LETTERS
AND
LITERARY MEMORIALS
OF
SAMUEL J. TILDEN

EDITED BY
JOHN BIGELOW, LL.D.

VOL. 2

NEW YORK AND LONDON
HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS
1908

Copyright, 1908, by Harper & Brothers.
——
All rights reserved.
Published February, 1908.

LETTERS AND LITERARY MEMORIALS
OF SAMUEL J. TILDEN

DAVID A. WELLS TO TILDEN

"Norwich, Conn, Jan'y 6th, 1876.

"My dear Governor,—I do not know as I can testify of my admiration of your message better than by saying that I want you to send me an early copy in pamphlet form for more careful reading and preservation.

"When the novel which Mr. Sherman and I have been writing (now in press) comes out, in a week or two, please see how curiously prices worked on our imaginary island, where the people used something for currency which had no value as a commodity.

"Very truly yours,
"David A. Wells."

Answered January 10, 1876, by the Governor, that he desired to submit some of the messages to Mr. Wells, but it was a race against time. The tables were not completed until the discussion was in the proof-reading. "Even I was surprised at the surplus of currency which they evince."

CHARLES O'CONOR TO TILDEN

"Fort Washington, Jan'y 12, 1876.

"My dear Governor Tilden,—In this form I will say nothing of the proceedings, surprising to me, as they must have been to you, which have marked the movements toward trying the Tweed civil cases. I have neither seen nor heard from the present chief of the 'bureau of municipal correction' since the newspapers began to regale us with its recent fortunes.

"My object in addressing you is to submit certain suggestions for consideration.

"When the present leading counsel for Tweed fell into a line of practice which, steadily pursued for years as it has been, might well have led to his being dubbed Attorney-General for Rascals, it was my lot to be much in professional antagonism to him. I found him to be neither wise, learned, nor, properly speaking, able, but essentially a trickster. He seems capable of being very troublesome, and to a negligent or unskilful adversary he may be regarded as dangerous.

"In dealing with his class, one will generally find a central device around which all their series of tricks revolve, and from which all their force and effectiveness are drawn. This man's course and career furnish an admirable illustration of this fact.

"Our multitude of judges, with equal powers, were perceived by him to furnish a hopeful quarry. One wicked, weak, or manageable could be found somewhere. The next item in his scheme for making judicial proceedings do the work which a bolder thief might seek to accomplish by piracy, highway robbery, or counterfeiting was to engage himself in quarrels where an unlimited number of separate suits by separate plaintiffs might be brought before different judges—all aimed at the same substantial object. This enabled him to make almost at random all sorts of harassing movements against the same parties. Slap-dash, hit or miss, he poured his shot upon the selected victims, the loss of a suit or failure of a movement troubling him not, the number of strings to his bow making this of no more consequence to him than the loss of a single soldier to the general of an army.

"You are aware that any single stockholder in a private or trading corporation may file a bill in equity against the corporation itself, its managing officers, and any one else suggesting malversation, and, of course, such a suit has all the usual incidents of receivership, injunctions, etc., etc. With a desperate Wall Street swindler for plaintiff, an utterly unscrupulous legal practitioner to direct it, and an unprincipled or manageable judge, the blackmailing capabilities of such a suit are not slight. And when you consider that the stock is always in the market, and that five shares, or, indeed, a single share, may be sufficient to qualify a plaintiff, you see the readiness with which a lot of these suits, like a swarm of insects in summer, may harass. It was with this single scrap of technical knowledge that the Attorney-General for Scoundrels qualified himself for his office. In a very large degree he has lived upon it ever since.

"It was in analogy to this right of the stockholder of a private corporation that some well-intentioned persons devised the scheme of judicially restraining municipal and other public officers from improper action. I believe the history of the rise and fall of this idea may be found in a long argument of mine reported in 'Wetmore v. Story,' 22 or 23 Barbour. You have read it and spoken of it to me. There is no analogy between the cases, and no basis in our common-law or customary jurisprudence for the pretended right of a taxpayer thus to intervene. The inconveniences of such a practice would be enormous. It should not be permitted.

"Using a noted and life-long corruptionist, Charles Devlin, one of Tweed's bail, the Scoundrel's Attorney-General has brought a suit of this kind intended to perplex the Ring prosecutions and aid in misleading the thoughtless readers of their partisan journals.

"I have said that such a suit is wholly without warrant in the common law, and the claim to sustain it thereby has been by the highest authority, in every form, judicially exploded; but in two statutes it may find some color at least of support, and I write in the hope that these may be at once repealed.

"The first of these is S. 3 of the city tax levy of 1864, ch. 405, p. 945. It was obtained by Nathaniel Sands, the then leader of reform, as actuary or general agent of Peter Cooper's Citizens' Association. His subsequent history is known to you. The other is ch. 161 of the laws of 1872, p. 467. You were then in the Legislature, and may have favored its passage; it is not impossible that I may have failed to condemn it when spoken to, but I never believed in the utility of such a remedy. A reluctance to throw cold water on the efforts of our friends sometimes dictates a prudent silence. But whatever might be said at that time, the law of 1875, establishing the right of the State, has superseded the use of any such private taxpayer's action, and this inexpressibly impudent suit of Devlin shows that the privilege tends to mischief. I hope you will get some real and earnest reformer belonging to the Republican party to bring in and push through a bill for the repeal of both these enactments.

"Another subject may seem to demand attention, and that speedily. In Polly Bodine's case, some years ago, it was found that the public journals had so thoroughly imbued the minds of the people with information or reports and ideas concerning the facts of the case that under the existing common law touching challenges to the favor it was hardly possible to get a jury. This must be so in Tweed's cases. The Legislature then altered the law, but I am told that the change is confined in its terms to criminal cases. It ought, by supplemental legislation, to be extended to all cases.

Yours faithfully,
"Ch. O'Conor."

BONAMY PRICE TO TILDEN

"2 Norham Gardens, Oxford, Jan'y 31, 1876.

"My dear Sir,—I hope that the great kindness which you showed me at New York will be allowed to plead my excuse with you for trespassing on your time with a few lines.

"I am anxious to tell you of the deep sympathy and interest with which I have closely watched your public career since I had the honor of becoming acquainted with you in America, as well as the strong admiration which it excited in me.

"Never did a man deserve better of his country; and I fervently hope that the new year will bring the amplest recognition of this fact from your fellow-countrymen.

"Yours truly,
"Bonamy Price."

THOMAS COTTMAN TO TILDEN

"New York, Feb'y 6th, 1876.

"Dear Sir,—I see by the papers this morning that Senator Francis Kernan had taken steps to reconcile the discordant elements of the Democratic party of this city. I am convinced of the unpracticability of the effort without your active interposition. Success with Tammany as at present organized is entirely out of the question. John Kelly, as chief, with Ned Gale, Tom Boize, Frank Spinola, Billy Boyd, and the like as chief counsel, will inevitably bring disaster upon the party and turn the State over to the Republicans in the fall. I would in no wise depreciate Mr. Kelly, whom I regard as a very estimable gentleman. But he has been most unfortunate in selecting his 'entourage.' There is no lack of efficient material in this city for constructing a capital to the Democratic edifice and insure harmony in all its proportions. As at present constituted, it is an incongruous mass, ready to disintegrate and form other affinities. Without some decided action on your part, there will most certainly be two delegations from this city to the convention, and the bad blood thus generated will outcrop in the fall election to the detriment of the party. I shall leave home to-morrow night for Washington, where I expect to remain a short time to confer with my Democratic friends from the different sections of the country. There being quite a number of my acquaintances representing different constituencies in Congress, the dissensions of the New York Democracy are certain to form the leading topic of conversation and the topic upon which the least satisfaction can be vouchsafed—and the entire responsibility laid at your door. Your personal friendship for Andrew H. Green might have been so evinced as not to have provoked antagonism to yourself, and might have availed by its influence to have kept him from exciting the wrath of a majority of the voting community. Wickham is weaker than Green in the popular estimation. Wickham is looked upon as milk and water, whilst Green is regarded as gall and wormwood, whilst Kelly is so encumbered with barnacles as to be impervious to the popular demand for a more democratic form of government than that now run exclusively for the benefit of favorites.

Very respectfully yours,
"Thomas Cottman."

A. E. SILLIMAN TO TILDEN

"Please do not trouble yourself to read until at entire leisure.

"56 Clinton St., Brooklyn, Feb. 14, '76.

