History of the forged "Morey letter" : a narrative of the discovered facts respecting this great political forgery ...

Front matter

■V

„N o.

x'

Preface

On the eighth day of November, 1880, and shortly after the Presidential

election of that year, GeneralJames A. Gai-field — President elect wrote me:

' ' I want you to press the prosecution of the Chinese forgery case until every rascal concerned in it is punished. * * * The subject must not be dropped, but pushed until the forger is discovered."

One week later — under date ofNovember 15th, 1880 — General Garfield ao-ain wrote me: "I hope you wiU persevere until the whole thing is discovered."

Until Avithin a week past I have not been able to say my work was completed, and yet I was in position, shortly before President Garfield v.as assassinated, to exhibit to him some of the original documents of which copies and facsimiles are given herein, and to satisfy him that there was httle doubt the entii-e history of the forgery would be obtained, and the fraud exposed.

The " hunt " has never ceased, and this volume has been wi'itten, not as a campaign document but as a history of the Morey letter ancl of the ascertained facts respecting its authorship, publication, endorsement and suppoi-t.

The wishes of General Garfield, as expressed to me in his letters, have, so far as possible, been carried out. The subject has not been "dropped," and I have " persevered " in the work to the best of my ability.

I THEREFOEE DEDICATE THIS BoOK TO THE MbMORY OF THE LATE

President, JAMES A. GARFIELD,

As A Tribute of Respect and Esteem.

J. I. D.

Neio York, May 31sl, 1884,

INTRODUCTORY.

This work has a three-fold purpose :

Fird. To recall to public attention the forgery during' the Presidential campaign of 1880 of the name of the late James A. Garfield to the so-called Morey lettei.

Second. To present to the country a plain historical recital of all the

facts — those heretofore known as well as those until recently undiscovered •

connected with the origin of the forgery, its appearance, and the false swearing, pei-jimes, alterations of documents and additional forgeries resorted to in the effort to sustain the letter after its publication.

Third. To awaken sufficient interest in the public mind to the great danger incident to the commission of such offenses in connection with our elections, and thereby to secure such legislation as will tend to prevent in the future the introduction of forgery as an element of party success at such times.

Having devoted the greater portion of two years of time to the investigation and study of this matter, and having ascertained the facts in relation to the document in question, its authors, aiders and abettors, I desire to say that I have neither the wish nor the intention to do injustice to any person, or to misrepresent the action of any political organization.

If, therefore, in the recital here made, the facts presented reflect severel}^ upon any individuals, or any committee, organization, or i^arty, it is solely because of their or its own action.

I seek only to narrate "the truth of history," and where there are different versions of any transaction I have presented the statement of each individual connected therewith, so far as I have been able to obtain it. Those who participated in the events of which I treat must stand or fall by their own conduce. My task is to present the record of their acts.

Before piassing to the story, it seems not inaiiprojiriate that a few words should be written as to my object in devoting to the investigation of this matter the time and labor I have given it.

Holding decided and radical views as to the absolute necessity, under our form of government, of unquahfied freedom and purity in our elections, I believe that the sui-est preventive of fraud at elections is publicity at each and every step taken, from the announcement of the fact that an election is to be held, to the declaration of the result thereof by the last and highest tribunal called upon to take action in regard thereto. Forgery and fraud thrive only in secret. Publicity not only tends to the prevention of crime, but leads to its detection, and subsequent exjiosure and punishment.

No fraud connected with, or incident to an election, should ever be considered as condoned, either by reason of its failure to accomplish the results sought, or by the fact that the day of election has passed. As a people, we have been, and we are to-day, far too remiss in this matter. The moment an election is over, the tendency is to treat whatever transpired during the canvass in the way of political offenses, as matters which were at the time of their commission both annoying and dangerous, but which are to be overlooked and forgotten in the general result. To this vicAV is to be largely attributed the frequency of such offenses as libel and forgery during exciting and hotly contested elections.

