If any one had told Bryant and Godwin in 1865 that within a half dozen years the party which led the crusade against slavery to victory, and which had carried the nation through the furnace of the war, would seem intolerable to many for its moral laxity and inefficiency1, he would not have been believed. It was then the party of youthful idealism, of enthusiasm in a great moral cause, of vigorous achievement. Yet in 1872 the Evening Post all but abandoned the Republican banner—it would have done so had the reform elements found a fit leader; and in 1876 the temptation to secede2 was presented in a new and equally strong form. Though it stayed with the party, in neither campaign did the paper surrender a jot3 of its independence, and in neither did it give the Republicans enthusiastic support.
There was but one tenable position in the election of 1868 for a journal which had supported Lincoln and the union throughout the war—to follow Grant; for the Democrats4 could not be trusted with Reconstruction6, while they offended all believers in sound finance by proposing to pay the war bonds in greenbacks. The Evening Post declared itself for Grant on Dec. 2, 1867, and published frequent editorials advocating his nomination7 until it took place six months later. It expressed a wholehearted faith in his courage, patient good temper, administrative8 energy, and judgment9 of subordinates. This belief was shared by others as discerning as Bryant. Lowell informed Leslie Stephen that Grant had always chosen able lieutenants10, that he was not pliable11, and that he would make good use of his opportunity to be an independent President.
390 The cordiality of the Evening Post for Grant was increased by its distaste for his Democratic rival. Bryant wrote to his friend Salmon12 P. Chase before the Democratic Convention, urging him to take a receptive attitude, and Chase replied hopefully; but it was Horatio Seymour who obtained the nomination, and for Seymour the Post had only contempt. A mere14 local politician, it termed him; it recalled how as the “copperhead” Governor of New York he had displayed a plentiful15 lack of both dignity and sagacity, and it believed him a weak creature, who would be controlled by dangerous men like George H. Pendleton and Francis Blair.
The Times was heartily16 for Grant, and so was the Sun, Charles A. Dana helping17 write the campaign biography of him. The Tribune was of course loyally Republican. It had to forget a good many rash—though, as it proved, too nearly true—words of the previous year, when, irritated by Grant’s loyalty18 to President Johnson, it had said that his prominence19 in politics was due merely to “the dazzling and seductive splendor20 of military fame,” and that he would make “a timid, hesitating, unsympathetic President.” But the Tribune was used to retracting21 impolitic judgments22, and was soon fighting with the World in that hammer and tongs23 style of which Greeley and Manton Marble were masters.
The disillusionment that followed so rapidly upon Grant’s inauguration24 was bitter to the whole of the decent Republican press. It is one of the most creditable chapters in American journalism25 that so many newspapers—Greeley’s Tribune, Horace White’s Chicago Tribune, Samuel Bowles’s Springfield Republican, Murat Halstead’s Cincinnati Commercial, and the Evening Post—had the courage to assert their independence of the Republican party when it fell into unworthy hands. Grant’s failure was more bitter to the Evening Post, the Springfield Republican, and other low-tariff26 journals than it was to the high-tariff New York Tribune; it was more painful to the Evening Post and other organs which advocated a mild Southern policy than to the Nation, which391 advocated a fairly severe one. But they all took a protestant attitude which was far in advance of that of the general public.
All administrations begin with a sort of political honeymoon27, in which every one gives the new President a fair field, and criticism is temporarily reserved. For some months the Post tried hard to believe that Grant was destined28 to solve satisfactorily all the problems bequeathed him by Andrew Johnson. It praised his inaugural29 speech highly. The principal task before him, it declared, was to get rid of the bummers, camp-followers, and contractors30:
The first and especial work which Gen. Grant undertakes is to clear the government of those who take its money without giving an equivalent; lobbyists, railway projectors31, speculators in grants of every form, whisky thieves, revenue swindlers, gold sharks, and the whole train of useless and costly32 hangers-on. These men are no longer an outside band of robbers who are unimportant enough to be disregarded. They have grown to be a great power; if united, perhaps they would be the greatest political power in the land. It is a work scarcely second to that of destroying Lee’s army itself, to destroy the system of plunder33 which now threatens our institutions. (Feb. 9, 1869.)
The task second in importance, the Evening Post believed, was a sharp reduction in the wartime tariff, which David A. Wells, Special Commissioner34 of Revenue, had just shown to be miraculously35 effective in making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Under it, said Bryant, the pig-iron manufacturers doubled their capital annually36, while the workmen lived worse than before; one of the two companies which enjoyed a monopoly of salt had earned $4,600,000 on a capital of $600,000 in seven years; and the lumber37 companies, Canadian competition being shut out, were piling up enormous fortunes while housing grew ever costlier38. The Post demanded also a revision of the uneconomic wartime revenue system, under which 16,000 different articles were taxed; they might advantageously be reduced to fewer than 200. It asked for measures paving the way to a resumption of392 specie payments, such as the accumulation of a large gold reserve in the Treasury39, and the passage of legislation authorizing40 contracts to pay in gold. Railway jobbery, involving the wasteful41 distribution of the national domain42, should be stopped, while civil service reform was prominent in the Evening Post programme. Of course, it wished military rule in the South brought to an end as speedily as possible, and the States placed upon their old footing.
