ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 575 William A. Weston, of Darke ; Edward P. Fyffe, of Champaign ; Isaac D. Clark, of Van Wert ; Cornelius Parmenter, of Allen ; William R. Smith, of Highland ; Chambers Baird, of Brown ; Albert B. Buttles, of Franklin ; Elias F. Drake, of Greene ; Philander B. Cole, of Union ; Henry C. Hedges, of Richland ; Leonard G. Harkness, of Huron; Lucien Q. Rawson, of Sandusky ; George Williams, of Wood ; Dresam W. H. Howard, of Fulton ; George A. Waller, of Scioto ; William Ellison, of Adams; Andrew Kilgore, of Pike; John A. Hunter, of Fairfield ; Joseph C. Devin, of Knox ; Ezra E. Evans, of Muskingum; Harrison G. Blake, of Medina ; Smith Orr, of Wayne; Joseph Kessinger, of Athens ; Edward Archibold, of Monroe ; Charles Hare, of Noble ; Isaac Morton, of Guernsey ; Lewis W. Potter, of Columbiana ; Robert Sherrard, of Jefferson ; William H. Upson, of Summit ; David R. Tilden, of Cuyahoga ; Frederick Kinsman, of Trumbull ; Moses C. Canfield, of Geauga. The convention was held in Baltimore on June 7 and 8. William Dennison of Ohio was its permanent chairman. Abraham Lincoln was nominated by acclamation, and Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, was made the vice presidential candidate. The Democratic National Convention assembled at Chicago, August 29, 1864. The Ohio delegation to this convention was as follows : Senatorial Delegates—William Allen, Allen G. Thurman, George H. Pendleton and Rufus P. Ranney. District Delegates—George Fries, George W. Martin, C. J. W. Smith and Alexander Long, of Hamilton ; Clement L. Vallandigham, of Montgomery; Christopher Hughes, of Butler ; John L. Winner, of Darke; David Loudenback, of Champaign; George M. Baxter, of Allen; Charles W. Cowan, of Auglaize; Chilton A. White, of Brown; James M. Trimble, of Highland; Samuel Medary and Samuel S. Cox, of Franklin ; John Y. Glessner, of Richland ; Paton Hurd, of Marion ; Charles Powers, of Sandusky ; A. M. Jackson, of Crawford ; E. S. Platt, of Lucas ; Edwin Phelps, of Defiance; David C. Vance, of Adams; William Newman, of Scioto; Edward B. Eshelman, of Ross ; Edson B. Olds, of Pickaway ; George W. Morgan, of Knox ; Charles Follett, of Licking ; Thomas J. Kenney, of Ashland ; James A. Estill, of Monroe; Martin D. Follett, of Washington; David W. Stambaugh, of Tuscarawas ; James W. Collins, of Belmont; John Archibald McGregor, of Stark ; Jonathan A. Wallace, of Columbiana ; Jabez W. Fitch, of Cuyahoga ; Van Buren Humphrey, of Summit ; Samuel W. Gilson, of Mahoning ; Michael Stuart, of Portage. Samuel Medary was unable to attend the national convention because of ill health and his place was filled by, George Spence, of Clarke. The democrats nominated George 'B. McClellan for president and George H. Pendleton for vice president. The campaign in Ohio was, of course, upon the issue of the war and the upholding of Lincoln's administration. It was known that the President was himself anxious that the result in Ohio should be as decisive as possible. Many great meetings were held, addressed by Secretary Chase and other powerful leaders. Ohio's response to the President's wish was : Lincoln—Home vote, 224,008 ; soldier vote, 41,646. Total, 265,654. McClellan—Home vote, 195,811 ; soldier vote, 9,788. Total, 205,599. Lincoln's majority, 60,055. The unionists also elected seventeen of the nineteen members of the Thirty-ninth Congress. This Ohio delegation in Congress was remarkable in that it comprised a galaxy of eminent men seldom seen in a group from one state. Two of them afterwards became presidents of the United States, and many others hold high places in the annals of the state. They were : Benjamin Eggleston, of Cincinnati; Rutherford B. Hayes, of Cincinnati ; Robert C. Shenck, of Dayton ; William Lawrence, of Bellefontaine; Francis C. LeBlond, of Celina ; Reader W. Clarke, of Batavia; Samuel Shellabarger, of Springfield; James R. Hubbell, of Delaware; Ralph P. Buckland, of Fremont ; James M. ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 577 Ashley, of Toledo ; Hezekiah S. Bundy, of Reeds Mill ; William E. Finck, of Somerset ; Columbus Delano, of Mount Vernon ; Martin Welker, of Wooster ; Tobias A. Plants, of Pomeroy ; John A. Bingham, of Cadiz ; Ephraim R. Eckley, of Carrollton ; Rufus P. Spalding, of Cleveland, and James A. Garfield, of Hiram. Governor Brough's message to the General Assembly which met in adjourned session January 3, 1865, gave startling figures on the finances of the state. The total receipts of 1864 (including the former balance) were $8,679,966.82 ; total disbursements, $6,679,006.15. Balance in the treasury, $2,000,960.47. The total debt of the state had risen to the great sum of $13,500,751.47. On February 4, official information having been received that the federal constitutional amendment abolishing slavery had been adopted, the Assembly passed a joint resolution congratulating the governor of Ohio upon that fact, and announcing that they would call upon him in a body to express their sentiments upon the subject. Richmond fell April 3. Lee surrendered to Grant on April 9, and Sherman was pressing General Johnson, with the certain expectation that he would surrender very shortly. These great events brought overflowing happiness to the people of Ohio, as it did to all the loyal states, and the popular demonstrations surpassed all those that had gone before. On April 8 Governor Brough issued his proclamation recommending that April 14, the fourth anniversary of the fall of Fort Sumter, be generally observed by the people of the state "as a day of thanksgiving and of general rejoicing, that religious assemblies and observances mark the day, and that the evening be given to bonfires, illuminations and the thundering of artillery, public assemblages and speeches, and such other manifestations as may be suggested to appropriately mark the heroic deeds of our armies and the general joy of our people at the early restoration of the Constitution and good government." While the rejoicing was at its height on that appointed night of April 14, Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. In those places where this awful intelligence was received by telegraph that same night, the people were plunged from the height of joyous festivities to the profoundest depths of grief. Then followed pages of details of the tragedy, the pursuit and death of the assassin, John Wilkes Booth, stenographic reports of the trial of the conspirators, and at last their execution on July 7. The transfer of the dead president's remains from Washington to his home at Springfield, Illinois, was the occasion of deeply impressive obsequies at Cleveland and Columbus. On April 27 Governor Brough and his official staff received the train bearing the body at Wickliffe in Lake County, and accompanied it to Cleveland. After a solemn procession the casket was there placed in a building specially constructed for its reception, on the east side of the park. From early morning until ten o'clock at night of Friday, April 28, more than 100,000 persons visited the remains, which were plainly visible to those who passed. At 9:30 o'clock of the next morning, after another imposing procession in Columbus, they were placed at the center of the rotunda of the state house, and there, before four o'clock in the afternoon, they were viewed by at least 50,000. The casket was then removed to the funeral train, which proceeded on its way west. Residents of Ohio were greatly shocked by the catastrophe of the destruction of the steamer Sultana in the Mississippi River near Memphis, Tennessee, on April 27, 1865, by the explosion of a boiler. More than 500 Ohio soldiers were among the 2,300 on board, exchanged prisoners of war on their way home. The total loss of life was 1,101, of whom a large proportion were Ohio men. On June 21 the republican convention met at Columbus to nominate candidates for state offices. Maj.-Gen. J. D. Cox, of Trumbull County, was named for governor, and A. G. McBurney, of Wayne, for lieu- 578 - HISTORY OF OHIO tenant governor. On August 24 the democrats convened, were presided over by Clement L. Vallandigham, nominated for governor general George W. Morgan, of Knox County, and for lieutenant governor, William Lang, of Seneca. The short campaign attracted comparatively little attention, as the rancor of the previous years had been somewhat allayed, and it was a foregone conclusion anyway that Cox would be elected. On April 29 Secretary of State William Henry Smith made an official announcement that Governor John Brough had died that day at his home in Cleveland. Adjutant-General Cowan, in official orders, required that all officers of the National Guard should wear the badge of mourning for thirty days, and that all armories and colors of the Guard should be be appropriately draped in black. This was followed in December by the news of the death of ex-Governor Thomas Corwin in Washington on the 18th of that month. ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNOR J. D. COX FIFTY-SEVENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Regular Session, January 1 to April 16, 1866; Adjourned Session, January 2 to April 17, 1867 The lieutenant governor, president ex-officio of the Senate, was Andrew W. McBurney. Edwin A. Parrot, of Montgomery County, was speaker of the House of Representatives. The result of the state election of 1865 was officially declared as follows : Governor—Jacob D. Cox, 223,642 ; George W. Morgan, 193,797 ; scattering, 360. Total, 417,799. Lieutenant Governor—A. G. McBurney, 224,943 ; William Lang, 193,150; M. U. McGinnis, 325. Treasurer of State—Sidney S. Warner, 225,657 ; George Spence, 193,072 ; J. H. McGuffey, 313. Attorney General—William H. West, 225,268 ; David M. Wilson, 193,469; Robert Hutcheson, 314. John Sherman was reelected to the United States Senate over Allen G. Thurman, the democratic candidate. At the adjourned session, 1867, canvass was made of official returns on the election of 1866. For secretary of state, William Henry Smith received 256,302 votes, and Benjamin Lefevre, 213,606. Smith's majority, 42,696. For judge of the Supreme Court, Josiah Scott received 256,263, and Thomas M. Key, 213,612. Scott's majority, 42,651. For member of the Board of Public Works, John M. Barrere received 256,281, and William Larwill, 213,633. Barrere's majority, 42,548. These two sessions of the General Assembly were devoted largely to war claims made upon the state. They appeared in very large numbers and required close scrutiny before being allowed or rejected. A good