Failure to reap the results intended by tlie commission of a political offense, perpetrated prior to or at an election, should never be regarded as a plea in bar to its investigation and exi)osure, nor should the close of an election be considered as a statute of limitations against its punishment. Investigation and exposure should follow the perpetration of any act committed with intent to im]n-operly aifect the result of an election. If it be j)()ssible, the offender should be punished; but, if the law has attached no pt-nultv to the act, it should, none the less, be investigated and exposed. I n this way only will the needed legislation be siJeedily obtained and future j)nttec-tion sec-ured.

It took ten long years of patient and arduous labor to secure the evidence respecting the fraudulent naturalization certificates issued by the New York Courts in the year 18G8, in such comjileteness as that the certificates might be " imjx)unded " and no longer voted upon. It was finally demonstrated that the 1" >ng period of time which had elapsed since their issuance, neither prevented the discovery of tlieii' fi'audulent character nor sanctified theii' possession ; and this fact will, it is believed, be of great service in preventing the repetiton upon any extended scale of similar fi'auds in the near futxu-e.

Entertaining these views, and looking back at most of the Presidential elections of the past twenty years, I observed that each such election seemed to have developed a new species, or form, of fraud whereby the result was sought to be affected. It appeared that at least once in every four years, partisan zeal had devised some new scheme to attain party success in other than the only proper and legitimate channel — the will of the i^eople, freely expressed, honestly returned and lawfully declared.

I. In 18()4:, to defeat Lincoln and Johnson, frauds were attempted in the receiving and retui'ning of the votes of the soldiers, and riots were threatened in New York.

The early exposure of the first mentioned plot led to its failure, while the clear head and rare executive ability of Major-General Butler, exercising the powers of a Department Commander, alone caused an abandonment of the latter project and maintained the public peace.

II. In 18(j8, to defeat Grant and Colfax, the most gigantic and systematic efforts were made to over-ride the popular will by means of organized relocating and wholesale frauds in 2iaturahzation.

Tliese ett'orts led to the enactment of the National Election Laws, and to similar legislation by many of the States, by which the future perjoetration of such offenses was guarded against, and their jounishment provided for.

III. In 1876, to defeat Hayes and "^^^leeler, organized violence and terrorism were resorted to in several States, tissue ballots were used without number, returns were altered, the attempt made to bribe electors, and, as a novelty, the famous " cipher dispatches" were used to accomjolish results not reached liy the votes cast.

l\. In 1880, to defeat Garfield and Arthur, a new device was resorted to, ill the publication and dissemination, shortly before the day of election, and at !i date so late as almost to preclude theii- efficient exposure, of forged letters in the names of Presidential candidates.

Eacli of these several efforts had its own specific purpose.

'J'hut of 1804 was intended to deter peaceful and law-abiding citizens from giving expression to their choice of candidates through fear of violence and disorder.

That of 18(18 was meant to carry the election by the casting and counting of thousands of false and fraudulent votes.

That of IHTO combined the two preceding schemes, and added the attempt to ])un'liase members of an Electoral College.

The effort of 1880 differed from the others in that it was intended to deceive the voters into casting their ballots for candidates other than those of their choice, by means of forged letters whicli gave expression to sentiments not entertained by their alleged authors, and views which were repugnant to a large class of voters.

Of aU the devices referred to, that of 1880, was, in many respects, the most dangerous, because the least readily to be met and controverted before its purpose was consvmimated, and the least likely to be thereafter reached, if successful.

If an election be carried by either violence, fraudulent voting, false naturalization, bribery, false canvassing, or forged or altered returns, investigation is certain to follow, exposure to ensue, and legal measures to be taken, nut only to punish the offenders but to oust the incumbents, and thereby, to give to the people "their own again."

If, however, an election should be carried by reason of forged expressions of views on the pai-t of candidates, whei-eby the voters either withheld their votes from their party nominees or cast them for those of the opposite party, not only would there be no method of punishing the guilty parties, if discovered — and the chances of discovery would be infinitesimal — but there would be no means by which the wrong could be remedied. The votes cast, although in fact falsely and fraudulently obtained, would stand, and the beneficiaries of the forgeries would alone profit thereby.

In view of the facts recited and of the opinions entertained by me upon these subjects, coupled with the earnest requests both of General Garfield and General Arthur, I determined that the forgery of the Morey letter should not He buried in an unknown grave with the passing of the election, notwithstanding the fact that the candidates whom it was designed to defeat — and whom it came near to defeating — were successful.

THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1880.

THE PARTY ORGANIZATIONS.

The nominees of the Republican party for President and Vice-President of the United States were General James A. Garfield, of Ohio, and General Chester A. Ai'thur, of New York. Those of the Democratic party were General Winfield S. Hancock, of Pennsylvania, and WilHam H. English, of Indiana, while the Greenback-Labor party nominated General James B. Weaver, of Iowa, and Benjamin J. Chambers, of Texas.

Each of these political organizations was represented by a National Committee charged with the duty of organizing and conducting the canvass on behalf of the party and its nominees.

The officers of the Republican National Committee were the Hon. Mai'shall Jewell, of Connecticut, Chaii*man ; the Hon. Stephen W. Dorsey, of Ai-kansas, Secretaiy, and Colonel George W. Hooker, of Vermont, Assistant Secretary.

The Greenback-Laboi- Committee chose George O. Jones, of New York, Chairman ; Lee-Crandall, of Washington, D. C. , Secretary, and Dyer D. Lum, of New York, Assistant Secretary.

The National Committee of the Democratic party organized on the 13th of July, 1880. The Hon. WiUiam H. Barnum, of Connecticut, was elected Chairman, and the Hon. Frederick O. Prince, of Massachusetts, Secretary, and Edward B. Dickinson, of Massachusetts, Washington, D. C. , and New York, Official Stenographer. From the whole committee an Executive Committee of eighteen members was appointed, jDrominent among whom were the following named gentlemen, most, if not all, of whom were also appointed from the Executive Committee as an Advisory Committee : Wilham H. Barnum. of Connepticut ; Frederick O. Prince, of Massachusetts ; Outerbridge Horsey, of :M!ir\i!iiul; Orestes Cleveland, of New Jersey ; Abram S. Hewitt, of New York ; ^^'illlalu L. Seott, of Pennsyl vania,and Bradley B. Smalley, of Vermont.

Ou the 2;Ul of July, the Democratic National Committee formally opened its headipiarters at No. 188 Fifth Avenue, in the city of New York.

Mr. Wilham H. Barnum, the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and ex-otiicio Chairman of the Executive Committee, had been a member of Conprress, and a Senator of the United States from the State of Connecticut, and was a prominent member of the Democratic National Committee of 187G. He is known in the councils of his party as an ardent Tilden man, but his i)ublic career has not been such as to inspire the country with any decided respect for himself or his political practices or methods.

Mr. AViUiam L. Scott, of Erie, Pennsylvania, was also a member of the Democratic National Committee of 1876 and a strong adherent of Mr. Tilden. He is an aggressive man, well known as a leader in the art of bolstering up party confidence by heavy and widely published wagers upon the success of his party. His ability to make large contributions and to aid in the raising of considerable sums of money toward the campaign fund of the Committee has never been lost sight of in its make up.

Mr. Abram S. Hewitt, of New York, was the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 187G. He is a gentleman of large wealth, marked ability, and great nervous energy. Most unfortunately, however, his judgment, speeches and action are constantly warped and controlled by his impetuosity, vanity, and other infirmities. This naturally results in his frequently assuming positions upon public questions which ai'e not only untenable, but which ai'e suiTounded by much which is irritating and embaiTassing to one possessed of his cultm-e, experience, and sensitiveness.

3ti-. Frederick O. Prince, of Massachusetts, may well be considered a life member of the National Committee, having been named thereon as early as the year 18G0, in which year he was fii'st chosen its Secretary, a position which he has ever since held. He was also, in 1880, the Mayor of the City of Boston, and did not give that attention to Committee matters during that year which it had previously been his habit to do. He is a gentleman possessed of some ])opularity in his State ; is ambitious for stih higher political honors, and desu'ous of a reputation for so conducting liimseH as to receive the suffrages and command the respect of those not recognized as strict party adherents.

I\Ir. Edward B. Dickinson, the Official StenogTapher of the Democratic National Committee in 1880, had been, I believe, an attache of the Committee since 18G8. He was originally fi-om Boston, has gi-eat cajDacity for work, and is po.ssessed of an extended acquaintance among the public men of his party. While his position with the Committee, in 1880, was, upon its face, a subordinate one, he was, in fad, the Acting Secretary of that body, and the duties discharged by him were laborious, confidential, and important.

