Chapter XIII: Kern’s Position at the Baltimore Convention

Senator Kern had not completely recovered from the strain of the Lorimer case when he found himself unexpectedly precipitated into the maelstrom of the Democratic National Convention at Baltimore, unquestionably the most remarkable assembly of the representatives of any party ever held in America. There have been many versions of his part in the important features of the convention, but the strange thing is that there has been such a general ignorance of the fact that he was in truth one of the potential figures in that great drama. It is known to all, of course, that he was the chairman of the committee on Resolutions and Mr. Bryan’s candidate for the temporary chairmanship, but the circumstances under which he became the candidate, the importance of his strategy in that contest, and the fact that but for his dissent his name would have been presented as a presidential candidate at a time when the convention seemed hopelessly deadlocked and with the support of a number of the most potential states, have never figured in the public’s estimate of his rôle. It is the intention here to relate this story as fully as possible without unpleasantly affecting

several prominent politicians who are still upon the scene.

I

On the Saturday before the Baltimore convention met Senator Kern, who had gone to Kerncliffe for a much-needed rest, returned to Washington in comparative ignorance of the developments in the convention city. The news that awaited his return was not of a pleasant nature.

The more important news he learned that hot afternoon as he sat in front of the Congress Hall Hotel was that the National Committee had selected Alton B. Parker of New York for the temporary chairmanship to deliver the keynote speech and that this had been challenged by Mr. Bryan, who had made it quite clear that he would fight. At that time he had no idea that he would be called upon to play any part in the contest other than to cast his individual vote in the convention. But there were various embarrassing angles to the situation thus presented. Many years before he had formed a personal friendship for Judge Parker and this friendship had grown with the years. The National Committeeman from Indiana had voted for Parker, which complicated the situation from the viewpoint of state politics. He entertained a momentary fear that the prospective fight might tend to the disruption of the party and the destruction of its prospects. But at the same time he understood perfectly the motives actuating Mr. Bryan and sympathized with them. With some forces known to be reactionary, lining up aggressively behind a man thought by the masses of the party west of the eastern mountains to be reactionary in his trend of thought, and with Mr. Bryan sounding the warning that the selection of that man for the temporary chairmanship would be a triumph for reaction, Senator Kern instantly knew his position in the fight. It was not a pleasant one; it came to be a far more important one than is generally known.

The National Committee had entrusted a sub-committee of eight to select the temporary chairman and this committee first proffered the position to Mr. Bryan, who declined, and then to Senator Kern, who refused to serve. It was the suggestion of both Mr. Bryan and Senator Kern that a thoroughly progressive Democrat, nationally known as such, should be chosen. The forces of Champ Clark had a candidate who measured up to the desired standard in Ollie James of Kentucky, then a member of the house, and the Wilson forces favored the election of Robert L. Henry, a representative from Texas, who also harmonized with Mr. Bryan’s idea of a temporary chairman. When the sub-committee met eight of the sixteen voted for Parker, three for James, three for Henry, one for Kern and one for O’Gorman. The one vote cast for Senator Kern was not the vote of the Indiana member, Mr. Taggart. The Indiana member did not vote for Kern because the senator had written him personally that he did not desire the position.

With this vote the fight passed to the full membership of the National Committee, and Bryan with a vigorous pen began a determined warfare through the press against the choice of the sub-committee. Realizing the importance of the issue, the Wilson followers, in view of Mr. Wilson’s telegram to Bryan accepting the latter’s view of the selection of Parker, withdrew the candidacy of Henry and went over to James. On the afternoon of the day before the full committee met in the evening, Bryan declared through the press that in the event the organization recommended Parker he would oppose him on the floor of the convention with another candidate. The issue was clean-cut. That night the full committee selected Parker by a vote of 32 to 20 for James and 2 for O’Gorman. The fight was on.

