Diary of Edward Bates, April 27, 1859

Dined with F. P. Blair Jr²⁵ — the first [t]ime I was ever in his house — invited specially with Judge Jno. C. Richardson²⁶ and C Gibson,²⁷ to meet Mr. Schuyler Colfax²⁸ M.[ember of] C.[ongress] of Indiana.

The object of Messrs. Blair and Colfax, no doubt, was to have a confidential conference with me and a few of my known friends, so as to approximate the terms upon which the Republican party might adopt me as its candidate for the Presidency, and I and my friends might co-act with them, in federal politics, upon honorable relations.

Both those gentlemen are influential leaders of their party, and both declare that I am their first choice. They both say that Mr. Seward²⁹ cannot get the nomination of his party, perhaps not because he is not the acknowledged head of the party and entitled to the lead, but because the party is not quite strong enough to triumph alone; and his nomination therefore would ensure defeat.³⁰ Mr. Colfax is very anxious to consolidate the whole N.[orth] W.[est] so as to ensure what he considers the main point for which, as he understands it, his party contends — i. e. — that the U. S. shall not extend slavery into any country where they do not find it already established.

< To that I have no objection >

Mr. C.[olfax] is also a very warm friend of Mr. Blair, and is anxious to consolidate in Missouri, so as to put Mr. B.[lair] on a good footing with a majority in the State.

And, working for that end, Mr. Blair is eager to form a combination within the State, upon the precise question of slavery or no slavery in Missouri. This, undoubtedly, would be good policy for Mr. Blair personally, because it would strengthen the local free soil party (of which he is the acknowledged local head) with all the forces that I and my friends could influence. But I doubt whether it would be good policy for us to be come parties to such an organization. Such a course supposes affirmative action, i. e. the passage of a law for the prospective abolition of slavery; and it can hardly be necessary to incur the labor and encounter the prejudice incident to that course now, when it is plain to be seen that, by the irresistable [sic] force of circumstances, without any statute to help on the work, slavery will soon cease to exist in Missouri, for all practical and important purposes. This latter view, I think ought to be constantly inculcated, and kept before the public mind, by the press — It ought to be habitually mixed up (as it properly belongs to the subjects) with all our views and arguments on public economy — [,] Manufactures, mining, Commerce, handicraft-arts, and grain and cattle farming. This line of policy would aid and accelerate the drain of slaves from the State, which is, even now, rapidly going on, to supply the growing demand in the South.

Mr. Colfax, concurring with a good many Republican papers, is much put out by the first paragraph of my N.[ew] Y.[ork] letter,³¹ denouncing the agitation of the negro question. He seemed to think that it was a denunciation of the Rep[ublica]n. party, and would turn many against me.

I think otherwise; and that its effects will be good. It is chiefly the friends of Mr. Seward who make the objection, and they of course, would be astute in finding or making any plausible objection, to get a rival out of the way. If my letter had been universally acceptable to the Republicans, that fact alone might have destroyed my prospects in two frontier slave states, Md. and Mo., and so I would have no streng[t]h at all but the Republican party. As it is, all sensible Republicans know that it is the Southern democracy which was and is the first and chief and constant agitators [sic] of the question. And even now, such men as Blair and Colfax are fully satisfied of my true position, and the true meaning of the paragraph. And such papers as the Tribune³² of N. Y. and the Advertiser³³ of Boston, tho' they might wish it otherwise, are content with it as it is. While the Baltimore papers (Clipper³⁴ and Patriot) warmly accept it. Being true, I of course stand by it, as I must stand by all truth — Moreover, in cool policy, I am satisfied that it is best as it is.

_______________

²⁵ Francis P. Blair, Jr., of Missouri: an ardent Freesoiler, congressman, 1857-1859 and 1861-1862; major-general in the Civil War; U. S. senator, 1871-1873; supporter of Bates for the Republican nomination for the Presidency in 1860; advocate of Johnsonian moderation in Reconstruction.

²⁶ A close personal friend of Bates; judge of the Supreme Court of Missouri; opponent in 1860 of the sectionalism of both Lincoln and Breckinridge and advocate of Bell and Everett.

²⁷ Charles Gibson: a Virginia-born Whig leader of Missouri who had studied law under Bates; an ardent unionist in 1861; solicitor of the U. S. Court of Claims, 1861-1864; a loyal Lincoln man until 1864 when he broke with the President, resigned in a public letter of protest, and supported McClellan; later a Johnson Democrat. At this time he was Bates's political manager.

²⁸ Republican member of the House of Representatives from Indiana, 1855—1869; speaker of the House, 1863-1869; a Radical in Reconstruction politics; vice-president, 1869-1873. At this time he was apparently working for Bates's nomination for the Presidency.

²⁹ Infra, March 5, 1861, note 26.

³⁰ Conservatives who feared extremism on slavery would not have voted for Seward, and he had won the implacable hatred of the large Know-Nothing group, and of Greeley and the Tribune. See infra, Aug. 19, 1859.

³¹ See supra, 1-9.

³² New York Tribune, April 16, 1859.

³³ Boston Daily Advertiser, April 18, 1859.

³⁴ Baltimore Clipper, April 19, 1859.

SOURCE: Howard K. Beale, Editor, Annual Report of The American Historical Association For The Year 1930, Vol. 4, The Diary Of Edward Bates, pp. 11-12

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, March 7, 1866

I have addressed a letter concerning League Island, communicating the report of Mr. Fox, the Assistant Secretary, who visited Philadelphia with the Naval Committee. The improvidence and neglect of Congress on this subject shows how unreliable all legislation is for the public interest in high party times. By an intrigue Brandegee of New London was placed on the Naval Committee. Colfax purchased his support by that appointment, and the displacement of English, an act of dissimulation and discourtesy to me personally as well as a sacrifice of the public interest. Brandegee wants the navy yard at New London because he lives there and it is his home, not for the public interest and the national welfare, and for that narrow, selfish, low object the Navy and the country are sacrificed.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 445-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, January 2, 1866

Neither Seward nor Stanton was at Cabinet council. Seward is on his way to the West Indies, Gulf, etc. He wishes to be absent until the issues are fully made up and the way is clear for him what course to take. There may be other objects, but this is the chief. The talk about his health is ridiculous. He is as well as he has been at any time for five years. Stanton had no occasion to be present. Some discussion as to whether the State of Louisiana is entitled to cotton bought by the Rebel organization or government. Dennison and myself had a free talk with the President after the others left. Although usually reticent, he at times speaks out, and he expressed himself emphatically to-day. The manner in which things had been got up by the Radicals before the session he commented upon. "This little fellow [Colfax] shoved in here to make a speech in advance of the message, and to give out that the principle enunciated in his speech was the true policy of the country," were matters alluded to with sharpness, as were the whole preconcerted measures of the Radicals. "I do not hear that the colored people called or were invited to visit Sumner or Wilson," said the President, "but they came here and were civilly treated."