But all of Bryant’s and Parke Godwin’s high expectations failed. The Post thought Grant’s Cabinet weak, and was especially shocked by his choice of the protectionist George S. Boutwell to be Secretary of the Treasury. It was equally offended by the selection of Elihu Washburne to be Minister to France, and Gen. Daniel Sickles43 to Spain—Spanish relations then being highly important on account of Cuba. There was no change in the tariff until 1870, when a new act reduced the duties on only one important protected commodity, pig iron, while it increased them on a half dozen. The revenue system was left in its complex iniquity44. Secretary Boutwell did nothing effective to bring the nation back to a specie basis, while the Evening Post sharply condemned45 his action in the “Black Friday” crisis (September, 1869) in selling $4,000,000 worth of gold without notice, and thus breaking the corner in gold which Jay Gould and James Fisk, jr., were trying to build up. This, it said, was taking sides unnecessarily in a battle between two sets of gamblers, when the Treasury had always before acted on the principle that all sales of gold should be public, with ample advance notice of the amounts to be sold, and should be ordered solely46 upon public grounds, without reference to speculation47. Reconstruction, going from bad to worse, was by 1870 a confused mixture of grasping carpet-baggers, downtrodden whites, corrupt48 Legislatures, and ignorant, poverty-stricken negro voters. Grant’s one marked display of energy had been in an effort to force the annexation49 of Santo Domingo, a measure which the Post abominated50.
393 Two months after Grant’s administration began, the Chicago Tribune harshly attacked him. The Post then pleaded for patience, but by midsummer of 1870 it was growing restive51.
The last straw for the Evening Post was Grant’s dismissal of his two ablest Cabinet members. He asked for the resignation of Attorney-General Ebenezer Hoar in June, 1870, sacrificing him for the votes of Southern Senators promised in behalf of the Santo Domingo treaty. Four months later, Gen. Jacob Cox was forced out of the Interior Department simply because the politicians wished to raid it for spoils. Already Sumner had been deprived, by Grant’s orders, of the chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, a slap in the face to the great body of liberal and intellectual Northerners who had admired Sumner ever since he had come forward as an anti-slavery leader. The dismissal of Motley from the post of Minister to England in the fall of 1870 angered Bryant, as it did all other American men of letters. When Secretary Cox resigned, the Post headed its editorial (Oct. 31, 1870): “General Grant’s Unconditional52 Surrender”—meaning his surrender to the politicians:
Not even Buchanan’s interference in Kansas was more gross and unblushing than President Grant’s attempt to coerce53 the Missouri Republicans to do his will and not their own. No President except Andrew Johnson has ever so openly tried, by wholesale54 removals from office and by the appointment of his favorites, to impose his “policy” upon the party.
The letters of General Cox, now published, show that in the practice of the smaller devices of politicians the President has been no less ready. The Secretary, who came into the Cabinet as the especial friend and representative of civil service reform, is forced to leave the Cabinet because the President insists, contrary to Gen. Cox’s desires, upon letting political committees levy56 tribute upon the poor clerks in the Interior Department.
Three days later, under the caption57 “The President and His Policy,” the Post joined those organs—the Chicago394 Tribune, Springfield Republican, and Dana’s and Greeley’s journals—which had already declared war:
He has now been twenty months in office, and if we look back over the leading and most conspicuous58 acts of his Administration, we find only the San Domingo treaty, defeated by those who would gladly support him in everything right or wise; the gross interference with the elections in Missouri; and the disgrace—so far as he could disgrace them—of Mr. Hoar, Mr. Wells, and Mr. Cox. That is a record of which General Grant will not be proud in those days of retirement59 from public life which await him.
The Liberal Republican movement in the East began to assume shape when the Free Trade League called a conference upon revenue and tariff reform in New York city for Nov. 22, 1870. It was attended by Bryant, Schurz, E. L. Godkin, Horace White, Samuel Bowles, Gen. Cox, former Commissioner Wells, and Charles Francis Adams, with some others. The first five named represented respectively the Evening Post, the St. Louis Westliche Post, the Nation, the Chicago Tribune, and the Springfield Republican, and the first four are all on the list of editors of the Evening Post. James G. Blaine, the Speaker, was so disturbed by this conference that he journeyed to Chicago to tell Horace White that he meant to give the tariff reformers a majority of the Ways and Means Committee. Meanwhile, in Missouri, Carl Schurz and B. Gratz Brown had already launched their insurgent60 movement, and by a coalition61 with the Democrats that same month swept the State. Everywhere the elements in favor of civil service reform, fiscal62 reform, low tariff and cleaner government began drawing together.
