3 SEPTEMBER 1881, Page 13

MR. CONKLING AND GENERAL GARFLELD.

PTO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.")

is not to be supposed that the details of American politics are of sufficient interest to English readers of the Spec- tator, to admit of any continued discussion by correspondence in your pages. But, as one of many American readers who believe that "A Yankee," in his letter of July 5th, has not accurately represented the political situation in the United States, I beg the favour of space for a few words of criticism upon his letter.

It is, indeed, true that the nomination of Mr. Garfield was a .surprise to him and to the Republican party. It was, however, more so to him than to a large section of the party, who hoped that the unexpected might happen. This section had no par- ticular choice for the Presidency. They only hoped that a man might be nominated who would not revive the methods of General Grant's administration, which had been in part broken up by President Hayes. Having secured the defeat of General -Grant, they were more than satisfied with the outcome of the Chicago Convention. A man was nominated who had received the best training of one of the best American colleges, who had served with distinction in the war of the rebellion, and who had had a long experience in the National Congress. Besides this, General Garfield had been a warm supporter of the administra- tion of Mr. Hayes, an administration which Mr. Conkling had lost no opportunity to revile. One of the reasons for this oppo- sition to General Grant was the belief that if elected he would be in his new term, as in his last, largely under the influence of Mr. Conkling. The distrust of the latter as a safe guide in the management of the affairs of the country, whether justified or not, was and is widely spread. After the nomination of Mr. Garfield, the three hundred and six delegates who, under the leadership of Mr. Conkling, Mr. Cameron, and General Logan, had held out to the last for Grant, endorsed the successful can- didate with great unanimity and good-feeling. Not so Mr. -Conkling. He, as in the canvas of 1876 (Hayes against Tilden), and as in some minor canvases, when the men nominated were mot to his liking, held aloof. He was silent for some -weeks, and was said to be sullen. At last, and when -General Garfield's prospects of election were good, and not bad, as your correspondent intimates, he was induced by the pres- Aare of his friends, represented by the candidate for Vice- President, to join in a campaign that was being everywhere vigorously carried on. Ever since Mr. Conkling thus came reluctantly into the field, we have been told, just as your cor- Tespondent has repeated, "It was the New York machine that made Mr. Garfield President." Waving all other answer to this audacious proposition, it is sufficient to say that it was the united Republican party that made Mr. Garfield President. If the 15,000 Independent Republicans of New York—" scratchers," not "half-breeds "—voters who would never have cast their ballots for General Grant, had withheld their support from Mr. Garfield, he would not have been elected. Thus we might also say of the Independent Republicans in such States as Ohio, Indiana, Connecticut, and New Hampshire. General Garfield was elected because his nomination made it possible to secure -these essential ballots. The overthrow of the third-term -scheme, so carefully nursed for four years, with its unit rule and its "bosses," made this possible. All that we can say to , the credit of Mr. Conkling in that canvas is that, judged by his own standard of party fealty, he only tardily did his duty. An opponent of the machine, as your correspondent claims to Le, who " confesses " that "in New York this party organisa- tion works reasonably well," must take a rose-coloured view of New York politics since Mr. Conkling has been the leader of the Republican "machine." Governor Cornell, whom "A Yankee" eulogises as its product, owes his reputation of being a fair Governor to his refusal to practise machine methods in his official position. It is widely believed that there is no entente cordiale between him and the now dis- comfited leader of that system, since he failed to use his position as Governor of the State in securing Mr. Conkling's return to the Senate, by bringing pressure upon Members of the State Legislature. Moreover, it is notorious that the machine has driven out of State politics such men as Mr. Evarts, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Morgan, and Mr. Wheeler, to replace them by ignorant and unscrupulous ward politicians, who are vulgarly known as "heelers." When Mr. Conkling was at the height of his power in the State, when a word from him would have sent a statesman to the Senate, a second-rate politician was elected, whose final exit from political life was hastened by a scandal that scarcely has a parallel in any political history.

No; the reign of the machine in New York and in General Grant's last term did not produce reasonably good results. It produced men who neglected official duties to engage in the nefarious work of stifling public opinion by the packing of caucuses and conventions, men who enriched themselves at the expense of the State, who did not assist nor originate plans for reforms in any departments of the Government, men who so conducted themselves as to turn the country over for a time to the Democratic party. One other charge to be made against them is that they imitated Tweed, of infamous memory, in the formation of unholy alliances with the corrupt wing of the opposing party.

Finally, in contradistinction to your correspondent's eulogium of Mr. Conkling, I quote a description of him given by Dr. Woolsey, late President of Yale College :—" He has originated no great measures in Congress, so far as I know, nor has he revealed any profound views on finance or the statesman's office. His great influence could not have existed, but for the spoils system." Fortunately for our country, it seems as if the machine were overthrown. Its first repulse occurred at Chicago, its Gettysburg in the President's victory in our National Senate in securing the confirmation of his nominations, and its Appom- attox in the refusal of the New York Legislature to return Roscoe Conkling.—I am, Sir, &c., KNICKERBOCKER.