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 409-10

Lieutenant-General William T. Sherman to Senator John Sherman, September 12, 1867

HEADQUARTERS, OMAHA, NEB., Sept. 12, 1867.

Dear Brother:

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

As to politics, I hardly know if I should approach Grant, as I can hardly judge of the influences that have operated on him since we were together last November. In accepting the acting office of Secretary of War, I doubt not he realized the delicacy of his position, and was willing to risk the chances. It is not for the interest of the United States that in a temporary political office he should sink his character as a military officer. In the former he should be in harmony with the executive, but in the latter he should be simply a high sheriff to execute the process of the court. My belief is that Congress cannot qualify the President's right to command the army and navy. He is the Constitutional Commander-in-Chief. But Congress can make rules and laws for the government of the army and thereby control the President as such Commander-in-Chief. In trying to array the President and General Grant in antagonism, Congress did wrong, and reaction is sure to result. It damages all parties, because few people take the trouble to study out the right, yet time moves along so rapidly and the election of a new President will soon settle these and all kindred questions. Your course has been fair, and you cannot wish to alter or amend it. Our country ought not to be ruled by the extreme views of Sumner or Stevens any more than by the extreme views of Calhoun, Yancey, etc., that have produced our Civil War. There is some just middle course, and events will flow into it whether any one man or set of men is wise enough to foresee it and lay down its maxims. I think Chase is the ablest man of his school, and I would personally prefer him to Wade, Colfax, or any of the men whose names I notice in this connection. Whether the precedent of a Chief Justice being a political aspirant may not be bad, I don't know. This is the Mexican rule, and has resulted in anarchy.

I don't think Grant, Sheridan, Thomas, or any real military man wants to be President. All see that, however pure or exalted their past reputations may have been, it don't shield them from the lies and aspersions of a besotted press. . . . Grant writes me in the most unreserved confidence, and never has said a word that looks like wanting the office of President. His whole nature is to smooth over troubles, and he waits with the most seeming indifference, under false and unjust assertions, till the right time, when the truth peeps out, so as to defy contradiction. . . .

Affectionately,

W. T. SHERMAN.

SOURCE: Rachel Sherman Thorndike, Editor, The Sherman Letters: Correspondence Between General and Senator Sherman from 1837 to 1891, p. 294-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, December 8, 1865

Sumner called on me with young Bright. We had quite a talk on the policy of the Government, and his own views. Sumner's vanity and egotism are great. He assumes that the Administration is wholly wrong, and that he is beyond peradventure right; that Congress has plenary powers, the Executive none, on reestablishing the Union. He denounced the policy of the President on the question of organizing the Rebel States as the greatest and most criminal error ever committed by any government. Dwelt on what constitutes a republican government; says he has read everything on the subject from Plato to the last French pamphlet. Tells me that a general officer from Georgia had informed him within a week that the negroes of that State were better qualified to establish and maintain a republican government than the whites. He says that Seward, McCulloch, and myself are the men who have involved the President in this transcendent error, I, a New England man, New England's representative in the Cabinet, have misrepresented New England sentiment. McCulloch was imbued with the pernicious folly of Indiana, but Seward and myself were foully, fatally culpable in giving our countenance and support to the President in his policy.

I insisted it was correct, that the country aside from heated politics approved it, and asked if he supposed there was any opposition to that policy in the Cabinet. He said he knew Stanton was opposed to it, and when I said I was not aware of it, he seemed surprised. He asked if I had read his Worcester speech. I told him I had but did not indorse it. He replied, "Stanton does." "Stanton," said he, "came to Boston at that time; the speech was thrown into the cars, and he had read it before I met him. Stanton complimented the speech. I said it was pretty radical or had pretty strong views. Stanton said it was none too strong, that he approved of every sentiment, every opinion and word of it."

I told Sumner I did not understand Stanton as occupying that position, and I apprehended the President did not so understand him. I told him that I well recollected that on one occasion last spring, when I was in the War Department, he and Dawes and Gooch came in there. He said, "Yes, and Colfax was there." "I recollect he was. Stanton took out his project for organizing a government in North Carolina. I had heard it read on the last day of Mr. Lincoln's life, and had made a suggestion respecting it, and the project had been modified. Some discussion took place at the War Department on the question of negro suffrage. Stanton said he wanted to avoid that topic. You [Sumner] wanted to meet it. When that discussion opened I left, for I knew I could not agree with you."

Sumner said he well recollected that meeting; that he and Colfax had proposed modifications of the plan and put it in an acceptable shape, but that we had upset it. One other member of the Cabinet had written him a few days before he left home expressing sympathy with him, and one other had spoken equally cordially to him since he arrived here. "You may have had a letter from Speed," I remarked. "No," said he, "but Speed has had a conversation with me."

I think Harlan must be the man, yet my impressions were that Harlan held a different position. Perhaps Iowa has influenced him. Our conversation, though earnest, was not in anger or with any acrimony. He is confident that he shall carry Stevens's resolution through the Senate, and be able to defeat the President in his policy.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 393-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: December 1, 1865

It is some weeks since I have had time to write a word in this diary. In the mean time many things have happened which I desired to note but none of very great importance. What time I could devote to writing when absent from the Department has been given to the preparation of my Annual Report. That is always irksome and hard labor for me. All of it has been prepared at my house out of the office hours, except three mornings when I have remained past my usual hour of going to the Department.

My reports are perhaps more full and elaborate than I should make them; but if I wish anything done I find I must take the responsibility of presenting it. Members of Congress, though jealous of anything that they consider, or which they fear others will consider, dictation, are nevertheless timid as regards responsibility. When a matter is accomplished they are willing to be thought the father of it, yet some one must take the blows which the measure receives in its progress. I therefore bring forward the principal subjects in my report. If they fail, I have done my duty. If they are carried, I shall contend with no one for the credit of paternity. I read the last proof pages of my report this evening.

Members of Congress are coming in fast, though not early. Speaker Colfax came several days since. His coming was heralded with a flourish. He was serenaded, and delivered a prepared speech, which was telegraphed over the country and published the next morning. It is the offspring of an intrigue, and one that is pretty extensive. The whole proceeding was premeditated.

