odell, and J. W. Watts, being each 
 duly and severally sworn, say that at the hour of twelve o'clock 
 m. of the (Glh) sixth day of December A. I). 1S7G, we duly assembled 
 at the State capitol, in a room in the capitol i)uilding at Salem, 
 Oregon, which was assigned to us by the secretary of state of the 
 
346 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 State of Oregon. That we duly, on said day and hour, demanded 
 of the governor of the State of Oregon and of the Secretary of 
 state of the State of Oregon certified hsts of the electors for Pres- 
 ident and Vice-President of the United States for the State of 
 Oregon, as provided by the laws of the United States and of the 
 State of Oregon; but both L. F. Grover, governor of the State of 
 Oregon, and S. F. Chadwick, secretary of state of said State, then 
 and there refused to deliver to us, or either of us, any such cer- 
 tified lists or any certificate of election whatever. And being in- 
 formed that such lists had been delivered to one E. A. Cronin by 
 said secretary of state, we each and all demanded such certified 
 lists of said E. A. Cronin, but he then and there refused to deliver 
 or to exhibit such certified lists to us, or either of us. Whereupon 
 we have procured from the secretary of state certified copies of the 
 abstract of the vote of the State of Oregon for electors of President 
 and Vice-President at the presidential election held in said State 
 November 7, A. D. 1876, and have attached them to the certified 
 list of the persons voted for by us and of the votes cast by us for 
 President and Vice-President of the United States in lieu of a more 
 formal certificate. 
 
 W. H. Odell. 
 
 J. W. Watts. 
 
 John C. Cartwright. 
 
 Sworn and subscribed to before me this 6th day of December, 
 A. D. 1876. 
 (Seal.) Thos. H. Cann. 
 
 Notary Public for State of Oregon, 
 
 What becomes now of the proposition of a State being 
 defrauded of its vote in the electoral college when its elec- 
 tors, appointed according to the will of the people of the 
 State, have assembled, discharged their constitutional duty, 
 and are deprived by the executive of the State of the cer- 
 tified lists which it becomes a part of their duty, if they re- 
 ceive them from him, and only in such case, to append in 
 verification? Wliich is it that is to stand, the electors made 
 by the Constitution of the United States sufficient certifiers 
 
THE DISPUTED rUKSIDEXTIAL ELECTION 347 
 
 of their own action, made by the act of Congress only subject 
 to the single duty besides of inclosing the lists that the 
 governor may have given them? Here you have the electors 
 meeting, voting, certifying, and transmitting, and showing 
 that the absence of the governor's list arises from the gov- 
 ernor's default and not their own, and that they have sup- 
 I)lied the fact on which the governor's list must rest if it 
 be lawful, the fact of the final canvass of the election, pro- 
 duced before you now here just as if you inspected it your- 
 self in the office of the secretary of state. 
 
 Now my friends are in the face of the proposition whether 
 a fraudulent, or a perverse, or an ignorant governor can sub- 
 tract or withhold the paper, and the electoral college be de- 
 stroyed and the presidential vote be lost. If we were to 
 proceed no further, I should ask, the governor's certificate 
 withheld, was there any excuse for that, is there any pre- 
 tense that it was delivered? Not the slightest. Nobody 
 pretends that the governor of Oregon ever furnished those 
 lists to the electoral college; nobody pretends that any 
 messenger or intermediary of his ever delivered those lists 
 to the electoral college. What is the language of the act of 
 Congress in that behalf? 
 
 It shall be the duty of the executive of each State to cause three 
 lists of the names of the electors of such State to be made and 
 certified, and to be delivered to the electors on or before the day 
 on which they are required by the preceding section to meet. 
 
 Is it to the college, to the body, or is it not? It is to the 
 college or body. Did the governor ever deliver them to this 
 college or to this body that was met? Did Mr. Cronin ever 
 deliver them as the agent of the governor to this college or 
 body that was met? Its title to them was complete. The 
 duty and obligation of the governor in this behalf were com- 
 plete when the college was assemi)lcd at the capitol. No 
 matter who composed it, whether Watts was a m(Mnl)(T or 
 
348 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Cronin was a member, the papers were then to be dehvered 
 to the college, and their subtraction, their withholding, 
 needs no description of fraud or contrivance. It was an 
 absolute desertion of duty, and such desertions of duty are 
 never gratuitous. They always have an object, and the 
 result that followed is the object designed. 
 How is the act of Oregon in this behalf? 
 
 The secretary of state shall prepare two lists of the names of the 
 electors elected and affix the seal of the State to the same. Such 
 lists shall be signed by the governor and secretary, and by the 
 latter delivered to the college of electors at the hour of their meet- 
 ing on such first Wednesday of December. 
 
 Was that done? If you employ an agent or messenger, 
 instead of delivering with due formality and openly, as I 
 venture to say has been done in every State in this Union, 
 has been done in Oregon until this election, then you are 
 responsible to see that the messenger or agent makes the 
 delivery. I then say that this certification and action of 
 this college are all that the Constitution and the laws of the 
 United States require, and that on the face of this certificate, 
 the college making its representations, and the knowledge of 
 this college in respect to its majority of attending members 
 being open to any inquiry, you are at once face to face with 
 the proposition whether a subtraction, a suppression by the 
 executive of the State of one of these lists, entitles both 
 Houses of Congress to throw out the vote of the State. 
 
 But this certificate contains a great deal more. The 
 occasion for its containing so much more is undoubtedly 
 because of this violation of duty on the part of the executive 
 of the State, but what does it contain? It contains an 
 abstract of votes cast at the presidential election as on file in 
 the secretary of state's office. It is the very canvass itself 
 of every county for every candidate and in every figure that 
 becomes the subject of tabulation. 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESmENTIAL ELECTION 349 
 
 Salem, Statp] of OiiKciox: 
 
 I hereby certify that the forej^oing tabulated statement is the 
 result of the vote cast for presidential electors at a general election 
 held in and for the State of Oregon on the 7th day of November 
 A. D. 1876, as opened and canvassed in the presence of his ex- 
 cellency 1.. F. Grover, governor of said State, according to the 
 law, on the 4th day of December, A. D. 1876, at two o'clock p. m. 
 of that day, l)y the secretary of state. 
 
 S. F. CiiAinviCK, 
 ISccrctarij of ISiate of Oregon. 
 
 Besides this, there is this certificate, the importance of 
 which will aj)])ear from the citation of some of the statutes of 
 Oregon which I shall mention: 
 
 United States of America, 
 
 State of Oregox, Secretary's Office, 
 
 Salem, December 6, 1876. 
 
 I, S. F. Chadwick, secretary of the State of Oregon, do hereby 
 certify that I am the custodian of the great seal of the State of 
 Oregon; that the foregoing copy of the abstract of votes cast at 
 the presidential election held in the State of Oregon November 7, 
 1876, for presidential electors, has been by me compared with the 
 original al)stract of votes cast for presidential electors aforesaid, 
 on file in this office, and said copy is a correct transcript therefrom 
 and of the whole of the said original abstract of votes cast for pres- 
 idential electors. 
 
 That is tliat transaction which, observed and attended 
 to })y the governor in ii certificate, would give to his cer- 
 tificate (he support in law if lie had di.scharged the duty 
 ill fad . 
 
 In witness whereof I have hereto set my hand and affixed the 
 great .seal of the State of Oregon the day and year above written. 
 
 S. F. Chadwick, 
 Secretary of the State of Oregon. 
 
350 SPEECHES OF \MLLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Besides that there is this: 
 
 List of Votes Cast at an Election for Electors of President and Vice- 
 President of the United States in the State of Oregon Held on the 7th 
 Day of November, 1876. 
 
 For Presidential Electors. 
 W. H. Odell received fifteen thousand two hundred and six 
 (15,206) votes. 
 J. W. Watts received fifteen thousand two hundred and six 
 
 (15,206) votes. 
 
 J. C. Cartwright received fifteen thousand two hundred and 
 fourteen (15,214) votes. 
 
 E. A. Cronin received fourteen thousand one hundred and fifty- 
 seven (14,157) votes. 
 
 H. Klippel received fourteen thousand one hundred and thirty- 
 six (14,136) votes. 
 
 W. B. Las well received fourteen thousand one hundred and 
 forty-nine (14,149) votes. 
 
 Daniel Clark received five hundred and nine (509) votes. 
 
 F. Sutherland received five hundred and ten (510) votes. 
 Bart Curl received five hundred and seven (507) votes. 
 
 S. W. McDowell received three (3), Gray, one (1), Simpson one 
 (1), and Sahsbury one (1) vote. 
 
 I, S. F. Chadwick, secretary of state in and for the State of 
 Oregon, do hereby certify that the within and foregoing is a full, 
 true, and correct statement of the entire vote cast for each and 
 all persons for the office of electors of President and Vice-Presi- 
 dent of the United States for the State of Oregon at the general 
 election held in said State on the 7th day of November, A. D. 1876, 
 as appears by the returns of said election now on file in my office. 
 
 S. F. Chadwick, 
 Secretary of State of Oregon. 
 
 [Seal.] 
 
 There is the list by the executive authority of the state 
 of Oregon so far as it was lodged in the ofl&ce and committed 
 to the secretary of state, so far as the great seal of the State 
 affixed by the executive officer of the State having its cus- 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 351 
 
 tody could make a certification by a State. Who else is 
 there in Oregon that can certih' a list? Who has the list? 
 Who has the seal? Who has the office both of record and of 
 certification? The secretary of State. Supposing, then, 
 that to be so for a moment, where do you find any defect in 
 that of being an adequate com])liance with the act of Con- 
 gress and the act of Oregon that gives you a list of the i)er- 
 sons appointed? You have nothing to do but to read tiie 
 laws of Oregon and see that electors are to be appointed by 
 election, and that in everj' election held in that State the 
 persons that have the highest number of votes shall be de- 
 clared elected — that is in the Constitution; and in the elec- 
 tion laws "that the persons having the highest number of 
 votes shall be deemed elected," and then you discard all the 
 rest as surplusage and unnecessary verification of the thing 
 certified. What does it want under the act of Oregon? 
 The act of Oregon requires a list to be given by the secretary 
 of state under the great seal of the State, and only requires 
 that the governor shall sign it. The governor, in pursuance 
 of the great breach of trust and duty which he had meditated 
 and was performing, refused his name to that certification. 
 Does that cease to be a certification that the Congress of 
 the United States will accept as an adequate observance of 
 the directory- duty that the executive authority of a State 
 shall furnish lists of the persons appointed? I think not. 
 We shall see by very brief references that under the laws 
 of Oregon this paper now here before you is to jou as matter 
 of evidence precisely the same as if you had before you the 
 original paper in the office of the secretary of state. 
 
 I ask attention to the laws of Oregon, not printed in the 
 little syllabus, that relate to the subject of evidence of ])ul)lic 
 writings, at pages 25'J, 256, and '257 of the Oregon code. The 
 Constitutional provision is given in this pam|)hlet. i)age 1S7: 
 
 There shall he a seal of Slate, kept by tiie secretary of state 
 for official purjwses, which sliall be called "the seal of the State of 
 
352 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXA\^LL EVARTS 
 
 Oregon." The secretary of state shall keep a fair record of the 
 official acts of the legislative assembly and executive department 
 of the State. 
 
 The secretary of state, by the law of Oregon, is keeper of 
 the action of the executive department of the State — and 
 shall, when required, lay the same and all matters relative 
 thereto before either branch of the legislative assembly. 
 
 The seven hundred and seventh section of the Oregon re- 
 vision provides: 
 
 Every citizen of this State has a right to inspect any public 
 writing of this State, except where otherwise expressed and provided 
 by this code or some other statute. Every public officer having 
 the custody of a public writing which the citizen has a right to in- 
 spect, is bound to give him on demand a certified copy of it on pay- 
 ment of the legal fees therefor, and such copy is primary evidence of 
 the original writing. 
 
 The documents that are embraced within this duty of the 
 secretary of State are named, so far as pertinent to this 
 inquiry, on page '^56, and within this certificate, as provided 
 in section 738: 
 
 Whenever a copy of a writing is certified to be used as evidence, 
 the certificate shall state that the copy has been compared by the 
 certifying-officer with the original, and that it is a correct transcript 
 therefrom, and of the whole of such original or of a specified part 
 thereof. The official seal, if there be any, of the certifying-officer 
 shall also be affixed to such certificate, etc. 
 
 Looking at this certificate, then, with the act of Congress 
 before you in reference to certified lists that are to be used 
 and employed, can you have any doubt that this contains 
 all that is necessary to make action, the bona fide action, the 
 complete lawful action, of the electors and of the State that 
 had chosen them electors — the disparagement of the au- 
 thentication under the act of Congress by the governor's 
 withholding of his certificate, if unexplained, not affecting 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 35S 
 
 the certification l)y llic ciecLors, who have done tlieir (hity 
 under the act of Congress or under the act of Oregon? 
 
 We, have, besides, the minutes of the college. Now are 
 the electors a body? They are so described in the Statutes 
 of the Ignited States; they are so described in the statutes of 
 Oregon. They are necessarily a college under the j)ower con- 
 fided in them to fill vacancies, which both by the act of Con- 
 gress and by the statutes of their respective States is con- 
 fided to them. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Mr. Evarts, who made 
 this list? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: The original as now on file? 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: The secretary of state, as the canvassing- 
 officer, in the presence of the governor, as I understand. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbot: Permit me to ask if there 
 is any law^ that you have discovered, Mr. Evarts, which 
 permits the secretary' of state to certify to a result drawn 
 from certain figures before him, certain returns? Is it not 
 simply that he can certify to any paper for what it is worth? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: By reason of this general power? 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbot: Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Evarts: He has given a certificate of the full paper; 
 that is the canvass. All the rest is a transaction lower do\\Ti 
 in the election. These are all the counties of the State, all 
 the votes returned, all the candidates voted for, the distribu- 
 tion and the tabulation, and was done by him in the presence 
 of the governor. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: I will call your attention 
 to the certification on the second page: 
 
 1 hereby certify that the foregoing t<abulated statement is liic 
 result of the vote cast for presidential electors, etc. 
 Mr. Evarts: Yes. 
 
 As opened and canvassed in the ])resenee oi' liis exeelleiiey L. ¥. 
 Grover, governor of said Stale. 
 
 24 
 
354 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 That is canvassing; producing the tabulated vote from 
 the votes forwarded from the precincts and counties in 
 the canvass. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: The next says "copy of 
 abstract." 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Bradley: "Compared with the 
 original abstract of votes cast for presidential electors afore- 
 said on file in this office." 
 
 Mr. Evarts: Yes; and the whole of it. Will any one 
 tell me what else there was to canvass.'* What more can 
 anybody do than take the returns? They cannot alter them ; 
 they are aU to be opened, all to be canvassed, and the result 
 produced. Whether you call it a result, provided it be a 
 paper, formal, complete, recorded, or whether you call it an 
 abstract of the votes according to law, it is the transaction 
 that the law confides to the officer, and it is its execution as 
 he files it after he has performed the duty. You will see by 
 the election laws that section 37 provides: 
 
 The county clerk, immediately after making the abstract of the 
 votes given in his county — 
 
 The same word is used; that is his return; that is his 
 canvass. The abstract is the canvass set down as the 
 result — 
 
 Shall make a copy of each of said abstracts, and transmit it by 
 mail to the secretary of state at the seat of government; and it shall 
 be the duty of the secretary of state, in the presence of the governor, 
 to proceed within thirty days after the election, and sooner if the 
 returns be all received, to canvass the votes given for secretary and 
 treasurer of state, state printer, justices of the supreme court, 
 member of Congress, and district attorneys ; and the governor shall 
 grant a certificate of election to the person having the highest 
 number of votes, and shall also issue a proclamation declaring the 
 election of such person. 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 355 
 
 Then for tho officers designated in regard io tlie election 
 of President : 
 
 The votes for the electors shall be given, received, returned, 
 and canvassed as the same are given, returned, and canvassed 
 for members of Congress. The secretary of State shall prepare 
 two lists, etc. 
 
 There being no provision for a governor's connnission or 
 anything of that kind; bnt I will not repeat the argnnient of 
 my learned associate, so eflFectnally, as it seems to me, made, 
 in regard to tliis operation. AYhat I have to say to your 
 honors is this, that you have included bv authentication 
 satisfactory to the laws of Oregon of the ven- canvass itself 
 as it now a])pears of record in the de})artment of state. 
 There is no other canvass. The blotter or the slate in which 
 there may have been a tentative addition of numbers is not 
 the transaction of record. This is the very thing. It never 
 existed as a canvass till it stood in that shai)e, and standing 
 in that shajK', it could acquire nothing additional, tolerate 
 nothing additional. In the minutes this board proceeds 
 witli its own transactions. The liour having arrived, 
 
 The meeting was duly organized by electing W. H. Odell chair- 
 man and J. C Cartwright secretary. 
 
 The resignation of J. A\'. Walts, who was, on November 7, A. D. 
 1H7(), duly elected an elector of Prcvsident and Vice-President of the 
 I'liitod States for the State of Oregon, was presented by W. H. 
 (Jdcll, and, after being duly read, was unanimously accepted. 
 
 ^'ou have his resignation. It was a transaction in perfect 
 good faith. It was in open day. It was matter of record in 
 this coUege. It rcsti'd upon an uncertain oj)inion as to 
 whether his having l)een postmaster destroyed his eligibil- 
 ity, whether it would destroy his vote; he refn.ses to act under 
 thai a|)|)oiiil uicnt for fear of thai |)ubhc injury to the State 
 of Oregon. lie did his (lut\ in llu- coMege of eh'ctors. If 
 Crom'n was a inciiiber of the college and ("rouin had attended 
 
S56 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and Cronin had part in the transactions, whatever was done 
 by Watts was done openly and would be seen and known by 
 Cronin as well as the others, and if there remained further 
 controversy, further action of the college to determine who 
 were the three, that would have been taken, that would 
 have been recorded in the minutes; but of the principal fact 
 that Watts refused to act under his original appointment on 
 the scruple that his State might thereby lose a vote that it 
 was entitled to, the college proceed (the disability having 
 been removed in their construction, and in yours, as I sub- 
 mit) to recognize the will of the people of Oregon in their 
 selection of the person of Mr. Watts, a man known and 
 trusted by that people, and gave him a title which, trusting 
 to, the State of Oregon would not put in peril one of its votes. 
 
 Then the voting proceeds, and the ballots are here. The 
 very ballots themselves, the originals that were deposited 
 are here, each of them bearing the indorsement of the elector 
 who deposited it. Therefore, you have the election here, and 
 now I should like to know whether under the Constitution of 
 the United States, under the statute of 1792, under the law 
 of Oregon about presidential elections, these minutes are 
 not plenary proof of the action of that college, if that was a 
 college. Did anybody ever pretend that the certificate 
 named by the act of Congress was any part of the warrant 
 of the electors to act in the college? No. It is to be de- 
 livered to the electors acting in the college in order that they 
 may use it as part of their transaction. Who can contradict 
 this? Who can be heard to contradict it? You have then 
 this absolute proof. When this college convened and under- 
 took to act, there were present the two men that without 
 any impeachment had a perfect title to the office. There 
 was present a third man, and their was nobody else present 
 and then the transaction went on. 
 
 I apprehend, therefore, that unless you hold that the want 
 of the governor's certificate, its subtraction by the viola- 
 
THE DISIHTKI) IMIKSIDENTIAL ELECTION S^T 
 
 tion of the governor's duty, is sufficient to suppress tlie 
 electoral college and the vote of the State, you have here 
 everything that you need under the act of Congress, under 
 the Constitution of the United States, without lot)king at 
 the certificates which they ])ut in in su])port of their title, 
 out of abundant caution, in the abundant i)erforniance of 
 duty, in order that it may be seen that the absence of any 
 formality is not to be imputed to them from the absence of 
 the principal fact on which and from which the formality 
 derives its sole claim to existence. 
 
 We have another certificate, and this contains nothing 
 that contradicts the other, nothing that by itself can stand 
 on its own inspection as an adeciuate transaction. In the 
 first i)lace, what is the certificate of the governor? Does this 
 comply with the act of Congress? 
 
 I, L. F. Grover, governor of the State of Oregon, do hereby cer- 
 tify that at a general election held in said State on the 7th day of 
 Novcm})er, A. D. 187(5, William H. Odell received lo,50() votes, 
 John C. Cart Wright received lo,'2U votes, E. A. Cronin received 
 14,157 votes, for electors of President and Vice-President of the 
 United States; (the syntax arrangement, perhaps, is a little at 
 fault, but we begin after a semicolon thus) being the highest 
 number of votes cast at said election for persons eligible, under the 
 Constitution of the United States, to be appointed electors of 
 President and Vice-President of the United States, they are 
 hereby declared duly elected electors as aforesaid for the State of 
 Oregon. 
 
 That is a negative pregnant. The disparity of votes is 
 shown. The fact of election on a general ticket is matter of 
 law in the State. You have in the other certificate the clear 
 certification of how the fact was as to who had the highest 
 number of votes. Now this governor has undertaken by the 
 insertion of the word "eligible" to cover himself from the 
 condenmation of open and recognized fraud and falsehood, 
 and he has undertaken by giving a reason, instead of obey- 
 
358 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ing the constitution and laws of Oregon, to save himself 
 from having absolutely deserted his duty. If there ever was 
 a State that had taken every precaution to provide that all 
 these suggestions, all these surmises, that by some method 
 of construction, by some usurpation of power, others than 
 the men who received the highest number of votes could be 
 deemed elected anywhere, in that State the constitution and 
 the laws of Oregon had so provided. Why was not the word 
 "eligible" put into the constitution and put into the laws 
 as determining who should be the product of an election, 
 who should be declared the product of an election, who 
 should be treated as the product of an election? The consti- 
 tution provides, as you have seen, that — 
 
 In all elections held by the people under this constitution, the 
 person or persons who shall receive the highest number of votes 
 shall be declared duly elected. 
 
 Concede for the moment that electors are not within that 
 clause of the constitution, nevertheless this shows what the 
 constitutional law of Oregon was with respect to what makes 
 an election; and when the legislature has determined that 
 the electors for President and. Vice-President of the United 
 States shall be produced by the method of election, and when 
 they have a law which is not limited to anything except the 
 question whether the election is in the State and ascribes the 
 efficacy of the highest number the case is complete and final, 
 as they do in this clause: 
 
 In all elections in this State the person having the highest num- 
 ber of votes for any office shall be deemed to have been elected. 
 
 That is section 40. But in the election law you will 
 find the strongest provision as to the highest number of 
 votes in the instance when it does prevent an election, be- 
 cause there are two for the same office having the highest 
 number of votes. 
 
 In section 36: 
 
rHK DISIMTKI) I'RKSIDKNTIAL ELKCTION 359 
 
 If the rc(iuisite number of county and j)recinct officers shall not 
 be elected by reason of two or more persons having an equal and the 
 liighest number of votes for one and the same office, the clerk whose 
 duty it is to compare the polls shall give notice to the several per- 
 sons so having the highest and an equal number of votes to attend 
 at the office of the county clerk at a lime to be appointed bj* said 
 clerk, who shall then and there proceed publicly to decide by lot 
 which of the persons so having an eciual number of votes shall be 
 declared duly elected; and the said clerk shall m.ike and deliver to 
 the person thus declared elected a certificate of his election as 
 hereinbefore provided. 
 
 Had the clerk a right to discharge the duty limited to cast- 
 ing votes and the imperative obligation to declare the one 
 who received the lot— had the clerk the right to substitute 
 for that duty a determination that there were no two per- 
 sons that had received the highest number of votes, and the 
 lot was not reciuired, because he thought one of tliem was not 
 eligible? But the clerk has in regard to those officers every 
 power that the governor has in regard to the other oflBcers, 
 (see section 37:) 
 
 In case there shall be no choice by reason of any two or more 
 persons having an equal and the highest number of votes for either 
 of such offices — 
 
 That is, the larger offices of the State — 
 
 the governor shall by proclamation order a new election to fill 
 said offices. 
 
 Is not that an imperative duty on the governor when there 
 are two having the highest number of votes? The law of 
 Oregon is that disciualification does not elect the other, and 
 that in that case there must he a new election; and has this 
 governor the authority to determine that, instead of having 
 a new election, he will commission the one, not that has the 
 highest number of votes— for thai is iuscruta))lc, I hey being 
 equal — but the one that he thinks is eligible? What be- 
 
860 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 conies of the right of the people to have a new election? 
 They voted for the men; they have produced that result; 
 and they are entitled to the consequence of the election. 
 
 What then is the title? What does it rest upon? It is 
 quite immaterial to you what the Cronin title in the abstract 
 is. The point for you to determine is, which of these col- 
 leges is to be counted. There cannot be two colleges. 
 When the civil law lays down the proposition that tres facit 
 collegium, it lays it down in the assertion of a principle, not 
 by an arbitrary rule. The principle of a college is that the 
 majority governs, and that principle cannot be applied to a 
 less number than three. One man is not a college; two men 
 are not a college, for there is not a majority there unless it 
 be a unanimity. Unanimity is not the essence of a college. 
 So long as people are unanimous they proceed in their nat- 
 ural rights as individuals; but three make a college because 
 the vital principle of a college is that the majority exercise 
 the power of the college; and here what have you before 
 you? A college of three; a college assembled; and what is 
 Cronin' s account of it? That all three met, and instead of 
 saying anything short he undertakes to say that they re- 
 fused to act as electors of President and Vice-President. 
 Will you allow his statement, backed by the certifying names 
 of two men who were not present — for they came in after- 
 ward and were chosen electors by Cronin, after the trans- 
 action upon which he bases the formation of his college — 
 will you allow Cronin's statement that these two men re- 
 signed, declined, remitted, deserted the duty of voting for 
 President of the United States to outweigh their own cer- 
 tificate, their own action, their own return, their own bal- 
 lots that are here before you? I should think not. And 
 if you are bound to look at the matter upon the legal ques- 
 tion whether the majority of the college can fill the vacancy 
 or whether the minority of the college can fill the vacancy, 
 each having assumed to do it, you will have no great trouble 
 
THE DISPUTP:D presidential election 361 
 
 in determining tliat the majority anchors the college to it- 
 self, and that the minority is no college at all. 
 
 Supposing it to be true that these electors did not recog- 
 nize Cronin, did not regard him as an elector; they had the 
 right to that jutlgment. Nobody else, I think, regarded him 
 as such except upon the experimental invention of him to 
 see whether he could be manufactured to stand until after 
 the counting of this vote. But did you ever hear that when 
 a bank director or a member of any corporation or of any 
 board, municipal or civil, under the Government of the 
 United States or under the government of any State, did not 
 recognize the title of one man claiming to be a member of 
 that board, anything happened except that he was excluded, 
 and if he was wrongfully excluded he must right himself 
 by law.-^ Other parties might question whether the action 
 of the board taken after that exclusion was or was not law- 
 ful. But did you ever hear that the exclusion of a member 
 of the board lawful or unlawful, just or unjust, authorized 
 him to go and fill the board and go on with business? I 
 think that is as great a novelty in the law of colleges, of 
 civil boards, of governmental boards, or of private boards, 
 as was ever suggested. If you depart from the pro])- 
 osition that whatever may have happened in respect to 
 Cronin of injustice or exclusion, that did not make him the 
 college, you have this absurd possibility in a State like Ore- 
 gon, that you would have three colleges, each man i)referring 
 to throw the votes his own wav and bv his o\mi authoritv. 
 But if you adopt the rule that the majority constitutes the 
 college, you put yourself under the ])rotection of the prin- 
 ciple which governs all corporate action, that there can be 
 but one college, one board, because the majority draws to 
 itself all the powers of the board. 
 
 Now look at the very peremj^tory direction of the law of 
 Oregon in respect to the conduct of the board when it meets 
 to discharge its duty — section 59: 
 
362 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 The electors of President and Vice-President shall convene at the 
 seat of government on the first Wednesday of December next after 
 their election, at the hour of twelve of the clock at noon of that day; 
 and if there shall be any vacancy in the office of an elector, oc- 
 casioned by death, refusal to act, neglect to attend, or othervN'ise, 
 the electors present shall immediately proceed to fill, by viva voce 
 and plurality of votes, such vacancy in the electoral college. 
 
 Can you have a plurality of votes when only one vote is 
 cast? 
 
 And when all the electors shall appear or the vacancies, if any, 
 shall have been filled, as above provided, etc. 
 
 They are not allowed to go on; they are not allowed to act 
 for the State of Oregon until they are possessed of the means 
 of casting its whole vote. 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: Permit me to ask you, 
 Mr. Evarts, what would be the case if two of the electors 
 had died since the election.'' There is but one left in the 
 land of the living; must the State lose its two votes or three? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: If the whole three have died? 
 
 Mr. Commissioner Abbott: No; if two have died and 
 there is but one left? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: If two have died and there is but one left, 
 the State ought to exercjse a power reserved to it to treat the 
 election as having failed, or it may be the votes would be 
 lawful. There is no existing law of Oregon, and no existing 
 law of any State, that in its terms covers the case of there 
 not being a college to proceed to fill vacancies. There can 
 be no college when you are reduced to one. You have an 
 elector, I agree, and it is certainly undesirable that the State 
 should lose its votes. That I agree, and I agree that an 
 honest effort to present the vote to the Congress here acting 
 on the subject should receive every indulgence on the part 
 of the political authority that deals with the question, but I 
 certainly cannot as matter of law^ admit either under the 
 act of Congress or — 
 
THE DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 36S 
 
 Mr. Hoadly: Will you permit a question? Does the 
 word *''i)lurality" there refer to i)lurality of the original 
 number elected, or of those remaining after the vacancy? 
 
 Mr. Evarts: There is nothing that confines it to the 
 whole numher. It is a clear authority to them to choose 
 by the plurality of a quorum. 
 
 Mr. Hoadly: To those remaining? 
 
 IVTh. Evarts: Of those remaining; but that does not 
 touch the question of whether there should or should not be 
 a quorum to act. The ordinary rule of corporations and 
 colleges is that a majority of a fjuorum is equivalent to a 
 majority of the whole. There must be some statute to the 
 contrary. This college of electors consisted of the two men 
 clearly chosen, that are not blotted out by any evidence 
 before you, except the certificate of Cronin, not that they 
 refused to act with him, but he says they refused to act as 
 electors. Where is his evidence? Where is the record? 
 Where are the minutes? Where is the notice in writing? 
 Where is the absenteeism? That is not certified to; but 
 they refused to act as electors, and he then proceeded to fill 
 their places by his single vote. 
 
 Now, whether or not under the laws of some States that 
 faculty could reside in a single elector, it does not reside in 
 a single elector by the act of Oregon. Oregon had, by the 
 provisions of I lie electoral law of the Union, power to pro- 
 vide for a failure of election. What was that? It was 
 when the election failed, when there was no production of 
 enough electors, if you please, to meet the true exigency of 
 the law in that Ix'lialf, if it recjuired a majority to be produced 
 by an election; and it is in that case, and in that case only, 
 that the State is allowed by the United States law to sub- 
 stitute in the place of the regular mode of election some 
 secondary method. But it does not recjuire the State to 
 provide a different mode of filling a vacancy arising from a 
 failure to elect, from the mode that they adopt for filling a 
 
364 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 vacancy arising in any other manner. Oregon has settled 
 that question for itself, that in whatever way, on the very 
 day of casting the electoral vote, a vacancy in the college 
 should exist, it should be filled. Thus, while the Constitu- 
 tion makes it absolutely necessary that there should be a per- 
 sonal attendance to cast a vote, and that a majority cannot 
 cast an absent vote, because the voting is to be by ballot, 
 and the ballots are to be counted, the State determines that 
 by no chance will it lose a vote if there be persons present on 
 that day who can fill the places and save the State its full 
 representation in the electoral college. 
 
 The State of Rhode Island, finical as it was in its legis- 
 lation, instead of making a better arrangement than this 
 of Oregon and the other States, placed itself under a much 
 worse system, according to the judicial opinion given by the 
 supreme court of that State. Suppose that when the legis- 
 lature of that State undertakes by a new appointment to 
 fill the vacancies originating from a failure of the people to 
 elect, it should be found that the legislature has filled the 
 vacancy by a person, who, when he comes to the college, 
 proves himself to be disqualified, what is to happen in that 
 State tlien.f* The legislature has not given to the college the 
 plenary power to fill vacancies. The resignation or with- 
 drawal of the disqualified elector will not allow the college 
 to fill his place. The same vice inheres in the choice by the 
 legislature of an unqualified person that would arise from 
 such an election by the people, and the State must lose the 
 vote. To be sure, practically, in a State like Rhode Island, 
 where the governor by blowing his horn at the door of the 
 executive mansion can summon the legislature as the farm- 
 er's wife calls to dinner the hands from the hayfield, there 
 would be no difficulty in suddenly supplying the vacancy; 
 but for the great State of Oregon, where there were found 
 insuperable difficulties in getting the legislature together, 
 no such arrangement would be either wise or suitable. 
 
THE DISPUTED PKKSIDENTIAL ELECTION 365 
 
 Now, upon an exaniinalion of all these certificates I have 
 been quite gratified to find that, although these operators 
 up in Oregon were as harndess as serpents, they were also 
 no wiser than doves. Nothing has been done there that 
 defeats the Constitution of the United States, that defrauds 
 the State of Oregon, that defeats the election of President. 
 All that has resulted from the attempt to perpetrate and 
 consummate a fraud is to exhibit the fraud to public con- 
 demnation; but the safety of the State remains unharmed. 
 
XI 
 
 ARGUMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE 
 UNITED STATES IN THE CASE OF FARRING- 
 TON AGAINST SAUNDERS— DECEMBER TERM 
 1870. COTTON TAX CASE. 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The case of Farrington vs. Saunders involved the question of 
 the constitiitionahty of an Act of Congress passed in 1866 by the 
 first eight sections of which a tax was laid on cotton. The act 
 was entitled "An act to reduce internal taxation, and to amend an 
 act entitled 'An act to provide internal revenue to support the 
 Government, and to pay interest on the public debt and for other 
 purposes.' "* After the case had been argued and taken under 
 advisement the Court ordered a re-argument, in which Mr. Evarts, 
 associated with Benjamin R. Curtis, took part. The Court below 
 had sustained the Act of Congress and on February 20, 1871, the 
 judgment was affirmed by a divided court. The Chief Justice 
 did not sit in the case which was therefore heard by a Court of 
 eight judges. The case is not reported. The facts of the case and 
 the points raised sufficiently appear in the following argument by 
 Mr. Evarts. 
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 If the Court please : I am sure it is unnecessary for nie to 
 suggest that the case which we have the honor now to present 
 for the second time to the consideration of this Court is an 
 important one. As it touches the question of the consti- 
 tutionality of a law of Congress it is, of course, important; 
 and when that law is in execution of one of the j^rincipal acts 
 of governmental authority and sovereignty, taxation, and 
 when the princijjal end of the discussion (to wit, the con- 
 formity of this legislation with the Constitution of the 
 
 * 14 U. S, Stalulcs, pp. 98-100. 
 
 366 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 367 
 
 United States or its repugnance to the Constitution) is one 
 tliat is of extensive and, ])erlia])s, ])ernianent and not casual 
 or exceptional a])])lication of tlie ])rincii)les of the Consti- 
 tution, its ini])<)rtance is still more oV)vious. Nor do I need 
 to insist tiial the (|uestions are deserving of the most at- 
 tentive deliberation of the Court, for your honors' order 
 tliat, after tlie very full and, on hoth sides, very able argu- 
 ment ])resented before (wliich I nuiy thus speak of, as I had 
 no part in it), that there should l)e a re-argument of the point, 
 shows that it deserves from counsel and will receive from the 
 Court renewed and more thorough investigation still. 
 
 There, if your honors please, the gravity and importance 
 of this case ceases, for, in regard to the amount involved in 
 the discussion, it is trivial — $^,500, claimed to be refunded 
 as illegally exacted from this plaintiff; and as matter of 
 fact there exists, as I am advised by those who are well in- 
 formed on the subject, scarcely any possibilities of a forensic 
 or judicial consideration that affects any pecuniary interest. 
 So, too, the condemnation of the law, if it should follow from 
 your honors' judgment, does not strike down any part of 
 the present operative powers or enactments of the legisla- 
 ture, for the tax some years ago, as your honors are well 
 aware, was entirely repealed. So that your honors really 
 occupy that most serene position, in regard to your highest 
 constitutional power and duty, of passing upon the con- 
 formity of laws with the Constitution of the United States 
 wlicre you are really rendt'ring a judgment that is wholly 
 judicial, not disturbing in the least any of the actual opera- 
 tions of the Government or its laws, and not jiassing ui)on, 
 or l)eing able at any time to ))ass ujxju, any considerable 
 pecuniary results from the determiualiou. 
 
 For the future, your advice on the Conslitutiou as to what 
 its true powers are within the prenu'ses of this discussion 
 may be received as the guide of subsefpient legislation. In 
 respect to the past, all that needs to be undone, or is to be 
 
368 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 undone, or can be undone, can never be a judicial question 
 except in the most trivial amounts, wholly resting in the 
 same power that passed the law, to redress any grievances 
 or any injuries that may have been inflicted under it. 
 
 As your honors, both in this case and other cases, and as 
 the counsel on both sides in this case, are familiar with all 
 the provisions of the Constitution and of the law in question 
 raising the general discussion, I may, perhaps, be permitted 
 here, before directing specific attention to any of those pro- 
 visions, to ask your consideration of the general attitude 
 under which the taxation clauses of the Constitution were 
 framed in their present shape, the general motives which led 
 to their adoption by the convention in their present shape, 
 and the guide and key, as I shall respectfully submit to your 
 honors, which the fair and just and thorough appreciation 
 of these influences furnishes for the just construction in the 
 matter of dispute, of the true meaning of the constitutional 
 provisions. 
 
 If there was anything that might be said to have fully 
 grown into the political sense and purpose of the American 
 people from their previous experience as subject communi- 
 ties, and from their triumph in maintaining their independ- 
 ence, it was this: that there should be no taxation without 
 representation, and no taxation except so far as might be in 
 proportion to representation. It was not merely that com- 
 munities not represented should not be subject to taxation 
 by legislative power in whose constitution they had taken no 
 part, but it went further than that, in a determination, 
 so far as it was within the compass of wisdom and energy in 
 the frame of a government, to provide that the capacity of 
 taxation lodged in the common representative body should, 
 as far as it was possible, be guaranteed and guarded in favor 
 of popular rights against the framing of any laws passed by 
 a majority of the representative body that should fall en- 
 tirely upon a minority or a local division of the people. 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 360 
 
 Those c-ommiinitios were divorso in llieir nature and do- 
 mestic situation and interests. They were, as they con- 
 sidered themselves, independent and quite able to take care 
 of those domestic and local interests, but not at all able, to 
 their satisfaction, to take care of themselves as independent 
 comnuinities toward the rest of the workl, and not disposed 
 to trust tliemselves among themselves to jealousies and dis- 
 cords and contentions in pursuing their domestic interests. 
 They, tlierefore, liad the purpose to frame a general govern- 
 ment that, in all its arrangements, in all its objects, and in 
 all its powers of attahiing those objects, should have in- 
 trusted to it all that should properly be described and under- 
 stood as what was common and general to those communi- 
 ties in respect of their attitude to foreign nations and what 
 was common and general among them in the matter of main- 
 taining harmony and common concurrence of interest among 
 themselves, so far as might be, but with an equally firm and 
 an equally intelligent purpose of preserving to the inde- 
 pendence and to the local control of these several communi- 
 ties all that might be fairly called domestic, or, in the lan- 
 guage of Mr. Ellsworth, the States were unwilling to tnist 
 their domestic interests to the General Government. 
 
 Trade, production, trade among themselves, diversity 
 of production, diversity of habits, of industries, of interests, 
 trade willi foreign nations, and the taxation or control or 
 regulation which touched them — all these subjects appeared 
 in their debates and shaped tlieir determinations upon the 
 very ])oint of the problem to be settled in the formation of 
 the Government. 
 
 Foreign trade was, in its nature, of common hiterest; 
 but yet it jiiight ])e controHed so as to bear upon one part 
 of tills country to the ])rejudice of another. Domestic 
 taxation on subjects of general and common interest and 
 duty in these comnnmities towards the General Govern- 
 ment should be subjected to tlie Federal exercise of that 
 
 25 
 
370 SPEECHES OP WILLIAM ^lAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 authority; and yet the Federal exercise of that authority, if 
 it were allowed to grasp the entire sovereignty of taxation at 
 the will only of the legislative body, might be used, in re- 
 s])ect of domestic taxation, so as to elevate and favor some 
 industries and some local interest, and to disparage, to dis- 
 favor, to oppress, to extinguish other interests limited in 
 locality or in the pursuits of the people. In this difficulty, 
 therefore, and in the different ways of disposing of it, the 
 convention found their greatest embarrassment, and exhibit, 
 as we have always been disposed to admit, the greatest 
 prudence, the greatest good temper, and the greatest in- 
 telligence in their solution. 
 
 Now, without finding in the Constitution, from any nice 
 philological criterion, the precise meaning of the different 
 words coming within the embrace of this general subject of 
 taxation (as certainly it should not be expected that wise 
 judicial legislation or practical discussion should do), we 
 nevertheless must not overlook the fact that, in determining 
 what the distribution of taxation or taxing authority on the 
 different subjects of taxation and the appurtenant regula- 
 tion of trade, of commerce, and of industry that followed 
 from this control of taxation, this general purpose and this 
 general intent and this claim of as complete execution of 
 the purpose and intent as it was within the compass of the 
 intelligence and of the patriotism of the framers of the Con- 
 stitution to produce, must be taken as the best guide in 
 determining what they meant by the particular arrange- 
 ments that they adopted ; and what they meant by the par- 
 ticular arrangements that they adopted was what the people 
 meant in accepting the Constitution and surrendering their 
 comparative local independence for the erection of this com- 
 mon Government. 
 
 Difficulty was found in several points of taxation. 
 There was no one of the general methods of taxation open 
 to sovereignty but what was thought to be exjDosed, in its 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 371 
 
 surrender by the different connuiinities to the common 
 (lovernment, to dan^'ers to tliemselves, and but few of the 
 members of the convention ever tliou^dit, if any of them did, 
 that a naked and absohite devohition upcm the new Govern- 
 ment of the wliole undefined and unHuiited power of taxa- 
 tion was, or should be, possil)ly compatible with the objects 
 in view. Nor was there any determination or any concession 
 that an> one of the branches of this taxation, whether it was 
 on imi)orts or onexi)orts, or on domestic consumption, could 
 be left untrannneled antl unlunited in the power of the Gov- 
 ernment; for when the subject of im])osts or duties on im- 
 portations, seemingly that wliicli tlie common interests 
 needed and the common necessities as well as the nature of 
 the tax should most freely and fearlessly j)lace witJi the Gen- 
 eral Government, was under consideration, it was felt — and 
 the contest went on day after day with the greatest persist- 
 ency — that the matter of im])osts should bear in it, and in 
 the very clause by which it was guaranteed, evidence that it 
 was not unrestricted. And when they arrived at the sub- 
 ject of domestic taxation, then came the question of direct 
 taxation, or taxation })y way of excise or otherwise, not 
 domestic duties that were caj)able of adjustment by con- 
 sumption or arrangement after the tax was laid. How 
 were these domestic taxes to be disposed of? WJiy, clearly 
 in full preservation of this general purpose and in full view 
 of the vital necessity and the vital interests that led to its 
 restriction. 
 
 Direct taxation, if we may judge from the debates, so far 
 as it lay in the minds of that convention in shaping tlie rule 
 by which its <'xactions should be drawn from tlie communi- 
 ties, was regarded as a taxation uj)on wealtli in distinction 
 from a taxation upon (•()nsum})ti()n, for all tlu* debates re- 
 (luired firmly, as a i)art of the Conslilulion, that this mat- 
 ter of taxation upon wealth slioidd be dislrii)ut<'(l according 
 to wliat this convention considered a jiisl rule of c.stiuiating 
 the comparative wealth of tliese different conuimnities. 
 
372 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWTLL EVARTS 
 
 It was proposed that there should be a fundamental pro- 
 vision that a ratio of taxation should be accommodated to 
 a mixed or compound computation of population and wealth, 
 and all direct taxation should be accommodated to the 
 standard thus furnished. The progress of the discussion 
 showed that, practically, it was very- difficult to make a 
 comparative estimate of the wealth of the different com- 
 munities as distinguished from the ratio that should be at- 
 tributed to their proportions in population; and, finally, 
 the convention, by a somewhat general consent of the lead- 
 ing debaters and thinkers on this subject in it, settled upon 
 this, which advanced them a great way in arriving at a so- 
 lution that, on the whole, taking things at large, population 
 furnished as good a ratio and proportion of wealth in the 
 different States as any other. 
 
 After wealth was discarded and population furnished the 
 ratio, then came the vexed question, what was to be done 
 with this anomalous portion of the community that were 
 slaves, and so property, and as slaves, not persons, and yet 
 were men and, in that sense, persons. Then the arbitrary 
 arrangement, coming from compromise rather than resting 
 upon reason, in which I believe both sides thought they gave 
 away altogether too much and each thought they acquired 
 nothing of much value, resulted in adherence to population 
 as being the measure by which the comparative wealth of 
 these communities should be estimated and according to 
 which direct taxation should be applied, and three-fifths of 
 all other than free persons being counted in the enumeration, 
 we have a Federal census. And your honors, in the perusal 
 of these debates, will find that, in the provision of date and 
 periodicity, a rule of estimate was insisted upon in a firm 
 and definite legislation in the Constitution on the subject of 
 this census as being one of the fundamental supports of the 
 contrivance to produce and maintain, under the Govern- 
 ment, the equality of burdens that it was intended should 
 be borne . 
 
COT'lON TAX CASE 37.'J 
 
 Now \ve are verj- prone, when the historj'' of tlie Govern- 
 ment has shown that direct taxation has been very seldom 
 and very narrowly emj^loyed by the Federal Government 
 and that it was discarded, not only because it was not neces- 
 sary and other forms of tax were so ninch more convenient 
 and manageable, but because the constitutional rule of 
 distributing the burdens of direct taxation was found to be 
 incon\'enient and somewhat distastefid even to tlie com- 
 munities that had so strongly insisted upon it, in view I say 
 of the history of the Government under the Constitution in 
 its practical operation about direct taxation, we are prone 
 readily to fall into a notion, in discussing and determining 
 the provisions of the Constitution, that the rule of direct 
 taxation was not of this solidity, this firmness, and this 
 weight in giving sha])e to the Constitution, which from read- 
 ing it is apparent and from the debates is made as evident 
 as the sun in the heavens. 
 
 What did tliey think they had accomplished? They 
 thought they had accomplished this: That no direct taxa- 
 tion (by which they meant what they regarded as taxa- 
 tion upon wealth) ever could be laid except on the Federal 
 proportion thus arbitrarily fixed and furnished by the census; 
 and that wherever this General Government invaded, so 
 to s])eak, the province of direct taxation, which ])rimarily 
 and principally they regarded as reserved to tlie States, 
 and necessarily reserved to the States, they should have at 
 their command no power by which any combinations could 
 force a direct tax upon any portion of this conmiunity to the 
 relief and release therefrom of any other ])ortion; and that 
 they could not accommodate it, even in their discretion as to 
 what was fair and equal, but were rigidly to adhere to what 
 was the basis upon which, and upon which alone, the Constitu- 
 tion could be formetl — the very rule tliat the Constitution 
 adopted as to what was fair and equal, and that was distri- 
 bution according to j)oi)uIation; and tJiat they should 
 
374 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 not have it in their power to adopt an honest appHcation of 
 this rule of distribution under the actual circumstances of 
 population when the tax was laid, and then keep it perman- 
 ently after the natural processes and operations of society 
 and of trade and of industry had diversified and changed the 
 relation; but that, not only at the start and at the basis, 
 there must be this rigid and faithful acceptance of the neces- 
 sary cramp upon taxation which was imposed, but there 
 should be a necessity, at frequently recurring periods of ten 
 years fixed in the Constitution, of a reassertion of the stand- 
 ard to be accepted and acted upon in the real circumstances 
 of the country. 
 
 Now, when we come to what (although the name is not 
 used in the Constitution) may, in grouping them together, 
 be called indirect taxes, there was the same intention, though 
 not so strict a necessity in their judgment, of preserving equal- 
 ity, to avoid at once the competitions of cupidity and the 
 disparity of favoritism; and it was attempted to prescribe 
 certain articles upon which the taxation could be placed, 
 and thus rigidly in advance fix in the Constitution for pos- 
 terity, the precise regulation of the subject. That being 
 abandoned, and certainly most wisely, an effort was then 
 made to restrict it to general descriptive words that should 
 preserve, as far as might be, a controlling influence on legis- 
 lation and furnish a constitutional measure and circumscrip- 
 tion of the bounds of taxation. 
 
 That was abandoned, and finally in their discussions, 
 economical and political, they came to the conclusion that, 
 in regard to this portion of the power of taxation, two guar- 
 antees would be adequate. In the first place, they do not 
 fall upon wealth, but upon consumption or expense, and if 
 the one condition, that the imposts and excises and other 
 domestic duties, if there be any, that pass themselves round 
 and distribute themselves in the natural movements of so- 
 ciety upon the subjects of taxation — if there be a single 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 375 
 
 provision tliat llioso taxes, in tlioir enactment, sliall be nni- 
 foiiii throu^'lioiit tlie United States, then the question, 
 wliether tliey fall equally and fairly upon the population 
 distributed tlirou<:jhout it, will be a matter that, in experi- 
 ence, the rule of consunii)tion, where there is a certain free- 
 dom in the tax])ayer as to how nuich tax he will pay, and 
 where the comnnmities can not be held to different rates of 
 ])ractical imi)osition by any contrivance or artifice of the 
 taxing power, will determine, and this will ])roduce the 
 satisfactory ec|uality. 
 
 That bein«^ dis])Osed of, there was one other subject which, 
 specifically and witliout determininfr whether a tax upon 
 the j)rescribed subject would or would not be a direct tax 
 upon wealth, or would or would not be an indirect tax upon 
 consumption — the question was to be determined, how it 
 sliall be regulated; I mean in respect of exports. When you 
 come to this discussion about exports you will find that this 
 convention did not intend that its primary rule of equality — 
 that no possibility of evading it by practical difficidties in 
 ai)i)lying it should override what they felt as the necessity 
 of this rule of equality being fixed firmly in the Constitution. 
 Exj^orts, as we all know, where the complete sovereignty and 
 the whole power and the whole duty in respect of taxation 
 are devolved upon a single government, may well be a subject 
 of taxation, and the power to regulate by taxation one of 
 great imj)ortance to the conmumity. 
 
 But here was the difficulty: When, in regard to foreign 
 commerce, we allow you, the General Government, the con- 
 trol of the duties on imports, we see at once that whatever 
 comes into the country, at whatever port of entry, whatever 
 State it enters, comes from without the wliole country, and 
 comes into the whole country; and as we have j)rovided the 
 rule that your taxation upon that shall be uniform, and shall 
 fall to the taxpayer through tli<' means of consujiiplion, we 
 have j)roduced e(|uality. Hnl when you come to exports, 
 
376 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 it is in vain to produce by any artificial reasoning the impres- 
 sion upon us, representing these distinct communities, that 
 whatever is exported, because it goes to a foreign country, 
 is therefore to be treated as being exported in any practical 
 sense from the whole country. It is an export from the place 
 where it is produced, whether that production, from the 
 community, from the local circumscription of interests 
 where it is produced, be manufactures or agricultural 
 produce, or whatever else it may be, and every effort was 
 made by the commercial States of the union to retain, even if 
 it were a circumscribed and limited, control over taxation 
 on exports. 
 
 It was insisted that in time of war it would be necessary, 
 would be important, and that an embargo would not be 
 lawful, if exports could not be taxed in any form. But that 
 was discouraged, justly discouraged, as a criticism deserving 
 attention when examined, because, as was conceded on 
 deliberation, a question of embargo was not a question of 
 duty; it was a question of war and a question of foreign re- 
 lations. 
 
 Now, without pursuing the matter further, all efforts to 
 reduce the subject of exports within the limitations by 
 which the Constitution had secured the equality in respect 
 of direct taxes and in respect of indirect taxes on consump- 
 tion, were found to be impracticable; and it was settled that 
 exports were such a subject in respect of taxation that the 
 only way these common communities could agree to dispose 
 of it, in respect of the powers of their common government, 
 was that it should have no power over it whatever in respect 
 of taxation. 
 
 Your honors will observe that, in this attempted discri- 
 mination between direct and indirect taxes, what falls upon 
 wealth is regarded as direct, and what falls upon consump- 
 tion is regarded as indirect. Imposts and excises and other 
 forms of domestic exaction on commodities or on the pro- 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 377 
 
 diiction of cominotlitios is really a tax ii])on consumption, 
 because the tax laid is not really paid by the party upon whom 
 it is imi)Osed, and the law imi)osin^' it uj)on him gives him 
 tlie means according to the natural operations of trade with- 
 in a community of reimlnirsing hijnself from the consumer. 
 The vigor of the law itself effects this, because, by the very 
 nature of im])ortations, no im])ortation can be the subject of 
 trade within our borders that has not paid the duty equally 
 on introduction, and, by the law of our excise, no domestic 
 subject made the means of a payment of a tax can be sold 
 within the comnumity without the tax having been paid. 
 But, the moment you come to deal with direct taxation, 
 there is no such faculty in respect of the person u])on whom 
 it falls, and the moment you come to deal with exports, as 
 our laws droj) their vigor with our boundaries when we lay 
 a tax upon an export, we do not, by the vigor of our law, im- 
 part to the person who pays that tax a power of reimbursing 
 himself from the consumer, because our laws, as is manifest 
 upon the verv' statement of the case, have no prevalence of 
 authority where the community consuming exports exer- 
 cises its option as to the consumption. 
 
 We may tlien, if the Court please, see ver\' briefly how 
 these problems were solved in the actual arrangements of 
 the Constitution. The first clause bearing upon taxation 
 ])roviding that "Representatives and direct taxes shall be 
 ay)j)ortioned among the several States which may be in- 
 cluded within this T^nion according to their res|)ective num- 
 bers," furnishes the guide for the comj)utation and the ar- 
 rangement for its rej)etition. There, I ajjprehend, we have a 
 distinct, ])ermanent, and wJioUy inexorable proposition of 
 the Constitution as to what is the nature of direct taxation; 
 and T tliink your honors will find that whatever is meant by 
 direct tiixation by tliis Constitution Ls the complement of 
 wlial is meant by the other forms of taxation that Iiave a 
 diti'erent rule provided for them. 
 
378 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 The eighth section takes up a jjositive power to lay these 
 taxes, which thus far have only been spoken of in the forms 
 of indirect taxation. "The Congress shall have power to 
 lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises." Now, 
 that stood until nearly the close of the debates of the Con- 
 vention, as the whole affirmative power in this granting 
 clause; and the restrictive or explanatory clause which now 
 forms the last member of this sentence as printed in the 
 Constitution, separate and apart from it, was postponed, 
 but always with the notion that the first clause would not be 
 enacted unless the second was. But the requirement that 
 they should be brought side by side, and the limitation made 
 a proviso, so to speak, or restriction in the very granting 
 power, was resisted "till finally, on the completion of the 
 draft of the Constitution" it was brought up and placed 
 where it now stands, and I submit it is in the nature of a 
 proviso or limitation. "To lay and collect taxes, duties, 
 imposts, and excises . . . but all duties, imposts, and 
 excises shall be imiform throughout the United States." 
 
 The ninth clause contains the prohibition on Congress that 
 "No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid unless in 
 proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore di- 
 rected to be taken." There had been an absolute provision 
 that all direct taxation should be in that proportion, and it 
 must be, I think, regarded as the specific function of this 
 repetitious clause to guard against any pretense that a 
 capitation tax, which was the subject in the mmd of one at 
 least of the great parties to the discussion, should ever be 
 claimed not to be a direct tax; for all direct taxation had al- 
 ready been required to follow the standard of the census, 
 and when the prohibitory clause comes a capitation tax is the 
 only one specified. It must be to mark it out as free entirely 
 from any possibility of doubt or discussion. But if you 
 undertake to name the capitation tax in a prohibition, then, 
 in order to exclude a conclusion that any other tax may be 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 370 
 
 otherwise laitl tliore must follow tiiis i)rovision, after the 
 words "no capifaiioti'' "or other tax shall be laid." 
 
 Then eojnes the provision in regartl to exports. The 
 phraseolot^y of this clause which I am al)oiit to read has been 
 the subject of comment by the Court, as well as in forensic 
 discussions, but I cannot forbear from insisting that its lan- 
 guage is very carefully and very thoroughly expressive of abso- 
 lute prohibition in any form, at any stage, under any guise. 
 The two words which confessedly com])rehend every kind of 
 taxation were "tax" and "dutv," and both of these words 
 are used in the ])roliibition. The prohibition is not applied 
 to the tax on exportation; it is not even applied in terms to 
 tax on exports. It is expressed thus: "No tax or duty shall 
 be laid on articles exported from any State." 
 
 No tax or duty meant, no tax or duty direct or indirect. 
 No excise, no form of taxation should impede exportation 
 under any guise or under any theory. "No tax or duty shall 
 be laid on articles ex]:)orted from any State." 
 
 If tlie Court please, I will ask attention very briefly to 
 the general provisions of our internal revenue system, into 
 which and as i)art of which the specific act under discussion 
 was subsequently brought. 
 
 The Act of 18G2 or of 1804, for one as well as the other 
 will ans^^^er the purj:)ose of my ])resent discussion. I ask 
 attention to section IIG of the Internal Revenue Act of 
 ISai (\'ol. XII, U. S. Stat., p. 488). Shnilar sections are 
 found in all the other Internal Revenue xVcts. 
 
 After the whole system of internal taxation is perfected, 
 comes this ])rovision: 
 
 And be it further enacted. That t'roin and alter [\\c dale t)n which 
 this act lakes eirect, there shall be an allowance or drawback on all 
 articles on which any internal duty or tax shall have been paid, ex- 
 cept raw or unmanufactured cotton, equal in amount to the duty 
 or tax paid thereon and no more when exported, the evidence being 
 furnished as required by the act. 
 
380 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I submit to your honors that, under the internal revenue 
 system, omitting, for the present, this exception about cot- 
 ton, treating that as if it were not in the section, that under 
 the internal revenue system of the United States no tax nor 
 excise was laid upon any article that was exported. It was 
 not laid in the guise of a general or domestic tax, and then 
 left to be defended as not being a tax on exports; it was a tax 
 upon consumption, as it was understood these uniform taxes 
 were to be when they reached commodities, at least, subjects 
 of merchandise or manufacture. Under that revenue sj^stem 
 no man could say that any tax or duty had been laid on 
 articles exported; for although the tax rested upon it while 
 it remained and might be a subject of consumption, the mo- 
 ment that it appeared, or in the interest of its owner or his 
 factor was to seek exportation, the law lifted itself to adhere 
 to the Constitution, which from that moment protected it. 
 That, then, was the general system, and that will be found 
 to be the general system of taxation, either in regard to im- 
 ports, which was intended to be a tax on consumption, and 
 not a tax upon foreign commerce, or in regard to excisable 
 articles, namely, that whenever either imports or domestic 
 products sought exportation, drawback equivalent to the 
 duty laid was always to be allowed, when it was possible 
 in the computations and ascertainments of identity to 
 allow it. 
 
 This then being the Constitution, and this the fidelity 
 with which an excise was preserved from being under that 
 name possibly a tax on an article exported, there comes this 
 law of 1866, which is found in the fourteenth volume of the 
 United States Statutes, page 98. Your honors have noticed 
 that in this general-drawback clause of the revenue system of 
 1862, which was the first act, there is made an exception of 
 raw or unmanufactured cotton, and no drawback was al- 
 lowed it. This act was passed durmg the war, and there was 
 a small tax of half a cent a pound. The only other clause in 
 
COTTON TAX C.\SE 381 
 
 that section wliicli I refer to for a moiiieiit — tJie same section 
 whicli excliitles raw cotton from tlie Ijenefit of drawback — 
 contains a subsequent provision that wlienever any manu- 
 factured cotton is exi)orted it sliall liave, not only the draw- 
 back of the excise which it has ])aid as a manufacture, but the 
 drawback of what the cotton tliat entered into its manu- 
 facture had j)aid as raw cotton. I mention this here, be- 
 cause it fonns a topic to be considered in the discussion of the 
 principal act. In addition to the tliree per cent which shall 
 have been paid on the manufacture of cotton the exported 
 manufactured cotton is to attract to itself a drawback of a 
 tax upon tlie raw cotton which has entered into its com- 
 position. 
 
 If the Court please, the principal section of tliis cotton-tax 
 act is this: "On and after the 1st day of August, 1866, in 
 lieu of the taxes on unmanufactured cotton as provided in the 
 act of 1864, as amended by the act of March 3d, 1865, there 
 shall be paid by the producer, owner, or holder upon all cot- 
 ton i)roduced within the United States, and upon which no 
 tax has been levied, paid, or collected, a tax of three cents per 
 pound as hereinafter provided," and the weight shall be as- 
 certained by an allowance for tare, "and such tax shall be 
 and renunn a lien thereon, in the possession of any person 
 whomsoever, from the time when this law takes effect, or 
 such cotton is produced as aforesaid, until tlie same shall have 
 been paid." 
 
 The law imj)resses a statutory and effective lien by the 
 weight of its own legislation uj^on every pound of cotton 
 Ihat then exists jind upon every ])ound that shall be grown 
 thereafter as it comes to maturity, and it uuist remain sub- 
 ject to that lien initil it is discharged by paynu'nt, the only 
 method provided. "And no drawback shall in any case be 
 allowed on raw or unuuiuufactured cotton of any tax paid 
 thereon when exporli-d jji (he raw or unnumufaclured con- 
 dition," 
 
382 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, if your honors please, you see the nature of this case. 
 It is that the Congress imposes upon the cotton the moment 
 it is produced the burden of this tax, there to remain until 
 it is paid, and an express provision that it shall adhere to it 
 as a tax laid upon it when it is exported, a sedulous and ab- 
 solute provision that a tax be laid upon all the cotton in this 
 country that shall adhere to it when it is exported. 
 
 The Constitution had said, no tax shall be laid upon any 
 article exported, which, if it meant anything, meant that no 
 tax should be laid upon an article to be exported which it 
 should bear in its exportation, for short of that there is no 
 vigor in the protection of exports from being taxed, and 
 especially no satisfaction of so sedulous a protection as the 
 Constitution has sought to throw around the subject in its 
 language, which is that no tax or duty, which is equivalent, 
 I must submit to your honors, to an enumeration of every 
 possible form in which tax or duty could be specifically laid 
 on an article to be exported, as if it had said, no tax, direct or 
 indirect in its nature, specifically applied to the thing to be 
 exported; no duty, excise or otherwise, shall be laid upon 
 any article exported. 
 
 We will see what aid we get from the determinations of this 
 Court in deciding whether a tax laid by the Constitution is 
 to be protected against invasion on the one hand from the 
 States, or a right in the States is to be controlled on the other 
 hand by the legislation of Congress; and we will also see 
 whether those principles do not far transcend any that are 
 necessary to invoke in determining this matter of exports. 
 The other clauses are familiar to the Court which substantially 
 bind the cotton to the point of its production until the tax 
 gatherer has effectively burdened it with the practical col- 
 lection or security for the collection, and contain a penal 
 guarantee against its removal, by affecting everybody who 
 intermeddles with it in the ordinary course of management 
 and transportation until the tax is paid or secured, making it 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 383 
 
 a criiiio to begin the very first sto]) towards exportation 
 without the actual payment of the tax or without the guar- 
 antees that attend tlie cotton to the point of tlie final 
 exaction of the tax. 
 
 If the Com-t })lease, we say, tlien, that this tax thus laid 
 is repugnant to tlie Constitution, and that if it be regarded 
 as an exi)ort tax — as a tax laid on an article exported or a 
 duty laid on an article exported — it is, in the very words of 
 the Constitution, a prohibited tax. If it be a direct tax it is 
 not apportioned; if it l)e an indirect tax it is not uniform. 
 
 The argument on the otlier side seeks to maintain its con- 
 stitutionality only by claiming it to be an indirect tax or 
 excise, and that it is not laid on an exported article. I have 
 read to your honors an internal revenue act, which, it is 
 claimed, is entitled to this pro])er description, that it lays 
 an excise, but not upon any article exported. It is claimed 
 that this cotton act lays an excise upon cotton, but not upon 
 cotton exported. 
 
 I will first consider the question whether it be a direct tax. 
 It is a direct tax, if at all, upon this relation to what is ad- 
 mitted to be in all the discussion a subject of direct taxation, 
 and in regard to which no taxation can be laid under this 
 Constitution, except by distribution according to the census — 
 that is, a tax upon land. Now, is it or not a sound proposi- 
 tion that a tax upon agricultural land must be tlistributed 
 according to the census? I sui)pose that it is. Is it true 
 that a tax upon the cro])s growing upon agricultural land is, 
 in the sense of taxation, a tax u])on land? Is it true that, if 
 such a tax, which in terms is embraced by this act, because 
 it is on the growing cotton at the time the act is passed, is a 
 tax s])ecifically upon the agricultural })roducts of agricultural 
 land it is a tax u])on the land? If these things be so, is a tax 
 u])on particular descrij^tions in climate and product of agri- 
 cultural land a tax upon that agricultural land? 
 