"My dear Sir,—I am indebted to some kind friend for a copy of your Message for 1876 (secluded among my books, I do not know whom); but recollecting your conversations with Mr. Bennett and myself some years since at Delmonico's, I am fain to believe that I am one of a number to whom you may have directed it to be sent; but in the uncertainty deem it more decorous to address you personally in my recognition of the favor. I read the Message at the time of its appearance with much interest, and was particularly struck with the strong clearness and distinctness of that portion of it pertaining to financial affairs, which perhaps is the 'part of the schooner' I am (or rather ought to be) more particularly conversant with. We are much indebted to Mr. Chase for the present state of things—his refusal to recognize the banks as government depositors, and have a clearing-house for the daily settlement of its debt, with enormous resulting economy of its physical features (for instance, the issue of legal-tender notes under such circumstances need not have exceeded one hundred million)—but mainly for setting loose under his national bank system a thousand new inflating-machines, called banks, practically unmuzzling the old banks which he cowed in under its flag. Admitting other causes, in my opinion it is mainly[1] the bank inflation which has caused the state of things culminating in 1873; and which crisis, opening the eyes of the community to its truths on the one side, shows them the terrors of contraction on the other, and the natural apprehension of a sudden contraction to a specie basis produces thus, of course, almost paralysis in all business movement beyond the immediate present. I do not think that the plan for arbitrary resumption in 1879 will be attended with happy effect. 'There is no royal road to learning,' and assuredly none to specie resumption. We have slid down the hill with intense velocity; we have got slowly to trudge up the hill again through the snow if we would have another slide. I think that if ten years ago we had commenced destroying the legal tender at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum we would have avoided 1873, and have been paying specie now; and I think if we commence[2] now in that ratio we shall in ten years arrive at the desired result, relieving the business community from the bugbear of rapid contraction. The destruction of 20 million legal-tender would carry with it 80 million bank credit—say, an annual contraction of 100 million. This, if the country is let alone, with a decent attention to the economy you suggest, it could have from the increasing receipts of its industry. In 1873, as a matter of curiosity, I examined into the statistics of finance for the periods stated, and it is from them I draw my conclusions above expressed. I annex a copy, as perhaps your experienced eye will take in at a glance the gravity of the record. Now, my dear sir, I hope you will excuse my troubling you with this long note, and not trouble yourself to answer it. With hopes that you may be blessed in health, and remain long as the head of your State, I am

"Very truly your friend and servant,
"A. E. Silliman.

CAUSE OF FINANCIAL CRISIS IN 1873

"Showing

"Money means in the hands of the community in excess of that of 1862, $1117 mills. And this $2,159,000,000 is the hub of the wheel from which radiates the individual debt of the community, until it reaches the apple-woman at the corner.

"Perhaps the above may vary, more or less, 20 or 30 mills.

"In considering the position, the banks are recognized as part of the public in their representations of their stockholders, and it is not intended to dissect out of their liabilities their individual status."

CHARLES O'CONOR TO TILDEN

"Fort Washington, March 16th, 1876.

"My dear Governor,—I had the honor of addressing you some time ago concerning the expediency of repealing a section of 1864 and an act of 1867, both of which most absurdly recognized a right of action in tax-payers for maladministration by public corporations.

"My reason for urging the step at this time is an action by one Charles Devlin, Tweed's bail, against the Attorney-General and others, seeking the appointment of a receiver and the transfer of the Ring suits to the control of the Tweed faction. Tweed's attorneys are attorneys for the plaintiff in this action, and for their motions they select as judge Charles Donohue, who, by the order for a bill of particulars, showed his fidelity to Tweed principles.

"It is ridiculous that such a suit should be permitted to harass us and bring our movements under the control of Donohue.

"I have supposed that a real reformer of the Republican party should be enlisted to push this repeal through, and if you select such an one I am willing, if put in communication with him, to aid him in any way that I can, and, if need be, I will go to Albany to co-operate with him.

"The relations of D. D. Field and Judge Peabody are such that the latter, though a very correct and honorable man, ought not to be drawn into this affair. Of course, his son, the member of Assembly, is subject to the same remark. And as young Mr. Fish and he are very intimate, and reside together in private joint lodgings, I would advise that Mr. Fish be not included in any movement on this subject.

"Yours truly,
"Ch. O'Conor."

WHEELER H. PECKHAM TO S. J. TILDEN

"New York, April 15th, 1876.

"Dear Sir,—I enclose draft of a bill appropriating twenty-five thousand dollars for expenses prosecuting the ring suits.

"The last appropriation was in 1874, ch. 359, laws of that year—$25,000.

"Of the sum then appropriated but about $8000 are left. The expenses of the last civil trial of Tweed will more than exhaust this. The disbursements of that trial are about $3000, and Mr. Carter's very moderate bill is $5000. That exhausts the appropriation without any bill for my own services.

"The trial was protracted and expensive beyond expectation. It consumed the two months of January and February and part of March. The deft. Tweed is making a case and will appeal, and consequently further expense must be incurred. The case vs. Sweeney is also ready for trial, and we expect to try it in May. Active proceedings are pending against others, which must result in the collection of very considerable sums of money. Over half a million of dollars has already been realized and paid over to the city treasury. Under the circumstances, it seems to me that there should be no hesitation on the part of the Legislature in passing the bill.

"Of course, the force of my opinion must be weighed in the light of my own interest. On that account it is proper to add that I have submitted this proposed law to your consideration at the request of Mr. O'Conor.

"Yours truly,
"Wheeler H. Peckham."

"Mr. O'Conor's name is left out of the act by his special request.—W. H. P."

CHARLES O'CONOR TO GOVERNOR TILDEN

"New York, May 1st, 1876.

"My dear Sir,—I write to remind you that great trouble and inconvenience are likely to result if the repealing acts sent up and handed to Senator Robertson are not pressed.

"Yours truly,
"Ch. O'Conor."

D. A. WELLS TO TILDEN

"Norwich, Conn., May 5th, 1876.

"My dear Governor,—I have canvassed the political situation in this State since I last saw you, and think there is no doubt of your receiving the unanimous support of Connecticut at St. Louis. Indeed, there is no diversity of sentiment, so far as I can hear, Loomis, of New London, being the only one of the delegates whom I should regard as doubtful. Dick Hubbard, of Hartford, who heads the delegation; Waller, of New London, the Speaker of the House (who will probably go as a substitute); and Hunter, of Willimantic, are all to be relied on as warm supporters, and they will control the delegation if it should need controlling. Barr, of Hartford, is a tricky fellow, and if you could bring some influence to bear on him it may be as well, though I am advised that it is not necessary.

"There is one element of the future that I do not like, and that is the probable election of Barnum to the Senate from this State in place of English. Barnum is so unfit, so much of the Tweed order of men, and a pig-iron protectionist into the bargain, that the effect of his election will be bad, not only in the State, but throughout the country. It will be cited everywhere as a proof that the professions of the party do not amount to anything; I do not, however, know what you can do about it, or whether it would be advisable to exert an influence if you could; but it is an event that is likely to disgust the free-trade element intensely, and also those who have a deep conviction of the necessity of political reform. Eaton is probably more responsible for this movement than any other man, except Barnum.

"Do you think I had better go to the 18th of May conference? I see nothing antagonistic in it to your interest; neither do I think it will amount to much. I know the Republican managers have a most profound contempt for the whole movement, and haven't an idea of allowing to Bristow to be nominated.

"Command me for any service I can render.

"Truly yours,
"David A. Wells."

"Hon. S. J. Tilden."

Shortly after the inauguration of Mr. Tilden as Governor, in January, 1875, he sent to the Legislature a special message setting forth his convictions of the corrupt management of the canals of the State. This message abounded with specific details of fraud of so infamous a character that even friends of the implicated contractors in the Legislature felt constrained to grant the request of the Governor, and by a concurrent resolution, adopted on the 31st day of March, 1875, authorized him to appoint a committee of four "to investigate the affairs of the canals of the State, and especially the matters embraced in the special message of the Governor, communicated to Legislature on the 19th of March, 1875."

In compliance with this authority, the Governor appointed four gentlemen, whose names are signed to the following report, two theretofore having acted with the Republican party and two with the Democratic. The Governor's commissioners organized at Albany on the 12th of April following; but before they began to take testimony the friends of the canal jobbers in the Assembly managed to pass a resolution appointing a commission of that body also to make a similar investigation, but naming in the resolution commissioners satisfactory to those who constituted what was known as the "Canal Ring."

This commission met two or three times, and then offered to the Governor's commission, under pretext of saving time and expense, to join them, so that the two commissions should constitute but one body. Of course this proffer was promptly declined, and the legislative commission took no more testimony, and was never heard of again.

The interval between the organization of the Governor's commission, in April, and the time for the introduction of water into the canals, near the end of May, was devoted exclusively to an examination of the most important works in progress or recently completed in the prism of the canals.