Subsequent to the election of 1880, ]\Ir. Dickinson occupied, for a time, offices with the H(jn. Smith j\l. Weed, of New Y^ork, whose connection with the attem])ts to control the Canvassing Board of South Carolina at the Presidential flection of 187G, by means which have become historical, will not soon be forj,'otten. He has also been carried upon the pay-rolls of the De])artment of Pulilic Works of the City of New York as an " axeman " — but the $75 a month allowed him under tbat title, as well as the other sums which he has received from the ap])ro|)riations granted that Department, have been given him lor other work than that which an " axeman " is generally called upon to perform.

The Chauacteu of the Campaign.

Tlie RepubUcan 'canvass was conducted with unusual energy, and while it cannot be asserted that errors of judgment were 'not committed, it is true that they were infrecpieut and of no special importance. The fairness and decency of ilie campaign waj^ed on belialf of its candidates was a inarliod feature, of wiiich Governor Jewell, as Chairman of the National Committee, had reason to be proud.

In this respect the canvass on the part of the Democratic party was in striking contrast, being mainly distinguished for its abusive and scandalous character.

It seems proper that some reference should be made to a few instances illustrative of the justness of the criticism here indulged in :

I. By the terms of a contract entered into between the telegraph companies and the Democratic National Committee, it was agreed, at the opening of the campaign, that all telegrams sent or received by the Committee were to be returned to it at the end of each week, as vouchers for the bills rendered. By the blunder of an employe of the Western Union Telegi-aph Company, two telegrams of the Repubhcan National Committee, addressed to parties in Florida, found a place in the package of messages forwarded the Democratic Committee on the 20th of October. Those two dispatches were sent by Governor Jewell. The first was to a gentleman in Florida, whose services, and tiiose of a friend, were desired upon the stump, informing him of the compensation which would be allowed them.

This telegram read as follows :

" Rush." New York, Octoher 12tli, 18j^0.

To Hon. Charles J. Noyes,

. Care of H. Jenkins, Jr.,

Jacksonville, Fla.

I teleo-raphed yesterday. I will provide, as requested, two hundred each for CalJender and yourself as compensation.

17 pa. ' MARSHALL JEWELL.

The second telegram read :

" Rush." New York, October 12tli, 1880.

Collector, Key West, Fla.

"City of Dallas " took 150 ; " City of Texas," 100 ; "Colorado, " 100, for Key West. Men on dock instructeil to say nothing about it.

26 pd. MARSHALL JEWELL.

This dispatch was sent under the following circumstances : On the 8th of October, Governor Jewell received information of the sailing of a number of men, during the preceding week, for Florida. He immediately sent the following message :

To F. W. Wicker, New York, October stli, 1880.

Collector, Key West, Fla.

Mallory steamer of last week had 200 or 300 workmen for some railroad. Looks to nie as

though they were sent to Key West to vote.

MARSHALL JEWELL.

Pursuing his inquiries as to the shipment of these men, Governor Jewell, on the 11th of October, received the following letter :

Custom House, New York.

Collector's Office.

Dear Sir. New York, October lUh, 1880.

I have just received the enclosed memorandum from a perfectly trustworthy person. You remember my telling you the other night I would try to get at the facts.

Yours in haste.

To the Hon. Marshall Jewell, TREICHEL.

Chairman, etc.

The memorandum enclosed read :

"City of Dallas," i:>0; " Stateof Texas," 100; " Colorado," 100; meu on dock instructed to say iiolliliig about it. Denied in olfice at dock that any had gone.

Upon this information and memorandiim, Governor Jewell, very properly, sent his telegram of October 12th, 1880, apprising the CoUector at Key West of tlie reported facts.

Instead of acting as a gentleman would naturally do, and immediately returning the telegrams to the company and observing silence as to their contents, Mr. Barnum exhibited them to Mr. Abram S. Hewitt, who proceeded to the steps of the Sub-Treasury in Wall Street, where, to an.admiring audience, he spoke as follows: vide New York World, October 22d, 1880.