 AVithout saying now whether uniformity is ])ossib](' in re- 
 
384 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 gard to a tax which is limited and local in its application to 
 agricultural land, we are now considering only the question 
 whether it is a direct tax when it is applied to the whole crop 
 of agricultural land producing specific crops. Certainly 
 there is no case in your honors' report or elsewhere that 
 holds the negative of this. The observation in the case of 
 Hylton, falling from Judge Patterson, favors the proposi- 
 tion that a specific tax laid upon the agricultural product of 
 land is a direct tax, and thus apportionable ; because, as his 
 honor says, if it were otherwise, it would be very easy to 
 elude the provision about a tax on articles exported. So that 
 so far as dictum goes we have this saying of that celebrated 
 judge and eminent statesman in the framing of the Constitu- 
 tion, Judge Patterson, that a tax upon agricultural products 
 of land would be a direct tax. 
 
 It is not apportioned; it is not apportionable; and there 
 comes the whole argument against its being a direct tax. 
 I do not know, if your honors please, how thoroughly it may 
 be held to be impressed upon the constitutional notion of 
 this country, that it is a test, under our Constitution, whether 
 a tax is direct, that it can or can not be apportioned. The 
 doctrine as it is held in the discussions in Hylton's case is 
 wholly unnecessary to the decision; for if there is any prin- 
 ciple upon which the carriage tax is supported it is that it is 
 a tax upon expense in the nature of an excise upon an article 
 consumed solely, and is therefore laid upon the person pos- 
 sessing and consuming it. 
 
 But the discussions have been there commenced, and since 
 continued, that it was a logical and legal and constitutional 
 test of whether a tax was direct or not, that it was con- 
 veniently — that is, within the range of convenience which 
 politics requires, which law making requires — apportionable. 
 Now what is the language? "Direct taxes shall be appor- 
 tioned." "No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid" 
 unless it be apportioned. Well, that must mean undoubtedly 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 385 
 
 that, in the sense of tlie franiers of the Constitution, some 
 direct taxes could he apportioned. But it by no means fol- 
 lowed that they thought that all direct taxation wliich was 
 at the command of a single community under a single gov- 
 ernment, could be a])i)lied and a])i)ortioned in this country 
 and among these different comnumities. They have under- 
 taken to say that no direct tax shall be laid unless it is ap- 
 portioned; and to determine whether a tax is direct or not 
 is by the nature of the tax, not by a philological definition, 
 but by a ])ractical consideration of what the framers of the 
 Constitution had imdertaken to do and had supposed they 
 had secured. ^Mien you come then, as you wall, to taxes 
 which in their nature are direct, and can not be apportioned, 
 I submit that it is a wholly faulty method of reasoning to 
 cliange the character of the tax which is prohibited unless ap- 
 portioned, and if not apportionable can not be laid, because 
 it can not be laid imtil it is apportioned. 
 
 If this Government of ours possessed, or was intended to 
 possess the whole fund of taxation that the comnumities 
 living under it were to bear and their exigencies might re- 
 quire, there would be more force in that reasoning. Not- 
 withstanding, it would still be faulty. But when we are 
 considering what range of direct taxation this people have 
 committed to their General Government, when confessedly 
 direct taxation was a subject that every domestic comnnmity 
 wishes to control antl keep to itself, and when, coming to a 
 subject of direct taxation which is not a])portionable, you 
 simply remit it to the control of domestic legislation, I sub- 
 mit that you are finding the precise situation which the 
 framers of the Constitution, representing the interests of 
 these several comnumities, insisted u])on; that the only 
 direct taxation that they would commit to the General Gov- 
 ernment was a direct taxation that was capable of distribu- 
 tion, and that whatever was not so capable was reserved to 
 the States, for the resources and support of their own Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 26 
 
386 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I agree, if you please, that when the Federal Government 
 comes to apply direct taxation it finds but few subjects of 
 direct taxation that can fairly claim to be apportionable, 
 and agree, if you please, that a tax on cotton, which is only 
 produced in eleven States, cannot be apportioned among 
 the States where it is not produced. That proves, not that 
 it is not a direct tax, but that it is not an apportionable 
 tax. Then it remains, except so far as the States are inter- 
 dicted from taxing it to the prejudice of the general inter- 
 ests, it remains a domestic subject of exaction and contribu- 
 tion. So of ice in New England; so of hemp in the West, 
 and so of any local article when it is sought to make it 
 specifically and by itself a subject of taxation. 
 
 While I do not claim that any guide is to be drawn against 
 the tax not being direct, by reason of any difficulty of ad- 
 ministering it one way or the other, yet I submit that it is 
 wholly faulty to look to the definition of the tax as being 
 direct or indirect upon the notion whether or not it is easily or 
 possibly apportionable. Does this then withdraw cotton 
 and ice and what not from the taxing power of the Govern- 
 ment.? No, every local and specific subject of taxation is 
 capable of generalization which will bring it within a head 
 that embraces other local and specific subjects of taxation 
 in other parts of the country. If you want to put a tax 
 upon the product of land, to wit, cotton land, put also a 
 tax upon the product of the other agricultural land, to wit, 
 hemp land and wheat land, and tobacco land, and find in 
 your very difiiculties and in the very restricted rate of 
 taxation that can thus be imposed, the very point that the 
 framers of the Constitution insisted upon as one of the firm 
 landmarks of their Government; that no tax should be laid 
 to which the constituents of the people who had voted for it 
 should make no contribution; and that when you wanted to 
 tax you must find a Federal or general basis upon which, as a 
 Federal and a General Government, you could fairly demand 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 387 
 
 that yoii were distributing' a burden according to tlw nietliods 
 of the Constitution; or, tliat taxation was inhibited. 
 
 Your honors are faniihar witli the general legal doetrines 
 and I need not repeat either the ])ro])osition or the authori- 
 ties that all there is to land is its product, its income, its 
 rents, its profits. We are all tenants whether we have a fee 
 or not. We can not transport the land or remove it from 
 th«' firm possession of the Government under which it rests, 
 its power of taxation and right of eminent domain, and under 
 the feudal system the incidents of tenure which answered all 
 the purposes of the Lord paramount. If you will put a tax 
 on agricultural ])rodiicts that fixes itself upon the very crops 
 as they grow and before they are picked, you are taxing that 
 land which produces those products; it is a direct tax upon 
 that land. If you find it useful thus to tax, then you must 
 have a comprehension of such taxation as, embracing the 
 area of ])ublic burden for public uses, complies with the dis- 
 tribution of the Constitution. 
 
 Is it an indirect tax? It is claimed that it is an indirect 
 tax. It is certainlj', in a general sense, either direct or in- 
 direct. But to come to the language of the Constitution, it is 
 either a duty or an impost (wliich last it is not) or an excise. 
 And to reduce the matter from the indefiniteness of duty, if 
 it be not a direct tax, it is an excise on consumption. 
 
 Let me, however, go back for a moment to say that the 
 great test of whether a tax is indirect — as to whether it bears 
 upon wealth, or whether it bears upon consumption— fails 
 to protect the tax as an excise whenever the tax is extended 
 beyond the consumption which the excise warrants and 
 pays for the enjoyment of. Whenever you put a tax of the 
 nature of an internal tax upon what is exported, you do not 
 make the payer a tax-gatlierer for the Government; he pays 
 it out of his wealth, out of his cotton, and your laws furnish 
 him no means of g<'tting it back at all in a foreign <ountry — 
 not the least; so that when von comr |o claim I hat ji tax is 
 
388 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 an excise you must understand that the limitation of an 
 excise is a tax laid upon domestic consumption. It is in- 
 direct for that reason — that when it is laid and collected it has 
 not fallen upon the person that bears it. He is a mere col- 
 lector, and whom it shall fall upon depends upon the usage, 
 the conveniences, the circumstances of the community, as 
 making them consumers of the article that has borne the in- 
 crement of price given it by the excise tax. Therefore, this 
 cotton tax, besides being a tax upon the crop and the whole 
 crop of cotton -producing land in this country, is, in respect 
 of its falling upon that cotton as an ex-j^orted or exportable 
 article, not a tax indirect and of excise, because the payer of 
 the tax, in respect to that exported article, has no means 
 of collecting the tax which he has paid. 
 
 Is it an excise? Well, if it be not a direct tax it is, I sup- 
 pose, an excise, because it falls upon a commodity an article 
 consumed by the community; and excise, I suppose, covers 
 that. There are other taxes — stamp duties, succession duties 
 and other domestic duties — but when you are dealing with 
 an article of product or merchandise the tax is an excise tax. 
 
 Is it uniform? Here is a map of the United States of 
 America, and of the circumscribed territory of the cotton 
 belt or cotton-producing region of the United States, show- 
 ing, in the first place, that it is wholly and continuously 
 local, touching only a portion of the country and leaving 
 the rest unaffected. It includes portions of the territory of, 
 I think, eleven States and no more, eight really being what 
 are called cotton-producing States. 
 
 Now, the provision of our Constitution is that all excises 
 shall be uniform throughout the United States, and this tax 
 is laid upon this cotton, irrespective of the question whether 
 it is consumed within this territory of the United States, or 
 whether it is consumed abroad. 
 
 An argument might be made that if a tax is laid — I do 
 not think it would be a sound one or fulfill the obligations of 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 389 
 
 the Constitution — an ar^innont niij;hl be made that no 
 matter how circumscribed tlie origin of ])r()(hiction mif^ht be, 
 if th<' excise was finally distributed on consumiition, then 
 the consumi)tion ])ervading the coiuitry, or possibly per- 
 vading the country, there might be a uniformity thus dis- 
 tributed. But I submit to your honors that no such limited 
 construction as that is possible, and, whether it be so or not, 
 this act is not an act wliich follows this article and collects 
 it from the people of the United States, among whom it is 
 distributed by consumption. It exacts it froni the producer 
 within this limited belt of territory, although the whole of it 
 should be consumed abroad. In that sense, and in that 
 event, it in no respect is an excise, and in no respect finds its 
 equalization in consumption. 
 
 The actual figures of the trade of the country are that about 
 five-sixths of the cotton go abroad, and one-sixth, at the ut- 
 most, is consumed here. There is no method of consuming 
 cotton except by manufacturing it. This is the actual sit- 
 uation of this property that is taxed. It can not be neces- 
 sary- to argue that this localization of the tax by the laws of 
 nature, the lines of climate, is just as definite and a much 
 more inexorable limitation than any statutory limitation 
 could be. If this Congress had laid a tax in terms of excise 
 upon all cotton produced within tliese States, naming them, 
 it woidd be no more a limited or a local tax tlian it is in adopt- 
 ing the description of tax as of land j)roducing cotton or of 
 cotton produced on land and there made taxable, as it is. 
 The arrangements of the Government have distributed the 
 cotton-tax officers onlv througli this local territorv. 
 
 Now, imiformity can not be departed from, because a 
 subject of taxation is not uniformly distributed. If you 
 wish to tax under a rule of uniformity certain ])roducts that 
 are of local growth, as cotton is here, then you must have a 
 rule of uniformity by adopting a subject of taxation which is 
 in its description and definition ca})able of unifonnity. Tlie 
 
390 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 subject thus described is distributed, not growing on every 
 acre, not growing in every township, not growing in every 
 county, and of course not equally growing, in regard to its 
 products, in the different sections of the country. Neverthe- 
 less, you have determined that you will resort to crude agri- 
 cultural products for taxation (and crude agricultural prod- 
 ucts are distributed all over the United States) and lay your 
 tax upon such products at the rate that the representatives 
 of all those products that are to bear the tax can agree upon; 
 and if they can not agree then you will not have the tax and 
 their constituents will be entirely unaffected in their pur- 
 suits. 
 
 Here, then, your honors see that the fundamental ideas of 
 the Constitution are not to be broken down, because a legis- 
 lature under particular circumstances finds a difficulty in its 
 appetite for revenue to arrange it satisfactorily. I do not 
 insist, as a legal point, that at the time this tax was laid the 
 whole region of country that bears this burden was unrepre- 
 sented in Congress. But the fact shows how it is that, if 
 people are to lay taxes that their constituents do not pay 
 and that do not affect the industry and pursuits and modify 
 the property and the prospects of their communities, they 
 lay them in a different way from what they would if they 
 observed the rule that their constituents should feel the first 
 pressure in common with the rest of the country. That was 
 the purpose of this arrangement of the powers of the General 
 Government. 
 
 But verbal uniformity is of no consequence. Massachu- 
 setts could not gain permission to tax teas, as against the 
 importation privilege, by taxing teas whether the growth of 
 Massachusetts or not. There are no teas the growth of 
 Massachusetts, and this tax gets no uniformity by not hav- 
 ing used words of circumscription. 
 
 Our proposition then is this : That you never can except 
 from the obligation of uniformity an excisable article be- 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 391 
 
 cause it is of limited i)ro(hietion, l)ut that by its very nature 
 it is protected by tlie Constitution from an exclusive })urd(>n 
 of taxation, and can be introduced into a common and gen- 
 eral and uniform burden only by the larger measure of tiixa- 
 tion which adopts it, not in its specific and limited growth 
 and product, but in its arrangement as one of a class of tax- 
 able objects that bear the burden. 
 
 Your honors will look in vain through the internal rev- 
 enue system of the United States for a taxation upon agri- 
 cultural products at large, or for a taxation of agi-icultural 
 products in any considerable form, if in any form at all, 
 unconnected with manufacture. There is an important 
 authority upon this subject in 2 Black, page 510, doubt- 
 less familiar to the Court, of Gibnan vs. The City of Sheboy- 
 gan, a Western case in which his honor Judge Swayne deliv- 
 ered an elaborate opinion of the Court and which j^assed 
 upon certain State legislation which had administered 
 taxation under a constitutional clause that required uni- 
 formity therein. It was held that — 
 
 The constitution of Wisconsin requires the rule of taxation to be 
 uniform, and this means that all kinds of property not absolutely 
 exempt must be taxed alike, by the same standard of valuation, 
 equally with other taxable property, and coextensive with the 
 territory to which it applies. 
 
 And the local, the State, law was denounced by the judg- 
 ment of this Court as unconstitutional because it exempted 
 classes of j)roperty from taxation. 
 
 I now come, if the Court ])lease, to a further consideration 
 of the question whether this is a tax or duty on an article 
 exported. 
 
 The particular statutory provisions which hold fast to the 
 cotton contemplate its export on the very face of the act, 
 and exact the tax notwithstanding exportation, making it 
 impossible to export it— physically impossible, I mean— 
 
392 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 without the payment of the tax, unless the law is evaded by 
 fraud. You cannot export it from the interior of Alabama 
 without moving it to a seaport. You cannot move it from 
 the district in which it is produced, which is the first motion 
 towards exportation; you cannot carry it to a port and ex- 
 port it without the payment of the tax. Even when it ap- 
 pears that it is not going into consumption, and so cannot 
 be a subject of excise proper, but is to go abroad, and is a 
 subject of export actually and in fact, still the tax must be 
 and is paid. 
 
 The only answer that is made to this being a tax laid on an 
 article that is exported, which it certainly is, and must be 
 paid, is that it is also laid upon an article not exported. 
 Where do you find a warrant in the Constitution to lay a 
 tax upon an article exported, if you will also lay a tax on an 
 article not exported? The very intent, the inexorable, un- 
 appeasable demand of these producing States was, that under 
 no exigencies of commerce or of trade, or of manufacture, 
 should the shaping of the destiny of their staples as for home 
 or foreign consumption be determined in the least by Fed- 
 eral legislation; and they used comprehensive language. 
 
 What would your honors think of a law which provided 
 that when cotton was exported the exporter should pay three 
 cents a pound tax before it went on board ship, and that 
 when it was manufactured the producer should pay three 
 cents a pound when it arrived at the mill.'* Is it less a tax 
 on the cotton reaching the ship's side for exportation that 
 some other cotton that has gone up into New England to be 
 manufactured bears an equal tax? And yet the language of 
 this law, where the effort lurks in generalities to make it ap- 
 pear an indifferent subject of consideration and a general or 
 universal tax on cotton, is precisely of the same nature and 
 efficacy as I have proposed. 
 
 Let us look at this subject as illustrated in the debates 
 which I will very briefly refer to. They are contained in 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 393 
 
 Vol. 71 of the Congressional Globe, page 2474, and were 
 had in the House of Rei)resentatives. This is the body of 
 our Government in whieh revenue measures arise. 
 
 Mr. Stevens, tlie leader of the House, the head of its 
 financial arranoements, introduces the subject in this way: 
 
 If the gentleman from Michigan had not moved to reduce this 
 tax I should have moved to amend by striking out "five" and in- 
 serting "eiglit." I think there is very good reason why this one 
 article should pay a verj' large portion of the taxation which we are 
 obliged to raise. If we had a right to lay an export duty, which 
 the Constitution at present forbids, we could, with an export duty of 
 ten cents per poimd, raise $'■200,000,000 annually, while at the same 
 time protecting our own manufacturers and selling abroad just as 
 much cotton as we do now. Under the circumstances we must do 
 the best we can. The only thing we can do is to lay an internal 
 duty and then allow a drawback upon that portion of the manu- 
 factured article which is exported. 
 
 The effect of that was to allow a drawback on every pound 
 of cotton that was manufactured, whether sold in this coun- 
 try or exported. Mr. Stevens, who had, by the way, 
 honestly proposed an anu>ndment of the Constitution re- 
 pealing this restriction of taxation on exports, and proposed 
 to satisfy the Constitution and what he regarded as the in- 
 terests of the country, in that way, said: 
 
 I agree with the gentleman from Maine, if you could fairly reach 
 what he is at; that is, if he would make it ten cents, and then with- 
 draw the home duty so as to leave it on the exported article, it would 
 come to just what I propose in my constitutional amendment which 
 I sent to the committee the other day. (That was a repeal of the 
 clause of the Constitution so as to allow a duty to be laid on ex- 
 f)orts.) I think there never was a grander time in the world for 
 the manufacturing of all the cotton for the world wherever civilized 
 man exists. An exi)ort duty of ten cents on cotton would give to 
 your home manufacturers the market of the world. That is the 
 true way to protect home industry and to wrest from foreigners a 
 revenue which shall pay off your nalional debt. 'I'hat is what 
 ought to be done. 
 
394 SPEECHES OF ^MLLIAM MAX\^TLL EVARTS 
 
 I suggest to the gentleman from Maine that I would go for an 
 amendment of ten cents provided it was not liable to the objection, 
 as a gentleman here suggests, of chasing the old fellow around the 
 stump, for it is whipping the devil around the stump there is no 
 mistake. 
 
 Now that pastime, no doubt, was engaged in, and from the 
 best motives; for I do not believe there was a particle of 
 conviction that this principle, this whole economical theory, 
 that you could make Europe pay the tax, was entirely falla- 
 cious; for instead of Europe pertinaciously paying the tax 
 our cotton culture w-as in danger of being destroyed. Our 
 people came to feel this and the tax was repealed. That 
 experiment was precisely the one which the staple-producing 
 States refused to allow^ the Federal Government to try — 
 they put it in the Constitution that the Government should 
 not try it — on any theory of building up the manufacturers 
 of the North, of giving our manufacturers the markets of 
 the world for manufactured cotton — those were precisely 
 the things which the staple-producing States thought would 
 be pressed upon them. 
 
 That was the nature of the financial scheme. The house 
 felt it so; the community felt it so. How would that have 
 stood as a proposition to be made by Mr. Ellsworth or Rufus 
 King to the delegates from the cotton-producing States, 
 the staple-producing States of the South, as being the kind 
 of law that they would pass under a constitutional pro- 
 hibition that no tax should be laid on an article exported? 
 We must do the best we can; we will lay a tax that shall 
 get the whole revenue of the Government from cotton, and 
 take it off the part which the New England States manu- 
 facture — yes, and give it to the manufacturer. That is ex- 
 actly what has been done. We will take every dollar of it 
 from you, w^hether the cotton be manufactured in this coun- 
 try or be exported. All that you export as crude cotton 
 shall pay the tax inexorably. All that the New England 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 395 
 
 inamifacturor exports shall take hack, cent for cent, the tax 
 on every pound of cotton wliidi lias gone into his establish- 
 ment for that purpose. I do not think Mr. Ellsworth or 
 Mr. King would have felt like pressing that as a perform- 
 ance of the constitutional obligation thus undertaken. 
 
 Well, tliey bore tliis matter of the tax on cotton that was 
 manufactured here and sold here, very ill. It was a pretty 
 burdensome tax upon our people, and INIr. Lynch of Maine 
 made this motion in regard to the clause that excluded cot- 
 ton from a drawback in the internal-revenue act. 
 
 I move to amend by striking out, in the second line of this sec- 
 tion, the words "when exported"; and also the words "and ex- 
 ported" in the eighth line. 
 
 I am not ascribing want of patriotism or want of intelli- 
 gence in saying tluit the staple-producing States would have 
 refused to subject their staples to such a tax, but would have 
 said "we will not form the Union if you insist upon it." 
 
 If your honors please, after the decision in Brown vs. The 
 State of Maryland (l'-2 Wheat., 419), you do not need to 
 teach that constitutional obligations can not be avoided by 
 forms and words. The State was not allowed to levy a tax 
 on imports by requiring persons who sold imi)orted goods by 
 wholesale, bale, etc., to take out a license for which they 
 should i)av fiftv dollars. 
 
 I also ask your honors' attention to a case in 3 Keyes' New 
 York Court of Appeals Re])orts (it seems to be an irregular 
 part of the series) to show how faithful that State has been 
 to the Constitution in this very regard. It was a case in 
 which the litigation was conducted, and in the court of ap- 
 peals was argued by me as counsel. 
 
 The State of New York took it into its head that it would 
 be a very convenient thing for it to raise about ten millions 
 of revenue upon the sugar and coffee that the Western people 
 consumed by taxing tlieir sale in New York by l)rokers. 
 They did not pass a law taxing them specifically and solely, 
 
396 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 but they passed a law by which a cent a pound or half a cent 
 a pound ( a very moderate tax) was laid upon all these sales, 
 and included in the tax articles that came from beyond sea — 
 imported articles. They required every broker effecting 
 such sales to give a bond that he would account to the State, 
 and made it penal for him to sell a pound of the described 
 articles until he went through that process. Several hun- 
 dred men of respectable character and importance in com- 
 merce complained that they were virtually interdicted be- 
 cause they could not pay such a tax. Had it been collected 
 it would have produced to the State of New York twelve 
 millions of dollars, a greater part of it coming out of 
 other States of the Union. 
 
 I was consulted, and advised a refusal to give the bond and 
 to stand an indictment. The case was made; it went up to 
 the court of appeals, and I supposed that I would have to 
 come here. But the State court disposed of the question, 
 decreeing the law to be unconstitutional. On page 374 is this 
 language : 
 
 A State cannot impose a duty upon articles which have been 
 imported for sale until the importer has either sold them, or divided 
 them into smaller quantities by breaking up the casks, packages, 
 etc., so as to destroy the character of import which subjected them 
 to duties under the laws of the United States. 
 
 After they have passed into the mass of general property by be- 
 ing sold by the importer either for consumption or resale, they may 
 be taxed in common with other property. Until such sale is made 
 the articles retain their character as imports, if the packages in 
 which they were imported remain unbroken. 
 
 This did not require that they should be in the hands of 
 the importer, and they were not all of them by any means. 
 Wherever the State can follow an article as being imported 
 from abroad and tax it because it is so imported, there the 
 Constitution of the United States can follow it and protect 
 it. Apply the liberality and the intelligence of these de- 
 cisions to this export tax and see whether it escapes from the 
 
COTTON TAX CASE 397 
 
 iiiliihitioii of tlie Constitution, wliicli is "No tax or duty 
 shall be laid on articles ex])orted." 
 
 Now the argument is made, can we tax an article before it 
 is known whether it will be exported or not? You can un- 
 doubtedly in good faith execute your power of taxation and 
 reduce within it the articles which you intend to embrace, 
 provided you liberate tliem from the tax when they begin 
 their character of export or are seeking exportation. The 
 forms of the law, laying a tax which is liberated on exporta- 
 tion, as in the general excise law, is not to be made a ground 
 of comi)laint. It is the substance we look to, on both sides. 
 
 The ciuestion is whether it is true that, notwitlistanding 
 the act of Congress, no tax has been laid upon exported raw 
 cotton. When the manufactured cotton starts from New 
 England for exportation you may very well say no tax has 
 been laid on that manufactured cotton about to be exported, 
 because, though a tax was laid on the raw cotton, supposing 
 it might not be exported when manufactured, yet the mo- 
 ment it shall evince its right to protection as an exported 
 article the tax returns, and it is as if it had not been taxed. 
 Now, you may fairly descriV)e all manufactured cotton that 
 goes from our ports as having no tax laid on it by this act; 
 and by the same rule you must find that every ounce of raw 
 cotton goes from our ports burdened by this tax, never to be 
 retrieved by any authority from this Governjnent to col- 
 lect it from the consumer. 
 
 The rules of trade are set forth in our brief, which I cannot 
 here repeat, and they show that during the whole period of 
 the prevalence of this tax the i)rice of cotton did not rise one 
 iota from that cause. It rose by the course of trade. New 
 regions of the earth's siu'face w<'re encouraged to yield this 
 product, and, assisted by bounties, poured their confluent 
 streams into tlie great markets of the world. Liverpool 
 fixed the price, and that j)r<n'ailed generally. New York 
 fixed it for the domestic producer, He bore the tax and 
 
398 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 paid it, which, if persevered in, would have extinguished the 
 production of this country and given the control of the mar- 
 kets of the world not to the United States, as Stevens fondly 
 hoped, but to the unmanufactured cotton of other regions. 
 
 If the Court please, there is always danger, at least always 
 room for a cynical insinuation in regard to verbal constitu- 
 tions, that they can be infringed by verbal laws. Our Con- 
 stitution has provided the present and vigilant, independent, 
 judicial inspection, ever alive and ever adequate to compare 
 written laws with a \^Titten constitution. And it is in the 
 power of this court, as it has been its high and beneficial 
 office heretofore, to insist that the conditions of the Consti- 
 tution shall be preserved. If they be violated, notwith- 
 standing judicial criticism establishing the correct standard, 
 there is no fault in the constitutional provisions that have 
 maintained this great arbitrament for the defense of the 
 Constitution, by your judgments. 
 
 I submit that when the great financial leader of the party 
 possessing legislative control had inserted this provision in 
 the act, that it was coming as near to producing this result 
 of a violation of the prohibition of a tax on exports as he 
 could come; that it invites the jealous scrutiny of every 
 lover of liberty and of the Constitution, whether he have a 
 special duty imposed on him or not, to examine whether it 
 does not violate the Constitution. But your honors hold 
 that duty, and it is for you to say whether it ever can be ap- 
 parent that the practical consequences of a violation of this 
 or any other tax clause of the Constitution are effected by 
 the accused legislation; and it is enough to say that, if that 
 is so, it is a violation of the Constitution as this Court did 
 in Brown vs. The State of Marylatid, and as is done in every 
 such case applying its criticism and proscription to State 
 legislation. Your honors will now pass upon this tax law, 
 a law of the United States which has no other or better 
 authority as against the supreinac;^' of the Constitution than 
 the State legislation has, 
 
POLITICAL AND PATRIOTIC SPEECHES AND 
 
 WRITINGS 
 
 3M 
 
]\IR. WEBSTER'S l^OSITION* 
 
 The solution of the grand problem of Availability now at- 
 tained, all men who have been engaged in efforts either to 
 favor or thwart its sueeessful issue stand gazing at the 
 eatastrophe; as from widely different ])ositions, so with very 
 diverse feelings and opinions. The great mass of the Whig 
 party, to their confusion and dismay, fintl that this god of 
 their idolatry — in whose name they have vowed vows, at 
 whose shrine they have made so many costly sacrifices of 
 duty and principle and pride; whose treacherous power has 
 nerved their strength through many a contest, and whose 
 illusive smile has led them through mocking victories to 
 seeming triumph — is, after all, but a false god, and has now, 
 in their hour of discomfiture, "no eye to pitj^ and no arm to 
 save." The great body of their antagonists look upon the 
 result with wild delight, with as much extravagance of self- 
 gratulation as if their own arm had wrought it out — certain 
 that great ruin has fallen ujion their foes, and deeming that 
 all the virtue which has passed out of their late victors shall 
 become a substantial accession to their own proper strength. 
 
 Apart from these latter — though included within the same 
 general party lines, viewing all these matters from a higher 
 point, in a wider scope and with a clearer insight — is gathered 
 a class of men, which has gained of late years a vast influ- 
 ence in public affairs, and the members of which we may 
 characterize as devout believers in the Democratic creed, 
 and earnest teachers of that })olitical faith. These men 
 have something of a religious zeal about them, and look upon 
 
 * An article apiK'aritif,' in tlie "N'ew World" OclolxT -i, ISH. A reference to the 
 circumstances in whicii the article was wriUcn may l)c found in the general intro- 
 duction to this collection. 
 
 401 
 27 
 
402 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 this singular concurrence of events with a kind of holy 
 rejoicing that some higher power has from such evil educed 
 such good. More shrewd than the enthusiastic masses 
 whose movements they guide, they perceive that develop- 
 ments thus far indicate only a weakening of their adver- 
 saries without any sure promise of a proportional addition 
 to their own strength, and are watching and deliberating 
 how they may best secure so desirable an end. Silent ex- 
 pectation is their true position, and, never impolitic, they 
 have thus far maintained it. 
 
 On the political arena there is yet another group, made up 
 from the most homogeneous section of the hybrid Whig 
 party, whose relations to the present crisis are to us more 
 interesting, and whose movements we watch with a more 
 earnest solicitude. It is composed of men who, from their 
 very moral constitution, not less than from their social 
 position, are sincerely conservative in their views — men 
 who had long been accustomed to see their opinions widely 
 separated from all external stations of power — who had 
 cherished their principles in the uncongenial atmosphere of 
 a minority only the more closely for its coldness — who have 
 contented themselves as well as they could with indirect 
 influence in public affairs, when they could not exert a co7i- 
 trol over them, able only to modify and thwart the plans of 
 their opponents, without succeeding in proposing or carry- 
 ing out any positive ones of their own — who, deceived by 
 the magnificent promises of this great solvent — availability 
 which was to transmute their cumbersome masses of ore 
 into shining coin current with the people — suppressed the 
 remonstrances of their better judgment, joined heartily in 
 the late contest, shouted loudly in the chorus of victory, 
 and now feel most acutely the appalling hollowness of their 
 triumph. The ready relief, which the great body of their 
 coadjutors find by ascribing the sad reverse to a dispensation 
 of Providence, which no prudence could foresee, and to the 
 
MR. WEBSTER'S TOSITION 403 
 
 treachery which no hottest sagacity couhi have suspected, 
 assuages in no degree their seIf-rei)roaclies. Confessing 
 (and in another sense than Hotspur meant it) that 
 
 Never did base and rotten, policij 
 
 Color her workings witli so deadly wounds, 
 
 they defy a similar delusion, tte bis in idem — their best 
 maxim of consolation. 
 
 We have prefaced the immediate consideration of the 
 subject, indicated in the title of our article, by this general 
 survey of the position of parties, because it serves to ex- 
 plain the different lights, in which the position and conduct 
 of the prominent men of the Whig party are regarded by 
 those who hold these various opinions. Discordant in their 
 views of the nature of the sudden changes on the scene of 
 politics — their estimate of the ability and dignity, with 
 which the great actors in the drama have ])layed and are 
 playing their parts, could not be expected to be more uniform. 
 Agreeing closely with neither of the classes we have described 
 — though the tenor of our previous articles have left it little 
 doubtful with which we most sympathize — we venture now 
 uj)on an attempt to define the relation to the Whig i)arty, 
 in the i)resent conjuncture, of that eminent statesman, emi- 
 nent ever in personal renown, eminent now in official station 
 — Daniel Webster. 
 
 The Whig party, in its present orgatiization, can hardly 
 be traced farther back than the Presidential election, wlu'cli 
 resulted in the elevation of (General Jackson to the Chief 
 Magistracy — its natne is of much more recent origin. It 
 was then, un(iuestionably snuill in numbers, bul compact 
 and subsfanlial in its constitution, and homogeneoiis in its 
 one essential principle — conservatism. During the period 
 of twelve years, and until six months ago, it was in oppositioti: 
 the only portions of ils creed, wliicli thai relation recpiired to 
 be brought into \iew, were negative; its vocation and office 
 
404 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 merely destructive. During this period, it gained greatly in 
 numbers, and in the last few years with remarkable rapidity. 
 To the accurate observer, however, it was obvious that this 
 increment was not from the conversion of the floating masses, 
 or of the loosely connected portions of the Democratic party 
 proper, to Whig principles, but by an accommodation of those 
 principles to these acceding bodies. To such an observer 
 it was no less obvious, that when this same party should come 
 into administration; when its positive creed should, by the 
 change of positions, be drawn into the broad light of public 
 discussion; when its vocation and office should become con- 
 structive; and when indefinite and unlimited accommodation 
 should be no longer possible, some quarrel should ensue as to 
 what \Miiggery was, and as to who were Whigs, In such 
 a state of things we now are. The accident of General 
 Harrison's death precipitafed, but did not cause it. 
 
 During the whole course of the opposition, who ever 
 doubted that Mr, Webster was a Whig.'^ Who ever doubted 
 that his constituent, the State of Massachusetts, was Whig? 
 In what battle with the administration was not he a fore- 
 most and effectual champion? In what prolonged contest 
 did not she hold up his hands ? In every fundamental debate his 
 heart was bold and his voice loud, and upon every important 
 measure her public action directly supported him. When, 
 in the memorable struggle to preserve the integrity of our 
 Legislative Records, the "live thunder" of his eloquence 
 shook the Capitol, its tones were reverberated in the solemn 
 "Protest of the renowTied State of Massachusetts." In 
 his popular progresses through the East and the West, the 
 North and the South, his own self-denying exertions and the 
 high enthusiasm, with which the Whig people greeted him, 
 show that he was a Whig, and nothing but a Whig. If Mr, 
 Webster was not in profession, in principle, and in action, 
 a Whig statesman, Massachusetts was not a Whig state. 
 
 At the moment, then, when the Whig party assumed the 
 
MR. WEBSTER'S POSITION 405 
 
 administration of affairs, Mr. Webster, by an arduous course 
 of party service, had earned the title of a leading' ^Vhig, and 
 was phiced at the head of the Whig Cabinet. His ])rinciples, 
 his pohcy, his official career were a priori — in the general 
 doubt as to what Whig principles were, and what Whig 
 policy would be — as authoritative an exponent of such 
 principles and policy as any one man's could be; and it is 
 only by specific and positive acts, inconsistent with the 
 general scope, or fundamental arguments of the Whig 
 faith, that he can be convicted of treacherv or defection. 
 Has any such been pointed out? Has any such been sug- 
 gested.^ His continuance in ])lace, which is a fact, and his 
 coalition with President Tyler, which is a conjecture. Any 
 others.' We believe not. Xot satisfied with denying that 
 in these regards Mr. Webster's conduct has been actually 
 treacherous or dishonorable, and proposing to make them 
 the subjects of some positive averments, we pass to a brief re- 
 view of his short official history, in no other aspect, however, 
 than to show that it has been thoroughly Whig. 
 
 The whole Whig })arty when in opposition, had made it 
 one of their gravest charges against the late administrations, 
 that, absorbed entirely in bargaining for votes and general 
 manoeuvering to confirm and jjerpetuate their reign at home, 
 they had entirely neglected our foreign relations; or, if con- 
 cerning themselves about them at all, had only done so to 
 make our honor and our duty toward other nations a mat- 
 ter of political traffic. The popular mind, as neither par- 
 ticularly careful of so remote concerns nor peculiarly capable 
 of judging them, did not make this a very prominent topic 
 in the electioneering contest. But a body of thinking men, 
 confined to no one section of the Tnion. and who will 
 not willingly concede themselves to be the least imi)ortant, 
 the least substantial, or least influential portion of that 
 party, deemed the settlement of the questions pending 
 concerning our boundaries and border ch'fficnllies, the eleva- 
 
406 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion of our national character to its appropriate height, and 
 the reparation of those injuries which we had sustained from 
 the weak conduct of those affairs by the last administration, 
 tasks inferior neither in magnitude nor difficulty to the 
 domestic duties of the new administration. Mr. Webster's 
 accession to the chair of State, was hailed by these men 
 with sincere delight; and his official life, short as it is, has 
 numbered many decisive acts — acts too, which are but 
 initiative to an extensive system. In what one of these 
 has not every prominent Whig sustained him? In what 
 one of these has not every prominent Democrat carped at 
 his skill, and assailed his honor .^^ His conduct of our foreign 
 relations has, then, been thoroughly Whig. 
 
 In those important measures of domestic legislation, 
 which the extra session of Congress has brought to a suc- 
 cessful issue, wherever his official station permitted him to 
 exert his influence, it has not been wanting. On the land 
 bill and the revenue bill, his opinions have been long fixed 
 and publicly declared, and his recent letters express his 
 hearty joy at their passage. In the success of the Bankrupt 
 bill (the only Whig measure which has passed without cur- 
 tailment or enervation) Mr. Webster had no secondary 
 share. Never included in Mr. Clay's list of Whig measures, 
 as the earliest result of discord and dismay caused by the 
 first veto, it had been out in the House by a decisive major- 
 ity — and this was deemed but the prelude to a similar dis- 
 aster awaiting the other important bills pending in either 
 House. In a speech of earnest eloquence, which, in the 
 ears of those who heard it, transcended any efforts of sena- 
 torial eloquence they had ever listened to, he revived the 
 drooping spirits, confirmed the energies, and animated the 
 patriotism of the Whig Congress, and this "great measure 
 of justice and benevolence" was given to the people. The 
 next morning witnessed its passage — a result not dreamed 
 of the day before. Then, one after another, the other bills 
 
MR. WEBSTER'S POSITION 407 
 
 passed and the integrity of the Whig party was preserved 
 — by whom more than by Mr. Wel)ster? In his influence 
 over our domestic legislation, then, he has been decisively 
 
 Whig. 
 
 On the subject of Mr. Webster's continuance in place 
 when the other Secretaries had resigned, we might content 
 ourselves with showing that, under the peculiar circumstances 
 of the case, the dictates of a high patriotism required him to 
 remain at his post, though personally his position should 
 appear for a short time equivocal : and then we might ask if 
 his situation from its being patriotic ceased to be Whig. 
 
 But the position of Mr. Webster, in a mere party jwint 
 of view, seems to us clearly one of rare dignity. His letter 
 of the 25th of August to the Massachusetts senators throws 
 much light upon the matter. With President Tyler's rela- 
 tions to the other heads of departments than himself he had 
 nothing to do. President Tyler's relations to the Whig 
 party, as a party, were by his second veto in no degree altered 
 from the position they assumed upon his first exercise of that 
 prerogative. 
 
 The same high considerations which induced Mr. Web- 
 ster to throw himself into the breach on the first occasion, 
 led him to strive to avert the occurrence of the second. 
 Had the counsels contained in the letter referred to been 
 heeded, a second time would he have preserved his party. 
 It listened to him once and was saved — it disregarded his 
 second appeal, and is now dismembered. When, however, 
 the catastrophe had taken place; when his party had been 
 point-blank thwarted in his darling measure by executive 
 caprice, he saw no reason for playing that most foolish and 
 most profligate game in politics, "the whole or none." As 
 the first veto had never been to him (though the House 
 thought otherwise) a sufficient reason for throwing out the 
 Bankruj)t bill, so did not the second one fully convince him 
 of the necessity of embarassing our foreign relations and 
 
408 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 going to war with the most powerful nation of the earth, on 
 an issue on which we morally and legally have the wrong, 
 and should unite against us all the civilized nations on the 
 globe.* 
 
 Many people sincerely thank him for taking so sensible 
 a view of the matter. Disordered mails might well rest 
 for a few days for Mr. Granger's successor. An empty 
 treasury might well do without an empty head, A week's 
 interregnum would encourage the naval whiskers and 
 mustache to no alarming growth; and nameless Indian 
 agents might perhaps, in that time, render themselves notori- 
 ous enough for detection. All these evils the country could 
 bear; but war, umr under present circumstances, no one can 
 endure to think of for a moment. In his continuance in 
 office then, Mr. Webster has acted pre-eminently like a Whig. 
 
 But some say, admitting that patriotism and duty to his 
 party might have induced Mr. W^ebster to maintain his place, 
 still personal honor should have compelled him to resign. 
 Without stopping to expose the absurdity of such an opin- 
 ion, we remark that there is no evidence of any personal in- 
 jury to Mr. Webster's honor or feelings. The fact that in a 
 Congressional career of twenty-five years he has never had 
 the slightest personal difficulty with any man, will be pretty 
 nigh conclusive evidence to many that nothing like what is 
 commonly meant by a "personal insult" can have been of- 
 fered to him; and that the "official insult," which Mr. Ewing 
 discloses, did not extend to Mr. Webster, the letter of the 
 latter, of August 25th, satisfactorily shows. If we will 
 closely look at the real reasons for the resignation of the ex- 
 Secretaries, we shall instantly see that none of them apply 
 to Mr. Webster. Messrs. Bell and Crittenden resigned be- 
 cause the popular clamor in their section of the country and 
 Mr. Clay's wishes required them to do so. Mr. Ewing for 
 
 * In this opinion, we beg leave to express a most entire dissent from the views 
 of the able and eloquent writer of this article. — (Ed. "New World.") 
 
INIR. ^^'EBSTER'S POSITION 409 
 
 the same two reasons, and the additional ones that he was 
 disagreeable to the President, and had lost his confidence. 
 Mr. Badger, for the two reasons aforesaid, sharpened some- 
 what by a Southern punctiliousness, which exacts so many 
 sacrifices, lest some one should think somebody had insulted 
 somebody. Mr. Granger very unwillingly, but because, 
 being always accustomed to do as other people told him, 
 though he tried hard, in this instance he could not break 
 the habit. 
 
 To none of these considerations could Mr. Webster 
 yield. Himself too substantive a person to square his move- 
 ments by Mr. Clay's wishes, sustained by the universal 
 approbation of New England,* entreated almost by those 
 statesmen whom the countrj'^ most respects, possessing the 
 fullest confidence and highest consideration of the President, 
 he retained his position and the Whig party will bear him 
 out in it. 
 
 It will be perceived that our whole purpose has been to 
 show that Mr. Webster's career and present position have 
 been, and are, thoroughly, decisively, pre-eminently Whig. 
 It would have been a more grateful task to exhibit him in 
 the quality of a patriot statesman, a fit theme for an abler 
 pen than ours. 
 
 W^e are amused at occasional paragraphs which speak of 
 !Mr. Webster's position as equivocal, as that of a disappointed 
 man, as even pitiable. No man in this country has ever 
 enjoyed more i)roud (and more honestly proud) moments 
 than he. No one can read the renowned speeches which 
 mark his progress through the nation, after some arduous 
 service achieved for his country, without wonder at the 
 multitude of great opportunities which have fallen to his 
 lot, and admiration at his noble bearing in them. Cicero 
 boasted that he alone of Romans had enjoyed a "Triumph" 
 in civic robes. Mr. Welxster has had many "Ovations." 
 
 * See Connecticut Whig Address and papers passim. 
 
410 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 It has been his singular fortune to achieve his greatest 
 successes when they would redound to the credit of others 
 and only remotely to his own advancement. His demoli- 
 tion of nullification swelled General Jackson's fame* — his 
 singular exertion in Congress and before the people during 
 the last four years, conspired to raise General Harrison to 
 the Presidency, and his present powerful efforts to hold to- 
 gether the Whig party will all promote the advancement of 
 Mr. Clay, while the lustre of his conduct of the affairs of 
 State, will adorn the administration of President Tyler, a 
 man for whom he probably never much cared. His posi- 
 tion, however, is safe — safe in contemporary history, and 
 safe for "the next ages." Should he withdraw from public 
 life, having accomplished nothing beyond his past achieve- 
 ments, their lustre has spread far and wide enough to il- 
 lumine his path to its end. Discharged from that warfare, 
 in which with much glory he has taken some scars, he shall 
 be no political Belisarius to beg for the suffrages of the popu- 
 lace, but retire upon a wealth of rich memories, upon reven- 
 ues of golden opinions. Such remarks as we had to make 
 concerning the supposed coalition between the President and 
 Mr. Webster we reserve for a future paper on "Mr. Tyler's 
 Position." E. 
 
 * General Jackson's admission that Mr. Webster had saved the Government 
 has but recently transpired. 
 
MR. TYLER AND THE WHIG PARTY* 
 
 To define and illustrate the relations held by the two great 
 leaders of the Whig party to the important movements in 
 the political world, was a task requiring no very shrewd 
 sagacity. Their proportions were colossal; their attitudes 
 were bold and statuesque; and they presented themselves 
 to the observer in no doubtful light. The intellectual su- 
 ])reinacy of Daniel Webster, the lordly will of Henry Clay, 
 imi)ressed on every page of the political history of our 
 coimtry for the last twenty years, rendered only an occasional 
 glance at other men, and at passing events, essential to the 
 full development of their "positions," W^e reviewed them 
 as we do the dissolved figures of heroes, naked of circum- 
 stances. 
 
 To perform the same service in the case of President Tyler, 
 seemed a very different labor. Endowed by nature with no 
 attributes of intellectual or moral power, in which we might 
 discern a prefiguration of his high destiny — trained by no 
 discipline of life to cope with those stormy elements in whose 
 collision he is tossed — raised to his lofty station by a rare 
 "conspiration of fortuities," we look in vain through his 
 previous career to read the law of his future conduct. To 
 make a substantial personage on the field of politics, requires 
 the array of circumstances, as much as the common men in 
 the streets require the aid of dress. Their identity is their 
 garb, and he needs most ample drapery to make him a pre- 
 sentable figure before the public. 
 
 Whether for his own or for his nation's sins, Mr. Tyler 
 was forced from the obscurity of private life into the posi- 
 tion of trust and power which he now occupies, we do not 
 
 * An article appearing in "The N'ew World" October 10, 18H. A reference 
 to the circumstances in which the article was written may be found in the general 
 introduction to this collection. 
 
 411 
 
412 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAX^VELL EVARTS 
 
 propose to determine. The fact we consider equally un- 
 fortunate for both. In the quiet exercise of his profession 
 as a lawyer, he doubtless may have secured the confidence 
 of the community in which he lived, though we imagine that 
 as an advocate in causes of much magnitude, requiring a 
 nice perception of principles, or a clear assertion of them, he 
 can never have been much sought after. The dignity of his 
 manners, the purity and integrity of his personal morals, 
 would suffice to make him a good citizen in his relation to 
 the state and to the society in which he moved, yet this same 
 wrong-headed conscience exliibited in his public life, would 
 be apt to mar the practical value of his influence in any 
 scheme of local or general benevolence, and make him one 
 of that large class of men who, with the best intentions, are 
 always doing some social mischief. 
 
 An active conscience, uninformed by sound wisdom, ten- 
 acity of his purposes, without discretion in the formation of 
 them, a religious self-respect, verging upon contempt for 
 others, were the prominent qualities which Mr. Tyler brought 
 to the administration of public affairs. We can hardly con- 
 ceive a more unfortunate conformation for a statesman in 
 power. In opposition, the good ingredients of such a char- 
 acter would be more effective, the ill less pernicious. In 
 positive action, sturdy resolution as likely in a wrong as in a 
 right direction, a narrow scope in the planning of measures, 
 and a perverse adherence to preconceived opinions, are the 
 best results which could be expected from qualities so ill- 
 ad justed. 
 
 In surveying whatever public acts of Mr. Tyler have sur- 
 vived in our memory, we find something of these features. 
 Even those most worthy in the eyes of his friends, display- 
 ing to the best advantage the peculiar traits of his char- 
 acter, and challenging, if any of his acts can, the respect and 
 admiration of his countrymen, betray a lack of symmetry, 
 a shortcoming, which disturb, if they do not destroy, their 
 
MR. TYLER AND THE WHIG PARTY 413 
 
 full efTect. These acts too have been performed in conjunc- 
 tures, where the conduct of really great men has furnished 
 a readv and most unfortunate contrast to that of Mr. Tvler. 
 When, rather than yield his conscience to the mandate of the 
 State of Virginia, and further the ])erpetration of an act 
 savoring equally of servility and tyranny, he flings at the 
 feet of his constituents the power and dignity of his sena- 
 torial station, his party a])plaud him and his friends admire. 
 But the nobler course of his eminent colleague, under the 
 y)recise circumstances, so checks the applause and diverts 
 the admiration to himself. With integrity no less stern, with 
 pride no less unyielding, but with a juster estimate of his 
 owTi position, with sounder views of that fragment of gov- 
 ernment in which himself and the great State of Virginia 
 formed ef|ually a part, Mr. Leigh signified his intention 
 neither to obey the usurping instruction, nor betray the 
 trust confided to him, by resigning it in the hour of peril. 
 Thus also ]\Ir. Tyler's recent exercise of the veto power, in 
 defiance equally of fierce threats and softest persuasion, at the 
 sacrifice of the favor of the dominant party most dear to 
 him, and winning only the applause of its opponents most 
 odious to him. exhil)its certainlv much nerve, and seems at 
 first sight deserving of sincere respect. But the remem- 
 brance of the illustrious example of Mr. Madison, soon 
 dispels such sentiment. We instantly feel how much more 
 worthily the latter demeaned himself under the same try- 
 ing circumstances — how th<' same honesty of conscience, 
 united with a more sagacious mind, and informed by a wider 
 experience, nu'ght have solved the difficulties of Mr. Ty- 
 ler's position, and enabled him to j)resent to the world a re- 
 nowned instance of the magnanimous subjection of ])rivate 
 opinions and wishes to constitutional duty. 
 
 The same inherent weakness in Mr. Tyler's character has 
 most disastrously maiufested itself through the whole brief 
 perioil of his Chief-Magistracy. Pluming himself upon his 
 
414 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 straightforwardness, ambiguity, almost to dissimulation, 
 has marked every one of his state papers; trenching himself 
 behind the sanctity of conscience, he is deemed by many 
 to have violated the true sense of his inauguration oath; 
 his boast of fidelity to his official trust has seemed only an 
 excuse for treachery to his party. If the management of 
 these vetoes was intended for an example of political hero- 
 ism, most sadly was it conceived, most sadly executed. 
 Stimulated by an agony of desire to preserve his consistency, 
 it results in a most miserable vacillation — 
 
 Quod petit spernit; repetit quod nuper omisit, 
 Aestuat et vitae disconvenit ordine toto. 
 
 So much for Mr. Tyler per se — his relations to the Whig party 
 are worthy of a more serious examination. 
 
 When the Whigs placed Mr. Tyler upon their National 
 ticket, they did it in the blindest folly; for his has never 
 been a non-committal policy — no skillful tissue of fraud was 
 woven to ensnare their suffrages, no powerful eloquence 
 exerted to beguile their judgment. The disappointment of 
 the sportsman who has bought a horse with spavined limbs, 
 which is distanced in the first heat, finds no sympathy either 
 in the law or in the hands of the spectators. Mr. Tyler's 
 state-rights principles, and his Virginia notions generally, 
 were patent defects in him as a Whig Executive, and many 
 men predicted that in the political race he would prove only 
 a quarter-nag, if he did not (as he has done) holt and throw 
 his rider. The honest energy of his opposition to the Jack- 
 son and Van Buren dynasty was his sole claim to Whig sup- 
 port, and their adoption of him is one more instance of the 
 short-sighted views of the availability party. In every as- 
 pect of the case this bitter truth they must admit, and it is 
 the consciousness of this truth, which adds hot instance to 
 their fiercest denunciations. 
 
 There is another opinion, which, if its truth be recognized, 
 
MR. TYLER AND THE \^TIIG PARTY 415 
 
 will aid us much in determining the mutual relations of Mr. 
 Tyler and the Whig party, and in solving any doubts which 
 may exist as to the true course towartl him to be pursued. 
 It is, that Mr. Tyler's exercise of the veto ])ower to crush the 
 darling project of the party, is an independent act, standing 
 alone. It is no part of a system — it is to be referred back to 
 no political cause, it reaches forward to no ulterior measures. 
 It is not the initiation of any scheme to secure his personal 
 aggrandizement, or assist the triumph of his peculiar con- 
 stitutional doctrines. It floiced only from his singular men- 
 tal and moral structure — it ends in the attainment of its 
 immediate object, the denial of a bank. 
 
 In the light of these two postulates, whatever of mystery 
 has enveloped Mr. Tyler's predicament seems to vanish. As 
 soon as we satisfy ourselves with looking at the simple nar- 
 rative of facts, which in the last six months have transpired, 
 without giving to conjecture respecting them the credit of 
 history, or to mere surmise the force of prophecy, the whole 
 case lies in a nutshell. Mr. Tjder differs from the Whig 
 Party on the subject of a Bank, and elects to exert whatever 
 power the constitution confers upon him, to prevent any 
 legislative action discordant with his views. This repug- 
 nance is composed of two ingredients. A bank is odious to 
 him intrinsically, because necessarily the organ and instru- 
 ment of political corruption and profligacy — it is also irre- 
 concilable with his states-rights doctrines. In aversion to 
 corruption and profligacy, the W^hig party will not confess 
 themselves a whit behind Mr. Tyler — they only regret that 
 he should have thought it his duty to stigmatize their 
 favorite measure by such harsh epithets. In the matter of 
 states-rights, Mr. Tyler is fundamentally at variance with 
 the great majority, both in weight and number, of the Whig 
 politicians. In reference to this great line, which, more than 
 any other political denunciation, from the foundation of the 
 government to this day has divided the antagonistic parties 
 
416 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 —Federalists and Democrats, Republicans and Jackson 
 men, Whigs and Locofocos — they, apparently, more to their 
 surprise than delight, find themselves upon opposite sides. 
 Upon whatever future measures, then, shall lie within the 
 regions traversed by this line, Mr. Tyler and the Whig party 
 can never agree. In all which are remote from this region, 
 for aught that appears, they might cordially concur. 
 
 Colicerning the acts and demonstrations of the two 
 parties in this quarrel since the rupture between them, we 
 have but a few remarks to make. During the six weeks 
 which have elapsed since the last veto, movements decisive 
 and significant have followed one another with singular 
 rapidity. 
 
 Each following day 
 
 Became the next day's master, till the last 
 
 Made former wonders, its. 
 
 To the student of contemporary politics this brief period 
 has been crowded with practical instruction. On the one 
 side the tone of the veto message, Mr. Webster's continuance 
 in place, the New England state addresses, Mr. Cushing's 
 letter, and the construction of the new cabinet, are the most 
 noticeable matters. On the other, the harangue of the Con- 
 gressional caucus, the secession of the retiring Secretaries, 
 Mr. Clay's attack upon the veto power, the New York State 
 declaration, and the result of the current elections, most 
 attract our attention. 
 
 The concluding paragraphs of Mr, Tyler's last message 
 urge the preservation of concord in a manner, most undig- 
 nified to be sure, but earnest and sincere. They deprecate 
 a severance of the political ties which had united them with 
 the dominant party in a style of ungraceful but honest ex- 
 postulation. They express not only a thorough desire, but 
 a sturdy determination to act in unison with that party 
 which raised him to power, in opposition to that party whose 
 reign he did his utmost to overthrow. The first response 
 
CASTLE GARDEN SPEECH 433 
 
 of the State. Tlie ri^lit of inartyrdoin under the law, and 
 the right of revokition to change the sources of the law, are 
 the only rights which reason, morals or religion can suggest 
 against an iniquitous system or administration of law. How 
 much of the devotion of the martyr, or the heroism of the 
 ])atriot, the agitators of our day exhibit, you, gentlemen, 
 can judge as well as I, and how little anything in the system 
 or the administration of our government can justify or ex- 
 cuse rebellion against it, let the freedom, security and happi- 
 ne!«i which jjrevails throughout our borders bear grateful 
 v.itness. 
 
 Let us, then, be misled from the plain path of duty by no 
 idle clamor, by no specious sophistry; let us know and feel 
 that he who strikes at a law, strikes at the law; that he who 
 violates or avoids the obligation of one clause of the Con- 
 stitution, is faithless to that great charter of our national 
 government, and to the Union of these States, which exists 
 by and under it, and by and under it alone; above all, let 
 no one who loves his country — who reveres the memory of 
 his fathers — who hopes for the hapi)iness of his children — 
 ever doubt or ever forget that as we the citizens of this great 
 republic, acknowledge no superior, and bow to no master 
 but the law, so have we no guardian of our rights, no pro- 
 tector of our liberties, but the law, and that every wound 
 to its authority, as surely enfeebles its 'protection. 
 
 In the actual aspect of public affairs, sir, the duty of every 
 good citizen is clear. While the enemies of public order 
 and security, whether at the North or at the South, labor 
 to irritate one portion of the nation against the other — to 
 aggravate and inflame differences of feeling and opinion — to 
 estrange from each other men born of one blood and of one 
 country — be it our care to emulate the noble spirit of our 
 conunon ancestry, who bound us together as one j)eople, 
 free, independent, })owerful; let the line be fairly drawn 
 between the foes of public order, the laws and the Constitu- 
 
 29 
 
434 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion — and whatever others may do, let us see to it, that in 
 our breasts the love of country shall reign predominant, 
 and that neither the cold selfishness of politics shall quench, 
 nor the fickle flame of fanaticism shall supplant, its sacred 
 fire. 
 
Ill 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES, ADVOCATING THE NOMINATION 
 OF DANIEL AVEBSTER TO THE PRESIDENCY 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Preliminary to the Whig Convention which met at Baltimore 
 in June, 1852, efforts were made by the friends and supporters of 
 Mr. AVebster throughout the country to influence jmblic sentiment 
 in favor of his candidacy as the nominee of that convention for 
 the presidency. In the autumn of 1851 a mass meeting was called 
 in Boston to meet in Faneuil Hall with this purpose in view, at 
 which there was presented for adoption an address to the people 
 of the United States that had been prepared by Edward Everett. 
 Following ii})on this a similar meeting was held at Metropolitan 
 Hall, New York, on March 5, 1852, which was attended by a very 
 large and enthusiastic audience. Mr. Evarts, always a devoted 
 admirer of Mr. Webster, was actively engaged in this movement 
 in his behalf and, as a member of the committee appointed for the 
 purpose, prepared the address to the people of the United States, 
 that follows, which he read and presented to the meeting for its 
 adoption. It was afterwards widely published in the press of that 
 day. 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 To the People of the United States: 
 
 The next approach of the election for the Chief Magistracy 
 of the T^nion, calls upon all its citizens to consider the actual 
 aspect of ])ul)lic affairs, to examine the characters and prin- 
 ciples of the leading statesmen of the nation, and to deter- 
 mine, upon a dclil)crate and ])atTiolic survey of all the vast 
 interests of this great Republic, to whom the administration 
 of these affairs and interests should be entrusted. If we 
 justly deem it a chief glory of our system of government 
 that its powers are to be exercised by no fortuitous allotment 
 
 4S5 
 
436 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of birth or rank, but by the free designation of popular choice, 
 it is a necessary consequence that that choice can be wisely 
 exercised only in favor of the most worthy and the most 
 capable. Just as fully as we estimate the value and dignity 
 of the Right of Suffrage, we must admit the solemn obliga- 
 tions of duhj which attend its enjoyment, and neither by 
 apathy nor by rashness in the exercise of the elective franchise, 
 neglect or abuse the liberty which distinguishes our condi- 
 tion from that of every other people. 
 
 Nor is it less the privilege and duty of every citizen both 
 to impart to others the grounds of his own opinions and 
 preferences on this subject of the highest concern to all, 
 and to receive theirs from them, for thus only can the con- 
 current sense of those who view alike the interests of their 
 common country, be ascertained and applied to the practical 
 results of an election. 
 
 But, fellow citizens, if these sentiments in their general 
 application receive our assent, we can scarcely exaggerate 
 the peculiar importance, in the actual condition of public 
 affairs and of .political parties, of their earnest adoption as 
 practical rules for our action, in preparing for and conduct- 
 ing the ensuing Presidential Election. 
 
 No reflecting mind can refuse to admit that the probable 
 duties, difficulties and dangers which will attend the Admin- 
 istration of the Federal Government during the next Presi- 
 dential Term, require that the reins of power should be held 
 by a firm hand, and guided with a wise experience of the past 
 and a sagacious forecast of the future. If the revolutionary 
 war and the labors of the Convention of 1787 gave a new 
 Constitution and Government to the established communi- 
 ties of the old States, recent public events have brought a 
 vast region of new territory and new interests within the 
 dominion of our existing Constitution and Government. If 
 our entrance as an independent nation into relations with 
 the other natioii^ pf tJie earth followed from the first prgan- 
 
THE XOMIVATIOy OF DAXIEL WEBSTER 437 
 
 izalion of our (lovoninuMit, our wondt-rlul growth in terri- 
 tory, ])oinilation, woaltli, and power, concurring with the 
 stupendous changes ^^TOugllt by science and invention in 
 the means of intercommunication with the old world, has 
 commenced a new era in our foreign reUitions. If contem- 
 l)oraneously with our birth as a nation, all Europe became 
 involved in the storms of war and revolution, and our humble 
 and remote position scarcely preserved us from being drawn 
 into the strife, the preparations for greater conflicts there, warn 
 us of a peril to which om* relations as a great commercial and 
 maritime nation now most certainly expose us. And if the 
 President of the United States was called upon to apply all 
 the resources of his wisdom and i)atriotism to direct and 
 control the first operations of the new Constitution and 
 Government upon the States over which they were estab- 
 lished, and to define and regulate our position and inter- 
 course with foreign nations in their then disturbed condition, 
 who can deny that the next Chief Magistrate of the Union 
 will require, for the successful conduct of our affairs, whether 
 foreign or domestic, the largest measure of the same great 
 qualities? 
 
 Under the influence of these sentiments, fellow-citizens, 
 at a ])ublic meeting, whether for numbers, or the universal 
 representation of the various interests of our Community, 
 never surpassed, held this day in the City of New York, it 
 was resolved to announce, as our unanimous choice, and to 
 submit to the consideration of the National Convention, 
 the name of Daniel Webster as a Candidate for the Presi- 
 dency of the United States, at the next election. 
 
 The character and career of Mr. Webster, his i)rincii)les, 
 his abilities, his public .services, his labors and his fame, the 
 honors which he has received from his countrymen, and the 
 renown to his country which he has imparted in return, are 
 known to you all. Born in the ordinarv condition of American 
 life, the son of a soldier of the Revolution, educated entirely 
 
438 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 in the schools and colleges of his native State, rising by his 
 own exertions to the height of his profession in the country, 
 he rejected the splendid emoluments which an exclusive 
 devotion to private pursuits ensured to him, and, at an early 
 manhood, entered the councils of the nation; for more than 
 a third of a century, with trifling intervals, he has been in 
 public life, as the immediate representative of the people, as 
 Senator, and as Secretary of State; during all this time, his 
 acts and his speeches have been seen and read, known, under- 
 stood and scrutinized by all his countrymen all over the land. 
 
 He is known on the seaboard from the St. Johns to the 
 Rio Grande, and from the Columbia to the Gulf of California, 
 by every seaman and by every merchant, as having achieved, 
 by the power of his reason, what war had failed to accom- 
 plish, and established on a basis hereafter never to be ques- 
 tioned, the absolute exemption of the American flag, in 
 whatever sea, from search or visitation, making the deck of 
 every vessel as safe from foreign interference as a cabin be- 
 hind the Alleghanies. 
 
 He is known throughout the vast interior to all engaged in 
 internal trade and navigation, as the earnest and consistent 
 opponent of that narrow construction of the Constitution 
 which restricts its commercial protection and operation to 
 salt-ivater, and denies them to our land-locked seas and 
 mighty rivers. 
 
 He is known to the farmer, mechanic, and manufacturer, 
 as the advocate of that system which defends, promotes, 
 and encourages American labor, and develops and expands 
 all American resources of production and manufacture, the 
 supports of foreign commerce. 
 
 He is known at home and abroad for those great negotia- 
 tions in our foreign affairs, which have composed strifes, 
 averted wars, extended commerce, settled boundaries, re- 
 paired national injuries inflicted or sustained, and signalized 
 our foreign relations by acts of mutual respect and comity, 
 by acts of magnanimity and clemency. 
 
THE NOMINATION OF DANIEL WEBSTER 439 
 
 But al)ov(' all, IVl low-citizens, he is known and eherislied 
 bv every lover of his countrv, as tJie Defender of the Consiifu- 
 tion and the Advocate of the Union; and whenever and wher- 
 ever "we behold the gorgeous ensign of the Kepubh'c, now 
 "known and honored througlioiit the earth, still full high 
 "advanced, ib> arms and trophies streaming in their original 
 "lustre, not a stri])e erased or j)olluted, nor a single star 
 "obscured, bearing for its motto, s])read all over in characters 
 "of living light, blazing in all its am])le folds, as they float 
 "over the sea and ovi'r the land, and in every wind under 
 "the whole heavens, that sentiment, dear to every true 
 "American heart, Liberty and Union, now and forever, 
 "one and inseparable.", — whenever and wherever wc 
 behold this flag of our countr3% the name of Daniel Wp:bster 
 and his fame are to our eyes mingled \\\i\\ its blazonry. 
 
 This eminent citizen, instructed in every art, trained in 
 every disci])Iine, informed by every experience of public 
 life, endowed with every power and furnished with every 
 acqm'rement fit for the service of the State, his public virtue 
 and patriotism, tried by every personal, partizan and sec- 
 tional influence within the whole sphere of our politics, and 
 ever found true to the whole country, and its permanent 
 welfare, this eminent citizen, now in full maturity of years 
 and wisdom, yet "his eyes not dimmed, nor his natural force 
 al)ated," we believe most worthy to receive the lionors, most 
 able to j)erform the duties, of President of the I'^nited States. 
 
