Official Proceedings 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION. 
 
 Masonic Hall, 
 
 St. Louis, Mo., May 6th, 1880. 
 
 At about 12:30 o’clock, Gen. John B. Henderson, Chairman of the Anti-Third Term Ex_ 
 ecutive Committee, called the convention to order and nominated E. C. Hubbard, of Ken¬ 
 tucky, to act as temporary chairman. Carried. 
 
 The Hon. E. C. Hubbard addressed the Convention as follows: 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention : For the distinguished honor of being called upon 
 to preside over this Convention, allow me to express to you my heartfelt thanks. We 
 have assembled here to-day as Republicans. If we loved'the Republican party less there 
 would be no motive why this concourse of people should have gathered together. We 
 come here, then, as Republicans who have believed, and who do believe, that the best 
 agency for preserving the magnificent results of the war is the Republican party. [Ap¬ 
 plause.] The Republican party will be called upon to nominate its candidate for Presi¬ 
 dent. I only say what every man believes when I declare that it is possible for the Re¬ 
 publican party to nominate the next President of the United States. [Applause.] Now, 
 at a moment when it would seem morally impossible that we can be mistaken in the line 
 of our duty, and when the path to success is so straightforward and so plain, we are con¬ 
 fronted with a great and impending danger in the violation of a long line of experience,, 
 in the violation of a tradition that is more sacred than law itself. Against common, 
 reason, common sense, and respectable prudence, a party has arisen in the land within; 
 our ranks who believe, or affect to believe, that the best interests of that party lie im 
 committing it to the third-term issue. To prevent in so far as we are able the Republican 
 party from committing itself to this issue, and, if possible, to avert the impending danger, 
 is the mission of this mass Convention. While not so numerous as brave, I undertake to 
 say that this meeting represents more people than were ever represented by a single Con¬ 
 vention in the history of a nation. [Applause.] In the brief time allotted me I can do 
 no more than summarize the objections to the third term. 
 
 
First —It violates a conservative tradition which I regard as essential to the permanency 
 fo republican institutions. [Applause.] 
 
 Second —A third term transmits with added and offensive danger that which in our in¬ 
 stitutions is more perilous. I allude to the spoils of office. [Applause.] 
 
 Th ird —The third term is a step in the direction of constitutional monarchy that no Re¬ 
 public can afford to take. [Great applause.] 
 
 Fourth —The third term will commit the Republican party to a false issue, and upon 
 that issue we are going to fail. [Applause.] 
 
 The objections, in brief, and a thousand others, illustrated by arguments patent, pow¬ 
 erful and conclusive, furnish a sufficient reason for the thinking observer to warn the Re¬ 
 publicans against the impending danger. [Applause.] We do not meet to advance the 
 interests of any particular candidate. [Great applause.] We are not here to express our 
 private views or redress private grievances, if any there be. [Applause.] We have no 
 axes to grind. [Applause.] We do not intend to turn the stone for anybody. This con¬ 
 vention, in my judgment, indorses the best sentiment of the Republican party and of all 
 parties. [Applause.] We voice the sentiment of the people, who, to have the opportu¬ 
 nity to express themselves uncontrolled by the machine, would, with a single voice, as 
 a single man, declare that no man ought to be elected President for a third time. [Ap¬ 
 plause.] I have no time to further'digress upon this cpiestion. 
 
 We protest against the third-term policy for another reason. The man who is the 
 embodiment of it—who is at this hour campaigning for votes—of all* men in the United 
 States is the least fitted by nature or education to hold it. [Applause.] Two years of a 
 second term demonstrated, to my mind at least, conclusively the utter inability of that 
 man to surround himself by men who could administer the affairs of this Government 
 without stealing. [Great applause.] There was a time in our history when every Repub¬ 
 lican heart pulsated with pride at our victories and our achievements; there was an hour 
 in our history when our battle-flags were upon the ramparts of the enemy, when our 
 guidons were advanced clear into his camp, and when our hearts pulsated with pride and 
 glory to uphold the flag of our country and the oriflam trembled in the breeze of Repub¬ 
 lican victory. Two years, alas! and what a change! The sun that set on the last day of 
 that term shed its golden rays upon a wrecked, ruined, dishonored Republican party, 
 leaving us the single legacy which is expressed, perhaps, by this: “There is ne’er an 
 honest man in all Denmark but he is an arrant knave.” [Applause.] It left us, as a 
 legacy, the debatable question whether a man could be a Republican without being a thief. 
 [Applause.] This was the condition of the once bright and glorious Republican party. 
 So far as I am concerned—and I only express my individual views—when Sumner was cut 
 down my faith wavered; and when, for doing his duty, John B. Henderson was struck 
 down, I ceased to be a hero-worshiper. [Great applause.] The details of this great con¬ 
 spiracy, which is seeking to commit us to a third term, are known to you all. Its impu¬ 
 dence, its audacity, are exceeded only by the infamy of an attempt to thwart the will of 
 the people, it seems to me. Now; I am as proud to-day as if the results of this conspiracy 
 were about to return to plague the inventors. Tricks and stratagems come home to 
 roo<st. The Conkling and Cameron chicken is about retiring to its coop. [Laughter and 
 applause.] One thing is demonstrated to be true, that the voice that is born of the ex- 
 Gaugers and Storekeepers is not the voice of the people. [Applause.] This convention, 
 by a bold and determined part, will go far toward strengthening wavering delegates, in 
 developing the opposition to the third-term movement; and, whatever may be the outcome 
 of our deliberations, the student of liistor}^ finds no movement that parallels the courage 
 or the manly undertaking of your declaration here to-day. ]Applause.] Speaking for 
 myself, I am a Stalwart Republican, having no faith in political transcendentalism or 
 Brook Farm experiments. I believe that under a Republican administration the business 
 of the Government should be administered by Republicans. I am here with no ax to 
 grind. I am here seeking no preferment, but solely and only because I believe that the 
 day the Republican party commits itself to the third term, that day it signs its own death- 
 warrant. [Tremendous applause.] I trust that our action here may be the means of 
 placing before the country some distinguished statesman whose character and Republi¬ 
 canism are above suspicion or reproach [applause], and that it will be the means of see¬ 
 ing" in November a united and harmonious Republican party marching to victory. [Ap¬ 
 plause.] 
 
 “ Thrice is he armed who hath his quarrel just.” 
 
3 
 
 Somebody has said, humorously, that “four-times armed is the man that gets in the 
 first blow.” We are “ thrice-armed” here because we are bold, and we are “four-times 
 .armed,” because I do hope and pray that the results of our deliberations may be to give 
 this third-term idea such a blow that there will be no track, trace or remains of it here¬ 
 after. [Applause.] I trust and hope, representing as we do so many millions of voters 
 in this land, that our action nuty be so far harmonious that when we are done it can be 
 said of us that we have won golden opinions from all sorts of people. [Great applause.] 
 
 On motion of Mr. G. L. Wright, of Missouri, Col. Eugene A. Guilbert, of Iowa, wa. 
 elected temporary Secretary. 
 
 Hon. G. C. Wharton, of Kentucky, moved that a Committee on Permanent Organiza¬ 
 tion be appointed. Carried. 
 
 The chair appointed the following named gentlemen to act: 
 
 G. C. Wharton, Kentucky; G. A. Finkelnburg, Missouri; G. W. Allerton, New York; 
 W. B. Clark, Massachusetts; Carl Roehl, Illinois; S. A. Archer, Indiana; E. W. Fox and 
 M. Hunt, Missouri: W. H. Jones, Ohio; Rev. D. G. Bryant, South Carolina, and M. E. 
 Bryant, Alabama. 
 
 F. W. Holls, of New York, moved that Major Bluford Wilson be called upon to address 
 the convention during the time the Committee on Organization were absent. Carried. 
 
 Major Wilson’s Address. 
 
 Gentlemen: It is not part of my purpose at this stage of the proceedings to rise 
 for the purpose of making a formal speech. The Convention was not called so much for 
 the purpose of listening to set speeches as it was for the purpose of shaping resolutions 
 carefully and deliberately throughout, and voicing forth not only the sentiment of those pre¬ 
 sent, but of the vast majority of the voters of the United States in opposition to the heresy 
 of a third term. No man is good enough to be a third-term President of this republic in face 
 of the unselfish and patriotic example of the father and founder of it. [Prolonged applause.] 
 His most illustrious and immediate successors left the sanction of their immortal names to 
 his example in declining to being third-term Presidents, and I believe that the people, 
 “through 100 years of loyal and painful observation,” have perpetuated the example into a 
 custom that has grown to the sanctity of a part of the fundamental law of the land. We 
 are present to-day, as citizens of the Republic, to lift our voices in solemn protest 
 against the violation of a precedent and a custom that has become a part of the common 
 law of the land. We are present, above all, as representatives to protest against this 
 heresy, this blind violation of the traditions of the party and the country. [Applause.] 
 New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Minnesota, Wisconsin and other States have lifted up 
 their voices in solemn protest against this departure with which the party is threatened 
 to-day by a sensational cabal and conspiracy. [Great applause.] We are present to-day 
 to warn these managers in earnest and deliberate language that they should not be per¬ 
 mitted to submit the party to what the chairman has called “the signing of its death- 
 warrant.” [Applause.] Having had some experience in connection with past Republican 
 administrations, I am unalterably opposed, above all, to the nomination of U. S. Grant. 
 [Applause.] I cheerfully recognize his claims upon the country for his patriotic ser¬ 
 vices as a leader in crushing out the rebellion, yet, in the presence of an issue like this, 
 personal consideration should not influence the judgment of thinking people to lead them 
 into by and forbidden paths, and commit them to a departure which threatens the exist¬ 
 ence of the party, and which in future bears a menace of danger to the Repuolic itself. 
 So far as the delegates are personally concerned we may be insignificant; we are 
 not chosen by the ringleaders of the party to voice the sentiment of ring organization. 
 The sentiment we reflect is of the vast majority of the voters of the United States 
 in opposition to a third term. Looking at the party to-day, where is the strength of the 
 third-term movement? Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Massachusetts, and all of glorious New 
 England are either silent upon the subject or engaged in a deadly contest for the pur¬ 
 pose of throttling the heresy in its inception. The sentiment is strong in South Caro¬ 
 lina, a State which illustrated during the administration of Senator Patterson “some of 
 the beauties of what we must expect under a third term.” According to Grant himself, 
 the State stands to-day erect, reconstructed, while under Patterson’s administration, ac¬ 
 cording to Patterson’s own words, it was given over to thieves and scoundrels, who 
 preyed upon the very vitals of the people. Patterson himself, with a cunning leer upon 
 his countenance, declared in Washington during the last days of Grant’s administration, 
 when it began to be apparent that there was to be a change in the policy of the party, that 
 there “were five years of good stealing left in South Carolina under a Republican admin- 
 
4 
 
 istration.” [Applause.] Alabama, under the control and influence of George H. Spencer, 
 was plundered until the people rose in revolution. 
 
 According to the admission of Grant himself, the condition of the people of Alabama, 
 South Carolina, Mississippi, and every Southern State is infinitely better under the 
 policy inaugurated by Hayes than under his own. [Applause.] These are the States 
 to-day in which there is not the slightest hope of securing an electoral vote in favor of a 
 Republican President, and yet they are the very States which are seeking to force upon 
 the party a nomination which, while it might promise to lead the Spencers, the Patter¬ 
 sons, the Wests, and the Caseys back to the flesh-pots of Egypt, yet bears with it over¬ 
 whelming menace of defeat and disaster. Col. Wilson handled the “ strong-government” 
 plea severely. “True,” said he, “ Grant’s government was a ‘strong one.’ ” The price 
 of disinfectants in St. Louis, I have no doubt, increased over 100 per cent, during the 
 time he was developing some of the “strength” of his Administration. [Great laughter.] 
 “A strong government” as illustrated by the Department of Justice under George H. 
 Williams, who stood by and saw, unmoved, an infamous conspiracy against the liberty of 
 a distinguished citizen of the District of Columbia concocted simply for the reason that 
 Columbus Alexander had the courage and the manhood to protest against outrage and 
 wrong and thieving in the affairs of the Administration of the District. [Applause.] “A 
 strong Government” as illustrated further by the fact that under the administration of 
 the same Williams the United States Marshals in nearly every Southern State squandered 
 hundreds of thousands of dollars in the business of setting up primaries and controlling 
 State Conventions in the interest of the Republican party. [Applause.] A “strong 
 Government” as illustrated by the a dministration of the affairs of the Interior Department 
 under the “great and good” Delano [laughter], who to his son John was in the habit of 
 repeating, doubtless, that old couplet: “Lord, bless me and my wife, my son John and 
 his wife, us four, and no more.” “A strong government” as illustrated by the administra¬ 
 tion of the War Department under a name which the speaker was ashamed to mention in a 
 Republican Convention such as this—under an administration when the Germans of this 
 country, under their great and eloquent exponent, CarLSchurz, were obliged to move in the 
 Senate of the United States for an investigation of a corrupt sale of arms to Frenchmen in 
 violation of National law. [Tremendous applause.] In reference to this matter, Col. Wil¬ 
 son, without desiring to be personal, said he had seen a letter from one Cabinet officer to 
 the w T ife of another charging that “if that Senatorial investigation w T ent any farther it w T ould 
 involve the wife of a Cabinet Minister connected with that speculation.” (Applause.) “A 
 strong Government ” as further illustrated in the administration of that same department 
 when every American blushed for very shame at the name of Belknap, from whom Grant de¬ 
 clared that he “parted, regretting.” He had not one word of regret, however, in parting from 
 such distinguished men as Jacob T. Cox, of Ohio, or Ben Bristow, of Kentucky. (Ap¬ 
 plause.) He had no regrets when the courageous and intrepid Ebenezer R. Hoar went 
 out of the Department of Justice because he was not permitted to administer his Depart¬ 
 ment in accordance with what he believed to be the simple rules of justice and right. 
 (Applause.) 
 
 He had no regrets when such an intrepid reformer and gallant executive as Marshall 
 Jewell was asked to step down and out of the office of Postmaster-General simply because 
 he had the manhood and the courage of his convictions to stand by Bristow and others 
 who were endeavoring to do their duty by the country, under the laws of the 
 country, which they regarded as paramount to their obligation to Gen. Grant or anybody 
 else. (Great applause.) “A strong government ” as illustrated by the administration 
 of the Navy Department in such pieces of villiany as the Secor contracts, for which Robe¬ 
 son escaped impeachment simply because he had the nerve, courage and audacity to stand 
 up and brazen out his infamy, and in regard to which Gen. Grant never raised his voice 
 in protestor objection. (Applause.) If this is the character of the “strong” govern¬ 
 ment now desired, if these are the data from which to judge of the future—and since the 
 days of Patrick Henry there is no other way to judge but by the past—then let the 
 people meet and say, as with one voice, as he believed they would, “We will not have 
 or support a man who thus illustrates strong government in violation not only of what 
 seem to be the traditions of the party, but the precedent and customs of the country 
 concentrated by a hundred years of acquiescence by the men of all parties.” (Prolonged 
 applause.) 
 
t> 
 
 “ Vote for Tilden,” shouted an outsider. 
 
 “No,” replied Major Wilson, “not for Tilden, either. (Applause.) We are, first and 
 above all, Republicans. (Applause.) 
 
 We stand here to-day by the faith handed down by the fathers, emphasized and repeated 
 by the Republican party in all the great Republican States of the nation. Let others go, 
 we remain. (Applause.) We will stand fast and true. The example of that illustrious 
 and immortal name (Washington) has given us a patrimony of which we should all be 
 proud. Be not led off into supporting any other men whose record is open to such just 
 criticism as that of Samuel J. Tilden. (Applause.) If we can do no better, we can at 
 least do what some of our colored friends are fond of doing down South—“take to de 
 woods” (laughter and applause), or, as the alternative to that, we can, in the bright cer¬ 
 tainty that we are right and that our friends are wrong, present to the country, at some 
 convention which shall hereafter be called, some man who is at once a representative of 
 the anti-third-term theory and of an honest, faithful administration of public affairs in the 
 interests of the people. (Applause.) Some such name I am proud I can mention; some 
 such name as that of your own genial John B. Henderson (applause), always in the fore¬ 
 front of the battle for right, brave, intrepid, regardless either of consequences personal 
 to himself or of the frowns of executive disfavors. (Loud applause.) He had the cour¬ 
 age and the manhood, with the power of his convictions of duty, to back up a Grand Jury 
 and prosecute a man who was the favorite then in the White House, and he would, I have 
 no doubt, with equal courage and equal wisdom, have prosecuted even the Executive 
 himself had he been unworthy. (Tremendous applause.) There are other noble names 
 such as Cox, of Ohio, Hawley, of Connecticut, George William Curtis, of New York, under 
 whose leadership the party would be proud to rally and fight for liberty and the right of 
 being citizens of “ the grandest and freest Republic under the sun.” This movement and 
 those engaged in it will doubtless be sneered at by some organs. I could mention 
 one in St. Louis, and another in Chicago, the latter of which, during the whole time when 
 the Government was trying to bring to justiue men who had been fattening upon the 
 spoils of the people, had not a word of encouragement or cheer for those who with their 
 best abilities were prosecuting such thieves. (Applause.) But the anti-third-term men, 
 strong in their convictions that they are right, and backed by such eloquent and burn¬ 
 ing words as those of Mr. Bellows, Woolsey, Scliurz, Cox, and others, can afford to go 
 forward to whatever fate fortune might have in store for them, but always and under all 
 circumstances determined to stand by and uphold the Republican doctrines given to them 
 by the fathers, and the laws and time-honored customs of the country. (Prolonged ap¬ 
 plause.) 
 
 At the conclusion of Col. Wilson’s telling and eloquent address, Chairman Wharton of 
 the Committee on Organization made the following report: 
 
 For President, Hon. John B. Henderson, of Missouri. 
 
 Vice Presidents, F. W. Holls, of New York, Franklin McTeigh, of Illinois, Otto Kirchner, 
 of Michigan, John W. Carter, of Massachusetts, E. R. Wood, of Pennsslvania, H. M. 
 Turner of Georgia, G. W. Bryant, of South Carolina, M. E. Bryant, of Alabama, L. M. 
 Eembitz, of Kentucky, Robert A. Hill, of Indiana, J. H. Wells of Florida, Judge R. E. Rom- 
 bauer, of Missouri and Dr. H. J. Lampe, of Missouri, Rufus Anderson, of Kansas, E. A. 
 Fulton, of Arkansas, Carl Grandpre, of Nebraska, T. D. Smalls, of Texas, Major Geo. 
 B.Halsted, of Minnesota, A. Hartzer, of Wisconsin and W. W. Wheeler, of California. 
 
 Secretaries: Col. Eugene A. Guilbert, of Iowa, Maj. E. S. Foster, of Missouri, Col. F. 
 T. Ledergerber and J. Wilson, of Missouri. 
 
 The report of the committee was received and adopted. 
 
 E. B. Cahoon, of Missouri, moved that a committee of three be appointed to escort 
 the Chairman to the rostrum. Carried. 
 
 The temporary chairman appointed the following gentlemen as the committee: 
 
 Tatcher Muencli, of Missouri; L. M. Dembitz, of Kentucky and W. W. Williams, of 
 Minnesota. 
 
 General Henderson’s Address. 
 
