"I but voice the sentiment of the country when I say that I consider the Administration of President Arthur has been signalized by its justice, eminent statesmanship and wise discretion."
Such was the tenor of mention, but much more pronounced, by men of the party, and Mr. Arthur's nomination previous to the assembling of the next Presidential Convention seemed a foregone conclusion.
Nothing I can write will fittingly describe the personnel of James G. Blaine, who was to be the prime feature of the Convention on nomination day. As a man in the field of statesmanship and in intensity of devotion, he was more idolized than any since his prototype, Henry Clay. With political erudition was blended an eloquence inspiring and fascinating; a nobility of character often displayed as the champion of the weak; a disputant adept in all the mazes of analysis, denunciation, or sarcasm, he had created antipathy as bitter as his affections were unyielding. While Speaker of the House, with his counterpart in eloquence, Roscoe Conkling, he had many tilts. One of the most noted and probably far-reaching in impeding his Presidential aspirations, was his defense of General Fry, whom Conkling sought to have impeached, but who was successfully vindicated and afterwards promoted by the War Department. During the struggle Conkling hurled a javelin of taunt and invective, incisive, but thought to be unjust, inducing a response said to have been terrific in its onslaught, confounding the speaker and raising excitement in the House to the highest pitch. I transcribe an epitome of the speech, which will be seen to have bristled with galling ridicule: "As to the gentleman's cruel sarcasm, I hope he will not be too severe. The contempt of that large-minded gentleman is so wilting, his haughty disdain, his grandiloquent swell, his majestic supereminent, overpowering turkey-gobbler strut, has been so crushing to myself and all the members of this House that I know it was an act of the greatest temerity for me to enter upon a controversy with him." Then, quoting ironically a newspaper comparison of Mr. Conkling and Henry Winter Davis, ascribing qualities held by them in common, he proceeded: "The resemblance is great, and it has given his strut additional pomposity. The resemblance is great, it is striking—Hyperion to a satyr; Thersites to Hercules; mud to marble; dunghill to diamond; a singed cat to a Bengal tiger; a whining puppy to a roaring lion. Shade of the mighty Davis, forgive the almost profanation of that jocose satire!"
But James G. Blaine, that master of diplomacy and magnetic fame, with an astute following inspired and wild with gilded promises; the nominating speech of Robert J. Ingersoll, prince of orators, lauding the nominee as "like a mailed warrior, like a plumed knight"—all these forces contributed to turn the tide from Arthur and give him the nomination. I was one of a lonely three of the Arkansas delegation that stood by the State's instructions and voted for Arthur, nine of the delegation voting for Blaine. For obeying the State and not the after conclusion of the delegation, in my next race for a delegate I was "left at the stand."
My failure reminded me of the boy—a humble imitator of the great George Washington—who hacked to death a choice tree. When asked who did it, jolly, gushing and truthful, said, "I did it, pap." The old man seized and gathered him, stopping the whipping occasionally to get breath and wipe off the perspiration, would remark: "And had der imperdence to confess it." The boy, when finally released, between sobs sought solace by saying, "I will never tell the truth again as long as I live." I did not conclude that one should be false to an implied promise with instructions received, but I was impressed with the conviction that it is unwise to trammel a delegation with decisive instructions. A general expression of the feeling or bias of the State Convention is proper, but so much can happen during the interim to change conditions that ultimate action should be largely left to the judgment and integrity of the delegation.
The manner of choosing a President is entirely different from that designed by the founders of the republic. The selection of candidates by an organized party was not anticipated. It was intended that men of high character should be chosen by the citizens of each State as electors, and they should select the men they deemed most fit to be President, and the selection thereafter ratified by the vote of the people. An elector now is but the mouthpiece of his party; no matter what may be his individual judgment, he dare not disregard its fiat. The result of the national election was the defeat of Mr. Blaine and the election of the Democratic candidate, Grover Cleveland. Mr. Cleveland had an independent personality and the courage of his convictions. Affable and cordial in his intercourse with Afro-Americans, and to those of his political household was prodigal in the bestowal of appointments. The effect of this was that many colored men, leaders of thought and race action, not seeing an increase of oppression, so freely predicted in the event of a Democratic President, advocated a division of the colored vote, with a view of harmonizing feeling and mutual benefit. A welcoming of that approach in the South may be deferred, but will yet be solicited, despite its present disloyalty to the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the Constitution.
CHAPTER XVII.
The closing decade of the past century was conspicuous for exhibitions of products of nature and skill intended to stimulate a country's consumption, but mainly to increase exportation; for a nation, not unlike an individual, that buys more than its resources warrant, bankruptcy is inevitable. Hence the industrial struggle of all progressive nations to produce more than they consume, export the residue and thereby add to the national wealth.