Mr. Bryan did not want to be the candidate against Parker. It was his plan to serve notice on the rank and file of the party throughout the country of the reactionary trend of the convention through a powerful speech he expected to make in presenting the name of his candidate. This he could not do were he himself the candidate. His first step was to ask Ollie James to permit the presentation of his name, but having been the avowed candidate before the committee of the Clark forces, the managers of the speaker of the house objected to James being a candidate. He then appealed to Senator O’Gorman, but found that he was pledged to Parker. Then it was he determined upon presenting the name of Senator Kern.

There were several reasons bearing on state politics which made the suggestion distasteful to Kern. He was interested in the nomination of Governor Marshall for the presidency, and the reasons which impelled the Clark forces to object to the candidacy of James made the idea unpleasant to the Indiana senator. All the various reasons were given Bryan in an effort to dissuade him from his plan to nominate Kern, but without effect. Meanwhile many of the senator’s friends became concerned over the proposal. While it did not operate in determining Kern’s state of mind, some of these friends, anticipating the long deadlock which occurred in the balloting for the presidency were convinced that should the convention be forced to go outside the list of avowed candidates no one would loom so promisingly as the Indiana senator, and they were anxious to prevent his prominence in connection with a fight. The strain told physically upon Kern. Many of his friends, and notably Senator Luke Lea of Tennessee, made frequent efforts to persuade the Nebraskan to nominate some other man. Mr. Kern himself had but little hope of their success. The night before the convention met while dining with Lea he made this clear. The Tennesseean made another trip to Bryan’s room and brought back the message that the latter had closed the subject with the remark, “I intend to nominate John to-morrow, and he will have to do what he thinks best about it.” It was after this that Kern himself made a last attempt. “He left my room,” writes Mr. Bryan to me, “late the night before the convention without a positive reply. He urged me to be a candidate, but did not decide the question whether he would accept. Next morning I heard a rumor that he might put me in nomination, but I had explained to him that I wanted to present to the convention the reasons why Parker should not be nominated and that I could only do that in a speech presenting the name of some one else. Not hearing directly from Kern, I presented his name and then he played his part, and it was a very skilful part.”

For the story of Senator Kern’s part between the time he left Mr. Bryan’s room late that night and the following morning I am indebted to Mrs. Kern, who was at the convention. He went directly to his own room and told Mrs. Kern everything that had transpired. He was so worried that he slept none that night, and his nervous condition brought on an illness that made sleep impossible. It was during that restless night that he planned his part on the morrow, and the first person to learn of his plans was Mrs. Kern, to whom he detailed his purpose early in the morning as he was sitting on the edge of his bed drawing on his shoes. With this exception he gave no indication of his intention. Contrary to the general assumption at the time that the scene in the convention that day had been planned by Mr. Bryan, the Commoner knew absolutely nothing about it until he witnessed it on the platform. “The plan was his own so far as I know,” Mr. Bryan tells me, “and no actor ever did his work more perfectly.”

Looking down from the gallery upon the convention that day one could easily imagine a storm-tossed sea. The excitement was intense. Great throngs futilely beat against the doors for admission. The day was intensely warm. The session was rich in the dramatic from the moment the venerable Cardinal Gibbons in his scarlet robes passed down the center aisle for the opening invocation until the result of the chairmanship fight was announced. The feeling on the part of Bryan’s enemies among the delegates had been intensified during the night, and there was some concern among the conservative and thoughtful lest the Commoner might be insulted so flagrantly as to result in a general resentment over the country.

When the familiar figure of the Commoner appeared in the convention he was given a remarkable ovation, and when a little later Senator Kern entered Bryan was given another demonstration. These exhibitions of devotion did not tend to sweeten the temper of his enemies, and when he appeared upon the platform to deliver his speech the hiss was not absent from the general turmoil. Seldom has the great orator appeared so majestic as he did in this fighting speech. There was something strangely hard, steel-like, in the man that those who had heard him frequently on less momentous occasions could not recognize. A more militant figure never faced a hostile crowd--and there were enough enemies in the convention to give it the appearance of hostility. Time and again he was compelled to pause by the hisses and imprecations, but he stood there immovable like a stonewall waiting for the storm to subside sufficiently for him to make his voice heard above the din. That speech made history--more so than the Cross of Gold speech in 1896. With the general purport of the speech we are not here concerned, for it is well known. But we are interested that in that portion of the speech having to do directly with Senator Kern. Here he said:

“It is only fair now that, when the hour of triumph has come, the
song of victory should be sung by one whose heart has been in the
fight. John W. Kern has been faithful every day during these
sixteen years. It has cost him time, it has cost him money, and it
has cost him the wear of body and of mind. He has been giving
freely of all that he had. Four years ago, when the foundation was
laid for the present victory, it was John W. Kern who stood with me
and helped to bring into the campaign the idea of publicity before
the election which has now swept the country until even the
Republican party was compelled by public opinion to give it
unanimous indorsement only a few weeks ago.

“It was John W. Kern who stood with me on that Denver platform that
demanded the election of senators by a direct vote of the people,
when a Republican national convention had turned it down by a vote
of seven to one, and now he is in the United States senate, where
he is measuring up to the high expectations of a great party.

“He helped in the fight for the amendment authorizing an income
tax, and he has lived to see a president who was opposed to us take
that plank out of our platform and put it through the house and
senate and to see thirty-four states of the union ratify it. And
now he is leading the fight in the United States senate to purge
that body of Senator Lorimer, who typifies the supremacy of
corruption in politics.

“What better man could we have to open a convention?

“What better man could we have to represent the spirit of
progressive Democracy?”

As Mr. Bryan was concluding his remarkable speech Senator Kern appeared upon the platform. No one knew his intent. And when the Commoner sat down, both cheered and hissed, and Kern claimed the recognition of the chair, a hush of expectancy fell upon the great convention. Throughout his speech, in some respects one of the most dramatic and effective ever delivered at a national convention, he was given the most respectful attention. Pale and wan from his sleepless night, he looked frail, but his voice was in excellent condition, and the interest of the delegates in his message was so intense that little difficulty was found in hearing him in the most remote portions of the gallery. As he referred to the time in his youth when, in 1872 he attended a Democratic national convention in Baltimore and said that the enthusiasm for Democracy in his young heart then was “no greater than that which glowed in his old heart now” he made a subtle appeal. His almost affectionate reference to his personal friendship for Judge Parker predisposed the followers of the New Yorker to a friendly attitude toward the speaker. And when he made his dramatic personal appeal to Parker, seated in the New York delegation, to join with him in the interest of harmony in withdrawing, and in deciding upon some one of numerous men he mentioned, the scene was almost theatrical. Here and there were murmurs, and Parker was seen engaged in earnest, animated conversation with his colleagues. There is no record of the nature of that conversation. There can be little doubt, however, that had he been an absolutely free agent at that moment, with no sense of obligations to those who were supporting him, he would have responded in the spirit in which the proposition was submitted. With Kern standing in silence waiting for the hoped-for answer, with Parker surrounded by gesticulative men, with the convention growing nervous under the tension, the scene was almost theatrical. And when, on finding that Parker would not respond, Kern turned to Charles F. Murphy, the Tammany chief, referring to him as “the leader of the New York Democracy, who holds that democracy in the hollow of his hand” and made the appeal to him, it was as though a bomb had been dropped from the ceiling. Receiving no response from Murphy, who sat in his seat stolid and unmoved, the attitude of Kern changed instantly from supplication to defiance, and with the declaration that if the contest must be “between the people and the powers,” there was but one man to lead, and withdrew his own name and nominated Bryan it was like the startling effect of an unexpected thunderbolt. This remarkable speech follows:

“Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Convention--I desire a hearing
in order that I may state my reason for not desiring to enter the
contest for temporary chairman of this convention. I believe that
by forty years of service to my party I have earned the right to a
hearing at the hands of a Democratic convention. I hail from the
state of Indiana, which will shortly present to this convention for
its consideration the name of one of the best, truest, and most
gallant Democrats on earth, in the person of the Hon. Thomas R.
Marshall, the governor of that state.