Between the 31st day of July of that year, when the commission submitted its first report, and the 14th of February, when it submitted its final report, it issued twelve reports. That which follows gives a summary of the facts developed by the investigation which confirm in every detail the charges made in the Governor's message, besides adding very much to the total amount of confirming testimony. The reason for this confirmation being so complete was that the Governor, almost immediately after his election, employed privately, and at his own expense, an engineer in whose professional training and experience he could place entire confidence, the late Mr. Elkanah Sweet, to make an investigation of the recent canal work, gave him authority to take down any portion of the work to ascertain how far and in what way it was not in conformity with the contract, and gave him also authority to inspect all the canal contracts in the archives of the Canal Board and compare them with his observations. Upon his report the facts presented in the Governor's canal message were based. Mr. Sweet, therefore, was naturally employed by the Governor's commission to make the yet more thorough and elaborate investigation required of them.

The Governor's canal message, with this incontestable confirmation of all its allegations, gave him a national fame, and contributed more than anything he had previously done to make his nomination to the Presidency a political necessity for the Democratic party.

Several previous efforts to investigate frauds in the operation of the State canals had been made by the Legislature, but all had theretofore proved abortive. One reason which contributed largely to prevent the investigation of the Governor's commission sharing the same fate was the exclusion of reporters from the meetings of the board during the examination of witnesses. By this means nothing of its work was given to the public until the testimony was digested into an intelligible report of what had been proved. The testimony was necessarily so largely technical that if given to the press day by day, as received, the public would have soon tired of the subject, and, what was worse, the witnesses would have been tempted to shape their testimony rather to its effects upon the newspaper public than upon the commissioners. The consequence was that when the reports appeared they were read, and their impact upon the public was proportionately prompt, instructive, and penetrating.

CANAL INVESTIGATING COMMISSION

FIRST REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR[3]

"To his Excellency the Governor, and to the Honorable the Legislature of the State of New York:

"The undersigned commissioners, appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, under a concurrent resolution of the Legislature adopted on the 31st day of March last, 'to investigate the affairs of the canals of the States, and especially the matters embraced in the special message of the Governor, communicated to the Legislature on the 19th day of March, 1875,' have the honor to submit the following report of the progress of their investigations:

"Your commissioners, assembled at the capitol, qualified and organized on the 12th day of April, 1875. The interval between that time and the opening of the canals, a period of about six weeks, was devoted exclusively to an examination of the most important works in progress, or recently completed in the prism of the canals. When this examination was interrupted by the introduction of water, near the end of May, your commission returned to the capitol and proceeded to supplement and enlarge the area of their information by the examination of witnesses.

"In this work they were unexpectedly embarrassed by a decision of one of the judges of this district, at Special Term, denying to them a power, which they supposed to have been conferred upon them by the legislative authorities, to require the production before them of the books and papers of witnesses. They directed an appeal to be taken from this decision, and it was finally reversed at the General Term, but not until late in the month of November, till when your commission was obliged to contend with all the inconveniences resulting from the privation of such a necessary and indispensable prerogative. The opinion of Justice Learned at the Special Term, and that of Justice James at the General Term, are annexed to this report.

"On the 31st of July the commission submitted their first annual report to the Governor. It relates to a contract for substituting slope and vertical for bench wall between Port Schuyler and the lower Mohawk aqueduct. This report was followed at intervals by eleven others, entitled, respectively, as follows:

"Second report.—H. D. Denison's contract east of the city of Utica.

"Third report.—Hulser's bridge contract.

"Fourth report.—Willard Johnson's lower side cut lock contract at West Troy.

"Fifth report.—Buffalo contracts and legislative awards.

"Sixth report.—Champlain enlargement; Bullard's bend contract.

"Seventh report.—Buffalo contracts and State officers.

"Eighth report.—The Baxter award.

"Ninth report.—Contract of E. W. Williams for building vertical wall at Rome.

"Tenth report.—Flagler & Reilley's pending contract at Fort Plain.

"Eleventh report.—Jordan level contracts.

"Twelfth report.—The auditor's traffic in canal certificates.

"A copy of these several reports, together with the testimony taken before the commission, covering together 2927 pages, are submitted with this report.

"Several other reports are in course of preparation. One on the Glen's Fall feeder, a second on the Canal Appraiser's ice awards at Rochester in 187 , and a third on the W. C. Stevens contract assigned to Denison, Belden & Co., for dredging the Albany basin, dated December 31, 1866, will be submitted at an early day.

"Though we have given this investigation our most unremitting and exclusive attention, we not only have not exhausted the subject, but there are many matters falling within the range of our inquiry which we have only been able to touch incidentally. Among these we regret that the subjects of 'ordinary repairs,' the lateral canals, and the present system of appraising canal damages are included.

"As we have been able to examine only a limited portion of the work done on the canals since 1868, of course we have found it impossible to extend our inquiries beyond that year, though we have abundant evidence that the mismanagement of the canals dates from a much earlier period. But the results of our investigation—incomplete as any investigation made in so short a time must necessarily have been—will, we think, suffice to indicate with tolerable distinctness what have been the more mischievous errors in the management of our canals, and some of their more obvious correctives.

"We propose to-day to submit to you such of the conclusions as we have reached, with all the testimony we have taken, reserving for a later day some further recommendations which are under consideration.

"Introductory to such conclusions as we are now prepared to submit to you, it is proper that we first invite your attention to the character of our canal property as an investment, and show precisely how it stands upon the books of the State.

"This sum of $28,000,000 and upwards represents the premium which the people of this State have paid in taxes during the last fifty-odd years to secure and encourage the use of these waterways for purposes of transportation, the equivalent of an annual subsidy of over $560,000.

"If to this be added the interest on the canal debt, the cost of collection, and the difference between miscellaneous expenses and receipts, as set forth in detail in Exhibit B, the loss to the State from the canals during the last fiscal year will be found to amount to the enormous sum of $1,412,470.79.

"The cost of repairs and maintenance is so obviously out of all proportion with the necessities of a system of completed structures like our canals, which have little that is complicated or perishable about them, that we are forced to seek the explanation of it in their administration.

"Our investigation was not long in revealing the fact that the canals have not been managed upon the principles which would govern any man in the administration of his private estate. The interests of the public have been systematically disregarded. The precautions with which the Legislature has attempted to defend this property from peculation and fraud, and secure for it faithful and efficient service, have been deliberately and persistently disregarded; while the responsibility of its agents has been so divided and distributed as to leave the State comparatively remediless and at the mercy of the predatory classes, who have been, if they do not continue to be, a formidable political power.

"The more conspicuous evidences of mismanagement which our investigation has disclosed may be divided into three categories:

"First, as to the modes of letting contracts.

"Second, as to the modes of measuring and estimating work to the contractors.

"Third, as to the facilities for procuring legislative relief.

"First, as to the mode of letting the contracts:

"It seems to have been the practice for years to let contracts upon conditions which exclude honest contractors and confine this business, at least as to what are termed 'extraordinary repairs,' almost exclusively to large capitalists. The large deposits required from contractors discouraged bidders with small means, while the encouragement offered to unbalanced bidding, by a neglect to enforce the faithful performance of the provisions of the contract, have a tendency to exclude all who bid fair prices, with the honest intention of giving the State fair work for them. Till since the commencement of this investigation we do not know of a single instance in which any forfeiture of his deposit had been enforced against any contractor; while we believe we do no one any injustice in saying that no contract has been let since 1868 the provisions of which have been properly complied with.

"There has been a corresponding disregard of all the provisions of law regulating the letting of the contracts. The law wisely required a preliminary survey, with maps, specifications, and estimates to be made by the division engineer, approved by the State Engineer and by the Canal Board, before a contract could be let. The purpose of these precautions was to ascertain the amount and probable cost of the work as a means of determining the relative merits of the respective bids, and to serve as a protection against false or erroneous estimates of engineers. These precautions have been almost universally neglected. The result has been that the amount of work and materials required in the actual construction varied so widely from the quantities let that in nearly every instance the person receiving the contract proved in the end to have been the highest instead of the lowest bidder;[4] and we cannot resist the conclusion that these precautions in many instances were neglected with the intent to afford greater facilities for defrauding the State. These evils have been greatly aggravated by the frequent changes of the engineers on the canals and the loss of knowledge as to work done, which the removed engineers carried away with them.