 Gentlemen —My first duty is to thank you, as I do sincerely, for the expression of your 
 confidence and regard. In return permit me to promise you at least an impartial dis¬ 
 charge of the duties imposed. 
 
 And now to the business for which we have assembled. 
 
 We meet to consider and discuss political duties at an important period of our history. 
 Theoretically, at the least, we are freemen—citizens of a republic in which each ** is the 
 
0 
 
 equal of his fellow.” * * Every man is a part of the republic. Whatever of talent,, 
 
 whatever of wisdom and experience any one of us can give to the counsels of hiscountry, it 
 is not only his right but his duty to give. On this principle rests the theory of republican 
 government. The freedom of speech and of the press is guaranteed no less for the benefit 
 of the government than for the liberty and security of the citizen. 
 
 As republican government is but the rational expression of the people’s will, freedom of 
 expression, in all its forms, must be preserved, in order that this will may be ascertained. 
 And to secure government by the people in its purity it is not enough that the freedom of 
 speech be merely guaranteed; it is equally important that the right be exercised. If we 
 have convictions touching our political duties those convictions should be contributed to- 
 the general expression of the popular will. And when we shall have expressed them the 
 whole duty of patriotism is not yet discharged. These convictions must put on the garb 
 of action. If we stop short of this our duty is but half performed. 
 
 He that is intimidated by power proves himself no less insensible than unworthy of the 
 rights of freemen. 
 
 He that is corrupted by the temptations and promises of office sells the public weal for 
 personal gain, and in a court of conscience accepts the taint of bribery. 
 
 He that surrenders to party what belongs to his country has already bartered his birth¬ 
 right of citizenship and ceases to be a factor in the preservation of liberty. 
 
 With a proper sense, I hope and believe, of our duties and responsibilities as citizens, we 
 meet to consider questions connected with the coming presidential election. 
 
 Some of the leaders of the Republican party tell us once more that all the hopes of 
 American liberty now depend on their success. If this be true would it not be wise in 
 them to adopt such policies and to nominate such candidates as may be acceptable to the 
 largest number of its members ? 
 
 We who are here, for many years have been faithful adherents of the party. We deserve 
 some consideration in its counsels. What we ask is not unreasonable. 
 
 The candidate presented by these leaders has been president for eight years. He has 
 already filled the two terms assigned by the constitutional fathers. Aside from the merits 
 or demerits of his administrations, we insist that this precedent of our institutions should 
 be observed. It is at least safe to follow it. It may be dangerous to abandon it. It is 
 no answer to say, “This is not the law; that it is a mere custom, whose breach is better 
 than its observance.” These precedents are often wiser than the written law. The com¬ 
 mon law itself is an unwritten code, a collection of precedents and usages, which the ex¬ 
 perience of our Anglo-Saxon fathers found applicable to good government and to the 
 security of person and property. In the language of Judge Kent, these usages and cus¬ 
 toms “ do not rest for their authority upon any express and positive declaration of the 
 will of the legislature.” Again he says: “The rules and maxims which constitute the 
 immense code of the common law grew into use by gradual adoption, and received from 
 time to time the sanction of the courts of justice, without any legislative act or interfer¬ 
 ence. It was the application of the dictates of natural justice and of cultivated reason to 
 particular cases.” 
 
 Sir Matthew Hale said that it was “the product of the wisdom, counsel, experience and 
 observation of many ages of wise and observing men.” The same may be said of the civil 
 law, which made Rome the mistress of the world, and yet administers justice in half of 
 Europe and a part of the United States. It is a code of precedents, deduced from univer¬ 
 sal custom, sanctioned by the wisdom of the people, and accepted and applied in the con¬ 
 duct of their affairs* The same is true of the public law. It is a bundle of prece¬ 
 dents, a code of customs, and yet it is honored and obeyed by the nations of the civilized 
 world. To destroy it is to remove gravitation from the universe. It is this code which 
 protects commerce on the high seas, preserves contracts against revolutionary changes of 
 government, prescribes the duties of neutrals in time of war, protects the persons o»f 
 embassadors and consuls,, fixes the law of blockade, gives rules to civilized warfare, limits 
 the right of search and preserves the freedom of the seas. 
 
 This great code, in the language of an American commentator, consists largely of a 
 “ collection of usages, customs and opinions, the growth .of civilization and commerce.” 
 
 When our English ancestors secured the great charter, that “no freeman should be 
 deprived of life, liberty or property except by the judgment of his peers or the law of the 
 land,” the trial by jury rested upon custom, and the “law of the land” had no other 
 definition than universal consent and immemorial usage. 
 
( 
 
 When our American forefathers protested against taxation without representation, they 
 pointed to no written law, but to the history of English civilization; to immemorial usage 
 and the customs and canons of the common law. 
 
 But aside from the precedent to which we insist upon adhering, we object to the nomi¬ 
 nation of Gen. Grant because of the character of his former administrations. We will not 
 willingly revive the story of their shortcomings. It is enough to say that heretofore they 
 brought dishonor, shame and defeat to the Republican party; and no reasonable guarantees 
 are offered that the future will be an improvement of the past. A nomination does not 
 remove the odor of these scandals. It only shifts the responsibility upon the party itself. 
 
 “The river Rhine, it is well kncnvn, 
 
 Doth wash your city of Cologne; 
 
 Rut tell me, nymphs, what power divine 
 Shall henceforth wash {he river Rhine!” 
 
 These gentlemen tell us that the condition of the country is such that a strong govern 
 ment is needed. The meaning of this term has never been sufficiently explained. If they 
 seek a government made strong by the love and confidence of the people, or one made 
 strong by the proper administration of the law, we shall be the last to present any objec¬ 
 tion. If, on the other hand, they seek the application of repressive measures to the South 
 outside of the constitution and against the law, we enter now our most solemn protest. 
 If the object be to dictate to the Southern people what representatives they shall send to 
 congress, whether white or black, Republican or Democratic, we here repudiate the 
 unwarrantable claim. We waged against them a war of four years’duration to compel 
 them to send members of congress to Washington instead of to Richmond. If these 
 leaders desire us to wage auother four years’ war to drive those members back to Rich¬ 
 mond, we shall withhold our consent. If the purpose of our leaders be, in violation of 
 constitutional guarantees, to send down armies of protection to the negro, while he votes 
 the Republican ticket, we answer that standing armies are but sorry teachers of public 
 opinion, and generally the worst guarantors of civil liberty—either for white or black. 
 That this clamor for strong government is as baseless as all other pretensions put forth to 
 overthrow the conservative safeguards of our institutions. It is sufficient to quote the 
 words of General Grant himself. At Bloomington, Ill., on the 17th of April last, after 
 informing the people that he had traveled over all the lately rebellious states, he said: 
 “The same decorations were seen in every state that are seen here to-night; the Union 
 flag floated over us everywhere, and the eyes of the people are as familiar with its colors 
 as yours, and look upon it as guaranteeing to all the rights and privileges of a free people 
 without regard to race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” At Little Rock, two 
 days before, he said he discovered that the sectional “feelings of the past are gone.” 
 
 These declarations furnish sufficient answer to all claims of government outside of the 
 law. There is no chattel slavery in the South, and there never can be again, Interest, 
 conscience, custom, all forbid it. The slave block is abolished forever. There is, how¬ 
 ever, a species of slavery in the South as well as in the North that cries for the emancipa¬ 
 tion of its miserable victims. In truthful language we are told that “he is not free whose 
 mind is enslaved;” and how many of our people consent to subject the right of judgment 
 and the dictates of conscience to the shackles of party rule. 
 
 It has been said that he alone is free “ whom the truth makes free.” 
 
 Then he who smothers his convictions and advocates measures which his soul abhors, 
 or supports for public office unworthy candidates, denies the truth and ceases to be free. 
 
 De Tocqueville truly says that the desire for office in America destroys the spirit of in¬ 
 dependence, stifles the manlier virtues and jeopardizes the existence of the state. 
 
 We all know that the theory and principles of our government are subverted by the 
 present practices of political parties. 
 
 They have usurped the functions of all its departments. Conventions make presidents; 
 conventions make legislatures and judges of courts; conventions are made by primary 
 meetings, and primary meetings are too often controlled by bullies, blackguards and 
 demagogues. Of late years, by extending the principle of state rights to the work of 
 professional politicians, they have adopted what they denominate the unit rule, by which 
 the vote of a single trickster may control an entire state. In order to make this work 
 effective they resort to all the arts of corruption. They employ professional voters for 
 the primaries, who are equally active and zealous for either party. They employ profes¬ 
 sional delegates who sell their services for lucre, or the empty promise of office. 
 
8 
 
 When the nominations are made they demand the support of honest men; they appeal 
 to the fears of some; to the prejudices of others; to the avarice of some and the aspira¬ 
 tions of others, while they apply the party lash to all. 
 
 Instead of electing our president by colleges of independent electors, these fraudulent 
 conventions, manipulated and controlled by the worst elements of society, not only dictate 
 the person of the executive, but the character and policy of his administration. These 
 are the evils from which we need emancipation. They belong no less to one party than to 
 the other. 
 
 Strong government is not the remedy for them. For them we need no standing armies, 
 -no military hero, no methods ot military rule. 
 
 The very reverse of all these is required. We want personal independence, respect for 
 the constitution and the laws, a total overthrow of party rule, an emancipation of the pub¬ 
 lic mind from the thraldom of party machinery. 
 
 It is by means of these arts, this perversion of all methods of good government, that the 
 .nomination of Gen. Grant is now threatened. Consecrated customs are to be put aside, 
 the example of good men is to be insolently spurned, and a nomination forced upon an 
 >unwilling party. 
 
 With the exception of the State of Pennsylvania, the states proposing to nominate him 
 cannot give him an electoral vote. Pennsylvania was secured upon a three-weeks’ notice; 
 and so reckless and defiant is the misrepresentation of the popular will that the public 
 judgment already proclaims revolt. Long before the Chicago convention assembles, the 
 glittering falsehood will have been exposed, and truth will assert its supremacy. 
 
 Ohio, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin, it is now certain, cannot be relied on for a 
 single electoral vote in case of his nomination. If the electoral vote of New York should 
 be given by an act of the legislature, the revolutionary proceeding would cost double as 
 many votes in other states. Illinois is now doubtful in its choice for a nomination, and 
 almost certain to oppose his election if nominated. 
 
 Under these circumstances we may the more confidently appeal to the Chicago conven¬ 
 tion. 
 
 To make that appeal becomes a part of the duty devolved upon this meeting. Let us 
 make it in a spirit of sincerity; let us remind our friends of our joint labors in the past; 
 of the many good deeds of the party in which we have all participated and of its splendid 
 renown, of which we are all proud. Let us ask them to reconsider and disavow their 
 purposes. If they prove deaf to the voice of justice, and reject the claims of past associ¬ 
 ation, we may be reluctantly forced to acquiesce in the necessity which demands our 
 political separation. In that event it may become necessary to declare that all political 
 •connection between them and ourselves is and ought to be totally dissolved, and that as a 
 free and independent party we have full power to call conventions, to nominate candi¬ 
 dates, and to do all other acts and things which an independent party may of right do. 
 
 It is now customary to deride us as weak and contemptible in numbers. The race is 
 not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong. More than once in human history 
 the weak have been able to confound the mighty. 
 
 A few earnest men pursuing the right, soon become irresistible. “Duties are theirs, 
 events are God’s.” In the language of Mr. Carlyle, “they perform the duty nearest to 
 them, and then other duties become clearer.” 
 
 The Liberty party of 1844, headed by Mr. Birney, received only 62,300 votes out of more 
 than two and a half millions cast. But this was sufficient to turn the scale and bring 
 defeat upon Mr. Clay, the most popular civic leader known to American politics. 
 
 The Freesoilers of New York, under Mr. Van Buren, in 1848, overwhelmed the victori¬ 
 ous Democracy and drove them from power. Earnest men are always in the majority. 
 They see the right and suffer no timid counsels or cowardly suggestions to stand between 
 them and duty. This little Liberty party of 1844 became the party of Lincoln in 1860. 
 
 In the last century a few earnest patriots at Boston epitomized human liberty into the 
 maxim: “ No taxation without representation.” To them the maxim was as sacred as the 
 religion of their fathers. They inscribed the principle on their banners, and followed 
 the flag amidst the scorn and contempt of the flatterers and minions of power. These were 
 the men who organized the first tea-party* known in American history. Those who tumbled 
 the tea into Boston harbor numbered only fifty men. At Concord and Lexington they 
 numbered an army; and there they fired the shot whose echoes awaked mankind. The first 
 
 * The Globe-Democrat in indicating the Anti-Third Term Party of Missouri, gave it the name of the 
 4 ‘ Tea Party.” 
 
9 
 
 tea-party gave us our institutions. Let us hope that the second may be able to preserve them. 
 
 We may not be able to elect a president of oui own choosing in the next canvass, 
 but "we can and do proclaim that the balance of power is in our hands. We can 
 determine which candidate chosen by others shall be elected, and we have already resolved 
 to exercise that power. 
 
 The methods of existing political parties must be reformed or the parties themselves 
 must cease to'exist. 
 
 The old issues have become useless for good. 
 
 The questions on which parties were organized are now substantially settled. The war with 
 all its passions and resentments, must be put away with the past. The constitution, with 
 its amendments, is accepted as the supreme law, and this gives us a government sufficiently 
 strong. The public faith must be preserved, and to do this settles the questions of com¬ 
 mercial law. Prudence and economy, supplemented by good crops, have exposed recent 
 heresies on the subject of finance and commended resumption to the judgment of all. 
 
 Errors of administration yet exist. The civil service is clumsy and corrupt. Political 
 tricksters have become a governing class, and office-seeking has been reduced to a profes¬ 
 sion. The executive tenure must be reduced to a single term, either by law or by 
 practice, to the end that the scandals of patronage may cease. The tyranny of party must 
 be broken, and personal independence asserted. If a party nomination must continue to 
 be equivalent to an election, the nomination must have such safeguards as will secure a 
 proper selection. 
 
 Permit us to indulge our reverence and respect for the traditions of the past. You may 
 call it a superstition, if you will. It has grown with our growth, and strengthened with 
 our strength. To honor our fathers is a commandment of the Christian religion. So far 
 this superstition has given us liberty, civilization, progress,wealth, happiness, government^ 
 law. It has preserved to us the union of our fathers. We love it with all its recol¬ 
 lections, and we would perpetuate it as we knew it in the days of our infancy: 
 
 The union of lakes, the union of lands, 
 
 The union of states none can sever; 
 
 The union of hearts, the union of hands, 
 
 And the flag of our union forever. 
 
 The Chairman announcing that the convention was organized and ready for business, 
 
 Mr. F. W. Whitridge read from the platform the following, which he had been instructed 
 to present: 
 
 Independent Republican Headquarters. \ 
 Union Square, New York, May 8. / 
 
 The executive committee of Independent Republicans of New York State offer to the 
 convention at St. Louis hearty sympathy and co-operation in their opposition to the renom¬ 
 ination of Gen. Grant for a third term. We believe that Gen. Grant ought not to be nomi¬ 
 nated at Chicago, because his nomination would array against the Republican party the 
 overwhelming opposition to the violation of the unwritten law against a third term; be¬ 
 cause the record of his previous administration condemns his candidacy, and because, 
 under such management as is associated with his name, would be defeated.at the polls as 
 it would then deserve to be defeated. The party managers in this State who have hesitated 
 at nothing to make the State convention servile to their will, have falsely endeavored to 
 represent New York as a unit for Gen. Grant. The Republicans of New York are not a 
 unit for Gen. Grant. We believe a majority of them oppose his nomination. We believe 
 that in the event of his candidacy a Republican third candidate should be put in the field 
 unless the Democratic candidate should be one so commanding the confidence of the 
 country as to make this course questionable, and we shall heartily co-operate in well-con¬ 
 sidered plans to this end, especially should Uiey include vigorous efforts in unison with 
 the rest of the party for the election of a Republican majority in the House, that in the 
 event of the election of a Democratic executive he should be supported in measures of 
 sound finance and administrative reform but not in partisan measures. We believe that 
 no candidate should be nominated at Chicago who will in any way put the party on the 
 defensive, and we look to the result of the convention at St. Louis by protesting against one 
 threatened blunder to promote the nomination of a candidate who willfully represent polit¬ 
 ical morality and the avowed principles of the party and who ought to and will win. 
 Horace White, Felix Kaufman, George W. Green, 
 
 J. Schoeniiof, Dr. S. S. Grey, F. W. Whitridge, 
 
 H. S. Vanduzer. R. R. Bonner, W. A. White. 
 
10 
 
 Mr. E. R. Wood, of Philadelphia, also read as follows- 
 
 National Republican League, ) 
 Office of Executive Committee, 
 
 No. 913 Walnut street, Philadelphia. ) 
 
 To the St. Louis Anti-Third Term Convention: 
 
 The National Republican League of Pennsylvania, in sending a delegate to the St. Louis 
 Convention, desires to express its hearty concurrence in the objects of that body. 
 
 The motto of the League, “ No third term—A party without a master and a candidate 
 without a stain,” embodies the principles on which it is founded, and which it believes 
 will influence a sufficient number of Republicans to turn the scale in the pending election. 
 But to accomplish this will require organization, and the League hopes the convention 
 may not adjourn without providing means by which such‘an organization may be consti¬ 
 tuted, in case the action of the Chicago Convention be such as to give the party a candi¬ 
 date who cannot be supported by conscientious and thoughtful Republicans. 
 
 Believing that the abuse of patronage is the source of our political demoralization, the 
 League ventures to express the hope that the St. Louis Convention will earnestly demand 
 of the Republican party that it place civil service reform among its leading principles. 
 
 The League hails the assembling of the St. Louis Convention as a most encouraging 
 evidence that the people are at last becoming aroused by the multiplying evils of our politi¬ 
 cal condition, and are rapidly becoming prepared to adopt the only remedy—that of eman¬ 
 cipation from the blind partisanship which has rendered party organization the tool of 
 unscrupulous managers. 
 
 By order of the executive committee. 
 
 Wji. Rotch Wister, Chairman. 
 
 Hampton L. Carson, Secretary. 
 
 The Secretary, Col. Guilbert, read the following communications: 
 
 To the National Anti-Third Term Republican Convention at St. .Louis. 
 
 We the undersigned Republican voters of the State of Iowa, being strongly opposed 
 to a third presidential term by 7 any one, however distinguished, and anxiously desiring 
 escape from the now utterly needless alternative of support to a candidate for such service 
 or acquiescence in the infliction of a greater evil, respectfully express to your convention 
 our intensely earnest sympathy with its avowed purpose of preventing, if at all possible, 
 the threatened misfortune to the Republican party of a third-term nomination at Chicago. 
 We are thus in sympathy with you for these among other reasons: 
 
 1. We are convinced that, as a matter of principle, and as a measure of safety for the 
 future, the traditional law of the Republic of a two-term service only in the Presidency 7 by 
 the same citizen, should not be departed from. 
 
 2. Daily accumulating developments leave no room to doubt that the opposition to a 
 third-term, on the part of tried and true Republicans, is so widely extended and so deep- 
 seated, as to render a third-term nomination extremely if not fatally hazardous to Repub¬ 
 lican success next November. 
 
 3. Our knowledge of the views and feelings of a very large number of Republicans in 
 this State, convince us that even in radical and heretofore immovably Republican Iowa, the 
 proposed nomination of General Grant for a third-term, will very greatly endanger and prob¬ 
 ably defeat tile election of Republican candidate for Congress in the First, Second and 
 Third Districts in this State, if in none other. 
 