Just how far should the Liberal Republican movement go? Schurz by the spring of 1871 was intent upon forming a new party, while men like Sumner wished to stay within the old party and reform it. The Chicago Tribune, the Springfield Republican, and the Cincinnati Commercial were soon supporting Schurz’s plan, while the Evening Post and the Nation held back. They were sympathetic with Liberal Republicanism, but they did not395 commit themselves to it. Bryant was as reluctant to give up his Republican allegiance now as he had been to forsake63 the Democratic standard in 1844, and he assailed64 the Administration without assailing65 the party. The Post declared in March, 1871, that the Republican organization was substantially sound; that it distrusted Grant and the politicians, but knew that the rank and file had resisted such follies66 as the deposition67 of Sumner and the Santo Domingo treaty. Next month, after the Liberal gathering68 at Cincinnati, it defined the movement as intended only “to bring back the Republican party to sound and constitutional legislation.” It would have been a dramatic display of independence for the Post to have broken with the regulars, as it was to do in 1884, but the event showed that it was well it remained lukewarm. When the Liberal Republicans shipwrecked their reform effort by naming a candidate quite unacceptable to the Post, it could change its attitude instantly from sympathy to hostility70 and derision.
E. L. Godkin relates that in the spring of 1864 he was invited to a breakfast in New York at which he found Wendell Phillips, Bryant, and one or two other men. Greeley entered and approached the host, who was standing71 by the fire talking with Bryant, but the poet ignored his fellow-editor. “Don’t you know Mr. Greeley?” the host inquired in an audible whisper. Bryant’s whisper came back more audibly still: “No, I don’t; he’s a blackguard—he’s a blackguard!”
This prejudice upon Bryant’s part, largely identical with the prejudice which made him refuse to speak to another editor whose principles and personality were both offensive to him, Thurlow Weed, had its share in the Evening Post’s hostility to Greeley when the Liberal Republicans nominated him for President. Bryant remembered that in 1849 Greeley had commenced a reply to an editorial in the Post with the words: “You lie, villain72! wilfully73, wickedly, basely lie!” It must also be considered that Greeley’s high tariff views were anathema74 to the Post, that his readiness to haul down the union flag396 at various critical moments in the Civil War had provoked the indignation of other editors, and that his extremely radical75 reconstruction policy had offended all moderate organs.
The news that the Liberal Republican Convention had nominated Greeley for President was telegraphed to New York on the evening of May 3, 1872. Bryant next morning was late in reaching the office. A vigorous discussion was going on, says Mr. J. Ranken Towse, over the character of the editorial comment to be made. “It was ended suddenly by the entrance, in hot haste, of Mr. Bryant, who said briefly76, ‘I will attend to that editorial myself,’ and promptly77 shut himself up in his room. The resultant article—cool, logical, bitter, but not violent—was distinctive78 in its animating79 spirit of contemptuous scorn, and carried a sharp sting in its closing assertion that in the case of a candidate for the highest honor at the disposal of the country, it was essential that the candidate should be, at least, a gentleman.”
W. A. Linn, long managing editor of the Evening Post, saw Bryant a moment. “Well,” the poet observed with a quiet twinkle, “there are some good points in Grant’s Administration, after all.”
The news was in every way a shock to the paper. When the Liberal Republican Convention opened, the Post had been filled with as high hopes for its success as those entertained by the Chicago Tribune, Cincinnati Commercial, or Springfield Republican. It had implored80 the leaders to make their enterprise “a movement for genuine reform, and not a mere antagonism81 to persons and Administrations”; it had warned them that they must choose a strong man for Presidential nominee82, for the people admired Grant’s strength of personality. Judge David Davis was not sufficiently83 a statesman, Gov. B. Gratz Brown of Missouri lacked experience, and “as for Mr. Greeley, his nomination would be a deathblow to the reform movement, because he is the embodiment of centralization and monopoly.” Its favorites were Charles Francis Adams, Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, and397 Gov. John M. Palmer of that State, in the order named. Had either of the first two been named, upon an acceptable platform, the Post would have supported him; but not the erratic84, simple-minded prophet of high tariff, Greeley, who, the Post’s special correspondent at the Convention reported, was pushed forward by a combination of politicians against the reformers.
Bryant’s editorial was one of two in the Evening Post that day. That given the leading position, written probably by Charlton M. Lewis, was entitled “The Fiasco at Cincinnati,” and was just such an editorial as appeared in dozens of other disheartened newspapers. It declared that the Convention, so big with promise, had gone the way of many a similar assemblage, surrendering its lofty principles to the wirepullers. The Post’s blow from the shoulder was struck by Bryant in the second column. He gave his editorial the mild title, “Why Mr. Greeley Should Not Be Supported for the Presidency85,” but each of the numbered paragraphs was vitriolic86.
