Salmon P. Chase to W. G. Kephart,* Winchester, Adams County, Ohio, May 8, 1849

June 19, [1849.]

My Dear Sir — On my return from Frankfort, Kentucky, day before yesterday, I found your note of the 7th inst. on my table. I shall not think it worth while to respond to the editorials of the Bee; but when a true & devoted friend to the sacred cause of Freedom asks my attention to any particular matter of accusation against me, I cannot hesitate about giving him all the satisfaction in my power. You write as if you feared some bad results to the cause of Free Democracy from the imputation of the Bee, implied rather than stated, that I changed or modified my opinions in regard to the Mexican war, for the sake of securing my election to the Senate. Neither this nor any other imputation alarms me. I have neither time nor inclination for replies to the attacks made on me by the partizans of Tay lorism. I prefer to let the acts of my life speak for me. If these witnesses are not believed, neither will any statement that I can make obtain credence. I do not therefore as a general rule take any notice of Newspaper aspersions. To you, however, a friend, I say distinctly that I neither retracted nor modified any old opinion, or adopted or expressed any new one, for the sake of securing my election. I abandon opinions when convinced that they are wrong and adopt opinions when satisfied that they are right, not otherwise. As to my opinions on the Mexican war I do not believe that a dozen members of the Legislature knew what they were. Certainly I was not interrogated at all in respect to them, nor can I recollect that I conversed with any member on that subject, until after my return from Washington, though it is by no means impossible that I may have done so. I have however expressed on various occasions my views on the subject in conversation both with friends and opponents, and these conversations may have been reported to members, though I have no knowledge of the fact. Of course there is not the slightest ground for the idea that I “stooped” to any insincerity or disguise for the sake of being Senator. I can say, I believe with truth, that the office has very little charm for me, except so far as it adds to my ability to promote the welfare of my country and advance the interests of the cause of Freedom.

I never took any active part in the controversy between the Whigs & Democrats in regard to the Mexican war. I was engaged in a different contest & on different questions. To me the question of slavery seemed paramount in importance to the question of the war: and I never thought it desirable to divide those who agreed in opposition to slavery, by raising disputes among them on the subject of the war. In fact this seemed to me the general policy of the Liberty men; and consequently we find no expression of opinion either in the Resolutions of the National Convention of 1847, or of any Convention in our own State on this matter. The Liberty men, generally, condemned the war, but some in one degree & some in another; and very few, to that degree, that they could not unite cordially with the Free Soil Democracy of New York, who generally sanctioned the war, in the support of the same national candidates; one of whom it is remarkable enough, sustained while the others opposed the Government in the prosecution of it. Holding the view which was thus acted on by the Liberty men generally I seldom referred to the war at all in any public addresses and, when I did, thought it best to abstain from any line of remark calculated to introduce division among ourselves. I had, however, my individual views on the subject, which I freely expressed, whenever the occasion seemed proper for it, in private talk. These views I have not held or expressed dogmatically, or with any absolute certainty that they were right exclusively, and that everybody who dissented from them was wrong. They were in substance the same as those expressed by Wilberforce in relation to the war of England against France in 1803 — a war in my judgment, the commencement of which was quite as indefensible as that of our war against Mexico “I strongly opposed this war” he remarked “differing from those with whom 1 commonly agreed, at a great cost of private feeling; but when once it had begun, I did not persist — in declaiming against its impolicy & mischiefs, because I knew that by so doing I should only injure my country.”

I was not in any position to make my views of any consequence; and in this respect my circumstances were very unlike those of Wilberforce, who was a prominent and influential member of Parliament. As a private citizen, however, though I did not approve the commencement of the war but on the contrary always regarded the pretension of Texas to the boundary of the Rio Grande as groundless, and the order of the President, that the troops should advance to that river as therefore unwarranted, I did not on the other hand, after the war was actually begun & had received the sanction of the Congress, think it my duty to oppose its vigorous prosecution, on the contrary it seemed to me, reasoning on actual facts & not on facts as I could have wished them to be, that this course was the only practicable road to a sure & permanent peace. In this I may have been wrong, and when convinced that I was, I shall fully admit it. I rejoice certainly that I was in no public position, which would constrain me, holding these views and unconvinced by argument against them to differ in action from those who felt themselves constrained by honest convictions of imperative duty uninfluenced by the spirit of opposition to the existing administration, to oppose all measures for the prosecution as well as the commencement of the war. Nor do I expect that any future circumstances will arise, the war being now terminated, in which I shall be compelled to differ from them. I might go farther in this subject, but I have said enough to shew you my exact position. In one thing we shall probably all agree that the result of the war has signally disappointed the anticipation of those who supported it as some doubtless did with a view to the extension of slavery. The acquisition of New Mexico & California, free from slavery, by their own laws, and the bold demand of the slaveholders that they shall be surrendered to its blight, has aroused a spirit of inquiry upon the whole subject of that terrible curse and the relations of the National Government to it, which can hardly fail to precipitate the downfall of the slave power & hasten the era of emancipation. Let me assure you, my dear sir, that I shall always receive the “reproofs of instruction” with respectful consideration. I am far from believing that I have attained correct views of every subject. I dare not say that I am exempt from even more than the ordinary bias of human nature in forming my judgments. But I can say that I desire to be right & pray that I may be kept from all error, & especially all error harmful to our beloved country or to the cause of Human Freedom & progress — Join me in these prayers & when you believe me wrong tell me so. If after all, in any particular, my course shall not meet your approbation, before you go beyond a simple condemnation of that particular action or line of action and think of withdrawing your confidence from me or inducing others to do so, consider whether you are warranted in so doing by the whole tenor of my life and the general character & scope of all my conduct. Having thus considered act as your sense of duty prompts you. I ask no more.

P. S. I shall be pleased to hear from you in answer to this.

_______________

* From letter-book 6, p. 91 (continued on 107).

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 174-7

Salmon P. Chase to Joshua R. Giddings,* April 4, 1849

April 4, [1849.]

My Dear Sir, I have just received your kind note of the 3rd March inviting me, in default of being able to obtain lodgings on my arrival at Washington, to share yours. It was left for me at Coleman's I suppose, & I never saw it until to day. I wish I had arrived in season to avail myself of it.