 Nor, fellow citizens, is it a less serious topic for your con- 
 sideration that Justice, justice to Mr. Webster and justice 
 to our country, justice to the historical greatness of the past, 
 and to the solemn claims of the future, re((uires the earnest 
 and devoted labors of us all, to reward his past and command 
 his future services for the Re])ul)lic. 
 
 He has served the State from early manhood to liie present 
 hour, he has labored for and loved his country with an en- 
 thusiasm untiring and undecaying— his very heart and life, 
 
440 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 as it were, have been wrought into the fabric of our pros- 
 perity and our glory; and at last he has crowned a long career 
 of noble achievements for the general good with a sublime 
 sacrifice of self to his sense of public duty, which has filled 
 the measure of fame, and touched the heart of the whole 
 people. 
 
 If, besides public talents, virtues, services, and great 
 deserts, popularity be required for success in the political 
 canvass, Mr. Webster enjoys it with the people of the 
 United States, to an unexampled degree. 
 
 He who denies this, either means by popularity something 
 different from admiration, respect, attachment and gratitude, 
 or he means by the people some nondescript portion of the 
 community, distinct from the men who till the soil, and ply 
 the loom, and crowd the mart, and navigate the ships, and 
 fill the professions and all the manifold pursuits of industry 
 and business. All these, whenever and wherever opportu- 
 nity affords, in town or country, at the North or South, at 
 the East or West, in the courts, in the Senate, in the popular 
 assembly, seek every occasion to gaze upon his person, to 
 listen to his eloquence, to grasp him by the hand, and attend 
 his presence and his movements with every display of en- 
 thusiastic admiration and regard. Repeatedly a candidate 
 for popular sufi'rage, he has always beaten his competitors; 
 his elections to the Senate have always been, on the part of 
 the Legislature, but a formal expression of the popular will 
 of its constituents, and his place in the Cabinet, now and 
 heretofore, has been accorded upon the well-defined and 
 general expectation and desire of the great mass of the 
 American people. 
 
 For twenty years the school boys of our land have re- 
 hearsed the eloquence of Daniel Webster, in the same breath 
 with that of Fisher Ames and Patrick Henry, and have 
 grown to manhood to find this classic of their school-books 
 the living Orator, Patriot and Statesman. 
 
THE NOMINATION OF DANIEL WEBSTER 441 
 
 Distrust tlion, IVIIow-citizcns, tlicso arrogant fontoiiuuTs 
 of an intollifcont, educated, enli^ditened, generous people, 
 whom they pronounce unahU' or unwiUing to recognize the 
 high deserts of ]Mr. Webster, clainu'ng only for themselves 
 an honorable excei)tion from such blindness and ingratitude! 
 
 For this, our own great State of New York, his frequent 
 public recej^tions in this city, and his recent enthusiastic 
 greeting, from town, village, and handet, throughout the 
 length and breadth of the State, have sufficiently shown the 
 sentiments of our peojile, and we fearlessly challenge for 
 him the test of the general ballot, to vindicate the whole 
 country from this aspersion on its intelligence and its patriot- 
 ism. 
 
 In this crisis of our history, such is the man whom we pro- 
 pose for your suffrages, and such his qualifications to meet 
 and fulfil its duties. — The issue of his acceptance or rejection 
 by the people, is one which cannot be evaded; and all the 
 vast consequences of welfare or misfortunes to the coimtr3% 
 which depend upon the decision, rest with each citizen, ac- 
 cording to the measure of his influence — over public opinions 
 and public action. Let us then, fellow-citizens, so discharge 
 our duty and our whole duty, to the country and to the 
 whole country, that in the result of the a])proaching contest, 
 we may with honest i)ride join our voices in the general joy 
 which will attend success. 
 
IV 
 
 SPEECH AT THE BROADWAY TABERNACLE 
 
 APRIL 29, 1856 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Among the public demonstrations that preceded the first Repub- 
 Hcan Convention for the nomination of candidates for President 
 and Vice-President, which was held in Philadelphia June 17, 1856, 
 one of the most important was the National Convention that met 
 at Pittsburgh on Washington's Birthday of the same year. The 
 organization of the Republican party had proceeded very nearly 
 to completion and the Convention at Pittsburgh was called by the 
 chairmen of the RepubUcan State Committees of Maine, Vermont, 
 Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana 
 and Wisconsin. Delegates from twenty-eight States and Terri- 
 tories, some four hundred in number met on the appointed day. 
 The body was composed of earnest and zealous men opposed to 
 the extension of slavery and was representative of all the best 
 elements in the country. The Convention and its proceedings are 
 thus described in Nicolay & Hay's "Life of Lincoln": — 
 
 "It was merely an informal mass convention; but many of the 
 delegates were men of national character each of whose names was 
 itself a sufficient credential. Above all, the members were cautious, 
 moderate, conciliatory and unambitious to act beyond the require- 
 ments of the hour. They contented themselves with the usual 
 parliamentary routine; appointed a committee on national organi- 
 zation; issued a call for a delegate convention; and adopted and 
 put forth a stirring address to the country. Their resolutions were 
 brief and formulated but four demands: the repeal of all laws 
 which allow the introduction of slavery into territories once con- 
 secrated to freedom; resistance by constitutional means to slavery 
 in any United States Territory; the immediate admission of Kansas 
 as a free State, and the overthrow of the present national Admin- 
 istration." 
 
 New York had sent a large delegation to this Convention, and as 
 
 442 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 44.'i 
 
 a sequel of its transactions a large mass meeting was held in New 
 York City on the evening of April 21)th at the Broadway Taber- 
 nacle. Mr. Evarts had prepared the call for the meeting which was 
 as follows : — 
 
 "The Citizens of New York opposed to the measures and policy 
 of the present National Administration for the Extension of Slavery 
 t)ver territory embraced within the com])act of the "Missouri 
 Compromise," and in favor of repairing the mischiefs arising from 
 the violation of good faith in its repeal, and of restoring the action 
 and position of the Federal Government on the subject of Slavery 
 to the i)rinciples of Washington and jefferson are respectfully 
 invited by the undersigned, to hold a Public Meeting at the 
 Broadway Tabernacle on Tuesday Evening, 29th day of April, to 
 hear the report of the delegates from the State of New York to the 
 Pittsburgh Convention, and to take measures for an organized 
 maintenance in the approaching Presidential Canvass, of the great 
 National principles of justice and freedom promulgated by that 
 Convention." 
 
 The Broadway Tabernacle, erected in 1836, was the house of 
 worship of the Broadway Tabernacle Church, a famous Congrega- 
 tional Church of that period, which had always been very active 
 in all the reforms of the day and particularly in the anti-slavery 
 movement. The building stood on the east side of Broadway, 
 between what is now Worth Street and Catharine Lane, and was 
 set back one hundred feet from Broadway. It had a comfortable 
 seating capacity for about 2o00. 
 
 The resolutions offered for adoption by the meeting, also drawn 
 by Mr. Evarts, were as follows: — 
 
 ''Resolved: That the treacherous repeal of the "Missouri Com- 
 promise," the wanton renewal of the political agitation of the 
 slavery question, the enlistment of the whole power of the Federal 
 Government in the extension of Slavery over territory' devoted by 
 the most solemn pledge and compact to Freedom, the countenance 
 and protection given by the Executive of the I hiion to the violent 
 and cruel tyranny established over the defenseless inhabitants of 
 Kansas, by the lawless i)opulalion on its borders, and the auda- 
 cious claim that the Federal Constitution is the C'harter and the 
 Federal Government should be the minister, of the maintenance 
 
444 sFeIcHES of WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and diffusion of Slavery as a National institution, have forced upon 
 the Country the issue of Slavery-extension or Slavery-restriction 
 for decision in the impending canvass for the election of President. 
 
 ''Resolved: That our unalterable attachment to the great senti- 
 ments of Justice and Freedom which inspired the Declaration of 
 our Independence and are wrought into the whole fabric of our 
 Constitution; our faithful devotion to the dignity, integrity, peace 
 and prosperity of the Union, our reverence for the memory of the 
 founders of the magnificent system of Government which has de- 
 veloped and protected the vast growth of this people to its present 
 rank among the nations of the world, and of the great statesmen 
 of the succeeding generation who have firmly upheld what was so 
 wisely estabhshed, compel us to postpone all other political ques- 
 tions, to forget all past political differences and to unite for the 
 restoration of the action and position of the Federal Government, 
 on the subject of Slavery to the principles of Washington and 
 Jefferson as alone compatible with the honor and safety of the 
 Republic. 
 
 ''Resolved: That we have heard with great satisfaction, and sus- 
 tain with a cordial approval the proceedings of the Pittsburgh Con- 
 vention, and avow the purpose ourselves to unite and by every just 
 influence to combine the efforts of our fellow citizens for the or- 
 ganized maintenance in the approaching Presidential canvass of 
 the political principles and objects proposed by that Convention. 
 
 "Resolved: That the Republican Committees or Associations of 
 the several wards in which they have been formed be requested to 
 report to the Executive Committee the names of their Officers and 
 the system of their organization, and that the wards in which no 
 such committees or associations exist be requested to proceed with- 
 out delay to complete their organization and to report the same to 
 the Executive Committee. 
 
 "Resolved: That the Ward Committees or Associations be re- 
 quested to appoint two representatives each to meet the Execu- 
 tive Committee, at such time and place as it may designate in 
 convention for the election of delegates to the Republican State 
 Convention to be held at Syracuse." 
 
 In moving the acceptance of the report of the New York Dele- 
 gation to the Pittsburgh Convention, Mr. Evarts made the speech 
 that follows: 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 445 
 
 "TABERNACLE" SPEECH 
 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen: — 
 
 In moving, Sir, as I now do, the acceptance by this meet- 
 ing of the report of the Pittsburgli Convention, which has 
 been so impressively introduced to our attention, I shall con- 
 sult the proprieties of the occasion, and my o\mi disposition, 
 no less than that of this audience, by making but a brief 
 suggestion of some of the principal features of the call, the 
 occasion, and the cause that has brought us together. 
 
 Your call supposes. Sir, that the present administration of 
 Federal power has adopted a policy, and is pursuing meas- 
 ures for the extension of slavery over territories once secured 
 to freedom — that the first step in this aggressive movement 
 was a disturbance of a solenm arrangement, which had been 
 entered into between the two opposing interests and senti- 
 ments which divided the country, and a violation of the good 
 faith in which that arrangement was cemented, and with 
 which it had been hitherto observed and defended. It sup- 
 poses that this course of federal politics is a departure from 
 the sensible, necessary, and primary principles on which our 
 government was founded, and the purposes for which it was 
 organized, and has hitherto been maintained; and it further 
 supposes that the public welfare requires that this evil legis- 
 lation should be reconsidered; that this violated faith should 
 be reconstructed, and that the principles and practice of the 
 Federal government should be restored to those which were 
 professed and acted upon by Washington and Jefferson, and 
 which are alone comj)atible with our honor, our dignity, and 
 our safety as a jieople. 
 
 Now, I\Ir. President, let us consider what the three great 
 steps of the Federal government by Federal legislation have 
 been, on this subject of slaverv. 
 
 At the v<>ry oulsel <»f our governmeni llie coiiiiuou terri- 
 tory, unoccupied by any state jurisdiction, was all devoted 
 
446 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 by a solemn ordinance to freedom forever. That was the 
 sentiment — that was the action of the founders of the Re- 
 pubhc in 1787, and re-enacted in 1789. All was not too 
 much then to give to Freedom; and all agreed that all was 
 not too much for freedom. 
 
 Now, at that time, Mr. Madison thus expressed himself, 
 in reference to the Federal Constitution in this aspect. He 
 said that he took it that "the Constitution was formed in 
 order that the government might save ourselves from the 
 reproaches, and our posterity from the imbecility which are 
 always attendant upon a country filled with slaves." 
 General Lee, of Virginia, says that "the Constitution 
 having done so much, it is to be lamented that a provision 
 had not been made for the gradual abolition of Slavery." 
 This was the action, this the sentiment then. 
 
 Just one third of a century passes away, just one generation 
 of men is withdrawn from the scene, and in 1820 precisely 
 the same question was presented to the American people as 
 to the future fate of its new territory then coming up for 
 occupation by civilized men. And then, gentlemen, in 
 order to obtain one half of that territory for freedom, there 
 must be paid out of that half a region large enough for a 
 kingdom as a ransom for the rest. Mark how the American 
 people and American statesmen and American politicians 
 have changed in thirty-three years! 
 
 But, Mr. President, thirty -three years now roll over again. 
 That generation of statesmen has passed off the stage. In 
 the year 1854 the question is again presented to the American 
 people, the American statesmen, and the American Congress 
 — what shall we do between slavery and freedom? Then 
 the ransom paid for the half of the territory is forgotten, and 
 then, by direct Federal legislation, it is determined that the 
 half that was given to freedom one generation ago, shall be 
 taken back by our generation and in our day. This is the 
 second step. 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 447 
 
 Now let me imagine that another third of a century has 
 passed away — that our generation is withdrawn from tlie 
 stage — and when we come to the year '87, the date of the 
 ortlinance of Freedom, and the year '89, the date of the first 
 free republic of modern times, how shall we show our ])rog- 
 ress, how shall we mark our statesmanshij), if the same path 
 be pursued, but by a solenm declaration that henceforth, in 
 all the territories of the United States, slavery and involun- 
 tary servitude shall be forever by law established? There is 
 nothing else for us to do. We gave once all to Freedom. 
 We gave next half to Slavery. We take away next the 
 half given to Freedom, and there is nothing left for us. 
 \NTierever Freedom dwells under our flag. Slavery follows 
 close after her. 
 
 There is one great and solemn lesson taught by the review, 
 and that is, that no succeeding generation has corrected the 
 error, or retraced the step of its predecessors, and the solemn 
 monition is put to us that we should follow quickly this 
 action by reaction. It is for you now who have seen this 
 thing done to undo it. It is for you to protest, now, or your 
 acquiescence will be pleaded with your children for further 
 concessions by them, as the acquiescence of our fathers has 
 ever been pleaded for further concessions by us. 
 
 Now, we suppose that this subject of the extension of 
 slavery to the territories, which, if they have any govern- 
 ment, are governed by the Federal power, is a legitimate 
 subject of Federal politics, and we intend to act accordingly. 
 We suppose that it is a more important subject of Federal 
 |)olitics than any other, and we intend to act accordingly. 
 We have called you together, and you have responded to 
 the call in one of those echoes which are heard from one 
 quarter of the land to the other. This is a practical ques- 
 tion. It is a question of making this sentunent felt in the 
 way that politicians understand — by votes, by influence, by 
 condemnation of the bad and by the support of the good. 
 
448 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 We do not intend to be led into any inquiry of sympathy, 
 however aggravating the wrong of the slave may be. We do 
 not intend to be drawn into any discussion of mere ethics, 
 or of mere philanthropy for the "inferior race," as they are 
 called by our Southern brethren. We do not intend to 
 unsettle any social relation, nor to assault or undermine any 
 existing institution, but we intend to exercise the clear right 
 of , freemen in determining whether these new and large 
 regions shall be devoted to free labor upon the one hand, or 
 to the occupation of slavery upon the other. 
 
 In determining this principle, we have no occasion to 
 quarrel with any of the dogmas that are assumed or argued 
 by those who have an interest in slavery. 
 
 It is said by them that slavery in this country has been 
 productive of unmixed good to the negro. So be it, if they 
 can prove it. But it is our opinion it has been productive 
 of unmixed evil to the white man. 
 
 They say that slavery is the only relation which is possible 
 in a society which is composed of blacks and whites and 
 mixed races. So be it, if they can prove it. But that only 
 adds to the strength of our opinion that no new territory 
 should be occupied by mixed races. 
 
 There is another argument by which the slaveholding 
 interest treats the efforts of the freemen of the North to get 
 possession of some part of these territories. It is said that 
 they have been won hy our common blood and treasure. 
 Well, if this were an argument to show that the black race 
 ought to be allowed to go into a new territory— if it was 
 pretended that they had been won by the common blood and 
 treasure of the blacks of the South and the white men of the 
 North, I could understand the force of the argument. 
 
 The territory has been won by the common blood and 
 treasure of the white men of the whole country, and if God 
 assist the efforts we commence to-night it shall be occupied 
 by the white men of the whole country. 
 
CASTLE GARDEN SPEECH 433 
 
 of the State. The ri^lit of martyrdom under the law, and 
 the ripht of revohition to change the sources of the law, are 
 the only rights which reason, morals or religion can suggest 
 against an iniquitous system or administration of law. How 
 nmch of the devotion of the martyr, or the heroism of the 
 ])atriot, the agitators of our day exhibit, you, gentlemen, 
 can judge as well as I, and how little anything in the system 
 or the administration of our government can justify or ex- 
 cuse rebellion against it, let the freedom, security and happi- 
 ness which prevails throughout our borders bear grateful 
 witness. 
 
 Let us, then, be misled from the plain j)ath of duty by no 
 idle clamor, by no specious soi)histry; let us know and feel 
 that he who strikes at a law, strikes at the law; that he who 
 violates or avoids the obligation of one clause of the Con- 
 stitution, is faithless to that great charter of our national 
 government, and to the Union of these States, which exists 
 by and under it, and by and under it alone; above all, let 
 no one who loves his coimtry — who reveres the memory of 
 his fathers — who hopes for the happiness of his children — 
 ever doubt or ever forget that as we the citizens of this great 
 republic, acknowledge no superior, and bow to no master 
 but the law, so have we no guardian of our rights, no pro- 
 tector of our liberties, but the law, and that every wound 
 to its authority, as sureh^ enfeebles its 'protection. 
 
 In the actual aspect of public affairs, sir, the duty of every 
 good citizen is clear. While the enemies of public order 
 and security, whether at the North or at the South, labor 
 to irritate one portion of the nation against the other — to 
 aggravate and inflame differences of feeling and opinion — to 
 estrange from each other men born of one blood and of one 
 country — be it our care to emulate the noble spirit of our 
 connnon ancestry, who bound us together as one people, 
 free, indej)endent, j)Owerful; let the line be fairly drawn 
 between the foes of public order, the laws and the Constitu- 
 
 29 
 
434 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tion — and whatever others may do, let us see to it, that in 
 our breasts the love of country shall reign predominant, 
 and that neither the cold selfishness of politics shall quench, 
 nor tlie fickle flame of fanaticism shall supplant, its sacred 
 fire. 
 
Ill 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES, ADVOCATING THE NOMINATION 
 OF DAMEL WEBSTER TO THE PRESIDENCY 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Preliminary to the Whig Convention which met at Baltimore 
 in June, IS.Vi, efforts were made by the friends and supporters of 
 Mr. Webster throughout the country to influence i)ublic sentiment 
 in favor of his candidacy as the nominee of that convention for 
 the presidency. In the autumn of 1851 a mass meeting was called 
 in Boston to meet in Faneuil Hall with this purpose in view, at 
 which there was presented for adoption an address to the people 
 of the United States that had been prepared by Edward Everett. 
 Following upon this a similar meeting was held at Metropolitan 
 Hall, New York, on March 5, 1852, which was attended by a very 
 large and enthusiastic audience. Mr. Evarts, always a devoted 
 admirer of Mr. Webster, was actively engaged in this movement 
 in his behalf and, as a member of the committee appointed for the 
 puri)ose, prepared the address to the people of the United States, 
 that follows, which he read and presented to the meeting for its 
 adoption. It was afterwards widely published in the press of that 
 day. 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 To the Peoj)Ie of the United States: 
 
 The next approach of the election for the Chief IMagistracy 
 of the Union, calls upon all its citizens to consider the actual 
 aspect of ])u])lic affairs, to examine the characters and j)rin- 
 ci])les of the leading statesmen of I he nation, and lo deter- 
 mine, upon a deliberate and ])atriotic survey of all the vast 
 interests of this great Republic, to whom the administration 
 of these affairs and int<Tesis should be entrusted. If we 
 justly deem it a chii'f glory of our system of government 
 that its powers are to be exercised ])y no fortuitous allotment 
 
 iS6 
 
436 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of birth or rank, but by the free designation of popular choice, 
 it is a necessary consequence that that choice can be wisely 
 exercised only in favor of the most worthy and the most 
 capable. Just as fully as we esthnate the value and dignity 
 of the Right of Suffrage, we must admit the solemn obliga- 
 tions of duty which attend its enjoyment, and neither by 
 apathy nor by rashness in theexercise of the elective franchise, 
 neglect or abuse the liberty which distinguishes our condi- 
 tion from that of every other people. 
 
 Nor is it less the privilege and duty of every citizen both 
 to impart to others the grounds of his own opinions and 
 preferences on this subject of the highest concern to all, 
 and to receive theirs from them, for thus only can the con- 
 current sense of those who view alike the interests of their 
 common country, be ascertained and applied to the practical 
 results of an election. 
 
 But, fellow citizens, if these sentiments in their general 
 application receive our assent, we can scarcely exaggerate 
 the peculiar importance, in the actual condition of public 
 affairs and of political parties, of their earnest adoption as 
 practical rules for our action, in preparing for and conduct- 
 ing the ensuing Presidential Election. 
 
 No reflecting mind can refuse to admit that the probable 
 duties, difficulties and dangers which will attend the Admin- 
 istration of the Federal Government during the next Presi- 
 dential Term, require that the reins of power should be held 
 by a firm hand, and guided with a wise experience of the past 
 and a sagacious forecast of the future. If the revolutionary 
 war and the labors of the Convention of 1787 gave a new 
 Constitution and Government to the established communi- 
 ties of the old States, recent public events have brought a 
 vast region of new territory and new interests within the 
 dominion of our existing Constitution and Government. If 
 our entrance as an independent nation into relations with 
 the other natippjs of the earth followed from the first orgau- 
 
THE NOMINATION OI^ DANIEL WEBSTER 437 
 
 ization of (.)ur (ioverniiu'ul, our wondcrlul <!:ro\vtli in terri- 
 tory, ])0])ulalioii, woaltli, and power, concurring with the 
 stupendous changes \\Touglit by science and invention in 
 the means of interconnnunication with the okl world, has 
 commenced a new era in our foreign relations. If contem- 
 ])oraneously with our birth as a nation, all Euroi)e became 
 involved in the storms of war and revolution, and our liumble 
 and remote position scarcely preserved us from being drawn 
 into the strife, thepreparationsforgreaterconflicts there, warn 
 us of a peril to which oiu- relations as a great commercial and 
 maritime nation now most certainly expose us. And if the 
 President of the United States was called upon to apply all 
 the resources of liis wisdom and patriotism to direct and 
 control the first o])erations of the new Constitution and 
 Government upon the States over wliich they were estab- 
 lished, and to define and regulate our position and inter- 
 course with foreign nations in their then disturbed condition, 
 who can deny that the next Chief IVIagistrate of the Union 
 will require, for the successful conduct of our aft'airs, whether 
 foreign or domestic, the largest measure of the same great 
 qualities? 
 
 Under the influence of these sentiments, fellow-citizens, 
 at a ])ublic meeting, whether for numbers, or tlie universal 
 representation of the various interests of our Community, 
 never surpassed, held this day in the City of New York, it 
 was resolved to announce, as our unanimous choice, and to 
 sul)mit to the consideration of the National Convention, 
 the name of Daniel Webster as a Candidate for tlie Presi- 
 dency of the United States, at the next election. 
 
 The character and career of Mr. Webster, his prin(ii)les, 
 his abilities, liis j)ui)lic services, his labors and his fame, the 
 honors which he lias received from his countrymen, and the 
 renown to liis country which he has imparted in return, are 
 known to von all. Born in tlie ordinarv condition of American 
 life, tlie son of a soldier of the Revolution, educated entirely 
 
438 SPEECHES OP WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 in the schools and colleges of his native State, rising by his 
 own exertions to the height of his profession in the country, 
 he rejected the splendid emoluments which an exclusive 
 devotion to private pursuits ensured to him, and, at an early 
 manhood, entered the councils of the nation; for more than 
 a third of a centiiry, with trifling intervals, he has been in 
 public life, as the immediate representative of the people, as 
 Senator, and as Secretary of State; during all this time, his 
 acts and his speeches have been seen and read, known, under- 
 stood and scrutinized by all his countrymen all over the land. 
 
 He is known on the seaboard from the St. Johns to the 
 Rio Grande, and from the Columbia to the Gulf of California, 
 by every seaman and by every merchant, as having achieved, 
 by the power of his reason, what war had failed to accom- 
 plish, and established on a basis hereafter never to be ques- 
 tioned, the absolute exemption of the American flag, in 
 whatever sea, from search or visitation, making the deck of 
 every vessel as safe from foreign interference as a cabin be- 
 hind the Alleghanies. 
 
 He is known throughout the vast interior to all engaged in 
 internal trade and navigation, as the earnest and consistent 
 opponent of that narrow construction of the Constitution 
 which restricts its commercial protection and operation to 
 salt-water, and denies them to our land-locked seas and 
 mighty rivers. 
 
 He is known to the farmer, mechanic, and manufacturer, 
 as the advocate of that system which defends, promotes, 
 and encourages American labor, and develops and expands 
 all American resources of production and manufacture, the 
 supports of foreign commerce. 
 
 He is known at home and abroad for those great negotia- 
 tions in our foreign affairs, which have composed strifes, 
 averted wars, extended commerce, settled boundaries, re- 
 paired national injuries inflicted or sustained, and signalized 
 our foreign relations by acts of mutual respect and comity, 
 by acts of magnanimity and clemency. 
 
THE NOMINATION OF DANIEL WEBSTER 439 
 
 But above all, ffllow-citizens, he is known and clierislied 
 by every lover of his country, as tlie Defender of the Constitu- 
 tion and the Adroeaie of the Union; and whenever and wher- 
 ever "we behold the gorgeous ensign of the Rc])ul)lic, now 
 "known and lionored throughout tlie earth, still full high 
 "advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original 
 "lustre, not a strij^e erased or polluted, nor a single star 
 "obscuretl, bearing for its motto, spread all over in characters 
 "of living light, blazing in all its ami)le folds, as they float 
 "over tlie sea and over the land, and in every wind under 
 "the whole heavens, that sentiment, dear to every true 
 "American heart, Liberty and Union, now^ and forever, 
 "one and inseparable.", — whenever and wherever we 
 behold this flag of our country, the name of Daniel Webster 
 and his fame are to our eyes mingled with its blazonry. 
 
 This eminent citizen, instructed in every art, trained in 
 every disci])line, informed by every experience of public 
 life, endowed with every jjower and furnished with every 
 acquirement fit for the service of the State, his public virtue 
 and patriotism, tried by every personal, partizan and sec- 
 tional influence within the whole sphere of our j^olitics, and 
 ever found true to the whole country, and its permanent 
 welfare, this eminent citizen, now in full maturity of years 
 and wisdom, yet "his eyes not dimmed, nor his natural force 
 abated," we believe most worthy to receive the lionors, most 
 able to ])erform the duties, of President of the United States. 
 
 Nor, fellow citizens, is it a less serious topic for your con- 
 sideration that Justice, justice to Mr. Webster antl justice 
 to our country, justice to the historical greatness of the past, 
 and to the solemn claims of the future, requires the earnest 
 and devoted labors of us all, to reward his past and connnand 
 his future services for the Re])ublic. 
 
 He has served the State from early manhood lo the present 
 hour, he has labored for and loved his country with an en- 
 thusiasm untiring and undcfaying — his very heart and life, 
 
440 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 as it were, have been wrought into the fabric of our pros- 
 perity and our glory; and at last he has crowned a long career 
 of noble achievements for the general good with a sublime 
 sacrifice of self to his sense of public duty, which has filled 
 the measure of fame, and touched the heart of the whole 
 people. 
 
 If, besides public talents, virtues, services, and great 
 deserts, popularity be required for success in the political 
 canvass, Mr. Webster enjoys it with the people of the 
 United States, to an unexampled degree. 
 
 He who denies this, either means by popularity something 
 different from admiration, respect, attachment and gratitude, 
 or he means by the people some nondescript portion of the 
 community, distinct from the men who till the soil, and ply 
 the loom, and crowd the mart, and navigate the ships, and 
 fill the professions and all the manifold pursuits of industry 
 and business. All these, whenever and wherever opportu- 
 nity affords, in town or country, at the North or South, at 
 the East or West, in the courts, in the Senate, in the popular 
 assembly, seek every occasion to gaze upon his person, to 
 listen to his eloquence, to grasp him by the hand, and attend 
 his presence and his movements with every display of en- 
 thusiastic admiration and regard. Repeatedly a candidate 
 for popular suffrage, he has always beaten his competitors; 
 his elections to the Senate have always been, on the part of 
 the Legislature, but a formal expression of the popular will 
 of its constituents, and his place in the Cabinet, now and 
 heretofore, has been accorded upon the well-defined and 
 general expectation and desire of the great mass of the 
 American people. 
 
 For twenty years the school boys of our land have re- 
 hearsed the eloquence of Daniel Webster, in the same breath 
 with that of Fisher Ames and Patrick Henry, and have 
 grown to manhood to find this classic of their school-books 
 the living Orator, Patriot and Statesman. 
 
THE NOMINATION OF DANIEL WEBSTER 441 
 
 Distrust tlu'ii. fcllow-citizi'iis, tlu'sc arrogant con ten mors 
 of an intolligonl, I'diuatrd, onliglilcncd, fjenerous people, 
 whom tliey jn'onoimce unable or mnvilling to recognize the 
 high deserts of IVIr. \Yebster, chiiming only for themselves 
 an honorable exce])tion from sucJi blindness and ingratitude! 
 
 For this, our own great State of New York, liis fretiuent 
 ])ublic recepticms in this city, and his recent enthusiastic 
 greeting, from to\\Ti, village, and handet, throughout the 
 length and breadth of the State, have sufficiently shown the 
 sentiments of our people, and we fearlessly challenge for 
 liim the test of the general ballot, to vindicate the whole 
 coimtry from tliis aspersion on its intelligence and its patriot- 
 ism. 
 
 In this crisis of our history, such is tlie man whom we pro- 
 pose for your suffrages, and such his qualifications to meet 
 and fulfil its duties. — The issue of his acceptance or rejection 
 liy the people, is one which cannot be evaded; and all tlie 
 vast consequences of welfare or misfortunes to the coimtry, 
 which dejjend ui)on the decision, rest with each citizen, ac- 
 cording to the measure of his influence — over public opinions 
 and public action. Let us then, fellow-citizens, so discharge 
 our duty and our whole duty, to the country and to the 
 whole country, that in the result of the approaching contest, 
 we may witli honest ])ride join our voices in the general joy 
 wliich will attend success. 
 
IV 
 
 SPEECH AT THE BROADWAY TABERNACLE 
 
 APRIL 29, 1856 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Among the public demonstrations that preceded the first Repub- 
 lican Convention for the nomination of candidates for President 
 and Vice-President, which was held in Philadelphia June 17, 1856, 
 one of the most important was the National Convention that met 
 at Pittsburgh on Washington's Birthday of the same year. The 
 organization of the Republican party had proceeded very nearly 
 to completion and the Convention at Pittsburgh was called by the 
 chairmen of the RepubUcan State Committees of Maine, Vermont, 
 Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana 
 and Wisconsin. Delegates from twenty-eight States and Terri- 
 tories, some four hundred in number met on the appointed day. 
 The body was composed of earnest and zealous men opposed to 
 the extension of slavery and was representative of all the best 
 elements in the country. The Convention and its proceedings are 
 thus described in Nicolay & Hay's "Life of Lincoln": — 
 
 "It was merely an informal mass convention; but many of the 
 delegates were men of national character each of whose names was 
 itself a sufficient credential. Above all, the members were cautious, 
 moderate, conciliatory and unambitious to act beyond the require- 
 ments of the hour. They contented themselves with the usual 
 parliamentary routine; appointed a committee on national organi- 
 zation; issued a call for a delegate convention; and adopted and 
 put forth a stirring address to the country. Their resolutions were 
 brief and formulated but four demands: the repeal of all laws 
 which allow the introduction of slavery into territories once con- 
 secrated to freedom; resistance by constitutional means to slavery 
 in any United States Territory ; the immediate admission of Kansas 
 as a free State, and the overthrow of the present national Admin- 
 istration." 
 
 New York had sent a large delegation to this Convention, and as 
 
 44? 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 443 
 
 a sequel of its transactions a large mass meeting was held in New 
 York City on the evening of April 2<)th at the Broadway Taber- 
 nacle. Mr. Evarts had prepared the call for the meeting which was 
 as follows : — 
 
 "The Citizens of New York opposed to the measures and poUcy 
 of the present National Administration for the Extension of Slavery 
 over territory embraced within the compact of the "Missouri 
 Compromise," and in favor of repairing the mischiefs arising from 
 the violation of good faith in its repeal, and of restoring the action 
 and position of the Federal Government on the subject of Slavery 
 to the principles of washingtox and jefferson are respectfully 
 invited by the undersigned, to hold a Pubhc Meeting at the 
 Broadway Tabernacle on Tuesday Evening, 29th day of April, to 
 hear the report of the delegates from the State of New York to the 
 Pittsburgh Convention, and to take measures for an organized 
 maintenance in the approaching Presidential Canvass, of the great 
 National principles of justice and freedOxM promulgated by that 
 Convention." 
 
 The Broadway Tabernacle, erected in 1836, was the house of 
 worship of the Broadway Tabernacle Church, a famous Congrega- 
 tional Church of that period, which had always been very active 
 in all the reforms of the day and particularly in the anti-slavery 
 movement. The building stood on the east side of Broadway, 
 between what is now Worth Street and Catharine Lane, and was 
 set back one hundred feet from Broadway. It had a comfortable 
 seating capacity for about 2o00. 
 
 The resolutions offered for adoption by the meeting, also drawn 
 by Mr. Evarts, were as follows: — 
 
 "Resolved: That the treacherous repeal of the "Missouri Com- 
 promise," the wanton renewal of the political agitation of the 
 slavery question, the enlistment of the whole power of the Federal 
 Ciovernment in the extension of Slavery over territory devoted by 
 the most solemn pledge and compact to Freedom, the countenance 
 and protection given by the Executive of the Union to the violent 
 and cruel tyranny estabUshed over tlie defenseless inhabitants of 
 Kansas, by the lawless population on its borders, and the auda- 
 cious claim that the Federal Constitution is the Charter and the 
 Federal Government should be the minister, of the maintenance 
 
444 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and diffusion of Slavery as a National institution, have forced upon 
 the Country the issue of Slavery-extension or Slavery-restriction 
 for decision in the impending canvass for the election of President, 
 
 ''Resolved: That our unalterable attachment to the great senti- 
 ments of Justice and Freedom which inspired the Declaration of 
 our Independence and are wrought into the whole fabric of our 
 Constitution; our faithful devotion to the dignity, integrity, peace 
 and prosperity of the Union, our reverence for the memory of the 
 founders of the magnificent system of Government which has de- 
 veloped and protected the vast growth of this people to its present 
 rank among the nations of the world, and of the great statesmen 
 of the succeeding generation who have firmly upheld what was so 
 wisely established, compel us to postpone all other political ques- 
 tions, to forget all past political differences and to unite for the 
 restoration of the action and position of the Federal Government, 
 on the subject of Slavery to the principles of Washington and 
 Jefferson as alone compatible with the honor and safety of the 
 Republic. 
 
 ''Resolved: That we have heard with great satisfaction, and sus- 
 tain with a cordial approval the proceedings of the Pittsburgh Con- 
 vention, and avow the purpose ourselves to unite and by every just 
 influence to combine the efforts of our fellow citizens for the or- 
 ganized maintenance in the approaching Presidential canvass of 
 the political principles and objects proposed by that Convention. 
 
 "Resolved: That the Republican Committees or Associations of 
 the several wards in which they have been formed be requested to 
 report to the Executive Committee the names of their Ofiicers and 
 the system of their organization, and that the wards in which no 
 such committees or associations exist be requested to proceed with- 
 out delay to complete their organization and to report the same to 
 the Executive Committee. 
 
 "Resolved: That the Ward Committees or Associations be re- 
 quested to appoint two representatives each to meet the Execu- 
 tive Committee, at such time and place as it may designate in 
 convention for the election of delegates to the Republican State 
 Convention to be held at Syracuse." 
 
 In moving the acceptance of the report of the New York Dele- 
 gation to the Pittsburgh Convention, Mr. Evarts made the speech 
 that follows: 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 445 
 
 "TABERNACLE" SPEECH 
 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen: — 
 
 In moving, Sir, as I now do, the cacceptance by this meet- 
 ing of the report of the Pittsburgh Convention, which has 
 been so impressively introduced to our attention, I shall con- 
 sult the proprieties of the occasion, and nn- o\\ti disposition, 
 no less than that of this audience, by making but a brief 
 suggestion of some of the principal features of the call, the 
 occasion, and the cause that has brought us together. 
 
 Your call sui)poses. Sir, that the present administration of 
 Federal power has adopted a policy, and is pursuing meas- 
 ures for the extension of slavery over territories once secured 
 to freedom — that the first step in this aggressive movement 
 was a disturbance of a solemn arrangement, which had been 
 entered into between the two opposing interests and senti- 
 ments which divided the country, alid a violation of the good 
 faith in which that arrangement was cemented, and with 
 which it had been hitherto observed and defended. It sup- 
 poses that this course of federal politics is a departure from 
 the sensible, necessary, and primary princijjles on which our 
 government was founded, and the purposes for which it was 
 organized, and has hitherto been maintained; and it furtlier 
 supposes that the public welfare requires that this evil legis- 
 lation should be reconsidered; that this violated faith should 
 be reconstructed, and that the principles and practice of the 
 Federal government should be restored to those which were 
 professed and acted upon by Washington and Jefferson, and 
 which are alone com])atible with our honor, our dignity, and 
 our safety as a pe()j)le. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, lei us consider what the three great 
 steps of the Federal government by Federal legislation have 
 been, on this subject of slavery. 
 
 At the v<TV outset of our government the common terri- 
 tory-, unoccupied by any blutc juri.'sdiclion, was all devoted 
 
446 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 by a solemn ordinance to freedom forever. That was the 
 sentiment — that was the action of the founders of the Re- 
 public in 1787, and re-enacted in 1789. All was not too 
 much then to give to Freedom; and all agreed that all was 
 not too much for freedom. 
 
 Now, at that time, Mr. Madison thus expressed himself, 
 in reference to the Federal Constitution in this aspect. He 
 said that he took it that "the Constitution was formed in 
 order that the government might save ourselves from the 
 reproaches, and our posterity from the imbecility which are 
 always attendant upon a country filled with slaves." 
 General Lee, of Virginia, says that "the Constitution 
 having done so much, it is to be lamented that a provision 
 had not been made for the gradual abolition of Slavery." 
 This was the action, this the sentiment then. 
 
 Just one third of a century passes away, just one generation 
 of men is withdrawn from the scene, and in 1820 precisely 
 the same question was presented to the American people as 
 to the future fate of its new territory then coming up for 
 occupation by civilized men. And then, gentlemen, in 
 order to obtain one half of that territory for freedom, there 
 must be paid out of that half a region large enough for a 
 kingdom as a ransom for the rest. Mark how the American 
 people and American statesmen and American politicians 
 have changed in thirty-three years! 
 
 But, Mr. President, thirty -three years now roll over again. 
 That generation of statesmen has passed off the stage. In 
 the year 1854 the question is again presented to the American 
 people, the American statesmen, and the American Congress 
 — what shall we do between slavery and freedom? Then 
 the ransom paid for the half of the territory is forgotten, and 
 then, by direct Federal legislation, it is determined that the 
 half that was given to freedom one generation ago, shall be 
 taken back by our generation and in our day. This is the 
 second step. 
 
THE TAHKHXACLE SPEECH 447 
 
 Now let me imagine that anotlier tliird of a century has 
 passed away — that our generation is withdrawn from the 
 stage — and wIkmi we come to the year '87, the date of the 
 ordinance of Freedom, and the j'ear '89, the date of the first 
 free re})ul)lic of modern times, liow sliall we show our prog- 
 ress, how shall we mark our statesmanship, if the same path 
 he jMn-sued, hut by a solenm declaration that henceforth, in 
 all the territories of the United States, slavery and involun- 
 tary servitude shall be forever by law established? There is 
 nothing else for us to do. We gave once all to Freedom. 
 We gave next half to Slavery. We take away next the 
 half given to Freedom, and there is nothing left for us. 
 Wherever Freedom dwells under our flag. Slavery follows 
 close after her. 
 
 There is one great and solemn lesson taught by the review, 
 and that is, that no succeeding generation has corrected the 
 error, or retraced the step of its predecessors, and the solemn 
 monition is put to us that we should follow quickly this 
 action by reaction. It is for you now who have seen this 
 thing done to undo it. It is for you to protest, noiv, or your 
 acquiescence will be pleaded with your children for further 
 concessions by them, as the acquiescence of our fathers has 
 ever been pleaded for further concessions by us. 
 
 Now, we suppose that this subject of the extension of 
 slavery to the territories, which, if they have any govern- 
 ment, are governed by the Federal power, is a legitimate 
 subject of Federal politics, and we intend to act accordingly. 
 We suppose that it is a more imi)ortant subject of Federal 
 politics than any other, and we intend to act accordingly. 
 We have called you together, and you have responded to 
 the call in one of those echoes which are heard from one 
 (juarter of the land to the other. This is a practical ques- 
 tion. It is a question of making this sentnnent felt in the 
 way that politicians understand — by votes, by influence, by 
 condemnation of the bad and by the support of the good. 
 
448 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 We do not intend to be led into any inquiry of sympathy, 
 however aggravating the wrong of the slave may be. We do 
 not intend to be drawn into any discussion of mere ethics, 
 or of mere philanthropy for the "inferior race," as they are 
 called by our Southern brethren. We do not intend to 
 unsettle any social relation, nor to assault or undermine any 
 existing institution, but we intend to exercise the clear right 
 of freemen in determining whether these new and large 
 regions shall be devoted to free labor upon the one hand, or 
 to the occupation of slavery upon the other. 
 
 In determining this principle, we have no occasion to 
 quarrel with any of the dogmas that are assumed or argued 
 by those who have an interest in slavery. 
 
 It is said by them that slavery in this country has been 
 productive of unmixed good to the negro. So be it, if they 
 can prove it. But it is our opinion it has been productive 
 of unmixed evil to the white man. 
 
 They say that slavery is the only relation which is possible 
 in a society which is composed of blacks and whites and 
 mixed races. So be it, if they can prove it. But that only 
 adds to the strength of our opinion that no new territory 
 should be occupied by mixed races. 
 
 There is another argument by which the slaveholding 
 interest treats the efforts of the freemen of the North to get 
 possession of some part of these territories. It is said that 
 they have been won hy our common blood and treasure. 
 Well, if this were an argument to show that the black race 
 ought to be allowed to go into a new territory — if it was 
 pretended that they had been won by the common blood and 
 treasure of the blacks of the South and the white men of the 
 North, I could understand the force of the argument. 
 
 The territory has been won by the common blood and 
 treasure of the white men of the whole country, and if God 
 assist the efforts we commence to-night it shall be occupied 
 by the white men of the whole country. 
 
THE TAliERXACLE SPEECH 449 
 
 It is said tliut it is the part ol' brolliren to occupy their 
 coninion lieritage in peace and (luiet, and tliat the white 
 man of tlie wSouth and the while man of the Xortli slioukl go 
 together and possess the hind; but there is one difficulty 
 al)out this business. It does not dej)end upon the hiw of 
 Congress or the hiw of any Stale, but it is written in the 
 liearts of the free laborers of our countrj^ that they will not 
 work side by side with slaves. Labor, gentlemen, we 
 of the free States acknowledge to be the source and basis 
 of all our wealth, of all our progress, of all our dignity 
 and value; but it is the labor of the free man. Carry 
 through this campaign the principle that the land of the 
 United States which is not inclosed within State limits 
 belongs to the white citizens of the United States. There is 
 nothing revolutionary, I take it, in that. 
 
 But, again, our principles favor general, in distinction from 
 special, legislation. Slavery, as a special interest, does not 
 stand different from other interests. In my judgment the 
 slave interest is no more entitled to the control and protec- 
 tion of the Federal government than the financial or tariff 
 interests. The people should govern the country, or the 
 people should desert the country — one thing or the other. 
 
 Another thing in our republican organization is, that we 
 are comprehensive in our politics, and not sectional. White 
 men live all over the country, but black men are geograph- 
 ically situated. The party of slavery is necessarily a geo- 
 graphical j){irty — it is a geographical party in fact, and 
 it is a geographical party by the lines of industry which can 
 make that institution live only in the climate of the South. 
 But free labor can live everywhere. Ours, then, is the 
 comprehensive party — theirs is the geograi)hical ])arty. 
 
 But there is, gentlemen, a nuich more serious evil in our 
 ])olitics tlian this I have alluded to — I mean that controlling 
 division called by the odious names of North and South. 
 Why, our country has grown very nuich since these names 
 
 30 
 
450 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 originated. When the Constitution was formed the whole 
 population of the United States resided on a strip of terri- 
 tory along the Atlantic coast; and then the country was 
 necessarily divided into a North and South, for it was all 
 East and no West. But I should think, that, with the growth 
 of our institutions and population until they now occupy the 
 continent and look out upon the broad Pacific, it might be 
 conceded that there was something besides a North and a 
 South — that there was an East, a Centre and a West. 
 We, then, as Republicans, aware that we stand, not by the 
 North, not by the South, but by the labor of freemen, 
 wherever they are, and against slavery and the lovers of 
 slavery, wherever they are — we expect to find lovers of 
 freedom in Maryland, in Virginia, in Missouri, in Kentucky, 
 in Tennessee, in Texas, and in every slave State. We 
 know we shall find lovers of slavery in Massachusetts, 
 in New Hampshire, in New York, in New Jersey, in 
 Pennsylvania, and in every free State; and if there be 
 anything geographical in that discrimination of parties, 
 it is the geography of the United States. Mr. Presi- 
 dent, I have no stone to cast at the slaveholder, upon any 
 accusation of a sinful exercise of mastery over the abject 
 population that crouches at his feet, for though each slave 
 owner may have a gyve and a manacle upon the person of 
 each slave, the system of slavery, by a terrible retribution, is 
 a gyve and a manacle upon the wJiole body of the society in 
 which it exists. How urgent, then, the obligation upon us 
 to see to it that neither by us, nor through us, nor over us, 
 this gyve and manacle are fastened upon any nascent State, 
 any new community. 
 
 There is another ver^^ great difficulty which the North — 
 I will not say "North," for I have eliminated that phrase 
 from our politics — but which the free States of this country 
 greatly suffer from. I mean the degradation oj politics. We 
 have had left among us, until recently, great statesmen, 
 
THE TAlHsHXACLK SPEECH 451 
 
 ^nvat orators, <;roat j)ul)lic men; Inil tlu-se ^cnlloincii liad 
 coininencetl their career under the ini|)iilse.s and influences 
 of the new government, and the general princii)les of free- 
 dom and equaHty with wliich the new government started. 
 Since, however, slavery came to control the government of 
 its o^^^l States, and by that means to control the Federal 
 government, and the politics of the free States through its 
 ])atronage, I can tell you that, so far as I know, though the 
 old men may be content to acquiesce, the educated, intelli- 
 gent, public-spirited young men of the free States have 
 studied, and will study, anything but politics which teaches 
 them their degradation. 
 
 But roll back the tide; let it be understood that instead of 
 your accomplished diplomatists and jurists being interro- 
 gated, before they can receive admission at Washington, as 
 to what they think a])out slavery, that it may be seen if they 
 are acce})table to the South— change the tone of the ques- 
 tion — encourage a free expression of opinion on that as on 
 other subjects — or, if the question is to be put at all, let it 
 be put to the public men of the slave States, whether they 
 are satisfied that slavery is a domestic institution, or claim 
 it to be a national institution — and you will have your 
 politics purified. 
 
 But, gentlemen, our duty in this juncture of j)ublic affairs, 
 has higher claims upon our attention than all these considera- 
 tions. Allow me, by way of illustration, to revert for a 
 moment to an incident of the last winter. The unwonted 
 rigor of the season had si)anned the Ohio with i\ free bridge. 
 A poor slave-mother, with all the treasure that she had in 
 the world her children, from a growing boy and playful girl 
 to an iul'aiif upon iier breast — had j)assed over thai free 
 bridge without let or hindrance, and was on the free soil 
 of Ohio. 
 
 Tlic power of I he l'\>d('ral government, under a law of 
 which 1 liaNc luTc no complaint to inake, pursued thai sla\c- 
 
452 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 mother to send her back to servitude; and, not able to re- 
 lease herself, she let out the spirit of her child into the free 
 light of heaven, even through the dark portal of death. 
 If it was noble and brave in the stern Sempronius to taunt 
 the Roman Senate with their long debate which of the 
 two they would choose, slavery or death, who shall say it 
 was ignominious in that poor slave-mother, by a quick deci- 
 sion and flashing execution, to determine that question for 
 her posterity. Ah! gentlemen, "one touch of nature makes 
 the whole world kin." And there are many of us who feel 
 a greater pride in sharing the bright red blood that ran 
 through a heart bounding for freedom, under the dark bosom 
 of that poor slave-mother, far greater than in What we have 
 in common with the pale faces of some of the statesmen of 
 the North. 
 
 Thus much for illustration of the lesson that I would 
 teach. The infant State of Kansas, now reposes upon the 
 bosom of the American people. The vows that swore she 
 should be born free have been violated; the charter of her 
 manumission has been repudiated, and she was born exposed 
 to slavery. A manly band of freemen has saved that infant 
 State; but the Federal government is now fast pursuing to 
 snatch it from their protection and from yours; and if you 
 admire the spirit of the poor slave woman of Kentucky, that 
 would treat her offspring thus to save them from slavery, 
 what shall I say to you to induce you to come forward to 
 save Kansas, and her millions to be born, from that slavery 
 from which a noble band of freemen thus far have rescued 
 her .5^ Are the slave women of Kentucky of nobler blood 
 than the free men of New York? 
 
 But, gentlemen, it is said that "Union nuist and shall be 
 preserved" and that is the principal object of my speech 
 to-night. I should suppose that eighteen hundred years, 
 without a new experiment, had furnished illustration enough 
 of the loud shouts which may be put forth in defence of the 
 
THE TABERNACLE SPEECH 453 
 
 shrine of the "Great Diana of the E])hesians," when the real 
 interest of the sliouters was eoncerned in I lie business of 
 "Demetrius tlie Silversmith." And for all that class of 
 sliouters for the preservation of the Union, I have no 
 respect. Their occu])ation in the government of the country, 
 through the slave interest, is the "business of Demetrius 
 the Silversmith," and they must save Diana's shrine, in 
 order to support that business. 
 
 But there is a very large class of most worthy and patriotic 
 citizens, who are justly sensitive upon any subject which 
 looks askance on good faith and good feeling, so important, 
 undoubtedly, to be observed in all parts of the country; 
 though how they can complacently look on and recognize 
 good faith or good feeling in the bad faith and bad feeling 
 j)ractised upon the other side of the Union, I do not know. 
 Now, this class has found an eloquent voice in the speech 
 and letter of an accomplished orator* of New England, 
 in which he closes by expressing the sentiment that he 
 "cannot unite with anv band which does not follow the 
 flag and keep step to the music of the Union." These are 
 my sentiments precisely. But it becomes important to 
 know what the flag and what the music of the Union is. 
 I am not myself sensible of any strange transmutation of 
 the American people, which, in the course of seventy years, 
 should change the noble hymn of American Freedom from 
 being the music of the Union into a sing-song chant in praise 
 of African slavery. 
 
 And, as to the "flag of the Union," I would say to that 
 eloquent orator, that the greatest statesman of New England, 
 when, in possession of his l)est reasoning powers and over- 
 whelming oratory, he stood up to suj)i)ort the Union and 
 Constitution, could give him a description of that flag. It 
 is the "gorgeous ensign of the Rei)ublic, now known and 
 honored throughout the earth — still full, high advanced — 
 
 * Rufus ("hoate. 
 
454 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 its arms and trophies streaming in their original histre — not 
 a stripe erased or polhited, nor a single star obscured — but 
 everywhere spread all over, in characters of living light, 
 blazing on all its ample folds as they float over the sea and 
 over the land, and in every wind under the whole heavens, 
 that sentiment dear to every true x\merican heart — ''Liberty 
 and Union, now and forever — one and inseparable!" That 
 is the flag of the Union which you and all of us will follow, 
 and keep step to the music of the shouts of freemen that 
 attend it. 
 
 But when w^e find that flag in the hands of whatever 
 standard bearers — whether they assume the honored name 
 of the Democratic party, or any other, or with whatever 
 shouts of patriotism it is flaunted to the breeze — and notice 
 that it is unfurled with every stripe polluted, and every star 
 obscured — all its blazing glories darkened into shame, all its 
 legend of living light extinguished and replaced by the mock- 
 ing motto, accursed to every true American heart — "Slavery 
 and Union, now and forever — one and inseparable," — that 
 flag, too, we will follow, but only to trample it under our 
 feet, and to strike down its standard bearer, as a conspirator 
 against the public freedom, and a traitor to the honor and 
 safetv of the Union. 
 
V 
 
 SPEECH AT THE ACADEMY OF MUSIC 
 OCTOBER 22, 1856 
 
 NOTE 
 
 During tlie Presidential canvass of 18.56 a mass meeting was 
 called together, October '2'-2, 1 Sad, in the Academy of Music, New 
 York, under the auspices of the Young Men's Re|)ul)lican (General 
 Committee of the City of New York. The Academy was crowded. 
 Governor Robinson of Kansas was the first speaker. Mr. Evarts 
 was the only other speaker of the evening and spoke as follows: — 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 Mr. President, and Gentlemen of the Young Men's Republican 
 General Committee, Ladies and Gentlemen of the City of 
 New York: — 
 
 The great and honest fame of the first Governor of Kansas 
 has drawn together, under the auspices of your energetic and 
 effective association, this magnificent assem})lage of the citi- 
 zens of New York, to pay their homage, in respect and 
 enthusiasm, for his great achievements in the cause that we 
 all honor, and to draw from his instructions some new 
 incentives to activity and exertion for the triumph of that 
 cause. 
 
 By tlie encouragement, sir, of your invitation, and by tluit 
 alone, I, having no other claim upon the attentions of this 
 assembly tlmn my interest in the common cause, may perha])s 
 tax your patience a little, but yet would a.sk some serious 
 attention to the issues of life and death of a great })eoi)le, that 
 are now swelling your hearts. 
 
 We are in the midst of the canvass of a Presidential elec- 
 tion. On the 1th of March next by the forms of the Consti- 
 tution, the Chief Executive intrusted for I he last lour years 
 
 455 
 
456 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 with your name, your honor, your power, lays them all down 
 at your feet, and you, sitting in majesty as a sovereign people, 
 to pass judgment upon this man who retires, say, " Well done, 
 good and faithful servant!" or, "Back, caitiff, to the obscu- 
 rity of private life!" To his successor, you say, "In your 
 pledge to us we reckon our honor, our safety, our liberty 
 secured. Take all our power, all our dignity; they are safe 
 in your hands." Such is the form of the Constitution. How 
 much substance there is in it, is to be determined on the 4th 
 of November, when you are to say to the man who raises 
 aloft the flag of "Liberty and Union," or to the man who 
 displays the banner of "Slavery or Disunion," which you 
 prefer. 
 
 I should not, gentlemen, need to say that the pending can- 
 vass touches the election of President, and that only, had not 
 an eminent citizen of the United States, having hmiself once 
 filled that high ofl5ce, and seeking it now a second time at 
 your hands, undertaken to exhibit himself before the country 
 as maintaining that there was something beyond the election 
 of a President involved, and that is, by what suffrages he 
 should be chosen, and whether he should be obeyed after his 
 election. Both those grave questions, how he should be elect- 
 ed, and whether he shall be obeyed after his election, were 
 settled in 1789 by the adoption of the Federal Constitution, 
 and no body in this country has authorized any politician, 
 any office seeker, any orator to say that when a President is 
 chosen by the constitutional number of electoral votes, he 
 does not possess all the power, all the dignity, all the author- 
 ity conferred by the Constitution, and would not receive the 
 respectful obedience of all the people of the United States. 
 
 Why, gentlemen, eight States of this Union, touching each 
 other, namely, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, 
 Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois, can elect a 
 President of the United States, and does any man tell me, 
 that if these eight States unite their electoral votes upon any 
 
PRESIDENTIAL C/VNVASS— IS^O 457 
 
 candidate, the other twenty-three States of the I^nion will 
 not obey him? 
 
 But, gentlemen, at this time, the election of a Cliief Exec- 
 utive, considered merely as the dejiository of the public 
 power, is of tlie utmost importance. And why? — because all 
 the ^^Tong, all tlie crime, all the sliames, all the sorrows of 
 Kansas that fill our hearts with anguish whenever they are 
 calleil to our minds, — all of them were agains-t ihe (\)nstiiution 
 and against the lawfi. It was not that the Constitution, with 
 all its full guarantees of personal riglits, was not extended 
 over Kansas. No! Your Constitution was right, your laws 
 were right, but yoiu* Executive was wTong. Where were 
 your Constitution and your laws then? Why, where the 
 Constitution and laws of every country are when a t^Tant 
 holds the power. Where was the Constitution of England — 
 where INIagna Charta, — where the mimiments of liberty that 
 Parliament, for a thousand years, had built up, when King 
 James established his superstitious and cruel despotism? 
 when Jeffries was at the head of the Judiciary, when the 
 bloody Dimdee and his bare-breeched Higlilanders overrode 
 the peaceful Scottish Lowhmders, and Mad TjTconnell, with 
 his Rajiparees, scourged the Protestant settlements in Ire- 
 land? They were trampled imder foot. But when William 
 of Orange brought back to operative \igor the Constitution 
 and the laws of England, where then was King James, and 
 where Judge Jeffries, and where Tyrconnell, Dundee and 
 their ruffian crew? King James was a ])ensioner on the 
 bounty of his royal cousin of France, picking u]) the crumbs 
 that fell from his table; Jeffries languished in the Tower, 
 smitten \\'ith loatlisome disease, and saved from the scaffold 
 only by the kind hand of natural death; Tyrconnell. and 
 Dundee, and their base followers, who had not fallen by 
 \iolence, were vaga))onds from i)ublic Justice or its victims. 
 And when your Constitution and laws are restored to their 
 just su])r<'macy by tli<' Cliief Magistrate, Fremont, wlirre will 
 
458 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 President Pierce, and Judge Lecompte, and Marshal 
 Donaldson, and Sheriff Jones, and the ruffian posse of Atchi- 
 sons and Stringfellows be found? 
 
 But, gentlemen, it has come to be a part of our Federal 
 system of poHtics that, at every election of President, there 
 is some leading issue, or political idea presented, to receive, 
 and which does receive, the stamp of the popular will, one 
 way or the other. And you will take notice that where the 
 question has once been fairly put, when it is included in the 
 election and has been passed upon, if there is anything that 
 the political history of our people discloses, it is this — they will 
 not have it reargued, but will consider it settled. Now, such 
 being the habit of our elections, what is the political issue 
 that is before us for decision, beyond and in addition to 
 the great and important fact of who shall wield the Execu- 
 tive power of the country? It relates wholly to the subject 
 of slavery — it does not relate in the slightest degree to the 
 power of the Pope, not in the slightest degree, but exclusively 
 to the subject of slavery. As I understand the proposition 
 presented for approval by the Democratic party to the 
 American people, and which it demands shall be adopted 
 as a part of our constitutional law by and in Mr. Buchanan's 
 election, it is this — the dogma is this — that the free Con- 
 stitution of the United States — the freest, perhaps the 
 only truly free, government in the world — when by the 
 advancing tide of population it is extended over virgin soil, 
 engenders the growth of chattel slavery, and that so ineradi- 
 cably, that it is not in the power of Congress, or of the people 
 of the territory, to remove it from the soil, but there it is by 
 the proper vigor of the Constitution; that nothing can be 
 done by the general government or by the local population 
 to affect the destiny of that fair region and its future popula- 
 tion in this regard, but at the moment when the question of the 
 formation of the Constitution of the nascent State arises, 
 then alone the institution of slavery can be lawfully sup- 
 pressed or excluded. 
 
lM{KSII)KN'ri AL CANVASS IH.K! 45f) 
 
 On the other hantl, the great i)ro])osition of constitutional 
 law which we jnrsent with Colonel PVeniont for your ap- 
 ])roval, is this — that tlie Territories of the United States be- 
 long to the people of the United States, and are governed by 
 the government of the United States, — that by the Constitu- 
 tion, (^ongress has full power to sha])e the laws of the Terri- 
 tories in every respect, inclutling this matter of the exclusion 
 of slavery, but it has not the power to establish slavery — and 
 why? Because your Constitution itself provides, among its 
 guarantees of personal rights, that by no means in the power 
 of the Federal Government shall any man be deprived of 
 liberty "without due jjrocess of law." 
 
 These propositions, gentlemen, are wide apart. Is the 
 issue they make im])ortant? Is there anything in this coun- 
 tr\' as important? Is there any difference between the States 
 of the Union — is there any difference between their hiAVs and 
 customs — between their characters, between them in wealth, 
 in progress, in liberty, except what slavery makes? Is not 
 ]\Iaine like Wisconsin, and New York like California; is not 
 South Carolina like Missouri, and Maryland like Louisiana? 
 All that are free are alike, and all that are slave are alike, — 
 and how different are the free from the slave! The question, 
 then, involved practically in this issue, is, whether all the 
 Territories are in danger of slavery, or are safe against that 
 hazard and secure against that danger? 
 
 Well, there is another party in the field having, I doubt 
 not, for its basis some great political sentiment — I don't 
 know what it is— the nearest I have ever heard anybody 
 come to it, is that Mr. Fillmore, its candidate, says he knows 
 no North, no South, no East, no West. Now I may be 
 mistaken, but my impression is that when tlie electoral votes 
 are counted next November, he will find this lack of accjuaint- 
 ance is reciprocal, and that neitlu'r the North, the South, 
 the East nor the West know him. 
 
 Between whom, gentlemen, is this issue and this contro- 
 
460 SPEECHES OF WnXIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 versy? Some people say it is between the North and the 
 South ; others say it is between the Free and the Slave States; 
 This is not so. Is it so? If it were, it were soon settled, for 
 there are 120 electoral votes only from the Slave States, and 
 176 from the Free States. No, you cannot put it off in that 
 way. It is not between any great aggregates like States, any 
 great masses like sections— it is between the people of the 
 United States — between the lover of slavery, whether he 
 live here, or wherever he lives, and the lover of freedom, 
 whether he live in South Carolina, or wherever else. I take 
 it there are plenty of people in New York who don't believe 
 in Fremont, and don't believe in excluding slavery from the 
 Territories. I take it that there is as much difference of 
 opinion on this point between Franklin Pierce and John P. 
 Hale, both of New Hampshire, — I take it that thei-e is as 
 much difference of opinion between Cassius M. Clay and 
 John C. Breckenridge, both of Kentuckj^ as between any 
 two men in the land. I take it that there is as much between 
 John C. Fremont and James Buchanan, both citizens of Free 
 States. No, gentlemen, hand to hand, foot to foot, eye to 
 eye, — you have got to fight this battle with your next-door 
 neighbors ! Everywhere some of the people are for slavery ; 
 everywhere some of the people are against it. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what have we to say about this? What 
 are we to do about it? We have simply to vote, and vote as 
 we think. And on the result of that ballot rests the determi- 
 nation of the great issue. The traveler climbing the Alps, 
 when he reaches a certain summit, has pointed out to him a 
 small thatched cottage, with steep roof declining either way. 
 That roof, with its ridge pole, divides the course of the waters 
 of the Alps. Whatever little drop of rain, or tiny flake of 
 snow falls upon this side or that of the narrow roof, finds its 
 way down and joins wdth some little rill, some brook, some 
 stream, and swells, as it may be, with its trivial bulk, either 
 the dark waters of the Danube, that roll between shores 
 
PRESroEXTIAL CANVASS— 1856 461 
 
 cursed witli slavery, into tlie gloomy wave of the Black Sea, 
 or miiiiiling with the glad ripi)les of tlie Rhine, flows on to 
 the Atlantic Ocean, whicli bears npon its bosom the com- 
 merce of Free Stat(\s. On the fourtli day of November, some 
 hnndred thonsand poll-booths will be opened for the nudti- 
 tudinous sufi'rages of this great peo])le, and of the votes, then 
 thick and fast descending, the story will be told in the same 
 way. Whatever single ballot falls at every hustings, swells 
 the tide that is to carry forward the forces of free societv to 
 made glad our whole land, — or else the overwhelming tide 
 of slavery, triumphing and to triumph, over the hopes of 
 civil liberty. Your vote is to tell one way or the other. You 
 may have reasons for not throwing your vote for Fremont 
 winch seem to you sufficient. It may be because you liave 
 heard he is a Catholic. Still, your ballot goes for slavery. 
 You may give as a reason for not voting for him, that you 
 woidd not vote for a man whose party harl)ors an Abolitionist. 
 Nevertheless, you vote for slavery; and your vote will live, 
 but you and your reasons will die. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, when our part and duty as freemen seems 
 so very plain a matter, why and how are we embarrassed and 
 impeded in our efforts to unite all the forces, all the voices of 
 free society on one side, as without hindrance or diflSculty, 
 all the forces and all the voices of slave society are combined 
 on the other.^ It is because those who ought to be with us are 
 deterred through foolish sophistries or idle fears from exert- 
 ing their ])owers as voters in this cauA'ass. They say our 
 party is sectional, and that we are particularly sectional in 
 our candidates. Now, let us look at this. Where do our 
 candidates live? One of them lives on the shores of the 
 Atlantic, in the State of New Jersey; the other on the Pacific, 
 in the State of California; and it would be a pretty la»'ge 
 section of tliis country that would include both of those 
 States. 
 