“I desire to take no part in this convention that will in any wise
militate against him or against his interests, which all true
Indiana Democrats this day loyally support. I have been for many
years a personal friend of the gentleman who has been named by the
national committee. Many years ago, when Judge Parker and I were
much younger than we are now, we met in a hotel in Europe and
became warm personal friends. That was long before his elevation to
the chief justiceship of the court of appeals of his state. Since
that time I have enjoyed his friendship. He had had mine. I have
accepted the hospitality of his home, and in 1904, when he was a
candidate for the presidential nomination, moved largely by that
personal friendship, I enlisted under his standard for the
nomination long before the convention, and went through that great
battle at St. Louis in his behalf. In that campaign, in response to
a request of Judge Parker personally made to me, I, on account of
my friendship for him, took the standard of a losing cause as
candidate for governor of Indiana, and carried it on to defeat, but
I hope not an inglorious defeat. In 1908 Judge Parker canvassed in
my state for vice-president. Last year when I was a candidate for
the national ticket, on which I was a candidate for the senate, in
the midst of a heated contest, Judge Parker traveled from New York
to Indianapolis to make a speech in my behalf.

“We have been during all these years, and are now, personal
friends. The greatest desire of my heart is the hope of a
Democratic victory. I attended a national convention in Baltimore
in 1872, before I had cast my vote, and my young heart was filled
with no more enthusiasm for success that year than my old heart is
now. I believe that Judge Parker is as earnestly in favor, as
earnestly desirous of Democratic success this year as I am.

“There are only a little over a thousand delegates in this
convention; there are seven million Democrats between the oceans.
There are millions of Democrats scattered from one end of this
country to the other who at this hour are all looking with aching
hearts upon the signs of discord that prevail here when there ought
to be forerunners of victory in the shouts of this convention. Is
there a man here who does not earnestly desire harmony to the end
that there may be victory?

“I am going to appeal now and here for that kind of harmony which
will change the sadness which at this hour exists in millions of
Democratic homes into shouts of joy and gladness.

“My friend, Judge Parker, sits before me in this convention, he
representing the national committee, I representing, not another
faction, thank God, but representing perhaps another section, and
we two men have it within our power to send these words of gladness
flashing throughout the republic. If my friend will join with me
now and here in the selection of a man satisfactory to us both; if
he will stand in this presence with me and agree that that
distinguished New Yorker who has brought more honor to the Empire
state in the United States senate than it has had since the days of
Frederick Kernan--James A. O’Gorman--this discord will cease in a
moment and the great Democratic party will present a united front.
Or if he will agree that that splendid representative from the
state of Texas in that same body, Charles A. Culberson shall
preside, or if he will agree upon that splendid parliamentarian,
Henry D. Clayton of Alabama, or if he will agree upon that young
Tennesseean, whose name is known in every home where chivalry
abides--Luke Lea--this matter will be settled in a moment. Or if he
will agree upon the blue-eyed statesman from Ohio, Governor James
E. Campbell; or if he will agree upon the reformer governor of
Missouri, ex-Governor Folk; or if he will agree on my own
colleague, the stalwart Democrat from Indiana, Benjamin F. Shively,
all this discord will cease.

“Will some one for Judge Parker, will Judge Parker himself, meet me
on this ground and aid in the solution of this problem, a solution
of which means victory to the party and relief to the taxpayers of
the country?

“My fellow Democrats, you will not promote harmony, you will not
point the way to victory, by jeering or deriding the name of the
man who led your fortunes in 1908. You may put him to the wheel,
you may humiliate him here, but in so doing you will bring pain to
the hearts of six million men in America who would gladly die for
him. You may kill him, but you do not commit homicide when you kill
him; you commit suicide.

“My friends, I have submitted a proposition to Judge Parker; I
submit it to the man, the leader of the New York Democracy who
holds that Democracy in the hollow of his hand. What response have
I? (A pause.) If there is to be no response, then let the
responsibility rest where it belongs. If Alton B. Parker will come
here now and join me in this request for harmony, his will be the
most honored of all the names amongst American Democrats.

