NOVEMBER 10, 1911
The Commoner.
3
When Seward Put His Finger on the &
Spot
ml
ore
Presidents and Judges Winced
fl
II
But a Faithful Historian of the Present Day Declares "That the Far-Seeing Politician
, from New York Had Penetrated so Deeply into the Relations of the Executive
and the Judiciary Was Enough to Have Incensed All of Them."
New York Independent (book review) : It
was a tense moment in the United States senate
when, on March 3, 1858, Mr. Seward, of New
York, uttered his scathing denunciation of the
august tribunal which guards the constitution
of the United States. Men of little importanco
and no political fortune here and there over the
country had launched their diatribes against
Chief Justice Taney and his colleagues who con
curred with him; but now a responsible senator
from a great commonwealth, openly and with
out reserve, in language which admits of no
misunderstanding, charges the president of the
United States and the supreme court with de
liberately entering into a' conspiracy to fasten
slavery forever upon the country. With almost
brutal directness, Seward said, "Before coming
into office Buchanan approached, or was ap
proached by, the supreme court of the United
States. The day of inauguration came,
the first one among all the celebrations of that
great national pageant that was to be desecrated
by a coalition between the executive and judicial
departments, to undermine the national legisla
ture and the liberties of the people." Then
with flashing indignation he turned upon the
court and pictured the judges as cringing
sycophants like those tools of Charles I who
did his bidding and then fawned upon him. The
effect of this great speech was electric and news
of it was quickly carried to every hamlet in the
country.
Conservative and respectable men stood aghast
at the rashness of the senator from New York.
Representatives of the slave-holding oligarchy
declared the charges to be unfounded and wholly
unbelievable the vaporings of a disordered
imagination, the outpourings of a mind destroyed
by partisan and malignant hatred. Many of the
best men in the country deplored this brutal
assault upon the supreme court, declaring it to
be not only without warrant, but also an attack
upon our sacred institutions and a violation of
the great principle of the separation of powers
an attempt of the legislature to browbeat the
judiciary into obedience to the republican party
in congress.
The ground for this dramatic outburst was
the statement made the year before by Presi
dent Buchanan in his Inatigural address of
March 4, 1857. In this address he said, speak
ing in regard to the point of time when the
people of the territory may decide when they
will accept or reject slavery:
"This is happily a matter of but little practi
cal importance. Besides, it is a judicial ques
tion which legitimately belongs to the supreme
court of the United States, before whom it is now
pending .and will, it is understood, be speedily
and finally settled. To their decision, in com
mon with all good citizens, I shall cheerfully
submit, whatever this may be. ' May
we not then hope that the long agitation on this
subject (slavery) is approaching an end.
Let every union-loving man therefore exert hla
best influence to suppress this agitation."
At the time of Seward's speech it was supposed
that he gratuitously assumed from Buchanan's
inaugural address that the president had prev
iously been in communication with the court and
knew when he uttered this solemn pledge to
abide by the constitutional decision,, exactly
what that decision would be. Seward, in his
attack, declared that Buchanan "announced
(vaguely Indeed, but with self-satisfaction) the
forthcoming extra-judicial exposition of the con
stitution and , pledged his submission to it aa
authoritative and final. The chief justice and
Ills associates remained silent."
Men who believed in the integrity of th
court would not accept Seward's declaration that
there had been previous collusion botween tho
two. They explained it on tho ground that tho
rumors concerning the decision of tho court had
been spread in "Washington, and that Buchanan
in common with other politicians of tho time
had shrewdly anticipated tho action of tho
judges. This is tho view taken by that dis
tinguished historian of the period, Rhodes (vol.
II, p. 269), who argues that Buchanan must
have known from tho rumors and statements
in newspapers what would be substantially tho
decision of the court on the territorial question.
In common with tho temperate men of that
time, Rhodes holds that there could have been
no direct communication botween the president
and tho court on the subject, for he says, "How
ever Buchanan got his intelligence, his charac
ter and that of Taney are proof that the chief
justice did not communicate tho import of tho
decision to tho president-elect. That either
would stoop from the etiquet of his high office
is an idea that may not be entertained for a
moment; and we may be sure that with Taney's
lofty notions of what belonged to an indepen
dent judiciary he would have no intercourse
with the executivo that could not brook the
light of day."
That Seward's wild charge that tho presi
dent had approached the court, or the court had
approached the president, Is true, and that tho
replies of men of Bober judgment were false,
we now know from letters published In the
Works of James Buchanan, edited by Prof.
John Bassett Moore. This great work contains
the result of an exhaustive research into tho
Buchanan materials. Nothing has been with
held. All Buchanan's correspondence as secre
tary of state, including all his papers relating
to the Mexican war, is fully set forth, In addi
tion to the documents relative to his adminis
tration. And with that devotion to tho principle
that science demands the truth and tho whole
truth, Professor Moore has published without
elision, and with proper editorial reserve, tho
materials which will be vital in the reconstruc
tion of that period of our history and which will
help to give Buchanan a higher place in many
respects than has been hitherto accorded to him
by partisan northern histories.