I have recd. since my return on Saturday last (31st ult) yr. 2 letters of the 14th & 28th March. I wish I could agree with you in the sentiment, “let by gones be by gones”: & in view of it I do. Let us arrange a satisfactory basis of future action & I will cordially respond to the sentiment But is it not manifest what has past must be reviewed, in some measure, in order to determine on this basis? It is clear to me that the question growing out of the division of this County ought to have been settled this winter by the repeal of the clauses effecting the division. In my judgment also the apportionment law, (so called,) should have been modified by the disjunction of counties improperly joined; & I held junction improper, if not unconstitutional, in all cases, where the counties, if separated, would be respectively entitled to a member. I am very sure that had the Representatives of the Free Democracy in the Senate and House last winter been willing to have done justice in these particulars to the old Democracy, not only might all division in our own ranks have been avoided, but the democrats, propitiated by this action, would have cheerfully aided the Free Soilers not only in the repeal of the Black laws, but in the enactment of suitable laws against kidnapping & prohibiting the use of state jails & the aid of State officers to the pursuers of fugitive slaves, & generally in carrying through our distinctive Free Soil Measures.

These consequences would have flowed naturally & inevitably from the state of feeling which always springs up among men, who find themselves in the relative positions occupied by the Free Democrats and the Cass Democrats & act justly & liberally towards each other.

A different line of conduct was resolved on, & the results of the winter session are far less complete, in my judgment, than they would otherwise have been: & we are now embarrassed by the question What shall be done with the division of Hamilton County? I do not see how we can keep this question out of the elections next fall: nor, in my judgment, is it now desirable to do so. I quite agree with you that “standing as we must in opposition to the administration necessity will compel the democrats & free soilers to act together on all matters touching the administration”: & I would add to this that there being a substantial agreement between the platform of State policy adopted by the Free Democratic State Convention last winter, & that of the old Democracy, it seems to me, that the same general harmony of action may be easily secured as to State matters. If such harmony can be secured without the sacrifice of principle, & without the sacrifice of the independent organization of the Free Democracy, the result cannot fail to be auspicious to the cause of Freedom & to its maintainers. Such harmony, resulting in a triumph of the Democrats & Free Democrats in the State election, would strengthen, infinitely, your position in the House & my position in the Senate, & give complete ascendency to our principles & measures in the Senate. The harmonious cooperation cannot be had, I apprehend, without a definition of its position by the Free Democracy on the Hamilton County question:¹ &, therefore I say that it does not seem to me desirable to avoid it. In fact I should have brought the question forward in our State convention had I felt assured that the clauses would be repealed before the end of the session & therefore yielded to the suggestions of several, & waived the introduction either into the Committee or into the Convention of a resolution which I had prepared.

But if it were desirable to keep this question out of the canvass could we do it? It must be decided by the next house & the next senate. The Democrats will elect, in this county representatives for the whole county on a single ticket. The Free Democracy will vote in the same way in all probability. The Whigs will vote by Districts. The democrats will have a majority in the first eight wards of Cincinnati, which they claim to be a district. The two sets of representatives will again present themselves at Columbus claiming seats. The free soilers, in all probability, will again have the question to decide between the claimants. How can we avoid the enquiry, How will the Candidates proposed by the Free Democratic Conventions vote on the question? If we should avoid it & elect men ignorant of their views on this question, does not the experience of last winter clearly shew that its decisions will divide the Free Soilers? I think then, that the Hamilton County question must be met & settled in our primary conventions.

My views in relation to it are fixed. I thought last winter & still think that the division clauses are not warranted by the constitution but that these clauses having been regarded as binding by a large proportion though a decided minority of the voters, the election held, partly under them & partly in disregard of them, should be set aside, the clauses repealed, & the election sent back to the people. I did not, however, regard it as the absolute duty of the Legislature to set aside the election in every event. On the contrary the Democratic Claimants to be entitled, stricti juris, to their seats. & therefore when it became impossible to send the election back to the people with the clauses repealed, through the refusal of Whig Freesoilers to vote for the repeal of them, I did not hesitate to approve the determination of Mess. Morse & Townshend to admit them to their seats, as constitutionally elected. I think, of course, that the candidates of whatever party they may be, having the highest number of votes cast in the whole county, next fall, will be entitled to seats in the House. So fixed is this opinion in the minds of the Democrats, that I do not doubt  that they will refuse to sit in a House from which the members from Hamilton County shall be excluded.

It seems to me, therefore, that the question of the Constitutionality & validity of the divisions — clauses, as well as the validity of the pretended enactment of the apportionment law should be fairly discussed in our conventions. I believe the result of such a discussion will be general acquiescence in the opinions, which I, in common with nearly all Liberty men, & Democratic Freesoilers & not a few Whig Free Soilers, confidently hold. If such be the result, it seems to me certain that we can achieve a most important victory next fall.

I have thus given you my views freely, I shall be glad to know they strike you. I learn that Briggs has repeated the charge of one of the Taylor Papers, here, that before the meeting of the Legislature I expressed an opinion in favor of the Constitutional of the division, & changed it afterwards to effect my purpose. This is simply false: & I should think Mr. Briggs must have known it to be so: & I am mistaken greatly if I did not express the opinion I now hold, in one or more letters to Cleveland before the meeting of the Legislature not so fully perhaps as I should now, for I had not so fully considered the subjects involved but substantially the same.

As to all personal attacks, however, I shall content myself with a simple appeal to the whole tenor of my past life & leave my vindication to Time & Public Reason. 1 enclose a statement of the popular vote on the question of annexation the southern part of Mill Creek to the city a bill for which purpose was so strenuously resisted by the Whigs in the Legislature last winter & was defeated by a tie vote in  the Senate. Hunker Whiggism musters in Whig Cincinnati only 1092 votes. The Democrats & Free Soilers united with the Whig annexationists & elected also an annexation council carrying every ward but one.

With very great regard,

[Salmon P. Chase.]

_______________

* From letter-book 6, pp. 133 and 174-175.

¹ See T. C. Smith Liberty and Free Soil Parties, 161.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 166-70

Salmon P. Chase to Thomas Stanley Matthews,* February 26, 1849

Feby 26 ['49.]