 4. While according to General Grant, as we gladly do, all possible honor in view of 
 his past service to the Nation in the field and at the Capital, and yielding to none in our 
 admiration for his many 7 excellencies of character, ability and patriotism, we cannot clpse 
 our eyes to the obvious fact, that very serious objections are urged against his candidature 
 for the Presidency, as a result of the numerous and grave mistakes and failures in civil 
 administration alleged or committed during his past terms of service in the executive chair. 
 These allegations are of such a character, and are so very strongly urged among and by 
 reliable and conscientious Republicans, as to render it certain that the nominatio’n of Gen. 
 Grant will entail upon the Republican party a campaign of explanation, apology and defense 
 at the precise juncture at which the blunders, reactionary efforts, treasonable designs and 
 actual crimes of the Democratic majority in Congress invite and urge the Republican party 
 to a campaign of defiant avowal, vigorous, aggressive and incessant attack. 
 
 5. We are confronted by the fact, too palpable to be ignored, and too serious in its 
 portents to be without great influence in determining our present utterance in behalf of 
 
11 
 
 the Republican party, that, should General Grant be nominated, while there are a large 
 number of Republicans who would vote for him with great reluctance, and with mental if not 
 expressed protest, there are many other Republicans, whose votes the party will greatly 
 need next November, who will consider the defeat of a third-term hominee a smaller evil 
 than his election. This fact exists. Hence, we urge especial attention to the danger it 
 threatens to Republican unity and success. It has force in view of the certainty that the 
 dissatisfied Republicans would find support thereto in such maxims as that of President 
 Hayes, that “ he serves his party best who serves his country well.” We greatly fear that 
 the number of Republican voters entertaining the views thus noted, is much larger than 
 has heretofore been supposed. We fear, indeed, that it is sufficiently large to defeat Gen. 
 Grant in some of the Northern States. At the same time we are firm in the belief that the 
 suggestion that Gen. Grant can carry so-me of the Southern States, is altogether illusory 
 and deceptive; for those States are hopelessly in the grasp, for the coming campaign, of a 
 political organization which will not permit an honest and free vote by the entire people, 
 and which would not allow a fair and true count of such a vote could it be cast. Because 
 of the fetters thus placed upon the Southern people by the criminal action of the Demo¬ 
 cratic party, we are and must be the more solicitous to secure a Republican nomination 
 which will not drive from its support the Northern voters upon which alone it must rely 
 for success. 
 
 Impelled thereto by these reasons, the undersigned, being unable as a result of busi¬ 
 ness and other engagements to attend your convention in person, thus present to you our 
 assurances of deep interest in the objects we understand you are desiring to accomplish. 
 As Republicans who are devoted to the grand old party, through whose agency the Repub¬ 
 lic has been saved from Treason, redeemed from slavery and placed on the highway of Pro¬ 
 gress and Wealth, and as citizens who deprecate above all else a control of this Nation by 
 the Democratic party—a consummation we would oppose to the utmost—we earnestly desire 
 that your convention will so wisely deliberate, and so unitedly and forcibly speak as that 
 the National Republican organization may be spared the mistake, and the American Nation 
 escape the disaster, of a third-term Presidential nomination at Chicago in June next. 
 
 April 26, 1880. Respectfully Yours, 
 
 Edward Russell, J. P. Stibolt, H. Lischer, J. W. Thompson, Geo. H. French, H. H. 
 Benson, H. H. Andressen, G. G. Carstens, R. Smitham, J. B. Fidlar, W. P. Speer, C. A. 
 Ficke, J. W. Green, S. F. Smith, Nat. French, H. R. Claussen, J. Scott Richman, Elias F. 
 Chapin, Geo. W. Ells, W. H. Wilson, W. F. Peck, John E. Henry, J. D. Campbell, M. J. 
 Rohlfs, and others, Davenport; G. B. Dennison, R. T. Thompson, F. R. Lewis, Geo. W. 
 Dillaway, R. M. Burnett, and many others, Muscatine. 
 
 To the Chairman of the National Republican Anti-Third-Term Convention: 
 
 The Republican State Convention of Wisconsin being held about the same time as your 
 convention at St. Louis, our citizens have given the former their particular attention, and 
 secured, as far as the city and county of Milwaukee is concerned, a unanimous Anti-Third- 
 Term delegation. To achieve this result, required the united efforts of all those in sym¬ 
 pathy with the Anti-Third-Term Movement, and for this reason the St. Louis convention 
 did not receive that attention which otherwise would have been given it. Appreciating 
 the importance, however, of giving expression to the voice of Wisconsin on this subject, 
 we, at this late hour, avail ourselves of this mode to express our heartiest sympathies with 
 the objects of your convention, and to convey to you the assurance of our heartiest 
 co-operation in your efforts to avert the threatening danger of a third term. Had time 
 permitted, this letter would have received the signatures of thousands of our fellow 
 citizens who earnestly desire the success of true Republican principles. 
 
 Milwaukee, May 5, 1880. 
 
 J H. Tesch, 
 
 H. M. Mendel, 
 
 Ed. Asherman, 
 
 R. H. Sabin, 
 
 G. Patek, 
 
 Ant Thormaeholkn, 
 
 Fred Dohenen, 
 
 Guido Pfister, 
 
 Wm. Frankfurth, 
 
 J. P. Philips, 
 
 C. W. Milbrath, 
 Clarence H. Young, 
 Aug. Frank, 
 
 Leo Roth, 
 
 L. Maschauer, 
 E. J. Lindsay, 
 T. F. Bechtel, 
 
 M. Roth, 
 
 Tul. Goll, 
 
 C. A .Meissner, 
 
 To the Independent Republican Convention at St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Gentlemen —The German-American Independent Republican Organization of New 
 York beg to confirm the opinions expressed in the enclosed address and to add further: 
 
12 
 
 They do not believe that the Chicago Republican Convention will seriously consider any 
 -address or resolutions.protesting against the nomination of General Grant, unless that 
 •convention becomes convinced that General Grant, if nominated, will be defeated. 
 
 They do not believe that such conviction can be imparted to that body, unless an Inde¬ 
 pendent Republican Convention will meet at Chicago previously to and at the time of the 
 Regular Republican Convention, fully prepared to uominate a third candidate, in case the 
 latter convention should nominate General Grant or any candidate whose honesty is not 
 beyond suspicion. 
 
 And they do believe that if such a third candidate is a well-known citizen of undoubted 
 ability and honesty, standing on the platform adopted by the Republican party in 1876, 
 that the greater part, if not the whole, of the Republican party vote may be concentrated 
 upon him so that he will be elected. Very respectfully, 
 
 H. Wesendon, President. 
 
 J. Sciioenhof, Secretary. 
 
 New Yoke, April 30, 1880. 
 
 Union Central Republican Club, of Hamilton Co., Ohio. 
 
 The members of the Central Union Republican club, of Hamilton county, Ohio, repre¬ 
 senting the mechanics of said county in assembly: 
 
 Resolved , That we regret to see a third-term presidential issue forced on the people of 
 this country, and this club announces its earnest adherence to the Republican principles 
 which limit the presidential services of any citizen to two terms, and which has been 
 wisely illustrated by the example of George Washington, requiring that the tenure of the 
 chief magistrate of the United States should not exceed a second term. 
 
 Resolved , That we are earnestly opposed to a third term for chief magistrate of the Uni¬ 
 ted States, and that in our opinion it will be detrimental to our Republican form of gov¬ 
 ernment. Thos. J. Chard, President, 
 
 Chas. Umberger, Corresponding Sec’y. 
 
 Madison, Wis., May 5, 1880. 
 
 To the Chairman of the National Republican Anti-Third-Term Convention, St. Louis: 
 
 The undersigned, delegates to the Republican state convention, most heartily sympa¬ 
 thize with the object of your gathering in common with thousands of Republicans in every 
 part of Wisconsin. We look upon a re-nomination of Gen. Grant as a calamity to the Re¬ 
 publican party, and we join in your efforts to prevent such a result. We are sincere in 
 the belief that a nomination of Gen. Grant would bring great disaster to the hitherto vic¬ 
 torious cause of Republicanism in our state. But for the fact that our state convention 
 is held about the same time of your convention, a fair representation from this state 
 -could have been expected; as it is, we have come to Madison in the same interest, believ¬ 
 ing that by so doing we can best serve the purpose we have in common with you in view. 
 
 (Signed.) 
 
 Lemuel Elsworth, John J. Senn, 
 
 Caspar M. Sanger, Milwaukee county. R. R. Kempter, Buffalo county. 
 
 Aug. Kickbush, K. I. Markstrum, Maranthon county, and 
 
 many others. 
 
 GERMAN REPUBLICANS. 
 
 Philadelphia, May 5. 
 
 To the President of the Anti-Third-Term Convention: 
 
 Believing with an overwhelming majority of the German-American Republicans of our 
 country that the movement of the machine to' force a third term for Gen. Grant, not be¬ 
 cause the country desires it, but because the machine demands it for its own purposes, we 
 add our most earnest protest against his nomination. The objections to a third term as a 
 dangerous precedent, and as contrary to the spirit of our institutions have often been so 
 ably and forcibly presented, and are so unanswerable, that no words of ours but those of 
 cordial endorsement can give them additional force. We would not in the least detract 
 from the eminent military services of Gen. Grant; he will ever be held in grateful memory 
 for them when we recall his lamentable failure as a civil administrator. The cry for a 
 strong military man in time of profound peace; the tacit admission that the Republican 
 party has but one man capable of being its standard-bearer, call for a determined protest 
 from all lovers of their country. We demand strong civil administration pledged to 
 honesty, economy and civil-service reform, and shall only support a candidate free from 
 
13 
 
 taint or suspicion and from corrupt associations. We assure you and all those who think 
 and act with you of our cordial co-operation. 
 
 Rudolph Blankenburg, 
 Oswald Seidensticker, 
 Joseph Kinke, 
 
 Executive Committee of Pennsylvania German-American Branch of the National Republi¬ 
 can League. 
 
 YOUNG REPUBLICANS, 
 
 Providence, R. I., May 3, 1880. 
 To the Convention to be held at St. Louis, May 6, 1880: 
 
 The Young Republican club desires to be represented in your convention as opposed to 
 the nomination of Ulysses S. Grant as candidate of the Republican party for President at 
 the next presidential election. We believe it to be extremely doubtful whether he could 
 receive the electoral vote of Rhode Island. 
 
 We are also strenuously opposed to the nomination of James G. Blaine. 
 
 At the last state election the bolters from the Republican party succeeded in depriving 
 the regular Republican nominee for governor of an election by the people. 
 
 Richard B. Comstock, John R. Gladding, 
 
 Benj. I. Wheeler, Wm. Sheafe Chase, 
 
 Frederick P. Read, 
 
 Executive Committee of the Young Republican Club of Rhode Island. 
 
 WILL NOT VOTE FOR GRANT. 
 
 North Manchester, Ind. 
 
 While adhering to the principles of the Republican party and earnestly desiring its 
 success at the polls in November, we protest against the nomination of any man who is 
 certain to lose the support of any important element of the party, and are therefore 
 heartily in sympathy with the purpose named in the call made by your committee for a 
 convention on the 6th inst. Out of a Republican vote of about two hundred in the town 
 of North Manchester, we, the undersigned, are outspoken in our opposition to the renomi¬ 
 nation of Gen. U. S. Grant for so many and such obvious reasons that we shall not under¬ 
 take to herein enumerate them. We each and all will refuse to vote for Gen. Grant, even 
 if he succeed in getting the Chicago nomination, and believe that many more Republicans 
 of our town, while not so outspoken as ourselves, will not vote for him if nominated; and 
 we believe that our town is not an exception, but a fair representative of the feeling in the 
 state of Indiana in regard to Gen. Grant’s candidacy. We hope that the convention to be 
 held at St. Louis on the 6th inst. will make provisions for a national convention of Liberal 
 Republicans to be held in case Gen. Grant secures the nomination at Chicago to place 
 candidates for president and vice-president in nomination to whom we can lend our 
 support. Regretting our inability to attend your convention in a body, we are respectfully 
 yours, Geo. W. Gunder, A. A. McKain, D. S. Miller, Thompson Arnold, A. Miller, James 
 N. Brady, G. W. Eichholtz, O. C. Rife, F. W. Green, A. W. Bowman, E. C. C. Olunant, 
 Henry Gunder, J. S. Andrews. 
 
 May 4, 1880. 
 
 COMMITTEE on resolutions. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock moved the appointment by the chair of a committee of thirteen to draft 
 resolutions, and that all resolutions touching the subject of platform be referred to that 
 committee. 
 
 The motion carried and the chair appointed the following as such committee: Henry 
 Hitchcock, St. Louis; Bluford Wilson, Illinois; R. A. Hill, Indiana; J. E. Scripps, Michi¬ 
 gan; J. W. Carter, Massachusetts; F. W. Whitridge, New York; L. H. Dembity, Ken¬ 
 tucky; E. R. Wood, Pennsylvania; R. E. Rombauer, St. Louis; W. W. Williams, Minne¬ 
 sota; B. B. Cahoon and Fred Muench of Missouri, and J. H. Welch of Florida. 
 
 The secretary read a resolution offered by E. W. Fox, declaring against the candidacy 
 of Gen. Grant and calling for a convention at Philadelphia, to place a third ticket in the 
 field in the event of Gen. Grant’s nomination at Chicago; also one offered by W. II. Jones 
 of Ohio. Both were referred to the committee on resolutions. 
 
14 
 
 oo^^Es^o^sriDEii^Ta^:. 
 
 Maj. Lucien Eaton then read a large number of letters received in answer to invi¬ 
 tations to take part in the convention. When his voice gave out he was relieved by Rev. 
 John Snyder. The correspondence was as follows: 
 
 FROM THURLOW WEED. 
 
 New York, April 18, 1880. 
 
 Gentlemen —I am in receipt of your invitation to attend Anti-Third-Term Repub¬ 
 lican Convention to be held at St. Louis on the 6th of May. Approving as I do most 
 cordially of the objects of your convention, I would gladly participate in its deliberations, 
 but the infirmities incident to old age render that impracticable. I must content myself, 
 therefore, with an earnest expression of hope that your patriotic efforts, combined with 
 the efforts of Republicans in other States, may rescue the government and country from 
 impending danger. The influences that will inforce Gen. Grant’s nomination, should 
 such a nomination be made, will insure his defeat. The premature call of our State 
 convention, coupled with the methods by means of which a muzzled delegation was 
 appointed, rendered the success of our ticket at least doubtful. If delegates thus chosen 
 here act with delegates from States sure to cast their electoral vote against Grant, his 
 defeat in this State becomes inevitable. Will our Republican friends in States “ solid ” 
 for Democracy, if seasonably admonished, deliberately involve themselves with us in a 
 common calamity? If Gen. Grant should be nominated, he will be indebted not to the 
 popular sentiment in Republican States, but to Senators Conkling, Cameron and Logan, 
 aided bv a “solid ” vote of delegates from States whose presidential electors will cast a 
 “ solid ” vote against their nominee. In this aspect of the question, I cling to the hope, 
 either that the three distinguished senators named will discover in season that they cannot 
 afford to be held responsible for the election of a Democratic president, or that the real 
 friends of Gen. Grant, when the glamour of ovations calculated to mislead him have 
 subsided, by revealing the whole and exact truth, induce the withdrawal of his name. 
 
 Respectfully, yours, Thurlow Weed. 
 
 FROM PRESIDENT WOOLSEY. 
 
 To Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary of the Anti-third Term Convention: 
 
 The “Father of his country” was urged to accept an election for a third-term, and 
 persistently refused, although there were weightier reasons for his making the opposite 
 decision than there have been at any time since he left the presidential chair. The course 
 which he took gave rise to one of the very few political habits of the United States, and it 
 is the only one.which relates to the conduct of candidates for the presidential chair. Are 
 there good reasons for adhering to this habit, or does it grow out of blind reverence for an 
 illustrious man, and nothing more ? I am so sure that it is founded on deep conviction in 
 regard to the highest policy of the country, that if it were to be broken through, I should 
 at once hope that attempts would be made to restrict the tenure of the president’s office 
 to a single term by a constitutional provision. 
 
 One great reason for clinging to the habit is, that, if it were given up, there would be 
 increased danger that the general government would fall into the hands of a faction within 
 a party. Government by party there must be, although the parties may agree in many of 
 their principles and much of their policy. But government by a clique will arise when 
 persons in official stations, with their subordinates distributed over a country, ipake it their 
 great aim to continue in office, and bind the chief magistrate to themselves by working for his 
 success. The life and purity of politics consist in breaking up such cliques after they have 
 had their brief day of success. A third-term president is' a clique’s new lease of office. 
 And this at length works its own cure; for it cools other political aspirants within the 
 same party, or provokes them to combine against the controling faction, and disgusts all 
 honest and right-thinking men. Thus while a third term would be advocated, as a con¬ 
 tinuance in power of the same party, it would probably be the deepest injury which a party 
 or its leaders could inflict on its permanence. 
 
15 
 
 But, again, if this habit were overthrown, a president himself might have hopes of a 
 new term, and might be in danger of making corrupt bargains with his friends and parti-4 
 sans. The increase in strength of personal motives necessarily weakens uprightness in 
 administration, and this, again, disaffects the better members of a party. A president who 
 obviously wants, or is wanted, by his friends to have the highest office for a third term, 
 goes into his office under renewed obligations to old friends, which are too strong for most 
 minds to feel and yet be perfectly honest in public administration. Thus, in a democratic 
 republic especially, great evils would attend elections to the highest office for the third 
 time. 
 
 I do not, indeed, see any great reason to apprehend that a third term would open the 
 way to a bold, bad man of seizing on the government as a tryant, and getting himself con¬ 
 firmed by a plebiscite. But I regard it as a link in the chain of corruption that we must 
 look as our chief source of public evil to a body of active, intriguing politicians on the one 
 hand, and to a mass of passive citizens on the other, who let political questions take their 
 course, if they only are not interfered with in their business and callings. 
 
 Theodore D. Woolsey. 
 
 FROM THE EDITOR OF THE SPRINGFIELD REPUBLICAN. 
 
 Springfield, Mass., April 6, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Secretary Anti-Third-Term Convention, St. Louis: 
 
 Dear Sir—I am in receipt of your letter and circular of the 2d, and beg to say that your 
 movement in opposition to the third term has my hearty support as a private citizen and 
 as a journalist. * * *. 
 
 The anti-third-term sentiment is very strong in this state and there can be little doubt 
 that we shall send anti-Grant delegates to the Chicago Convention. 
 
 Yours very truly, Samuel Bowles. 
 
 FROM MURAT HALSTEAD. 
 
 Ex-Senator Henderson : Cincinnati, May 5, 1880. 
 
 My Dear Sir — I think the convention will lose force if it does not confine itself 
 strictly to hostility to third-termism. Under the conditions of the country a vote for a 
 third term will be a vote to confer the presidency upon Gen. Grant for life, with an invi¬ 
 tation to him to drop the forms of election as soon as convenient, and an urgent 
 suggestion that he shall, whatever happens, declare himself elected and take the office, 
 which he is to magnify according to his will. 
 