"Second, as to the mode of measuring and estimating work to the contractors:

"This responsible duty, involving, as it should, a perfect familiarity with the terms of the contract and with the character of the work in progress, has been devolved, not by law, but in practice, entirely upon assistants who are not sworn; who, but in few instances, have been found to possess a competent knowledge of engineering; and who, in most cases, appear to owe their positions, and therefore to have been in a greater or less degree dependent upon the political favor and influence of the contracting class. It will be hardly a matter of surprise, therefore, that in not more than a single instance that has come under our scrutiny have we found the work faithfully measured, or a single contract closed, under which the contractor has not received more than he was entitled to.

"Under these influences, operating in favor of the contractor and to the prejudice of the State, a system of fraudulent estimates and measurements has become so established that though in direct and flagrant violation of the very language of the contract, it is deliberately defended by those who profit by it, on the ground that it has been sanctioned by long usage. For example: it has been a practice of the engineers to allow the contractor for excavating behind vertical wall, on a slope of one to one, without regard to the necessity for such excavation, and whether the excavation was made or not.

"As nearly all vertical wall is constructed in the winter or early spring, and when the banks are frozen, the cut is usually vertical or nearly so, and any charge for such excavation is a fraud upon the State. The contracts also uniformly provide that the contractor shall be allowed nothing for the filling in of the place supposed to be excavated behind the walls, if such filling is from earth already paid for as excavation, unless he is obliged to draw his material more than 200 feet on the line of the canal. This provision has also come to be treated as obsolete, and the State seems to have been uniformly charged not only for excavation which had not been made, but for filling up the assumed excavation which, had it been made, the State was not bound to pay for. The profits derived in this indirect way through the fraudulent connivance of the agents of the State, has led to an enormous expenditure for works wholly unnecessary, and which to keep in repair must continue to subject the State to a very considerable yearly expense.

"One of the principal expenditures upon the canals since 1868 for extraordinary repairs has been made in the construction of vertical and slope walls which have been, as we think, very unwisely substituted for the old walls, the capacity of the canals before their removal having been ample for all their business.

"Between the 1st of January, 1868, and the 1st of July, 1875, there have been built forty-three and one-third miles, linear measure, of vertical wall, at a total cost, including the removal of bench walls which they displaced, of $1,589,885, the cost per linear foot averaging $6.95.

"These walls, besides costing four or five times as much as the slope walls, are less durable, much more expensive to keep in repair, and possess no substantial advantage except in large towns, the commerce of which requires special facilities for docking. But of the forty-three and one-third miles built since 1868, it cannot be pretended that so many as three were needed to meet such exigencies.

"Without stopping at present to inquire if the business of the canal justified the removal of the old bench walls at all, it is very certain that a good slope wall would have been preferable throughout nine-tenths, at least, of the entire extent upon which vertical wall has been constructed; and, at the rate paid for slope wall during this period, would have resulted in an economy to the State of not less than $1,300,000, or nearly $200,000 a year.

"An important item in the cost of this vertical wall was made up of the fictitious estimates to which we have already alluded. Assuming that the State was uniformly charged with fictitious excavation and embankment along the entire length of this vertical wall—and we have no satisfactory proof that a single rod of it was entitled to be excepted—the loss to the State from this source alone cannot be estimated at less than $230,000.

"We have found all the other more important provisions of these contracts as uniformly disregarded. We have torn down and carefully examined the work under more than forty contracts; and we cannot name one in which the work comes up, even approximately, to the specifications. The contracts define with great precision the size and character of the stone to be used, the mode of their disposition, the thickness and other dimensions of the wall, the character of the cement and sand, the quality of lining, and what else is needed to insure durability and a capacity to resist the shocks from loaded boats to which the walls of canals are constantly subjected. In no one of the forty-odd contracts that we examined did we find the stone either in size or disposition; the dimensions of the wall; the quality of the sand, lime, cement, and gravel, to correspond with the specifications. The consequences to the State are not only that it has been called upon to pay for a higher class of work than it has received, but that it is exposed to a large annual expenditure to keep these ill-constructed and for the most part worthless walls in repair. It has been a not uncommon circumstance for the superintendent to be called upon to repair the earlier work under a vertical wall contract while other portions of the structure were still in progress. To keep this class of walls in repair promises to be one of the principal sources of expense for the future maintenance of our canals.[5]

"Nor is this system of fictitious estimates confined to vertical wall. Since 1868 fifty-three and two-thirds miles of slope wall have been built. By the terms of the contracts these walls should have had an average thickness of at least fifteen inches, measured perpendicularly to the slope. None of the stone composing it should have been less than twelve inches in length at right angles to the face, and the rear of the wall was to rest on a base of clean, hard gravel nine inches thick. The engineers have uniformly estimated these walls at the specified thickness of fifteen inches, while in point of fact we have not found on any of our canals a single stretch of slope wall, constructed since 1868, that would average over ten inches. Of course, the stones are usually smaller than the minimum size required by the specifications, and we did not find a single specimen of the clean, hard gravel lining required by the contract; so that the State has been made to pay, throughout the whole forty-three and two-thirds miles of slope wall, for one-third more of constructed wall than it has received—full prices for a very inferior quality of stone—and for lining the whole work, though not a single yard of the required quality appears to have been ever furnished.

"To confirm our own judgments, and to be sure that we were not applying an erroneous standard to the work done in the prism of the canals, we invited Professors Peter S. Michie and J. B. Wheeler, of the United States Military Academy at West Point, to go over a large proportion of what we had already visited and to give us the benefit of their judgment about it. Their report is annexed, and will be found to accord in all substantial particulars with the opinions we have felt it our duty to express in our previous report to his Excellency the Governor, and in this communication, in reference to all the contract work on the canals that has fallen under our observation.

"Third, as to the facilities afforded by the Legislature to contractors for procuring legislative relief:

"These facilities appear to have been grossly and corruptly abused under the discretionary power conferred upon the Canal Board by the Legislature. Numbers of contracts have been cancelled when such portions of the work as were let on terms profitable to the contractor had been executed, while those portions of the work that were let upon terms more advantageous to the State were left unexecuted. In such cases it not unfrequently happened that this remaining work was let to the same parties, under a new contract, at much higher rates. When the Canal Board was found to turn a deaf ear to such appeals, these applications for relief would be addressed directly to the Legislature, where the fear of doing injustice, and the want of the time and familiarity with the subject necessary for investigating its details, often permitted the allowance of awards conceived in fraud and without a single legal or equitable merit.

"An illustration of this class of abuses will be found in the fifth and seventh reports of this commission to the Governor. For one of them—the case of the award for the relief of John Hand—George D. Lord, a member of the Assembly which made the award, is now under indictment, it appearing that the claim made in his behalf was altogether fraudulent and the alleged proofs fictitious. Another award was also made to George D. Lord of $119,000 for alleged losses under contracts with the State for work in Buffalo harbor. This was, to all appearances, as much greater an abuse of legislative credulity, as the amount exceeded that which was realized under the award to John Hand. The limited technical knowledge of canal administration possessed by a large majority of State legislators, and the claims of other important business upon their attention, make it impossible for them to properly scrutinize appeals of this character, which are usually pressed by designing men, perfectly familiar with all the resources for deception which our complicated canal system afforded, prior to the constitutional amendment of 1874.

"In view of the systematic infidelity of the agents of the State which this investigation has disclosed, is it surprising that the expenditures for extraordinary repairs alone on our canals have amounted, since 1867, to $8,444,827.24, or to nearly as much as the whole of our canal debt, less the sinking fund, which on the 30th of September, 1875, was $8,638,314.49? Of these expenditures for extraordinary repairs it is our belief that fully seventy per cent. have been inconsiderate, unwise, and unprofitable to the State.[6]

"The facts which have been brought to light in the course of this investigation have constrained us already to recommend rigorous proceedings to be taken against the following parties:

"First.—Against Denison, Belden & Co. for the recovery of large sums of money which they appear to have received unlawfully under their contracts for work between Port Schuyler and the lower Mohawk aqueduct, and for work east of the city of Utica, both on the Erie Canal. The claims of the State against these parties are fully set forth in the first and second reports of this commission to the Governor, and suits are in progress.

"Second.—George D. Lord has been indicted by a grand jury of Erie County, upon the facts disclosed by this commission, for bribery in procuring an act of the Legislature for the relief of one John Hand. The history of this case will be found in the fifth report of this commission to the Governor.

"Third.—Thaddeus C. Davis, late member of the Board of Canal Appraisers, has also been indicted for a conspiracy to cheat the State. The circumstances which made him amenable to the criminal courts are set forth in the fifth, seventh, and eighth reports of this commission to the Governor.

"A civil suit has also been instituted against Davis to recover moneys fraudulently obtained from the State by himself in conjunction with George D. Lord.