My D^r Stanley, I wish to ask y^r intervention for me in the affairs of the Standard. I had a despatch from Mr. Garrard to day enquiring whether in case he should sell to Mr Giddings, at 30 days, 6 mos, — 12 mos. for $700 I would endorse the notes; I ans^d. by a letter to Hamlin, that I would, provided a mortgage of the establishment would be executed to you in my behalf to indemnify me against loss. The fact is I have already advanced to the Standard directly, this winter, $310 besides $10 for subscriptions & $75 to enable Mr. Hamlin to remain in Columbus, as editor &c in which you may understand more than ever Lord Coke discerned in the &cs of Littleton. These and other expenses that you wot of and the necessity I am under to meet a third of a $700 liability for Mr. Hamlin within the next month make so heavy drafts upon my resources that I have become alarmed & dare not venture much farther. Still I am so satisfied of the necessity of sustaining the Standard that I am willing to encounter the risk involved in the endorsements named, provided I can be made in any degree secure: At the same time I do not wish to take any mortgage on the establishment directly to myself, because I do not wish my name connected with the paper at all, which could not be avoided in case of a mortgage to myself, as the mortgage, under the law must be recorded to be of any validity. I want you to represent me in this matter and act as you would for yourself and regard it simply as a business transaction, except I am not particular that the establishment shall be a perfectly sufficient security for the seven hundred dollars. I shall be content to run the risk of losing a hundred or two dollars, beyond the amount of the security.

Mr. Hamlin writes me that some $500 can be realized from the printing for the House. I shall be glad, if out of this $500 the first instalment of the $700 can be paid while the balance can be applied to the support of the paper until subscriptions can be collected and a fund made up. Still if nothing better can be done, I will consent to take on myself the burden of providing for the first instalment, though circumstanced as I am. I don't want this burden put upon me unless it be absolutely necessary.

Will you attend to all this matter for me? — Considering yourself fully authorized to act in the premises.

Don't go into the matter at all unless there is a reasonably certain prospect of the paper going ahead and paying its way. It would be useless folly for me to endorse for the purchase of the paper, if it must die at any rate, or be thrown on me for support, exclusively, or nearly so.

As the subscriptions for the Daily were proportioned to 3 mos in time, I do not see that there is any obligation to supply subscribers beyond that time, and, as it will not be practicable to keep up the Daily through the year, I think the present is a good time for stopping it. A clear full and racy sketch of the proceedings of the Legislature, made up from the Statesman and the Journal, would be more interesting to the majority of readers than the ordinary reports. In this way a first rate weekly could be made & expenses could be greatly reduced. If Mr Giddings would take hold of the paper in real earnest and go into the field to get subscribers it seems to me that the paper could be sustained.

I think I have made my views intelligible to you. I want you to act cautiously for me, remembering my position & circumstances & bearing in mind all I have said, I enclose a power which, if necessary, you can use.

I shall be very anxious to hear from you as to the state of things in the Legislature. I hope you will use your influence to have a caucus organized consisting of Swift, Van Doren Townshend & Morse and others, if any, who are willing to join them on the basis proposed by Dr. T., and have frequent meetings for consultation. Be sure, also, to get the kidnapping bill which I handed to Smith of Brown put through both Houses. A Homestead Exemption Bill, a Bill prohibiting use of State Jails &c & services of State Officers to pursuers of Slavery, and a bill to prevent kidnapping are necessary free soil measures which Townshend & Morse should not fail to obtain the passage of. They should also press the New Constitution Bill to a vote, and use their efforts to get a fair apportionment Bill. By the way, it seems to me quite important that Riddle should be induced to consent to such amendments of his Hamilton County Bill, as he can be brought to by persuasion, & that the bill should then pass in that shape. It is quite certain to my mind that if a new apportionment bill cannot be had the repeal of the division of Hamilton County should be secured without much regard to form or pleas: and it is also certain that if a new apportionment bill cannot be got through the Senate, no bill to which Riddle does not consent can be got through that body even in relation to Hamilton County. Hence the necessity of concert & consultation with Riddle & pressing nothing through the House to which he does not consent. See Pugh as to this & others, & let discretion guide. Write me at Washington & let me know from day to day how matters stand. I will telegraph you when I am about to start.

_______________

* From letter-book 6, pp. 170-171

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 162-5

Salmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin, Columbus Ohio, January 29, 1849

Cincinnati, Jany 29, 1849.

My Dear Hamlin: Thank you for your kindness in keeping me advised of events transpiring at Columbus. Nothing has occurred here of interest since I wrote you.

This morning the Globe contains an admirable article in relation to the Apportionment Act which does Taylor great credit and which I hope you will republish. The only thing exceptionable is the reference to me as having urged a compromise by which Spencer & Runyon should be admitted to their seats & the Hamilton County clauses repealed. There is no foundation for this and I hope you will omit this sentence containing the reference & the next one in case you republish. The article will read as well without these two sentences as with them. Don't neglect this; for the reference seems to me calculated to do harm.

All I ever did having any relation to this matter was to suggest in conversation with Whigs & Democrats before the meeting of the Legislature the avoidance of all violent excitement by waiving the question of constitutionality, admitting Spencer & Runyon under the law, & repealing the clauses. But I never thought that the decision of the constitutional question could be avoided or should be avoided if insisted on by either party, and that the law could be held constitutional, if the question should be pushed to a decision. My opinion on this matter, and also as to prima facie right are too well known, I think, to allow the possibility of harmful misrepresentation in most quarters. Still it is possible some may get wrong impressions from the paragraph, if published, and I hope therefore you will not fail to leave it out.

I had a letter from Hibben yesterday. He thinks Tillinghast may be fully relied on. But he must have a seat next Townshend & Morse.

I do wish I could see you and have a talk. Can't you come down say Friday night & spend Saturday & Sunday: returning Monday?

