Mary Austin - "The Lovely Lady"

Bjoernstjerne Bjoernson - "Captain Mansana and Mother's Hands"

Lafcadio Hearn - "Glimpses of an Unfamiliar Japan"

Feodor Sologub - "The Created Legend"

Annual Bibliography of Commonwealth Literature 2007
This paper argues that discourses of love in Ghanaian market literature for youth offer a view into complex negotiations of agency and empowerment. Drawing on Deborah Durham's notion of youth as "social `shifters'" and Francis Nyamnjoh's conception of the "interconnectedness" of agency, I take Ghanaian market literature as one specific case of how African literature for youth foregrounds questions of continuity and change as African societies enter into increasingly complex global relations. In this literature for youth, received notions of love, often constructed out of impressions from American pop and hip hop music, carry new notions of agency that compete with existing "domesticated" forms. Authors like Ike Tandoh and Evelyn Tay employ discourses of love to offer youth alternative avenues for empowerment in a context of socio-economic disenfranchizement. In a creative process of "straddling", this writing both reveals and reproduces the contradictions that obtain in youth configurations of agency.

Twenty Years of Congress, Volume 2 (of 2)

J >> James Gillespie Blaine >> Twenty Years of Congress, Volume 2 (of 2)




There was naturally great curiosity to see how his nomination would be
received: first, by the projectors of the Liberal revolt, and second,
by the Democracy. Most of the Liberals promptly acquiesced, though a
few protested. Especially among the Ohio representatives there was
great discontent. Stanley Matthews humorously and regretfully admitted
that he was "not a success at politics." Judge Hoadly published a card
calling the Cincinnati result "the alliance of _Tammany_ and Blair,"
but still hoping for some way of escape from Grant. Most of the German
Liberals rejected the ticket, doubtless finding other objections
emphasized by their dissent from Mr. Greeley's well-known attitude on
sumptuary legislation. The free-trade Liberals of New York held a
meeting of protest, presided over by William Cullen Bryant, and
addressed by David A. Wells, Edward Atkinson, and others who had
participated in the Cincinnati Convention. But this opposition
possessed little importance. The positive political force which had
entered into the Liberal movement stood fast, and the really important
question related to the temper and action of the Democrats.

Their first feeling was one of chagrin and resentment. They had
encouraged the Republican revolt, with sanguine hope of a result which
they could cordially accept, and they were deeply mortified by an
issue whose embarrassment for themselves could not be concealed. They
had counted on the nomination of Mr. Adams, Judge Davis, Senator
Trumbull, or some moderate Republican of that type, whom they could
adopt without repugnance. The unexpected selection of their life-long
antagonist confounded their plans and put them to open shame. At the
outset, the majority of the Democratic journals of the North either
deplored and condemned the result or adopted a non-committal tone.
Some of them, like the _New-York World_, emphatically declared that the
Democracy could not ratify a choice which would involve a
stultification so humiliating and so complete. A few shrewder
journals, of which the _Cincinnati Enquirer_ and the _Saint-Louis
Republican_ were the most conspicuous, took the opposite course and
from the beginning advocated the indorsement of Mr. Greeley.

In the South the nomination was received with more favor. Mr.
Greeley's readiness to go on the bail-bond of Jefferson Davis, his
earnest championship of universal amnesty, and his expressed sympathy
with the grievances of the old ruling element of the slave States, had
created a kindly impression in that section. The prompt utterances of
the Southern journals indicated that no obstacle would be encountered
in the Democratic ranks below the Potomac. At the North, as the
discussion proceeded, it became more and more evident that however
reluctant the party might be, it really had to alternative but to
accept Mr. Greeley. It had committed itself so fully to the Liberal
movement that it could not now abandon it without certain disaster.
Its only possible hope of defeating the Republican party lay in the
Republican revolt, and the revolt could be fomented and prolonged only
by imparting to it prestige and power. The Liberal leaders and
journals did not hesitate to say that if it came to a choice between
Grant and a Democrat, they would support Grant. With this avowal they
were masters of the situation so far as the Democracy was concerned,
and the Democratic sentiment, which at first shrank from Greeley,
soon became resigned to his candidacy.