 If the Republican party adopts this programme by the nomination of Grant it will 
 be a Grant party—nothing more. The highest office in the government one can hope to 
 attain after that is that of favorite. Assume that the powers arrayed for Grant succeed 
 we shall not, of course, have the forms of monarchy, but all the evils and none of the 
 good of that mode of government. Deadly hostilities to these tendencies and possibilities 
 is not necessarily personal to Grant; it is loyalty above, all considerations of individuals 
 and organizations to Republican principles. 
 
 The third-term issue is large enough. It should not be mixed with any smaller matters. 
 There should be no discrimination against any candidate with the exception of ex-presi- 
 dent, and we should draw the line on him that Washington and Jefferson drew on them¬ 
 selves. 
 
 If the Republican party emerges from Chicago the third-term party, war should be 
 declared upon it, and the object of this convention should be to make ready for that con¬ 
 tingency. There should be no other issue made or suggested. Many would perhaps be 
 pleased to pose as civil service reformers, but I do not believe in reform that in theory con 
 templates an official class, and in practice gives the political power of the States of Ne\i 
 York and Pennsylvania into the hands of enemies whose vanity it is to hold the admin 
 istration in contempt. 
 
 Massachusetts has set a bad example in coupling the name of Blaine with that 
 Grant. Let Blaine alone. He is doing brave work against the third-term treason, and 
 would be churlish not to give him credit for it. I suppose he is a sinner, but I would foi 
 give him his sins for this good work, and give him the glory of it. 
 
 M. Halstead. 
 
16 
 
 S. D. BINGHAM OF MICHIGAN. 
 
 ^tHon. J. B. Henderson : Lansing, Mich., May 4, 1S80. 
 
 Dear Sir— 
 
 ***** Michigan will do her whole duty by sending a delegation to Chicago 
 that will oppose the nomination of a third-term candidate, as unwise and dangerous to 
 success—for which we are all working. 
 
 I trust the action of your convention will be dignified and manly, and that the result 
 will be felt at Chicago. No attack should be made upon any candidate, and no threats of a 
 bolt in case the wishes of the conveution are not complied with. 
 
 I do not think Gen. Grant will be nominated. Yours truly, 
 
 S. D. Bingham. 
 
 BETTER CALL A HALT. 
 
 Paducah, Ivy., April 1, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir—I heartily approve the action proposed in the resolutions you enclose. I 
 shall do all in my power to promote the end desired by the organization of the anti-third 
 term movement. If Grant is to be the nominee of the Republican party, then it is time 
 that opposition to such folly should make itself felt. Even if elected, with the influences 
 which will inevitably surround Grant, the Republican party could not survive another of 
 his administrations. We had better call a halt now, before we are committed beyond re¬ 
 demption, 
 
 I fear I shall not be able to attend your convention, but I hope the line of conduct we 
 shall pursue, in the event Grant is nominated, will be unequivocally announced—not in 
 spirit of menace, but as the conclusion of our deliberate convictions. 
 
 The general impression here, among thinking Republicans, is, that if Grant is nomi¬ 
 nated he will be defeated, unless the Democrats nominate Tilden or commit some other 
 equally egregious blunder. The opposition here is stronger against Grant than against a 
 third term. Very Respectfully, 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary, etc., St. Louis, Mo. E. W. Bagby. 
 
 • FROM FRED HASSAUREK. 
 
 Cincinnati, May 1, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq.— Dear Sir: I am opposed to the nomination of Gen Grant or 
 any other presidential candidate for a third term. I do not even believe that a president 
 should be elected for a second term. No act or expression of President Hayes has met 
 with such general and unqualified approval as his announcement in the beginning, that 
 he would under no circumstances, be a candidate for re-election. The unanimity with 
 which the country has acquiesced in this his original pledge, in spite of his irreproachable 
 administration, clearly proves the people’s belief in the correctness of the principle upon 
 which his prospective refusal was based. I hope the day is not far distant, when this 
 general belief will take the shape of a constitutional amendment, extending the term of the 
 office of president and prohibiting the re-election of its incumbent. 
 
 It has become fashionable in some circles to sneer at the opposition to a third term as 
 a superstition. Under this superstition, however, our institutions have been strengthened 
 and preserved. With this superstition our country has become great and remained free. 
 If it be superstition to cherish a proper reverence for the teachings and the example of the 
 fathers of the republic, I can only say let this superstition be maintained. I am super¬ 
 stitious enough to believe that Gen. Washington was a greater man than Gen Grant. 
 
 My best wishes for the success of your convention, I have the honor to remain yours 
 very truly, F. Hassaurek. 
 
 ANY REPUBLICAN BETTER THAN GRANT 
 
 Wilmington, N. C., April 15, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir —The movement that you have inaugurated has my entire sympathy, and in 
 whatever way I can aid you will give me very great pleasure to do so. I am opposed t 
 the third term. I am in favor of any Republican in preference to Gen. Grant, not because 
 I am opposed to the individual, but I am against the policy of overriding the unwritten 
 law concerning the third term. * * * Very truly, yours, W. P. Cannday. 
 
17 
 
 FROM EX-SENATOR FENTON. 
 
 Jamestown, N. Y., Mav x, 1880. 
 My Dear Sir— ??? 
 
 * * * I approve of the object of the meeting as I understand it. I am opposed to 
 
 Gen. Grant’s nomination, both because of its third-term character and because, also, for 
 other reasons, I think it would put in peril our party success. * * * 
 
 Very respectfully yours, R. E. Fenton. 
 
 Hon. Jno. B. Henderson, St. Louis: 
 
 NOT FIT TO BE MADE. 
 
 Pensacola, Fla., April 1G, 1880. 
 
 Fred. T. Ledergerber, Secretary: 
 
 Dear Sir —The circular of your committee is at hand and meets a most hearty response 
 from myself and numerous others, who want the Republican party to exist in the future 
 as iu the past, the party of liberty. If, as is claimed by the third-termers, “ we need a 
 strong man,” liis name is not Gen. Grant. We had more outrages and lost more elections 
 in anyone year of his last four years’ “ reign ” than in all the other eleven years I have 
 resided here. All we require is an open field for truth, and that we now have, and are 
 sure of Florida under any other leader than Grant. I cannot and will not undertake to 
 canvass the state to make apologies for a nomination “not fit to be made.” We have 
 numerous capable statesmen upon whom we can call to fill the presidential chair. I leave 
 for a conference with leading members of the party this morning, and will advise you if 
 we can send a delegate to the convention. 
 
 We are a poor people and have long distances to travel in our own state, and the state 
 convention meeting in early May will absorb our available material for delegates. 
 
 The Grant bulldozers are moving earth and hell here to get an indorsement of their 
 candidate from the convention. We do not think they will succeed. 
 
 My advices from the East and North point toward the defeat of three terms. 
 
 Yours, S. C. Cobb. 
 
 NO REASON FOR A THIRD TERM. 
 
 * Austin, Texas, May 1, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary Executive Committee Anti-Third-Temi Party, S. Louis, 
 
 Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir —I am iu hearty sympathy with the objects of the convention. I am 
 unalterably opposed to a third term for any man, and I can see no reason why Gen. Grant 
 should be again elected president. I refused to support him for a second term and joined 
 with the Liberal Republicans in 1872 to secure his defeat, and if it had not been for the 
 treachery of the Democracy the nation would have been saved much of the disgrace 
 brought upon it by his administration. If two terms were sufficient for Washington, it 
 certainly should be for Grant. I 11 fact, I have always believed that the presidential term 
 of office should be extended to six years, and an amendment to the national constitution 
 should be adopted preventing any man from being elected to that office a second time. 
 
 But if there were no objection to a third term, I can see no reason why Gen. Grant 
 should be again elected to the office of president. His previous administration "was a by¬ 
 word and a reproach, and a very stink in the nostrils of honest men. He went into office 
 when the great Republican party was in the zenith of its power and glory. He left office when 
 he and his administration had brought that party to the very verge of defeat and disgrace. 
 The very men—the whiskey thieves and corruptionists — the machine politicians, who 
 brought disgrace and infamy upon his previous administrations, are now the ones who are 
 demanding and clamoring for his nomination again, that they may once more revel in their 
 rascalities. 
 
 I cast my first vote in 1854 in Pennsylvania for the last nominee of the old Whig party 
 in that state for governor, and for tw r enty-six years I have opposed the Democratic party, 
 but I earnestly feel that it would be better for the country and better for the Republican 
 party that Grant should be defeated if his nomination is forced on the party, than that we 
 should have success with him as our" candidate. Much as I would deplore the success of 
 the so-called Democratic party, and regret the defeat of the Republicans, I believe the 
 country and the Republican party could better stand four years of Democratic rule than it 
 
18 
 
 could another four years of Grant, and these I believe are the sentiments of very many of 
 the best and most intelligent Republicans in Texas. 
 
 1 trust the convention may be a great success, that its deliberations may be harmonious 
 and that it may be the means of averting the disastrous defeat of the Republican party, 
 that will surely follow the nomination of Gen. Grant as its candidate. Very truly yours. 
 
 W. Y. Leader, 
 Editor Daily Dispatch. 
 
 DON’T LIKE THE COMPANY. 
 
 Cambridge, Mass., April 17, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq.: 
 
 Dear Sir —I ought to say, in candor, that while I am decidedly opposed to the renom¬ 
 ination of Gen. Grant, I do not, individually, feel any objection to nominating any satis¬ 
 factory candidate for a third term. I do not share the sentiment on that point which is 
 felt by many wise and good men. The fact that it is felt so generally is, however, a strong 
 argument against the nomination of Gen. Grant. * * * 
 
 My objection to it arises mainly from the bad political company which the General 
 keeps. For him I have a great respect. With thanks for the invitation, I am 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 H. Thayer. 
 
 FROM REV. DR. BELLOWS. 
 
 282 East Fifteenth St., N. Y. ) 
 
 April 30, 1880. j 
 
 Dear Sir — I regret not to be able to share in person the meeting on the 6th of May, 
 but it costs little time or trouble to send my opinion, of little importance as it maybe, to an 
 assembly of brains and worth and patriotism, such as I am sure yours will be. 
 
 I am opposed from strong conviction to the third term of any man. The third 
 term means no limit to the occupation of the presidential chair, if the ambition of the pos¬ 
 sessor wishes to hold it, and the people consent, when they are strong to prevent, until 
 they are weakened by acquiescence and have lost the power to contend with the machine 
 which strengthens with uninterrupted possession of all the inummerable offices in the gift 
 of the administration. There is no radical means of preventing this, except the one-term 
 rule (make the term six years if you will), which President Hayes deserves the credit of 
 having voluntarily committed himself to, and of having honorably adhered to. This pur¬ 
 pose lias made him to the extent of his power a civil-service reformer, and all that is highly 
 creditable in his administration centers round his reform in the New York custom-house, 
 the old hub of the machine in New York. 
 
 And when the third term connects itself, as it does in the approaching election, with a 
 military man, whose name and fame are chiefly that of a soldier, I object with an added 
 alarm and a more resolute resistance. Every argument used in favor of Gen. Grant’s 
 election or nomination is with me an argument against it. 
 
 First—He put down the rebellion! 
 
 Is it to put down rebellions that presidents are to be chosen in peaceful times? Then, 
 alas, we surrender all our boast—of a country safe in its laws and its people’s love; in its 
 freedom and its preference for its own constitution! Are we ready to confess that we 
 have sunk into the condition of a Mexican or South American province and rely on our 
 arms for our ordinary safety? 
 
 It is dangerous to say as much as that General Grant put down the rebellion. The 
 people put it down under a president that selected a competent general to do the people’s 
 will. 
 
 Now, you wish to have the president and the general in the same skin. It was a 
 mistake to make Gen. Grant president once; it was a folly to make him president twice; 
 it will be a madness, if not a crime, to make him president for a third term. Heaven 
 knows we want no voting by platoons! The machinery and the necessities of war are the 
 precise reverse of all the virtues and habits required in peace. To obliterate individuality 
 is the very object of the uniform; to restore it and maintain it, of the citizen’s coat, of ail 
 colors and shades. Epaulets in the presidential chair are an anomaly and mean spurs in 
 
the saddle, where the people are ridden. Third-term presidents tend to become princes 
 and are tyrants in the making. 
 
 It is not, however, the ambition of Gen. Grant or any other soldier that is to be most 
 dreaded; it is the madness and stupidness of the people led by party fuglemen, who mis¬ 
 take an available for a desirable or a safe candidate. 
 
 Second—The chief argument for Grant’s nomination is that he can be elected! If 
 that is his best claim it is one dangerous to encourage. I object to putting forward this 
 claim so unblushingly. It means that the people of the United States have resigned the 
 hope or expectation of putting the man they choose and are obliged to have the man that 
 circumstances render eligible. This is a confession of failure in our Republican principled 
 which it is mortifying to accept and which we repudiate. Respectfully yours, 
 
 Henry W. Bellows. 
 
 JOHN T. RUNYAN, N. J. 
 
 Keyport, April 6 , 18 S 0 . 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Secretary : 
 
 Dear Sir —New Jersey is opposed to the third-term business. I have been se¬ 
 lected by the Republicans of this township to represent them at the state convention, 
 which meets in Trenton, May 6 , and would say that we passed resolutions opposing the 
 third term. * * * Yours, &c. John T. Runyan. 
 
 WHAT CARL SCHURZ SAYS. 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 Dear Mr. Henderson :—You need not fear that I shall remain silent and inactive 
 when the real tug of war comes, if it does come. As to my post of duty under such cir¬ 
 cumstances, my mind is fully made up. * * * Carl Schurz. 
 
 JAMES FREEMAN CLARKE. 
 
 Jamaica Plain, Mass., May 2, 1880. 
 
 My Dear Sir —* * * If the Republican party is so mad as to nominate Grant, after all 
 their experience of his past administration, I shall see nothing before them but defeat 
 and disaster. They will then, to please the machine, throw away an almost certain pros¬ 
 pect of victory under any good man. Is it not paying rather heavily in order to please 
 Conkling and Cameron? Yours very truly, James Freeman Clarke. 
 
 Hon. John B. Henderson, St. Louis. 
 
 BRIEF DISPATCHES. 
 
 Washington, D. C., May 5 , 1880 . 
 
 To Hon. John B. Henderson, St. Louis: 
 
 Public duty keeps me here. My belief is that no citizen, whatever his public service 
 and however much he may be endeared to our people by reason of his great and noble 
 qualities as a soldier or statesman, can or ought to be elected a third time president of 
 this republic. The experiment will be disastrous to the party and particularly to the 
 candidate that thus attempts to brave public opinion. * * Ben. Butterworth. 
 
 WM. R. MOORE, MEMPHIS. 
 
 Memphis, Tenn., April 12, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Secretary, &c., St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir — I am not engaged in politics, but feel, nevertheless, as a private citizen and 
 business man, a very deep interest in the question at issue. Born, reared, and always 
 identified in interest and by family ties, with the Southern section of our common country, 
 I have,notwithstanding, ever voted the Republican ticket in opposition to all my rela¬ 
 tives, neighbors, &c., and done, in addition, all that I could, to preserve intact the rich 
 heritage bequeathed to us in the, to me, sacred Union, handed down to us by the “ Fa¬ 
 thers of the Republic. ” I voted for Lincoln, Grant and Hayes, and yield to no one now 
 in loyalty and gratitude to Gen. Grant for the great services he has rendered to his and 
 my country. But with all this I feel that I in no way detract from his grand character by 
 now declining to place him in a position which would, I feel, do great violence as well to 
 
20 
 
 \ 
 
 my own sense of patriotism as the sacred cause which he has so nobly served, and which 
 can be preserved, I think, by an adherence to the landmarks of our history, as laid down 
 by Washington and Jefferson and Jackson, and the many others to whom we have been 
 taught to look for safe political guidance. I deem it of the first importance that we 
 should select a candidate whose political acts in the past will not in the coming campaign 
 place us on the defensive. We have several able Republicans talked of for the presiden¬ 
 cy whose records, in case of a nomination, will require constant explanations and defence. 
 Let’s avoid them and take one whose past course defends itself. 
 
 Very respectfully, Wm. R. Moore. 
 
 Madison, Wis., May 5 , 1880 . 
 
 To Emory S. Foster, Secretary Anti-Third-Term Convention, St. Louis: 
 
 Republican convention declared against third-term by electing nineteen anti-Grant 
 men to one in his favor. W. W. Coleman, Daily and Weekly Herald. 
 
 WILL REFUSE TO VOTE. 
 
 Philadelphia, April 12 , 1880 . 
 
 Gentlemes —I heartily approve of the contents of your circular and sincerely hope 
 your convention of May 6 may meet with the success which it deserves. In my opinion 
 the Republicans of Pennsylvania are decidedly opposed to the nomination of Gen. Grant 
 again, and if the leaders of the party should, by force, be able to make him the nominee, 
 a very respectable proportion of the usual followers will remain away from the polls. * * * 
 
 Very truly yours, Sam’l" W. Pennypacker. 
 
 • 
 
 LEMON THOMPSON, ALBANY. 
 
 New York, Apr. 30. 
 
 Fred. T. Ledergerber, Esq.: 
 
 ************1 fully sympathize with 
 the object of the meeting as set forth in the call dated St. Louis,March 25 , 1880 . I sincere¬ 
 ly feel that such a meeting is highly necessary and proper. I should be very glad to take 
 part in it; I should feel that I was discharging a patriotic duty. The renomination of 
 Gen. Grant would be a great calamity, both to the country and the Republican party. 
 I could not consent to support him, and there are tens of thousands of other Republicans 
 who would feel and act the same. Gen. Grant’s nomination is being planned and urged 
 by a class of dishonest and corrupt machine politicians who do not represent the people 
 or the party, and Gen. Grant has put himself in the hands of these men, who, by appeal¬ 
 ing to his ambition and love of power, are leading him blindly to his own and his country’s 
 destruction. If the Republican convention should nominate Gen. Grant and the Demo¬ 
 cratic convention should nominate Samuel J. Tilden I could not support either of them; 
 I would be in favor in such a case of nominating a third man. I know of no man who 
 would awaken more enthusiasm and satisfy the best element of both parties better than 
 Benj. A. Bristow of Kentucky. I hope that the St. Louis convention will make provisions 
 for such a contingency. 
 
 Very truly yours, Lemon Thompson. 
 
 W. W. WILLIAMS, MINNESOTA. 
 
 Albert Lea, Minn., April 26 , 1880 . 
 
 Maj. E. S. Foster: 
 
 Sir— Yours of the 22d received. I intend to lie with you on the 6th if I can possibly do 
 so. My heart is in the work and I want to see it succeed. We are getting up a local organ¬ 
 ization here; it numbers 123 after one day’s canvass, all Republicans and many of them Scan¬ 
 dinavians, almost all of whom say they will not vote for Grant if he be nominated. I am in 
 the fight, and propose to neither give nor take quarter, but to fight it out on this line, and 
 I much prefer defeat with a good candidate than success with a bad one. 
 
 Yours truly, W. W. Williams. 
 
 FROM GEORGE WILLIAM CURTIS. 
 
 The following dispatch from George William Curtis, Esq., dated at New Brighton, 
 Staten Island, was received by the executive committee on the 4th inst.: 
 
21 
 
 “ 1 am unable to come to St. Louis, but I sympathize with all Republicans who under 
 present circumstances oppose a third-term nomination. I see no good reason in the con¬ 
 dition of public affairs for endangering the success of the Republican party by committing 
 it unnecessarily to the overthrow of a sound and conservative tradition of the government, 
 which has been formally accepted by the party in many States, and which has never been 
 questioned or violated. Geoiige William Curtis.” 
 
