I had a formal call to-day from a committee consisting of
Mr. Cook of Illinois, a member of the National Committee, Mr. Humphrey, an ex-Member
of Congress from Brooklyn, and two or three other gentlemen. Mr. Cook opened
the subject by presenting me a resolution, adopted unanimously by the National
Committee, complaining in general terms that the employés of the Brooklyn Navy
Yard were, a majority of them, opposed to the Administration. He also presented
a paper which the President had given him from certain persons in Massachusetts
and New Hampshire, complaining in a similar manner of the condition of affairs
in the Charlestown and Kittery navy yards. Our interview was long, and matters
were pretty fully gone into. After reading the papers, I stated that these were
charges in general terms, and asked if they had any specific facts, anything
tangible for us to inquire into. Was there any case within their knowledge, or
the knowledge of any one to whom they could refer, of wrong, of disloyalty, of
offensive political bearing? They were evidently unprepared to answer. Mr. Cook
said he had understood there were some warrant officers who ought to be
removed. I explained there were naval officers and there were civilians in the
Navy Yards. The former were detailed to duty, the latter are appointees of the
Department. The masters are appointed by the Department and they employ all the
workmen, subject to the approval of the chiefs of their respective departments.
I had appointed and retained all the masters in Brooklyn by the advice of Mr.
Humphrey and his associates. If there were any improper persons employed there,
it was by the masters thus selected on Mr. Humphrey's recommendation. Mr. Cook
said he had not fully understood this matter. Mr. Humphrey said there were a
good many disloyal men in the yard. I requested him to point them out, to give
me their names, to specify one. He was not prepared, nor were either of the men
with him. Mr. Humphrey said that a majority of the men in the yard were
Copperheads, opposed to the Administration. I asked him how he knew that to be
the case, for I could not credit it. He said he had been told so, and appealed
to the master joiner, who was present, — a little deaf. The master joiner
thought that four sevenths were opposed to the Administration. I inquired on
what data he made that statement. He said he had no data but he could tell
pretty well by going round the yard and mingling with the men. I told him that
besides introducing partyism into the yard, which was wrong, his figure was
mere conjecture, and asked if their ward committees in the city outside the
yard did their duty, if they canvassed their wards, knew how many navy yard men
were in each ward, and how they stood relatively with parties. They were aware
of no such canvass, had no facts, had done nothing outside.
But the burden of their complaint was against Mr. Davidson,
the Assistant Naval Constructor, who would not dismiss, or give his approval to
dismiss, any man of the opposition. Again I asked for facts. “Why, if there is
this wrong, has not a case been brought to my knowledge? You must, certainly,
among you all, know of a single case if there is such a grievance as you
represent.” Mr. Humphrey appealed to the master joiner, who related the
circumstance of a difference that had grown up between a workman and a
quarterman, an appeal was made to Mr. Hallock, the master, Hallock wrote his
dismissal for insubordination, and Mr. Davidson had not approved it; no action
had yet been taken.
This was the only case they could recollect. This, I told
them, was not a case of disloyalty, or objectionable party opinion, but one of
discipline. If as stated, the facts should have been reported to me, and I
would have given them attention. But nothing, they were confident, could be
done with Mr. Davidson to favor the Republican Party. I asked Mr. H. if he knew
Mr. Davidson's political opinion. Told him Mr. D. had been recommended by every
Republican Member of Congress from Philadelphia. Mr. H. did not know what his
opinions were, but he had no sympathy with us. I told him my impressions were
that D. was a friend and supporter of the President, but he had gone a stranger
to Brooklyn, and been treated with neglect and now was much misrepresented;
that I was satisfied and confirmed that my impressions were correct, that there
was no proper party organization in Brooklyn, that they had no proper canvass,
that they did not labor and exert themselves properly, but sat down leisurely
and called on the President and Secretary of the Navy to do their party work
and organization for them; that in this way they could never make themselves
formidable. They must mingle with the people, be with them and of them,
convince them by intercourse that the Republicans were right. That they should
invite the employees to their meetings, furnish them with arguments, get them
interested, and they would, in that way, have their willing efforts and votes.
They thought, they said, they had a pretty good
organization, but if allowed to go into the yard they could better organize, it
would help them much. I told them I thought such a proceeding would be wrong;
it was a maxim with me not to do that which I condemned in another. They said
if they could go near the paymaster when he was paying the men off, and get the
assessment off each man, it would greatly aid them. I told them it would help
them to no votes. The man who was compelled to pay a party tax could not love
the party who taxed him. His contribution must, like his vote, come
voluntarily, and they must persuade and convince him to make him earnest and
effective.
I promised to write instructing Delano, the constructor, to
pass on the selections and dismissals of men, and not to depute this duty to
his assistant. This, they thought, would afford them relief, and though I
perceived there was disappointment in the matter of money-getting, which is
obviously the great object in view, they went off apparently satisfied with the
victory for Delano.
SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the
Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866,
p. 142-5