Among these papers, as footnotes to the first
inaugural address (volume X, pp. 106-7 ff.),
Professor Moore prints two letters addressed to
Buchanan, one from Justice Catron, of Ten
nessee, and the other from Justice Grier, of
Pennsylvania, which show that tho court
had approached Buchanan some time before his
inauguration; that Buchanan had brought somo
kind of pressure to bear upon the court; that
the chief justice and Justice Wayne (the latter
of whom had been chiefly instrumental in forc
ing the judgment upon the court) were fully
aware of and approved tho negotiations between
the court and Buchanan; and that when Bu
chanan made his statement in his inaugural ad
dress that he would abide by the decision of the
court he knew definitely what the Important
point in that decision would be.
In the first of these letters, under tho date of
February 19, 1857, Justice Catron writes to
Buchanan suggesting what he might safely say
in his inaugural address about the Dred Scott
case and asking him to write to Grier and en
deavor to bring him to terms:
"Will you drop Grier a line, saying how neces
sary it is & how good the opportunity Is, to
settle the agitation by an affirmative decision of
the supreme court, the one way or the offaer. He
ought not to occupy so doubtful a ground as tho
outside issue that admitting tho constitution
ality of the Mo. Comp. line of 1820, still, as no
domicile was acquired by the negro at Ft. Snell-
ing, & ho returned to Missouri, ho waB not frco.
Ho has no doubt about tho question on tho main
contest, but hns boon persuaded to tako tho
smooth handle for tho sako of poaco.
"Sincerely yr. frd
"J. CATRON."
Whether this lottor from Catron was drawn
by a previous letter from Buchanan It docs not
appoar; but wo do know that Buchanan wroto
to Grier, for In a letter of February 23, 1857,
from Grier to Buchannn, tho formor says:
"Your letter camo to hand this morning. I
havo takon the liberty to ahow It In confldonco
to our mutual friends Judge Wayne and tho chief
justice. Wo fully appreciate and concur In your
vlows as to tho desirableness at this tlmo of
having an expression of tho opinion of tho court
on this troublesome question. WITH THEIR
CONCURRENCE (capitals mine) I will givo you
in confidence tho history of tho caso beforo us,
with tho probable result."
This is followed by a' story of tho caso and a
statement as to how tho final result was reached.
Grier also says, "I am anxious that It should
not appear that tho line of latltudo should mark
tho lino of division In tho court" in other
words, he did not want to help discredit tho
court by showing that it was a pure slave de
cision rendered by judges from slave states. So
Grier, of Pennsylvania, In his own language, "In
conversation with tho chief justice, agreed to
concur with him." Grier In this lottor also
adds, "There will therefore be six If not sevon
(perhaps Nelson will remain neutral) who will
decide the compromise law of 1820 to bo of non
effect. But tho opinions will not bo delivered
before Friday, tho sixth of March." Then Grier
concludes:
"We will not let any others of our brethren
know anything about tho cause of our anxiety to
produce this result, and though contrary to our
usual practice, we havo thought due to you to
state to you In candor & confidence the real state
of tho matter."
As Professor Mooro justly remarks, these let
ters "are obviously Inconsistent with and tacitly
refute the charge that the Dred Scott caso was
the result of a conspiracy In which the 'Kansas
Nebraska bill was the first step.' " But they
do prove that President Buchanan, Chief Justice
Taney and other justices of the supremo court
were not above entering into correspondence for
the purpose of reaching some adjustment of tho
slavery Issue that would bo wholly acceptable to
the slave power. They proved that the charges
made by Seward and afterward repeated by Lin
coln in milder form were true, although theso
men apparently had no direct evidence warrant
ing their statements. In view of these facts wo
do not wonder that, as Rhodes says, "Taney was
so incensed at the speech of Seward that he told
Tyler, who was afterward his biographer, that
had Seward been nominated and elected presi
dent in 1860 Instead of Lincoln he would havo
refused to administer to him the oath of office."
That the far-seeing politician from New York
had penetrated so deeply into the relations of the
executive and tho judiciary was enough to havo
incensed all of them.
The Works of James Buchanan. Edited by
Prof. John Bassett Moore. 12 volumes. Phila
delphia: J. B. Llppincott Co. $5 each.
OUST LORIMER
Now that Lee O'Neill Browne has admitted
that he acted as the agent of Lorimer and that
Lorimer "loaned" him the money (without any
note being given) with which to pay his attor
neys Mr. Lorimer might as well resign. No
senate can seat him in the face of such proof.
1
i
m
4
ir'Hrn-A'iliifc4ifti'iiiriirtriir iiiifiirirti7irii iiiiiiirf'fii m rrft i i r L a1.-