Chapter DXI: Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce this (1)

article by appropriate legislation."

"The amendment received the votes of 29 States, constituting
the requisite three fourths, and thus became a part of the
organic law. On the 30th of March, 1870, President Grant
communicated the fact to Congress in a special message."

_H. Wilson,
History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power,
volume 3, chapter 47._

ALSO IN:
_J. G. Blaine,
Twenty Years of Congress,
volume 2, chapters 16 and 19._

{3572}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1869-1890.
Recovery of the domination of Whites at the South.
Suppression of the Colored vote.
Prosperity of the Southern States.

"Between 1869 and 1876, the whites had in every Southern State
except South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana, regained
control of the government, and in 1876 those three States were
also recovered. The circumstances were different, according to
the character of the population in each State. In some a union
of the moderate white Republicans with the Democrats, brought
about by the disgust of all property holders at the scandals
they saw and at the increase to their burdens as tax-payers,
had secured legitimately chosen majorities, and ejected the
corrupt officials. In some the same result was attained by
paying or otherwise inducing the negroes not to go to the
polls, or by driving them away by threats or actual violence.
Once possessed again of a voting majority, the whites, all of
whom had by 1872 been relieved of their disabilities, took
good care, by a variety of devices, legal and extra-legal, to
keep that majority safe; and in no State has their control of
the government been since shaken. President Hayes withdrew, in
1877, such Federal troops as were still left at the South, and
none have ever since been despatched thither. … With the
disappearance of the carpet-bag and negro governments, the
third era in the political history of the South since the war
began. The first had been that of exclusively white suffrage;
the second, that of predominantly negro suffrage. In the
third, universal suffrage and complete legal equality were
soon perceived to mean in practice the full supremacy of the
whites. To dislodge the coloured man from his rights was
impossible, for they were secured by the Federal Constitution
which prevails against all State action. The idea of
disturbing them was scarcely entertained. Even at the election
of 1872 the Southern Democrats no more expected to repeal the
Fifteenth Amendment than the English Tories expected at the
election of 1874 to repeal the Irish Church Disestablishment
Act of 1869. But the more they despaired of getting rid of the
amendment, the more resolved were the Southern people to
prevent it from taking any effect which could endanger their
supremacy. They did not hate the negro, certainly not half so
much as they hated his white leaders by whom they had been
robbed. 'We have got,' they said, 'to save civilization,' and
if civilization could be saved only by suppressing the
coloured vote, they were ready to suppress it. … The modes of
suppression have not been the same in all districts and at all
times. At first there was a good deal of what is called
'bulldozing,' i. e. rough treatment and terrorism, applied to
frighten the coloured men from coming to or voting at the
polls. Afterwards, the methods were less harsh. Registrations
were so managed as to exclude negro voters, arrangements for
polling were contrived in such wise as to lead the voter to
the wrong place so that his vote might be refused; and, if the
necessity arose, the Republican candidates were counted out,
or the election returns tampered with. 'I would stuff a
ballot-box,' said a prominent man, 'in order to have a good,
honest government;' and he said it in good faith, and with no
sense of incongruity. Sometimes the local negro preachers were
warned or paid to keep their flocks away. … Notwithstanding
these impediments, the negro long maintained the struggle,
valuing the vote as the symbol of his freedom, and fearing to
be re-enslaved if the Republican party should be defeated.
Leaders and organizers were found in the Federal
office-holders, of course all Republicans. … After 1884,
however, when the presidency of the United States passed to a
Democrat, some of these office-holders were replaced by
Democrats and the rest became less zealous. … Their friends at
the North were exasperated, not without reason, for the gift
of suffrage to the negroes had resulted in securing to the
South a larger representation in Congress and in presidential
elections than it enjoyed before the war, or would have
enjoyed had the negroes been left unenfranchised. They argued,
and truly, that where the law gives a right, the law ought to
secure the exercise thereof; and when the Southern men replied
that the negroes were ignorant, they rejoined that all over
the country there were myriads of ignorant voters, mostly
recent immigrants, whom no one thought of excluding.
Accordingly in 1890, having a majority in both Houses of
Congress and a President of their own party, the Republican
leaders introduced a bill subjecting the control of Federal
elections to officers to be appointed by the President, in the
hope of thus calling out a full negro vote, five sixths of
which would doubtless have gone to their party. The measure
appeared to dispassionate observers quite constitutional, and
the mischief it was designed to remedy was palpable. … It
passed the House, but was dropped in the Senate under the
threat of an obstructive resistance by the (then Democratic)
minority. Secure, however, as the dominance of the whites
seems now to be against either Northern legislation or negro
revolt, the Southern people are still uneasy and sensitive on
the subject. … This horror of negro supremacy is the only
point in which the South cherishes its old feelings. Hostility
to the Northern people has almost disappeared. … Just because
they felt that they had fought well, they submitted with
little resentment, and it has become a proverb among them that
the two classes which still cherish bitterness are the two
classes that did not fight,—the women and the clergy. … Not,
however, till the whites regained control between 1870 and
1876, did the industrial regeneration of the country fairly
begin. Two discoveries coincided with that epoch which have
had an immense effect in advancing material prosperity, and
changing the current of men's thoughts. The first was the
exploration of the mineral wealth of the highland core of the
country. … The second discovery was that of the possibility of
extracting oil from the seeds of the cotton plant, which had
formerly been thrown away, or given to hogs to feed on. The
production of this oil has swelled to great proportions,
making the cultivation of cotton far more profitable. … Most
of the crop now raised, which averages eight millions of
bales, and in 1894 was expected to exceed ten millions (being
more than double that which was raised, almost wholly by slave
labour, before the war), is now raised by white farmers; while
the mills which spin and weave it into marketable goods are
daily increasing and building up fresh industrial
communities."