deal of time was taken in considering amendments to the Federal Constitution submitted by Congress. These came as a result of the war, the one of chief interest conferring the voting franchise upon the negroes. There was the usual party animosity, and great friction developed, but the amendments submitted were all ratified. State laws were amended and codified, the duties of all civil officers were more clearly defined, the school laws were revised with the purpose of adding to the efficiency of the system. War seems always to be followed by what in modern times has been designated as "crime waves," and the civil war was no exception. The year 1866 was a season of very many heinous crimes in Ohio. Almost 580 - HISTORY OF OHIO all issues of the newspapers recounted the commission of murders and robberies of far greater proportions than ever before in the history of the state. Prominent among these was the entering into the Second National Bank of Cadiz, on the night of April 28, and the stealing of $350,000 in United States Government bonds and currency. The robbers first visited the house of Milton Brown, the cashier, and compelled him to give them the keys to the bank. After looting the vault they locked the watchman in it and escaped on a hand car. They were captured near LaGrange after a battle in which one of them was badly wounded. Within three weeks they were in the penitentiary under long sentences. In March, 1866, a celebration was held at Marietta commemorative of the establishment of the first white settlement in. Ohio. There was at that time one survivor of those who had landed at Marietta in 1788, more than seventy-five years before. A letter from him—Dr. Lincoln Goodale, of Columbus—was read on the occasion, he not being able to attend in person. It stated that he had been a member of the first party, being then six years old. His father had been taken prisoner by Indians at Belpre in 1794, and died while among them. The letter closed : "I believe there is no human being in Ohio who has lived within the limits of the state as long as I have." In 1866 Doctor Goodale had for sixty years been a resident of Franklinton and Columbus, and had taken a most active and important part. in the development of the Capital City. On the night of March 22, 1866, the most destructive fire in the history of the state up to that time occurred at Cincinnati. Pike's Opera House, the building of the Cincinnati Enquirer, and the Adams Express Company's office were entirely consumed, a fact greatly deplored by all the people of the state. The large audience in the theater which had witnessed "the gorgeous spectacle, 'A Midsummer Night's Dream,' " had been dismissed shortly before, and there were no personal injuries, but the destruction of property entailed a loss of more than $2,000,000. A noteworthy occurrence of this year, 1866, was the establishment by law of county children's homes. Under the act all destitute children not insane, imbecile or affected by contagious diseases, are received into these homes. From them they are committed to families, and are inspected annually. These beneficent homes originated with Mrs. Catherine Fay Ewing, whose interest in the subject had been aroused while a teacher and missionary among the Choctaw Indians, and by knowledge then gained of wrongs practiced upon helpless little ones. She had established a small home for them near Marietta, supported by herself with great sacrifice, and from this small beginning developed the idea which eventually was taken up by the state upon her initiative with the General Assembly. The much heralded communication with Europe by Atlantic cable, which in 1858 had so stimulated the imagination of Ohio people, had failed to work. But on July 28, 1866, it became known in the state that all obstacles had been overcome and that Cyrus Field had established a trans-atlantic cable on a practical basis. Thereafter Ohio papers, in common with those of the whole nation, carried foreign news only a few hours old. The first news dispatch over the cable was dated at London, August 3, 1866, and had reference to activities in the war between Austria and Prussia which was then in progress. One of the news features of the year 1866 of popular interest in the history of Ohio was the development of the game of baseball. It had had a beginning in the East three or four years before, and was now taken up with the greatest enthusiasm in all parts of Ohio. It was on a strictly amateur basis, but regularly organized clubs representative of their home towns became very numerous, and great rivalry developed among them. Games were attended by thousands of people, with excited interest on both sides. Already the fundamentals of the ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 581 game had been established by rules. The number of players, the names of their positions, the number of innings, and many other features were precisely as they are today. But the system of scoring has been considerably changed. The word "errors" had not been invented. The record included not only "runs," "outs," "home runs," "strike outs," and "left on bases," but also "fly catches," "foul bound catches," "muffed balls," "out on bases," "run outs," "out on flies" and "out on fouls." The newspapers devoted much space to the sport, containing long accounts of games of importance. Scores were high—sometimes more than 100 runs were made on either side, and games often ran more than four hours. In 1869 the first professional baseball club in America was organized—the "Red Stocking Club of Cincinnati"—and in long tours it swept everything before it, not meeting a single defeat for almost two years. The political campaign of 1866 was again a strenuous one, developing much bitterness. The war was too recent not to have left unhealed wounds, and the republicans were not sparing in opening them afresh in their attacks upon their democratic opponents. "Remember Andersonville ! Remember Libby ! Remember Belle Isle ! Remember the skeletons of your starved sons and brothers ! Remember the teachings of the democratic leaders brought on the war, with all its accumulated horrors—the murders of three hundred thousand of our young men, and a debt of three billions !" These and many other startling lines appeared in large type in republican newspapers and in hand bills. It was not an election of local importance, only three state offices to be filled, the governor's office not among them. But members of Congress were elected and both sides strove hard—the republicans to hold the large preponderance of their representation on the delegation, and the democrats to make gains. In this they were successful to the extent of one vote. The state went republican by 42,696 majority. But the campaign. of 1867 was of far more moment to the state and of greater interest to the people. President Johnson had, during the year 1866, aroused animosity against himself among the republicans of the country by his policy with reference to reconstruction of the states lately in rebellion, and this feeling had grown greatly in 1867. The breach finally led to the impeachment trial of Johnson in 1868. The situation in 1867 was a critical one, and great importance was attached to the result of the Ohio election of that year. The republicans met in convention at Columbus on June 14, and nominated Rutherford B. Hayes, of Hamilton County, for governor ; Samuel Galloway, of Franklin, for lieutenant governor ; John Welch, of Athens, for supreme judge ; James H. Godman, of Marion, for state auditor ; Sidney S. Warner, of Lorain, for state treasurer ; and William H. West, of Logan, for attorney general. Galloway, who had been a strong candidate for the nomination for governor, declined to stand for election as lieutenant governor, and his place on the ticket was filled by the State Central Committee with the name of John C. Lee, of Lucas. The democratic convention nominated Allen G. Thurman for governor, Daniel S. Uhl for lieutenant governor, John McElwee for state auditor, Cochran Fulton for state treasurer, Frank H. Hurd for attorney-general, and Thomas M. Key for supreme judge. The speakers in the campaign included the ablest leaders on both sides. Senator John Sherman was prominent on the stump, and Gen. William H. Gibson was another conspicuous figure among the republicans. Thurman, Allen, and other democrats of first ability, were also very active. The editors of both sides exercised their powers of vituperation to the limit. The result of the election was greatly reduced republican majorities, and democratic majorities in both houses of the General Assembly—eighteen to seventeen in the Senate and fifty-six to 582 - HISTORY OF OHIO forty-nine in the House. This assured the election of a democrat as United States Senator. GEORGE H. PENDLETON AND OHIO'S CONTRIBUTION TO CIVIL SERVICE REFORM Ohio is great in many ways. The achievements of her sons are not confined to the spectacular vocations of statesmanship and war. Piatt and Howells and other writers have given her a respectable place in the literature of the republic. The "Darling Nelly Gray" of our Hanby, the "Dixie" of our Emmett, and the "Softly and Tenderly Jesus Is Calling" of our Thompson have gone round the world and found an abiding place wherever the tender melodies of the heart are played or sung. Our Edison and our Brush have extended the domain of invention, applied new forms of energy in the field of productive industry and released the light electric that rivals the day and flashes from the uplifted torch of Liberty Enlightening the World. It was left for the Wright brothers to achieve the impossible, to first rise from the earth on wing, to ride the impalpable air, to thrill the world with the "audacity of their design and the miracle of its execution." But these flowers do not bloom in the conservatories of our orators, and their choicest garlands are reserved for the warriors and politicians —the statesmen, perhaps, for Ohioans have risen to that eminence. And what is a statesman ? "One versed in public affairs and government," says Webster ; "a successful politician," half ironically declares a writer ; "a dead politician," observes another ; while a well known platform orator offers this discriminating comparison : "A statesman is one who tries to see what he can do for this country ; a politician is one who tries to see what his country can do for him." It is not necessary to say that Ohio has had politicians and some statesmen ; and perhaps in a few instances both have been united in the same