First, said Bryant, Greeley lacked the needed courage, firmness, and consistency87. His course during the Civil War had been one prolonged wabble, which at its best moments was irresolute88, and at its worst was cowardly. Second, his political associates were so bad that his administration, if he were elected, could not escape corruption89. Here Bryant referred to such of Greeley’s friends as R. E. Fenton, the leader of those New York city Republicans, who, leagued with the Tammany Ring, had done so much to help Tweed do business. The Times, which had exposed Tweed, vigorously insisted upon the same point. The third objection, wrote Bryant, was that Greeley had no settled political principles, with one exception, and the fourth was the exception. “He is a thorough-going, bigoted90 protectionist, a champion of one of the most arbitrary and grinding systems of monopoly ever known in any country.” When in 1870 the duty on pig iron was reduced from $9 a ton to $7, Greeley had told Grant that he would make it $100 a ton if he could. The fifth objection to Greeley, the climax91 of the398 editorial, lay in “the grossness of his manners,” as Bryant put it. “With such a head as is on his shoulders, the affairs of the nation could not, under his direction, be wisely administered; with such manners as his, they could not be administered with common decorum.” By this, Bryant did not refer to Greeley’s slovenly92 dress, nor to his use of the lie direct, but meant a certain Johnsonian grossness which he thought Greeley permitted himself in the drawing-room.
Taken as a whole, the editorial was a regrettably extreme attack upon a man who, if erratic and uncouth93, was also the soul of kindliness94 and sincerity95; and Samuel Bowles was justified96 in complaining that the Post showed personal feeling. Yet the fierce and contemptuous attitude of Bryant by no means stood isolated97. The Times that day called Greeley’s nomination “a sad farce,” said that the first impulse of every one was to laugh, and declared that “if any one man could send a great nation to the dogs, that man is Mr. Greeley.” He would disorganize every department, commit the government to every crude illusion from Fourierism to vegetarianism98, and embroil99 it with every foreign country. Schurz was heartsick, and for some time refused to support the nominee, while the German leaders and newspapers, from which much had been hoped, were almost unanimously hostile. In a number of States independents openly repudiated100 the ticket. E. L. Godkin, of the Nation, was totally disgusted, for he detested101 Greeley’s high tariff views. He had written as early as 1863 that Greeley “has no great grasp of mind, no great political insight,” and now his biting pen did more than that of any other writer to defeat the candidate.
The Atlantic Monthly promptly fell in behind Grant. Manton Marble of the World had watched the Cincinnati Convention with a hopefulness equaling, but differing from, Bryant’s. Now he lashed102 out at the Convention’s mistake, stayed with the journal long enough to express wholehearted dislike of Greeley, and then retired103 so that the World might give him unenthusiastic support.399 Harper’s Weekly brought out the absurdities104 of Greeley’s candidacy in striking fashion. Thomas Nast’s cartoons kept the old editor in a ridiculous light week after week—now devouring105, with a wry106 face, a bowl of boiling porridge labeled “My own words and deeds,” now at his Chappaqua farm seated well out on a limb, which he was earnestly sawing off between himself and the tree. Greeley’s chief assistance in New York, aside from the Tribune, came from Dana and the Sun; indeed, Dana had come out for his eventual107 nomination as early as 1868, when almost no one was thinking of it. The other Democratic newspapers, as the Express, climbed rather grumblingly108 on the Greeley bandwagon; since Bennett’s death the Herald109 had not been of their number.
For a time the Evening Post, in its intense dissatisfaction with the candidate, had some hope that another nomination could be effected. It suggested such an attempt, and that the selection be made by an assembly of leaders, not left to the “dangerous machinery110 of a convention.” The Free Trade League made itself the instrument of this effort, and called a meeting at Steinway Hall on May 30, to be presided over by Bryant. Gen. Jacob Cox, ex-Commissioner Wells, and others gave it their support, but the gathering came to nothing. In June the Post was placed definitely behind Grant. The campaign was dismal111 for it, as for all other conscientious112 journals. It was impossible for even the Times to be enthusiastic over Grant, or even Dana over Greeley. The Evening Post’s attitude toward the regular Republican nominee was precisely113 that which the Springfield Republican took towards the Liberal Republican candidate. “Support the ticket, but don’t gush,” Bowles had telegraphed his subordinates from Cincinnati. How far Bryant was from abandoning his criticism of the President is evident from an August editorial entitled “Grant’s Real Character.”
The Post objected to the “Napoleon-C?sar-Tweed” theory of Grant, the belief that he was a corrupt man of colossal114 ambition, egotism, and determination, but it said400 nothing more in his defense115 than that he was “a plain American citizen, with his average defects, his average ignorance, his average intelligence, and his average vices55 and virtues116.” It made fun of his ignorance of political economy—he had said that the nation could never be poor while it had the gold locked in the Rockies. It scored his liking117 for money, gifts, good dinners, flashy associates, fast horses, and “style.” The Post spoke118 thus caustically119 of Grant because Bryant had no idea of stultifying120 the newspaper, even to help beat Greeley; but it did it the more readily because it knew Greeley had not a chance. The mass of the party was with Grant, and he received a plurality of three quarters of a million.