My friend Preston King committed suicide by drowning himself in the Hudson River. His appointment as Collector was unfortunate. He was a sagacious and honest man, a statesman and legislator of high order and of unquestioned courage in expressing his convictions and resolute firmness in maintaining them. To him, a Democrat and Constitutionalist, more than to any other one man may be ascribed the merit of boldly meeting the arrogant and imperious slaveholding oligarchy and organizing the party which eventually overthrew them. While Wendell Phillips, Sumner, and others were active and fanatical theorists, Preston King was earnest and practical. J. Q. Adams and Giddings displayed sense and courage, but neither of them had the faculty which K. possessed for concentrating, combining, and organizing men in party measures and action. I boarded in the same house with King in 1846 when the Wilmot Proviso was introduced on an appropriation bill. Root and Brinkerhoff of Ohio, Rathbun and Grover and Stetson [sic]¹ of New York, besides Wilmot and some few others whom I do not recall, were in that combination, and each supposed himself the leader. They were indeed all leaders, but King, without making pretensions, was the man, the hand, that bound this sheaf together. From the day when he took his stand King never faltered. There was not a more earnest party man, but he would not permit the discipline and force of party to carry him away from his honest convictions. Others quailed and gave way but he did not. He was not eloquent or much given to speech-making, but could state his case clearly, and his undoubted sincerity made a favorable impression always.

Not ever having held a place where great individual and pecuniary responsibility devolved upon him, the office of Collector embarrassed and finally overwhelmed him.

Some twenty-five years ago he was in the Retreat for the Insane in Hartford, and there I knew him. He became greatly excited during the Canadian rebellion and its disastrous termination and the melancholy end of some of his townsmen had temporarily impaired his reason. But it was brief; he rapidly recovered, and, unlike most persons who have been deranged, it gave him no uneasiness and he spoke of it with as much unconcern as of a fever. The return of the malady led to his committing suicide. Possessed of the tenderest sensibilities and a keen sense of honor, the party exactions of the New York politicians, the distress, often magnified, of those whom he was called upon to displace, the party requirements which Weed, who boarded with him, and others demanded, greatly distressed him, and led to the final catastrophe.

King was a friend and pupil of Silas Wright, with whom he studied his profession; was the successor of that grand statesman in both branches of Congress. Both had felt most deeply the bad faith and intrigue which led to the defeat of Van Buren in 1844, and to the ultimate downfall of the Democratic party, for the election of Polk, Pierce, and Buchanan were but flickering efforts to rekindle the fires of the old organizations. Confidence and united zeal never again prevailed, and parties subsequently took a sectional or personal character.

_______________

¹ There was no Stetson in Congress at the time. Perhaps Wheaton of New York, who was one of the supporters of the Proviso, was the man whom Mr. Welles had in mind.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 384-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: December 3, 1865

Told the President I disliked the proceedings of the Congressional caucus on Saturday evening. The resolution for a joint committee of fifteen to whom the whole subject of admission of Representatives from States which had been in rebellion [should be referred] without debate was in conflict with the spirit and letter of the Constitution, which gives to each house the decision of election of its own members, etc. Then in appointing Stevens, an opponent of State rights, to present it there was something bad. The whole was, in fact, revolutionary, a blow at our governmental system, and there had been evident preconcert to bring it about. The President agreed with me, but said they would be knocked in the head at the start. There would be a Representative from Tennessee who had been a loyal Member of the House since the War commenced, or during the War, who could present himself, and so state the case that he could not be controverted. I expressed my gratification if this could be accomplished, knowing he alluded to Maynard, but suggested a doubt whether the intrigue which was manifest by the resolution, the designation of Stevens, and Colfax's speech had not gone too far.

Congress organized about the time this conversation took place. Maynard was put aside, I think by concert between himself and the Radical leaders. The resolution introduced by Stevens passed by a strict party vote. In the Senate, Sumner introduced an avalanche of radical and some of them absurd-resolutions. These appeared to have absorbed the entire attention of that body, which adjourned without the customary committee to wait upon the President and inform him that Congress was organized. This was not unintentional. There was design in it.

Fogg of New Hampshire, our late Minister to Switzerland, came to see me this evening with Chandler, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

The recall of Fogg was an unwise, unjust, and I think an unpolitic act on the part of Seward, and I shall not be surprised if he has cause to rue it. Fogg was associated with me on the National Executive Committee in the Presidential campaign of 1860, and was brought in particularly intimate relations with Mr. Lincoln at that time. No one, perhaps, knows better than F. the whole workings in relation to the formation of the Cabinet of 1861. These he detailed very minutely this evening. Much of it I had known before. He has a remarkable memory, and all the details of 1860 and 1861 were impressed upon his mind. He was the first to bring me assurance that I was selected for the Cabinet from New England. I thought at the time his, F.'s, original preferences were in another direction, although the selection of myself was, he then and now assured me, acceptable to him. At that time F., listening to Seward's friends, believed he would not accept an appointment in the Cabinet. Such were the givings-out of his friends and of Seward himself. I told F. at the time, as he still recollects, he was deceiving himself, and that Mr. Lincoln was in a strange delusion if he believed it.

Weed tried to induce Mr. Lincoln to visit Mr. Seward at Auburn. Said General Harrison went to Lexington in 1841 to see Mr. Clay, who advised in the formation of that Cabinet. Mr. Lincoln declined to imitate Harrison. The next effort was to try to have a meeting at Chicago, but this Mr. L. also declined. But he did invite Hamlin to meet him there. On his way Hamlin was intercepted by Weed, who said the offer of the State Department was due to Mr. Seward, but S. would decline it. The courtesy, however, was, he claimed, due to Mr. S. and to New York. H. was persuaded, and Mr. L. intrusted him with a letter tendering the appointment to Seward.

Shortly after the commencement of the session of Congress in December, 1860, Fogg says Hamlin, when coming down from the Capitol one afternoon after the adjournment of the Senate, fell in company with Seward, or was overtaken by him. They walked down the avenue together, Seward knowing H. had been to Chicago. On reaching Hamlin's hotel, he invited S. to go in, and a full conversation took place, S. declaring he was tired of public life and that he intended to resign his seat or decline a reëlection and retire, that there was no place in the gift of the President which he would be willing to take. Several times he repeated that he would not go into the Cabinet of Mr. Lincoln. Having heard these refusals in various forms, Hamlin then told him he had a letter from Mr. Lincoln, which he produced. Seward, H. says to Fogg, trembled and was nervous as he took it. He read the letter, put it in his pocket, and said, while his whole feelings were repugnant to a longer continuance in public employment, he yet was willing to labor for his country. He would, therefore, consult his friends before giving a final answer. The next, or succeeding, day he left for New York, but before going he mailed a letter to the President elect accepting the appointment. Hamlin repeated all the facts to Fogg last week, so far as he was concerned.