“If there is to be no response, if the responsibility is to rest
there, if this is to be a contest between the people and the
powers, if it is to be a contest such as has been described, a
contest which I pray God may be averted, then the cause to which I
belong is so great a cause that I am not fit to be its leader. If
my proposition for harmony is to be ignored, and this deplorable
battle is to go on, there is only one man fit to lead the hosts of
progress, and that is the man who has been at the forefront for
sixteen years, the great American tribune, William Jennings Bryan.
If you will have nothing else, if that must be the issue, then the
leader must be worthy of the cause, and that leader must be William
Jennings Bryan.”

As Kern concluded, weak from a sleepless night and an enervating ailment, a friend took him by the arm and led him, “ashen hued and sick,” as the press reports described his appearance, from the stage. He passed within arm’s reach of Bryan, but not a word was exchanged between the two, nor even a look. The move Kern made was as much of a surprise to Bryan as to Parker. It was not a prearranged affair. There was no sharp practice in it. But it was an earnest effort of a loyal Democrat to pour oil upon the troubled waters and prevent a battle between members of the same army. As he spoke the expression on Bryan’s face clearly denoted his surprise. As he proceeded the expression of surprised anxiety gradually gave way to one of satisfaction and then to frank admiration. And when he was led from the stage, the Commoner in a dramatic manner accepted the commission which had been handed back to him. Had Bryan been a candidate originally the progressives of the country would not have had the warning of the reactionary plot. Had Kern remained silent and permitted the convention to vote between himself and Judge Parker without first submitting his series of compromise proposals, any of which should have been acceptable, the country might not have understood that there was a “rule or ruin” policy behind the men who presented Parker’s name. Thus Kern’s speech was quite as effective and important as that of Bryan.

Still it was not Senator Kern’s purpose to embarrass Judge Parker, in whose personal devotion to the party he had the most perfect confidence. He did entertain the hope that the New York jurist would meet him on the ground of a general conciliation. But when it became apparent that Parker was so situated that he could not respond to what must have been his natural impulse, and Kern made his appeal to Charles F. Murphy it was not so much with the thought that he might accept as with the intention to placing the responsibility and giving it “a local habitation and a name.”

Among Kern’s enemies there was a disposition to disseminate the idea that his action had compromised his personal popularity. Nothing could have been farther from the fact. The United Press on the following day properly gauged the effect when it said that “Kern’s efforts to obtain harmony in his personal appeal to Parker to withdraw in the interest of the party has added to his popularity among the men who championed Parker’s cause.”

That night he saw Bryan for the first time after the late parting of the night before. Accompanied by Mrs. Kern he called at Bryan’s rooms, where he found the Commoner in the center of his reception room surrounded by a crowd. Catching sight of the senator, Bryan broke through the crowd, his face wreathed in the Bryanic smile, and placing his arm affectionately about Kern’s shoulders, he said delightedly:

“How did you ever come to think of it? That was the smartest thing you ever did.”

Mr. Bryan publicly expressed his view of the performance in his newspaper article of the next morning:

“I think the reader, when he has fully digested this scheme
(Kern’s) will admit that it is about as good an illustration as has
been seen in many a day of the manner in which tact and patriotism
can be combined. After I had put Senator Kern in nomination against
Parker, he took the platform and made a most forcible and eloquent
plea for harmony in the convention. He called attention to the
great issues involved and to the importance of presenting a united
front. He then presented a list of names.... He called upon Parker,
who sat just in front of him, to join him in withdrawing in favor
of any one of these men in order that the convention might operate
without discord. It was a dramatic moment. Such an opportunity
seldom comes to a man. If Parker had accepted it it would have made
him the hero of the convention. There was a stir in his
neighborhood in a moment. The bosses flocked about him, and the
convention looked on in breathless anxiety, but he did not
withdraw. The opportunity passed unimproved. Senator Kern then
appealed to Mr. Murphy to induce Judge Parker to withdraw, but Mr.
Murphy was not in a compromising mood. This was the only thing that
Senator Kern did, the good faith of which could be questioned. I am
afraid that he had no great expectation of melting the stony heart
of the Tammany boss. At any rate nothing came of the generous offer
made by Mr. Kern except that it shifted to the shoulders of Judge
Parker and his supporters entire responsibility for any discord
that might grow out of the contest.”

