‘7' - "—»-g: r

THE LIBERAL REFORM MOVEMENT
INMICHIGAN POLITICS
1870-1876

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
DOUGLAS EMERSON STECK
1975

'fi .

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

310419 4620

  
  
    

III”

I. BI'IIIy p' Imp

  

 

3 I I
‘ BINDING av "I

MES SENS”

'RY BINDL
Isrnmeeoar mom:- III I

I
. 3
CI I“
g“:, ABSTRACT
. I. U
f}! I THE LIBERAL REFORM MOVEMENT IN MICHIGAN POLITICS
I" 1870-l876
By

Douglas Emerson Steck

Reform agitation in American politics in the l870$ was
widespread. It was related to rampant corruption and incompetence
in government and a desire to move from the problems and concerns
of the Civil War era to those of the post-war period. Much of the
reform impetus came from political "independents“ who organized
reform-oriented third party movements. In Michigan their efforts
led most notably to the establishment of the state Liberal Republican
Party in 1872 and the National Reform Party of l874. This study
examines the men, issues, and political events which constituted the
Michigan Reform experiment. It also assesses the impact of the
Liberal Reform drive on state politics and on the relative strength
of the Republican and Democratic parties in Michigan.

The most helpful research materials for this project were
the correspondence of Michigan Reformers and their supporters, and
selected state newspapers which gave extensive coverage to the Reform

effort. Of the manuscripts consulted the most comprehensive were the

Douglas Emerson Steck

Austin Blair papers in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit
Public Library. The papers of other Reformers in this collection were
relevant, as were those located in the Michigan Historical Collections
at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and the Historical
Collections at Michigan State University in East Lansing. Among the
available reform-minded newspapers were the Grand Rapids Daily Times,
Kalamazoo Gazette, Marshall Democratic Expounder, [Battle Creek]
Michigan Tribune, Lansinggdgurnal, and Detroit Free Press.

Several additional types of source materials were used.
They included printed government documents of state and national
relevance, manuals and almanacs, and collections of political speeches.

Works related to state and local history were indispensable.
Most pertinent were county histories, biographical works, and mono—
graphs dealing with various phases of Michigan's political history.

The research performed in these and other sources led to
a number of major conclusions about the Liberal Reform movement in
Michigan politics. First, it substantially affected both the
Republican and Democratic parties in the state. Reformism helped to
discredit the former and to bolster the image of the latter, and
played an important role in bringing about the defeat of Zachariah
Chandler for the United States Senate in l875. Second, it provided
numerous political candidates and orators in Michigan during the
l8705. Third, it set the tone for state politics and stimulated the
revival of independent voting. Fourth, it facilitated the political

growth of the farmers' movement. And, fifth, it contributed to the

Douglas Emerson Steck

development of the machinery of fusion through which the Greenbackers
and Democrats seized control of the statehouse in l882.

As for the Reformers themselves, a number of other conclusions
were reached. For the most part Michigan Reformers were self-made men
of considerable wealth, talent, and respect. They tended to be sincere
in their reform efforts which aimed at making the existing governmental
and political system more responsive to the needs of the people.
Generally they were less interested in gaining political office per-
sonally than in ensuring the success of the Reform movement. As a
group they did not exhibit the anti-democratic cynicism and distrust
of the populace found in many eastern Reformers. They did not always
agree with one another nor were they always consistent in their posi-
tions on the issues but in their good will toward the people they
remained steadfast. Most of them it could be claimed were motivated

by a strong sense of social responsibility and political idealism.

THE LIBERAL REFORM MOVEMENT IN MICHIGAN POLITICS
1870-1876

By

Douglas Emerson Steck

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of History

1975

@Copyright by
Douglas Emerson Steck

I975

To My Parents

1'1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to acknowledge my appreciation for the inspiration,
guidance, and encouragement extended to me throughout the entire
doctoral program by the members of my guidance committee. Special
thanks are offered to Professors Robert E. Brown and Richard E.
Sullivan. And, for his efforts in my behalf, a sincere note of
gratitude is extended to my major professor and thesis director,

Dr. Frederick D. Williams.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
PREFACE ........................... v
Chapter
I. SEEDTIME FOR REFORM ................ 1
II. LIBERAL REPUBLICANISM IN MICHIGAN ......... 37
III. NATIONAL REFORMERS ON THE MARCH .......... 82
IV. THE REFORM TIDE CRESTS, THEN EBBS ......... l29
V. REFORMERS IN PROFILE ................ 174
VI. CONCLUSIONS .................... 214
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY ........... . ........ 223

iv

PREFACE

The first half of the decade of the 18705 was a time of
widespread concern for political reform. 0n the national level it
witnessed the Liberal Republican effort of 1872 and the reform-oriented
Hayes-Tilden campaign of 1876. In several states a myriad of reform
movements were launched which affected to varying degrees the politics
in those states. The years from 1870 to 1876 in Michigan saw the
emergence of a Liberal Reform movement, centering primarily upon the
Liberal Republican and National Reform Parties in the state.

This study examines the origins, course, and results of the
Reform experiment in Michigan. In the process it answers the follow-
ing questions. What were the issues which evoked a reform response
among men of different political persuasions in Michigan? How were
the Liberal Republican and National Reform Parties organized and
what policies did they advocate? How much impact did the Liberal
Reform movement have on state politics and on the relative strength
of the two major parties? What was the relationship between the
Reform effort and the success of the farmers' movement in Michigan?
What factors contributed to the decline of the independent Reform
experiment by 1876? And, what was the political legacy of the Reform
effort in the years after 1876?

The Reform leaders themselves are analyzed. Their
backgrounds, beliefs, and goals are used as keys to understand
their motives and sincerity. Finally the relationship of Michigan
Reformers to those elsewhere is evaluated and the respective

character of Reformers in and out of Michigan is examined.

vi

CHAPTER I
SEEDTIME FOR REFORM

The years from 1870 through 1872 can be considered the
“seedtime” for political reform in Michigan. These years witnessed
some early manifestations of discontent with the Republican machine
and popular support for the cause of reform. Of cardinal importance
was the emergence of major issues which were damaging to the Republi-
can party and which the Reformers exploited in launching the Liberal
Republican movement in the state. Those issues can be categorized
as national, state, and local in scope.

The national issues encompassed several related to the
aftermath of the Civil War and in particular to the process of
Reconstruction in the South. Michigan Reform Republicans and Demo-
crats maintained that the Radical Republicans continued to foster the
hostile feelings of the war long after it was over. They believed
President Ulysses S. Grant was especially culpable. In a speech at
Detroit, Austin Blair, Civil War governor of Michigan, charged that
l

the president had been "trying to make peace with the sword."

Another leading advocate of Liberal Reform in the state, Charles S.

 

1Speech of Austin Blair, July 22, 1872, bound in "Michigan
Political Speeches," Michigan State Library, Lansing, Michigan.

May of Kalamazoo, stressed that the time had come for "the final peace
and reconciliation between North and South."2 Michigan newspapers

which backed the Liberal Republican movement in 1872 demanded “universal

"3

amnesty and peace. And when the Liberal Republicans drew up their

state platform, it called for "a revival of fraternal feelings between
sections."4
Part of the concern expressed over the lingering antagonism
of Reconstruction was directed at the denial of constitutional rights
in the South. Of particular interest were the rights of individuals
vis-a-vis the government. Attention focused on the abrogation of
many southerners' rights to the franchise and habeas corpus. Blair
demanded that "the people of the southern states be governed under

"5

the Constitution. The Liberal Republicans, meeting in Jackson,

articulated the need for "the removal of all disabilities on account

"6

of the rebellion, and the protection of habeas corpus. One

 

2Speech of Charles Sedgewick May, September 27, 1872, in
C. S. May, Speeches of the Stump, the Bar, and the Platform (Battle
Creek: Review & Hearld ca., 1899).

3Marshall Democratic Exppunder, August 10, 1872; Detroit
Free Press, January 25, 1872; Grand Rapids Democrat, July 24, 1872.

 

4"Michigan Liberal Republican Platform," typescript copy
in the Spencer Collection, Michigan State Library, Lansing, Michigan.
Hereafter cited as the "Michigan Platform." .

5Blair's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political Speeches."

6"Michigan Platform."

reform-minded newspaper called for “the preservation of individual
liberty and the inviolability of the writ of habeas corpus,“7 and
another pointed out that "individuals have inalienable rights, not
ceded to the government, and which majorities cannot take from
them."8

In addition to stressing the need for the maintenance of
individual rights under the Constitution, the Reformers pursued the
issue of the rights of state and local governments. They claimed
that these rights had been denied on a massive scale by the federal
government's treatment of the South after the war. The Marshall
Democratic Expounder envisioned extreme dangers in this denial of
the "preservation of the rights of states as guaranteed by the

Constitution of the United States."9

Speaking of the proper relation-
ship between the federal and state governments, Austin Blair said
that "each is supreme in its own sphere of authority and neither has
any right to interfere with the other." "The balance of power in

the American system," he stated, "depends upon that preservation."

He added that he had "no belief in the perpetuity of the American

government at all unless that system could be maintained." “We must

 

7Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 10, 1872.

8Michigan Argus (Ann Arbor), July 15, 1870.

9Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 10, 1872. See also
Saginaw Daily Courier, May 7, 1872.

not,“ he said, "take the powers of the states and subject them to

the great central authority at Washington, for this would remove

the constitutional safeguard of the people for local self-government."10
Another series of nationally oriented issues exploited by

those who opposed Radical Republicanism centered around the economic

policies of the Grant administration. Liberals felt that more steps

should be taken to insure sound currency and the maintenance of the

11 12

public credit. They were for the most part "hard money" advocates.
At Cincinnati the Liberal Republicans stated in their platform that
"the public credit must be sacredly maintained, and that repudiation
in every form and guise must be denounced." Further, they resolved
that "a speedy return to specie payment is demanded alike by the
highest considerations of commercial morality and honest government."13
This stance was heartily endorsed by Liberal Republicans in Michigan.
The high protective tariff was an issue as well. Michigan's

two senators and six representatives in Congress in 1870 were all high

 

10Blair's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political
Speeches.“ See also speeches of Duncan Stewart and Robert McClelland,
ibid.

1]"Michigan Platform."

12Irwin Unger, The Greenback Era (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1964), p. 131.

13Kirk H. Porter (comp.), National Party Platforms, (New
York: The Macmillan Co., 1924), p. 77.

protection Republicans.14

And they, along with other Radicals,
reportedly acted in concert with businessmen to perpetuate a monopoly
of the domestic market for native manufactures through the protective
tariff. The public in turn was swindled by the high prices charged
for goods sold in a market free from foreign competition. "The
merchants and manufacturers," one paper said, "have too long with
the full complicity of government been permitted to fleece their
fellow citizens through the instrumentality of the tariff." The
voter was admonished to consider "what right the central government
had to tax the common consumer...for the benefit of private
companies?"15
Reformers demanded a "move away from extravagance in
government spending and a return to rigid economy."16 An example
of the greatly deplored waste was the abuse of the franking privilege.
One journal described as "enormous" the frauds "perpetrated under

the cover of the franking privilege." It noted that the Radicals

employed the privilege to "transmit whatever printed matter they

 

14Clarence Lee Miller, The States of the 01d Northwest and
the Tariff, 1865 - 1888 (Emporia: Emporia Gazette Press, 1929), p. 78.

15Kalamazoo Gazette, February 23, 1872, January 12, 1872.
See also Grand Rapids Daily Times, September 20, 1870.

16"Michigan Platform."

wished to disseminate" at the public expense.17

Another example of
this extravagance was the construction of an elaborate stable at the
rear of the White House at a cost of $30,000. Opponents held that

the money for this project was taken illegally from funds appropriated
for the State Department and that "it had never been accounted for

and no record appeared regarding it."18

As economy measures, Reformers
frequently suggested the elimination of such expenditures and "the
dismissal of all unnecessary government officials and agents to

lighten the public burden."]9 Finally, the machinations of the
inscrutable Secretary of the Treasury, George S. Boutwell, were of
growing concern. He regularly "leaked" information concerning the
sales and purchases of gold and bonds by the government and changes

in interest rates on bonds to certain Grant men on Wall Street, such

20

as Henry Clews. These brokers were thus able to make “great fortunes

at the expense of the American people."21

 

17Michigan Argus, May 4, 1870. See also Marshall Democratic
Expounder, September 5, 1872.

18Michigan Argus, September 27, 1872.

19Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 10, 1872.

20Matthew Josephson, The Politicos (New York: Harcourt, Brace
and Co., 1938), p. 122; Earle Dudley Ross, The Liberal Republican Move-
ment (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1919), p. 185.

2lKalamazoo Gazette, September 27, 1872.

The Grant administration was heavily criticized, as well,
for its handling of foreign affairs. Senator Charles Sumner's
arraignment of the President's foreign policy received wide circula-
tion in Michigan. In it he contended that Grant "touched nothing he
did not muddle." After citing problems with Spain and Cuba he asked,

22

"When before in our history have we reached such bathos?" Particu-

larly upsetting to the Reformers and critics of Grant was his attitude

toward the Dominican Republic.23

The President apparently acted

under the influence of adventurers and capitalists who wanted to tap
the fabulous Dominican riches by annexing the Republic. Grant became
a booster of their cause and employed special executive agents to help
facilitate annexation. He pledged privately to use all his influence
in Congress to win approval of the plan. This presidential pledge
outraged his opponents and prompted one Michigan paper to write: "We
hope that the Senate will persist in its refusa1--not withstanding

the personal lobbying at its doors by President Grant-~to ratify the
treaty for the purchase of San Domingo."24

The national issue which captured the most attention of

Reformers and opponents of Republicanism in Michigan was that of

 

22Speech of Charles Sumner, May 31, 1872, bound in the
“Jenison Collection," Vol. 27, Michigan State Library, Lansing,
Michigan.

23Walter Lafeber, The New Empire (Ithaca: Cornell University
Press, 1963), pp. 38-39; Ross, Liberal Republican, pp. 9-10.

24Michigan Argus, April 1, 1870.

graft and corruption in the highest echelons of government. Critics
of the administration abhorred the detrimental effects of the "spoils
system“ and viewed the election of 1872 as a "struggle of the people
for honest government against cabals and rings."25
The general atmosphere of corruption and dishonesty
derided by Liberal Reformers and others had spawned a number of well
publicized scandals prior to the fall of 1872. The attempted corner—
ing of the gold market by Jay Gould and Jim Fisk with initial presi-
dential acquiescence or cooperation lent some credibility to charges

“26 The so-called

that the Republican leaders were "thieves.
Chorpening fraud was subjected to endless examination. The charge
was that Postmaster General Creswell "had attempted to defraud the
government of a vast sum of money." He purportedly approved the
payment of $443,000 to George Chorpening, a former mail contractor.
The claim was very old, dating back to service rendered prior to
1856, and grossly inflated. Assistant Postmaster General George
Earl, a close friend and associate of Creswell, resigned his position
to become Chorpening's attorney. He prosecuted the claim and won the
extraordinary concession from Creswell. To Reformers the whole

episode reeked of graft.27

 

25May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump;
Michiggp_Tribune, March 8, 1872.

26Kalamazoo Gazette, January 7, 1872.

 

27Blair's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political Speeches;"
Michigan Tribune, July 26, 1872.

The New York customs house fraud also aroused the ire of
Michigan opponents of the Republican Party. They charged that the
New York customs house was considered by the President and the
Secretary of the Treasury, "not as a department of the government
whose employees were appointed to faithfully collect the revenues,
but rather as an instrument to run the state and city government in
the interest of General Grant and his party." In addition, numerous
officers were under salary at the customs house who did nothing but
“blackmail honest and wealthy merchants by false charges of attempt-
ing to defraud the government." If payoffs were not obtained from
these merchants their goods would be seized and they would be put
out of business. A government official testifying before a Senate
investigation committee swore under oath that "the general order of
business at the New York customs house was so managed as to extort
unjust charges, that it was a nuisance, in short that it was
robbery."28

Another travesty fostered by the Republican Party, accord-
ing to critics, was the voting fraud. They believed that the
national administration aided and abetted illegal election maneuvers
in the various states to insure its maintenance in power. The
Pennsylvania frauds exemplified this charge. The opposition press in
Michigan claimed that "there was not a shadow of a doubt that the

Radicals' candidate John F. Hartranft [Republican gubernatorial

 

28Kalamazoo Gazette, February 23, 1872; Michigan Argus,
January 19, 1872.

 

10

candidate and close associate of Simon Cameron] carried his majority
by an organized system of fraud, by repeaters, ballot-box stuffing,
and forged or altered returns." In one Philadelphia ward, the
fifteenth, the four election judges certified that "the returns as
they made them up and signed them were subsequently altered."29

An additional issue of national scope which was tied to
corruption was that of government facilitation of the railroad
monopoly, through land grants and preferential treatment. E. 0. Ross
has said that "an anti-monopoly argument in which the opposition
could attack the administration effectively was that regarding abuses

in public land grants."3°

To the Reformers, the speech of Michigan
Republican Omar D. Conger in the House of Representatives, in June,
1870, epitomized the attitude that fostered government support of

such monopolies at the public expense. Conger maintained that "certain
cheapness and speed of loading, unloading, and transporting our sur-
plus products, merchandise, and manufactures over so vast a country

as ours is the foundation of national prosperity; and as far as the
financial condition of the country will permit, I think it is the

“31

duty of the government...to favor and further such a policy. A

 

29¥iEE19§flTAEHE§9 October 25, 1872; Michigan Tribune,
October 25, 872: Ka amazoo Gazette, October 4, 1872.

30

 

 

Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 168.

31Speech of Omar D. Conger, June 13, 1870, "Michigan
Political Speeches."

11

typical response to such a proposal was voiced by a leading Michigan
Liberal Republican, Duncan Stewart of Detroit. In a speech at a
Greeley-Brown ratification meeting in the summer of 1872, Stewart
queried: "Is it right that the Congress of the United States or
the President of the United States or anyone else should give away
pieces of land larger than countries in Europe...pieces of land as
large as the whole New England states...?" He then answered his own
question by saying: "No, every man who owns land must cultivate it.
I would like to see Jay Cooke cultivating a farm ten times as big as
New England and I would like to see Tom Scott as his plowman."
Stewart pleaded with his audience to "look at the public lands and
see how the public has been plundered and then decide that the land
belongs to the people and not to the government, and that it [the
government] has no more right to rob the people than a guardian has
to rob an orphan that is placed in its care."32
National party despotism constituted another major issue
for Reformers and opponents of Republicanism in Michigan. Reformers
held that leaders of the Republican Party were growing unresponsive
to the wishes and aspirations of the membership, and were prone to
the use of strong-arm tactics to insure support for their policies.
As one historian has said: "There was a bitter dislike of the
thoroughgoing Jacobin or Cromwellian spirit in Congress and in the

Army. Under the plea of loyalty and of conserving hard won victories,

 

32$tewart's speech, July 22, 1872, ibid.

12

conscientious Christian Republicans were called upon to support their.

party in whatever it did."33

This became increasingly difficult as
more and more evidence of dishonesty and wrong doing by Republican
leaders was uncovered. In July, 1872, a former Michigan Republican
congressman drew attention in a pro-Greeley speech to the party's
efforts to "ostracize anyone who dared utter a demand for reform."34
A Republican friend of Blair wrote that "there is a bitterness in
the manner of the Grant men toward all who venture an opinion adverse
to their own."35 And C. S. May stated that "if there were no other
reason for revolt, then party depotism would furnish one."36
Many sensitive Republicans were coming to abhor the tyranny
of the Radical election practice known as "waving of the bloody shirt."
A contemporary observer illustrated the Radical tendency to use this
tactic in speaking of Zachariah Chandler. He said that to Chandler

"37

"Democrats were copperheads and copperheads were rebels. The

speech of John Creswell in Jackson typified the bloody shirt charge.

 

33Henry Clyde Hubbart, The Older Middle West, 1840-1880
(New York: Russell & Russell, Inc., 1963); p. 243.

34Detroit Free Press, July 26, 1872.

35George W. Fish to Austin Blair, March 19, 1872, in the
Blair Papers, Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library,
Detroit, Michigan.

36May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.
See also Michigan Tribune, January 19, 1872.

37Henry A. Haigh, "Lansing in the Good Old Seventies,"
Michigan History, XIII (1929), p. 100.

13

He labeled Democrats as "renegades who had gone over to the enemy."38

At the heart of the despotism problem was the patronage
and power wielded by the "White House Ring" and a cabal of powerful
congressional Radicals. In the words of one Reformer, “the rank and
file Republicans are as powerless in their party as a flock of sheep.
They have no voice in it to control its policies or nominations.
They can vote for such men as Chandler and the like shall suffer to

be nominated. That is all they can do."39

Adding to the Reformers'
chagrin was their conviction that the government controlled by the
Radical oligarchy did not work for the people, but rather for the
party. Congress, they said, “looked not after the interests of the
people but after the interests of the party."40 As they saw it,
government had become its own vested interest.

The blame for party despotism and the seemingly ubiquitous
corruption and malfeasance in the federal government naturally was
concentrated upon the most visible of the national leaders: the
President, Vice President, and leading Radicals in Congress. This

placing of blame took the form of a multi-faceted attack on figures

such as Ulysses S. Grant, Henry Wilson, and Zachariah Chandler.

 

 

38Speech of John Creswell, August 1, 1872, "Jenison Collection,"
Vol. 27.

39May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

40

Michigan Argus, May 20, 1870.

14

One phase of this attack on individual Republican leaders
was launched from a puritanical position which proposed that govern-
ment officials must order their personal lives and habits according

to Christian morality.4]

Pious critics denounced the President as

a foul-mouthed, blasphemous drunk who led an "unChristian" life.
Chandler and others naturally came under similar attack. A pro-
Greeley Detroit editor described the Michigan Senator as a "drunkard
and a coarse, vulgar, ignorant man who was profane in conversation

and often times filthily obscene."42

One newspaper proposed that

"if God can forgive an unrepentant rebel and Chandler cannot, it is
only evidence of how far the latter stands from the path of Christian
duty and that he is in rebellion against the divine will."43 In a
sense, then, the personal morality of national figures identified
with the Republican administration was measured against Christian
teachings and found wanting. Reformers appealed to “Christian and
moral men" to recognize these figures for what they were--evi1,

self-centered, and morally and spiritually depraved men.44

 

4IWilmer C. Harris, Public Life of Zachariah Chandler,
(Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1917), p. 106.

42H. E. Baker to Brackley Shaw, December 28, 1870, in the
Shaw Papers, Michigan Historical Collections, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, Michigan. '

43Michigan Argus, February 9, 1872.

. 44Kalamazoo Gazette, October 16, 1872; Lansing Journal,
September 26, 1872.

15

Beyond such puritanical attacks, the leading national
Republicans were castigated individually on a more mundane plane for
a plethora of odious traits.

Grant came under fire for his ineptness, gift-taking,
nepotism, and cronyism. Reformers generally agreed that the sole
ground for the selection of Grant as President had been his military
record. They ridiculed the notion that a good general would make a
good chief executive. "It was evident," one said, "that General
Grant had no civil qualifications for the presidency as his whole
training had been military, and as he had never even taken interest

"45 Former

enough in public affairs to vote but once in his life.
Michigan governor Robert McClelland stated at a Greeley-Brown

ratification meeting that President Grant “certainly has never shown
any ability whatever to discharge the duties incumbent upon him from

"46

the position he occupies. The Liberal Reformers and their allies

obviously envisioned themselves engaged in a struggle for “effective
administration and against presidential incompetence and pretension."47
Grant's penchant for accepting expensive gifts from

influential people in business and government gave the advocates of

 

45May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

46
Speeches."

McClelland's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political

47May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

16

reform another opening for attack. The Lansing Journal cried that

"48 Grant's

"our President has an insatiable greed for gifts.
indiscretions in that regard made him vulnerable to some vitupera-
tive comparisons. One postulated that

Grant went into office poor. Tweed went into office poor.

Grant is rich. Tweed is rich. Grant claims that his

residences, farms, horses, etc. came from gifts. Tweed

claims that his speculations made him a millionaire. Grant

may be insensible to the shame of his gifts. Tweed may be

insensible to the shame of his speculations. The parallel

between the two notorious gentlemen is striking.49
Admittedly this is an extreme illustration of inferential character
assassination, but at the very least Liberal Reformers and Grant's
enemies maintained that such gift-taking was a manifestation of the
General's lack of judgment and of his unfitness for the presidency.

Grant left himself vulnerable to charges of nepotism

through his habit of appointing relatives to government positions.50
Further complicating matters was the fact that many of these rela-
tives disgraced their new offices. Michigan observers noted the
case of F. M. Lamper, a cousin of Grant who was appointed by the
President as a whiskey agent in Chicago. Lamper was subsequently

discovered mishandling the revenue and removed. Grant then put

 

48LansingJournal, September 5, 1872.

49Kalamazoo Gazette, January 5, 1872.

50Ibid., August 2, 1872. In an article entitled "Our Royal
Family" it was noted that no fewer than 22 members of the Grant clan
were government appointees. A similar article is in Michigan Tribune,
August 30, 1872.

 

 

 

 

 

ll. llllln‘flllllll

l7

Lamper in charge of a land office in the Washington Territory at a
salary of $4,000. "Cousin Lamper showed the family characteristics
by becoming a defaulter to the amount of $25,000." The only

question remaining in the mind of the Reformers was where Grant would

next appoint his cousin.51

Another case of nepotism that aroused
even more fury was that of the President's brother-in-law, James F.
Casey, who was appointed to the office of collector of the port of
New Orleans. In that position he not only embezzled funds but also
engaged in "offenses against the sovereignty of the State of
Louisiana." He did this by employing bribery, blackmail, and other
reprehensible tactics to acquire the support of state legislators
for measures that would politically and financially benefit himself
and the Republican organization in the state.52
Complementing the issue of nepotism was the issue of
“cronyism." Reformers noted that if one happened to be a friend of
Grant, or a friend of a friend, he stood a good chance of gaining a
political appointment regardless of hi§"past record or ability. An
example of this was the case of George K. Leet, a young army officer

who had been a member of Grant's staff during the war. Leet went to

New York with a letter from the President "seeking business" and

 

51Kalamazoo Gazette, January 12, 1872.

52
Speeches."

Blair's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political

l8

ended up in the lucrative general order business at the customs house
taking in thousands of dollars from wealthy merchants.53
The tentacles of such “cronyism” were in some instances
so pervasive as to extend to the next generation. A case in point
was that of H. C. Johnson, a close personal friend of Grant. Johnson's
son was trouble prone and among other things, he had forced himself
on a servant girl, served time in the house of refuge, engaged in
barroom brawls, and shot a man. Yet his father by virtue of his
friendship with the President had enough political and pecuniary
influence to bail him out of trouble every time. Ultimately, "the
young hopeful turned up as a lieutenant in the regular army."54
Charges of "cronyism" were many and infamous men such as
Orville E. Babcock and Horace Porter were linked to the White House
as a result.55
Henry Wilson, designated as Grant's running mate in 1872,
was the object of persistent complaints by Liberals and others about
his "Know Nothing" background. A "verification" was published in
Michigan that Wilson had indeed been elected to the Senate from

Massachusetts on the basis of "Know Nothing" support. This'Verifica-

tion" was attributed to J. P. Healy, a former law partner of Daniel

 

53Michigan Argus, February 9, 1872; Michigan Tribune, July

 

26, 1872.

54Michigan Argus, September 20, 1872.

55Josephson, Politicos, pp. 120-125.

19

Webster.56

In Detroit, the outspoken proponent of the Liberal
Republican cause, Duncan Stewart, stated colorfully that "Henry
Wilson walked through the doors of the Know Nothing lodge into the
Senate of the United States and never could have gotten there any
other way."57
Wilson's old speeches came back to haunt him as well. One
was circulated in which he had said that "foreigners had not the
sense of a Newfoundland dog...and were vile, filthy, degraded, idiotic

paupers and vagabonds."58

Obviously such revelations greatly dis-
turbed most immigrant groups and in Michigan they upset most
particularly the German community. In fact, this "element had in
large numbers been alienated from the administration and thus regarded
with much favor the new independent reform movement."59
Liberal Reformers spearheaded the demand for something to
which the Republicans only paid lip service--civil service reform.
Only this reform, they held, could eliminate the evils of the spoils

system and provide for government appointments on the basis of honesty,

 

56Marshall Democratic Expounder, April 29, 1872. See also
Michigan Tribune, September 13, 1872.

57
Speeches."

Stewart's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political

58Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 29, 1872.

59Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 166. See also Mark O.
Kistler, "The German Language Press in Michigan," Michigan History
XLIV (1960), pp. 307-309 and Lansing Journal, August 15, 1872.

 

20

ability, and efficiency. In their national convention at Cincinnati
the Liberal Republicans emphasized civil service reform as the most
important answer to the graft and corruption associated with the
Grant regime. In their platform they stated: "We regard thorough
reforms of the civil service as one of the most pressing necessities
of the hour. [We hold] that honesty, capacity, and fidelity consti-
tute the only valid claims to public employment [and demand] that the
offices of the government cease to be a matter of arbitrary favoritism
and patronage, and that public station become again a post of honor."60
In Michigan Charles S. May argued that "next to the great
need of reconciliation and final peace between North and South, is
the necessity for reform in the civil administration of the govern-
ment." In this connection he recalled the demand of the national
platform for a single term limitation on the presidency as a key to
effective reform. But the most vital prerequisite to the achievement
of the desired changes in the civil service was a change in govern-
mental leadership. "We must," May exhorted Michigan voters, "elect
honest and competent men to office in order to get real civil service
reform."6]

Thus, a number of issues of national scope constituted

"seeds of reform" in Michigan. These included the administration's

 

60Porter, National Platforms, p. 77.

61May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

21

intransigence toward the South, its abrogation of individual and
states' rights, its prodigal economic policies, its bungling and
avaricious moves in the sphere of foreign affairs, its handling of
public lands, the general tenor of corruption in national politics,
party despotism, and the personal morals, philosophies, and
practices of Republican leaders.

A number of other issues, more exclusively related to the
state political scene, emerged between 1870 and 1872. They too
became "seeds of reform."

Two of these issues centered upon proposed constitutional
amendments which the electorate of Michigan voted upon in 1870. One
dealt with public support of railroads and the other concerned in-
creasing the salaries of elected officials.

Of the two the railroad question drew greater attention,
debate, and concern. It stemmed from a railroad aid law passed by
the legislature in 1869 which enabled I'any township, city, or village
to pledge its aid, by loan or donation, to any chartered railroad

d."62 If a majority of the

company...for the construction of its roa
voters approved such aid, bonds would be issued. And, from that
point on it would be incumbent upon local authorities to "levy,

assess, and collect upon the taxable property a sufficient sum of

 

62Michigan, Acts of the Legislature, 1869, I, 89. For a
discussion of the railroad development in Michigan and the aid
problem see Edmund Calkins "Railroads of Michigan Since 1850,"
Michigan History, XIII (1929), pp. 5-25.

22

money to pay all bonds or interest upon the same as either the bonds

or the interest became due."63

This law was subsequently reviewed
by the state supreme court in May of 1870 and was declared unconsti-
tutional. The central principle of the majority decision was that
a tax "to be valid must be levied for a public purpose and to tax
a community for the benefit of a private corporation which proposed

"64 The

to construct a railroad was not a power of the legislature.
court decision led to a special session of the legislature which
convened at the end of June and drew up a resolution to submit to
the voters in November, a three-part constitutional amendment which
would allow such aid to railroads. The three sections of the pro-
posed amendment were: that the rates of state railroads be regulated
by the state legislature and that rate discriminations be disallowed,
that consolidation of parallel or competing lines be prohibited, and
that individual municipalities by citizen vote could issue bonds to
help pay for railroad construction.65
Because of the legislatures' refusal to accept the edict

of the court, the railroad issue and the principle of "taxation of

the public for private gain" became one of the main lines of attack

 

63Acts, 1869, I, 93.

64Harriette M. Dilla, The Politics of Michigan, 1865-1878,
Vol. XLVII, No. 1, Columbia Studies in History, Economics, andTPUBlic
Law (New York: Columbia University Press, 1912), p. 108.

65Ibid.. p. 110.

23

against the Republican Party in Michigan.66

The Michigan Argu§_de-
clared that "to issue bonds to help build a railroad is not legitimate
taxation, it is spoilation, and robbery without the highwayman's
excuse." It added that "the confiscation of a man's money for the
benefit of twenty men who are organized as a railroad company, whose
sole object is their private enrichment is utterly at war with the
Constitution of the United States and the State of Michigan."67
Another proposed amendment also resulted in heated contro-
versy. It provided increases in state and judicial salaries.
Obviously this proposal ran contrary to the growing demand by
Reformers and the public-at-large for greater frugality in govern-
ment and less taxes. It was perceived as a "salary grab" and as
later balloting would show was about as unpopular with Republicans
as with Democrats.68
A further issue which aroused the Reformers' ire in Michigan
was the virtually complete domination of state politics by Zachariah

Chandler of Detroit. Chandler's tyranny was resented by substantial

numbers of people within the Republican Party.69 A friend wrote to

 

661bid., p. 121.

67Michigan Argus, July 1, 1879. See also Detroit Free Press,
October 15, 1870.

680illa, Politics of Michigan, p. 120. Michigan Manual, 1871,
p. 246.

69Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 21.

24

Blair that "the best Republicans in our state know that the party is
controlled here by the dictator Chandler, a man who disgraces his
constituents instead of honoring them."7O
Much of Chandler's power stemmed from his control of the
federal patronage in the state which he dispensed through the head
of the Republican State Committee, Stephen Bingham. As one con-
temporary historian put it, "Stephen Bingham was the factotum of
the Chandler regime and potentate and dispenser of the political pap

and federal patronage in Michigan."71

In stressing the need for
civil service reform, Austin Blair pointed out that "Mr. Bingham 0f
the State Republican Central Committee issued a circular to all
postmasters and government officers, saying that they had been
assessed for political purposes and the money came in from all

n72

quarters. Chandler's control and manipulation of the patronage

was exacerbated by the fact that his "endorsement" was requisite for

gaining most significant elective offices in the state]3
Chandler was the leader of the so-called "Detroit Ring"

which was increasingly resented by non-Detroiters. An observer of

the Michigan legislature of 1871 noted the dissension on the part

 

70J. N. Frey to Austin Blair, April 11, 1872, Blair Papers.
See also George Fish to Blair, February 8, 1872, and J. F. Driggs t0
Blair, April 13,1872, ibid.

7lHaigh, "Lansing in the Seventies," p. 105.

72Saginaw Daily Courier, November 2, 1872.

73Marshall Democratic Expounder, April 4, 1872.

25

of the Republicans from the "out-state" areas who were "very bitter...
since Detroit had had both U. S. Senators the greater part of the

"74 This dis-

time since the state had been admitted to the union.
satisfaction was also apparent in the correspondence of Republicans.
Letters written to Blair alluded disparagingly to the "Detroit Ring"
and speculated on ways to break down "Detroit's supremacy."75
In a Kalamazoo speech, C. S. May called attention to the
futility of trying to reform the Republican Party in Michigan as
long as Chandler controlled it. And, he stated, "there is no way
to overthrow Chandler from within the party." The only answer to
the conundrum in May's view was to bolt the party and join the Liberal
Republican Movement.76
Because of the dominance of the state government by Radical
Republicans, a number of instances of partisan abuse occurred in the
legislature. The reapportionment of the congressional districts of
the state early in 1872 was a case much publicized by those demand-
ing reform. In the selection of the senate reapportionment committee,

Lieutenant Governor Morgan Bates appointed "thirteen Republicans and

of the Democratic strength he did not appoint a single one." The

 

74Louis M. Miller, "Reminiscences of the Michigan Legislature
of 1871," Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, XXXII (1902),

p. 432.

75ceorge P. Sanford to Austin Blair, February 3, 1872 and
March 9, 1872, and J. F. Driggs to Blair, April 13, 1872, Blair Papers.