 Well, now, if you will go with me to the river whicji divides 
 
462 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Virginia from Ohio, and put the foot of the compass down in 
 the middle of that stream, I will draw a circle with a radius 
 of sixty miles which will touch Pennsylvania and Kentucky, 
 the States in which the Democratic candidates reside. But 
 that is not sectional! If a party nominates for President 
 Colonel Benton, who lives in Missouri, and for Vice-Presi- 
 dent, Judge Douglass, of Illinois, that would not be sectional 
 and yet the States are close together. But if you would put 
 up Mr. Bissel, of Illinois, for President, and Colonel Lane, of 
 Indiana, for Vice-President, that is sectional. These States 
 are not any nearer together than the other two, but still that 
 is sectional. Now, let us try it again. If you nominate 
 Governor Chase, of Ohio, for President, and Cassius M. Clay, 
 of Kentucky, for Vice-President, why then you are sectional 
 again. So you perceive it all comes to this sheer nonsense, 
 that if one or the other of the candidates for the high offices 
 of this government is not pro-slavery in sentiment, then the 
 nomination, and the party making it, is sectional. 
 
 Let us take the antecedents of our candidates. Colonel 
 Fremont, born in what was then the southernmost State of 
 the country, Georgia — reared, educated, imbued with such 
 principles as he would take from that soil, in the southern- 
 most State in feeling. South Carolina — living now in Cali- 
 fornia, the southernmost political division of our Pacific 
 possessions — a man born, bred and educated in a Slave State, 
 and that never, never lived in a Free State till he made a Free 
 State for himself to live in. But he is sectional. What a 
 monstrous perversion, what a miserable practice upon the 
 intelligence of the American people is it to accuse the Re- 
 publican party of being sectional in its candidates, when it 
 takes for one of them, a man born and bred at the extreme 
 South, and who never resided in the North! Well, they say 
 again, that Fremont is a young man, and that Buchanan is 
 an old one. To that we reply, we would rather have a young 
 man who is in favor of liberty, than an old uuui that is iu 
 
PRESTDF-XTTAL CANVASS— ISofi 463 
 
 favor of slavery. And moreover, we would rather have a 
 man living all his lifetime under the influence of slavery, and 
 who yet favors freedom, than a man living all his lifetime 
 under the influence of freedom, antl who yet ])refers slavery. 
 
 Well, what is it to be sectional? Are our principles sec- 
 tional? What are they? And what would be se'ctional princi- 
 ])les? Whenever any party is constituted in the Ignited States 
 with principles that seek the aggrandizement, the develop- 
 ment, the enrichment of one section of the country at the 
 expense of, or in tlisregard of, the general interests of the 
 whole country, that party is sectional. Are our principles 
 exposed to this condemnation? Are the principles of free 
 speech, free press, free soil, free men and Fremont local 
 j)rinciples that we are striving to spread for the aggrandize- 
 ment of any section of this coimtry, and in disregard of the 
 interests of the whole country? Are they or are they not? 
 (Cries of "No, no!") Look, then, at the other side, having 
 for their principles, nothing, nothing, nothing, but the ex- 
 ])ansion, the extension, tlie aggrandizement of a local, exclu- 
 sive, sectional interest of property — slavery, at the expense, 
 first, of the local interests of the new Territories, and secondly, 
 to the disgrace and degradation of the Union. Now, gentle- 
 men, when a man tells me a sectional party is an evil in our 
 politics, I agree with him. But when he seeks to determine 
 for me which is the sectional party, and tries to make me be- 
 lieve that it is a party that endeavors to extend the common 
 rights, interests, and institutions of American free society, I 
 I take leave to differ from him. 
 
 But again, they say our party is revolutionary. Well, in 
 a ])olitical sense, it is. It is revolutionary, first, in the sense 
 of turning out of office those now in— they like rotation in 
 ofiice, bul no revolution out of offic*'. But I am not to be 
 frightened, nor are you to be frightened, by being told that a 
 measure or policy is revolutionary. The (piestion lies behind 
 this. If the present state of things is satisfactory, then a rev- 
 
464 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 oliition is wrong and not desirable. But if not, then a revolu- 
 tion is right, and may be necessary. The question is, whether 
 it is a revolution to turn things upside down, or to set things 
 right side up. And from the time of General Washington 
 down, the people of this country have been in favor of turning 
 things right side up whenever they needed it. But how is 
 our party revolutionary? It is revolutionary in this, that we 
 mean to change the political power of this country and place 
 it in accordance with the Constitution, to wrest it from the 
 minority that have wielded it against the spii'it of that in- 
 strument, for eighty years, and place it in the hands of the 
 majority. Strange to say, gentlemen, now is the first time 
 that this has been seriously attempted. The slaveholding 
 interest has governed this country up to this hour. How 
 does it do that? When a grave statesman of Athens surprised 
 the ruler Pericles in his gambols with his infant boy, and was 
 disposed to check his play as unsuited to his high station, 
 Pericles said to him, "Why, sir, that boy governs Greece; he 
 governs his mother, his mother governs me, I govern Athens, 
 and Athens governs Greece." So the slaveholders govern 
 the Slave States, the Slave States govern the Federal Union, 
 and the Federal Union, by the introduction of its politics 
 into State affairs, governs the Free States. 
 
 There is another revolution in politics, that if our party is 
 successful it will begin to accomplish, and that is, to redress 
 one of the principal dangers that threatens the Constitution 
 of the United States. As you all know, the two pohtical 
 forces that make our system harmonious, are like the two 
 forces which govern the solar system, the centripetal force 
 of the Federal Government keeping the States together, and 
 the centrifugal force of State-rights, preserving the separate 
 States from being merged in the central power. It is essen- 
 tial to the right adjustment of these two political forces in our 
 system, that their reciprocal action should not be disturbed 
 by any combinations of rights or interests among the States. 
 
PRESIDENTIAL C AXVASS— 1806 465 
 
 Attentive to tliis consideration, tlie wisdom of tlu^ franiers of 
 the Constitution introduced this i)rovision into that instru- 
 ment, that "no State shall, witliout the consent of Congress, 
 make any agreement or compact with another State." And 
 why? Because combinations of States, liaving tlieir interests 
 united, woukl disturb the luirmonious working of the govern- 
 ment, just as phinets of the sohir system, drawn from their 
 se])arate orbits, and forming new aggregates of matter, 
 woukl unsettle the whole system of gravitation. I would 
 like to know if the unity of interests, and the determined 
 purpose of the Slaveholding States to adhere together, do 
 not make a com])act stronger than ink or parcliment could 
 frame, stronger than the family com])act of the Napoleon or 
 Bour})on dynasty. They are united, antl unless severed by 
 a revolution of politics, the system of this government, the 
 reciprocal action of Federal and States-right princijiles never 
 can ])lay in harmony now. The State of Maryland, the 
 State of ^Missouri, the State of Kentucky, whose policy 
 would be to get rid of slavery, if each was left free to considt 
 its separate interests, is held in the bonds of this slavery 
 compact. Now, we mean to make a revolution in this re- 
 spect in our national politics. 
 
 There is yet another revolution in i)olitics which we aim 
 at and will effect. We, the people of these United States, 
 are one mass; we have no division between a privileged 
 class or peerage and the commonalty, as they have in Great 
 Britain. Before the people of that country can make or 
 alter any law, they must collect tlie sense of tlie common 
 people by themselves, tlirough the Commons, and the sense 
 of the peerage by itself, tlirough tlu' House of Lords, and if 
 the .sense of the Commons and ])eerage, taken separately, <lo 
 not concur, no law can be made or alt<Mcd. Tluit is to say, 
 the i)eerage Iiave a veto uj)on the wishes of all the rest of the 
 nation. Now, although in our Constitution tluTc is nothiiig 
 of that kind, yet in our politics it is the ruling idea. We 
 
 81 
 
466 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 must have the collective sense of the common people — that 
 is, of the people of the Free States; — and the collected sense 
 of the aristocracy — that is, of the Slave States — and only 
 what they concur in, can become a measure or the policy of 
 our government. 
 
 That is the present system of our politics. It is this notion 
 that is constantly suggesting that you must always have one 
 candidate in the Slave States and one only in the Free States, 
 and that any system of policy that does not receive support 
 in the Slave States is said to be unconstitutional and threat- 
 ening to the Union. Now, as the Constitution does not 
 make slavery an estate, to be separately consulted, we don't 
 intend to consult that interest separately, but all the people 
 and all their interests equally and together. 
 
 Another reason given as to why it will not do for good 
 citizens to support our ticket is, that if we elect our candidates 
 the Slave States will dissolve the Union. Well, gentlemen, 
 in a matter of the first consequence, I agree with Mr. Burke, 
 that "it is better to be despised for too anxious a solicitude, 
 than to be ruined by too confident a security." And I never 
 will calculate or speak lightly of the value of the Union. 
 Show me the remotest threat of danger to the Union, and I 
 will join with whoever will join, until that danger is removed. 
 But, gentlemen, I must have my own judgment of where 
 the threat of danger comes from. And this is but another 
 of the fallacies brought into this campaign; they think to 
 alarm us by raising the cry that the Union will be dissolved, 
 and withdraw our attention from the true source of that 
 peril. Now, gentlemen, it is not so easy to dissolve the 
 Union. But if it ever is dissolved, and I do not believe it 
 ever will be, it will be dissolved for a reason foreseen by the 
 eminent conservative statesman, Mr. Webster. He imder- 
 stood this business perfectly. He was devoted to the Union. 
 He could descry the danger afar off, and hurry to the rescue. 
 Where did he find it.^ It was not from inattention to the 
 
rRESIDENTIAL CANVASS— 18.50 467 
 
 demands of Frei'doin. TTo said this question of liberty and 
 riplit has taken a far deeper seat in the American mind and 
 American conscience than any question of ])olitics. He said 
 it mi^ht be guided by reason and made obedient to the Con- 
 stitution, but any attem])t to repress, or confine, or smother 
 it, would only inflame or exaggerate it till it exceeded all 
 restraints, and then, lie warns his countrymen in this empha- 
 tic language: "I know nothing even in the Constitution or 
 in the Union itself which would not be endangered by the 
 explosion that might follow." 
 
 It is always well to look at bolh ,vdes, and that is a thing 
 that people don't always care to do, but that lawyers have 
 to do. When King George and his Ministry, headed by 
 Lord North, were talking about the King's ])rerogativ<\ and 
 the ])ower of I'arliament to bind tlie peo])le of the Colonies 
 l)y any laws which it chose to enact, Burke and Lord Chat- 
 ham were urging: What will become of the Empire, and what 
 of the Colonies? Attention was i)aid only to the powers of 
 Parliament and the King's prerogative, and tlie consequence 
 was that they lost the Colonies. And, in like manner, there 
 are two sides to this business of the danger to the Union. 
 We have no patience with this cry about the dissolution of 
 the Union! It is time it was out of onr politics. All these 
 people who talk about it have an undefined notion that each 
 of those great States — the Palmello State, for instance— was 
 once a nation, and thai all it has to do is to get out of the 
 confederacy, and it will Ix' a nation again. No State in this 
 Union, of the original thirt(>(Mi, <>vcr was a nation. They 
 were all parts of one political system while they were Colo- 
 nies of England before we had tJiat growth in the progress 
 of events that authori/<-s the s<parate establishment of a new 
 nation. We had iniilcd ;iii(I become one — articulati-d to- 
 gether in tiu- eml)ry<). \\v wtre first United Colonies, then 
 United Stat<'s. and wIhm wc dc<'lar<Hl our indejx'uch'nce, we 
 proclaimed in the naine of "the United Stales of America, 
 
468 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free 
 and independent States." That was our birth. We were 
 not born a feeble brood, of small and ignoble States. 
 We were a true whelp of the British lion, and produced, as 
 is the manner of that noble beast, at a single birth! 
 A nation was born in a day! So, what are you to dissolve 
 into? Not into the original condition of several nation- 
 alities, or single States? You have got then to do what no 
 nation ever did. You have got to tear your country in 
 pieces. It is not a matter of parchment nor a resumption of 
 dormant nationality. It is a dissevering of the warm body 
 of your mother country. And when you find any instance 
 of a people, living under the worst government, attempting 
 this, it will be time to fear that the people living under the 
 best government the world ever saw, w\\[ attempt it. Po- 
 land was dismembered, but not by Polanders. A great deal 
 has been said, gentlemen, about dissolution, to frighten peo- 
 ple from voting according to their choice, and a very eloquent 
 man, the resources of whose logic and the splendor of whose 
 oratory no man admires more than I do — I mean Mr. Choate, 
 of Massachusetts — finds warrant to vote for Buchanan in 
 this same reason. Now, there is a great deal of power in a 
 figure of speech, and if you yield to it and don't scrutinize 
 its logic, you are lost. Mr. Choate, in this connection says: 
 "Believing the noble Ship of State to be within half a cable's 
 length of a lee shore of rock, in a gale of wind, our first busi- 
 ness is to put her about, and crowd her off into the deep, 
 open sea. That done, we can regulate the stowage of her 
 lower tier of powder, and select her cruising ground, and bring 
 her officers to court-martial at our leisure." 
 
 Now there is an admirable figure! — admirable but delu- 
 sive — for it assumes the whole question, and if you jump on 
 its back and let it run away with you, you are lost, as Mr. 
 Choate was. There are other perils to which the good ship 
 of commerce, as well as the noble ship of State, is exposed, 
 
I'KESIDKNTIAL CANVASS— 18j(> K){) 
 
 besides a lee shore, Tliere is danfjer always to the good ship 
 of commerce in mid-ocean, if she have a valuable freight, 
 from within, no less than from without. There is always 
 danger of mutiny, and sometimes for the ])ur])ose of hauling 
 do\\ii the bright flag of honest commerce, and nmning up 
 the dark ethsign of Uie slave trader. Now, gentlemen, do the 
 loyal sailors of the little ship love that good ship in whose 
 womb they are safe against the storms of wind and sea, whose 
 tall mast carries the flag of their country's honest commerce, 
 whose every fold gleams with the lightnings of tlieir country's 
 power against their enemies, and with the smile of their 
 country's love for themselves? Do they love their good ship 
 less when they discover a plot or an outbreak of mutiny? 
 Do they love her any the less when the treason is suppressed 
 and the traitors are punished? With glad cheers they salute 
 the free flag of honest trade, still flying at the mast head, al- 
 though it be with hearts bursting with anguish at the sad 
 fate of their ])oor comrades that dangle at the yardarms. 
 Now, gentlemen, you can judge as well as I, which figure of 
 speech best illustrates the dangers our ship of State is now 
 encountering. 
 
 As the Slave States, then, cannot dissolve into what they 
 were not, original sej)arate sovereignties — they nuist go 
 through a new revolution under the lead of a new Declara- 
 tion of Independence. For, I take it, though a good ileal of 
 late has been said against our Declaration of Independence, 
 "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind recjuires that 
 the" Southern Confederacy "should declare the causes which 
 impel them to the separation," and the fundamental princi- 
 ])les on which their new j)olity is to be buill. Now. let us 
 have the matter uj) for once. Our Declaration of Inde|)en- 
 dence starts with "the glittering and sounding generalities," 
 that are now deemed so dangerous, that is," that all nu'n are 
 created equal, that tliey are endowed by their Creator with 
 certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty 
 
470 SPEECHES OF WITJJAM MAX^VELL EVARTS 
 
 and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights gov- 
 ernments are instituted among men, deriving their just pow- 
 ers from the consent of tlie governed: that whenever any 
 form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is 
 the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute 
 a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, 
 and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem 
 most likely to effect their safety and happiness." It is these 
 doctrines that are frightening our pro-slavery friends, North 
 and South, now. This "passionate and eloquent manifesto" 
 is feared as disorganizing. The new "Declaration," I im- 
 agine, will have none of these faults of glitter or eloquence, 
 but only plain working political truths. It will begin some- 
 what in this sort: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: 
 some men are born weak and some strong, physically and 
 mentally; some men are born to wealth, and some to pov- 
 erty; some are heirs to education and learning, and some to 
 ignorance and folly. We hold these further truths to be self- 
 evident: that the strong, the rich and the learned, own the 
 the weak, the feeble and the ignorant." Now when you have 
 established that as self-evident, it is clear that anything you 
 may choose to add to it will be equally self-evident. They 
 will then proceed : "We hold that these different classes have 
 certain inalienable rights; one is the right of the strong, the 
 wealthy, and the learned, to life, liberty and the pursuit of 
 happiness, and also to the pursuit of the life, liberty and 
 happiness of the feeble, the poor and the ignorant; while to 
 the unfortunate class, the poor, the weak, and the ignorant, 
 are secured the inalienable right to be protected and encour- 
 aged to labor, that the fruits of their labor may be eaten by 
 their masters." 
 
 Now constitute a State on such principles, and you have 
 a good working system of government. What will the griev- 
 ances be which will justify the separation? Chiefly, no doubt, 
 that our govermnent cherishes liberty, a free press, free 
 
PRESIDENTIAL ( ANVASS— 1856 471 
 
 speecli, a freo ])iilpit, free literature, and free labor, — that it 
 (lares to hold the monstrous revolutionary red, or black, or 
 red and blaek, Re])ublican doetrine, — tliat "greasy nieeJian- 
 ics, filtliy operatives, and sniall-fisted fanners" have a right 
 to vote! Well, now, woukl not the general opinion of 
 mankind justify any nation, any ]X'0])le in throwing off 
 such a despotism, and would not such a recital of grievances 
 approve itself to the good sense of the civilized world? 
 
 But there is nmcli miseliief from tlie prevalence of the opin- 
 ion, vagu<' and unsubstantial as it is, that a dissolution of 
 the Union is ])ossible. ]\Iany men in tlie North believe that, 
 in every disaster to freedom, there is one resource which we 
 have left; that if we are beaten and trampled down, if slav- 
 ery be waived in trium])h over us, that we can dissolve the 
 T^nion and have for ourselves a separate government, relieved 
 from this element of discord and violence. Gentlemen, that 
 is a wTetched mistake. You cannot get rid of your country 
 if it Ijecojne hateful to you. You cannot slip out from your 
 government if it be t;^Tannical. If you have not virtue 
 enough to vote, you have not virtue enough to fight. 
 
 If you have two Free-State neiglibors, a Fillmore and a 
 Buchanan, to Jiold down every Fremont in our political strug- 
 gles for freedom under the Constitution, they will keep you 
 dowTi when you are striving to relieve yourselves from a 
 tyranny of wjiich }'ou are tired. You ought not to desire to 
 get out of the government even if it sliouid become oppressive 
 because by tJie Constitution and the laws you have the polit- 
 ical power, when you choose to exert it, to remedy the evil 
 comi)lained of. But when you have not the virtue to vote 
 for a man who would save you from tyranny, you liave not 
 the virtue enough tJirougli seven years of war and misery to 
 conquer a peace, as your rallicrs did. Now, gentlemen, 
 won't you work harder, won't you talk louder, won't you 
 strive better to mak<' the gov<Tnment of your country what 
 it should be, when you know that whatever it may be, you 
 
472 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 cannot escape from its dominion, but must bear it with what 
 grace you may? 
 
 What are we coming to if we don't accomplish this pro- 
 posed revohition in the pohtics of this country? I don't 
 think there ever was so great, so melancholy, so gloomy a 
 change in the prospects of any community, as in eighty years 
 from the time of the Revolution has been effected in the so- 
 cial condition and general moral standing of the white inhab- 
 itants of the Slave States. In all that I have said or thought 
 about slavery in this campaign, I have never touched upon 
 it as a social institution, in the relation between the masters 
 and their slaves. I have never touched upon the oppression 
 of the slave; never sought to excite sympathy; never sought 
 to disturb the relation of master and slave in the Southern 
 States. Nor have I spoken to-night, nor at any other time, 
 of slavery, except as a political institution, and in its influence 
 on the liberty of our free fellow-coimtrymen. If you com- 
 pare, with some little attention, the general feeling of the 
 people, the tone and morality of the Slave-State communities 
 on all questions of public liberty and common right in 1776 
 and so in 1789, with the exhibition that their governments, 
 the people in primary meetings, their public men and their 
 public papers, make of themselves before your eyes and mine 
 in this campaign, you will agree with me that there never was 
 so melancholy a reduction of the scale and standard of civil 
 white society as has taken place in that portion of our com- 
 mon country, a portion which we love no less than any other 
 and which we will do everything in our power, under the Con- 
 stitution and the laws, to raise to as high a condition of social 
 and material prosperity as is enjoyed by ourselves. 
 
 This is very melancholy to contemplate. General Wash- 
 ington was always open and clear in his demands of liberty 
 for the slave, always in favor of freedom for himself and 
 everybody else. He was before and during the Revolution 
 the foremost man of Virginia. Now, look at the proud 
 
PRESIDEXTL\L CANVASS— 1856 473 
 
 Conunon wealth with Governor Wise at its head as its repre- 
 sentative man, and look at what he has dared to say — and 
 to say, too, in the presence and liearing of his civilized coun- 
 trymen, and as tlie controlling sentiment and policy by which 
 he was governed in his jiolitical preferences — that the i)arty 
 which, by the extension and the opening of the new markets 
 for slavery, would raise the price of the slave-l)orn natives 
 of his State, so that he could sell them away from their na- 
 tive homes at an enlarged profit to their masters — that (hat 
 party would receive his support. It is for this that he ap- 
 proves and supports ]\Ir. Buclianan's policy as calculated to 
 raise the market value of men, born and reared on the soil 
 of Virginia, from $1,000 to $5,000 a head. I never heard so 
 infamous a sentiment from any man who had learned to 
 .speak a civilized tongue. It is the doctrine of the king of 
 Dahomey, neither more nor less. The King of Dahomey 
 derives his wealth from the price of his subjects whom he 
 sells for deportation into foreign slave markets. "But," 
 he says in effect, ""this accursed policy of the United States, 
 of England, and of France, that has suppressed the slave- 
 trade, has reduced my i)rofits. One of my black subjects 
 that I get but $oO for, sells in Cuba for $800; but if you only 
 restore and legalize the slave-trade I will get $800, less the 
 mere commercial freight." Now, if that is not Governor 
 Wise in sentiment and ])olicy, I don't know wliat the thing 
 means. 
 
 But again. General Washington u.sed to preside at meetings 
 discussing the subji'ct of slavery and the best means of its 
 abolition. Now, Mr. Underwood cannot go to Philadelphia 
 merely to discuss in your Uonvenlion the question of the 
 extension of slavery without being banished from the State of 
 N'irginia. That is wliat they do in ^'irginia now. Thai is 
 how they tliink and lee! in \'irginia now. The last mail from 
 Wheeling brought us im-ws (lial a Haptist clcrgyu'an had been 
 sent from tlie State ""because he was not content to advance 
 
474 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the cause of Christ in conformity loith Southern institutions.^^ 
 Now, gentlemen, we won't accumulate epithets; but did you 
 ever hear such a sentiment? I have been told always that 
 the cause of Christ bent the institutions of men to its own 
 supremacy, never that it accommodated itself to human 
 institutions, if it were at variance with them. Recently, 
 gentlemen, there occurred in the State of North Carolina an 
 instance which happens to be exactly the counterpart to one 
 which occurred in Virginia when Mr. Jefferson was in the 
 prime of his life and activity. Professor Hedrick, a native 
 of North Carolina, always living there, educated there — a 
 professor in its university — wrote a letter, not about the 
 abolition of slavery, but simply expressing his opposition to 
 the extension of slavery, and his intention to support Fre- 
 mont for the Presidency. He wrote this letter, giving good 
 sound, political, statesmanlike reasons for his opinions. The 
 faculty at once meet, tell him he is a nuisance, that they 
 require his services no longer; and the students burn him in 
 eflBgy on the campus. In Mr. Jefferson's time. Dr. Price, 
 of London, an eminent philanthropist, had written a pamph- 
 let against slavery, in general condemning it, with a view to 
 its absolute suppression. He sent to Mr. Jefferson a copy 
 of this pamphlet, and Mr. Jefferson wrote in reply this letter 
 concerning it, and the effect of circulating its doctrines in 
 the United States of America : 
 
 Mr. Jefferson begins by speaking of the manner in which 
 he thinks the pamphlet — which, it seems, had been exten- 
 sively circulated in America^ — will have been received. 
 "Southward of the Chesapeake," he thinks, "it will find but 
 few readers concurring with it in sentiment." From the 
 mouth to the head of the Chesapeake, it would be received 
 more favorably, — "The bulk of the people approving it in 
 theory;" slaveholding "keeping the consciences of many 
 uneasy." While northward of the Chesapeake the oppon- 
 ents of its doctrines would be about as rare as "robbers and 
 murderers." He then proceeds to say: 
 
PRKSIDEN'TIAl. CANVASS— 18.J() 475 
 
 In Maryland I do not find snoli a disposition to begin the redress 
 of tliis enormity as in Vir«>;inia. This is the next State to which we 
 may turn our eyes for tlie interestin-,' spectacle of justice in conflict 
 with avarice and oppression — a conflict wherein the sacred side is 
 gaining daily recruits from the influx into office of young men 
 grown and growing up. These have sucked in the principles of 
 liberty, as it were, with their mother's milk. And it is to them I 
 look with anxiety to turn the fate of this question. Be not, there- 
 fore, discouraged. What you have written will do a great deal of 
 good; and, could you t^till trouble yourself with our welfare, no man is 
 more able to give aid to the laboring side. The College of William 
 and Mary, in Williamsburg, since the remodelling of its plan, is the 
 place where are collected together all the young men of \irginia, 
 under preparation for public life. They are there under direction, 
 most of them, of a Mr. Wythe, one of the most virtuous of char- 
 acters, and whose sentiments on the subject of Slavery are unequiv- 
 ocal. I am satisfied, if you could resolve to address an exhortation 
 to these young men, with all the eloquence of which you are master, 
 that its influence on the future decision of this important question 
 would be great, perhai)s decisive. 
 
 Thus you see, that so far from thinking you have cause to repent 
 of what you have done, I wish you to do more, and wish it on the 
 assurance of its effect. The information I have received from 
 America of the reception of your pamphlet, in the difterent States, 
 agrees with the expectation I had formed. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, i.s there not some difference made in 
 eighty year.s, when Jefferson applauds and thanks an English 
 philanthropist for having mooted the question of slavery, 
 and wlien he speaks of the good efi'eet wliicli such a pamphlet 
 would have on the ingenuous youth receiving their education 
 for public life? Is there not some difi'erence between tliat 
 state of feeling in society at that time, and that whicli is 
 dis{)layed under your eyes against Professor Iledrick, a na- 
 tive of North Carolina, and a |)rofessor in its state univer- 
 sity? 
 
 I have a word, gentlemen, to say as to wJiat the Kei)ubli- 
 
476 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 can party has done, and what it is going to do. Great 
 revolutions, even in the settled course of politics, are not 
 wrought in a day. But nevertheless, great changes do some- 
 times take place in a short time. When King James, of 
 Scotland, was traveling southward, to assume the English 
 throne, opened to him by the demise of Queen Elizabeth, he 
 was humbly attended by eight hundred Puritan clergymen 
 of England, with a petition beseeching from him the pro- 
 tection of the crown that they might, in peace and quiet, 
 observe the forms of their religion. The haughty monarch 
 flushed with his new-gained throne and crown, spurned them 
 and their petition, and told them if they did not mend their 
 faith he would "hurry them out of the land." But, never- 
 theless, in the next generation, the Puritan General Crom- 
 well, hurled from the British throne the first-born son of 
 King James, and threw his head as a sacrifice to the insulted 
 and violated Constitution and liberties of England. 
 
 When, two years ago, there was pending before the Ameri- 
 can Congress the great question of the repeal of the Missouri 
 Compromise, three thousand Puritan clergymen of New 
 England, humbly besought your government that they 
 would stop this enormous iniquity, and suppress this vast 
 injustice. The leader in that outrage and that mfamy, 
 Douglas, of Illinois, cheered on by President Pierce and their 
 triumphant party, insulted, in ribald tones, the Puritan 
 clergymen and their petition, and told them that if they did 
 not mend their piety, strenuous examples would be made of 
 some of them. Nevertheless, in two short years, the Ameri- 
 can people exacted from that Democratic party the ignomin- 
 ious sacrifice of Douglas in their own Convention, as the 
 wages of the political sin he had committed, and consigned 
 him to the political death he had deserved. And his fellow 
 laborer in political crime. President Pierce, received no better 
 fate. Lovely and united in their political life, in their polit- 
 ical death they were not divided. Now, that is what the 
 
PRESIDENTL\L CANVASS-1856 477 
 
 Republican party has done. And in every place in the Sen- 
 ate of the Union, for which the Free States have had a new 
 election, it is come about that a man in favor of slavery has 
 thus far fallen, and been succeeded by a freeman. And in 
 Pennsylvania, on a joint ballot, another liead of these be- 
 trayers of your i)ul)lic trusts sjiall fall. And by the control 
 of the Senate of Indiana, a man now filling the Senate, the 
 abettor and aider of this infamy, shall retire from his seat 
 and it shall be kept oi)en till filled by a supi)orter of liberty. 
 Now what is the I{e])ublican party to do? The j)eople want 
 to know whether it is going to elect its President or not. 
 AVhat do we think of Pennsylvania, and what is to be said 
 about it? The Democratic party is congratulating itself that 
 it is not drowned yet in the political flood that is sweeping 
 over the country. Now, that political flood is not the tem- 
 porary swash of a transient influence, but it is a true tide, and 
 as any of the Almanacs will tell you, it will be high tide till 
 the Fourth of November. And if, in the fidl swell of this 
 tide, some bad eminence should be left unwashed by its 
 healthful waters, it will be time enough then for that bad 
 eminence to congratulate itself on its escape. It all depends 
 upon what the effect shall be, on the spirit of the people, of 
 the State election in Pennsylvania, whether it is a prelude 
 of disaster or victory. Ix^t no man forget that the repulse 
 of the Redan i)repared the way to the storming ot the ^lala- 
 koff. Does the tide ebb? is the question. Are the legions 
 broken in spirit? Has the tide ebbed in your l)osom? (Cries 
 of "no, no!") Is the spirit of the legions in New York 
 (luclh'd? (Cries of "no, no!") Then they are not in Penn- 
 sylvania, for they are men of like passions with you. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is a trial, a great trial going on 
 before the p<'<)ple. And the tribunal is the assembled ma- 
 jesty of the free citizens of the T'^nited States. The culj)rit 
 is the Democratic party, taken red-handed in the guilt of all 
 the crimes, of all the shames, of all tlie sorrows of Kansas. 
 
478 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EYARTS 
 
 Now, we have a maxim in the law, that in every such august 
 procedure there are two parties on trial, the criminal and his 
 judge, and if the guilty man escapes the judge is convicted. 
 So, if the Democratic party escapes your verdict, you are 
 convicted as no better than it. This we all understand. 
 We all remember a notable instance in Kentucky, where one, 
 young Matt. Ward, murdered in cold blood a schoolmaster, 
 who had laid his hand upon a younger brother in the just 
 discipHne of his school. Well, Matt. Ward was on trial, 
 and a great many other people were on trial. But Matt. 
 Ward escaped the gallows, and the rest were gibbeted by 
 public opinion. Preston S. Brooks was on trial, and he 
 pleaded guilty, and stood with shameless brow before the 
 judge, and made a bold harangue to him, and suffered, for 
 his sentence, a fine of three hundred pieces of silver — the 
 price of American freedom of speech in the Senate of the 
 United States — and paid it with a sneer. He knew his judge. 
 Does the Democratic party know that the price of American 
 liberty, sacrificed in Kansas, is worth only so many pieces of 
 silver? Does the Democratic party know its judge? That is 
 the question to be determined. I tell you the issue is put, 
 the indictment is drawn, the Republican party is chief pros- 
 ecutor, the proof is complete, the evidence is all in, the 
 prisoner confesses, and now the question is whether all the 
 intelligence, all the patriotism, and all the liberties of this 
 people — ^free schools, free speech, free press, free literature, 
 free labor — have made us all slaves? All the pomp and 
 pageantry of freedom is but as sounding brass and tinkling 
 cymbals, if the spirit of liberty is so far decayed among us as 
 to leave this great treason unrebuked, this convicted criminal 
 unpunished. 
 
VI 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE EIGHTEENTH WARD 
 REPUBLICAN FESTIVAL, NEW YORK, FEBRUARY 22, 
 
 1860 
 
 NOTE 
 
 In the year 1860, and each year during the Civil War, the Re- 
 pubhcans in New York City made special observance of Wash- 
 ington's Birthday, by public dinners, which were largely attended 
 and were called at the time "Republican Union Festivals." On 
 these occasions there were many speeches by prominent Republi- 
 cans, all of a patriotic and serious nature. Mr. Evarts took part in at 
 least three of these occasions; two only, however, of his speeches have 
 been preserved. The dinner at which the speech that immediately 
 follows was delivered was held at the Gramercy Park House. The 
 speech delivered in 1862 printed at page 533 of this volume was at 
 the Repubhcan Union Festival held at Irving Hall under the aus- 
 j)ices of the Republican Central Committees of the City and County 
 of New York. This later dinner in 1862 was attended by about six 
 lumdred persons and among the speakers were Dr. Bellows, Horace 
 Greeley and Henry J. Raymond. On both of these occasions Mr. 
 EUiot C. Cowdin presided. 
 
 In response to the Sentiment: 
 
 Washington's Example — -His Life was Devoted to Tii ree 
 Great Objects, the Independence of His Country, 
 Its Union, and Its Freedom. W' hoever Thinks Only 
 of the First and Second, Forgetting the Last, 
 Overlooks the Completeness of His Character. 
 
 SPEECH 
 yfr. President: — 
 
 I feel greatly honored by the invitation of your Committee 
 
 lo take some pari in I lie festival of friends and neighbors, 
 associated in the saiiu- sentiments regarding the safely, the 
 
 479 
 
480 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 honor, and the glory of our country, to celebrate as befits 
 all its citizens, the great day which in the birth of Washing- 
 ton gave so large promise for the future of this nation and for 
 the hopes of the world — a promise not too large for the 
 achievements of his life and the influence of his character to 
 
 redeem. 
 
 Mr. President, your sentiment has truly stated the great 
 objects, the great purposes, the great achievements of the 
 life of Washington. The freedom of his country, its inde- 
 pendence, its union, were the purposes of his life; and by his 
 life and its actions he accomplished them all. And you are 
 right, sir, in saying, and saying fitly to the political temper 
 of these times, that he who looks at his example or at the 
 great acts of the American Revolution as being concerned 
 wholly or mainly with the establishment of ouj National 
 Independence and of the Federal Union, as objects dis- 
 tinguished from, or superior to, the liberty of the people, 
 and of the nation, greatly errs. 
 
 Why, Sir, so far from this being the last, it was the first 
 in the thought, first in the plan, and first in the action of 
 Washington and of his contemporaries. 
 
 It was a struggle for liberty against oppression before the 
 ideas of Independence or of Union had developed themselves. 
 Why, Sir, after the battle of Bunker Hill, in '75, when Wash- 
 ington passed through the City of New York, on his way to 
 take command of the forces at Cambridge, he was addressed 
 by the Provincial Congress of New York. When they ex- 
 pressed their full assurance to him that "after success in 
 the glorious struggle for American liberty," — to result in an 
 accommodation with the mother country— he would lay 
 down the important military trust committed to him and re- 
 assume the character of a citizen, Washington replied to 
 them for himself and the officers who stood around him: 
 "We shall most sincerely rejoice with you in that happy 
 hour, when the establishment of American liberty, on the most 
 
EIGHTEENTH WARD REPrRLTCAX FESTIVAL 481 
 
 firm and solid foundations, shall enable us to return to our 
 private stations in the bosom of a free, peaceful, and happy 
 country." This, Sir, was a year before the Declaration of 
 Independence; Washin^'ton was animated, as the whole 
 country was inflamed, by the sacred fire of liberty, for the 
 men, the women, and the children that occupied the terri- 
 tories. This was, then, the heroic position of Washin^'ton. 
 And, for myself. I love to contemi)late his attitude in the 
 maturity of manhood, a British subject, but fighting for 
 hberty, as a rebel, not against the Constitution of Great 
 Britain, but against the tyranny of its King and ParHa- 
 ment . 
 
 Look at him as he stood avowing these sentiments, con- 
 ceahng nothing, with no equivocation. "Peace, peace, I 
 hope, gentlemen, with you, shall come, but only when the 
 establishment of American liberty on the firmest and most 
 solid foundations shall enable us to return to our private 
 stations in a free countrv." 
 
 How noble, as he uttered these words, does he rise before 
 us, in mien and in feature! With how brave a heart, and 
 with what power in anns, did he adhere to that purpose. 
 
 As the opening contest showed larger and larger dimen- 
 sions to the question of freedom, — involving independence of 
 Crown and Parliament to escape their tyranny — as a part 
 of the energetic effort for liberty, and suljordinate always to 
 that, he counseled and fought for the Independence of the 
 country. And when, the Intlependence of the country 
 gained, its preservation, its maintenance, still always for 
 the surer protection of liberty, demanded a nearer and clearer 
 union of interest and of government, he, as the President 
 of the Convention of 1787, comi)leting its labors in the Con- 
 stitution of 1789, consummated the last act in the great 
 drama of American Liberty, thus "established upon the 
 most firm and solid foundations" of National Inde|)en(lence 
 and Constitutional Union. 
 
 32 
 
482 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MA5tWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, to Washington, to Jefferson, to the Congress of *76, 
 and to the soldiers of the Revohition, Independence was but 
 one, and Union was but another, of the firm and soHd founda- 
 tions of American Liberty ; and except as the foundations of 
 Liberty, they were nothing. 
 
 Mr. President, I will not recite the familiar story of the 
 public life of Washington. As it began so it endured to its 
 end, faithful and true to the love of hberty. 
 
 As he approached the close of his public career, by the 
 completion of his second presidential term, he warned his 
 countrymen of the dangers that beset their liberty, in the 
 celebrated Farewell Address — quoted, now by the party 
 that follows the single idea of Americanism, in those ])arts 
 of it which relate to foreign and entangling alliances, and 
 now by another party that would smother under the great 
 sentiment of Union the still more sacred sentiment of 
 Liberty. 
 
 What is his Farewell Address? What is its object and its 
 purpose? and what stands in the fore front of it? It is the 
 earnest hope "that the happiness of the people of these 
 States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete 
 by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this 
 blessing as may acquire to them the glory of recommending 
 it to the applause, the affection, and the adoption of every 
 nation which is yet a stranger to it." And when he ap- 
 proaches that portion of his address in which he expresses 
 his farewell solicitudes and gives farewell counsels, he speaks 
 first of the love of liberty, saying: "Interwoven as is the 
 love of liberty with every ligament of our hearts, no recom- 
 mendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the 
 attachment"; and then he proceeds to enforce the prime 
 necessity of maintaining the Independence of the nation, 
 then feeble and youthful, against foreign interference, as the 
 first and most dangerous avenue to the overthrow of its 
 liberty; and then, he warns against all that shall tend to 
 
EIGHTEENTH WARD REPUBLICAN FESTIVAL 483 
 
 distract or weaken tlie Union of the States, as tlie next 
 forniidahle foe to the preservation of our lil)erty. 
 
 If the temple be thus sacred and deservin^j of every pious 
 care, that its foundations sliouhl he kept secure, let us never 
 forget that the deity that inhahils it. is great(T than the 
 lenij)le. 
 
 Mr. President, the last month of the expiring century put 
 out the light of that life which, with steady and ever-grow- 
 ing lustre, and more than any other human life that ever 
 shone among men, shed a benign influence upon the for- 
 tunes of his country, and upon the hoj)es of liis race. The 
 seal of death stam])ed his life as fortunate, and consecrated 
 in the hearts of his countrymen a shrine that never shall be 
 deserted. 
 
 Mr. President, — Sixty years have passed, the period of two 
 generations has passed, and we to-day, amid the responsibil- 
 ities of active life, are to look upon our country, its liberties, 
 its independence, and its union, and see what are the issues 
 in controversy for our time and for our action. Suital)le 
 as were the counsels of Washington, as to the dangers which 
 might threaten our national indei)endence in the feeble- 
 ness of our youth, who shall say that now it is an important 
 practical lesson or duty of ours to be solicitous about any 
 assault upon our independence from abroad.^ Why, sir — 
 until, within the last few months, we heard a base suggestion 
 from Virginia that the horsemen of a foreign emperor 
 should tranij)le our sacred soil, and his fleet vex with their 
 keels the free waters of our coast — no voice has dared to 
 question our absolute safety against foreign power. Until 
 from some more ])otential voice than that foolish Virginian's 
 we have an invitation or a threat of foreign invasion, we need 
 not fear danger to our national indcp<Midence from any 
 foreign source. 
 
 And then. Sir. as to the Union: two generations of men 
 have grown uj) to know and to feel, — shall I say the ad- 
 
484 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 vantages of the Union? No! it is putting it upon too low 
 considerations to speak of the advantages of the Union; 
 two generations of men have grown up to know and to 
 love their country, and that country is the Union. Are 
 we, for the first instance in the world's history, a people who 
 rest their love of country and their jealousy for its integrity, 
 upon a calculation of its advantages? Why, one might as 
 well put his affection for his mother upon a question of 
 gain, as to talk of his love of country being limited and regu- 
 lated by a calculation of its advantages. No! gentlemen, 
 the Union is our country; we have no other. What is 
 smoothly called a "dissolution of the Union," is the dis- 
 memberment of our country. When dismembered, it is no 
 longer the country of our love — but, bereaved and exiled, 
 we are to find or make, as best we may, a new home for our 
 affections. 
 
 But, gentlemen, while this sentiment of patriotism of a 
 proud and powerful people thus guarantees the preserva- 
 tion of our country in its complete integrity, and while 
 great lakes and rivers, and the intercourse of society, and 
 the railroads and the telegraphs make it quite impossible, — 
 if we were so poor-spirited a race of men as to calculate 
 nothing but the advantage of preserving the integrity of our 
 country, — quite impossible, I repeat, to dismember it, let 
 me say to you that neither the power that makes us secure 
 in our independence among the nations of the world, nor 
 those causes which make sure as the ground on which we 
 stand, and perpetual as the sky over our heads, the preserva- 
 tion of the Union, that none of these immense guaranties of 
 independence and of union are, alas! in their nature or of 
 necessity, guaranties of our liberty. Great nations have not 
 always been free; none ever has been free till ours. Here, 
 then, is the point of danger and responsibility, and here 
 come in the duty, the solicitude, the interest, the vows of 
 the Republican party. Their Independence being safe, and 
 
EIGHTEENTH WARD REPUBLICAN FESTIVAL 485 
 
 tlioir Union hc>in<f safe, tlu' liberties of these United States 
 must and shall be preserved. 
 
 Mr. President, — What is the Republican i)arty, and what 
 are the public services it pur])oses? 
 
 Its ]nirpose is to restore the liberties of the country 
 threatened by the policy and purposes of the Slave Power, 
 as carried out through the action of the General Govern- 
 ment as administered by the Democratic i)arty. That is 
 the imiK'uding tlanf^er against which the Republican i)arty 
 has rallied; and as distinctly, let me say. Sir, under the name 
 of Washington as the nation ever rallied under that name in 
 the War of Independence. It is a mistake to suppose, — 
 and all the people that so flippantly make the charge do not 
 sup])ose so, — but it is a mistake to suppose, that the Re- 
 publican party primarily or at all, is concerned with the 
 civil condition of the black race within the States of the 
 Union. We know our duties as men, and we know our du- 
 ties as citizens. The Repul)lican party is a political organ- 
 ization, distinctly and boldly assuming all ])olitical duties, 
 but distinctly and honestly abstaining from all duties, in 
 connection with this question of slavery, that are not i)o- 
 litical and are not constitutional. 
 
 Now% how is it that the threat to the liberties of this 
 country has arisen? How is it that danger to our liberties 
 maybe expected and feared from the institution of slavery .?* 
 Is it that our material strength or i)rosperity shall be im- 
 peded or overthrown by the presence of four millions of 
 slaves in our population, already numbering twenty-six 
 millions of free white peo|)le? No! Rut, gentlemen, it is 
 that the essential idea on which that institution rests, is 
 force, is power against right and against liberty; and w^hen 
 great political communities, as the States of this country, 
 in which that institution exists and is cherished, have, as 
 the foundation of their social structure, this princij)le of 
 force and power, against right and against liberty, why, 
 
486 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the maintenance and confirmation of that institution cher- 
 ish and expand the idea of power and force against right 
 and against Hberty; at length, the immense social inter- 
 est, that rests upon this basis, of necessity urges and com- 
 pels a wider and wider subjection of right and liberty 
 to force and power. It is this that has required, and has 
 effected the social subordination of the non-slaveholding 
 white population of the slave States; that has, finally, in- 
 sisted upon the complete suppression of liberty of speech, 
 liberty of the press, liberty of religion, liberty of travel, and, 
 in fine, of common American liberty, over one third of this 
 nation. And when this original force is aided by this im- 
 mense acquisition, it will extend, and, unchecked, will ac- 
 complish what it now distinctly attempts, the moral sub- 
 jugation of the free States of this country, in order that the 
 social institution of African slavery may be secure. Thus, 
 step by step, grows the colossal power of slavery, which 
 already, so bestrides this whole land, that we, the freemen of 
 the free States, can only "peep about to find ourselves dis- 
 honorable graves," or manfully meet the controversy with the 
 weapons that belong to it, and resolve, like Washington, 
 that "not until American liberty shall be re-established on 
 the most firm and solid foundations, will we return to our 
 private stations, a free, a peaceful, and a happy people." 
 
 And now, gentlemen, the example of Washington is not 
 merely a subject of commemorative reverence — it is a bright 
 and Hving spirit that should be accepted and adopted as the 
 guide and leader of our action in the warfare of politics, 
 which belongs to a free people whenever public affairs re- 
 quire redress. The sentiment of the country has, by recent 
 occurrences, manifested itself in the most laudable manner. 
 The women of America have visited the sepulchre of Wash- 
 ington, and have rescued it from the neglectful hands of his 
 kindred, and from the careless keeping of that State of which, 
 alas, so much of the greatness lies buried in his grave. This 
 is well. 
 
EIGHTEENTH WARD REPUBLICAN FESTIVAL 487 
 
 Bill the spirit of Washington appeals to the manhood of 
 the country, wherever it can be found, to rescue tlie great 
 monument reared to his fame in the peace, prosperity, dig- 
 nity, power, and hherty of the American people from tlie 
 disgraces and the dangers that the neglectful hands and the 
 careless keeping of that portion of this nation which claims 
 him as nearest to them, have involved them and us in. The 
 manhood of the nation is not all found in the Rei)ul)lican party, 
 but all that there is in the Republican party is manful and 
 brave; and if it retains its manhood and its valor, it will soon 
 embrace within its numbers and its strength all the manhood 
 and the valor of the American people. If it will follow its 
 principles, follow its leaders, abide their fortunes, and con- 
 sider nothing gained in political success in which a true leader 
 of the forlorn hope does not himself plant the true standard 
 of the Republican partA' upon whatever height we may 
 gain, our cause, our triumph, our glory is secure; but if we 
 fall short and waver, the liberties of the country will need 
 other defenders, and will find them. 
 
 Now, Mr. President and gentlemen, I have but glanced at 
 the topics which your toast suggests, and yet I have detained 
 you longer than I intended, and longer than I should have 
 done. I will close with asking you to do honor to this senti- 
 ment: — 
 
 The Republican Party: The example of Washington is its 
 impulse and its guide to whatever labors and sacrifices may 
 be necessary, to bring back the administration of the Gov- 
 ernment to the love and the defense of Liberty. 
 
VII 
 
 THE ISSUES OF THE DAY 
 
 Speech Delivered at Auburn, New York, in the 
 Presidential Canvass of 1860 
 
 NOTE 
 
 At the Republican Convention in Chicago in May, 1860 that 
 nominated Abraham Lincoln as the candidate of the party for the 
 Presidency, Mr. Evarts appeared at the head of the New York 
 delegation in the interest of Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward had been, 
 as he was at the time, the conspicuously great leader of the Re- 
 publican party in the East, and his adherents went to the Conven- 
 tion in the confident expectation that the nomination would fall 
 to him. It may fairly be said that, in the character of the men 
 composing it, in the earnest and fervent devotion of its members 
 to one great principle, — that of opposition to the extension of slav- 
 ery, upon which all united, discarding for the time all discordant 
 views, — in the wisdom of its choice which the future made manifest 
 and in the political revolution of which it was the precursor, this 
 Convention at Chicago in 1860 stands pre-eminent among recorded 
 transactions in this country's political annals of the nineteenth 
 century. The part that Mr. Evarts played as the champion for 
 Mr. Seward was of course conspicuous. 
 
 Mr. Blaine in his personal recollection of the scene at Chicago 
 thus speaks of Mr. Seward and the labors, in his behalf, of his lead- 
 ing supporters, Mr. Thurlow Weed and Mr. Evarts: 
 
 "When the Convention assembled, notwithstanding all adverse 
 influences, Mr. Seward was still the leading and most formidable 
 candidate. His case was in strong and skillful hands. Mr. Thur- 
 low Weed, who had been his lifelong confidential friend, presented 
 his claims, before the formal assembling of the convention, with 
 infinite tact. Mr. Weed, though unable to make a public speech, 
 was the most persuasive of men in private conversation. He was 
 quiet, gentle and deferential in manner. He grasped a subject 
 with a giant's strength, presented its strong points and marshalled 
 
 488 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 489 
 
 its details with extraordinary power. Whatever Mr. Weed might 
 lack was more than snpphed by the eh)quent tongue of WiUiam M. 
 Evarts. Sehloin, if ever, in the whole field of political oratory, 
 have the speeches of Mr. Evarts at Chicago been equalled. Even 
 those who most decidedly differed from him followed him from 
 one delegation to another, allured by the charm of his words. He 
 pleaded for the Republic, for the party that could save it, for the 
 great statesman who founded the party and knew where and how 
 to lead it. He spoke as one friend for another, and the great career 
 of Mr. Seward was never so illumined as by the brilliant painting 
 of Mr. Evarts." 
 
 When the din and roar of wild enthusiasm, from the vast crowd 
 of Mr. Lincoln's supporters that thronged the "wigwam," which 
 greeted his assured nomination on the third ballot, had subsided, 
 Mr. Evarts, standing ui)on a table in the Convention Hall, with 
 every sign of the deepest emotion moved to make the nomination 
 of Mr. Lincoln unanimous, in these few words: — 
 
 "The State of New York by a full delegation, with complete 
 unanimity of purpose at home, came to this Convention and pre- 
 sented for its choice one of its citizens, who had served the State 
 from boyhood up, who had labored for and loved it. We came 
 from a great state with, as we thought, a great statesman, and our 
 love of the great Republic, from wiiicli we are all delegates, the 
 great American Union, and our love of the great Republican party 
 of the Union, and our love of our statesman and candidate, made 
 us think that we did our duty to the country and the whole country 
 in expressing our love and preference for him. For, gentlemen 
 it was from Governor Seward that most of us learned to love Re- 
 publican principles and the Republican party. His fidelity to the 
 country, the Constitution and the laws; his fidelity to the party 
 and the fjrinciple that the majority governs; his interest in the 
 advancement of our f)arty to its victory, that our country may 
 rise to its true glory, induces me to a.ssume to sj)cak his .sentiments, 
 as I do, indeed, the opinions of our whole delegation, when I move 
 you, as I now do, lli;il tlic nomination of Abraham Lincoln, of 
 Illinois, as the Rei)ublican candidjilc for the suffrages of the whole 
 country for the office of Chief Magistrate of the American Union, 
 be made unanimous." 
 
490 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Bitter as was the disappointment of Mr. Seward and his followers 
 over the outcome of the Convention, never for one moment did 
 they hesitate in their hearty support of the party and its candi- 
 dates in the Presidential canvass that ensued. At Auburn, the 
 home of Mr. Seward, October 16, 1860, Mr. Evarts delivered the 
 speech that follows on "The Issues of the Day." 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Fellow-Citizens: — 
 
 It is not with any expectation of saying or doing anything 
 in the canvass, for the party to which we are all attached, 
 and for the principles, the triumph of which we deem essen- 
 tial to the safety and true honor of our country, more than 
 any other citizen, who might be favored with your call to 
 address you, that I now arise, and in the presence of this 
 great multitude of sober and intelligent electors of the State 
 of NeW' York, to say, as briefly as may be, what seems to be 
 pertinent and important in the very stage of the canvass 
 which w^e have now reached. 
 
 By the form of the Constitution one simple duty is now 
 devolved upon the citizens of this coimtry — that duty is the 
 election of a President and Vice-President. That is the 
 extent and limit of our duty; and yet a large part of our 
 citizens seem to be engaged in anything but that. They 
 seem to suppose that the question which was before the 
 Convention of 1787, and which resulted in the formation of 
 the Constitution under which we now live, is ever open to 
 this people, and that is "What Government they shall have, 
 and whether they shall obey it.'^" Gentlemen, that question 
 was settled for us, and it will remain settled long after we 
 have passed from this stage. 
 
 Now, in preparation for the actual and practical duties 
 imposed by the Constitution, I need not say to you, that if 
 the Constitution is to be maintained and upheld, it is to be 
 by the performance faithfully and intelligently of the duties 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 491 
 
 that are assigned to us under it, and tlieir performance at the 
 time and in tlie manner tJiat the Constitution itself proposes; 
 and I say that, in the ])rei)aration for tlie performance of that 
 duty, various poHtical parties have proi)osed for the suffrages 
 of the citizens different candi(hites for the Presidency and 
 Vice-Presidency of the United States. One Convention was 
 liekl by the party to whicli you, for tlie most part, I take it, 
 and I belong — the Re])ublican party of the United States of 
 America. In a Convention in which twenty-four States of the 
 Union were represented, some partially, but still with 
 twenty-four States, the Republican sentiment was fairly and 
 lionestly represented. They put in nomination for the suf- 
 frages of the people of the Ignited States, dwelling wherever 
 they may — in Maine, in Louisiana, in Georgia, in Michigan, 
 in Oregon, or in California — Abraham Lincoln, of Illinois, 
 and Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine. They are before the whole 
 people, and there is nothing in the organization of the party, 
 nothing in the princij)les that we propose, nothing in the 
 character or purpose, the political conduct or history of our 
 candidates, that should not as readily, as properly, as fairly 
 invite a suffrage from the banks of the Arkansas, from the 
 banks of the Columbia, as from the banks of the Penobscot 
 or the North River. 
 
 Another political party representing in Convention twenty 
 five States, many of them fragmentary, many of them with 
 disputed, and some of them, it seems to me, with sham rep- 
 resentatives, but yet counting twenty-five States in some 
 form or other, has also put forth cantlidates before the people. 
 These are Judge Douglas, of Illinois, and Governor Johnson, 
 of Georgia. They, too, are thrown before the people, whose 
 suffrages are asked in their support. 
 
 Another Convention, representing in a somewhat irregular 
 form, but yet containing rei)resentatives of twenty different 
 States of the Union, has placed in nomination two other 
 citizens of great distinction in the past j)olitical history of 
 
492 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 this country. They are Governor Bell, of Tennessee, and 
 Edward Everett, of Massachusetts; and they, with what 
 antecedents, what principles they possess, with what they 
 have done, whatever they have promised, are before the 
 whole people for its choice. 
 
 Another Convention, representing, in some way or an- 
 other, by sham, substitute, fragmentary, or nominal delega- 
 tion in respect of some, — yet representing nineteen States of 
 the Union, have put in nomination Mr. Breckenridge, of 
 Kentucky, and General Lane, of Oregon, who are also before 
 the people for their suffrages. And now the single question 
 is, "Out of these candidates whom will ye choose to govern, 
 under the Constitution, the people of all the States for the 
 next four years .f^" 
 
 Now it strikes us, at first, as something quite different from 
 the ordinary posture of a canvass for the Presidency, that 
 there are so many tickets in the field, and as quite singular 
 in the history of all parties that in not one of these conventions 
 was there a representation of the whole thirty-three States 
 of the Union. In our own Convention, as I have stated, 
 there were twenty-four; in the Douglas convention, made 
 up as it was, there were but twenty-five; in the Bell and 
 Everett Convention, there were but twenty; and in the 
 Breckenridge and Lane Convention there were but nineteen. 
 This, gentlemen, teaches us, upon distinct lines of fact, that 
 are not to be disputed, that the sentiments of these people 
 are divided, in no inconsiderable degree, upon subjects that 
 are, or were supposed to be, connected with, or involved in, this 
 canvass; for the failure of regular antagonism between can- 
 didates and of a fair and full collection of all the States of the 
 Union, is an indubitable fact. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is one party which proposes to fulfil 
 its constitutional duty — to proceed, without disorder and 
 without confusion, without disturbance of the public peace 
 or threats of the public safety, to the election of the candidates 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 493 
 
 that have been proposed for your suffrage. That party, I 
 need not say to you, is tlie Republican party; but I must say 
 to you that, so far as I can discover, all the otlier parties in 
 this canvass are determined that they will not perform that 
 constitutional duty in reference to their candidates, and are 
 determined that we shall not perform it for ours. I state to 
 you, as the distinctive featin*e of this Presidential canvass, 
 that, whereas the duty is that a President shall be elected, 
 and whereas we propose to perform that duty, all the politics, 
 all tlie zeal, all the oratory, all the enthusiasm, all the prom- 
 ises, all the threats, all the hopes are, that we should be pre- 
 vented from choosing our candidates; and that, so far as we 
 can see, none of thejn pro])Ose to, or expect to, choose their 
 own. Now, it is a little hard, gentlemen, that a party which 
 quietly, soberly and faithfidly sets about doing that which 
 unperformed, strikes at the very foundation of a constitu- 
 tional government — to perform that duty which, failing to be 
 performed, leaves our government, until the defect be sup- 
 plied, without a chief magistrate upon whom depends the 
 entire executive course of the government — that a party 
 such as ours, and so situated, I say it strikes me as hard that it 
 should be stigmatized in all (juarters as an enemy of the Con- 
 stitution and the Union. It seems very odd to me that all 
 these other parties, that propose to defeat the whole canvas.i 
 and prevent the peo])le from coming to a choice, should, on 
 their various })latforms, on various pretences, claim for them- 
 selves the conduct and character of faithful servants of the 
 Constitution and protectors of the Union against us, the 
 Republicans. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, mark how the matter stands. U|)on 
 what do thev justifv themselves in this cour.se .^ That wt* are 
 dangerous to the government, and that our success threatens 
 the I nion and the Constitution! What should be the wav in 
 which our opj)onents should act when a candidate is ])ut in 
 nomination whose success threatens the dangers which tliey 
 
494 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 allege? Wliat is the way to defeat him? Manifestly by put- 
 ting in nomination against him a candidate whose character 
 and whose principles will maintain the Union and uphold the 
 Constitution. This is their duty. That is the theory of our 
 government^this is the plan for upholding it. Now, can 
 they make the sensible portion of the United States believe 
 that they dread the success of the Republican party upon 
 public grounds, and because of fear for the safety of the coun- 
 try, and they have not the patriotism, self-denial and large- 
 ness of views, to sacrifice personal interest and party success 
 sufficiently to agree upon a man who can defeat the candi- 
 date of the Republican party? Why, if they could show us 
 that by defeating our candidate before the people, they could 
 at the next stage of a constitutional election in the House of 
 Representatives be able then to agree upon a candidate, and 
 thus avert these dangers to the Constitution and the Union, 
 we might put more faith and have more patience with these, 
 their views. But when they get to the House of Representa- 
 tives, what they propose there is not to elect a President of 
 the United States, which is the constitutional duty there to 
 be performed, but to prevent the Republicans, who there are 
 the largest power in the suffrages of the States, from electing 
 their candidates; and thus the Constitution is to be again 
 defeated, a duty avoided; and the truth is, gentlemen, that 
 they propose to carry on this entire controversy, for these 
 great offices, against the Constitution, against the Union, 
 and, so far as their action goes, their success will be in the fact 
 that for first time in the history of the country no President 
 of the United States will have been elected anywhere. 
 
 Now, this is literally true. The whole scheme and plan is 
 absolutely to defeat both plans of the Constitution for the 
 election of a President, and then in the Senate where no Presi- 
 dent ever can be, or ever was intended to be, or ever by the 
 Constitution was proposed to be elected, thej' shall elect a 
 Vice-President and turn him into a President by operation 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1800 495 
 
 of the law. Gentlemen, whicli ol" tliese opposing forces (for 
 there .ire three parties on one side and one on the otlier) 
 understands llie Constitution and its duty, and wliieli of 
 tlieni proposes to fulfil it? 
 
 Now, in every canvass for the Presidency whiU> the suf- 
 frage remains free, and no power overawes the exercise of it on 
 the part of the citizen, there must be involved, to secure the 
 attention of our vast j)opulation and to attract their confi- 
 dence and their votes to the one side or the other, some great 
 sentiment, or some great interest that shall he disseminated, 
 spread and «'nforced up(m tlie popular mind to divide the 
 country, and so by the major voices to carry into power one 
 or the other of the parties espousing one or the other of these 
 sentiments. This sentiment, to be availal)le for the ])urpose 
 of a Presidential canvass, must be something that is vital to 
 the Constitutional government imder which we live, and as 
 extensive as the j)eople whose suffrages are to determine the 
 question. No local matters have a proi)er i)lace in the Presi- 
 dential canvass — no State interests force themselves upon 
 the attention of the ])eoi)le so as to disturb, or be of any use 
 in, the canvass for the Presidency. We inherit the idea from 
 our British ancestry, that with every general election for 
 Parliament, whatever the purposes of the party may be, they 
 must go to the country upon some vital interest of the British 
 Constitution. 
 
 Now, there are two great sentiments to which the hearts 
 of the people always have responded — to which they will 
 respond in this canvas.s — to which, I trust, they will always 
 respond while we are a nation, and neither our ])roj)hetic nor 
 our imaginative vision canies us beyond that time. One of 
 these is the great sentiment of liberty, to which we owe our 
 birth as a nation, which shines in every line of the Declara- 
 tion of Indei)endence, the great statute ot oui- nati<jnal ex- 
 istence. The I<)V<' of liberty pervades lli<' peojjle, and, 
 touched by tJiat chord, it throws on the one side or tlu' other 
 
496 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of it the opposing parties, and who ralHes in the loudest and 
 clearest tones for liberty, will be likely to carry the day. But 
 there is another sentiment which, as well as this one I have 
 named, forms the spirit of the people; there is another senti- 
 ment, which is brought home in this pressure upon the con- 
 sciences, the feelings and the intelligence of the people, and 
 that is, what relates to theactual body politic, the national life, 
 the Constitution of our liberties in the form and frame of the 
 American Union. That is a sentiment which never can be, 
 and never shall be disparaged in any canvass with which you 
 or I, or any RepubHcan, has aught to do. For, if liberty be 
 the inspiring spirit of our national life, the Union is the bodily 
 frame of that life itself, and without it we have no country. 
 It matters but little to us whether our free, happy, powerful 
 and prosperous national life suffers its death blow from a 
 wound inflicted upon liberty, or from a wound inflicted upon 
 the national frame of the government. Poland dismembered 
 equally with France imperialized, has lost its national life. 
 While we contend for the one sentiment with greater ardor, 
 as it seems exposed, let us never doubt — let us never fail to 
 admit, that with a nation that comes to its end when its 
 frame is destroyed, whether the soul of liberty be separated 
 from the body of the Constitution or the body of its Consti- 
 tution be dissevered and dismembered so that liberty can no 
 longer inspire and move it, national death and destruction 
 are equally the result. Accordingly we shall find, gentlemen, 
 that in these great agitations of an intelligent and free people, 
 which form the working forces of a Presidential canvass, one 
 or the other of these great sentiments is sought to be availed 
 of for party success; I do not say dishonestly, — sometimes 
 honestly, sometimes otherwise; for sometimes there is an 
 enormous gap in the process of reasoning which suggests 
 that certain principles will be promoted by the election of a 
 certain candidate. When you see in a little petty town elec- 
 tion, over a petty poll booth, that widespread premise and 
 
THE ISSUES OF TITE DAY— 18(i() 497 
 
 this moan conclusion; — that "all the friends of the Union 
 and the Constitution will voti* for John Smith for Constable," 
 you sometimes conclude that there is, possiljly, a gap which 
 nuiy excuse a friend of the Constitution and tlie l^nion from 
 voting for Smith. But, nevertlieless, some connection is to 
 he preserved, and you must judg<', and the people do judge, 
 whether in the watchword and i)romises of a party, there is 
 a fair and reasonable association with tlie success of the can- 
 didates. 
 
 Look at the various parties that are before the peo- 
 ple. I will state with candor, and certainly with no in- 
 tention to im])ute wrong sentiments, my views of the various 
 parties, and I do say that we find arrayed in those mottoes 
 and watchwords, sentiments which define and fairly repre- 
 sent the objects and purj)oses, tlie moving and controlling 
 feelings that actuate the parties now before the people. 
 