_J. Bryce,
The American Commonwealth
(3d edition). chapter 92 (volume 2)._

{3573}

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1870.
The Ninth Census.

Total population, 38,558,371 (exceeding that of 1860
by 7,115,049), classed and distributed as follows:

North Atlantic division. White. Black. Maine. 624,809 1,606 New Hampshire. 317,697 580 Vermont. 329,613 924 Massachusetts. 1,443,156 13,947 Rhode Island. 212,219 4,980 Connecticut. 527,549 9,668 New York. 4,330,210 52,081 New Jersey. 875,407 30,658 Pennsylvania. 3,456,609 65,294

Total 12,117,269 179,738

South Atlantic division.

Delaware. 102,221 22,794 Maryland. 605,497 175,391 District of Columbia. 88,278 43,404 Virginia. 712,089 512,841 West Virginia. 424,033 17,980 North Carolina. 678,470 391,650 South Carolina. 289,667 415,814 Georgia. 638,926 545,142 Florida. 96,057 91,689

Total 3,635,238 2,216,705

North central division.

Ohio. 2,601,946 63,213 Indiana. 1,655,837 24,560 Illinois. 2,511,096 28,762 Michigan. 1,167,282 11,849 Wisconsin. 1,051,351 2,113 Minnesota. 438,257 759 Iowa. 1,188,207 5,762 Missouri. 1,603,146 118,071 Dakota. 12,887 94 Nebraska. 122,117 789 Kansas. 346,377 17,108

Total 12,698,503 273,080

South central division.

Kentucky. 1,098,692 222,210 Tennessee. 936,119 322,331 Alabama. 521,384 475,510 Mississippi. 382,896 444,201 Louisiana. 362,065 364,210 Texas. 564,700 253,475 Arkansas. 362,115 122,169

Total 4,227,971 2,204,106

Western division. Montana. 18,306 183 Wyoming. 8,726 183 Colorado. 39,221 456 New Mexico. 90,393 172 Arizona. 9,581 26 Utah. 86,044 118 Nevada. 38,959 357 Idaho. 10,618 60 Washington. 22,195 207 Oregon. 86,929 346 California. 499,424 4,272

Total 910,396 6,380

Grand total. 33,589,377 4,880,009

In addition the census shows 63,199 Chinese, 65 Japanese, and
25,731 civilized Indians, making a total of 38,558,371, as
stated above. In the decade preceding this census the
immigrant arrivals numbered 2,466,752, of which 1,106,970 were
from the British Islands, and 1,073,429 from other parts of
Europe.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1871.
Renewed Negotiations with Great Britain.
The Joint High Commission, the Treaty of Washington
and the Geneva Award.

See ALABAMA CLAIMS: A. D. 1869-1871; 1871; and 1871-1872.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1871.
The first Civil-Service Reform Act.

See CIVIL-SERVICE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1871 (April).
The Force Bill.

At the extra session of Congress, which met March 4, 1871 a
sweeping Act was passed to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment.
"This Act allowed suit in Federal courts by the party injured
against any person who should in any way deprive another of
the rights of a citizen; it made it a penal offence to
conspire to take away from any person the rights of a citizen;
it provided that inability, neglect, or refusal by any State
to suppress such conspiracy, to protect the rights of its
citizens, or to call upon the President for aid, should be
'deemed a denial by such State of the equal protection of the
laws' under the XIVth Amendment; it declared such
conspiracies, if not suppressed by the authorities, 'a
rebellion against the Government of the United States'; it
authorized the President, 'when in his judgment the public
safety shall require it,' to suspend the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus in any district, and suppress the
insurrection by means of the army and navy; and it excluded
from the jury-box any person 'who shall, in the judgment of
the court, be in complicity with any such combination or
conspiracy.' The authority to suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus was to cease after the end of the next
regular Session of Congress."

_A. Johnston,
History of American Politics,
2d edition, page 214._

ALSO IN:
_Annual Cyclopœdia, 1871,
page 228._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1872.
Decision of the San Juan Water Boundary Question
by the Emperor of Germany.

See SAN JUAN OR NORTHWESTERN WATER-BOUNDARY QUESTION.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1872.
The Twenty-second Presidential Election.

The leading candidates for President in 1872 were General
Grant, nominated for re-election by the main body of the
Republican Party, and Horace Greeley, of New York, put forward
by a revolted section of that party and accepted and supported
by the Democratic Party. "In 1870 the Republican party in
Missouri had split into two parts. The 'Radical' wing wished
to maintain for the present the disqualifications imposed on
the late rebels by the State Constitution during the war; the
'Liberal' wing, headed by B. Gratz Brown and Carl Schurz,
wished to abolish these disqualifications and substitute
'universal amnesty and universal enfranchisement.' Supported
by the Democrats, the Liberal Republicans carried the State,
though opposed by the Federal office-holders and the influence
of the Administration. This success stimulated a reaction in
the National Republican party, many of whose members believed
that the powers of the Federal Government over the local
concerns of the States had already been enforced up to or
beyond constitutional limits, that the various enforcement
Acts were designed rather for the political advancement of
President Grant's personal adherents than for the benefit of
the country, the freedmen, or even of the Republican party;
and that the efforts to police the Southern States by the
force of the Federal Government ought to cease.
{3574}
In the spring of 1871 the Liberal Republicans and Democrats of
Ohio began to show symptoms of common feeling on these
subjects, and during the summer the 'Liberal' movement
continued to develop within the Republican party. January
24th, 1872, the Missouri Liberals issued a call for a National
Convention at Cincinnati in the following May." At the meeting
in Cincinnati the Liberal Republican Convention nominated
Horace Greeley for President, and B. Gratz Brown for Vice
President. The Democratic National Convention which met at
Baltimore, June 9th, adopted these candidates, with the
"platform" on which they were nominated. "A few recalcitrant
Democrats met at Louisville, Kentucky, September 3d, and
nominated Charles O'Conor, of New York, and John Quincy Adams,
of Massachusetts."

