Ohio History Journal

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3


NOTES                                                                        201


State Archeological and Historical Quarterly, XLVI (April 1937), 148-165; "The Mone-

tary Problems of William McKinley," Ohio History, LXXII (October 1963), 263-292,

341-343. Articles are by Jeannette P. Nichols.

59. Hayes, Diary and Letters, III, 582, 600. In 1884 and 1888 Hayes again listed

Sherman among possible candidates, expressing particular regret that he was not nom-

inated in 1888. Ibid., IV, 146, 175, 256-257, 392, 393, 395.

60. Brown and Williams in Diary of Garfield, quote these words in describing what

they call "an adequate nominating speech" (p. lvi), Sherman omitted the words in

question from the excerpt from the speech in his Recollections, (p. 774). If Sherman

calculated to kill Garfield's boom by using Garfield as his nominating agent, the Secre-

tary underestimated the resourcefulness of Garfield's claque and ignored appraisals by

Hayes and himself that Garfield was "not firm-not a moral force. He leaned on others"

and that "his will power was not equal to his personal magnetism." Hayes, Diary and

Letters, IV, 110 and Sherman, Recollections, 807.

61. During a Garfield visit to Washington in November, Sherman agreed that he

should not be reappointed to the Treasury but told Garfield that he wanted the

senatorship. Garfield had been supposed to favor Governor Foster, but subsequently

Foster withdrew on request that he thereby restore harmony to the legislature. Sherman,

Recollections, 802-804; Sherman to Dalzell, November 5, 1880, Sherman Papers; Hayes,

Diary and Letters, III, 625.

62. This speech, of some length, was quoted extensively and commented upon in

the Ohio press of January 20-21, 1881. The Columbus Dispatch of January 20 observed

that at "The Reception in the Senate Chamber . . . the melting mood manifested by

all, including Mr. Sherman's political adversaries indicated anything but coolness." The

Democratic Cleveland Plain Dealer of January 20 noted that friends and opponents

"likewise did homage to his talents and abilities, rejoicing at least that the state if it

must be represented by a Republican would be represented by one of whom the state

need not feel ashamed."


1. Charles R. Williams, The Life of Rutherford Birchard Hayes (Boston, 1914), II,


2. Chester L. Barrows, William M. Evarts (Chapel Hill, 1941). Brainerd Dyer, The

Public Career of William M. Evarts (Berkeley, 1933).

3. Alexander DeConde, The American Secretary of State: An Interpretation (New

York, 1962), 115-116.

4. Harry Barnard, Rutherford B. Hayes and His America (New York, 1954), 442-444,


5. Allan Nevins, Hamilton Fish: The Inner History of the Grant Administration

(New York, 1937), 864.

6. David M. Pletcher, The Awkward Years: American Foreign Relations Under Gar-

field and Arthur (Columbia, Mo., 1962).

7. Daniel Cosio Villegas, The United States Versus Porfirio Diaz (Lincoln, Neb.,

1963). Gerstle Mack, The Land Divided: A History of the Panama Canal and Other

Isthmian Projects (New York, 1944), 281-316. Thomas A. Bailey, A Diplomatic History

of the American People (New York, 1964), 392-396, summarizes existing literature on

the Chinese immigration question.

8. Elmer Clarence Sandemeyer, The Anti-Chinese Movement in California (Urbana,

Ill., 1939), chapters 1-3. Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, A History of the United States Since

the Civil War (New York, 1917-1937), IV, 213-238, Gunther Barth, Bitter Strength: A

History of the Chinese in the United States, 1850 - 1870 (Cambridge, 1965).

9. William M. Malloy, ed., Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and

Agreements Between the United States and Other Powers, 1776 - 1909 (Washington,

1910), I, 234-236. Tyler Dennett, Americans in Eastern Asia (New York, 1922), 535-544.

10. Proceedings of the Republican National Convention held at Cincinnati, Ohio

(Concord, 1876), 57-63. Not all eastern delegates opposed the Chinese plank. Some of

them joined delegates from California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Nevada, Utah,

Arizona, Idaho, Wyoming, and New Mexico to vote down a resolution introduced by

Edward L. Pierce of Massachusetts for striking out the Chinese plank.

11. Democratic Party National Committee, The Campaign Text Book (New York,

1876), 5. Philip Roach, editor of the San Francisco Daily Examiner, claimed that he