Great efforts were made to secure the Treasury for Cameron. This was a part of the programme of Weed and Seward. I have always understood that Mr. Lincoln became committed to this scheme in a measure, though it was unlike him. Fogg explains it in this way: In the summer and fall a bargain was struck between Weed and Cameron. The latter went to Albany and then to Saratoga, where he spent several days with the intriguers. Cameron subsequently tried to get an invitation that fall to Springfield, but Lincoln would not give it. This annoyed the clique. After the election, Swett, who figured then as a confidential friend and intimate of Lincoln, not without some reason, was sent, or came, East to feel the public pulse. At a later day he went to California and had a finger in the Alameda quicksilver mine. Swett was seized by Weed and Company, open rooms and liquors were furnished by the New York junto, and his intimacy with Lincoln was magnified. Cameron took him to his estate at Lochiel and feasted him. Here the desire of Cameron to go to Springfield was made known to Swett, who took upon himself to extend an invitation in Mr. Lincoln's name. With this he took a large body-guard and went to Springfield. Although surprised, Mr. Lincoln could not disavow what Swett had done. Cameron was treated civilly; his friends talked, etc. After his return, Mr. Lincoln wrote him that in framing his Cabinet he proposed giving him a place, either in the Treasury or the War Department. Cameron immediately wrote, expressing his thanks and accepting the Treasury. Mr. Lincoln at once wrote that there seemed some misapprehension and he therefore withdrew his tender or any conclusive arrangement until he came to Washington. I have heard some of these things from Mr. L[incoln]. Fogg, who now tells them to me, says he knows them all.

Mrs. Lincoln has the credit of excluding Judd of Chicago from the Cabinet. The President was under great personal obligations to Judd, and always felt and acknowledged it. When excluded from the Cabinet, he selected the mission to Berlin.

Caleb Smith was brought in at a late hour and after Judd's exclusion. Weed and Seward had intended to bring in Emerson Etheridge and Graham of North Carolina, and After the President came to Washington, a decided onset was made by the anti-Seward men of New York and others against Chase. An earlier movement had been made, but not sufficient to commit the President. Senator Wade of Ohio did not favor Chase. Governor Dennison was strongly for him, and Wade, who disliked Seward, finally withdrew opposition to C. But about the time I reached Washington on the 1st of March another hitch had taken place. I had remained away until invited, and had been mixed up with none of the intrigues.

The President (Lincoln) told me on Sunday, 3d March, that there was still some trouble, but that he had become satisfied he should arrange the matter. Fogg tells me that Greeley and others who were here attending to the rightful construction of the Cabinet had deputed him to call upon the President and ascertain if Chase was to be excluded. A rumor to that effect had got abroad and Lamon, a close friend of Lincoln (too close), was offering to bet two to one that C. would not have the Treasury. Fogg called on the President, but first Mrs. L. and then Seward interrupted them. On Tuesday, the 5th, at 7 A.M., Fogg and Carl Schurz called on the President to make sure of Chase. Seward followed almost immediately. Lincoln, in a whisper, told F. all was right, and subsequently informed him that he had been annoyed and embarrassed by Seward on the 1st of March, who came to him and said that he, S., had not been consulted as was usual in the formation of the Cabinet, that he understood Chase had been assigned to the Treasury, that there were differences between himself and Chase which rendered it impossible for them to act in harmony, that the Cabinet ought, as General Jackson said, to be a unit. Under these circumstances and with his conviction of duty and what was due to himself, he must insist on the excluding of Mr. Chase if he, Seward, remained. Mr. Lincoln expressed his surprise after all that had takenplace and with the great trouble on his hands, that he should be met with such a demand on this late day. He requested Mr. S. to further consider the subject.

The result was that Mr. Lincoln came to the conclusion if Seward persisted, he would let him go and make Dayton, of New Jersey, Secretary of State. But Seward did not persist.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 387-92

Diary of Congressman Rutherford B. Hayes: December 1, 1865

Members of the House are entitled to some perquisites: All the back numbers of the Congressional Globe, a small library of some value; seventy dollars for stationery; fifty dollars for newspapers for this session, and twenty-four copies of the Congressional Globe for the Congress of which he is a member.

A caucus of the Ohio Union delegation held at Mr. Delano's rooms tonight. Present: Ashley, Bingham, Buckland, Bundy, Clark, Delano, Eggleston, Garfield, Hayes, Hubbell, Lawrence, Plants, Schenck, Shellabarger, Spalding, and Welker. Absent, Eckley. It was our first, and a very agreeable and harmonious, meeting. Mr. Delano, chairman, stated the object to be to consult as to candidates for the offices of the House of Representatives, and as to matters connected with the organization of the House. It was agreed to support Mr. Colfax for Speaker and Mr. McPherson for Clerk, they being the old officers and having no opposition. Much talk about the candidates for doorkeeper. One, Mr. Hawkins Taylor, seemed to have many friends. It was, however, stated that he sold out the Chase committee. Mr. Clark made two or three zealous talks in his favor. Mr. Ashley made some sport by allusions to the Chase business. Spalding in earnest opposed him on that account. Schenck talked earnestly and well—evidently the leading man of the delegation. Spalding talked well also, but was unwilling to be bound by the action of the delegation until his candidate for postmaster was provided for. We then all agreed to support Colonel Given for postmaster.

We agreed to oppose the admission of any delegate from the Rebel States for the present. Ashley is a large, good-natured, popular style of man-full of good humor. Shellabarger, a sober, gentlemanly, able man; General Garfield, a smooth, ready, pleasant man, not very strong; Clark, disposed to talk rather too much; Lawrence, ditto, and not quite happy in his views; Delano, clear and correct; Hubbell, talky. Schenck, Delano, Spalding, and Shellabarger, in the order I name them, strike me, judging by tonight, as the strongest men. Bingham and Ashley said so little that I can't place them.

General Schenck gave notice that he would propose an amendment on the first opportunity by which representation would be based on suffrage. All seemed to acquiesce. On General Schenck's suggestion I offered the resolution, with educational test or condition added. Adopted with two negatives, viz., Ashley and Shellabarger.

My old college friend, R. E. Trowbridge [of Michigan], came bouncing into the caucus in his old jovial way to welcome me. Very little change in him.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 6-7

Diary of Congressman Rutherford B. Hayes: December 2, 1865

The Ohio members generally dined with General H. B. Banning of Mount Vernon at his headquarters at Alexandria. Visited the soldiers' cemetery with its three thousand graves, neatly arranged, and its rustic gothic building. A fine specimen of the work. Pine with the bark on the lumber.

Fort Rogers with its two hundred-pound rifled Parrotts and its fifteen-inch columbiad attracted our attention.

The general caucus [of Republican members] tonight a pleasant thing. Mr. Morrill of Vermont, an intelligent merchant who put the vote, "Contrary-minded will say no," presided. Thad Stevens made the important motions. A committee of seven reported resolutions to be submitted to the Senate and House, providing for the appointment of a Joint Committee of Fifteen, nine for the House, six for the Senate, to report as to the status of the Rebel States and whether they were in a condition to be represented; and in the meantime all members from those States to be kept out.