 There is a small j^arty which I liave not yet named, and 
 which has its candidates before the ])eo])le — a party which 
 seems wholly devoted to the inspiration of the single idea of 
 libertv, and which seems to me to liave failed in a true cour- 
 ageous compr<>hension of the duty of American citizens in 
 this beJialf. 1 am sure I don't know jH'ocisely by wliat name 
 this j)arty is called now; sometimes it has been called the 
 "Liberty" — by its opponents it lias generally been called 
 the "Abolition Party" and sometimes the "pure Anti-Slav- 
 ery Party." Gerrit Smith, I believe, is its candidate for 
 the Presidency. Now, I am inclined to think that, so ab- 
 sorbing, so controlling, has this party regarded the sentiment 
 of liberty as running through even the abject class of our 
 population in certain States of our Union, they really do give 
 it predominance and ])re-eminence over the sentiment of 
 Union; and that, if tliev could have tiieir own wav and had 
 to choose wlu'lher they would carry on to its final lriumi)hant 
 success, this principle of liberty at the sacrifice' of the Union 
 itself, tliey would be obliged fairly to say tliat liberty or dis- 
 ss 
 
498 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 union was the feeling and hope of their hearts. I don't 
 criticise the sentiment. It is an honest, manly and brave 
 sentiment, and whenever honest, manly and brave sentiments 
 are avowed and enforced before the people by the fair arts of 
 public influence, I have not a word to say against them, nor 
 a frown to give to their supporters. I think, however, that 
 the members of this party fail of their duty. They do not, 
 ]3erhaps, love liberty too much, but they do not appreciate 
 the fact that the Union is at the bottom of liberty, all that we 
 have or may have, and that that liberty which cannot be 
 promoted in the LTnion cannot be promoted out of it. 
 
 There is another party which, I am bound to say, has given 
 so unfortunate, and, as it seems to me, so monstrous a per- 
 version to the sentiment of liberty, that it is willing to adopt, 
 and really does feel the sentiments expressed by, the motto 
 or watchword — "Slavery or Disunion." This party has for 
 its candidates Breckenridge and Lane. Now, gentlemen, 
 here is a party that discards and tramples on these two 
 sacred sentiments alike. So absorbed is it in the special 
 interests of property — or let them call it what they choose, 
 I have selected their own nomenclature, — that they will 
 advance it before and beyond either of the sentiments, 
 "Liberty" or "The Union of the States." And they give 
 us the proposition, I think, by their orators, by their political 
 courses, by their platforms, and by their conduct generally, 
 to understand that they now give in their adhesion to the 
 interests of slavery so far, so vehemently, and so exclusively, 
 that if their plans, their hopes and their sentiments be not 
 adopted by this American people, and confirmed by the 
 suffrages of the voters of the country, thus failing of slavery's 
 prosperity and advancement, they will take disunion and its 
 consequences. 
 
 Now, there is the Douglas party at the South and the 
 North, which gives such a predominance to the sentiment of 
 Union, and yet adhering to this great interest of slavery 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 499 
 
 whicli is in our politics, it may be said that they shape 
 their fornuila in this wise: Slavery and I^nion; that is to say, 
 not that they ])refer slavery, but that the Union is a senti- 
 ment so strong and slavery an interest so strong, that they 
 have not the courage, tlie faith, tlie reliance upon free prin- 
 ciples sufficient to lead them to adopt more devotion even to 
 the Union, and that Union and Slavery be voted up or down 
 — to live and thrive, or dwindle and decay, as may be — is 
 their contrivance for the safetv of the countrv. 
 
 There is a party whicJi is represented by the respectable 
 candidates— Messrs. Bell and Everett— which, at least in 
 the Free States, does not seem to put itself upon the same 
 footing in these regards as the Douglas Party; though, so far 
 as I can discover, the same political organization in the Slave 
 States seems to have about the same sentiment of Slavery 
 and Union, witJiout Slavery or Disunion, and yet not coming 
 to any higher standard than Slavery and Union. This party 
 in the Free States, represented by Messrs. Bell and Everett, 
 so far as I can see, is so absorbed and so subjugated to this 
 sentiment of I'nion — a wise and patriotic sentiment certainly, 
 when not pushed to extravagance— that it is willing to put 
 itself upon a footing of political ser\'ility to the institution of 
 slavery. AVill it adopt, will it vindicate, will it espouse, as its 
 choice and preference, for the sake of Union and what it 
 deems peace, harmony and quiet, political servility, and sur- 
 render those free and spontaneous sentiments which all free 
 men feel on this subject? But "political servility and Union" 
 are what they are willing, in substance and effect, to present 
 for the good of the country, and it is the best wliicji they, at 
 this juncture, can do. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, tlie Republican party, in my judgment, 
 is ready to take hold with confidence, with firnmess, with 
 energy and with faitli in the people and the i)rincii)les of our 
 fathers, of the two great sentiments, that divide sometimes, 
 but really should always unite, the parties of tJie American 
 
500 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 people, and to inscribe as the legend on its banners in this 
 controversy "Liberty and Union, Now and Forever, One and 
 Inseparable." 
 
 Do we flatter ourselves or disparage our opponents 
 in this distribution and division of these great sentiments 
 that are our common birthright? I know that Repub- 
 licans are for Liberty and for the Union; I know that they 
 ask no greater liberty and no greater power for themselves, 
 in the regions of our country where they live, than they are 
 willing to accord to their fellow men in every portion of our 
 fair land. I know that it is a prevalent, fervent and pre- 
 dominant sentiment of the Republican heart, that, when we 
 get outside of that natural feeling which we give to our birth- 
 place, when we get outside of that allegiance which we owe 
 to that political community known as the State in which we 
 were born and in which we live — outside of that circumscrip- 
 tion which nature and political duty draw closely around us 
 — I know that there is not a Republican within the sound of 
 my voice that does not rejoice in, and hope for, and plan for, 
 and work for, under these life-giving sentiments of "Liberty 
 and Union," the good of Alabama and Louisiana as much as 
 for the good of Vermont or Michigan. 
 
 Our sentiments are not sectional. The life that we draw 
 from them will be communicated to every portion of our land, 
 wherever those portions of our land are ready to imbibe their 
 life-giving influence. And we will disseminate them; we 
 will uphold them; we will maintain the conflict in favor and 
 for the good of all parts of the country. 
 
 It is said, gentlemen, that the Republican party, if repre- 
 sented rightly by this sentiment of liberty, and this love of 
 Union, is a "one-idea" party. There is but one duty con- 
 fided to us in this canvass, and that is the election of a Presi- 
 dent and Vice-President, and that duty performed, we shall 
 have performed our obligation to the Constitution of the 
 United States. But let us ^ee -^hether we are a "9ne4dea" 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 501 
 
 party and whether it is a reproach. II' it be founded on an 
 idea, it is an idea large enoiigli, wlien divided up, to furnisli 
 the antagonistic princijiles of three other parties. That is 
 something in size and bulk for an idea. Is it then to be ob- 
 jected to, that it is not an idea that is in the people's heads 
 and hearts.^ Gentlemen, who make parties, ])latforms, and 
 combinations, and who furnish sentiments? One would 
 supi)ose that they were made to order by some sujx'rior 
 power, and were letdown upon the people to be adopted under 
 the direction of leading j)oliticians. The people have the 
 ideas and the sentiments, out of which moral forces and 
 politics are directed and controlled. And when a party on 
 one side, or on the other, has the ideas and the sentiments 
 that the people have in their heads and hearts, it has enough 
 for tliat canvass. Some of oin- respectable friends, who don't 
 like agitation, are constantly asking us, "Why will you divide 
 the people on the question of slavery.? Why don't you divide 
 them upon something that they all agree about?" This is 
 all childish nonsense, and he who thinks that he can by 
 whistling raise the wind to carry his craft across the Atlan- 
 tic, will think that in political juntos you can agree to sup- 
 press a sentiment or an idea, and get up some other for 
 popular use. So much for that. 
 
 But the idea is a large one, and it is connected inseparably 
 with these two sentiments of our love of Liberty and Union, 
 and, therefore, the purposes and principles of the Republican 
 party do rightly invoke these united sentiments. The idea, 
 gentlemen, is that slavery whether it be good or bad, politic 
 or pernicious, is local, and that free labor is the national basis 
 upon which we build up wealth and i)ower. Now, that is the 
 idea, and it is an idea large enough for any nation to have for 
 a four years' canvass. 
 
 Let us see how tliis cpiestion arose — how much of fact, and 
 fact that cannot be disfigured or kej)t out of view there is in 
 it, and about which all nmst agree. The great fact is, gen- 
 
502 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 tlemen, that the population of our country inckides within 
 its bosom four niilHons of persons of African descent. There 
 is the fact. No Southern statesman or politician can dis- 
 guise it; no Northern statesman can influence or pervert it. 
 Here they are. What have we to do about them? I mean 
 "we" as a nation — you and I in our political duties, not in 
 our philanthropy, with our sympathies or our moral and re- 
 ligious influences; but what have we to do with the fact 
 politically, in our duty as citizens under the Federal Consti- 
 tution .f* That is the question that divides the country. 
 
 In the first place, gentlemen, these blacks are for the most 
 part in the condition of slavery. They have derived that 
 condition, and it is maintained over them by the force of the 
 laws of the separate states in which they live. I need not say 
 to you, gentlemen, that we should have no confusion of ideas 
 about what liberty and slavery are. They have nothing 
 magical about them. The difference between them, wide 
 and deep as it may be, exists wholly by positive law. Why 
 are we free.^* Why do we call ourselves free? What do we 
 mean by freedom, except that we live in communities whose 
 laws leave us free, as God made us, deducting only that small 
 contribution from individual liberty which is necessary for 
 the common right and the common safety? It is in our laws, — 
 in our magistrates who protect those laws, — in the processes 
 of those laws which give to the feeblest the support of the 
 whole community in defence of his rights, — that we are free- 
 men. Sir James Mcintosh, than whom there never was a 
 clearer thinker in these matters, defines liberty as a "security 
 against wrong." 
 
 That is liberty. Think it over as to what is your condition 
 of liberty. It is security against wrong. You are permitted 
 to work out your sentiments and the purposes of your nature, 
 as an individual, against wrong and oppression. Now, 
 slavery — slavery is a word that trips lightly on the tongue, — 
 but slavery is nothing but the local condition in which the 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 503 
 
 slaves are, by power of the government under which they hve 
 and which controls th<'ni; — and ])erhaps as ready and com- 
 plete a definition of slavery as has yet been given would be the 
 converse of the definition of liberty. Slavery, gentlemen, in 
 essence, in practical abjectness, and in misery, is helpless- 
 ness against wrong, and that is the legal condition in which 
 it is placed in the communities where it is cherished and main- 
 tained as a social institution. I need not say to you that, as 
 a political duty, we have nothing to do with the passing of 
 the laws in the states where slavery exists — and that ends 
 that subject. Where, then, does the conflict arise which 
 causes this diversity of sentiment and this conflict of political 
 action.^ Why, when this black population is to overflow the 
 boimds of these separate states by the laws of which its con- 
 dition is fixed, then it becomes a question for those into whose 
 territory it flows to say what should be done with it; and if 
 it overflows into the territories of the United States of Amer- 
 ica, then you and I and every citizen has a political responsi- 
 bility and a political duty because then it is beyond State 
 jurisdiction, and is within the jurisdiction of the United 
 States of America. And as it is a condition that it must have 
 the sup]:)ort of the law to exist in fact, it must be governed 
 and regulated by the laws of the government having juris- 
 diction,— the government of the Territories into which it 
 overflows. 
 
 Thus, you and I, in common A^vith the citizens of Alabama, 
 Missouri, of Massachusetts and Illinois, have our say, our 
 opinion, our votes, our action and our principle upon this 
 subject. Now, can anyone gainsay this? Gentlemen, as I 
 have said, the idea being that slavery is local, and not na- 
 tional, the moment you remove, or attempt to remove, this 
 African i)0])ulation out of the State in which they are held in 
 bondage, into your Territories, under your governments, 
 under your laws, the determination whether tliat ])()])ulation 
 shall be held in slavery, — kept in the condition of help- 
 
504 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 lessness against wrong, — or whether that population comes 
 into the Territory to be Hfted into freedom and protected 
 by security against wrong, is precisely the duty and the 
 action that you must meet, whatever the consequences, 
 under your duty to the Constitution and in maintenance of 
 your share of the citizens' protection and defence of the 
 government. 
 
 Now this conflict has been said to be irrepressible, and 
 various authors of this doctrine of the irrepressibility between 
 the interest of slave labor and of free labor have been brought 
 before the notice of the people. Governor Seward was re- 
 proached with having in 1858 invented this doctrine of an 
 "irrepressible conflict." Since that time Mr. Lincoln has 
 been put forward as the candidate of the Republican party, 
 and so that reproach, if it be a reproach, as our opponents 
 intended it, has been transferred to Mr. Lincoln, and they say 
 that he, two years earlier than Governor Seward, was the 
 author of that doctrine. 
 
 Well gentlemen, I happen to have a little extract from a 
 newspaper which will show you another origin for this doc- 
 trine of the " L-repressible conflict" between the forces of 
 slave and free society. The "Richmond Enquirer," before 
 Seward and before Lincoln, set down this proposition — 
 
 The opposite and conflicting forms of society cannot, among 
 civilized men, coexist and endure. The one must give way and 
 cease to exist — The other become universal. If free society be 
 unnatural, immoral and unchristian, it must fall and give way to 
 slave society — a social system as old as the world, as universal as 
 man, 
 
 And we take that issue. If free society is "imnatural, im- 
 moral and unchristian," which the Virginia editor says it is, 
 then, by the highest duty to ourselves and to all men, we 
 must be turned into slaves. There certainly is an "Irre- 
 pressible conflict" stated. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, these may be called the observers of this 
 "Irrepressible conflict" between the forces of slave labor and 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 505 
 
 free labor — between society respectively l)nilt upon these 
 two opposite systems; the Author of that conflict is He who 
 mysteriously framed this union of the body and the soul 
 which constitutes the human race. For, in the last analysis, 
 the dift'erence between slave labor and free labor is this, — 
 that a power superior to the individual man seizes upon him, 
 degrades his labor, stinmlates, enforces, and employs all his 
 energj' which allies him with the brute, his muscles, his 
 nerves, his power as of oxen and of horses, in the labor that the 
 slaveowner gets by tasks from his abject dependents. Free 
 labor is informed by man and directed by will. It is the 
 application of the whole man by himself — the master of his 
 own limbs by the intellect and the passions which God has 
 given him with which to rule his own body. And it is quite 
 obvious that so long as there be these two methods, by one 
 of which man is degraded to the level of the brute, and his 
 labor to the level of brute labor, and by the other of which 
 he is the master of his own body, and is lifted up by his own 
 effort into moral, intellectual and social development and 
 improvement, they "cannot "(as the editor of the "Rich- 
 mond Enquirer" says), "among civilized men, coexist and 
 endure." Let us see why. 
 
 Let us see what are some of the trivial objections which 
 are made sometimes by honest-minded men. "AYhat is the 
 objection," they say "that your free people of the North have 
 to going into a territory and running the forces of free society 
 parallel with the systems of slave labor.-^" Why, the moral 
 conflict between them is utterly incompatible with the i)eace- 
 ful coexistence of the two together; I mean while they run on 
 as forces conflicting and striving for the mastery, for I admit 
 that the actual condition of the slaves, when it is settled that 
 the institution is to pass away, may tem])orarily be left sub- 
 ordinate to and controlled by the great forces of free society. 
 Why, gentlemen, just take the two systems of the chaste 
 Christian single marriage and that of polygamy — tlu' system 
 
506 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of our society which treats women as the equal, the sharer of 
 the heart of her husband, the mother of his children and the 
 part of his household — and the system of polygamy, that 
 treats her as the slave of his passion and makes her subject 
 to his caprices and then ask the free people of the North and 
 the free people of the South (for on this question there is no 
 difference of opinion between the two sections) what objec- 
 tion there is to polygamy occupying a territory, and why they 
 cannot go and live side by side with this institution. Gentle- 
 men, nature is stronger than politicians. She will have her 
 own way. Now, practically, is not this so.^ How happens it 
 that the overflowing population of the sterile soil and inclem- 
 ent climate of the New England States, and of this, and 
 other Northern States have in the earlier days, — when the 
 inpenetrable West imposed such barriers to the progress of 
 civilization — how happens it, I ask, that that overflowing 
 population did not turn down into Virginia, the Carolinas, 
 Alabama and Georgia? The laws of our country extended 
 over the whole, the genial climate and fertile and prolific soil 
 invited the industry of the free. Why did they not go there? 
 Why did they shoot clear across the continent, as if there had 
 been a wall of fire drawn on the Northern boundary of 
 Virginia? And why, not until they had occupied to the 
 Pacific Ocean, did the returning wave seek to encroach upon 
 the line of territory that slavery had claimed for its use? 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you see that this is not a fictitious issue. 
 It is a real issue. It is deep, permanent, as necessary as the 
 principles of human nature. You see that besides being a 
 question of political duty and political right, in which we are 
 concerned, it is a question whether our Territories shall be 
 cultivated by free or by slave labor; it is a question of vital 
 importance to the overflowing tide of our population, because 
 the presence of slavery, as an established and controlling 
 institution, necessarily drives the free population away from 
 the reach of it. 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 507 
 
 And, gentlemen, it liai)i)ens to be a little odd, with these 
 sentiments, that the most extraordinary char<>es are made 
 upon the Repnblican party. Om- fellow citizens of the Slave 
 States tell us, in justification of the system of slavery, that 
 it is the only system comi)atil)le with the coexistence of the 
 two races in the same community — that is, — their coexist- 
 ence in at all equal numbers. That may be. We do not 
 dispute with them on that point. But we say, that being 
 admitted, they cannot extend themselves into the Territories 
 of the United States, and carry \\'ith them their black i)opula- 
 tion, without having slavery nudntained and ])rotected. 
 Well, our i:)rinciples are opposed to the maintenance and 
 protection of slavery in the Territories. That we avow; that 
 they complain of; but that they understand. Yet you will 
 find in the organ of opinion in the Southern States, and in 
 their organs having affinity with them in the Free States, 
 they charge that the Republican party is in favor of African- 
 izing America ! The policy and principles of the Republican 
 party to keep slaves out of the Territories, in the opinion of 
 our Southern friends, is to keep the African race out of the 
 Territories, while their principles would carry it in. And yet 
 they say, and while they charge it in effect as a fault of ours 
 that our principles would fill the Territories with white peo- 
 ple and would keep the slaves out, that we are in favor of 
 Africanizing the continent! The extension of the institution 
 and of the i)opulation would be promoted and advanced by 
 the policy and j)rinciples of the parties which are 0])posed to 
 us, and we who stop the tide cannot be accused of favoring 
 the extension of that j)opulation. 
 
 And here, gentlemen, I may notice a proj^osition which 
 has been used bj^ many persons to soothe their own con- 
 sciences for their indifference on the subject of slavery, and 
 that is, that the carrying of the institution of slavery into new 
 Territories does not increase the number of slaves. They 
 are opposed to increasing the number of slaves, but they say 
 
508 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 that the extension of the institution does not increase the 
 number of slaves. A very respectable, intelligent gentleman 
 whom I ever desire to mention with honor, Mr. James T. 
 Brady, the candidate of one of the divisions of the Democra- 
 tic party for Governor of this State, in a public speech that 
 he recently delivered, suggested that idea. Why, gentlemen, 
 what can be more abhorrent to the plainest principles of 
 social economy than that the extension of the area over which 
 a race is distributed does not tend to their increase. When- 
 ever Mr. Brady will be of the opinion that the descendants of 
 Irishmen are no more in the world than they would have been 
 if they had always been confined within the limits of Ireland ; 
 whenever we shall feel that there are no more descendants of 
 Englishmen than if this wide continent had not been opened 
 to that population, but they had all been confined within the 
 island of Great Britain; whenever it shall be true that there 
 are only just as many Morgan horses in the world as if they 
 had always been confined to farm work in Vermont, and had 
 not been distributed over the country for the luxury of its 
 population everywhere; whenever it shall be demonstrated 
 that there would be only just as many perch in the world if 
 they had always been shut up in Owasco Lake, and not dis- 
 tributed in rivers and lakes everywhere, then, I say, there 
 will be something in the idea that the extension of slavery 
 into Territories does not tend to increase the number of 
 slaves. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, there is another question which I 
 desire to meet fairly and squarely, and that is the imputa- 
 tion against the Republican party as favoring negro equality. 
 I take it that the Republican party, and that every man, 
 whose mind and nature have been developed by education 
 and Christianity, feels that, because of the actual condi- 
 tion of feebleness, of ignorance, and of degradation of any- 
 body, he never gains any right, even by the weight of his 
 little finger, to add to that depression and misfortune. And 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 509 
 
 I take it that it will be a lon<j time before it will be a mark 
 of nobility of s])irit and manliness of character to add to the 
 misfortunes and feebleness of the humble and distressed. 
 I believe that it is a fundamental principle of civilized 
 society and Christian religion that as before the eye of God, 
 so in the judgment of the law, all men who are men are to 
 have equal rights of protection. Now, when I am making 
 this suggestion about the Republican party's notion of the 
 equality of the negro, God forbid that any man should say 
 that I, jjrofessing, as I do, to speak with deliberation, with 
 circumspection, with a just regard of duty to myself and to 
 you, should ever be quoted as opposed to that kind of 
 equality to the lowest and feeblest of the human race. Bnt 
 let us look a little at this subject of negro equality from 
 points of view which do not occur to our Southern friends. 
 They do not complain that the law which excluded slavery 
 or slaves from the Territory would i)revent white men from 
 going there, except in a particular relation, to which I shall 
 advert. So far, then, as whites are concerned, the white 
 man who chooses to go alone from South Carolina or from 
 Alabama, or from Kentucky, would have just as good a 
 chance under this principle of exclusion of slaves, as a man 
 from Vermont, from Pennsylvania, or from Ohio; but they 
 say we white men of the South cannot go into a new territory 
 without our blacks carrying us. And there is the difficulty. 
 Now, whicli is the master of the situation and of the future 
 of that man — the white man or the black man who must 
 carry him.^ You remember how Benjamin Franklin aided the 
 diffusion of universal suffrage, when there was a proj^erly 
 qualification which ho wished to abolisli, by the suggestion 
 he made in regard to the property voting rather than the 
 man. He says, "You recjuire a man to ])ossess fifty dollars 
 worth of |)roperty before he can vote." Now, to-day, a man 
 professes himself to exercise the right of suffrage. He ia 
 ^sked whether he has fifty dollars worth of property. He 
 
510 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 says, "Yes — I have a jackass that is worth fifty dollars." He 
 votes. Well, at the next election the man comes up again, 
 but his jackass having died he cannot vote. "Now," as Dr. 
 Franklin asks, "which was it that voted the year before, the 
 man or the jackass?" 
 
 Now, gentlemen, pursuing the tenor of these suggestions, 
 if in the Southern States they have a class of the population, 
 in subjection to whom the movements of the white people 
 must be made, it is very easy to see that in certain most 
 important relations this population is the master of the move- 
 ments of the white. 
 
 But, again, they say, that, in their estimation, a mixed 
 population of whites and slaves, as a unit, is a better popula- 
 tion than an equal number of people on one side of the line 
 all white. Well, gentlemen, let us suppose there are one 
 thousand white people forming a little community in the 
 State of Ohio, and that on the opposite bank of the river, in 
 Kentucky, there is another community made up of five hun- 
 dred whites and five hundred negroes; and this latter com- 
 munity they say, is a stronger, wiser, safer, and better com- 
 munity than the one thousand on our side. Well, gentlemen, 
 when some British officers were trying to excuse the defeat 
 of one of their frigates by an American frigate having a 
 smaller crew, the Englishmen retorted by saying that two- 
 thirds of the crew of the American ship were Englishmen 
 and Irishmen. "Yes," said the iVmerican, "and it was just 
 the other third that made the difference." Now, take from 
 the one community, of one thousand white men, five hundred 
 white men, and you have five hundred white men remaining. 
 But of the other community of five hundred white and five 
 hundred black, you take the five hundred white and you have 
 five hundred blacks remaining. It is that dilution of the 
 black population that they consider a larger and better ele- 
 ment of society than an equal number of white people of one 
 side. That is not only negro equaUty but negro superiority. 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 511 
 
 We submit to the argument without ill-nature, because we 
 are satisfied that it is f(uite the other way. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this subject of equality has been 
 broached on the op])osite side, by a very distinguished gentle- 
 man in tlie Democratic party, a very eminent lawyer and a 
 very close reasoner — I mean Mr. Charles O'Conor. He, in 
 endeavoring to attract the attention, favor and support to 
 the institution of slavery from the people of the State of New 
 York, put to them this proi)osition : "The condition of Slav- 
 ery at the South is jjrecisely, in the eye of the law, the con- 
 dition of your sons here, while they are under age; the only 
 difference between the lad of twenty at the North and the 
 slave at the South being that the lad is to be emancipated 
 at the age of twenty-one, while the slave continues in the 
 same condition for life." This monstrous j)roposition, gen- 
 tlemen, is not for me to dissect or refute. Its absurdity is 
 obvious; but let me say to you, gentlemen, when they are 
 using this reckless argument, that it is just as much an asser- 
 tion of the equality of condition to say that the white man 
 is on the same level with the black as it is to say that the 
 black is on the same level with the white. There is no differ- 
 ence in that res])ect. So you see, gentlemen, that none of 
 these efforts to divert the public mind and the public atten- 
 tion from the real inquiry will avail anything. We are a po- 
 litical party. We act in our Federal relation within our 
 ])olitical duty. We act upon the subject of slavery within 
 the Territories according to our notion of the safety and 
 true development of our country. 
 
 Now, there being this conflict, let us see who it is between. 
 Tlie ordinary j)hrase for it is that it is between the North and 
 the South. Between the North and the South? This "irre- 
 pressible conflict" but the occui)ation of the territory by 
 these contending tides of population? Well, gentlemen, 
 there is great danger in generalities. What is the North? 
 What is the South? Where is the line drawn? The phrases 
 
512 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 have no meaning in our political constitution. There are no 
 such powers. It answered very well in geographical descrip- 
 tion, while the population of this country was confined to 
 the margin of the Atlantic Ocean. But what has become of 
 the division between the East and the West? We reach now 
 from shore to shore of the two great oceans of the world. We 
 have the great Mississippi Valley. We have a vast region 
 of interior territory. Hence the division between the North 
 and the South does not express the conflicting parties at all. 
 Then they will say that it is between the Slave States and 
 the Free States, but that is not so. If it were so, why then, 
 under our system of politics, which gives the predominance 
 of Federal votes the power of determining the question, it 
 would have been settled long ago: there are 120 votes from 
 the Slave States and 183 from the Free States, and it is very 
 easy to see that a conflict dividing the parties of the country 
 by that line, would be very soon ended. 
 
 No, gentlemen, these are cunning disguises by which this 
 conflict is sought to be made geographical, or sought to be 
 circumscribed on the one side or on the other by the demar- 
 cation of State lines. It is not so. The controversy is be- 
 tween the friends and supporters of slavery in the United 
 States of America, wherever they are, and the opponents of 
 that institution, who regard it as dangerous and injurious to 
 the common benefit of the country. That is it. You cannot 
 gain the credit of a gi-eat division of the country, or of great 
 bodies of states. Look at it. I take it that, in our midst, 
 Mr. O'Conor is as great an advocate, promoter and defender 
 of the institution of slavery as Mr. Yancey, who lives in 
 Alabama. I take it that Mr. Gushing,* of Massachusetts, 
 is as vehement, as turbulent, as obstreperous an advocate of 
 slavery as Mr. Toombs, of Georgia. I take it that Governor 
 Seward is no more fiery or no more bold an opponent of the 
 extension of slavery than Cassius M. Clay, of Kentucky. I 
 
 * Caleb Gushing. 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 513 
 
 take it that IVIr. Everett betrays the hopes of freedom by his 
 timidity in the very citadel of Boston, and that Winter Dayis 
 beats do^vn the ])roud pretensions of slavery in the City of 
 Baltimore. Nay, St. Lonis is to-day a more Republican city 
 than New York; and Baltimore, considering its position, is 
 as bold at least as Boston, Now let us understand how we 
 are gi'oujied. So, too, there are large classes of our po])ulation 
 — the slave traders of our Northern ports — the merchants 
 who fit them out — their crows, and all the hangers on of that 
 interest — tJie great share of the bankers, the great share of 
 the moneyed interests of the Northern States — these are com- 
 bined with the interests of the slaveholders in the sup])ort 
 and maintenance of slavery. A great many of the farmers, 
 a great many of the honest, plain, poor, but hardy, mechan- 
 ics of Virginia, INIaryland, North Carolina, Kentucky and 
 Tennessee, are opponents of slavery and slavery extension, 
 and they act and feel with the Republican party. 
 
 The division is of sentiment and of opinion and not of sec- 
 tions, or of States. Now, that being the division, you will 
 perceive that whether or not one sentiment or the other can 
 make headway, develop itself and find speech and act politic- 
 ally for the furtherance of it, in one or the other part of the 
 country, must depend upon the laws, upon the habits and 
 upon the feelings of the people. Thus here, as I have stated, 
 distinguished men advocate slavery openly and fairly. Mr. 
 O' Conor, to whom I have alluded, stated to a large New York 
 audience that the question was, whether slavery was just or 
 not — that if slavery was just, then they were right on their 
 side — that if slavery was unjust, then Governor Seward and 
 all his followers were right. He laid down the proposition 
 to be enforced and accepted by us, that slavery was just, be- 
 nign and l)eneficent; that only those who were of that way 
 of thinking should sustain tlie Democratic party, and that all 
 of the opposite opinion were rightfully on the Rei)ublican 
 side. Mr. O'Conor is a clear thinking, honest man, who 
 
 34 
 
514 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 utters his sentiments freely on these questions, and no one 
 attempts to stop him from exercising his right of speech. 
 But how is it in the Southern States? Do they enforce their 
 views in the general way of argument, suggestions, and fair 
 and honest influence? There was an humble mechanic, a 
 man of Irish origin, who went to the State of South Caro- 
 lina to work as a bricklayer in the capital of that State — I 
 mean Thomas Powers. He ventured a suggestion that 
 Slavery was not "just," not "benign," not "beneficent" — 
 an honest opinion, doubtless, and one which he gathered 
 from observation. What were the arguments that were 
 used with him to satisfy him that he ought to change his 
 opinion? Why he was taken — he was beaten with many 
 stripes until the blood ran; he was tarred, he was feathered, 
 he was starved, he was insulted, he was hooted from the 
 community; and thus he was convinced, I suppose. The 
 stripes exhibited to him the manifest justice of slavery, the 
 boiling tar exhaling the odor of its benignity and the feath- 
 ers descending in a gentle mantle of its beneficence. 
 Now, Mr. O'Conor and Mr. Powers, running in different 
 lines of reason and argument would very likely come to 
 opposite conclusions. No, gentlemen, our Constitution 
 makes our suffrage free — leaves it to be settled by honest 
 argument by all the arts of fair and honest influence; 
 and whenever the speech and the facts, the conduct and 
 the character of the Republican party can be made known 
 in the communities that cherish and defend slavery, you 
 may rely upon it that there will be as many to uphold and 
 defend free labor there as there are to defend and protect 
 slave labor here. 
 
 Another very cutting sarcasm that we suffer from, from 
 the voters of the States that have established and now main- 
 tain slavery, to uphold their favorite institutions, and from 
 the Democratic orators too, is, that we are a hypocritical race; 
 that we are fond of money above every other thing, and 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 515 
 
 trample, for piin's sake our princii)les under our feet; that 
 we fit out slave-traders, that our merchants furnish the 
 means, the credit, and the insurance; and they say: "Look, 
 now, at the North, which professes to be opposed to Slavery, 
 and yet furnishes the means for this abominable traffic." 
 Well, there is no fusion. It is not the North that is opposed 
 to slavery; it is the people, who have the sentiments of free- 
 dom who are opposed to slavery; and those who have not 
 those sentiments are engaged in anything, if you please, that 
 the law will tolerate, or that the law will wink at, in advance- 
 ment of slavery. But let me ask that Democratic orator, 
 how many of those people that he thus classifies and stigma- 
 tizes, does he suj)posevote the Republican ticket? Whenever 
 Republicans are caught in the service of slavery we shall 
 hang our heads! But when the orator who denounces our 
 wickedness, counts among the voters of his party, captain 
 and crew, the owner and merchant, the banker and district 
 attornev, the officers and marshal, and the whole concern 
 engaged in prosecuting, promoting, defending, protecting or 
 winking at, the abomination, it is for them to cease their 
 accusations. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, after all, coming back to the Territories, 
 the question is, are we planning, are we executing any oppres- 
 sion on our fellow citizens of the Southern States by main- 
 taining the rights of free labor, and by our proposition that 
 the Territories shall be occupied by free laborers, by free 
 citizens from Georgia, South Carolina, from Massachusetts, 
 from New York, and where not.'' That depends, it is said, 
 uj)on the Constitution of the United States of America; 
 and the ])ropositions of the different ])latforms on this subject 
 are i)ut forth l)y the different ])arties to gain the adherence 
 of tlu' peo])l('. I will ask your attention first to the proposi- 
 tions of the different sections of the Democratic party, and 
 then to our own, saying first a word or two on the platform 
 of the Constitutional Union party, which lias given us no 
 
516 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 interpretation of the Constitution, and no views concerning 
 it. ' It is a mistake to suppose that the Constitutional Union 
 party have confined themselves to declaring as their only 
 sentmients, "The Union, the Constitution, and the enforce- 
 ment of the Laws." They have gone further. They have 
 said that it is the dictate of duty and patriotism to have no 
 other sentiments at all. 
 
 None, whatever, can we have, except what are embraced 
 in the formula, "The Union, the Constitution, and the 
 enforcement of the Laws." Well, "Many men of many 
 minds," and so long as constitutions, governments and laws 
 are open to construction and opinion, if you want us to know 
 what your opinions are, you must use some other phrase or 
 terms than those which are common to us all — "The Union, 
 the Constitution, and the enforcement of the Laws." We all 
 go in for that. 
 
 Now, the Breckenridge party says this: — 
 
 That, the Government of a Territory organized by an Act of 
 Congress, is provisional and temporary; and during its existence 
 all citizens of the United States have an equal right to settle with 
 their property in the territory, without their rights either of person 
 or property being destroyed or impaired by Congressional or Ter- 
 ritorial legislation. 
 
 That it is the duty of the Federal Government, in all its Depart- 
 ments, to protect, when necessary, the rights of persons and prop- 
 erty in the Territories and wherever else its Constitutional author- 
 ity extends. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you will notice that there was the same 
 indisposition with the framers of these resolutions to men- 
 tion the word "slavery," that is known to have prevailed 
 with the framers of the Federal Constitution. They deter- 
 mined that it should not be used, and for the best of reasons. 
 The abhorrence of slavery, the estimate of it as a temporary, 
 exceptional, foreign institution, made our fathers sedulously 
 to omit from the whole framework of the Constitution the 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18C0 517 
 
 name of slavery and slaves, and the fear of an intelligent free 
 people led the franiers of the Breekenridge ])latforni to leave 
 out the word "slavery," and to prevent it from peeping out 
 in any line or syllable. It was only by covering up the ques- 
 tion under the abstract idea of the rights of property that 
 they could get a hearing, and secure anything but the merest 
 indifference and contempt, for their suggestion that the Con- 
 stitution of the United States created, protected, defended, 
 or required from Congress the creation, the protection, or 
 defence of slavery. 
 
 Well, now if you will take the Republican ideas about what 
 is property under the Constitution, and what are persons 
 under the Constitution, we shall have no difficulty in saying 
 that it is the duty of the Federal Government to protect the 
 rights of persons and property in the Territories of the United 
 States. 
 
 What is the Republican doctrine about protecting the 
 right of property and persons in the Territories. f^ The eighth 
 section of the platform adopted at Chicago says: — 
 
 That the normal condition of all the Territory of the United States 
 is that of Freedom; that as our Republican fathers when they abol- 
 ished Slavery in all our National Territories, had ordained that 
 "No person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without 
 due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever 
 such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Con- 
 stitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the author- 
 ity of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any individual, to 
 give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States. 
 
 Now the Republican doctrine is that by the Constitution 
 of the United States slaves are persons and are not property; 
 that whenever they are named in that instrument they are 
 so described as persons, and that, in the spirit of our ances- 
 tors, and in the records of their deliberations, it is manifest, 
 everywhere, that they would not admit into that Constitu- 
 tion even the word "servitude," much less "slavery," but 
 
518 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 only the word "service"; and the only stringent clause of the 
 Constitution is that which looks to the rendition of escaped 
 fugitives from service. But I do not hesitate to say that the 
 Breckenridge proposition entirely fails in covering the in- 
 stitution of slavery, because they put themselves upon the 
 general notion and name of property; and the Constitution 
 of the United States nowhere, not in any line, not in any 
 syllable, not by implication, not by possibility, stamps the 
 character of chattel property upon men, to be protected, like 
 bales of goods and hogsheads of sugar, under the Federal 
 jurisprudence, as property. But if the Breckenridge proposi- 
 tion means to say that Congress and the Territorial legisla- 
 tures have no right to pass any laws impairing the rights 
 either of person or property, in the general and extensive 
 sense in which they use it, I do not hesitate to say it is the 
 sheerest nonsense in the world. I should like to know what 
 the whole function and duty, what the whole province, what 
 the whole scope of enactments and of legislation are but the 
 subjects of persons and property? I should like to know what 
 there is in New York to legislate about if it is not persons 
 and property.? I should like to know if the government that 
 governs cannot legislate about persons and property? Now, 
 to say that the Congress of the United States and the Terri- 
 torial governments they create have sole sovereignty over 
 the territory, and yet cannot legislate about persons and 
 property, why, in the name of Heaven, what can they legis- 
 late about? You must either have a government or no 
 government. If you have got a government, it can govern. 
 Why do they not put their language so that it will read that, 
 though it is a government, and can legislate about persons 
 and property, it cannot legislate about slaves? Why don't 
 they say that slaves are neither persons nor property but are 
 mixed up of both — or take some other dogma, by which to 
 make some magical exception of slavery from the purview of 
 legislation? It is a monstrous absurdity that a government 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 519 
 
 Nvliicli nilos a Territory does not include dominion over slaves 
 and their relations as well as white men and theirs — that the 
 government of a Territory which, by its laws and their ad- 
 ministration in the course of justice, may affect every white 
 man within it, cannot, by any enactment, alter the condition 
 of a slave for a single hour, or, to a hair's breadth, ameliorate 
 his condition. 
 
 We have a government or we have not a government, and 
 slavery being a matter of positive law, is subject to the con- 
 trol of Congress. It is in these generalities where lurks the 
 fraud that our opponents practice ui)on the intelligence of 
 our peo])le. The Douglas platform is neither more nor less 
 than this: — "Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the 
 Democratic Party, as to the nature and extent of the powers 
 of the Territorial legislature, and as to the powers of Congress 
 under the Constitution of the United States, over the insti- 
 tution of Slavery within the Territories — -Resolved, That the 
 Democratic Party will abide the decisions of the Supreme 
 Court of the United States on the questions of Constitutional 
 Laws." 
 
 AVell, gentlemen, there is no objection to that. There is 
 nothing Anti-Republican in that avowal. The Republican 
 party not only leaves slavery but all their rights about per- 
 sons and property before the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, when they come before that tribunal. So, you will 
 see, that our friends have either not spoken explicitly, def-. 
 initely and with frankness in the statement of their views, 
 or else they have been unfortunate in the selection of a pen- 
 man or the selection of words to express their meaning; for 
 the Republican party accepts the United States Courts as the 
 huN-f ul expounder.s of their law in cases that come before them. 
 And if Congress passes a law excluding slavery from the 
 Territories, and a slaveholder takes his slaves there; and if 
 a Republican lawyer brings a writ of habeas corpus, and a 
 Republican judge says the slave is free and you then go to 
 
520 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the Circuit Court and a Republican Circuit Judge says also 
 that the slave is free; and if you then go to the Supreme 
 Court of the United States, and that Court says the law is 
 unconstitutional and the slave is not free, so long as the 
 government stands, so long as the judgment in that case 
 stands, it will be respected, as it was in the Dred Scott case 
 which made Dred Scott a slave until he fortunately died. 
 But, on the other hand, if Congress passes a law that slavery 
 shall be established in the Territories, passes a slave code 
 and the slave is there held, and a Republican lawyer brings 
 a suit of habeas corpus, and a Democratic judge in that Terri- 
 tory says the law is constitutional, and the slave is a slave, 
 and a Democratic Circuit Judge, on an appeal, says the same 
 thing, and the Supreme Court of the United States says that 
 the law is unconstitutional and that the slave is a free man, 
 then let the people submit to the Supreme Court of the Uni- 
 ted States. This idea of law and justice — reverence for 
 law and justice — ^being an element to bind the consciences of 
 the good, and never an element strong enough to control the 
 wicked passions of the bad — is a sentiment inconsistent with 
 civil government and must be frowned upon everywhere. 
 
 When the Supreme Court of the United States makes this 
 judgment in favor of liberty, then let it be obeyed. Now, 
 gentlemen, how does it happen that the Supreme Court is 
 such a favorite repository for the settlement of the question 
 of liberty and slavery.? If you will notice, you will see that 
 the Democratic party, or the slaveholder's party, has shifted 
 a good deal as to where it would trust this question. In the 
 first place, Congress was the place to determine whether 
 slavery should or should not exist in the Territories. Large 
 Democratic majorities, subservient Northern constituents 
 unshamefaced representatives, made Congress a safe deposi- 
 tory for the question of slavery. But all at once the Repub- 
 lican sentiment found strength enough to express itself, and 
 to control one branch of Congress, and then our Southern 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 521 
 
 friends tliou^lit that Congress had no power over the ques- 
 tion of slavery in the Territories. Not they ! Tlie people of 
 the Territories had the power under the "great principle of 
 squatter Sovereignty" — the noble })rinciple of the people 
 controlling their own institutions, and Kansas was just the 
 place to try it. Why did this ])rinciple suit Kansas? Why, 
 because Kansas had a barrier of the Slave State of Missouri 
 between it and freedom. The slave interest had free ave- 
 nues to it for the overflowing dominion of slavery, and they 
 had violent men and violent passions, and wicked purposes, 
 as power always has when it contends against right, and 
 squatter sovereignty (not as Mr. Douglas now puts it, giving 
 the sovereignty to the people when they are a grown uj:) com- 
 munity) meant, according to the pure Southern doctrine, 
 that the first comers settled the question of slavery or no 
 slavery, because Missouri could get there sooner than New 
 York or Massachusetts. That was all very well. But we 
 are a free people, and we can move, whether black men will 
 carry us or not — and though South Carolina and Missouri go 
 there first, Massachusetts and New York stayed therelongest. 
 When, behold the change in the views of the slave holding 
 party! — "Was there ever such an abominable doctrine," they 
 said, "as Squatter Sovereignty? It leads to all manner of 
 violence and irritation between honest poi)ulations, turning 
 them into voters and fighters, when they ought to be plowing 
 and tilling the fields! How can American liberty stand the 
 shock of Scjuatter Sovereignty?" But we told you so, gentle- 
 men — we told you that Congress was the place to figlit it out 
 in words, where you could vote and we could vote, and the 
 sober, honest people, who sent us, were waiting for the deci- 
 sion. We ask them to take the matter back before Congress. 
 "Take it back! — it is the unsafest and most unconstitutional 
 place in the world! If you attempt to pass a law in Congress 
 to abolish slavery in the Territories, we will dissolve the 
 Union. The Sui)reme Court is the place." 
 
522 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Now, gentlemen, look at the unsleeping eye of Slavery — 
 that great, powerful interest which, while we, a free honest 
 people, have been minding our own business, satisfying our- 
 selves by sending John Jones or John Smith to Congress, has 
 been seizing upon the power of the government; and the 
 slave interest, with six millions of white people, and we with 
 thirteen millions of white people — they have got the Supreme 
 Court of the United States, and they have got the Circuit 
 Courts, too. Yes, oddly enough, it turns out that six millions 
 of men have five judges while thirteen million have but four. 
 That fact explains the safeness of the depository of the ques- 
 tion of slavery with the Supreme Court of the United States, 
 and Douglas thinks on the whole, that the Supreme Court 
 of the United States is the best place to put it — for the pres- 
 ent. And, gentlemen, is not this an enormous fraud upon 
 an honest people who suppose that everybody is as honest as 
 themselves.? Why, the circuit of one of the Supreme Court 
 judges— Judge McLean — contains foin* millions of white peo- 
 ple; while one circuit presided over by a Supreme Court 
 Judge in the slave interest, and which contains within its 
 jurisdiction the States of Mississippi and Ai'kansas, contains 
 a population of four hundred and fifty thousand whites — a 
 Northern judge being made equal to the task of presiding 
 over a circuit of five millions of active, enterprising white 
 people, while to do the business of quiet, peace-loving slave 
 owners, one judge is required for less than a half million of 
 whites. But, furthermore, whenever the organization of the 
 Supreme Court shall be adjusted, according either to the 
 claims, or the pressure of business, or the amount of popula- 
 tion, there will be at least six of the nine judges representing 
 the free states, and three only representing the slave states. 
 Then we will agree that the Supreme Court of the United 
 States of America is the place to settle the question of Liberty 
 and of Property. 
 
 It is a great mistake, gentlemen, to suppose that there is 
 anything irreverent in calculating upon changes of opinion 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 18G0 523 
 
 in the courts of justice. Lawyers liave a prevalent notion 
 that they change pretty often, and suitors sometimes find 
 that whereas on a particular ])oint the Court in one case de- 
 cides against them, wlien three months after the case is again 
 raised, and they are in opposite interests, it is decided against 
 them too. The Supreme Court of the United States, that 
 venerable tribunal, against which neither by tone, by gesture, 
 nor by im])lication will I ever raise my voice, let them be 
 judges of the cases that come before them — let them decide 
 them right or wTong — a free people must maintain their 
 judiciary or they have no defense for tlieir liberties. But 
 some years ago it was the settled law of that Court — settled 
 by the judgment of the great Chief Justice Marshall, and 
 concurred in by his brother judges, that a corporation — a 
 banking corporation if you please — could not be sued in a 
 United States court unless every stockholder was a citizen 
 of one particular State. That was the law year after year, 
 and the Court decided in favor of one interest and against 
 another in numerous instances uj)on that ])oint. But a few 
 years later the Court turned right around and said that the 
 previous decision was all a mistake — and that the locality 
 gave the jurisdiction of the Court without reference to the 
 residence of the stockholders, anfl that a New York bank 
 could be sued in a New York district, although the stock- 
 holders might live in Massachusetts and partly in South Caro- 
 lina. This, gentlemen, shows that differences of opinion may 
 gain ground on subjects that come before the Court; and 
 when the great question on the meaning of the Constitution 
 is argued Ix'fore the Supreme Court of the United States in 
 reference to whether slaves are property under the Jurispru- 
 dence of the United States, let us hope, at least, that a 
 different judgment will be given, and that the Court will not 
 hold that slavery can be jnaiutaiiied in the State of New York 
 imder the sanction of the Federal Constitution. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, when oj)inions are all miming one way 
 it is very easy to say they will never change, but change is 
 
524 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the law of politics as well as in all else, and the people who 
 think it so dangerous and so threatening to our liberties and 
 to the Constitution of this country, should the Republican 
 party be trusted with the rule in the Federal Government, 
 when they see it carried on by the Republican party, even 
 they may change their opinion. Changes quite as remark- 
 able as that have occurred in subjects that are not connected 
 with politics. We are all familiar now with the subject of 
 railroads and the speed and safety of trains of cars. But let 
 me read to you, what a grave reviewer said thirty-five years 
 ago, in the first English periodical,— " The London Quar- 
 terly." Said he: — 
 
 We are not advocates for visionary projects that interfere with 
 useful establishments. We scout the idea of a railroad, as imprac- 
 ticable. . . . What can be more palpably absurd and ridiculous 
 than the prospect of locomotives traveling twice as fast as stage 
 coaches ? We should as soon expect the people of Woolwich to suffer 
 themselves to be fired off upon one of Congley's ricochet muskets, 
 as to put themselves at the mercy of such a machine, going at such 
 a rate. 
 
 Now this conservative people, who have all the while been 
 riding in the slow coaches of a pro-slavery administration, 
 have been scouting the idea of anything so "visionary" as a 
 Republican Government interfering with "useful establish- 
 ments" (that is the Democratic party), and they think it 
 would be as mad as for the people of this country to be "fired 
 off from one of Congley's ricochet muskets" as for them to 
 trust Lincoln and Seward with the conduct of this govern- 
 ment. But they will live to travel fast and comfortably to 
 the Pacific Railroad march of free labor and free institutions. 
 
 But, gentlemen, the real sectionalism of this country is the 
 predominance of a particular interest that seeks its own 
 aggrandizement at the expense and sacrifice of the common 
 rights. Such, gentlemen, is the institution of slavery, a 
 State institution protected by laws — a property institution, as 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 525 
 
 they call it, but an institution that for its own aggrandize- 
 ment has striven to control, and has controlled, and will 
 control, while it may, the destinies of this country. Why, 
 see how these orators from the South talk about the great 
 staple cotton. Mr. Yancey makes a speech to the merchants 
 of New York on the subject of cotton. "Cotton," he says, 
 "is a great production." Yes, he thinks "it is' the mistress 
 or the master of the world." AVell, INIr. Yancey, that is all 
 very fine; but whose cotton is that? Whose cotton? — why, 
 the i)lanters', of course. Yes, certainly it is. Each parcel 
 of cotton that the planter raises, initil he sells it, belongs to 
 him; but as an item of production of national wealth and 
 of national power, whose cotton is it, Mr. Yancey? Come, 
 now, speak the truth ! It is the cotton of the nation to which 
 we both belong. Yes, Mr. Yancey, it is, W^e tolerate none 
 of these separations of interest. You cannot provoke an 
 envy at the prosperity, at the growth, at the wealth of any 
 of the States, or at the powerful influence as an element of 
 national strength and national wealth of the great product 
 cotton. So, when you set up that there is any such section 
 as the South that owns cotton, or as the North that owns 
 ships, understand that the locality of property is not to be 
 confounded with the universality of national interest, and 
 that our ships are yours and your cotton is ours. 
 
 The Republican party favors no such disposition of sepa- 
 rating the interests of the coimtry. I fear that the slave- 
 holding interest has allowed itself to be drawn into too much 
 of this sentiment, and that it looks really with more compla- 
 cency at the building up of Manchester, Liver]X)oI, Havre 
 and Paris by the productions of tlie South than it does upon 
 the building up of Boston, Lowell, New York, or your own 
 manufacturing towns. Ix't us have an end of this. Let us 
 understand, then, the commercial question of tliis coimtry, 
 that, gifted with a domain that extends from ocean to ocean, 
 inliabited by a people whose enterprise is balked l)y no diffi- 
 
526 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 culties and runs into every peaceful avenue to development, 
 formed by Providence with a hardy region that develops the 
 man and the woman and the child who, in our part of the 
 country, are able and willing to work with their hands and 
 with their heads, having a vast grain-producing region in the 
 valley of the Mississippi, and blessed by Providence with a 
 monopoly, if you please, of the great staple for clothing the 
 world, in your boasted cotton ; all these are by honest Ameri- 
 can industry, laid down as the rich tribute to the genius of 
 the Constitution, to the strength of the Union, and to the 
 enlargement of free and prosperous society. But when you 
 turn around and talk about cotton being master of the free- 
 men of the world, that the liberties of this country and the 
 liberties of England hang, forsooth, upon a cotton thread; 
 when you ask us to adopt the doctrine that, instead of new 
 shirts being made for men to wear, that men were made to 
 wear new shirts, that cotton dominates over the free spirit 
 of commercial nations, you mistake your audience for the 
 utterance of such ideas. Why, gentlemen, this Mr. Yancey 
 would doubtless have us believe that the great Hercules of 
 free labor that is to perform his twelve tasks of laying out 
 this continent for the habitations of justice and freedom for 
 generations unnumbered yet to come, finds his final fate, 
 as Hercules of old did in the shirt of Nessus, under whose 
 debilitating poison he yielded up the vigor of his life. Mr. 
 Yancey, this great cotton shirt of yours that you have 
 wrapped around the world, may keep it warm, but it will 
 never control the beatings of its heart. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the present trouble with our friends in 
 the Slave States is that when they come to complaining of 
 difficulties and of apprehension (and probably they feel 
 them in some sort), they do not seem to know what to pro- 
 pose, if anything, for us to do. They say if Lincoln is elected, 
 though everything is done the Constitution says shall be 
 done, though he has the most votes (and it is the duty of some- 
 
THE ISSUES OF THE DAY— 1860 527 
 
 body to tlirow votes so cas to elect somebody, if possible), yet, 
 after all this, if Lincoln is elected, tliey will secede from the 
 Union! Why? Isit notconstitntional? Yes, it is constitu- 
 tional, but it threatens all kinds of mischief. Well, we ask, 
 what have you to say about it? Who, imder Heaven, sludl 
 we vote for? Down South you do not seem to be agreed u])on 
 this subject. You are votin<? for Bell, you are voting for 
 Douglas. Do you exj)ect to elect either of them? No. We 
 want to beat Lincoln ! Well, we might help you beat Lincoln, 
 but whom shall we elect? Gentlemen, do you suppose that 
 the public mind of the country is in a state to tolerate a dis- 
 cussion of this question, when there are votes enough to elect 
 Lincoln, and not votes enough to elect anybody else. They 
 will say, "W^e must have a President, and we must have 
 Lincoln, if we cannot have anvbodv else"; and our answer 
 must be, until you show some concurrence of sentiment how 
 do you know but that if we should help you to elect Douglas, 
 you would not secede as you have threatened? And some of 
 you say that Douglas is worse than Lincoln ! Otliers too, say 
 that Breckenridge threatened the country; and still a part 
 of you say that Bell is a traitor to Southern rights ! Wliat a 
 bad lot of candidates there is before the people. Let us 
 make haste and elect one of them, and hope for "better luck 
 next time." 
 
 But this is Mexican politics — not ours — this saj^ing that 
 it is constitutional to elect anybody who has the most votes, 
 and if it turns out to be a man they like they will submit, but 
 if it is a man they don't like they will not. Now here is our 
 country — a great country, with a Constitution, a Union, 
 pros])erity, haj)piness, wealth, aggrandizement, power and 
 fame. Are we to suffer these childish suggestions to inter- 
 fere for a moment with our actions unless it be to offset it by 
 a greater aggn'gate vote for the candidate, upon whose elec- 
 tion they would suggest a subversion of American li4)erty? 
 Their principle is that there is a power in this country that 
 
528 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 is stronger than the Constitution, and can subvert it and the 
 laws, when we exercise our right of suffrage. If that be so, 
 the sooner we find it out the better, and we will settle that 
 matter in our turn, leaving as broad and firm and rich a leg- 
 acy to our children, as we received from our fathers. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I shall detain you no longer, but with one 
 suggestion shall leave this subject, thus imperfectly treated, 
 though I have trespassed much upon your patience. Lord 
 Bacon says that, "When you would have a tree produce 
 more fruit than it is used to do, it is not anything that you 
 can do to the boughs, but it is stirring the soil and putting 
 fresh moulds about the roots that must work it." Now, our 
 fathers planted this tree of constitutional liberty to flourish 
 forever, to dominate with its protecting shade over this whole 
 continent, from ocean to ocean, and be a shelter for genera- 
 tion after generation of men that should be true to the 
 principles of justice. The winds of agitation may sweep in 
 the boughs and the ordinary contrivances of party may keep 
 up, if you please, the appearance of active intelligent care of 
 the government; but I tell you that it has not produced as 
 good fruit of late as it used to do. It is not anything that 
 you do to the boughs, but it is stirring about the roots and 
 extending the free soil from which they must derive nourish- 
 ment that it is to reproduce and amplify forever and forever 
 the growth, the beauty, the flower and the fruit which belong 
 to its nature. 
 
VIII 
 
 SPEECH AT MASS MEETING HELD IN UNION 
 SQUARE, NEW YORK, ON THE AETERNOON 
 OF SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 18G1 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The firing on Fort Sumter and its evacuation and surrender by 
 Major Anderson on the 13th of April, 18(51, and the imniediate 
 call by President Lincoln for 75, 000 volunteers to sustain the gov- 
 ernment aroused the j)eople of the North throughout the country 
 to a realization that the Union and the national government were 
 in peril. The loyal men of New York City answered at once. 
 The news reaching New York on Sunday, April 14, there appeared 
 in the "New York Tribune" of the following morning a call for a 
 patriotic mass meeting which was circulated throughout the day 
 for signatures. The merchants, the bankers, the professional men 
 and men of all sorts, loyal to the government, rallied to its support. 
 Committees were formed, money was subscribed, and every effect- 
 ive measure was taken in aid of the State government to raise and 
 equip at once regiments to be sent to Washington to protect the 
 Capital. 
 
 Along with these preparations, the movement proceeded for 
 a great mass meeting to express by a solemn demonstration the 
 patriotic sentiment of the great city of the country. The first 
 proposition was to hold the meeting in Cooper Institute or the 
 Academy of Music, but it was evident from the spontaneous up- 
 rising of the i)opulation that any building would be wholly inade- 
 quate for the occasion and it was j)romptly decided to hold the 
 meeting in Union Square on the afternoon of Saturday, April 
 20. Gen. John A. Dix was selected to preside and a committee 
 on resolutions and speakers was ai)pointed which afterwards added 
 to its number gentlemen representing distinct organizations, not 
 political, that had joined in the general volunteer movement of 
 the merchants. Of this committee, Mr. Evarts was a member 
 and drew the resolutions that were adopted by the commitloc and 
 presented to the meeting. 
 
 35 529 
 
530 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Never before had such a demonstration been planned, and 
 never before or since has any such assembly of men been gathered 
 together in this country. While preparations for the meeting 
 were in progress, news was received of the firing on the Sixth 
 Massachusetts regiment by the mob in the streets of Baltimore, 
 as it passed through on the way to Washington. This incident 
 served to give added strength to the earnest patriotism of the 
 loyal men of New York, It was estimated that there were one 
 hundred thousand persons present at the meeting and five stands 
 were erected at different points for the accommodation of the 
 many speakers. The plans of the committee had contemplated 
 four stands to which was added a fifth at the last moment. 
 
 The proceedings of the meeting are succinctly outlined in a his- 
 torical sketch of the Union Defence Committee of the City of 
 New York by Mr. John Austin Stevens. The Union Defence 
 Committee, of which Mr. Evarts was the secretary, was the direct 
 outcome of this Union Square meeting, appointed pursuant to the 
 resolutions adopted by that assemblage, "to represent the citizens 
 in the collection of funds and the transaction of such other busi- 
 ness, in aid of the movements of the Government, as the public 
 interests may require." 
 
 The order of proceedings at the several stands was uniform. 
 They were opened by prayer offered by some eminent clergyman 
 of the city and some distinguished citizen presided at each stand. 
 The resolutions were read and a number of speakers made short 
 addresses to the crowds. General Dix, chairman of the entire 
 assemblage, was at stand No. 1, on the east side of Union Square 
 facing the equestrian statue of Washington. With him were 
 Major Robert Anderson and other officers from Fort Sumter, who, 
 during the meeting, were escorted from stand to stand to receive 
 the acclamations that greeted their presence. The Rev. Gardiner 
 Spring, the venerable pastor of the Brick Church, offered prayer. 
 General Dix was introduced and spoke. Mr. Robert H. McCurdy 
 read the resolutions offered by the committee. During the pro- 
 ceedings, a letter from Archbishop Hughes was read and the follow- 
 ing were the speakers at this stand: — Hon. Daniel S. Dickinson, 
 Senator Edward D. Baker, of Oregon, Hon. Robert J. Walker, 
 Fernando Wood, mayor of New York, former Governor Hunt, the 
 
MASS MEETING IN UNION SQUARE 531 
 
 Hon. Robert C. Schenck, of Ohio, William M. Evarts, Simeon B. 
 Chittenden and Caleb Lyon of Lyonsdale. 
 
 The few words from Mr. Evarts on this occasion were as follows: — 
 
 (Reported in the "New York World" of April 22, 18G1.) 
 
 Mr. Cliainnan and (leuilemen: — 
 
 I regard this as a business inoetiii^ cominenciiig the great- 
 est transaction that this generation of men have seen. We 
 stand here the second generation from the men who declared 
 our indejiendence, fought the battles of the Revolution, and 
 framed our Constitution. The question for us to decide is 
 whether we are worthy children of such men or whether our 
 descendants shall curse us as we bless our fathers. Gentle- 
 men, you have got something more to do than you have done 
 hitherto — something more than merely to read the glori- 
 ous history of the past; you have got to write a history for 
 the future that your children will either glory in or blusli for. 
 
 When Providence puts together the 19th of April, 1775, 
 when the first lilood was shed at Lexington, and the 19th of 
 April, 18G1, wlien the first blood was shed at Baltimore, I tell 
 you it means something. What that statue of AVashington 
 sustains in its firm hands, the flagstaff of Fort Sumter, I tell 
 you means something. There is but one question left, and 
 that is, whether you mean something too. If you mean 
 something, do you mean enough? Do you mean enough of 
 time, of labor, of money, of men, of blood, to seal and sanc- 
 tion the glories of the future of America? Your ancestors 
 fouglil for and secured independence, liberty and equal 
 rights. Every enemy of liberty, independence and equal 
 rights has told you that those ideas are inconsistent with 
 government. It is for you to show that government of the 
 people means that the ])eople shall obey the government. 
 Having shown what the world never saw till the Declaraticm 
 of Indei)endence was made — what a people which governs 
 itself can do in peace — you are lo show what a people which 
 governs truly means to accomplish, when it wages war 
 
532 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 against traitors and rebels. Each man here is fighting his 
 own quarrel and protecting the future of his children. With 
 these sentiments, you need no argument and no suggestion 
 to carry you through this conflict. You are to remember 
 your fathers and care for your children. 
 
IX 
 
 SPEECH AT THE REPUBLICAN UNION FESTIVAL, 
 NE^Y YORK, FEBRl ARY 22, 1862.* 
 
 In response to the Toast: 
 
 "The Constitution of the United States: — With All 
 Its Privileges and Blessings, May It be Perpetua- 
 ted TO the Latest Posterity." 
 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen: — 
 
 It is my good fortune, by the kind invitation of your com- 
 mittee, to take part now, for the third time, in the celebra- 
 tion of this great national festival, under the auspices of the 
 Republican Association; and the three occasions, including 
 the i)resent, are at three notable stages in the great national 
 transaction, for the inauguration of which, in support of the 
 Constitution, and through which for the triumphant main- 
 tenance of the Constitution, the Republican party is, in my 
 judgment, mainly responsible. 
 
 We celel)rated the day in 18G0, in advance of the Repub- 
 lican nomination for the Presidency, which had for its pur- 
 pose to defend the Constitution against the encroachment of 
 a great State interest, that was striving to impress a local in- 
 stitution upon the national life and character. We succeeded 
 in the election, under the peaceful forms of the Constitution, 
 and had transferred the power of the government from 
 the faction that had so long wielded it, to hands that 
 were faithful to the spirit of the Constitution. We cele- 
 brated this anniversary in 1861, in the waning months of the 
 administration of Mr. Buchanan, in the very midnight of the 
 gloom which prevailed over this country, from the period of 
 the election of Mr. Lincoln, until the guns of Sumter pro- 
 claimed the breaking day. A military rebellion was planned 
 and threatened, and had commenced the revolt which since 
 has made such head. We celebrate it now, sir, when the 
 armed rebellion has assumed its fullest proj^ortions — when 
 
 * See prefatory note to speech, page 479. 
 
 533 
 
534 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the power of the country has been raised against it, — and 
 when the decHning fortunes of treason announce that, soon, 
 reinstated and re-estabHshed, the Constitution will resume 
 its sway over the whole territory of the Republic. 
 
 Mr. President, it was the Constitution as our fathers framed 
 it, before the rebellion broke out; it is the same Constitution 
 while the rebellion rages ; — and it will be the same Constitu- 
 tion when the rebellion is over. And, without laying any 
 stress upon the great topics of popular liberty, and of national 
 strength and pride, which have been aimed at, at least, in 
 other political constitutions, let us understand that the 
 vital and peculiar principle of our Constitution is, that a 
 great nation can be formed, with the strength of govern- 
 ment and its fund of power so distributed as not to be an 
 overmatch for the freedom of the people — that a nation can 
 be constituted powerful enough to maintain itself in the 
 family of nations, and to secure to its citizens the honor, 
 respect, and protection which only a mighty nationality can 
 command, and yet, by the division of the great fund of 
 power essential to government, between the general and the 
 local administration, the people can be protected in their 
 freedom, and secured in the management of then- everyday 
 interests by representation, neither remote from them, nor 
 insensible to every duty to them. 
 
 Mr. President, the first essential safeguard of this distri- 
 bution of powers is, that the general government shall deal 
 only with that which is common and national, and the State 
 government shall have the exclusive administration of what 
 is local and peculiar. The struggle, under such a distribu- 
 tion of power, constantly is, or constantly may be, for local 
 institutions and interests, to strive to force themselves into 
 national life and character; and, on the other hand, for the 
 general government to establish rules and laws for domestic 
 institutions and interests, which its policy and its pur- 
 pose, as the policy and the purpose of the majority of the 
 
REPUBLICAN UNION FESTIVAL 535 
 
 nation, may su^^est. I hold tliat the fun(hnuonlal principle 
 of the Repuhlican party, — the keynote of its political pur- 
 pose and action, — has been, and is, to oppose this invasion 
 hy domestic and peculiar interests, of the domain of na- 
 tional power. To stop the encroacliment of slavery, and 
 to destroy the political power of slavery, was the i)ur])ose 
 and end, and will be to the last, as thus far it has been, 
 tlie success of the Republican party. According to the 
 experience of the nation, when, by the suffrage under the 
 Constitution, we had placed a Re])ul)lican administration in 
 Washington, we had accom])lished our political ])uri)ose, and 
 secured the trium])h of our princii)les. The ballot, which 
 our Constitution decreed should be the final arbiter in polit- 
 ical controversies, had placed the control of the government 
 in our hands. But, — a strange novelty in our affairs, — an 
 appeal was taken to arms; and we, the people of this coun- 
 try, have been obliged to try over again, by the bullet, and 
 the bayonet, those questions which the will of the nation 
 had settled by the ballot. The Constitution is to be main- 
 tained — and it is always and in all things to be nuiintained — 
 and when that ciuestion has been settled by the absolute 
 suppression of the rebellion and the peaceful resumption of 
 the dominion of the laws, then, but not till then, the triumph 
 is complete. 
 
