the forty-sixth ballot without any substantial change was only an indication of the fear on the part of Fillmore and Webster men, to venture a change from one to the other "." Sunday brought the definite failure of the attempts at uniting the compromise forces on a single candidate and with it the announcement that the morrow would witness the nomination of Scott with southern support to the number of twenty votes if necessary."

The first part of Monday's session was taken up with a consideration of the despatch that Henry J. Raymond, editor of the New York Times, had sent to his paper in which he reported an understanding between the northern and southern delegates and asserted that the latter would be open to the charge of breach of faith if they forced the defeat of Scott's nomination. Renneau of Georgia resented this charge of a corrupt bargain" as applied to the delegates from his section. and introduced resolutions ordering Raymond's expulsion. A long debate ensued. A motion to lay this resolution on the table was at first defeated but when the question was put, after Raymond had had an opportunity of offering an explanation, he was acquitted by the convention. His speech made it clear that his report had made no reference to a formal bargain between the delegates of the two sections: "I asserted then, and I assert now, that in giving away as they [the northern delegates] did, upon the platformin conceding, as they did to their brethren of the South,

21 New York Herald, June 21.

22 New York Herald, June 21. On Sunday the Tennessee delegation sent ex-Governor Jones to Washington and he returned bearing a pledge from Scott entirely satisfactory and covering every possible ground of objection. Washington Union, July 27.

an important position, . . . the northern Whigs did it in the belief, and with the expectation, that they would be met in a similar spirit of concession and coalition by the Whigs of the South." He referred to the fact that the South had carried every vote but one against the North, that the whole business of the convention had been planned and its whole character shaped by a majority of states instead of a majority of numbers. He pointed to the fact that the northern men had shown their strength by carrying Jessup's amendment, which would have secured the advantage for a majority of numbers, and then had voluntarily withdrawn it and receded from their position. "If after having done all this for the sake of promoting harmony in the party and securing to it unity of feeling and of action, you of the South had not met them in a similar spirit, and conceded to them the poor boon of a candidate of their choice, I tell you now that you would have been exposed to the charge of bad faith."

The pointedness of the argument, together with the earnestness and the frankness of the speaker, had its effect upon the convention. The southerners did not desire to appear altogether devoid of a sense of grațitude and of the spirit of compromise, especially as they had no hope for their own candidate. The balloting was resumed. It was simply a question of who would deliver up Fillmore and when it would be done. The fiftieth ballot brought important gains for Scott; the fifty-third gave him the nomination with 159 votes, as against Fillmore's 112 and Webster's 21. Virginia contributed eight, Tennessee and Missouri each three for the winning candidate.

23

za Maverick, Henry J. Raymond and the New York Press, 134, 135.

The attitude of the southern delegates toward the nomination is worthy of note:

Amid the intense excitement and cheering a resolution was offered by a delegate from Alabama to declare the nomination unanimous.

Alabama and other delegates from the South, have stated that the adoption of the platform removed their instructions to vote against Scott.

Mr. Jones, of Tennessee, read a letter from Scott dated yesterday, saying:

"Having the honor to be a candidate of the Whig Convention, I will accept the nomination, if tendered to me, with the platform laid down by the convention."

Louisiana then pledged herself to the nominee.

North Carolina came in unanimously.

Mr. Grantland, of Georgia, announced Georgia for the nominee.

Mr. Bryan of S. C. responded on behalf of the delegation of that State that General Scott had endorsed the platform, and South Carolina endorses Scott.

The Chairman of the Alabama Delegation left his delegation to answer for themselves.

Mississippi responded heartily in favor of the nominee.

Georgia, through Mr. Dawson, responded, and promised that the Whigs of Georgia would accept Scott on the Whig platform, and would do their best to elect him.

The responses from the South caused considerable enthusiasm, and as each State responded, hearty cheers were given.

24

24 New York Herald, June 22. Cf. report in Philadelphia North American, June 22.

The body of the southern delegates had supported Fillmore to the end with dogged determination: great was their disappointment when he failed to secure the nomination. Webster, however, their second choice, failed to secure a single vote from the representatives of the slave states. To the aged statesman this was a source of bitter disappointment." No one, however, regretted it more than the southern delegates themselves, for upon the records of the convention there was not a sign of their real sentiments. The Mississippi delegation before returning to their homes called on Webster to express their admiration for him and their regret that conditions had prevented them from giving him their votes. They explained that, had it not been for the fear that the abandonment of Fillmore would be the signal for some of the southern delegates to break for Scott, they would gladly have come to his support. As it was, they almost regretted that they had not done so regardless of consequences and thus taken the chance to set both Webster and themselves aright before the nation." A large number of the southern Whigs in Congress tried to do this for themselves and their constituents and so, less than a week after the convention, Webster was invited to a public dinner which might give them an opportunity to show their appreciation and devotion." Webster accepted the honor but no day was named and the event never took place.

When Scott came to write his letter of acceptance of the Whig nomination he found himself between the

25 Van Tyne, Letters of Webster, 531-532.

National Intelligencer, June 25; cf. Curtis, Life of Webster, II, 622-623.

National Intelligencer, June 30.

Scylla of northern anti-slavery fanaticism and the Charybdis of southern insistence upon the finality of the existing guarantees of slavery. Previous to his nomination, his northern managers had secured from him the promise of a letter that would neutralize the effect of the obnoxious platform in the North, and both Seward and Greeley, and perhaps others, had tried to draft a satisfactory letter for him. One was actually agreed upon which was ready to be promulgated upon the announcement of his nomination." But before that time arrived Scott was subjected to new pressure from the opposite side. Not only had the Archer letter been secured from him to influence the southern delegates, but on Sunday, June 21, Senator Jones, who had gone to Washington as the representative of the Tennessee delegation to confer with Scott, was given a pledge that was intended to satisfy the southern delegates." This was the letter read by Jones the next day, after the nomination had been made," and by it Scott was definitely committed to the acceptance of the platform. But it was necessary for him to do more than this to satisfy the southern irreconcilables, those who in their devotion to the conservative interests of their section had from the beginning to the end condemned the circumstances of his candidature. Stephens tells us that he at once sent Scott a message urging an unequivocal endorsement of the platform and promising his support in that event." But Scott could not go too far, although

28 Pike, First Blows of the Civil War, 139-142.

29 National Intelligencer, Aug. 6; Washington Union, July 27.

30 New York Herald, June 22; Philadelphia North American, June 22; Washington Republic, June 22. Some reports give this as a telegraphic despatch, which circumstantial and internal evidence proves impossible. See National Intelligencer, June 22.

31 Avary, Recollections of A. H. Stephens, 28.