While the work of reconciling the free-traders to the nomination of a
Protectionist, and of inducing the Democracy to accept an anti-slavery
leader, was in full progress, the Republican National Convention met
at Philadelphia on the 5th of June. The venerable Gerritt Smith led
the delegation from New York, with William Orton, Horace B. Claflin,
Stewart L. Woodford, William E. Dodge, and John A. Griswold among his
associates. Governor Hayes came from Ohio; General Burnside from Rhode
Island; Governor Hawley from Connecticut; Governor Claflin and
Alexander H. Rice from Massachusetts; Henry S. Lane and Governor Conrad
Baker from Indiana; Governor Cullom from Illinois; James Speed from
Kentucky; Amos T. Akerman from Georgia; John B. Henderson from
Missouri; William A. Howard from Michigan; Ex-Senator Cattell and
Cortlandt Parker from New Jersey; Governor Fairchild from Wisconsin;
John R. Lynch, the colored orator, from Mississippi; Morton McMichael,
Glenni W. Scofield, and William H. Koontz from Pennsylvania; Thomas
Settle from North Carolina; James L. Orr from South Carolina.

Mr. McMichael, whose genial face and eloquent voice were always welcome
in a Republican Convention, was selected as temporary chairman. "The
malcontents," said he, "who recently met at Cincinnati were without a
constituency; the Democrats who are soon to meet at Baltimore will be
without a principle. The former, having no motive in common but
personal disappointment, attempted a fusion of repellent elements which
has resulted in explosion; the latter, degraded from the high estate
they once held, propose an abandonment of their identity which means
death." The only business appointed for the first day was speedily
completed, and left ample time for public addresses. Gerritt Smith,
General Logan, Senator Morton, Governor Oglesby, and others made
vigorous party appeals, and delivered enthusiastic eulogies upon
General Grant. Among the speakers were several colored men. It was
the first National Convention in which representatives of their race
had appeared as citizens, and the force and aptitude they displayed
constituted one of the striking features of the occasion. William H.
Gray of Arkansas, B. B. Elliott of South Carolina, and John R. Lynch
of Mississippi made effective speeches which were heartily applauded.

With the completion of the organization, by the choice of Judge Settle
of North Carolina as permanent president, the Convention was ready on
the second day for the nominations; and on the roll-call General Grant
was named for President without a dissenting vote. Then came the
contest in which the chief interest centred. Mr. Colfax had, at the
beginning of the year, written a letter announcing that he would not
be a candidate for re-election as Vice-President. He had undoubtedly
alienated some of the friendship and popularity he had so long enjoyed.
Under these circumstances Senator Henry Wilson of Massachusetts
appeared as a candidate, and made rapid headway in party favor. He
had always been a man of the people, and, though not shining with
brilliant qualitites, had acquired influence and respect through his
robust sense, his sound judgment, and his practical ability. In ready
debate, and in the clear and forcible presentation of political issues,
he held a high place among Republican leaders. Mr. Colfax had recalled
his withdrawal, and as the Convention approached, the contest was so
even and well balanced as to stimulate both interest and effort.

The struggle was practically determined, however, in the preliminary
caucusses of two or three of the large State delegations. When the
roll-call was completed on the first and only ballot, Wilson had 364-1/2
votes and Colfax had 321-1/2. The 22 votes of Virginia had been cast for
Governor Lewis, the 26 of Tennessee for Horace Maynard, and the 16 of
Texas for Governor Davis. The Virginia delegation was the first to get
the floor and change to Wilson, thus securing his nomination; and the
others promptly followed. Among the powerful influences which
controlled the result were the combination and zealous activity of the
Washington newspaper correspondents against Mr. Colfax, who had in some
way estranged a friendship that for many years had been most helpful to
him.

The platform came from a committee, including among its members General
Hawley, Governor Hayes, Glenni W. Schofield, Ex-Attorney-General Speed,
Mr. James N. Matthews, then of the _Buffalo Commercial_, and other
representative men. That the year was largely one of personal
politics, rather than of clear, sharp, overmastering issues, might be
inferred from the scope and character of the resolutions. It was an
hour for maintaining what had been gained, rather than for advancing to
new demands. Equal suffrage had been established, and the danger of
repudiation which had threatened the country in 1868 had apparently
passed away. The necessity and duty of preparing for specie
resumption, which soon after engrossed public attention, were not yet
apprehended or appreciated. Between the two periods the chief work was
that of practically enforcing the settlements which had been ordained
in the Constitutional Amendments.