When Greeley’s insanity121 and death followed so tragically122 upon his humiliating defeat, the Evening Post made belated amends123 for its campaign severity. Its obituary124 editorial of Nov. 30 was marked by a generosity125 which it might well have shown earlier:
Without money, family, friends, or any of the usual supports by which men are helped into eminence126, Mr. Greeley won his place of influence and distinction by the sheer force of his intellectual ability and the determination of his character. By good natural abilities, by industry, by temperance, by sympathy with what is noblest and best in human nature, and by earnest purpose, the ignorant, friendless, unknown printer’s boy of a few years since became the powerful and famous journalist, whose words went forth127 to the ends of the earth, affecting the destinies of all mankind.
II
An entirely128 different question was posed by the election of 1876—the question whether the long friendship of Bryant and the former sub-editors for Samuel J. Tilden should carry the Evening Post over to the Democratic side. The decision finally made is of peculiar129 interest, for it shows how little Bryant was inclined to let personal considerations sway him upon any public question.
Early in the thirties, while Bryant and other editors were wrangling130 over the Bank, an ardent131 Democrat5 from401 New Lebanon, N. Y., named Elam Tilden, visited the Evening Post, and introduced his son Samuel, a boy in roundabouts. Bryant often spoke in later years of the impression made on him by the youth’s precocity132, handsome features, and cultivated speech. A few years later young Tilden studied at New York University, and improved his acquaintance with the poet. When in the fall of 1841 Bryant made one of his country excursions, he chose New Lebanon for headquarters, and visited the Tilden family. The ties between Tilden and the Post were much strengthened after 1848, when Bigelow became junior editor. We have seen that they were acquainted as young lawyers, and Bigelow was State prison inspector133 at the same time that Tilden began his political career in the Assembly. Tilden frequently visited the Post and discussed political topics, it was there that he published an explanation of his stand in the campaign of 1860, and it was with the freedom of an old friend that he told Bigelow that he and Bryant shared the blood-guilt134 of the conflict.
After the war his visits were less frequent. But he made the Evening Post his mouthpiece when, in 1871–2, he, ex-Mayor Havemeyer, and Andrew H. Green pushed home the fight against the Tweed Ring. The Post always credited Tilden with being the chief agent in proving the actual guilt of Tweed’s lieutenants. During the spring of 1873 an acrimonious135 controversy136 was carried on between Tilden and the Times, turning in the main upon a new Charter proposed at Albany, which Tilden attacked and the Times defended. Tilden used the Post for the publication of his letters, and Bryant editorially supported him.
As Governor, Tilden invited Bryant in the early weeks of 1875 to pay him a visit at the Executive Mansion137, and the editor accepted. Both branches of the Legislature tendered Bryant a public reception, the first time that the State had paid such an honor to any man of letters. At a dinner party on Tilden’s birthday, Bryant, in toasting the Governor, said that the public would not be displeased402 if his present position proved a stepping-stone to the Presidency. At all times the Post, like other New York papers, expressed golden opinions of Tilden’s administration, and in especial of his attacks upon the “Canal Ring,” a bi-partisan organization which had gained huge sums through fraudulent contracts for the repair of the State canals.
It was therefore natural that when in 1876 the election of a successor to Grant approached, Tilden’s friends had a strong hope that Bryant and the Evening Post would lend the Governor their support. The newspaper gave no advance hint of its attitude. When Hayes was nominated by the Republicans on June 16, it, like all other independent journals, was pleased. Its overshadowing fear had been that Blaine, whom it detested as dishonest, would be named, and it saw in Hayes as good a man as its own previous favorite, Bristow of Kentucky. While some sneered138 at the nomination as negative and weak, the Post predicted that it would “turn out to be positive and strong.” On the other hand, it thought the platform poor. It called the civil service plank139 platitudinous140 and empty, and the currency plank, which temporized141 with regard to specie resumption, worse still.
Nor did the Evening Post immediately commit itself after the Democratic Convention. Over Tilden’s nomination it rejoiced even more than over that of Hayes. It recognized his sterling142 integrity and zeal143 as a reformer and was delighted that he had beaten both Tammany and the mediocre144 Western aspirants145, Senator Thurman and Gov. Hendricks. But it did not openly pronounce for him, and its comment upon the Democratic platform maintained a careful impartiality146. “In respect to financial reform their position is worse than that of the Republicans; in respect to a reform of the civil service they offer nothing better; in respect to revenue reform they have done better.” The decision was left until after the 4th of July.