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 161-2

Edward Stowe Hamlin

Edward Stowe Hamlin, 1808-1894, of New England parentage; settled in Elyria, Ohio, 1830; prosecuting attorney 1833-35; nominated by Whigs candidate for the 28th Congress, was unsuccessful but elected to the 29th (1844), receiving many Liberty votes. Cf. Philanthropist, Nov. 8, 1843. In 1846 he established the True Democrat which be edited for a year or more. As an anti-slavery Whig he attended the Liberty party convention for the Northwest, Chicago, 1846, where he “spoke for Ohio with liberality and good sense, holding to his Whiggery, but avoiding anything that could rasp his Liberty audience.” Cf. Smith, T. C. Liberty and Free Soil Parties of the Northwest. This author describes the aid given by him to Chase and the Democrats in the Ohio Legislature of 1849. Ibid. pp. 165-175. He drafted the somewhat famous instrument signed by Townsend, Morse, and others, in which the contracting parties agreed to vote for the Democratic nominees to all State offices provided they would vote for Salmon P. Chase for U. S. Senator. Previously Riddle, Lee, and other ex-Whigs had entered into a deal with the Taylor men in regard to the offices, hoping to secure their support later on for the election of a U. S. Senator. Cf. Ibid.

The Ohio Standard, Columbus, was established as a Free Soil paper by E. S. Hamlin and I. Garrard, 1848; subsequently, 1854, the former assumed control of the Columbian, Columbus. Member of the Free Soil convention in Buffalo, 1848, and one of the Committee on Resolutions. Served three years as president of the Board of Public Works of Ohio, and by special act of the Legislature, was attorney for the State to arrange the water leases of the canals. Declined the appointment of Attorney-General of Ohio. Planned several canals and railroads in Ohio, and was the attorney for the Cincinnati, Indianapolis & Lafayette R. R. for a number of years. Later his various projects took him to Virginia. For further accounts see Hart's Chase; Townsend's Account of the 47th General Assembly of Ohio, 1848-9, in Mag. of Western History, V. 6, p. 623; also, Letters of Salmon P. Chase (45 in number) to Edward S. Hamlin, in American Hist. Association Annual Report, 1902, Vol. II.

SOURCE: Quarterly Publication of the Ohio Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, 1915-1917, Volumes X-XII, Selections from the Follett Papers, III, p. 23-4

Salmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin, Saturday, January 20, 1849

Sat. 20 Jany.

I see the correspondent of the Enquirer suggests that the Dems. will vote against Riddle's bill. Would not that be a grand move? Mama gave little Jack a piece of pie. Jack pouted and wanted a whole one. Mama said “no.” Jack flung down the piece offered and said he would have none. He would go to bed without his supper, that he would, before he would take such a little piece. Mama said “go,” and Jack got neither pie nor piece. Consult Esop for the moral.

Swift acted nobly in regard to the Governor business: I am glad that the credit of settling that matter belongs to him. He is a first rate man; and if he, Smart, Townshend, Riddle, Morse & Van Doren would form a caucus, or nucleus of one, there might be a real free soil party in the Legislature; and Townshend & Morse might be greatly strengthened.

I have mentioned to Hoadly what you say about his article. He says, “Make any use of it you please; but no use which you think will injure the cause.” He has no sensitiveness of authorship. Make an article of it or lay it aside altogether, as you think best. But is it not important to bring distinctly to view the fact that at the time of the Election of Shuber there was no Free Soil Caucus properly speaking but only a caucus of Whig Free Soilers? And that T. &. M. have always been in favor of a Free Soil Caucus or conference on the principles laid down by the State Convention.

It is a shame that you should be compelled, in your circumstances to sacrifice so much for the cause. I do hope that soon the necessity for it may be removed. In the meantime, though I am not a little straitened myself, you are perfectly at liberty to draw on me for fifty dollars, and we will settle it when convenient to yourself.

Write me as often and as much in detail as you can.

P. S. Do you hear anything from Bolton? He has not written me. I fear he dont like what I said of Bliss.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 154-5

Salmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin, January 20, 1849

Cincinnati, Jan’y 20, 1849

My Dear Hamlin; I wrote you fully by this morning's mail, and had sent my letter to the Post Office before I received your note of yesterday. I am very glad to hear of the prospect of the passage of Morse's Colored Children's School Bill, including the repeal of the Black Laws. The Repeal of those laws is an object dearer to me than any political elevation whatever; and is worth more to us as a Party than the election of any man to any office in the gift of the Legislature. It removes out of our path the greatest obstacle to our complete triumph, while it is in itself a great victory of humanity and justice. I shall rejoice in the passage of the bill on another account. The credit of it will redound to our friend Morse.

What has become of the Bill to prevent Kidnapping which I drew, and which you promised to hand to Riddle? I hope it is not lost. With a little improvement it might be made a complete safeguard, not only against the action of our officers & the use of our jails for the recapture of fugitive slaves, but also against the kidnapping by force or fraud of free persons. I shall be glad to see it on its way through the two Houses.

As to the School bill I hope its friends will not consent to any amendment of any kind, unless merely verbal, but push it right through just as it is.

I do not know that I can say anything more than I have said in relation to the Standard. I have done and said all I could for it, and shall continue my efforts. I have no doubt all the money needed can be raised in the Spring. Vaughan told me he would write to Townshend tonight on the subject of the Printing. I hope Riddle will read the letter.

I received today a letter from Dr. Bailey in which he speaks of an interview with Giddings, in which the Senatorial Election in Ohio was the subject of Conversation. I will extract a few sentences which shew that Mr. Giddings entertains none but the kindest feelings towards me — no other indeed than those which I have so often expressed to you in relation to him.

“I have seen” says the Doctor “and talked freely with Giddings. He is moderately ambitious —would like to be United States Senator. If there is a good chance of his election, if the Free Soil men will unite upon him, he wishes to run. If they cannot or will not unite upon him, he says you & you alone, by all means are the man. I told him he ought to write to one of his Free Soil friends in the Legislature just as he talked to me, frankly, fully, and request the letter to be shown to you, so that his position and views might be clearly known”

The Doctor adds a good deal as to the advantage of having me in the Senate, Giddings being already in the House, which I will not offend against modesty by transcribing. I fear, however, that the Doctor agrees with me in opinion that if Giddings were out of Congress as well as myself, he & not I should be placed in the Senate. He desires my election on the theory that Giddings cannot be spared from the House, and that getting me in the Senate, Giddings being already in the House, would be clear gain. I have quoted the extract to show you that Giddings does not entertain the wish, which some have imputed to him, to defeat an election if he cannot be himself elected.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 153-4

Salmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin,* Columbus, Ohio, January 16, 1849

Cincinnati, January 16, [1849].