76May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

26

Senate at the time was composed of twenty-six Republicans and six
Democrats. The Free Press stated that "when it came to appointing
a partisan committee, Morgan Bates, receiver of the United States
Land Office at Traverse City and Lieutenant Governor of the state

was without rival."77

In light of such shocking tactics dissident
Liberals and Democrats concluded that the Republicans effectively
gerrymandered the new districts to assure themselves of victory in
subsequent elections. Such unabashed and blatant political
opportunism contributed to the reform crusade.78
The state government was also wracked by allegations of
misconduct on the part of officials and departments. An illustra-
tion was found in complaints about the state financial policy which
"kept an average balance in the treasury of $750,000 for the benefit
of pet banks." A specific charge stipulated that as of October 22,
1872, the balance in the state treasury was $1,011,164.57 and this
unwarranted surplus was "fat plucking for the ring banks." The
essence of such charges was that excess monies in the treasury were
being lent at minimal interest to favored banks for their use. Thus,
the people of Michigan were in effect being taxed for the benefit of

the bankers and their Republican politician co-conspirators.79

 

77Detroit Free Press, March 19, 1872.

78Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 131. The act of reappor-
tionment was opposed by most Democrats in the legislature and by a
total of 17 Republicans.

79Michigan Argus, November 1, 1872; Michigan Tribune,
October 25, 1872.

27

A more spectacular scandal involved the impeachment of the
commissioner of the state land office, Charles A. Edmunds. The
Michigan House of Representatives sent to the Senate a list of
eleven charges against Edmunds "in support of its impeachment against
him for corrupt conduct in office and for crimes and misdemeanors."80

A number of the articles of indictment dealt directly with
Edmund's official duties. They stipulated that the commissioner had
conspired with fellow clerks in the land office to withhold from
public sale large tracts of land for the benefit of certain land
speculators and for their own personal enrichment. They further
charged that Edmunds and his clerks had bought lands from the land
office while employed there, in direct violation of the law, and
that they had engaged in the illegal purchase and sale of swamp
land script.8]

Other articles had to do with purported immoral acts by
the land commissioner not directly connected with his official duties.
One charged that Edmunds "had published and circulated an obscene
printed paper entitled Every Wednesday Night, containing impure,
scandalous, and obscene matters, language and descriptions...which

was a scandal in the community and tended to corrupt the morals of

youth and other good citizens of the state." Another contended that

 

80Michigan, Journal of the Senate, 1872, p. 6.

8'Ibic1.. pp. 7-10.

28

he had been drunk publicly on a number of occasions and that he flew
in the face of "laws of decency and morality by committing adultery
with certain females in Lansing and elsewhere." He had thus disgraced
his office and was unfit to hold it any longer.82
Ultimately, Edmunds was acquitted because a two-thirds vote

could not be obtained on the charges.83

But the damage had been done.
The accusations against the commissioner were widely circulated and
believed in Michigan. They represented everything that Reformers
stood against: dishonest and wasteful government, graft and fraud,
and immoral and unChristian actions. Certainly they helped to swell
the ranks of the fledgling reform movement in the state.84

The problem of political harassment also emerged as a
significant issue in the years from 1870 through 1872. Much of this
harassment was limited to verbal and written invective. The use of
the "bloody shirt" tactic to villify and discredit Democrats and the
attempts to intimidate Republican Reformers has already been noted.
Both of these tendencies were illustrated in the rabidly Republican
Adrian Times and Expositor. Columns which dealt with activities of
the Democrats were regularly headed "The Confederates" and those

that referred to the Liberal Republicans were entitled "The Left Wing."85

 

821bid.. pp. 11-13.

83"Michigan," Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia, XII (1872): P- 541°

84Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 132; Kalamazoo Gazette,
May 31, 1872.

85Adrian Times and Expositor, September 12, 1872.

29

Sometimes the acrimony extended beyond verbal or written
expression to physical abuse. On occasion, opponents tried to break
up Liberal gatherings prior to the election of 1872. At one such
meeting in Cass County, a group of Radical rowdies put a donkey into
the hall where the featured speaker was commencing his address. The
frightened animal ran around the room braying loudly and effectively
disrupted the proceedings. "This outrageous attempt of the Grantites
to prevent free speech," said the Kalamazoo Gazette, "though in
accordance with their policy of hate, will cost them some votes in
Cass County."86

The matters discussed above are representative of the issues
of state scope which Liberal Reformers and their political allies
exploited to further their cause and undermine the corrupt, entrenched,
Republican political machine.

At the local level of government and politics a plethora
of problems related to Republicanism were manifest.

Local officials were the subject of charges of ineptness,
corruption, and nepotism. The case of Sheriff Lymon M. Gates of
Kalamazoo County is typical. Gates was an avowed Radical Republican
who used his position to undermine the political opposition and con-
solidate Republican power in the county. His ineptness sometimes

appeared to be masked intimidation of local citizens who opposed him

 

86Kalamazoo Gazette, November l, 1872.

3O

politically. The local paper cited the case of Samuel Tift who was
shot at by the sheriff while driving along the road with his own
wagon and team. Gates subsequently stated that he was under the
impression that the horses were stolen. The sheriff and his family
also exemplified at the local level the kind of Grantite nepotism
and string-pulling that was so abhorrent to Reformers. Gates
appointed his brother as a deputy sheriff and made room on the
public payroll for his minor son as a turnkey in the jail. Further,
the Gates clan owned a hotel in town and family members used their
positions, influence, and time to drum up tourist business at the
establishment.87
The county board of supervisors was a local governmental
unit that came under fire at times. The Kalamazoo Gazette expounded
upon the supervisors' "haste to gerrymander the county to secure the
interest of a faction," and tersely concluded that:
It is a burning shame that the supervisors of our county...
should so far violate the law, common decency and even common
honesty as to perpetrate such a fraud upon their neighbors and
fellow citizens and all for no other reason than a mere con-
temptible little party advantage. It shows the deep-seated

dishonesty that preambulates every part of the Republican
Party.88

 

87Ibid. Sworn affadavits by Kalamazoo constables were pub-
lished which indicated that Gates had offered one man the position of
deputy sheriff to deliver the vote of his German friends, and had
offered to pay other men to increase arrests and lodgings in his jail.

88Ibid., January 19, 1872.

31

In the municipalities, the city council was often the
target of criticism. In Detroit, for instance, the men appointed
by the council to take the census of births and deaths in the city
were all Radical Republicans who canvassed at public expense asking
not only questions relevant to the census but many of political
relevance too. They inquired as to how many voters resided at given
addresses and even as to how they cast their ballots in past elections.
These men were paid out of the public treasury and used materials
purchased with public funds. The Detroit Free Press "objected to
men under the cloak of being appointed to take a census of births
and deaths endeavoring by categorical questions to obtain political
information," and suggested "that when the Radicals desire to make
a political canvas, it should be done at their own expense and not
saddled on the city."89

These, then, are a few examples of the types of local
issues that received attention by Liberal Reformers and other
enemies of the regular Republican Party in Michigan from 1870 through
1872.

These years were significant as well, because of the appear-
ance of some early manifestations of Reform strength in the state.
It was becoming clear that the disaffection with the Republican

Party over the issues just enumerated was being translated into

political results. The emergent political impact of the Reform

 

89Detroit Free Press, March 22, 1872.

32

cause can best be seen in the voting results of the state election

of 1870, the defeat of John F. Driggs for Congress, and the rejection
of the proposed constitutional amendments to aid railroads and raise
the salaries of state officials and judges.

In analyzing the balloting of 1870, Harriette M. Dilla
claimed that the election "marked the beginning of a reform movement
which was to attain a tremendous importance four years later."90
Her declaration was based in part upon the steady decline of the
Republican vote in the gubernatorial contests after 1866. In that
election, the Republican candidate, Henry H. Crapo, received 96,746

91

votes to 67,708 for his Democratic opponent. This gave Crapo, who

identified strongly with congressional Radicals, the greatest plur-

ality ever afforded a gubernatorial candidate in the state up to that

92

time. And all six congressmen from Michigan chosen that year were

Republicans. In 1868 the vote for Republican Henry P. Baldwin for

93 Thus,

governor was 128,051 and that for the opposition was 97,290.
the Republican Party had slipped, from garnering almost 59 per cent

of the vote in 1866 to somewhat more than 56 per cent in 1868. By

 

9°0i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 119.

 

9lMichigan Manual, 1869, p. 230.

92Willis F. Dunbar, Michigan: A History of the Wolverine
State (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1965), p. 466.

93Michigan Manual, 1871, p. 245.

 

33

1870 the Republicans got only 53.8 per cent of the votes,94 with a
101,031 count for Baldwin compared to a vote of 84,363 for the

Democrat Charles C. Comstock.95

In that same year came a significant

diminution of the Republican victory margin in all the congressional

elections of the state. In the first district the margin was less

than one thousand, and in the fifth district it was a razor-thin

279 votes. In the sixth district, the Republicans not only lost the

seat but realized a total vote drop of nearly 5,000 from the previous

election. In 1868 the Republican nominee had polled 20,115 votes to

16,720 for the Democrat. But in 1870 the Democrats won with a

count of 16,618 compared to the Republicans' 14,879.96
The growing concern over Republican corruption was best

illustrated in the defeat of two-term congressman, John F. Driggs,

in the sixth district. As noted above, the Republican Randolph

Strickland had easily carried the district in 1868 by over 3,000

votes, but two years later Driggs lost it by about 2,000 votes to

the Democrat.Jabez G. Sutherland. By 1870, John Driggs was so tainted

with corruption that he was being denounced by some members of his

own party as well as by the Democrats.

Many of the charges levelled against Driggs stemmed from

his previous activities in Congress. One of these held that he had

 

940i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 119.

 

95Michigan Manual, 1871, p. 245.

 

96M" ppo 247: 250: 251.

34

accepted a bribe to appoint a non-resident of his district to the

military academy at West Point.97

A more serious and more publicized
charge related to Driggs' role in the Isabella County land fraud.
The congressman reportedly accepted a $5,000 payment from speculators
to procure legislation which would allow the sale of Indian reserva-
tion lands to private lumber interests. Such procurement, according
to the charge of the United States district attorney, was achieved
by "bribery, by impositions, and by fraudulent means."98
Because of the substantive nature of the charges against
Driggs, a number of reform-minded Republicans resorted to an action
which foreshadowed the Liberal Republicans' effort of 1872. They
held a convention at St. Johns in Clinton County which repudiated

99 The bolt was applauded

Driggs as candidate for Congress in 1870.

by the independent Grand Rapids Daily Times as a protest against

party corruption and proscriptiveness. It was also compared favorably

to the simultaneous bolt of Liberal Republicans in Missouri.100
Despite some reservations, the regular party convention

confirmed his candidacy with the nomination. Opponents then charged

that Driggs through his agents had offered bribes to the members of

 

970i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 117.

98Detroit Free Press, October 22, 23, 26, November 2, 1870.

 

990i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 116.

100Grand Rapids Daily Times. September 30. 1872-

35

the nominating convention to cast their ballots for him.]01

Ultimately
it was left to the voters to administer a resounding defeat to this
tarnished office-seeker.

Further indication of the growing desire for change and
reform in Michigan is found in the fate of two of the constitutional
amendments presented to the voters in 1870. The railroad aid amend-
ment, as already shown, was divided into three sections. The first
two, which called for the regulation of rates and the elimination of
rate discriminations by the state legislature and the prohibition
of the consolidation of competing lines were overwhelmingly approved.
The affirmative plurality was 27,205 for the first section and
25,718 for the second. The third section which provided for public
aid for the construction of railroads was soundly rejected by a

margin of 28,375 ballots.102

These results revealed a pattern of
selective voting and a real concern for the control of the much
criticized railroad monopoly. Michigan voters also turned down the
"salary grab" amendment, which would have increased judicial and

state salaries, by a plurality of 32,803.103 Obviously the electorate

was becoming more concerned about frugal, effective, and honest

 

 

 

government.
1O'0i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 117.
102Michigan Manual, 1871, p. 246.
103

Ibid.

36

The period from 1870 through 1872 was truly a "seedtime
for reform." Issues of national, state, and local scope emerged
to crystallize resentment against entrenched Republicanism and to
create an impetus for reform. And, the evidence indicates that
the desire for reform was beginning to be translated into concrete
political actions which would contribute to the rise of the Liberal

Republican movement in Michigan.

CHAPTER II
LIBERAL REPUBLICANISM IN MICHIGAN

By the beginning of 1872 in Michigan, "there was manifested
a growing discontent with the management and policies of the Republi-
can Party and a marked tendency toward independent action."1 Many
long-time Republicans agreed with the sentiment of attorney E. L.
Koon of Hillsdale, who proposed to Blair that "it may be necessary
to cut the cords [of the Republican Party] for it does seem that
they are being drawn pretty tight by the men running the machine.
Political slavery is the very worst kind and sometimes becomes
unbearable."2

The invitation to engage in an independent effort came
from the "only existing official Liberal organization, that in
Missouri." On January 24, 1872, a state Liberal convention had
been convened at Jefferson City. The resolutions drawn up at that

convention included those demanding universal amnesty, reform of

the tariff and civil service, and a limitation upon the power of

 

1Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 21.

2E. L. Koon to Austin Blair, February 24, 1872, Blair
Papers. See also Eugene Rowlson to Blair, June 22, 1872; J. N.
Frey to Blair, April 11, 1872; H. Wright to Blair, July 5, 1872;
and V. A. Saph to Blair, July 6, 1872, ibid.

37

38

the federal government to interfere with the rights of the states.
A call was issued to "all Republicans desirous of aiding in securing
such reforms," to gather for a national convention on May 1, 1872 at
Cincinnati, Ohio.3
The response to the Missouri convention was warm among
those in Michigan most frustrated with the Republican administration.
The sympathetic Michigan press described the affair most favorably
in terms of size, representativeness and enthusiasm. It was claimed
that so many people flocked to Jefferson City that all the local
hotels and resorts were filled to overflowing. The convention
itself was reported to be “one of the largest ever assembled in the
state." The makeup of the convention was representative not only
of the Liberal faction in Missouri but of many other places as well.
"Several prominent gentlemen were in attendance from other states"
including Tennessee, Ohio, and New Jersey. The participants per-
ceived themselves to be involved in a "grand and noble work" and
enthusiasm ran very high. The reading of the platform "called forth
repeated and very enthusiastic applause and a general storm of cheers
followed the close." The hope was expressed by those in attendance,
I'for the inauguration of a movement which would be supported by the
majority of American people in the interest of reform and true

Republicanism." The convention was thus viewed in Michigan as a

 

3Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 51-52.

39

most important step toward "insuring the end of the corruption and
unconstitutional usurpations of the Grant administration."4
The propitious coverage of the Missouri convention was
accompanied by an attitude of hopeful optimism toward the call for
a national convention. That call, advocated by the "ablest and best
men of the country," was seen as a crucial act in the expansion of
the Liberal Republican Movement."5 A paper signed by leading
Detroit Republicans, including several prominent Germans was circu-
lated in Michigan ardently "accepting the invitation of the Liberal
Republicans of Missouri to be represented at the Cincinnati Con-

vention."6

Lansing businessman and newspaper publisher George P.
Sanford wrote to Blair that "the people are in earnest for a
thorough-going reform of the administrative abuses of this [Grant]
government.... If the choice lies between the continuation of this
administration and coalition under Trumbull, Greeley, Cox, Davis or
any other good man, the people will speak next fall in tones that

"7

will penetrate even the profound stupidity of Chandler. In Mason,

 

4Detroit Free Press, January 25, 1872; Saginaw Daily
Courier, January 25, 1872. Austin Blair of Michigan receTVed a
personal invitation to Cincinnati from a committee of leading
Liberal Republicans. William Cullen Bryant, Jacob D. Cox and
Carl Schurz to Blair, June 6, 1872, Blair Papers.

 

5Niles Democrat, March 30, 1872; Ross, Liberal Republican,

 

p. 55.

6Marshall Democratic Expounder, April 18, 1872.

7George P. Sanford to Austin Blair, February 3, 1872,
Blair Papers.

40

newspaper editor 0. B. Harrington said, "I am awaiting...the
Cincinnati convention with some interest. The right man on a good
platform would reduce the Grant stock to the condition of Confederate

bonds."8

Practically all discontented Republicans in the state be-
lieved that the proposed Cincinnati convention was "pregnant with
meaning."9 "The ripple started by the Liberal Republicans of
Missouri was beginning to be felt...in Michigan."10
The Cooper Institute meeting of April 12, 1872, another
milestone in the early organization of the Liberal Republican party,
was celebrated warmly by many in Michigan. It was described in some
of the state's papers as "an imposing affair" and "the largest
political meeting ever held in New York City." Thousands, reportedly,
were turned away from the jam-packed hall. The vast gathering, in-
cluding many men "prominent in political and social clubs," was
addressed by such "distinguished statesmen of the Republic" as Lyman
Trumbull and Carl Schurz. The enthusiasm of those privileged to hear

the speakers was "unbounded."n

 

80. B. Harrington to Austin Blair, March 24, 1872, ibid.

90. s. Upton to Austin Blair, February 12, 1872, ibid.

'OH. 0. Hall to Austin Blair, April 5, 1872, ibid.

HKalamazoo Gazette, April 19, 1872; Detroit Free Press,
April 13, 1872; Saginaw Daily Courier, April 16, 1872.

41

Such zealous reporting of the event involved very optimistic
conclusions about the potential of the fledgling Liberal Republican
drive. In light of the "vast turn out" some reporters believed that
"the people were alive to the new movement, inaugurating, as it

WOUId. reform in all branches of government."12

A statement by the
Kalamazoo Gazette best summed up the impact of the Cooper Institute
experience on hopeful Reformers in Michigan. "It begins to look,"
contended the paper, "like the days of this corrupt [Grant] adminis-
tration are numbered. Cincinnati is coming up. The Liberal Republi-
cans are in earnest, they mean business."13
A few days after the Cooper Institute meeting the process
of selecting delegates to attend the Cincinnati convention was
initiated in Michigan by a group of well-known Republicans. The
group led by Duncan Stewart of Detroit, a locally famous Scotsman
and entrepreneur, issued a public call for a meeting to be held at
the Biddle House in Detroit on Thursday evening, April 18, 1872. The
purpose of the meeting was to discuss the method for "securing a
proper representation at the Cincinnati Convention." This call was
signed by such prominent citizens as Stewart and Charles Endicott
of Detroit; J. 8. Ten Eyck, George P. Sanford, and George House of

Lansing; and Osmond Tower of Ionia.14

 

12Saginaw Daily Courier, April 16, 1872.

13Kalamazoo Gazette, April 19, 1872.

145aginaw Daily Courier, April 17, April 18, 1872.

42

The method for choosing delegates to Cincinnati was
dictated to a great extent by the late date. To arrange a state
convention for that purpose, with less than two weeks remaining
prior to the opening of the Cincinnati convention, seemed infeasible.
Hence, the Detroit conference recommended "that each town, city, and
county send delegates who should meet there [in Cincinnati],
organize, and appoint such committees and take such action as would
be necessary to represent the state."15

In accordance with the Detroit directive, groups of
Liberal Republicans in Michigan issued clarion calls for meetings to
select delegates. Typical of these was one printed by the German
Republican newspaper, Zeitung, which declared that "the time for
action has come. Throughout the whole land people are rising in
their majesty to root out corruption. Reform has been attempted in
the now existing dominant political party, to no avail.... The
people are [therefore] on the eve of creating a new party to achieve
reform and the beautiful city of Cincinnati shall be the birth place.
The flourishing Saginaw Valley should be represented there."16

The means of selecting delegates at the local level varied.
In some cases a delegation was appointed by the local Liberal Republi-

17

can committee. In others people simply volunteered on an individual

 

ISDilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 135.

16Saginaw Dai]y_Courier, April 19, 1872.

 

'7Ibid., April 21, 1872.

43

basis to attend the national convention.18 Actually, though, the
invitation to go to Cincinnati was open to all Republicans who
opposed the Grant regime and a large attendance was greatly desired.19
During the pre-convention period, extensive correspondence
occurred among leading Michigan Republicans with liberal leanings.20
In the exchange of letters, the men who were to form the vanguard of
the state Liberal Republican movement attempted both to ascertain
each others feelings about Cincinnati, and to persuade one another
to support the movement. In correspondence with C. S. May of Kalama-
zoo, Austin Blair discussed the "war on Grant and the military ring
[which] waxes hotter and hotter every day." He noted that "Trumbull,
Schurz. and Sumner seem determined to take their friends and march

off in a body," and he wondered about the implications.21

Along with
others such as St. Joseph railroad builder A. H. Morrison and George
Sanford, May in turn wrote to Blair "offering advice and asking his

position concerning the Liberal Republican movement."22 J. P. Thompson

 

18Howard P. Nash, Third Parties in American Politics
(Washington: Public Affairs Press, 1959), p. 110.

'90i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 136.

20Robert Charles Harris, "Austin Blair of Michigan: A
Political Biography " (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department
of History, Michigan State University, 1969), p. 241.

21Austin Blair to Charles S. May, March 9, 1872, in the May
Papers, Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library, Detroit,
Michigan.

22Harris, "Blair," p. 243.

44

of Grand Rapids, an editor and noted agriculturalist, invited Blair
to appear at a mass rally called to appoint delegates to Cincinnati
and to organize a Liberal Republican Club. He tried to persuade
Blair to commit himself publically by saying: "Governor, we ask you
to lead us in this movement. Our city and county, and congressional
district are ripe for it. With you as our leader we can carry this
state.“23

As a result of the Detroit meeting and directive, of the
local gatherings around the state, and of the extensive correspondence
between leading Liberal Republicans, a semblance of organization be-
gan to emerge which would be further enhanced by developments at
Cincinnati.

Most of the Michigan men arrived in the Ohio city on the
morning of April 30, 1872. They held an impromptu meeting at the
Spencer House in the late morning, and decided that Michigan would
support Charles Francis Adams for president. As a Massachusetts
congressman and son of former president, John Quincy Adams, he
possessed the necessary political credentials and impeccable moral
character. A few of those present voiced their intention of support-

ing Austin Blair for the vice-presidential post.24

 

23J.P. Thompson to Austin Blair, April 19, 1872, Blair

Papers.

24Port Huron Daily Times, May 1, 1872.

45

A second and more significant conference convened at the
Spencer House at 2:30 that afternoon. Approximately forty Michi-

25 In accordance with the decision of the

ganders were present.
convention organizers, an official delegation was selected, composed
of twice as many members as the state had senators and representa-

tives in Congress.26

This meant that Michigan's delegation would
have twenty-two members, based on nine representatives and two
senators. Saginaw was well represented on the delegation. Chauncy
W. Wisner, a lawyer and active local politician, was chosen chair-
man and Claude Beirele, owner of the German paper Zeitung, was
designated the secretary. After the selection of the delegation, a
resolution was proposed and passed that the delegation should vote

as a unit. Next, a state central committee was picked to take charge
of the canvass in Michigan. This was comprised of one member from
each of the state's congressional districts and Detroit industrialist
and civic leader Frederick Carlisle was named chairman. Finally,
after a debate on the balloting for president and a reaffirmation

that Michigan would vote for Adams with former Ohio Governor Jacob

Dolson Cox for vice-president, the meeting adjourned.27

Ibid.

26Mash, Third Parties, p. 110.

27Marshall Democratic Expounder, May 2, 1872; Port Huron
Daily Times, May 1, 1872.

46

At noon on May 1, 1872, Colonal Grosvenor of Missouri and
Stanley Matthews of Ohio officially opened the convention. These
men "set forth the short-comings of the [Grant] administration and
the responsibilities of the delegates in the usual style."28
On the following day several members of the Michigan
delegation were selected for service on convention committees. M.
Mansfield (third district) was named to the committee on credentials;
J. P. Thompson (fourth district) to the platform committee; Otto
Starck (first district) to the committee on organization; and W. S.
Maynard (third district) to the committee on rules. The convention
also designated 0. B. Clark (third district) of Michigan as one of
the vice-presidents.29
On the second day the convention adopted a rule providing
for individual voting as opposed to unit voting. This rule negated
the decision of the Michiganders at their meeting of April 30th:
however, most of the state delegation did vote together on the
various ballots for president, and fragmentation was kept to a
minimum.30
The platform was adopted unanimously on the morning of

May 3rd. It included calls for ending the animosities of the war,

for restoring full civil and political rights to individuals and

 

28Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 91.

29Proceedipgs of the Liberal Republican Convention, in the
Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library, Detroit,
Michigan, p. 6.

30Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 91.

47

states, for hard money, fair taxation, limitation of land grants to
actual settlers, and for a return to honest, frugal, and efficient
government. It was non-committal on the tariff, leaving the deter-
mination of that issue "up to the people."31

At this juncture the convention proceeded to its crowning

work, the naming of the candidates to lead the new movement."32

In
the balloting the Michigan delegates split their votes unevenly
between Adams and the erratic editor of the New York Tribune, Horace
Greeley. 0n the first ballot Adams gained an easy margin of 56
votes over Greeley, the Michigan vote being 18 for the former and

4 for the latter. After those results were tabulated, B. Gratz
Brown, Missouri Reformer, withdrew from the contest and many of his
votes were switched over to Greeley, who then captured a two vote
plurality on the second ballot. Strangely enough, just when Greeley
surged ahead, the entire 22 Michigan votes were cast for Adams. 0n
the sixth and final vote the Michigan tabulation was 20 for Adams
and 2 for Greeley. Before the results of the sixth ballot were
announced, however, there occurred a veritable stampede to Greeley,
who consequently ended up the victor with a total of 482 votes to

187 for Adams.33

 

3lProceedipgs, p. 2.

32Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 96.

33
pp. 97-100.

Proceedings, pp. 21-29; Ross, Liberal Republican,

48

The selection of a vice-president required only two ballots.
On the first, Michigan delegates divided between several different
choices with Governor Gilbert C. Walker of Virginia, George W.
Julian of Indiana, Senator Lymon Trumbull of Illinois, Senator T. W.
Tipton of Nebraska, B. Gratz Brown and J. 0. Cox all getting votes.
Trumbull and Cox subsequently withdrew from the race and Brown won
easily, with Michigan's vote on the second and final ballot a solid
22 for Brown.34

Before the men at Cincinnati disbanded they elected a
Liberal Republican National Executive Committee and tapped a Michigan
delegate, D. E. Corbitt of the fifth district, for membership.35

Several leading Liberal Republicans in Michigan whole-
heartedly endorsed the Cincinnati Platform and the nomination of
Greeley. Blair was pleased. Of the platform, he said, “the con-
vention spoke my thoughts entirely." And he "enthusiastically

36

approved“ Greeley's nomination. "We have a candidate,“ he said,

h."37

"who proposes to make peace by holding out the olive branc He

lauded Greeley as a defender of individual and states rights, a

 

34Proceedings, pp. 30-31; Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 100.

35Detroit Free Press, May 4, 1872.

36Harris, "Blair," p. 244.

37
Speeches."

Blair's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political

49

tenacious yet sensitive fighter for principle, and a charitable man
who acted in a wise and generous manner when he provided bail for

the imprisoned Jefferson Davis.38

C. S. May believed both Greeley
and Brown to be among "the earliest and best Republicans in the
country." He described them as honest, trustworthy, and "eminently
representative Republicans standing on a Republican platform."39
Duncan Stewart saw Greeley as a "man of the people" and the platform
as an instrument providing for the "return of government to the
people."40
Of the Michigan Republicans who stood ready to sacrifice
for reform, George C. Worth was representative. A circuit court
commissioner from Hastings, he stated: "I am conscientiously in
favor of the Cincinnati platform and its candidates, and have made
no secret about my preferences. I am ready to resign my county
office and to cast my lot with the Liberal Republican movement...
come what may I am disposed to stand or fall with...the movement and
am willing to risk all I have upon the issue."41

There were other Republican Liberals, however, who were not

at all euphoric about the nomination of Horace Greeley. "While I

 

38Ibid.

39May's speech, September 27, 1872, Speeches of the Stump.

40Stewart's speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political
Speeches." See also A. H. Morrison to Blair, May 22, 1872 and George
H. Murdock to Blair, June 24, 1872, Blair Papers.

4'aeorge 0. worth to Austin Blair, May 12, 1872, Blair

Papers.

50

sympathize most heartily with the principles underlying the Cincinnati

movement" one wrote, "I am by no means enthusiastic over the results

"42

[nomination] of the late convention. Another theorized that

"Uncle Horace is much the strongest man south of the Mason Dixon line
but Adams or Trumbull would have [been] stronger in Michigan."43 A
third said, "I have much confidence in Mr. Greeley's honesty and
good intentions but he is unfortunately a visionary."44
A large segment of the Liberal support in Michigan was

comprised of Germans, and they were alienated by the choice of

Greeley. In fact, Carl Schurz, one of the major architects of the
Liberal movement, believed that "the great mass of Germans who had
formed such a strong element among the Liberals, were entirely

45

alienated and doubted if even he could rally them again." The

Germans apparently were unahppy with Greeley because of his support
of protection and abstinence and would have preferred either their

countryman Schurz or Charles Francis Adams as a candidate.46

 

42

Edwin Fleming to Austin Blair, May 20, 1872, ib d.

i
43S. S. Lacey to Austin Blair, May 16, 1872, ibid.

44Horatio Pratt to Austin Blair, June 25, 1872, ibid.

45Ross, Liberal Republican, pp. lO8-109.

51

Despite their "bitter disappointment," Grant and Wilson

were more objectionable than Greeley to many of them.47

Henry Wilson
had been a notorious "Know Nothing" back in Massachusetts and was

thus despised by the Germans. Excerpts from his speeches appeared

in Michigan papers aimed at securing German support for the Liberal
ticket. One of these quoted Wilson calling Germans "lop-eared, wide
mouthed, mullet headed Dutchmen just up from some hut in the land of
Kraut, with foam of beer still sticking in their horse-tail whiskers
and their breath smelling of garlic and onions, enough to kill a

white man at 300 yards."48 Further, the Grant Administration was
resented because of "its sale of arms to the French during the war
between that power and the Fatherland."49 Eventually most Germans
decided to "follow the lead of their great countryman and distinguished
orator and statesman, Carl Schurz, and pledge themselves to vote in
the interests of reconciliation and honest government for Greeley and
Brown." And by the end of July of 1872, the liberal Lansing Journal
claimed that "six of the seven German newspapers in Michigan supported
Greeley and the Germans of the state were for him in about the same

ratio."50

 

47Hubbart, Middle West, p. 252.

48Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 29, 1872.

49Lansing Journal, August 15, 1872.

5°Ibid., August 15, July 25, 1872. In Detroit all three
German newspapers were anti-Grant with the Abend Post most strongly
pro-Greeley. That paper was owned by Augustharxhausen, a close per-
sonal friend of Carl Schurz, who usually shared Schurz's views.

Kistler, "German Press," pp. 307-309.

52

The Democrats of the state were very supportive of the
Cincinnati platform. The platform demand "that states should be
secure in their rights under the constitution, and that the
centralizing encroachmentsof the federal government should be
checked, was identical with that of the Democracy." The Democrats
claimed that the platform was one "we could have made ourselves."
They believed that it was "broad enough for all true lovers of
freedom, equality, and constitutional liberty to stand upon.“5]

On the Greeley nomination, most Democrats at first were
either noncommittal or vehemently opposed. One view was that
Greeley was an inconsistent fellow who did not generally inspire
much confidence and cooperation, but he was for amnesty, equal
rights, and had the support of Negroes and laborers.) Thus, either
endorsement or condemnation of him was to be "withheld until the

"52 The other view was that

feelings of the people were known.
Greeley was a supremely "egotistical, vain, foolish, and nervous
man...who as president would be exposed and succumb to wild and
unwise perversions of the practice and theories of government."
This view argued that the only thing Horace had ever been consistent

on in his life was his "hatred of the Democratic Party." Part of

the pique manifested in such an assessment was explained by the

leetrpitFree Press, May 4, May 25, 1872; Saginaw Daily

Courier, May 7, 1872.

52Saginaw Daily Courier, May 4, 1872.

53

fact that the Liberal Republicans had "contemptuously spurned the
Democrats from their convention" and were therefore to be considered
as "enemies of the Democratic Party."53
It is clear that the decision of many Republicans and
Democrats to support Horace Greeley hinged upon the outcome of the
Democratic convention at Baltimore. A typical Republican sentiment
was expressed by J. P. Heinshaw of Brooklyn, Michigan, who wrote:
"I will no longer support Mr. Grant and if the Democracy...shou1d
endorse Mr. Greeley and the Cincinnati platform, I feel much inclined
to...."54 Heinshaw's inclination became reality. A Liberal Republi-
can paper noted a veritable "stampede of Republicans to Greeley...

"55 Some

since the Cincinnati nomination was ratified at Baltimore.
Democrats, who had been recalcitrant towards Greeley, changed their

minds after Baltimore. The once alienated Free Press believed it

 

"to be the duty of the Democracy and of the Democratic organs to
support the nominations made by the Democratic Convention...."56
The Liberal RepubliCans held an early organizational

meeting in Lansing on July 2, 1872. This gathering occurred in the

 

53Detroit Free Press, May 12, May 16, 1872. Some of the
irreconcilable Democrats led an abortive "straight Democratic" move-
ment which held a convention in Jackson on September 27, 1872.
Robert Bolt, Donald Dickinson (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.,
1970), p. 15. Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 142.

 

54J. P. Heinshaw to Austin Blair, June 24, 1872. See also
Alpheus Williams to Blair, May 27, 1872, Blair Papers.

55LansingJournal, August 1, 1872.

56Detroit Free Press, July 14, 1872.

 

54

senate chambers of the state capitol and was attended by fifty to

sixty leading Liberal Republicans. Speeches were made by such

notables as Austin Blair of Jackson, General George Inness of Grand

Rapids, and Nelson B. Jones the socially prominent real estate

and insurance dealer of Lansing. Two major items of business were

transacted at the meeting. First a Liberal Republican Executive

Committee was established to complement the Liberal Republican State

Central Committee which had been set up at Cincinnati. This

Executive Committee consisted of Amos Root from Jackson, A. H.

Morrison from St. Joseph, George G. Briggs from Grand Rapids, Osmond

Tower from Ionia, and Perry Joslin from Saginaw. The second order

of business was to call a mass convention in Jackson on the 25th of

July. The call was directed to all Liberal Republicans of Michigan

and to all who were in "sympathy with them," to gather at Jackson "to

ratify the nomination of Greeley and Brown, and to endorse the plat-

form adopted by the Liberal Republican mass convention of Cincinnati."57
The Jackson meeting was significant for a number of reasons.

First, it was representative of the many Greeley-Brown ratification

meetings which were held in various cities across the state and consti-

tuted a major element in the Liberal Republican campaign. Second, it

witnessed the creation of an official platform for the Liberal Republi-

cans in Michigan. Third, it resulted in a reorganization of the

 

57Saginaw Daily Courier, July 3, 1872; Grand Rapids Daily
Times, July 21, 1872.

55

upper echelons of the Liberal Republican hierarchy, and finally it
laid out the "blueprint" for fusion with the Democrats during the
campaign of 1872.

In many ways the event at Jackson was a prototype of an
important campaign tool, the mass ratification rally. The rally
was designed to stir up interest and enthusiasm in the Liberal
cause by attracting large crowds and maximum coverage in the press.
The Jackson affair was attended by approximately 5,000 people from
all parts of the state. Some came in delegations and others singly.
A number of bands from surrounding towns were brought in and they
provided a continuous display of marching and supply of patriotic
music. The spirit generated by the music was further heightened by
the firing of guns and cannons. The town and its buildings were
amply draped with bunting and streamers and large American flags
were displayed everywhere. The meeting itself was held in an open
square at the corner of Main and Jackson streets in front of the
court house. There, a special elevated speakers' platform had been
constructed and decorated with "green boughs of tamarack." Over the
platform, hanging between two ornate columns, was a life-sized por-
trait of Horace Greeley.58

At the proper time,-those assembled selected officers and

committees for the meeting. By popular acclaim, they chose former

 

58Saginaw Daily Courier, July 26, 1872; Detroit Free Press,
July 26, 1872.