 AGAINST GRANT ON ANY TERMS. 
 
 Cambridge, Mass., April 25, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., or F. T. Ledergerber, Secretary Anti-Third-Term Convention: 
 
 Dear Sir —I regret that I cannot attend the anti-third-term convention at St. Louis. 
 As I have once before written on another occasion, I am so opposed to a third term, that 
 I should oppose it even if Washington or Lincoln were the candidate, and so opposed to 
 the renomination of Gen. Grant that I should object to it even were the third-term question 
 not involved. Very truly yours, 
 
 Thos. Wentworth Higginson. 
 FROM A FRIEND OF GRANT. 
 
 New York, April 26 . 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq., Chairman: 
 
 Dear Sir —* * * I have long been a friend of Gen. Grant, and am so still. I joined the late 
 A. T. Stewart and others of this city in the first request to the general to allow his name 
 to be presented as a candidate for the presidency. Now I am ready to join in a request 
 that he shall do himself the great honor to be the first to refuse the office of President, 
 and thus set at rest the hearts of his Republican friends. 
 
 Yours most respectfully, 
 
 Wm. H. Webb. 
 
 FOR A STRONG DECLARATION. 
 
 Philadelphia, April 17, 1880. 
 
 Fred. T. Ledergerber, Esq., S. W. corner, Fifth and Olive streets, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir— * * * I hope there maybe issued such a strong, clear, manly, temperate declara¬ 
 tion of principles as will cause those inconsiderate advocates of the third term to pause 
 ere they attempt to force upon the country such an evil as would most assuredly ensue 
 upon the renomination of Gen. Grant. He lias done the country much service, and he 
 has been honored thereby; let him not press it, and himself, into serious trouble by a 
 vaulting ambition. Very respectfully, 
 
 Natii. E. Janney. 
 
 HOPES FOR SUCCESS. 
 
 Hillsboro, III., May 3, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq.: 
 
 Dear Sir — * * * It was my good fortune to be present at Jackson, Michi¬ 
 
 gan, July 0, 1854, when the Republican party was named, and have been a stalwart ever 
 since. I belong to the somewhat numerous class of Republicans who have a decided 
 prejudice against a third term. In the event of Gen. Grant’s nomination, we shall have 
 to face the following dilemma: 
 
 (1) We can help elect Gen. Grant, for whom we have a high respect and admiration, but 
 in doing so we must discard a wholesome precedent which we deem of much value; or, (2) 
 we can help defeat Gen. Grant. This would put a final extinguisher on third-term ism, 
 but it would involve the serious effect of turning the government over to the control of a 
 party we profoundly distrust. 
 
 Let us see whether there is any escape from these alternatives. I think there is a grow¬ 
 ing recognition of the fact that we have the best and purest government, when the three 
 powers, president, senate and house, are not all in the hands of one party. If the senate 
 were chiefly Republican, I think we might extinguish third-termism at the cost of a Demo¬ 
 cratic president, and deem it a good bargain. We of the ranks care little who divide the 
 spoils. 
 
 But, unfortunately, the senate is not Republican. What the next house of representa¬ 
 tives will be cannot be known till after the presidential election. But the defeat of a third- 
 
term president is quite consistent with the choice of a Republican house. It might even 
 be made in some small degree to promote that result—for many Democrats, as well as Re¬ 
 publicans, confess the ill effects of intrusting all the powers to one party. Between third- 
 termism and complete Democratic rule I should submit, with an ill-grace, to a third-term. 
 But with a reasonable assurance of a Republican house, I incline to the other horn of 
 the dilemma. 
 
 With the highest esteem for Gen. Grant, who has twice had my suffrage, I am just now 
 half angry with him for not perceiving that the new honor which the nation seems ready 
 to lay at his feet is offered at a cost which the nation can ill afford. Apart from personal 
 and temporary aspects, it must be as plain to him, as to say, that the traditional limita¬ 
 tion on the tenure of the office forms a safe and wholesome rule; and that the nation 
 would be the poorer for the sacrifice of a prescription which it lias taken a century to 
 establish. If there existed an emergency which he alone could adequately fdl, the case 
 would be different. 
 
 The suggestion of Csesarism as connected with Gen. Grant is too absurd for discussion. 
 Yet it is plain that if, in the near or distant future, ambitious Caesarism should confront 
 us in earnest, it might be a matter of vital moment whether the traditional policy of the 
 nation’s first century had been confirmed or reversed. 
 
 Edmund Fish. 
 
 O. H. BROWNING, QUINCY, ILL. 
 
 Quincy, III., April 26 , 1880 . 
 
 Dear Sir —Although having no party affiliations, I am not indifferent to the course of 
 political events, and never fail to exercise the high privilege and to discharge the impera¬ 
 tive duty of voting, not for partisans, but for those I may believe the most worthy and best 
 fitted for the duties of the positions to which they may be elevated. 
 
 Noav, if the Republicans shall nominate Gen. Grant and the Democrats Mr. Tilden I 
 cannot conscientiously support either of them, and there are many others in the same 
 dilemma with myself. 
 
 What I wish to know, therefore, is, whether in tliecontingency above supposed, it is 
 the purpose of the St. Louis Convention to furnish a candidate who can be heartily sup¬ 
 ported by those who are more anxious to promote the interests of the country, than to up¬ 
 hold an administration in the interest merely of party spoilsmen and rings. 
 
 Yaurs truly, O. II. Browning. 
 
 Hon. Jxo. B. Henderson, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 HON. JOHN BRINDLEY, WISCONSIN. 
 
 Boscobel, Wis. April 29, 1880. 
 
 The resolutions received express my sentiments exactly, and nearly all the Republi¬ 
 cans in this part of our state would gladly say the same to you. * * * 
 
 Yours truly, John Brindley, 
 
 Member Wisconsin State Legislature. 
 
 UNALTERABLY FIXED 
 
 Cromwell, Conn., April 29, 1880. 
 
 F. T. Ledergerber, Esq., St. Louis: 
 
 Dear Sir —Your note of invitation to the St. Louis conference next month is at 
 hand. 
 
 It would give me great pleasure to be present and to give my voice, vote and influence 
 against the third-term project. 
 
 I am unalterably fixed in my opposition. I shall under no circumstances vote for 
 Grant. My opposition is not so much due to the fact that it would be his third term, as 
 to my conviction of his unfitness for the office. His election means a return to the corrupt 
 pi'actices of his last administration. It means a control of the Government patronage 
 by a senatorial ring composed of Cameron, Carpenter, Conkling, Logan, etc. It means 
 a “kitchen ” and “ horse jockey ” cabinet. It means a reaction from the clean, upright 
 administration of Hayes. 
 
 Wishing your movement success, I am sincerely yours. 
 
 M. S. Dudley. 
 
23 
 
 FROM GRANT’S NATIVE COUNTY. 
 
 Bethel, O., April 19 , 1880. 
 
 Anti-Third-Term League, St. Louis: 
 
 Gents —In response to your call let me say to you that this (Clermont) is Grant’s 
 native county, and that this village was for many years the home of the Grant family, and 
 the General has many relatives now living here. We regard Gen. Grant as Clermont’s 
 most distinguished son. We are very proud of him. We say he is the greatest man of 
 the age. We think Grant too wise to accept a nomination at Chicago for a third term, 
 when defeat is certain. This “ boom ” may prove to be a boomerang and return to injure 
 the boomers. I will say that if you should take the Republicans of this county you would 
 not find five per cent, of the party favorable to a third-term candidate. I don’t think that 
 there is more than five per cent, of the Democrats in this county who would favor the 
 nomination of Mr. Tilden. The partisan mills are grinding away for Grant and Tilden, 
 and things look ominous to us, the common citizens, for the nomination of Gen. Grant 
 at Chicago and Samuel Tilden at Cincinnati. I should like to come to your convention, 
 but business will most likely keep me away. 
 
 I have been a Republican since the organization of the party, and I do not wish to 
 see the party have a Waterloo defeat, such as we surely will have if we undertake to carry 
 this third-term nonsense. 
 
 We have thousands of good men for the office, and should not be compelled to vote 
 for Gen. Grant because the political bummers force the measure. I hope wise counsels 
 will prevail, etc. Yours truly, J. M. Goodwin. 
 
 THE EFFECTS APPARENT. 
 
 Boston, April 17, 1880. 
 
 F. T. Ledergerber, Esq.: 
 
 My Dear Sir —Tlie published call which accompanies your invitation is in accordance 
 with the views of three-fourths, at least, of the Republicans in Massachusetts. Those 
 who head the Grant movement here have lost the respect and confidence of the people. 
 Most of them have held office under Grant, and every one of them expects to gain some 
 personal advantage by Grant’s re-election. Already the good effects of your protest 
 against the movement are beginning to be seen in the passage of condemnatory resolutions 
 in the local caucuses all over the country. If the delegates to Chicago were not to be 
 elected until September, I doubt if Grant would get a single one of the leading Republican 
 states. Very truly yours, 
 
 Jas. M. Bugbee. 
 
 ON WHAT SUCCESS DEPENDS. 
 
 Cambridge, Mass., April 28, 1880. 
 
 Fred. T. Ledergerber, Secretary: 
 
 Dear Sir —I am heartily in sympathy with the object of the convention. I trust that 
 the deliberations of the convention will result in resolutions of no uncertain sound, and 
 in action that shall prevent the nomination of Gen. Grant at Chicago, by proving that his 
 nomination would be likely to lead to the defeat of the Republican party in November. 
 
 The very large body of Republicans who are opposed to Gen. Grant’s nomination upon 
 principles which will not allow them to vote for him if nominated, cannot be safely counted 
 out of the party. * * * 
 
 The Independents will hold the balance of power, and the success of the Republican 
 party in November is dependent 011 the selection of a candidate at Chicago for whom they 
 will be ready to labor and to vote. 
 
 Trusting that the best results may follow from the action of your convention, 
 
 I am with high respect, very truly yours, 
 
 Charles Eliot Norton. 
 
 Wilmington, Del., May 6, 1S80. 
 To Chairman National Republican Convention, St. Louis: 
 
 Patriotic devotion to great principles disregarding ephemeral issues will, I believe, 
 command approval of twenty thousand New York Republicans. 
 
 Henry Randall Waite. 
 
A NEW ISSUE. 
 
 Burlington, Iowa, April 2tf, 1880. 
 
 Mr. E. T. Lederoerber, Secretary Committee of Convention, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir—T he putting forward as a candidate for President of the United States of one 
 who has filled that office for two terms creates a new issue, and must embarrass and 
 weaken, and perchance utterly disintegrate, the Republican party organization. Does it 
 mark a political degeneracy in the Republican ranks? 
 
 1 trust your efforts, and those of other citizens, to resist it will be vigorous, determined 
 and successful. Should the convention at Chicago be betrayed into such a step, it must 
 lead to new political combinations that will be directed, I think, by wisdom, ability and 
 virtue that will provide new guards for our future security and respect the old landmarks 
 of American society. Your obedient servant, 
 
 Wm. Slater. 
 
 COL. SAMUEL M. QUINCY, BOSTON. 
 
 16 Court Street, t 
 Boston, April 28 , 1880 . ) 
 
 H enry Hitchcock, Esq., Chairman Anti-Third-Term Committee: 
 
 Dear Sir —I share to the fullest extent the convictions and sympathize in the pur¬ 
 poses, as I understand them, of those by whom the convention has been called. 
 
 Six years of army service, embracing the whole of the late war, have left in my mind 
 the profoundest admiration for Gen. Grant as a military leader, and were I called on once 
 more to follow the drum in my country’s cause there is certainly no living captain upon 
 the planet to whom I should look up with more absolute confidence. Moreover, none 
 will admit more willingly than I that by the Republican dignity, simplicity and modesty 
 of his demeanor, under a shower of European honors, our ex-president has added new 
 lustre to the character of the American citizen. For all that, I should regard his nomi¬ 
 nation for a third term by the Chicago convention, as one of the most fatal steps which 
 could be taken, whether viewed from the narrow stand-point of party success or in the 
 broad and paramount interests of our country and form of government. 
 
 It is the fact—lamentable enough, but it is the fact that to the corrupt methods and 
 practices, to the peculiarly objectionable regime generally of a knot of politicians surround¬ 
 ing and in power under our last president, there has been applied the name of “Grantism.” 
 And this label will not wash off, however we may scrub. It may well be that the great 
 man ought not to be held accountable for a tithe even of thf* evil which has been thus 
 unfortunately stamped with his image and superscription, but the fact remains that it is 
 so stamped—a fact which must throw the party who shall select this candidate into the 
 weakest possible attitude in which to open a campaign—that of exculpation and defence. 
 
 The senseless cry for a “strong man,” i . e ., a candidate who, if elected, may be 
 relied on to assume the reins of government, peaceably if he can, but forcibly if he must, 
 strikes me as the most utter piece of self-stultification ever indulged in by pretended 
 believers in our people’s capacity for self-government. It is not so very long since a knot 
 of conspirators surrounding the president of a European republic thus decided upon the 
 necessity of a strong man to save the nation—and the next day the Paris boulevards ran 
 blood, and the adventurer waded through slaughter to a throne. Now, although we know 
 Gen. Grant to be just as incapable of attempting to play such a role as was George 
 Washington, yet such is the logical denouement at which we shall sooner or later arrive, 
 if we now begin by admitting that we must elect a fighter in order to inaugurate him. 
 
 And whenever this despairing cry for a strong man shall have echoed across the 
 Atlantic what music will it not be to the ears of those who, at the breaking out of the 
 rebellion, made such exultant haste to announce that “ the bubble of the great republic 
 has burst.” The long predicted, hoped and prayed for collapse of that people’s govern¬ 
 ment whose success shakes every throne will be hailed as imminent. In the name of 
 whatever republican manliness we ought to have inherited from our ancestors, let us not 
 give this aid and comfort to our enemies. Rather let us show the world our firm con¬ 
 viction and our perfect confidence that the government established by our fathers—the 
 government of the people, by the people find for the people, may yet be trusted to stand 
 alone without the assistance of third terms, “ strong men,” standing armies or bayonets. 
 
 Respectfully, vour obedient servant, 
 
 Samuel M. Quincy, 
 
 Late Colonel U. S. Colored Troops and B. B. G. Vols. 
 
25 
 
 FROM MAJOR GEORGE B. HALSTED, OF MINNESOTA. 
 
 Excelsior, Minn., April 23, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq. : 
 
 You are at liberty to use my name in any way you may think advisable or beneficial for the 
 patriotic object you have in view — defeating the third-termer, Grant. 
 
 I was in Minneapolis and St. Paul recently, and was much gratified at finding many Repub¬ 
 licans in sympathy with your movements. The claim is made often that Grant has all his old 
 soldiers with him. This is not true in fact. I want to be present at our county convention, 
 which may prevent my being at St. Louis. 
 
 If I am not on hand I shall be glad to be represented by any gentleman agreeing with us, 
 whom you may select. Respectfully, 
 
 George B. IIalsted. 
 
 Owensburg, Ky., April 22, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary N. R. Anti-Third-Term, etc., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Dear Sir : — Permit me to say that I am most heartily in accord with the objects of your 
 association, and have done, and shall continue to do, all in my power to prevent the nomination 
 of any man for a third time for the Presidency of the United States. The opposition to the 
 Third-Term movement in this State, although not so strong nor so well organized as it might 
 have been, was not altogether in vain. * * * The feeling here against a third term is very 
 
 strong, and, in case of Grant’s nomination, will tend to paralyze the Republican party in 
 Kentucky. I can not tell how many will attend your Convention from this State, but trust that 
 it will be well represented. Trusting that the country will be spared another term of fraud 
 and favoritism, as was Grant’s second term, I am, 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 J. W. Feighan. 
 
 FROM ETHAN ALLEN. 
 
 New Y t ork, April 30. 
 
 Hon. J. B. Henderson: 
 
 Dear Sir — My early departure for Europe will prevent me from attending your convention 
 next week to oppose the wickedness of Grantism. I am with you heart and head, and expect to 
 return from Europe in August to publicly oppose Grant’s election if, unfortunately, our party 
 must submit to the curse of his nomination, which God forbid! I strongly urge a resolution, 
 not only against a nomination for a third term, but that we will oppose his election. There can 
 be no principle in the matter short of resisting his election. Let the key-note be opposition to 
 Grant and support of any other man named at Chicago. Believe me, 
 
 Yours truly, Ethan Allen. 
 
 New York, May 3, 1880. 
 
 IIon. J. B. Henderson, Convention of National Republicans: 
 
 My Dear Sir — I very much regret that I have not been able to join 3 -ou and our other 
 friends at St. Louis, in their efforts to scotch and kill the political heresy of a third-term, which 
 is the latest treason against our common country. I am very glad in the reflection that I was of 
 those who, eight years ago, under the name of “Liberal Republicans,” inaugurated the opposi¬ 
 tion to that man who, through his friends, and as I believe by his own personal manipulations, 
 now seeks for the third time to be President of the United States; an act which Washington 
 condemned by his example, which Jefferson denounced by special reference, and of which 
 Andrew Jackson would have said “By the Eternal, the man who dares to propose such an in¬ 
 sult to me, deserves to be hung as an accursed traitor.” Fortunately for the people, the 
 schemes of the conspirators, in this first step towards Empire, are well understood, and can be 
 thwarted by bold and honest opposition. Three men, one in each of the great States of New 
 YY>rk, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, placed in power by Grant, through the agency of public 
 patronage, before he retired from the presidency, and undisturbed since in their possessions bj r 
 Grant’s successor, propose to dictate to the Republican party. The issue is thus at once clearlv 
 presented and sharply defined. Can such a triumvirate conquer? If so, then the glories of this 
 great Republic have culminated, and the end is not far off. We are fighting desperate men, and 
 if we win at all, it can only be by the boldest methods. We can not afford to speak with bated 
 breath, nor scheme in the dark with any indirection, in the vain hope that the common enemy 
 will be turned from his purpose by the force of moral suasion. If on principle we are honestly 
 opposed to a third, term , then we are opposed to the election as well as the nomination. I have 
 
26 
 
 j 
 
 but little faith in those “clubs” and “organizations ” that stop at a declaration against a third 
 term. The only opposition that “bites ” is that which refuses a vote to Grant even if named at 
 Chicago. I fail to understand the logic of those who say that it is wrong to nominate Grant, 
 and yet that it is right to elect him if nominated. If, on principle, we are opposed to a third 
 term, then it is the election which of necessity we must resist as being the “ substance ” of the 
 controversy. Those so-called “Independent Republicans ” are but “sham reformers,” who, 
 proclaiming loudly their opposition to Grant, yet lay upon the table all resolutions formulating 
 their professions. As for myself, I never yet have voted a Democratic ticket, nor would I now 
 vote for Tilden, but would rather note vote at all, if he or Grant be the only alternatives; but 
 if Grant be forced upon the Republican party (and failing to nominate a third ticket, for which 
 I should strive), and assuming that the democracy nominate any respectable citizen other than 
 Tilden, I shall deem it to be my duty to prefer country to party, and avoid the greater evil of a 
 third term by openly supporting the Democratic nominee. If your convention will boldly place 
 itself upon this ground, there will be no misunderstanding your position and intentions, after 
 you shall have dispersed to your homes; and such decisive utterance will carry consternation 
 to the camp of the enemy and surely work his defeat. 
 