Colfax, McPherson, and ——— nominated by acclamation for their present places viz., Speaker, Clerk, ———. Then for doorkeeper, Goodenow [sic] of New York, and Hawkins Taylor, of Iowa or Kansas, stood sixty-six to fifty-seven. Bad for the West, was the feeling of our men. King, of Minnesota (nominally, really New York), the present incumbent was named [for postmaster], also others, all having printed tickets. Here we seemed caught; we had no tickets ready. Spalding nominated Colonel Given in a proper speech, Roscoe Conkling sustained King in a speech delivered in a distinct, clear tone, with great deliberation and in language fitted to print. Spalding's best point was that Colonel Given was a soldier. Phelps, of Maryland, nominated a soldier an officer of colored troops of his State, one of two who from that State led black men, who lost a leg at the mine at Petersburg. Phelps is young, did his part well. The best speech, best delivered and all, was by our Mr. Delano (in favor of Colonel Given).

[The caucus] adopted, on a test vote the Ohio idea. Stevens angry, resisted, threatened to leave the caucus. Finally carried his point as stated, viz., a Joint Committee of fifteen.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 7-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, March 2, 1865

Had a houseful of visitors to witness the inauguration. Speaker Colfax is grouty because Mrs. Welles has not called on his mother, — a piece of etiquette which Seward says is proper. I doubt it, but Seward jumps to strange conclusions.

Hale, as I expected he would, made an assault on Fox's appendix to my reply, and denounces it as egotistical autobiography, and is determined it shall not be printed. The poor fellow seems not aware that he is advertising and drawing attention to what he would suppress.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 250-1

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, February 4, 1865

There was yesterday no meeting of the Cabinet. This morning the members were notified to meet at twelve meridian. All were punctually on hand. The President with Mr. Seward got home this morning. Both speak of the interview with the Rebel commissioners as having been pleasant and without acrimony. Seward did not meet or have interview with them until the President arrived. No results were obtained, but the discussion will be likely to tend to peace. In going the President acted from honest sincerity and without pretension. Perhaps this may have a good effect, and perhaps otherwise. He thinks he better than any agent can negotiate and arrange. Seward wants to do this.

For a day or two, the naval appropriation bill has been under consideration in the House. A combination, of which H. Winter Davis is the leader, made it the occasion for an onset on the Department and the Administration. The move was sneaking and disingenuous, very much in character with Davis, who is unsurpassed for intrigue and has great talents for it. He moved an amendment, having for its object a Board of Admiralty, which should control the administration of the Department. The grounds of this argument were that the Department had committed errors and he wanted a board of naval officers to prevent it. He presents the British system for our guidance and of course has full scope to assail and misrepresent whatever has been done. But, unfortunately for Davis, the English are at this time considering the question of abandoning their system.

Mr. Rice, Chairman of the Naval Committee, a Boston merchant, is reported to have made a full and ample and most successful reply to Davis, who was voted down. I have not doubted the result, but there was a more formidable effort made than was at first apparent. The Speaker, who is not a fair and ingenuous man, although he professes to be so, and also to be personally friendly to me, is strictly factious and in concert with the extremists. In preparation for this contest he had called General Schenck to the chair. Schenck is one of the Winter Davis clique, and so far as he dare permit it to be seen, and more distinctly than he supposes, has the sympathy of Colfax. Stevens, Chairman of the Ways and Means, is of the same stripe. It is a combination of the radicals prompted and assisted by Du Pont and Wilkes. Hitherto hating each other, and invidiously drawing in others, the miserable wretched combinations of malcontents and intriguers, political and naval, had flattered themselves they should succeed. But they were voted down. I am told, however, that under the rulings and management of the hypocritically sanctimonious Speaker the subject is to be reopened.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 235-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, August 6, 1864

I had a telegram from Tom this morning, stating that Colonel Stedman was mortally wounded and would probably not survive the night, that General Ord desired his promotion without delay, that it might be received before his death, and wishing me to call at once on the President. I did so, who responded readily to the recommendation, and I then, at his request, saw Secretary Stanton, who met me in the right spirit.

While at the President's Blair came in, and the President informed us he had a telegram from Greeley, desiring the publication of the whole peace correspondence. Both Blair and myself advised it, but the President said he had telegraphed Greeley to come on, for he desired him to erase some of the lamentations in his longest letter. I told him while I regretted it was there, the whole had better be published. Blair said it would have to come to that ultimately. But the President thought it better that that part should be omitted.

I remarked that I had seen the Wade and Winter Davis protest. He said, Well, let them wriggle, but it was strange that Greeley, whom they made their organ in publishing the protest, approved his course and therein differed from the protestants. The protest is violent and abusive of the President, who is denounced with malignity for what I deem the prudent and wise omission to sign a law prescribing how and in what way the Union shall be reconstructed. There are many offensive features in the law, which is, in itself, a usurpation and abuse of authority. How or in what way or ways the several States are to put themselves right — retrieve their position - is in the future and cannot well be specified. There must be latitude given, and not a stiff and too stringent policy pursued in this respect by either the Executive or Congress. We have a Constitution, and there is still something in popular government.

In getting up this law it was as much an object of Mr. Winter Davis and some others to pull down the Administration as to reconstruct the Union. I think they had the former more directly in view than the latter. Davis's conduct is not surprising, but I should not have expected that Wade, who has a good deal of patriotic feeling, common sense, and a strong, though coarse and vulgar, mind, would have lent himself to such a despicable assault on the President.

There is, however, an infinity of party and personal intrigue just at this time. A Presidential election is approaching, and there are many aspirants, not only for Presidential but other honors or positions. H. Winter Davis has a good deal of talent but is rash and uncertain. There is scarcely a more ambitious man, and no one that cannot be more safely trusted. He is impulsive and mad and has been acute and contriving in this whole measure and has drawn Wade, who is ardent, and others into it. Sumner, I perceived, was bitten before he left Washington. Whether he has improved I am not informed. Sumner is not a constitutionalist, but more of a centralist than the generality of our people, and would be likely to sanction what seem to me some of the more offensive features of this bill. Consolidating makes it more a government of the people than of the States.

The assaults of these men on the Administration may break it down. They are, in their earnest zeal on the part of some, and ambition and malignity on the part of others, doing an injury that they cannot repair. I do not think Winter Davis is troubled in that respect, or like to be, but I cannot believe otherwise of Wade and others; yet the conduct of Wade for some time past, commencing with the organization of the present Congress in December last, has, after the amnesty proclamation and conciliatory policy of reconstruction, been in some respects strange and difficult to be accounted for, except as an aspiring factionist. I am inclined to believe that he has been bitten with the Presidential fever, is disappointed, and, in his disappointment, with a vague, indefinite hope that he may be successful, prompted and stimulated not only by Davis but Colfax, he has been flattered to do a foolish act.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 94-6

Gerrit Smith: Destroy Not Man's Faith In Man!, June 12, 1862

DESTROY NOT MAN'S FAITH IN MAN!

ACCEPT THE RIGHT MAN, WHICHEVER PARTY NOMINATES HIM!