Such is the true story of Kern’s part in the great fight over the temporary chairmanship which did more to determine the progressive trend of the convention than everything else combined. The defeat of Bryan by a small margin aroused the rank and file of the party everywhere, and the wires to Baltimore were burdened with thousands of indignant telegrams of protest which made a profound impression upon the delegates and made quite impossible a repetition of such a fight, on such an issue, and with such a result.

II

After the country had been heard from there was a general disposition to give the progressives the right of way. Ollie James was made permanent chairman. And Senator Kern was made chairman of the committee on Resolutions.

When the committee on Resolutions met there was a desire to make Mr. Bryan its chairman, but he refused to serve in that capacity, desiring a freer hand to dealing with the convention than would be compatible with presiding over the deliberations of the committee. It is significant of Senator Kern’s position in the party at that hour that with Bryan’s declination the committee turned instantly to him. Partly because of his physical condition he at first declined, but was finally prevailed upon to accept. The United Press gave the true reason for his unanimous selection when it said that “Senator Kern was turned to at once as representing the progressive Democracy.” It has always been customary for the committee to report after the nomination of a candidate for president, but immediately after its organization Mr. Bryan offered a resolution providing for a report on the platform before the nomination, and urging as a reason that no man should be nominated who did not square with the platform of the party. There was some dissent, but the resolution was passed, and the grind of work began at once and was incessant until completed. Without detracting from the importance of numerous members of the committee it is unquestionably true that the three men who exercised more influence perhaps than any others were Bryan, Senator O’Gorman and Senator Kern.

The platform agreed upon was one of the most progressive on which any candidate of any party ever ran and was in complete accord with the views of its chairman. Senator Kern read the resolutions to the convention and moved their adoption, and they were accepted without a contest of any character.

III

It is but proper that Senator Kern’s relation to the presidential nomination should be disclosed, for his was the name that hovered over the convention constantly as the most probable compromise selection in the event of a hopeless deadlock. Because of the persistency of the “Kern talk” there has been from hostile quarters a tendency to question his loyalty to the candidacy of Governor Marshall; and during the prevalence of the talk _The New York World’s_ convention correspondent attempted to create the impression that the reactionary forces were working quietly for the nomination of the man who next to Bryan did more to force the convention into progressive channels than any man in it.

Senator Kern was as loyal as it was possible for man to be to the candidacy of the Indiana governor. He felt that Mr. Marshall had many elements of strength and looked upon him as a possible compromise between the two leading candidates in the event of a deadlock. Under these circumstances he frowned down any suggestion of his own name as calculated to weaken the prospects of Indiana’s candidate by casting suspicion upon the sincerity of Indiana’s support. I had personal evidence of this of the most positive character.

Several months before the convention, as the number of candidates multiplied and the possibility of complications developed, a number of prominent politicians of a Pacific coast state wrote Senator Kern expressing a desire to launch his candidacy in that state, and to follow it immediately with the organization of “Kern for President” clubs. Assuming of course that a letter of such importance should be answered personally, I placed the letter in his hands. He was seated at his desk writing, and, as usual, smoking. He read it through carefully, a puzzled expression on his face, and then with a quizzical smile he handed it back.

“Aren’t you going to answer it?” he was asked.

By this time he had resumed his writing.

“No--you acknowledge it,” he said, still writing.

“What shall I say?”