 Apart from the political crime of placing any man for a third time in the Presidential 
 chair, Grant upon his own-merits should be cast out, as unworthy of the place. The deficiencies 
 of his former administrations can not be concealed. Have we forgotten that it was under Grant 
 that the “Kuklux ” murders were inaugurated in the South? It was under him that the Repub¬ 
 licans lost nearly eveiy State in the Union; it was he who left Washington City, with the de¬ 
 mocracy controlling Congress, for the first time in twenty years; it was under him that we had 
 the “ whisky ” rings, the “ Shepard’, rings, and the “ Belknap,” and “Babcock,” and “Robe¬ 
 son” scandals, and other infamies too numerous to mention. Have we forgotten how every 
 association of honorable men throughout the nation felt bound to demand a reform of the 
 abuses of Grant’s administration? The “ Union League Club ” of this city, during the cam¬ 
 paign of 1876, declared in a printed report which is now before me, that it favored (as a suc¬ 
 cessor to Gen. Grant), “For a presidential candidate, one who has no connection, direct or 
 indirect, with the errors and abuses which have brought reproach upon the country and the 
 dominant party.” One could quote volumes such as this from every State, and of this date. 
 Have we forgotten that Grant’s administration was so full of blackness, that it served as a back¬ 
 ground, to show forth a presidential candidate, whose chief merit was that he had boldly fought 
 its accumulated iniquities? Mr. Benjamin H. Bristow was brought up almostto the presidential 
 line (and would to God that he had crossed it), mainly because he stood out as the most prom¬ 
 inent among tho&e who had attempted to repress, redress, and reform the foulness of Grant’s 
 last term in office. Now we may well ask, what virtue has so suddenly come into Grant, that 
 he should be returned to resume the work in which he so conspicuously failed, and from which 
 he retired four years ago to the great relief of all patriotic citizens? 
 
 There are many giants from whom the Republican party can choose a leader, whose nomina¬ 
 tion will be of itself the assurance of victory. * * * 
 
 I have the honor to remain, yours very truly, 
 
 Ethan Allen. 
 
 Boston, April 11, 1880. 
 
 My Dear Gen. Henderson — ‘I received the copy of the Republican containing your anti- 
 third-term speech, every word of which I read, and every word of which I approve. I have 
 been watching your course with great interest, and I write now not onty to thank you for your 
 speech, but to wish your convention entire success. * * * 
 
 Sincere^ and faithfully yours, 
 
 J. H. Wilson. 
 
 FROM THE STATE TREASURER OF WISCONSIN. 
 
 Madison, Wisconsin, April 22, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., St. Louis : 
 
 Dear Sir — The Grant movement is daily losing ground in Wisconsin. Even many who 
 heretofore were strongly for Grant, admit now that it would be bad policy for the future success 
 of the Rebublican party to force Grant on the convention at Chicago. * * * The majority 
 of Wisconsin Republicans are opposed to Grant. 
 
 Respectfully Yours, 
 
 Richard Guenther. 
 
27 
 
 Fairmont, West Virginia, May 3, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir — I wish I could be witli you on the 6th instant at St. Louis, to join my fellow- 
 citizens in their protest against the nomination of a candidate for the third term, for President 
 of the United States, at the approaching election. The call for this anti-third-term convention 
 is opportune and significant. It is not only a protest against Gen. Grant’s candidacy, but it i 3 
 a firm step to strengthen our tenure of liberty and free institutions. He is a deluded citizen 
 who entertains the idea that there are no persons in the United States who long for empire. In 
 1868 I assisted to elect Gen. Grant President of the United States. I had great doubts of his 
 fitness at the time. The mistake was soon apparent. Rings, nepotism, self-aggrandizement, 
 and intolerance so characterized his first term, that I resolved not to support him for a second. 
 The country saw with shame the ring of Leet & Co. around the bonded warehouses of New 
 York. Contributions were there levied for the benefit of private secretaries of the President, 
 Indian rings, proscriptiom_of Sumner and others. I cannot go into detail. These acts are 
 fresh in the minds of tne people. Even Gen. Grant was so sensible of his errors, that in his ac¬ 
 ceptance of the nomination for the second term, he promised to do better. But his second 
 term went from bad to worse, until the country was confronted with the fact that it was being 
 robbed of its revenues by his appointees. Public opinion demanded the prosecution of the 
 offenders. A number of them were convicted in St. Louis, and sent to the penitentiary, but I 
 believe Grant pardoned all of them before his term expired. 
 
 Gen. Grant’s lust for lucre, as seen by accepting all the gifts presented to him, and bestowing 
 his highest appointments on the men who gave to him most liberally, had more to do with cor¬ 
 rupting officials than any thing that has ever occured in this country. From the watchman to the 
 secretary, they reasoned: “ If the President, who has a princely salary, can receive presents 
 
 and bestow high appointments, why may I not take gain from whomsoever I can obtain it ? ” 
 Thus, by example, moral restraint was broken down. In fact, his second term so far surpassed 
 the first in offensive acts and reckless disregard of public sentiment, that when the people saw 
 that he was using all of his vast patronage to force his election for a third term, the great Re¬ 
 publican party discussed the propriety of a third term as a principle. The opinion of the 
 fathers, as found in the debates in the United States constitutional convention, were laid before 
 the people. The example of patriot presidents, with their reasons therefor, was pointed out. 
 So deep and abiding was the anti-thira-term principle impressed upon the minds of the people, 
 that public sentiment demanded that the Congress of the United States should, and it did, in 
 1875 pass a resolution, with singular unanimity, declaring against a President being a candidate 
 for a third term. Republican conventions in a number of the Republican States, knowing the 
 sentiments of the people, passed similar resolutions, all concurring in the fact that the anti- 
 third-term principle is a part of the unwi’itten law of the land, is one of the safeguards of lib¬ 
 erty, and is as binding as the constitution itself. 
 
 In 1875, this third-term principle was better understood by the people than ever before. It 
 is only emergencies which bring up great subjects for discussion in this country. Grant’s ad¬ 
 ministrations, with his desire for a third term, brought on this discussion; but.the reasoning 
 soon passed from the individual to the great principle. The press, orators, * statesmen, arid 
 essayists threw such a flood of light upon the subject, that the candidacy of a man for the 
 third term, for the presidency, was condemned not for 1876 alone, but for all time to come. 
 But now, in four short years, the great Republican party is insulted by’the declaration in effect, 
 that this great discussion was only a political trick; that the Congress, and the Republican 
 Conventions that passed these resolutions, only intended to deceive or amuse the people for a 
 season —that they’meant nothing! 
 
 At the end of Gen. Grant’s second term, he had his trainers, as well as his retainers, who had 
 fattened on his bounty. They had carefully read the history of Csesar; how he had procured 
 his first and second pro-consulship; how he had amused and built up his popularity among the 
 populace of Rome, by his frequent dispatches, detailing his victories over the semi-savages in 
 Gaul and Britain, and how he had prepared the people of Rome to receive him as a god. 
 All knew the sequel. * * * From Gen. Grant, as a soldier and citizen, I do not desire to 
 
 take one laurel that he justly deserves; lam discussing him as a third-term candidate, and 
 unfit to be President of the United States. If the people composing the great Republican 
 party are so blind as to foster military heroes for their chief magistrate; if they have so little 
 appreciation of the teachings of history, as not to understand the dangers to the republic of a 
 third term; if they have no more convictions than to place themselves in the hands of selfish 
 politicians, regardless of their better judgment, they are not fit custodians of the precious liber¬ 
 ties of the American people, and the sooner the country understands this the better. 
 
 But I have an abiding faith in the patriotism of the great body of the Republican party. As 
 a party, I think its principles, aims, and aspirations are far above any other party in the 
 
28 
 
 United States. My brightest hopes for the future of my country, cluster around the prospect 
 of its success. President Ha} r es, though environed by troubles, brought about by Grant’s blun¬ 
 ders, b 3 r a Democratic House all the time, and a Senate against him, part of the time, has 
 yet made a creditable administration, one that history will honor. 
 
 I hope to see a statesman nominated at Chicago, and if such is the case, he will surely be 
 elected. It will be utterly out of the question to elect Gen. Grant, if he is nominated. 1 be¬ 
 lieve that if he is the nominee, tens of thousands of Republicans will refuse to go to the polls, 
 rather than stultify themselves by voting for him; and wiry should thej r not? 
 
 I am looking for good results from }mur anti-third-term convention. I hope it will adopt 
 wise measures and speak in language not to be misunderstood. “Eternal vigilance is the 
 price of liberty,” is a truism; and is as true to-day as at any time in the ages when tyrants 
 made slaves of the people. 
 
 Except in Republican France, Csesarism is lightening its grasp all over Europe, England not 
 excepted. Keep the watch tires of liberty brightly burning! 
 
 I am, truly yours, 
 
 F. H. PlERPONT. 
 
 FROM THE CHAIRMAN REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE. 
 
 Lancaster, Ky., April 21, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir — lam opposed to the nomination of Gen. Grant, and bitterly opposed to the 
 third-term principle; or I might more properly say, want of principle. It would be unneces¬ 
 sary here to give the reasons for the faith within me. * * * Hoping that your convention 
 
 may do something which will prevent the nomination of Gen. Grant, and save the party from 
 disgrace and defeat, I am, Very respectfully, 
 
 Geo. Denny, Jr. 
 
 FROM GEN. A. C. McCLURG, ADJUTANT-GENERAL OF ONE OF SHERMAN’S 
 
 ARMY CORPS IN THE MARCH TO THE SEA. 
 
 Chicago, Ma}’- 3, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock: 
 
 My Dear Sir — If you can prevent the nomination of Grant, * * * I shall be heartily 
 rejoiced; and I know of scores of other good men of this ilk possessed of the same feelings. 
 Don’t hesitate to go to any 7 - length, and I think you will be well backed. 
 
 Faithfully yours, A. C. McClurg. 
 
 Fredericktown, Mo., April 23, 1880. 
 
 Col. Emory S. Foster. 
 
 My Dear Foster —I shall go up to the Convention. I enthusiastically endorse what you and 
 all our friends have done to sound the alarm against the third term, and to prepare the county 
 for its defeat, either in or after the Chicago Convention. We can not, and must not stultify 
 ourselves by voting in favor of such a solecism as is this third term, and especially to place 
 Grant back to repeat the follies and crimes of his last administration. You may reliantly 
 expect me to do all in my power to make the Convention successful. Put me where I will do the 
 most good. Sincerely Yours, 
 
 B. B. Cahoon. 
 
 Detroit, Mich., April 12, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq. : 
 
 Dear Sir —I have read with much interest and pleasure of the movement against a third term, 
 and write this for the purpose of offering my services in the cause; as yet no action has 
 been taken here to any purpose. Michigan is most decidedly anti-Grant. There are 2,000 
 good strong Republicans in this city who will never vote for Grant, and many thousands more 
 who would personally prefer defeat to the party than have Grant President. 
 
 Any suggestions you may make will be gladly received, and I trust the convention, May 6th, 
 may have a good delegation from this State. The enclosed expresses my views of Grant. 
 
 Yery truly, 
 
 John B. Corliss. 
 
 Mt. Morris, Ills., April 15, 1880. 
 
 Gen. Henderson: 
 
 Dear Sir — T take the liberty to write you this letter, that you may know the feeling in 
 this section in regard to the presidential question. There is a deep-seated hostility here among 
 
29 
 
 a large number of good Republicans about a third term. I find numbers of men here who say 
 they will not vote for Grant again. I know these persons to be in earnest, and I feel myself, 
 that to elect him once more would bode no good to him, to the party, nor to the best interests 
 of the country. I would suggest to you, that you be not timid or wavering in your action at 
 St. Louis. Let the Grant office-brokers understand that you mean business. They will scout 
 at you, but if they find we are in earnest, they will heed your remonstrance. A few documents, 
 such as your own speech, Weed’s and Wolsey’s letters, are opening the eyes of people. 
 
 Excuse me for this brief letter, but I am in earnest. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 J. Hiestand. 
 
 Auburn, N. Y., April 10, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary, etc. : 
 
 Dear Sir — All the Republicans in this county except the machine men, — and their num- 
 is not large,—are opposed to a third term. I suggest the following names: * * * Mr. 
 Knapp is one of the proprietors of The Auburn Daily Advertiser , published here, and which is 
 anti-third-term. Yours truly, 
 
 F. D. Wright. 
 
 Minneapolis, Minn., April 15, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Secretary, etc. : 
 
 Dear Sir — The feeling in this State I judge to be strong anti-third-term, and in Excelsior, 
 where the matter has been talked up considerably, I have heard of but three (3) persons ex¬ 
 press for Grant. 
 
 With me, although I am firm and sincere in my republicanism, I am free to confess I should 
 cast no vote for U. S. Grant. Yery respectfully, 
 
 Frank H. Shepard, 
 
 (Late 1st Lt. 24th Mass. Yols), Excelsior Minn. 
 
 Louisville, Ky., May 3, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq. : 
 
 Dear Sir —I am heart and soul with you in the cause. I suppose that Kentucky will lend 
 her aid in the movement, and prove to the world that we are not all for a third term. True, our 
 County Convention and State Convention were manipulated by wire workers in the interest of 
 machine men, but our delegation, I am happy to say, will not be so solid asut has been repre¬ 
 sented to be. In future, if you will send to Z. 0. King, on the Evening Post , a strong “anti” 
 man, any documents, he will notice them and be able to give you valuable information. Wish¬ 
 ing you a harmonious and fruitful meeting, I am 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 C. P. Will. 
 
 Macon, Mo., April 24, 1880. 
 
 Hon. John B. Henderson, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir —The people of the United States have thus far, in their career as a nation, been 
 honorably and patriotically equal to every emergency, and I have implicit trust that they will 
 be true to themselves in this one. While Gen. Grant represents the loyal sentiment of the 
 nation, he also represents personalism, low partisanism, and ignoble selfishness, in American 
 politics. In the former character lies his strength among the masses. In the latter, he rallies 
 the corrupt and partisan politicians of high and low degree. In my opinion, the greatest 
 danger now threatening our institutions is the “spoils system of politics,” and of this Gen. 
 Grant is the very embodiment. Amid reproach and contumely, it is necessary for those who 
 would see American freedom perpetuated in its purity, to present an unbroken opposition to 
 the one-man power which now threatens our country. Better a Democratic triumph, than a 
 triumph of “ Grantism.” Respectful^, 
 
 Wm. P. Beach. 
 
 Lansing, Mich., April 26, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Secretary. 
 
 Dear Sir —Enclosed please find another list of anti-Grant-to-the-backbone Republicans. 
 The Evening News, of Detroit, with a daily circulation of 24,500, is strongly anti-Grant, and is 
 doing good service. Yery respectfully, 
 
 Emil Fecht. 
 
30 
 
 New Haven, Conn., April 17, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq., Chairman: 
 
 Dear Sir : — I have been a Republican ever since I have been a voter, but shall not vote for 
 Gen . Grant if he is nominated. The tendency for the past five years has been away from 
 the principles on which the Government was founded, and I believe it is time for us to call a 
 halt before going any further on the road which we have been travelling. The third-term 
 movement does such violence to the history and traditions of the country, that I would in no 
 case give my vote for a third term, believing that any one who would accept a nomination for 
 a third term deserves to be distrusted, if not feared. I can not conceive of any one who- 
 sincerely desires the permanent welfare of the country as accepting a nomination for a third 
 term; and the mere fact that he is willing to do so, is sufficient reason for the conclusion that 
 he is not fit for the place. Yours very truly, 
 
 George A. Butler. 
 
 Cincinnati, 0., April 21, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq.: 
 
 Dear Sir — Speaking for myself, lam free to confess my hearty sympathy with the anti- 
 third-term movement. I yield to no one in my admiration of Gen. Grant as a man of unques¬ 
 tioned integrity, and as a military leader whose achievements on the field of battle will forever 
 entitle him to the profound gratitude of every sincere patriot and lover of human liberty. But 
 notwithstanding all this, I find myself constrained to oppose his present candidacy, for the fol¬ 
 lowing reasons: — 
 
 In the first place, almost every Republican State convention in 1875 clearly and emphatically 
 endorsed that unwritten law which prohibits more than two presidential terms to the same per¬ 
 son, and the nomination of Grant at Chicago would put the Republican party in the awkward 
 predicament of justifying a political doctrine in 1880, which they had express^ condemned in 
 1875. 
 
 Secondly. The election of Grant to a third term — could such a thing happen — would be a 
 direct step towards perpetuating the government of this country in the hands of one man. It 
 would unquestionably be viewed by the masses as a movement in the direction of monarchy. 
 Let the barriers which have been raised by Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and others be 
 overthrown, and who can foretell the consequences? The history of this nation has prescribed 
 a limitation to the number of presidential terms, and it behooves every lover of democratic gov¬ 
 ernment to insist on an adherence to that limitation. 
 
 Thirdly. Should Grant be the nominee at Chicago, he will be overwhelmingly defeated. Pro¬ 
 fessional politicians maj 7 manipulate the party machinery to further their own selfish and cor¬ 
 rupt purposes, by having delegations instructed to vote for Grant; but from careful inquiries 
 among mechanics and artisans, who constitute the bulk of the party, and who take no stock 
 whatevea in politics as a profession, I am satisfied that such an earnest and deep-rooted opposi¬ 
 tion to a third term exists in the minds of the Republican masses — at least in this section of 
 the country — as to make Grant’s defeat in Ohio a foregone conclusion. 
 
 Several other reasons suggest themselves, but lack of leisure compels me to forbear. The 
 continuance of the Republican party in power is to my mind a thousand fold of greater conse¬ 
 quence than the personal aggrandizement of any man, or of any hundred men. The party ex¬ 
 ists, not for the purpose of elevating any individual to power, but for the advocacy and estab¬ 
 lishment of certain principles of government, which are deemed essential to the cause of civil 
 liberty and of human progress. Hence the anxiety of the Republican masses to have nomi¬ 
 nated at Chicago a man who will lead them on to victory beyond a peradventure, and not one 
 whose leadership implies inevitable defeat. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 W. H. Jones. 
 
 Cincinnati, April 26, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., St. Louis: 
 
 Dear Sir — Since my former letter to you, I have become more convinced than ever, that 
 should Grant be the Chicago nominee, the Repbublican party will be doomed to utter defeat 
 next November. Last Saturday evening, I acted as judge at a primary election held in Pre¬ 
 cinct A, Third Ward of this city. Scores of business men, who had never before been known 
 to attend a primary election, presented themselves at the poles for the avowed purpose of 
 defeating any effort that might be made to elect Grant delegates to the State Convention, and 
 of the three hundred votes that were cast, a large proportion of those who casLthem expressed 
 voluntarily, and without any solicitation whatever, their emphatic determination not to support 
 
31 
 
 Grant incase he is the nominee. One man only expressed a preference for Grant, whereas 
 scores spontaneously expressed their uncompromising opposition to him. 
 
 Sincerely yours, W. H. Jones. 
 
 Evansville, Ind., April 17, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary, St. Louis: 
 
 Dear Sir — I desire to add my voice to the endorsement of the movement in opposition to 
 Grant. 
 