The platform, after reciting the chapter of Republican achievements,
declared "that complete liberty and exact equality in the enjoyment
of all civil, political, and public rights should be established and
effectually maintained throughout the Union by efficient and
appropriate Federal and State legislation." It asserted that "the
recent amendments to the National Constitution should be cordially
sustained because they are _right;_ not merely tolerated because they
are _law_." It answered the Liberal arraignment of the civil service
by declaring that "any system of the civil service under which the
subordinate positions of the Government are rewards for mere party zeal
is fatally demoralizing, and we therefore favor a reform of the system
by laws which shall abolish the evils of patronage." Besides these
points, the Republican platform opposed further land-grants to
corporations, recommended the abolition of the franking privilege,
approved further pensions, sustained the Protective tariff, and
justified Congress and the President in their measures for the
suppression of violent and treasonable organizations in the South.

The Democratic National Convention met at Baltimore on the 9th of July.
The intervening two months had demonstrated that it could do nothing
but follow the Cincinnati Convention. The delegations were distinctly
representative. New York sent Governor Hoffman, General Slocum, S. S.
Cox, Clarkson N. Potter, and John Kelly. Among the Pennsylvania
delegates were William A. Wallace, Samuel J. Randall, and Lewis
Cassidy. Henry B. Payne came from Ohio; Thomas F. Bayard from
Delaware; Montgomery Blair from Maryland; Henry G. Davis from West
Virginia; Senator Casserly and Ex-Senator Gwin from California; Charles
R. English and William H. Barnum from Connecticut; Senator Stockton and
Ex-Governor Randolph from New Jersey. The Confederate forces were
present in full strength. Generals Gordon, Colquitt, and Hardeman
came from Georgia; Fitz-Hugh Lee, Bradley T. Johnson, and Thomas
S. Bocock from Virginia; General John S. Williams from Kentucky;
Ex-Governor Vance from North Carolina; Ex-Governor Aiken from South
Carolina; John H. Reagan from Texas; and George G. Vest from Missouri.
Mr. August Belmont, after twelve years of service and defeat, appeared
for the last time as chairman of the National Democratic Committee.
Thomas Jefferson Randolph of Virginia (grandson of the author of the
Declaration of Independence), a venerable and imposing figure, was made
temporary chairman, and Ex-Senator James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin,
permanent president. Mr. Doolittle, having been first a Democrat, then
a Republican, then a Democrat again, could well interpret the duplicate
significance of the present movement; and he made a long speech devoted
to that end.

On the second day the Committee on Resolutions reported the Cincinnati
platform without addition or qualification. There was something grim
and grotesque in the now demonstrated purpose of the Democratic
Convention to accept the platform which Mr. Greeley had constructed
with especial regard for the tender sensibilities of the Liberal
Republicans. While the Democrats as a body had persistently opposed
emancipation, and regarded it as a great political wrong, the party now
resolved to maintain it. Hostile throughout all its ranks to any
improvement in the status of the negro, they now determined in favor
of his "enfranchisement." Resisting at every step the passage of the
Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution,
they now resolved to "oppose any re-opening of the questions that have
been settled" by the adoption of these great changes in the organic
law. With the Southern States dominant in the Convention, their
delegates (all former slave-holders and at a later period engaged in
rebellion in order to perpetuate slavery) now resolved with docile
acquiescence to "recognize the equality of all men before the law; and
the duty of the Government, in its dealings with the people, to mete
out equal and exact justice to all, of whatever _nativity, race,
color_, or persuasion, religious or political."

The Confederate leaders, still sore and angry over their failure to
break up the Union, now declared that they remembered "with gratitude
the heroism and sacrifices of the soldiers and sailors of the
Republic," and that no act of the Democratic party "should ever detract
from their justly earned fame, nor withhold the full reward of their
patriotism." Hitherto viewing the public debt as the price of their
subjugation, they now declared that "the public credit must be sacredly
maintained;" and they heartily denounced "repudiation in every form
and guise." In their determination to make a complete coalition with
the other wing of Mr. Greeley's supporters, the Confederate Democrats
determined to accept any test that might be imposed upon them, to
endure any humiliation that was needful, to assert and accept any and
every inconsistency with their former faith and practice. It is
somewhat interesting to compare the platform to which the Democrats
assented in 1872 with any they had ever before adopted, or with the
record of their senators and representatives in Congress upon all the
public questions at issue during the years immediately preceding the
Convention.