My Dear Hamlin: I have had my supper, — I have donned my dressing gown & slippers;—my wife is beside me in our snug dining room;— everything is comfortable around me;— and I am writing to a friend in whom I repose full confidence. At this moment I cannot find it in my heart to indulge a single unkindly or uncharitable thought toward any human being. To be sure, I do feel as if a certain individual, who rejoices in the initials S. P. C., might be a good deal better employed, than in political navigation; and sometimes find it difficult to suppress a rising sentiment of indignation against him, when I think of his preposterous folly in venturing to have opinions of his own, & even, what is scarcely credible, daring occasionally to act upon them. But with the exception of the slight disturbance occasioned by the conduct of this individual the current of my thoughts flows quite smoothly tonight. I wish you were here to sit down & chat with me. How pleasantly we might contrive to dispose of an hour or two!

But I can easily imagine your actual situation, — not half so pleasant as mine — sitting in the Standard office, at the long pine? table, scribbling some Editorial for the paper perhaps a defence of Townshend & Morse, — perhaps a gentle hint to our amiable friend Chaffee. Well, I am sorry for you. If wishes could “execute themselves” — as the rascally slaveholders who preside in the Supreme Court of the United States say of the fugitive clause in the Constitution — you should have a nice large cushioned leather library chair, with the easiest flowing gold pen, and the blackest ink and the finest blue wove paper, a bright fire, a warm carpet, and all the etcetras which could make an editorial sanctum attractive and delightful. Then you should have a plentiful income coming in like the tides into the Bay of Fundy, and a long, long list of faithful paying subscribers, constituting a congregation that the Pope — and every editor, you know is an infallible Pope — might be proud to preach to. But I can almost fancy you exclaiming “Stop! Stop! What is the fellow after? Does he want to drive me to suicide by reminding me so ruthlessly of the vast difference between the ideal & the actual?” and so I will stop; for I want no such responsibility on my shoulders or conscience.

I suppose you see the True Democrat regularly, and of course, have noticed the course of Briggs towards Townshend, Morse & myself. The object seems to me plain enough. If he can cut Townshend & myself down, & terrify Morse into unhesitating acquiescence into the decisions of the Whig Freesoil Caucus the course will be left clear, he thinks, for the unchecked sway of Free Soilism of the Whig stamp. But I think he must fail in his reckoning. He cannot, 1 believe, hurt Townshend or myself, nor do I imagine that his threats or menacing intimations will have much effect on Morse. I feel, however, a good deal of solicitude to know whether Mr. Morse maintains his independent position. I shall be much disappointed if he does not. To recede now would be worse than never to have taken it. How is it with our good friend, Mr. Van Doren? Is he regarded now as an Independent Free Soiler or a Whig Free Soiler?

I do wish that the Free Soilers in the Legislature could unite on the only practical basis of union. That is let the Democratic Free Soilers, & the Whig Free Soilers, and the Independent Free Soilers (which terms I use for distinction's sake only) meet together and confer freely on the course best to be pursued in every case of importance. At these meetings let mutual and perfect toleration be exercised by each towards all the rest, and let everything which is done or spoken be under the seal of the most sacred confidence. If they can after a comparison of views find a ground on which all can stand honestly & in good faith, let them take it and maintain it no matter who may be benefitted or injured by it. If they cannot find such a ground but, after the best efforts to reach it have failed, they find themselves, in consequence of honest convictions, influenced or not influenced by former party associations, unable to agree let each take his own course, with perfect respect for the others and with fixed determination not to ascribe or even indulge the supposition of improper motives. Of course such conferences of Free Soilers should allow the attendance of none, however antislavery or personally worthy, except those who adopt, in good faith, & without reservation, the National & State Platforms of Free Democracy, and have fully made up their minds and openly avowed their determination to act permanently in & with the Party organized upon them. I can think of no way so well calculated to prevent discord and secure a mutual good understanding as this. I do not know whether even this way is practicable.

I have this moment, (Tuesday 12 M) recd. your letter and thank you for it. Vaughan has written a reply to Briggs for the Cleveland True Democrat. It does not put the action of Morse & Townshend on the true ground precisely but I think it will do good. It does more than justice to me. Vaughan I am glad to find, agrees with us as to the prima facie right of Pugh & Peirce and thinks the division clauses should be repealed. I do not think he has considered the question as to the unconstitutionality of the law. I am glad Riddle proposes to introduce a bill to repeal the clauses. It is the right thing to do at this time, and he is the right man to do it. It will reflect credit on him, and do much service to Townshend & Morse. I regretted to see Beaver's remark that the division clauses of the apportionment law w^d not be repealed while the First district remains disfranchised. This will do no good. The true question is, “Is the repeal right?” If it is, it cant be done too soon. I would write to Randall, but I did write to him a few days since, on the subject of the Governor's Return, as friendly a letter as I could & took great pains here & with friends elsewhere to set his action in that matter in the most favorable point of view. But I have heard nothing from him, & don't wish to seem to force a correspondence on him. Suppose you find out, as you easily can, why he dont write?

It seems to me that you must come out in defence of Townshend & Morse: and I am not sure that justice does not require a frank statement of the whole action in Columbus, resulting in the virtual expulsion from the caucus of all the Democratic & Independent Free Soilers.

I have no time to write further without losing the mail. I am very glad your cough is better.

_______________

* Edward S. Hamlin was a member of Congress from Ohio, 1844-45. He was an ardent worker for Chase, and at this time was the editor of an anti-slavery paper at Columbus, the Ohio Standard.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 145-8

Salmon P. Chase to Charles Sumner, July 11, 1848

Cincinnati, November 27, 1848.

My Dear Sir: Thanks for your welcome and cheering letter. It is truly grateful to me to feel how responsive to each other are our judgments and sympathies. Our struggle is ended — only for the present, I would say rather, it is just begun, did not the recollections of eight years of effort, amid difficulties and discouragement far formidable than any which now encompass us, carry me back to a much earlier date of the beginning of the Contest than many assign. The Buffalo Convention of 1848, and the movements which immediately issued in that, I would call the beginning of the end. I think that now, through the twilight of the present and the mist of the future, the end may be discovered — at least by eyes annointed with faith.