56

Governor Austin Blair to preside over the event as "president of the
day" and appointed nine vice-presidents, one from each congressional
district. In addition, they selected three secretaries and a
committee on resolutions.

Blair called the meeting to order and a number of individuals
proceeded to berate the Grant and Chandler regimes and laud the Liberal
cause. The speakers included Blair, Lyman Trumbull, state legislator
Jacob Ferris, and former congressman Randolph Strickland.59

At the conclusion of Trumbull's speech, the chairman of the
committee on resolutions, Eugene Pringle of Jackson, read the plat-
form which was then adopted with great cheering.60 The preamble of
the platform noted that it had been drawn up by a geographically
representative committee, “assembled from all the portions of the
state." It mentioned, too, that the committee in its work had been
"encouraged by the recollection of a similar movement in 1854 and of
the convention which then organized and named the Republican Party."61
Being "mindful of the great events which had removed slavery and other
causes of division among the American people, and believing that re-
conciliation was the duty of the hour," it stated the following:

1. A reaffirmance of the principles relating to the equality
of men; to the settlement consumated by amendments of the

Federal Constitution; to the removal of all disabilities
on account of the Rebellion: to local self-government and

 

6]"Michigan Platform."

57

the protection of the habeas corpus; to a reform of the
civil service, including a limitation of the presidency
to a single term; to the maintenance of the public credit
and the sacredness of the debt we owe the defenders of
our country; to holding the public domain for actual
settlers; to the duties of honesty and firmness in our
intercourse with foreign nations, which are well set
forth in the resolutions adopted by the convention lately
held at Cincinnati.

That the unanimity with which the Democratic Party had
accepted the political situation with regard to the,
matters settled by the war and amendments to the Consti-
tution warrants all good citizens...in regarding these
issues...to better illumine a page of history than to be
the cause of present differences.

The evidence being clear that party management is now in
the hands of corrupt rings, intent to hide from the
people the villainy which lurks in public offices, we
point out the only practicable remedy...is an entire
change of administration....

That without desertion of any principle, the opportunity
is now afforded to make such change both in the national
and state governments as twelve years in the one and
eighteen in the other of uninterrupted possession by the
same political party render proper, in order to rid the
departments of bad usages and dangerous precedents and
by the publicity which change affords to give the people
opportunities for checks and securities for the good be-
havior of their public servants.

That the Jeffersonian test of honesty, capability, and
faithfulness to the Constitution, which should be applied
to all candidates for office, seems to be fully met by
Horace Greeley and B. Gratz Brown....

That in order to secure honest government, to revive
fraternal feelings between different sections of the
country, and to preserve the Constitution and the right
of local government in the states, we desire and invite
the co-operatign of men of all parties and past political
associations.6

 

62Ibid.

58

Another resolution, not related to the platform, was intro-
duced and passed which changed the makeup of the state central
committee. This proposed that the committee which had been appointed
at Cincinnati be combined with the state executive committee which
had been appointed at Lansing. This expanded body was charged with
supervising the canvass and issuing a call for a state Liberal

Republican nominating convention.63

Pursuant to passage of this
resolution, a meeting was held in Lansing on July 29, 1872. Present
were the members of the new committee. The chairman was former
state senator and organizer of the Michigan G.O.P, Whitney Jones.
The members were F. Carlisle, H. C. Hall, C. 8. Blake, G. C. Jones,
D. E. Corbitt, V. A. Saph, W. A. Lewis, A. Root, A. H. Morrison,
G. G. Briggs, 0. Tower, P. Joslin, and C. Beierle. The secretary
of the committee was N. B. Jones. The committee proceeded to draw
up a call for a Liberal Republican State Convention in August.64
One of the most crucial results of the Jackson meeting
emanated from a conference that was held in the evening after the
public rally was over. On that Thursday night the existing state
committees of the Liberal Republican and Democratic parties met
jointly and agreed to a plan of political fusion for the upcoming

campaign and election.65

 

63Saginaw Daily Courier, July 26, 1872.

64Kalamazoo Gazette, August 2, 1872.

65Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 1, 1872.

59

Such a move had been anticipated by both the Democrats and
Liberal Republicans. A number of attempts had been made by both
sides to win sympathy and support for fusion. The Liberal Republican
National Committee, meeting in New York City on July 12, 1872, had
recommended to the Liberal Republicans in the various states “to
hold their state and congressional conventions, when possible, at
the same time and place with the Democracy, in order that conference
may unite the two parties in the electoral, state, and congressional

tickets."66

A Democratic paper called for "a thorough and harmonious
organization and concert of action between the Democrats and Liberal
Republicans through which a complete revolution in the country as well
as state...could be effected and a glorious victory gained over the

Grant ring."67

One appeal for cooperation was reminiscent of Thomas
Jefferson's first inaugural address and his comments about Federal-
ists and Republicans. It simply stated that "we are all Democrats,
we are all Liberal Republicans."68
The plan endorsed at Jackson was as follows: each party

would maintain a distinct organization and hold its own preliminary
meetings, county and state, attended by its own delegated representa-
tives. Nominating conventions, however, for county, state, and

congressional offices, would be held at the same time and place.

 

66Grand Rapids Daily Times, July 17, 1872.

67Niles Democrat, July 20, 1872.

68Marshall Democratic Expounder, July 18, 1872.

60

Nominations would be made by joint committees of conference comprised
of equal numbers of Democrats and Liberal Republicans. Members of
these committees would report back to their respective conventions
and if the agreed-upon nominations were accepted, the two conventions
would meet in joint-session to ratify them.69
The rationale for such a plan was: (1) it would make
“each wing of the political movement a high contracting party to
all nominations;" (2) it would "secure the nomination of men who
were reasonably acceptable to both sides, because it gave to each
side a veto power upon any objectionable candidate;" and (3) be-
cause "each wing of the movement would be represented by its own

elected delegates at all conventions, all nominations made by those

conventions, would be binding upon all parties to the creation of

the conventions."70

Thus, arrangements were made to have cooperation concurrently
with separation. This well suited those who could not bring them-
selves to completely forsake their separate and traditional identity.
J. P. Thompson, for example, had written to Blair: "I feel it is
of great importance to effect and preserve a Liberal Republican organi-

zation. I have no idea of being swallowed by the Bourbons."7]

 

69Ibid., August 1, 1872.

Ibid.

71d. P. Thompson to Austin Blair, July 30, 1872, Blair Papers.

61

There were other members of the Liberal Republican and
Democratic parties who believed that more cooperation was necessary
for certain phases of campaigning than was actually possible under
the plan of fusion. So an urgent request was issued for the forma-
tion of Greeley—Brown clubs around the state. Since these were not
to be considered part of the party machinery but rather as "campaign
agencies," there was no need for maintaining separate organizations.
In the clubs, Democrats and Liberal Republicans could work together
in complete harmony.72

The Greeley-Brown clubs which were to be an important cog
in the political effort of 1872, were formed at local meetings of
interested Democrats and Liberal Republicans. At a typical
gathering in Grand Rapids, speeches were given by leading local
representatives of both parties. The Honorable Jacob Ferris, a
Republican state legislator and former supporter of Grant, resound-
ingly declared that "Democrats and Liberal Republicans must band
together to save the country from ruin and to end military despotism
and to preserve civil liberties." Colonel Andrew T. McReynolds, a
Democrat of long-standing, followed with a discourse on the
necessity of ending the war once and for all and of restoring peace

for the country and civil government in the North and South.73

 

72Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 1, 1872: A. H.
Morrison to Blair, May 8, 1872, Blair Papers.

73Grand Rapids Democrat, July 24, 1872.

62

Each club drew up a constitution and in the case of Grand
Rapids the preamble to this document summed up the purpose of the
club. It stated a belief in the “need for a change of administration,"
and "for the purpose of promoting the election of Greeley and Brown,"
it announced "the formation of a Greeley-Brown Club and the adoption
of a constitution and by-laws."74

The officers and committees of the clubs were charged with
carrying out various duties vital to the campaign. Among these were
arranging mass rallies and the appearance of speakers, acquiring and
circulating documents helpful to the Liberal cause, recruiting
members, making lists of voters, canvassing the wards, and collecting
monies for the campaign.75

During the summer of 1872, the Liberal Republicans and
Democrats staged a series of Greeley-Brown ratification rallies in
Michigan's more substantial cities and in many of the small towns as
well. Most of these were similar to the one in Jackson, already
described. Perhaps the most popular speaker at these affairs was
Ex-Governor Austin Blair. His letters reveal a never-ending number
of requests by officers of local Greeley-Brown Clubs and other

76

interested parties to appear and deliver an address. Other speakers

 

; Ibid. See also Michigan Tribune, July 26, 1872; and
Marshall Democratic Expounder, July 25, 1872.

 

ISIbid.

76W. D. Harriman to Austin Blair, August 7, 1872; Jerome
W. Turner to Blair, July 5, 1872; J. H. Richardson to Blair, August
12, 1872, Blair Papers.

63

in great demand included Lyman Trumbull, Randolph Strickland, Eugene
Pringle, A. T. McReynolds, C. S. May, Ex-Governor Robert McClelland,
and Duncan Stewart.

In the months of August and September the Jackson blueprint
for fusion underwent a thorough trial at county and congressional
conventions. The Liberal Republicans held their preliminary meetings
locally and selected their own delegates to attend the conventions.
The Democrats did the same. Once the conventions were underway. a
joint committee of conference hammered out the list of nominees to
be endorsed or rejected by the two conventions. The resulting

tickets were usually well-balanced between Democrats and Republicans.77

. The most significant Liberal Republican convention was, of
course, the state convention held in Grand Rapids on August 22, 1872.
The newly-enlarged Liberal Republican State Central Committee issued
a call on July 29th for the convention to nominate "candidates for
presidential electors and state offices." On the matter of repre-
sentation at the state convention, the call explained that "each
county would elect two delegates for each Representative to which,
under the last apportionment it was entitled in the lower house of

the state legislature and that every organized county should be en-

titled to at least one delegate. Further, with the exception of the

 

77Kalamazoo Gazette, September 6, 1872: Saginaw Daily
Courier, August 29, 1872; Grand Rapids Democrat, September 11, 1872.

64

Upper Peninsula counties, "no delegate would be entitled to a seat
who did not reside in the county he represented."78
On August 22nd the Liberal Republican convention took
place in the circuit court room of Lippeg Hall in Grand Rapids.
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 noon by Osmond Tower of
Ionia, a member of the Liberal Republican State Committee. Tower
appointed Randolph Strickland of St. Johns as the temporary chairman
of the convention and Nelson B. Jones of Lansing as the temporary
secretary.79
Upon assuming the chair, Strickland thanked those
assembled for the privilege of his position. He then delivered a
brief speech. "We are charged," he stated, "with reforming the
abuses of our national administration. A civil service reform is
necessary, and for this purpose the good and true men are binding
themselves together all over the nation. Upon the Cincinnati plat-
form the people of the country are joining together for the good of
their country. The people desire an honest government. We are en-
titled to it. As Liberal Republicans we should join hands with all
who favor reform and reconciliation. And, I trust that concord will

govern our deliberations."80

 

78Kalamazoo Gazette, August 2, 1872.

79Detroit Free Press, August 23, 1872; Grand Rapids Daily
Times, August 23, 1872; Michigan Tribune, August 30, 1872.

 

80Ibid.

65

On the motion of various participants, a number of
committees were created. These included a committee on credentials
and permanent organization chaired by O. 8. Clark, a committee on
resolutions chaired by Jerome W. Turner, and a committee on con-
ference, chaired by Adam Elder. Following the selection of committees,
the convention recessed until 2:00 in the afternoon.81

Upon reassembling, the convention was called to order by
Strickland and the committee on credentials presented a report on
the official delegates for the various counties. This report was
accepted and adopted. Then, the committee reported on the permanent
convention officers. The president was lumber magnate Dwight Cutler
of Ottawa. Among the vice-presidents chosen from each congressional
district were A. Marxhausen of Detroit, Allen Potter of Kalamazoo,
Osmond Tower of Ionia, H. C. Briggs of Howell, and John F. Driggs of
Saginaw. Secretaries of the convention were Nelson B. Jones of
Lansing and Robert F. Hill of Kalamazoo.82

Mr. Cutler then took the chair and called for the next
order of business which was the reporting of a new Liberal Republi-
can State Central Committee. The chairman of the new committee was

the omnipresent Nelson B. Jones of Lansing. Members from the first

district were Adam Elder and August Marxhausen of Detroit; from the

 

81

H
U-
.3

Q

82

H
U'
._i

D.

66

second district were W.D. Harriman of Ann Arbor and H. C. Hall of
Hudson: from the third district were Daville Hubbard of Marshall
and Dr. E. A. Foote of Charlotte; from the fourth district were
A. H. Morrison of St. Joseph and H. Barnaby of Mendon; from the
fifth district were H. H. Pope of Allegan and Osmond Tower of Ionia;
from the sixth district were R. C. Ripley of Flint and H. C. Briggs
of Howell; from the seventh district were V. A. Saph of Marine City
and J. B. Wilson of Lapeer; from the eighth district were A. M.
Cummings of Bay City and Dr. E. Fish of Granville: and from the ninth
district were George Wagner of Marquette and C. S. Pratt of Traverse
City.83
At this point a small group of black men appeared in the
convention hall. Led by M. Sweeney of Battle Creek, these "colored
friends of Greeley and Brown" asked to address the gathering. "They
were admitted to the floor of the convention amid loud applause and
their eloquent speeches were met with cheering." At the conclusion
of the speeches, two of their number, Sweeney and W. C. Carter of
Ypsilanti, were spontaneously elected as delegates to the convention.84
Perhaps the enthusiastic response of the Liberal Republicans was in
some measure a reflection of their guilt that theirs was basically a
white man's movement and that the newly enfranchised blacks were to

play a very minor role.

 

831

0'

id.

U"

id., Kalamazoo Gazette, August 30, 1872.

67

The Democrats, who were holding their convention in near-by
Luce's Hall, requested that the conference session now commence. The
Liberal Republican conference committee subsequently retired to a
meeting with the Democratic conference committee. The Liberal Republi-
can convention then recessed.85

About 5:30 p.m. the convention reconvened and "it was
announced amid great excitement that the joint conference committee
had agreed upon a state ticket." The committee then made this report:
for governor--Austin Blair of Jackson; for lieutenant governor--John
C. Blanchard of Ionia; for secretary of state--George H. House of
Ingham; for state treasurer--Joseph A. Hollon of Saginaw: for attorney
general--Matthew H. Maynard of Marquette; for auditor general--Neil
O'Hearn of Livingston; for commissioner of the land office-—George H.
Murdock of Berrien; for superintendant of public instruction--Willard
Stearns of Lenawee; and for member of the state board of education--
Dr. Edward Feldner of Wayne. Of this slate the Liberal Republicans
were Blair, House, Murdock and Feldner.86

Presidential electors were as follows: for electors-at-

large--George V. Lothrop of Wayne County and Charles S. May of Kalama-
zoo County; for the first district--Otto Starck of Wayne County; for

 

85Grand Rapids Daily Times, August 23, 1872; Detroit Free
Press, August 23, 1872; Michigan Tribune, August 30, 1872.

86Ibid.

68

the second district--John Wahl of Monroe County; for the third
district--Andrew J. Bowne of Barry County; for the fourth district--
Henry Chamberlain of Berrien County; for the fifth district--Henry
Fralick.of Kent County; for the sixth district--Randolph Strickland
of Clinton County; for the seventh district--Abraham Smith of St.
Clair County; for the eighth district--Charles Babo of Bay County;
for the ninth district--Charles B. Fenton of Mackinac County. In
this group the Liberal Republicans were Starck, May, Strickland and
Babo. The report of the committee was accepted and adopted and the
Democratic Convention was informed of this action.87
A committee of Democrats then appeared at the Liberal
Republican convention and announced that the report of the joint
conference committee had been unanimously adopted in the Democratic
convention. The chairman of this committee "cordially invited the
Liberal Republicans to join the Democrats in a joint session to
ratify the nominations. This invitation was accepted with great
enthusiasm and the convention adjourned to proceed to Luce's Hall.
A procession of Liberal Republicans, headed by a local band, formed

and marched over to join the Democrats to the delight of all involved.88

H
U-
_a

O.

H
U'
—I

Q

69

After a tumultuous welcome by the Democrats, the combined
convention received the nominees into its presence. Austin Blair
received an especially deafening ovation and proceeded to make a
short acceptance speech. The other nominees followed suit. All
were then given loud cheers of approval.89

A list of resolutions was read and ratified. The first
“recognized the justice, patriotism, magnanimity and wisdom of the
great doctrines enunciated in the Cincinnati platform.” The second
endorsed the candidacies of Horace Greeley, "a man distinguished for
his purity of character and probity," and B. Gratz Brown, "a man of
industry, intelligence and experience." The third ratified the
nomination of Austin Blair in whom were "all those high qualities of
honesty, intelligence, experience and devotion to the public welfare...."
The fourth ratified the other candidates on the state ticket as
"gentlemen of well known worth of character and fitness for elevated
official positions.“ The fifth triumphantly resolved that "with such
a platform and such a national and state ticket we boldly and con-
fidently enter this political contest, conscious of the high claims
and justice of our cause to war with an unscrupulous, wily, and corrupt
enemy, who is intent upon the exercise of governmental power, public
plunder and self-aggradizement, relying on the intelligence, patriotism

and virtue of the great American people, firmly believing that a

 

70

90 This last resolution sounded the

complete triumph awaits us."
keynote of the campaign to be waged against entrenched Republicanism
in the nation and state up to the November election.
In the nine congressional districts, candidates were
selected by joint conference as well. The nine men who ultimately
emerged as the choices to do battle with the Republicans were A. S.
Bagg of the first district, Adrian College President Asa Mahan of
the second district, John Parkhurst of the third district, Allan
Potter of the fourth district, Andrew McReynolds of the fifth district,
Augustus Baldwin of the sixth district, John Richardson of the
seventh district, Chauncey Wisner of the eighth district, and Samuel
P. Ely of the ninth district. Of these nominees, Mahan, Potter,
Richardson, and Wisner were Liberal Republicans.9]
During the fall campaign the issues developed by the Liberal
Republicans and their Democratic supporters were essentially those
discussed in chapter one. "As in other campaigns of the Reconstruction
period, the war and its results furnished the chief lines of argument."92

There were continued demands for honesty, frugality, and efficiency in

government. These were supplemented by appeals for hard money, sound

 

goResolutions adopted by the joint Liberal Republican-
Democratic Convention, August 22, 1872, typescript copy in the Spencer
Collection.

91Kalamazoo Gazette, September 20, 1872; Michigan Tribune,
September 13, September 20, 1872.

92Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 173.

71

credit, and a downward revision of the tariff, and a cry for signi-
ficant reform of the civil service. The general thrust of the
Liberals' demands was supportive of a return of government to the
people and a simultaneous destruction of political centralization,
bossism and rings.

The Liberals appealed strongly to the integrity and con-
science of all voters, Democratic and Republican. This approach
seemed increasingly relevant as the campaign wore on due to the
emergence of a new and momentous scandal-~credit mobilier.93

Michigan Reformers also made entreaties to more specific
yet politically potent socioeconomic and ethnic groups. The main
ones were the farmers, the workingmen, and the Germans. For the
benefit of the agrarians, it was noted that "the Republican Party
of the state was trying to reconcile the great agricultural
interests to taxation for the benefit of the salt, copper, and

"94

lumber interests. The Republican party was represented to the

urban worker as the benefactor of his business and banking interests
which "built palaces for a lucky few and condemned the working man

"95

to slums and tenements. Horace Greeley was presented as a hero

of the working man and "the only man who ever ran for the presidency

 

93Kalamazoo Gazette, September 20, 1872.

94Grand Rapids Daily Times, September 20, 1872.

95Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 8, 1872.

72

of the United States that served a regular apprenticeship at his

96

trade." Richard Trevellick of Detroit, the politically active

president of the National Labor Union, reportedly "came out" for

Greeley and Brown.97

The argument for the low tariff was directed

at the worker just as it was at the farmer. Reform advocates said
that high tariffs had effectively cut America off from world markets
and had thus lessened domestic production and caused unemployment."98
Thus interestingly, the Liberal Republican movement, through its
anti-monopoly and low tariff appeals aimed at farmers and workers,
cut across geographic and economic lines and resulted in an ”inter-

action between agricultural and urban centers."99

Among ethnic
groups the Germans received the most attention from the Liberal
Republicans and their Democratic allies. As has been noted, the
old'Know-Nothing'speeches of Henry Wilson, the vice-presidential
candidate, were dredged up and published in Liberal Michigan news-

papers. Under a banner heading "Foreigners Read This," one journal

 

96Saginaw Daily Courier, November 2, l872.

97Clifton K. Yearley, "Richard Trevellick: Labor Agitator,"
Michigan History, XXXIX (1955), p. 435; Marshall Democratic Expounder,
August 8, 1872. Conrad Marxhausen, brother of liberal publisher
August, was an important figure in Detroit's labor movement, Kistler,
"German Press," p. 310. Unfortunately the politically potent Detroit
trades assembly was on the decline by 1872, Sidney Glazier, "The
Michigan Labor Movement,“ Michigan History, XXIX (1945), pp. 73-82.

 

98Marshall Democratic Expounder, August 8, 1872.

99Chester Destler, American Radicalism (Chicago: Quadrangle
Books, 1966), p. 6.

73

introduced a quotation from such a speech made in 1856 with these
words: "Foreign born citizens, remember that if you vote for the
Grant ticket this fall, you will endorse the man who uttered [this
speech]." Generally the German community was exhorted to support
the Liberal cause of their countryman Carl Schurz and to refute the
corrupt and prejudiced Grant regime.100 A
The political campaign of 1872 was characterized by in-
flamed emotion, acrimony, and personal abuse. "The efforts of
Liberals to break up the old party and their willingness to enlist
the aid of Democrats [in so doing] made the Republicans most bitter
toward that element. And, the Greeley politicians...found their
readiest and most congenial arguments in the abuse of the President

101 CertalnIY too, the "press contributed greatly

and his advisors."
to the calumny.“ Attempts to drop "bomb shells" were common. The
Liberals were constantly exposing new cases of fraud and corruption
at all levels of government, perpetuated by the evil Republican
party.102
The Liberal forces attempted to convince the people of

Michigan that there was a ground swell of support for the reform

 

100Saginaw Daily Courier, October 30, 1872: Lansing
Journal, August 15, 1872.

101Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 150.

74

cause among former staunch Republicans. Endless lists were printed
in various state newspapers enumerating the defectors from Republi-
can ranks. These 'members of the G.O.P. in "long-standing" were to
vote for Greeley because "the once great party formed for progress
was now turned into a political ring...." Literally hundreds of
signatures of former Republicans were obtained to endorse the new
movement.103
The campaign was marked by a great deal of political

"hoopla." I'Hilarious mass meetings and parades“ were held "to appeal
to the voter's emotions and prejudices." The Greeley-Brown campaign

104 One facet

clubs played a large role in organizing such affairs.
of the "hoopla" was the construction of campaign headquarters which
were replicas of Horace Greeley's famed farmhouse in Chappaqua, New
York. Such a structure was raised in Lansing and dedicated with a
great, emotion-packed rally. In describing the building, the
Lansing Journal, a Liberal Republican paper, noted that the most
paramount of the decorations was a "large-sized portrait of the
standard bearer in the cause of honest government, Horace Greeley."

This likeness was "wreathed in evergreens" and beneath it appeared

the words, "Greeley and Brown the peoples candidates." In front of

 

 

 

1035a inaw Dail Courier, July 17, 1872; Marshall Democratic
Expounder, July 18, I872; Michigan Tribune, July 19, 1872.
104

Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 161.

75

the speaker's stand the word "Reconciliation" met "the eyes of all
present." A motto in German to the left of the speaker's stand was
translated as "We stand strong in truth, right, and beauty." Anti-
Grant mottos were scattered throughout the structure. Among them
the following: "A land grant for poor men--U. S. Grant for the
nabobs," "Honesty is the best policy-~a motto discarded by the
Grantites," and "Death to Political Rings."105
The results of the election indicated that the campaign
efforts of the Liberal Republicans and Democrats had not been overly
efficacious. For the office of President of the United States, U. S.
Grant received 138,455 votes in Michigan compared to only 78,355 for
Greeley. In the gubernatorial race Austin Blair ran somewhat
better than did Greeley for President. He received a total count
of 81,880 to 138,968 for the Republican nominee John G. Bagley.106
A county by county analysis reveals that the closest races
were in the counties of Jackson, Livingston, Macomb and Monroe. In
these counties the Republican plurality was minimal. The fusion
ticket also piled up significant counts in Berrien, Clinton, Saginaw,
Washtenaw, St. Clair, Oakland, Wayne, Genessee, Ingham, Kent,

Lenawee, Calhoun and Kalamazoo.107

 

105Lansing Journal, August 22, 1872.

106Michigan Manual, 1873, p. 257.

‘07Ibid.. pp. 254-257.

76

The German enclaves in Clinton and Saginaw counties went
overwhelmingly for the Liberals and Democrats. In Westphalia, for
example, the totals showed 249 for Greeley and 252 for Blair to
only 22 for Grant and 23 for Bagley. In Frankenmuth, the Germans
gave Greeley 172 and Blair 173 while Grant and Bagley received only
29 and 30 votes respectively.108

The Republicans swept all nine congressional races rather
handily. The closest contest was recorded in the first district
where the Liberal candidate polled 9,843 to only 11,703 for the
Republican.109

The election results in Michigan were indicative of those

in the rest of the country.”0

The Republicans had thus achieved
a substantial victory.

The reasons for the failure of the Liberal Republican-
Democratic effort were numerous. "The most fundamental explanation
of the tidal wave of 1872 was...that the country had confidence in
Grant and his administration and did not wish at the time of re-
adjustment from the great war to risk a doubtful experiment."1H

Despite the charges against him and his advisors, Grant yet stood

 

'OSIbid.. pp. 278-321.

109Ibid., p. 258.

"°Ibid.. pp. 428-429.

1HRoss, Liberal Republican, p. 190.

 

77

as a great and admirable war hero in the eyes of the people.“2

And,
to many Republicans the Democratic Party was "still thought to be
unreconstructed" and Horace Greeley was viewed as "erratic and
unstable."n3 Apparently, too, the power of "Old Zach" and the
state Republican organization was formidable, for despite the com-
bined Liberal-Democratic effort, Michigan delivered an impressive
percentage of the vote for Grant.”4
Another significant factor in the victory of the Republi-
cans in the nation and the state was "the impossibility of reconciling
large numbers of Democratic voters to Greeley's candidacy...."n5
A comparison of the returns of the 1872 election with earlier ones
"shows conclusively that large numbers of Democrats stayed away from

the polls...."”6

Oakland County, for example, had given Horatio
Seymour 4,442 votes for president in the election of 1868 and 4,363
votes to the Democratic candidate for governor in the election of

1870. In 1872 the county could muster only 3,326 votes for Greeley

 

113Ibid.; Lansing Journal, November 7. I872-

114Cassopolis Vigilant, November 14, 1872; Michigan Tribune,
November 15, 1872; Lansing Journal, November 21, 1872.

llsRoss, Liberal Republican, p. 188. See also Lansing
Journal, November 7, 1872. It should be noted, too, that in Michigan
"it was impossible for many Democrats to forget Blair's ultra-Radicalism
of the past." See Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 147.

116Ross, Liberal Republican, P- 189- See 315° 3°]t’
Dickinson. p. 16.

78

and 3,605 for Blair. Wayne County which had gone Democratic in
both 1868 and 1870 went Republican in 1872, despite a substantial
vote for the Liberal-Democratic ticket. Even in sparsely populated
Mackinac County the traditional Democratic majority was shaved to a
slim 26 votes.“7
The fact remained, too, that economic prosperity still
was prevalent in 1872 and the average voter associated the success
of the Republican Party with the continuation of "good times."118
Some reactions of the Liberal Republicans were tinged with
bitterness. One Liberal journal asked "can an honest election be
had?" It noted that the patronage was part of the problem. It was
"very largely increased since the war and was simply immense. Its
command of money was unlimited. Its swarms of office holders could
give up their entire time to the duties of political canvassers."n9

The influence of big money and big business was also criticized.

"More Republicans would have joined us" said the Lansing Journal,

 

"but for the malign influence of gold and stock gamblers, and the
cowardly fear of the great moneyed corporations of the country who

believed the Republican administration, if re-elected would continue

 

117Michigan Manual, 1873. pp. 255-257.

H8Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 190.

119Lansing Journal, November 7, November 21, 1872.
See also Michigan Tribune, November 15, 1872.

79

to serve their interests better than would any other one."120

Illegal election day activities were also rumored. "Fraud stalked
abroad under the meridian sun of election day" complete with
"repeating, ballot box stuffing, and miscounting."]2]
But a note of hopeful optimism was expressed as well. A
Liberal Republican journal maintained that "it takes time to harmonize
and consolidate a party formed from elements heretofore antagonistic.
The Liberals and Democrats will yet achieve the result. They are
in an honest majority in this nation [and] the principles they have
contended for are wise, just and necessary to the safety and per-
petuity of this Republic. Patience and fidelity will achieve their

triumph."122

Some Liberal Republicans were greatly encouraged about
the possibilities for the future. George Murdock of Berrien wrote
to Austin Blair that "two years hence with proper candidates and
judicious action you may put Berrien County down for one senator and
two representatives in the state legislature."123
Although the Liberal Republican experiment failed in
Michigan and in the nation in 1872, it was significant. It con-

tributed to a growing demand for honesty and responsibility in

 

120

H

bid.

12lLansing Journal, November 7, 1872.

122Ibid.; Michigan Tribune. November 8. 1872-

123
Blair Papers.

George H. Murdock to Austin Blair, November 13, 1872,

80

government. This concern was manifested to some degree in the
striking gains of the anti-Republican forces in elections of 1874
and the unseating of the Radical Zachariah Chandler from his senate
seat in 1875.124

Further, the "events of 1872 marked the end of the old
Republican coalition of the Civil War years. Having tasted insur-
gency in the Liberal Republican movement, many erstwhile Republicans
remained out of the old party and either became nominal Democrats or
joined the various agrarian and reform parties of the period."125
This was certainly true in Michigan.

Some others returned in future years to the ranks of the
G.O.P. where they formed the nucleus of a "Mugwump" faction which
was to bring a vital reform concern to the once jaded party. In
Michigan "the element of reform became a prominent part of the
Republican program."126

Despite the presence of "disappointed office seekers" and

127

"political adventurers" within the ranks of the Liberal Republican

movement, it was not primarily an exercise in political opportunism

 

1240i11a, Politics of Michigan. 99- 171-179-

125John G. Sproat, The Best Men: Liberal Reformers in the
Gilded Age (New York: Oxford University Press,71968), p. 87.

1260i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 189.

127Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 66.

81

or negativism. In Michigan especially, the movement was headed by
the sort of "respectable and in many cases eminent" men who were

'28 These individuals

perhaps too few in the national movement.
were successful in business and agricultural pursuits. They were
highly principled and socially concerned and active. They were
also living proof of what has been called the "most striking
feature“ of the Liberal Republican effort, that is, the "large
number of Free-Soilers and founders of the Republican party among

the bolters."129

 

128Ibid., p. 65.

129Ibid., p. 61. See also William Stocking, Under the Oaks

(Detroit: Detroit Tribune, 1904), pp. 22-23, 38-39, 40-41, 49-50:
Floyd B. Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan 1837-1860 (Lansing:
Michigan Historical Commission, 1918), pp. 93, 111, 190; Theodore
Clark Smith, Ihe Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the Northwest (New
York: Russell and Russell, 1967), pp. 142, 200-203, 293.

 

 

CHAPTER III
NATIONAL REFORMERS ON THE MARCH

The Liberal effort in Michigan did not expire with the
debacle of 1872. There were still, in 1873, Republicans who were
sufficiently alienated from the regular party to persist in an
independent course. J. H. Richardson of Tuscola stated: "our
cause is just and it must prevail....I am for reform body and
soul."] 5. R. Hughes of St. Joseph wrote to Blair that "the
numerous astounding developments made since the close of last
fall's campaign have fully justified and vindicated the course of
honest Liberal Republicans," and that he believed "more firmly
than ever in the absolute necessity of rescuing the government...
by taking it out of the hands of the corrupt men that now administer
it."2 Democrats, too, were imbued with the thought that their
salvation lay in an alliance with disaffected Republicans. For

example, in supporting the concept of fusion for the spring

elections, John G. Parkhurst urged a "good set of resolutions

 

1John H. Richardson to Austin Blair, March 16, 1873,
Blair Papers.

25. R. Hughes to Austin Blair, April 1, 1873, ibid.

82

83

and a new name under which all opponents of corruption, fraud, and
a central government can unite."3
As a result of this sentiment, a joint Liberal Republican
and Democratic call was issued in the spring of 1873 for a convention
in preparation for the upcoming state election. The convention was
to be held in Jackson on the 27th of March to "nominate candidates
for the supreme court and two regents of the university." The call
was addressed to “all who are opposed to the corruption of men in
power and all who desire to participate in an earnest and determined
effort to reform existing abuses and restore honesty and economy
to the management of all public trusts." All such persons were in-
vited to "participate in preliminary meetings...called to elect
delegates to the state convention." The call was signed by both
Foster Pratt, the chairman of the Democratic State Central
Committee, and Nelson B. Jones, chairman of the Liberal Republican
State Central Committee.4 This year was to be different, then,
from 1872. It was to witness the complete merging of the Democratic
and Liberal Republican forces without even a pretense of maintain-

ing separate organizations. There were to be no separate conventions

or selection of nominees by joint conference.

 

3John G. Parkhurst to Austin Blair, March 16, 1873, ibid.

4Grand Rapids Democrat, March 12, 1873; Michigan Tribune,
March 20, 1873.

 

84

This trend was also noticeable in the organization of the
county conventions. The case of Kent County was typical. There a
call was issued for "a county convention of Democrats and Liberal
Republicans...to appoint delegates to the state convention at
Jackson and to nominate a candidate for county superintendent of
schools." The call was addressed to “all persons who are opposed
to corruption in office in any and every form, congressional or
otherwise." Each town and ward would be entitled to select three
delegates to the county convention. That body in turn was to
designate two men to attend the state convention for every repre-
sentative the county had in the state legislature. Again, in a
manner similar to the call for the state convention, both the
chairman of the Democratic County Committee and the chairman of
the Liberal Republican County Committee signed the call.5

The spring state convention assembled in the Jackson
Union Hall on March 27, 1873. It was called to order by Foster
Pratt, the Democrat, and Eugene Pringle, the well-known Liberal
Republican from Jackson, was elected as the permanent chairman.
The opening statements of these two men foreshadowed a new sort
of political organization which was to facilitate a complete Liberal

Republican-Democratic fusion. Pratt said that "events are rapidly

drifting all the elements opposed to the administration into a new

 

5Grand Rapids Democrat, March 19, 1873. A unified
approach was employed at the municipal level as well. See the
Michigan Tribune, April 3, 1873.

 

85

and distinctive organization." Pringle then proposed that the
convention was "representative of a people astounded at the
corruption shown by the recent congressional investigations, the
actors in which were shielded by the great party controlling the
government." "They were assembled" Pringle went on, "to carry
out the popular idea that there should be a reconciliation of
affairs and the administration of government should be conducted
on the principles of reform and economy."6
The proceedings of the convention were marked by relative
harmony. The officers and committees selected were comprised of
representative numbers of Democrats and Liberal Republicans. And
there appeared to be a distinct spirit of cooperation among them.7
The committee on resolutions presented a report which
was adopted with great enthusiasm. The statements contained there-
in were indicative of a blurring of traditional party identities
and labels.8 The introduction to the resolutions noted that the
delegates were "elected for the most part without reference to
past political affiliations to represent the view of those opposed

to the manifold corruptions of the party in possession of the

government." They were, it claimed, "impressed with the importance

 

6Detroit Free Press, March 28, 1873; Michigan Tribune,
April 3, 1873; Marshall Democratic Expounder, April 3, 1873.

