The Writings of Carl Schurz/To L. Q. C. Lamar, March 2d, 1885
TO L. Q. C. LAMAR[1]
Horace White and George Jones of the Times informed me that President Cleveland had offered a place in the Cabinet to Mr. Whitney, and that it had been accepted. White telegraphed a remonstrance to Albany to be presented to Mr. Cleveland and he also wrote to Bayard, making me promise that I would write to you. I do so, somewhat reluctantly, because I detest complaining. But it seems necessary in this instance.
We Independents have taken upon us a certain responsibility with regard to the coming Administration. We have promised our followers an era of reform and high-minded government.
Mr. Manning's selection for the Treasury Department is to us a terrible load to carry. He has no standing in National affairs. He has, justly or unjustly, the reputation of a machine politician, whose elevation to the most powerful place in the Cabinet is widely regarded, among our own people, as a reward for political services rendered and as an encouragement for further political services to be rendered. This imputation may be all unjust, but it will be, indeed it is now, pretty generally accepted. This is a fact which no amount of explanatory talk can change; and this fact will deprive the Administration of a very large part of its moral credit and the popular confidence. The appointment of Mr. Whitney added will deprive it of most of the rest. I am not personally acquainted with that gentleman, having seen him only once. He may be an honest and a clever man, but he has still less of national standing than Mr. Manning. The only reputation he has, is that he is Senator Payne's son-in-law, the brother-in-law of the Standard Oil Company, worth several millions, and that he last fall contributed $25,000 to Mr. Cleveland's campaign fund. These are his only distinctions. Aside from these he is only known as a politician on a small scale.
These two gentlemen appear in Mr. Cleveland's Cabinet as the men he brought with him; as his confidential friends and advisers, and as the leading spirits of the “reform Administration.” Not only the opposition will represent it so, but so it will seem to a large majority of the people who elected Mr. Cleveland.
They will ask: What merit is there in Mr. Whitney that would entitle him to be a member of the Government? What motive can have prompted his appointment? Is it to pay for his campaign contribution? Is the Standard Oil Company behind him? Is it not known to the President, that one of the most scandalous and alarming signs of the times consists in the invasion of the Senate by millionaires who have no distinction but their money? Is it the business of a “reform Administration” to invite the millionaire who has no other distinction than his money, also into the Cabinet? These questions will be asked. What answer can we give to the patriotic men who followed our lead? Shall we speak of the President's good intentions? Facts are stronger arguments than the intentions observed by them. There can be no doubt about it, if these things are done, the moral credit of the Administration, with our people at least, will be gone. It will require years to recover it, if it can ever be recovered. An Administration with such leading spirits will not be trusted. And thus the great opportunity for the “coöperation of the best elements,” which we have long been wishing and working for, is recklessly thrown away. You can imagine how I feel when I think of this after the struggles I have gone through.
When I saw Mr. Cleveland I gave the best interpretation to what passed between us. What has since happened makes that interview appear in a different light. When speaking of Mr. Manning I said that it was a mistake to take into a Cabinet a personal friend for the purpose of having a confidential man there; that thus jealousy and ill-feeling were created; that he would soon find all high-minded men in his Cabinet deserving of equal confidence, and that no arrangement should be made indicating that such was not his expectation. He disclaimed this with regard to Mr. Manning. But not a word was said by him of his intention of appointing Mr. Whitney. Had that name been mentioned I should have told him frankly all the objections that I have written you of, and I should have added that, such selections left the regard due to the men of national standing in the Cabinet somewhat out of view, that, had there been such a combination of confidential home-politicians, such a germ of clique-business and intrigue in the Hayes Cabinet when I was invited into it I should have considered it due to my self-respect to decline the invitation. Indeed, you will vainly look for just such a couple of appointments from the President's own State in the history of Cabinets.
I have reason to believe that the selection of Mr. Whitney was contemplated, if not resolved upon, by Mr. Cleveland when I saw him, and that he withheld the information from me because he did not want to discuss it. But Mr. Whitney's selection had been warmly protested against by Independents when his name was mentioned before, and Mr. Cleveland was well aware how distasteful that selection would be to them. Immediately after the election expressions of Democratic gratitude to the Independents were loud and gushing. We declined all reward. We wanted only a Government we could confide in. But now I may say that, as to the arrangement of the Administration, everything we especially recommended in that respect was refused, and everything we especially objected to, was done. And surely those recommendations as well as objections were in the highest degree unselfish, modest and reasonable.
If the Cabinet is formed as intended, a majority of the rank and file of the Independents, disappointed and distrustful, will, I apprehend, quietly find their way back to their old associations. Those of the leaders who are, as journalists, obliged to speak, will also be obliged to criticise severely, if they want to keep the confidence of their readers. I, for my part, unwilling to denounce and unable to defend, shall lapse into silence, consider myself discredited with my constituency, dismissed from the political field and relegated to private pursuits. Is it not a singular fate? My coöperation with Democrats for good ends leaves me strange experiences. When I had to bolt from my party in Missouri for the purpose of restoring the ballot to the disfranchised “rebel sympathizers,” I was first praised by them to the skies, and then they used those very ballots to drive me out of the Senate and to put one of their own men in my seat. And now when I have exposed myself to the bitterest hatred and vindictiveness of the party from which I received all my public honors, for the purpose of inaugurating an era of reform and high-minded politics, I find myself, by the very first act of those so put into power, discredited, if not made ridiculous, in the eyes of those who followed my lead, and virtually driven from the field of political activity and influence.
Do not misunderstand me. This is no case of personal grievance. I have none. I want nothing. The Administration could offer me nothing that would have the least value to me. But I do not want to see the great aims long and faithfully fought for, recklessly compromised. I do not want to see this great chance for a fruitful working together of the best political elements thrown away to gratify a few politicians. Do not deceive yourself. Your Administration can do little without the confidence of public opinion. It would have that confidence in the highest degree with a Cabinet of statesmen, and will lose it with such confidential advisers surrounding the President.
You may ask why I did not address this letter to Mr. Cleveland. Because not speaking to me about Mr. Whitney s appointment indicated that he did not want me to speak to him about it. I still take him to be an honest and well-meaning man; but I fear he is already under dangerous influences. I write to you because I think you and Bayard may still do much to save the coming Administration from moral discredit and yourselves from constant embarrassment and mortification in it. You might very properly do this: Ask Mr. Cleveland pointedly whether the Cabinet so constituted has the confidence of the Independents, and whether it will not be well that relations of frank confidence with the Independents be maintained. If he says that this Cabinet has the confidence of the Independents you may safely answer that he is grossly deceived. If a letter is mentioned written by Mr. George Jones of the Times complimentary to Mr. Whitney, you will find that this letter was obtained under circumstances which Mr. Jones would probably like to have inquired into. At any rate, it would not be out of the way to insist that the feelings of the Independents concerning this Cabinet be first directly and authentically ascertained.
This letter is for you only—of course, I suppose, you may feel it necessary to discuss what I say with Bayard. But I pour myself out to you in the confidence of friendship. Your opportunities and responsibilities are great. See to it that you do not start in an unseaworthy bottom.
- ↑ Prospective Secretary of the Interior.