| PAGE | |
| [Preface to the First Edition (1901)] | [v] |
| [Foreword to the New Edition (1917)] | [xiii] |
| [CHAPTER I] | |
| Resistance to Aristocracy—1789-1798 | [1] |
| [CHAPTER II] | |
| Aaron Burr at the Helm—1798-1802 | [11] |
| [CHAPTER III] | |
| Tammany Quarrels with De Witt Clinton—1802-1809 | [17] |
| [CHAPTER IV] | |
| Slow Recovery from Disaster—1809-1815 | [29] |
| [CHAPTER V] | |
| Tammany in Absolute Control—1815-1817 | [37] |
| [CHAPTER VI] | |
| Clinton Maintains His Supremacy—1817-1820 | [47] |
| [CHAPTER VII] | |
| The Suffrage Contest—1820-1822 | [56] |
| [CHAPTER VIII] | |
| Struggles of the Presidential Factions—1822-1825 | [60] |
| [CHAPTER IX] | |
| The Jackson Element Victorious—1825-1828 | [69] |
| [CHAPTER X] | |
| The Workingmen’s Party—1829-1830 | [77] |
| [CHAPTER XI] | |
| Tammany and the Bank Contest—1831-1834 | [85] |
| [CHAPTER XII] | |
| The Equal Rights Party—1834-1837 | [94] |
| [CHAPTER XIII] | |
| Tammany “Purified”—1837-1838 | [112] |
| [CHAPTER XIV] | |
| Whig Failure Restores Tammany to Power—1838-1840 | [117] |
| [CHAPTER XV] | |
| Rise and Progress of the “Gangs”—1840-1846 | [128] |
| [CHAPTER XVI] | |
| “Barnburners” and “Hunkers”—1846-1850 | [140] |
| [CHAPTER XVII] | |
| Defeat and Victory—1850-1852 | [150] |
| [CHAPTER XVIII] | |
| “Hardshells” and “Softshells”—1852-1858 | [161] |
| [CHAPTER XIX] | |
| A Chapter of Disclosures—1853-1854 | [167] |
| [CHAPTER XX] | |
| Fernando Wood’s First Administration—1854-1856 | [174] |
| [CHAPTER XXI] | |
| Wood’s Second Administration—1856-1859 | [181] |
| [CHAPTER XXII] | |
| The Civil War and After—1859-1867 | [194] |
| [CHAPTER XXIII] | |
| The Tweed “Ring”—1867-1870 | [211] |
| [CHAPTER XXIV] | |
| Tweed in His Glory—1870-1871 | [225] |
| [CHAPTER XXV] | |
| Collapse and Dispersion of the “Ring”—1871-1872 | [237] |
| [CHAPTER XXVI] | |
| Tammany Rises from the Ashes—1872-1874 | [250] |
| [CHAPTER XXVII] | |
| The Dictatorship of John Kelly—1874-1886 | [258] |
| [CHAPTER XXVIII] | |
| The Dictatorship of Richard Croker—1886-1897 | [267] |
| [CHAPTER XXIX] | |
| The Dictatorship of Richard Croker (Concluded)—1897-1901 | [284] |
| [CHAPTER XXX] | |
| Tammany Under Absentee Direction—1901-1902 | [290] |
| [CHAPTER XXXI] | |
| Charles F. Murphy’s Autocracy—1902-1903 | [299] |
| [CHAPTER XXXII] | |
| The Sway of Bribery and “Honest Graft”—1903-1905 | [307] |
| [CHAPTER XXXIII] | |
| Tammany’s Control Under Leader Murphy—1906-1909 | [324] |
| [CHAPTER XXXIV] | |
| Another Era of Legislative Corruption—1909-1911 | [342] |
| [CHAPTER XXXV] | |
| “Chief” Murphy’s Leadership—Further Details 1912-1913 | [356] |
| [CHAPTER XXXVI] | |
| Governor Sulzer’s Impeachment and Tammany’s Defeat—1913-1914 | [375] |
| [CHAPTER XXXVII] | |
| Tammany’s Present Status—1914-1917 | [392] |
HISTORY OF TAMMANY HALL
CHAPTER I
RESISTANCE TO ARISTOCRACY
1789-1798
The Society of St. Tammany, or Columbian Order, was founded on May 12, 1789, a fortnight later than the establishment of the National Government, by William Mooney.[1] “His object,” says Judah Hammond,[2] an early member of Tammany, “was to fill the country with institutions designed, and men determined, to preserve the just balance of power. His purpose was patriotic and purely republican. The constitution provided by his care contained, among other things, a solemn asseveration, which every member at his initiation was required to repeat and subscribe to, that he would sustain the State institutions and resist a consolidation of power in the general Government.”