7Ibid.

8Hubbart, Middle west, p. 253.

86

of organizing an opposition which could unite upon living issues
all men who, for whatever cause, desired a change of administration
and were hopeful of being able to co-operate with similar movements
in other states....“9
The resolutions reaffirmed the sentiments of the
Cincinnati and Baltimore platforms of 1872. They considered "all
questions relating to slavery, the rights of citizens, and the
national debt, so settled and determined by constitutional amend-
ments as to be historical only and no longer living issues." They
went on to condemn the Credit Mobilier and Salary Grab scandals as
well as military rule in the South and continued centralization of
the power of the federal government. They demanded the "renovation
of the civil service in every department" and the strict account-
ability of all elected officials.10
The final resolution summed up the view of assembled
Democrats and Liberal Republicans on the type of organization,
cooperation, and candidates they desired. "We prefer,“ it read,
"an organization independent of past party associations under such

auspices as will carry no dead issues into future political contests.

We have no honors for Democrats or Republicans as such, we should

 

9Detroit Free Press, March 28, 1873; Michigan Tribune,
April 3, 1873.

10Ibid.

87

seek candidates on account of fitness and not for party services,
we would restore government to its pristine purity...."11

The concern expressed for the political independence of
the nominees was well illustrated by a debate which occurred over
the proposed candidacy of Henry T. Hinman for regent of the uni-
versity. Hinman, a life-long Democrat, was nominated by Andrew T.
McReynolds, also a former Democrat. The nomination was opposed by
Liberal Republican George P. Sanford. The latter said that he
"would have preferred another gentleman, solely on the grounds of
past affiliations." After much debate, Andrew M. Fitch of Albion
was suggested as a candidate. Since his political past was less
rigidly ensconced in either of the major parties, he was perceived
as an independent and Sanford supported his nomination. Fitch

12

then joined Duane Doty as the two nominees for regents. Another

independent political figure, Isaac Christiancy, was tapped as the

choice for the Michigan Supreme Court.13
The keynote speaker for the convention was the Honorable

Austin Blair. He stressed that the charges made against the

Republican Party during the 1872 campaign had been borne out by

recent scandalous developments in the federal administration. He

 

88

urged again independent political action to correct such abuses.
His speech was warmly received and it was clear that he enjoyed
the great respect and approbation of those in attendance.14
The issues articulated by the Liberals during the abbre-
viated spring campaign were headed by the Credit Mobilier and
Salary Grab scandals in the federal government. These were
presented as evidence of pervasive greed, corruption, and waste-
fulness in the Republican administration and party.15
In the state a scandal of such dimensions was uncovered
that it was tabbed the "Michigan Credit Mobilier." An investiga-
tion showed that former Land Commissioner Charles Edmunds, who
had been acquitted of impeachment charges by the Michigan Senate
in 1872, had indeed been blatantly guilty of at least some of the
charges. He had been involved in a "general land steal" which re-
sulted in the illegal sale of reserved lands to private speculators.
State lands, federal lands, mineral lands, and lands reserved for
railroads in Michigan were sold, with Edmund's authorization, to

16

private interests at very low prices. This discovery seemed to

indict the Republican Party in Michigan of concealing corruption,

 

14Ibid.

15Michigan Tribune, February 27, April 13, 1873; R. B.
Robbins to Blair, March 14, 1873, Blair Papers.

16Detroit Free Press, April 11, 1873; Michigan Tribune,
April 19, June 19, 1873.

89

for it appeared likely that the Republican-dominated Senate had
whitewashed their tainted fellow party member by refusing to convict
him on the impeachment charges.

Another state issue was a new "salary grab“. This took
the form of an act of the state legislature to increase the pay of
its employees in violation of the Constitution.17

The election results in the state were not too encourag-
ing for the Liberals. Their strongest candidate was Isaac
Christiancy for the state supreme court. But to their chagrin he
was also nominated by the Republicans because of his former Free
Soil sympathies. Thus, there was really no contest here and
Christiancy was elected without opposition. In the races for the
two regencies of the university, the Republicans won handily. The
special elections in the two judicial districts also resulted in
Republican victories. In the newly created 20th judicial district,
however, the Liberal candidate, Flavius J. Littlejohn, ran a strong
race, and in his loss there was reason for hope.18

Despite the overall defeat in the spring elections in

Michigan, the Reformers were not discouraged. They had a ready

 

'70i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 151; Laws of Michigan,
1873: pp. 2‘4.

18Detroit Free Press, April 8, 1873; Dilla, Politics of
Michigan, p. 149. Littlejohn received 3,799 votes and his Republi-
can opponent J. W. Stone, accumulated 3,991. For complete election
statistics see Michigan Almanac, 1874. pp. 56-57.

90

rationalization. It simply was that the voters of the state
"under the party lash, with money used freely" might be expected
to give a majority to the Republican ticket. They insisted, though,
that the people of Michigan would not willingly "sanction the
corruption of the party in power" and if freed from harassment,
they would disavow that which, to their collective conscience, was
reprehensible.19
The Liberal analysis of the election outcome in states
other than Michigan was genuinely optimistic. In perusing the vote
in states such as Ohio, Missouri, New York, and Connecticut, the
sympathetic press concluded that "the drift of public sentiment is
against the Republican Party. The people have shown their indigna-
tion against the Credimob robberies and whitewashings, against
backpay thefts, and against executive interference in state govern-
ments." The reaction to the "sweeping Liberal victory" in Connecti-
cut was absolutely euphoric. There, it was claimed, the main issue
was "Creditmobilierism" and political corruption in general and the
"victory for the right was emphatic."20

During the fall elections of 1873 in Michigan, Liberals

took a further step toward the establishment of a completely new

 

19Grand Rapids Demograt, April 15, 1873: see also Marshall
Democratic Expounder, April 17, 1873; Michigan Tribune, April 10,
17, 1873.

20Ibid.; The Connecticut Liberal coalition was one of the
most successful. See Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 219.

 

91

Reform party. A special congressional contest in the fifth district,
necessitated by the death of the popular Republican incumbent Wilder
D. Foster, highlighted the elections.21
On October 22, 1873, a convention met in Grand Rapids to
select a Liberal candidate for the vacant seat. Such well-known
Democratic Reformers as John C. Blanchard and Henry Fralick and
equally illustrious Republican Liberals as A. B. Morse and Osmond
Tower attended.22
Blanchard, who was beginning to emerge as one of the most
sincere and effective Reformers of the period, requested the passage
of a resolution officially designating the gathering, a UPeoplefs
Convention." Specifically, the resolution stated that the "con-
vention assembled, without reference to any and all past political
organizations, declares itself to be a people's convention and as
such seeks to nominate a suitable candidate for Congress without
reference to such candidate's past political preferences or

associations."23

Thus all traditional party identities were to
be discarded in favor of a new non-partisan label.
The platform of the "Peoplefls Convention" contained a

number of provisions reminiscent of the Liberal Republican demands

 

 

21Grand Rapids Democrat, October 29, 1873.
22Ibid.
23

H
U'
—l

O.

92

of 1872. One called for a maintenance of the public credit and the
payment of the public debt "as rapidly as the resources and best
interests of the country" should demand. A second advocated a
return to the "economical administration of government" and to the
principles of honesty, capability, and accountability in the ranks
of government. A third requested "wise and judicious legislation
either by Congress or the states which would protect labor from
the avaricious exactions and encroachments of capital, and secure
among other things the cheap transportation of the products of in-
dustry from one section to another.“ A fourth was opposed to
"special or class legislation and to donations of public lands to
railroads or other corporations either by national or state govern-
ments. A fifth denounced the Credit Mobiliers and increases of
salaries of public officials while in office.24
The participants in the "People's Convention" wasted little
time in selecting a nominee. He was Charles C. Comstock, a furni-
ture manufacturer and former mayor of Grand Rapids. In accepting
the nomination, Comstock made clear that it had been "entirely
unsought“ by him but that he was willing to do the best he could to

win for the people and reform.25

 

Ibid.

251pig,; See also Representative Men of Michigan (Cincinnati:
Western Biographical Publishing Company, 1878), 5th dst., pp. 19-20.

93

Following the balloting several key participants in the
convention delivered speeches. A. B. Morse of Ionia railed against
the many abuses in government and underlined the need for reform.
John C. Blanchard referred in his oration to the Bible. He quoted
the statement: "when the wicked bear rule the people mourn." He
then proposed that "this clause is very applicable to present
times." "We have nominated," he went on, "a most excellent candi-
date in whose honesty and integrity all have faith. Let us then
go home and work, work, work, to elect him and there may be a
prospect that the wicked will cease from troubling and the weary
will be at rest."26

In the ensuing campaign the general themes of political
independence, honesty, and frugality developed at the "People's
Convention“ were echoed by the Reform forces. The liberal Gragg|
Rapids Daily_Times said: "We now have two candidates in the field
for congressman from our district. One is on the Republican ticket
with its Credit Mobilier and Back Pay aroma still fresh. The other
stands upon a platform ignoring Republicanism and Democracy, but
I adhering to honesty, integrity, and the wish to do the greatest good
for the greatest number."27

The election in the fifth district was exceedingly close.

In fact, no final statement of victory or defeat could be made for

 

26Grand Rapids Democrat, October 29, 1873.

27Grand Rapids Daily Times, October 23, 1873.

94

a number of days after the voting until the last ballot from the
most obscure burg in the district had been tabulated. In the end
it became clear that Republican W. B. Williams had triumphed by

an infinitesimal plurality of 68 votes.28

This result was truly
startling in light of the fact that the deceased Republican in-
cumbent had carried the district just one year earlier by a

majority of 8,606 votes.29

The forces of reform were naturally
not happy about the defeat, but they were ecstatic over the per-
formance of their candidate who easily carried Kent and Muskegon
counties, while acquitting himself well in Allegan, Ionia, and
Ottawa.30
In reviewing the outcome of the elections of the fall
of 1873 in Michigan and around the country the Liberal reaction
was enthusiastic. "Taken altogether," a Liberal Republican journal
claimed, "the elections resulted in general Republican disasters.“
It argued that the voting patterns in such widely disparate loca-
tions as Ohio, California, Iowa, Minnesota, New York, Virginia,

Kansas, New Jersey, and Massachusetts constituted the "beginning

of a great work, undertaken by the friends of reform." The

 

28Grand Rapids Democrat, November 12, 1873.

29Michigan Manual, 1873, p. 260.

30Grand Rapids Democrat, November 12, 1873. In observing
the small margin of the Republican victory in the fifth district one
paper said, "the Grant men are astounded." Michigan Tribune, Novem-
ber 13, 1873.

 

95

victories were attributed to the hard work, acumen, and alacrity of
"those who had charged themselves with correcting abuses in govern-
mental administration." These people were exhorted to "continue
their good work and remain unflagging in their determination to
adhere to the cause of justice and good." If they did "the people
of the country would surely have cause to rejoice in the result of
future elections."31
In their attitudes Michigan Reformers were in alignment
with the feelings of national Reform leaders. "G. W. Curtis and
others interpreted Republican loses in the off-year elections of
1873 as a rebuke of Republican recklessness."32
During the time remaining in 1873 Michigan Liberals
busied themselves with plans for the following year. George Murdock,
a consistent advocate of independent reform, wrote Blair a number
of letters putting forth his views on the possibilities of the
cause in the new year. He called for the early organization of a
new movement and speculated that the Liberals "headed by a good
state central committee could get over 100,000 votes in the fall of

1874 and secure a reliable majority in the legislature."33

 

3lGrand Rapids Daily Times, November 7, 1873; Michigan
Tribune, November 13, 1873.

32Ari Hoogenboom, Outlawing the Spoils (Urbana: University
of Illinois Press, 1961), p. 126.

33George Murdock to Austin Blair, November 17, 1873. See
also Murdock to Blair, October 20, 1873 and December 6, 1873, Blair
Papers.

96

The precedents set in 1873 for independent political
action in 1874 were significant. Perhaps the most meaningful of
these was the expressed Liberal conviction that to achieve genuine
reform it would be necessary to surrender past party affiliations
and to give up traditional political labels as well. The unique
types of organization experimented with in the spring and fall
elections would serve as models for 1874. The events of 1873
constituted the "stepping stones toward the formation of a new
party that would unite all the friends of reform and of a return

to just government."34

This new party would crystallize in 1874
and be called the National Reform Party.

The new year witnessed continued efforts for independent
political reform at the local level. These were most noticeable
in special elections held in February of 1874 to fill vacancies in
the state legislature, and in the regular spring municipal and
county elections in April.

The resignation of Philip H. Emerson, senator from the
eighth legislative district, occasioned a special election in
Calhoun County. By the end of January Liberal Reformers in the
county had issued a call for a convention to choose a nominee to

fill the vacated seat. The call invited to the February convention

"all electors of Calhoun County who favor reform and economy in the

 

34Kalamazoo Gazette, April 4, 1873: Michigan Tribune,
December 4, 11, 1873.

 

97

administration of government and who are opposed to the continuance
of the present corrupt and extravagant use of the public funds or’
the endorsement of vast monopolies by subsidy or land grants."35
The convention was attended by many well-known proponents
of reform who were from the start in an innovative and independent
mood. Those present included Samuel S. Lacey, a close friend and
confidant of Austin Blair and a leading Liberal Republican, and
Daville Hubbard of Marshall, an influential farmer and soon to be
leader in the National Reform movement. The inventive spirit of
the participants manifested itself in the adoption of a new party
name--the "People's Reform Party." A resolution passed that in the
upcoming election the Liberal slate be headed by the "People's
Reform Ticket."36
The convention selected William F. Hewitt as the "people's
candidate" for state senator. It then resolved that "without regard
to party or prior political antecedents we present to the electors
of this county our candidate William F. Hewitt for senator in the
spirit of reform." It further resolved that its purpose was to
"rescue the nation from the present corrupt and unfaithful partisans

whose conduct and purposes are a serious menace to the free institu-

tions established by the founders of the government."37

 

35Marshall Democratic Expounder, January 29, 1874.

36Ibid., February 12, 1874; Michigan Tribune, February 19,

1874.
Ibid.

98

In Berrien County a similar situation existed. A vacancy
in the Michigan House of Representatives necessitated a special
election. Former Democrats and Liberal Republicans joined together
in a "People's Convention" to select a candidate. They picked
Ethan A. Brown, who, despite his past Democratic ties, had become
according to observer George Murdock, a firm advocate of independent
reform.38

A third example of reform activism occurred in Hillsdale
County. There a "People's Convention" nominated John P. Cook to
fill a vacancy in the state senate, caused by the death of William
Stoddard. Upon accepting the nomination, Cook stated he stood for
"opposition to monopoly and subsidies."39

In the special elections, Hewitt, Brown and Cook were
successful, and their victories had a buoyant effect on Liberal

40 Pro-reform

Reformers and the enemies of regular Republicanism.
organs crowed: "the first gun of the next campaign has been fired."

"It has broken the ring," and "defeated the corruptionists." They

 

38George Murdock to Austin Blair, February 17, 1874 and
February 26, 1874, Blair Papers.

39Hi11sda1e Standard, February 17, 24, 1874.

40Hewitt defeated a Republican opponent in Calhoun County
where the Grant majority had been 2010 in 1872 and John Cook was
victorious in Hillsdale County, a "banner Grant County." There the
President had garnered a majority of 3500 votes in 1872. Michigan
Tribune, February 26, March 5, 1874.

99

maintained that the victories showed that a "reform party if fully

"41

organized can carry the state in next fall's election. Thus it

was being suggested that a reform party be created on a state-wide
basis.

During the regular spring municipal and county elections
the trend toward independent reform and the rejection of tradi-
tional party ties and identities continued. This was illustrated
in the town of Marshall. There a majority of the old-guard Republi-

cans who had been "among the most earnest, active, and influential

members of that party since its organization," officially deserted.42

At the convention to select municipal candidates on a
"People's Reform Ticket“ the following resolutions were made:

Whereas the status of the old political parties has become
unsatisfactory to the great mass of taxpayers of the country,
and in as much as they are fast becoming subservient to
controlling rings and scheming politicians and,

Whereas the great issues which created them are past and
new issues involving new interests are fast demanding our
attention and legislation and,

Whereas a Republican form of government is a government of
the people, a government by the people, and a government
for the people therefore,

It is resolved, that we hereby absolve our allegience to
them and unite upon the great principle. that all legislation
should be to secure the greatest good for the greatest

number and,

Resolved, that as farmers our claims have been totally ignored
by both political parties and we have had no part in government,

 

4lMarshall Democratic Expounder, February 26, 1874: Michigan
Tribune, February 26, 1874; Miles Democrat, March 4, 1874.

42Marshall Democratic Expounder, March 12, 1874.

100

except to foot the bills and,

Now we demand the representation we are entitled to and
we intend to have it and,

Resolved, that this movement zhall be known and designated
as the People's Reform Party. 3

Among the usual concerns of Liberal Reformers a strong
note of agrarian discontent was discernible in these declarations
and that element was to be of vital significance in the National
Reform effort in Michigan. The impact of the Grange was clearly
beginning to manifest itself politically.44

The response of Reformers to the spring election results
in the state revealed a growing confidence in the possibilities for
the ultimate success of their cause. In Marshall, for example,
the "People's Reform Ticket" was elected by a substantial majority
and the "Grant-Chandler Ring" was "left without a representative."
"The people,‘I exclaimed one journal, "have condemned the Credit
Mobilier, salary stealing, and venal character of the present
administration."45

The outcome of the April elections around the country

bolstered this confidence. "The elections," said an observer,

 

43Ibid.

44Richard H. Barton, "The Agrarian Revolt in Michigan
1865-1900” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of History,
Michigan State University, 1958), p. 122.

45Marshall Democratic Expounder, April 9, 1874. The
victory of the "People's Reform" ticket in Battle Creek also reflected
what the local Reform organization called an overwhelming defeat of
"Grantism" and the "Ring." Michigan Tribune, April 9, 1874.

101

"prove that the power of the Republican Party is being broken by
the forces of Reform and the people feel at liberty once more to
think and act for themselves. A great revolution is underway and
the general lesson taught by the April elections is that the
Republican Party has received a premonitory stroke of the general
paralysis that it will experience in November of 1874."46

The emergence of the state-wide National Reform Party
in Michigan must be viewed as the culmination of an evolutionary
process. Its origins can be traced back as far as 1870 to the
famous "bolt" of the Republicans of the sixth district against the
renomination of J. F. Driggs for Congress. The Liberal Republican
drive of 1872 was a contributory factor. Important too, were the
events of 1873. By 1874 conditions were virtually ideal for the
formation of a new, reform-based party.

The roles of two men early in 1874 were of crucial
importance to the organization of the National Reform Party in the
state. They were George Murdock of Berrien and John C. Blanchard
of Ionia.

Murdock was one of the earliest advocates of a state-wide
new party movement. He urged this concept on Blair in a series of
letters in 1873 and kept up his barrage during the early months of

1874. On January 6th he wrote requesting more support for a new

 

46Mi1es Democrat, April 11, 1874.

102

party and conjectured that Foster Pratt, the Democratic leader,
might be willing to accept the notion. In February he wrote again
commenting favorably on the independent reform effort in the special
legislative election in Berrien County. And by March he was taking
credit for the idea of calling a mass convention to set up a new
party.47
Despite Murdock's claims, it appears that John C. Blanchard,

a well-liked and respected young lawyer from Ionia, was the principle
architect of the National Reform Party in Michigan. On April 4,
1874, he wrote to Blair enclosing with his correspondence a circular
which he had authored. It was signed by himself and five other
leading citizens of Ionia. This document which was printed on
January 4, 1874, constitutes the earliest description of the National
Reform Party in the state. The circular entitled "Declaration of
Principles of the National Reform Party" was introduced with the
following words:

We the undersigned citizens...of the state of Michigan

desirous of perpetuating our free institutions...with

equal rights and privileges to all, and feeling satis-

fied from the experience of the past few years that the

tendency of the present administration is to corruption,

centralization, and the ultimate overthrow of republican

institutions...and feeling that the only remedy to avert

such a state of things and to bring the country back to

that purity of administration and respect for constitu-

tion and law that existed in the early days of the
Republic is through the organization of a new political

47George Murdock to Austin Blair, January 6, 1874,
February 17, 1874 and March 23, 1874, Blair Papers.

103

party, which we respectfully suggest be called the
National Reform Party.... We hereby organize ourselves
into such a new political organization and...cordially
invite every true lover of his country, without regard
to past pollgical preferences, to join in such politi-
cal action.

The ensuing list of fourteen major principles commenced
with a statement supportive of the Union and the federal system of
government while reaffirming the belief in states rights and a
strict construction of the Constitution. Other points called for
the maintenance of the public credit and the payment of the public
debt, the use of the tariff for revenue and a "just and equitable"
system of taxation, territorial expansion, a liberal pension law
for Union veterans and their families, a fair homestead law to
“secure homes for all actual settlers of the public domain, civil
service reform limiting terms in office for most elected officials,
economy and merit as guiding principles in governmental adminis-
tration, a uniform national currency and limitation on interest
rates, protection of labor from capital, the control of railroads
and a cessation of land grants to them, a prosecution of Credit
Mobilier, and repeal of the Salary Act.49

In his letter accompanying the circular Blanchard spoke

hopefully of the political potential of the proposed new party. "I

 

48"Declaration of Principles" enclosed in a letter from
John Blanchard to Austin Blair, April 4, 1874, ibid.

491bid.

104

have no doubt," he said, "that a good state ticket can carry the
state in the next election, also the legislature. In which event
I am pressing your name [Blair] for senator." He further indi-
cated to Blair that he would call for an organizational convention

in Lansing sometime in June.50

Blanchard, however, was subsequently
upstaged by a group of reform-minded state legislators.

Interest in a new party had been growing among anti-
Republican and independent members of the legislature for quite a
while. On March 23, 1874, George Murdock wrote to Blair about his
correspondence with newly-elected State Representative Ethan A.
Brown. The letter had informed Murdock that certain members of the
legislature had met in caucus on the evening of March 18th to dis-
cuss the possibilities for calling a mass convention to set up a
new party. "They decided," he said, "to wait till they got home
to get up petitions simultaneously in the different counties they

represented...."51

They could thus test the grass-roots support
for the idea. On May 11th Murdock received a letter from State
Senator John P. Cook dealing further with the need for calling a
state convention to launch the new party. Murdock related this to
Blair and added: "I feel certain our chances would have been better'

if we had organized last February but lost ground can be made up

 

50John Blanchard to Austin Blair, April 4, 1874, ibid

5IGeorge Murdock to Austin Blair, March 23, 1874, ibid.

105

if we have a harmonious convention and a working state committee."52

Clearly, then, the interested legislators were about to make a move.
That move came with the selection of a committee by the

opposition members of the legislature to write and issue a call.

This legislative committee was comprised of State Senators John

P. Cook of Hillsdale and Thomas S. Cobb of Kalamazoo and Repre-

sentative Ethan A. Brown of Berrien.53

The call came on May 22nd
for a "mass state convention" in Lansing, on August 6, 1874, "to
secure the organization of a party on the basis of live issues, and
for the restoration of purity and statesmanship to the high places
of our state and national government." The new party was to be
founded upon and dedicated to "liberty, union, purity in office,
and reform in the administration of government." The need for an
independent party resulted from the "inability and unwillingness of
all existing parties" to do anything about the incompetency and
corruption in government which "was by themselves created."54
This call was picked up and published in many of the
state's newspapers. It was naturally allotted more attention in
those which had reform leanings. Such organs attempted to impart

a sense of national scope to the new party by focusing on the re-

action of Liberals in other states to the Michigan call. An

 

52George Murdock to Austin Blair, May 11, 1874, ibid.

53Marshall Democratic Expounder, May 28, 1874.

54Grand Rapids Democrat, May 27, 1874; Michigan Tribune,
June 4, 1874.

106

article from the Milwaukee News, known as the “leading reform
journal of Wisconsin," was published in Michigan. It contended
that the Reformers of Michigan would "lead the people of the state
out of the corrupt and degenerate Republican organization into the
gathering army of Reformers in the great Northwest." It further
argued that the movement would "prevent the return of drunken Zach

Chandler to the United States Senate."55

The Michigan reform
press made note of independent reform movements which were emerg-
ing in other states such as Wisconsin, Iowa, California, Oregon,
Kansas, and Minnesota.56
The much heralded Reform convention assembled in the
senate chambers at the state capitol in Lansing on August 6, 1874.
Approximately one hundred delegates were present. Among the
Reformers attending were William F. Hewitt, Henry Chamberlain,
D. B. Harrington, George W. Underwood, W. W. Woolnough, Thomas S.
Cobb, George H. Murdock, John C. Blanchard, C. C. Comstock, Jerome
W. Turner, and Randolph Strickland. The Honorable John P. Cook
called the meeting to order and after the selection of committees
on resolutions and permanent organization Austin Blair delivered a

keynote address.57

 

55Grand Rapids Democrat, June 3, 1874; Michigan Tribune,
June 11, 1874.

 

56Ibid.

57Detroit Evening News, August 6, 1874; Lansing Journal,
August 13, 1874; Michigan Tribune, August 13, 1874.

107

The report of the resolutions committee began by emphasiz-
ing the impossibility of reforming the existing parties from within.
It called for independent action and appealed for a united effort
by all regardless of past political views. It went on to support
the provision of a sound currency and a return to hard money, the
maintenance of the rights of states to "order and control their
own domestic concerns," the single term principle for the presi-
dency, and the exorcism of "needless officeholders, contractors,
and corrupt rings."58

In a special anti-monopolistic appeal to the farmer, one
resolution proposed that "the legislature had the right to regulate
the fares and freight rates on railroads to protect the public
against unfair charges." Also it held that the "legislature must
tax railroads equally with other property for the support of
government." Finally, it denounced the provision of free railroad
passes for members of the state legislature, state officers, and
judges. This practice was "inimical to the interests of the labor-
ing and producing classes."59

The resolutions also criticized the operations of the state

treasury. In particular they attacked the practice of maintaining

an unwarranted and unreasonably high surplus of funds which were

 

58Ibid.; Kalamazoo Gazette, August 14, 1874; Grand Rapids
Democrat, August 12, 1874.

 

59Ibid.

108

stored in certain undisclosed and privileged “pet banks." The
state treasury, they admonished, must diminish the large balance
by spending it in such a way as to "greatly reduce the people's
taxes." Further it must keep records of the accounts of public
funds "open to public inspection." And the state treasurer must
provide the legislature with information on the location and safety
of public monies.6O
The independent Detroit Evening News summed up the plat-
form of the Lansing convention in a way which captured the spirit
of the new party. "The platform," it said, "recognizes the fact
that there is a good deal of honesty and patriotism laying [sic]
around loose in both the existing parties, but their acts in the
past show that reform cannot be obtained by acting with either."61
Not all the participants in the Lansing convention were
entirely enamored of the platform. Specifically, there were men
in the delegation from Kent County who were disillusioned with the
demand for hard money. This "looked more to contraction than to
the expansion of the currency" and as a result the Kent County

62 That

delegates, led by C. C. Comstock, withdrew in a body.
county was to become a hotbed of Greenback agitation just two years

hence.

 

Ibid.

6lDetroit Evening News, August 7, 1874.

62Grand Rapids Democrat, August 12, 1874; LansingAJournal,
August 13, 1874; Kalamazoo Gazette, August 14, 1874.

109

One of the last and most important acts of the convention
was the appointment of a state central committee for the National
Reform Party. The members were J. P. Cook-~chairman, Eugene Pringle,
James S. Upton, Jerome Turner, and George Murdock. This group was
to coordinate the activities of the new party in the upcoming cam-
paign. In its first official act the committee issued a call for
a state nominating convention to be held in the city of Jackson
on September 9, 1874.63

Shortly after the Lansing meeting, the central committee
began to supervise the setting up of National Reform committees in
the various counties and the calling of local conventions to select
delegates to the state convention. It provided that each representa-
tive district in the state legislature could send two voting dele-
gates to Jackson.64

The delegates thus designated gathered at Bronson's Hall
in Jackson just after 11 o'clock on the morning of September 9,
1874. The convention was called to order by John P. Cook, who moved
to appoint temporary officers. They were Andrew T. McReynolds as

chairman and Albert A. Dorrance as secretary. Several committees

were next established. They included many familiar names such as

 

63Ibid.

64Kalamazoo Gazette, August 28, 1874.

110

Eugene Pringle, John H. Richardson, F. M. Holloway, F. A. Baker,
and William F. Hewitt.65
The commencement of the afternoon session witnessed the
announcement of official delegates and permanent officers. McReynolds
remained as chairman of the convention and Dorrance as the secretary.66
Chairman McReynolds delivered a speech of more than an
hour's duration. He spoke of the necessity of cooperation between
Liberal Republicans and Democrats in order to combat the corruption
and evils of entrenched Republican power in the nation and state.
He dwelled on the reprehensible actions of the central government
including the Salary Grab Act. In speaking of the currency issue
he was vague. He was "neither in favor of inflation nor in favor

n67

of contraction... After McReynold's oration the convention

recessed to allow the committee on resolutions to complete its
work.68

During the recess John Blanchard of Ionia addressed those
remaining in the hall. He spoke briefly of the need for reform at

all levels of government. He offered a series of suggestions which

 

65Ibid., September 11, 1874; Detroit Evening_News, September
9, 1874; Michigan Tribune, September 17, 1874; Detroit’Free Press,
September 10, 1874.

Ibid.

67Detroit Free Press, September 10, 1874; Michigan Tribune,
September 17, 1874; Kalamazoo Gazette, September 11, 1874.

Ibid.

 

111

he hoped would be incorporated in the as yet uncompleted platform.
Among these were a single term limitation for president, two terms
for senators and representatives in Congress, and the election of
postmasters in all cities of less than 25,000 inhabitants.69

Upon reassembling the convention heard the report of the
committee on resolutions. It charged that reform was infeasible
through either of the existing political parties and that a new
party was necessary. It was to be organized as the National Reform
Party and was to work for the following: a reduction in the number,
power, and salaries of the offices of the national government;
safeguards that office-holders would be selected on ability and not
subject to undue political pressures; more elective offices and a
speedy turn to sound currency and free banking. After some debate
the convention adopted the report and temporarily adjourned]O

The main order of business at the evening session was the
election of candidates for the state ticket. In the balloting for
governor, Henry Chamberlain of Berrien County won out over John P.
Cook of Hillsdale. Other top selections on the ticket were Jerome
W. Turner of Owosso, chosen for lieutenant governor, William F.

Hewitt of Marshall for state treasurer, Frederick M. Holloway of

Hillsdale for auditor general, Chauncey W. Green of Farmington for

 

 

112

commissioner of the state land office, Andrew T. McReynolds of
Muskegon for attorney general, George H. House of Lansing for
secretary of state, and Duane Doty of Detroit for superintendent
of public instruction.7]
Next, the Reformers selected a state central committee
with Fred Baker of Detroit as chairman and John C. Blanchard of
Ionia as secretary. Other members included W. W. Woolnough of
Battle Creek, George H. Murdock of Berrien, and George W. Under-
wood of Hillsdale. The committee was charged with filling any
vacancies which might appear on the state ticket and with the
"speedy calling" of congressional conventions]2
At the close of the National Reform convention, Austin
Blair delivered an address. He lauded the state ticket and claimed
that it was comprised of men of "honesty and brains" and that such
men would win the support of the people. He took Chandler and the
"Detroit Ring'to task and fired a broadside at Grant and the Salary
Grab. He stressed that the campaign would be a crucial one and
would result in a heavy turn-out of voters. If the Reformers would
only exercise judgment in making local and legislative nominations,

they would achieve a great victory in the fall.73

 

113

The Democrats did not fuse with the Liberal Reformers as
they had in 1872. They believed that they could preserve their
separate identity and through partial cooperation with the Reformers
carry the elections. Some of the Democratic regulars were alienated
from the Liberals by 1874. The Michigan Argus, which at one point
in 1872 had been very supportive of the Reform movement, explained
this alienation. It claimed that the Democrats were tired of
"playing second fiddle to the Reformers." Further it blamed the
disastrous defeat of 1872 on the Liberals and said that that alone
"ought to satisfy all that the Democracy cannot be transferred
bodily to a new organization."74

The Democrats held their convention in Kalamazoo on
September 10, 1874. In making up their ticket they adopted four
of the National Reform candidates. They accepted Henry Chamberlain
for governor, George H. House for secretary of state, Chauncey W.
Green for commissioner of the state land office, and Duane Doty for
member of the state board of education. For the other posts they

substituted men of their own choosing.75

 

74Michigan Argus, quoted in Lansing,State Republican,
July 10. 1874.

750i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 158; Michigan Tribune,
September 17, 1874. Henry Chamberlain who headed both the Democratic
and National Reform state tickets in 1874 was very concerned with
honesty and morality. He helped to organize the Three Oaks Anti-
Swearing Society. See circular of November 4, 1875 in the Chamberlain
Papers, Historical Collections, Michigan State University, East Lans-
ing, Michigan.

114

The National Reformers and Democrats came to share a
fifth candidate by a rather extraordinary set of circumstances.
Several days after the Reform convention Andrew T. McReynolds,
who had been designated as the nominee for attorney general, wrote
a letter to the National Reform State Central Committee declining
the nomination tendered to him at the convention. He claimed that
he was prompted by a concern for a united front and victory in
the upcoming election. He expressed the hope that the Democratic
choice would be substituted for himself on the Reform ticket. In
fact, he suggested that the entire National Reform ticked should
withdraw in favor of the Democratic one. He cited the case of
New York where a reform organization had issued a platform and
statement of principles but had put no nominee in the field to
avoid jeopardizing the Democracy's chances of defeating the
Republicans.76

This action by McReynolds should not really have surprised
the Reformers if they had listened closely to his speech at their
convention. In that talk he spoke in terms of Democrats and Liberal
Republicans cooperating for victory against the conmon enemy. He
did not emphasize at all the concept of a new party completely re-
moved from the old ones. This was odd Since he was the chairman of
a convention which was quintessentially concerned with a new and

independent reform movement.77

 

76Grand RapidsQemocrat, September 16, 1874; Michigan
Tribune, September 24, 1874.

77Detroit Free Press, September 10, 1874.

115

At any rate, the withdrawal of McReynolds triggered a
flurry of consultations among Reform leaders. The most notable of
these was between F. A. Baker, chairman of the state central
committee, and Charles S. May, long-time spokesman for reform from
Kalamazoo. Baker, of Detroit, wrote a number of letters to May try-
ing to persuade him to accept the nomination for attorney general.
He argued that May's name would strengthen the ticket and that he
"would make a better candidate for the post than those offered by
either of the other parties." To allay May's concerns about pre-
serving his image as an objective and selfless reformer, Baker
wrote: "I do not think your candidacy would hurt you, the people
are perfectly aware of the fact that you did not seek the nomination
and do not covet the office."78

The problem of the vacancy was not easily solved. At
first, May declined the offer of Baker but continued to give his
hearty support for the National Reform Movement. The predilection
of the Reform Central Committee was then to endorse the Democratic
nominee for attorney general, M. V. Montgomery. Finally May con-
sented to the use of his name on the Reform ticket but indicated his
79

reluctance to engage in active campaigning for his own election.

Ultimately the two parties came to share five candidates. They were

 

78F. A. Baker to Charles S. May, September 16, 1874 and
September 19, 1874, May Papers.

79Michigan Tribune, September 24, October 15, 1874.

116

Chamberlain, House, Green, Doty and J. M. Sterling. The latter, the
Democratic nominee for state treasurer, was embraced by the National
Reformers when their man, W. F. Hewitt, indicated a desire to run
for a county office.80
Thus there was only a quasi-fusion between the Democrats
and the National Reformers in 1874. Some of the candidates were
shared but others were not and the two parties "maintained through-
out the campaign a separate organization."81
In the selection of congressional candidates this pattern
generally held true. Democrats and National Reformers held separate
conventions and did not, for the most part, nominate through joint
conference. There was some sharing of candidates as on the state
tickets. Those men selected by both parties included Alpheus
Williams representing the first district, Fidus Livermore for the
third district, Allan Potter for the fourth district, and Mark
Wilber for the fifth district.82
In the latter district there occurred a throwback to the

tactics of 1872. The Democrats and National Reformers met simul-

taneously in Grand Rapids and employed a joint conference committee

 

80Lansing Journal, October 8, 1874; Michigan Tribune,
October 8, 1874.