A people are demoralized by being trained to the ready entertainment of charges of corruption against those, whom they select to be their rulers, teachers and exemplars. For, when they can easily suspect such ones of baseness and crime, their faith in man is destroyed. It scarcely need be added that, when they have no longer faith in man, they will be quick to acquiesce in the application of a very low standard of morality to their leaders, and a still lower one to themselves. I say a still lower one, inasmuch as they will, naturally, expect a less degree of moral worth in the masses than in the individual, who is, here and there, selected from the masses on account of his superior wisdom and virtue. How much better it would be to persuade the people that it is their duty to hold sacred the reputation of those, whom they elevate to posts of honor! For how much more like would they, then, be to elevate those only, whose reputation is worthy to be held sacred! Moreover, what could be more elevating to themselves than such carefulness in selecting their guides and representatives!

I have been led to make these remarks by seeing the recent calumnious and contemptuous treatment of the Chief Justice and such Senators as Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull. The flood-gates of defamation were opened upon Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull, because they voted for the acquittal of the President. I wish they had voted for his conviction. For, although I had not, previously, taken much interest in the proposition to impeach him, nevertheless, after reading those parts of his last Annual Message in which he traduces the colored citizens of our country, I was quite willing to have him removed from office. Were Victoria to take such an outrageous liberty with the Irish or Scotch or Welsh, she would quickly be relieved of her crown. I do not forget that insulting the negro is an American usage. But not with impunity should the President of the whole American people insult, in his official capacity, any of the races, which make up that people — least of all the race, which is, already, the most deeply wronged of them all. This gross violation of the perfect impartiality, which should ever mark the administration of the President's high Office — this ineffable meanness of assailing the persecuted and weak, whom he might rather have consoled and cheered, should not have been overlooked, but should have been promptly and sternly rebuked. How petty the President's affair with Mr. Stanton, compared with his unrelenting wicked war upon these black millions, to whose magnanimous forgiveness of our measureless wrongs against them, and to whose brave help of our Cause we were so largely indebted for its success!

I said that I wish Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Trumbull had voted for the conviction of the President. Nevertheless, in the light of their life-long uprightness, I have not the least reason to doubt that they voted honestly. Nay, in the light of their eminent wisdom, I am bound to pause and inquire of my candid judgment whether they did not vote wisely as well as honestly.

This clamor against the Chief Justice was not, as is pretended, occasioned by his conduct in the Impeachment Trial. That this conduct was wise and impartial, scarcely one intelligent man can doubt. This clamor proceeded from the purpose of preventing his nomination to the Presidency. It is said that he desires to be President. But a desire for this high Office is not, necessarily, culpable. Instead of being prompted in all instances by selfishness, it may in some instances be born of a high patriotism and a disinterested philanthropy. For one, I should rejoice to see the Chief Justice in the Presidency; — and I say this, after a-many-years intimate acquaintance with him — after much personal observation of the workings of his head and heart. I, however, expect to vote for Grant and Colfax. I like them both; and, in the main, I like the platform on which they stand. Nevertheless, if contrary to my expectations, the Democrats shall have the wisdom to nominate the Chief Justice, and along with him a gentleman of similar views and spirit — a gentleman honest both toward the Nation's creditors and toward the negro — I shall prefer to vote for the Democratic Candidates. And why, in the case of such nomination by the Democrats, should not every Republican be willing, nay glad, to sustain the nomination? If the Democrats, at last sick and ashamed, as I have no doubt tens of thousands of them are, of ministering to the mean spirit of caste — prating for “a white man's government,” and defying the sentiment of the civilized world — shall give up their nonsense and wickedness, and nominate for office such men as Republicans have been eager to honor — how wanting in magnanimity and in devotion to truth, and how enslaved to Party, would Republicans show themselves to be, were they not to welcome this overture, and generously respond to these concessions!

By all means should the Republicans let, ay and help, the Democratic Party succeed at the coming Election, provided only that its candidates be the representatives of a real and righteous, instead of a cutaneous and spurious, Democracy. That success would bring to an end this too-long-continued War between Republicans and Democrats. That success would turn us all into Republicans and all into Democrats. The old and absorbing issues about Slavery and its incidents would, then, have passed away. The “everlasting negro,” having gained his rights, would then have sunk out of sight. Doubtless, new Parties would, ere long, be formed. But they would be formed with reference to new questions or, more generally, to old ones, which, by reason of the engrossing interest in the Slavery Battle, have been compelled to wait very long, and with very great detriment to the public weal, for their due share of the public attention.

And, then too, when the quarrel between the Republican and Democratic Parties had ended, Peace between the North and the South would speedily come. Hitherto, the Republican Party has been so anxious to keep a bad Party out of power, that it has not been in a mood to use or study all the means for producing Peace between the North and South. It should, immediately on the surrender of the South, have inculcated on the North the duty of penitently confessing her share of the responsibility for the War—a share as great as the South's, since the responsibility of the North for Slavery, out of which the War grew, was as great as the South's. Quickly would the South have followed this example of penitent confession. And, then, the two would have rivalled each other in expressions of mutual forgiveness and mutual love. Amongst these expressions would have been the avowal of the North to charge no one with Treason, and to open wide the door for the return of every exile, who had not, by some mean or murderous violation of the laws of war, shut himself out of the pale of humanity. And amongst these expressions would have been the joyful consent of the North to let fifty or a hundred millions go from the National Treasury toward helping her War-impoverished sister rise up out of her desolations. The heart of the South would, now, have been won; and she would have manifested the fact by tendering to the North a carte blanche — feeling no fear that there would be any designed injustice in the terms of “Reconstruction,” which her forgiving and generous foe should write upon it. Yes, there would, then, have been Peace between the North and the South — a true and loving and enduring Peace. Ashamed of their past, they would unitedly and cordially have entered upon the work of making a future for our country as innocent and as happy as that past had been guilty and sorrowful. It is not, now, too late to have, by such means, such a Peace. We should, surely, have it, were there to be, at the coming Election, that oneness between Republicans and Democrats, which good sense and good feeling call for.

Is it said that the money, which in loans or (preferably) gifts to the South, I ask to have used in effecting this Peace would make the Peace cost too much? I answer that it would be returned tenfold. The improvement in our National credit, resulting from such a Peace, would, very soon, enable our Government to borrow at an interest of four per cent. Comparatively small, then, would be our taxes, and, by the way, comparatively small, then, would be the temptation to cheat the Nation's creditors.

Peterboro JUNE 12 1868.

G. S.

Bottom of Form

SOURCES: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 266-7; Smith, Gerrit. Destroy not man's faith in man! Accept the right man, whichever party nominates him! ... G. S. Peterboro. Peterboro, 1868. Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.12703100/. 