_A. Johnston,
History of American Politics,
2d edition., chapter 22._

The Prohibitionists put in nomination James Black, of
Pennsylvania, for President, and John Russell, of Michigan,
for Vice President. The Republican nominee for Vice President,
on the ticket with General Grant, was Henry Wilson, of
Massachusetts. The popular vote cast was 3,585,444, or
3,597,132, for Grant, and 2,843,563, or 2,834,125 for Greeley
(according to the return that may be counted from Louisiana,
where two rival returning boards disputed authority with one
another); 29,489 for O'Conor and 5,608 for Black. Mr. Greeley
died on the 29th of November, 1872, before the electoral
colleges cast their vote, the consequence being that the
Democratic votes in the colleges were scattered. The following
is the electoral vote for President as counted by Congress:
Grant, 286; Thomas A. Hendricks, 42; B. Gratz Brown 18;
Charles J. Jenkins 2; David Davis, 1. The votes of Louisiana
and Arkansas were rejected, as were three votes cast in
Georgia for Horace Greeley, deceased.

_E. Stanwood,
History of Presidential Elections,
chapter 23._

ALSO IN:
_G. W. Julian,
Political Recollections,
chapter 15._

_E. McPherson,
Handbook of Politics for 1872 and 1874._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1872-1873.
The Credit Mobilier Scandal.

See CREDIT MOBILIER SCANDAL.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1873.
The so-called "demonetization of silver."

"We have heard a great deal in later years about the
surreptitious demonetization of silver in 1873. There was,
however, vastly too much criticism wasted on the act of 1873;
for the real demonetization of silver in the United States was
accomplished in 1853. It was not the result of accident; it
was a carefully considered plan, deliberately carried into
legislation in 1853, twenty years before its nominal
demonetization by the act of 1873. … In 1853 the single
standard was gold. This was a situation which no one rebelled
against. Indeed, no one seemed to regard it as anything else
than good fortune (except so far as the subsidiary coins had
disappeared). … In the debates it was proposed that, as the
cause of the change in the relative values of gold and silver
was the increased product of gold, the proper remedy should be
to increase the quantity of gold in the gold coins. … There
was no discussion as to how a readjustment of the ratio
between the two metals might be reached, for it was already
decided that only one metal was to be retained. This decision,
consequently, carried us to a point where the ratio between
the two metals was not of the slightest concern. And so it
remained. The United States had no thought about the ratios
between gold and silver thereafter until the extraordinary
fall in the value of silver in 1876. … In the provisions of
the act of 1853 nothing whatever was said as to the silver
dollar-piece. It had entirely disappeared from circulation
years before, and acquiescence in its absence was everywhere
found. No attempt whatever was thereafter made to change the
legal ratio, in order that both metals might again be brought
into concurrent circulation. Having enough gold, the country
did not care for silver. … In 1873 we find a simple legal
recognition of that which had been the immediate result of the
act of 1853, and which had been an admitted fact in the
history of our coinage during the preceding twenty years. In
1853 it had been agreed to accept the situation by which we
had come to have gold for large payments, and to relegate
silver to a limited service in the subsidiary coins. The act
of 1873, however, dropped the dollar piece out of the list of
silver coins. In discontinuing the coinage of the silver
dollar, the act of 1873 thereby simply recognized a fact which
had been obvious to everybody since 1849. It did not introduce
anything new, or begin a new policy. Whatever is to be said
about the demonetization of silver as a fact must center in
the act of 1853. Silver was not driven out of circulation by
the act of 1873, which omitted the dollar of 412½ grains,
since it had not been in circulation for more than twenty-five
years. … The act of February 12, 1873, is known as the act
which demonetized the silver dollar. Important consequences
have been attached to it, and it has even been absurdly
charged that the law was the cause of the commercial crisis of
September, 1873. As if a law which made no changes in the
actual metallic standard in use, and which had been in use
thus for more than twenty' years, had produced a financial
disaster in seven months! To any one who knows of the
influence of credit and speculation, or who has followed the
course of our foreign trade since the Civil War, such a theory
is too absurd to receive more than passing mention. To the
year 1873 there had been coined of 412½-grain dollars for
purposes of circulation, only $1,439,457, and these were
coined before 1806."

_J. L. Laughlin,
History of Bimetallism in the United States,
part 1, chapters 5 and 7._

See, also, MONEY AND BANKING: A. D. 1848-1893.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1873.
The Panic.