 And now, INIr, President, allow me to say, that the Con- 
 stitution is equally concerned, and the maintenance of our 
 liberties and our power is equally concerned, that the inva- 
 sion by the general government of the sphere of local and 
 domestic institutions and interests, shall never be permitted. 
 It will be found that the good Ship of the Constitution has 
 two broadsides, equally well armed, and whose thunders 
 alike are sleepless when danger threatens. Whenever danger 
 comes, as it has done, from local or State interests striving 
 to control the Federal government, we have a broadside 
 for the enemy in that quarter; and whenever the rage of the 
 
536 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 contest seeks to make the struggle revolutionary, and to 
 carry the Federal government into a suppression of the clear 
 right of the States to the control of their domestic legisla- 
 tion, it will be found that the other broadside of the Consti- 
 tution has as many tiers of guns, of as heavy metal, and with 
 ammunition as effective, as when it was bearing upon its 
 enemy on the other quarter. We are attached to our govern- 
 ment, we know that it will bear the stress to which it is now 
 subjected, and, in the future, we fear not but that it will 
 outride every storm. Therefore, all fears and alarms that 
 because we are sustaining the Constitution against one hos- 
 tile power, we shall, by the zeal of the contest, be carried 
 beyond the lines of duty, and press this war into a revolu- 
 tionary interference with what the Constitution attributes 
 to State control, are in my judgment, wholly vain. 
 
 But, gentlemen, a word as to the Constitution and its 
 relations to slavery as rising in this war. In the first place, 
 with all the reading that I have been able to give to the Con- 
 stitution, I have never been able to see, that, beyond a single 
 clause in it of very narrow application, there was the least 
 obligation, or the least duty, in regard to the protection or 
 maintenance of slavery anywhere. We have, undoubtedly, 
 a constitutional provision and duty, that in a certain spe- 
 cific case, where slavery presents itself outside of the State 
 in which it prevails as a domestic institution, it shall be 
 remanded to its home, there to be dealt with. I refer, 
 of course, to the fugitive slave clause of the Constitution. 
 We have another provision, generally referred to as hav- 
 ing some concern with slavery, which obliges the Federal 
 government to assist loyal State authorities in suppressing 
 insurrections, too great for their own power to subdue. 
 But that provision, gentlemen, applies to an insurrection of 
 free white men, just as much as to an insurrection of black 
 slaves; to an insurrection in Massachusetts, just as much as 
 to an insurrection in South Carolina. It is a matter of gen- 
 
REPUBLICAN UNION FESTIVAL 537 
 
 oral concern, that the civil structure of the State shall not 
 be overthro\\Ti by an armed rebellion, too powerful for the 
 resources of the State to put down. Indeed, the only occa- 
 sions, in our constitutional history, where this power of the 
 Federal government has been invoked, have been to sup- 
 press seditious combinations of white men in the free States 
 of the country. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, men think differently, in dealing with 
 the subject of slavery, as to the end at which they should 
 begin. INIany men, enlightened, public-spirited, earnest, 
 and zealous, think that the social structure of slavery 
 must be undermined, in order to overthrow its encroach- 
 ing political power. INIy ovra judgment and feeling have 
 always been that the political power of slavery must first be 
 overthrown, in order that its social structure may be under- 
 mined. It is our duty to see to it that slavery gains not one 
 ounce of strength, not one day of duration by an added sup- 
 port of the Federal government. 
 
 But, that duty discharged, it is our further duty to leave 
 slavery to the disintegration and destruction, which, thus 
 thrown back and made a domestic and local institution, 
 domestic and local control of it must, of necessity, occasion. 
 The power of the Federal government is what has kept it 
 alive in many of the States of the Union, and gives it strength 
 in all where it maintains itself. In that, the free states 
 have been guilty. But they have repented, and they have 
 brought forth fruits mete for repentance. They no longer 
 sustain or protect it. And just as surely as the weight of 
 the Federal government, tllro^^^l into the scale of slavery, 
 hitherto has influenced politics in the free states, and made 
 them pro-slavery in sentiment and in action, just as surely 
 will the power and patronage of the Federal government, 
 when engaged on the side of free ])rin(;ij)les, make the slave 
 states anti-slavery. But it will do it without injury to the 
 text or to the spirit of the Constitution; — correcting its 
 
538 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 bad support of a feeble and enfeebling institution, it will leave 
 it to the processes which its own society will provide for its 
 destruction. Why should we consider slavery, when robbed 
 of its political strength, and driven to depend upon its own 
 merit, and its own unaided forces, a dangerous institution? 
 To whom is it dangerous? Look at the states on which it 
 turns its fond gaze and upon which it bestows its smiles; 
 and look at the states on which, retreating, it turns back its 
 frowns. No, gentlemen, believe me, the favor of slavery is 
 a false, a meretricious favor, and, as of every other harlot, 
 it is its love and not its hate that should inspire fear, and its 
 rage inflicts no wounds so deep as its caresses. 
 
 Gentlemen, we are fighting, and we are fighting for the 
 Constitution. War, to sustain the Constitution, however 
 different from peace in its methods, is just as constitutional. 
 It is always constitutional to support the Constitution, by 
 such measures and by such weapons, as are necessary to repel 
 the force that is brought against it. And while this con- 
 stitutional war lasts, its forces, its blows, shall not be with- 
 held, not averted, not parried by the Constitution, but shall 
 fall with whatever shattering force they may upon the insti- 
 tution of slavery; and whatever slave war makes free, peace, 
 restored, shall never re-enslave. Go on with your war. It 
 falls upon the guilty authors of the rebellion — the slavehold- 
 ing aristocracy of the South. Let it fall with all its weight, 
 upon the bad stimulant of their unholy passions — the insti- 
 tution of slavery; and when the war is over, whatever of 
 slavery is left within the jurisdiction of loyal State govern- 
 ments, will be dealt with by them. If the structure of 
 society shall be so far broken by prolonged contumacy of 
 rebellion, in any region, that a loyal State government can- 
 not be found, or the materials of its rightful and safe con- 
 struction cannot be gathered, then society, by necessity, falls 
 under the protective control of the Federal government, 
 and slavery, then, in common with all other domestic in- 
 
REPUBLICAN UNION FESTIVAL 539 
 
 stitutions, will bo directlj' dealt with. But, <Tontlemen, with 
 good faith and an honest purpose, we will maintain the 
 l)rinciples of the Constitution, and not in the zeal of the 
 contest, or in the heat of our resentments, or in the glow of 
 our own just enthusiasm for liberty, destroy the Constitu- 
 tion that this war is, on our part, raised to uphold. 
 
 There has been a great deal of puzzle, gentlemen, about a 
 certain matter in this war, when the progress of our arms 
 brings us in contact with the black poj)ulation of the South. 
 A somewhat taking theory and phrase, that never seemed to 
 me to be very sensible, were, early in the campaign, put 
 forth by a distinguished general, which, putting slavery upon 
 tlie ground of 'property, described the slaves as contraband of 
 war. INIy view of the Constitution, in this connection, is 
 this: that the slaves of the South are to the Constitution 
 and to the Federal government but a part of the population 
 of the South. And when treason defies the government, and 
 raises the flame of war, the Constitution knows but two de- 
 scriptions of peojile — those that are loyal, and those that are 
 rebel. And, weighed against the safety and protection of the 
 loyal slave, the lives and fortunes of a hundred rebel masters 
 are but dust in the balance. This proposition, so thorough 
 and universal, arises under the laws of ivar — a constitutional 
 war — and no enactment of Congress can add greater vigor 
 of authority, or ])roduce greater practical results, than an 
 active exertion of these ])owers of war. 
 
 Mr. President, I believe I have said all that is necessary 
 about the Constitution. T do not believe, as an eloquent 
 gentleman has suggest<'d to us, that it is altogether a matter 
 of geography whether we maintain the Union and our Fed- 
 eral government or not. I think it depends a great deal 
 more upon the people of the country, — upon their intelligence, 
 upon their integrity, upon their virtue, ui)on their willing- 
 ness, in sober and honest endurance, to bear the burdens 
 that are necessary for the triumj)!! of our cause. I believe, 
 
540 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Mr. President, that we need to marshal the financial re- 
 sources of the country with equal courage and wisdom — 
 that we must pay taxes long-continued and heavy. As, too, 
 I believe that this generation has been guilty of the desertions 
 of public duty that have come so near overthrowing the 
 great fabric of government that our ancestors transmitted to 
 us, I say that it is unjust and cowardly for us to put on 
 our posterity the pajanent for our sins. I would like to 
 know what manhood there is in saying, "We will defend 
 against the dangers that our feeble and selfish politics have 
 brought upon the noble heritage that our fathers prepared 
 for us and future generations, but we will make our children 
 pay the expenses of it." And we must insist upon it, that, 
 with the same perseverance, the same fidelity, the same 
 honest self-sacrifice, with which our fathers wrought for us, 
 we will labor in this, the heat of our day, for our children. 
 We must be honest. I say it, Mr. President, with profound 
 sincerity, that, next to the crime of taking money to betray 
 your country, in its danger, is the offence of extorting money 
 for defending it in its necessity. I don't believe in that 
 softness of phrase which makes it a crime to grow rich by 
 the betrayal, and a happy fortune to grow rich out of the 
 necessities, of the country. Let us see to it that a deep and 
 firm public opinion makes itself felt upon this subject — felt 
 by the government, felt by the cabinet, felt by the con- 
 tractors, and felt by the people. 
 
X 
 
 SPEECHES IN THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE 
 
 "TWEED RING," 1871 
 
 NOTE 
 
 At the beginning of the year 1871, that small band of conspira- 
 tors, known as the "Tammany Ring," perhaps more frequently 
 designated, by the name of the chief in the conspiracy, as the 
 "Tweed Ring," was strongly intrenched in the government of the 
 City of New York and was at the height of its power. The 
 complete and compact organization of the "Ring" that placed this 
 corrupt cabal, — Tweed, Hall, Connolly and Sweeny, — securely in 
 control of the entire administration of the city's government and 
 finances, was the result of several years' skilful planning and manipu- 
 lation. The history' of its rise to power and its final overthrow, in 
 the autumn of 1871, has been told by those who most actively took 
 part in the exposure of the wholesale robbery of the people of the 
 city, and in the prosecution of the criminals.* 
 
 The ascendancy of this body of knaves, and the successful execu- 
 tion of their plans for plunder, were made possible through a gen- 
 eral degradation of the politics of the period, the corrupt character 
 of the State Legislature and the widespread ai)athy of the elector- 
 ate. The elections of 18G8 in New York City were marked by every 
 conceivable method of extensive fraud and corruption of the gross- 
 est character. They resulted in the elevation to the governorship 
 of the nominee of the "Ring" and the election of Hall as mayor. 
 As Mr. Tilden said, by this election "the 'Ring' became completely 
 organized and matured." Hall's term of office as mayor expired 
 with the year 1870, and at the elections of that year he was re- 
 elected to the office for another two year period. 
 
 * Writings ami Speeches of Samuel J. Tiliien, edited Ijy John Bigelow. 
 
 PeriilatiDii Triiimphiiiit: lu-iiif,' llic Ilctonl of a Four Years' CainpaiK'n against 
 Offieial Malversation in the City of New York, \. I)., 1.S71 to 187.5, ijy diaries 
 O' Conor. See also Chapter on the "Tweed King" in IJryee'a American 
 Commonwcaltii. 
 
 541 
 
542 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 In the year 1870, a new charter of municipal government for the 
 City of New York was procured from the legislature. This, in its 
 general principles, was an improvement upon the former system of 
 government, as it had existed since the year 1857, and as such com- 
 mended itself to the judgment of many of the best citizens. It 
 simplified very much the administration of the city's affairs and 
 placed the responsibility in a few hands. It has been said with 
 some truth that " the new charter's only fault was that those hands 
 were at the moment unclean and grasping hands." The new char- 
 ter had been obtained from the legislature wholly in the interest of 
 the "Ring" and it enabled these thieves to continue their depreda- 
 tions with ease and secrecy and in apparent security for the time. 
 The operations of the "Ring" had excited public suspicion in 1870, 
 and one cause of this had been the failure of the comptroller to 
 publish in January of that year his report of the city's finances. 
 This was not given to the public until the following October. By a 
 bold move on the part of the "Ring," the comptroller invited a 
 committee of citizens, made up of men of the highest respectability 
 and honor, to examine the financial affairs of the city, and he was 
 able so to deceive this body of gentlemen that they issued a public 
 statement to the effect that "the financial affairs of the city under 
 the charge of the comptroller are administered in a correct and 
 faithful manner." This same committee gave the debt of the city 
 as twenty millions less than what it was afterwards ascertained to 
 be and stated that the entire debt of the city would probably be 
 extinguished in less than twelve years. 
 
 In 1871, not content with the powers they already had under the 
 charter, the "Ring" applied for and secured further legislation 
 which gave still larger opportunities for robbing the city. The ex- 
 posure of the methods of the "Ring" began on July 8, 1871 by the 
 publication of a statement in the New York Times of that date. 
 This was followed by additional statements of the accounts of the 
 city as disclosed and furnished to that newspaper by a disap- 
 pointed, corrupt politician, who had somewhat accidentally been 
 informed in minute detail of the fraudulent operations of the 
 "Ring." The revelations of the New York Times aroused the 
 people of the city, and honest citizens, of all parties, united in 
 placing before the people reform tickets for the coming election 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 543 
 
 containing the names of honest candidates irrespective of party as 
 against the Tammany ticket which was all in favor of the "Ring." 
 The canvass resulted in the overwhelming triumph of the reform 
 movement and in the subsequent dislodgment and overthrow of 
 the "Ring," and those who had supported it. Tweed was, to be 
 sure, through his powerful local influence, returned to the State 
 Senate, but he never dared to take his seat. 
 
 The four speeches that follow, delivered April G, October 20 and 
 25, and November 2, 1871, at various stages of this popular upris- 
 ing, are taken from the reports in the New York Tribune of the 
 days following. The speech of A])ril 6 was delivered at a mass 
 meeting at Cooper Institute, under the auspices of the Council for 
 Political Reform, an organization with which Mr. Evarts was 
 closely identified. The meeting was called as a protest against 
 the vicious legislation, then pending before the New York Legis- 
 lature, to which we have referred. Mr. Evarts spent the summer 
 of 1871 in European travel and, on his return in October, entered 
 at once and heartily into all the movements against the "Ring," 
 that were then well organized and under way. 
 
 The speech of October 20 was made at a citizens' convention 
 held in Chickering Hall, under the auspices of the Council for Polit- 
 ical Reform, to nominate candidates for judicial, legislative, city 
 and county offices, and that of October 25 was delivered at a mass 
 meeting in Cooper Institute, at which Horace Greeley presided, to 
 ratify the Re])ublican State ticket. On November 2, within a week 
 of the election, a great mass meeting was held in Cooper Institute 
 at which Mr. Tilden, Mr. Joseph H. Choate and Mr. Evarts spoke. 
 An incomplete report of Mr. Evarts's speech has been preserved. 
 
 History' justly accords to Samuel J. Tilden the chief honor and 
 credit for the overthrow of the "Tweed Ring," for his indefatigable 
 labors, both in the political field, and as a lawyer in the public 
 prosecutions that followed the political defeat of the conspirators. 
 In the legal proceedings Mr, Charles O'Conor was the leader. 
 Though Mr. Evarts did not figure as prominently, his counsel was 
 freely sought and as freely given in the initiatory movements that 
 culminated in the downfall of the conspiracy. In the fall of 1871, 
 Mr. Evarts was appointed as one of the three counsel for the 
 United States, in the matter of the Alabama Claims, before the 
 
544 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Geneva Tribunal. This mission took him to Europe late in De- 
 cember of that year and prevented any further participation in 
 these affairs at home. 
 
 SPEECH AT COOPER UNION, APRIL 6, 1871 
 
 Fellow Citizens: 
 
 I am quite sure that if the patriotic, laborious efforts of 
 the Council for Political Reform now carried on for some 
 years not only in this city but in this State, laying the founda- 
 tions for great and important public action, could be re- 
 warded tonight by no consequences from their call but this 
 very assemblage itself, it would be to them evidence, to you 
 evidence, to honest men evidence, to knaves evidence, that 
 the people of this city and of this county do take an interest 
 in the substantial welfare of the Commonwealth and in the 
 name and fame of American citizenship. 
 
 For this assembly, so vast in its numbers, so universal in 
 its comprehension of the interest and the pursuits of this 
 community, so earnest and honest in its makeup, is brought 
 hither by none of the excitements of politics, by no zeal for 
 candidates, by no interest in the results of any special elec- 
 tion. The conjuration which has brought you together is to 
 prove the conjuration to combine you in the warfare, the 
 weapons of which you are tonight to assume, and that is a 
 conjuration as deep and as earnest as that with which the 
 foundations of this republic were raised, and with which it 
 was saved from the ruin that was threatened it by violence. 
 For of what good is it that we should have brave and heroic 
 ancestors, and that we should have brave and heroic con- 
 temporaries on the field of battle, adequate to join an issue 
 with the strongest rebellion that the world has ever seen, if, 
 when this heroism has secured a perfect triumph, our imbecil- 
 ity, our ignorance, our folly surrenders to the shme of fraud, 
 what would not be yielded to the roar of battle? The truth 
 
CAIVIPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWT.ED RING" 545 
 
 is, gentlemen, that a meeting like this is but a symptom of 
 what occuj)ies the public mind throughout this whole coun- 
 try — of deep, of serious concern about the very institutions 
 u])on which our liberty rests. But without a protector, 
 without a guardian, except what each brave heart and each 
 shrewd heat! shall furnish to each citizen, what headway, 
 what strength, can any scattered and diffused force have 
 against ])Owerful combinations, stinudated by sordid purpose, 
 and confederated in the bonds of common infamy? 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this Council for Political Reform has 
 imdertaken to set on foot the sentiments and movements 
 and to facilitate the cond)inations by which disorganization 
 which is the hope, the ])lan, the strength of the conibined 
 movement of selfishness and fraud, shall cease. If subter- 
 ranean links can be made between knaves of both parties, 
 open and manly combinations can be made by true men of 
 both ])arties, and the hosts may be counted on one side and 
 the other. The occasion of this meeting is the pendency of 
 certain measures before the legislature threatening serious 
 accession to the strength against which we are allied, serious 
 invasions of the common right of citizens, serious interfer- 
 ence with the institutions of our liberty, civil and religious, 
 in which we have our pride and our safety. And the situa- 
 tion is propitious. We stand not indifferent to parties; we 
 are all adherents of one party or the other; but we mean that 
 parties sliall confine themselves to their true function, which 
 is honestly, usefully to maintain the princii)les on one side 
 and the other for which, and in which, the party has its life, 
 by which and through which, the nation has its life. But 
 when either party, especially the party to which we respect- 
 ively adhere, loses its i)ublic virtue and first becomes a fac- 
 tion, seeking only the selfish interests of its members, and 
 then — oh, sad catastrophe! — a conspiracy seeking the public 
 life; then our hands, our voices our votes, are the first to be 
 raised to crush the treason against the common safety. 
 
 36 
 
546 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And look how propitious the actual political situation is 
 for the assertion of this principle, the exercise of this power. 
 The Republican party holds at Washington every depart- 
 ment of national authority, the executive, Congress, the 
 judiciary. The Democratic party in this great State of 
 New York, of which we are all citizens, holds every depart- 
 ment of power, executive, legislative, judicial, and in this 
 city every department of local administration. Neither of 
 these parties can say to the citizen within the sphere of its ad- 
 ministration that it is embarrassed, or impeded, or thwarted 
 in its administration of power. Whatever faults we shall 
 find in regard to the administration at Washington, it is all 
 Republican. Whatever faults we shall find in the admin- 
 istration in New York City and New York State, it is all 
 Democratic. And the people of the United States are— and 
 I hope it may always be so — watching them both and not 
 from distress necessarily, or suspicion, but because the peo- 
 ple are aware that great questions of taxation, of revenue, 
 of public expenditure and of public honesty in the servants 
 of the nation and of the State, and in the administration of 
 suffrage, are paramount and principal practical questions 
 in all of our affairs. You will observe then, also, another 
 great change in this movement which we tonight publicly 
 inaugurate. It is that neutral judgment of both parties. It 
 is nothing to boast of in respect of superior strength in the 
 popular will. The elections are closely adjusted. In New 
 Hampshire no governor is elected by the people, and the 
 legislature, barely carried by the Democracy, is to choose a 
 governor. In Connecticut no governor is chosen by the 
 people, and the legislature, carried by the Republicans, is 
 to choose a governor. The congressmen of the Democracy 
 are chosen in New Hampshire and the Republicans in Con- 
 necticut. And each party draws off from these divided 
 fields, watching anxiously the strength of the other. Is there 
 not, then, some hope that when voters on all sides really 
 
CAMPAIGN AG.VINST THE "TWEED RING" 547 
 
 concern themselves with matters of taxation, of expenditure 
 and of honesty, and wlien the pojmhir will, holding, as it al- 
 ways has and always should, the final question of power in its 
 hands, thus stands aroused, watchfully and equally balanced, 
 is it not an auspicious time for honest men to come together 
 and say, " Now we meet as earnestly on one side and the other 
 as you, but we fight for the issues that we avowed, and we 
 will allow no ])rofligacy, no treason, no surrender or betrayal 
 of the trust." And as in war so in politics. There is but 
 one general way of visiting dis])leasure. Yom* guns always 
 point toward the enemy, and yom* shots cannot be promis- 
 cuously diffused. In politics, the way that neutral power, 
 that means to prevent foul play, shows its authority is by 
 comliining its guns against the party that exhibits the foul 
 play. And these things are perfectly well understood by the 
 ])oliticians. The politician is not a man that possesses his 
 soul in patience by any means. A politician is a man racked 
 by anxieties, conscious that a breath may unmake him, as 
 a breath has made him; and the breath of a meeting 
 like this is as easily understood by a politician as a ward 
 meeting. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is a deep distrust in this coimtry 
 of the good faith of political managers — a feeling that the 
 very institutions, which make up the defences, as well as the 
 glories, of liberty, are in danger — because a people, the best 
 instructed, the most vigorous, and, I think, the most patriotic, 
 and the most intelligently patriotic that the world ever saw, 
 by its very confidence in its institutions, has relaxed that 
 practical virtue, without which no valuable possession, 
 however safely transmitte<I, can be secured and enjoyed. 
 Why, gentlemen, we reallj^ seem to have thought that the 
 wisdom of the fathers of our institutions had set going a 
 machine in government that had the virtue of perpetual 
 motion, and that it was not limited to an establishment of 
 the organism of liberty which brave hearts and honest heads 
 
548 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 could wield for the protection of their country, of themselves, 
 and of all their interests, and which slaves and knaves could 
 traniple in the rnire as if it had not caused the long series of 
 martyrdom which built up liberty. And we must get over 
 that notion. And then there has always been another 
 difficulty. When those threats were made against the insti- 
 tutions and against the government and its administra- 
 tion, we must look around to see where the protectors were. 
 Cromwell was named Lord Protector of the liberties of 
 England, and he ably discharged that duty. But who is 
 named Lord Protector of the liberties of America? The 
 same persons that are named its sovereigns — the people. 
 And you can surrender this liberty whenever you please. 
 You can have it stolen from you whenever you do not resist 
 the thief. You can have it murdered before your eyes when 
 you are too cowardly to intercept the assassin, and I would 
 like to know who will do the weeping for you then. You 
 have had everything that the human race, in its progress up 
 to now, could give to help and maintain freedom. You 
 have had education as free as the air; you have freedom of 
 conscience; you have a free press; you have the right of 
 free assembly, the right to bear arms; you have the right of 
 free and equal suffrage, and you have all the elements of 
 justice, equality and of attainment. Yet if the end of the 
 whole of it is that the only combination that you are capable 
 of, when the wolves of fraud attack you, is that sole combina- 
 tion which the sheep have ever been known to exhibit, that 
 is, following the first that ran away — who will save you, who 
 will help you? Now, it is very easy to say we will fight for 
 our rights. It is all very fine; we have always been ready 
 to do something else than the thing that we are called upon 
 to do; and just so long as these marauders of our peace and 
 these defamers of our character find out that we are always 
 ready to do something else than the very thing we need to 
 do, you may rely upon it they will not be disturbed at all. 
 
CAMr.\IGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 549 
 
 The moral of it all, fjjentleinen, is that our liberties arc all 
 in our own hands. There is not a dungeon, or a thumbscrew, 
 or a file of solders, or a t>Tant of any kind, that threatens the 
 person, or life, or the liberty of anybotly. All they ask of 
 you is that you will be gag^red, and lie still while they pick 
 your pocket. And if you resist and make a noise and a 
 fracas, and break the jieace, why who could comi)lain if they 
 break your heads for doing so.^ Now, gentlemen, that is 
 precisely the matter; epithets are of no force. It is no 
 longer a matter of pride to be a New Yorker; it is a matter of 
 deep disgrace, if New Yorkers cannot save themselves from 
 the infamv in which thev are now submerged. And there 
 are a great many people that think so, among which nmnber 
 I include all who are now in this room. You may be sure 
 there are a great many people outside of this building that 
 are of the same opinion. There are always four people that 
 will be of the same way of thinking, that stay away from the 
 meeting, to one of those that come. The first quarter are 
 those that do not come because they don't think there will 
 be anybody there. The next quarter stay away because the 
 room will be so full that they cannot get in. The third 
 quarter stay at home because they can read it all in the news- 
 paper the next morning, and the next cpiarter stay away 
 because they think it would not do any good if they would 
 come, and, as far as they are concerned, it is j)robably so. 
 
 Now, what are the great institutions upon which our lib- 
 erty rests.'' The separation of Church and State, freedom of 
 instruction, fearless administration of justice, and the suf- 
 frage. Now, wlio are interested in these j)articularly, I would 
 like to know? Is it the rich man? Why, the rich men are 
 those that come on pretty well, as is shown by the fact of 
 their being rich, under any form of government except that 
 of the next world i)erhaj)s. I never heard there was any 
 trouble about having rich men under an em])ire, under a 
 t\Tannv, und<T an East Indian government of nabobs and 
 
550 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 satraps. No trouble with the rich men there; the trouble 
 was with the poor. They kept growing poorer while 
 the rich grew richer. Did you ever see, before this present 
 exhibition, in America, in the face of the people, the tax- 
 payers growing poorer every day and the taxgatherers 
 flaunting their riches in their eyes.'* We have gone on under 
 oiu" institutions with perfect safety and without discords 
 between the rich and the poor. Why? Because justice 
 and law presided over them all. And the rich man's fortune 
 marked his enterprise, his energy, his thrift, his frugality, 
 perhaps his good luck, and the poor man's poverty, and 
 earnest and honest labor gave him justice, and equality, 
 and education for his children, and a vote at the polls, and 
 it was the best country for him the world ever saw. And 
 all these rich men that I see were sons of poor men. 
 
 But let me warn this nation that if you are going to intro- 
 duce the inequalities of life made by the taxation of the poor 
 to make up the fortunes of the rich, by fraud and force, the 
 principle of justice no longer keeps the peace between these 
 classes of society. Why, we ought to be able to understand, 
 after the tremendous war we have gone through against 
 injustice and the oppression of slavery, sacrificing 250,000 
 men, loading ourselves and our posterity with debt for many 
 years, and bringing on the field larger armies, with sterner 
 fighting, than any fields have shown before, that there was 
 some human nature in this American people, and that it 
 would show itself all over the world when injustice and fraud 
 become triumphant. We are none of us prophets, but we do 
 know that oppression will make a wise man mad; and we 
 know that we are a wise people. The truth is that this 
 country, for the first time, is brought face to face with real 
 politics. It is the question whether freedom can peacefully 
 preserve itself by the fact that every man has a peaceful vote, 
 and every man has a musket behind his peaceful vote, to 
 see that his vote is respected. Now, we have tried that. 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 551 
 
 We made a peaceful vote in 1860, and it was not respected; 
 and we shouldered our niusket till it was respected. And 
 now look at the poor man's vote. The rich man can stay 
 away from the jjolls, as lie often does. Poor men always go 
 to the polls. I honor that vote. I honor the poor Irishnum 
 who goes to the polls as early as the rights of citizenship can 
 be honestly given him. I honor the liberty-loving German, 
 who goes to the polls and votes according to his notions of 
 what liberty and law require. I honor the American youtli 
 who looks forward to his majority, when he can assume the 
 duties and enjoy the privileges of a voter, I abhor the meth- 
 ods that suj^press the equality of the vote — the poor man's 
 only possession and only j^rotection — and, in a fraudulent 
 coimt, or in repeaters' ptTsonations — infamous robberies of 
 liberty — strike dowTi the poor man's power. And if I 
 abhor it, who do not suft'er niuch from it personally, you 
 may rely upon it that before long the poor men who are thus 
 robbed will abhor it, and abhor the men that have robbed 
 them . 
 
 Why, gentlemen, of what use is the suffrage to the classes 
 that desire respect and equality and cannot enforce it? If 
 their masters tell them, we have hired enough people to do 
 the voting, and we cannot count you any longer; and we have 
 paid peo})le to do the counting, and we do not care what the 
 votes put into the ballot box are, who has taken away the 
 suffrage.' Who, but the ruling powers in this city, who now 
 demand from your legislature an increase of authority and 
 full scope for taxation at their will? Now, gentlemen, we 
 suspect our i)iil)lic servants of good faith in their rej)resenta- 
 tions of the parties. Why, gentlemen, what do you think of 
 this state of facts? A wise arrangement of places on the 
 board of inspectors or canvassers provides that there shall be 
 a representative of the beaten or inferior ])arty u])on it. 
 Very well, that is in order to have fair i)lay. Well, now, in 
 1868, the count in this city carried the vote of this State to 
 
55^ SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 make the governor and the Democratic candidate for presi- 
 dent; and if New York State, by its electors, had been the 
 turning point of the presidential election, as it might have 
 been, it would have elected the president. Eighty thousand 
 or so, I think, was the count. It was false and fraudulent, 
 and the representatives of the Republican party in the count 
 and the canvas did their share in the betrayal of the suffrage. 
 And I am told, on good authority, that this turning point of a 
 false State election, and the false presidential election (as it 
 might have proved) did not make more than $200 in any one 
 instance for the betrayal of the Republicans' trust. Well, 
 now, no man will even play cards if he knows the cards are 
 marked. What shall we do with Republicans if this is the 
 style in which our servants treat the trust we put in them.f* 
 I do not wonder that the Democratic masters scoff and sneer 
 at the virtue of the Republican party where they have 
 measured and bought. These are pretty serious facts. 
 Now, supposing a presidential election had been turned in 
 that way — do you think the Mississippi Valley would have 
 stood that, or do you think they would have found out that 
 they had the muskets behind their votes, and these men in 
 New York must fight for their votes if they wanted them 
 counted in that way.^^ There is not so niuch danger of re- 
 peating on the battlefields, nor of counting those that are 
 not there. It is difficult even to count those that run away. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, these are pretty serious matters, and I 
 beg to say to you that, in my humble judgment, the people of 
 this country are thinking a great deal more on these subjects 
 than they are on any of the past issues that have divided the 
 politics of this country and have been fought through. 
 
 I would not advise any political party to hazard their main- 
 tenance of power upon the avowed espousals of corruption, 
 and an avowed contempt of honest men. And yet I speak 
 now of a party to which I do not belong. I think the popu- 
 lar judgment is that the present management and adminis- 
 
CAMTARiN A(rAINST THE • TWEED KING" 553 
 
 tratioii of tliat ])aiMy, now in power in this city, do boast of 
 tlicir coiTuiJtion and do dcsi)ise lionest inon. They say, 
 " Wliat are you ^^oin^^ to do ahoiit it ? " 1 think they will find 
 out wliat we are ^oing to do about it. Now, you know a 
 man nuiy divide liis nionied interest a <,'ood deal, and tliere 
 may be a balance wlien he is frientls with tlie ])owers that be, 
 and he confines his patriotism to explosions in liis family; but 
 when you have got down to the men that are poor and hon- 
 est, they feel tlie shrinkage of the comforts of life and the 
 o])})ression; ami when you come to the men that are ])roud 
 of their t)irtli-right, if they were born here, and ]:)routl of their 
 adopted country if they came here, and find that American 
 liberty is made a by-word and a hissing, by vile and arrogant 
 aristocrats, made so by taxation, you have touched a senti- 
 ment that does not divide itself up between the worsliip of 
 the powers that be and tJie maintenance of self-respect at 
 home. You cannot have tliem both. 
 
 Now, these measures, first the city tax l)ill, which is a very 
 extraordinary bill, defended by a great many people because 
 it is not any worse — the same feeling that George III had in 
 celebrating the victories over his troops in America — because 
 'tis no worse. They say, "Good heavens! don't raise a row 
 about these people taxing you two per cent; if you do, they 
 will tax you two and a half per cent"; and if you insist ui)on 
 it, that your representatives, that you have chosen for your- 
 self, and the people of the State have chosen and sent to 
 Albany, sliould tax you, they say, " Wliy, don't you see what 
 a pack of rascals you have chosen?" Well, gentlemen, I 
 don't know but the i)eople of this county and this State 
 are going to say that four men may tax them, jHovided tliey 
 won't tax them but $'-2^2.0(H),()00 a year. 
 
 Tlie Commons of England fought for the ])ower of taxa- 
 tion; they would not allow a shilling to be taken from them 
 by the King, although it was an honest lax, and em])loyed 
 in the nation's defence. They say, wJien we tax ourselves 
 
554 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MiVXWELL EVARTS 
 
 we 'want to know what it is paid for. The Commons of 
 America threw over the tea and broke up the stamp records 
 rather than pay a tax that they had not laid themselves. 
 And now you are soberly requested to agree that if these 
 people will be satisfied with arranging for what and in what 
 expenditures $22,000,000 shall be raised, you let them have 
 the handling of that sum of money. Now you can throw 
 away your liberty if you choose. For my part, I propose to 
 stand upon the proposition that the people's representatives, 
 chosen by themselves, shall have the power of taxation, and 
 be accountable for it; and, if we don't like it, we will change 
 them; and if we don't change them then, we must not say 
 we do not like it. 
 
 But I cannot express my contempt for the people that 
 would throw away in open day this power of taxation on the 
 cringing argument that if we complain somebody else will tax 
 us more. No, we will tax ourselves! What prevents your 
 legislature from saying today: "So many thousands, so many 
 millions, shall be raised for this and that purpose, and reduc- 
 ing it on an honest estimate to $15,000,000 or $14,000,000.?" 
 What prevents it? Nothing but the fact that you have sent 
 to Albany seventeen men who all live on taxes and hold 
 places in the city government. Well, now, what a spectacle 
 is this for a free people.'' Why, the British Parliament, the 
 British Commons fought this through, that they would have 
 no "place" men in Parliament; that the men who went to 
 Parliament should go there for the public trust, and no 
 other, and when a new member of Parliament is asked 
 to take a place in the Ministry to carry on the execution of 
 the government, he is obliged to resign his seat in Parliament 
 and go to the electors to see whether they will choose him 
 over again for he has become a "place" man. Did you ever 
 hear of such an infamous piece of misconduct on the part of 
 the voters of this city, including ourselves, as to sit down 
 under a government that has taxed us, our representatives 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST TIIE "TWEED RING" 555 
 
 every one of tliem being incuinhents in office iindiT these 
 men tliat administer and distrihute taxation? 
 
 Now, I |)ropo.se tliat at tlie next election we will have some 
 representatives who are satisfied with being representatives, 
 and are not "])lace" men, and then we will see how they will 
 tax us, and not give up the power of taxation to four "place" 
 men in this city to administer taxes which we pour into their 
 laps. 
 
 Now, we have a pretty good registry law, and I have not 
 heard of anybody complaining that he did not get a chance to 
 vote once at that election; there may have been such cases, 
 but they have not forced themselves upon public attention. 
 Now, there were two great measures of the last session, one 
 a new charter giving to our mayor very thoroughgoing and 
 peremptory powers. I won't discuss who had the appoint- 
 ment of the subordinates, and who is responsible for them; 
 that depends a good deal, when we give these powers to the 
 mayor, on the question whether we are going to have an 
 honest count of votes to find out whether he is going to be 
 mayor; and some Republicans who had the Republican 
 party under their wing agreed with some gentlemen who had 
 the Democratic party under their wing, that they would give 
 the great power of the charter if they would give us an honest 
 election under the registry, and the princi])le of this integrity, 
 in the registry was this, that on the Tuesday before election 
 the registration should cease, that thereafter the books should 
 be open only to the entry of challenges, and that on the next 
 Tuesday — election day — after this intermediate space of 
 pre])aration, the integrity of the suffrage should be chal- 
 lenged; and nowall theyproi)Ose is to break u]) this intermedi- 
 ate period of challenge, and substitute for it an intermediate 
 period of registration, merely formal, T su])]K)se, for preserv- 
 ing the integrity of thebargain. Theyregister up to Saturday 
 night, having the insj)ectors of election become registrars, 
 and these are all ai)i)ointed by the mayor; and any- 
 
556 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 body, on Tuesday morning, that has not been registered, may 
 vote, if he is only able to say that he has not been registered. 
 Now, that is very well, I say. That will be the destruction 
 of this "Ring" that governs us; for all the feeble, and all the 
 foolish, and all the faltering Republicans and worthy citizens, 
 that believe in the thief's conversion at the last hour, will sur- 
 render any such doctrine in their future faith. But knaves 
 like these never keep their word. Their promises may be as 
 magnificent as you desire, but, as Mr. Burke says, hypocrisy 
 can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intend- 
 ing to give what it promises, it costs nothing. 
 
 Now, we have a board of taxation which is elected by the 
 people, as the matter now stands, but it is all turned over to 
 the mayor, and we have a system of parochial schools, which 
 is intended to introduce clerical education for the common 
 people without cost, instead of secular education upon which 
 the foundations of civil and religious liberty in this State and 
 this country rest. I will occupy none of your attention 
 with any dissection of these measures. You may throw 
 away the independence of State separated from the Church, 
 you may throw away the equality of education for the chil- 
 dren of all ; but we who think otherwise in this meeting and in 
 this community, we intend to vote against it, and to vote 
 hereafter against anybody in the legislature that votes for it. 
 Now, gentlemen, I will come to a conclusion. 
 
 There is trouble about organization. In the first place, 
 many good citizens, it is said, think we are malcontents and, 
 I suppose, enemies of civil and religious liberty. In this 
 meeting here tonight, I am certain that nobody feels greater 
 respect for Peter Cooper than I. This very hall is a monu- 
 ment to his public spirit, his honesty, his worth, his virtue. 
 But I am afraid that in his confidence some men in a small 
 thing may be as good as he is; he is a little visionary. 
 Gentlemen, we are not afraid of anybody unless they are in 
 ambush. Then we are afraid of them. We are afraid of 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 557 
 
 Republican canvassers that count Democratic votes. We 
 are afraid of Tammany Democrats and Tammany Repub- 
 licans. ^Ye are not afraid of honest Democrats, whether 
 yoimg or old, and we are not afraid of honest Republicans 
 whether or no they have this or that opinion on any other 
 questions. With manhood untouched and every institution 
 of liberty at our command, we will sound the bugle for the 
 battle, and we will leave the field carrying our shields, or 
 borne upon them. 
 
 SPEECH AT CITIZENS' CONVENTION, CHICKERING 
 HALL, OCTOBER 20, 1871. 
 
 Fellow Citizens: 
 
 I have to thank you, absorbed as you were in your public 
 duties, for not forgetting me in my temporary absence, and 
 for giving me the credit of sympathizing with you, and 
 having the disposition to do, at any moment and at all times, 
 all that it is in my power to do, in aid of the great movement 
 for the honest portion of the city against the corrupt gov- 
 ernment which it seeks to overthrow. I am sure that I have 
 much more to learn than to teach in regard to this move- 
 ment, though the subject of our corrupt government and 
 the dangers to our institutions, to the peace, the welfare and 
 the honor of this city, have long been subjects of reflection 
 with me. Nor have I hesitated on occasions, fit or unfit as 
 it might seem to others, to insist upon it, that this further 
 temporizing with the corrupt tjTanny was unworthy of our 
 manhood, and a disgrace to free institutions; that calling 
 evil, good and good, evil was an immorality that could no 
 more prosper under a free government than under a despot- 
 ism; and that it was the necessary conclusion of such violent 
 and wicked usurpations of power, by peaceful, orderly and 
 intelligent correction to restore the public safety, or, that 
 alternative failing us, for injustice and corruption could never 
 be a permanent form of government, since no alternative 
 
558 SPEECHES OF ^TXLL\M ^MX^^TLL EV.\RTS 
 
 remained to the cominimity except %'iolence and force, 
 then by resort to that alternative. I believe the people of 
 the City of Xew York now thoroughly understand the length 
 and the breadth of the evil, the nature of the remedy, and 
 that thev have the courage, the constancv and the intelli- 
 gence firmly and persistently to apply the peaceful rem- 
 edies, that are to restore to the honest people of this city 
 the management of their ovra affairs. 
 
 Now, the part that this body has to bear in this afiFair is 
 apparent as well to om'selves as to the rest of the commu- 
 nitv. In movements of this kind there must necessarilv be 
 something of spontaneity; and this body, called together 
 with no permanent or organized interests of its o^ti, with 
 no constitution of the party that is to be maintained and 
 kept up, as a fit, it seems to me the most fit, representation of 
 a great piu-pose and energy- of this people now called to 
 action in this emergency, must proceed, for the present occa- 
 sion, without regard to party feelings, party interests or party 
 recollections, and combine, as against a common foe, all the 
 elements of resistance which are necessary to give any hope 
 or promise of success to any part of the resisting power. 
 For we must not underestimate the strength of Tammany in 
 the suffrage and in the affections of a large portion of the 
 political thinkers and plaimers in this community. 
 
 Now, there are various organizations all having at heart 
 the purpose of resistance to our common enemy. Out of 
 all these are some independent, some inconsistent elements, 
 and the good sense of these organizations, and of the people 
 of the citv must, before election dav comes, have settled 
 upon some list of candidates, according to which and in sup- 
 port of whom the vote is to be cast for or against this corrupt 
 government. I am sure that in this body, and I should not 
 wish to feel any less confidence in regard to all other bodies, 
 at the right time, and after due consideration of all the 
 difficulties and all the claims on all sides, we shall come to a 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAIXST THE "T^^'EED RIXG" 559 
 
 conclusion that \\-ill present as single a ticket for the vote 
 of the opponents to Taniniany as Tammany presents to its 
 adherents. 
 
 The question of how this city shall be represented in the 
 senate and assembly of the State is the great and principal 
 question, for the whole i)ower of the government of tliis city, 
 under our free Constitution, is lodged in the representatives 
 of the people as they choose them. All our efforts through 
 the courts, through the magistracy, through the forms and 
 powers of law, are dependent upon the legislature, and so 
 they are sure there to be corroborated, re-enforced, aided and 
 made effectual, or retarded, embarrassed and defeated. 
 And Tammany is a])plying its whole energies and all its 
 calculations to the legislature of the State of New York. 
 It is expecting by its own successes, by the counting of its 
 adherents, to have a majority in both branches of that legis- 
 lature obtained to do its corrupt purposes. It is our busi- 
 ness to see that, neither from lack of patriotism, honor and 
 intelligence, nor from want of industry, do we throw away 
 any chance of having that legislature of the character, and 
 the stamp, and the power, and of the courage that will furnish 
 all the weapons that the legislature can furnish to the honest 
 people of this city, of this State, to drive out of power these 
 corrupt despots, to punish them by the penalties of personal 
 expiation for their crimes, and to restore to the treasury of 
 the city the plunder which they have taken from the citizens. 
 
 Now, that is the point of interest. Carry your legislature, 
 and vou have the halter around the neck of everv one of 
 these jjlunderers; you have the halter around the neck of 
 every corrupt judge, and every timid district attorney. But 
 throw away that power, and you have appealed to the people 
 by the suffrage to choose rei)resentatives and they have 
 chosen the friends of the corrupt government. If that 
 catastrophe hai)pens in this community, let us be sure that 
 it does not happen through want of intelligence, of patriot- 
 
560 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ism, of self-sacrifice on our part, so that we may bear with 
 dignity the curse which we have not contributed to bring 
 upon ourselves. 
 
 But, gentlemen, let us understand, as I think Tammany 
 understands, that in the union of the elements of opposition 
 to Tammany there is no absolute assurance of success, and 
 all the arts and all the influence which are incident to these 
 political matters are expected to be brought into play to 
 embarrass, embitter and create jealousies and difficulties 
 such as to prevent this union. I believe the citizens of New 
 York look upon this voluntary association of gentlemen in 
 whom they have confidence, and rightly, quite as much as 
 to any other organization, to see to it that tickets are prop- 
 perly made out and conibined; that they have confidence in 
 the intelligence and integrity that has been bestowed upon 
 this election. 
 
 One thing more : The sooner such a ticket can be brought 
 before the public the better; and if your committee have had 
 adequate conferences with other bodies of citizens so that a 
 ticket can be presented in whole or in part for consideration 
 tonight or at an early meeting to be named tonight, so much 
 the better. This is a movement of citizens at large. If this 
 part of the matter can be properly attended to, I think I 
 may safely say that before election day comes some demon- 
 strations of the authority of law will be made with a precision 
 and a directness in tracing plunder to the pockets where it 
 now lies and it will help the public sentiment on election day. 
 
 SPEECH AT COOPER UNION, REPUBLICAN RATIFICA- 
 TION MEETING, OCTOBER 25, 1871 
 
 Mr. Chairman, Fellow Citizens, Ladies and Gentlemen: 
 
 The crowd of honest, earnest men, which fills this hall on 
 this inclement night, upon the call of the Anti-Democratic 
 Committee, of the Republican Committee, for the rati- 
 fication of their State ticket, opposing the Tammany 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 561 
 
 ticket, ])ro|)osed for the suffrage of the peoi)le of tliis 
 city, shows conchisively that it is ii])on tlie hve and 
 present issues of our ])olitics that you undcrstiind the suf- 
 frages of the ]HH)i)le are demanded. I am quite sure that 
 there lias been more sober purpose, more gloomy thought, in 
 the minds of the people of the Ujiited States, regarding their 
 government, their institutions, their prosperity, their safety 
 even, during llie last few years, than there ever were during 
 the ninety years of our independence as a nation before. I 
 am fjuite sure that those who understand the subject most 
 fully, and the honest intentions and the common sense of the 
 nation, know and understand that we are in the presence of 
 a more powerful menace against our institutions than ever 
 the institution of slavery or the War of the Rebellion ])laced 
 before us. There we had an enemy that we coidd know and 
 count. There we had an enemy that was furnished with 
 deadly weapons aimed at us, but against whom we could 
 aim deadly weapons with sure effect. But in the great 
 crisis of our fate as a nation, which we are so suddenly 
 brought in the presence of, unlike our great struggle for 
 the integrity of the union, we do not know w^ho are friends 
 and who are foes. \Ye do not know how many our foes are, 
 because the falsification of the suffrage leaves honest men 
 at a terrible disadvantage. There is no repeating on the 
 battlefield. A man who answers his roll call there is apt to 
 be somewhat courageous, but he never answers twelve times. 
 But in the suffrage, see how you were op])osed by the power 
 of fraud, since the seizing the sacred vessels of the free govern- 
 ment, and poisoning the draughts by which the very s])irit 
 of liberty is supposed to Ix' kept alive. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the two State tickets of the two parties 
 are here. 'J'he great issue, the great fact, the great thought 
 before the ])e()])l(' of the Slate as well as the ])eoj)le of the 
 city, is corru])ti()ii, and nothing else. And Tammany is 
 corruption, and nothing else. And everybody knows it. 
 
 37 
 
562 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 You know it, and all the people know it, and both State 
 conventions know it. The Republican State Convention 
 nominates this list of worthy citizens of their party, and the 
 Democratic Convention had, at its meeting, choice out of its 
 own party of those whom it would nominate, and it nomi- 
 nated the same men who filled the offices at Albany while 
 the legislative corruption was going on, and while the 
 legislative power was building up the scheme of fraud and 
 wrong that Tammany conceived. I have no other state- 
 ment to make, no other question to ask, in regard to the 
 vote to be given, for corruption or against it, between these 
 two tickets. These men have held authority while the 
 institutions of fraud were perfected, and interposed no re- 
 sistance nor remonstrance. 
 
 I have said that grave and even gloomy thoughts filled 
 the minds of the people of the United States. Was it from 
 any feeling of despair or doubt as to whether freedom was 
 to be banished from the world. '^ As to whether the educa- 
 tion, the duties of the majority of the people were to become 
 a scorn to the people of the world? No! But it was from 
 the uncertainty in their minds whether the virtue that be- 
 belonged to this community of ours — I speak of the whole 
 country — could be aroused, by political authority to redress 
 these monstrous wrongs upon our honor, or whether we ought 
 to go through another war for that purpose. For be sure that 
 a people constituted as the American people is, will suppress 
 this corruption, either by peaceful or by bloody means. 
 
 All the efforts now being made, to enlighten and inspire the 
 people of this state and of this city, by the orderly and quiet 
 exercise of their rights as citizens, to determine whom they shall 
 have to rule over them, and what principles they shall ap- 
 prove, are really in the interests of peace. And you, and all 
 other bodies of reformers, and all other efforts at reform 
 whatever they may be, if honest and sincere, are combina- 
 tions to avail themselves of the principles of civil liberty to 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 563 
 
 rectify abuses in government. But if a nation is either so 
 stupid or so cowardly that it will not use the weapon under its 
 control, it deserves to fall : for corruption is not intended by 
 God or man as an institution of government. It is mortifica- 
 tion set into the vital interests of societv and destrovs them 
 entirely. There are no institutions of government that can 
 endure its touch, and you are tlierefore brought to the test 
 of intelligence, vigor and manhood, to determine whether from 
 any j)alaver of knaves or whether from discord among your- 
 selves you know what the present fight is, and will insist uj)on 
 pointing all your guns one way on the fort you are at- 
 tacking in this election. Wluit would you think of a fellow 
 who was robbing your ])ocket on this side, telling you, by 
 way of apology, that another fellow was robbing the other 
 pocket also, and it was quite the custom all aroimd, and you 
 need not make a fuss about it. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, a good deal of talk on the subject of 
 these abominable frauds, as everybody understands, is of the 
 same sort. We are told that in other j)laces and in other 
 times the same thing has been done and is being done. But 
 does that make it any more bearable because we have been 
 robbed before.'^ Now, gentlemen, is there a knave in Tam- 
 many, or in the city, engaged in and profiting t)y this enor- 
 mous plundering, that desires the success of the Republican 
 State ticket.'* I think not. Is there one of them that does 
 not desire the success of the Democratic ticket.'* You answer 
 for them. You know how that is. Let there be no confusion 
 and no doubt, no coolness on the part of those who are en- 
 deavoring to sustain the credit and ])rinciples of this State, 
 this city antl of the free government by their course in this 
 coming election. 
 
 Now political parties, if you j)lease, tend to corrui)tion from 
 the possession of i)OW('r. Agreed. And one reason why we 
 have a frecpient suffrage is thai IhaL tendency may be 
 checked by the exercise of an intelligent supervisioji and cor- 
 
564 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 rection by the people. How do they do it? By bringing the 
 other party into power. And the fear of being thus turned 
 out and the hope of being brought in by honest suffrage is the 
 working force whereby the interests of freedom maintain a 
 control over government. But when that last and final 
 exercise of sovereignty of the people is attacked in its very 
 essence by tyranny, we propose to preserve its power; and 
 when the suffrage is falsified, I say to you that there is no 
 crime of treason under any government, written in any book, 
 or in the bloody scaffolds that history shows us, that deserves 
 so deep a curse, and so swift retribution as the corruption of 
 a free people. And why.'^ Under despotic governments, the 
 people are at liberty to strive and struggle for freedom of 
 speech and the press; for freedom in religion, and the suf- 
 frage; and I never yet have known any tjTant that did not 
 understand that the possession of all these weapons of free- 
 dom was death to tyi'anny. But here we have a nation, 
 armed with every power that the wit of man or the goodness 
 of God has given to a people to preserve themselves by. 
 And yet these men laugh at you; they tell you in so many 
 words that they will repeat, and repeat — miscount and mis- 
 count, and the freedom of suffrage is endangered to the 
 utmost. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what are you going to do about it.'^ You 
 cannot direct your attention to confirming your power as 
 freemen. You have that already. But what are you going 
 to do about it.'^ If it comes to a miscount of the votes it will 
 have to be before long a true count of bayonets. Now, 
 gentlemen, the "Ring" and its parasites say that this direct 
 talk to the American people is extravagant. They said so 
 last spring, and a great many people have said, "What be- 
 comes of your reform meetings.'^ These men have got the 
 power and they go on." Well, gentlemen, if we had not 
 begun in the spring we should not have fought in the sum- 
 mer, and carried the citadel, as we are going to do in the 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE "T\\TEED RING" 50.) 
 
 aiitiimn. And I tliink tlio foelin*,^ now is " Wliat limit is there 
 to what you are goin^ to do about it? Is it the penitentiary? 
 Is it to be scorned down and banislied from the presence of 
 freemen; or is it to be only the restitution of the money that 
 has been stolen?" 
 
 Well, now, political j^arties fall into the conditions of 
 factions, and then their usefulness is very much lost; and 
 from faction it comes to conspiracy; and soberly, gentlemen, 
 I say what has been calhul the government of the State and 
 City of New York for the last few years, has been nothing 
 but a conspiracy having no public views, no public policy, no 
 public men engaged in it but a mere combination of men to 
 rob you, and laugh at you while they are doing it. Some six 
 months ago, certain people who took no part in the contest, 
 satisfietl themselves with saying that "Tweed was smarter 
 than all the rest of you!" Well, that is a strange sort of 
 pacification of the men who are doing all they can to correct 
 abuses. Wickedness has waxed fat and kicked, and its 
 doom is fixed. Would any one join the Democratic party 
 today that never belonged to it before under the aspect it 
 now presents? I have heard it mentioned, as a very laudable 
 test of fidelity in a lover toward the mistress of his affection, 
 that lie should remain true to her after her beauty had been 
 ravaged by smallpox. But tlid you ever hear of anybody 
 falling in love with another who had the smallpox? And 
 that of the confluent kind? I think that if the Democratic 
 party arrays itself in its finest raiment, and puts a golden 
 girdle about itself, that there is no danger of its overcoming 
 our dislike while the signs and scars of corruption are upon 
 it. I do not think it exj)ects that. It can only go into 
 the hospital and be cured of it at present. Would to God 
 that corrui)tion, like smalljjox, could be had only once. I 
 say, gentlemen, the corruption in our government has had no 
 parallel in the history of governments. TJiere is no king nor 
 emperor in all the world, nor for the last hundred years, that 
 
566 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 could have done or been detected in doing what these despots 
 of the "Ring" have done, and maintain for himself and his 
 courtiers the least protection from the vengeance of his 
 subjects. 
 
 Now I have heard a great deal, and with interest, of the 
 sympathy which om- fellow citizens of the different nations 
 have manifested in the struggles going on in their own coun- 
 tries — Italians, Germans, Frenchmen, Irishmen — against 
 what they call tyranny. I would like to see some of them 
 now interested to help this American people, and to save 
 themselves from the tyranny being practiced on all foreign 
 and native citizens by this despotic "Ring." We have 
 heard much of the politicians feathering their nests as it is 
 called, and the "Ring" has tried to excuse itself for a long 
 time by saying all they have done was to feather their nests, 
 and that the geese were expected to furnish the feathers. 
 They said, "Whoever heard a goose complain of being 
 plucked?" They got through this summer by the ordinary 
 profitable operations of politics and it came to be very plain 
 that they had taken out of the public coffers money in large 
 sums; but exactly how large and exactly where it has gone 
 — whether it has been divided equally between five thousand 
 or a hundred thousand, or what number of people — nobody 
 knew. The brave men of the press, the brave men of the 
 people — to be honored hereafter if they are not now, as 
 among the greatest benefactors of the people ever called 
 for, or the public spirit of the people has ever furnished, did 
 not wait for the suffrage and did not wait to ask permission 
 of the Ring but demanded from the fears, from the terrors, 
 that had taken possession of this "Ring," that the Treasury 
 would no longer be in their hands. 
 
 We have put into the comptroller's office Andrew 
 H. Green, a Democrat always, and a Democrat now, 
 but an honest man always, and an honest man now, 
 a fearless man always, and a fearless man now. He 
 
CAMPAIGN AGAINST TIIK "TWKED RING" oGT 
 
 holds the Treasury by o])eration of tlie popular ^ill. 
 Well, these eitizens did not sto]) there. They thou<>lii that 
 purpose and a little law might do some good. The attorney- 
 general's authority was communieated to his associate 
 counsel, Mr. O'C'onor, and he liolds that power by the will 
 of the peoj)le. Now you see, if they will only stir themselves, 
 they can do something as well as others. Is what has been 
 done to be lost on the seventh of November.'^ Are they to 
 laugh in our faces and say "Well, you see we have taken 
 the sense of the people and they are against you?" How 
 long will Mr. Green sit there and let the people of this State 
 express their approval of the "Ring"? Not long. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I am able to say to you that some de- 
 finite investigations have shown that having come, in the 
 course of the summer, out of the vague euphemism of "feath- 
 ering their nests" to stealing, we have been able to deter- 
 mine what was stolen, by whom and who got it. I will 
 venture to say that in the figures you will see in the papers 
 tomorrow, about which there is no imcertainty and no mis- 
 take and nothing obscure or equivocal you will see a more 
 infanious rol)bery than was ever committed imtler any 
 despotic government. You will see the i)lunder in the 
 pocket of the robber. You will see that you are to be taxed 
 to keep it there; to contril)iite your share toward this 
 unlawful gang, and that it all goes to enrich the man who 
 appeals to the suffrages of his fellow citizens to be elected 
 to the senate of the State of New York. Now, there were 
 three persons apjiointed to audit some daijns. They audi- 
 ted tliem at $G, ()()(), 000. The county was authorized to 
 borrow the money to pay them. All lliat money was drawn 
 out in the shape of warrants to the order of these people that 
 were apparently creditors of the piihlic, and all that money 
 went to the holders of these bills; but $;J,.>00,000 of that 
 $6,000,000 was deposited to the credit of a subordinate clerk, 
 
568 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 the common agent of the public plunderers and of that $3,500,- 
 000, $932,000 was drawn by him to the credit of William M. 
 Tweed and deposited in his bank. Now the only mode of 
 paying those warrants and the bonds, is by your and my 
 future taxation and this is to be raised, so far as that million 
 goes, to keep that million in Mr. Tweed's pocket and you pay 
 your shares of it. Well, now, when I said that no king, no em- 
 peror, in Europe, now or for the past hundred years, could do 
 a thing of that kind and face his subjects and preserve 
 himself, his tenure of office, his dynasty, and his courtiers, 
 did I exaggerate at alLf* But this man does not ask that he 
 may keep his foot in New York, but that you should choose 
 him your senator to make laws. He laughs at it; he goes 
 among his followers and is received with rapturous applause. 
 Did you ever hear of a king or emperor that laughed at his 
 subjects because he had a standing army with bayonets? 
 And if this man has a standing army with votes, may he not 
 laugh? And who pays the standing army of the king with 
 bayonets but the subjects? And who pays the standing 
 army of this t;yTant with votes but you and I by our taxation? 
 And who sustains them except the people of this city with 
 their suffrages? We shall have made some progress, how- 
 ever, when the bare finger of the public power can be laid 
 without uncertainty upon Mr. Tweed, as having received a 
 million of your money in this form — a million days' labor 
 taken by him through plunder out of a fund that is to be 
 replenished by the day's labor of a million workmen. 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, you must understand that these 
 things cannot exist and be known and understood, without 
 somebody else being tried and condemned in the public 
 scorn of the world beside Mr. Tweed, if he is chosen senator. 
 All persons of this city who, with the explicit evidence of 
 these frauds before them, do not seek to redress and punish 
 them by taking part against the criminals are their accesso- 
 
CAMI'AIGN AGAINST TIIK 'TWEED RING" 569 
 
 ries after the fact. 1 do not care who they are. I do not care 
 wliether tliey Hve on Fiflli Avenue or at tlie Five Points, 
 1 tell you thai anyl)ody who does not do all he can, from now 
 to election day, to prevent this monstrous infamy to tliis 
 community, is an accessory after the fact. 
 
 Fortunately, the Re])ul)lican party has no different feelings 
 or interests. The ordinary party warfare carries it against 
 the administration under wliicli this has been done. A 
 great many Democrats mean to do all that they can and 
 we are to be tried as everybody that has to be tried, with 
 the determination to go according to the facts, and I trust 
 you know that if ]Mr. Tweed is chosen senator from this city 
 all the newspai)er paragraphs, all the Fourth of July orations 
 from this time henceforth forever cannot alter the judgment 
 formed by the lovers of liberty in countries across the Atlan- 
 tic, who are straining tlieir eyes to see what is to come of all 
 this and to prevent them from concluding that the beacon 
 of liberty has hidden its light forever. 
 
 I know of what I speak. I know that all through Europe 
 there is an intense solicitude on the part of the common 
 people that this defilement, this pollution, this infamy shall 
 be shown to have been from the negligence of the American 
 ])eoj)le, and that, when discovered, it can no longer be main- 
 tained or be repeated. If you could only know with what 
 interest also the friends — perhaps the honest friends, but at 
 any rate, the interested friends — of the despotic governments 
 look at the same problems, which are now proceeding before 
 tlieir eyes, claiming that in the affairs of government the 
 strong arm is necessary and that freedom is an illusion, and 
 that they will find su])i)ort in the result of your action, you 
 would see then, how l)oth sides of the Euro])ean continent, 
 in oj)inion, are dwelling upon this election to detennine 
 wliether, or not, your country, my country, is the hope of 
 freedom or is the danger to liberty that they may avoid. 
 
570 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 SPEECH AT COOPER UNION, NOVEMBER 2, 1871 
 
 3Ir. President and Felloiv Citizens: 
 
 I rejoice to find that as we are approaching election day 
 the issues before this people are clearing up; that men's 
 minds are concentrating upon their duty; that they are fully 
 furnished with the evidence and the information according 
 to which that duty is to be performed. I ventured to re- 
 mark two years ago, in reproach at the great apathy in 
 regard to public affairs into which this whole community 
 had fallen, under circumstances that permitted me to veil 
 the sad truth in a jesting garb, that all politics had suffered 
 an eclipse, not total to be sure, but annular — nothing but a 
 "Ring" being visible.* I have had the satisfaction now to 
 see the whole power of burning vengeance of political retri- 
 bution escaping from its eclipse to blast the highest of these 
 political conspirators. I have seen the "Ring" broken 
 never to be renewed; and the full power of public opinion 
 has been exerted, powerful and permanent, and to be effec- 
 tual, to rescue this community from their degradation and 
 ruin. 
 
 How far advanced we are from that state in which we 
 were even six months ago! When we undertook to com- 
 mence this great awakening I noticed from abroad these 
 intense demonstrations of public power with gratitude that 
 knew no bounds; and I noticed the attitudes and move- 
 ments of these discovered rascals. Why, under the blazing 
 power of this public indignation last September there was 
 seen the handwriting upon the wall that shook the courage 
 of these conspirators. What did their great soothsayer, 
 who furnished the intellect and the brains of the conspiracy, 
 say about it? Oh! this handwriting on the wall could be ex- 
 plained by natural causes; it was a mere phosphorescence, 
 bred of mephitic damps of party warfare; it would blow 
 over. Indeed! This wrath of an indignant people was in 
 
 *New England Society dinner 1869. 
 
CAIMPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 571 
 
 the view of the complacent mayor nolliing but a forgery and 
 woukl soon be exposed. Tlie next stage discovered, was 
 spread all over P^iirope, the statement of tlie mayor that it 
 was a Rei)iiblican conspiracy to injure the credit of the City 
 of New York, that tliey wislied to borrow money and the 
 Rei)ublicans thought that by injuring the credit of the city 
 it would crii)ple the Democratic party. But all these follies 
 and frivolities soon disappeared under the closed, peremp- 
 tory and decisive accusations which filled the public mind, 
 and satisfied the public intelligence that j)lunder, sheer and 
 flagrant j)luntler had been the action of this conspiracy. 
 And tlien we were told that all the vouchers would })e printed, 
 and put to shame this very accusation, and that all these ad- 
 ministrators would act in the public interest, and every- 
 thing would go right. But thanks to your intelligence, and 
 your meeting in Se])tember, an end was put to all this foolish 
 attempt to beguile and mislead the people and from that 
 time forward every step onward on your path has been 
 marked by defeat and retreat on the part of your enemy. 
 By these accusations, which are too terrible to consider with 
 patience, they were driven to that confession w}iich rests in 
 suicide, to that conviction which grows out of j)roof of the 
 actual burglary, abstracting and destroying of vouchers. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, do not think for one moment that so 
 great a crime, so clearly traceable to the party accomplishing 
 it, ever grew out of any disposition to conceal the mere de- 
 tails of fraud. It was the desperate effort of men who saw 
 the State's prison oi)ening to receive them for the vulgar 
 crime of forgery of voucliers which were destroyed. All 
 records, all details on the books, satisfactory as they are to 
 show the city's liabilities, do not answer the purpose of a 
 forged instrument to be submitted to courts and juries to 
 convict of forgery. 'J'hat is the reason that burglary inter- 
 venes to protect the heads of this conspiracy from its condign 
 punishment. 
 