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, April 29, 1864

Usher relates to me to-day some damaging stories concerning the Treasury. I cannot but think them exaggerations. I know, from some reliable and unmistakable sources, that there have been improprieties among the subordinates of a licentious character, and that Chase is cognizant of the facts. It has surprised me that, knowing the facts, he should have permitted the person most implicated to retain a position of great trust. Only great weakness, or implication in error would give a solution. I do not for a moment entertain the latter, and the former is not a trait in his character.

These matters cannot be suppressed. Blair says Chase will not assent to a committee. He cannot avoid it, and since Frank Blair has left, I think he will not attempt it. Colfax, the Speaker, will give him pretty much such a committee as he wishes. The majority will be friends of Chase, as they should be, and none probably will be unfair opponents.

The President to-day related to two or three of us the circumstances connected with his giving a pass to the half-sister of his wife, Mrs. White. He gave the details with frankness, and without disguise. I will not go into them all, though they do him credit on a subject of scandal and abuse. The papers have assailed him for giving a pass to Mrs. White to carry merchandise. Briefly, Mrs. W. called at the White House and sent in her card to Mrs. Lincoln, her sister, who declined to receive or see her. Mrs. W. two or three times repeated these applications to Mrs. L. and the President, with the same result. The President sent a pass, such as in some cases he has given, for her to proceed South. She sent it back with a request that she might take trunks without being examined. The President refused. She then showed her pass and talked “secesh” at the hotel, and made application through Mallory first and then Brutus Clay. The President refused the former and told Brutus that if Mrs. W. did not leave forthwith she might expect to find herself within twenty-four hours in the Old Capitol Prison.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 20-1

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, April 30, 1864

The Wilkes court martial found him guilty on all charges and sentenced him to three years’ suspension and a reprimand. It is a light punishment for the conviction.

Army movements indicate an early and great battle, but when and where to be fought is unknown in Washington.

Congress to-day has ordered a committee on the Treasury. It is made up as only Colfax could do it. Some able friends of Chase are on it, and Brooks who is a superficial demagogue is associated with them.

Thirty years ago I was accustomed to meet Brooks, then a resident of Portland, Maine. He was at that time a zealous Whig partisan, with no settled principles. Judging from the New York Express, his paper, I think he has changed very little, though now elected by, and acting with, those who call themselves Democrats and have a Democratic organization.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 21-2; William E. Gienapp & Erica L. Gienapp, Editors, The Civil War Diary of Gideon Wells, p. 399-400.

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, April 11, 1864

John C. Rives, it is stated, died yesterday. He was a marked character, guileless, shrewd, simple-hearted, and sagacious, without pretension and without fear, generous and sincere, with a warm heart but no exterior graces. I first met him in the winter of 1829 in the office of Duff Green, where he was bookkeeper. In the winter of 1831, I think, we met at Georgetown at the house of Colonel Corcoran. F. P. Blair, whom I met on the same evening for the first time, had been out with Rives to try their rifles. They had first met a few days previous. Rives was then a clerk in the Fourth Auditor's office, — Amos Kendall. The latter passed the evening with us. Years later Rives and myself became well acquainted. He was first bookkeeper and then partner of Blair and made the fortunes of both.

In the House of Representatives a sharp and unpleasant discussion has been carried on, on a resolution introduced by the Speaker, Colfax, to expel Long, a Representative from Ohio, for some discreditable partisan remarks, made in a speech last Friday. There being an evening session, I went to the Capitol for the first time this session. Heard Orth, Kernan, Winter Davis, and one or two others. The latter was declamatory, eloquent, but the debate did not please me, nor the subject. Long I despise for his declarations, but Colfax is not judicious in his movement. Long went beyond the line of his party, and Colfax cannot make them responsible for Long's folly.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 8-9

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, December 14, 1863

Yesterday was warm and balmy as a day in June. Business so crowded to-day that I was unable to clear my table, which is unusual, for I make it a point to dispose of all current business daily, though to accomplish it I am sometimes unable to get away until late. Had many calls from Members of Congress. The Committees of the two houses are announced. Hale is Chairman of the Senate Naval Committee. In the House, Brandegee of New London is substituted for English. This exchange is not a good one, is made in bad faith, and, after two distinct interviews with Mr. Colfax, without consulting or apprising me. Brandegee's name was not on the list which Colfax showed me, nor was it mentioned in either of our interviews; on the contrary we had an explicit understanding that the New England Members on the committee would be retained. The President has, I see, a right appreciation of Colfax, but in this instance there is an intrigue lying behind it.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 484

Diary of Gideon Welles: December 1863

It has been some weeks since I have opened this book. Such time as I could spare from exacting and oppressing current duties at the Department has been devoted to gathering and arranging materials for, and in writing, my Annual Report. Most of this latter labor has been done in the evening, when I was fatigued and exhausted, yet extending often to midnight. Likely the document itself will in style and manner show something of the condition of the author's mind. In examining, analyzing, and weighing matters, I have sometimes felt discouraged and doubted my ability to do equal and exact justice to all, injustice to none. Every statement and sentence will be scrutinized, criticized, and scanned; politicians, naval men, legislators, statesmen at home and abroad will in this period of war and controversy study what may be said, with a zeal and purpose beyond what is usual. My wish is to do wrong to no one, to present the facts correctly and to serve my country honestly. The two or three friends to whom I have submitted the paper speak encouragingly of it. Mr. Faxon has been most useful to me and assisted me most. Mr. Fox and Mr. Lenthall have made sensible suggestions. I have found Mr. Eames a good critic, and he twice went over the whole with me. When finally printed and I sent off my last proof, I felt relieved and better satisfied with the document than I feared I should be. There is a responsibility and accountability in this class of papers, when faithfully done, vastly greater and more trying than in ordinary authorship. I believe I can substantiate everything I have said to any tribunal, and have omitted nothing which the Congress or the country ought to know. I do not expect, however, to silence the captious, or those who choose to occupy an attitude of hostility. If what I have said shall lead the government to better action or conclusions in any respect, I shall be more than satisfied.

The President requested that each head of Department would prepare a few paragraphs relating to his Department which might, with such modifications as he chose to make, be incorporated into the message. Blair and myself submitted ours first, each about three weeks since; the others were later.

I was invited and strongly urged by the President to attend the ceremonials at Gettysburg, but was compelled to decline, for I could not spare the time. The President returned ill and in a few days it was ascertained he had the varioloid. We were in Cabinet-meeting when he informed us that the physicians had the preceding evening ascertained and pronounced the nature of his complaint. It was in a light form, but yet held on longer than was expected. He would have avoided an interview, but wished to submit and have our views of the message. All were satisfied, and that portion which is his own displays sagacity and wisdom.