 1. As a true Republican, desiring the success of our party, I do not think he can be elected. 
 
 2. After mature reflection, I can not obtain my consent to vote for him. 
 
 I am surprised to find the indignant feeling among Republicans against the Grant movement. 
 A gentleman who has just canvassed the State for a candidate for a State office at our coming 
 convention, tells me that nine out of ten of all the Republicans of the State, that he has talked 
 with, are strongly opposed to the movement. He is reliable. Grant, if nominated, will lose 
 Indiana, 50,000 votes. * * * Yours truly, 
 
 J. E. Iglehart. 
 
 Detroit, March 25, 1880. 
 
 Hon. John B. Henderson, St. Louis. Mo. : 
 
 Dear Sir — The movement begun in your city in opposition to the third-term scheme, 
 rejoices the hearts of thousands of Republicans in Michigan to-day. We should be glad to see 
 it defeated in convention for the sake of the party; but if not, we will do our patriotic duty at 
 the polls, and bury it so deep that it will never be resurrected. We love the Republican party, 
 but if it must be sacrificed to defeat this diabolical scheme, let it die. Country first, and party 
 afterward, is the motto of Michigan Republicans. Very truly, vours, 
 
 S. N. Hurlbut. 
 
 Warrenton, Mo., April 28, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq. : 
 
 Dear Sir —As a life-long Republican, I should certainly shrink from doing anything to 
 imperil the success of that party, but I believe I am less of a partisan than a patriot, and the 
 situation is in my estimation sufficiently grave to justify the decision that it is better to abandon 
 the party than the unwritten law, which helps to support our free institutions. Better to let 
 the party perish than help to merge it in Grantism and personal rule. I believe the nomination 
 of the ex-President means the defeat of the Republican party, and I am ready, therefore, to do 
 whatever I can to prevent it. I purpose attending, and hope much may be accomplished. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 Hamilton Moore. 
 
 OFFICE “ DER NEW YORK REPUBLIKANER,” 
 
 • ' 
 
 (The only German Republican paper published in New York City.) 
 
 New York City," April 1, 1880. 
 
 Senator J. B. Henderson, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Sir —.The 75,000 German-Americans of New York State are “solid” against the third term. 
 Without them the “syndicate” has no chance to carry this State, except by legislative proxy, 
 which is evidently the last ditch in this desperate game of theirs. 
 
 I hope that the third term will not be saddled on the party. It is too heavy a load, and ninety 
 per cent, of the 700,000 German voters in the Union will not swallow the “hemlock” cup. 
 
 Grant can not carry this State on that account; but we apprehend that the electoral votes of 
 New York State will, in event of his nomination, be delivered by legislative proxy, which the 
 third-term syndicate is quite desperate enough to attempt. 
 
 Der New York Republikaner represents truly the prevailing sentiment (in this great State) 
 among our Germans. * * * 
 
 You ought to see to it that Illinois does not kiss the third-term toe in her convention — then 
 the bottom will be knocked out — otherwise it is my prediction that the senatorial syndicate will 
 appear at Chicago, with the electoral vote of New York on a presentation plate for the third 
 term, or its substitute, viz.: No one than “Roscoe Conkling ” himself. You may depend upon 
 it, that is “ the flattering unction which they lay to their souls.” 
 
 I suppose that you are aware that I drafted the call which was issued February 9, 1880, by 
 the German-American Republicans of New York State, protesting against a third-term, and 
 which was the first and initiatory step in this State against the third-term syndicate. Since then 
 numerous other steps have been taken, all towards the same purpose. 
 
 Truly yours, J. C. F. Byland, 
 
 (Editor of the New York Republikaner, 234 and 235 Broadway.) 
 
32 
 
 Chicago, III., April 16, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir: —Why don’t you prepare pledges for circulation, which shall bind .Republicans 
 to oppose Grant if he be nominated? 
 
 I propose to attend the convention ; meanwhile, you can command me in furtherance of the 
 ends which it will seek to attain. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Henry L. Shepard, Editor Alliance. 
 
 * Springfield, Mass., April 16, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq.: 
 
 Dear Sir — I sympathize heartily with the purpose of the convention. 
 
 I attended yesterday, as a delegate, our Republican State Convention. The sentiment which 
 united a two-thirds majority of the convention was opposition to Grant. * * * There have 
 been few organizers or workers. The convention—a very strong, intelligent body — ex¬ 
 pressed the spontaneous sentiment of the people, the sober and serious convictions of 
 Massachusetts Republicanism. * * * 
 
 May I suggest to you some points from the Massachusetts standpoint: — 
 
 1. Our people’s objection to Grant, while it rests partly on the adherence to the no-third- 
 term tradition, consists chiefly, I think, in dislike of his presidential record, his character, and 
 his associates. Sincerely yours, 
 
 George F. Merriam. 
 
 FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. 
 
 Louisville, Ky., April 27, 1880. 
 
 My Dear Sir — I intend to be in St. Louis on May 6th. I am in full sympathy with your 
 movement, and will do any thing in my power to add to its success. Yours truly, 
 
 Gabriel C. Wharton. 
 
 To Hon. John B. Henderson, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Grand Island. N. C., May 3, 1880. 
 
 To F. T. Ledergerber, Secretary: 
 
 Dear Sir — Your communication is duly received, and we heartily sympathize with the 
 resolutions of the anti-third-term movement. In our State of Nebraska a Grant boom of any 
 extent never has prevailed, and whatever existed has nearly expired since the wire-workers of 
 the Grant-machine, so shameful to the Republican party, packed the State conventions in 
 Pennsylvania, Missouri, and everywhere they could get a hold. Here in central Nebraska more 
 than seven-eighths of the Republicans are opposed to a third-term candidate, especially our Ger¬ 
 man population. 
 
 We sincerely hope that the convention of the better elements of the Republican psfryt will be 
 instrumental, that at the National Convention in Chicago a candidate may be nominated whom 
 the German Republican voters can heartily support to the end of a successful election as 
 President. 
 
 We oppose strongly the idea of having a sovereign again. We made this country our home, 
 where we abjured all allegiance and fidelity^ to princes,whosoever they are; and we do not wish 
 to be subjects again of a potentate in this country. This is the general sentiment among our 
 German population here. Very respectfully we remain, 
 
 . Karl Guse, 
 
 William Stolley, 
 
 Worcester, Mass., April 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. F. T. Ledergerber. 
 
 Dear Sir —I believe the hour calls for plain outspoken words in regard to our duty at the 
 present time. You have doubtless seen by the newspapers that Massachusetts has declared 
 against a third term. * * * I look upon the Republican party as one destined in the future 
 
 to work out a more glorious achievement than it has yet accomplished. Let us remember our 
 standard bearer should be a man that we can trust and all follow without one deserter. Mutiny 
 at the present means defeat. We must have a united party, a solid phalanx. With this we 
 shall be victorious; without it, I fear defeat. Yours truly, 
 
 . E. H. Hill. 
 
 Huntington, Suffolk County, N. Y., April 17, 1880. 
 
 * * * I don’t know a man in this place who declares his preference for Grant. If 
 
 Chicago won’t give us something better than Grant, get Cincinnati to give us, etc. Faithfully, 
 
 James T. McKay. 
 
33 
 
 From the Editor of the Indianapolis News. 
 
 Indianapolis, April 26, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir — I have your invitation to attend the Anti-Third-Term Convention next week, 
 and will not only try to be there, but shall endeavor to induce attendance from this State. 
 
 Fred. L. Ludergerber, Esq., St. Louis. Yours truly, 
 
 J. H. Holliday. 
 
 New York, April 5, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Dear Sir— Deeply interested in the matter myself, I have been at considerable pains during 
 the last month to quietly sound my friends and the many gentlemen I come in contact with, 
 who are with me Republican in politics. The deep-seated, though undemonstrated feeling 
 against the third term has astonished and filled me with satisfaction. Often where I expected 
 a doubtful or qualified opposition, I was delighted to find an intense determination against the 
 ambition of the “Great Sacrificer.” The sentiment of the people is right; they lack only 
 organization. I am very truly yours, 
 
 Jas. G. Jones. 
 
 FROM THE EDITOR OF “ THE PUBLISHERS’ WEEKLY.” 
 
 New York, May 4, 1880. 
 
 My Dear Sir—I believe there is less danger to the Republican party in temporary defeat 
 than in the election of General Grant for a third term, and conscientious Republicans will fail 
 of their duty if they do not make determined opposition — first, to his nomination; if necessary 
 to his election. The Republican party, the Republican managers, force on us a bad candidate. 
 I hope to see him defeated. We shall at least, as good Republicans, succeed, I think, in restor¬ 
 ing the Republican majority in the House which General Grant lost to us in his second term; 
 and in that event, a good Democratic President would be less objectionable than a bad Repub¬ 
 lican one. Truly yours, 
 
 R. R. Bowker. 
 
 To the Secretary Invitation Committee, St. Louis Convention. 
 
 Covington, Ky., April 16, 1880. 
 
 Emery S. Foster, Esq., Secretary, St. Louis, Mo.; 
 
 Dear Sir — I am heartily in sympathy with the movement, and am satisfied that a very large 
 majority of the white voters in this State are opposed to a third term for General Grant. They 
 believe his nomination would be unwise and dangerous. The party is almost absolutely certain of 
 defeat, with him as its candidate. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 D. N. Comingore. 
 
 Madison, Ind., April 23, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir — As to the “third-term” sentiment, I can say, that so far as this city and county 
 are concerned, there is very little of it,*— perhaps not twenty Grant men in the county; no 
 third-term for us! * * * * * 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 G. W. Southwick. 
 
 33 East 83d Street, May 3, 1880. 
 
 Messrs. Hitchcock, Pretorius, Finkelnburg, etc.: 
 
 Dear Sir — I have received your invitation to attend the “National Anti-third-term Repub¬ 
 lican convention,” in St. Louis, on May 6th, and beg to thank you for the honor. Were it 
 feasible for me, I should try to be present, and at least add one to the numbers which I trust 
 may emphasize the protest against the renomination of Gen. Grant. 
 
 It is a constant surprise to me that intelligent men fail to realize the gravity of the situation, 
 when a Republic proposes to break throngh the only barrier against prolonged personal power in 
 the Executive. That apathy is itself the sign that the Republic is slowly making ready for the 
 repeated experience of history. Those whose eyes areopen should “cry aloud,” and, if you 
 will allow in a clergyman, another Biblical phrase, “the trumpet must give no uncertain 
 sound.” Let it sound through the country the determination of hosts of good Republicans, 
 who have voted no other ticket for years, to refuse their suffrage to the ambition that would ask 
 that which our greatest and best have declined to solicit. 
 
34 
 
 Let it say out frankly that hosts of Republicans will never vote to bring back the regime that 
 shamed the nation, palsied the party, and demoralized the young of the whole land. Let it say 
 plainly that the minority which holds the balance of power, does not only protest beforehand 
 against this fatal nomination, but is resolved to bolt it if made! What that means we have 
 taught our masters in this State. 
 
 Wishing you all success, I am, yours truly, 
 
 R. Heber Newton. 
 
 Greenfields Mass., April 19, 1880. 
 
 Dear Sir —The nomination of Gen. Grant, followed by mere action on the part of the 
 Democrats, would, in my judgment, render Massachusetts a doubtful State. 
 
 Truly Yours, 
 
 Edward E. Lyman. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq., Chairman, etc. 
 
 New York, April 23, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster : 
 
 Dear Sir —It is my good fortune to come in contact with quite a large number of Ameri¬ 
 can and German Republican voters. I find that the Germans are all agreed that a re-election 
 for a third term is a dangerous procedure, and has a tendency to establishing a bad precedent, 
 and looks too much to personal government. They are consequently opposed to a third term. 
 I am very sincerely yours, 
 
 J. Sherman. 
 
 FROM EX-U. S. SENATOR FOWLER, OF TENNESSEE. 
 
 Washington, D. C., April 29, 1880. 
 
 Hon. John B. Henderson: — 
 
 Dear Sir : — I 'congratulate you on your noble speech, and the decided position assumed by 
 Missouri Republicans against the ruinous party madness manifested by that great party which 
 has made so many sacrifices for the republic. Weary of patriotic effort, the leaders have sur¬ 
 rendered the interests of the country to the hope of retaining power. Grant loves small men 
 and those whose ambitions and desires subordinate to the means of gratification. He has and 
 will prostitute the patronage of the republic to the basest purposes. His disqualifications 
 spring as much from his innate affections as from the influence of surrounding circumstances. 
 
 The third-term principle is dangerous, and threatens the ultimate ruin of republican princi¬ 
 ples in the country. It is the breaking down of those moral restraints imposed by experience 
 and conviction on the exercise of party ambition and personal interests. These moral bonds 
 have alone preserved our liberties and institutions from ruin. 
 
 I am not now about to discuss the questions you have treated so ably. I can support no man 
 for a third term, and Grant has no claims upon the American people that entitle nim to such 
 an honor or dishonor, for certainly it is a disgrace to countenance so destructive a passion for 
 power. 
 
 I hope the protest you are making may be sufficient to warn the American people of their 
 danger. If I can do so, I will be with you. The Republican party has men enough of ability 
 for President without resorting to so gross a disregard of our dearest interests. So far from 
 wanting a strong man, if Grant were that, the country had better dispense with the office 
 entirely. 
 
 I hope for your movement the greatest success. Yours truly, 
 
 Jos. S. Fowler. 
 
 Caledonia, Livingston Co., N. Y., April 20, 1880. 
 
 E. S. Foster, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Sir — Grant will cost the party 4 per cent, of the vote here—and I think more if we can have 
 an opposition candidate who is a good Republican. 
 
 Grant under no circumstances, and another candidate if Grant is nominated at Chicago, is 
 what we want. Respectfully, W. W. Lewis. 
 
 New York, April 15th, 1880. 
 
 Emery Foster, Esq. : 
 
 Sir — When we -started this anti-third-term movement we had no idea that we would meet 
 with the success we have. Myself with five friends started at my residence, held a meeting, 
 passed resolutions, and appointed officers, and in the course of ten days found it would not 
 answer the requirements of the call to hold meetings at a private residence. We now hold our 
 
35 
 
 meetings on Avenue C, and things are progressing finely among the workingmen of this district. 
 The only time I have to work in the cause is evenings, being employed in business which takes 
 all the hours of the day. We have several good men in this district who would be pleased to 
 attend the convention. Time and money are wanting, more especially the money, I expect, as 
 they are all mechanics, but well posted in politics. It would be impossible for me to attend, as 
 I have not the time to spare. The feeling here is very strong against a third term, and the work 
 goes bravely on. Hoping we shall meet with success, I remain yours truly, 
 
 Joseph L. Bailey. 
 
 Boston - , April 17, 1880. 
 
 Hon. Henry Hitchcock, Chairman: 
 
 * * * * * We have already done some work in Massachusetts, and we shall continue 
 to exert what influence we may have in the same direction. 
 
 Our convention at Worcester, last Thursday, spoke in the most emphatic way against Grant, 
 and it is evident that we should lose many thousand votes in Massachusetts if he is nominated. 
 
 Very truly yours, George G. Crocker. 
 
 FROM THE EDITOR OF “THE BRISTOL BANNER.” 
 
 Bristol, Ind., Aril 7, 1880. 
 
 To the National Republican Anti-third-term Convention, St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Gentlemen — Noav my candid opinion is that nine out of every ten Republicans in this Elk¬ 
 hart County are strongly in opposition to Grant, only as a third-term candidate. Again, it is 
 my honest opinion that two out of ever} 7 - five Republicans of this Elkhart County will vote the 
 Democratic ticket, if Grant is made the nominee. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 C. F. Mosier. 
 
 FROM THE MAYOR OF NEW LISBON. 
 
 New Lisbon, Ohio, April 8, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, St. Louis, Mo. : 
 
 Kind Sir —Yours of 3d inst., with enclosure, recieved to-day. In reply, I am an anti-third 
 termer of the stalwart kind; should estimate (based on hearing parties speak of the matter, and 
 reliable reports) that about one hundred out of voting Republican men in this (centre) township of 
 about six hundred, would not vote for Grant, if nominated; and I think that a fair part of the 
 entire party in at least the ratio of one hundred out of every six hundred Republican voters in 
 this county would not vote for Grant, if nominated; and the same proportion of the counties 
 north of this county would do the same thing. Of one thing be assured, that if driven to the 
 nomination of Grant, very many of us could not vote next fall, or else vote for an independent 
 anti-third termer, and thus teach such leaders as Cameron and Conkling a lesson, notwith¬ 
 standing the above treasonable (?) utterances to party fealty. I have in the past always been 
 a stalwart Republican, and no one can prevent me from being a Republican in the future; but 
 Republicanism ends with two terms to one man as President of the United States. If any 
 further service can be rendered in any way, advise me. 
 
 I am respectfully, 
 
 J. M. Dickinson. 
 
 Miamisburg, Ohio, March 27, 1880. 
 
 Chairman of the National Republican and Third-Term Executive Committe: 
 
 Sir — We, as privates in the army of politicians, do not get that fair representation with which 
 we are justly entitled. Stalwarts map out a line of campaign suited to their views and inter¬ 
 ests, entirely ignoring'the element that accomplishes the work, viz., the rank and file. When do 
 you see the"views of a man in comparative obscurity published in the newspapers of the land; 
 on the contrary, men of prominence and political hucksters’ views are eagerly sought after for 
 publication; thus the sentiment of a very small minority is substituted for the great mass—the 
 power behind the throne—and there is where the Republican party is going to wake up to a 
 realization of its mistakes, if these men of prominence in politics persist in forcing Gen. Grant 
 on the people as a presidential candidate. Here in my own locality, men who are stanch 
 Republicans, and who have always voted the Republican ticket, will hesitate, and many refuse 
 to sacrifice this inborn principle of the nation within them, to slaughter their best convictions 
 by voting for Gen. Grant. The earnest prayer of enlightened Democracy is for Grant’s nomi¬ 
 nation ; they plainly see victory for their party in this State if he is nominated. Again the 
 Government, since its organization on this principle of unwritten law, has been steadily advanc- 
 
36 
 
 ing, and is now the peer of any nation on earth; 'and when they come to try to subvert the will 
 of the people, backed up by history of the past, in forcing upon them an untried, hazardous, and 
 doubtful experiment, they are going far in the direction of a defeat to the Republican party. 
 It has been advocated by men of great height in politics, that when you get a good man for 
 president, keep him there as long as he behaves well, even for life, and then we will be saved 
 this strife and agitation, consequent on these frequent changes in office. 
 
 Agitation has been the life and promoter of the grand institutions that our country is blessed 
 with, and whenever we settle down to a comatose state under one-man-power, believing we have 
 the right man in the right place, in all likelihood we will be waked up to a stern reality that 
 we have surrendered the fundamental principles of our Government, obtained in an eight long 
 years of struggle by our forefathers. If all the opposition in private could be arrayed 
 publicly, it would necessitate the immediate withdrawal of Gen. Grant, as a candidate; it is in 
 justice to Gen. Grant that it should be, and not be made the victim of representations made to 
 him by his powerful political friends, who are trying to smother this opposition to a third-term. 
 
 John H. Coons. 
 
 Quincy, III., April 29, 1880. 
 