character. From the days of Arthur St. Clair and Edward Tiffin, with one brief interval, party lines have been tautly drawn in the Buckeye State. Our thoughts have ever freely turned to the candidate for official preferment, to the orator on the hustings, to the partisan leader in the whirlwind of a political campaign. In piping times of peace, he is our hero. It is but a few years since we were wont, in this state, with the wildest enthusiasm, to celebrate the transcendent prowess of such a one in a song with the familiar refrain : "He's a great big man, He's a politician." In the popular opinion of the day it took a great big man to be a politician, and the successful politician was hailed as the great big man. Times have changed a little and that song has been relegated to cold storage. The great big men of today do not wish it to be understood that they are so because they are politicians. In these times the intelligent and independent citizen asks the candidate for honors not, "What have you done for your party ?" but "What have you done for the common-weal—for your country ?" or "What do you propose to do for your country ?" The party is the incident, the instrument, the necessary agent, perhaps ; the achievement, the service is everything. With our past ambition for political eminence and our enthusiasm for party names and party leaders, it is a. little singular that we should forget an Ohio statesman, whose supreme achievement was unselfish and patriotic in its inception, national in its scope and beneficent in its results. It is a fact, nevertheless. His personality and gentlemanly qualities are still remembered by his contemporaries and remain as a tradition among their descendants, but as much cannot be said for his ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 583 constructive statesmanship. Nor is his work forgotten because it died with him. The cause for which he raised his voice and challenged all corners in the arena of debate lives today. Every year adds to its strength. Its virtues are proclaimed alike by progressives and conservatives. It stands as a protest against official incompetence, spoliation and corruption. Without it, government would have degenerated into a system of plunder and venality, and the foundations of our republic would have rotted away. The champion of this cause was fortunate, as the world views it, in his birth and early environment. His paternal grandfather was a soldier of the Revolution, aide-de-camp to Gen. Nathaniel Green and later United States District Judge of Georgia, under appointment by Washington. The friend and partisan of Alexander Hamilton, he was second to that ill-starred statesman in the fatal duel at Weehawken. His father early came to the Queen City of the West, where he attained distinction and was elected to Congress in the famous campaign of 1840 as an adherent of William Henry Harrison. The son, in behalf of whose achievement in statesmanship this sketch is written, was born in Cincinnati in a home provided with all the comforts and luxuries of that day, in the memorable year of 1825, when Lafayette was touring the young republic and our forefathers were celebrating with bonfires and illuminations the semi-centennial jubilee of our national independence. A pupil in the Woodward High School at the age of eight, and eight years afterward a graduate from the Cincinnati College, under the presidency of William H. McGuffey, he was later a special private student under some of the leading professors of the West. At the early age of nineteen years, he commenced a foreign tour for study and observation that took him to the principal cities of Europe, to the Holy Land and Egypt. He lingered in Germany at Heidelberg and became a student at its famous university. Returning in 1846, he was admitted to the bar two years later and entered upon the practice of the law. At the age of twenty-two his associates, his studies and his travels represented an aggregate of educational opportunity and achievement rarely equalled, even in our own time. In his early political ideals and espousals, however, he was not so fortunate. His father was a whig. The son became a democrat. It is not a misfortune under all circumstances to transfer party allegiance; but in the days before the Civil war, when Wendell Phillips was thundering at Faneuil Hall, when Abraham Lincoln was raising his voice in the arena of debate, when the great arm of the North was uplifted to smite the institution of human slavery, it was unfortunate for a young man of culture, courage and conscience to be arrayed on the other side. The biographer of our subject commends the youth for his independence in breaking away from the political faith of his fathers, and in this expression we may heartily join, with the regret that he did not find a better field for the exhibition of his talent and his political ambition. He first appears in the arena as a candidate from Hamilton County for our State Senate. He was elected by a large majority. Before the close of his term, he was nominated for Congress in the First Cincinnati District and defeated. He was renominated two years later and elected. When faction rent his party, he cast his fortunes with the Douglas democrats. When Lincoln was elected in 1860, this congressman was reelected and arrayed himself with the opposition. He continued to serve in the House until March 4, 1865. He was one of the conspicuous and active members of Congress through the stormy period of the war. Always gentlemanly, persuasive and conservative, he nevertheless opposed many of the measures of the Great Emancipator and cried peace, peace when there was no peace. His eulogist has much to say of his devotion to the Union and his 584 - HISTORY OF OHIO willingness to vote money and men for its defense by force of arms, but is forced to admit that during the crisis "he differed widely with the administration as to its policy and management of the war." The fact is that through these years of stress and struggle he was usually an obstructionist and much of a thorn in the side of Abraham Lincoln. To still further emphasize his attitude, in 1864, while a member of Congress, he ran for vice president on the ticket with McClellan against Lincoln and Johnson, on a platform with that unfortunate plank relating to the war for the preservation of the Union. And now you know who he was. His name was George H. Pendleton. 1 Had his career ended here his public service might well have been forgotten. On the great moral and political issues growing out of the war he was wrong, sincerely and conscientiously so, but nevertheless wrong. Such is the verdict of history. And from that verdict there is no appeal. Like the judgments of the Lord, it is true and righteous altogether. In 1886, Mr. Pendleton was defeated for Congress in his old district. Shortly afterward he advocated the payment of Government bonds in greenbacks, an idea that attained great popularity for a time. In Congress Mr. Pendleton had opposed the issue of greenbacks. The announcement of his new idea subjected him to the charge of inconsistency, against which he inveighed with more satisfaction to himself than to the electorate. In 1869, he made a canvass of Ohio for governor on the "greenback idea" against Rutherford B. Hayes and was defeated. Much was expected of him in the state campaign of 1875, with the greenback idea as the paramount issue ; but his part in that contest was disappointing to his party. He was evidently reluctant to go as far as William Allen and Samuel Cary in support of an inflated currency. Relegated to private life after years of service in the exploitation of unsuccessful policies and issues, he had, at this time, it must be admitted, slight claim to eminent statesmanship and enduring fame. That it is never too late for a man of his equipment to achieve both in a worthy cause, is proven by his triumphs of succeeding years. In that unique autobiographic contribution to history and literature, entitled "The Education of Henry Adams," the author finds fault with the judgment of his time which applauded the pretentions of mediocrity and passed in silence the achievements of genuine merit as exemplified in the statesmanship of George H. Pendleton. We may rest assured that Henry Adams would not have recorded such an observation prior to 1878. In the state campaign of 1877, occurred the debate between Pendleton and Garfield. 2 As this exemplifies the character of the two men, a few sentences are here quoted from a writer of the time : "During that historic debate, which covered every question at issue between the two parties, and which was carried on in the midst of a most exciting canvass, not a word was used by either of these distinguished gladiators which could in any way reflect upon the personal character of the other. One could at times imagine he heard the sword and the battle-ax of the one striking upon the mailed helmet and cuirass of the other, but the argument was dignified and impersonal. These were great party men contending for their party, their cause and their principles ; yet they were chivalrous." This description calls to mind another historic debate, on this same high plane, between William McKinley and our distinguished and popular fellow citizen, Governor James E. Campbell. 2 - For facts in regard to his early life and political career see "Life and Speeches of George H. Pendleton," by G. M. D. Bloss; also address of Hon. Isaac M. Jordan in memory of George H. Pendleton, Cincinnati, March 8, 1890. 2 - At Springfield, September 27, 1877. ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 585 In 1878 Pendleton was elected to the United States Senate, in dignity and prestige and power, the first legislative body in the world. It offered rare opportunity for his eminent talents, and on the ladder of that opportunity he rose to the heights of statesmanship. He interpreted the need of the hour—the demand of the future, and became for all time heir to the gratitude of the republic. The spoils system had been the bane of our institutions. It threatened the very life of the republic. It multiplied offices and sinecures and the wild and indiscriminate rush for them. In our state and national capitals it fed the mad enthusiasm of inauguration day and flooded the streets with cavalcades of shouting patriots looking for jobs. It led and inspired all from ward worker to platform orator. In the midst of the carnival of political debauchery it assumed a sinister and monstrous form. Before it governors bowed, cabinet officers paid obeisance, the representatives of the people groveled, and dignified senators licked the dust. A cloudless July morning. A flash out of the clear sky. The hiss of the assassin's bullet, and our Garfield was borne away mangled and bleeding to suffer lingeringly and to die. A group of students on an Ohio college campus were standing still at the news of the awful tragedy. The silence was broken by some one, who said, "The President was shot by Charles J. Guiteau" ; but that was not true. A little later another said, "The President was shot by Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed office-seeker"; and that was only half true. Who was it, what was it, that struck down Garfield and thrust him "from the full tide of this world's interests, from its hopes, its aspirations, its victories into the visible presence of death" ? 