You have fought a glorious battle in old Massachusetts. Young Wisconsin, alone, can claim equal honors with you. You have had to contend with long-seated prejudices arrayed against our Presidential nominee and against the overbearing money power of the Lords of the Loom. Under the circumstances, you have, I suppose, equalled if not exceeded your own most sanguine expectations. We are looking now, with great anxiety for the result of the second trial in the District of Judge Allen and our noble Palfrey. Most earnestly do I hope that Massachusetts will honor herself by sending those true sons to represent her in the next Congress. She and Liberty will need them there.

Here in Ohio we did not do near so well as we expected — not near so well as we should have done had the vote been taken immediately after the Buffalo Convention. Many causes conspired to diminish our vote. The principal were the general impression, that the contest was between Taylor and Cass, and the idea, unceasingly disseminated, that General Taylor would not veto, would, in fact, favor the Wilmot Proviso. No man labored harder to produce these impressions than Mr. Corwin. He traversed the whole state, speaking to large assemblies and to small, at the principal points and obscure villages, saying every where, “I know Gen. Taylor will not veto the Proviso”, and endeavoring to convince the people, by his stories of Gen. Taylor's action in reference to the Seminole negroes, that he was, in fact, a man of antislavery opinions and sympathies. Whether he succeeded in convincing himself I don't know; but certain it is that he exerted a mighty influence in checking the development of anti-Taylor sentiment, and in persuading many who had resolved to oppose the Philadelphia nomination, to come out in favor of it. All this operated against us in two ways. While Mr. Corwin succeeded in detaching two or three votes here and two or three there from the Free Soil Cause, securing them for Taylor, the very fact of the defection of these votes induced more or less of those who had resolved to with-hold their votes from Cass and give them to Van Buren, to forego their determination and to fall back into their old ranks. This process, placing us between the upper and the nether millstone and diminishing our force by every turn of the wheel, was carried on very actively for several weeks preceding the election; and though we did all we could to counterwork it, yet, being scattered over a large territory with hardly any pecuniary resources and a very imperfect organization and little or no mutual concert or cooperation among our Committees or speeches, all our efforts did not avail much. The battle is now over and Senator Corwin and his co-workers have the satisfaction of having quietly reduced the Free Soil vote, without any other result than that, (which the Free Soilers have predicted ever since the nomination of Taylor), of giving the electoral suffrage of Ohio to General Cass. Whether Senator Corwin has shared in the impression he has endeavored to make upon the people I do not know. One thing is certain; he has lost entirely the confidence of the sincere and earnest antislavery men of the State. The very men, who eight months ago were his warmest friends — in fact his only reliable and fast friends in the State — are now converted into his most decided and stern opposers. They still admire his talents and esteem his social qualities, but they no longer respect his principles.

The results of the contest leave us here in Ohio, in a peculiar position. The election of Taylor makes his supporters anxious that their promises to the people in his behalf shall be, in some degree, kept. Should he veto the Wilmot Proviso or conduct his administration so as to indicate disfavor to it, we may look for another revolt among the Whigs. On the other hand the defeat of Cass has secured the last link that bound a large number of Democrats — in fact a great body of them in this State to the Slave Power. They have no longer any bond of union in their old organization. The spoils are gone — and the South is gone. Under these circumstances many of them are turning a wistful eye toward the Buffalo Platform, and I should not be greatly surprised if the coming winter should witness a union between the old Democracy and the Free Democracy in our Legislature upon the principles of our Platform. Already such a union is foreshadowed by the tone of the newspapers, and the course of events in the northern part of the State. Should it take place in any considerable section of the State it must pervade the whole. In the Legislature the Free Democrats together have the majority; and they may unite in the election of a senator; though this is more doubtful than their union in future contests. Whether this union takes place or not — and it can only take place through the adhesion of the old Democracy to one principle — the course of the Free Democracy it seems to me lies clear before them. Their path, no less of safety than of honor is straightforward. They have no choice, except shameful dereliction of principle, or bold and resolute perseverance.

This is true of every other State as it is of Ohio; and I am glad to see that the choice of our friends everywhere seems to be already made. Nowhere do I observe adjudications of wavering or retreat.

I agree with you that it is of great importance that an address should be issued to the People of the union embracing the topics and indicating our future course as suggested by you. It will be difficult to get any delegation appointed by the State Committee to prepare such an address. It seems to me that your suggestion that it should be issued by the Free Democrats in Congress is a good one; or possibly, it might come, with as much effect, from the Free Soil association of the District of Columbia, having been prepared with the advice and concurrence of our friends in Congress and out of Congress who may be gathered in Washington at the commencement of the session.

Our own State Convention will be held on the 29th, June, when we shall doubtless issue an address to the People of Ohio, and define our position on questions of State policy.

I shall be very glad to hear from you frequently. Our former correspondence and your published writings had taught me greatly to esteem you; and our limited intercourse last August was sufficient to make me feel towards you the strongest sentiments of friendship. Is it not Cicero who tells us that the strong ligament of friendship is “idem velle et idem nolle”? And is not this the tie between us! At any rate I claim your friendship by this title and shall hope that you will manifest your allowance of the claim, by writing me as often as your engagements will allow.

Faithfully and cordially yours,

[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 141-5

Salmon P. Chase to Eli Nichols,* Walhonding, Coshocton County, Ohio, July 11, 1848

Cin^ti. Nov^r. 9 [1848.]

