The time is coming, if it has not already arrived, when among
fair-minded and intelligent Americans there will not be two opinions
touching the Hayes-Tilden contest for the presidency in 1876-77—that
both by the popular vote and a fair count of the electoral vote Tilden
was elected and Hayes was defeated; but the whole truth underlying the
determinate incidents which led to the rejection of Tilden and the
seating of Hayes will never be known.
“All history is a lie,” observed Sir Robert Walpole, the corruptionist,
mindful of what was likely to be written about himself; and “What is
history,” asked Napoleon, the conqueror, “but a fable agreed upon?”
In the first administration of Mr. Cleveland there were present at a
dinner table in Washington, the President being of the party, two
leading Democrats and two leading Republicans who had sustained
confidential relations to the principals and played important parts in
the drama of the Disputed Succession. These latter had been long upon
terms of personal intimacy. The occasion was informal and joyous, the
good fellowship of the heartiest.
Inevitably the conversation drifted to the Electoral Commission, which
had counted Tilden out and Hayes in, and of which each of the four had
some story to tell. Beginning in banter with interchanges of badinage
it presently fell into reminiscence, deepening as the interest of the
listeners rose to what under different conditions might have been
described as unguarded gayety if not imprudent garrulity. The little
audience was rapt.
Finally Mr. Cleveland raised both hands and exclaimed, “What would the
people of this country think if the roof could be lifted from this
house and they could hear these men?” And then one of the four, a
gentleman noted for his wealth both of money and humor, replied, “But
the roof is not going to be lifted from this house, and if any one
repeats what I have said I will denounce him as a liar.”
Once in a while the world is startled by some revelation of the unknown
which alters the estimate of a historic event or figure; but it is
measurably true, as Metternich declares, that those who make history
rarely have time to write it.
It is not my wish in recurring to the events of nearly five-and-forty
years ago to invoke and awaken any of the passions of that time, nor my
purpose to assail the character or motives of any of the leading
actors. Most of them, including the principals, I knew well; to many of
their secrets I was privy. As I was serving, in a sense, as Mr.
Tilden’s personal representative in the Lower House of the Forty-fourth
Congress, and as a member of the joint Democratic Advisory or Steering
Committee of the two Houses, all that passed came more or less, if not
under my supervision, yet to my knowledge; and long ago I resolved that
certain matters should remain a sealed book in my memory.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account