8‘0i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 159.

82"Michigan." Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia, XIV (1874).

p. 557.

117

to arrive at the selection of Wilber.83

This development though,
was the exception rather than the rule in 1874.

Separate organizations were used at the legislative and
county levels as well. In most districts the Democratic and
National Reform labels were kept intact but there was some sharing
of candidates. However, there were a few cases where fusion was
complete under the Reform banner.84

During the campaign the National Reformers kept up a
constant attack against the Grant regime which they claimed was
culpable for the numerous scandals which had transpired between
1872 and 1874. In addition to Credit Mobilier and the Salary
Grab, there were the "Sanborn Contracts," the "Washington Ring"
steal of "Boss Shepard" and other odious affairs.85 Grant was
labeled by the Reformers as "unfit for office." They charged
that "by his selection of advisors and confidants, by his neglect
of public duties and his indifference to public wrongs, by his
distribution and use of the public patronage" he had "done more to
demoralize the public service than any five presidents who had

preceeded him." The "revolting" possibility that he might run for

a third term seemed feasible since "he had not denied it." Reformers

 

83Saginaw Daily Courier, September 20, 1874.

84Michigan Tribune, September 17, 1874. An example of
complete fusion was found in Calhoun County.

85Ibid., October 29, 1874.

118

therefore renewed their demand for the limitation of the presidency
to a single term as part of an overall reform of the civil service.
Grant, they said, "had throttled civil service reform in its cradle,
as King Richard had smothered the princes in the tower."86
Radical Reconstruction in the South persisted as an issue
in 1874. The Reformers detested what they termed the "federal
tyranny" in Louisiana, where William P. Kellogg was "backed up by
federal bayonets." They generally portrayed the southern govern-
ments as under the thumb of venal, avaricious carpetbaggers who,
with their ignorant black partners, were totally incompetent to
govern and were consumed with plundering. The civil rights of the
southern whites, they said, were being completely abridged under
the Radical Reconstruction program. The Reformers also slashed at
the ongoing use of the "bloody shirt" tactic by the Republicans
against their political opponents, North and South.87
In addressing themselves to state issues the National
Reformers kept up a constant barrage against Chandler and his
corrupting influence on Michigan politics. Chandler men in state
government were said to be tyrannical and extravagant and prone to

enriching themselves at the public expense. Critical scrutiny of

the operations of the state treasury led to the conclusion that

 

86May's speech, October 15, 1874, Speeches oiythe Stump.
See also Michigan Tribune, September 24, October 29, 1874.

87Ibid.

119

the people of the state were being swindled and over-taxed to
support the state treasurer and certain privileged bankers in
style. Austin Blair repeatedly called for an end to the "plunder
of the public treasury."88
The subjects of taxation and the related preferential
treatment of railroads were given much attention by the Reformers.
They complained that taxes for the ordinary citizen were too high
and that they could be reduced by spending some of the surplus
funds in the treasury and halting the exemption of railroad property
for tax purposes. They further contended that the distribution of
free railroad passes to state legislators, judges, and other
officials must cease. The railroad monopoly with the complicity
of government was detrimental to the people and must, they claimed,
be controlled.89
The thorough corruption of the G.O.P both in the nation
and state was a central campaign issue. The party, Reformers
charged, had "fallen from its high purpose, the moral strength and
purity were gone and the great animating force which had held it

together was seen no more for with the victory had come the spoils,

plunder, and easy virtue." The party was "full of maladministration

 

88Saginaw Daily Courier, July 7, 1874. See also Michigan

Tribune, October 15, 1874.

89Lansing State Republican, June 12, 1874; Michigan
Tribune, June 18, 1874.

120

and corruption and was the prey of rings and upholders of monopolies."
It could not, therefore, "be reformed from within." It was "too

full of corruption and too completely in the hands of the worst men

in it." These men "controlled the caucuses every time" so the honest
Republicans had "no remedy except to bolt the nominations and go

n90

outside the party. Another related issue subjected to criticism

was the Republican practice of assessing its state office holders
a certain percentage of their salaries to finance campaigns.9]
Actually the National Reformers argued that both the major
parties had outlived their usefulness. They were self-serving and
consumed with outmoded and dead issues. The time had come to put
the past behind. "Our business," said C. S. May, "is not to per-
petuate and keep alive the political divisions and animosities of
the days which are gone but to meet like men the issues and questions
of the present times."92
Although the issues of the currency and the tariff were
of great interest to the people, the Reformers assumed a rather
ambiguous stance on both. Officially they called for a return to

specie and seemed to support a restriction of the currency. But

their stand on resumption was tempered with a rather vague thought

 

90May's speech, October 15, 1874, Speeches of the Stump.

9'0i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 167.

92May's speech, October 15, 1874, Speeches of the Stump.
See also Michigan Tribune, June 4, 1874.

121

that it should be done only at a pace that was consistent with the

best interests and financial prosperity of the country.93

"94

The
tariff, they held, was to be "used for revenue. The Reformers
were apparently afraid of alienating the pro-Granger element by
taking too strong a position on economic policies that were con-
trary to the achievement of an expanded and inflated currency.95
There was no elaboration on the tariff simply because the Grangers
themselves could not definitively agree upon it and, therefore, the

96 These same

least specific stand would offend the fewest.
Reformers did not hesitate, though, to take the Republican adminis-
tration to task for its fiscal vascillations and wastefulness,
which they claimed had exacerbated the depression underway since
1873.97
AS in 1872, the Reformers aimed a special appeal at the
farmers and urban workers. These two groups were especially hard

hit by the ongoing depression. "In this situation it was natural

 

930i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 158; Michigan Tribune,
August 13, September 24, 1874.

 

940i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 158.

95Ibid., See also Michigan Farmer, July 14, 1874.

—_

96Solon Justus Buck, The Granger Movement (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1933), p. 155. Some Michigan farmers
apparently supported the tariff on lumber, salt, wool and grain.
See Michigan Farmer, June 23, 1874.

 

 

97May's speech, October 15, 1874, Speeches of the Stump;
Michigan Tribune, October 2, 1873.

122

for Reform leaders to attempt a coalition between the two dis-

contented producing classes...."98

The general ploy was to blame
the depression and economic inequities on monopolies constructed
and perpetuated by the "privileged classes" with the acquiescence
of the Republican-controlled government.99
In 1874 the National Reformers did not direct any
specific appeals to the Germans or other ethnic groups as the
Liberals had done two years previously. Because this was not a
presidential contest it was more difficult to make a meaningful
issue out of Henry Wilson's "Know-Nothing" past or the Grant
administration's support of France in the Franco-Prussian War.
An indirect appeal was made to the Germans, however, by pointing
out the support of the Republican dominated state government for
prohibition which was unpopular in the German community.100
The National Reformers were totally apathetic toward
potential black voters. There is virtually no mention made of
black people in the Reform campaign rhetoric. One can only specu-

late that the Reformers concluded that the black vote would go

automatically to the Republicans and that any vigorous entreaty to

 

98Richard M. Doolen, "The National Greenback Party in
Michigan Politics," Michigan History, XLVII (1963), p. 163.

99Kalamazoo Gazette, August 14, 1874.

 

'000i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 173; Michigan Tribune,
March 25, 1874. The prohibition issue is examined—in Floyd
Streeter, "History of Prohibition Legislation in Michigan," Michi-
gan History, 11 (1918), pp. 289-308.

 

 

123

blacks might serve only to antagonize whites who otherwise would
support the third party.

In many ways the campaign in Michigan was less emotional
than that of 1872. Personalities did not dominate as they had
previously. Instead, Reformers appealed to the voter's reason, his
integrity, his courage, and his independence. They asked him to
follow the dictates of his conscience in transcending political _
and party considerations to cast his ballot for honesty, frugality,
and "the good of the country." "Be brave, be manly, and true to
your convictions," they exhorted, "it will not hurt you to be in a
third party for a little while or to vote for principle without
hope of immediate success. That is what the grand old pioneers
of anti-slavery did in this country...."101

There was less "hoopla" and campaign gimmickry employed
in this election as compared to the contest of 1872. This was to
be expected since 1874 was an "off-year" election. There were
fewer mass rallies and grand gatherings but some things remained.
The "bombshell," for instance, was used frequently by Reformers in
turning up new scandals in state government like that related to
the operations of the state treasury. The presentation of the
Reform movement as one of national scope was used again. Reform

publications concentrated on the coverage of independent reform

 

1O1May's speech, October 14, 1874, Speeches of the Stump.
See also Michigan Tribune, June 11, July 23, 1874.

124

efforts in various states and linked them directly to what was
going on in Michigan. The idea of a "national revolution" against
corruption was used to generate interest in and support of reform
in the state.102
The results of the fall election of 1874 constituted a
landslide victory for the opponents of the Republican Party.
Nationally, it was clear that "the bloody shirt could no longer
control the outcome of an election." The Republicans lost control
of the House of Representatives in their "first political defeat in

a national election since the Civil War."103

Across the country
"many state offices came again into Democratic control and the
Liberal influence, especially in the West, either in close alliance
with the Democrats or in independent movements, was an important

factor."104

The Grand Rapids Daily Times exclaimed that the results
of the elections "must be gratifying to the true friends of reform
and good government everywhere. The administration has been rebuked
in unmistakable language and they must listen to the demand for
change by the people from Massachusetts to California."105
Michigan was very much in step with the rest of the nation

in 1874. In the gubernatorial race the Republican incumbent John

 

102Niles Democrat, April 4, 1874.

103Kenneth M. Stampp, The Era of Reconstruction, 1865-
1871 (New York: Random House, 1965), p. 209.

104Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 210.

105Grand Rapids Daily Times. November 4. 1874-

125

Bagley just squeezed by the Democratic and National Reform candi-
date Henry Chamberlain with a total vote of 111,519 to 105,550.106
The Republican gubernatorial vote had thus plummeted from over
sixty-one per cent of the total ballots cast in 1872 to just over

fifty per cent in 1874.107

Chamberlain carried many counties,
including Berrien, Clinton, Ingham, Ionia, Jackson, Kent, Lenawee,
Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, Saginaw, St. Clair, Washtenaw,
and Wayne. Further, he lost the counties of Kalamazoo, Muskegon

and St. Joseph by a combined margin of only 190 votes.108

In the congressional races the Democratic and Reform
candidates won in the first, fourth, and sixth districts. This
was especially impressive in the latter two districts which had
gone Republican by majorities of 5,266 and 5,492 votes respectively

in 1872.109

The Republicans were victorious in the other six
districts but with substantially diminished majorities contrasted

with two years before. In fact, in those districts where the G.O.P.

 

106Michigan Manual, 1875, p. 233; Michigan Almanac. 1875.

 

1070i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 171.

108Michigan Manual, 1875, pp. 231-233.

'OgIbid., pp. 236-238.

126

triumphed the pluralities were less than 1,600 votes in all but the
ninth district.110
The state legislature was drastically altered by the
election. Prior to 1874 it had been utterly dominated by the
Republicans. After the contest that party clung to a combined
majority in both houses of only ten. The new Senate was comprised
of fourteen Democratic and Reform members and only eighteen Re-
publicans. In the House there were forty-seven Democratic and
Reform seats to just fifty-three for the Republicans.111
The reaction of Michigan Reformers to the outcome of
the state election was exuberant. They called the results "grand
and glorious" and suggested that "the power and dominion of ring
rule war broken and that Grant-Chandlerism had received its fatal

blow."n2

 

noIbid., pp. 235-240; see also Michigan Almanac, 1875,
p. 67. The 1874 election also witnessed the overwhelming defeat of
the new proposed state constitution and the womens' suffrage amend-
ment. These are discussed in D. C. Shilling "Constitution making
since 1850," Michigan History, XVIII (1934), pp. 33-47 and in
Karolena Fox, "The Movement for Equal Suffrage in Michigan," Michigan
History, 11 (1918), pp. 90-109. The Reformers attitudes reflected
those of the majority of voters and they generally considered the
constitution and womens' suffrage "dead issues." Michigan Tribune,
August 13, 1874.

11]"Michigan,“ _ppleton's Annual Cyclppedia, XIV (1874),
p. 557; Michigan Almanac, 1875, pp. 32-33.

112Marshall Democratic Expounder, November 5, 1874;
Michigan Tribune, November 4, 1874. In his diary, John A. Parkhurst
wrote "good news from the elections. Republicanism is everywhere
defunct." Parkhurst Diary, November 4, 1874, in the Parkhurst Papers,
Historical Collections, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

127

The reasons for the great successes recorded against the
long dominant Republican Party in the fall of 1874 were many. First,
there was the financial panic which gripped the nation and struck
severely at the producing classes. Second, there was "the continuing
exposure of scandals which reached into Grant's official family...."n3
Third, there was the "Crime of 1873" which in the view of farmers in
depressed agricultural states had "passed Congress through the
corrupt influence of a cabal of powerful government bondholders who
conspired with treasury officials and influential congressmen."114
Fourth, there was division within the Republican Party over matters
related to Reconstruction, the economy, and political tyranny.”5

In Michigan these factors were augmented by some other
state-related considerations. The Republican Party in the state
"was more odious to the Granger element than was the Democracy,
while its prohibition sympathies alienated the German element and
liquor interests." In addition, "the administration of state
finances by Treasurer Victory P. Collier elicited harsh criticism
and the large surpluses with continued taxation embittered many tax-

payers who would otherwise have supported the Republican Party."“6

 

H3Roy F. Nichols, The Stakes of Power 1845-1877 (New
York: Hill and Wang, 1961), p. 216.

H4Allen Weinstein, Prelude to Populism: Origins of the
Silver Issue 1867-1878 (New HavenzTYale university Press, 1970),
p. 8.

115Nichols, Power, p. 217.

H60i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 173.

128

The most successful candidates were endorsed by both the
Reformers and Democrats and were well-known political figures. This
was true in other states as well as Michigan. There were, however,
“hotbeds” of independent reform sentiment in the state where lesser-
known candidates with no official Democratic support received a
substantial segment of the vote. A good example was the case of
Levi Sparks, candidate for lieutenant governor on the National Reform
ticket. Known mainly to farmers, he received a strong vote in the
"four old southern agricultural counties of Branch, Eaton, Calhoun
and Hillsdale."H7

The overall impact of the National Reform effort was
significant. The success of the Democrats can be explained in large
measure by their adoption of the types of reform issues which were
introduced by the National Reformers. Also, the fact that the
newly-elected Democratic and Reform members of the legislature along
with some independent Republicans were so thoroughly committed to
reform boded ill for the continuation of Zachariah Chandler as senator
from Michigan with his re-election attempt coming up in 1875. Finally,
the National Reform effort was significant because it perpetuated the
tradition of independent voting which had been revived by the Liberal
Republican movement of 1872. That tradition has subsequently proven

to be a vital and stimulating factor in our political history.

 

H7Barton, "Agrarian Revolt,‘I p. 125.

CHAPTER IV
THE REFORM TIDE CRESTS, THEN EBBS

The Reform effort in Michigan reached its apogee in 1875
and then subsided in 1876. In what one observer called "the most
thrilling political incident" of the 1870s, a coalition of Reformers
and Democrats unseated Chandler from his "high and mighty estate in
Michigan" in January of 1875.1 Thereafter, the former Liberal
Republicans and National Reformers actively pursued the debate on
such issues as civil service reform and the currency but had diffi-
culty maintaining an independent movement. By the presidential
election of 1876 most of them had affiliated with either the Demo-
cratic or Greenback Parties.

Zachariah Chandler had long been criticized by Reformers,
Democrats, and many regular Republicans for his personal and public
habits. He was depicted as a drunken, foulmouthed blasphemer who
was totally devoid of moral scruples and integrity. He was further
charged with political tyranny in the domination and manipulation of
the Michigan Republican Party for his own selfish ends.

Of course some of the opposition to Chandler was based in ‘

political opportunism but his defeat had much more to do with

 

1Haigh, "Lansing in the 705," p. 109.

129

130

considerations of reform, integrity, and the preservation of the
democratic process. Many of those men who provided the crucial
margin of victory opposed the Senator on these latter grounds. In

October of 1874 the reform-minded LansingyJournal published an edi-

 

torial which set the tone for the fall political campaign and for
the January struggle against entrenched "Chandlerism." It focused
on moral power in politics and stated that "chicanery and fraud may
for a time succeed in politics but in the long run there, as else-
where, honesty is the best policy...[and] moral power alone is
omnipotent."2

The growing opposition toward Chandler received forceful
expression after the fall elections of 1874. Because the "Democrats
and Liberals had achieved the grand work of obliterating the 60,000
vote Republican majority in the state while electing four members to
Congress and nearly half of the legislature," it appeared that "the
defeat of Zach Chandler for the United States Senate" was near at
hand. The question began to crop up in anti-Republican journals of
"who should succeed Senator Chandler?"3

Signs of discontent with Chandler and his tactics within

the ranks of the Republican Party were increasingly evident. The

organ most concerned with voicing Republican opposition to the

 

2Lansing Journal, October 8, 1874.

 

3Ibid., November 5, 1874; Detroit Free Press, November 6,
1874; Michigan Tribune, November 26, 1874.

 

 

131

Senator was the Detroit Advertiser and Tribune. In explaining the
Republican setbacks in the fall election the paper claimed that
"among the most potent agencies in producing our defeat has been
the discontent excited by obnoxious systems of party management and
the distrust aroused by the prominence gained in Republican councils
by men representing the lower and not the better tendencies of
politics." The Republicans of Michigan, it said, "must heed and
profit" by that fact and reject the effort of Chandler for another
senatorial term.4
What troubled an increasing number of Republicans most
was the phenomenon of "senatorial rule" as manifested in the
arbitrary hegemony of Chandler in the Michigan party. To them,
“Mr. Chandler personified an utterly indefensible system of political
management" characterized by the "filling of federal offices with
active and devoted retainers bound to him by selfish ties." He
"dictated nominations for elective positions" by manipulation through
his agents and "proscribed public men who were not pliant to his
will." He used his patronage powers to "bargain for the support of
local politicians." And, most insidiously, he "set up fidelity to
himself as the standard of Republican orthodoxy." In these many
ways Chandler "identified himself with that utterly demoralizing style

of politics which makes the spoils its chief weapon and debauches the

 

4Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, November 10, 1874.

132

independence and integrity of men in position, which paralyzes the
will of the individual voter and which substitutes a tyranical and
prescriptive regency for freedom of party action."5
With such disapprobation expanding, speculation over a
possible successor to Chandler was rampant. The correspondence of
legislators and politicians revealed this interest. State Senator
John N. Mellen wrote to Blair asking what support the former governor
might have among the newly elected members of the state legislature
for the position of United States Senator. "Knowing that there is
a division among the Republicans on Mr. Chandler," he said, "I feel
that the Democrats may unite with the anti-Chandler men on someone
and I frequently hear your name mentioned...."6
This type of hypothesizing was also apparent in the
editorial pages of the anti-Chandler press. One of the early
suggestions offered was that a state supreme court justice might
make a suitable compromise candidate. The three most frequently
mentioned were Thomas M. Cooley, James V. Campbell, and Isaac P.
Christiancy.7 The Detroit Evening News claimed, however, that the

most logical candidate to succeed Chandler would be "a third party

man" most likely Charles S. May or Austin Blair. "The former," it

 

5Ibid. See also Michigan Tribune, March 5, 1874.

 

6John N. Mellen to Austin Blair, December 5, 1874, Blair
Papers. See also George Fish to Blair, January 11, 1875 and M. D.
Ward to Blair, January 11, 1875, ibid.

7Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 174.

 

133

said, llwould undoubtedly be an available man to unite on, one
possessing the requisite ability and prominence while being eminently

8 There thus seemed to be at least a

free from any party ties."
partial consensus that someone connected with the political Reform
movement in the state would replace Chandler in the Senate.

The Granger interests of Michigan began to involve them-
selves by supporting Webster Childs as their choice for senator.
Childs in their estimation would provide a distinct and felicitous
departure from Chandler's outspoken opposition to currency expansion
and paper money.9

The employment of the caucus to virtually dictate the
nominee for the senatorial seat was bitterly denounced by the
anti-Chandler forces. The Detroit Advertiser and Tribune maintained
that this practice was a "perversion of the Constitution which re-
quired the election of senators by a free vote of the state legis-
latures." The "dictation of the caucus was held under the pressure
of an enormous lobby organized in the interest of an active post-

seeker."10

The Lansipg Journal proposed that "old Zach Chandler is
about to commit political rape upon the State of Michigan and force

her to submit to his low desires for the senatorship." Lansing, it

 

8Detroit Evening News, January 8, 1874. For a similar view,
see Michigan Tribune, December 3, 10, 1874.

 

gDilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 175: Michigan Tribune,
November 26, December 10, 1874.

10Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, January 7, 1875.

134

said, "will be overrun with a violent, ravenous mob of frenzied
lobbyists...and all opposition will be browbeaten and howled down
by the fierce crowd of Chandlerian janizaries." The question was
posed: "shall political influence and money power force him

1] The

[Chandler] upon a protesting and nauseated constituency?"
Grand Rapids Dailnyews concurred in this sentiment when it argued
that increasing numbers of Republicans were exhibiting an "aversion
to the caucus gag."12
The Republican senatorial caucus was held in Lansing on
Thursday evening, January 7, 1875. The swarms of Chandler lobbyists
had been diligently at work the previous few days bringing every
possible Republican into the fold. By the day of decision only
fifty-seven men had signed the call for the caucus. Two more who
were absent had their names appended retroactively. Chandler was
easily victorious in the caucus vote as he received fifty-two of the
fifty-seven votes cast. The other five were scattered between
Webster Childs, John Bagley, and James Campbell. But what appalled
the Chandlerites most was the bolting of the caucus completely by

twelve Republicans.13

 

HLansing Journal, December 31, 1874.

12Grand Rapids Daily Times, January 7, 1875.

13Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, January 8, 1875.

135

These bolters were quickly tabbed the "immortal twelve"

by the Detroit Evening News.14

They were Senator J. H. Jones of
Branch County, and Representatives G. P. Robinson and G. W. Van Aken
of Branch County, S. R. Billings and Leroy Parker of Genesee County,
E. L. Briggs and S. M. Garfield of Kent County, W. F. Harden of
Allegan County, T. J. West of Berrien County, L. J. Taylor of
Shiawassee County, Cady Neff of Wayne County, and A. B. Copley of
Van Buren County. It was rumored that all twelve were supportive
of Webster Childs but the subsequent balloting did not bear that out.
They did share, however, a common dislike of Zachariah Chandler and
what he stood for and did not wish to see him Mfiri a fourth senatorial
term.15 In a letter to Blair, State Senator George W. Fish, a
long-time friend and fellow Reformer, called the bolters "perfect
heroes." He expressed the hope that they could be persuaded to unite
with the Democrats and Liberals in the legislature upon "some good
man who would be satisfactory to all."16
The next several days prior to the first ballot of the
legislature were marked by an almost desperate attempt on the part

of the Chandler lobby to persuade the bolters to change their minds.

At first the Chandler forces used the promise of rewards for a change

 

 

14Detroit Evening,News, January 14, 1875.
15Ibid., January 8, 1875.
16

George W. Fish to Austin Blair, January 11, 1875, Blair
Papers.

136

of heart. "Promises of anything and everything" were made to the
bolters and to those who might convince them to come back into the
fold.17 The next approach was the appeal for party harmony. But
that did not work either and the Detroit Tribune astutely observed:
"All talk about harmonizing the party when it is uttered by the men
who have been practicing political tyranny is hypocritical trash.

The good sense of all candid men revolts and their honest indigna-
tion rebels against such proceedings."18 Ultimately the Chandler

men resorted to a thinly disguised type of brass-knuckled pressure
and harassment characterized by tacit threats. "The opposition found
themselves assailed from all sides with great force and infinite
ingenuity." "Platoons of men from all walks of life attacked the
little band of anti-Chandler men." This process of blatant pressure

19

was likened to "dragooning." But "the army of hired lobbyists

20

could not whip in the brave and honored twelve," and George Fish

expressed the hope to Blair that "the friends of the anti-Chandler
movement would write words of encouragement to the brave men who had

so far dared to withstand the immense pressure of the lobby."21

 

17Grand Rapids Daily Times, January 6, 1875.

 

 

 

18Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, January 11, 1875.
19Ibid.; Grand Rapids Daily Times, January 8, 1875.
20

Grand Rapids Daily Times, January 9, 1875.

-21George W. Fish to Austin Blair, January 11, 1875, Blair

Papers.

137

Obviously, "the Republican opposition to Mr. Chandler
within the legislature was neither slight in character nor shallow
in conviction." It was rooted in"the Senator”s personal failings,
his close fellowship with the likes of Simon Cameron, his use of
the patronage, the proscriptive treatment meted out to the un-
pliant, the presence among his trusted adherents of so many men
wholly devoid of scruples and his attempt to force himself upon the
state and party for a fourth senatorial term."22

In addition to the regular Republican bolters, the
Michigan legislature included several Liberals who were also to be
a part of the anti-Chandler coalition. These were men who had been
active in either or both of the Reform movements of 1872 and 1874.
They were former Liberal Republicans and National Reformers. Among
these legislators were Senators George W. Fish of Genesee County,
Allen B. Morse of Ionia County, and Thomas S. Cobb of Kalamazoo
County. In the House of Representatives they included men such as
Ethan A. Brown and C. A. Potter of Berrien County and Joseph A. Hollon
of Saginaw County.23

The third and most numerous group arrayed against the

Chandlerites was, of course, that comprised of the regular Democrats.

 

22Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, January 11, 1875.

23Michigan Manual, 1875, pp. 441-478; Michigan Almanac,
1875. pp. 32-33.

138

Their acknowledged leader in the anti-Chandler struggle was William
L. Webber, Senator from the twenty-fifth district encompassing
Saginaw County.24
In pure numbers the combined anti-Chandler forces were
impressive but because of their diverse backgrounds and interests
they were to have difficulty uniting upon a single candidate to oppose
Chandler. This became increasingly evident as the voting got under
way on the 19th of January.25
On the designated day at 3:00 p.m. the balloting
commenced in the Senate and the House. In the former, the vote was
split between ten candidates including some men closely identified
with the ongoing Liberal Reform movement. These were Robert
McClelland, Henry Chamberlain, Isaac P. Christiancy, and Austin
Blair. Chandler received seventeen of a possible thirty-one votes

26

cast in the Senate. In the House the votes were divided among

fourteen nominees. Those identified with the Reform effort were
John C. Blanchard, C. C. Comstock, Robert McClelland, and Isaac P.
Christiancy. In the House vote Chandler received a total of

27

forty-six. He thus had a combined total of sixty-three votes

 

24Dilla, Politics of Michi an, p. 198. See also J. A.
Hubbel to Peter White, January 24, 1875 in the White Papers,
Michigan Historical Collections, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.

25Michigan, House Journal, 1875, pp. 113-114.

26Michigan, Senate Journal, 1875, pp. 91-92.

27Michigan, House Journal, 1875, pp. 113-114.

139

and fell just four short of the number required for election. He

had been successful in gaining the votes of five of the original

bolters but the other seven split their crucial ballots among Childs,

Christiancy, and Blair and thus deprived him of victory.28
In the hours preceeding the next vote at 12:00 noon on the

21st, the Chandler lobby applied pressure of such fanatical intensity

on the remaining Republican bolters that one of them broke. He was

Samuel M. Garfield, representative of the second district in Kent

County. The pressure applied to Garfield was so unrelenting and

cruel in light of his well publicized stroke and partial paralysis

that the unscrupulous nature of Chandler's power politics was

dramatically demonstrated. Just days before the voting began

Garfield had been forced to change his residence clandestinely to

rid himself of the lobbyists who would give him no rest. And

finally, despite his better judgment and principles, he had to give

in or risk death from his infirm condition. In face of the lobby

and "petition pressure played upon him with great Skill and per-

sistence," he capitulated "in weakness and despair." The Detroit

Advertiser and Tribune decried the outrage and stated: "Like the

hunted and wounded deer on whose flanks the hound has fastened and

cannot be shaken off, the sick and worn out legislator was brought

down." It concluded that Chandler had gotten one more vote "but not an

ounce of moral support."29

 

28Ibid.

29Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, January 20, 21, 1875.

140

On January 21, 1875, a ballot was taken in a joint session
of both houses. This time Chandler garnered sixty-four votes, having
picked up Garfield's. But the combined opposition, including the re-
maining six regular Republican bolters, cast their sixty-eight
ballots for other candidates. The strongest of these was G.V.N.

30 This

Lothrop, followed by Isaac Christiancy, and Webster Childs.
was the closest that Chandler was to come to re-election as senator.
The Democrats, Liberals, and bolting Republicans had not
yet coordinated their actions. But as it became clear that they had
the required number of votes to win, they held some secret consulta-
tions. "The result of their discussions was the agreement that if
a man satisfactory to all could be found, they would unite and secure
his election."31 Pursuant to this arrangement the name of Isaac P.
Christiancy was suggested. ''The selection was a fortunate one" and
all the anti-Chandler forces were now poised to administer the
coup de grace.32
On Thursday, January 21, a third vote was taken. This
time an overwhelming preponderence of the Chandler opposition cast
their vote for Christiancy and the combination "gave precisely the

necessary majority of all the votes cast'I to elect Christiancy.33

 

 

 

30Michigan, House Journal, 1874, pp. 124-125.
.3]Dilla, Politics of Michigan, p. 178.

321919-

33

Zachariah Chandler, His Life and Public Services (Detroit:
The Detroit Post and Tribune, 1880), p. 338.

141

The final count was sixty-seven for Christiancy and forty for

Chandler. Many of the Senator's backers changed their votes at

the last minute to different men hoping to confuse and frighten

the opposition into deserting Christiancy. The tactic did not work

and merely resulted in a diminished total for Chandler when the

final count was certified.34
“There was much weeping and gnashing of teeth that day

at Chandler headquarters,"35

but his opponents were ebullient. The
headline of the LansingyJournal screamed: "Old Zach Busted." The

paper claimed that "all honor is due to the brave and magnanimous
Democrats and Liberals who joined hands with six brave Republicans

to break the most odious and arrogant ring that ever cursed Michigan."36
The Marshall Democratic Expounder stated that Chandler had been
defeated because he was "the exponent of a system of partisan politics
and the chief of a remorseless ring of mere politicians who sold
their influence and the patronage of government to perpetuate their
own lease of political life and secure their advancement."37 In his

diary for January 21, 1875, John G. Parkhurst wrote: "I. P. Christiancy

elected U. S. Senator and Zach Chandler defeated, a great victory over

 

34Detroit Eveninngews, January 21, 1875.

35Mary Karl George, Zachariah Chandler (East Lansing;
Michigan State University Press, 1969), p. 240.

36Lansing Journal, January 21, 1875.

 

37Marshall Expounder, January 28, 1875.

142

n38

politicians and money power. This event "marked the high tide

of...anti-Republican success" in Michigan during the Reconstruction

period.39

Chandler's successor in the Senate was a man acceptable
in the eyes of Liberals, Democrats, and Republicans alike. He was

"an original Republican,"40

having helped organize that party in
Michigan after actively participating in the Free Soil Movement.
Prior to that he had been a Democrat. He was first elected to the
state supreme court in 1857 and was re-elected without opposition in
1865 and again in 1873. While on the bench he "withdrew entirely

"41

from partisan politics and cultivated the reputation of a

42

"serious scholar and great jurist." He was thus generally per-

ceived as an independent man of principle and his aloofness from
campaigning made him especially popular with the Reform forces.43

In the spring of 1875 the Democracy took steps to under-
cut the impact of any future state Reform movement not under Demo-

cratic auspices. First, the Democrats waited until after the

Reformers had issued a call for a state convention prior to the

 

38John G. Parkhurst diary, January 21, 1875, Parkhurst

Papers.

390i11a, Politics of Michigan, p. 179.

40Detroit Post and Tribune, Chandler, p. 338.

4IDetroit Free Press, January 22, 1875.

42Haigh, "Lansing in the 705," p. 109.

43mm, Politics of Michigan, p. 149.

143

spring elections. They then issued their own call and scheduled

their convention one day before the already announced Reform Con-

vention. This time the Reformers were going to have to adopt the

Democratic candidates instead of vice-versa. Second, the Democratic

State Committee issued a call for a "Democratic and Liberal" con-

vention hoping to draw would-be Liberals and Reformers away from an

independent course into the Democratic organization.44
The Democratic call was issued on February 6, 1875 for

a "Democratic and Liberal Convention" to be held in Jackson on

March 2nd for the purpose of nominating candidates for justice of

the supreme court and regent of the university. In directing

county committees to hold conventions to select delegates to Jackson,

the call said that those committees should "extend a cordial invita-

"45 This statement set

tion to all opposed to a partisan judiciary.
the tone for the Democratic state convention and campaign. The
Democracy assumed the mantle of non-partisanship in order to lure
independents away from the third party Reform movement and to imply
that the Republican Party was a vehicle of partisanship and corruption.

At their convention the Democrats selected Benjamin F.

Graves for a full term on the supreme court bench and Lyman B. Norris

 

44Detroit Free Press, February 7, 1875; Marshall Demogratic
Expounder, February 11, 1875; Kalamazoo Gazette, February 12, 1875.

45Detroit Free Press, February 7, 1874: Kalamazoo Gazette,
February 12, 1875.

 

144

for a partial term to fill the vacancy left by the departure of
Christiancy. The candidates for regents of the university were
Samuel T. Douglass and Peter White. In its coverage of the con-
vention the Democratic Detroit Free Press used the headline:
"Non-Partisan Nominations Made for the Supreme Bench."46
The call of the National Reform Party of Michigan for a
spring state convention was issued on January 28, 1875, over a
week earlier than that of the Democrats. It designated Lansing as
the site of the convention to be held on the third day of March,
one day after the Democratic convention. It was signed by the mem-
bers of the National Reform State Central Committee.47
In accordance with the call, county conventions made
local nominations and elected delegates to the Lansing gathering.
The convention in Wayne County gave the best clue as to the nature
of the Reform effort for 1875. It was held February 24, 1875, to
nominate candidates for circuit court judge and county superintendent
of schools. Fred Abbott Baker, a Detroit lawyer, and chairman of
the National Reform State Central Committee, was a leading participant
in the Wayne convention. He offered to the assembled men the follow-

ing preamble and resolution which were unanimously adopted:

Whereas the facts recently reported to Congress by the
Louisiana investigating committee conclusively show that the

 

46Detroit Free Press, March 3, 1875.

47Marshall Democratic Expounder, February 11, 1875;
Kalamazoo Gazette, February 12, 1875.

145

difficulties in that state have been caused by the inter-
ference of the Administration through the Customs House
party at New Orleans with the local elections and that by
such interference and with the assistance of the federal
army the will of the people of Louisiana as lawfully ex-
pressed at the ballot box has been overthrown and their
right of local self-government destroyed, therefore

Resolved that for the purpose of securing to the
people of the United States the right to order and con-
trol their own local affairs, free from Executive influence
or dictation, the power of appointing civil officers whose
duties require them to reside in the several states should
be taken from the President and vested in the People.48
In this resolution Baker alluded to a number of the
on-going concerns of the Michigan Reformers. These were the Grant
Administration's Reconstruction policy, its centralization tendencies
at the expense of local, state and individual rights, its corruption,
and the need for curtailing the appointive powers of the President
and increasing the elective powers of the people.. This latter con-
cern was elaborated upon by A. G. Comstock of Detroit who presided
as president of the Wayne Convention. In a speech to the meeting he
declared that ''civil service reform is the great need of the hour."49
About the only major issue not touched upon in Baker's resolution was
that of the necessity of maintaining "hard money“ and a sound
currency, but that was to be amply addressed by the Reformers at

Lansing.