"Fourth.—Indictments have also been found upon the testimony furnished by the commission against the following other high officials: Alexander Barkley, ex-canal commissioner; John Kelly, late superintendent of section No. 12 of the Erie Canal; J. Frederick Behn, division engineer of the western section; and D. Clinton Welch, ex-superintendent of section No. 12.

"Fifth.—Upon testimony furnished by this commission, the commissioners of the canal fund made a requisition upon the Governor for the removal of Francis S. Thayer, late Auditor of the Canal Department, and on the twenty-eighth day of December last Mr. Thayer was suspended upon charges of unlawfully trafficking in canal certificates and violating his duty as auditor 'in respect to the public moneys in his charge and subject to his draft.' The charges preferred by the commission upon which the commissioners of the canal fund and the Governor acted, together with their proceedings thereon, respectively, are hereunto annexed.[7] The testimony by which these charges were established will be found in volume three of the accompanying testimony, at pages 1140, 2070, 2156, 2162, 2180, 2215, 2226, 2239, 2256, 2305, 2347, 2379, 2381, 2382, 2383, 2385, 2389, 2407, 2414, 2417, 2420, 2422, 2426, 2445, 2460, 2461, 2534, 2560, 2585, 2587.

"The following sums in cash, or evidences of indebtedness, obtained from the State through fraud, have already been reclaimed by and restored through the commission to the treasury:

Canal Commissioner's certificates of indebtedness, issued on account of the second John Hand award:

"The following sums are shown by the reports of this commission to the Executive to have been estimated to the contractors for work that was never performed, or was improperly paid for through erroneous classification, and for which the receivers should be required to make restitution:

"Large as these sums appear, we are fully impressed with the belief that they form but a fraction of the amount that is due to the State from similar sources.

"For the purpose of ascertaining more precisely the extent of this class of liabilities, and to protect the State in future from the irregularities and improvidence out of which they have arisen, we recommend that the Canal Board be clothed with ample powers and authority for taking testimony.

"A perusal of the testimony and the reports to the Executive herewith submitted clearly establish the fact that our canals are a burden to the States less, perhaps, through the imperfection of our laws, than the mode in which they have been administered.

"Every appropriation for new work and extraordinary repairs on the canals for the six years from 1867 to 1873 contained a provision that no part or portion of the money therein appropriated 'for new work or work on change of plan' should be expended or paid, nor any contract involving such expenditure and payment be made on behalf of the States, until the maps, plans, and estimates of such new work had been submitted to and approved by the Canal Board.

"There has been a law on the statute-books since 1850, yet more stringent, which provides that 'before any work shall be contracted for on any canals of the State the division engineer shall cause to be ascertained, with all practical accuracy, the quantity of embankment, excavation, and masonry, and the quality and quantity of all materials to be used, and all other items of work to be placed under contract, a statement of which, together with maps, plans, and specifications corresponding with those adopted by the Canal Board, and on file in the office of the State Engineer and Surveyor, shall be publicly exhibited to persons proposing for work to be let.'

"These most explicit provisions of law have been very rarely observed. Contracts have not only been let without the preliminary surveys, maps, plans, and estimates, but one of the most familiar abuses on the canals of late years has been to change the plan of work after the contract is signed, by which the contractor gets relieved from the unprofitable portions of his work, and is furnished a pretext for establishing a new scale of prices, in connivance with the auditing officers. Illustrations of this method of defrauding the State may be found in several of the reports submitted to the Executive. The most costly one to the State is described in our first report. The contract for substituting slope and vertical wall for the bench wall between the Port Schuyler and the lower Mohawk aqueduct provided originally for 14,000 cubic yards of slope wall and only 9000 of vertical wall. As if distrustful of the influence of the contractor over its own agents, the Legislature, within six months after the time this work could have begun, in appropriating money to carry it on, absolutely prohibited the expenditure of more than five per cent. of the appropriation for vertical wall. Regardless, however, of this restriction, and regardless of the terms of the contract which provided for twice as much slope as vertical wall, nearly ninety-five per cent. of the cost of the work on that contract was incurred upon vertical wall and work incident to such construction, while not a single yard of slope wall was built; and as a consequence, an improvement which could have been readily and well done for the original appropriation of $84,645 has already cost the State about half a million for wretched work, and is still far from completion. No attention was ever paid to the provision of the act requiring the change of plan from slope to vertical wall, with the maps, plans, and estimates for such new work to be submitted to and approved by the Canal Board, and advertised and let to the lowest bidder.

"Nor does the infidelity of the State's agents appear to have stopped here. While the records of the canal commissioners and of the Canal Board certify that the preliminary surveys, maps, plans, specifications, estimates, etc., required by law were actually produced before them and approved by them and by the State Engineer; in point of fact, no such precautions for the protection of the State, so far as we have been able to ascertain, were actually taken.[8]

"It is obvious that the abuses to which we have invited your attention cannot be remedied except:

"First, by concentrating responsibility for the administration of the canals in fewer hands;

"Second, by lodging somewhere a more efficient power for the suspension or removal of offenders;

"Third, by providing more specific, complete, and efficient laws for preventing and punishing abuses when disclosed; and,

"Fourth, by providing for the vigorous prosecution and punishment of unfaithful servants.

"Under the present organization the responsibility for a non-compliance with the provisions of the laws for the repair and maintenance of the canals is so distributed between nine State officers, composing the Canal Board, and the auditor, the superintendents, the division, resident and assistant Engineers, that it is nearly impossible to bring any one of them to justice, unless all, or at least a large majority, are of accord in that purpose. Could one person be held responsible for the acts of all of his subordinates, the remedy would be simple and probably adequate. Should the people ratify the proposed amendment of the Constitution, which is designed to clothe a new officer, to be called Superintendent of Public Works, with the powers now vested in the canal commissioners, together with other powers necessary to his functions, this evil of divided responsibility will be greatly diminished. At present the powers of removal and suspension of unfaithful officers are altogether inadequate.

"We recommend, in addition, that the division and resident engineers, and such others engineers as it may be necessary, in the opinion of the State Engineer and Surveyor, to employ temporarily upon any particular work, should be appointed by the State Engineer and Surveyor, with the approval of the Canal Board, subject to removal by the State Engineer and Surveyor alone. In case of every such temporary employment, we would recommend that the rate of compensation be fixed by the Canal Board before such person employed enters upon duty; that he be required to file the usual oath of office, and that he be only paid by the auditor of the Canal Department upon his oath to the correctness of the items charged for expenses and time, and a certificate of the approval of the State Engineer and Surveyor attached.

"No modification of the Constitution or of the law, however, will ever work any substantial reform unless adequate provision is made in some way for a more vigorous prosecution of unfaithful servants. The law is no protection unless its penalties are enforced against those who violate it; the justice that sleeps might as well be dead. Had the laws been enforced promptly when they had been notoriously violated, our canals would not only now be out of debt, but a fruitful source of revenue to the State. It is our conviction that the Legislature will do well to see if this arm of the government ought not to be strengthened. The evidence here submitted will show that very large sums of money have been taken annually from the State by the fraudulent connivance of the State agents with contractors, which should be reclaimed and restored to the treasury and an example made of all the parties participating in the robberies. The preparation of the testimony in these prosecutions, covering, as it must in most cases, a series of years, the actions of a large number of public officers, and servants, and involving a scientific examination of great varieties of work and a familiarity with the principles of engineering and the field work of the engineers, and with the accounts preserved in our public archives, will involve an amount of labor and expense for which at present there is no adequate provision.

"The commission was occupied in the taking of testimony until after the present session of the Legislature had commenced. The testimony could not be written out by the stenographer and put into the hands of the printer until the latter part of the month of January. This will explain any apparent delay in the transmission of this report, there being obvious inconveniences in sending part in print and part in manuscript. There has been no delay in its preparation, except what was the natural and inevitable result of efforts of the commission to render its contents readily accessible to your Excellency and to the legislative bodies.

"For the expenses of the commission the sum of $30,000 was appropriated by the last Legislature. The expenses will exceed this sum about $5000, for which we respectfully ask an appropriation. For greater convenience in presenting the testimony taken, we had it printed at a cost of over $4000. This, together with the legal expenses growing out of the proceedings to establish the authority of the commission to compel the production of books and papers and the witnesses to testify, occasioned this deficiency.

"John Bigelow,
"D. Magone, Jr.,
"A. E. Orr,
"John D. Van Buren, Jr.

"Albany, February 14, 1876."

"EXHIBIT D.