“Say that I am not and will not be a candidate; that Indiana has a candidate and one that would give a good account of himself.” That is the kind of letter, not even bearing Kern’s signature, that went back to men of real political potentiality on the Pacific coast. After that many other people in different parts of the country outside Indiana wrote along the same line. These letters were always shown Kern, but with the exception of the first one not one of these was read through to the end, and in every case a letter similar in character to the one he ordered written in the first instance was sent. After a while he was clearly annoyed and disturbed by the suggestion these letters conveyed. He simply ignored them, refused to seriously consider them, and evidently preferred not to see them.

In Indiana he had many importunate friends who insisted on making him a candidate against his will, and with these he dealt directly and always with the stern injunction that they do absolutely nothing that could possibly create the impression outside the state that there was any divided opinion in the state regarding the position the state should take on the presidency.

This dangling of a possible prize before him was carried to the convention on the day it met and was never permitted out of his range of vision up to the very day that Woodrow Wilson was nominated. Mr. Bryan tells me that one of the reasons given him by Kern for his opposition to being nominated for the temporary chairmanship was the fact that “he was embarrassed by the fact that he was being mentioned for the presidency by men in other delegations” and such prominence as might follow his nomination for the chairmanship might be falsely interpreted as a bid for the prize. On the second day of the convention the Associated Press carried the story that many astute politicians had reached the conclusion that under the two-thirds rule of Democratic conventions none of the avowed candidates could be nominated and that “some of the progressives” had commenced to “test sentiment for Kern” and that the movement had “gained considerable momentum.” On that day it was a commonplace comment about the hotel lobbies that the nominee “would be Wilson or Kern.” And on that day men of much political importance in other states than Indiana began to interest themselves in “testing sentiment for Kern.” The theory of these men was that when the “conservatives” found they could not nominate Clark or Harmon, and the “progressives” learned they could not nominate Wilson, both elements would find in Kern the satisfactory way out. And during that time Kern was importuned, and harassed, every hour of the day, dragged from the Resolutions committee to meet delegates anxious to vote for him, followed to his room at night. When the movement reached such proportions as to seem serious he took the position that as long as there was any possibility of the nomination of any of the avowed candidates, and as long as there was any chance of a compromise on Marshall his name should not under any circumstances appear in the balloting.

Long before the various candidates had been formally presented to the convention it required no extraordinary perspicacity on the part of veterans of national conventions to see that none of the avowed candidates could or would be nominated without prolonged balloting, and that there was a strong possibility of a hopeless deadlock. It did not require many ballots to justify the fear. In the resulting discussion of a compromise candidate or “dark horse” no name appeared with such frequency as that of Kern. Although he was constantly holding his friends in check this did not spare him from the suspicion of some and the open criticism of others. _The New York World_ sounded a “note of warning” in a direct charge that “the reactionaries of the convention” were planning to throw the nomination to Senator Kern to prevent it from going to Wilson. The absurdity of the assumption that “reactionaries” would be interested in the nomination of the progressive leader of Indiana, who had been intimately identified with the reform measures of Mr. Bryan was not explained. The truth is that the men who were drawn to the Kern solution of a deadlock were found among members of both wings of the party. But the men who gave the movement impetus in the beginning and remained throughout the most faithful to it were progressives of the most militant stripe. Among them were men whose first choice were Wilson, Clark, Harmon and Marshall. The Underwood forces alone contributed no support to the movement. The most active and aggressive sponsor of the Kern compromise idea in the event the deadlock continued long enough to engender bitterness was Senator Luke Lea of Tennessee, whose first choice was Wilson.

The name of Kern appeared for the first time in the balloting on the third ballot when a delegate from Ohio went to him. After that there was scarcely a ballot in which he did not appear usually with one vote, frequently with two and sometimes with more. This was only significant in that it kept his name constantly before the convention as a way out.

On June 29th, three days before the nomination of Wilson, the Associated Press carried the story of the “dark horse” talk and said that “the names of Kern and Gaynor are most frequently mentioned;” and on the same day the United Press announced that Kern would not be a candidate until it had been clearly demonstrated that Wilson, Clark or Marshall could not be nominated, and that Indiana would then lead the way, to be followed by Illinois.