 

48Detroit Free Press, February 25, 1875.

49Ibid.

146

Among those selected by the Wayne County Reform Convention
to attend the state convention in March were Baker and the outspoken
German Reformers and hold-overs from the Liberal Republican movement
of 1872, Otto Starck and Adam E1der.50

F. A. Baker called the State Reform Convention to order
at 11:00 a.m. on March 3rd. The members chose General John G.
Parkhurst of Branch County as temporary chairman and the Honorable
C. A. Potter of Berrien County as temporary secretary. Following
the reports of the committees on credentials and organization, there

occurred the confirmation of Parkhurst as permanent chairman and

A. G. Comstock of Detroit as permanent secretary.5]

The committee on resolutions, chaired by F. A. Baker,
reported the following preamble and resolutions:

Whereas the Administration party by its action in Congress
and its management of the government since the last election
has shown itself unequal to the demands and necessities of
the Country and incapable of self-reformation, and,

Whereas the Democratic party has a majority in the next
House of Representatives and upon its action in our opinion
depends the result of the next presidential election and in
a great measure the destiny and the future welfare of the
Republic, therefore,

Resolved, that the next Congress be requested to pass joint
resolutions proposing amendments to the Federal Constitution
as follows: (1) Prohibiting Senators and Representatives
from soliciting appointment to or removals from office and
authorizing Congress to provide for the election by the

 

50Ibid.

5‘Ibid., March 4, 1875; Kalamazoo Gazette, March 12, 1875.

147

people of any and all civil officers whose duties are
local in their nature and require them to reside in the
several states (2) Providing for the election of the
President and Vice President and United States Senators
by a direct popular vote and making the President
ineligible for re-election (3) Prohibiting Congress from
making anything but Gold and Silver legal tender in the
payment of debts.

Resolved, that the State Central Committee be instructed
to call a State Convention in March of 1876 to consider
the question of calling a National Convention to nominate
candidates for President and Vice President of the United
States.52

The proposals dealing with the accountability of federal
officials, the election of previously appointive officers by the
people, and the limitation of the presidency to one term were carbon
copies of similar demands made by the Reformers in 1874.

Some elements were new and distinctly novel. The
suggestion of direct popular election of the president, vice
president, and senators was rather enlightened and foreshadowed a
similar demand made later by the Populists and by the Progressives
after them. The proposal for calling a national convention to
select a presidential ticket constituted a new expansion of the
scope of the thinking of Reformers in Michigan. Men who previously
had been content merely to envision themselves as part of a national
stream of reform now were contemplating the initiation of a
national reform organization themselves. Ironically this burst of

optimism and energy came just at the time the movement was beginning

to wane in the state.

 

Ibid.

 

148

The statement on the currency was much stronger than the
Reform position taken in 1874. No longer was there any qualifica-
tion about resumption or the return to hard money. This illustrates
the fact that the money question was beginning to emerge as the most
significant issue on the political front and that the Reformers
were now willing to alienate their agrarian allies by condemning
inflation. This risk hurt the already weakening Reform movement.

Other resolutions of the Reform convention of March,
1875, were addressed to the Democracy. One expressed thanks for
Democratic support in the overthrow of Chandler. "The Democrats
of the state legislature," it read, "are entitled to the thanks of
the people for the patriotism evinced in rising above party pre-
judice and uniting in the election of Judge Christiancy to the
United States Senate, thus denying the party what belongs to the
country and mankind."53

The final resolution of the Reform convention endorsed
the Democratic nominees chosen the day before. It claimed that
"the action of the Democratic and Liberal Convention held at
Jackson...meets the cordial approval of this convention and we
hereby accept the nominees as our own candidates and commend them
to the support of the intelligent electors of the State."54

Baker sent a copy of the convention resolution to Isaac

Christiancy. In a return letter the Senator wrote that "the

 

53Ibid.

54Ibid.

149

resolutions represent some important principles I am inclined to
favor."55

The gracious acceptance of all the Democratic candidates
is somewhat significant for it indicates an abandonment of the
Reformers insistence upon independent candidates. Graves and
Norris could be interpreted to be non-partisan independents but a
man such as Peter White from the upper peninsula was more firmly
identified with the Democracy.56 This apparent capitulation to the
Democrats is partially explained by the Reformers' recognition that
the Democracy had outmaneuvered them politically by holding its
convention first and nominating candidates. It also revealed an
increasing doubt about the Reformers' capability to carry signifi-
cant number of votes on their own without the Democratic fusion.
And, finally, it signaled a new departure in political tactics for
Michigan Liberal Reformers still operating outside either major
party.

The departure involved discontinuing the use of the
state-wide political reform structure for campaign purposes and

using it to influence the debate on the great issues of the currency

and civil service reform. Some Reformers, however, did persist in

 

55Isaac P. Christiancy to Fred Abbott Baker, March 14,
1875, in the Baker Papers, Burton Historical Collection, Detroit
Public Library, Detroit, Michigan.

56Michigan Manual, 1875, p. 451.

 

150

an independent course in local politics in the spring and fall of
1875 and the spring of 1876.

The highlight of the Reform movement in Michigan in the
fall of 1875 was the organization of a "hard money" conference. On
September 28, 1875, the state central committee of the National
Reform Party of Michigan issued a call addressed to "the People of
Michigan" for a "mass conventiod'to be held in Detroit on October 14,
1875.57

The call warned that "those who believe in sound
currency should not underestimate the strength of the inflationists."
It proposed that "the prosperity, the honor and the happiness of
the nation demanded that the [inflationist] movement be defeated."
The "hard money" conference "would assist in this work." Those
attending would have an opportunity to discuss the problem and elect
delegates to a national hard money conference to be held later in
Cincinnati. "A cordial invitation was extended to all classes of
people without regard to party signification."58

F. A. Baker called the conference to order at 12:00 noon
on October 14th and delivered a short address on the evils of in-

flation. Those attending selected the publisher of the Michigan

Tribune, W. W. Woolnough of Battle Creek,as temporary chairman and

 

57Marshall Democratic Eypounder, September 30, 1875;
Kalamazoo Gazette, September 24, 1875.

 

 

Ibid.

151

A. G. Comstock of Detroit as temporary secretary. Next they estab-
lished a committee on resolutions comprised of J. W. Griffith of
Greenville, J. G. Parkhurst of Coldwater, and F. A. Baker. After
this action the convention recessed.59
Upon reconvening, the convention named the following
permanent officers: Jerome W. Turner of Owosso as chairman and
A. G. Comstock as secretary. Turner spoke out in behalf of hard
money and Comstock read letters from Senator Isaac Christiancy,
former Governor Austin Blair, and Congressman George H. Durand. In
these letters the writers expressed their disappointment at not
being able to attend the convention due to other duties and responsi-
bilities but expressed their sincere belief in the avowed purposes
of the meeting. They elaborated on the evils of inflation and the
absolute necessity of maintaining hard money.60
At this point the committee on resolutions presented its
report. The first resolution spoke of the call for a national hard
money conference and stressed Michigan's responsibility to dispatch
delegates to that event. Concerned Michiganders, it said, had
"discarded all party feeling" because of their overriding belief

"that foreign and domestic commerce and all productive industry must

languish under a currency depreciated and fluctuating in value and a

 

59Detroit Free Press, October 15, 1875.

60Ibid.

152

revenue which is unequalled in its burdens." The second resolution
expressed the extent of the commitment of those in attendance to
hard money and against inflation. "We inflexibly set our face," it
said, "against all schemes for currency inflation or any form of
paper currency, greenbacks, or otherwise, so long as that currency
shall consist of irredeemable promises to pay money." In support-
ing resumption it said, "we will oppose any policy which has not
the direct purpose to establish paper currency on a par with and
actually redeemable in coin." A third resolution "cordially
commended to the friends of sound currency throughout the United
States" the concept of a national conference on the most serious
national money problem.61
The appointment of the Michigan delegates to the
Cincinnati convention then took place and included some of the most
illustrious leaders of the ongoing Michigan Reform movement. The
delegates were Charles S. May of Kalamazoo, Austin Blair of Jackson,
J. H. Richardson of Tuscola, George H. Murdock of Berrien, F. A.
Baker of Detroit, W. W. Woolnough of Battle Creek, G. W. Underwood
of Hillsdale, J. Westley Griffith of Greenville, Byron Stout of
Pontiac, and John Hosmer of Detroit.62
The convention closed with a short address by Eugene
Pringle of Jackson. He emphasized that hard money must be the

"redemption basis of any circulating medium."63

 

153

In the fall county and municipal elections the independent
Reform effort was not nearly as visible as it had been previously.

In Wayne County, for example, there was a Democratic County Convention
and no separate Liberal or Reform convention. Further, two of the
candidates selected by that convention as Democratic nominees for
justice of the peace were Peter Guenther and A. G. Comstock.64
These men had been identified with the independent Reform movement
both at the local and state level just a few months before the

spring elections.65 During the campaign there was considerably more
talk about the "reform Democracy'I than about the independent Reform
movement.66 These elections provided evidence that the Reform cause,
though not dead, was to find future expression within the traditional
party structure rather than in the form of a third party effort.

In analyzing the outcome of the local elections of the
fall of 1875 in Michigan and elsewhere, journals that had previously
stressed coverage of the independent Reform movement changed their
emphasis. They talked not of a third party outside the two major
parties but rather of the determining role to be played in elections

"67

by the "independent voter. He would not be a slave to one party

 

64Ibid., October 17, 1875.

65Ibid., March 4, 1875.

66Lansing Journal, October 14, 1875; Kalamazoo Gazette,
November 5, 1875.

 

 

67LansingJournal, November 4, 1875; Kalamazoo Gazette,
March 31, 1876.

 

 

154

but would switch his support between the two parties depending upon
the circumstances and the candidates. "The independent voter" it
was argued, "had provided the Republicans with a slight margin of
victory in the 1875 elections, not because he was reconciled to
"Grantism" but because he was alarmed by the ghost of repudiation."
Having "smashed inflation that year” the same voter would, "if the
issue of endorsing Grantism was presented again...denounce it with
nausea and vehemence!" The independent voter moving freely between
the Democratic and Republican camps was now viewed as the key to a
"grand victory for reform and honest government."68

By the beginning of 1876 the remaining independent
Michigan Reformers were continuing their work on major national
issues. They directed most of their attention to civil service
reform.

The activities of Fred Abbott Baker, by now the acknow-
ledged leader of the independent Reformers, illustrated this pro-
clivity. He kept abreast of the actions of Michigan men in Congress
who were interested in civil service reform legislation. Among
these were Representatives Alpheus S. Williams and George Willard.69

Williams, who had been supported by the National Reformers

and Democrats in his successful congressional bid in 1874, authored

 

68Lansing Journal, November 4, 1875.

69George Willard to F. A. Baker, January 19, 1876, Baker

Papers.

155

House Resolution 50 which was introduced on January 24, 1876. It
called for a constitutional amendment which would achieve the follow-
ing reforms: (l) prohibit senators and representatives "from solicit-
ing appointments to or removals from office;" (2) provide for
congressional creation of "a civil-service commission...with absolute
advisory and confirmatory powers in regard to appointments to and
removals from office;“ and (3) provide that "civil officers whose
duties require them to reside in the several states...be elected by

"70

the people... This resolution was supported by Baker and the

wording was almost identical to that used by the latter in drawing up
resolutions for the National Reform party in the spring of 1875.71
George Willard, United States Representative from the
third district of Michigan, was also promoting civil service reform
in Congress and was influenced by Baker and the Michigan Reformers.72
He wrote to Baker thanking him for support in "preserving the inde-
pendence of the several departments of the government." He lauded
Baker for his understanding of "the essential principles which
should be kept in view in securing an efficient and uncorrupt adminis-

tration of public affairs." He concluded by saying: "I am fully

aware that questions relating to national policies and reforms in the

 

70Congressional Record, 44th Congress, lst Session, p. 591.

7iDetroit Free Press, March 4, 1875; Kalamazoo Gazette,
March 12, 1875.

 

72House Journal, 44th Congress, lst Session, p. 260.

 

156

methods of civil service administration have received at your hands
much careful and thoughtful attention." He promised to consult
Baker on the feasibility of future moves toward the success of "the
great work of civil service reform."73
Baker was also in contact with civil service reform
advocates from outside of Michigan. He received a letter from
Representative Scott Lord of New York dealing with the Williams'
proposal and the possible loopholes in it. Lord proposed a resolu-
vtion to amend the Constitution to provide for the election of post-
masters, marshals, assessors, and collectors, and for their
accountability to the people and their removal from office for mis-
conduct. Scott's letter recognized the leader of the Michigan
Reformers as a nationally respected figure in the civil service
reform effort.74
The spring elections of 1876 brought further evidence
that the independent Reform effort had become relatively inactive in
state politics by this time. There were a few examples of independent

Reform activity but these were diminished from former years. Rather,

there seemed to be a more complete merging of Reformers with the

 

73George Willard to F. A. Baker, January 19, 1876, Baker

Papers.

74Scott Lord to F. A. Baker, June 24, 1876, Ibid. Baker,
in fact, had been commended for his interest in civil service reform
by such nationally respected Reformers as George William Curtis. See
G. W. Curtis to Baker, September 19, 1874, ibid.

157

Democrats. In Saginaw the Democrats chose "the great reformer
Chauncey W. Wisner to head their ticket for mayor."75 And in
Kalamazoo and Jackson, the Democrats and Reformers joined together
and supported a Liberal Democratic ticket.76
The most dramatic division seems to have been between
the two major parties and the Greenbackers who were now running
candidates in many municipal contests throughout the state. In
some places the fear of the Greenbackers was so hysterical that
former political enemies became allies to defeat the threat. In
Vassar, Michigan, "the Republicans abandoned their organization
and joined with the hard money Democrats to defeat the Greenback

Ticket."77

Many Liberal Reformers had by now concluded that they
must join with one or both of the existing parties to undercut the
evil of inflation.

But even into the spring of 1876 a coterie of Reform
leaders continued to cherish hopes of independently controlling the
outcome of elections. And, they acquired the support of men of
like minds from several states. F. A. Baker and other Michiganders

received copies of a significant letter from New York. It was an

official invitation to a national Reform conference to be held in

 

75Detroit Evening News, March 31, 1876.

76Ibid.; Kalamazoo Gazette, April 7, 1876.

77Detroit Evening News, April 1, 1876.

158

78

New York City in May. The invitation was introduced with these

words:

The widespread corruption in our public service which

has disgraced the Republic in the eyes of the world and
threatens to poison the vitality of our institutions,

the uncertainty of the public mind and of party counsels
as for grave economical questions involving in a great
measure the honor of the government, the morality of our
business life and the general well being of the people,
and the danger that an inordinate party spirit may through
the organized action of a comparatively small number of
men who live by politics, succeed in overriding the most
patriotic impulses of the people and in monopolizing
political power for selfish ends, seem to render it most
advisable that no effort should be spared to secure to

the popular desire for genuine reform a decisive influence
in the impending national election.79

The conference was to be held to "prevent the national
election of the centennial year from becoming a mere choice of evils
and to secure the election of men to the highest office of the
Republic whose character and ability would satisfy the exigencies of
the present situation and protect the honor of America's name." In
Short, an all out effort was to be made to "secure to the popular
desire for genuine reform a decisive influence in the impending

national election."80

 

78William Cullen Bryant, et al. to F. A. Baker, April 6,
1876, Baker Papers. Others to receive invitations were C. S. May,
G. W. Underwood and James E. Scripps. See Lansing Republican, May
19, 1876; Kalamazoo Gazette, April 2, 1876.

79Ibid.

80Ibid.

159

This letter was signed by a formidable group of Reformers
from several states. They included Henry Cabot Lodge, William
Cullen Bryant, Theodore W. Woolsey, Alexander Bullock, Horace White,

and Carl Schurz.8]

Because the two major parties were beginning to
realize that the independent Reformers might hold the key to victory
in the upcoming election, the New York conference "was watched with

"82 The convention

much attention by the politicians of both sides.
included approximately two-hundred delegates from eighteen states.
The Michigan participants were C. S. May, G. W. Underwood, and James
E. Scripps.83
In the presidential contest of 1876 the two major parties
made an all-out effort to attract the remaining independent Liberals
into their ranks. This effort was manifest both at the national
and the state level, and in the end was almost completely successful.
The Democrats were by far the most effective in the
struggle to attract the Liberal Reformer. "The strength of the
Democratic Party, both numerically and morally, in 1876 was vastly

superior to what it had been four years before." Of the many factors

which had contributed to its "increased vitality, considerable weight

 

81Ibid. For a good discussion of the "Fifth Avenue Con-
ference" see Sproat, Best Men, pp. 90-92 and Hoogenboom, Outlawing

Spoils. PP. 138-139.

82Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 229.

83LansingRepublican, May 19, 1876.

160

must be given to the influence of the Liberal element, both in add-
ing directly to the Democratic vote and in increasing the party's
reputation for loyalty and integrity."84
On matters of national concern the Democrats launched a
two-front drive to attract the Liberal independents. They attached
the new scandals of the Republican Administration, especially the
spectacular Belknap and Whiskey Ring affairs, and stressed that
they were opposed to this sort of dishonesty in government and
would ally with all of a like mind. Second, they supported Samuel
S. Tilden for the presidency and portrayed him as the hero of reform
for what he had done to the Tweed Ring as the crusading governor of
New York.85
With regard to Michigan, the Democrats related examples

of Republican "ring rottenness" in the state,86

and made a vigorous
attempt to include Reformers in their organization. In their call
for a preliminary state convention to select delegates to the
National Democratic Convention in St. Louis, they were amicable to-
ward the independents. That call by the Democratic State Central

Committee urged the county committees "in calling their respective

 

84Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 227. It is interesting to
note that whereas most of the Michigan Reformers migrated into the
Democratic Party in 1876, the majority of eastern Reformers went into
the Republican ranks. See Sproat, Best Men, p. 102.

85Detroit Free Press, July 9, 1876; Kalamazoo Gazette,
March 3, 10, May 12, 1876.

 

86Detroit Free Press, July 16, 1876.

161

conventions...to cordially invite Liberals and all others, without
regard to previous party affiliations, who are opposed to the
extravagance and corruptions of the Republican Party to unite with
us....”87
That convention, described as one of the biggest and
most enthusiastic ever, was held in Detroit on the 24th of May and
was distinctly oriented toward the reform sentiment. One of the
resolutions produced by the gathering claimed that “while political
parties are necessary agencies in the administration of government
yet the love of party should always be subordinate to patriotism,
and none should be placed in nomination but such as are honest,
capable, and efficient...." Another maintained that "no party
deserves success at the polls except upon the basis of unselfish
devotion to the best good of the whole people." And, a third pro-
claimed that "in the interest of pure government outraged, free
institutions imperiled, and to redeem the American name from the
stigma attached to it by the corruptions of the party in power, we
cordially invite the co-operation of a11 honest men irrespective of
former party affiliations."88
The convention was amply sprinkled with well-known

Liberals and many were placed in key positions. A. B. Morse and

George P. Sanford were named as permanent secretaries. Sanford also

 

87Ibid., March 10, 1876.

88 bid., May 25, 1876.

162

found himself placed on the new Democratic State Central Committee.
Members of various convention committees included men such as O. W.
Powers and C. C. Comstock. Among the official delegates were H. C.
Hall, J. K. Parkhurst, A. A. Dorrance, N. S. Boynton, and Henry
Chamberlain. J. C. Blanchard was in attendance but not as a

89 All of these had been involved in either or both the

delegate.
Liberal Republican and National Reform drives.

After the St. Louis convention had been held the Democrats
in the state stepped up their efforts to capture the members of the
independent Liberal Reform movement. The Detroit Free Press stated
that "the spirit of reform is abroad and cannot be doubted by any
thoughtful person who has attended the meetings of the Democrats
and Liberals in Detroit and elsewhere since the St. Louis convention."
It added that "the masses have a firm belief that reform is an
imperious necessity and there is a united front of opposition to the
plunderers who represent the present administration."90

Further efforts to cement the coalition of Liberals and
Democrats were exemplified by ratification meetings and the creation
of campaign clubs. The meetings were scheduled by the Democrats to

ratify the St. Louis nominations and usually included easily recog-

nizable Liberal Reformers as speakers along with the representatives

 

89Ibid.; Kalamazoo Gazette, May 26, 1876. For coverage of
of the Democrat convention in St. Louis see Kalamazoo Gazette,
June 30, 1876.

 

90Detroit Free Press, August 12, 1876.

 

163

of the Democracy. At typical gatherings the orators included C. S.
May, Robert McClelland, G. V. N. Lothrop, and Eugene Pringle. The
press coverage of these events usually stated that the mass meetings
were held for “Tilden and reform" and for "honest men and honest

government."91

A number of "Democratic-Liberal Clubs" were organized
reminiscent of the Greeley campaign clubs of 1872. They strove to
bring close cooperation between Liberals and Democrats and to
facilitate the handling of the campaign.92
In the official Democratic call for the state nominating
convention the state central committee kept up its policy of en-
couraging the participation of formerly independent Liberals. It
urged the county committees in calling for local conventions to
select delegates to the state convention to "invite all citizens
irrespective of past party affiliations who are opposed to continu-
ing the corrupt rule of the past four years and to the control of
bad men at the seat of government to unite with us...."93
The state convention in Detroit on August 9, 1876, was

clearly programmed to maximize the issue of reform and to encourage

the active participation of Liberal Reformers. The temporary chairman

 

9iDetroit Free Press, July 9, 1876; Kalamaapo Gazette,
July 21, 28. 1876.

92Detroit Free Press, August 12, 1876; Kalamazoo Gazette,
July 28, 1876.

 

93Detroit Free Press, June 27, 1876; Kalamazoo Gazette,
June 30, 1876.

 

 

164

G. V. N. Lothrop, said in his opening remarks that "it is our duty
to place in the Executive chair of the nation the man who more than
any other in this country is the representative of official cleanli-
ness and pure statesmanship which the times and the suffering people
demand."94
The official platform incorporated several resolutions
concerned with reform. "We declare," one read, "that the supreme
object of political action at the present time is to bring about
such reform in public administration as shall remove from office
the men and the party whose corruptions have dishonored the Republic
at home and disgraced it in the sight of foreign nations...and
restore to the people...a just, honest, economical and constitutional
government." A second said, "we demand of our public servants both
state and national, honesty, capability, and fidelity as guarantees
of good government...and the inauguration of the reform demanded by
the people."95
Among the official delegates and participants in the con-
vention were several men active in the independent Liberal cause in
previous years. The delegates included J. G. Parkhurst, W. W.

Woolnough, T. S. Cobb, A. B. Morse, G. P. Sanford, Mark Wilber, and

Henry Chamberlain. Men of Liberal persuasion were also members of

 

94Detroit Free Press, August 10, 1876.

95Ibid.

165

the official committees of the convention. W. D. Harriman and G. W.
Powers served on the committee on credentials and Byron A. Stout on
the committee on resolutions.96
The official nominations of the Democratic convention
included a number of outstanding Liberals. Electors-at-large were
the indomitable Austin Blair and J. S. Upton. The Liberal Reform
officers of the state ticket were George H. House for secretary of
state, J. G. Parkhurst for state treasurer, and Frederick M. Holloway
for auditor general.97
The Reformers were also active in the Democratic con-
gressional conventions. In the third district, for example, Eugene
Pringle of Jackson made a speech at the nominating convention in

98

support of the nominee Fidus Livermore. In the first district the

Democratic choice for Congress was General A. S. Williams who had
been a candidate of the National Reformers in 1874.99
Like the Democrats, the Republicans also tried to attract
the support of independent Reformers in 1876. The Republicans
stressed that they indeed were wholeheartedly behind reform and

honest administration of government. They described Rutherford B.

Hayes as the epitome of integrity and lauded him as a great hero of

 

Ibid., November 9, 1876.

166

civil service reform.100

While not denying the existence of numerous
scandals at the national level of government during the Grant
presidency, they did take credit for correcting the abuses them-
selves. "Amid all the clamor against the administration," they
said, "the fact stands out that no guilty man is allowed to escape
though he be a party leader in a great city or a member of the
president's cabinet."]0]
At the same time the Republicans did cast some aspersions
upon the Democracy's claim to the title of the party of honesty,
integrity, and reform. They stressed that Democrats had been
notoriously corrupt in government service at various levels and
even raised some questions about the reform image of the Democratic
presidential nominee Samuel Tilden. They charged that the latter,
while he had been chairman of the New York State Democratic Central
Committee, had enjoyed close ties with Boss William Tweed of
Tammany Hall in New York City and had been friendly with a number
of Tweed's henchmen such as Peter Sweeny and Richard Connally.102
Prior to the calling of state conventions to choose

delegates to the Republican National Convention in Cincinnati, the

Republican National Committee issued a call which invited all interested

 

100Detroit Advertiser and Tribune. August 24. 1875-

101Lansing Republican, June 27, 1876.

 

102Oetroit Daily Post. August 24. 1875'

167

parties in the several states to attend the to-be-scheduled con-
ventions. It invited "without regard to past political differences
or previous party affiliations...all who were in favor of the con-
tinued prosecution and punishment of all official dishonesty and of
an economical administration of government by honest, faithful,

and capable officers."103 And in Michigan the State Republican
Committee, in calling for the convention to be held at Grand Rapids
on May 10, appealed to "all Republican electors and other voters
without regard to past political differences or party affiliations
who believed in and supported the principles enunciated in the

National Oa11."'04

Obviously the state Republicans were desperately
trying to mend their tattered image and attract the independent
reform-minded voter.

At the preliminary state convention to select delegates
to the national convention, the Republicans kept up their effort.
S. D. Bingham, chairman of the Republican State Central Committee,
opened the convention with a short address in which he counseled

the assembled that "in this campaign the presentation of such men

for candidates as are eminent for ability, purity, and integrity is

 

 

necessary."105 The resolutions of the convention reiterated the
103 . .
LanSTng Republican, June 5, 1876.
'04Ibid., April 28, 1876.
105

Ibid., May 12, 1876.

168

demand for Republican candidates of ability and honor, and called
for the practice of honesty and economy in matters of governmental
administration.106
Despite their efforts to appeal to the independent
Liberal, there was little evidence at this gathering that the
Republicans were successful. The press coverage of the event made
virtually no mention of former Liberal leaders as being elected
delegates to Cincinnati or merely as attending or participating in
the convention.107
The Michigan Republicans also carried on the reform theme
in their activities related to the state nominating convention of
August 3, 1876. In their announcements of the convention and in
their resolutions produced at the convention they appealed to the
Liberal independent. The first resolution of their platform en-
dorsed the principles and nominees of their national convention at
Cincinnati and proclaimed that these were a sure "guarantee that
the party's record in the future...would be distinguished for the
preservation of the Union, faithfulness to its financial engagements,
and protection of civil and political rights and a prompt and

efficient reform in government service."108

 

106Ibid.

108Detroit Daily Post, August 4, 1876.

169

As in the case of their preliminary state convention, the
appeals to the former Liberal independents did not appear to work.
On the official lists of the Lansing state convention officers,
committee members, and official delegates, there was a dearth of
recognizable Reform leaders. The same was certainly true of the
candidates nominated by the convention.109

The third important party active in Michigan and national
politics in 1876 was the Greenback Party which did have some success
in winning the support of former Liberals. Despite many Democratic
and Liberal statements in the past about the dangers of inflation
and soft money, there was an amicable attitude toward the Green-
backers by 1876 based probably on political expediency and the
possibility of defeating the Republicans through fusion with the
Greenbackers. The fact that the great majority of the Liberals
were now associated with the Democracy combined with the "very
friendly relationship existing between the Democratic and Greenback
parties during this campaign“ helps explain the participation of
some Liberals in the Greenback movement. And, the appearance of the
names of some Liberal Reformers on both the Democratic and Greenback
tickets for this year helped.no Also, there were many former

National Reformers from the agrarian counties of the western part of

 

109Ibid.

noOi11a, Politics of Michigan. P- 200-

170

the state who had harbored inflationist predilections for a long
time who quite naturally migrated into the Greenback Party.]]]
Finally there were some Reformers who had been Liberal Republicans
in 1872 and National Reformers in 1874 and had adhered to a hard

money line previously. Some of the latter group had even partici-
pated in the "hard money" conference of 1875. But they now ended

up in the Greenback Party of 1876.“2

This seeming contradiction
cannot be fully explained. Perhaps this small handful of men were
simply committed to the third party principle and were more com-
fortable outside the two major parties. Quite possibly they saw in
the overall Greenback aims some of the same goals of former Liberal
movements. It is conceivable as well, that the aftermath of the
depression of 1873 changed their minds about the advisability of a
hard money stance.

At a preliminary convention in Jackson on May 3rd to pick
delegates to the National Greenback convention to be held in
Indianapolis on May 17th, there was evidence of possible reform
influence. In their resolutions the Greenbackers called for some
things which were reminiscent of earlier reform demands. One was for
more protection of the laboring classes and the control of the

capitalist-banking class. In demanding support for "farmers, mechanics

and laboring men" they charged that both of the old political parties

 

1“Detroit Evening_News. AUQUSt 25. 1876'

”21bid.

171

"were so completely committed to the interests of the parasite
classes as to be wholly unfit to serve the people earnestly and
honestly." The Greenbackers also demanded that the public domain
be preserved for actual settlers and not be "distributed to specu-
lators, and corporations." They further called for a limitation
of two terms for most governmental office holders. They condemned
"extravagance and fast living" on the part of office holders which
contributed to "villainous corruption, monstrous frauds, and gross
immorality" among those who were supposed to be the “servants of
the people."113
In the upcoming election the Greenbackers favored
"upright and honest men to administer government instead of
political barnacles, tricksters, post-traders, and office-brokers."
Such men of integrity and intelligence had to be selected "regard-
less of former political associations to fill positions of trust
and responsibility." All "good men" of whatever political affilia-
tion were invited to join the Greenbacks to obtain their goals.”4
Some past Reformers were present at the May Greenback

convention and were even chosen as delegates to the National Green-

back Convention. They were Mark D. Wilber, former National Reform

 

113"Michigan Greenback Platform and Proceedings," type-
script copy in the Spencer Collection. '

H“Ibid.

172

congressional candidate from the fifth district, and Levi Sparks,
the National Reform candidate for lieutenant governor in 1874.”5
"Former Liberals were also prominent at the Greenback

state nominating convention in Grand Rapids on August 24, 1876."n6
C. C. Comstock of Grand Rapids was chosen as an elector-at-large.
Levi Sparks was nominated for lieutenant governor and J. H.
Richardson was chosen for commissioner of the state land office.
Two past Reformers who had been picked by the Democrats were en-
dorsed by the Greenbackers. They were John G. Parkhurst for

‘17 Levi

treasurer and Frederick M. Holloway for auditor general.
Sparks subsequently became the Greenback candidate for governor
when the choice of the convention for that post, O.K. Carpenter,
declined the nomination.118
The independent Liberal-Reform movement in Michigan had
thus subsided by 1876 but it had had an important impact on state
politics. It provided a number of the major candidates for state
elections between 1872 and 1876. It allied with the Democratic
Party, thus allowing that party to neutralize some of the copper-

head stigma, and take the offensive against the extravagant and

 

“51bid.

116Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 217.

117Detroit Evening News, AUQUSF 25’ 1876'

llBBarton, "Agrarian Revolt," p. 129.

173

corrupt Republican party as the force of reform and honesty and
frugality in government. It was instrumental in facilitating the
coalition of opposition forces to defeat Zach Chandler for the
Senate. And it helped to influence the established parties to
adopt a political stance more conducive to reform. Finally, it

encouraged the practice of independent voting.

CHAPTER V
REFORMERS IN PROFILE

Any study of Liberal Reform as a political phenomenon
leads naturally to speculation about the background, motives, and
goals of the Reformers. In the post-Civil War era the champions
of change were extremely individualistic and thus difficult to
categorize. But they did share some common traits and this has
encouraged historians to attempt to describe the "typical" Liberal
Reformer of that period.

In his book The Best Men: Liberal Reformers in the
‘Gilded Age, John G. Sproat cautions that it is somewhat risky to
generalize about a reformer “type." He points out that among the
Reformers there were “some very real differences in character,
temperament, and intellect...." He notes that the Reformers
collectively comprised a "very loose confederation" and that men
"signed on and backed off at will, joining perhaps only for a
national presidential campaign, or to press for a single pet
reform, or to express an indistinct but felt sense of frustration
or outrage." Yet Sproat does concede that there were at least

some who could be conSidered more or less "full time" Reformers.1

 

1Sproat, Best Men, p. 273.

174

175

He attempts to profile some of the characteristics of
the persistent Reformer. They were, he says, among the "best men
in American society after the Civil War--the men of breeding, and
intelligence, of taste and substance." And they shared some traits
which "gave them a recognizable identity among dissenters in the
Gilded Age." One was their economic philosophy. "Their political
economy was orthodox liberalism, idealistic and sternly inflexible."
They were rigid adherents of the theory of laissez-faire which
seemed to them to complement this "country's traditions of property
rights and individual freedom." They believed that the economy
operated according to certain natural, immutable laws which worked
most efficaciously for the benefit of the greatest number when left
unfettered.2
Another common trait was a quasi-puritanical perception
of morality and material success. Reformers linked the two and
used them as a standard in making political judgments. "Their
moral code, grounded firmly in the Protestant tradition," was the
"criterion by which they judged public questions and political candi-
dates." And they contended that "respect for traditional moral
values produced material rewards as well as spiritual." They believed
that "only through moral rejuvenation...could the United States ful-
fill its destiny." That work was to be done by the principled and
righteous Reformer whose affluence and social prestige were evidence

of his purity and integrity.3

 

21bid., pp. 7-5.

31bid.. p. 9.

176

To the Liberal Reformers the most venerated hero was the
"independent man in politics.” They exalted the person who "refused
to permit the base spirit of party to corrupt his individual judg-
ment.“ In their ongoing war against political abuses they thrived
on the independent stance which allowed them to ignore traditional
appeals to party loyalty or the lash of party discipline. Their
aim was to pit the major parties against one another in quest of
independent support and thereby force the parties to embrace as
part of their platform the desired reforms.4

Of great importance to the Liberals' entire approach to
reform was the exercise of moderation. They demanded evolutionary
rather than revolutionary reform. They hoped to "restore certain
conditions of the past or to mildly amend certain new and dis-
turbing developments." They had no misgivings about the capitalist
system and were ardent advocates and defenders of the concept of
private property. They desired no fundamental alterations in the
structure of government. They only wanted to make government more
responsive to the needs and will of the people by reducing the in-
fluence of special interests in the government. "They deplored all
extremism...and sought to avoid precipitate action or surrender to

base passion."5

 

177

Despite the demanding and often frustrating nature of
political reform the Liberals believed it to be their "public duty
and responsibility." As the "best men" of society they must lead
the battle or surely "reform would fail and the abuses in society
would become stepping stones to power for demagogues, time-serving
politicians, and radical agitators of all sorts."6

In addressing himself to the phenomena of midwestern
reform in the gilded age, Russel B. Nye also identified characteris-
tic traits of Reformers. One was the moderation of their efforts
which "aimed at planned experimentation rather than disintegration
and upheaval." They desired to seek reform within the "current
framework of politics," utilizing "traditional, legitimate, politi-
cal means like the ballot, the third party, and fusion...."7

An additional shared concern of Reformers was the
eradication of specific economic and political grievances or evils
which were injurious to the citizenry. Generally "midwest reform
politics attempted from the beginning to adjust government to the

"8

needs of the people. Reformers and ”third party dissidents fought

 

6Ibid., p. 10.

7Russel B. Nye, Midwestern Pro ressive Politics,_l870-l958,
(East Lansing: Michigan State University ress, 1959), p. 13.

