under this system. There is that most formidable of men, “the man to be provided for”; a man who must necessarily have an office; a man who has “claims” that cannot be disregarded and who cannot be neglected with impunity; a man to be put in position at all hazards. I will ask the Secretary to read from the testimony taken by the Retrenchment Committee, published last year, the passage I have marked.
The Chief Clerk read as follows:
There was a gentleman named Livingston, who belonged to one of the old families of New York. He lost his property in the crisis of 1837. There was a vacancy in the appraisers department at New York, by removal or death. He was a Catholic. Mrs. Alexander Hamilton, taking a letter from Bishop Hughes, went to Mr. Tyler, and had Mr. Livingston appointed appraiser. Nobody in the customhouse had any respect for his report; nobody had any respect for his signature. The custom was to inclose his return to another appraiser in an envelope, and it would be investigated before the goods were passed. When Mr. Polk came in everybody thought Mr. Livingston would be removed; but Mr. Livingston remained. Mrs. Hamilton was living, and Bishop Hughes was there and in addition to that there was a petition got up in his favor, headed by Martin Van Buren, and signed by all the leading influential Democrats in the State of New York. That document would be worth $500 for the autographs alone. I knew he could not be removed; but when the tariff of 1846 was made I was one of Walker's Congress, as it was called. Mr. Walker sent for me to go to Washington to help him frame a circular, to arrange the bill. I went there, and worked for some time with him. One night, when we had got through, he ordered up some toddy, and was gossiping. I said to Mr. Walker, “Why don't you send Mr. Livingston as Minister to England?” “Why so?” said he. “Why,” said I, “there are very few questions pending between the two countries now—nothing but what the Secretary of State can attend to.