3 It was the spoils system, that nerved the arm of the assassin, sent along it to the instrument of death the impulse of hate and plunged the land into silence and darkness and woe. "Strangulatus pro republica," said the stricken man as he tossed on his couch of pain. Yes, slaughtered for the republic, tortured, martyred—our costly sacrifice to the demon of greed and spoliation and factional hate and partisan plunder. It sometimes takes a thunder-clap to arouse us to a sense of neglected duty. It took the earthquake shock of a World war to start us in the quest of a universal and enduring peace. In 1881 it took the life of a President to start political parties on the road to the redemption of platform pledges with regard to the civil service. Garfield did not die in vain. The conscience of our guilty nation was touched. A movement to mitigate the evils of the spoils system was inaugurated in the United States Senate under the leadership of George H. Pendleton. To his credit be it said, on this question he took up arms against the traditions of his own party and the demoralizing and debasing practices of both parties. A brief review of the progress of civil service reform in the United States may not be out of place here. Such a survey is appropriate in view of the fact that famous Ohioans, officially prominent in the service of the Nation, had much to do with the inauguration and promotion of this policy. From the organization of political parties in this country there has been a temptation to use the appointive power to reward faithful partisans. In the earlier years of the republic, rewards for partisan service were comparatively few and far between. They varied somewhat under different administrations. It was left for President Andrew Jackson to apply very generally the principle in politics that "to the victor belongs the spoils," although he did not originate that declaration so often attributed to him. Jackson was severely criticised for the inauguration of 3 - Blaine, James G. Memorial address on life and public services of James A. Garfield, House of Representatives, February 27, 1882. 586 - HISTORY OF OHIO the spoils system on a grand scale. His successors, however, for the most part followed his example, and the tendency was then as it is today in other matters, when an act of the appointing power is criticised, to excuse it on the ground that it is not so bad as a similar exercise of the power by a predecessor. The Civil war and the stirring events leading up to it crowded out of the public thought the reform of the civil service system and other matters of minor interest. At the close of the war the Nation was enormously in debt and retrenchment in expenditures was imperatively demanded in order that the payroll of the Government might be reduced and its obligations might be met. In 1864 Charles Sumner, then United States Senator from Massachusetts, introduced a bill "to provide for the greater efficiency of the civil service." This bill authorized the appointment of a board of examiners, competitive examinations, promotion by seniority and removal for good cause only. The bill did not reach a vote. On May 5, 1868, Thomas Allen Jencks, congressman from Rhode Island, presented in Congress an elaborate report which is generally considered as the "starting point of civil service reform in this country." The plan recommended and finally included in a bill introduced by Mr. Jencks, followed closely that authorized in the bill introduced by Sumner. It was ably discussed by Mr. Jencks, who was a man of wealth, culture and influence and highly respected by his associates. Somewhat to the surprise of Congress and those interested throughout the country it received very substantial support and came within seven votes of passing the House. In the meantime able advocates of the reform of the civil service began to announce their attitude. Prominent among these were George William Curtis and Carl Schurz. In spite of this evidence of progress, however, the outlook for effective legislation was not encouraging. Shortly after the failure of the Jencks bill, substantial aid to the movement came from an unexpected quarter. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, shortly after his election to the Presidency, let it be known that he favored the reform. In subsequent years his early advocacy seems in large measure to have been forgotten by the public. His close association in the Presidency with such men as Conkling, Logan and other practical politicians has left the impression that like his friends and advisors he favored rotation in office. The centenary of the birth of General Grant was appropriately celebrated in his native state, Ohio, April 27-28, 1922. Able addresses reviewing his services to the country in war and peace were delivered by President Harding and Senators Willis and Pomerene, at his birthplace and other points in Southern Ohio where he spent his boyhood days. These addresses, however, contained no reference to the fact that he was the first of all the Presidents of the United States to recommend to Congress the enactment of laws for an effective reform of the civil service. In his second annual message to Congress, December 5, 1870, he made the following recommendation : "Always favoring practical reform, I respectfully call your attention to one abuse of long standing which I would like to see remedied by this Congress. It is a reform in the civil service of the country. I would have it go beyond the mere fixing of the tenure of office of clerks and employes who do not require 'the advice and consent of the Senate' to make their appointments complete. I would have it govern, not the tenure, but the manner of making all appointments. There is no duty which so much embarrasses the Executive and heads of departments as that of appointments, nor is there any such arduous and thankless labor imposed on senators and representatives as that of finding places for constituents. The present system does not secure the best men, and often not even fit men for public place. The elevation and purification ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 587 of the civil service of the Government will be hailed with approval by the whole people of the United States." 4 Assuredly this is a frank statement that must have been gratifying to the friends of civil service reform. It is sincere in tone and was followed by subsequent declarations that indicated clearly President Grant's deep interest in this subject. One year later, in his third annual message to Congress, he followed up his initial recommendation with an encouraging statement of progress : "In my message to Congress one year ago I urgently recommended a reform in the civil service of the country. In conformity with that recommendation Congress in the ninth section of 'An act making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government and for other purposes,' approved March 3, 1871, gave the necessary authority to the Executive to inaugurate a civil service reform, and placed upon him the responsibility of doing so. Under the authority of said act I convened a board of gentlemen eminently qualified for the work, to devise rules and regulations to effect the needed reform. Their labors are not yet complete, but it is believed that they will succeed in devising a plan that can be adopted to the great relief of the Executive, the heads of departments and members of Congress, and which will redound to the true interest of the public service. At all events, the experiment shall have a fair trial."5 In his fourth annual message to Congress, December 2, 1872, he again reported progress and urged additional legislation : "An earnest desire has been felt to correct abuses which have grown up in the civil service of the country through the defective method of making appointments to office. Heretofore federal offices have been regarded too much as the reward of political services. Under authority of Congress rules have been established to regulate the tenure of office and the mode of appointment. It can not be expected that any system of rules can be entirely effective and prove a perfect remedy for existing evils until they have been thoroughly tested by actual practice and amended according to the requirements of the service. During my term of office it shall be my earnest endeavor to so apply the rules as to secure the greatest possible reform in the civil service of the Government, but it will require the direct action of Congress to render the enforcement of the system binding upon my successors ; and I hope that the experience of the past year, together with appropriate legislation by Congress, may reach a satisfactory solution of this question and secure to the public service for all time a practical method of obtaining faithful and efficient officers and employes." 6 President Grant's earnest and persistent effort in this new field of executive endeavor entitles him to honor as a progressive statesman whose policy in regard to the civil service was in harmony with the advanced thought of his time. After his reelection to the Presidency, in his inaugural address, which was brief, he still found room to express his continued interest in this reform : "It has been, and is, my earnest desire to correct abuses that have grown up in the civil service of the country. To secure this reformation, rules regulating methods of appointment and promotion were established and have been tried. My efforts for such reformation shall be continued to the best of my judgment. The spirit of the rules adopted will be maintained." 7 On April 18, 1874, President Grant transmitted the report of the 4 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 109. 