"We are surrounded by fraud. I have myself seen to-day a telegram sent by Marshall Jewell, the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, to his agent in Florida : " We ship you 200 men on such a vessel, 200 by another steamer, 100 on another."

This extraordinary statement of Mr. Hewitt was followed, late in the evening of the day on whicli it was made, by a long address from Mr. Chairman Barnum, " to the public," in which was printed the telegrams with the dec-laration that they Avere "then being lithographed" for general distribution. Tlieir publication led at once to a statement of the facts by Governor Jewell, and the sensation " died a bornin'," the telegraph company demanding the immediate return to it of the dispatches and following its demand by proceedings in the courts to compel prompt compliance therewith.

n. The calumnious address of Mr. Wilham H. Barnum issued on September 17th, relative to the Maine election, in which, among other charges, he declared that the Republicans "had stopped the returns coming in, and delayed them until they could be altered."

The fact was, that in the year 1878, on the Monday of the week following the Tuesday of the election, the returns from but 476 towns had been received ; that in the year 1879, on the Monday of the week following the Tuesday of the election, but 479 towns had been heard from. In 1880, of which Mr. Barnum spoke, there had, on the night of Friday, September 17th, the date of the issuance of his address — only three nights after the Tuesday of the election — been received and j^ublished the returns from 490 towns.

in. The scurrilous and simultaneous placarding and defacing, upon a fixed day, in all the large cities and villages of the country, of dwellings, l)ubhc buildings, lamp posts, fences, trees, pavements and gutters, with the figures " 829."

Tliis action was intended to cast a slur upon General Garfield, and if not done at the instigation of the Democratic National Committee, received the wiirm approval of members of that body and excited the admiration of the Democratic press.

IV. The conduct of the Democratic National Committee in the matter of the so-called Morey letter.

PART FTllST.

THE MOREY LETTER.

THE POLITICAL SITUATION PRIOR TO AND AT THE TIME OF ITS PUBLICATION.

To the end that the political situation at the time of the publication of the Morey letter may be cleai'ly understood, a brief reference to the then, and shortly preceding, condition of the canvass appears necessary.

The State election in Maine, in September, had resulted in the choice of General Plaisted as Governor, upon a fusion ticket of Democrats and Greenbackers. Tliis gave the Democracy strong hopes of success in the National canvass, then but six weeks oft', while it warned the Republicans that they must put forth their best efforts if they expected to win in November. Ohio and Indiana were to hold State elections on the 13th of October, and it was practically conceded that the result in those States would forecast the issue in November.

Fortunately, the lessons of the Marine election brought wisdom to the minds of the Republican leaders. The result was the laying aside of many old and threadbare topics of discussion, which were quite as well understood by the great mass of the people as by most of the stump orators of the day. In place thereof there was precipitated into the canvass a living issue — the tariff question. The platform of each party had proclaimed the pai-ty position upon this issue. That of the Republicans demanded "a tariff" that will discriminate in favor of American labor," while that of the Democrats favored " a tariff for revenue only."

Instantly, the character of the campaign changed, and all along the Repubhcan lines was felt the pressure of the recruits who came crowding in uj^on its ranks. New interest was everywhere awakened. The young men, who were about to cast their first votes for a President, were found flocking to the RepubHcan cause. The business men of the country were seen taking the most lively interest in the success of the Republican candidates. The employes of the great manufactories, mills, foundries and shops became aroused and clamorous for " tariff' cards " and " tracts," while on every side there was manifested the greatest activity and the warmest enthusiasm in the Republican canvass.

At this time, and under these circumstances, was conceived a scheme to cheat and defraud the voters of the Nation, by obtaining their ballots for the Democratic candidates. The means adopted was a forged letter, which purported to have been written by the RepubUcan nominee for President, at a date months prior to his nomination, wherein he was made to give expression to views the reverse of those declared to be held by him in his letter of acceptance, and the wording of which was so framed as to be obnoxious to a large class of voters.

The Democratic party of the country, fearing defeat, through its National Committee and other prominent leaders caused this letter to be published, in facsimile, endorsed and circulated it, and to the last hour of the active life of the Committee, in the year 1880, supported, sustained and defended it, though a palpable and pronounced forgery, for the sake of pax'ty success.