572 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 We are approaching the last act, which in the peaceful 
 capacity under our institutions as citizens, we can perform 
 in an election, and it is not too much to say that all the facts 
 being known — the character of the men nominated being 
 known, the opposing opinions and influences of good men 
 being reconciled, and a solid vote to be thrown against this 
 band of conspirators — it is the truth that our institutions 
 and the value of them is the thing to be tried on next Tues- 
 day. 
 
 Now I do not know which of two alternative results is the 
 most terrible — the honest success of Tammany, or the con- 
 demnation of our institutions by fraud, if either of them should 
 happen. If we have to believe that upon this state of facts 
 and of proof, the actual majority of voters desire to continue 
 these men in power and votes honestly put in and fairly 
 counted will show that Hall, Tweed, Connolly and Sweeny 
 have a majority, — if that be the fact, I do not see that there 
 is much hope for our liberty and our equality of political 
 power. If, on the other hand, we, the honest people, go to 
 the polls in pursuance and in execution of the right and the 
 duty to select our rulers, and we show a majority of ballots, 
 which, fairly counted, would thrust from power these plun- 
 derers of the public, and the vote is not counted, but is set 
 down as a majority in their favor, I do not see that that 
 speaks very well for oiu- institutions as they are administered. 
 
 Talk about the possession of power by the people ! What 
 power have the people, if the machinery by which they ex- 
 ercise it is wrested from their hands by falsehood and by 
 forgery? Why talk about this scheme of checks and bal- 
 ances of power whereby tyranny is impossible and freedom 
 is secure? Why, before the eyes of all the world, by this ad- 
 ministration of crime and this administration of the ballot, 
 all the checks in our system of government of municipal 
 affairs are like the checks on the city treasury which these 
 rascals have pocketed. 
 
CAINIPAIGN AGAINST THE "TWEED RING" 573 
 
 Now 1 wisli it to be iiiiderstood tliat you feel tliat such 
 tyranny as thus demonstrated by tliis interference is intol- 
 erable and will not be submitted to. 
 
 The ballot is that which distinguishes a free government 
 from a des])otic one. It was only gained when despotism 
 after despotism had been overthrown. It was that we should 
 be taxed according to our vote, and if we are to maintain 
 oiu- independence as a nation, we must not be told flatly 
 and sciuarely by these despots that we may vote as we please, 
 and they will count as they please. If that is the case, they 
 will ])ick our pockets in the future as in the past, and this 
 even wise men cannot bear. 
 
 ***** 
 
 The speaker referred to the divisions apparently exist- 
 ing among the i)arty of reform particularly the religious 
 prejudices, and thought that when a thief or highway rob- 
 ber had knocked us down we should not consider whether 
 he was a Protestant or a Catholic, but turn our attention to 
 apprehending him. 
 
XI 
 
 SPEECH AT MASS MEETING HELD IN COOPER UN- 
 ION JANUARY 11, 1875, TO PROTEST AGAINST 
 THE ACTION OF THE FEDERAL MILITARY 
 AUTHORITIES IN LOUISIANA 
 
 NOTE 
 
 During the period of "reconstruction" the continuous struggles 
 between the "carpet-bag," mihtary governments set up and main- 
 tained by the Federal power on the one hand, and the best elements 
 of the native white population of the Southern States on the other, 
 resulted frequently in a situation of anarchy and misrule with all 
 the concomitants of violence and bloodshed. Perhaps, of all the 
 Southern States, Louisiana was in a worse plight than any, and the 
 bitterly exasperating conditions, brought about by the corruption 
 and ignorance that flourished almost unchecked in all departments 
 of the government thus imposed upon the State, led to atrocious 
 and lawless acts of vengeance and retaliation, that went uncon- 
 demned and unpunished. Society, in its broad sense, presented 
 in Louisiana, during the whole period from the end of the Civil War 
 to the final adjustment under the administration of President 
 Hayes, a revolutionary aspect. The revolution was held in check 
 only by the presence of the United States troops; while, on the 
 other hand, their presence and authority were a constant source of 
 excitement and irritation. The situation attracted the attention 
 of the whole country and was the subject of Congressional inves- 
 tigation. The incident that gave rise to the meeting at which Mr. 
 Evarts made the speech that follows occurred while the members 
 of a Congressional Committee of Investigation were present in 
 New Orleans. The situation and the incident are thus described 
 by Rhodes in his History of the United States, the substance of his 
 narrative being derived from the Report of this Committee and 
 other equally authoritative sources : 
 
 "In the autumn of 1874 an election for members of the legisla- 
 ture took place; on the face of the returns the Conservatives had 
 
 574 
 
PROTEST AGAINST MILITARY AUTHORITIES 575 
 
 a majority of 29 in a House of Representatives of 111 niemhcrs. 
 But tlie returning board, an instrument of Governor Kellogg and 
 Marshall Packard, found, after a session of many weeks, that 53 
 Rei)ul)licans and 53 Conservatives had been elected while as to 5 
 seats tlicv rendered no decision whatever." The historian then 
 gives the following account of the happenings in the legislature on 
 January 4, 1S75: 
 
 "At noon the clerk of the last House called the roll of the present 
 assembly; o'i Republicans and 50 Conservatives answered to their 
 names. (A full house was 111.) Instantly thereafter a number 
 of members rose but Billieu, a Conservative, held the floor and 
 nominated Wiltz another Conservative as temporary chairman. 
 Paying no attention to a point of order raised by the clerk he put 
 the motion which was responded to by loud ayes and equally loud 
 noes, but he declared it carried. Wiltz sprang to the platform, 
 seized the gavel from the clerk, was sworn in by a justice, called the 
 House to order and administered the oath to the members in a 
 body. A clerk, sergeant-at-arms and a number of assistant ser- 
 geants-at-arms were appointed; these last appeared at once with 
 badges bearing the insignia of their office. On a motion, which 
 was carried amid much disorder, the five Conservative members 
 from the parishes left in dispute by the returning board were 
 seated. Wiltz was elected speaker and, after taking the oath, 
 proceeded to swear in the members, but, as most of the Rej)ubli- 
 cans had withdrawn from the House, only 00 members in all re- 
 mained. Fifty were the Conservatives who had originally an- 
 swered to their names, five more were those who had just been 
 admitted and five were Republicans. These five Republicans 
 undertook to withdraw from the hall. Wiltz ordered the Sergeant- 
 at-arms to i)revent their egress in order to avoid breaking his 
 (juorum of fifty-six. Meanwhile the disturbance prevailing in the 
 lobby outside the bar of the House was increasing. On niotioti, 
 the couiinandcr of the Federal trt)()ps was asked to preserve the 
 peace, (icneral de Trobriand appeared, accom|)anied by only 
 one aide; a word from him to the crowd in the lobby restored 
 order. The (leneral retired; the business of the House went on. 
 At about three o'clock (ieneral de Trt)l)rian(l, in uiiiforin, his 
 sword at his side, and two of his staff in attendance, reappeared, 
 
576 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 furnished with an order from Governor Kellogg to clear the hall of 
 all persons not returned as legal members by the returning-board. 
 He gave the speaker to understand that he proposed to eject the 
 five members. Speaker Wiltz protested, but the General was 
 inexorable. He called his soldiers into the hall and ordered the 
 five expelled. With fixed bayonets the soldiers approached suc- 
 cessively each member, sitting in his seat, and forced him to leave 
 the House. Wiltz and the Conservatives thereupon withdrew. 
 The Republicans remained and, after effecting a crude organiza- 
 tion, proceeded to business." 
 
 General Sheridan was at the time in command of the troops 
 in Louisiana, and upon his report to the Government at Wash- 
 ington of these proceedings, Mr. Belknap, then Secretary of 
 War, telegraphed him, on January 6, the approval of the admin- 
 istration in these words: 
 
 "The President and all of us have full confidence in and 
 thoroughly approve your course." 
 
 The news of this business was spread abroad by the press, and 
 when it reached New York an indignation meeting was called to 
 be held in Cooper Union on the evening of January 11. The hall 
 was crowded to overflowing by an assemblage of citizens of all 
 political parties. Mayor Wickham presided and William Cullen 
 Bryant, then over eighty, was present on the platform and spoke. 
 Mr. Evarts's speech on this occasion, as here printed, is taken 
 from the newspaper report, appearing in The New York Tribune 
 of January 12, 1875, and, though fairly well reported, is not as 
 complete as might be desired. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 I am quite sure, fellow citizens, that no Republican in this 
 land can honestly complain that, in the call and purpose of 
 this meeting, his party has not been treated with absolute 
 consideration; for, if there was ever an occasion when an 
 opposition party might seek to make demonstrations in its 
 own behalf to the prejudice and disaster of its opponent, 
 that opportunity was offered to the Democratic party by 
 the conduct of the Federal government. The Federal 
 
PROTEST AGAINST MILITARY AUTHORITIES 511 
 
 government is all Republican — the President, both Houses 
 of Congress, the subordinate officers throughout the Union. 
 In the State of Louisiana itself the government upheld in 
 power by the Rejiublican Federal administration is the 
 Rei)ublican State administration of Governor Kellogg. 
 Now, first, under ordinary jmnciples of political responsi- 
 bility, the Republican party being ostensibly responsible for 
 the high-handed act of military subversion of civil govern- 
 ment , our fellow citizens of New York have understood patri- 
 otism and love of liberty and obedience to th'e Constitution, 
 apart from any political organization; and they have under- 
 stood that no political act shall be rightly imputed to the 
 responsibility of any political party until it has been sub- 
 mittetl to their aj^proval. You, therefore, are assembled 
 here as citizens of the United States, to teach every political 
 party that there are limits to their competitions and their 
 antagonism, which no political party shall safely surpass; 
 that when men vote, and when their chosen officers meet, 
 and when, without violence and demonstration of insurrec- 
 tion, they undertake the conduct of the political govern- 
 ment, no soldier can interfere. 
 
 And now, this nation emerged ten years ago from a great 
 war, in which unmeasured contributions of blood and treas- 
 ure were poured out in maintenance of the government of the 
 United States. And why.^ Because the people of the United 
 States were determined that the integrity of their territory 
 should be preserved. And why did they wish to preserve 
 the integrity of their territory, but that the Constitution of 
 the United States should l)e upheld and obeyed? And now, 
 every officer of a State, and every officer of the United States 
 takes a solemn oath to sustain the Constitution of the United 
 States. But there is one officer who takes the singular 
 oath ])rescribed in the Constitution of the United States, 
 and that officer is the President of the United States. And 
 his oath is not that conmion oath that I have named, but 
 
 38 
 
578 SPEECHES OP WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 this oath of great authority confided to him by the whole 
 people — that he will sustain, protect and defend the Con- 
 stitution of the United States. And now, the Constitution 
 of the United States, made for troublous times as well as 
 peaceful, undertakes to furnish the means of power to the 
 Federal government in respect of interference in the States. 
 There are two very firm lines of limitation — observe! — 
 which will protect the magnificent symmetry of our govern- 
 ment, for the people of forty millions now, and of a hundred 
 millions hereafter; and that is, that the sole intervention of 
 Federal power within the province of State authority shall 
 be to suppress violence, and that that office it shall not assume 
 except when invited by the supreme authority of the State. 
 And that supreme authority of the State as named in the 
 Federal Constitution is the legislature of the State. Is it only 
 in the casual condition that the legislature is not in session, 
 that the governor can represent the State in the demand ? No ; 
 but only on condition that the legislature cannot be convened. 
 In the situation whereby there is a recess of the legislature 
 of the State of New York, as there is from the adjournment 
 in April until its next meeting in January, the governor of 
 the State of New York has no authority under the Federal 
 Constitution to invoke the intervention of the Federal gov- 
 ernment, except in an emergency that does not permit his 
 convening the legislature in extra session. The situation in 
 Louisiana was that the legislature was in session; and the 
 governor had no power whatever to represent that State in 
 a demand for the intervention of the Federal officers. Have 
 we been favored by General Sheridan, or by the cabinet at 
 Washington, with any promulgation of an application made 
 by the assembled legislature of Louisiana, for Federal inter- 
 vention to turn some of their members out.^^ I think not. It 
 is only in case of an insurrection, or in case of a disturbance 
 that amounts, in fact, to an insurrection, that the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States has provided for this intervention; 
 
PROTEST AGAmST MILITARY AUTHORITIES 579 
 
 and it is only in support of that intervention, that the legisla- 
 tion of Congress of 1795 and 1807 has armed the President 
 with authority. 
 
 And now for General Sheridan (and for reasons that I shall 
 state to you, I do not ask that any special expression of your 
 disapprobation shall be visited upon him) I should think it 
 but fair to take his own statement of the occasion and of the 
 manner of that intervention. It is unquestionably the fact 
 that there was insecurity and alarm (for we agree that Gen- 
 eral Sheridan has no such timid disposition as that he would 
 be likely to exaggerate the occasion or the fact of alarm), 
 and that there had been some disorders in the State; but he 
 uses this somewhat uncommon phrase in American parlance, 
 that the military were present as conservators of the peace! 
 Here was a national ge?2s d'arme instead of the civil police 
 officers ; and wherever United States troops are to be found I 
 suppose that they are to be considered to be conservators of 
 the peace. This legislature being in session, and one party 
 having elected a speaker, and there being disorder thereupon, 
 and confusion, the speaker asked that some United States 
 officer would speak to the crowd and disperse them quietly. 
 General de Trobriand asked if that was their wish, and the 
 speaker said yes; and General de Trobriand then spoke to 
 the people, and in a moment there was peace. So, if there 
 had been insurrection, it was soon over. And the thanks of 
 this orderly body of the legislature of Louisiana were offered 
 to General de Trobriand for his gallantry in maintaining the 
 peace. Thereupon, Governor Kellogg, outside of the legis- 
 lature (for he is not a member of it), asked General de Tro- 
 briand to take a file of soldiers, go into the legislature and 
 take out five men who were acting as members of that Ijody. 
 I might be disposed to characterize, with some severity, the 
 action of an inferior officer like (General de Trol)riand, or 
 that of his superior. General Sheridan, were it not for a prop- 
 osition of good government, known to us lawyers in a Latin 
 
580 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 phrase — respondeat superior — the authority that directs the 
 action of subordinates, must be held responsible; and I think 
 that the President of the United States, under the official 
 communication of his authority, through the Secretary of 
 War "and all of us" is to be held to answer therefor. While 
 there is nothing said in the Constitution of the United States 
 about the authority of "all of us," I suppose that Secretary 
 Belknap drew "all of us" in to share the glory, although we 
 did not assume the responsibility. 
 
 But the President of the LTnited States has approved that 
 act. Now, Governor Kellogg, if he gave that order and it 
 was executed, deserves impeachment by the legislature of 
 Louisiana. I would like to see Governor Tilden sending in 
 a file of New York soldiers to take out the Republican major- 
 ities in the Senate, when it came to vote for United States 
 Senator, and see whether a Democratic House at Albany, as 
 it is now, would stand patiently by and see the privileges of 
 the legislature violated. Well, now, I do not exactly like 
 the form of argument addressed to citizens of the United 
 States — as we all are — that we must not be unconcerned or 
 careless about this action in Louisiana, for it may be re- 
 peated in New York. I do not like that form of argument 
 to citizens. 
 
 I tell you, fellow citizens of the United States, that when it 
 is done in one State it is done in all. The United States, 
 it is our boast, in its frame of government, is vital in 
 every part, and cannot be hurt in one part without injury to 
 all. Supposing that this intervention of military power to 
 break the action of independent State authority, should hap- 
 pen to be executed in Missouri or any other State, to take 
 out a majority of the Electoral College when we were choos- 
 ing a President, and by the subversion of the vote of that 
 State, one man should be chosen instead of the other, what 
 would you have then for civil law, vast multitudes of men 
 being engaged on the question of a disputed presidency.? The 
 
PROTEST AGAINST MILITARY AUTHORITIES 581 
 
 President that would take his seat on sucli a platform, would 
 have nothing but curses. For I say to you, fellow citizens, 
 that the moment we come to complacency on one side, that 
 profits by the action, and nothing but chagrin and disap- 
 pointment at political success on the other, our liberties are 
 gone. All the preliminaries of the elections are useless, if a 
 usurper can step in and raise the question whether the 
 usm-jiation will or will not be sustained. It is for that 
 reason that this crowd here to-night is not Democratic — is 
 not Republican — but is American. 
 
 Now, thus far we have only the President that has ap- 
 proved — though Secretary Belknap says it belongs to *'all of 
 us" but if the two majorities in Congress have no voice, no 
 action, no authority, or if they adopt this policy, and main- 
 tain the right of a file of soldiers to decunate the legislature — 
 even then I'll not admit that the Republican party is to be 
 held responsible for their action, until you have given us 
 Republicans a chance to say and do what we will say and 
 do also. 
 
 I have observed a growing disposition on the part of the 
 depositories of political power to separate themselves more 
 and more from the popular support of the party that gave 
 them their authority. I see the first evidence of that in the 
 warning to them, in the silence of our voters that has placed 
 the Democratic party apparently in the majority in the 
 most powerful States. But if the depositories of power of the 
 Republican party are ready to put themselves before the 
 country upon the constitutional proposition that a file of 
 soldiers can empty a State legislature, under any of the cir- 
 cumstances proposed by any body, as prevailing in Louisiana, 
 I think those representatives in power of the Republican 
 party will find they have as few supporters in their own 
 party as they have in the Democratic party. I think they 
 will find it about as easy convincing the people of the 
 United States that they must conquer their prejudice against 
 
582 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 this mode of maintaining authority, as a good many poHti- 
 cians found in satisfying the people of the North that they 
 must conquer their prejudices against the methods of the 
 Lecompton Constitution. I remember speaking in 1856 at 
 the first meeting to protest against the agitations which led 
 to the great trouble in the country, and even six months after- 
 wards in the City of New York, the sentiments, the opinions, 
 and the ticket, that were presented at that meeting, had only 
 one thousand votes. But how many years was it before it 
 had votes enough to control every State in the Union, and 
 had armies, and treasury, and united voices, without dis- 
 tinction of party, carrying it on triumphantly — for the main- 
 tenance of the Constitution? And we gained two things: 
 That the American people never would submit either to have 
 their territory mutilated or their Constitution corrupted. 
 
 Now, the laws of Congress require that whenever a state 
 of violence in the State, to which the Federal suppression 
 should be lawfully applied, exists, the exercise of that au- 
 thority by the Federal government should be accompanied 
 by a proclamation requiring the insurgents to disperse. 
 Now, I believe a proclamation of that kind was issued some 
 months ago, and they all dispersed. How long would it be, 
 fellow citizens, that the Federal authority thus pronounced 
 will be peacefully obeyed by a malcontent State popula- 
 tion, having just such grievances, if they learned that the 
 next thing that the Federal government does after they have 
 dispersed, is to use violent acts in suppressing their in- 
 surrection; if their dispersion is only to make it possible 
 for the Federal government to do by violence, with a squad 
 of soldiers, what, if the insurgents had held together, the 
 Federal government would have needed to have its whole 
 army for.^ Isn't it the merest fraud in the world to carry 
 back from this action in respect to this legislature on the 
 fourth day of January to an insurrection of a few months 
 before, dispersed by pacific separation .^^ 
 
PROTEST AGAmST MILITARY AUTHORITIES 583 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have detained you too long. There are 
 other troubles at the South in respect of which and their 
 suppression, the Federal government is clothed with extra- 
 ordinary power. By a late Act of 1871, whenever any com- 
 bination or conspiracy exists against the State laws and the 
 United States laws, to the effect of suppressing one of the 
 rights, privileges or immunities of citizens of the United 
 States, and the constituted authorities are either unable to 
 protect, or, for any reason fail in, or refuse the protection, 
 then it is lawful for the President of the United States to use 
 the military and the army and the navy to maintain those 
 violated rights. If, when the election of Louisiana was held, 
 there were organized bands, combinations and conspiracies, 
 which intimidated the poorer voters, which intimidated the 
 black voters in the State of Louisiana, then was the time for 
 the President of the United States to interfere and suppress 
 those violent combinations and conspiracies, that trampled 
 upon the rights of suffrage, though in the meanest voters. 
 
 I hope it won't be long before the City of New York, with- 
 out distinction of party, will respond with the same voice 
 and energy as to-night against any combinations or con- 
 spiracies that are framed with the purpose of intimidating 
 voters of such State in the exercise of their suffrage. I shall 
 be as ready to speak, my associates here of the Democratic 
 party will be as ready to speak, at a meeting of that kind in 
 that emergency, as we are to speak now. But we do not 
 want, after an election is held, and when there has been no 
 violence and no combination and no conspiracy, or, at least, 
 no exercise of authority to suppress it, to have the authority 
 exercised by emptying the legislature, because a military 
 officer or President thinks that somebody was prevented 
 from voting at the election. 
 
 The fundamental right of a legislature to control, to deter- 
 mine the qualifications and the constitution of its own body 
 is of the very essence of legislative government. What use 
 
584 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 is it to give the purse and the sword to the House of Com- 
 mons or to the House of Congress, if the King or the Presi- 
 dent, by mihtary power can determine who and what the 
 House of Congress and Commons is composed of? And that 
 is what they voted for in England; the indubitable ancient 
 rights of Parliament to hold the purse, without any danger 
 from the flame of royal power, that could determine the qual- 
 ifications of the members of the House of Commons, and 
 then, after a while, let the House of Lords assume the power 
 and right to determine the qualifications of the members of 
 the House of Commons. But in 1694 the House of Commons 
 determined that the qualifications of its members were at 
 its own final disposal, and that the ancient liberties of the 
 House of Commons required it; and no King and no House 
 of Lords has questioned this power of the House of Commons 
 since. For these reasons the people at this time are justi- 
 fied in being concerned at this marked interference with the 
 supremacy of the civil power over the military — with the 
 independence of the State legislature of Federal government, 
 and in the absolute abstinence of Federal power, except 
 upon the invocation of the legislature, for the suppression of 
 actual violence, and its withdrawal, necessarily, that violence 
 should be suppressed. 
 
 Now, I do not know whether there is to be a sequel to this 
 matter or not. I think not; but Lord Bacon said long ago 
 that soldiers in peace were like chimneys in summer, and 
 that only when the fires were lighted did they become of 
 use. I should be sorry to think that there were any calcula- 
 tions that the patriotism of this people could be inflamed for 
 political purposes, only by the larger and more virulent agita- 
 tion that belongs to civil strife. But if there be any such 
 sequel, let us see that it is summarily disposed of, and that 
 the voice of this people teaches all its rulers that in time of 
 peace all the powers, all of the authorities, all the ofiicers, 
 and all the magistrates, are servants of its laws. 
 
XII 
 
 SPEECH AT COOPER UNION IN THE IIAYES- 
 TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, NOVEM- 
 BER 1, 1876. 
 
 During the close of the Presidential canvass of 1876, the following 
 letter signed by about two hundred of the merchants of New York 
 was addressed to Mr. Evarts: — 
 
 To Hon. William M. Evarts, &-c.. 
 
 Dear Sir: — The undersigned respectfully ask the expression of 
 your views at a public meeting, at the earliest time that may suit 
 your convenience on the bearing of the pending election on the 
 debt, the credit, the National faith, the reform of the public service 
 and the repose of the country which we fear are being gravely 
 endangered while the people are beguiled into a sense of security by 
 unfounded representations and promises. It has been said that 
 "the safety and wisdom of investments in the funded debt of the 
 Government do not depend upon Presidential elections, in the 
 opinion of European capitalists and bankers, any more than the 
 soundness of English consols dej)ends on whether the Ministry is 
 Tory or Liberal." 
 
 We do not believe that European capitalists are so indifferent to 
 the lessons taught by our recent history as these words imply; nor 
 that they ignore the fact that the time has passed when the great 
 parties of the Republic were alike devoted to the supremacy of the 
 Constitution and the perpetuity of the Union. 
 
 Europe cannot have forgotten that our Civil War arose from 
 antagonistic views of the character and power of the National 
 Government in its relation to the States. 
 
 Of that war the world is reminded to-day by the Southern claims 
 already filed in the House of Representatives, amounting to hun- 
 dreds of millions of dollars, that threaten seriously to increase the 
 national debt, which, despite its large reduction, weighs heavily on 
 the industry of our land. 
 
 585 
 
586 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 These claims are urged partly on the ground which was taken by 
 prominent Democratic leaders, North and South, including their 
 Presidential candidate, that the National Government had no right 
 to protect the integrity of the nation by the coercion of seceding 
 States. 
 
 It is also to be feared that the election of Mr. Tilden might be 
 regarded as a reversal of the verdict of the war, under which the 
 southern people would be incited to claim their indemnity for their 
 past losses and immunity in any further acts of secession. 
 
 Such a radical change in the policy of government would, in our 
 opinion, not only impair its credit at home and abroad, and post- 
 pone indefinitely the resumption of specie payments, but endanger 
 in the future our peace and prosperity. 
 
 Questions of such moment to the American people deserve the 
 greatest consideration on national grounds by the light of history 
 and the National Constitution. 
 
 The independency of your political position, your professional 
 and public career, and your wide experience and acquaintanceship 
 both in Europe and America, will give high authority to your views, 
 and make them of the gravest consequence to the country in this 
 hour of peril. 
 
 Praying an early and favorable response, we have the honor to 
 be, sir, with the highest regard, your faithful friends and fellow 
 citizens. 
 
 To this Mr. Evarts, on October 28th, replied as follows: 
 
 New York, October 28, 1876. 
 Gentlemen : — I have had the honor to receive your request for the 
 expression, at a public meeting in this city, of my views on some of 
 the principal questions which enter into the pending canvass for the 
 election of a president and vice-president of the United States. 
 
 Although I cannot assent to your kind estimate of the interest or 
 value to the public which the terms of your invitation attribute to 
 my opinions, or their expression, yet I fully recognize the obliga- 
 tions of every man to take such part in the public discussions of the 
 election as his fellow citizens may call upon him to do. 
 
 The earliest day which my necessary occupations leave at my 
 command is Wednesday next, and it will then give me great 
 pleasure to offer to the public judgment such considerations as 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTLVL CAMPAIGN 587 
 
 seem to me important and controlling on the topics to which you 
 have invited my attention. I am, with great respect, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 William M. Evarts. 
 To John J. Astor, John Q. Jones, Robert L. Stuart, John A. Dix, 
 William E. Dodge and others. 
 
 Before an audience that filled Cooper Union to overflowing over 
 which Mr. William E. Dodge presided, Mr. Evarts delivered the 
 speech that follows, as reported in the New York Tribune of the 
 following day. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: — 
 
 The wise man has said that there is a time to every pur- 
 pose under heaven, and in enunciating the vicissitudes of 
 human affairs and the varieties of human conduct to which 
 there was always an appropriate time, he has recounted a 
 time to keep silence and a time to speak. The American 
 people have long ago made up their minds that the heat of a 
 Presidential canvass is not a time to keep silent, and is a 
 time to speak. Whether or no I should have found, in 
 special considerations, some reason to doubt whether I might 
 not keep silent and might not refrain from speaking, yet 
 when the call of these merchants, that make up so much of 
 the prosperity, and pride, and hope, and energy of New Y ork, 
 assigned to me this duty, I could not but accept it. Nay, 
 more; the developments of the canvass and its issues and 
 the immense stake that turns upon the vote of next Tuesday, 
 had satisfied me that no man, who could expect to take the 
 ear of the country in the least, was justified in being silent. 
 Whichever side he should speak on, he could not belittle 
 or undervalue the occasion or the issue, and if his voice could 
 serve, it should be heard while there was yet time. 
 
 By the methods of our politics, gentlemen, we are unable 
 to separate the question, in the popular mind or in the 
 popular vote, as to the party to which it would willingly 
 
588 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 intrust the conduct of public affairs, from the other question 
 as to what man or which men of the party that they prefer 
 they woukl select. Necessarily, therefore, there comes to 
 be some confusion of ideas, in drawing the distinctions be- 
 tween personal preferences, and measures of the force and 
 faculty and strength of will and character of the opposing 
 candidates, when, after all, the real question is and must be, 
 which party will you have to take your government, to which 
 will you intrust your interests, where is the safety of the Re- 
 public to be found in the period of the next Presidential term? 
 Well, in these contests of ours, so frequent and so familiar, 
 there are always three interests that enlist more or less the 
 popular feeling and the popular fashions. The first we may 
 dismiss lightly— it is the interest of the office-holders and 
 the interest of the office-seekers, intense and important to 
 them and to their friends, and in the great mass of our offices, 
 of course, an element of power and force in the community. 
 But the commotion which these interests in their competi- 
 tion excite is neither very wide nor very deep. It does 
 not much touch the public peace nor affect the public con- 
 fidence. But beyond this, in all these Presidential elections, 
 there is an enlistment of the enthusiasm and the admiration 
 of the great masses of the people for one or the other of the 
 statesmen of the country that are to lead the canvass. These 
 sometimes go to a great height, and they sometimes simulate 
 in solicitude, in earnestness, the real anxieties that touch the 
 public welfare, and are influenced by the public safety. But 
 these, gentlemen, we are always sure to find, never carry the 
 agitations of the public mind beyond a limit that is quite 
 safe to the public peace and quite consistent with the perma- 
 nence of the value of the public securities, and after election 
 — when even Henry Clay is defeated and Polk is elected in 
 lieu of him — the agitations of the community subside, parties 
 are all within the range of equal duty, and the peace of the 
 country is undisturbed and its public credit unimpaired, and 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESmENTIAL CAMPAIGN 589 
 
 generally speaking, and in the happy condition in which our 
 country has generally been i)laced at Presidential elections, 
 what I have now assigned is the whole limit and range of the 
 interests and the excitements that attend an election; and, 
 in that sense and under those circumstances, it is true that a 
 decision, by the ballot, who shall be President of the United 
 States carries no more peril to the public credit and the 
 public peace, than in England a change from the Tories to 
 the Liberals, or the reverse. 
 
 But when there does enter into a canvass, when, in the 
 |)opular a])preciation, there does enter into the canvass ques- 
 tions that touch at the vital point, the integrity of the gov- 
 ernment, the permanence and welfare of the State, then the 
 agitations that attend that question supplant and over- 
 whelm all the lesser questions that make up the staple of 
 political discussions and differences. And the people of 
 these United States determine for themselves, and know for 
 themselves, whether, in the im])ending election, these vital 
 interests are included or are not; if they are, the people will 
 act up to them; if they are not, they, the people, will not 
 down at the bidding of any master or teacher, foreign or 
 native. I take it, the people of the United States 
 know as much about Liberal and Tory politics as the 
 financial agents of European houses in Wall Street. 
 I take it to be possible that on the issues of American politics 
 they know and feel a great deal more. As I have said, when 
 these issues come in they give law to the contest; they re- 
 divide the lines between the parties; they rally those who 
 think the Northern people are better custodians of the 
 interests that the Northern people maintain than anybody 
 else can be, even their own countrymen residing in other parts 
 of the country. Sometimes these issues come up late in the 
 canvass. The good temper, the good faith, the honest pur- 
 poses of the great mass of the American i)eople niake them 
 slow to believe evil of any of their countrymen, so slow, in 
 
590 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 their past history, that nothing but a war, that has buried 
 half a milHon of their chosen youth and exhausted a thousand 
 milhons of their treasure could open their eyes. But we 
 don't need two such eye-openers in one generation. 
 
 [Peter Cooper here entered the hall, and as he advanced 
 upon the platform Mr. Evarts greeted him cordially. After 
 the applause had subsided Mr. Evarts continued.] 
 
 Sometimes these great issues are stifled until it is too late, 
 and then the nation has to fight its way back to a ground of 
 safety, that it silently and foolishly surrendered. There 
 was some danger of that in this canvass. The South had 
 come to be so much exhausted in their strength, and all their 
 animosities had been so completely burned out of them, and 
 their leader, Mr. Tilden, our fellow citizen, so well known 
 to us, had been so unwarlike in the past, and so hostile to 
 the burdens of taxation that it was scarcely imaginable that 
 there could be any threat to the public peace, any danger 
 to the public credit, from the advances, even unopposed, 
 of so peaceful and so placid a party candidate as that. But 
 the American people, after all, when it comes to the point, 
 had rather trust themselves than anybody else. And if a 
 bear should propose to one of our backwoodsmen, after the 
 bear had been worsted in a fight, to prove by experiment 
 how the bear's strength had been exhausted and his hatred 
 extinguished, by trying another good hug with him, I think 
 the backwoodsman would prefer he would try it with some 
 one else in his stead; or in some other form, say with a slip- 
 noose around his neck, to see if he could not throw the 
 bear that way. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, we are in the midst of a canvass, and 
 simple as the call of the committee which has honored me 
 with the invitation is in its terms, no one can fail to see that 
 in the brief enumeration of the subjects of discussion which 
 may be annoimced as matters touching the public credit, the 
 public service and the public peace, we have a Presidential 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTLVL CAMPAIGN 591 
 
 canvass where the issues arc of the vital and searching char- 
 acter that I have named. 
 
 I will first say whatever I have to say of the two can- 
 didates of the parties, and I will speak first of Governor 
 Tilden, because I shall have the less occasion to expatiate 
 concernin*,' him, as you all know him as well as I do. 
 But I have not one word to say in disparagement of his 
 abilities, which are distinguished, or of the character 
 of his mind, which is very marked; nor shall I deny that he 
 has performetl services of great value to the people of this 
 city when he was fighting the Democracy, and that he also 
 was doing a great service in the State when he was diminish- 
 ing the taxes of the farmers; and I don't doubt that in those 
 spheres of public usefulness he ought to be encouraged and 
 continued by the people of the country. There he has 
 made his fame, and whoever interrupts him in reaping the 
 true harvest of those labors does him no service, and may do 
 the country a great deal of harm. But the question is ob- 
 viously very different whether Governor Tilden, at the head 
 of the Democracy, a Democracy made up as it is, fighting 
 the Republican party, is in the same line of usefulness that 
 he was, when he was fighting Twecfl and Tammany Hall. 
 And there is room to doubt whether auditing the war claims 
 of theSouthern people will be as likely to diminish the taxes of 
 the farmers as what he has done in the service of the State. 
 These tickets then i)roduced by Governor Tilden may entitle 
 him to ride on some other route and by some other train, but 
 not by this, nor to the White House. And yet I can con- 
 ceive an arrangement of the Democratic J^arty wherein 
 Governor Tilden iiiiglil be useful and safely its leader, 
 even in the conduct of the great affairs of the Federal 
 government. Bui 1 think (lie R('|)ublicans will i)rert'r to 
 choose a President of tlicir own; and tliat I lie time has 
 not vet come when thev will elect (Jovernor Tilden and a 
 
592 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 united South. And if the Repubhcans don't elect them 
 everybody knows they will never be elected at all. 
 
 Now, Governor Hayes is to me personally almost an 
 entire stranger, but there are some traits in his character, 
 some facts in his life, some purposes in his conduct which, 
 when once recognized, make him or leave him a stranger to 
 no true lover of his country. He is a gentleman of edu- 
 cation. Whatever of instruction or benefit from instruction 
 I received from the great masters of the law at whose 
 feet I sat — ^Judge Story and Professor Greenleaf — the same 
 advantage — and the same instruction Governor Hayes had. 
 I should have been offended, if I had not been amused, at 
 the philippics with which some large portions of our 
 Eastern people — most of them, no doubt. Democratic, 
 but a good many Republican — have felt at liberty to 
 slight the personal claims and merits of Governor Hayes, 
 because they had not heard of him. Well, but he had 
 lived to be fifty years old — a man of education and of 
 character, of high principle, possessed of every social and 
 personal virtue — and the people in the city and in the State 
 in which he lived had heard of him ! 
 
 How many men had heard favorably of Governor Tilden 
 while he was in the secrets and councils of Tammany and 
 Tweed. f* And when Hayes, at the age of fifty-four, was dis- 
 covered and made known to the great mass of his country- 
 men with thousands, nay, a million of intelligences burning 
 upon his life and record, there has been nothing for him 
 either to explain or explain away. 
 
 But let us see what are the traits that a people value in 
 their citizens when they offer themselves for their suffrages. 
 Let us compare his war record, for instance, with that 
 of Governor Tilden. How many seasons would it have 
 taken to overcome the rebellion if Governor Tilden, fol- 
 lowed by the American people, had fought it on the line that 
 he adopted .^^ And how vast would have been the treasures 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAISIPAIGN 593 
 
 for distribution among tlie soldiers and sailors of the war, 
 that were fighting for us, if his method of replenishing the 
 treasury had been adopted! I am not disparaging the rec- 
 ord. I take it as it is. But I say that he was not a fore- 
 most captain or general in arms; and when the country was 
 in need, he did not hurry, with gifts of gold, frankincense, 
 and myrrh, to its aid. That is all I say of him, and it is all 
 that any of his friends claim for him. Well, now, there are 
 a great many soldiers that become so from ])rofessional 
 obligations. There are others, alas, that seek the service to 
 rei)air a shattered character, and others that cannot find 
 anything less dangerous and more j)rofitable to do. But I 
 ])ut it to you now, gentlemen, as citizens of New York, 
 whether when you find a man in a ])eaceful profession, in 
 the bosom of a famil3^ with his wife and children about him, 
 possessed of ample fortune, with no military obligations 
 whatever upon him, and that man enlists for the war and 
 fights his way through it, if he has not done as much as 
 America expects any citizen to do? 
 
 Why, take our fellow citizens in the organization for which 
 we have so great admiration and to whom we owe many a 
 real debt, the Seventh Regiment of this city. I think that 
 all of those gentlemen and their wives and sweethearts, all 
 thought they had done a brave and manly thing in going in 
 for a three months' service of their country. I think their 
 fellow citizens thought so too. I did for one, and I should 
 not think, in any company of honest men, of depreciating 
 that degree of military service on the part of those gentlemen, 
 surrounded as they are with all that makes life attractive. 
 
 But Governor Hayes, with everything about hiui, enliste<l 
 for tiic war-, and somehow or other, neither in classic times 
 nor since, has there been sup])osed to be any greater hoiioi' 
 than to be willing to die lor your country, and 1 Ihink 
 Governor Hayes showed that willingn«'ss, and that touch of 
 
 39 
 
594 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 patriotic duty can never be disparaged in any community of 
 citizens, that were in favor of the war in which he fought. 
 
 But, they say, "He isn't a statesman." Well, he has 
 been a very good candidate, and that is all we have to do 
 with him at present. He has beaten in succession all the 
 Democratic statesmen of the State of Ohio, every one of 
 them, in his own esteem and in that of his fellow citizens, 
 and in that of the Democratic party, fit, himself, to be a 
 candidate for the Presidency of the United States. And 
 he has beat them all. And it will be a little hard if — when 
 he is running himself for the Presidency against a Presiden- 
 tial candidate, that none of those three great statesmen of 
 Ohio of the Democratic party thought ought to have been 
 nominated — he can't beat him. But his service has been 
 great — thrice governor, and governor of the great State of 
 Ohio, and thrice discharged the duties of the office without 
 fear and without reproach. If he will do for us as President 
 as well as he did for us as soldier, as well as he did for the 
 people of Ohio as governor, we shall be sorry that he has 
 precluded himself from a re-election. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, we come to consider some of the topics 
 which touch really the call and the issues of the canvass. 
 And, first, these merchants want to know what the effect 
 on the value of the securities, with which their safes are 
 stuffed, will be from the election of Mr. Tilden or the elec- 
 tion of Governor Hayes. Now it is pretty clear that 
 they would not have asked the question unless they felt some 
 doubt, and it is pretty clear that when the merchants and 
 bankers doubt, then the humble people that cannot afford 
 to lose their share in savings bank deposits and life insurance 
 companies had better be stirring themselves. The great 
 fabric of the public credit sustains all values and all in- 
 terests. It isn't to the interest of the rich when the 
 poor man's property is shrinking and the rich man buys it. 
 The rich man doesn't lose anything, but a pall is thrown 
 
HAYES-TILDEX PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 595 
 
 over the pul)lit' credit; anxiety, solicitude, perturhation, 
 occupy the minds of the masses of the people; then 
 comes a rush and a crusli, and a loss and a collapse. 
 And many never rise from that change in their affairs, pro- 
 duced without their fault perhaps, but not without their 
 fault if they have so blinded their eyes to party zeal as not 
 to see the difference to the securities of a country whether its 
 government is in the hands of those who sustained it in war 
 or whether in the hands of those who fought against it in 
 war. We have a homelv maxim that a fool and his 
 money are soon parted, and those who expose themselves 
 to that folly and that loss of property come within 
 that maxim. And it will neither console their self-com- 
 placency nor restore their property to know that so wise 
 and so wealthy a man as Mr. Belmont thought so too. 
 
 Well, the two parties, or the one of them that is installed 
 in power, will have to do with the public credit, and it is 
 said that it is not altogether wise or prudent to trust the 
 Republican party with the further management of your 
 finances, your debt, and your public credit. Well, why? 
 They certainly have managed them pretty well so far. 
 The only serious complaint that I heard for years 
 against the administration of the finances by the Re- 
 publican party w^as, that they were paying the debt too 
 fast, and taking too much money out of the people to apply 
 to that o})ject. Well, gentlemen, there may have been 
 some pinch in that, but see what a bold and faithful step 
 it was, facing the opprobrium of heavy taxation, in- 
 sisting even upon the income tax, to pay the debt of the 
 nation. Is it common for public servants to increase tax- 
 ation with a view to j)ublic favor.'' But the great lesson was 
 to be taught this people that their energies were not crushed 
 by the war; that they were not impoverished, and that the 
 slain of the war had not so thinnetl the ranks of labor, and 
 the defection of the South had not so far reduced the volume 
 
596 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of our population and our wealth, but that we could honestly 
 pay our debt and show that it was not a mill-stone about 
 our neck. There was statesmanship for you. Expose a 
 party to unpopularity, open this adverse criticism, but 
 when a party could point to the expenses of the govern- 
 ment regularly paid, and six hundred and fifty-six million 
 dollars of the debt discharged, they could face the world 
 of Europe, and they could meet any danger of another 
 rebellion. 
 
 Well, we have reduced the interest thirty odd millions a 
 year and we have reduced the taxation three hundred 
 millions, so these merchants say, and it seems to me that as 
 the possible increase of payments of the debt, decrease of 
 interest, decrease of taxation, are multiplying on every 
 side, that the wise people will let the party that has paid 
 so much of their debt, diminished their taxes so much and 
 the burden of interest on the unpaid debt so much, go on 
 and do the same thing until they are tired. I never knew of 
 a farmer discharging a hand because he had dug too many 
 potatoes in a week, and I never heard of a merchant dis- 
 charging a clerk because he could sell too many boxes of 
 goods to solvent customers. 
 
 But insensible as any propositions of that kind are, hope- 
 less of any influence on the public mind, there is another and 
 a grave subject, to wit, the resumption of specie payments. 
 Well, now, why is it that it is important for the people, 
 especially a people made up of men who work, and 
 thrive, and commence with nothing but the capital of 
 their labor out of which to make their fortune — why is it 
 important to them that they should have the value and the 
 hsLsis of specie for the measure of their labor? The law says 
 that the currency — whatever it may be — they shall take for 
 their labor. And when men print currency it is quite ob- 
 vious there is not so much labor in the making of the dollar 
 as what they shall do; but when gold and silver are the 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 597 
 
 measure of a man's labor tliey measure it not by the im- 
 I^rinting on the metal — for this is merely a eertificate of the 
 fjovernment so as to be understood by everybody that it is 
 gold, anil how much there is of it — it does not get its value 
 in the mint: not a jiarticle of it — it takes its value from other 
 men's labor, because up to the last pennyweight of its sub- 
 stance it is the exact amount of somebody's labor that got 
 it out of them. And when men have nothing but their 
 labor in this world they like to be sure when they trade with 
 it that they get a good measure of the poor man's labor in 
 return. 
 
 But that is the reason the Democratic party was so wise 
 and so popular, before it had occasion to modulate its prin- 
 cii)les to the getting of votes. It was the hard money party 
 of the United States. It was the champion of the laborer, 
 of the farmer, of all men who ])ro(luced by toil a portion of 
 the public wealth, and nothing has dismayed me more than 
 to see the utter profligacy of a ])arty that has thus allied 
 itself, identified itself with the cause of the laboring man, and 
 tied tlown the currency of the country by most useful enact- 
 ments through a long series of years, now scouting the stand- 
 ard of gold and silver as an illusion and a snare, and holding 
 that the measure of the printing press shall make the volume 
 of the money that is to pay for the jioor man's labor. I can 
 agree to all diversities of o])inion on finance, but I don't 
 know what has ha])pened to these Democrats to change their 
 opinions on finance. I know they said this Legal-Tender act 
 was unconstitutional. I know they said it would never be 
 obeyed. I know they derided and decried it, and lamented 
 that even in war a pe()|)le could uol pay specie to their soldiers 
 and for the commodities of life. But now we are told, when 
 men say that it is the interest of labor that gold should be the 
 measure and the standard, that it is an o])pression of the war. 
 Now, they are not stuj)id. There is not a man in the country 
 that does not know a gold dollar is a gold dollar, and that a 
 
598 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 paper promise to pay a gold dollar is only of value because 
 the gold dollar is expected to come some time or other. You 
 can easily see that the denomination of paper currency is not 
 going to amount to much if they are not to be paid. The 
 promise to pay ten dollars or one hundred dollars not per- 
 formed is not any better than the promise to pay one dollar 
 not performed, nor as good as the promise to pay one 
 dollar performed. And I have watched for fear I had over- 
 rated the intelligence of my countrymen in this behalf, and I 
 really do not find that there is any danger of the American 
 people being fond of money without any intrinsic value, 
 that is made for them of the fluctuating councils of a parcel 
 of Congressmen who get the first hand in the distribution 
 of it after it is made. 
 
 Now, does anybody doubt that the Republican party is 
 in favor of specie payments.'* Does any one doubt that 
 Governor Hayes is in favor of specie payments .f* No one. 
 Isn't it very plain, then, that if we want specie payments 
 you will get them from Governor Hayes and the Republican 
 party .f^ If you do not want them, why then you have your 
 choice between voting for Governor Tilden and our esteemed 
 fellow citizen, Mr. Cooper. Mr. Tilden professes to want 
 specie payments, but not enough to hurt Governor Hend- 
 ricks, not enough to name a time when he wants it, 
 and not enough to lose any votes by wanting it. But 
 Peter Cooper — honest man as he is and has been all 
 his life — he professes not to want specie payments, and 
 not to want it, all the time. So, gentlemen, when 
 you look at this matter between the two parties you see 
 at once that on this question of specie payments there 
 is not any doubt on one side, and there is great uncer- 
 tainty on the other. Now, the Republican party passed a 
 bill, and one of its clauses was that specie payments should 
 be resumed on January 1, 1879. It is the law of the land 
 to-day and it goes on to say that the Secretary of the 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 599 
 
 Treasury should for prepare for and meet tlial duty, thus im- 
 posed upon him, by surphis from the revenue, or by the 
 negotiation of bonds at a favorable rate of interest. Now 
 Governor Tilden, before he entered the currents of Presi- 
 dential aspiration, thought that that was a good law, and 
 that one of the best things about it was its definiteness and 
 certainty, and that the State of New York ought to go and 
 do likewise at the same time and in the same manner. But 
 now he has discovered that naming a day for resumption is 
 an insurmountable impediment to having resumption. 
 He says that resuming with preparing is nugatory, and 
 therefore that preparing, I suppose, without resuming, is a 
 great deal better and he shows that it is a good thing to 
 name a day on which you will start on a voyage or a journey, 
 but it is a great embarrassment to know when you will ar- 
 rive at the end of it. I suppose that the steamers or the 
 locomotives which are imagined or expected to draw peo- 
 ple through in the regular time will be apt to burst their 
 "bilers" in doing it. But this is not according to the com- 
 mon sense of the American people. I should as soon think 
 of Governor Tilden ascribing his long unmarried life to the 
 frequency with which he named the day for his marriage as 
 to persuade him that having a certain time within which 
 to prepare confuses and embarrasses the preparation. This 
 Democratic profession of fondness for paper money — of 
 fondness for Republican and unconstitutional rags — has 
 always seemed to me the extreme of political effrontery, 
 and I have seen some specimens of political effrontery 
 sometimes, even in parties to which I have belonged my- 
 self. I think, therefore, that the bankers in Wall Street 
 do not need any instruction as to whether the Repub- 
 licans would handle the finances well, or whether they would 
 bring about specie payments. They want some shrewd in- 
 telligence, if they could find it, that would ])rove to them that 
 the Democrats would do the same thing, and I confess their 
 
600 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 application to me to perform that service is a complete 
 failure. I have turned it over in my mind every way that 
 I could. I have read Governor Tilden's letter of acceptance 
 backward and forward. I have endeavored to see whether 
 you could get specie payments sooner with Tilden President, 
 and Hendricks Vice-President, or with Hendricks President 
 and Tilden Vice-President. I have endeavored to see what 
 there was that could prevent the Democratic party from 
 overthrowing the sentiments of the Republican party as to 
 the time of payment, and spending the two years after the 
 election of Tilden up to January, 1879, in getting ready, and 
 by a Democratic Congress and Senate, if they have one, 
 extending the time — say for sixty or ninety days, or some 
 such short period. But I have been unable to understand it, 
 and therefore my counsel is that the Republican party will 
 take good care of the finances, and will resume specie pay- 
 ments; and that the Democrats will do as they shall be ad- 
 vised after the next election. Now, under these circum- 
 stances, as you cannot advise them after the election, I 
 think you had better exercise your intention before. 
 
 Well, there is another topic of very great interest, too, and 
 that is the civil service — the reform of the civil service. I 
 think the past of the two parties is not altogether satisfactory 
 on that question. I think that while the Democrats were 
 in power, say up to 1860, they had introduced, developed, 
 expanded, burned into the system of the politics of this 
 country, the doctrine that the civil service belonged to the 
 people that distributed the offices or controlled the votes, 
 and I do not think that is a good basis for civil service. 
 
 Well, now, the Republicans had a great many things on 
 their hands besides attending to the civil service. They 
 suppressed the rebellion; they maintained the institutions 
 of the country unbroken; they restored 'its peace; they 
 have paid off its debt, and they have been found wanting 
 in some degree in their conduct of the civil service. I 
 
HiVYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN (>01 
 
 will not conceal or extenuate their faults, but I would like 
 to conii)are the record of the Democratic party with a hud^et 
 as hi^ as the Repuljlicans have liad, before I will prefer the 
 Democrats to tlu^m. They liad a hud^'et of sixty or eighty 
 millions before the war. The details of the peculations and 
 of the deductions, which those peculations made from the 
 volume of that revenue, have been spread before the public. 
 Now, before they compare themselves with the Republican 
 party in the civil service and the administration of the 
 revenues of the country, in that connection I would like to 
 see them with a budget of three hundred millions to give an 
 account of to this people, year after year, for twelve years. 
 Or rather, I will take that back. I would not like to have 
 them have that budget even for the purpose of making that 
 record. I would rather concede the point than concede the 
 budget. 
 
 Well, the future question of this country is pre- 
 cisely that — how we are to curb the power of the immense 
 range of office-holders over the i)olitics of the country? They 
 are killing all the statesmen; they are belittling all the issues; 
 they are degrading all politics; they are injuring all politics. 
 But it is not a thing to be done in a day. The vicious circle 
 has been keenly touched by Governor Hayes in his straight- 
 forward letter of acceptance; the vicious circle by which the 
 placemen make the Congressmen and the Congressmen the 
 placemen — and both leave the people out — has been touched, 
 as with a needle, by Governor Hayes. And the first ground 
 of my confidence in any physician to cure an ill or heal a 
 wound is to be sure that he knows what the wound is. Now, 
 I think you may search Governor Tilden's long letter of ac- 
 ceptance with candles and you won't find any declaration 
 that he means to make war on Democratic placemen making 
 Democratic Congressmen, or Democratic; Congressmen mak- 
 ing Democratic placemen. He says but this: "Their (juali- 
 fications ought to be carefully scrutinized." Well, they have 
 
602 SPEECHES OF WILLL\M MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 always done that. All the talents and virtues that our poor 
 humanity can collect about a man that wants an oflSce won't 
 pass the scrutiny, unless he has the qualifications which the 
 Democratic party was the first to require, and will be the last 
 to relinquish. 
 
 But you will observe that it is impossible that the Demo- 
 cratic party, who began this rule of the public service, should 
 adopt this reform while all the offices are filled by Repub- 
 licans. That would be too much for human nature. That 
 would be a barren victory. That would be a division of 
 spoils that they have never been brought up to. And, 
 therefore, I see that an eminent Democratic statesman, in an 
 address the other night, has prepared the ground for turning 
 out all the Republicans, not on political grounds, but because 
 they are all liars and slanderers. Well, gentlemen, we shall 
 always have a reason — I am afraid too much of a reason — 
 for both parties to urge. But the Republican party has a 
 right to demand of Governor Hayes, if he is elected, with a 
 whole body of officeholders, speaking generally, of the same 
 political party with himself — they have a right to demand of 
 him, nominated because he was in favor of civil service re- 
 form, accepting the nomination as given to him because he 
 was in favor of civil service reform, that he carry out the 
 work of weeding out the incompetent and the unworthy 
 Republicans and filling their places with honest and worthy 
 Republicans. And if there are not enough Republicans, 
 filling them with honest and worthy Democrats. That is 
 the war we are in for. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, this question does not much touch 
 the public credit except in the sense of the public faith and 
 of the interest and the affection which the people feel for 
 their government, which has been sorely tried — I won't say 
 during the last sixteen years, but during the last forty years 
 — by the prevalence of what, I think, has been a dangerous 
 postponement of the true political wisdom and ability of the 
 
HA^'ES-TILDEN PRESIDENTLVL CAMPAIGN 603 
 
 country to the interests of wliat is called in <,'ross lan^ua^e 
 "the machine." But that belongs to neither party. That is 
 a struggle to a pjeneration, antl that should not be addressed 
 to the party that did not invent it and that has struggled 
 pretty hard to put an end to it. I ditl not understand that 
 the position of Governor Tilden at St. Louis, by which he 
 triumphed over his competitors, turned upon the ground at 
 all that he would not appoint Democrats to office or that he 
 would a})ply a rigid exaction of that competency and in- 
 tegrity which excluded political issues. I think we must 
 conclude then, that all people that are honestly in favor of 
 civil service reform will find in Governor Hayes a fearless, 
 open, firm supporter of the principles which will lead to 
 reform. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, I am brought to what would be the 
 third to])ic of administration, as measured and to be expected 
 from one party and the other — I mean the treatment of that 
 vital question of the pacification of the South, of the pacif- 
 ication of the country, of the preservation of the efforts of 
 the war, of the discharge of the obligations of good faith 
 which the Republican party has assumed for one of the 
 results of the war. But I am at once admonished that I 
 cannot make the comparison between the administrative 
 action or the administrative promises — between the jiarties 
 — because the Democratic l^arty, as a party, in its organiza- 
 tion and in its action, has never done anything except to 
 produce, to prolong, to embarrass the war. I cannot tell 
 what tliev would do if thev undertook the service of protect- 
 ing these Republican lambs down South; I do not know what 
 they would do with preserving the i)ublic faith in a debt that 
 has been created in maintaining the government, and which 
 is a burden ui)on the people; I do not know what they would 
 do in regard to the maintenance unbroken of the right of 
 suffrage in the freedmen — a duty to which the while men of 
 this countrv can ne\er l)e recreant, unless, at least, thev are 
 
604 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 ready to admit that the freedmen are better able to govern 
 them than they are to govern the freedmen. I do not wish 
 to be romantic, I do not wish to be exalted, but there is one 
 thing that can stand neither the curse of God nor men, and 
 that will be the desertion of the freedmen by leaving them a 
 prey to the rebels of the South. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, as I do know what the Republicans will 
 do, or wish to do — sometimes freely, sometimes insufficiently, 
 and sometimes thwarted and opposed beyond their strength 
 to overcome resistance — I prefer to advise the continuance 
 of that duty in the hands that have thus far discharged it, 
 and in the hearts that feel the obligation. I am there- 
 fore obliged, instead of pursuing details as to what will be 
 the better course for the voters in their reliance upon the 
 administration of this question, to meet at once what 
 includes the whole. Is it safe for the people of the United 
 States to intrust to the Democratic party organized and 
 constituted as it is, led by the candidate that they propose 
 for your suffrages, with the record of the party constituted 
 as it now is, and of the candidate during the period of 
 the struggles of the war, during the antecedent steps 
 that led to it, during the process of pacification that 
 has followed — is it wise to trust it to them at all? And I 
 mean by that, not whether the nicest wisdom would so 
 determine, but I mean whether if you trust what has been 
 gained by so much blood sacrifice, and so much treasure 
 devoted — if you trust that and lose it, when will you ever 
 have blood or treasure to save your country again .^^ Now 
 there might be a Democratic party that would include a ma- 
 jority of the thoughtful and honest citizens of the 
 Northern States, led by a candidate who, notwithstanding 
 prepossessions, had leaped into the conflict of the country 
 and sided himself with the loyal people to suppress 
 the rebels. And there might be economic issues, prob- 
 lems of finance, problems of administration, that by 
 
HAYES-Tn>DEN PRESmENTIAL CAMPAIGN 005 
 
 a measuring of class or by a large volmiie of superiority, 
 the people of the United Slates would trust to that 
 party thus constituted and thus led. I am discussing 
 no abstract proposition, I am describing no abstract party. 
 I am not saying a word against the thousands and thousands 
 of Democratic soldiers that fought on our side, the thousands 
 and thousands of Democratic voters that voted on our side, 
 and who, for aught I know, may be all honestly and patriot- 
 ically in their judgment voting here and there and now and 
 then with the Democratic party, the party to which they 
 were allied by birth or by habit. I am talking about a 
 Democratic party made up in its preponderance of the 
 soldiers — so far as there are soldiers in it — that fought against 
 the country; and of voters in the mass who voted against the 
 country and did not help, by voice or word, or support the 
 maintenance of the great institutions, the sustenance of the 
 nation. And I say that when the people that have gone 
 through these labors, toils and sacrifices are by their own 
 votes to determine whether they will reinvest with jiower 
 the Democratic party that, in its constitution and its leader- 
 ship is, in my judgment, wholly undistinguishable in princi- 
 ple or in make-up from the party as we expelled it from 
 power, we are proposing a movement of this people that is 
 intolerable to their self-respect, incompatible with the safety 
 of the country, inconsistent with the maintenance of the 
 Constitution. 
 
 It was thought to l)e a very good lesson of our war, and one 
 that would not be forgotten, that men would fight as they 
 vote; that if the mass of this people were deternu'ned that 
 Abraham Lincoln should be President they would fight till 
 he was President of the whole United States, to which they 
 chose him. And they did it. And now the cool proposition 
 on l)ehalf of the Democracj^ is made to us same people that, 
 although we fight as we vote, we won't vote as we fought. 
 Well, gentlemen, if we won't vote as we fought, we will have 
 
606 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 some reason for changing our vote. We will understand 
 what the issue is, and if, understanding that issue, we make 
 up our mind that we will surrender our character, our con- 
 duct, our hopes, our future, why we will do it, and on good 
 reason. But we won't do it on any such foolish reason as 
 that the Republican administrations have shown eccentrici- 
 ties, shortcomings, blunders, or faults. It is too narrow an 
 inspection of a house to find these blemishes, and then 
 determine to burn it down. 
 
 Well, now, is the Democratic party as now constituted, 
 and as now led substantially identical with the Democratic 
 party as constituted and as led when James Buchanan was 
 President, and a solid South and a fragmentary North up- 
 held it.'' I don't think you could search the record of a 
 statesman of the Democratic party and find a closer analogy 
 between his opinions, declared by himself, and the opinions 
 which led the Southern people into the folly of armed resist- 
 ance to the government and exposed the Northern people to 
 the toils and sacrifices of its armed maintenance than be- 
 tween those of Mr. Tilden and Mr. Buchanan. There are 
 no cerements of the grave about him, but that only proves 
 that he is not Buchanan himself. There is the same halting 
 between two purposes; the same letting "I dare not" wait 
 upon "I would"; the same imbecility to suppress the rebel- 
 lion, although you might lament it with a flood of tears. 
 Ah! gentlemen, there is the same odor of denationality 
 about him. Now the whole question whether the South — 
 who could measure their strength and ours — would fly to 
 arms against the government, was to be solved, in their 
 judgment, by the question whether the government would 
 fly to arms against them, and determine what it was by the 
 Democratic party's saying that there was no license in the 
 Constitution to do so, and that the moment a military rebel- 
 lion took place that was the end of the Union. Well, gentle- 
 men, a military organization, a military threat, is an easy 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTLVL CAMPAIGN C07 
 
 mode of overcoming the strength of a great peoj^Ie. But 
 the Republican North determined the question whether a 
 mihtary rebelhon against the government of the United 
 States could be sup])ressed, and opened the question whether 
 the resolution and the credit and the patriotism of the 
 organized loyalty of the country was stronger than what 
 Governor Tildcii calls the organized revolution. 
 
 But we tried that, and it i)roved that we were not wrong. 
 As was said by the lawyer to a client who came to consult him 
 about his brother, and asked whether he could be put in jail 
 on such a cause of action. "No," said the lawyer, "he can 
 not." "But," said the Ijrother, "he is in jail now." 
 Now, whether we did it constitutionally or unconstitu- 
 tionally, we did it, and judgment has been entered, and 
 now an appeal is taken, and the Democratic party, sub- 
 mitting in arms, now says that it is going to show that all 
 that was unconstitutional, and what the consequences will 
 be of that correction of the law of this land, you, gentlemen, 
 can judge as well as I if you are fools enough to have that 
 correction made. I think the judgment we have got is 
 a good one for us. 
 
 Now I have said — for I will be guilty of no injustice to 
 Governor Tilden — that the turning point was, whether the 
 loyal people of the country would find the right authority 
 and power to suppress that rebellion, and the question, 
 whether the South shoukl be urged on to the fatal and 
 inevitable step of military resistance, was to be settled by 
 the attitude of their political allies North, in anticii)ation of 
 the election of Lincoln, and during the period between that 
 election and his inauguration. 
 
 Now I would like to have you understand what the 
 Southern doctrine about this Constitution of ours is. 
 Away back in 1798 the Southerners undertook to deter- 
 mine the doctrine which should last as long as they wanted 
 it, and this is the doctrine: "But that, as in all other cases 
 
608 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 of compact among parties having no common judge, each 
 party has an equal right to judge for itself; as well of in- 
 fractions as of the mode and measure of redress, . . . 
 and that a nullification by those sovereignties of all un- 
 authorized acts done, under the color of that instrument, 
 is the rightful remedy." 
 
 Well, under the instruction of that doctrine, as prepared 
 at the end of a generation, they consented to try it on and 
 nullify on the tariff question; and now let me show you the 
 advantage of having a Democratic President of the views of 
 the Constitution that concur with ours and with those of 
 the majestic march of the people of the United States to 
 their triumphant maintenance of their country against the 
 largest rebellion that the world ever saw. It was in the 
 Democratic doctrine that the means was found to nip that 
 rebellion in the bud without its ruffling a hair or increasing 
 the dead or sacrificing the dying. Let us see then what 
 might have been done when this Rebellion broke out had 
 the incumbent of the Presidential chair been Gen. Andrew 
 Jackson. Now, he was a good Democrat. I never 
 belonged to his party, but he was as loyal to this 
 country as any man that ever lived in it. As he says 
 (I have read you the Resolutions of 1798 and I will now 
 bring them down to modern time): "The Constitution of 
 the United States, then, forms a government, not a league; 
 and whether it be formed by compact between the States, 
 or in any other manner, its character is the same." How- 
 ever it got to be a government, it is one, and now, supposing 
 Buchanan had sent this exhortation to the people, hurrying 
 to fight against their government. This is the exhortation 
 which General Jackson addressed to the South in 1832: 
 
 "Tell them that, compared to disunion, all other evils are 
 light, because that brings with it an accumulation of all. 
 Declare that you will never take the field unless the star- 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTL\L CAMPAIGN 609 
 
 spangled banner of your country sliall float over you; that 
 you will not be stij^matized when dead and dishonored and 
 scorned while you live as the authors of the first attack on 
 the Consiitution of your country. Its destroyers you can- 
 not be. You may disturb its jjeace; you may interrupt the 
 course of its prosperity; you may cloud its reputation for 
 stability; but its tranquillity will be restored, its prosperity 
 will return, and the stain upon its national character will be 
 transferred and remain an eternal blot on the memorv of 
 tliose who caused the disorder." 
 
 We do not try to distinguish between the Democrats and 
 ourselves in loyalty, in courage, and in determination. No; 
 we try to distinguish between the Democrats that are loyal, 
 coiu-ageous, and Hrm and the Democrats who were disloyal, 
 timid and base — and that is a distinction that, so long 
 as this is a free country, I propose to draw. And if the 
 Democrats do not like it, they cannot like it worse than they 
 like that exhortation of Jackson's, for I cannot beat that if 
 I were to try all night. 
 
