IT

CHAPTER VII.

GREAT SPEECH AT INDIANAPOLIS.

T would be impossible to give any reasonably comprehensive impression of the political doctrines held and taught by Mr. Hendricks in the brief space of these pages. We have heard a good deal in these days about personal magnetism, but it is very questionable if any man ever excelled Mr. Hendricks in the power to convince and sway an audience. A man of simple habits, with a graceful bearing, and a manly, handsome face, in which gentleness and determination blend in such a manner as to charm any audience before which he rises; with blue eyes and a dimpled chin, and lines of good humor playing around his expressive mouth, nature has endowed him with all the elements of the true orator. Whoever will take the trouble to peruse his speeches will find them complete and exhaustive, as full of instruction as they are entertaining. The following speech, one of the most comprehensive of all Mr. Hendricks' orations, was delivered during the campaign of 1874, on Monday, September 14, at Indianapolis:

The fortunes of the Republican party had become so desperate at the late adjournment of Congress, that it was found necessary to appeal to the people in a congressional address, to stand by the leaders. The address was signed by thirty-nine members, constituting the congressional committee. General John Coburn, of this State, was one of the thirty-nine. They ask to be continued in power, and their army of eighty thousand office-holders to be perpetuated on the payrolls, because they are good and the Democrats are bad. And they go back thirty years before the war to prove the latter. I think no Indianian had a right to sign a paper saying that from 1830 to 1860 there is hardly a memory left connected with the control of public affairs "at which the nation should not blush." During that thirty

years our population increased from twelve to thirty-one millions, and the wealth and commerce of the country correspondingly advanced. The resources were gradually but steadily developed. The people were prosperous, contented and happy. You know that bad government could not bear such fruit. That period included the greater part of Jackson's Administration, which is yet distinguished for integrity, firmness and statesmanship, and which strengthened the confidence of the world in free and Republican institutions. During that period Texas was annexed, a country large enongh for three great States; and now, after the public lands under the control of Congress have been so largely granted away, no portion of our country offers greater advantages to our people, who need and seek cheap homes and farms, than Texas. That period includes the administration of the Treasury by James Guthrie, of Kentucky, a great man who did not suffer the loss of one dollar of the people's money. That generation has passed away, but it has left many names illustrious for patriotic devotion to country and elevated statesmanship. What think you of Jackson, of Benton, and Cass, and Silas Wright, of Marcy and Woodbury, and of Douglas? Did they not always and everywhere vindicate their country's right and honor; and in the great contests with the giants of the Whig party were they not able with dignity and credit to maintain themselves, their party, and their cause? Over them, their works and their achievements, this congressional committee of thirty-nine, moved by the spirit of modest virtue, and like the sons of Noah going backward, would throw the mantle of forgetfulness. Who are the committee of thirty-nine, good souls and pure, who are so ashamed and would have the country blush for what our fathers did? I will not name them all; that would be too much. So much excellence and virtue would overcome light would blind you, Chandler, Cameron, Conover, of Florida; Mitchell, of Oregon; Cobb, of Kansas; some delegates from the Territories; and Stewart, of Nevada.

you as an excess of

The meeting of the committee for a last reading of the address must have presented a scene of thrilling interest. The delicate sensibilities of Chandler were thoroughly aroused by the sentiment that he lived in times of such elevated purity, and that he was not exposed to the corrupt influence of association with Andrew Jackson.

At first Mr. Cameron was disturbed by some obscure reference to official integrity, which was hinted at as proper, for it suggested the disagreeable memory of the resolution of the House of Representatives during the war, which made it necessary for him to abdicate the War Department; but when he perceived the blow struck at the men of the

past he was comforted, for they hit that granite man, William L. Marcy, who set an example of illiberality and unkindness in that office in his conduct of the Mexican War, in not allowing his friends and partisans to grow rich off of the army and the people.

Mitchell, of Oregon, had been a little unfortunate in coming into the Senate with a very disagrecable odor about his character, so much so, indeed, that others were restless in sitting in the chamber with him; but that was past, fumigatory explanations had been made, and they had become accustomed to it, as indeed they have lately become accustomed to a good many new things; but his distress on that account was forgotten in the abasement which he felt in contemplating so much above him the sublime faith of Stephen A. Douglas in man's right and capacity for self-government.

Senator Clayton, of Arkansas, could properly sign such an address, because he had been investigated and whitewashed, but I could not tell why the gentle delegates, political eunuchs, from Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona, should display so much passion toward the men of the past. But upon reflection I knew it was because they had seen so much of the Indian service out there, and so appreciated its purity, its justice to the white man, and its care for the Indian, that they could not endure the stern and positive way in which Jackson made the Indian obey the authority of the country, and the white man respect the rights of the Indian.

True, the service has been unfortunate of late; it costs about $7,000,000 for the supplies and maintenance, whereas it used to cost, when the number was far greater, but $3,000,000. And if we include the military government and control, the cost must be many times greater; and the misfortune is, that the Indian is becoming worse, and the borders more insecure.

But if I am mistaken in supposing that it was the Indian service which so moved the pure minds of these delegates, then it must be their long residence in the city of Washington, and their observation of the highest development of their party in the government and improvement of the District of Columbia. True, a terrible and crushing debt has been created, reaching nearly $30,000,000, which Congress will probably pay out of the Treasury; and corruption bore sway, so that even the form of republican government was abandoned, and a Roman triumvirate was established and rules the capital of the nation. But what care these delegates for all that? They see the grandeur and the splendor of the city, rivaling the seats of monarchy in the Old World, and they look with contempt upon the cheap and plain style that prevailed during the thirty years

which they denounce. It may have been this feeling that caused them to unite with General Coburn and the others in this sentiment taken from the address: "It has been loudly vaunted that those were cheap administrations. Compared with the expenditures of these times, they were cheap, very cheap. Compared with their worth to the country, they were probably the most profligate the world ever saw. They cost the people from $50,000,000 to $75,000,000 per annum. Those millions maintained for us the empty pageant we called government. It was the worst pageant that could be contrived. It was not even showy; it was vulgar."

That, it seems, is clear enough. The simple and unostentatious style of the past is to be held in contempt as vulgar. Then men labored faithfully and accounted truly in every public trust; then taxes were low; and the laws were plain and easily understood; then influence and respectability were sought and won because of official integrity. Some old men yet live who recollect those times. But now government is to be made a pageant. A glittering, gaudy, pretentious and parvenu aristocracy is to take the place of a despised and crushed Democracy. The people are to be made contented by brilliant and costly show, and the display of power. By such a course Louis Napoleon maintained himself for a while upon the throne of France, but his failure and disgrace came upon him and his people when the hollow structure of his authority was brought against the real power of a solid people.

Let us look at some of the specific charges in the address against Democratic rule. "We bullied Austria out of a Hungarian refugee." That was the case of Martin Koszta, a Hungarian by birth, who had emigrated to this country, had lived in New York one year and eleven months, and in proper form, according to our laws, had declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States. In 1853 he went to Europe on business, carrying an authenticated copy of his declaration, and intending soon to return. While at Smyrna, he was seized by the emissaries of Austria and forcibly taken on board the Hussar, an Austrian brig-of-war, and held in close confinement, to be carried back for punishment by that cruel government because of his aspirations for liberty.

Captain Ingraham, of our navy, was then in command of the sloop-of-war St. Louis, in the Mediterranean, and, coming to anchor at Smyrna, was told by our consul what had taken place. After consulting our representative at Constantinople, he demanded of the Austrian commander the surrender of Koszta, with the assurance that he would be taken if not surrendered. He was surrendered, and

placed under the protection of the French consul, and returned to the United States, and Austria never laid her iron hand upon him again. For his gallant and noble conduct, Congress voted Captain Ingraham a medal. Mr. Marcy, as Secretary of State, in a correspondence of extraordinary ability, maintained and vindicated our country's position and conduct, and established public judgment in our favor. Do you regret that Koszta was not left an Austrian prisoner? If not, what think you of this charge against the Democracy by the Republican Congressmen?

The next charge is in these words: "We despoiled Mexico of a portion of her territory." By treaty, at the close of the Mexican war, we acquired New Mexico and California; we hold them still. From the latter we have realized untold wealth. But is it true that the acquisition was not the result of legitimate war and fair treaty? that it was the act of force by the strong over the weak? that it was robbery? and that the officers and soldiers in that war were despoilers? If that be so, then, however proud the people have been of the achievements of the soldiers, and of the magnificence of the acquisition, ought not the country to be restored? No; the question was long since settled. It is ours by legitimate and proper war and fair treaty, and the demand made that we should blush because of that war and its results, only shows their inability to find real fault in Democratic administrations.

They also charge, "We domolished Greytown." That is true. It was in 1854. It was on the line of travel and commerce between the Atlantic States and California, and after that the semi-barbarians and half-clothed savages of that locality no more interrupted our commerce or murdered our people.

REGULATION OF TRANSPORTATION.

By what authority and in what manner our internal commerce shall be regulated is a question of present and deep interest, and party managers who ask an indefinite extension of power should declare their policy in unmistakable terms. In their addresses the members of Congress evade it, except to say that whatever may or may not be expedient to be done, "only the Republican party can be relied upon to do it." Why so? Has that party not been in power, both State and national, long enough to have done something, if its leaders were really in favor of anything?

In respect to the proposition that Congress shall build a double track railway from the Mississippi to the Atlantic, the congressional address says, This is worthy of careful consideration." And in respect to the proposed expenditure of $20,000,000 per year by Con