 

8Ibid., p. 14.

fl

178

monopolists and the interests so that well-being and power might
flow unimpeded...to the laborer and farmer.”9
In terms of heritage, vocation, and political sentiment
one historian has characterized the Liberal Reformers as follows:
they were "mostly professional men, editors, lawyers, doctors,
clergymen and professors, whose families had long occupied an
honored position in society." They "started their careers as
free-soilers and finished them as anti-imperialists. In the interim
along with the civil service reform they advocated tariff reform,
sound money, and antimonopoly."10
Solutions proposed by typical Reformers for the abuses
that offended them were the simple remedies of good government,
economic orthodoxy, and moral rejuvenation." They thought that by
"reviving the Jeffersonian regard for limited government," living
by "Christian moral precepts," and trusting in "the natural laws of
economics" they could redeem and preserve America's reputation as a
"stronghold of opportunity and individual freedom."H
Such generalizations about the backgrounds, motives, and

goals of Liberal Reformers in the nation and midwest lead per force

to a comparison of the Reformers who were active in Michigan politics

 

9Russel B. Nye, This Almost Chosen Pepple (East Lansing:
Michigan State University Press, 1966), p. 26.

10Hoogenboom, Outlawing Spoils, p. x.

 

nSproat, Best Men, p. 6.

179

from 1870 to 1876. This effort will be facilitated by brief bio-
graphical descriptions of F. A. Baker, Austin Blair, John C.
Blanchard, William D. Harriman, Daville Hubbard, Charles S. May,
A. B. Morse, George K. Murdock, Allan Potter, Eugene Pringle, John
H. Richardson, Duncan Stewart, Osmond Tower, Jerome W. Turner, and
George W. Underwood.

No survey of leading Michigan Reformers would be complete
without the inclusion of Austin Blair. As much as any other, he
was noted as an active supporter of the Liberal Reform effort during
the years in question. He was a Liberal Republican in 1872, a
backer of the National Reform Party in 1874, and a Reform Democrat
in 1876.

Blair came to Michigan from upstate New York. He had
attended the local public schools there and taken two years of
pre-college training at Cazenovia Seminary. Later he attended
Hamilton College and finished his collegiate career at Union College.
Upon graduation he became a teacher for a short while and then
entered the legal profession.12

Blair moved to Michigan in June of 1841. He settled in
Jackson and began a law practice. He relocated in Eaton Rapids where
he commenced his Michigan political career by winning the position
of Eaton County Clerk. "His next try for political office was less

successful" and in the fall of 1843 he was defeated in a race for

 

12Harris, "Blair," pp. 5-9.

180

the state legislature. Tradgedy plagued Austin Blair in Eaton
Rapids and he lost both his daughter and wife to illness. He
subsequently moved back to Jackson "where he resided for the rest
of his 1ife."13
Over the years he pursued a long and illustrious legal
and political career. The posts he held ranged from local munici-
pal and county offices to the state legislature, to the Civil War
governorship, and to the United States Congress. He was associated
at various times with the Whig Party, the Free Soil Party, the
Republican Party, the Liberal Republican Party, the National Reform
Party and the Democratic Party. He helped to found the Republican
Party in Michigan in 1854.14
Blair's biographer has noted that he was a "political
idealist" from the start. Along the way he fought for such causes
as the abolition of slavery and capital punishment, prison reform,
achievement of the franchise for blacks, and various types of
political reforms to make government frugal, efficient and responsive
to the needs of the people.15
Blair fitted well the model of the Liberal Reformer. He

perceived himself to be among the "best men" of society and there-

fore destined and obliged to be a leader of the Reform cause. He

 

13Ibid.. pp. 17-27.

'4Ibid.. pp. 26. 33. 89. 215.

15Ibid.. pp. 30-40.

181

was convinced that the spoils system militated against the political
success of the "best men." "Ignorant men," he said, get appoint-
ments when intelligent men cannot," and "vicious men vault into snug
places which honest men seem unable to reach." He demanded men of
intelligence and political ability for elective office. Consequently
he was an outspoken advocate of civil service reform.16

At various Reform conventions and gatherings in Michigan
the Civil War Governor made references to the necessity of morality
and accountability in politics. He called for a high level of moral
"purity" for all individuals aspiring to office. He thus exhibited
the puritanical strain which was characteristic of the Liberal
Reformers.

A true democrat, he insisted that government be responsive
to the needs of the people. In calling for governmental reform at
all levels, he held that men "must demand the severe accountability
of the government to the people."17

Blair believed in and publicly supported government which
was efficient and frugal, but his brand of reform was anything but
revolutionary. He wanted change but within the existing social,
political, and economic framework. His advocacy of third party re-
form efforts was nothing more than an attempt to show what the two

major parties had been in the past and must strive to be in the future.18

 

16Ibid., p. 239.

17Saginaw Daily Courier, July 7, 1874.

Ibid.

182

Fred Abbott Baker of Detroit was another leading Reformer.
He was one of the principal architects of the National Reform move-
ment of 1874, an organizer of the "hard money" conference of 1875
and a leading advocate of civil service reform in 1876.

Baker was born on a farm in Holly Township in Oakland
County. He began his education in the public schools and continued
it at the Michigan Agriculture College in East Lansing and Eastman's
Business College in Poughkeepsie, New York. He subsequently served
as a clerk and a bookkeeper in his father's general store in Holly.19

When the war came young Baker tried to join the army. He
volunteered for service in Michigan's 11th Cavalry but was turned
down for health reasons. He had a hernia.20

Not being satisfied with the life of a store employee
Baker took up the study of the law. He was admitted to the bar in
1867 and entered law practice with a well-known attorney, Col.
Sylvester Larnard, in Detroit.21

While he was with Larnard, Baker became an expert in the

area of constitutional law and the law of municipal corporations.

He received accolades for his role in the widely publicized "park

 

19George Irving Reed (ed.), Bench and Bar of Michigan
(Chicago: Century Publishing Company, 1897), pp. 378-379.

 

20Ibid., p. 22.

211bid., p. 380; Michigan State Gazetteer and Business
Directory, 1875, p. 216.

 

183

case." The state legislature had passed a law which compelled the
city of Detroit to purchase certain lands for a park. Baker
"publicly and fearlessly in advance of everybody else attacked the
statute as unconstitutional." He prepared a brief on the case which
served as a cornerstone of the campaign against the legality of
the legislature's action. The state supreme court sustained Baker's
argument and the law was struck down.22
As for political identity, Baker was a Democrat during
most of his career. He did diverge from that course on a number of
occasions, however, when it seemed to him that genuine reform could
be attained only through a new, third party effort. He was one of
the original National Reformers and served as state chairman of the
organization in 1875. Baker "never sought political preferment“
but did serve in various capacities when drafted. He participated,
for example, as a member of the village council and a representative
in the state legislature.23
During his political career, Baker generally manifested
those traits which were indigenous to the model Liberal Reformer.
He was an independent spirit. This was illustrated in his pursuance

of the "park case" before the public acceptance of his stand had been

confirmed. He was firmly committed to the notion that a man's

 

22Reed, Bench and Bar, p. 380.

 

23Ibid., pp. 380-381.

184

principles must determine his actions. This conviction carried over
into his political activities. He lauded the will to "rise above
party prejudice" where ever it interfered with the needs of the
country.24
Baker believed that government should be directly
responsible to the electorate and thus he supported the concept of
the direct election of senators, the vice-president, and president.
He further endorsed the idea that "the people should elect any and
all civil officers whose duties were local in nature and which re-
quired them to reside in the states where the duties were performed."25
There is no doubt that he considered himself and was considered by
others to be one of society's "best men," well suited for a prominent
place in the crusade for civil service reform. This sentiment was
expressed by leading Liberal Reformers, both in and out of Michigan.26
Since his own success was firmly rooted in the existing
socioeconomic and political system, Baker sought reform without
revolution. He had risen from rather humble origins to become one

of Detroit's leading lawyers, and his legal fame had been enhanced

by his pursuit of an independent and principled course in politics.

 

24Detroit Free Press, March 4, 1875.

Ibid.

26George Willard to F. A. Baker, January 19, 1876 and
William Cullen Bryant, et al., to Baker, April 6, 1876, Baker Papers.

185

Quite simply he strove to make the existing "system" work more
beneficially for the optimum number of people in society. He saw
this as his gravest responsibility.27
John Celsus Blanchard was another important Reform leader.
Born in Cayuga County, New York, in 1822, he received his early
education at Temple Hill Academy and Camuga Institute. In 1836, at

the age of fourteen, he moved to Michigan.28

Once there he engaged
in a number of menial jobs, including a clerkship in a store and

work as a farm hand. He studied the law on his own and in 1874, at
the age of twenty, he passed the bar examination. He then entered

legal practice in Detroit.29

Later, Blanchard removed to Ionia,
Michigan and joined a law partnership with A. F. Bell of that town.
In time he and Bell emerged as the most prestigious firm in mid-
Michigan. This felicitous development was due almost exclusively
to Blanchard's brilliance in the field of criminal law. He came to
be recognized as the "head of his field."30 During his career he

defended thirty accused murderers and never lost a case.31

 

27Other information on Baker is found in Michigan Manual,
1877, p. 656; Michigan Biographies, Vol. I (Lansing: Michigan Histori-
cal Commission, 1924), p. 41, and A. H. Marquis, Book of Detroiters,
(Chicago: A. H. Marquis, 1914), p. 38.

 

 

28Representative Men, 5th dst., p. 10.

29John S. Schenck, History of Ionia and Montcalm Counties,
(Philadelphia: D. W. Ensign and Company, 1881), p. 170.

30Ibid.; Michigan Gazetteer, 1873, p. 359.

31Portrait and Biographical Album of Ionia and Montcalm
Counties, (Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1891), p. 775.

186

Blanchard's incisive legal mind was complemented by a
sincere social concern. He was a "liberal benefactor" of almost
every worthy project. Besides his efforts in behalf of churches
and schools, he contributed at least a thousand dollars a year to
other charitable causes for many years. He served as a school
director in Ionia and was a trustee and supporter of Albion College.32
As an independent, vigorous, and involved politician,
Blanchard was first active in Michigan's Free Soil party and later
became a leader in the Liberal Republican and National Reform
efforts of 1872 and 1874. Before and after these third-party
experiments he was a Democrat. Blanchard held many offices over
the years and in 1872 was the Liberal-Democratic nominee for
lieutenant governor of Michigan.33
Of Blanchard's many social committments, the church and
fraternal organizations ranked first. He was active in the Methodist
Episcopal Church and for a long time was a prominent member of the
Order of Masons.34
The life style of John Blanchard generally reflected his
affluent and socially prestigious position. He resided in a magni-
ficent house, built with stone from a quarry of which he was part

owner. 35

 

32Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. 170.

33Representative Men, 5th dst., p. 10.

34Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. 170.

35Biographical Album of Ionia County, p. 775.

187

Blanchard was widely revered for his high standards of
morality and integrity and for his personal determination. His
perseverance won him respect and he was lauded as a self-made man,
well deserving of his position of "prosperity and influence." The
citizens of Ionia manifested their admiration for him by electing
him as president of the village.36

Blanchard's brand of reform was genuine, unselfish, and
uncompromising. He wanted "purity of administration and respect
for the Constitution and the law," and demanded elected officials
who were "honest and capable and rigidly accountable" to the
electorate. He insisted upon the preservation of the rights of
individuals and states. He called for a frugal and efficient
government, and, above all, one that acted not to serve the
"privileged c1asses,‘I but to serve the general welfare.37

John Blanchard was no revolutionary. He supported the
existing governmental and economic system. As a self-made man he
was well aware of the benefits to be derived by anyone willing to

work and apply his energies for a desired goal. Thus he simply

strove to restore the morals and principles that had "existed in the

 

36Schenck,.History of Ionia Counpy, p. 170. See also
E. E. Branch, History of“Ionia County_(Indianapolis: B. F. Bowen
Company, 1916), p. 300.

37Circular enclosed in Blanchard's letter to Blair,
April 4, 1874, Blair Papers.

188

early days of the Republic.“ If this could be done, the “system”
would work as the founding fathers had originally intended.38
Blanchard's sincerity in the cause of reform was un-
questioned. Even his political opposition recognized it. The
Lansing State Republican, in a bitingly satirical essay on the
motives of some of those in attendance at the National Reform
Convention in September, 1874, acknowledged that Blanchard's pur-
pose was to further "the interest of reform."39
Also active in the Michigan Liberal Republican and
National Reform movements was William D. Harriman of Ann Arbor.
Harriman was born in Vermont in 1833 and was educated in the local
schools and at the Peachman Academy. He taught in his native state
for a number of years before coming to Michigan.40
Harriman was an active and independent political figure.
He was a Republican before becoming involved in the Reform movement.
He voted for Greeley in 1872 and was active as a Liberal Republican
in that year, and as a National Reformer in 1874. Subsequently he

became a Democrat and retained that political identity.4]

 

Ibid.

3gLansing State Republican, September 11, 1874.

40Portrait and Biographical Album of Washtenaw Couniy,
(Chicago: Biographical Publishing Company, 1891), p. 444.

Ibid.

189

As a successful lawyer, judge, and politician, Harriman
was deeply involved in the civic and business affairs of Ann Arbor.
He was a trustee of the Unitarian Church and president of the Ann
Arbor Savings Bank. Quite naturally he was considered as one of
the city's leading citizens and he resided in a "large, elegant
brick residence."42

In addition to being a longtime advocate of honesty and
reform in politics, Harriman believed in laissez-faire economics
and was a proponent of free trade.43

Harriman was a beneficiary of the American social, politi-
cal, and economic structure and he sought to make that structure work
better to benefit more people. He certainly did not want to over-
throw or destroy those existing institutions and traditions which
had accounted for his success.

Daville Hubbard of Marshall was representative of the
Granger-oriented farming interest which, by 1874, had become a
salient feature in the Reform movement. Hubbard was born on a farm
in New York in 1829 and moved to Michigan in 1835. He rapidly
emerged as one of the more effective and prosperous farmers in the
Marshall area. Indeed, his farm was one of the finest in the state,

a real showcase.44

 

42Ibid.; History of Washtenaw County (Chicago: Chas. C.
Chapman Company, 1881), p. 1002.

43

 

Biographical Album of Washtenaw County, p. 444.

44Representative Men, 3rd dst., p. 56.

190

When the Civil War came Hubbard entered the Union Army
as a private and eventually rose to the rank of captain. He saw
action at the first battle of Bull Run.45

His Michigan political career began with membership in
the Free Soil Party. After this experience he assisted in the
formation of the Republican Party in the state. By 1872 he had
become so disillusioned with that party that he joined the Liberal
Republican ranks and worked for the election of Horace Greeley. He
later moved into the National Reform Party and the Greenback Party
before returning to the Republican fold. Although urged on numerous
occasions to run for various local and state offices, Hubbard de-
clined. But he did serve in organizational capacities at various
levels of politics. He was thus willing to "work in the trenches"
without yielding to the temptation to gain any public glory for
himse1f.46

Hubbard was one of the principal organizers of the Grange.
He was keenly aware of the interests and needs of farmers and be-
lieved that the organization could serve them. He held several posts
in the Marshall Grange including that of Master for the first two

years.47

 

45Ibid.
46Ibid.
47

H
U'
.4

D.

191

Hubbard grew wealthy from his activities in agriculture
and business. In addition to his farm in Marshall he purchased
several others in and out of Michigan. The largest of these was a
2,300 acre farm in Iowa. There and elsewhere he raised and sold
prize sheep and cattle. In Marshall he was a stockholder and director
of the First National Bank and a partner in a hoe company and other
enterprises.48

Hubbard was among the most affluent men in his area and
his pursuit of the "People's Reform" effort was not based on any
need for personal gain. As one of the "best men" in his community,
he was concerned with the restoration of honesty and efficiency in
government. And his knowledge of the special needs of the farmer
made him typical of the agrarian Reformer.

Of the many Michigan Liberal Reform leaders, Charles
Sedgewick May was perhaps the most widely known and respected. His
national reputation for political oratory was almost as strong as
his reputation in the state. May was born in Sandisfield, Massa-
chusetts on March 22, 1830. Four years later his parents moved to
a farm in Kalamazoo County, Michigan, where May spent his formative

years.49 He received his early education in the local schools, went

 

48Ibid. See also Washington Gardner, History of Calhoun

County (Chicago: Lewis Publishing Company, 1913), pp. 1214-1215.

49David Fisher and Frank Little (eds.), Compendium of
History and Biography of Kalamazoo County (Chicago: A. W. Bowen
and Company, 1906), p. 522.

192

to college at the Kalamazoo branch of the University of Michigan,
and Bennington, Vermont. He passed the bar examination in 1854.50
Having embarked briefly upon a law career, May delved
into journalism. He served as the Washington correspondent for the
Detroit Tribune, ultimately ascending to the associate editorship
of that paper. Still later he returned to Kalamazoo and resumed the
practice of 1aw.5]
When the Civil War came, May then the county attorney,
resigned his office and organized Company K of the Second Michigan
Infantry. This was Michigan's first volunteer company and May "led
it with honor" in battles including Bull Run. He was later commended
for his bravery and recommended for promotion, but his military
career was short-lived. A break down of his health led to a pre-
mature honorable discharge.52
Upon returning to Kalamazoo and his legal practice May
quickly became involved in politics. In 1863 he was elected to the
position of lieutenant governor of Michigan on the Republican ticket

with gubernatorial candidate Austin Blair. He acted in concert with

the Liberal Republicans in 1872 and the National Reformers in 1874

 

50

Q.

Ibi .
5'Ibi .

52Portrait and Biographical Record of Kalamazoo, Allegan,
and Van Buren Counties (Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1892), p. 468.

D.

193

and thereafter with the Democrats. On numerous occasions he de-
clined invitations by the Reformers and Democrats to run for
Congress and other offices.53
May's political impact was in large part attributable to
his extraordinary oratorical ability. He gained a national reputa-
tion as a speaker in 1863 upon delivering an address to the state
senate supporting the war effort. This speech was circulated
widely throughout the northwest under the title of "Union, Victory,
and Freedom." It appeared in its entirety in many Republican
journals throughout the North. In 1872 he gave an address in
Kalamazoo supporting the Liberal Republican cause and condemning
the corruption of the Grant Administration. This was employed by
the Liberals as a campaign document on a national basis. In 1874
a similar speech on behalf of the National Reform Movement in
Michigan became the main campaign paper. In 1876 May's speech at
Cleveland, Ohio, backing Tilden and Hendricks, was published in
leading Democratic organs.54
May's legal success was also due to a significant degree
to his oratory. He was involved in many famous trials and delivered

a number of briefs before the state supreme court. One especially

noteworthy effort was entitled "Trial by Jury" which he presented

 

53Ibid.; Michigan Biographies, Vol. II, p. 87.

54Biographical Record of Kalamazoo County, p. 468.

194

before the law department of the University of Michigan. This "gave
him standing as an advocate second to few in the Northwest."55
The secret of May's oratorical stature lay in the force
and clarity of his style and delivery. One observer said that he
was "forceful and earnest, his diction at all times pure and flowing,
his manner self-possessed, and as he advanced with his subject he
warmed to a glow of oratory that charmed all who heard him."56
Another said that "the classical quality of his style, the strength
and often pungent quality of his sentences and logic, and purity
and effectiveness of his imagery and diction, with pleasing, well
modulated voice and gesture, and often intense earnestness, rendered
him a leading public speaker and orator, whether before a jury or
on the platform."57
May was a very religious man and was active in the
Unitarian Church. For a number of years he served as the vice-
president of the national Unitarian Conference. And in 1870, upon
the death of the president of the Conference, he was appointed by
the national committee to fill the vacancy.58

Generally recognized as a man of purity, impeccable

integrity, and strong independent values, May was said to be "of a

 

55Ibid., p. 469; Kalamazoo Gazette, March 26, 1875.

56Biographical Record of Kalamazoo County, p. 523.

57Fisher, Compendium of Kalamazoo County, p. 523.

58Ibid.

195

very sensitive nature, true to his convictions of propriety and right,

"59

and an advocate of the pure life. He was known "as a thoroughly

independent thinker, and an affable, scholarly, cultivated gentle-
man."60
In politics one of the main criterion of the Liberal
Reformer was a genuine independent spirit and the courage to act on
that spirit. May met this test. He displayed "an unswerving regard
for principle, a pronounced independence, and an unyielding moral
courage." He never "made himself subservient to any party and ever

."61 A dogged

kept himself aloof from the mere machine politicians...
opponent of political tyranny, he stated that the party "should never
command or coerce. It should never have any claims upon people

further than those which accord with the reason, the judgment, and

the conscience of the individual voter."62

May and his family were socially prominent. They had two
grand residences, one in Kalamazoo and an exclusive summer home on
the shore of Gull Lake. May's wife and children were "well educated

and occupied good positions in society." Here certainly was one of

the "best families" of Michigan.63

Ibid.

60Portrait of Kalamazoo County, p. 469.

6]Ibid., pp. 468-469.

62May's speech, October 15, 1874, Speeches of the Stump.

63Portrait of Kalamazoo County, p. 469.

196

Another prestigious Michigan Reform leader was Allen
Burton Morse. He was a native of Michigan, born in l839 at Otisco
in Ionia County. He attended public school on an irregular basis,
receiving much of his early education from his father. The elder
Morse was a judge of the probate court and had served as a member
of the state legislature. Young Morse later took a two year course
at the Michigan Agricultural College.64
Morse's war record was truly impressive. In l86l he
enlisted in the army and saw action in many famous battles includ-
ing Manassas, Gaines Mill, Antietam, and Chickamauga. He lost an
arm in the Battle of Missionary Ridge and was commended for bravery
under fire by William T. Sherman.65
Upon completion of his military service he returned to
Ionia, took up the study of the law, and was admitted to the bar in
l865. He practiced law in and around Ionia for some twenty years
thereafter.66
Allen Morse enjoyed a long and distinguished political
career. His offices ranged from county prosecuting attorney, to

mayor of Ionia, to state senator. In l874 he was the Liberal candi-

date for senator from the 27th district and was elected by a substantial

 

64Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. 164.

651bid.

66Michigan Biographies, Vol. II, p. l24.

197

67

majority in a normally strong Republican district. In that race

the Liberals pointed out that "Morse...had been a good Republican

d.68

as long as Republican meant anything" goo The culmination of

Morse's political and legal career occurred in l885 when he was

elected to the Michigan Supreme Court.69
Morse was a man of tenacity, principle, and bedrock

integrity. In legal, judicial, and political activities he

II 70

"expressed opinions fearlessly. His oratory reflected this

7] When he believed

approach. It was "plain, simple, and direct."
that the regular Republicans had gone astray he was not afraid to
support the Liberal Republicans in l872 and the National Reformers
in l874.

George H. Murdock of Berrien Springs was a leading spirit
of the Liberal movement in the state, and especially of the National
Reform effort of l874. He was born in Bedford County, Pennsylvania

in 1829 but received his education in the select schools of St.

Louis, Missouri, where his family had moved. In l847 he came to

 

67Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. l64; Michi an
Manual, 1875, p. 447; Men oflProgress (Detroit: Evening News Assoc.,

19001, p. 227.

68Detroit EveningyNews, October l3, l874.

69Portrait of Ionia County, p. 203.

70Schenck, History of Ionia Count , p. l64.

71Portrait of Ionia County, p. 203.

198

Berrien Springs, Michigan, establishing permanent residence there.
He operated a store in the community before entering politics by
winning election as Berrien County Clerk.72
When the Civil War commenced, Murdock organized Company I
of the First Michigan Sharpshooters. He served in the Army of the
Potomac, seeing action in the Battle of the Wilderness and in the
siege of Petersburg. He was seriously wounded in the head during
the latter campaign. For meritorious service he was promoted to
major and honorably discharged from the army in December, 1864.73
Upon returning home, Murdock re-entered politics and
over the years served in various local offices. At first he was
a Republican, but he affiliated with the Liberal Republican cause
in l872, helped organize and direct the National Reform movement
in l874. and by 1876 had entered the Democratic fold. After 1876
he owned and operated the official Democratic county organ, the

Berrien Countnyournal.74

Murdock was instrumental in promoting the construction and
extension of railroads in southwestern Michigan. He facilitated the

extension of railroad service to Berrien Springs and acted as an

 

72Portrait and Biographical Record of Berrien and Cass
Counties (Chicago: Biographical Publishing Company, l893), p. 291.

731bid.

74Ibid.

199

officer of the St. Joseph Valley Railroad for several years. In
addition to his railroad activities he generally "aided and promoted
all enterprises of a private and public nature that would benefit
his village."75
Allen Potter, a distinguished Liberal Reformer from
Kalamazoo, was born in Saratoga County, New York, in l8l8. Educated
in the local schools, he eventually took up the trade of tinner and
came to Michigan in l838 where he pursued his vocation in the
southern part of the state.76
In l845 he moved to Kalamazoo and became a successful
entrepreneur. As owner of a hardware store and tin shop he went
into partnership with some of the well-to-do residents and purchased
a blast furnace. Later he became a partner in a gas company and
also rose to prominence in the banking field as the organizer and

77

vice-president of the Michigan National Bank. He was a founder

of the South Haven Railroad and served as president of the line as
well as assisting in the establishment of the Kalamazoo Paper Mill.78
In addition to being an astute and shrewd businessman,

Potter was a humane and generous man who contributed freely to local

 

 

751bid., p. 292.

76Fisher, Compendium of Kalamazoo County, p. 172.
”mm.

78

Portrait of Kalamazoo County, p. ll37.

200

churches and charities. He was an incorporator of a college, and
served for several years as the treasurer of the Michigan Asylum
for the Insane at Kalamazoo.79
Allen Potter led a varied and independent political life.
His experience included terms in the United States Congress, the
state legislature, and as mayor of Kalamazoo. Originally a Republi-
can, he became increasingly independent due to disillusionment with
the G.O.P. In l872 he was a Liberal Republican and he associated
with the Independent or National Reform movement in l874. There-
after he aligned with the Democratic organization.80
Potter was widely respected both as a business leader
and politician. "In his legislative work," an observer noted, "he
projected the same energy, capacity, and breadth of skill that dis-
tinguished him in private business. He displayed a wide and accurate
knowledge of public affairs that made him a valuable member of the

“81

bodies to which he was sent as a representative. Regarded locally

and across the state as one of the "best and purest men," Potter was
an "influential and deservedly respected resident of Kalamazoo County."82
Liberal Reformer Eugene Pringle was born in Otsego County,

New York, in 1826. He spent much of his youth in Chautaugua County

 

791bid.

80Ibid.; Michigan Biographies, Vol. II, p. 203.

81Fisher, Compendium of Kalamazoo County, P- 175°

82Detroit Free Press, August 31, l872.

201

where he attended the district school. He extended his educational
experience at the Mayville Academy and the classical school at
Batavia. By age eighteen he had begun to study the law and was
admitted to the New York Bar in 1849. In 1850 Pringle moved to
Jackson, Michigan, and set up a law practice in partnership with
Samuel H. Kimball. He "soon became recognized as one of the
earnest, versatile and able young advocates of the state."83
A "long and distinguished service in public office" was
initiated in 1852 when Pringle was elected a circuit court com-
missioner. He went on to occupy many other positions including
that of state legislator and mayor of Jackson. Changing party
identity according to personal convictions and principles, Pringle
was successively a Democrat, a Republican, a Liberal Republican, a
National Reformer, and a Democrat again.84
Pringle was recognized throughout the state as one of
the foremost corporate attorneys and promoters of railroad companies.

He worked incessantly for legislation which would expedite the

financing and extension of railways in Michigan. A prime mover

 

83Charles V. DeLand, DeLand's History of Jackson County
Logansport, Indiana: B. F. Bowen,—1903), p. 498; Michigan
azetteer, 1873, p. 374.

84DeLand, Jackson County, pp. 498-499, 501. See also
Representative Men, 3rd dst., p. 79, and Michigan Biographies, Vol.
II, p. 212.

202

behind the development of the Grand River Valley Railroad, Pringle
served as an officer of that and other lines.85
Pringle was a participant in the formation of other
business ventures besides railroads. He aided in the founding of
the Jackson Iron Company, served as its secretary, and played a
key role in the development and exploitation of the company's
extensive properties on the Lake Superior shore. Pringle also
became a stockholder in a company set up to furnish a water works
for the city of Jackson. As the attorney of the company, he
supported legislation providing for the local ownership of the
water works through the purchase of stock by the municipal corpora-
tion. "This was the first instance of municipal ownership of public
utilities" in Michigan.86
Socially, Eugene Pringle was one of the elite of Jackson.
He and his family were considered among the most prestigious. They
were "in the best social life of the city.‘I Their plush home was a
local landmark and the center of much "gracious hospitality."
Pringle was honored as one of the "most distinguished citizens and
sterling pioneers of Jackson."87

Pringle's character was typical of the sincere Liberal

Reformer. His "integrity of purpose in all the relations of his

 

85DeLand, Jackson County, p. 500; Men of Progress, p. 315.

86DeLand, Jackson County, pp. 500-501.

87Ibid., p. 502.

203

life was ever beyond cavil. He performed all duties public and
private with a high sense of honor and in a manner alike commendable
and upright." His individuality was "so distinctive that he could
not but encounter personal antagonisms, but even his bitterest
opponents did not venture to assail the honesty and sincerity of the
man at any point in his active and signally useful career."88
The most illustrious Liberal Reformer from Tuscola
County was John H. Richardson. He was born in Randolph, Vermont,
in 1814 and spent his youth there. He worked on a farm and picked
up his early education in the district schools as best he could.
In 1847 Richardson moved to Michigan, settling near the town of
Tuscola. He secured a tract of pine lands, built a saw mill and
went into the lumber business at which he was conspicuously
successful. He later built a flour mill and after that a sash and
blind factory. All of these ventures were financially profitable.
The income from these enterprises was supplemented by two large and
productive farms which Richardson owned and operated. Speaking of
this clearly ambitious and self-made man, one writer noted that "He
had been eminently successful in business and had acquired a fine

competence and all the fruits of his own labor."89

 

881bid., p. 501.

89Historyof Tuscola apd Bay Counties (Chicago: H. R.
Page and Company, 1883), pp. 36-37.

204

When the Civil War commenced, Richardson joined the cause
of the Union and became a hero. His exemplary actions in the Penin-
sular campaign led to a promotion to lieutenant-colonel. In the fall
of 1863 his health failed and forced him to resign from the military.90

Before and after the war Richardson served in a number of
county and state positions through appointment and election. He
exhibited a strong strain of political independence and was in
succession a Republican, Liberal Republican, National Reformer,
Democrat and Greenbacker.9]

A man of lofty political principles, Richardson continually
demanded the highest standards of morality and conduct of those en-
dowed with the public trust no matter to which party they belonged.
He was a life-long advocate of reform. He once wrote to Blair that
the Liberal cause "was just and must prevail" and concluded that he
"was for reform body and soul."92

Richardson's social prominence in Tuscola was great. He
lived in “a fine residence in the village" and enjoyed the "confidence
and esteem of his many friends" who placed him in an "honorable

position.“93

 

golbid.

911bid.; Michigan Bipgraphies, Vol. 11, p. 234; Michigan

Manual, 1883, p. 485.

92J. H. Richardson to Austin Blair, March 16, 1873, Blair

Papers.

93Historyof Tuscola County, p. 37.

205

One of the main proponents of the Liberal Republican cause
in 1872 was Duncan Stewart of Detroit. He was born in Scotland and
emigrated to the United States and Detroit in 1843. Although not
formally educated, he revealed a strong sense of business acumen
from a rather tender age.94

Stewart engaged in many business pursuits during his
adulthood. He became one of the most important, large-volume grain
merchants in the United States. He served as president of the
Detroit Board of Trade and was a member of the board of directors
of the Second National Bank. Also he was a major owner of the
Western Transportation Company.95

In addition to his successful business activities
Stewart was a great humanitarian and a dedicated member of the
Presbyterian Church. He contributed substantial amounts of money
over the years to various causes. One of the most visible of his
projects was the construction of a new church in the city. The
result was a "beautiful Gothic structure" which became, with time,
a landmark.96

In politics, Duncan Stewart was an influential Republican.

This was illustrated by his early relations with Senator Zachariah

 

94Clarence and Agnes Burton, History of Wayne County and
the City of Detroit (Detroit: S. 5. Clarke Publishing Company,
1930). pp. 295-296.

96

951bid., p. 296.
bid., p. 297.

206

Chandler. The latter at one point offered Stewart the Republican

nomination for the gubernatorial post. Such an endorsement was

tantamount to election in Michigan, but Stewart declined on the

grounds that he had private commitments which were more important

to him than election to the highest office in the state. Obviously

he was an independent and individualistic thinker who would not be

swayed by the wealthy or the powerful.97
Although Stewart was generally regarded as an "old

line" Republican and party leader, he had become extremely dis-

illusioned with that party by 1872. He was chagrined by the policy

of Radical Reconstruction which was being pursued in the South. It

was said that after he had spent a few months in that section "he

came back converted‘l to the Liberal view.98
Stewart also was extremely agitated by the persistence

of Republican support for a high tariff. He believed that this

operated for the benefit of the capitalist classes to the detriment

of the workingman. Further, he concluded that it was the duty of

the federal government to prevent the capitalist from leeching on

the productivity of the workers through such instruments as the tariff

and various "land grabbing” schemes.99

 

Ibid.

98Grand Rapids Democrat, July 31, 1872.

99Detroit Free Press, August 10, 1872.

207

Stewart concluded that the only rational course for him
to take would be to support the Liberal Republican drive whose
presidential candidate had as some of his avowed goals the reconcilia-
tion of North to South and letting the people decide what was to be
done about the tariff. During the campaign Stewart became one of
the most sought after and respected supporters of the Liberal
Republican cause.100
Osmond Tower of Ionia was another staunch Liberal Reformer
in Michigan. He was born in Hampshire County, Massachusetts, in
1811. Educated in the common schools, he learned carpentry and
practiced that trade through various moves which brought him first
to upstate New York and finally to Michigan where he settled in Ionia
in 1835.101
Once he arrived in Ionia, Tower branched out into various
business associations. These included partnership in a drygoods
operation, a hardware firm, and a company which manufactured and sold
hot-air furnaces. He also got into the railroad business, serving
as a major stock holder and principal officer for the Ionia and
Lansing railroad and the Ionia and Stanton railroad. He further be-

came president of Home Mutual Insurance Company.102

 

lOO
Speeches."

Stewart's Speech, July 22, 1872, "Michigan Political

'O'Schenck, History_of Ionia County, p. 160.

102Ibid.; Michigan Gazetteer, 1873. P- 350-

208

Tower began his political career as a Whig and then be-
came a Republican, Liberal Republican, and National Reformer. He
held many offices ranging from county clerk to state senator.103
As a reform-minded politician he was considered a man of strong will
and "unquestioned integrity," and his moral character was said to
be "above reproach."104

The Towers comprised one of the most preeminent families
in Ionia. They enjoyed the approbation of neighbors and friends
and they lived in what was termed "a magnificent residence."105

Jerome W. Turner was born in Franklin County, Vermont,
in 1836 and came to Howell, Michigan, with his parents in 1839.

He received his early education in the local public schools and at
Northville and Lodi Academies. After attending the University of

Michigan he took up the study of the law and successfully completed
his bar examination by 1857.106

For awhile Turner engaged in a law practice with Judge
F. C. Whipple in his home town. But shortly he moved to Shiawassee

County and settled in Owosso which became his permanent residence.

 

103Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. 160; Branch,
History of Ionia County, p. 504; Michigan Biographies, Vol. II,
p. 365.

104Schenck, History of Ionia County, p. 160.

106Portrait and Biographical Album of Clinton and Shiawassee
Counties (Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1893), p. 326.

209

He entered again the practice of law at his new home and became one
of the more respected advocates of the area.107
During the war, Turner received various appointments
which kept him rather far removed from the battlefield. He served
as an adjutant and paymaster in northern Michigan and in Louisville,
Kentucky.108
Turner enjoyed an extended political career, during which
he was twice elected to the state senate and was chosen as mayor of
Owosso. Throughout his political life Jerome Turner displayed a
proclivity for honesty and reform in government. Consequently he
deserted the Republican Party because of its corruption and joined
wholeheartedly the Liberal Republican and National Reform movements.
When the independent Reform effort declined, he moved over into the
Democratic ranks.109
Turner and his family were intellectual and social leaders
in Owosso. He provided his seven sons and one daughter with
“superior educations" and three of them followed him into the legal

profession. His wife was a "lady of rich and varied accomplishments.

