The Life and Work of James A. Garfield, Twentieth President of the United States: Embracing an Account of the Scenes and Incidents of His Boyhood; the Struggles of His Youth; the Might of His Early Manhood; His Valor As a Soldier; His Career As a Statesman; His Election to the Presidency; and the Tragic Story of His Death.Ridpath, John Clark
History
The Life and Work of James A. Garfield, Twentieth President of the United States: Embracing an Account of the Scenes and Incidents of His Boyhood; the Struggles of His Youth; the Might of His Early Manhood; His Valor As a Soldier; His Career As a Statesman; His Election to the Presidency; and the Tragic Story of His Death.
Ridpath, John Clark
Garfield, James A. (James Abram), 1831-1881
This was the work of the “visiting statesmen.” When the canvassing of
votes was completed, without waiting for or trying to influence the
result, General Garfield returned to Washington, as did nearly all the
others.
It has been a question whether outsiders ought to have been at New
Orleans at all in this emergency. Certainly a public man ran great risk
of doing himself harm by going, and it required the utmost
circumspection to get out of it, clear from suspicion of evil. A year
afterward this affair was examined by the Potter Committee, and of
Garfield, the worst they could say was this: “We found no fault in him.”
But the struggle at New Orleans did not decide it all. When January came
it was seen that there would still be trouble in deciding who were
elected. It was feared by all that an attempt to decide by the existing
laws, without the help of further provisions, might lead to serious
difficulties.
Accordingly, on January 29, 1877, there was passed in the House a law
providing for the Electoral Commission, a body to be composed of five
Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, five Senators and five
Representatives, to whom should be committed the duty of deciding, by
their recommendation, the votes of any disputed States.
General Garfield was opposed to this commission, which he thought an
unhappy way of ending the trouble. His views are given in a speech made
to the House, on January 25, wherein he said:
“What, then, are the grounds on which we should consider a bill like
this? It would be unbecoming in me or in any member of this Congress
to oppose this bill on mere technical or trifling grounds. It should
be opposed, if at all, for reasons so broad, so weighty, as to
overcome all that has been said in its favor, and all the advantages
which I have here admitted may follow from its passage. I do not
wish to diminish the stature of my antagonist; I do not wish to
undervalue the points of strength in a measure before I question its
propriety. It is not enough that this bill will tide us over a
present danger, however great. Let us for a moment forget Hayes and
Tilden, Republicans and Democrats; let us forget our own epoch and
our own generation; and, entering a broader field, inquire how this
thing which we are about to do will effect the great feature of our
republic, and in what condition, if we pass this bill, we shall
transmit our institutions to those who shall come after us. The
present good which we shall achieve by it may be very great; yet if
the evils that will flow from it in the future must be greater, it
would be base in us to flinch from trouble by entailing remediless
evils upon our children.
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