The report which committed the Democracy to so radical a revolution in
its platform of principles met with protest from only an inconsiderable
number of the delegates, and was adopted by a vote of 670 to 62. The
Convention was now ready for the nominations. It had been plain for
some weeks that the Cincinnati ticket would be accepted. The only
question was whether the Democratic Convention should formally nominate
Greeley and Brown, or whether it should simply indorse them without
making them the regular Democratic candidates. It was urged on the one
hand that to put the formal seal of Democracy on them might repel some
Republican votes which would otherwise be secured. It was answered on
the other hand that the passive policy would lose Democratic votes,
which were reluctant at the best and could only be held by party
claims. There was more danger from the latter source than from the
former, and the general sentiment recognized the necessity of stamping
the ticket with the highest Democratic authority. There was but one
ballot. Mr. Greeley received 686 votes; while 15 from Delaware and
New Jersey were cast for James A. Bayard, 21 from Pennsylvania for
Jeremiah S. Black, 2 for William S. Groesbeck. For Vice-President
Gratz Brown received 713, John W. Stevenson of Kentucky 6, with 13
blank votes.

Mr. Greeley's letter accepting the Democratic nomination appeared a few
days later. He frankly stated that the Democrats had expected and
would have preferred a different nomination at Cincinnati, and that
they accepted him only because the matter was beyond their control.
He expressed his personal satisfaction at the endorsement of the
Cincinnati platform, and affected to regard this act as the
obliteration of all differences. The only other point of the letter
was an argument for universal amnesty. This was the one doctrine upon
which the parties to the alliance could most readily coalesce, and
Mr. Greeley gave it singular prominence, as if confident that it was
the surest way of winning Democratic support. He emphasized his
position by referring to the case of Mr. Vance, who had just been
denied his seat as Senator from North Carolina. Mr. Greeley made this
case the chief theme of his letter, and insisted that the policy which
excluded the chosen representative from a State, whoever he might be,
was incompatible with peace and good will throughout the Union.(1)

With Grant and Greeley fairly in the field, the country entered upon a
remarkable canvass. At the beginning of the picturesque and emotional
"log cabin canvass of 1840," Mr. Van Buren, with his keen insight into
popular movements, had said, in somewhat mixed metaphor, that it would
be "either a farce or a tornado." The present canvass gave promise on
different grounds of similar alternatives. General Grant had been
tried, and with him the country knew what to expect. Mr. Greeley had
not been tried, and though the best known man in his own field of
journalism, he was the least known and most doubted in the field of
Governmental administration. No other candidate could have presented
such an antithesis of strength and of weakness. He was the ablest
polemic this country has ever produced. His command of strong,
idiomatic, controversial English was unrivaled. His faculty of lucid
statement and compact reasoning has never been surpassed. Without the
graces of fancy or the arts of rhetoric, he was incomparable in direct,
pungent, forceful discussion. A keen observer and an omnivorous
reader, he had acquired an immense fund of varied knowledge, and he
marshaled facts with singular skill and aptness.

In an era remarkable for strong editors in the New-York Press,--embracing
Raymond of the _Times_, the elder Bennett of the _Herald_, Watson
Webb of the _Courier-Enquirer_, William Cullen Bryant of the
_Evening Post_, with Thurlow Weed and Edwin Crosswell in the rival
journals at Albany,--Mr. Greeley easily surpassed them all. His mind
was original, creative, incessantly active. His industry was as
unwearying as his fertility was inexhaustible. Great as was his
intellectual power, his chief strength came from the depth and
earnestness of his moral convictions. In the long and arduous battle
against the aggressions of Slavery, he had been sleepless and untiring
in rousing and quickening the public conscience. He was keenly alive
to the distinctions of right and wrong, and his philanthropy responded
to every call of humanity. His sympathies were equally touched by the
sufferings of the famine-stricken Irish and by the wrongs of the
plundered Indians. Next to Henry Clay, whose ardent disciple he was,
he had done more than any other man to educate his countrymen in the
American system of protection to home industry. He had on all
occasions zealously defended the rights of labor; he had waged
unsparing war on the evils of intemperance; he had made himself an
oracle with the American farmers; and his influence was even more
potent in the remote prairie homes than within the shadow of
Printing-House Square. With his dogmatic earnestness, his extraordinary
mental qualities, his moral power, and his quick sympathy with the
instincts and impulses of the masses, he was in a peculiar sense the
Tribune of the people. In any reckoning of the personal forces of the
century, Horace Greeley must be counted among the foremost--intellectually
and morally.