The Russian government has thought proper to send its fleets into American waters for the winter. A number of their vessels arrived on the Atlantic seaboard some weeks since, and others in the Pacific have reached San Francisco. It is a politic movement for both Russians and Americans, and somewhat annoying to France and England. I have directed our naval officers to show them all proper courtesy, and the municipal authorities in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia have exhibited the right spirit. Several of the Russian ships arrived and ascended the Potomac about the 1st instant.

On Saturday, the 5th instant, the Admiral and his staff made me an official visit, and on Monday, the 7th, the Secretary of State and myself with Mr. Usher returned the visit. Taking a steamboat at the navy yard, we proceeded down to the anchorage near Alexandria, where we were received with salutes and dined with the officers. On Monday dined with Baron Stoeckel and the Russian officers at Seward's. Tuesday we were entertained at Stoeckel's. On Wednesday, the 9th, received and entertained fifty Russian officers, the Cabinet, foreign ministers, and the officers of our own Navy who were in Washington, and all professed to be, and I think were, gratified. It was a question whether some of the legations would attend, but I believe all were present at our party.

Mr. Colfax was elected Speaker, and the House was organized without difficulty. There was an attempt to elect some one else, but it was an abortion. Washburne of Illinois wanted the place, but found few supporters and finally gave up the effort. Blair, to my surprise, went for Washburne, who, though the oldest, is confessedly the meanest man in Congress. Colfax is exceedingly sore over the course of Blair, who, he says, advised him not to compete with Grow, and now, when the field is open and fairly his, goes for W., whom he (C.) knows B. does not like. I not only preferred Colfax, but did not conceal my contempt for Washburne, whose honesty and veracity I know to be worse than indifferent. Blair tells me his opinion of W. is pretty much the same as mine and that he suggested and spoke of him at the instigation of the President, who, while he has not a very high opinion of Washburne, wants confidence in Colfax, whom he considers a little intriguer, — plausible, aspiring beyond his capacity, and not trustworthy.

In the appointment of committees, Colfax avows a desire to do justice to the Departments, which Grow did not in all cases, but placed some men on the Department committees that were positively bad. In no instance did he consult me. There is a practice by some Secretaries, I understand, to call upon the Speaker and influence his selections. The practice is, I think, wrong, yet courtesy and propriety would lead a fair-minded Speaker to appoint fair committees and consult the Departments and not put upon committees any of the class mentioned, objectionable characters who would embarrass the Secretary or be indifferent to their own duties. The conduct of Colfax is, so far as I am concerned, in pleasant contrast with Grow. Not that I do not appreciate Grow, nor that I am not on friendly terms with him. But C. has called and consulted with me, which G. never did. I neither then nor now undertook to select or name individual members, as I know has been done by others. Colfax named or showed me a list of names from which he proposed to make up the Naval Committee. He says Schenck intimates he would like to be chairman, — that when, in Congress twenty years ago, he was on the Naval Committee, the duties were pleasant and familiar to him. There are, however, family rather than public reasons which now influence him. If on the Naval Committee he would expect to legislate and procure favor for his brother. The Schenck family is grasping and pugnacious. I objected to him, and also to H. Winter Davis, who is Du Pont's adviser, and who is disappointed because he was not made Secretary of the Navy.

In the Senate there is a singular state of things, I hear. Their proceedings are secret, but I am informed the Senators are unanimously opposed to placing John P. Hale on the Naval Committee, where he has been Chairman, but persistently hostile to the Department. The sentiments of Senators, I am told, confounded Hale, who alternately blusters and begs. Some, very likely a majority, want the moral courage to maintain and carry out their honest convictions, for there is not a Senator of any party who does not know he is a nuisance and discredit to the Naval Committee, and that he studies to thwart and embarrass the Department and never tries to aid it. This movement against Hale is spontaneous in the Senate. It certainly has not been prompted by me, for though he is the organ of communication between the Department and the Senate, I have ceased to regard him with respect, and have been silent respecting him.

. . . The Senators have failed to pay attention to him, and do well in getting rid of him, if they succeed in resisting his importunities, which, I hear, are very persistent. . . . The Senators have, in their secret meetings, let [Hale] know their opinion of him, — that their confidence in him has gone. Should they continue him as Chairman of the Naval Committee, he will have no influence, and his fall, which must eventually take place, will be greater. . . .

The interference of Members of Congress in the organization of the navy yards and the employment of workmen is annoying beyond conception. In scarcely a single instance is the public good consulted in their interference, but a demoralized, debauched system of personal and party favoritism has grown up which is pernicious. No person representing a district in which there is a navy yard, ought ever to be placed on the Naval Committee, nor should a Member of Congress meddle with appointments unless requested by the Executive. It is a terrible and increasing evil.

A strange sale of refuse copper took place in September at the Washington Navy Yard. I have had the subject investigated, but the board which I appointed was not thorough in its labors, and did not pursue the subject closely. But the exhibit was such that I have dismissed the Commandant of the Yard, the Naval Storekeeper, and two of the masters, who are implicated, yet I am by no means certain I have reached all, or the worst.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 479-83

Diary of John Hay: December 12, 1863

I met at the Theatre S. S. Cox, who was speaking of the statesmanship and success of Gov. Seward, attributing much to the bon hommie and affability of his manners. He says Seward sent for him the other day and asked him if he wanted to retain his place on the Committee of Foreign Relations, and if he wished to designate what gentlemen on the Democratic side should be associated with him, promising to speak to Colfax for him. This frank kindliness seemed to have won Cox over very much personally. Seward is unquestionably gaining in popularity very fast. Mercier said of him the other day: — “II est très sage.” The diplomatic body have all apparently stopped abusing him, and those who do not like, have been forced to respect.

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 138-9; For the whole diary entry see Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and letters of John Hay, p. 137.

Fitz Henry Warren to James S. Pike, December 16, 1860

Burlington, Iowa, December 16, 1860.

James Pike: I am fructified in spirit to see “J. S. P.” again at the foot of a Washington letter. How are you, and where have you been? I should have written to you a long time ago, but I have been busy all the season “crying in the wilderness,” and to some purpose, too, for we have done a large business in Iowa as well as in the “inductive” State of Maine.

Being at a safe distance from South Carolina and Georgia, I look on very calmly. Several gentlemen are to be killed before my turn comes. Oh for an hour of Old Hickory or Old Zach! Are we to have turbulent times? I do not exactly see the end, for I am ignorant what the new Administration is to be. Let Abraham put in Corwin for Secretary of Treasury; Pennington, Secretary of the Interior ; and Colfax, Postmaster-General, and we shall have a lovely time. That committee, with C. for chairman, will have an illustrious labor and parturiate a generation of mice.

Give me a letter occasionally, with a history of the green-room rehearsals and other items.

Who is to be senator from Maine?

Very truly, your friend,

Fitz-henry Warren.

James S. Pike, Esq.

SOURCE: James Shepherd Pike, First Blows of the Civil War: The Ten Years of Preliminary Conflict in the United States from 1850 to 1860, p. 526