Before the Revolution, societies variously known as the “Sons of Liberty” and the “Sons of St. Tammany” had been formed to aid the cause of independence. Tammany, or Tamanend, was an Indian chief, of whom fanciful legends have been woven, but of whose real life little can be told. Some maintain that he lived in the neighborhood of Scranton, Pa., when William Penn arrived, and that he was present at the great council under the elm tree. His name is said to have been on Penn’s first treaty with the Indians, April 23, 1683. He is also described as a great chief of the Delaware nation, and his wigwam is said to have stood on the grounds now occupied by Princeton University. The fame of his wisdom, benevolence and love of liberty spreading to the colonists, they adopted his name for their patriotic lodges. When societies sprang up bearing the names of St. George, St. Andrew or St. David and proclaiming their fealty to King George, the Separatists dubbed Tammany a saint in ridicule of the imported saints. The Revolution over, the “Sons of Liberty” and the “Sons of St. Tammany” dissolved.
The controversy over the adoption of the Federal constitution had the effect of re-uniting the patriotic lodges. The rich and influential classes favored Hamilton’s design of a republic having a President and a Senate chosen for life, and State governments elected by Congress. Opposed to this attempt toward a highly centralized government were the forces which afterward organized the Anti-Federalist party. Their leader in New York was Governor George Clinton. The greater number of the old members of the Liberty and Tammany societies, now familiarly known as “Liberty boys,” belonged to this opposition.
During this agitation Hamilton managed to strengthen his party, by causing to be removed, in 1787, the political disabilities bearing upon the Tories. New York was noted for its Tories, more numerous in proportion than in any other colony, since here, under the Crown, offices were dispensed more liberally than elsewhere. In the heat of the Revolutionary War and the times immediately following it, popular indignation struck at them in severe laws. In all places held by the patriot army a Tory refusing to renounce his allegiance to King George ran considerable danger not only of mob visit, but of confiscation of property, exile, imprisonment, or, in flagrant cases of adherence to the enemy, death. From 1783 to 1787 the “Liberty boys” of the Revolution, who formed the bulk of the middle and working classes, governed New York City politics. In freeing the Tories from oppressive laws, and opening political life to them, Hamilton at once secured the support of a propertied class (for many of them had succeeded in retaining their estates) numerous enough to form a balance of power and to enable him to wrest the control of the city from the “Liberty boys.”
The elevation to office of many of the hated, aristocratic supporters of Great Britain inflamed the minds of the “Liberty boys” and their followers, and made the chasm between the classes, already wide, yet wider. The bitterest feeling cropped out. Hamilton, put upon the defensive, took pains in his addresses to assure the people of the baselessness of the accusation that he aimed to keep the rich families in power. That result, however, had been partially assured by the State constitution of 1777. Gaging sound citizenship by the ownership of property, the draughtsmen of that instrument allowed only actual residents having freeholds to the value of £100, free of all debts, to vote for Governor, Lieutenant-Governor and State Senators, while a vote for the humbler office of Assemblyman was given only to those having freeholds of £20 in the county or paying forty shillings rent yearly. Poor soldiers who had nobly sustained the Revolutionary cause were justly embittered at being disqualified by reason of their poverty, while full political power was given to the property-owning Tories.