When he left the fields of labor in which he had become illustrious,
to pass the ordeal of a Presidential candidate, the opposite and weaker
sides of his character and career were brought into view. He was
headstrong, impulsive, and opinionated. If he had the strength of a
giant in battle, he lacked the wisdom of the sage in council. If he
was irresistible in his own appropriate sphere of moral and economic
discussion, he was uncertain and unstable when he ventured beyond its
limits. He was a powerful agitator and a matchless leader of debate,
rather than a master of government. Those who most admired his
honesty, courage, and power in the realm of his true greatness, most
distrusted his fitness to hold the reins of administration. He had in
critical periods evinced a want both of firmness and of sagacity. When
the Southern States were on the eve of secession and the temper of the
country was on trial, he had, though with honest intentions, shown
signs of irresolution and vacillation. When he was betrayed into the
ill-advised and abortive peace negotiations with Southern commissioners
at Niagara, he had displayed the lack of tact and penetration which
made the people doubt the solidity and coolness of his judgment. His
methods of dealing with the most intricate problems of finance seemed
experimental and rash. The sensitive interests of business shrank from
his visionary theories and his dangerous empiricism. His earlier
affiliation with novel and doubtful social schemes had laid him open
to the reproach of being called a man of _isms_.

Mr. Greeley had moreover weakened himself by showing a singular thirst
for public office. It is strange that one who held a commanding
station, and who wielded an unequaled influence, should have been
ambitious for the smaller honors of public life. But Mr. Greeley had
craved even minor offices, from which he could have derive no
distinction, and, in his own phrase, had dissolved the firm of Seward,
Weed, and Greeley because, as he conceived, his claims to official
promotion were not fairly recognized. This known aspiration added to
the reasons which discredited his unnatural alliance with the
Democracy. His personal characteristics, always marked, were
exaggerated and distorted in the portraitures drawn by his adversaries.
All adverse considerations were brought to bear with irresistible
effect as the canvass proceeded, and his splendid services and
undeniable greatness could not weigh in the scale against the political
elements and personal disqualifications with which his Presidential
candidacy was identified.

The political agitation became general in the country as early as July.
Senator Conkling inaugurated the Grant campaign in New York with an
elaborate and comprehensive review of the personal and public issues on
trial. Senator Sherman and other leading speakers took the field with
equal promptness. On the opposite side, Senator Sumner, who had sought
in May to challenge and prevent the renomination of General Grant by
concentrating in one massive broadside all that could be suggested
against him, now appeared in a public letter advising the colored
people to vote for Greeley. Mr. Blaine replied in a letter pointing
out that Mr. Greeley, in denying the power of the General Government
to interpose, had committed himself to a policy which left the colored
people without protection.(2)

The September elections had ordinarily given the earliest indication in
Presidential campaigns; but circumstances conspired this year to make
the North-Carolina election, which was held on the 1st of August, the
preliminary test of popular feeling. The earliest returns from North
Carolina, coming from the eastern part of the State, were favorable to
the partisans of Mr. Greeley. They claimed a decided victory, and were
highly elated. The returns from the Western and mountain counties,
which were not all received for several days, reversed the first
reports, and established a Republican success. This change produced
a re-action, and set the tide in the opposite direction. From this
hour the popular current was clearly with the Republicans. The
September elections in Vermont and Maine resulted in more than the
average Republican majorities, and demonstrated that Mr. Greeley's
candidacy had not broken the lines of the party. Early in that month
a body of Democrats, who declined to accept Mr. Greeley, and who called
themselves "Straightouts," held a convention at Louisville, and
nominated Charles O'Connor for President and John Quincy Adams for
Vice-President. The ticket received a small number of votes in many
States, but did not become an important factor in the National struggle.

In anticipation of the October elections Mr. Greeley made an extended
tour through Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana, addressing great masses of
people every day and many times a day during a period of two weeks.
His speeches, while chiefly devoted to his view of the duty and policy
of pacification, discussed many questions and many phases of the chief
question. They were varied, forcible, and well considered. They
presented his case with an ability which could not be exceeded, and
they added to the general estimate of his intellectual faculties and
resources. He called out a larger proportion of those who intended to
vote against him than any candidate had ever before succeeded in doing.
His name had been honored for so many years in every Republican
household, that the desire to see and hear him was universal, and
secured to him the majesty of numbers at every meeting. So great
indeed was the general demonstration of interest, that a degree of
uneasiness was created at Republican headquarters as to the ultimate
effect of his tour.

Copyright (c) 2007. topboookz.com. All rights reserved.