Its Publication.

On the nioniinp; of Tuesday, October 19tli, 1880, Truth, a comparatively uiiknowu ])oiiny paper published in the city of New York, announced that on the following,' day it -would " produce positive evidence that James A. Gartii'ld is [was] a prtmounced advocate of Chinese cheajD labor." On the mornin>,^ of A^'ednebday, October 20th, Truth published, in type, the following letter :

"GARFIELD'S DEATH WARRANT."

" Personal and Confidential.'''

"House op Representatives,

Wasiiincton, D. C, Jan. 2.3d, 1880."

"Dear Sir:

Yours ill relation to the Chinese problem came dulj' to hand. 1 take it that the question of employes is only a question of private and conwrate economy, and individuals or compunys have the right to buy labor wliere they can get it cheapest.

We have a treaty with the Chinese Government which should l)e religiously kept until its provisions are abrogated by the action of the general Government, and 1 am not prepared to say that it should be abrogated until our great manufacturing and corporate interests are

conserved in the matter ul' labor.

Very truly yours, "H. L. Morey, J. A. GARFIELD."

Employers' Union,

Lynn, Mass."

The publication was accompanied by a statement that ' ' the foregoing is a true copy," which was not in exact accord with the facts, as was disclosed two days thereafter upon the appearance of o. facsimile of the letter. It was added that the letter " was mailed at Washington by the Republican candidate for President to Henry L. Morey, a prominent member of the Employers' Union, Lyain, Massachusetts. At his death, which recently occurred, it was found among his effects."

Summary of the subsequent course of ' ' Truth " and of the Daily Press OF New York, respecting the Morey Letter, prior to the arrest of Kenward Philp.

From the day of the first publication of the Morey letter by Truth, down to a date long subsequent to the day of election, its treatment of General Garfield, of the letter itself, and of every one Avho questioned its authenticity, w:is coarse and brutal in the extreme. The tone and chai'acter of its editorials may be judged by the following extracts :

On Thursday, October 21st, it declared that General (jai-field, in causing to be sent the jn-ess denial of the genuineness of the letter, was " a liar."

On Fritlay, October '22d, it published, in facsimile, both the letter and the envelojie in which it was claimed to have been mailed to Morey, declared General (Jiirliold's name to be "synonymous with treachery and falsehood," pronounced him a " stupid liar," as "guilty of a sneaking he," and as a "desj)eratc " and " stupid liar."

On ]\[ouday, October 2,5th, it styled him a " doubly branded liar," and chiugeil him with resoi-tiug to " black lies and foul slanders to save his failing cause."

On Die iiiorniiij; of Thursday, October 21st, a press denial from Mentor, Ohio, made on behalf of General Garfield, was published in most, if not all, the >iew York daiUes.

'i^he facsimile of the Morey letter, as published in Tni'h on October 22d, was found to be quite different in essential particulars from the letter as printed by it in type. The facsimile disclosed the fact that at least three words, and apparently a fourth, were incoi-rectly spelled. Tliey were " companies," which was written "companys," the word "economy," which Avas written "ecomomy," and the word 'religiousl}'," which was written " reli<,'- eously." Of these the word " companys " alone was printed as it appeared in the letter and the facsimile, while the printed copy, from its fii'st appearance to its last, contained the word "employes," which, in both the letter and the facsimile, was spelled " employees."

It also appeared, from the facsimile, that the signature to the letter, as wi'itten, was not J. A. Garfield, as printed, but " J. A. Garfield " — the " r" in Garfield being dotted and not the "i."

The presentation of the letter, for two days, in so grossly inaccurate a form was, at least, a very grave error. The blunders in oi'thogi-aphy, in the original letter, were of great gravity in their character, and the printed cojiy should have shown them.

Another noticeable fact disclosed by the facsimile of the face of the envelope — which alone was published — was the absence fi'om the Washington postmark of the month, day of month and hour of mailing.

In its issue of Saturday, October 23d, Truth declared that Samuel J. Kandall, the Speaker of the National House of Representatives, when shown the original of the Morey letter, "compared it carefully with letters in his possession, scrutinized each word, mark and letter, and declared that it was truly in James A. Garfield's handwriting."