During these days no man did more to hold the Indiana delegation together for Marshall than Senator Kern. When on the 29th ballot Major G. V. Menzies of Indiana broke the solidarity of the delegation by voting for Kern no man resented it more than the senator, who was more embarrassed than flattered. To all Indianians who called upon him at his room with the suggestion that the “time has come to break from Marshall”--and there were many both on and off the delegation--he stubbornly refused to listen. The thought behind his uncompromising attitude was that once the delegation broke away from its instructions there was no certainty that the majority would not ultimately find their way into the camp of ultra-conservativism.

Meanwhile he was given to understand that Illinois was ready at any moment Indiana led the way to transfer her vote to him, and he had good reasons for assuming that with his consent he could have the support of Ohio. In the event such a “drive” had been undertaken, assurances were given by men of potentiality that Michigan would follow and that far western states such as Colorado and Wyoming would fall in line. It was a tremendous temptation that was placed before him, and the very incongruity of the company urging it--progressives and bosses--would have made it seem to one less astute and less given to analysis as peculiarly auspicious. The feeling between the followers of the two leading candidates was hourly intensifying. The delegates were tired, and many financially embarrassed by the unexpected prolongation of the convention and were anxious to get away. If at such an hour and under such circumstances three such states as Indiana, Illinois and Ohio had bolted toward a dark horse, followed by Michigan and states from the far west and from the south, it might have resulted in a stampede and his nomination. It was Kern’s personal opinion that it might result in throwing the convention into a turmoil of uncertainty out of which would come the nomination of a reactionary; and such he believed to be the intent of some who were most insistent on his giving consent. He refused his consent.

At no time did Mr. Bryan give any encouragement to those who tried to interest him in Kern as a compromise candidate. This led to the silly story that the two former running mates had cooled toward one anther because “Kern had not warmed up to Bryan’s convention propositions.” It was immediately after this story became current, at a time when there was much speculation as to whether the convention would be compelled to adjourn without making a nomination, that Mr. Bryan, in an interview suggesting possible compromise candidates, named Kern, Ollie James, Senator O’Gorman and Senator Culbertson as a list from which a selection might be made. The fact that Kern was first in the list was immediately seized upon as evidence of Bryan’s partiality to his nomination, and that same day bets were offered that he would be nominated. Speaking of Kern, Mr. Bryan said:

“Senator Kern of Indiana already has received the support of nearly
six million and a half of Democrats for the vice-presidency, and
since that time he not only has been elected to the United States
senate, but has distinguished himself among his associates by the
prominent part he has taken. He is the leader of the fight against
Senator Lorimer. If there can be no agreement upon any of those now
being balloted for it ought to be easy to compromise on a man like
Senator Kern.”

Then the drift toward Wilson began with the action of Bryan in withdrawing his vote from Clark because of the action of Tammany in throwing him its support and casting it for the New Jersey governor. It was the beginning of the end. On the day following the action of Bryan Senator Kern in a statement given to _The Indianapolis News_ correspondent declared that the Indiana delegation was “first, last and all the time for Governor Marshall and had no second choice,” but added that the second choice of the people of Indiana was probably Wilson. From this time on the probability of a “dark horse” dwindled and the convention hurried to the conclusion of its work with the nomination of the ticket of Wilson and Marshall.

No single man with the probable exception of Bryan was more instrumental in the general result of the Baltimore convention than John W. Kern.

His dramatic action in the chairmanship fight had done more than any other one thing could to throw the burden of responsibility for the contest upon the reactionaries; his work on the committee on Resolutions made for progressivism; and his refusal under great pressure to permit the use of his name in the convention for the purpose of breaking away from the avowed candidates probably made the nomination of Wilson possible; and the support given the candidacy of Governor Marshall by the delegation of a doubtful state like Indiana no doubt made his selection for the vice-presidency logical and inevitable.

But the emotional conflicts through which he passed during those steaming days left him in a state of physical exhaustion from which he did not recover during the summer.