My Dear Sir, I recd. yrs of the 6th to day, & as I shall be obliged to leave the city to attend the Circuit Court at Columbus on M’day next & shall be much engaged in the meantime I an^r it at once. In regard to State Policy, which the Free Democracy should adopt, I think it of great importance that it should be, in the first place, truly Democratic and, in the second, well considered & generally approved by our friends. Neither your views nor mine may be fully met, — yet if the general principles of the policy adopted be sound, I do not doubt that we shall both be satisfied, approximation to particular opinions is all that can be expected in the details of a general plan. I agree that the advantages of a paper currency, securely based upon & promptly convertible into specie, are such that there is no reasonable probability that its use will be dispensed with. The great problem then is to make it safe and deliver it from the monopolizing control of corporations & favored individuals. I am wedded to no particular plan. Let us have the most efficient. The most prominent objection likely to be made to yrs., is that it makes the Government of the State a Banker. I have been accustomed, myself, greatly to distrust Government Banking: but I have neither time nor place to state my reasons now. When we meet at Columbus we will talk the matter over. I am much obliged to Governor Shannon for his kind opinion of me, & cordially reciprocate his good will. I think, however, the times require, — and such I am assured is the opinion of the friends of our movement in our own & other states, — in the Senate of the United States, from Ohio, a man, who thoroughly understands & will steadfastly maintain the whole platform of the Free Democracy. I do not know but Governor Shannon is such a man. If so, I shall witness his elevation to any station which the Legislature or the People may confer upon him, with unfeigned pleasure. For myself, I have no aspirations for the office of Supreme Judge. I have devoted eight of the best years of my life to one great object — the overthrow of the Slave power and slavery by Constitutional Action: and I desire no position in which I cannot efficiently promote this leading purpose. On the bench I could do little for it:— not so much, I think, as I can in my present position.

Nor do I desire to be considered as a candidate for any other place. Some of our friends have been pleased to think I can be of use to our cause in the Senate: and men of other parties have said that, in the contingency that their strength in the Legislature shall prove insufficient to elect a candidate of their own, they will be satisfied with my election to that body. I am not weak enough to found any serious expectations or aspirations upon these views and expressions. I look upon the election of myself or any other Free Soiler as a contingent possibility — nothing more.

I trust that the Representatives of the Free Democracy in the General assembly, will act when they meet at Columbus, with the patriotic wisdom & independent firmness which the crisis will require. Upon all the questions which they will be called upon to decide, as virtual arbiters, between the other parties, I hope they will manifest strict impartiality, and decide then, without bias, as their own conscientious convictions demand. In selecting their own candidates, for whatever public stations, they should inquire not “Whence is he ?” — nor “With what party, did he act?” but “Will he, if elected, promote most efficiently the interests of our cause?” and “For whom can the suffrages of our fellow members be most certainly obtained?” It would be affectation in me to say, that I should not be highly gratified if the choice of the Free Soil members in the Legislature should fall on me, and that choice should be approved by a majority of their fellow members:— for I do believe that I understand the history, principles & practical workings of the Free Soil movement as thoroughly as most men, & nobody, I presume, will question my fidelity to it. If, however, that choice made on those principles should fall on another than myself — upon Giddings, Root, Swan, Hitchcock, Brinkerhoff, or any other of those true-hearted & able men who have so nobly sustained our cause during the recent struggle — no man will be more prompt than I to concur cordially in it or more desirous than I to see it confirmed by the Legislature. What I wish to have understood is this, — I do not seek any office:— much less do I claim any. I do not even desire any, however elevated or honorable, in which, while discharging faithfully its general duties, I cannot efficiently promote the cause of Free Democracy:— but should our friends have the power & feel the disposition to place me in a position, in which, while so discharging its duties, I can so serve our cause, the reproach of “sinister motives” —the cheap missile of malignant detraction — would have as little influence in deterring me from accepting it, as similar attacks have had on my past action against slavery. No man, I trust, is more sensitive to just blame than I:— few I am sure are more indifferent to censure felt to be undeserved.

_______________

* From letter-book 6, pp. 160. Eli Nichols was a worker for Chase in the Ohio Senatorial election, which resulted, after a contest of nearly three months, in Chase's election, Feb. 22, 1849. See Hart's Chase, 103-112, and T. C. Smith's History of the Liberty and Free Soil Parties, 160-175.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 139-41

James A. Garfield to Corydon E. Fuller, May 10, 1861

Columbus, May 10, 1861.

My Dear Corydon: — Your favor was duly received, but I have been away, and so overwhelmed with military matters that I have not been able till now to answer. I am glad to hear that you have succeeded in getting a paper. It was very mortifying to me to have a failure here in Ohio. Now that the piping times of war are upon us, I hope and believe you will be able to make a good thing out of it.

I have resolved that I can not remain quiet while the war is around us. I am going into it in some capacity.

I am sorry that I can not now accommodate you in the matter of money at this time. I have not drawn my pay for several weeks, and on the receipt of your letter I went to the Treasury, and found there was not a dollar there for members of the Legislature, and will not be for several weeks. I have not now money enough to pay my board and washing. I am very sorry indeed. I want you to write to me at once, and tell me if you have been able to secure the amount named. If not, I will hope to be able to get hold of some as soon as possible.

In the war now upon us, we can not tell the outcome either to individuals or to the nation. If I live through it, we shall some time meet again.

Love to Mary when she sees you, and believe me, ever and faithfully,

Your brother,

James.

SOURCE: Corydon Eustathius Fuller, Reminiscences of James A. Garfield: With Notes Preliminary and Collateral, p. 316

Columbus, Ohio, May 15 [1862].

The General Assembly of the Presbyterians in the United States, convened here at 11 o’clock to-day.  Assembly opened by Rev. John C. Backus, D. D., of Baltimore.  They accepted the hall of representatives, tendered by a resolution of the legislature and met there at 4 P. M.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Saturday Morning, May 17, 1862, p. 2

Heavy Retrenchment

The Ohio Legislature, at its recent session has cut down the ordinary State, county and local taxes $2,359,293, and has reduced expenditures accordingly.  This sum will pay all the States expenses for the present year.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Friday Morning, May 16, 1862, p. 2

Soldiers Voting

Our exceedingly [veracious] contemporary next door says, that in the Democratic Constitutional Convention of Illinois provided that soldiers should have the privilege of voting on the new constitution of that State; and also says the Democrats in the Ohio Legislature tried to do the same thing, but the Republicans wouldn’t allow it.  Now what are the facts?  The Illinois Convention, with only two dissenting voices, agreed to allow the soldiers to vote on the proposed constitution.  The Democratic commissioners appointed for the purpose, however, have fixed things so that the said soldiers have about as much real voice in the adoption of the new Constitution as the inhabitants of Kamtschatika.  In Ohio, the plan was opposed by both parties on the ground that there was no way to punish illegal voting.