"The panic of 1873 differed very materially from the other
great panics by which this country has been afflicted. Lack of
capital was the main difficulty in 1837 and 1857. Population
had increased so rapidly that millions of human beings were
out of work, and apprehension spread lest there might not be
food enough to go around. In 1873, however, men were well
employed. Business of all kinds was in excellent condition,
and no one doubted for a moment that there would be plenty for
every man to eat. The excellent condition of trade, in fact,
was the chief factor in the panic of 1873. Everyone was busy,
and wanted money with which to carry on his trade. For two
years before the crash, money had been in great demand.
{3575}
Railroads had recently been built to an extent such as this
country had never known before. Whereas, in 1861, railroad
construction amounted to only 651 miles, in 1871 it reached
the then unprecedented figure of 7,779 miles. This new
mileage, moreover, was mainly in the West, where the immediate
remuneration was but slight. Railroads were being pushed
forward into regions which could not be expected to return an
income for twenty years. The cost of railroad construction in
this country during the five years preceding September, 1873,
was estimated by the Comptroller of the Currency at no less
than $1,700,000,000. The money to pay for this extravagant
building was obtained, not from the earnings of the old
portions of the road, but from enormous issues of railroad
bonds, placed to a large extent among the banks of this
country, but still more among the capitalists of Europe. In
the Northern Pacific Company occurred the most flagrant abuse
of railroad credit the world has ever known. … One after
another of the Western roads defaulted in paying the interest
on its bonds. The result was, that, by the summer of 1873, the
market for new issues of railroad bonds had practically
disappeared. Meantime the banks and bankers of New York were
loaded down with railroad paper. The railroads had borrowed
money for short periods in the expectation that before their
notes fell due they would have raised the money to make
payment by the sale of bonds. A temporary relief was felt, in
June, 1873, through the customary midsummer ease in money. But
this temporary respite only made the difficulty worse. Deluded
by the momentary calm, the New York banks added still further
to their loans. … The year before, money had grown tight early
in September, and the more cautious banks began gradually to
call their loans, fearing that the experience of 1872 might be
renewed. But the rates for money did not noticeably increase,
and the only cause for excitement early in the month was the
failure, on September 8, of the Mercantile Warehouse and
Security Company, owing to advances on bonds of the Missouri,
Kansas & Texas Railroad. This was followed, on the 13th, by
the failure of Kenyon Cox & Co., of which firm Daniel Drew was
a member, caused by loans to the Canada Southern Railroad. By
this time the sky was heavily overcast. Money was now
advancing rapidly, the New York banks were calling loans on
every hand, and new loans on railroad paper were scarcely to
be had at all. Suddenly, on the 18th of September, the tempest
burst. On the morning of that dark day, Jay Cooke, the agent
of the U. S. Government, with some four millions of deposits
from all parts of the country, and his fifteen millions of
Northern Pacific paper, declared his inability to meet his
debts. The report flew down 'the street' with the ferocity of
a cyclone. Railroad shares were thrown upon the market by the
bushel, in utter disregard of their intrinsic value. … Stock
brokers continued to announce their failures all day long.
Nothing seemed able to withstand the shock, and when, on
September 19, the great banking house of Fisk & Hatch went
under, terror became universal. A run was started on the Union
Trust Co., which was believed to have close intimacy with
Vanderbilt's railroads, and on the Fourth National Bank, whose
dealings were largely with Wall street brokers. The panic, was
by this time so general that the banks began to refuse one
another's certified checks, and on the 20th a considerable
number of the New York banks suspended payment. On that day
the Union Trust Co., the National Trust Co., and the National
Bank of the Commonwealth all closed their doors. At 11 o'clock
on the 20th, the New York Stock Exchange, for the first time
in its history, closed its doors, and the Governing Committee
announced that the board would not be opened till further
notice. This high-handed measure caused an outcry for the
moment, but on calmer judgment it was generally conceded that
the measure was a good one. On the evening of that Saturday,
September 20, the Clearing House Association met and adopted a
plan similar to that adopted in the panic of 1857, and in
substance this: Any bank in the Clearing House Association
might deposit with a committee of five persons, to be
appointed for that purpose, an amount of its bills receivable,
or other securities to be approved by the committee, and the
committee were then to issue to that bank certificates of
deposit, bearing interest at 5 per cent. per annum, to an
amount not exceeding 75 per cent. of the securities or bills
receivable so deposited. These certificates could be used in
settlement of balances at the Clearing House for a period not
to extend beyond the 1st of the following November, and they
were to be received by creditor banks during that period
daily, in the proportion which they bore to the aggregate
amount of the debtor balances paid at the Clearing House. The
amount of certificates should not exceed $10,000,000. The
legal tenders belonging to the associated banks were to be
considered and treated as a common fund held for mutual aid
and protection, and the committee were given power to equalize
the same by assessment or otherwise in their discretion. This
scheme, simple as it was, proved of the utmost efficacy in
mitigating the evils that must always follow a distrust among
banks. The lull occasioned by the intervening Sunday was
employed by President Grant and Secretary of the Treasury
Richardson in a visit to New York. All day long they gave
audience to business men at the Fifth Avenue Hotel.
Suggestions of every description were offered as a remedy for
the disease. The most feasible proposition, and that which was
finally adopted, was the purchase of Government bonds. …
Shortly after his return from the Fifth Avenue Hotel,
Secretary Richardson announced his intention to buy Government
bonds, and, in a few days, $13,000,000 of the U. S. greenbacks
were thus absorbed. … On Tuesday, September 30, the Stock
Exchange was once more opened. It was expected on all hands
that this would be the signal for another onslaught. But so
general was this expectation that most persons refrained for
the moment from offering their stocks. As a result, the market
opened a trifle higher than it had closed ten days before. It
continued to advance, moreover, till October 7. On that day a
new decline set in, and on October 14 came a fearful drop,
which carried prices lower than on September 20. From this
reaction there was a gradual improvement till October 31, when
the failure of Hoyt, Sprague & Co., the great mill owners of
Providence and New York, once more shook the market and
brought stocks, on October 31 and November 1, to the lowest
prices of the year.
{3576}
With those prices it became manifest that the panic had
reached its end. Money had already begun to flow to New York
both from Europe and from the West, and the public, tempted by
the excessive decline in stocks, began to purchase freely. The
result was a steady though gradual improvement through the
remainder of the year."

_The Panic of 1873
(Banker's Magazine, November, 1891)._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1875.
The Whisky Ring.

See WHISKY RING.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1875.
The second Civil Rights Bill and
its declared unconstitutionality.