"The commission to investigate the affairs of the canals of the State present to the honorable commissioners of the canal fund:

"That Hon. Francis S. Thayer, Auditor of the Canal Department, has violated his duty as such auditor 'in respect to the public moneys in his charge and subject to his draft':

"First.—In that, on the 21st day of July, 1874, he procured the passage of a resolution by the commissioners of the canal fund whereby $200,000 of the sinking fund was directed to be invested in the taxes to be levied pursuant to chapter 462 of the laws of 1874; and after procuring the passage of such resolution did set apart said sum in violation of the Constitution. That the auditor's motive was to benefit George D. Lord. That in carrying out such intent the auditor paid $120,497.02 of said sum of $200,000, so set apart, within two days thereafter to Thad. C. Davis, as the agent of George D. Lord. That this was a violation of the Constitution, see article seven, sections two and thirteen. That the auditor is responsible for this misapplication of money, see his testimony, pages 2544, 2546.

"Second.—In that, on or about the 1st day of December, 1874, there being money subject to the warrant of the auditor for that purpose, the said auditor refused payment to S. R. Wells, administrator, of an award in his favor for $5207.50 on the false pretence that he had no funds, and immediately after such refusal negotiated the purchase, and did purchase, the said award at about $200 less than it called for of principal and interest, and on the 9th day of February, 1875, audited the said claim at the sum of $5454.92, and drew his warrant therefor in favor of George A. Stone, as assignee.

"George A. Stone had no interest in the transaction, and the auditor testifies that it was purchased for his brother-in-law, E. J. McKie. As to the evidence of this charge, see testimony of S. R. Wells, page 37 (folio 513 to folio 517); testimony of D. Willers, Jr., page 42 (folios 571 and 572); testimony of the auditor, pages 2507-2511; that the profit went to the benefit of the auditor, see pages 2595.

"Third.—In that, on the 11th day of March, 1875, there being money subject to the warrant of the auditor for that purpose, the said auditor refused payment to George M. Case of an award in his favor for $9768.71, on the false pretence that he had no funds, and, immediately after such refusal, negotiated the purchase, and did purchase, the said award, including accrued interest, at $10,510.73, and did on the twentieth day of May thereafter audit said claim for the full amount thereof, including interest, to wit, $10,730.60, and drew his warrant therefor in favor of George A. Stone, assignee.

"George A. Stone had no interest in the purchase, as appeared by his testimony, pages 2160-2229, and the auditor testified that he made the purchase for his brother-in-law, E. J. McKie.

"As to the evidence, see testimony of Auditor Thayer, pages 2507, 2586, 2595.

"Fourth.—In that, on the 15th day of March, 1875, the auditor purchased a certificate in favor of E. H. French for $1184.26 at a discount of $24.64. It was paid May twentieth thereafter at its full face. As to evidence of this transaction, see testimony of Auditor Thayer, same pages and folios referred to above as to George M. Case's certificate.

"Fifth.—In that, on the 12th day of April, 1875, the auditor purchased sixteen canal commissioners' certificates, amounting in the aggregate to $29,962, from Nehemiah L. Osborne at a discount of seven per cent. per annum from the face thereof, but for what length of time the discount was made we are unable to ascertain, further than that the time was in excess of the time between the purchase and payment by the auditor.

"These certificates were paid May 20, 1875, to George A. Stone. That the auditor derived a personal advantage from this transaction, see testimony of George A. Stone and of Auditor Thayer, pages 2229, 2595.

"Sixth.—In that, on the 28th day of April, 1875, the auditor purchased from H. D. Denison five canal commissioners' certificates, of the aggregate amount of $49,610, at a discount of seven per cent. per annum, but for what time he discounted them we have not been able to ascertain, further than that it was in excess of the time between the purchase and payment. On the twentieth day of May thereafter the auditor audited said certificates and drew his warrant for the payment thereof in favor of George A. Stone, assignee, at $50,542.06, and the amount gained went to the personal advantage of the auditor. As to evidence of this transaction, see testimony of George A. Stone, page 2229; Francis S. Thayer, page 2476.

"Seventh.—In that, on the 29th day of April, 1875, the auditor purchased from H. D. Denison six canal commissioners' certificates, of the aggregate amount of $30,687, at a discount of seven per cent. per annum, but for what length of time he discounted them we have not been able to ascertain, further than that it was greater than the time between the purchase and payment; that on the twentieth day of May thereafter the auditor audited these certificates and drew his warrant therefor in favor of George A. Stone at $31,153.03. That the personal gain from this transaction went to the personal advantage of Francis S. Thayer, see his testimony, page 2595.

"Eighth.—That the auditor drew his warrant in payment for a canal commissioners' certificate, in favor of John D. Hamilton, for $38,000, on the 28th day of June, 1875, in violation of law in this: that he paid it without the sworn certificate of an engineer, as required by statute.

"Ninth.—In this, that the auditor, in June, 1875, purchased a canal commissioners' certificate, subject to his own audit, from James P. Buck, for $6496.28, at a discount of ten per cent. For the evidence of specification, see testimony of James P. Buck, page 2216.

"The auditor claims he made this purchase for his brother-in-law, E. J. McKie.

"Tenth.-In this, that on the 2d day of July, 1875, the auditor purchased canal commissioners' certificates, subject to his own audit, to the amount of $49,953.91, at a discount of eight per cent. and accrued interest, in favor of the purchaser. For evidence of this purchase, see testimony of Willard Johnson, page 2386; testimony of F. S. Thayer, page 2514.

"Eleventh.—In that, in addition to those above enumerated, the auditor purchased, between the 9th day of March and the 14th day of July, 1875, canal commissioners' drafts and certificates, subject to his own audit, to the amount of $64,959.81, all of which he afterward audited and drew his warrants in payment thereof. As to the evidence of these several transactions, see testimony of George A. Stone, page 2241; that the auditor derived a direct personal advantage from these transactions, see testimony of Francis S. Thayer, page 2595.

"John Bigelow,
"A. E. Orr,
"John D. Van Buren, Jr.,
"D. Magone, Jr.,

"Commissioners."

"EXHIBIT E
"COPY OF THE REQUISITION OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE CANAL FUND

"The undersigned hereby certify that, at a meeting of the commissioners of the canal fund, held at the Canal Department, in the city of Albany, on the 28th day of December, 1875, at 10 o'clock A. M.,

"Present—William Dorsheimer, Lieutenant-Governor; Diedrich Willers, Jr., Secretary of State; Nelson K. Hopkins, Comptroller; Thomas Raines, Treasurer; Daniel Pratt, Attorney-General,

"The following proceedings were had:

"On motion of the Attorney-General, it was

"Resolved, That a requisition is made upon his Excellency the Governor to suspend Francis S. Thayer, the auditor of the Canal Department, and to appoint a suitable person to perform his duties, if it shall be made to appear to him that the said auditor has violated his duty in respect to the public moneys in his charge and subject to his draft, the particulars of which alleged violations of duty appear in the report of the commission to investigate the affairs of the canals of the State, which has been submitted to this board, and which is herewith transmitted.

"The members of the board who voted in favor of the adoption of said resolution were as follows: The Lieutenant-Governor, Attorney-General, and Secretary of State. The Comptroller voted in the negative. The Treasurer was not present when the vote was taken, by reason of illness.

"William Dorsheimer,
"Lieutenant-Governor.
"Daniel Pratt,
"Attorney-General.
"Diedrich Willers, Jr.,
"Secretary of State."

"EXHIBIT F
"EXECUTIVE ORDER FOR THE SUSPENSION OF AUDITOR THAYER

"State of New York: Executive Chamber,
"Albany, December, 1875.

"Whereas, The commissioners of the canal fund, by their requisition hereto annexed, have required or recommended the suspension from office of Francis S. Thayer, the auditor of the Canal Department; and, whereas, it has been made to appear to me that the said Francis S. Thayer, as such auditor, has violated his duty in respect to the public moneys in his charge and subject to his draft;

"Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of section 2, of chapter 783 of the laws of 1857, I do hereby suspend the said Francis S. Thayer from his office as auditor of the Canal Department.

"In witness whereof, I hereunto set my name and cause to be affixed the privy seal of the State this 28th day of December, 1875.

{ State of New York. }
{ Excelsior. } "Samuel J. Tilden."
{Executive Privy Seal.}
"By the Governor,
"Chas. Stebbins,
"Private Secretary.

"Indorsed: Order by Samuel J. Tilden, Governor, suspending Francis S. Thayer, auditor of the Canal Department.

"Filed December 28, 1875, at four and a half o'clock P.M.

"Diedrich Willers, Jr.,
"Secretary of State."

A. E. ORR TO TILDEN

"New York, May 19, '76.

"Governor Tilden,—We ended our work on the commission last Tuesday.

"I regret that I could not see you and say farewell, and wish you God-speed in the work with which you are so prominently identified.