5 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 155. 6 - Ibid., p. 205. 7 - Ibid., p. 223. 588 - HISTORY OF OHIO Civil Service Commission, "authorized by the act of Congress of March 3, 1871." He still expressed undiminished faith in the establishment of a merit system and asks Congress to continue appropriations for the support of the work of the Civil Service Commission. In his annual message of December 7, 1874, President Grant expressed his discouragement resulting from the failure of Congress to carry out his recommendations with reference to the reform of the civil service. "The rules adopted to improve the civil service of the Government," he declared, "have been adhered to as closely as has been practicable with the opposition with which they meet. The effect, I believe, has been beneficial on the whole, and has tended to the elevation of the service. But it is impracticable to maintain them without direct and positive support of Congress." 8 He seemed sensitive to criticism of what had been done to improve the service and disappointed at the action of Congress. "Under these circumstances," he continued, "I announce that if Congress adjourns without positive legislation on the subject of 'Civil Service reform' I will regard such action as a disapproval of the system and will abandon it, except so far as to require examinations for certain appointees, to determine their fitness. Competitive examinations will be abandoned."9 The only action on the part of Congress thus far had been a provision in an appropriation bill in 1871 authorizing the President "to prescribe such rules and regulations for the admission of persons into the civil service of the United States as will best promote the efficiency thereof." It further gave him power, "to employ suitable persons to conduct said inquiries," and appropriated $25,000 to inaugurate this service. The appropriation was not renewed at the end of two years and the President was left without means to proceed with the reform in which he was so deeply interested. At the same time Congress recognized the rules that had already been established by the enactment of a law prohibiting the assessment of the salaries of Government employes for political purposes. This represented the sum total of what was accomplished under the Grant administration. In the Presidential campaign of 1876 the two leading political parties pledged themselves to civil service reform. Rutherford B. Hayes was known to be especially friendly to the movement. In his inaugural address he devoted two paragraphs to the subject. Among other things he said : "I ask the attention of the public to the paramount necessity of reform in our civil service—a reform not merely as to certain abuses and practices of so-called official patronage which have come to have the sanction of usage in the several departments of the government, but a change in the system of appointment itself ; a reform that shall be thorough, radical and complete ; a return to the principles and practices of the founders of the government." 10 He further directed attention to the fact that in the preceding political campaign both parties had been pledged to civil service reform and accepted the mandate "as the expression of the united voice and will of the whole country upon this subject." 11 His plea for a merit system was followed with the famous declaration of the duty that came to him as chief executive of the Nation, concluding with the expression that has become a classic : "The President of the United States of necessity owes his election to office to the suffrage and zealous labors of a political party, the members of which cherish with ardor and regard as of essential importance 8 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 300. 9 - Ibid, p. 301. 10 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 315. 11 - Ibid, p. 445. ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 589 the principles of their party organization ; but he should strive to be always mindful of the fact that he serves his party best who serves his country best." 12 In his first message to Congress December 3, 1877, President Hayes again drew attention to the necessity of reform in the civil service and the demand for such reform on the part of the two leading political parties. In conclusion he said : "I have fully believed these declarations and demands to be the expression of a sincere conviction of the intelligent masses of the people upon the subject, and that they should be recognized and followed by earnest and prompt action on the part of the legislative and executive departments of the government in pursuance of the purpose indicated." 13 In his annual message of December 1, 1879, the President gave much space to civil service reform and its growth in popular favor. "The grave evils," he declared, "and the perils of a partisan spoils system of appointment to office and of office tenure are now generally recognized." 14 He drew attention to previous recommendations of President Grant, 15 devoted space to a discussion of what has been attempted to date to improve conditions and concluded by asking Congress "to make the necessary appropriations for the resumption of the work of the Civil Service Commission." He declared that economy would "be promoted by authorizing a moderate compensation to persons in the public service who may perform extra labor upon or under the commission, as the executive may direct." 16 In his message of December 6, 1880, he drew attention to the extension of the merit system to the "custom-houses and postoffices of the larger cities of the country." He reported that "In the City of New York over 2,000 positions in the civil service have been subject in their appointments and tenure of place to the operation of published rules for this purpose during the past two years. The results of these practical trials have been very satisfactory, and have confirmed my opinion in favor of this system of selection." 17 Under date of February 28, 1881, President Hayes transmitted the report of Dorman B. Eaton, chairman of the Civil Service Commission, on the results of the application of the merit system to the postoffice and custom-house in the City of New York, and declared that the result of a practical test of the system had been very gratifying. While President Hayes throughout his administration manifested a lively interest in the reform of the civil service, his recommendations to Congress did not meet with a cordial response and no legislation on the subject was accomplished in advance of what had been secured under the administration of President Grant. The election of President James A. Garfield was hailed with satisfaction by the civil service reformers. He had on various occasions expressed his approval of the merit system.. He was one of the most scholarly of all our presidents. It was believed that his influence with Congress would powerfully aid in the enactment of an effective civil service law. In his inaugural address he declared that the civil service could never be placed on a satisfactory basis until it was regulated by such a law. Beyond this, however, the paragraph that he devoted to civil service reform was guarded and indefinite. He evidently reserved for his message to Congress a fuller statement of his views and a more specific intimation of the provisions that should be included in the 12 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 445. 13 - Ibid., p. 465. 14 - Ibid., p. 561. 15 - Ibid., p. 564. 16 - Ibid., p. 565. 17 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 636. 590 - HISTORY OF OHIO desired legislation.18 Unfortunately his tragic death prevented the statement of his policy in a message to Congress. The manner of his death, however, was a powerful agency for the overthrow of the system responsible for it. It must be borne in mind that while George H. Pendleton turned his back upon the traditions and practices of his party he kept strictly within the platform pledges of that party. Beginning with the year. 1872, the democratic party in its national conventions had gone on record in no uncertain language, in favor of the reform of the civil service. The platform on which Greeley was nominated demanded the merit system and denounced the then existing order in the following terms : "The civil service of the Government has become a mere instrument of party tyranny and personal ambition, and an object of selfish greed. It is a scandal and reproach upon free institutions and breeds a demoralization dangerous to the perpetuity of a republican government." Succeeding conventions of the party in even more forceful and definite language demanded civil service reform and condemned the spoils system. In plain and simple terms, what is the spoils system ? It is the giving of official positions in return for party service. It says to the ward worker, the caucus manipulator and professional vote getter, "You help elect me mayor or congressman or governor, and I will give you an office in return. I will either throw out some one to make a place for you or have a new office created for you." In short, it is a system of legalized corruption. In the language of the San Francisco Call, "The spoils system declares that men shall make a living out of politics. It implies that they shall give or withhold their votes because a valuable consideration has been offered. Less disgraceful than outright bribery, it is more pernicious, for the briber pays his obligations out of his own pocket ; the spoilsman makes the public pay them." To this one might add that while the briber corrupts the voter, the spoilsman, as a rule, through the appointment of inefficient men, not only corrupts the voter but demoralizes the public service. Every time an agent of the government appoints an incompetent man, or any man, for the sole purpose of paying a political debt he sets a corrupt example for the whole people. And this is none the less true when done without sinister motive. The corrupt practices of high finance and debased politics are natural and logical results of the spoils system against which Pendleton inveighed. From a purely business point of view, the supreme folly and criminal waste of such a system is apparent. How long would a great railroad system operate successfully if every two years a new president of the road should be elected, who in turn should fill all positions on the basis of political service, drive out the trained and experienced men and put the vote getters in charge ? There would be jobs and sinecures and fancy salaries; there would be wrecks and broken bones and mangled bodies that would make humanity shudder. What would happen if the same policy were applied to our public schools and colleges and universities ? In a comparatively short time there would be chaos and confusion intolerable and disastrous. And yet prior to 1883, the vast and complex machinery of our government was administered on the basis of spoils. As already intimated, the spoils system is to be condemned because it blunts the moral sense of the citizen and loots the public treasury under the guise of the law. One of its fruits was a goodly number of influential citizens with two codes, one for dealing with private and another for dealing with public affairs. It is even said that in those degenerate days there were men who would not take a penny from a 18 - Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VIII, p. 11. ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 591 neighbor, even in the dark, but who still seemed to think it was not very wrong to steal a little from the state. The struggle for place, the demoralization of the public service and the tragic result to which reference has been made led to a widespread demand for a reform of the civil service. With this George H. Pendleton was in hearty sympathy and he was prompt to respond. He devoted his influence and energies to end this saturnalia of spoliation by the establishment and enforcement of the merit system. In his speech in the United States Senate in December, 1881, he said : "This spoils system opens up to every thoughtful man, nay to every man who will see, even without thinking, visions of wrong, injustice, brutality, wastefulness, recklessness, fraud, peculation, degradation of persons and parties, which have driven from public life much of the cultivated intellect and refined morality of the country, and fill even the most hopeful mind with sadness for much in the present and grave anxiety for the future." Again in the same speech he said of this system : "It is the prolific parent of fraud, corruption and brutality. * * * It lowers the tone and degrades the sentiment, not only of the public men, but, more important still, of the whole people behind them." This arraignment he followed up with an able presentation of the merit system proposed in his bill. If his vision of what he hoped his measure would accomplish has not been fully realized in the almost forty years that have elapsed, it is the ideal toward which, in spite of temporary delays and reverses, the practices of state and nation are slowly but assuredly moving. A year later, in December, 1882, he again spoke in favor of his bill for the enactment of which he had labored unceasingly. In his brief speech he said in part : "The existing system which, for want of a better name, I call the `spoils system,' must be killed or it will kill the Republic. I believe that it is impossible to maintain free institutions in this country upon any basis of that sort. I am no prophet of evil, I am not a pessimist in any sense of the word, but I do believe that, if the present system goes on until 50,000,000 people shall have grown into 100,000,000 and 140,000 officers shall have grown into 300,000, with their compensation in proportion, and all shall depend upon the accession of one party or the other to the presidency and to the executive functions, the presidency of this country, if it shall last in name so long, will be put up for sale to the highest bidder, even as in ancient Rome the imperial crown was awarded to those who could raise the largest fund." Our population has grown to over 100,000,000 and there were in the classified service alone in 1917, 327,000 persons. In 1918, this number had reached approximately 600,000, due largely to the World war. The number reported in 1923 was 411,398. 19 The civil service reform movement, as we have seen, did not originate with Pendleton. The bill that he introduced was largely the work of the National Civil Service Reform Association and its president, Dorman B. Eaton. Similar measures had previously been introduced and considered in Congress. But nevertheless to Pendleton is due the credit for sponsorship and chief influence in the enactment of the national civil service law. The peculiar political condition at this time and his relation to it should not be forgotten. After the tragic death of Garfield, following the bitter factional fight in the republican party, the congressional elections went strongly democratic. The prospect for democratic victory at the coming presidential election was bright. The practical politicians of that party very naturally did not relish the prospect of the enactment of a civil service law that would perpetuate in office many thousand republican appointees. If there was to be any civil service 19 - United States Civil Service Commission. Report, 1923, p. 187. 592 - HISTORY OF OHIO law, they much preferred that it be deferred until their party came into power, and their hungry friends and retainers were comfortably established in the berths for which they had waited so long. This feeling was shared by democrats in Congress. Under these circumstances, the leadership of George H. Pendleton, in the movement for civil service reform, was most fortunate if not absolutely essential to the enactment of the law. Just a word, by way of parenthetical diversion, for the "practical politicians." Hard names should not be applied to them. The rank and file are firmly convinced that they are rendering their country a patriotic service in the support of their party and that they are entitled to recognition for this service. They were and, where they are still found, are the product of a system for which they should not be held responsible. After all the "workers," those who come into actual contact with the voters and arouse "patriotic party interest," are perhaps less reprehensible than the "higher ups" who contribute cash lavishly and claim their reward in consulships, ministerial posts, ambassadorships and other appointive positions of trust and honor. Senator Pendleton was aware that his action was not pleasing to many democratic party workers, to "the boys in the trenches," but believing that his course was right and that it would ultimately inure to the benefit of his party, he never wavered in the fight that he led for the merit system. His bill passed the Senate December 27, 1882, by a vote of 38 to 5 ; it passed the House January 5, 1883, by a vote of 155 to 47, and was approved by President Arthur January 16, 1883. For his courageous support of the measure he incurred the ill will of "the boys" in Ohio, and they quietly prepared to retaliate. When his senatorial term came to an end he suddenly found that he had a large fight on his hands in the Legislature which was controlled by his party. "The boys" pitted against him the old war horse, Durban Ward. The fight waxed warm, for "the boys" were after the scalp of Pendleton. January 8, 1884, was the date set for the caucus of the democratic members of the General Assembly of Ohio to determine who should be nominated to succeed Senator Pendleton. There were three candidates for the honor, Henry B. Payne, Durban Ward and Pendleton, who sought to succeed himself. The contest became exciting and charges of bribery were freely made. The situation became so tense that Ex-Senator Allen G. Thurman, always deeply interested in the welfare of his party, felt called upon to issue the day of the caucus the following letter that expresses his view of the contest and is here reproduced in full : "I have nothing against either of the candidates. They are all men of ability. My personal relations with each of them have always been friendly and pleasant. But there is something that shocks me in the idea of crushing men like Pendleton and Ward, who have devoted the best portions of their lives to the maintenance of Democracy, by the combination against them of personal hatred and overgrown wealth. I hear Payne men say : 'We cannot support Pendleton because we disapprove of his civil service reform bill,' forgetting that convention after convention of the democratic party, both State and National, had resolved in favor of civil service reform, and also forgetting that the Republicans now in office are just as liable to be turned out as if the Pendleton bill had never passed. I do not advocate that bill. I think it ought to be amended or repealed ; but I would not slaughter a life-long Democrat because in a long public service he happened to make one mistake. "But if these gentlemen can not support Pendleton, why can not they support Ward ? He is not responsible for the civil service reform bill. Indeed, I have always understood that he disapproves of it. That he is a man of ability, every man must admit ; that he has performed ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 593 immense labor for our party, no one will deny. Why, then, prefer Payne to him ? The answer, I fear, is perfectly plain. There never has been any machine politics in the Democratic party of Ohio. We have, as a party, been freer from bossism than any party that ever existed. But some men seem to think that we ought to have a machine, amply supplied with money to work it, and under absolute control of a boss or bosses, to dictate who shall and who shall not receive the honors and rewards within the gift of the party. To set up such a machine it is necessary, in the first place, to kill the men who have heretofore enjoyed the confidence of the party—the men whose ability, hard labor, and principles did so much to keep the party together in the terrible ordeal through which it has passed. I am unwilling to see this done. It does not concern me personally, for I am a mere private citizen, having no expectation or wish to ever hold office again. But although I have never sought for revenge upon my enemies in the party—if I have had any—on the other hand, I have never deserted my friends, and I do not want to be called on to be a pall-bearer at their political funerals. I want to see our officers elected in the good old-fashioned Democratic mode, and not by some new-fangled mode that, to say the least of it, wears an evil-omened and inauspicious aspect. I want to see all true Democrats have a fair chance, according to their merits, and do not want to see a political cut-throat bossism inaugurated for the benefit of a close party corporation or syndicate." 