All the influence of Bigelow, who sometimes still wrote editorials for the Post, was in favor of Tilden. He was403 the candidate’s campaign manager, and would be Secretary of State if Tilden won. So was all the influence of Parke Godwin, Bryant’s son-in-law and formerly147 a part owner. Bryant’s own friendship for Tilden weighed heavily in the balance. But the decision was not, as the public supposed, Bryant’s alone. Some years earlier the Evening Post had been reorganized as a joint148 stock company, and Bryant held exactly half, not a majority, of the shares. The other half were owned by Isaac Henderson, the able, smooth-tongued, rubicund149 business manager, who had been a partner since the early fifties, and whose influence as Bryant became older gradually extended outside the business office to the editorial rooms. His one anxiety for the Evening Post was that it should pay fat dividends150, and he was no more scrupulous151 as to the means than the business managers of other newspapers. Mr. J. Ranken Towse tells us how distinct by 1876 was the influence he exerted upon the editorial policy:
It was not often that legitimate152 exception could be taken to its utterances154, but as much could not be said of its unaccountable reticences. For some of these there may have been a good and sufficient reason, at which I cannot even guess, but there were others which could be understood only too easily. The simple fact is that William Cullen Bryant, though editor-in-chief and half owner, was by no means in absolute control of the paper. Between the counting room and the editorial department there was a constant, silent, irrepressible conflict, not to say antagonism—for I have always been convinced that the limits of it were defined by some sort of agreement, written or tacit—whenever the question at issue was one of direct commercial profit, which often acted as a bar to the candid69 discussion of inconvenient155 topics.
When on June 29 the Post printed its warm but noncommittal praise of Tilden’s nomination, Henderson, who knew that commercial sentiment in New York was in favor of the Republicans, came upstairs and was closeted with Bryant in a long discussion of editorial policy. The next important editorial utterance153, July 5, was an angry attack upon the Democratic platform. The Democratic Party was condemned for its “knavish” indifference404 to sound currency, and was represented as an unsafe organization to be given charge of Southern affairs while they remained so unsettled. On July 6 the Post remarked that the hard-money Tilden, running in 1876 upon a soft-money platform, presented an exact parallel to the high-tariff Greeley running in 1872 upon a low-tariff platform; that “the two canvasses156 are alike in their treachery, their evasiveness, their shameless surrender of principle.” On July 10 it declared fully13 for Hayes.
Bigelow and Parke Godwin have published a number of Bryant’s letters relating to this stand by the Evening Post. One is his refusal of Tilden’s request that he let his name head the ticket of Democratic electors. Another is his letter to J. C. Derby explaining that, while he believed Tilden a truer statesman than Hayes, he thought the Republican principles, especially with regard to sound money and the merit system, so much superior that it was impossible to detach the Evening Post from the party that had won the Civil War. He implied that his control of the paper was complete, and said that its utterances had suited him in everything except some details; while Henderson explicitly157 stated to the somewhat incredulous Derby that this was true. But Bigelow’s and Godwin’s own letters of the time have not been printed, and they show a strong belief that Bryant did not make the Post’s decision. It is sufficient to quote one by Bigelow, dated Albany, July 14:
The principal result of my talk with Henderson was to satisfy me that—[Bigelow simply made a long, wavy158 line]. The rest I will tell you when I see you.
I can hardly trust myself to talk about the Post. I hope to be spared the necessity of writing about it. But the Evening Post that you and I have known and honored, which educated us and through which we have educated others in political science, I fear no longer exists. The paper which bears its name is no more our Evening Post than the present Commercial Advertiser is the sheet once edited under that name by Col. Stone. I only wish Mr. Bryant had his name stricken out of it.
Allowance must be made for Bigelow’s chagrin159. The405 probability is that Bryant at the end of June was wavering; that Henderson advanced his arguments respectfully but firmly; and that Bryant of his own free will placed the Evening Post behind Hayes. After all, his old associates in attacking Grant, the Liberal Republican leaders, flocked back to the G. O. P. He had the resumption of specie payments close to his heart, and was alarmed by the soft-money convictions of western Democrats; he feared the shock to hopes of civil service reform if a horde160 of office-hungry Democrats poured into Washington; and the recent conduct of the Democratic House gave him reason to think they would do little for tariff reduction. It was perfectly161 logical for the journal to stand with the party which it had helped found and had ever since supported, while it would have been hard to find a logical justification162 for leaving it. Throughout the campaign it stood by Hayes, though with very moderate zeal, and it rejoiced when the Electoral Commission gave him the Presidency. Bryant later wrote that he had never before felt so little interest in a contest for the Presidency. No one ever knew for whom he voted on election day, for, saying with a smile that the ballot163 was a secret institution, he always refused to tell; Bigelow believed that he voted for neither candidate.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
inefficiency
|
|