 Gentlemen —Those who desire to reverse the precedents set by Washington, Jefferson, 
 Madison, Monroe, and Jackson, and elect a citizen for a third term, must show either that a great 
 crisis is at hand, which demands exceptional measures, or that their candidate has such peculiar 
 qualifications for the office, that precedents, even when set by such men, should be reversed 
 for him. It seems to me that their persistent attempts to prove both these propositions are 
 marked failures. There is no crisis; and their eulogies of the ex-President, begin and end in 
 assurances that he would not, if elected, repeat the disastrous policy which caused general 
 satisfaction with the conclusion of his eight years’ reign. 
 
 I use the word “reign” advisedly; for many prominent supporters of the third term avow 
 that they advocate Gen. Grant’s renomination in the confident hope that, if elected, as no Pres¬ 
 ident ever has been, he will take this high position, and use it in a manner no President was ever 
 intended to. I am, gentlemen, with very sincere respect, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 William Everett. 
 
 Paducah, Ky., May 8, 1880. 
 
 Hon. Emory Foster, Secretary, etc., St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 My Dear Sir — I am in sympathy with the purposes of your Convention, and am fully 
 aware of its importance. Tell Hubbard that whatevr he may assume for Kentucky, he may 
 calculate on my cordial cooperation. I am with the Convention, even though its resolutions 
 extend to the nomination of an anti-third-term candidate, if Grant is nominated at Chicago. 
 And, although I have been appointed elector for this district by the Republican State 
 Convention which recently met at Louisvile, I will decline that position, as I have already 
 intimated I would, if Grant is nominated at Chicago, and stump the State on behalf of the anti- 
 third-term candidate. Yours truly, 
 
 E. W. Bagby. 
 
 
 Kansas City, Mo., May 2, 1880. 
 
 Emory S. Foster, Esq., Secretary of Anti-Third-Term Republican Executive Committee, 
 St. Louis, Mo.: 
 
 Dear Sir — The Republicans of this city opposed to the renomination of General Grant, 
 formed an Anti-Grant Club last night, and elected the following officers: President, Col. R. 
 H. Hunt; Secretary, Henry Stubenrauch. The following gentlemen were chosen as delegates 
 to the Anti-Third-Term Convention to be held in your city May 6th; * * * * 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Henry Stubenbauch, 
 
 Secretary of Club. 
 
 F. W. HAYES, DETROIT. 
 
 Detroit, Michigan, April 15, 1880. 
 
 F. T. Ledergerber, Esq., Secretary: 
 
 Dear Sir — I am in frill sympathy with you in your efforts to save the Republican party 
 from the responsibility of nominating any person for a third term, and will gladly render all the 
 assistance I can to make your labors successful. * * * 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 F. W. Hayes. 
 
37 
 
 THE “STRONG MAN” IDEA. 
 
 Williams College, Williamstown, Mass., April 19. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq.: 
 
 Dfar Sir — * * * Massachusetts has just spoken in a decisive manner against the can¬ 
 didacy of Gen. Grant, and I trust such action will be taken by the Republicans before the con¬ 
 vention at Chicago as shall convince the delegates who are to meet there that the country is not 
 ready to depart from the safe custom established b} 7 the example of all other former Presidents, 
 excepting the one who now seems anxious for a third term. 
 
 I believe a majority of the people would regret to see the administration again conducted as 
 it was under Gen. Grant; that they are opposed to a third term, and to the idea that a President 
 has an} 7 power to reach the presidential chair by armed force, by acting the “strong man,” 
 They believe he is a private citizen until he is inaugurated by the regularly-constituted servants 
 of the people. Truly yours, 
 
 P. A. Chadbourne. 
 
 CONGRESSMEN IN DANGER, 
 
 Muscatine, Ia., April 27, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Esq. : 
 
 Dear Sir — * * * * I hope great good will result from the action of the convention. 
 
 Iowa, as a State, will vote for the Chicago nominee, be it Gen. Grant or any other; but should 
 Gen. Grant be the nominee, I fear we will lose two, if not three, of our Congressmen. If the 
 Democrats make a judicious nomination, I do not believe Gen. Grant can be elected. 
 
 Yours truly. 
 
 G. B. Denison, 
 
 Chairman Republican County Committee. 
 
 CLEAVE TO THE PRINCIPLE. 
 
 Catlettbsurg, Ky., April 30, 1880. 
 
 Hon. Henry Hitchcock : 
 
 Dear Sir — I hope that the moral effect of the convention of the 6th of May will prevent 
 the nomination of Gen. Grant. 
 
 I permit no man to go before me in honoring Gen. Grant, but am unwilling to sap the life of 
 the nation to gratify an ambition that should be now satiated. Our debt to him is great, but 
 not so great as to require self-sacrifice. It would have been better to have avoided the sacrifice 
 of 500,000 lives and $5,000,000,000 of treasure, and had two governments with the Republican 
 principle more or less strong actuating each, than to have saved the nation at such frightful cost 
 to introduce the monarchical principle for the personal benefit of our successful general. I have 
 no personal hostility to Gen. Grant, and if it involved no sacrifice of principle, could cheerfully 
 support him; but I do believe, in common with the masses of the party, in the unwritten law, 
 which has as much force as the English (an unwritten) constitution, and therefore cleave to the 
 principle and reject the man. Those who urge him upon the party against its wish are endan¬ 
 gering his glory, and for this reason I cannot believe them to be in the main his friends, but 
 schemers seeking self at the enormous price of another’s reputation. 
 
 In this emergency we should not consult our personal preferences, but national safety and 
 well-being. The nation outweighs any man’s fortunes. 
 
 It is now clear that the people do not demand his nomination. Then why force it upon 
 them? The machine, only, has spoken in New Y r ork, Pennsylvania and Kentucky. Unless 
 the gods have made them mad, they ought not to attempt to make men vote as they wish, re¬ 
 gardless of the voter’s will. The “strong-man” argument means nothing or too much. If it 
 mean back-bone, the “Maine steal” showed that Blaine has it; resumption showed that Sher¬ 
 man has it; the Franco-Prussian war showed that Washburne has it; and the reputation of 
 Senator Edmunds in Congress shows his patriotism and courage to be as rock-ribbed and strong 
 as the mountains of his native State. If it mean more than this, the conservative, law-abiding 
 sentiment of the nation will grind the party supporting it into dust; or if our Goliath bring 
 down ruin upon our enemies, the temple of constitutional government will fall also. It is a 
 cruel necessity that will compel us to choose either horn of the dilemma. Grant is the symbol 
 of force, and his nomination is likely to beget opposing force. We should not threaten force, 
 nor should we cower before it. Let us declare for honest money, a free and fair election or a 
 fair fight, and we will surely win; but if we begin with driving away our friends, and embolden 
 our enemies, who have not recovered their courage since the war, by crying “but one man can 
 win,” alas! for our hopes. If Gen. Grant should be elected, the indications are that he would 
 
38 
 
 build a personal pai'ty; and this means a Grant party ruled by Grant, personal government, 
 centralization. In the face of which the people would for at least a period, until frightened by 
 its excesses, prefer a party with an opposite tendency. 
 
 Before we nominate Gen. Grant, we should honestly answer these questions: What strong 
 man gave Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, to the Democracy? And rent the Republican 
 party? What lost the elections of 1874? What nearly lost the election of 1876? Gen. Grant’s 
 nomination involves a defensive campaign, and a disputed election — possibly civil war; and 
 when we fight over a disputed election we are Mexicanized. Any other candidate secures an 
 aggressive campaign and a decisive peaceful victory. 
 
 Can we do our enemy a greater service than to give him the first principle (third-term) he 
 has had for a platform for twenty years? Can we better secure our own defeat? 
 
 As a Southerner who never cast a vote disloyal to the nation, I am bold to say, that it is not 
 decent for the South, that can give no help in the hour of battle, to force a candidate upon 
 the States that must elect and plan a campaign that they must win. 
 
 In 1861 Ohio and Indiana reached out their strong arms and saved Kentucky to the Union, 
 although the effort whitened our fields with the bleaching bones of their sons. As a native 
 Kentuckian, I feel that it was not generous, but ungrateful for Kentucky to forget this sacrifice 
 and dictate the nomination of a candidate distasteful to them. It wa3 not Kentucky that spoke, 
 but the lust of the politician and the craven fear of her most ignorant voters. 
 
 Kentucky will endorse the action of her district delegates who refuse to be bound by State 
 instructions. 
 
 If your movement fails, I fear the history of the Kepublican party is ended, and with it the 
 reign of Northern civilization. That will be a dark day. As the alien and sedition laws caused 
 Southern civilization to dominate this land for sixty years, so will the third term stay the hand 
 of progress for years — perhaps forever. It is a red-hot shame that one man’s ambition should 
 hange the scale of a conflict between two civilizations. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 R. C. Burns. 
 Elkhart, Ind., May 1, 1880. 
 
 Henry Hitchcock, Chairman, etc.: 
 
 Dear Sir — I am opposed to the nomination of Grant: 
 
 First. Because to elect any man to the presidency for a third term is to break down one of 
 the safeguards of the republic. 
 
 Second. Because he can not be elected, and his nomination, and certain defeat, would place 
 the rebel Democracy in full possession of every department of the government; and thus Grant 
 would, by his third effort for the presidency, surrender to the rebel generals nearly everything 
 that Lee surrendered to him at Appomatox. 
 
 Third. Because he ought not to be elected for the reason that all his patronage is already 
 mortgaged to the men whose questionable conduct, in Grant’s previous administration, nearly 
 destroyed the Republican party. 
 
 Fourth. He is now a party to the fraudulent transactions that are employed to secure his 
 nomination, and brought to shame and mortification his former supporters, by running from 
 place to place to secure the nomination, like a two-year-old boy crying for a tin whistle. 
 
 Grant could not carry either of the following States: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, 
 Ohio, Indiana, "Wisconsin, California, or Oregon, nor one of the late slave States, and bis nomi¬ 
 nation would make at least four of the other States doubtful. I cannot but hope that your 
 convention will do much to save the Republican party and the nation. 
 
 Truly yours, M. F. Shuey. 
 
 Muscatine, Ia., April 30, 1880. 
 
 Fred. T. Ledergerber, Secretary, St. Louis, Mo. : 
 
 Dear Sir — Permit me to express my hearty sympathy with the obiect of the convention, as 
 set forth in the call for the same. While the objections to a third presidential term are suffi¬ 
 ciently great to attract the attention of all thoughtful and patriotic citizens, they should be par¬ 
 ticularly emphasized in the case of Gen. Grant. The abuses and corruption which characterized 
 his previous administration not only demonstrated his unfitness for the presidency, but alienated 
 a large and influential body of voters from the Republican party, thereby enabling the Democ¬ 
 racy to gainAontrol of Congress — an event to be deplored, not only as a disaster to the Repub¬ 
 lican party, but as a national calamity, and a constant menace to good government. 
 
 While the primary object of your convention is to avert the impending danger of the nonii 
 nation of Gen. Grant at the Chicago convention, it should be your duty as well as your privi 
 
 / 
 
39 
 
 lege, to denounce, without hesitation and without reserve, the nomination of any candidate who 
 has not a record above the breath of suspicion, and to demand in the name of all liepublicans 
 who love good government and their country more than their party, the nomination of some 
 statesman of ability^ and unquestioned integrity, who can command the support of the large 
 and increasing bod} 7 - of thoughtful and independent voters, whose views have been expressed to 
 some extent by the Independent Republican Committee of New York, the National Republican 
 League of Philadelphia, and the convention of Young Republicans of Massachusetts. 
 
 With the hope that your convention will be harmonious, and that its action will be such as 
 to exert a powerful influence upon the Chicago convention, in the interest of a good govern¬ 
 ment, I am very truly yours. W. A. Clark. 
 
 FROM A WEST VIRGINIA EDITOR. 
 
 Wheeling, W. Va., April 24. 
 
 Dear Sir — Your letter of the 22d to hand. I would like to be present at your Anti-Third- 
 Term Convention of May 6, but fear I cannot be. Our.'paper’is strongly committed against 
 Grant’s nomination, and we are greatly in hopes he can be defeated at Chicago. 
 
 Ex- Gov. F. H. Pierpont, Fairmount, Marion County, W. Va., is one of the most prominent 
 opponents of Grant in this State. No Republican paper in the State supports Grant. 
 
 Very truly. 
 
 A. W. Campbell, 
 
 (Editor Intelligencer .) 
 
 Hundreds of other letters were received from all parts of the country, containing the same 
 views as are contained in these published. 
 
 L 
 
 MORE EXPRESSION OF VIEWS. 
 
 On motion of Mr. Fox, Mr. R. A. Hill, of Indiana, was invited to address the convention. 
 Mr. Hill, on taking the platform, delivered an eloquent and earnest address. He said the friends 
 of Gen. Grant came before the people asking them to disregard the precedent established and 
 recognized for generations, in order that he might hold an office. The precedent was not adopted 
 for the first century of the republic, but for all time, as long as the republic should exist. It 
 was adopted as a protection and defence against the danger of a man of uncertain patriotism 
 and undue ambition. This government was established for a permanency. When our fathers 
 chose the emblem of our nationality they rejected the design of a flag with the tree of liberty 
 upon it, beneath the branches of which the oppressed of all nations might find shelter. They 
 said this would not do; the storms of heaven would rend it, the worm would bore it to the 
 heart, and it would die. The next design offered contained a pyramid, fche most lasting of 
 architectural structures, but the fathers said, even mountains would wear away; and this was 
 also rejected. Then they chose the red from the rosy dawn, and the field of blue from the 
 expanse of heaven ; this they studded with thirteen of the brightest fixed stars of the firmament, 
 and that was the design adopted. Why should the honored precedent of a generation be violated 
 for one man? No one man was a necessity for forty millions of people. It was now well 
 known that the call for Grant was not the spontaneous expression of a people’s desire, but was 
 an artificial excitement worked up by designing men. The need for a strong government was 
 a delusion; the government to-day was the strongest on earth. Its strength had been demon¬ 
 strated in no doubtful way. The proposition to place the power in one man’s hands must rest 
 on the claim that the vices were on the part of the governed, and the virtues were with those 
 who govern — a claim which was in direct conflict with the whole theory of American institu¬ 
 tions. Mr. Hill’s speech was warmly applauded. 
 
 THE PLATFORM. 
 
 In pursuance of the demand, and representing the convictions of what we believe to be a ma¬ 
 jority of the Republican party throughout the Union, this convention of Republicans has 
 assembled for the purpose of declaring those convictions, with reference to the present aspect 
 of political affairs. Their deliberate and emphatic expression is especially demanded in view 
 of the 'determined efforts made to force upon the party the nomination of a candidate for the 
 Presidency for a third term, in defiance not only of the traditions of the government as estab¬ 
 lished by its founders, and consecrated by unbroken and venerable usage and prescription down 
 to the present time, but also of the solemn declarations of the Republican party through its 
 conventions in the largest and controlling Republican States, reaffirmed by its representatives 
 in the popular branch of Congress, and adopted by the entire party in the declaration of its 
 latest Presidential candidate; be it therefore 
 
40 
 
 Resolved, That the members of this convention, for themselves and those whom they repre¬ 
 sent, hereby reaffirm their devotion to the principles of the Republican party as heretofore set 
 forth by its"authorized representatives. And in view of present exigencies, we do especially 
 reaffirm the recent declarations of State Republican conventions, as follows:— 
 
 By the convention of New York, 1875: “ We declare our unalterable opposition to the selec¬ 
 tion" of any President for a third term.” 
 
 By the State convention of Pennsylvania, 1875, reaffirmed in 1876: “We are unalterably 
 opposed to the election to the presidency of any person for a third term.” 
 
 By the State of Ohio: “ The observance of Washington’s example will be in the future, as it 
 has been in the past, regarded as a fundamental rule in the unwritten law of the Republic.” 
 
 By the Massachusetts Republican convention, 1875: “Sound reason, as well as the wise and 
 unbroken usage of the Republic, illustrated by the example of Washington, requires that the 
 term of the chief magistrate of the United States should not exceed a second term.” 
 
 Like sentiments having been announced by the Republican convention of Minnesota and 
 other Republican States, and having been affirmed in 1875 by an overwhelming majority of both 
 political parties in the national House of Representatives in the following words: 
 
 “ That the precedent established by Washington and other Presidents of the United States, in 
 retiring from the Presidential office after their second term, has become by universal concur¬ 
 rence a part of our republican system of government, and that any departure from this time- 
 honored custom would be unwise, unpatriotic, and fraught with peril to our free institutions.” 
 
 Resolved, That the nomination of a third-term candidate is especially to be deprecated, because 
 it will unavoidably put the Republican party on the defensive; because it will revive the mem¬ 
 ory of public scandals and official corruption which brought our party to the verge of ruin, and 
 will again alienate a large and powerful body of voters, without whose aid success is neither 
 possible nor deserved; while in the character and surroundings of the third-term candidate we 
 find no sufficient guarantee against their reoccurrence, but rather a renewed menace in the 
 history of the men who are loudest in his support. 
 
 Resolved, That Ave believe that the questions now agitating the public mind, connected as they 
 are with the currency, the tariff, the civil service, the railroads and other means of intercom¬ 
 munication, require the talents of a trained statesman. We find objections to the third-term 
 nomination now urged upon the country also in that it would substitute a dangerous tendency 
 to personal government, for a determined and unwearied effort for this the reform of the civil 
 service; that reform, fearless and thorough, we declare to be vital to the welfare and safety of 
 the republic itself. 
 
 Resolved, That as Republicans we cannot be hero worshippers; and we demand from a party 
 without a master, the nomination of a candidate without a stain. 
 
 Resolved, That a national committee of 100 be appointed and instructed, in the event of the 
 nomination of G-e Aral Grant, to meet in the city of New York, at the call of the chairman of 
 this committee, and then to act in such manner as they shall then deem best to carry out the 
 i spirit and purpose of these resolutions; the said committee to be selected by a committee of 
 
 eleven, and published at its earliest convenience. 
 
 Mr. G. L. Wright, St. Louis, nominated the following as the committee of eleven to select a 
 national committee of one hundred: Lucien Eaton, Emil Pretorius, and Henry Hitchcock, of 
 Missouri; E. C. Hubbard, of Kentucky; W. S. Allerton, New York; J. W. Carter, Massachu¬ 
 setts; E. R. Wood, Pennsylvania; J. H. Jones, Ohio; W . W. Williams, Minnesota; R. A. Hill, 
 Indiana; Bluford Wilson, Illinois. 
 
 On motion of Col. Wilson, of Illinois, the names of Mr. F. W. Whitridge, of New York, 
 and Gen. Henderson, of St. Louis, were added to the committee. 
 
 Isador Bush moved the appointment of a committee of five to present the proceedings of the 
 convention to the Chicago Convention. Carried. 
 
 The chair named the following gentlemen to act: E. C. Hubbard, of Kentucky; Bluford 
 Wilson, R. A. Hill of Indiana; E. R. Wood, of Pennsylvania, and John M. Carter, of Massa¬ 
 chusetts. 
 
 Col. Bluford Wilson, of Illinois, offered the following: 
 
 Resolved, That the cordial thanks of this convention be, and the same are hereby extended to 
 the various local committees for their efforts, crowned as they have been with such gratifying 
 success, to provide for the comfortable and convenient transaction of the business of this 
 meeting. 
 
 Adjourned sine die. 
 
 EUGENE A. GUILBERT, 
 
 Attest: JOHN B. HENDERSON, Secretary. 
 
 Chairman.