Letters and Literary Memorials of Samuel J. Tilden, v. 1

by Samuel J. Tilden

THE FIRST GUN FOR FREE SOIL

"April, 1848.

At the threshold of the Free-soil revolt of 1848, ex-President Van Buren, who was spending the winter in lodgings at Julian's Hotel in Washington Place, New York, said one day to Mr. Tilden, as he handed him a roll of manuscript: "If you wish to be immortal, take this home with you, complete it, revise it, put it into proper shape, and give it to the public."

Mr. Tilden replied that he had not the slightest wish to be immortal by any process that would impose upon him at that time any more labor; but he consented to take the manuscript down to the residence of the ex-President's son, John Van Buren, who then resided in White Street, and he agreed that if John would do half of the work he would do the other half. John did agree, and a few days after the interview referred to, Tilden and John met at the ex-President's lodgings to report.

Mr. Van Buren opened the subject by asking what they had done with Niagara Falls. This referred to a somewhat ambiguous metaphor which had found its way into the ex-President's manuscript. "We have struck that out," was the reply. He laughed, as if rather relieved at having an unpleasant duty discharged by other hands, while they went on to read the result of their joint labors.

After the address had received the combined approval of each party to its composition, the next question was how to get it before the public. After discussing various plans, they finally decided to issue it as an address of the Democratic members of the Legislature. Accordingly, on the 12th of April, Senator John G. Floyd, from the committee of Democratic members of the Legislature to prepare and report an address, read the paper to his colleagues, by whom it was unanimously adopted. This memorable and epochal document was given at length in the Public Writings and Speeches of Tilden, Vol. II., page 537. This address deserves to be regarded as the corner-stone of the "Free-soil" party, as distinguished from the party of unconditional abolition.

S. P. CHASE[14] TO JOHN VAN BUREN

"Columbus, June 19, 1848.

"My dear Sir,—Many of our Free-Territory men in this quarter are in doubt as to the course which the New York Democracy intend to pursue in reference to the Buffalo convention. Will they be represented in it? Will they concur in the nominations made by it? If Judge McLean can be induced to accept a nomination for the Vice-Presidency, in connection with Mr. Van Buren for the Presidency, will they cordially accept it? If the convention, on mature deliberation, should think it expedient to nominate Judge McLean for the Presidency and Col. Samuel Young or Bradford R. Wood or yourself for the Vice-Presidency, would the New York Democracy concur in that nomination? There is a strong disposition, also, in the West to drop the older politicians altogether and take younger men, who better represent the spirit of the time. One of the best and ablest Democrats in the State, I mean Edwin M. Stanton, said to me to-day that if John Van Buren should be the nominee of the Buffalo convention he would roll up his sleeves and go to work till the election for the ticket; and I am sure that to all the young Democrats and all the young Whigs in the State your name would be more acceptable than your father's. Suppose the convention should be animated by this spirit and nominate men of this generation, would the New York Democracy concur?

"I put these questions to indicate the various phases which the movement may assume. My own opinion is that, under existing circumstances, the best possible nomination for the Presidency has been made at Utica, provided the name of John McLean can be associated with it. Whether it can be is, as yet, in doubt, though I fear the doubt will be resolved against my wish. If it cannot be, we have no man in the West whose name on the ticket would be altogether unexceptionable. If Judge McLean should consent to allow his name to be used, the ticket would undoubtedly sweep Ohio, and would gain immense accessions of strength throughout the West. I firmly believe that the nominees may, in that event, be elected this year. It would be, to be sure, sacrificing a good deal on the part of Judge McLean, so long prominent in the regards of the people as a candidate for the first office, to accept a nomination for the second; and the bitterness with which he could be assailed by the slaveholders and their allies would exceed greatly that which is now manifested towards your father. Nothing but a strong sense of personal duty, and a deep interest in the success of the movement (and he avows that interest openly), will prevail on him to consent, and, I fear, he will not feel that duty absolutely requires the step. It is probable that he would regard an offer of a nomination for the first office differently. He would then be the recognized head or representative of the movement, and would feel the abuse directed against him, as levelled chiefly at the cause. And I think he would represent the movement almost exactly as Silas Wright would have done if living. I regard him as more nearly resembling Silas Wright in the general character of his views on public questions than any living public man. While, therefore, I repeat that if we can have Judge McLean's name for the Vice-Presidency I would rather take the ticket as it would then stand—Martin Van Buren and John McLean—than any other, you will not wonder that I regret that the action of the convention at Utica has interposed an obstacle to a different arrangement. Whether the obstacle is insuperable you are a far better judge than I am. If it be, then, we must take the Utica nomination, supply the Vice-Presidential vacancy and make the best fight we can.

"You will have observed the difficulty suggested by the National Era growing out of the expressions in your father's letter, in relation to slavery in the District of Columbia; and you are doubtless aware that all that part of the letter in reference to the course of his administration on the subject of slavery is very distasteful to almost all anti-slavery men, whether Whig, Democratic, or Liberty.

"I wish that part of the letter could have been omitted. It does no good to revive the past. Our business is with the present and the future. Your remarks in your speech at Genesee on the 20th of June are full of truth. The Free-Territories question, in discussion, must bring up the whole slavery question inevitably. Our contest is with the slave power, and it will break us down unless we break it down. The people will not stop with the exclusion of slavery from Territories: they will demand its complete denationalization. Now many understand Mr. Van Buren's letter, so far as it touches upon slavery in the District, as a reiteration of his pledge to veto a bill for the abolition of slavery there if enacted by Congress. I do not myself so understand it. I cannot believe that at the present day and under present circumstances, when a strong anti-slavery sentiment exists in Maryland and Virginia, which would be vastly strengthened by such a measure—so strengthened, indeed, that those States would by it be converted into free Territory States—that he would interpose the slightest obstacle to its adoption. I cannot doubt that, on the contrary, he would give it every favor consistent with the proper discharge of his function as President.

"So many, however, take a different view from mine that it is highly desirable, in the event that M. Van Buren is to be the nominee of the Buffalo convention, to have all doubt on this matter removed, so that he may be received and understood everywhere as a true representative of the movement.

"The uprising in this State exceeds all expectation, and if we only can present a proper ticket at Buffalo we shall have the best chance of carrying the State. But the effect of the movement is different here from its effect in New York. The question in this State will be between the independent nominee and Cass. Taylor is, with us, entirely out of the question. The people reject him, and the politicians support him, when they do at all, doubtingly and without enthusiasm. The Cass men are more active and with better hopes. In conversation with Judge Wood yesterday, or the day before, I remarked to him that I was a little surprised, after reading of the interview between himself, Cass, and the people at Cleveland, to hear of his advocating on the stump the claims of Cass, as a Wilmot proviso man. 'Oh,' says the judge, 'He is for the proviso as much as any of us.' 'Do you mean to say, then, that the Nicholson letter was designed to cheat the South and get the nomination?' I asked. 'D—n them,' said he, 'it is their turn to be cheated.' This is a common argument among the Cass men; and as there is something like retribution in kind indicated by it, it don't take very badly among the people.

"I shall be very glad to hear from you, and to be advised of the views of yourself and others, to whom you may show this, as to what is best to be done and the best mode of doing it.

Yours very truly,
"S. P. Chase."

"P. S.—Did you or Mr. Preston King receive a telegraphic despatch, at Utica, stating the action of our people's convention, which adjourned the day before your session commenced? We, Mr. Vaughan and myself, sent one on the evening of the 21st, and it should have reached you on the morning of the 22d at the latest. We shall be glad to know whether it reached you at all, and, if so, when."