 AYell, let us see now further, and we will come down to the 
 year 1852; you cannot complain of that as so remote as the 
 year 1798: "That the Democratic party" — this was the 
 resolution of their convention — "will faithfulh' abide by and 
 uj)liold the principles laid down in the Kentucky and Vir- 
 ginia Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and in the Report of Mr. 
 Madison to the Virginia Legislature in 1799; that it adopts 
 those i)rinciples as constituting one of the main foundations 
 of its political creed; and is resolved to carry them out in 
 their obvious meaning and import." 
 
 Well what enormous courage they showed in carrying out 
 those resolutions in their meaning and imj^ort; for when the 
 first gun was fired, they all ran away. Well now with 
 Buchanan, let us come along down to 18C0. He gave his 
 views about resistance to the government of the 1 idled 
 States, after Jackson had given his ojnniou about thirty 
 
 40 
 
610 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 years before. See whether it sounds in its sentiments Hke 
 Jackson; and when you hear that, I will ask you to hear 
 whether it sounds like Tilden. You may be sure if you 
 think it sounds like Jackson, it doesn't sound like Tilden. 
 "The question fairly stated is — Has the Constitution dele- 
 gated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submission 
 which is attempting to withdraw, or has actually withdrawn 
 from the Confederacy.'^ I have arrived at the conclusion 
 that no such power has been delegated to Congress nor to 
 any other department of the Federal Government." 
 
 He was too consistent a statesman to issue an exhortation 
 in the language of Andrew Jackson denouncing the thunders 
 of vengeance upon the people who did what they had the 
 right to do. Now Black was then an eminent lawyer, and 
 was in strict adherence to the Democratic party — the At- 
 torney General. He says: "If this view of the subject be 
 as correct as I think it is, then the Union must perish, utterly 
 perish, at the moment when Congress shall arm one portion 
 of the people against another, for any purpose beyond that 
 of merely protecting the General Government in the essence 
 of its proper constitutional functions." 
 
 Well, let us see whether Governor Tilden reminds you of 
 Buchanan or of Jackson! Whether his constitutional opin- 
 ions are like Buchanan or Jackson! Now, on the twenty- 
 sixth day of October, 1860, at precisely the same stage in 
 the Presidential canvass that we stand at to-day. Gover- 
 nor Tilden, then a private person, but of great credit as a 
 doctor of law of the Democracy, wrote this letter — 
 wrote it in the very stress of the incipient rebellion — wrote 
 it because he then thought it would paralyze the North and 
 make the South strike; he wrote it, but he wishes now he 
 never had.* Now, speaking of the States he says: "Each is 
 organized into States, with complete governments, holding 
 
 *See Letter to William Kent, Tilden's Public Writings and Speeches Vol. I, at 
 page 295 et seq. 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAIVIPAIGN 611 
 
 the purse and wielding tlie sword. Tliey are held together 
 only by a compact of confederation." 
 
 Now, does that sound like Buchanan? Buchanan did not 
 write his message that I have read from until thirty days 
 after this letter of Tilden. So Tilden is not a plagiarist; he 
 set the copy. 
 
 "The single, slender, conventional tie which holds States 
 in confederation has no strength comi)ared with the com- 
 pacted, intertwining fibres which bind the atoms of human 
 society into one formation of natural growth." 
 
 Now, what a ])iece of rhetoric that is. If rhetoric could 
 have laid the Southern ambition, that would have. Only 
 think of the South relapsing back into "compacted intertwin- 
 ing fibres, which bind the atoms of lunnan society into one 
 fonnation of natural growth!" Well, they were com- 
 pacted, and their fibres were intertwined into the form of 
 regiments. He goes on to say: 
 
 "They recognized no right of constitutional secession, but 
 they left revolution organized, whenever it should be de- 
 manded by the public opinion of a State; left it with power 
 to snap the tie of confederation as a nation might break a 
 treaty, and to repel coercion as a nation might repel inva- 
 sion. They caused us to depend, in a great measure, upon 
 the public opinion of the States in order to maintain a con- 
 federated Union. They intended to make it necessary for 
 us, in reasonable degree, to respect that public opinion." 
 
 And now we come to the idea that strangled poor Mr. 
 Buchanan : 
 
 "Especially is this true of a compact of confederation 
 between the States, where there can be no common arbiter 
 invested with authorities and powers equally capable with 
 those which courts possess between individuals for deter- 
 mining and enforcing a just construction and execution of 
 the instrument." 
 
612 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And now, in order to show that we Repub.Hcans did not, 
 according even to Mr. Tilden's estimate of us, hold these 
 views, he says — and he says it with regret — "But I cannot 
 fail to see in the mind of every second man I meet among the 
 Republicans the prevalence of ideas upon which it is im- 
 practicable to administer a confederated government." Well, 
 now, saying that word of us — that we could not see the way 
 in which the government was to stand if it depended upon 
 the public opinion of South Carolina, and if these organized 
 revolutions existed, and there was no right and no power on 
 the part of the loyal communities to put it down — while 
 Governor Tilden was turning his attention to the organized 
 forces of revolution in disloyal States, some of us turned our 
 attention to the manifest and noble pride which organized 
 loyalty in the other States; and it is quite clear that if you 
 get the patriotism and the courage and the majority, say of 
 the State of New York, in favor of efforts to defend the gov- 
 ernment, then you will get an organized loyalty of the State 
 of New York that fights with its whole power and counts 
 against the organized revolution of South Carolina! Ah, 
 but gentlemen, gentlemen, there was the trying point! There 
 was the question, and Governor Tilden laid his finger on the 
 very marrow of it. "Democrats of New York, touch not 
 with one finger the unholy effort to use force to maintain 
 the Government." And if we had not found a good many 
 Democrats who looked at things as Jackson did, and not as 
 Governor Tilden did, we never should have had the organized 
 loyalty of the State of New York but it would have counted 
 on the side of organized revolution. I was one of five men 
 that on Tuesday after the firing on Sumter met in a private 
 office in Pine Street to feel the pulse of this people, to arouse 
 them, and call a public meeting, and we did not know whether 
 we dared do it, lest the fewness of the number should be 
 counted and the game should be lost; and then we did not 
 dare to take the Academy of Music, for fear our shrunken 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 613 
 
 columns would dis])lay the poorness of the patriotism of New 
 York. But by Friday, the 19th, we determined there was 
 no building that could hold the loyal i)eo})le — the organized 
 loyal people — and on the twentieth day of April we had 
 one hundred thousand men in Union Square, and there would 
 have been one hundred thousand and one if Governor Tilden 
 had been there. There were ninety-nine thousand nine 
 hundred and ninety-nine without Fernando Wood, and he 
 was there. We went on. We appointed a Committee of 
 Safety. We actually hired steamers, raised regiments in our 
 own name, with our own funds, and without the power of 
 authority, and we fought it out on that line of our con- 
 struction of the Constitution, and of Jackson's construction 
 of the Constitution. And we have not hesitated to denounce 
 anybody and everybody that thought or wished or felt on 
 the other side, just as Jackson denounced those people. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I have seen no retraction of these polit- 
 ical opinions on the part of Governor Tilden. I have never 
 seen any retraction of these political opinions on the part of 
 the solid South, and if I get a solid South wishing to dissolve 
 the Union — either for interest or hatred — I do not think I 
 have got a very strong barrier against it in these opinions 
 backed by Samuel Tilden, and if Attorney General 
 Black should be recalled to that office I do not think you 
 would get a very serviceable law to uphold this government, 
 for he hasn't changed that opinion. Well, now, what have 
 they to say in their own behalf on all these troubles, about 
 the great aggregation of debt, about the claims of the South? 
 That "the debts ought to be paid all around, losses ought to 
 be borne, that bygones ought to be bygones, and that all 
 the matter ought to be settled by putting us on an equality" 
 — of common ruin, I suppose; I do not know. 
 
 Governor Seymour — and it is a most extraordinary rec- 
 ommendation for a party that is seeking the suffrages of 
 the Republic against the oi)posite party — Governor Seymour 
 
614 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 beseeches his countrymen to confide the executive branch 
 of the government to the Democratic candidate, because, 
 if he undertakes to carry out his principles, the Repubhcan 
 Senate will prevent it. And Governor Tilden says in his 
 last letter that if the Democratic Congress and his party 
 undertake to do these things he will veto them. I have 
 understood that General Jackson was elected to veto 
 a bank that the Whigs were for, but I never heard of choos- 
 ing a President for vetoing the measures that his party were 
 in favor of. Indeed, gentlemen, it may seem as if this 
 Democratic party, as it comes mincing up to gain the favor 
 of the American people, relies for the graces both of its con- 
 tour and its drapery upon the same thing that our modern 
 ladies' dresses do — the "pull-back." What if the "pull- 
 back" should break.'^ As I never knew what might happen 
 to a lady, so I cannot tell, if the "pull-back" should break, 
 what might happen to the party. 
 
 I remember many years ago to have seen a story told by 
 the Ettrick Shepherd in "Blackwood's Magazine," of a 
 couple of brave Scotchmen who went out boar-hunting, but 
 their point was not so much the prowess of overmastering 
 the savage boars as of getting into their dens and securing 
 the succulent and savory food of the young. And one of 
 them went into the den where he heard the squealing of the 
 little young boars, and left his companion outside to look 
 after the old boar if he should come along. Well, Sawney 
 was brave, but his gun missed fire, and the boar dodged him 
 and got into the opening of the den, but Sawney, with great 
 presence of mind and great strength of body, seized hold of 
 the boar's tail and twisted it around both hands and braced 
 his feet against the side of the den. Well, his companion 
 inside found the light darkened, and called out, "Sawney, 
 Sawney, what stops the light.^" Sawney was a man of few 
 words, and had no breath to waste in explanations, and he 
 says: "If the tail breaks you will find out." Now I 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 015 
 
 cannot be any more ex])licit, but I am inclined to think 
 on Governor Tiklen's letter that if the veto breaks you will 
 find out. Now the boar's tail was never made except 
 for the light and fantastic play of keeping the flies off, 
 and the veto was never made for the hard work of carry- 
 ing on the government, and I think that the veto will 
 break or, if it does not, that the resolute and set purpose 
 of the men of strong convictions and strong passions that 
 are to fill Congress with a united South will break the Presi- 
 dent if they can't break the veto. At any rate there is noth- 
 ing in the story of the Ettrick Shepherd that encourages us 
 to choose Tilden President. 
 
 Now Governor Tilden won't change his political opinions. 
 They are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. He would 
 no more change those opinions than I would change mine. 
 He holds that the offspring of our Revolution in 1776 was 
 but the litter of feeble States having no tie, but that it was 
 severed when they parted from the mother country. 
 I believe that there was then formed a mighty and puis- 
 sant nation — the United States of America — by the grace 
 of God free and independent of all the world, includ- 
 ing South Carolina. 
 
 Now, about the ability of these people to keep these 
 promises, see what was thought, in this letter, about 
 President Lincoln: 
 
 "What will Mr. Lincoln do.^* Can he be expected, as 
 President, to understand the state of things in any other 
 sense than that of his own partisan policy.'* Can he avoid 
 the attempt to maintain the power of his party by the same 
 means which will have acquired it? Can he emancipate 
 himself from the dominion of the ideas, associations, and 
 influences which will have accompanied him in his rise to 
 power?" 
 
 Well, now. Governor Tilden certainly would not expect 
 the American people to give him credit for changing his 
 
616 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 views or defeating his party, that he, speaking in entire 
 good faith and with entire respect to President Lincoln and 
 the RepiibHcan party, said would be impossible for Mr. 
 Lincoln. Then let me give you the advice he gave to the 
 people at the stage of the matter that we are now at. I 
 shall only need to alter the name of the person spoken of to 
 inculcate the injunction. He thus exhorts his countrymen: 
 
 "Elect Lincoln, and we invite those perils which we can- 
 not measure; we attempt in vain to conquer the submission 
 of the South to an impracticable and intolerable policy; our 
 only hope must be that as President he will abandon the 
 creed, the principles, and pledges on which he will have been 
 elected. Defeat Lincoln, and all our great interests and 
 hopes are unquestionably safe." 
 
 I will reread it: "Elect Tilden and we invite those perils 
 which we cannot measure; we attempt in vain to conquer 
 the submission of the South to an impracticable and intol- 
 erable policy; our only hope must be that as President he 
 will abandon the creed, the principles, and pledges on which 
 he will have been elected. Defeat Tilden and all our great 
 interests and hopes are unquestionably safe." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, we Republicans made a record, and we 
 incurred the hatred of a great many of our countrymen, and 
 we were scorned and derided by the public opinion of many 
 aristocratic classes in politics, but we triumphed, and every- 
 body recognized the power of this country, its strength, knew 
 that it was a nation, and had as much power to keep up its 
 nationality as God has ever given to a nation in the world. 
 Semper potens armis et uheri gleba — "Always powerful in 
 arms and in the great area of its fruitful soil." 
 
 And now they ask us to bring back the same people and 
 the same President that we expelled, defeated and divided. 
 A nation never will go back! A nation never will go back! 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESmENTLVL CAIMPAIGN 617 
 
 True, the English people recalled the Stuarts, and bore a 
 shameful penance of twenty years for doing so, but then it 
 was the aniiy and the aristocracy that recalled Charles 
 Stuart, and not the Puritans and the ConiinoTiwealth men. 
 They did not vote that the Stuarts should come, but 
 what have we? Human nature is the same. What- 
 ever credit you may give to Governor Tilden as he 
 seems to be in purpose, he cannot do what the party in Con- 
 gress won't allow him to. It will be in vain that he says, 
 "I came in by the votes of very many excellent Repul)licans 
 who trusted that bygones were to be bygones, and nobody 
 was to be disturbed, for I told them so, and now you are 
 raising the old storm over their heads." "What do we care 
 for that.'^" they say: "were not our heads bowed to the 
 Re])ublican storm for years?" W^hat did the Stuarts do? 
 
 Cromwell had stood to England as Lincoln stands to 
 America. Cromwell, by the universal consent of the present 
 generation of Englishmen the greatest warrior that ever 
 rallied the power of England, Cromwell is dead; Cromwell 
 is buried. The feeble councils of the Presbyterians that 
 were not Puritans and of the army that was neither Rej)ub- 
 lican nor Royalist, recalled the Stuarts. Charles had prom- 
 ised that when he should come back that bygones should be 
 bygones, that his toleration should be manifest, and nothing 
 but ])eace and happiness should reign in "Merrie England." 
 But what was the result? The armies returned, the Parlia- 
 ment was crowded with Tories and Royalists, and INIacaulay, 
 in a few words, sums up what came of the King's word and 
 of his promise that l)ygones should be bygones. 
 
 "He therefore made a feeble attempt to restrain the intol- 
 erant zeal of the House of Commons; but that House was 
 under the influence of far deeper convictions and far stronger 
 passions than his own. After a faint struggle he yielded, 
 and passed, with a show of alacrity, a series of odious acts 
 against the separatists." 
 
618 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 And the Ironside regiment, and all the stout defenders of 
 civil liberty and religious freedom in England were ground 
 under the heels of the restored party. And Cromwell — 
 the dead Cromwell — was exhumed, his head was cut off by 
 the executioner and displayed over Westminster Hall to show 
 the justice of England! That head, the greatest in England 
 while living was thus exposed — a terrible lesson to all feeble 
 lovers of liberty, that like to bring back to power and domin- 
 ion the foe they have vanquished. Now the annals of 
 our time have changed, but the scorn, the undying con- 
 tempt of the vanquished slave power will be dealt out to 
 us loyal people if, after having had the courage and the 
 purpose and the fortitude to rescue the country from them, 
 we, by our willing vote, having the question in our own 
 hands, decide to let them back again. 
 
 Ah, the old parliamentary doggerel describes well the 
 wisdom, the prudence of the Constitution: 
 
 Methinks I hear a lion in the lobby roar. 
 Say, Mr. Speaker, shall we bar the door 
 
 And keep him out.'* or let him in 
 And take our chances to get him out again? 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I think you have concluded that I do not 
 consider that either the public credit, or the public faith, or 
 the public weal, or the public peace, or the public govern- 
 ment, or the people of the United States will be as safe under 
 Tilden as they will be under Hayes. And I say unto these 
 merchants and bankers in the gross, that in my opinion of the 
 prudent choice between the two men, I cannot occupy your 
 attention tonight until the late hours with all the details by 
 which, if not an absolute drowning of the public credit, a 
 continual threat of that drowning would infect our securi- 
 ties in all the markets of the world. But I will put it bright 
 and clear — that a people that by the suffrage, after having 
 
HAYES-TILDEN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 619 
 
 had the courage to stand to their o])inioii of the Constitution, 
 and having differed from Buchanan and agreed with Jack- 
 son and fought it out on that Hne, shoukl vote back a Presi- 
 dent that agrees witli Buchanan and meets the denunciation 
 and scorn that Jackson would shower down upon him were 
 he alive — that nation loses stability of purpose, courage in 
 civil matters, prudence in affairs of State, and, although 
 fighting brings out the great qualities of a nation, fighting 
 doesn't improve the price of its bonds. 
 
 Well, Governor Tilden cannot be made President of the 
 United States in any view of the canvass, without the vote 
 of the State of New York. He cannot carry the vote of the 
 State of New York, unless by the vote of the people of the 
 City of New York and its neighborhood. And you, citizens 
 of New York, not only now wield that vast power and influ- 
 ence that belongs to your wealth, your intelligence, your con- 
 nections with the industry and the prosperity of all the land, 
 but you have got the actual hold on the power itself, and as 
 you determine, and as you act, from now onward to the 
 7th of November at sundown, will the determination be 
 whether the city shall throw such a majority as overcomes 
 the vast preponderance in the rural portion of the State. 
 I speak as to wise men. Vote for Tilden, if you please, but 
 vote knowing what will happen and what you are doing and 
 will have done! I have never thought it possible that my 
 countrymen, with the issue developed before them, in time 
 could ever reproduce the phantom of Buchanan's likeness 
 in the Presidential chair. It may be. It may be that on 
 the 14th of April next the anniversary of the surrender of 
 Fort Sumter and the anniversary of the murder of Lin- 
 coln, Governor Tilden may by the voice of a free people be 
 its great Chief Magistrate. But I wouldn't believe it be- 
 forehand. And I hope I shall never have occasion to believe 
 it afterward. It may be, but I don't believe it, that the 
 
620 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 people of this country with this record of the poKtical opin- 
 ions of Mr. Tilden, and this record of the party that is behind 
 him, pressing on their notice, may clothe him with the purple 
 of their power, may put the golden chain of their public 
 favor about his neck, and may applaud him as the man that 
 this people delighteth to honor. But I don't believe they 
 will, and if they do, the depth and the measure of their re- 
 pentance, it is not worth while now to insist upon. 
 
XIII 
 
 SPEECH DELI\'ERED IN THE GARFIELD-HAN- 
 COCK PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN IN COOPER 
 INSTITUTE, NEW YORK, SEPTEMBER 29, 1880. 
 
 NOTE 
 
 We close this selection of strictly political addresses of Mr. 
 Evarts with one of his speeches delivered during the Presidential 
 campaign of 1880. It is, doubtless, unnecessary to call to the 
 reader's attention that no attempt has been made to include in 
 these volumes all of Mr. Evarts's political utterances. Many of 
 his speeches that made their impression at the time have suffered 
 at the hands of the reporters and remain in fragments only. If 
 any such attempt were made the result would be voluminous and 
 of very trifling value. The selection here made will, it is ho])ed, 
 give a living impression of his position in the public life of his time, 
 his attitude towards the momentous questions of his day and his 
 character as a political orator before a popular audience. 
 
 Although, at various stages of his career, holding high public 
 office — as Attorney General at the close of President Johnson's 
 term, as Secretary of State under President Hayes and late in life, 
 as United States Senator from New York — it is but just to his 
 memory to say that in each case these honors came to him unsought 
 and that the choice met with general public approval. Though a 
 public man he was not in any sense what would be generally desig- 
 nated as a politician; and though not a politician, he was from the 
 first a devoled and staunch supporter and adherent of the Repub- 
 lican party and an unswerving believer in its principles and the 
 doctrines it espoused. 
 
 Large audiences were drawn together by any announcement 
 that he was to speak in a political campaign and the Republican 
 press as a rule gave full though not always very accurate reports. 
 Mr. John Sherman, one of his colleagues in President Hayes's 
 
 621 
 
622 SPEECHES OF WILLI.AJ^I MAX^^^LL EVARTS 
 
 cabinet, repeats, in his "Recollections of Forty Years," an amusing 
 remark by Mr. Evarts in regard to his political speeches, which 
 Mr. Sherman characterized as "a refined specimen of egotism" on 
 Mr. Evarts's part. In the campaign of 1879 for the election of 
 Governor of New York, the Republican State Committee had 
 asked Mr. Sherman to make speeches in several places throughout 
 the State and he had agreed to do so. Mr. Evarts, however, in 
 accepting a similar invitation, confined himself to the making of 
 one speech in Cooper Institute. ]Mr. Sherman complained to Mr. 
 Evarts, that he, a citizen of Ohio, should be expected to make 
 several speeches in the New York canvass, while Mr. Evarts, a 
 citizen of New York, was let off with only one. INIr. Evarts replied: 
 "Well, Mr. Sherman, when the people of New York wish my views 
 upon public questions, they arrange for a meeting in Cooper Insti- 
 tute or some such place. I make the speech and it is printed and 
 is read." 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 Mr. Chairman, Fellow Citizens, Ladies and Gentleme^i: — 
 
 The kind reception which you have accorded, in ad- 
 vance, to whatever I may be able to contribute in the can- 
 vass now pending, to the proper judgment of the American 
 people on the great issue before them, inclines me to think 
 that I was wrong in an opinion which I had intended to 
 espouse, that it was the press that was the only potent 
 orator in these popular discussions. By their magnificent 
 enterprise and apparatus they speak to millions w^here we 
 speak to thousands. By their perpetual possession of the 
 public ear they lay down, line upon line, precept upon pre- 
 cept, in season and out of season, whether men will hear or 
 whether thev will forbear. The orator has no such hold 
 upon the attention or the respect of the people. But I 
 know that if one speak, even in a whisper, in the cause of his 
 country, and for love of it, the people of the United States 
 will catch up the sound; and wdierever patriotism has not 
 died out, and wherever liberty is not suppressed, and wher- 
 
G.\RFIELD-IL\XCOCK CAMPAIGN 623 
 
 ever suffrage is honored and respected, they will carry on 
 that voice, though lost in the final decision which has tri- 
 umphed, or has faded away. 
 
 The question before the country, the question before 
 this vast representative assembly, is, to which of the two 
 parties that divide the United States the conduct of its 
 affairs for the ensuing four years may be safely, may be 
 wisely, may be hopefully, may be dutiably intrusted by a 
 people loving its honor, respecting its duty, and the value of 
 the institutions which wo have inherited from a noble an- 
 cestry. 
 
 Twenty-four years ago the people of this country intrusted 
 the management of their affairs to the Democratic party of 
 the United States. Twentv-four vears ago thev trusted to 
 a Democrat of Pennsylvania, Buchanan, the management 
 of her affairs. To-day it is proposed to you that you shall 
 restore tlie same Democratic party in the hands of another 
 Pennsylvania Democrat. Twenty years ago the people of 
 this country intrusted the management of their affairs to 
 the Republican party, born of patriotism and devoted to 
 liberty. Twenty years ago they thus intrusted their affairs 
 to the hands of an Illinois Republican. And, substantially, 
 the people of this country are to answer to-day the inquiry 
 of their conscience, the test of history, the judgment of the 
 world, whether they repent of taking power from Buchanan, 
 and repent of giving power to Lincoln. 
 
 Active faultfinders may, in this process of twenty years, 
 have had private or public grievances. There may have 
 been failures of equality always to the greatness of the 
 demands, but as history reads it, as foreign nations read it, 
 as the great God-fearing people of the United States read 
 it, if, next November the Pennsylvania Democrat is re- 
 stored to power, it is a verdict that the people have tired of 
 patriotism and are weary of liberty. Now, in these twenty 
 years, the Democratic party, made up as it was when it was 
 
624 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 trusted under Buchanan, asked — five times asked — to be 
 restored to power, and five times the people have answered 
 in the same way: "Never; no, never." They tried it during 
 the war, when the nation was in the tliroes of desperation, 
 when every coward had joined the Democratic party — if he 
 had a party — when every coward in the whole North was 
 arrayed in the army of non-fighting traitors, and the people 
 said: "It is sad to us that our youth have perished, and that 
 our youth must perish; it is sad to us that mourners are to 
 go about our streets for a whole generation; it is sad to us 
 that the substance of this people, thrifty, industrious, fond 
 of the pursuits of gain, should be poured out like water, and 
 that, so far as we can see, the last dollar may be put forth. 
 But we know what made our population what it was; we 
 know what made our greatness, and we will maintain ' Lib- 
 erty and Union, one and inseparable,' though the last man 
 should fall, and the last dollar should bespentin the conflict." 
 
 They asked again after the war was over, and after the 
 resistance to the loyal government had taken the form of 
 controversies about reconstruction, and the appeal to the 
 people was that the Republican party, having fallen into a 
 quarrel, and having on their hands a great impeachment and 
 a great struggle within their own ranks, would now, at least, 
 under this experience of vicissitudes of concord and union 
 among themselves, trust power to the Democratic party 
 united — no longer divided between combatants in arms and 
 non-combatants in treachery — the united Democratic party 
 — and the people said: "No. The party that carried us 
 through the war, when you said it was a failure, shall con- 
 duct the government now, and you shall submit to it. And 
 that you may understand what we mean, we put the great 
 captain, who received your surrender, in charge of the 
 Government." 
 
 Well, four years went on and they said: "Now, our people 
 are fond of a change." So you thought when you took up 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAIMPAIGN 625 
 
 arms in 1860, and we showed you that we were not fond of a 
 change. We loved our government as it was. We adored 
 our country as it was. You then proceeded to try and in- 
 augurate a change, and enforce it by the most telhng argu- 
 ments that the Democratic party ever issued — powder and 
 shot and shell. No; we will keep the government so long as 
 the Democratic party holds out the threat and presents the 
 array, and avows the principles we have resisted up to this 
 time. We will keep it in the hands of the same Captain of 
 our armies that we trusted before. 
 
 Well, they said: "Now we have had long peace and pros- 
 perity." Long peace and prosperity ! Think of the empha- 
 sis the Democratic party put upon that in the year 1876. 
 "We have liad long peace and prosperity." Why, do they 
 suppose that we are a nation of red Indians to whom a few 
 years of peace seem irksome and tiresome, and who desire a 
 change. Did they suppose that when the laborers of the 
 country, under the desperate tangle of our finances that the 
 rebellion had brought upon us, were working upon half time 
 and upon half wages, did they think that that was the com- 
 plete prosperity that the laboring people of the nation 
 should enjoy .^ We answered: "No; we will elect a volunteer 
 soldier that never hid behind his charming family, but went 
 to the war and served to the end, and we will trust him." 
 Well, then, they said, "Wliat can we do to please these 
 people? We have offered them a change four times since 
 they trusted Lincoln, and they said they would not change 
 at all. Why, they must be a people of fixed principles. They 
 must be a people that understand their own minds, and it 
 must be that they can take care of their own interests. What 
 an extraordinary people! A people, they say, wedded to 
 such a continuance in well doing and with such a sagacious and 
 persistent selection of the means of carrying out their jHir- 
 poses is on the very brink of despotism. What can save 
 them — a people that chooses Republicans for twenty years? 
 
 41 
 
626 
 
 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 Why, what can save them from the very abyss of military 
 despotism?" 
 
 We thought that when, in 1865, we had ended the greatest 
 war that modern times have seen, and when it waged against 
 free and equal institutions by a military power, we thought 
 that was nearer a threat of military despotism than anybody 
 had ever dreamed of in the United States, and when we got 
 out of it we thought we were rid of it forever, and we are. 
 It is not now by the ranks of war and its armaments that 
 they attempt to overpower you. It is by your own frank, 
 generous, confiding natures, which, like charity, "suffer 
 long and are kind," that they expect us to yield, from an un- 
 guarded people, what no powers in the world could otherwise 
 take from the people. 
 
 Well, they said: "Only look at the alternatives we offered 
 you. We offered you in 1864 a great Union General — Gen- 
 eral McClellan." Well, he was a great Union General, and 
 the united South, in arms, not voting, and this desiccated 
 Democracy that attended upon their will at the North said : 
 "What, not take a great Union General.? Why, what a 
 pledge of fidelity, when you see as plain as day that if you 
 only put yourselves under that great Union General, McClel- 
 lan, the South will lay down their arms because they won't 
 have anything to fight for, they will have gained it." An 
 admirable suggestion to a people that is fond of peace 
 and likes commerce and manufactures and a great deal 
 of peaceful industry and development — a charming pro- 
 posal! The answer was : " This candidate of yours is better 
 than his party. He was only unready, but his party was 
 untrue. But yet the great statesman that the affections of 
 the people had twined about, that has written a more glori- 
 ous page in our history than any other since Washington, 
 that has made liberty universal, and has dispelled the shades 
 of color and broken the lines of race, was a good enough 
 President for us, though he was not a great General of the 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 627 
 
 Union Army, and had not been either unready or untrue 
 during the country's trials." 
 
 Well, in 1808, they said: "We offer you a candidate now 
 (always from the North)— Governor Seymour, a candidate 
 better than his party." Well, that we agreed was true. 
 But how under heaven should these people think — when 
 ours is a government, not of men, not of kings, not of nobles, 
 but of the mass of the pojjular feeling and of public principle 
 that is represented in the Presidency — how, I say, should 
 they think that a party could commend itself to the suffrage 
 by saying its candidate was better than they.? What a 
 reason for taking a party, that is worse than the candidate! 
 I don't know but our countrymen have eaten of the insane 
 root and gone mad, but I don't think that any answers 
 they made to that proposition in the past show that they 
 have lost their wits at all. Well, now, Governor Seymour 
 was better than the party. In fact, as he has gone on 
 increasing in excellence, I think he is better than any party, 
 or, in fact, I don't know but he is better than all his fellow 
 men. That may be. I know he showed a very extreme 
 instance of that forgiving spirit and humbleness of soul 
 which are said to mark the Christian when, clothed with 
 the sword of power and speaking in the name of author- 
 ity, when your streets were red with the blood of innocents, 
 he spoke to the rioters as his friends. Now, that suits a man 
 for some departments of life, but not for the command of 
 the army and navy of the United States. 
 
 Well, in 1872 they said: "Those people are very hard to 
 please. We have offered them candidates that were better 
 than our party; now we will offer them another candidate, 
 a man who doesn't belong to our party at all. Tliese North- 
 ern men," they said, "are of rather a melodramatic tempera- 
 ment. They like a show, and what could be a finer show 
 than for a great party to take a candidate for the Presidency 
 right off from the top of the other party. Well," they said, 
 
628 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 "you must admit that that candidate is better than our 
 party." They said: "We only presented you before a loyal 
 patch upon a moth-eaten garment of rebellion and Democ- 
 racy." "Well," we replied, "we admit that you have not 
 presented a patch, but you have actually clothed yourselves 
 in another man's garment," and we added, "our notion that 
 the party that is in power ought to be in power, is the trans- 
 action which the American people pass upon in their Presi- 
 dential elections, and we will vote for General Grant and 
 not for Horace Greeley." 
 
 "Well," they said, "we have tried everything. Now we 
 will have a man after our own heart, a man that does not 
 come from the Republican party, a man that is not better 
 than our own party. Who can tell about these fickle melo- 
 dramatic Northerners, who are always running into scrapes 
 for want of prudence, thrift and forethought — a people that 
 you cannot keep out of the fire or out of the water.?" And so 
 they presented our distinguished fellow citizen and my class- 
 mate — Samuel J. Tilden. Well, that was fine. Now they 
 say : "Look at him ! See how we have come back to our true 
 colors! Did you ever see," say they, "a pattern that was 
 better matched by a patch on it than the Democratic party 
 was by Samuel J. Tilden? Now you cannot object to that." 
 "Well," the people said: "Let us look at that. Didn't you 
 have an old ticket and a popular suffrage on it then twenty 
 years ago — 1856.? " (For this Tilden candidacy was in 1876.) 
 Let us look at that. Somehow or other, it strikes us that 
 history is repeating itself, and that the same voters that 
 voted for Buchanan are to vote for Tilden, and we will agree 
 that, so far as we can see, in record and in temper, Tilden and 
 Buchanan are as hke as two peas. "Now, we have had that 
 pattern before," the people said, "and we will choose Hayes." 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, we come along down. At their 
 elections the Democratic party has been made up of the 
 same constituents — the solid South and the desiccated 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 629 
 
 Democracy of the North, and the people liave passed iijion 
 them as such. And now they present again the same com- 
 bination — the sohd South and tlie desiccated Democracy of 
 the North, neither more nor less — and they have chosen a 
 candidate, saying: "Having tired ourselves with pleasing 
 you by offering every pattern and patch, we will give you 
 another candidate that is better than our j^arty." Indeed, a 
 very eminent public thinker and writer, who seldom speaks 
 within bounds, has thought to frighten the people of the 
 country that espoused the Republican candidacy by saying 
 that our candidate, God bless him! General Garfield — 
 this is the crushing criticism upon him — is no better than 
 his party. Well, we thought so, we thought so. We thought 
 the party was as good as could be, and that, while it could 
 find in its ranks and in its lead many men that were worthy 
 of its honors and of its votes, we really must be excused 
 from saying that we could find any one man that was 
 better than the great Republican party. 
 
 Now, this is an extraordinary business. The Democratic 
 party, conscious of the beam in its own eye, and knowing 
 that there is not even a mote in the eye of the Republican 
 party, has sought to make a balance of the beam in the 
 Democratic party against the mote in the Republican 
 candidate. Well, that is an extraordinary situation! A 
 whole party trying to make a balance out of themselves 
 against what they charge as a blemish in our candidate! 
 They try to make a balance against the enormous iniquities 
 unrepented of and not yet laid aside; every epaulet, every 
 plume, every ruffle, every cartridge-box, every sword-belt, 
 every holster still surrounding the Democratic party in its 
 relation to our institutions and our prosi)erity, they think to 
 overcome by drawing attention to what they call a mote in 
 our candidate. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, when Mr. Black, desiring to help his 
 party, said that Garfield ])ersonally was one of the honestest. 
 
630 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM ]VL\XWELL EVARTS 
 
 warmest-hearted, most guileless men that he ever knew; 
 that he was a man of genius, of learning, of eloquence, 
 of popular power, he knew where to put the only arrow 
 that could pierce any harness of our candidate when he 
 said: "But, good as he is, he cannot in politics and in govern- 
 ment be any better than his party." Now, General Garfield 
 stands before the American people as a candidate for its 
 highest honors upon a plane of longer and more varied experi- 
 ence, of better proved capacity, of larger benevolence, of a 
 comprehensive mind, and a tender heart for his countrymen's 
 difficulties and dangers and sorrows, than any candidate that 
 has been presented to the people of the United States by 
 either party since Henry Clay. I had occasion to remark 
 four years ago on the superciliousness of our Eastern people 
 here — New York and New England, and the Atlantic board 
 — of taking it for granted that, because the candidate lifted 
 up on the shoulders of the great people of the West was not as 
 familiar to our observation and as clear in our estimate as 
 one of our great men, of assuming that he was not so fit as 
 he should be, and voting in the dark against him, as so many 
 did against President Hayes. But now that he has stood in 
 the light for four years; now that his countrymen and the 
 public men of Europe have estimated his public services, 
 and when our people feel the full rush of honesty, of fidel- 
 ity, which brought prosperity to the very finger-ends of every 
 man in the land, they begin to think that if they had known 
 President Hayes as well four years ago as they do now, he 
 would have had a larger majority. We had the same talk 
 about him then that they would like to engage you in now 
 about General Garfield. They had the same talk about him 
 then, I say, that he seemed to be a good man, but they did 
 not know exactly by what counsels and advisers he would be 
 surrounded. They did not know who was to lead him, and 
 who was to push him, and who was to guide him; and as they 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 631 
 
 saw various adventurers, leaders of the party, that looked as 
 if they would like to have a share in the government, some of 
 whom they liked, and some of whom they did not like, why, 
 people said, they would vote in the dark until they knew who 
 was going to manage him. Nothing has managed him but 
 love of country, an upright nature, a sincerity in the homely 
 virtues of American common life that will long be remem- 
 bered in the affections of the men and women of the United 
 States. 
 
 Now, people begin to say — Democrats — "Oh! If your 
 party had only renominated President Hayes, why, we would 
 not have stood against him; he has the hearts of the people. 
 But as for Garfield we don't feel so sure." In other words, 
 they feel about Garfield now as they felt about President 
 Hayes four years ago. And four years hence, they will feel 
 about Garfield as they feel about President Hayes now. 
 They used to be, in following the Republican party and 
 adopting its credits as belonging to themselves, at a safe 
 marching distance of about twelve or eight years behind 
 them, but now they are beginning to crowd us, for they are 
 only four years behind. If they will only keep on and study 
 our step and learn our music, it may bring them abreast of us 
 some time or other. 
 
 Well now, having discussed General Garfield, who is not 
 better than his party, let us look at General Hancock, who 
 is better than his part}'. General Hancock is a great and 
 faithful General of the armies of the United States. He was 
 a faithful General in the war, and in his place in the army he 
 has been a faithful General since, and no Republican seeks 
 either to obscure or belittle his claims upon his countrymen. 
 But when General Hancock is sought to be the "make-way" 
 to bring up the party whose candidate he is to the standard 
 of a party like ours, that has seen a Lincoln, a Grant, and a 
 Hayes, he has got to have a gi-eat deal more avoirdupois to 
 weigh us down. 
 
632 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 What do these people think a change of party govern- 
 ment means? Is it, as some of these palaverers would have 
 us suppose, a toss of a copper or a wave of a hand, and all is 
 over? Is that so? Is that what a change of party means; 
 what a change of parties in a great nation like this means; 
 what a change of parties from one that preserved the coun- 
 try to the other that attacked it — is that all that it means? 
 Does it mean nothing to the poor freedmen of the South 
 whether, all else being against them, the Federal Executive is 
 to be against them too? Does it mean nothing to the loyal 
 people of the country, to the heroes in your fights, to the 
 leaders in your cabinets, and to the memories of the great 
 statesmen that have passed away, whether the American 
 people are to put that party and those memories and those 
 living statesmen to an open shame; and whether they are 
 to exalt over their heads the party that, in the name of the 
 people and with the people's power, we have resisted until 
 we saved the country through war and preserved it from dis- 
 asters of peace? I tell you, gentlemen, that the relations of 
 a people to their public men and of the public men to the 
 people are reciprocal; and when a nation turns its back in 
 prosperity upon those who never turned their backs, in the 
 field or in the cabinet, against the enemies of the country, 
 the people has gone over to the side of the enemies of the 
 country. 
 
 Manners change in different ages; but this affair of a transfer 
 of power from one party to another, diametrically its oppo- 
 site, is, with a proper allowance for the difference of manners 
 and the ameliorations of life, pretty much the same thing. 
 And, as I remember but one great character in history that 
 received from his countrymen the surname of "The Superb" 
 — only one, — "Tarquinius Superbus," of Rome — I thought 
 I would see whether history, that had repeated itself here 
 w^th this magnificent title,* would not find some other 
 
 * General Hancock had been popularly spoken of in admiration as The Su- 
 perb Hancock. 
 
GARFIELD-ILVNCOCK CAMTAIGN G33 
 
 traits of resemblance in the transactions of Tarquinius's 
 government. 
 
 The King of Rome that preceded Tarquinius had made a 
 change in the Roman Constitution in favor of popuhir rights. 
 He had endowed with a share in the suffrage and in the com- 
 monwealth the plebeians, and it was a thorn in the side of 
 the haughtv classes that domineered over them that the 
 poor plebeians should be trusted with the suffrage. Now, 
 I think that Lincoln did something of that kind for the 
 poor plebeians of the South. I think the Republican party 
 has done, not only something, but all that its power thus far 
 has permitted it to do, to establish those popular rights — to 
 be sure only in the hands of the plebeians. Tarquin came for- 
 ward and slew Tullius, and the great reformers that repre- 
 sented the people died by the hand of the assassin, and then, 
 when he had thus got power, he at once took away from the 
 very plebeians every vestige of their rights. He put to death 
 all Senators that had voted for it. He took into his hands 
 the whole administration of justice, and he slew or exiled all 
 that were obnoxious to his will. Well, gentlemen, let me say 
 for the Roman people that Tarquinius Superbus was the last 
 king that ever sat upon the throne in Rome and until the 
 time that Brutus completed the assassination of Caesar — 
 down to that time there had always been a Brutus that would 
 brave the eternal devils to be King. Now, as I say, manners 
 have changed. But the principle of human nature is the 
 same which makes the gulf so wide between the princii)les of 
 Servius Tullius and Tarquinius Superbus, and so wide the 
 gulf between the principles of the party of Abraham Lincoln 
 and the party of General Hancock, and change of parties does 
 not pass like a summer dream. No, it is to be from our 
 hearts, if at all, and, thank God, it is to be only if we have 
 the will to allow it. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, we have candidates also for Vice- 
 President, and I take Mr. English first. I have never seen 
 
634 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 any very open or public avowal of why the Democrats nom- 
 inated Mr. English. He was not in our minds at all. I do 
 not know that his countrymen were turning him over among 
 the men that they thought the Democrats could nominate. 
 It will not do to put it wholly upon the fact that he is a rich 
 banker, and so we look at the speeches he has made in Con- 
 gress twenty years ago, when they talked about abolition- 
 ists and about the blacks and about the plebeians in the 
 fashion that the old Democrats used to talk about our notions 
 of befriending the people. There did not seem to be any 
 reason for his nomination to be found there and I leave it for 
 his neighbors, who have expressed their minds about him, 
 whether there is anything in that large liberality of per- 
 sonal character which makes a man popular, in spite of 
 the badness of his political principles. I do not understand 
 that there is a very wide claim on that score. I do observe 
 in his letter of acceptance that he seems to be of a very 
 sympathetic nature — feels for the sufferings of others — 
 because I observe that he expresses great interest in the 
 toiling millions of his countrymen. Well, these are tri- 
 fling matters, perhaps, but yet they do show whether a 
 party is sincere or not; and when I saw that Mr. English 
 had this yearning of heart for the toiling millions of his 
 countrymen, I could not but think of a story that our excel- 
 lent judge. Judge Brady, is fond of telling at the expense of 
 our profession — for there is one good thing about us lawyers, 
 that we do repeat all the jokes against ourselves that we can 
 pick up. Well, a young man who had lost his father, and 
 had yet a small estate of fifty dollars from a solvent debtor, 
 that still he needed to collect by law, waited upon a lawyer in 
 the village, who he knew was a friend of his father, and asked 
 him to collect it. The lawyer received him as only a lawyer 
 knows how to receive a client and admitted frankly that he 
 did know his father, and that he loved him as a father, and 
 nothing would give him greater pleasure than to collect that 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 635 
 
 little bill. So, when the process had brought in the money, 
 word was sent to the young man that the debt had been col- 
 lected, and that he would be glad to pay it to him deducting 
 the costs, and so the lawyer handed out to the young man, 
 who was full of gratitude, fifteen dollars out of the fifty, 
 at which he seemed a little dazed in counting it, and the 
 lawyer said, "Why, is it not all right; are there not fifteen 
 dollars there? " "Oh, yes," says the young man, "there are 
 fifteen dollars; I was only thinking how lucky it was for me 
 that you didn't know my grandfather." And I could not 
 help thinking how lucky it was for these toiling millions of 
 our countrymen that only a few thousand of them were 
 within the immediate friendship of Mr. English. 
 
 And now General Arthur, our townsman and our 
 friend, is proposed to make one more in the long roll of 
 Vice-Presidents that New York has given to the nation. 
 Everybody knows of General Arthur that he never sought 
 an honor, but took only such as came to him by the free-will 
 of his fellow citizens; everybody knows that in the lead of the 
 great administrations of our political affairs, he has been 
 trusted and honored, and the people of the United States 
 accept this candidacy from this, our great state and city, and, 
 knowing of his character and position, intend to make his 
 term the ninth Presidential term that has been filled by 
 Vice-Presidents from the State of New York. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, let us see what are the great questions 
 before the people. In the first place, let me submit to your 
 intelligence that the people of the United States do not need 
 to be asked to reconsider any of the decisions that they made 
 in 1864, or in 1868, or in 1872, or in 1876. Those have 
 passed into the judgment of their countrymen, and the people 
 have said that the Republican party should keep power, not- 
 withstanding anything that could be urged, with reason or 
 without, by hypercriticism or by honest discontent, that the 
 party, the great party and its great and honest leaders, 
 
636 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 should be kept in power at all those terms. Now, if I am right 
 in this, what ought always to be the great question for a peo- 
 ple practical in their tastes and interested in their prosperity? 
 It is, what shall we say of the party as it has administered 
 the government for the past four years ? What shall we say 
 of the Democratic party as it has exhibited itself in the last 
 four years? Is it wise, is it prudent, is it for our advantage 
 that the government should run on for four years more in 
 the conduct of that party that has guided it four years, 
 and in the same way that it has been guided for four years? 
 Has the Democratic party, that we condemned during 
 all these previous stages at which our judgment has been 
 called for, has it, in the last four years, helped our credit, 
 helped our peace, helped our public faith, helped our pros- 
 perity? We do not need to be told that we live under 
 the government of a good God. That we knew, even when 
 the Democrats were racking our hearts with sorrow, and 
 rifling our coffers of wealth. It was not a good God that we 
 turned upon and cursed. It was the Democratic party that 
 we turned upon and cursed and defeated, and when this 
 general and universal Providence, protecting us all through a 
 great party, has, in what belongs to government, in what be- 
 longs to prudence, in what belongs to honesty, in what be- 
 longs to human wisdom, spread the golden mantle of peace 
 over the whole country, filled out granaries and our ware- 
 houses, lit up our forges, set a-whirling all our spindles, and 
 asked even for more means to employ the industry of this 
 people, this people are not to be turned aside by saying that 
 it is all a good Providence that did that. 
 
 Well, to bring it down a little more concisely in this Demo- 
 cratic devoutness, it seems that we have been living under a 
 financial theocracy for the last eight years, and that John 
 Sherman was favored by Providence as the best man to 
 carry out the purposes of the Divine wisdom. Well, Mr. 
 Bayard thinks that that doubtless was a mistake on the 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 637 
 
 ])art of Providence, for he ought to have been the ])roi)het 
 under this theocracy. AVell, gentk^nien, if the Re])u))Hcan 
 party lias carried on the government thus prosperously and 
 to these results by the special favor of Providence, did you 
 ever hear of a more illogical reason to a people than that they 
 shoukl turn them out because Providence was on their side? 
 Do the Democrats expect to get along against Providence or 
 without Providence? 
 
 But away with these frivolities. No doubt Providence 
 causes His sun to shine upon the evil and the good, and His 
 rains to fall upon the just and the unjust; but, nevertheless, 
 the farms of the drunkard and the sluggard do not show such 
 a smile of Providence as the farms of the thrifty and the 
 laborious and the temperate. Did not this sunshine and 
 rain fall upon the wide areas of agriculture when our corn 
 was used to burn for fuel, because confidence was destroyed 
 in the country, and it could not be moved to the hungry de- 
 mands of Europe? But what moves the crops? Is it the 
 railroads and the steamships? Why, the iron tracks and the 
 trackless j)aths of the ocean were as open at those times as at 
 these. Why is it that there was no capital, that there was 
 no enterprise? Why, there was caj)ital and there was enter- 
 prise, but the unextricated snarl of our finances, brought 
 about by the war and perpetuated by Democratic obstruc- 
 tions in peace, had frightened caj)ital, and it had hidden itself 
 in the six per cent bonds of the United States. And then 
 when following in the same path with Abraham Lincoln's 
 Secretary of the Treasury, we set our faces toward John 
 Sherman — favored by his countrymen antl favored by Prov- 
 idence as well, no doubt — when he carried througii that mag- 
 * nificent financial march to the broad sea of pros])erity, which 
 rivals in the fame and in (he gratitude of his countrymen that 
 military march liuit the great Caj)tain, Sliernuui, took to the 
 sea then he unbound capital and enterprise, then he dis- 
 lodged it from its safe shelter under the six per cent bonds 
 
638 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 and reduced it to the scanty pittance of four per cent, 
 and drove it out into the activities of commerce and the 
 risks of manufactures. And then you had the circle com- 
 pleted as distinctly by this final touch of the human pru- 
 dence, sagacity, fidelity, and courage of the Republican 
 party, just as distinctly as the natural philosopher completes 
 the circuit of the electric current that surrounds the world. 
 
 Now, I would like to know how much the Democratic 
 party did to help Providence out of its diflBculties. I am 
 astonished at this element in party politics. Why, every- 
 body knows that the conflicts in England and in this coun- 
 try are based upon this proposition — that the party in 
 power is to be blamed for its faults, its errors and even its 
 misfortunes, and that it is to receive the honor of its fidel- 
 ity, of its wisdom, of its prosperity. And this is the first 
 time that statesmen, who valued their public character, 
 have gone through the land prating against a party's right 
 to the honor of the things that it had done. Let them say 
 that they will do better — let them say that they will do 
 better against Providence than we have done with it. Let 
 the country trust them if they will. 
 
 But they say, that General Hancock, who is better than 
 his party, has always been an excellent friend of the coun- 
 try and its prosperity and faith. Well, now, when a man is 
 a candidate for the Presidency and writes letters, everybody 
 knows they come substantially from the bottom of his 
 heart. That is settled. If there is anything that the 
 country can rely upon as true in purpose and in fact, it is 
 in a candidate's letters. That we have always known. 
 But, nevertheless, letters are not exactly transactions. 
 When Admiral CoflBn, who lived in Cape Cod as a child, 
 had adhered to the British Crown, and risen to a great 
 rank in the navy, came over to visit this country about 
 fifty years ago, and renew his associations with his people 
 and the familiar scenes of his boyhood, he told his officers that 
 
GARPIELD-HAXCOCK CAMPAIGN G39 
 
 when they got to Cape Cod they would see lobsters that 
 would make them open their eyes — that they would see lob- 
 sters that would weigh twenty-five pounds. The rules 
 of the quarter-deck do not permit you to contradict an Ad- 
 miral flatly, but still some distrust was shown on the faces 
 of those Lieutenants and Captains. "Well," he says, "if 
 you doubt it, I will make you a bet that when we get to 
 Cape Cod I will show you lobsters that weigh twenty-five 
 pounds." And the bet was made, under this permission of 
 the Admiral. And when they got there the Admiral scoured 
 the Cape, but he did not find any lobsters that weighed 
 twenty-five jiounds. So he said, "Well, they don't happen 
 to be here just now, but I will get the aflfidavits of the old 
 fishermen," and he brought piles of affidavits, that when they 
 were fishermen in early times, lobsters that weighed twenty- 
 five pounds were as common as huckleberries are on the 
 Cape. Then it was left to an umpire to decide which had 
 lost or won the bet. And this concise judgment was given 
 by the umpire, which would entitle him to a seat on the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States if everything in his life 
 comported with it. His decision was that "Affidavits are 
 not lobsters." Now if any one doubted that, they could 
 try to eat an affidavit from any source whatever, People 
 are said sometimes to swallow their oaths, and these written 
 depositions are not very savory food. 
 
 Now, candidates' letters are not the decrees of a Demo- 
 cratic caucus, much less the acts of Congress of the United 
 States. If anybody thinks they are, and elects General 
 Hancock in that view, he will have to come back to that 
 sober, commoni)lace judgment, that candidates' letters are 
 not acts of Congress. Now, General Hancock prides him- 
 self, and justly, upon having been a consistent and a gen- 
 uine and earnest Democrat all his life. He was so in 18G4. 
 I have never heard that he "kicked," as the phrase was, 
 against the platform at Chicago of the Democratic party. 
 
640 SPEECHES OP WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I never heard that he did, and I do not now find that it was 
 made a matter of boast then. 
 
 Now, let us look at this party of ours, that has a candidate 
 no better than itself, and the Democratic party, with their 
 candidate that upheld its platform then, and let us see 
 how they compare. It is short reading. The Republicans 
 say in 1864: "We approve the determination of the Govern- 
 ment not to compromise with the rebels or to offer them any 
 terms of peace except such as may be based upon an uncon- 
 ditional surrender of their hostility, and a return to their 
 just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United 
 States, and we call on the Government to maintain this 
 position, and to prosecute the war with the utmost possible 
 vigor to complete the suppression of the rebellion, in full 
 reliance upon the self-sacrificing patriotism, the heroic 
 valor, and the undying devotion of the American people to 
 the country and its free institutions." I would like to see 
 the Republican now that will not follow his party in that 
 sublime faith through the next election in November. 
 
 What did the Democratic party say at that very time on 
 this very point .f* "That this convention does explicitly de- 
 clare as the sense of the American people, that after four 
 years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of 
 war, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare de- 
 mand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of 
 hostilities, with a view to an ultimate conventign of the 
 States or other peaceable means, to the end that at the 
 earliest practicable moment peace may be restored on the 
 federal union of the States." Which was right — the arro- 
 gant assumption of the Democrats to speak the deliberate 
 sense of the American people, or the humble faith, in the 
 dark hour and in the shadow of the valley, of the Repub- 
 lican party, that they could rely on the patriotism, the 
 courage, and the undying devotion of the American people 
 to their country and its free institutions? Now, I think I 
 
GARFIELD-HAXCOCK CA^IPAIGX 641 
 
 would ratlur liave <a candidate wlio is not better than that 
 Republican jiarty than a candidate who is a good deal better 
 than that Democratic party. 
 
 But in 1868 General Hancock was actively enlisted in the 
 maintenance of the i)rinciples then avowed by the Demo- 
 cratic party. He was a candidate before the convention, 
 and received, I think, 144 votes — I will not de])rive him of 
 anything — I think 144| votes. So, there he is, with his 
 colors nailed to the flag-staff. Now, nothing remained but 
 this war. They had foinid out that the American people 
 were attached to their institutions. But there we were, 
 with this load of debt, with this embarrassment in the 
 burden of taxation, with a people still tugging and sweat- 
 ing under the burdens that the Democratic party had 
 laid on it. And now, they say, is a time to catch these 
 people in despair. There are no trumpets now, there are no 
 drums, there are no cannon — none of the pomp and circum- 
 stance of war to arouse and inflame them. It is the painful, 
 slow drudgery of labor to pay taxes, and of capital to pay 
 tribute to the government. 
 
 Now, we will see how the two parties stand, and how the 
 party that Garfield represents stands by the side of, and in 
 comparison with, the Democratic party. I will read of 
 the Democratic party first: "1868: The bonded debt shall 
 be paid in greenbacks. Government bonds and all other 
 securities to be taxed equally with all other property." 
 There is the faith of the nation sacrificed at once. It then 
 arraigns the Republican party "for the unparalleled oppres- 
 sion and tyranny that have marked its career." Now, this 
 is the smootli-si)oken General Hancock, wlio thinks that the 
 Republican party will not make much of a change if it falls 
 into line behind him. This is the party — our party — that 
 he speaks of as displaying the "un])aralleled opj^ression and 
 tyranny" that have marked our career — your career and my 
 career! Let us vote for Hancock! Again, it announces 
 
 42 
 
642 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 "that should the Republican party succeed in November 
 next, and inaugiu-ate its President, we will meet as a subju- 
 gated and conquered people, amid the ruins of liberty and 
 the fragments of the Constitution!" Well, I would be very 
 glad to meet General Hancock, as I often have done, almost 
 anywhere. But amid the ruins of liberty and the fragments 
 of the Constitution I would say that I would not recognize 
 him at all. Then they "regard the reconstruction acts of 
 Congress as usurpations" and "as unconstitutional, revolu- 
 tionary and void," and yet we are told everything is going on 
 "smoothly" — "in a groove" — in a Republican groove, with 
 only a change of cars and of brakemen, and of engineers, and 
 of conductors, and of Superintendent. The whole fabric — 
 that splendid fabric — of energy, of courage, of faith, by 
 which the wisdom of the Republicans has drawn the nation 
 out of the horrid, out of the ruinous contacts and destruction 
 of war, and set it on the plane of comparative peace and on 
 the plane of law — all that "usurpation," "unconstitutional, 
 revolutionary, and void!" 
 
 What did we say when we were struggling to pay this 
 debt.? I think it must be admitted that the North was to 
 pay, and is to pay, more of that debt than the South. We did 
 not try to "scale it"; we did not try to tax it. What did we do? 
 We speak our mind fairly well. Our platform denounced all 
 forms of repudiation as a national crime. There is no un- 
 certain sound in that, is there? We did not stop to see 
 whether we could commit a crime and escape punishment in 
 this world, or at the hands of Providence. It was enough 
 for us to know that it was a crime. "And the national 
 honor requires the paying of the public debt in the uttermost 
 good faith to all creditors at home and abroad," not only 
 according to the letter, but the spirit of the law under which 
 it was contracted. "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth 
 life." And if there was any doubt in the minds of our credi- 
 tors, whether they were the poor widows and orphans in our 
 
G.\RFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 643 
 
 land, or the Rothscliilds and rich bankers of London, that we 
 would jjay a debt tliat was so sacredly contracted to save all 
 that is worth having in this world, according to tlie spirit as 
 well as the letter, such a declaration would set tlieni at rest. 
 
 Now, let us see the wisdom of the other side. They said, 
 "pay your debt in greenbacks; tax your Government secur- 
 ities." We said that the best policy, by which to diminish 
 our burden of debt, is so to imi)rove our credit that capi- 
 talists will seek to loan us money at lower rates of interest 
 than we now pay, and must continue to pay so long as re- 
 pudiation, partial or total, open or covert, is threatened or 
 suspected. Now, there are two ways of getting rid of debt. 
 Which is the true mother of this child of the nation — the pub- 
 lic credit — that boldfaced jade, the Democratic party, that 
 would have cut it in half and left it to perish, or that nursing 
 mother, the Republican party, that sought to shelter and 
 cherish its weakness until it should outgrow it, and become, 
 as it is to-day, the glory and the strength of the American 
 people.' I am happy to say Mr. Chairman, that those senti- 
 ments of the Republican party were uttered when you were 
 at the head of the finances of the nation. 
 
 I am not going to read the later platforms, for they are 
 fresh in your minds. In 1876 they said that the resumption 
 of specie payments was impossible, and would ruin us. 
 Well, as the client said to the lawyer, when he asked him if 
 the magistrate could put him in prison for such and such 
 and such cause. "No," said the lawyer, "he cannot." 
 "But," said the client, "he has; I am in prison." We did 
 resume specie payments; did it ruin us.'^ Well, gentlemen, 
 Napoleon used to say that, in the affairs of war, he had 
 noticed that Providence favored the heaviest battalion, 
 and I think that, in the affairs of peace. Providence favors 
 courage, fidelity and faith in the moral government of the 
 world. 
 
644 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 There are two things that imderHe the whole fabric of 
 poHtical society, its interest and its sentiment. One is the 
 suffrage, which is the basis of it all. Another is the large- 
 ness and integrity of our country, which this people, for 
 some reason or other, in spite of all the inculcation of South- 
 ern dogmas, are insisting upon thinking greater than any 
 of its parts. 
 
 Our people know what the elements and traits of free 
 suffrage are, and have resented any attack upon it in any 
 form. What is the education of this people if it be not to 
 value the liberties of others as well as their own? I never 
 knew a king, or a noble, or priest, or rich man that did 
 not value his liberty, and I think some of them were willing 
 even to carrv their liberties to the extent of license, as we 
 say. But the question is, whether the strong value the 
 liberties of the weak. The question is, whether the proud 
 value the liberties of the humble. The question is, whether 
 the man of great intellect, of great learning, values the 
 liberties of the ignorant. And when a great section of 
 this country talks about suffrage as an inviolable right, and 
 then, with all its strength, all its pride, all its learning, 
 flaunts itself before this country, boastful that it can in- 
 timidate the weak and can deceive the ignorant, I don't 
 think much of their love of liberty, except in the sense 
 that kings and nobles love liberty — for its license — at the 
 expense of the poor, the humble, the ignorant and the weak. 
 That is an old stage of politics in this world, but since the 
 Fourth day of July, 1776, it has not been the politics of the 
 American people, and I don't think it will be next November. 
 
 Let us see how much the platforms preach, and at the 
 hustings, the orators palaver about the suffrage. The plat- 
 form of the Democratic party speaks of it as the right pre- 
 servative of all rights, and immediately proceeds to take it 
 away from the blacks. Now, if that right is preservative of 
 all rights, and you take it away from the blacks, cimning as 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 645 
 
 you are, you take away their rights. Now, General Han- 
 cock says, in the admirable letter of acce])tance, of which 
 his party is so proud, that a free ballot, a full vote, and an 
 honest count is what the people of the United States want. 
 Now, here is a little table that has been used by an accom- 
 plished orator throughout the western j^art of this coimtry, 
 in which he gives the following result of a free ballot, a full 
 vote, and a fair count in 1876: 
 
 Hayes Tilden 
 
 Green County, Ala 2 408 
 
 Walton County, Ga 2 1,393 
 
 Wilkes County, Ga 2 1,139 
 
 East Feliciana, La none 1,736 
 
 Lawrence County, Miss 2 2,073 
 
 Tallahatchie County, Miss 1 1,144 
 
 Yazoo County, Miss 2 3,672 
 
 Brown County, Texas 1 2,525 
 
 Eastland County, Texas 3 1,787 
 
 Hidalgo County, Texas 4 1,629 
 
 Buchanan County, Va 2 1,330 
 
 Now, you see what the Democratic protection of the right 
 of suffrage, preservative of all rights, and a free ballot, a full 
 vote, and a fair count is. Here are eleven counties in six 
 different Southern States that have produced in the aggre- 
 gate twenty-one votes for Hayes and sixteen odd thousand 
 for Tilden. Now, I think that, under a candidate that is 
 better than his party, and with this preaching in the plat- 
 form, and this palaver at the hustings, the Republican vote 
 in these counties will probably be doubled from twenty-one 
 to forty-two. But as the Democrats like to be included in 
 all this talk about a free ballot, a full vote, and a fair count, 
 I suppose their aggregate will rise from sixteen thousand to 
 thirty-two thousand. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I don't know what the Anuu'ican i)eople 
 are made of. I don't know whether they like this palaver. 
 
646 SPEECHES OF WILLIAM MAXWELL EVARTS 
 
 I don't think it is creditable to a candidate, that is better 
 than his party, to write such contemptuous imitation of such 
 principles as that. I don't think it is creditable to a party, 
 even though it is worse than a candidate, to put forth such a 
 solemn proposition of its love of that suffrage, "preserva- 
 tive of all rights." The only equal for this disparity be- 
 tween principles and practice that I have ever heard of, 
 was that of a man who broke his wife's head with a motto 
 that hung in a frame at their bedside, "God bless our home." 
 Now, as I say, loving the suffrage, we resent any inter- 
 ference with it. Now, this Democratic party says to us, 
 "Oh, don't mind them — the negroes of the South: they are 
 far off; they are not of your race; they are ignorant; they 
 are feeble. Don't distress yourselves about this injury of 
 the poor blacks in the distant parts of the country; that is 
 our State right, and we mean to exercise it." But when the 
 American liberty accuses the Democratic party of having 
 made a deadly assault upon the first foundation right of 
 liberty and equality, the Democratic party undertakes to 
 reply: "When have we made such an assault.? Why, we 
 have prophesied under the name of liberty, and under the 
 name of hberty we have cast out Republican devils." The 
 answer is, "Inasmuch as ye have done it to the least of these 
 poor disciples of liberty at its feet, ye have done it unto me" 
 and in the scales of justice, and in the eye and in the balance 
 of the Divine scrutiny this is a law of the moral government 
 of the world, and if this people looks with patience on this 
 robbery of the suffrage from these poor freedmen, it won't be 
 long before we shall have to debate what we shall do to pro- 
 tect the suffrage of these poor plebeians whom Tarquin the 
 Superb would rob of their franchises. 
 
 (Note: We omit the remainder of this speech as reported. It is 
 too fragmentary and disjointed. Mr. Evarts continues in much 
 the same vein to deal with the questions, as between the two great 
 
GARFIELD-HANCOCK CAMPAIGN 647 
 
 political parties, that were uppermost in the public discussions of 
 the day. Maintaining that the Democratic party was fundament- 
 ally the same then, in its purposes and its theories of government, 
 as it was before and during the civil war, he continued in his solemn 
 warnings against letting that party into control of the government 
 again. There is a brief defence of the Republican doctrine of a 
 protective tariff, dwelling upon the argument that one of the pur- 
 poses and results of the Republican tariff was the protection and 
 maintenance of the American laborer against conditions that would 
 bring American labor down to the level of that of Europe; and that 
 this tariff, in its encouragement of manufactures, would enure to 
 the benefit of the South, if the South would but take advantage 
 of it, in the establishment there of great industrial enterprises. He 
 closes, reproaching the Democratic party for its sectionalism in the 
 "Solid South," and claiming for the Republican party, upon its 
 past great record and its then recent histor5% the support of the 
 voters to continue it in power as the safeguard of the welfare of 
 the count^y^) 
 
 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 

NOV 
 
 HQ 
 
:.-■ I .Ml 
 
 ,n,T:r^^°^^ 
 
 013 763 294 g 
 
 
 • 'Sill 
 
 . -m 
 
 
 lis; 
 
 ^:'!^iiiP 
 
 ■ z ' .'•'1 
 
 
 ''■'■''■•■y'Hi;; 
 
 'i ■'■''' III