"Congress, to give full effect to the fourteenth amendment to
the federal Constitution, passed an act in 1875, which
provided that all persons within the jurisdiction of the
United States shall be entitled to the full and equal
enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and
privileges of inns, public conveyances on land and water,
theatres and other places of public amusement, subject only to
the conditions and limitations established by law, and
applicable alike to citizens of every race and color,
regardless of any previous condition of servitude. … In 1883
the act was held unconstitutional. The Fourteenth Amendment,
says Bradley, J., does not 'invest Congress with power to
legislate upon subjects which are within the domain of State
legislation, but to provide modes of relief against State
legislation or State action of the kinds referred to. It does
not authorize Congress to create a code of municipal law for
the regulation of private rights; but to provide modes of
redress against the operation of State laws and the action of
State officers, executive and judicial, when these are
subversive of the fundamental rights specified in the
amendment.' Civil Rights Cases, 109 United States 3."

_T. M. Cooley,
Constitutional Limitations which rest upon the
Legislative Power of the States, 6th edition,
pages 733-734 and foot-note._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876.
Admission of Colorado into the Union.

See COLORADO: A. D. 1806-1876.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876.
The Sioux War.
Battle of Little Big Horn.
Death of General Custer.

Hostilities with a powerful confederation of Sioux or Dakota
tribes of Indians, in the northwest, were brought about, in
the spring of 1876, by gold discoveries in the Black Hills and
the consequent rush of miners into the Indian reservation. To
subdue the hostile Indians, three military expeditions were
set in motion,—from Fort Fetterman, under General Crook, from
Fort Ellis, in Montana, under General Gibbon, and from
Bismarck, in Dakota, under General Terry. These were to
converge on the upper waters of the Yellowstone, where Sitting
Bull, the able chief of the Sioux, and his camp, in the valley
of the small stream commonly known as the Little Big Horn. The
Sioux warrior used the advantages of his central position like
a Napoleon, striking his assailants in turn, as they came
near, with far stronger forces than they knew him to possess.
Crook was forced back; Gibbon was brought to a halt. Terry
came last on the ground. His command included the famous
Seventh Cavalry,—the regiment of General Custer. In ignorance
of the surprising number of braves which Sitting Bull had
collected, Custer was sent to make a detour and attack the
Indian camp from the rear. Doing so, on the 25th of June, he
rode into a death trap. Five companies of the regiment, with
its heroic commander at their head, were surrounded so
overwhelmingly that not one man escaped. The remaining seven
companies were too far from the others to cooperate in the
attack. They fortified a bluff and held their ground until the
27th, when Terry and Gibbon came to their relief. The Indians
retreated toward the mountains. The campaign was soon resumed,
and prosecuted through the fall and winter, until Sitting Bull
and some of his followers fled into British America and the
remaining hostiles surrendered.

_F. Whittaker,
Complete Life of General George A. Custer,
book 8, chapter 4-5._

ALSO IN:
_J. F. Finerty,
War Path and Bivouac,
part 1._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876.
The Centennial Exhibition at Philadelphia.

In 1871, the Congress of the United States passed an act to
provide for the commemoration, in 1876, of the centennial
anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, by holding an
exhibition, at Philadelphia, "of American and foreign arts,
products, and manufactures." The act created a commission,
composed of one delegate from each state and territory of the
United States, to which commission was committed the
"exclusive control" of the contemplated exhibition; though the
State of Pennsylvania was required to make provision for the
erection of suitable buildings. "To the surprise of those
writers who had contended that there would be no exhibits from
abroad,' there was shown a universal desire on the part of all
nations to co-operate liberally in the World's Fair of 1876.
These different governments appropriated large sums of money,
selected as commissioners men of the highest standing, loaned
to the exhibition their most valuable works of art, and in
every sense indicated a desire on the part of the Old World to
forget the past and to unite itself closely with the future of
the New. Singular as it may seem, there was no disposition on
the part of Congress to facilitate and aid in carrying out
this grand enterprise. The money had to be raised by private
subscription, from all sections of the United States, and it
was only by a determined and persistent effort with Congress
that at last a government loan was secured of $1,500,000,
which loan has been called up by the government and repaid
since that time. The City of Philadelphia appropriated
$1,000,000 and the State of Pennsylvania $1,500,000, and all
other states, notably New Jersey, Delaware, Connecticut, New
Hampshire, etc., subscribed to the stock issued by the
Centennial Board of Finance. In 1873, the location so well
known as Fairmount Park was selected for the exposition, and
immediate possession given by the City of Philadelphia, free
from all expense or charge, and who also liberally contributed
to the success of the World's Fair 1876 by the erection of two
magnificent bridges over the Schuylkill at a cost of over
$2,500,000, in addition to the various improvements made in
Fairmount Park. … The total number of exhibitors at the
World's Fair 1876 was estimated at 30,864, the United States
heading the list with 8,175; Spain and her colonies, 3,822;
Great Britain and colonies, 3,584; and Portugal, 2,462. …

{3577}

The exhibition opened on the 10th of May, 1876, and from that
time until November 10, 1876, there were admitted a grand
total of 9,910,966 persons, of whom 8,004,274 paid admission
fees amounting to $3,813,724.49."

_C. B. Norton,
World's Fairs, chapter 6._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876-1877.
The Twenty-third Presidential Election and its disputed result.
The Electoral Commission.