"I leave in the faith that fearless honesty will place its heel on fraud and corruption, and that you will be the standard-bearer selected at St. Louis and surely prove victorious in November next.

"The best men of each party are beginning to see the necessity for just such action, and you are daily receiving numerous recruits.

"Don't give way an inch.

"Very respectfully, your friend,
"A. E. Orr."

"MR. TILDEN AND THE DEMOCRATS

[From the New York "Tribune" (Republican) of May 27, 1876.]

"Mr. Tilden is by no means the only Democrat at the East whom good citizens might rejoice to see nominated for the Presidency. His name would undoubtedly do honor to the ticket to be made at St. Louis; but it is not essential to the credit of the party, and if some of his own political brethren are bitterly opposed to him, that is, in one sense, a family affair, over which the outside world need not greatly vex itself. As an indication of the tendencies of the Democratic party, however, the causes of the hostility to Tilden becomes a matter of national concern. The first serious manifestation of enmity came from Tammany Hall, and it finds expression in the columns of the Express, where it is alleged that Gov. Tilden has made use of his position to organize a personal party. But this is such a strange complaint to come from the Tammany Hall autocracy that there must be something more behind it. The World, whose change of proprietorship is generally interpreted as a blow at Mr. Tilden's pretensions, has not a word to say against the Governor; it only insists, with good sense and good temper, that there are other eminent Democrats whose merits and whose chances are entitled to consideration. But on Wednesday a conference of leading Democratic politicians was held at Albany to consider how Mr. Tilden could be most conveniently thrown overboard, and from them it would seem that we ought to obtain some light upon the interesting question which neither the World, nor the Express, nor Tammany has seen fit to answer. There were present at this conference Chief-Justice Church and Justice Allen, ex-Lieut.-Gov. Beach, ex-Gov. Hoffman, ex-Speaker Littlejohn, and other well-known men, and the judgment of the meeting is understood to have been unanimous that Mr. Tilden, having alienated a large faction of the Democracy, is not the man for St. Louis.

"We mean no reflection upon the integrity of any of these estimable gentlemen, but it is a significant fact that pretty nearly all the most reputable Democrats whose names have been, either rightly or wrongly, connected with the Tweed and Canal Rings, were found on Wednesday in their company. It was probably not the fault of Judge Church and Judge Allen that the Canal Ring and what was left of the old Tammany Ring united in 1874 to run them both against Tilden, first one and then the other, in the canvass for the nomination; but it was certainly their misfortune. That fight of the Rings against Tilden was a matter of notoriety, and the nomination of our present Governor, instead of Judge Church or his cousin, Judge Allen, was generally recognized throughout the State as a triumph of the better elements of the Democracy over the thieves and corruptionists. It seems to be the same fight that is renewed now. Judge Allen is known as the author of the much-criticised decision of the Court of Appeals which released Tweed from Blackwell's Island. Mr. Beach is remembered as the gentleman who made such a strange exhibition of himself last Summer by publishing a card in which he intemperately denounced a report of the canal investigating commission as "unfounded in every particular," and who then, being subpœnaed by the commission, swallowed his card and convicted himself of official neglect out of his own mouth. The history and affiliations of ex-Gov. Hoffman are well enough known.

"Altogether, it may be said that the Albany conference only brought to the front the men who have always been recognized as Governor Tilden's enemies and rivals, and who, from their peculiar positions, could not be his friends, not because they are not personally good men, but because a reform movement cannot be carried on in New York without hurting their allies and adherents. And if we go outside the State we find the anti-Tilden sentiment confined to the Western inflationists and communists, who hate every man that believes in a dollar, and are perfectly frank in the declaration of their sentiments. Now, as we have said before, the Democratic party is not so poor that it can name no one for the Presidency whose fitness is not so marked as Mr. Tilden's; but if he is to be thrown overboard the country has a right to insist that the reasons for his rejection shall be made quite clear; otherwise it is sure to draw unpleasant conclusions. The Democratic candidate, whoever he may be, must be a man whom repudiators, canal thieves, and the relics of the old Tammany cannot support."

THE FIFTH AVENUE HOTEL CONFERENCE OF 1876

[From the "Sun," April 7, 1900.]

"A man with half a memory writes a long letter to the Evening Post of this city recalling the circumstances of the once-famous Fifth Avenue Hotel Conference of May, 1876. He thinks the political situation is ripe for another such demonstration on the part of eminent citizens who do not want to vote for McKinley again, yet view with apprehension the probability that Bryan will be the alternative choice. There is as much time now before the two great nominating conventions, he points out, as there was when Carl Schurz and others met in the Fifth Avenue Hotel to save the country. A quarter of a century has considerably idealized his mental picture of that conference and its results. This is his description of it now:

"'It was a gathering of the foremost patriots in the nation, regardless of party affiliations, to discuss the political situation and suggest to the country a programme for the Presidential canvass which was soon to begin. There were philosophers and scholars of the first rank, eminent lawyers, and brilliant editors, and men who had won renown in many a fierce campaign as "practical" politicians and popular leaders. The call which brought them together distinctly disavowed the idea of nominating a candidate or framing a platform, except, possibly, in the barest outlines. The whole purpose of the conference was to end at one stroke some of the false conditions against which the conscience and intelligence of the country were in revolt, but not to pull down anything for which it was not prepared to offer something better as a substitute.'

"This conference to which the writer in the Evening Post refers in terms of reverence, amounting almost to awe, met at the Fifth Avenue Hotel on May 16, 1876, in response to a call signed by Mr. Schurz and a few others. There were present about two hundred gentlemen, mostly of the type which afterward came to be known as the Mugwump; that is to say, the type addicted to proclaiming its superior intelligence and conscience in political affairs. As might be expected, the Hon. Carl Schurz, the Flying Dutchman of American politics, was the most conspicuous figure. He made the principal speech, and he was chairman of the committee which prepared and reported a pretentious 'address to the country.' This address to the country constituted the sole fruit of the conference's deliberations.

"Let us supplement the half-memory of the man who wants another such demonstration of the foremost patriots, philosophers, and scholars, under the leadership once more, as we assume from the tone of his letter, of the Hon. Carl Schurz. At the time the conference met there was nothing murky in the political situation. On the Republican side the nomination of Governor Hayes, of Ohio, was clearly indicated. The Sun had predicted it long before the patriots and philosophers assembled. Mr. Blaine was an aggressive candidate, and there was some third-term talk about Gen. Grant; but the Conkling-Blaine feud and the Bristow disaffection already rendered practically certain the nomination of a compromise candidate not identified with either faction, and the logic of the situation pointed directly to Governor Hayes. On the other side everything was shaping towards the event which occurred at St. Louis six weeks later, the nomination on the second ballot, by far more than the required two-thirds majority, of Samuel J. Tilden, a statesman and reformer representing with singular closeness the ideal which was declared to be in the minds of Mr. Carl Schurz and his associates.

"That celebrated address which Mr. Schurz drafted, with the assistance of the intelligence and conscience of the country, could scarcely have called more pointedly for Tilden and barred out Hayes as the President desired by the foremost patriots, philosophers, and scholars, had it mentioned their names. We quote from Mr. Carl Schurz's address to the country:

"'We shall support no candidate who, however favorably judged by his nearest friends, is not publicly known to possess those qualities of mind and character which the stern task of genuine reform requires, for the American people cannot now afford to risk the future of the republic in experiments on merely supposed virtue or rumored ability to be trusted on the strength of private recommendations.

"'The man to be intrusted with the Presidency this year must have deserved not only the confidence of honest men, but also the fear and hatred of the thieves.

"'The country must now have a President whose name is already a watchword of reform, whose capacity and courage for the work are matters of record rather than promise.'

"There was much more of the same sort in the address which Mr. Schurz signed and the Fifth Avenue Hotel conference issued. Within a few weeks the Republican party nominated the man whose capacity and courage for the work of reform were matters of promise only, and the Democracy put up the statesman already publicly known to possess those qualities of mind and character which the stern task of genuine reform required.

"What was the sequel? A few weeks later the Hon. Carl Schurz, the author of all the high-sounding professions in the address to the country, was hard at work persuading citizens of the Mugwump type to cast their votes for Hayes and against Tilden; and a few months later, after Mr. Hayes had failed to secure a majority of the electoral vote, but had been counted into the office to which Mr. Tilden was elected, the Hon. Carl Schurz, reformer and leader of the Fifth Avenue Hotel conference, got his pay for partisan activity; it came in the shape of a Cabinet appointment, which he promptly accepted.

"Such is the true story of the May conference of 1876."

JOHN T. MORGAN TO MONTGOMERY BLAIR

"Confidential.

