Washington City, Jany. 16, 1851.
My Dear Sir, Mr.
Hoadly, of Cincinnatti, has requested me to write you in relation to his
election as Judge of the Superior Court, and it gives me real pleasure, — except
so far as his election would deprive the office in which I am interested of his
services — to comply with his request. He is a gentlemen, of very rare
abilities, and in my judgment, peculiarly qualified to fill a judicial station
with honor to himself and credit to his appointers. His energy and industry
give assurances that the business of the Court, which is terribly in arrear,
would be brought up and expedited to the great advantage of suitors and
lawyers. These qualifications are first worthy of consideration, in some
respects but not in all. I rank even before these a generous devotion to human
liberty and a disposition to make law answer the ends of justice instead of the
purposes of oppression. His views, I believe, of the Constitution and Law as
bearing on the question of Human Rights are, I believe, the same as my own.
What they are you know. It is something to be added to these considerations
that Mr. Hoadly was one of that — it is not too much to say he was the leader —
of that band of democrats, who forsook Cass when he forsook Democracy by
writing the Nicholson letter, & stood with us on the Buffalo Platform. I
hope, if your views of public duty permit it, that you will not, if it be
possible to elect Hoadly, concur in the election of any other man, not as amply
qualified, and especially not in the election of a Whig with the cooperation or
under any arrangement with the friends of this administration.
Sumner is, I suppose, defeated at Boston. Websterism and
Cassism coalesced against him, and every nerve was strained to defeat him by
every appliance. The Hunkers have probably succeeded.
I enclose an article from the Toledo Republican, which seems
to me to take right views of the course proper to be pursued in the Legislature
by Free Democrats, if they cannot elect a man, [sic] out and out, of
themselves. But I do not yet despair of such an election. Morse gave me a gleam
of hope that you might yet be elected. I should be more than delighted to
welcome you to a share of my toils. If it be impossible, however, to elect a
radical free democrat, and the democrats should tender a man whose course of
action has inspired his friends with the assurance that he is as
good a freesoiler as I am a democrat it would be wisdom in my judgment, under
present circumstances, to [sic] make arrangments with the old line for his
election to the Senate & of an equitable proportion of Free Democrats to
other offices. But I do not anticipate that the freesoilers can be satisfied in
this way, for I do not suppose that men who refuse to vote for Medary could be
brought to vote for any man who would be satisfactory to Freesoilers, even
though taken from the old line ranks.
I do not myself anticipate any election. It has been said
that the Whigs will elect Hitchcock. If they will, without any arrangment as to
other offices, I take it for granted the Free Democrats would not refuse their
votes to a man who has shewn his fidelity to our cause as he did during the
campaign of '48, and has abided in the Free Democratic organization ever since.
True his views are not radical like yours or mine; but that difference would
not excuse such as you and I from his support, any more than it excused such as
he is from my support in 1849. I would not imitate their bad example. But I
would enter into no arrangement with the supporters of this
Administration in relation to elections upon any terms. It would be, I
verily believe, fatal to our organization and our progress. If they
choose to vote for one of our men without consideration, except a preference
for his character & capacity over opposing candidates, well & good. Our
Natural allies are the old line democrats. If, under evil influences,
they refuse the alliance, and you cannot elect independently, I say, for one,
let the election go over and let us appeal to the people. I have no fears as to
the result.
Nothing new here. The Hunker Leaders of the old Line are
down hearted. It becomes daily more and more apparent that no one of them can
unite the democratic party. One of them remarked to me the other day that the
democratic party was broken up for ten years to come. I told I thought we
should be able to unite on true principles in two or three years: but he didn't
seem desirous of that.
Shew this to Pardee and give my best regards to him.
_______________
* Lent
by Mr. Homer E. Stewart, Warren, Ohio.
SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual
Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol.
2, p. 230-2