 

'071pid.; Michigan Gazetteer. 1873. p. 515-

108Biographical Album of Shiawassee County. P- 325-

1091pid.; Michigan Biographies, Vol. II, p. 374; Charles
Moore, History of Michigan, Vol. IV (Chicago: Lewis Publishing
Company, 1913), p. 2147.

210

Turner was granted much "admiration and honor“ by his fellow citizens
who recognized him as "one of the most highly respected members of
society in Owosso."no
George W. Underwood, who was also in the vanguard of
political reform in Michigan in the 18705, had a successful back-
ground. Born in Massachusetts in 1814 he attended local schools.
His higher education was superior. He went to both Amherst and
Union Colleges as well as a theological school in Connecticut, and

"11] In 1843 he removed to

was known as a "formidable scholar.
Hillsdale, Michigan and opened a drugstore. In addition to becoming
the area's best known druggist, he also devoted much time and effort
to his farm.”2
Underwood was very socially conscious and thus became
involved in many organizations and cultural causes. He helped
found the Agricultural Society of Hillsdale County and served as
president of the Hillsdale County Fair Association. He was instru-
mental in providing for the erection of an impressive public opera
house for the town. In addition he was the most important force be-

113

hind the founding and development of Hillsdale College, having

 

110Biographical Album of Shiawassee County, p. 326-

1”Representative Men, 2nd dst., p. 73.

Ibid.; Elon G. Reynolds. Compendium of History and
Biography oijllsdale County (Chicago: A. W. Bowen and Company,
1903), pp. 327-328.

113

 

Representative Men, 2nd dst., pp. 73-74.

211

organized a group of local men to put up the necessary money to
locate the college at Hillsdale, when a similar group was trying to
get it established at Coldwater.H4
Underwood was a man of great integrity and faith. He
was a proponent of temperance and a strong Christian, and demanded
of elected government officials the same high moral and ethical
standards which he set for himself. When the Republican leadership
refused to provide these, Underwood became actively involved in the
Liberal Reform movement in the state.”5
The profiling of Michigan Liberal Reform leaders in the
18705 reveals that in many ways they were typical of the reformer
"type" as described by scholars such as Sproat and Nye. They
certainly were men of intelligence and substance and were considered
by themselves and others to be the "best men" of society. They
further believed it to be their responsibility to reform government
to make it more honest, efficient, and responsive to the needs of
the people. To be sure they were men of high morality, integrity,
and faith, and they were motivated by a quasi-puritanical impulse.
They and their contemporaries linked financial and material success

to "right living." For the most part, they were intimately involved

in business affairs and were very much imbued with the classical

 

114Portrait and Biographical Album of Hillsdale County
(Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1888), p. 181.

115Representative Men, 2nd dst., p. 74.

212

economic philosophy of laissez-faire. The evidence indicates that
they were interested in maximizing their profits and building up
great personal fortunes with grand homes and material comforts.
They also were very aware of their social responsibilities and were
generally philanthropists on one scale or another. They were
interested in furthering education as well as morality and gave
heavily to schools, colleges, and churches. The reform they advo-
cated was non-revolutionary, perhaps even conservative. They simply
wanted to restore to government the honesty, frugality, and efficiency
which they perceived to be characteristic of the early Republic.

In some other ways the Michigan Reformers were not like
those described by Sproat and Hoogenboom. These historians attri-
buted to Liberals in the gilded age an anti-democratic strain and a

cynicism in reform.”6

They also charged that some Reformers were
political "outs" who were trying to get back in.117 There is a
dearth of evidence to support these contentions with most of the
Michigan Reform leaders. Obviously there were a few who used the
Reform movement as a vehicle to recoup previous political losses.
There may have been some as well who disdained the common people.
Surely, too, the Reformers at times were caught in contradictions

between what they did and said and between business and legal trans-

actions and political stances. And some of them switched positions

 

116$proat, Best Men, p. 271.

H7Hoogenboom, Outlawing Spoils, p. ix.

213

on certain issues over the years. But generally the Reformers were
well-meaning and relatively consistent in their views and actions.
It appears that the Liberal Reformers of Michigan were
neither anti-democratic nor crass political opportunists. Most of
them were self-made men who had risen to great heights from rather
humble and often poor beginnings. They knew of the plight of the
common man and addressed most of their political efforts toward
making the political system responsive to him. They were willing
to take political risks to ensure this end. Further many of the
Reform leaders were loath to take any political credit for their
actions. Practically all turned down offers to run for office at
one time or another because they might, by pursuing office, under-
mine the credibility of their motives. As a body they were sincere,
genuinely concerned Reformers who were motivated in the main by a

good dose of political idealism.

CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS

The Liberal Reform experiment in Michigan politics from
1870 to 1876 had many significant ramifications. It helped to dis-
credit the national Republican Party and simultaneously to enhance
the image of the Democratic opposition. It also undermined the
position of the state Republican organization and of the men who
ran it. In this latter regard it played a vital role in the
political defeat of Chandler in 1875. It supplied many state and
local candidates for the elections during the period. From its
ranks came campaigners and orators who helped influence political
reform across the country. Reformers set the tone for state
politics during the seventies and were instrumental in reviving the
tradition of independent voting. They contributed to the success
of the farmers' movement, and aided in the development of the
machinery of fusion through which the statehouse was wrested from
the Republicans in 1882.

Republican domination and Democratic impotence had
characterized Michigan politics from the Civil War to the decade of
the seventies. The Republican machine led by such powerful bosses as
Zach Chandler completely controlled and dictated the course of

political events in the state. The Democrats had been discredited

214

215

by charges of "copperheadism," and the "bloody shirt" was waved
frequently and effectively in determining the outcome of elections
in a manner beneficial to the Republicans.

The Liberal Reform effort helped to alter this situation.
Reformers tarnished the image of the Republican Party and depicted
that party as the vehicle of vindictiveness toward the South which
worked to keep alive and perpetuate the divisiveness and antagon-
isms of the war. They claimed that the Republicans stood for party
tyranny and political bossism and emphasized the ubiquitous corruption
which had proliferated under a Republican administration. They
criticized the Republican support of the high tariff as detrimental
to the interests of the working man and charged that the monetary
policy of the Grant administration was one of vascillation between
contraction and inflation. The foreign policy of the Republican
party they noted was imperialistic and grasping and completely
contrary to the principles of self-determination and the right of
peoples to direct their own affairs and destinies. Disregard for
the right of people to self government was also manifested by the
Republicans in their southern policy. And Republican interest in the
southern blacks, they charged, was based primarily on political con-
siderations. In short, the forces of Reform pointed up the many
weaknesses and faults of the Republican party and demanded that

thoughtful and objective voters abandon it.

216

While attacking the Republicans the Liberal Reformers

were aiding the Democrats by working in close alliance with them.

By association, the Democracy seemed to stand for things desired

by the Reformers. These included the reconciliation of the

sections of the country, the restoration of individual and states'
rights, especially in the South, anti-imperialism in foreign affairs.
sound money and responsible economic practices, the elimination of
corruption and tyranny in politics, and a return to efficiency,
frugality and honesty in government at all levels. In short, the
Reformers lent some gravely needed credibility to a thoroughly
discredited party. The Democracy could now take the offensive for
the first time in years. It could declare itself to be the champion
of honesty, reform, frugality, and humanity. It could argue that
Democrats worked for the common man while Republicans were the
servants of business interests and political bosses whose needs were
antithetical to those of the laboring man.

By associating the Michigan Republican Party with the
evils and deficiencies of the Grant administration, the Liberal
Reformers helped to bring about the downfall of that party from
its hitherto unassailable position in the state. This effort was
expedited by the presence of the despised and mistrusted political
boss, Zachariah Chandler. Most of the objectionable dimensions of
party tyranny and corruption at the national level could be docu-

mented in the state in the activities of Chandler and his lieutenants.

217

If such men could be overthrown, the Reformers reasoned, then
government at all levels could be made more honest, efficient, and
responsive. The fundamental Reform appeal was to return government
to the people.

One of the most momentous changes wrought in state
politics through the efforts of the Liberal Reformers and their
Democratic allies was the overthrow of boss Chandler in 1875.

There can be no question but that the Reformers helped to set the
tone of the attack on Chandler which ultimately resulted in his
downfall. From 1870 onward the Reformers directed a continuing
assault against the character, morals, and political habits of

"Old Zach," and succeeded in marshalling public opinion against the
Senator. Repeatedly they used him to symbolize everything that was
the epitome of the corrupt, dishonest, and wasteful politician. In
addition to setting the tone of verbal assault they also played an
instrumental role in the actual political operations which brought
on his defeat. The reform-minded legislature which finally turned
him out of office was sprinkled with Liberal Reformers who had come
to that body on Reform tickets from various parts of the state.
They combined effectively with Democrats and bolting Republicans to
win the victory. And itzis interesting that the man selected to
replace Chandler was the independent reform-oriented Isaac Christiancy.

The Liberal Reform effort contributed substantially to the
choice of major and minor candidates in state elections during the

years under examination. In 1872 the state ticket which opposed that

218

of the Republicans consisted of a number of true Liberal Republicans
in addition to some long-standing Democrats. In 1874, again, the
ticket consisted of National Reformers and Democrats. During the
period of study there were several men of a reform bent elected to
the state legislature. In county and municipal elections as well,
men of the Liberal Reform forces were chosen to represent local
constituencies. These candidates played a major role in the
successes recorded against the Republicans. In some instances of
combined slates the Reform candidates were more attractive to the
voters than were the Democratic candidates.

In addition to providing major and minor candidates to
oppose Republicans during the years in question, the Liberal
Reformers furnished some of the most respected campaigners and
orators in the state. A few of these had national reputations.
Included among such figures were Austin Blair, Duncan Stewart,
Charles Sedgewick May and Fred Abbott Baker. Such individuals were
so widely known and respected that they certainly helped to achieve
the election of Liberal Reformers and their Democratic allies in
many places.

Those men are also significant because they proved that
the Reform movement was not the product of politicians who, in
selfish pursuit of office, created third parties to achieve for
themselves what they could not acquire within the traditional
two-party structure. Many of them neither sought office nor accepted

a draft for office. They were willing to work in other capacities to

219

achieve success of those principles and goals which they held dear.
They certainly were not "losers," desperately seeking a means to
regain some lost stature or prestige. Most of them enjoyed the
respect and approbation of their fellow Michiganders. They were
usually successful professional or business men and they applied

to a political cause the same talents and perseverance that spelled
success for them in their private lives. Obviously such men did
not operate out of greed or selfish motives. Instead they appeared
willing to sacrifice themselves to some degree for those things in
which they fervently believed.

The Reformers set the tone of state politics in general
during the period. The evidence indicates that the Democrats and
Republicans took up the cry of reform and the restoration of honesty
to government. This became especially obvious with the election of
1876 when, in both the nation and the state, the emphasis was on
reform and clean and effective government. These concerns were
reflected in party platforms and in the statements and character
of party candidates. The Reformers were able to influence the tenor
of state and national politics out of all proportion to their
absolute numbers because the leadership of the two established
parties realized that the Reformers' demands had great popular appeal.
Thus they moved to "steal the thunder" of the Reformers by adopting
as their own the Reform cause.

In addition to setting the tone of state politics the

Liberal Reform effort also contributed much to the revival of a

220

pattern of independent voting in Michigan. This development was
crucial in light of the blind and emotional ties to the traditional
parties that resulted from the feelings engendered by the Civil War
and its aftermath. For the first time since the conflagration,
people were beginning to base their vote not upon the appeal of
their party to revulsion against the "enemy" but rather upon a
logical consideration of the issues. Still more significantly, they
were being asked by the Reformers to do what was honest, frugal, and
right, rather than what was good for one party and detrimental to
the opposing one.

As the Republican vote in the state diminished over the
years under study, it became clear that the appeal was at least
partially working. Many individuals across the state were beginning
to conclude that the Republican party was not acting in their best
interests and was even acting in ways which were not honest. People
were becoming more discerning in declaring allegiance to a party if
indeed they did that at all. They were gaining the courage to
abandon long-standing loyalties and voting patterns and to create
new ones. This was one of the great services of the independent
Liberal Reform movement in Michigan. It encouraged the abandonment
of blind party support through the ballot and substituted in its
place a concern for independent ballot casting and political action
based upon rational and moral considerations. In short, it helped
to restore principle to politics and to instill in the voter a new
sense of responsibility to do the right thing, to do that which would

benefit the people as a whole.

221

The independent Reform effort was also of crucial signie
ficance to the emergent farmers' movement of the last quarter of the
nineteenth century. The farmers had for some time been subjected to
deplorable economic conditions growing out of financial panic,
natural disasters, business monopoly, and an unsympathetic govern-
ment. The Grange had emerged in the 18705 as a vehicle to help the
farmer improve his plight, but it was at first avowedly anti-political
in organization and function. A third party structure, sensitive to
the special needs and interests of the agrarian community was re-
quired and that structure was provided by the Liberal Reform effort.
This is not to argue that the Liberal Reform movement in the state
was simply an agrarian political protest. It was not. It emerged
before the farmers organized and then served as a vehicle for
farmers, along with many other groups, to achieve the overthrow of
the entrenched Republican machine which worked in ways injurious to
the farmer and other laboring men of the state. Aside from some
local Reform organizations, however, most of the leadership of the
movement was provided by non-farmers or part-time farmers. Simply
stated, the Liberal Reform movement was not exclusively for the
benefit of farmers, even though it did help them and was supported
by them.

One of the most important roles of the Liberal Reform
movement in state politics dUring the 18705 was the restructuring and
fusing of the opposition to the Republican party. Fusion was first

tried, with limited results, in 1872 when the state Liberal Republicans

222

and Democrats shared the same ticket. It was tried again, in a
slightly different form, but with considerably more success, in the
elections of 1874. In that instance there were separate tickets for
the National Reform and Democratic parties, but the two had many of
the same nominees. The sharing of candidates on state tickets,
along with the new forms of simultaneous convention activity, contri-
buted to the early refinement of fusion machinery. This was used
with startling success by the Democrats and Greenbackers in gaining
control of the state house in 1882. The use of fusion tactics
generally increased the chances of the opponents of Republicanism in
local, state and federal elections. The Liberal Reformers must be
given much of the credit for the development of effective "fusion
politics" in the state.

In a more general sense the Liberal Reform movement in
Michigan and elsewhere was important because it reflected the changing
concerns of a people in a period of transition. In the years after
the Civil War the populace longed to lay to rest the old issues
connected with that tragedy. They wished to take up the concerns of
the present. They desired the restoration of integrity and efficiency
to government and solutions to emergent economic problems. By
addressing themselves to these desires of the people, the Liberals

"peculiarly typified the new post-bellum age."1

 

1Ross, Liberal Republican, p. 238.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY ,

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

\

MANUSCRIPTS

The most valuable source of manuscripts for the study of
Michigan political reform in the 18705 is the Burton Historical
Collection in the Detroit Public Library. Located there are the
papers and correspondence of many of the men who played leading
roles in the Reform effort. Among those represented are Austin
Blair, Charles S. May, Fred Abbott Baker, and Osmond Tower.

The Blair Papers for the years 1870 through 1876 are the
most helpful. Included in the former governor's correspondence are
countless letters from Reform leaders in and outside of Michigan.

Of special interest are those which reveal the political strategy

of the Reformers for the elections of 1872 and 1874. Since Blair
was one of the most noted politicians among the Reformers, he was
inundated with letters requesting his assessment of the political
scene and the possibilities of Reform success in the state. Numerous
appeals to run for office and to appear at Reform campaign rallies
are also contained in the letters.

The May Papers, although much less extensive, are of strategic
import. They contain a number of Blair's letters asking for advice
and support. They also reveal how May, who generally sought to avoid

running for office to maintain the integrity of his reform stance,

223

224

was beseeched on numerous occasions to go against his judgment in
this regard. The letters reveal the great respect that May, the
most noted Reform orator, commanded in Michigan.

The Baker Papers are most critical for a proper under-
standing of the National Reform effort of 1874 and the campaign for
civil service reform. Baker was the acknowledged state leader of
both of these movements and was consulted by Reformers both in and
outside of Michigan.

Another Reformer whose correspondence appears in the
Burton Collection is Osmond Tower of Ionia. Although sparce in
number, Tower's letters provide insight into his views on politics
and the characteristics he most valued in politicians.

The papers of persons who were basically Democrats but
sided with the Reformers are represented in the Burton Collection.
One of the more pertinent collections in this category contains the
papers of Alpheus S. Williams.

Of use, too, are the Proceedings of the Liberal Republican
Convention (New York, 1872) also found in the Burton Collection.

The Historical Collections at Michigan State University in
East Lansing contain some materials germane to the Reform movement in
the state. Most helpful of these are the diaries of John G. Parkhurst
containing his views of such things as the defeat of Chandler in 1875.
Also certain items in the Chamberlain Family Papers relate to the
activities of Henry Chamberlain who was at various times a Reformer,

Democrat, and Greenbacker.

225

At Ann Arbor, the Michigan Historical Collections of the
University of Michigan are valuable in the main for the papers of
Republicans, Democrats, and Greenbackers who acted in concert with
the Reformers, and who were on occasion endorsed as joint candidates.
Among the most relevant are the papers of Brackley Shaw and Peter

White, and the reminiscences of Charles C. Comstock.

PRINTED GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS: FEDERAL AND STATE

Federal

The most useful Federal Document is the Congressional Globe
which became the Congressional Record in 1873. The debates recorded
therein are especially valuable for determining the role of
reform-minded Michigan congressmen in furthering the cause of reform
at the federal level. The Congressional Record for the 44th Congress,
lst Session, for example, reveals the purposes of Michigan civil
service reformers. The House Journal and Senate Journal are also
helpful in tracing the actions of Reformers from Michigan in their
respective houses. The United States Statutes at Large are of aid

as a reference to federal legislation of a reform nature.

State

The Michigan House Journal and the Michigan Senate Journal
are useful in ascertaining the activities of the legislature and the
voting records of the Reform members. In particular the Senate

Journal of 1872 is a great help in understanding the details of the

226

impeachment proceedings against Land Commissioner Edmunds. Also
the House Journal of 1875 is instructive for determining the voting
records of Reformers, Democrats and bolters in the senatorial
election of 1875. Further, the Laws of Michigan to 1873 and the
Acts of Michigan thereafter enable one to understand legislation
which was unpopular with the voters of the state and which helped
to undermine the image of the Republican Party. This includes
statutes covering things such as public aid to private railroad
companies and the state "salary grab." They are also helpful in
revealing those acts which were passed because of the reform impetus.
One of the most important sources of voting statistics, information
on constitutional amendments, and the personnel of state government

is the Michigan Manual. The volumes used range from 1869 on a

 

bi-annual basis through 1877. They are most valuable for revealing
the strength of Reform-related voting by town, city, county, con-

gressional district, and state.

NEWSPAPERS

A plethora of state newspapers provide much of the basic
information on the personnel, activities, and issues of the Reform
movement.

A number of Democratic papers consulted had liberal leanings
in the 18705. Of these the Detroit Free Press, Marshall Democratic
Expounder, Kalamazoo Gazette, Grand Rapids Democrat, Saginaw Dai1y_

Courier, and the LansingAJournal were used most extensively. After

227

some initial opposition to Liberal Reform efforts, the Free Press

 

changed ownership and began to endorse Liberal Republicanism.
Thereafter, throughout the years under consideration, it contained
some of the most thorough coverage of Reform activities and con-
ventions of any paper in the state. The Expounder gives good
general coverage to Reform and is informative on the Reform pursuits
of the farming element in Calhoun County. Also, S. S. Lacey, a
longtime Reformer and confidant of Austin Blair, assumed control of

the organ during the period underconsideration. The Daily Courier

 

provides valuable information on the Reform cause in the Saginaw
Valley and the interests of reform-minded Germans in that area.

The Journal was founded in 1872 as a Reform newspaper supporting
the Liberal Republican cause. It was first published by George
Sanford, a Liberal Republican and a close friend of Blair. By 1874
it had become Democratic but continued to give coverage to the
Reform effort, especially as it dovetailed with the Democratic
campaigns. Other Democratic organs which are of use include the

Michigan Argus of Ann Arbor, and the Niles Democrat.

 

Of the Republican papers the pro-Chandler Detroit Post is

 

helpful, as is the Lansing Republican. The anti-Chandler Republican
sheet until its merger in 1877 was the Detroit Advertiser and
Tribune. This paper naturally gives considerable coverage to that
dimension of the Reform movement which resulted in the defeat of
Chandler in 1875. Helpful, too, are such papers as the Jackson Daily

Citizen, the Coldwater Republican, the Ionia Sentinel, the Hillsdale

 

 

228

Standard, the Port Huron Daily Times, and the Adrian Times and

 

Expositor.

Two professed independent journals have considerable
value. One is the Detroit Evening News, which gives balanced
coverage of most of the significant political events in the state,
while openly supporting neither of the two major parties. The
other is the Grand Rapids Daily Times, which was a Liberal Republi-
can sheet in 1872 and pursued an independent course thereafter.

In some ways the [Battle Creek] Michigan Tribune is the
most representative Liberal Reform paper. It was owned and edited
by Walter W. Woolnough of Battle Creek, a leading Liberal Republi-
can and National Reformer. It covers both of these movements,
extensively. Unfortunately it is only available through 1874.

The Michigan Farmer is useful for determining the agrarian

position on matters such as the tariff and the currency.

OTHER SOURCES

Helpful statistical data are available in various directories
and almanacs. Of special use are the Michigan Almanac and the
Michigan State Gazetteer and Business Directqry for the 18705. The
former provides a wealth of political data and the latter offers
information about the business and professional affiliations of
Reformers and others. Appleton's Annual Cyclppedia is also useful for

its coverage of Michigan political activities in 1872 and 1874.

229

Several collections of political speeches in the State
Library in Lansing are germane. These include "Michigan Political
Speeches;“ "Speeches by Michigan Men;" C. S. May, §peeches of the
Stump, the Bar, and the Platform (Battle Creek, 1899); and relevant
volumes in the “Jenison Collection."

The Spencer Collection is valuable as a source of state
party platforms and convention proceedings and participants for
the period.

Two excellent contemporary accounts of the political
scene in the state capitol in the seventies are Lewis M. Miller,
"Reminiscences of the Michigan Legislature of 1871," Michigan
Pioneer and Historical Collections, XXXII (1948), pp. 419-447, and
Henry A. Haigh, "Lansing in the Good Old Seventies," Michigan
History Magazine, XIII (1929), pp. 99-112.

Coverage of matters related to the Liberal Reform movement
is found in: Richard Barton's unpublished Ph.D. dissertation "The
Agrarian Revolt in Michigan, 1865-1900" (Michigan State University,
1958); Edmund Calkins, "Railroads of Michigan Since 1850," Michigan
History Magazine, XIII (1929), pp. 5-25; Richard Doolen, "The
National Greenback Party in Michigan Politics," Michigan History
Magazine, XLVII (1963), pp. 161-183; Sidney Glazier, "The Michigan
Labor Movement," Michigan History Magazine, XLIV (1960), pp. 303-323;
Karolena Fox, "The Movement for Equal Suffrage in Michigan," Michigan
History Magazine, II (1918), pp. 90-lO9; D. C. Shilling, "Constitution
Making Since 1850," Michigan History Magazine XVIII (1934), pp. 33-47

230

and Floyd Streeter, "History of Prohibition Legislation in Michigan,”
Michigan History_Magazine, II (1918), pp. 289—308.

Among the sources of biographical information on the
Michigan Reformers are Michigan Biographies, 2 vols. (Lansing,
1924); Representative Men of Michigan (Cincinnati, 1878); and G.
Reed (ed.), Bench and Bar of Michigan (Chicago, 1897). The most
concentrated and detailed information, however, is in a myriad of
county histories and biographical albums which go into great detail
about the lives and fortunes of the prestigious Reform leaders.
Typical of these are such volumes as John Schenck, History of Ionia

and Montcalm Counties (Philadelphia, 1881); Portrait and Biographical

 

Record of Berrien and Cass Counties (Chicago, 1893); Compendium of

 

History and Biography of Kalamazoo County (Chicago, 1906); Clarence
and Agnes Burton, History of Wayne County and the City_of Detroit,
6 vols. (Detroit, 1930); and Charles DeLand, DeLand's History of

 

Jackson County (Logansport, 1903).

The most thorough volume on a single major Reformer is
Robert Charles Harris' unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, "Austin Blair
of Michigan: A Political Biography" (Michigan State University,
1969).

Works on the leading antagonist of the Liberal Reformers are
Wilmer Harris, The Public Life of Zachariah Chandler (Lansing, 1917);
Mary Karl George, Zachariah Chandler: A Political Biography (East
Lansing, 1969); and the Detroit Post and Tribune's Zachariah Chandler:

His Life and Public Services (Detroit, 1880).

231

Good brief biographies of leading Michigan Democrats in
the 18705 are Robert Bolt, Donald Dickinson (Grand Rapids, 1970)
and Peter White (Grand Rapids, 1970).

There are but few histories dealing with Michigan politics
in the period under consideration. The most valuable is Harriette
Dilla, The Politics of Michigan 1865-1878 (New York, 1912). This
volume provides a good description of the major political issues
and parties of the Reconstruction era in the state. It is rather
weak, however, on the Reform movement. The coverage is brief and
in some cases provides an inaccurate picture of the character of
the Reformers and the structure and operations of the Reform parties.
Despite this and other shortcomings, it remains the only work
devoted exclusively to Michigan politics in the Reconstruction era.
Floyd B. Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-1860 (Lansing,
1918), provides valuable background material on the activities of

Reformers before the Civil War and William Stocking, Under the Oaks

 

(Detroit, 1904), covers the creation of the Republican Party in
Michigan and lists the founders, many of whom later became Reformers.
The general histories of Michigan provide insights into the
issues and conditions which contributed to disillusionment with the
Republican Party in the state, and to the rise of Reform opposition
in fusion with the Democrats. These include Clever Bald, Michigan in

Four Centuries (New York, 1954); Willis Dunbar, Michigan: A History

 

 

of the Wolverine State (Grand Rapids, 1965); Charles Moore, History

 

of Michigan, 4 vols. (Chicago, 1915); and Henry Utley and Bryon

 

232

Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory, and State, Clarence
Burton (ed.), 4 vols. (New York, 1906).

Four volumes pertaining to the politics of the Middle West
are, Henry Hubbart, The Older Middle West 1840-1880 (New York, 1936);
Horace Merrill, Bourbon Democraey of the Middle West 1865-1896
(Seattle, 1953); Theodore Clarke Smith, The Liberty and Free Soil

 

Parties in the Northwest (New York, 1967); and Russel B. Nye, Mid-
western Progressive Politics (East Lansing, 1959). The latter
offers a good discussion of the early organization of the Reform

movement of the 18705.

GENERAL SECONDARY SOURCES

The general subject of the Reconstruction Period is adequately
covered in several works which incorporate the more recent scholar-
ship on the subject. They are Roy Nichols, The Stakes of Power (New
York, 1961); Rembert Patrick, The Reconstruction of the Nation (New

 

York, 1967); Kenneth Stampp, The Era of Reconstruction (New York,

 

1965); and John Hope Franklin, Reconstruction After the Civil War

 

(Chicago, 1961). These present judicious and balanced accounts of

the Reconstruction process and the participants in it. In each volume
the image of the Radicals, carpetbaggers, scalawags and blacks is

- somewhat redeemed. The national prevalence of political corruption

is noted, as are some of the positive achievements of the Reconstruction

governments in the South.

233

David Donald, The Politics of Reconstruction (Baton Rouge,
1965), is a quantitative study which shows that Republican Radicalism
could be partially explained by the practical necessity of getting
elected.

A number of older works on Reconstruction are also vital.
William A. Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic (New York,
1907) is the seminal study. Claude Bowers, The Tragic Era (Cambridge,
1929), is based on the fallacious view that the period was negative
and destructive without any redeeming features. The debacle is
blamed on the irresponsible Radicals, predatory carpetbaggers,
specious'scalawags and ignorant freedmen.

Paul Buck, The Road to Reunion (Boston, 1937), is useful
in understanding those forces which operated to bring the alienated
sections back together after the Civil War.

Andrew Johnson's role in the Reconstruction process is
examined in several works. The older view is Howard K. Beale, Ihe_
Critical Year, 1866 (New York, 1930). He sees the President as the
champion of individual and states' rights and a proponent of
reconciliation besieged by a coalition of vicious Radicals and grasp-
ing business interests. That view is contradicted by Eric McKitrick,
Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (Chicago, 1960), which reveals the
chief executive as a man who was incapable of compromise even with
the moderates in Congress, and who, through his emotional personal
reactions to criticism of his policies, virtually ensured his isola—

tion and the take-over of the Reconstruction process by the Radicals.

234

John and LaWanda Cox, Politics,rPrinciple,_and Prejudice (New York,
1963), indict Johnson for ignoring the plight of the freedman and
for failing to insure at least minimal civil rights for him.

The standard account of the Grant Presidency is William
Hesseltine, Ulysses S. Grant: Politician (New York, 1957).

The close of Reconstruction is explained in C. Vann Wood-
ward, Reunion and Reaction (Boston, 1966). In detailing the events
which led to the compromise of 1877 and the removal of federal troops
from the South he emphasizes political bargaining, the influence of
railroad interests and northern apathy toward southern blacks.

The post-Reconstruction era is covered in John Garraty, IDS.
New Commonwealth (New York, 1968) and Robert Wiebe, The Search for
Qrger (New York, 1967). Stanley Hirshson, Farewell to the Bloody Shirt
(Bloomington, 1962) and Vincent De Santis Republicans Face the Southern
Question (Baltimore, 1959) discuss the strategies developed by the
Republican party to rebuild a power base in the South. The key issue
was whether to appeal to the black or white voter and they vacillated
on this. In The Right to Vote (Baltimore, 1965), William Gillette pro-
poses that in supporting the Fifteenth Amendment, Republican leaders
were less concerned with the black southern vote than with the vote of
northern blacks. The plight of blacks in America during the post-
Reconstruction period is found in Rayford Logan, The Negro in American
Life and Thought,_The Nadir 1877-1901 (New York, 1965). The title indi—
cates how blacks were generally treated by whites.

Reconstruction foreign policy is adequately covered in Walter

Lafeber, The New Empire, An Interpretation of American Expansion

235

(Ithaca, 1963). This work contends that American expansionism
1860-1898 was prompted mainly by pressures from business interests.
Other standard volumes such as Robert Ferrell, American Diplomacy,
A History (New York, 1959) are also helpful in deciphering those
strands of Grant's foreign policy objectionable to the Reformers.

Business is treated in Thomas Cochran and William Miller,
The Age of Enterprise (New York, 1942). This volume keys on the
rise to dominance of big business in the American economy. A
sympathetic treatment of business development is found in Edward
Kirkland, Industry Comes of Age; Business, Labor,_and Public Policy,
1860-1897 (New York, 1961). This volume lauds and congratulates
businessmen for their leadership and initiative. They are viewed
generally as men of integrity who had the general welfare at heart.
A similar work is Thomas Cochran, Railroad Leaders 1845-1890: The
Business Mind in Action (New York, 1966). A discussion of the life
style, philosophy and rationale of business leaders is found in
Edward Kirkland, Dream and Thought in the American Business
Community 1860-1900 (Ithaca, 1956). The older interpretation which
is highly critical of the business heads of the latter half of the
nineteenth century is Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons (New York,
1934). This work depicts businessmen as ruthless tyrants who trampled
on the rights of workers and consumers in their lustful pursuit of
the almighty dollar.

Money issues including such matters as free silver, green-

backs, and the tariff are covered adequately in several volumes. Allen

236

Weinstein, Prelude to Populism: Origins of the Silver Issue 1867-
1§Z§_(New Haven, 1970), provides the background of the silver move-
ment and comes up with some new conclusions. He argues, for example,
that there was some element of truth to the conspiracy theory of the
"Crime of 73." The subject of greenbacks is most definitively
treated in Irwin Unger, The Greenback Era (Princeton, 1964). Armain
theme of this book is that there is no easy way to define who the
hard money or soft money people were at any given moment. Support

or opposition to greenbacks depended upon a number of complicated

and shifting issues and considerations which often resulted in the
seeming alliance of rather strange bedfellows. Stanley Coben,
"Northern Businessmen and Radical Reconstruction," Mississippi Valley
Historical Review, XLVI (1959) and Robert Sharkey, Money, Class and
.Earty (Baltimore, 1959) also argue that it is difficult to link
political identity with financial policy or position. In looking at
the attitudes of businessmen toward Reconstruction they found that

no correlation could be drawn consistently between business interests
and either a Radical or conciliatory policy toward the defeated South.
The views rather were as diverse as the businessmen themselves. On
the subject of the tariff, the most valuable volume for the period is
Clarence Miller, The States of the Old North West and the Tariff,
1865-1888 (Emporia, 1929). He indicates that the position of mid—
western congressmen on the tariff was at first shaped by response to

the agrarian interests of the region and later mainly by party affiliation.

237

The plight of the farmer in the period under examination
is discussed in Fred Shannon, The Farmers' Last Frontier (New York,
1945). The standard version of the rise and function of the Grange
is Solon Buck, The Granger Movement (Cambridge, 1933).

The definitive account of political corruption in the
latter part of the nineteenth century is Matthew JosephSon, Ihe_
Politicos (New York, 1938). This work attributes much of the ram-
pant corruption to the undue influence of business interests in the
political process.

A number of books are valuable in considering the Reform
response which evolved in reaction to dishonesty and insensitivity

in government. These include Eric Goldman, Rendezvous with Destiny

 

(New York, 1956), and Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (New York,
1955), which concentrate primarily on the period beginning with the
18905 but which include enlightening remarks on Reform in the 18705
and 18805. Chester Destler, American Radicalism, 1865-1901 (New
London, 1946) is also useful. The best and most recent study of
Liberal Reform after the Civil War is John Sproat, The Best Men:
Liberal Reformers in the Gilded Age_(New York, 1968). A valuable
analysis of the civil service reform effort is Ari Hoogenboom,
Outlawing the Spoils (Urbana, 1961). Both of the latter volumes

cast a cynical eye on the real motives and sentiments of the Reformers.
Sproat proposes that they viewed themselves as the social and politi-
cal elite and were really anti-democratic in attitude. They seemed

to distrust and even disdain what they considered to be the ignorant

238 A

masses. Hoogenboom, on the other hand, sees the main support for
civil service reform as emanating from the political "outs" who were
motivated by their desire to recapture lost political office by
changing the ground rules. These conclusions are generally not
substantiated in this study of Michigan Liberal Reformers.

Several works on the subject of third parties are helpful
in comprehending the political manifestations of the Reform senti-
ment. Among these are Fred Haynes, Third Party Movements Since the
Civil War (Iowa City, 1916); William Hesseltine, The Rise and Fall
of Third Parties (Washington, 1948); and Howard Nash, Third Parties
in American Politics (Washington, 1959). Also relevant is Fred Shannon,
American Farm Movements (Princeton, 1957).

The standard account of the Liberal Republican experiment
of 1872 is Earle Ross, The Liberal Republican Movement (New York,
1919). Although it is dated, it remains the only full-length study.
The Cincinnati convention is covered well in Matthew Downey, "Horace
Greeley and the Politicians: The Liberal Republican Convention in
1872," Journal of American History, L111 (1967). Also pertinent is
Patrick Riddleberger, "The Break in the Radical Ranks: Liberals vs
Stalwarts in the Election of l872,'I Journal of Negro History, XLIV
(1959).

 

  

Typed and Printed in the U.S.A.
Professional Thesis Preparation
Cliff and Paula Haughey

144 Maplewood Drive
' East Lansing, Michigan 48823
Telephone (517) 337-1527

 

MICHIGAN smTE UNIV. LIBRARIES
111111|1|1||||||111111111111111111111111
31293104194620