"Selma, Ala., June 3d, 1876.

"Hon. Montgomery Blair.

"Dear Sir,—I have had two valued favors from you—the last of 25th May. I was chosen as a State elector, and also as a State delegate to St. Louis by our recent convention. It was very large, fully representative, unusually able, and harmonious. The delegation to St. Louis is very able, comprising many of our best men. No instructions were given. I did not even hear much discussion of candidates. The great leading thought is success, and to gain this every man will sacrifice all his preferences for any particular candidate. I think I may state safely (but I do it in personal confidence) that not more than two of our twenty delegates favor now the nomination of any other person but Mr. Tilden. One of these stated to the convention that he was under no pledges to any man. This state of opinion is the result of close scrutiny of the drift of sentiment in the Northern States, and especially in New York. The recent movement of Church and Kelly and others has deceived no one here.

"I am satisfied that Alabama will be very reluctant to take such a lead as would have the appearance of dictating the candidate to the Northern States. The North ought to settle its differences about the minor and purely political question of currency laws and allow us to unite with them in demanding a pure government which will give them a chance for life. If they force us to choose, however, we will certainly be directed solely by the consideration of 'success.' We can't afford to risk anything to gratify a predilection. If you could, Bayard would get the State. I was at Montgomery at the time you refer to as a member of the convention of 1861. I do not remember that Mr. Bayard was there. I feel satisfied he was not there.

"As his friend I would prefer to see him wait a time and mature more thoroughly his great powers in the school of experience. Still, he would now be a most acceptable President to all the people of the Southern States.

"My conviction remains unshaken that Mr. Tilden is the strongest man in N. Y.; that he is an honest Democrat from principle; that he acts squarely on his convictions in everything; that his record is one to inspire confidence in the people; that he will attack fraud and corruption wherever he meets them, without fear or hesitancy; and that his good sense, and the best interests of his own State, will lead him to give to the country with which the great commercial cities are so intimately associated in the means of prosperity, peace and protection, while it is working out with honest toil its redemption from poverty and distress. This is all we need. We do not wish the power that springs merely from the weight of numbers in the electoral colleges. We wish no offices, or, rather, we need none, and our wisest men will be glad if we get but few. Let us alone, and we will soon become richer than we have ever been.

"Genl. E. W. Peters, who is Col. Denison's law partner, is in our delegation, and will probably be our chairman. He is a hard-money Democrat, and is much impressed with the necessity of Mr. Tilden's nomination as a matter of success.

"Very truly yours,
"Jno. T. Morgan."

On the 28th of June the Democratic National Convention at St. Louis nominated Mr. Tilden for President.

The whole vote on the second ballot was 738; necessary to a choice, 492. Tilden had 535; Hendricks, of Indiana, 66; Allen, of Ohio, 54; Parker, of New Jersey, 18; Hancock, of Pennsylvania, 59; Bayard, of Delaware, 11; Thurman, of Ohio, 2. Indiana seconded Pennsylvania's motion to make Mr. Tilden's nomination unanimous, and it was adopted.

In the month of June, 1876, Governor Tilden received a note from a citizen of Minnesota complaining that he could get no evidence of any success achieved by the Governor in his war upon the Canal Ring, and that it was thrown in the face of the people out there that nothing had been accomplished. His letter concludes as follows: "Now, if ever I have seen any disposition of these cases of corruption it has escaped my memory, and to be prepared to answer our assailants on their only one point, with an earnest desire to convert them to Tilden and reform, is solely the object of my writing."

To this letter Tilden wrote the following reply, dated June 15, 1876: "Your letter of June 12th has been handed to me. In reply, I would like to state that it takes time to obtain the evidence and prepare the actions, civil and criminal, in such cases as those against the members of the Canal Ring. The machinery of justice under the State government has not the unity and efficiency that it has under the Federal government, where the district attorneys and marshals are appointed by the Chief Executive instead of being elected in their localities. On the whole, however, these cases have proceeded with more rapidity than could have been expected under the circumstances. You will have become, doubtless, aware before this reaches you that George D. Lord was convicted a few days since at Buffalo. The principal civil suit against Beldon, Denison & Co. is set down for trial on the 12th of July. The trial was put off for a few weeks by the court against the opposition of the Attorney-General. The most important thing, of course, was to break up the system, and that has been done. A secondary object is to deter from the commission of similar offences in future, and that work is going on satisfactorily."

P. H. SMITH TO TILDEN (TELEGRAM)

"Springfield, Ill., June 21, 1876.

"To Gov. Sam. J. Tilden,
"15 Gramercy.

"The Chicago Times to-day says that you were chairman of platform committee in eighteen hundred and sixty-four which put forth the famous peace resolution pronouncing the war as a failure. Please telegraph the fact. Large majority of this convention for you.

"P. H. Smith."

MANTON MARBLE TO PERRY H. SMITH (TELEGRAM)

"June 21, 1876.

"To Perry H. Smith,
"Springfield.

"Your telegram shown me. Governor Tilden was not chairman of platform committee of Chicago convention. James Guthrie was. Tilden opposed resolution containing phrase speaking of war as having thus far failed to restore the Union in committee; got it stricken out; refused to agree to resolution with it in. It was then irregularly restored. Tilden refused to agree to resolutions at all stages, and sent messages by me to McClellan advising him to discard it in letter of acceptance. Tilden made speech in New York delegation against resolution, which was briefly reported by me in World, and is copied in Courier-Journal telegraphs. I was present in New York delegation and at meetings of committee or in adjoining room."

At the Democratic convention of the State of New York, held at Utica, May, 1876, Governor Tilden was recommended as a candidate for President to the National Democratic Convention, to be held at St. Louis on the 26th of June following. At the meeting of that convention an informal ballot disclosed such a decided partiality for Mr. Tilden over either of the other candidates that he was nominated on the next ballot.

MAJOR-GENERAL HOOKER TO TILDEN

"Garden City, L. I., June 29th, '76.

"To his Excellency, Gov. Samuel J. Tilden.

"My dear Governor,—I cannot refrain from offering you my sincere congratulations on your nomination to the exalted office of the President of the United States. As a quiet observer of the political events of the nation, I know of no one in my day that has afforded me so much satisfaction, and sincerely hope and believe that the wisdom shown by the selection at St. Louis will be fully ratified by the great mass of our people in November next. We require reform in politics, religion, and morals, and I am convinced that we will receive them generously at your hands. The whole government of the nation has been corrupt—desperately corrupt—and the honor and glory of applying the antidote, I am convinced, will belong to you. If the fact of your nomination does not enhance the material values of the nation I am sure your election will do it. Already I seem to breathe a new atmosphere, as is the case with every well-wisher of the country.

Sincerely yours,
"J. Hooker."

CLARKSON N. POTTER TO TILDEN

"61 Wall St., N. Y., June 29, '76.

"My dear Governor,—Your letter was well received yesterday at Union College, and I am glad you sent it.

"I got down last evening just in time to hear of your nomination in the street and take into your house the news. Heaven grant you may be elected. The country needs that, far more than you do or can desire it.

"Faithfully yours,
"Clarkson N. Potter."

WILLIAM ALLEN BUTLER TO TILDEN

"New York, June 29, 1876.

"My dear Governor Tilden,—I congratulate you most heartily. Whatever may be the fortunes or the fate of the coming struggle, there is nothing but satisfaction to your old friends in your well-earned victory at St. Louis, and you can well understand how specially gratifying it is to

"Yours sincerely,
"William Allen Butler."

ROBERT B. MINTURN TO TILDEN

"New Brighton, Staten Island, July 3, 1876.

"My dear Governor Tilden,—No one has been more delighted than I by your nomination; and you, knowing how much I have desired it, may have been surprised at not receiving any word of congratulation from me.

"The truth is that, at a time when the mails and the wires have been burdened with messages of felicitation for you, it seemed that you would scarcely care to have any formal expression from those of whose regard and support you were already assured. I may have been wrong in this feeling, and perhaps I should at once have written to tell you how much I was rejoiced at your nomination, and how thoroughly I have admired your noble fight against the worst constituents of our politics—culminating in your victory, at the St. Louis convention, over all the jobbing elements of the party, which were strengthened by a most unprecedented and venomous opposition from your own State.

"My gratification at your nomination has, however (I must confess), been mingled with deep regret at the phrase in the platform which denounces the resumption clause of the act of 1875. I know as well as any one the fraudulent character of that act—I know that the Cincinnati convention refused to endorse it—but, nevertheless, I feel that it was a solemn pledge of the national faith, a pledge which cannot be repudiated without discredit, not to say, disgrace.