| n.无效率，无能；无效率事例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
secede
|
|
| v.退出，脱离 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
jot
|
|
| n.少量；vi.草草记下；vt.匆匆写下 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
democrats
|
|
| n.民主主义者，民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
democrat
|
|
| n.民主主义者，民主人士；民主党党员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
reconstruction
|
|
| n.重建，再现，复原 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
nomination
|
|
| n.提名，任命，提名权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
lieutenants
|
|
| n.陆军中尉( lieutenant的名词复数 )；副职官员；空军；仅低于…官阶的官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
pliable
|
|
| adj.易受影响的；易弯的；柔顺的，易驾驭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
salmon
|
|
| n.鲑，大马哈鱼，橙红色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
plentiful
|
|
| adj.富裕的，丰富的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
heartily
|
|
| adv.衷心地，诚恳地，十分，很 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
helping
|
|
| n.食物的一份&adj.帮助人的，辅助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
splendor
|
|
| n.光彩；壮丽，华丽；显赫，辉煌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
retracting
|
|
| v.撤回或撤消( retract的现在分词 )；拒绝执行或遵守；缩回；拉回 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
judgments
|
|
| 判断( judgment的名词复数 )； 鉴定； 评价； 审判 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
tongs
|
|
| n.钳；夹子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
inauguration
|
|
| n.开幕、就职典礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
journalism
|
|
| n.新闻工作，报业 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
tariff
|
|
| n.关税，税率；(旅馆、饭店等)价目表，收费表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
honeymoon
|
|
| n.蜜月（假期）；vi.度蜜月 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
inaugural
|
|
| adj.就职的；n.就职典礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
contractors
|
|
| n.（建筑、监造中的）承包人( contractor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
projectors
|
|
| 电影放映机，幻灯机( projector的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
costly
|
|
| adj.昂贵的，价值高的，豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
plunder
|
|
| vt.劫掠财物，掠夺；n.劫掠物，赃物；劫掠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
commissioner
|
|
| n.（政府厅、局、处等部门）专员，长官，委员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
miraculously
|
|
| ad.奇迹般地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
annually
|
|
| adv.一年一次，每年 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
lumber
|
|
| n.木材，木料；v.以破旧东西堆满；伐木；笨重移动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
costlier
|
|
| adj.昂贵的( costly的比较级 )；代价高的；引起困难的；造成损失的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
treasury
|
|
| n.宝库；国库，金库；文库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
authorizing
|
|
| 授权，批准，委托( authorize的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
wasteful
|
|
| adj.（造成）浪费的，挥霍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
domain
|
|
| n.(活动等)领域，范围；领地，势力范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
sickles
|
|
| n.镰刀( sickle的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
iniquity
|
|
| n.邪恶；不公正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
speculation
|
|
| n.思索，沉思；猜测；投机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
corrupt
|
|
| v.贿赂，收买；adj.腐败的，贪污的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
annexation
|
|
| n.吞并，合并 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
abominated
|
|
| v.憎恶，厌恶，不喜欢( abominate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
restive
|
|
| adj.不安宁的，不安静的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
unconditional
|
|
| adj.无条件的，无限制的，绝对的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
coerce
|
|
| v.强迫，压制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
wholesale
|
|
| n.批发；adv.以批发方式；vt.批发，成批出售 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
levy
|
|
| n.征收税或其他款项，征收额 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
caption
|
|
| n.说明，字幕，标题；v.加上标题，加上说明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
conspicuous
|
|
| adj.明眼的，惹人注目的；炫耀的，摆阔气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
retirement
|
|
| n.退休，退职 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
insurgent
|
|
| adj.叛乱的，起事的；n.叛乱分子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
coalition
|
|
| n.结合体，同盟，结合，联合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
fiscal
|
|
| adj.财政的，会计的，国库的，国库岁入的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
forsake
|
|
| vt.遗弃，抛弃；舍弃，放弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
assailed
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
assailing
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的现在分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
follies
|
|
| 罪恶，时事讽刺剧； 愚蠢，蠢笨，愚蠢的行为、思想或做法( folly的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
deposition
|
|
| n.免职，罢官；作证；沉淀；沉淀物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
gathering
|
|
| n.集会，聚会，聚集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
candid
|
|
| adj.公正的，正直的；坦率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
hostility
|
|
| n.敌对，敌意；抵制［pl.］交战，战争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
villain
|
|
| n.反派演员，反面人物；恶棍；问题的起因 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
wilfully
|
|
| adv.任性固执地；蓄意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
anathema
|
|
| n.诅咒；被诅咒的人(物)，十分讨厌的人(物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
briefly
|
|
| adv.简单地，简短地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
distinctive
|
|
| adj.特别的，有特色的，与众不同的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
animating
|
|
| v.使有生气( animate的现在分词 )；驱动；使栩栩如生地动作；赋予…以生命 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
implored
|
|
| 恳求或乞求（某人）( implore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
antagonism
|
|
| n.对抗，敌对，对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
nominee
|
|