Four candidates for the Presidency were named and voted for by
as many different parties in 1876, although the contest of the
election was practically between the Republicans and
Democrats, as in previous years. The former, after a prolonged
struggle of rival factions, put in nomination ex-Governor
Rutherford B. Hayes, of Ohio, with William A. Wheeler, of New
York, for Vice President. The candidates of the Democratic
party were ex-Governor Samuel J. Tilden, of New York, for
President, and Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana, for Vice
President. Before these nominations were made, the Prohibition
Reform party and the party calling itself the Independent, but
popularly known as the "Greenback party," had already brought
candidates into the field. The first named put Green Clay
Smith, of Kentucky and G. T. Stewart, of Ohio, in nomination;
the nominees of the last named were Peter Cooper, of New York,
and Samuel F. Cary, of Ohio. "Thirty-eight States participated
in the election. Colorado had been admitted to the Union in
August, 1876, and, in order to save an additional election,
the choice of electors for that occasion was conferred upon
the legislature. All the other States appointed them by
popular vote. The polls had hardly closed on the day of
election, the 7th of November, when the Democrats began to
claim the presidency. The returns came in so unfavorably for
the Republicans that there was hardly a newspaper organ of the
party which did not, on the following morning, concede the
election of Mr. Tilden. He was believed to have carried every
Southern State, as well as New York, Indiana, New Jersey, and
Connecticut. The whole number of electoral votes was 369. If
the above estimate were correct, the Democratic candidates
would have 203 votes, and the Republican candidates 166 votes.
But word was sent out on the same day from Republican
headquarters at Washington that Hayes and Wheeler were elected
by one majority; that the States of South Carolina, Florida,
and Louisiana had chosen Republican electors. Then began the
most extraordinary contest that ever took place in the
country. The only hope of the Republicans was in the perfect
defence of their position. The loss of a single vote would be
fatal. An adequate history of the four months between the
popular election and the inauguration of Mr. Hayes, would fill
volumes. Space can be given here for only a bare reference to
some of the most important events. Neither party was
over-scrupulous, and no doubt the acts of some members of each
party were grossly illegal and corrupt. … In four States,
South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, and Oregon, there were
double returns. In South Carolina there were loud complaints
that detachments of the army, stationed near the polls, had
prevented a fair and free election. Although the board of
State canvassers certified to the choice of the Hayes
electors, who were chosen on the face of the returns, the
Democratic candidates for electors met on the day fixed for
the meeting of electors and cast ballots for Tilden and
Hendricks. In Florida there were allegations of fraud on both
sides. The canvassing board and the governor certified to the
election of the Hayes electors, but, fortified by a court
decision in their favor, the Democratic electors also met and
voted. In Louisiana there was anarchy. There were two
governors, two returning boards, two sets of returns showing
different results, and two electoral colleges. In Oregon the
Democratic governor adjudged one of the Republican electors
ineligible, and gave a certificate to the highest candidate on
the Democratic list. The Republican electors, having no
certificate from the governor, met and voted for Hayes and
Wheeler. The Democratic elector, whose appointment was
certified to by the governor, appointed two others to fill the
vacancies, when the two Republican electors would not meet
with him, and the three voted for Tilden and Hendricks. All of
these cases were very complicated in their incidents, and a
brief account which should convey an intelligible idea of what
occurred is impossible. … Thus, for the first and only time in
the history of the country, the election ended in such a way
as to leave the result in actual doubt, and in two States the
number of legal votes given for the electors was in dispute. …
As soon as the electoral votes were cast it became a question
of the very first importance how they were to be counted. It
was evident that the Senate would refuse to be governed by the
22nd joint rule [under which no electoral vote to which any
member of either House objected could be counted unless both
Houses agreed to the counting of it]—in fact the Senate voted
to rescind the rule,—and it was further evident that if the
count were to take place in accordance with that rule it would
result in throwing out electoral votes on both sides on the
most frivolous pretexts. It was asserted by the Republicans
that, under the Constitution, the President of the Senate
alone had the right to count, in spite of the fact that the
joint rule, the work of their party, had assumed the power for
the two Houses of Congress. On the other hand, the Democrats,
who had always denounced that rule as unconstitutional, now
maintained that the right to count was conferred upon
Congress. A compromise became necessary, and the moderate men
on both sides determined to effect the establishment of a
tribunal, as evenly divided politically as might be, which
should decide all disputed questions so far as the
Constitution gave authority to Congress to decide them. The
outcome of their efforts was the Electoral Commission law of
1877," by which a Commission was created, consisting of
fifteen members—the Senate appointing five from its own body,
the House five, and four Associate-Justices of the Supreme
Court, designated in the bill, appointing a fifth from the
same court. The Senators selected were Edmunds, Morton,
Frelinghuysen (Republicans), and Thurman and Bayard
(Democrats). The Representatives were Payne, Hunton, Abbott
(Democrats), and Garfield and Hoar (Republicans). The four
Supreme Court Justices designated by the Act were Clifford,
Field (Democrats), Strong and Miller (Republicans). They
selected for the fifth member of the Commission Justice
Bradley, who was a Republican.
{3578}
"The natural choice of the justices would have been their
associate, David Davis; but he had been ejected only five days
before as senator from Illinois, and it was regarded by him
and by others as improper that he should serve. Thus the
commission consisted of eight Republicans and seven Democrats.
If Judge Davis had been selected, there would have been only
seven Republicans, and the result of the operation of the law
might have been different. … The count had begun on the first
day of February, and the final vote upon Wisconsin was not
reached until the early morning of March 2. As question after
question was decided uniformly in favor of the Republicans, it
became evident to the Democrats that their case was lost. They
charged gross partisanship upon the Republican members of the
Electoral Commission, in determining every point involved in
the dual returns for their own party, though as a matter of
fact there does not seem to have been much room for choice
between the two parties on the score of partisanship. Each
member of the commission favored by his vote that view which
would result in adding to the electoral vote of his own party.
But as the result of the count became more and more certainly
a Republican triumph, the anger of the Democrats arose. Some
of them were for discontinuing the count; and the symptoms of
a disposition to filibuster so that there should be no
declaration of the result gave reason for public disquietude.
But the conservative members of the party were too patriotic
to allow the failure of a law which they had been instrumental
in passing to lead to anarchy or revolution, and they sternly
discountenanced all attempts to defeat the conclusion of the
count. The summing up of the votes [Hayes, 185; Tilden, 184],
was read by Mr. Allison of Iowa, one of the tellers on the
part of the Senate, at a little after four o'clock, on the
morning of the 2d of March, amid great excitement. … Mr. Ferry
thereupon declared Rutherford B. Hayes elected President, and
William A. Wheeler Vice-President, of the United States. The
decision was acquiesced in peaceably by the whole country, and
by men of every party. But the Democrats have never ceased to
denounce the whole affair as a fraud. … It is to be hoped that
the patriotism of the American people and their love of peace
may never again be put to such a severe test as was that of
1876 and 1877." According to the Democratic count, the popular
vote stood:
Tilden, 4,300,590;
Hayes, 4,036,298;
Cooper, 81,737;
Smith, 9,522.
The Republican count gave:
Tilden, 4,285,992;
Hayes, 4,033,768.