The talk about two Democrats to one Republican in the army, has been proved to be the very reverse of truth so often that we should think even the Democrat would be ashamed of it.  Its repeated asseveration only shows the callousness of its editorial conscience.  It is probably trying to make itself believe so – not an uncommon thing with dealers in fiction.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Saturday Morning, May 10, 1862, p. 1

XXXVIIth Congress – First Session

WASHINGTON, Feb. 3.

SENATE. – Mr. Wade presented a joint resolution from the Legislature of Ohio, instructing members of Congress to use their efforts to secure such amendment of the naturalization laws as well grant naturalization to those of foreign birth who serve during the war.

Mr. Wade also introduced a resolution for a national armory in Ohio.  Passed.

Mr. Chandler presented resolutions from the Legislature of Michigan, re-affirming loyalty to the government and hatred of traitors, and asking the government to speedily put down the insurrection; favoring the confiscation of the property of rebels, and asking that as slavery is the cause of the war it be swept from the land.

Mr. Harris presented a petition from citizens of New York, asking that Congress take speedy measures to repeal the present reciprocity treaty between Canada and the United States.

Mr. Harris also presented resolutions from the Legislature of New York, asking a modification of the law for raising revenue so that any amount may be raised by any State, by any mode of taxation except duties on imports; that each State be allowed to assume the amount of tax and assess for the payment and the collection of the same, according to its own laws and by its own officers.  Referred.

Mr. Pomeroy offered a resolution asking the Secretary of War for all orders relative to the force in the military command of Kansas, and whether the same be commanded by Gen. Lane, and whether any change has been made in the military orders since Gen. Lane left the Senate and took charge of the force, and whether Gen. Hunter’s order already published is in accordance with the orders of the War Dept.  Laid over.

Mr. Chandler offered a resolution that the committee on commerce inquire in the expediency of immediately notifying Great Britain that the reciprocity treaty is not reciprocal, and that it be terminated at the earliest possible moment.  Laid over.

Mr. Simmons, from the committee on patents, reported back the joint resolution appropriating $3,000 for the purchase of cotton seed for general distribution, with an amendment appropriating $1,000 for the purchase of tobacco seed.  Amendment adopted, and the resolution passed.

Mr. Anthony offered a resolution that the [committee] on patents inquire into the expediency of making an appropriation to aid in the experiment of manufacturing flax as a substitute for cotton.  Adopted.

Mr. Johnson moved to take up the bill providing for the construction of a military RR through the States of Kentucky and Tennessee.  Disagreed to.

Mr. Cowan offered a joint resolution relative to the lake and river defences of Pa.  Referred.

After executive session adjourned.

HOUSE. – Mr. Lovejoy offered the following:

Whereas, It has been learned by this House that five Illinois regiments did, on learning the contents of the report of Sec. Cameron, lay down their arms in token of their refusal to fight for the same; therefore

Resolved, That the committee on the conduct of the war inquire into the alleged fact, and report the same to Congress.

Mr. Fouke desiring to discuss the subject, it went over under the rules.

On motion of Mr. Baker, it was resolved that the committee on Post Offices and post roads be requested to inquire into the propriety of establishing, by law, a system for the free receipt and delivery, by postmen, of all mail matter in cities containing upwards of 10,000 inhabitants, in conformity with the admirable and economical Post Office system of the principal cities of Europe.

The House then proceeded to act on the Senate’s amendment to the House bill making appropriation for completing the defences of Washington, which amendment provides that no volunteers or militia in any State shall be mustered into service on any ground or condition and confined within the limits of any State or vicinity; and if any volunteers or militia have thus been mustered into service, they shall be discharged.

Running discussions followed, in which it was maintained on one side that Home Guards were necessary in Missouri, Kentucky and Maryland, official provision having already been made to that end; and on the other, that no troops had a right to ask for special privileges, but all should be placed on the same footing.  The House finally disagreed to the above Senate amendment by a vote of 55 against 86.

The House then went into committee of the whole on the Treasury note bill.

Mr. Vallandigham made a speech on the subject.

Adjourned.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport Iowa, Tuesday Morning, February 4, 1862, p. 1

The Ladies Of Cincinnati After The Mayor

Forty-six ladies of Cincinnati have petitioned the Legislature to impeach and remove from office Mayor Hatch, of that city.  This is doubtless on account of the Wendell Phillips mobbing affair which, it is charged, was winked at by the Mayor.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, April 5, 1862, p. 3

Help for the Wounded

CINCINNATI, April 9.

A boat has been commissioned to take physicians, nurses and stores to the scene of the battle in Tennessee.  A meeting at the Chamber of Commerce was held and a committee of five appointed to take subscription to buy food and other necessaries for the wounded, and a large amount was raised in an hour.  Capt. Dickson is authorized to pay for the boat.  The committee appointed by the Chamber of Com. will go to Columbus to-night to urge the Legislature to make an appropriation to charter other boats and procure necessary supplies.  It is probably that three or four boats will leave here this week for Tennessee.  A large number of nurses have offered their services.

LOUISVILLE, April 9.

There was a large meeting of citizens, the Mayor presiding, to make arrangements for taking care of the wounded from Corinth.  $2,500 was contributed and any further amount desired offered.  The steamer Commercial left for the Tennessee river tonight with medical and other supplies.  The steamer Diligent will leave to-morrow with nurses and supplies.  Any amount of hospital accommodations in this city were offered.

BOSTON, April 9.

Gov. Andrews [sic] telegraphed to headquarters to-day, tendering the services, without compensation, of any number of Massachusetts surgeons ready to go West and aid the wounded.

INDIANAPOLIS, April 9.

A special train with surgeons, hospital stores and supplies for the wounded at Pittsburg Landing. Leaves here to-night.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Friday Morning, April 11, 1862, p. 2

The Fourth Senatorial Caucus was . . .

. . . held in Columbus, last evening, and after the 48^th ballot adjourned sine die, it being evident that further efforts to make a nomination would be fruitless.  Delano on one ballot led Wade.  The highest ballot for the latter was 47, lacking two of the majority.  Mr. Eggleston proposes to elect by joint Convention, without caucus nomination.  But it is doubtful whether the Legislature will consent to that. – Cin. Com.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Wednesday Morning, April 2, 1862, p. 2

A petition . . .

. . . was recently presented to the Ohio Legislature, asking that the pay of members by reduced from $2 to $4 per day.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Saturday Morning, March 15, 1862, p. 2