20 Allen O. Myers, state representative from Franklin County and strongly opposed to the election of Payne, in his account of this contest speaks thus of the principal reason brought forth by democratic members of the General Assembly for opposing Pendleton : "The argument used against Mr. Pendleton, was that he was the author of the civil service law. But the platform upon which the state ticket had been elected, and the legislature had been carried, was the most emphatic endorsement of civil service reform, that the Democratic party of Ohio had ever made. The pretext for opposing Mr. Pendleton was the most flimsy and pitiable that could be presented. This feature of the Senatorial convass only demonstrates the insincerity of political parties and promises."21 Opinions still differ as to what extent this argument was sincere or a matter of excuse. It seems clear, however, that members of the General Assembly relied upon it to justify their action with their constituents and it may be truly said that Pendleton made the fight for principle and paid the penalty. He was defeated in the democratic caucus, and Payne succeeded him in the Senate. When the civil service bill was up for consideration, friends warned him of its effect on his party. In answer he said : "It has been said that the abandonment of the spoils system will exclude Democrats from office when the day of our victory shall come. I do not think so. On the contrary I believe the adoption of this policy as our party creed will hasten the day of the victory of our party, and its adoption as a law will under any administration fill many offices with Democrats. I think it will bring to our aid very many men not hitherto of our political faith, who believe this reform a vital question in our politics." In 1884 Grover Cleveland was elected President. He won on a margin of less than 1,500 votes in the State of New York. The result depended upon a number of influences, all of which were necessary to his success. He had the support of Harper's Weekly and the civil service reformers, the so-called Mugwumps, of that day. Without their aid he could not have been elected. George H. Pendleton and his civil service act were very material influences in bringing about this result. 20 - Columbus Evening Dispatch, January 8, 1884. 21 - Myers, Allen O. Bosses and Boodle in Ohio Politics, p. 228. 594 - HISTORY OF OHIO He knew what he was talking about when he said, "It will bring to our aid very many men not heretofore of our political faith who believe this reform a vital question in our politics." He helped to win the national victory for his party, but fell outside of the breastworks at the hands of "the boys." In 1885 he was appointed by President Cleveland minister to Germany, a post that he filled with credit to himself and his country. On his way back to America, he died at Brussels, Belgium, November 24, 1889. He was survived by two daughters and a son, Frank Key Pendleton, a successful lawyer and eminent jurist of New York City. His wife, whose maiden name was Alice Key, was a daughter of Francis Scott Key, the author of "The Star Spangled Banner." Her death by accident, while her husband was in the foreign service, almost prostrated him. From the shock he never fully recovered. George H. Pendleton was familiarly known as "Gentleman George," and it is the testimony alike of supporters and opponents that he was at all times and under all circumstances the perfect gentleman. High tribute is paid to his domestic virtues, his eminent ability and his personal honor that was never sullied. His great achievement, the civil service law, still stands. In spite of all assaults, it is today more firmly established than ever before. It will never be repealed. Its place is as secure as if it were imbedded in the constitution. It has been extended and municipalities and states are following the example of the National Government. We do not realize what we owe to the merit system. Its preventive agency is like that of pure water. We are conscious of slight defects in the latter without thought of its continuous contribution to our health and the health of the community. So with the merit system. We notice its defects, its limitations, its faulty administration without a thought of what would happen if we went back to conditions of forty years ago. If the great number of positions under the protection of the national civil service law were, as of old, thrown into the lottery of a presidential campaign, it would rock the Republic to its foundations. It is easy often from surface indications or the noise of interested parties to conclude that the civil service law, or any law that runs counter to the interest of a considerable number of people, is a farce. On the whole, however, it must be conceded that the merit system is a pronounced success, and the law that established it is the greatest achievement in constructive statesmanship to the credit of an Ohioan since the close of the Civil war. ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNOR RUTHERFORD B. HAYES FIFTY-EIGHTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Regular Session, January 6 to May 18, 1868. Adjourned Session, November 23 to November 25, 1868. Second Adjourned Session, January 25 to May 17, 1869 John C. Lee was the lieutenant-governor and ex-officio president of the Senate. John F. Follett, of Licking County, was speaker of the House of Representatives, but later resigned and was succeeded by French W. Thornhill, of Coshocton County. On the House staff the journal clerk was John A. Cockerill, a young newspaper reporter of Dayton, whose subsequent career was noteworthy. After the first session of the General Assembly he became successively a reporter and city editor of the Cincinnati Enquirer, correspondent in the Turko-Russian War of 1877, one of the founders of the Washington Post, managing editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, editor and later managing editor of the New York World. 596 - HISTORY OF OHIO The official canvass of votes in the election of 1867 for state officers made by the Assembly on January 8, 1868, showed the following results : Governor—Rutherford B. Hayes, 243,605 ; Allen G. Thurman, 240,622. Total, 484,227. Lieutenant-Governor—John C. Lee, 243,486 ; Daniel S. Uhl, 240,845. State Auditor—James H. Godman, 243,461 ; John McElwee, 240.840. State Treasurer—Sidney S. Warner, 243,318 ; Charles Fulton, 240,802. Judge of the Supreme Court—John Welch, 243,480 ; Thomas M. Key, 240,941. Attorney-General—William H. West, 243,449 ; Frank H. Hurd, 240,874. Governor Hayes, one of the men of Ohio whose names are enrolled on the list of Presidents of the United States, was born at Delaware, and had reached the age of forty-six years when he became governor. He had moved to Cincinnati, where he was a practicing attorney. He had entered the war in 1861, and had been promoted from time to time for distinguished service until he attained the rank of brigadier-general. In 1864, while in the field, he was elected to Congress, and reelected in 1866. He became governor before his term in Congress expired, and was reelected in 1869. In his third term as governor, which began in 1875, he was nominated and elected President, in 1876. In 1881 he retired to his home in Fremont, and died there, January 17, 1893. At the adjourned session of the General Assembly, in 1869, Allen G. Thurman, whom Haves had defeated for governor in 1867, was elected United States Senator by the democratic assembly. Thurman's name is famous in the annals of Ohio. When elected senator he was fifty-six years old, and was one of the most noted lawyers of the country. He had been on the state Supreme Bench seventeen years before. and was chief justice from 1854 to 1856. He served in the United States Senate until 1881, was a candidate for the democratic nomination for the presidency in 1888, and after Cleveland was named instead, he was made the party's candidate for Vice President. His home was in Columbus, where he died in 1895. The claims of those citizens of Ohio who had been damaged by the raid of Gen. John Morgan in 1863 had not yet been settled, although they had been under investigation for five years, and it was not until April 30, 1869, that they were finally disposed of. On that date an act was passed by the General Assembly appropriating $580,837 for the purpose. Of this total, $430,969 was "for the payment of damages and injuries caused by the rebel forces in taking, damaging and destroying property, most of which property was afterwards recaptured by the union forces and appropriated to the use of the United States." The damage done by the union forces amounted to $143,611 ; and $6,257 was paid because of property taken, damaged or destroyed by the militia of Ohio. A very drastic law was enacted to stop prize fighting in the state. Principals in them were to be imprisoned for from one to ten years, and trainers, backers, spectators, and even newspaper reporters who attended them were subject to a fine of from $10 to $500, and imprisonment of from ten days to three months. Political agitation was the outstanding feature in the lives of Ohio people in 1868. The impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson held their attention almost to the exclusion of every other topic until it was ended. This Ohio interest was natural. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, of Ohio, presided at the trial. Benjamin F. Wade, United States Senator and acting Vice President, would have succeeded Johnson in case of the removal of the latter from office. Henry Stanbery resigned his office as attorney-general to defend Johnson. The removal of Edwin M. Stanton from the cabinet was one of the leading causes ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 597 of the impeachment of the President. The relation of all of these men to Ohio was intimate and of long standing. Debate upon the charges to be brought against Johnson by the Lower House of Congress before the United States Senate began early in February, and the great trial started late in March. It continued until May 16th, when the vote was taken by the Senate—thirty-five for conviction and nineteen for acquittal. As thirty-six votes (two-thirds of all) were necessary to convict, Johnson remained in his office. The Ohio editors and people were greatly excited by these events. Charges of being "sold out" were made by the republicans, and the democrats were jubilant over the result. The election of state officers was of far less importance than that for President. The name of General Grant was prominently used in that connection as early as January. He was not known in any political relations or activities, but was sympathetic with those who were fighting President Johnson, and was classed as a republican. The state convention was held in Columbus on March 4th, and nominated a state ticket and two presidential electors-at-large, and elected four delegatesat-large to the convention which was to be held at Chicago on May 20th. In its platform it proposed Grant for President and Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio, for Vice President. The state ticket named was : Supreme judge, William White, of Clark County ; secretary of state, Isaac R. Sherwood, of Williams ; school commissioner, John A. Norris, of Geauga ; clerk of the Supreme Court, Rodney Foos, of Clinton ; member of the board of public works, James Moore, of Coshocton. Ex-Governor David Tod and Samuel Galloway were nominated for presidential electors-at-large, and the following were elected delegatesat-large to the national convention : Fred Hassaurek, of Hamilton County ; John C. Lee, of Lucas ; John A. Bingham, of Harrison, and James Scott, of Warren. The delegates of the nineteen districts were : William P. Stoms, James W. Sands, Thomas L. Young and Henry Kessler, all of Hamilton County ; Orville C. Maxwell, Montgomery ; Nathaniel C. McFarland, Butler ; Leander H. Long, Champaign ; Horace Coleman, Miami ; Oscar F. Locke, Hancock ; Lewis T. Hunt, Hardin ; Samuel Hemphill, Brown ; George W. Hulick, Clermont ; Coates Kinney, Greene ; James S. Goode, Clark ; Thomas C. Jones, Delaware ; Henry C. Godman, Marion ; Frederick Wickham, Huron ; Arthur B. Nettleton, Erie ; Asher Cook, Wood ; Horace Sessions, Defiance ; John Campbell, Lawrence ; John Ellison, Adams ; George W. Gregg, Pickaway ; Thomas W. Beach, Ross ; John A. Sinnet, Licking ; Israel Green, Knox ; Addison S. McClure, Wayne ; John H. Boynton, Lorain ; Frederick W. Wood, Morgan ; Cyrus Grant, Meigs ; Benjamin Rush Cowen, Belmont ; Elijah Burnett, Tuscarawas ; John C. Hostetter, Carroll ; J. F. Oliver, Stark ; Rufus P. Spalding, Cuyahoga, and Samuel S. Osborn, Lake. The democratic convention, at Columbus on January 8th, nominated as their candidates for state offices : William Hubbard, of Logan County, for secretary of state ; William E. Finck, of Perry, for Supreme judge ; John M. Webb, of Mahoning, for clerk of the Supreme Court ; Samuel J. Kirkwood, of Seneca, for commissioner of common schools, and Arthur W. Hughes, of Cuyahoga, for member of the board of public works. The men selected as delegates-at-large to the democratic national convention were: Gen. George W. McCook, of Jefferson County ; John G. Thompson, of Franklin ; Washington McLean, of Hamilton, and Chilton A. White, of Brown. At the republican national convention in Chicago, which began its sessions May 20, 1868, Delegate Fred Hassaurek, of Cincinnati, by invitation delivered a noted address upon reconstruction, and Ohio men were conspicuous throughout the proceedings. General Grant's name was presented by Gen. John A. Logan, of Illinois, and there was no other candidate for President. When Ohio was called in the roll of the 598 - HISTORY OF OHIO states, Thomas C. Jones, chairman of the delegation, responded : "Ohio has the honor of being the mother of our great captain. Ohio is in line and on that line proposes following the great captain, who never knew defeat, to fight it out through the summer and through the autumn to the end of the contest, and to be the first in storming the entrenchments until victory is secured and all the stars of the firmament of our glorious constellation are restored in their proper order, and all the sons of freedom throughout the earth shout for joy. Ohio gives forty-two votes for Ulysses S. Grant." The delegation had decided to vote solidly from first to last for Senator Benjamin F. Wade for Vice President. On the first ballot he received 147 votes, there being ten other candidates. He held an increasing lead through the three successive ballots, receiving 206 on the fourth, but on the fifth there was a stampede to Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana, and his nomination was made unanimous. The democratic convention in New York assembled on July 4th, and was a stormy one. There were many candidates for President, and twenty-two ballots were taken. Horatio Seymour, of New York, and Francis P. Blair, of Missouri, were nominated for President and Vice President, respectively. The campaign of 1868 did not create much excited interest. The result was at no time in doubt, owing to the wonderful popularity of General Grant. In October the state republican candidates were elected by majorities ranging from 17,000 to 18,000, and in November Grant and Colfax carried the state by 41,546. The official figures were 280,- 167 for them, to 238,621 for Seymour and Blair. The total of 518,788 votes was 42,234 greater than had ever been cast in the state before. The presidential electors who cast Ohio's vote for Grant and Colfax were as follows : David Tod, of Mahoning County ; Samuel Galloway, of Franklin ; John G. Olden and Stanley Matthews, of Hamilton ; Andrew G. McBurney, of Warren ; Jonathan Cranor, of Darke ; David Thompson, of Allen ; David W. Bailey, of Clinton ; Charles C. Walcutt, of Franklin ; Lyman B. Matson, of Richland ; Luther A. Hall, of Seneca ; Hiram Frease, of Henry ; John J. Harper, of Scioto ; Phillip M. Wagenhals, of Fairfield ; William D. Hamilton, of Muskingum ; Seth M. Baker, of Ashland ; Levi Barber, of Monroe ; Isaac Welsh, of Belmont ; Edward F. Schneider, of Stark ; Stephen H. Pitkin, of Cuyahoga, and Frederick Kinsman of Ashtabula. President Grant appointed Ex-Governor J. D. Cox secretary of the interior, and Columbus Delano, of Mount Vernon, succeeded him in that office in 1870. The event of the year 1868, which, other than the election, was of most widespread interest in the state, was the destruction by fire of the great Central Ohio Lunatic Asylum in Columbus, on the night of November 17th. The fire fighting facilities of Columbus were utterly inadequate to cope with it. The cisterns, which were the only source of water supply, were quickly emptied, and the building was abandoned to destruction. Six of the patients confined in cells were suffocated before they could be rescued, and many were saved through a hole cut in the roof. Most of the rescued inmates were removed to the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, the Penitentiary and a local hospital, but some escaped and were recovered with difficulty. The loss to the state was approximately $300,000. The asylum was never rebuilt on the site, but was succeeded by the State Hospital for Insane, on the high ground west of Columbus, the largest institution of its kind in the world. The election of the year 1869 resulted in another victory for republican candidates for state offices. Most of them were incumbents, renominated by the convention. The democratic convention, held in Columbus on July 7th, nominated Gen. William S. Rosecrans, but a month later he declined to stand for election, and George H. Pendle- ANNALS OF OHIO ADMINISTRATIONS - 599 ton, of Cincinnati, was named in his stead. The majorities of the republican candidates ranged from 7,000 to 8,000. FIFTY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Regular Session, January 3 to April 18, 1870. Adjourned Session, January 3 to May 2, 1871 John C. Lee was again lieutenant-governor and ex-officio president of the Senate. A. J. Cunningham, of Hamilton County, was elected speaker of the House. The state board of equalization, which was presided over by William L. Groesbeck, determined that the total tax valuation of real estate in the state was $707,846,036. The joint session of the Assembly, after canvassing the returns of the election of 1869, declared the official results as follows : Governor—Rutherford B. Hayes, 236,082 ; George H. Pendleton, 228,567 ; Samuel Scott (prohibition) 679. Lieutenant-Governor—John C. Lee, 236,297 ; T. J. Godfrey, 228,722 ; Joshua Woodworth, 743. Treasurer of State—Sidney S. Warner, 236,345 ; Stephen Buhrer, 227,948 ; Thomas Edwards, 780. Attorney-General—Francis B. Pond, 235,285 ; John M. Connell, 227,903 ; James A. Sumner, 774. The Reform School for Girls, near Delaware, and the Reform Farm for Boys (afterwards designated the Boys' Industrial School) near Lancaster had now been established, and, although not completed, were ready to receive inmates. The governor was therefore authorized by the Assembly to transfer minors confined in the penitentiary to the new institutions. Action was taken looking to another convention for revising and amending the state constitution. The act in this regard was dated March 30, 1871. It submitted to the voters, at the election of October 10th of that year, the question, "Shall there 13e a convention to revise, alter or amend the constitution ?" and prescribed all regulations for taking and returning the votes to the secretary of state and the president of the Senate. On March 22, 1870, the first step was taken by the Assembly in establishing a state agricultural and mechanical college. The act provided for the appointment of a board of trustees, to consist of one member from each congressional district, which should decide upon a location "reasonably central in the state." This was under the Morrill law, granting land by the United States for that purpose. It was the beginning of the Ohio State University at Columbus, which has grown to be one of the great educational institutions of the United States. A law of peculiar interest in the history of Ohio, as showing that notwithstanding the state's encouragement through almost seventy years, and the continuous efforts made under that encouragement, all the wolves in the forests had not been eradicated. Four to six dollars each had been the price paid for wolf scalps in the early days, but on March 18, 1870, the General Assembly passed an act authorizing county commissioners to offer, if necessary, a bounty of $100 each for all wild wolves slain. On April 4, 1871, the first act in the history of the state was passed to prevent cruelty to animals, and upon this law have been established scores of humane societies to compel its observance. It named a great variety of abuses of domestic animals as defining the offenses to be prevented, and imposed fines of from $10 to $50 upon conviction of violation of the law. At the legislative session of 1870 an event which created great tumult was the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, giving all negroes the right to vote. There