_E. Stanwood,
History of Presidential Elections,
chapter 24._

ALSO IN:
_C. A. O'Neil,
The American Electoral System,
chapters 20-21._

_A. M. Gibson,
A Political Crime._

_Congressional Record,
volume 5 (1877), parts 1-2._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1877.
Halifax Fishery Award.

See FISHERIES, NORTH AMERICAN: A. D. 1877-1888.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1877-1891.
The Farmers' Alliance.

The Farmers' Alliance "is the outcome of a movement which
first culminated, shortly after the Civil War had ended, in
the formation of the Patrons of Husbandry, or, as they were
more commonly called, 'The Grange,' the object of which
organization was the mutual protection of farmers against the
encroachments of capital. The collapse of the Grange was due
to a mistake it had made in not limiting its membership
originally to those whose interests were agricultural. The
first 'Alliance' was formed in Texas, to oppose the wholesale
buying up of the public lands by private individuals. … For
about ten years the Alliance remained a Southern organization.
In 1887, about ten years after the first local Alliance in
Texas was formed, and five after the State Alliance, the
'Farmers' Union' of Louisiana united with it, under the name
of the 'Farmers' Alliance and Co-operative Union of America.'
Branches were quickly established," in other Southern States.
"Later in the same year, the 'Agricultural Wheel,' a similar
society operating in the States of Arkansas, Missouri,
Kentucky, and Tennessee, was amalgamated with the Alliance,
the new organization being called 'The Farmers' and Laborers'
Union of America.' The spirit of the movement had
simultaneously been embodied in the 'National Farmers'
Alliance' of Illinois, which was started in 1877, and quickly
extended into Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas,
and Dakota. A minor organization, the 'Farmers' Mutual Benefit
Association,' was started in 1887, in the southern part of
Illinois. Finally, in 1889, at a meeting held in St. Louis,
these different bodies were all practically formed into a
union for political purposes, aiming at legislation in the
interests of farmers and laborers; and the present name of the
'Farmers' Alliance and Industrial Union' was chosen. … Its
main professed object is the destruction of the money power in
public affairs, and the opposition of all forms of monopoly.
It demands the substitution of legal tender treasury notes for
National bank notes; also an extension of the public currency
sufficient for the transaction of all legitimate business; the
money to be given to the people on security of their land, at
the lowest rates consistent with the cost of making and
handling it. It demands government control, not only of money,
but of the means of transportation and every other public
function."

_Quarterly Register of Current History,
volume 1, page 132._

ALSO IN:
_F. M. Drew,
The Present Farmers' Movement
(Political Science Quarterly, June, 1891)._

See, also,
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: A. D. 1866-1875.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1878.
The Bland Silver Bill.

The act familiarly known as the Bland Bill was passed by
Congress in 1878. "Although the silver dollar of which the
coinage was resumed in 1878 dates back as a coin to the
earlier days of the Republic, its reissue in that year marks a
policy so radically new that the experience of previous years
throws practically no light on its working. The act of 1878
provided for the purchase by the government, each month, of
not less than two million dollars' worth, and not more than
four million dollars' worth, of silver bullion, for coinage
into silver dollars at the rate of 412½ grains of standard
silver (or 371¼ grains of fine silver) for each dollar. The
amount of the purchases, within the specified limits, was left
to the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury. As every
Secretary of the Treasury, throughout the period in which the
act was in force, kept to the minimum amount, the practical
result was a monthly purchase of two million dollars' worth of
silver bullion. The act is sometimes described as having
called for a monthly issue of two million silver dollars; but
this was not the exact situation.
{3579}
The amount of silver obtainable with two million dollars
obviously varies according to the price of the metal in terms
of the dollars with which the purchases are made. In February,
1878, when the first purchases were made, those dollars were
the inconvertible United States notes, or greenbacks, worth
something less than their face in gold. … When specie payments
were resumed, on the first of January, 1879, and the
greenbacks became redeemable in gold, the measure of value in
the United States became gold, and the extent of the coinage
of silver dollars under the act of 1878 became simply a
question of how much silver bullion could be bought with two
million dollars of gold. The price of silver in 1878 was, in
terms of gold, not far from a dollar for an ounce of standard
silver. After 1878 it went down almost steadily. … The silver
dollar of 412½ grains contains less than an ounce (480 grains)
of standard silver. The monthly purchase of two million
dollars' worth of silver therefore yielded more than two
million silver dollars, the amount being obviously greater as
the price of silver went lower. On the average, the monthly
yield was not far from two and a half millions of silver
dollars. So much each month, therefore, or thirty millions of
silver dollars a year, was roughly the addition to the
currency of the community from the act of 1878. An important
provision of the act of 1878 was that authorizing the issue of
silver certificates against the deposit of silver dollars. …
The dollars and certificates between them constitute what we
may call the silver currency of the act of 1878. The passage
of that act was due to causes easily described. It was part of
the opposition to the contraction of the currency and the
resumption of specie payments, which forms the most important
episode of our financial history between 1867 and 1879. … No
doubt some additional force was given to the movement in favor
of the use of silver from the desire of the silver-mining
States and their representatives, that the price of the metal
should be kept up through a larger use of it for coinage. But
this element, while sometimes prominent in the agitation, was
not then, as it has not been in more recent years, of any
great importance by itself. The real strength of the agitation
for the wider use of silver as money comes from the conviction
of large masses of the people that the community has not
enough money."