| n.被提名者；被任命者；被推荐者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
sufficiently
|
|
| adv.足够地，充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
erratic
|
|
| adj.古怪的，反复无常的，不稳定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
presidency
|
|
| n.总统(校长，总经理)的职位(任期) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
vitriolic
|
|
| adj.硫酸的，尖刻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
consistency
|
|
| n.一贯性，前后一致，稳定性；(液体的)浓度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
irresolute
|
|
| adj.无决断的，优柔寡断的，踌躇不定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
corruption
|
|
| n.腐败，堕落，贪污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
bigoted
|
|
| adj.固执己见的，心胸狭窄的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
climax
|
|
| n.顶点；高潮；v.(使)达到顶点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
slovenly
|
|
| adj.懒散的，不整齐的，邋遢的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
uncouth
|
|
| adj.无教养的，粗鲁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
kindliness
|
|
| n.厚道，亲切，友好的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
sincerity
|
|
| n.真诚，诚意；真实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
isolated
|
|
| adj.与世隔绝的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
vegetarianism
|
|
| n.素食，素食主义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
embroil
|
|
| vt.拖累；牵连；使复杂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
repudiated
|
|
| v.（正式地）否认( repudiate的过去式和过去分词 )；拒绝接受；拒绝与…往来；拒不履行（法律义务） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
detested
|
|
| v.憎恶，嫌恶，痛恨( detest的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
lashed
|
|
| adj.具睫毛的v.鞭打( lash的过去式和过去分词 )；煽动；紧系；怒斥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
retired
|
|
| adj.隐退的，退休的，退役的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
absurdities
|
|
| n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 )；荒谬；谬论；荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
devouring
|
|
| 吞没( devour的现在分词 )； 耗尽； 津津有味地看； 狼吞虎咽地吃光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
wry
|
|
| adj.讽刺的；扭曲的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
eventual
|
|
| adj.最后的，结局的，最终的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
grumblingly
|
|
| 喃喃报怨着，发牢骚着 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
109
herald
|
|
| vt.预示...的来临，预告，宣布，欢迎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
dismal
|
|
| adj.阴沉的，凄凉的，令人忧郁的，差劲的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
conscientious
|
|
| adj.审慎正直的，认真的，本着良心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
colossal
|
|
| adj.异常的，庞大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
defense
|
|
| n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
liking
|
|
| n.爱好；嗜好；喜欢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
caustically
|
|
| adv.刻薄地；挖苦地；尖刻地；讥刺地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
stultifying
|
|
| v.使成为徒劳，使变得无用( stultify的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
insanity
|
|
| n.疯狂，精神错乱；极端的愚蠢，荒唐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
tragically
|
|
| adv. 悲剧地，悲惨地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
amends
|
|
| n. 赔偿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
obituary
|
|
| n.讣告，死亡公告；adj.死亡的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
generosity
|
|
| n.大度，慷慨，慷慨的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
eminence
|
|
| n.卓越，显赫；高地，高处；名家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
wrangling
|
|
| v.争吵，争论，口角( wrangle的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
ardent
|
|
| adj.热情的，热烈的，强烈的，烈性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
precocity
|
|
| n.早熟，早成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
inspector
|
|
| n.检查员，监察员，视察员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
acrimonious
|
|
| adj.严厉的，辛辣的，刻毒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
mansion
|
|
| n.大厦，大楼；宅第 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
sneered
|
|
| 讥笑，冷笑( sneer的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
plank
|
|
| n.板条，木板，政策要点，政纲条目 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
platitudinous
|
|
| adj.平凡的，陈腐的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
temporized
|
|
| v.敷衍( temporize的过去式和过去分词 )；拖延；顺应时势；暂时同意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
sterling
|
|
| adj.英币的(纯粹的，货真价实的)；n.英国货币(英镑) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
mediocre
|
|
| adj.平常的，普通的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
aspirants
|
|
| n.有志向或渴望获得…的人( aspirant的名词复数 )v.渴望的，有抱负的，追求名誉或地位的( aspirant的第三人称单数 )；有志向或渴望获得…的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
impartiality
|
|
| n. 公平, 无私, 不偏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
joint
|
|
| adj.联合的，共同的；n.关节，接合处；v.连接，贴合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
rubicund
|
|
| adj.(脸色)红润的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
dividends
|
|
| 红利( dividend的名词复数 )； 股息； 被除数； （足球彩票的）彩金 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
scrupulous
|
|
| adj.审慎的，小心翼翼的，完全的，纯粹的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
utterances
|
|
| n.发声( utterance的名词复数 )；说话方式；语调；言论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
inconvenient
|
|
| adj.不方便的，令人感到麻烦的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
canvasses
|
|
| n.检票员，游说者，推销员( canvass的名词复数 )v.（在政治方面）游说( canvass的第三人称单数 )；调查（如选举前选民的）意见；为讨论而提出（意见等）；详细检查 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
explicitly
|
|
| ad.明确地，显然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
wavy
|
|
| adj.有波浪的，多浪的，波浪状的，波动的，不稳定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
chagrin
|
|
| n.懊恼；气愤；委屈 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
horde
|
|
| n.群众，一大群 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
justification
|
|
| n.正当的理由；辩解的理由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
ballot
|
|
| n.（不记名）投票，投票总数，投票权；vi.投票 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |