Darwin E. Ware.

THE recent death of Judge Hoar so nearly ends the list of living men who were his colleagues in the Cabinet when he was Grant's first Attorney-General that the events of that time may fairly be considered matter for historical treatment. What we call political reasons for reticence have lost their force. If the facts connected with his retirement from office teach any lesson, there seems to be no good reason why it should not be taught. If they throw light upon the characteristics of President Grant and help to make him and his administration more clearly intelligible, it may be of service to true history to make them known. Not even party interests can now be promoted by concealment, and there is always a chance that the cause of good government may be helped by indicating what led to past errors which are pretty generally confessed.

Current popular opinion in 1870 ascribed Judge Hoar's retirement from the Cabinet to discontent with his position

and duties, to irritation at the rejection of his nomination to the Supreme Court, and to personal chafing in his relations to those with whom a public officer must work. It was left, in most men's minds, vaguely doubtful whether he had taken the initiative in the matter of his resignation, or whether the President had been led to ask for it on account of embarrassments growing out of supposed eccentricities of temper which interfered with cordiality between the executive and legislative departments of the government. It is the essence of apology to put strongly forward the plausible circumstances which mitigate a severe judgment, and political apologies are apt to be the most perfunctory of all. Anything is urged which may silence or soften publie complaint, and in Judge Hoar's case it became very quickly evident that the popular instinct had divined that a blunder had been made, if a positive wrong had not been done. His magnanimity was shown by his silence, for he must

have been sorely tempted at times to tell what the facts were. He was so sincerely anxious that Grant's administration should be a success that he urged his friends to ignore everything which was personal to himself, and to treat his retirement as an incident so naturally resulting from circumstances as not to call for discussion.

His intellectual ability, his learning, his sterling integrity, were universally recognized. His wit was of the highest and purest flavor, and was not merely an adornment of his conversation; he made it a potent auxiliary of his logic, clinching the triumph of an argument and disarming an adversary by an illustration that made opposition seem ridiculous. When dealing with injustice or dishonesty, the edge of his humorous sarcasm cut like a knife, and the doer of a wrong had no refuge from self-contempt but in wrath and hatred. With those who tried to force incompetent or unworthy men into positions in the Department of Justice he was righteously indignant, and nearly every complaint of acerbity in his temper could be traced directly to discomfited attempts to make judges or district attorneys of disreputable or unfit men. With spoilsmen of this class he was apt to use plain English. No doubt he had thus made a considerable number of influential enemies by the close of 1869. The passage of the new judiciary act called for the nomination of the whole class of circuit judges, and the Attorney-General's heart was set on having the new places filled by men who would honor the bench in the performance of judicial duties subordinate only to those of the Supreme Court. He could not always make his judgment of men potent, but the President stood by him so well, on the whole, that the judicial nominations sent to the Senate that winter are proof enough of his character and his courage.

It was in the midst of irritations thus growing out of struggles to influence a

large batch of appointments of so important a kind that Judge Hoar's own name was sent to the Senate with the nomination to the bench of the Supreme Court. There were two vacancies, and Edwin M. Stanton was nominated to the other. Judge Hoar did not seek the place, nor take any initiative in the matter. He was too thoroughly a lawyer not to be fully sensible of the great honor of the position, but he was too clear-headed not to estimate at their value the antagonisms he must meet. The reasons for the President's action are found, in part, in circumstances which grew out of the original organization of the Cabinet.

As will be remembered, Grant's first nomination to the Treasury Department was that of Mr. A. T. Stewart, of New York. He was chagrined that legal objections to a merchant's serving in that office should interfere with his plan. Governor Boutwell, of Massachusetts, was the strong choice of many members of Congress, but to appoint two Cabinet officers from the same State was unusual, and the President hesitated. It was then, at the very beginning of his service, that Judge Hoar assured the President that if, at that time or any other, his resignation would relieve him of any embarrassment in the matter, he would tender it at once. It is, perhaps, enough for the moment to say that the vacancy in the Supreme Court appeared to the President to offer an honorable solution of the anomaly in the Cabinet organization.

It has been stated with some color of authority that Grant had offered the post of Secretary of the Interior to Governor Boutwell, in the first cast of the Cabinet, and that the nomination of Judge Hoar to the attorney-generalship was determined on when Mr. Boutwell had declined the place as taking him out of the line of congressional work, for which he had special predilection. I do not know that this is true, but it accords well with Judge Hoar's suggestion that if any embarrassment resulted from the pre

sence of two Massachusetts men in the Cabinet, he himself should be the one to retire.

The interesting question then is, How did any embarrassment for the President arise, and how did he act upon it? The answer is found in the history of the effort to annex San Domingo to the United States, a curious chapter in American administration.

General Rawlins had died at the beginning of September, 1869, and his death was an irreparable loss to Grant and to the administration. Other men might fill the office of Secretary of War, but no other man could be found who could be the successful intermediary between General Grant and his associates in public duty. His friendship for his chief was of so sacredly intimate a character that he alone could break through the taciturnity into which Grant settled when he found himself in any way out of accord with the thoughts and opinions of those around him. Rawlins could argue, could expostulate, could condemn, could even upbraid, without interrupting for an hour the fraternal confidence and good will of Grant. He had won the right to this relation by an absolute devotion which dated from Grant's appointment to be a brigadier-general in 1861, and which had made him the good genius of his friend in every crisis of Grant's wonderful career. This was not because of Rawlins's great intellect, for he was of only moderate mental powers. It was rather that he became a living and speaking conscience for his general; as courageous to speak in a time of need as Nathan the prophet, and as absolutely trusted as Jonathan by David. In military problems Grant had a strong and almost intuitive sagacity in determining upon the path to victory; not always the easiest or the most economical in blood and treasure, but a sure one when his own indomitable courage and will had clear scope. He silently listened to the discussion of such men as Sherman and McPherson, he pa

tiently turned the matter over in his own thoughts, and after a while enounced a decision which showed the aid he got from intelligent debate, whilst it was clearly marked with his own directness of purpose and boldness of action. Rawlins knew how to bring on such helpful discussion in Grant's presence. He knew how to reinforce the influence of those who deserved to be trusted, and to expose insidious and false friendship. He had blunt, wrathful words of objurgation for those who put in Grant's way temptations which he knew to be dangerous. A moral monitor and guide not hesitating at big oaths and camp expletives seems a strange type of man, but no one could deny that Rawlins's heart was as true and his perception of the thing demanded by the honor and the welfare of his chief was as clear as his manners and words often were rough.

It will not need argument to show how useful such a friend and counselor might be as a Cabinet officer. He could give warnings that no one else could utter; he could insist upon debate and information before settled purposes should be adopted; he would know of influences at work that others would learn of only when some important step was already taken; his own openness of character would make him frank in action with his colleagues, and an honorable representative of their general judgment and policy. Rawlins might have differed from Mr. Fish as to the foreign policy of the government, especially in regard to Cuba, but he would have seen to it that no kitchen cabinet committed the President to schemes of which his responsible advisers were ignorant. Indeed, there was no danger that a kitchen cabinet could exist till Rawlins was dead.

In the early months of Grant's administration there was at Washington a representative of the Baez government in San Domingo, named Fabens. That country was in a revolutionary condition, and it was not certain that Baez would

be able to maintain himself against his rival, Cabral, who was at the head of an armed force in the interior of the island. Fabens professed to be negotiating for the purchase of some of the old arms which filled our arsenals after the close of the civil war. He was, however, constantly suggesting the annexation of San Domingo to the United States, and Mr. Fish from time to time reported these overtures, and the annoyance which the persistence of Fabens gave him. The annexation scheme met with little favor in the Cabinet, and Congress showed itself consistently opposed to it. The objections were various, and were based on grounds of general policy as well as on the particular circumstances of the case and of the time.

First, there were those who held firmly that the only sound policy of the United States is a strictly continental one, coupling a leading influence on the mainland of America with deliberate abstinence from distant extensions of territory. Second, there were those who, in view of the fact that the dominant population of the island was of the negro race, felt that the problems involved in our own great emancipation were quite as large as this generation could satisfactorily handle or solve. Third, still others thought that as the whole island of Hispaniola was divided between the two republics of Hayti and San Domingo, jealous of each other, the one speaking only French, the other only Spanish, the acquisition of the Spanish half would necessarily be followed by the annexation of the whole, each contingency seeming to excel the other in troublesome complications. Fourth, men of statesmanlike character felt deeply the inconsistency of opening a new scheme of West India colonies while the treaty with Denmark for the purchase of St. Thomas, negotiated by Mr. Seward, was still pending, and not formally rejected by the Senate, though there was time for repentance, as the period for final ratification

would not expire till the middle of April, 1870. Lastly, there were some scrupulous enough to be deterred from favoring annexation because Baez was forbidden by the Constitution of his country from negotiating it; and who believed with Charles Sumner that it would be a wrong to the people of the colored race to take from them the territory which gave them the opportunity to work out the problem of their capacity for independent selfgovernment.

The discussion of the subject at Cabinet meetings had been free, and although Grant was a listener rather than a participant in the debate, there was a general acquiescence in the opinion of Mr. Fish that a cordially friendly attitude to the actual government in San Domingo, with decided discouragement to all intervention and filibustering, should be our poliThis was so well understood that there was no hesitation in talking about the matter in this sense, and in letting it be known that the administration had taken this line of conduct.

cy.

One day, however, the President casually remarked that the navy people seemed so anxious to have the bay of Samana as a coaling station that he thought he would send Colonel Babcock down to examine it and report upon it as an engineer. Babcock, as will be remembered, was one of the group of young army officers who, having been members of Grant's military staff, were retained in duties near his person during his presidency. His position was nominally that of assistant private secretary. His army service had been creditable, and he was a very intelligent and competent military engineer. The suggestion of sending him on the errand was not welcome to those who were anxious to avoid complications, but there was no objection raised, and the acquiescence was a silent one. It was stated that no publicity would be given to the mission, and.that a confidential report upon the country, its people, its harbors, would be useful,

Before Babcock was ready to go, the President, in the same casual way, remarked that the New York merchants who had control of the trade with the island had courteously tendered to Babcock a free passage on one of their ships. This showed that somebody was giving publicity to the mission, but it had greater significance in showing that the State Department had no part in its management. Mr. Fish, evidently surprised, remarked that it seemed to him very undesirable that Colonel Babcock should be the guest of merchants having great trading interests in San Domingo, whilst he was upon a confidential investigation for the President. General Grant acquiesced, and said he would direct the navy to give Colonel Babcock transportation, as vessels were going down to join the West India squadron. Still again, a day or two later, it was said that, as Babcock did not speak Spanish, a well-known officer of the InspectorGeneral's department would accompany him. Lastly, it appeared that Mr. Columbus Cole, then a Senator from California, was to be of the party on this new voyage of discovery to Hispaniola. As the members of the Cabinet were carefully discreet in their reticence, the increase of the party and of the apparent importance of the mission caused a certain uneasiness, especially as rumors began to fly about that business speculations were involved, and that the official character of the affair was much less than its real significance. The members of the government felt loyally bound to suppress their own doubts, and to attribute to the excitability of the quidnuncs the rumors of important purposes connected with Babcock's voyage.

After some weeks' absence, Babcock's return was announced by the New York newspapers, with suggestions of interesting results. On seeing this, I called upon Mr. Fish at the State Department the same afternoon. He sent his private secretary from the room, and closed the

door; then coming toward me with manifest feeling, he said, "What do you think! Babcock is back, and has actually brought a treaty for the cession of San Domingo; yet I pledge you my word he had no more diplomatic authority than any other casual visitor to that island!” An earnest discussion of the situation followed, in which we agreed that the proper course was to treat Babcock's action as null, and to insist upon burying the whole in oblivion as a state secret; this being the only way, apparently, to save him from the grave consequences of a usurpation of power. It did not occur to either of us, in view of the past history of the matter, that the President would assume the responsibility for the illegal act of his messenger.

In the informal discussion of the subject which incidentally occurred before the next Cabinet meeting, the view Mr. Fish had taken seemed to be the general one, and it was expected that he would present it when we should be assembled. When the heads of departments came for the purpose to the President's room at the White House, they found Babcock already there, showing to each, as he arrived, specimens of the ores and products of the island, and descanting upon its extraordinary value. He met a rather chilling reception, and soon left the room.

It had been the President's habit. at such meetings, to call upon the members of the Cabinet to bring forward the business contained in their portfolios, beginning with the Secretary of State. This would at once have brought the action of Babcock up by Mr. Fish's disclaimer of all part in the matter, and his statement of its utter illegality. On this occasion, however, General Grant departed from his uniform custom, and took the initiative. "Babcock has returned, as you see," said he, " and has brought a treaty of annexation. I suppose it is not formal, as he had no diplomatic powers; but we can easily cure that. We can send back the treaty, and have Perry,