_F. W. Taussig,
The Silver Situation in the United States,
part 1._

See, also, MONEY AND BANKING: A. D. 1848-1893.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1880.
The Twenty-fourth Presidential Election.

For the twenty-fourth Presidential election, in 1880, the
Republicans, meeting at Chicago, June 2, named General James
A. Garfield, of Ohio, as its candidate for President and
Chester A. Arthur, of New York, for Vice President. The
so-called Greenback party (which had appeared four years
before, in the election of 1876), meeting at Chicago on the
9th of June, put in nomination, for President, James B. Weaver
of Iowa, and, for Vice President, B. J. Chambers, of Texas.
The main object and principle of the Greenback party was set
forth in the following declarations of its platform: "That the
right to make and issue money is a sovereign power to be
maintained by the people for the common benefit. The
delegation of this right to corporations is a surrender of the
central attribute of sovereignty. … All money, whether
metallic or paper, should be issued and its volume controlled
by the government, and not by or through banking corporations,
and, when so issued, should be a full legal tender for all
debts, public and private. … Legal tender currency [the
greenback notes of the civil-war period] should be substituted
for the notes of the national banks, the national banking
system abolished, and the unlimited coinage of silver, as well
as gold, established by law." The Prohibitionists
(Temperance), in convention at Cleveland, June 17, nominated
Neal Dow, of Maine, for President, and A. M. Thompson, of
Ohio, for Vice President. On the 22d of June, at Cincinnati,
the Democratic party held its convention and nominated General
Winfield S. Hancock, of Pennsylvania, for President, and
William H. English, of Indiana, for Vice President. At the
election, in November, the popular vote cast was 4,454,416 for
Garfield, 4,444,952 for Hancock, 308,578 for Weaver, and
10,305 for Dow. The electoral votes were divided between
Garfield and Hancock, being 214 for the former and 155 for the
latter. Every former slave-state was carried by the Democratic
party, together with New Jersey, California and Nevada.

_E. McPherson,
Handbook of Politics for 1880 and 1882._

ALSO IN:
_J. C. Ridpath,
Life and Work of James A. Garfield,
chapters 10-11._

_J. G. Blaine,
Twenty Years of Congress,
chapter 29._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1880.
The Tenth Census.

Total population, 50,155,783 (exceeding that of 1870 by
11,5117,412), classed and distributed as follows:

North Atlantic division.

White. Black. Maine. 646,852 1,451 New Hampshire. 346,229 685 Vermont. 331,218 1,057 Massachusetts. 1,763,782 18,697 Rhode Island. 269,939 6,488 Connecticut. 610,769 11,547 New York. 5,016,022 65,104 New Jersey. 1,092,017 38,853 Pennsylvania. 4,197,016 85,535

Total 14,273,844 229,417

South Atlantic division. Delaware. 120,160 26,442 Maryland. 724,693 210,230 District of Columbia. 118,006 59,596 Virginia. 880,858 631,616 West Virginia. 592,537 25,886 North Carolina. 867,242 531,277 South Carolina. 391,105 604,332 Georgia. 816,906 725,133 Florida. 142,605 126,690

Total 4,654,112 2,941,202

North Central division. Ohio. 3,117,920 79,900 Indiana. 1,938,798 39,228 Illinois. 3,031,151 46,368 Michigan. 1,614,560 15,100 Wisconsin. 1,309,618 2,702 Minnesota. 776,884 1,564 Iowa. 1,614,600 9,516 Missouri. 2,022,826 145,350 Dakota. 133,147 401 Nebraska. 449,764 2,385 Kansas. 952,155 43,107

Total 16,961,423 385,621

{3580}

South Central division. White. Black. Kentucky. 1,377,179 271,451 Tennessee. 1,138,831 403,151 Alabama. 662,185 600,103 Mississippi. 479,398 650,291 Louisiana. 454,954 483,655 Texas. 1,197,237 393,384 Arkansas. 591,531 210,666

Total 5,901,315 3,012,701

Western division.

Montana. 35,385 346 Wyoming. 19,437 298 Colorado. 191,126 2,435 New Mexico. 108,721 1,015 Arizona. 35,160 155 Utah. 142,423 232 Nevada. 53,556 488 Idaho. 29,013 53 Washington. 67,199 325 Oregon. 163,075 487 California. 767,181 6,018

Total 1,612,276 11,852

Grand total. 43,402,970 6,580,793

In addition the census shows 105,465 Chinese, 148 Japanese,
and 66,407 civilized Indians, making a total of 50,155,783, as
stated above. The immigrants arriving in the country during
the preceding ten years numbered 2,944,695, of whom 989,163
were from the British Islands and 1,357,801 from other parts
of Europe.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1881.
The brief administration of President Garfield.
His assassination.

"President Hayes had left the new administration a heritage of
hatred from the Stalwart element of the Republican party. It
was President Garfield's chief wish, politically, to heal up
the chasm which the past had opened, and not to recognize one
faction more than another. … The defeat of the Stalwarts at
Chicago, by Garfield, naturally tended to transfer their
hostility from the outgoing to the incoming President."

See STALWARTS AND HALF-BREEDS.