Test Bank for Invitation to Psychology, 7th Edition, Carole Wade, Carol Tavris Samuel R Somm

Test Bank for Invitation to Psychology,

7th Edition, Carole Wade, Carol Tavris
Samuel R Sommers Lisa M. Shin
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankmall.com/dow
nload/test-bank-for-invitation-to-psychology-7th-edition-carole-wade-carol-tavris-samu
el-r-sommers-lisa-m-shin/

Visit TestBankMall.com to get complete for all chapters

 Test Bank for Wade, Tavris, Sommers, and Shin – Invitation to Psychology 7e
TOTAL Chapter 1
ASSESSMENT
WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGY?
GUIDE
Section/Learning Factual Conceptual Applied
Objective
POP QUIZ 1 Multiple Choice 1-4, 6-9 5, 10
POP QUIZ 2 Multiple Choice 1-6, 8, 10 7, 9
Psychology, Pseudoscience, Multiple Choice 1-2, 5, 7, 9-11, 13-18, 22- 3-4, 6, 8, 19-21, 27- 24, 41, 45, 47, 54-
and Popular Opinion
23, 25-26, 29-40, 43-44, 46, 28, 42, 51-53, 58, 61, 56, 62-63, 67, 69
LO 1.1.A – Define psychology,
describe how it addresses topics 48-50, 57, 59-60, 46-66, 68 70
from a scientific perspective, True/False 1-44
and differentiate it from
pseudoscience and common
Short Answer 3-7, 9 1, 8, 10 2, 11
sense. Essay 3 2, 4-5 1
LO 1.1.B – Discuss some of the
early perspectives and Integrative Essay
individuals that were influential
forerunners of modern
psychology.
LO 1.1.C – List and describe
four major perspectives in
modern psychology.
LO 1.1.D – Describe the roles
that psychologists play in
research, practice, and the
community.
Thinking Critically and Multiple Choice 71, 80-81 78-79, 82 72-77
Scientifically About
Psychology True/False 45-65 10,12
LO 1.2.A – Explain what critical
thinking is, discuss important Short Answer 13-14 12
critical-thinking guidelines, and
give an example of how each Essay 6-7
applies to the science of
psychology. Integrative Essay
LO 1.2.B – Discuss how
students can use the principles
and methods of psychology to
more effectively study
psychology.
Doing Research: Moving From Multiple Choice 83-86, 89, 92-98, 101-102 90 87-88, 91, 99-100
Questions to Data
LO 1.3.A – Describe the major True/False 66-78
ways participants are selected Short Answer 15
for psychological studies and
how the method of selection Essay 8
might influence interpretations of Integrative Essay
a study’s outcomes.
LO 1.3.B – Discuss the
advantages and disadvantages
of using different descriptive
methods such as case studies,
observational methods, tests,
and surveys.
(Continued on next page)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
2
 Test Bank for Wade, Tavris, Sommers, and Shin – Invitation to Psychology 7e

Section/Learning Factual Conceptual Applied

Objective
Correlational Studies: Multiple Choice 103- 108-113, 115-116, 107
Looking For Relationships
106,107,108,109,117, 121-122
LO 1.4.A – Illustrate with an
example how the correlation 120,121,122
coefficient give both the size True/False 79-85
and direction of the
relationship between two Short Answer 17 16
variables.
LO 1.4.B – Explain why a Essay
correlation between two
variables does not establish a Integrative Essay
causal relationship between
those variables.
The Experiment: Hunting Multiple Choice 126,127,129,132,136, 125, 130, 133-135, 128, 131-132, 136-
For Causes
137,141,142 140-142 137
LO 1.5.A – Distinguish an
independent variable from a True/False 86-92, 94-106 93
dependent variable and give Short Answer 22 18-21
an example of each.
LO 1.5.B – Explain how Essay 9
random assignment helps Integrative Essay
create conditions in an
experiment, and explain the
difference between an
experimental group and a
control group.
LO 1.5.C – Discuss the
methodological advantages,
limitations, and ethical
considerations related to
experimental research design.
Evaluating The Findings Multiple Choice 146, 148,150,151,152, 150 144, 146, 152-154
LO 1.6.A – Explain how
154,158,159
descriptive statistics can be
used to compare the True/False 107-117
performance of groups and Short Answer
research participants.
LO 1.6.B – Explain what a
Essay 10-11 12
statistically significant Integrative Essay
research result does and does
not mean.

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
3
Test Bank for Wade, Tavris, Sommers, and Shin – Invitation to Psychology 7e

Name __________________________________________________________

Chapter 1 – Pop Quiz 1

1. Psychology is defined as the discipline concerned with

a. the study of all physical stimuli that affect human sensations and perceptions.
b. behavior and mental processes and how they are affected by an organism’s physical state, mental state,
and external environment.
c. the study of humankind and the importance of culture in explaining the diversity in human behavior.
d. maladaptive human behaviors and cognitions that are incorporated into a person’s self-worth during
childhood.

2. _______________ established the first psychological laboratory in 1879.

a. Sigmund Freud
b. John Locke
c. William James
d. Wilhelm Wundt

3. Which modern psychological perspective focuses on how people reason, remember, understand language, and
solve problems?
a. the learning perspective
b. the cognitive perspective
c. the sociocultural perspective
d. the psychodynamic perspective

4. In almost all states, a _______________ is required to obtain a license to practice clinical psychology.
a. doctorate
b. master’s degree
c. medical degree
d. certificate from a psychoanalytic institute

5. Critical thinking requires

a. creativity for creating alternative explanations.
b. treating all theories as equally valid.
c. low tolerance for uncertainty.
d. emotional reasoning.

6. Research methods that depict behavior, but do not necessarily yield causal explanations, are called
a. experimental methods.
b. blind studies.
c. significance tests.
d. descriptive methods.

7. Assessment instruments that are designed to tap unconscious feelings or motives are called
a. objective tests.
b. projective tests.
c. double-blind tests.
d. single-blind tests.

8. A _______________ is a measure of how strongly two variables are related to one another.
a. relationship coefficient
b. meta-analysis
c. Bayesian statistic
d. correlation

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
4
 Test Bank for Wade, Tavris, Sommers, and Shin – Invitation to Psychology 7e

9. Which variable does an experimenter manipulate when conducting experimental research?

a. control variable
b. confounding variable
c. independent variable
d. dependent variable

10. A result that is significant at the .05 level indicates that

a. the result was obtained purely by chance and is not real.
b. the probability that the result is due to real differences between groups is .05.
c. there is a positive relationship between variables.
d. the probability that the result occurred by chance is low, and therefore the result is probably real.

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
5
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
was as wise in statesmanship as he was skillful in war; but in a
strange land Hannibal closed his eyes to his country’s woes by taking
his own life. Nor need we confine our research to Pagan antiquity
alone, for such stains upon what is called popular government.
During the present century France has enthroned and banished the
Bourbons, and worshiped and execrated the Bonapartes; and Spain
and Mexico, and scores of States of lesser note, have welcomed and
spurned the same rulers, and created and overthrew the same
dynasties.
For the matchless progress of enlightened rule during the last
century, the world is indebted to England and America. Parent and
child, though separated by violence and estranged in their
sympathies even to the latest days, have been coworkers in the great
cause of perfecting and strengthening liberal government. Each has
been too prone to hope and labor for the decline or subordination of
the other, but they both have thereby “builded wiser than they
knew.” Their ceaseless rivalry for the approving judgment of
civilization and for the development of the noblest attributes of a
generous and enduring authority, have made them vastly better and
wiser than either would have been without the other. We have
inherited her supreme sanctity for law, and thus bounded our
liberties by conservative restraints upon popular passions, until the
sober judgment of the people can correct them. She has, however
unwillingly, yielded to the inspiration of our enlarged freedom and
advanced with hesitating steps toward the amelioration of her less
favored classes. She maintains the form and splendor of royalty, but
no monarch, no ministry, no House of Lords, can now defy the
Commoners of the English people. The breath of disapproval coming
from the popular branch of the government, dissolves a cabinet or
compels an appeal to the country. A justly beloved Queen, unvexed
by the cares of State, is the symbol of the majesty of English law, and
there monarchy practically ends. We have reared a nobler structure,
more delicate in its framework, more exquisite in its harmony, and
more imposing in its progress. Its beneficence would be its weakness
with any other people than our own. Solon summed up the history of
many peoples, when, in answer to the question whether he had given
the Athenians the best of laws, he said: “The best they were capable
of receiving!” Even England with her marked distinctions of rank,
and widely divided and unsympathetic classes, could not entrust her
administration to popular control, without inviting convulsive
discord and probable disintegration. Here we confide the enactment
and execution of our laws to the immediate representatives of the
people; but executives, and judicial tribunals, and conservative
legislative branches, are firmly established, to receive the occasional
surges of popular error, as the rock-ribbed shore makes harmless the
waves of the tempest. We have no antagonism of rank or caste; no
patent of nobility save that of merit, and the Republic has no
distinction that may not be won by the humblest of her citizens. Our
illustrious patriots, statesmen, and chieftains are cherished as
household gods. They have not in turn been applauded and
condemned, unless they have betrayed public trust. They are the
creation of our people under our exceptional system, that educates
all and advances those who are most eminent and faithful; and they
are, from generation to generation, the enduring monuments of the
Republic. We need no triumphal arches, or towering columns, or
magnificent temples to record our achievements. Every patriotic
memory bears in perpetual freshness the inscriptions of our noblest
deeds, and every devoted heart quickens its pulsations at the
contemplation of the power and safety of government of the people.
In every trial, in peace and in war, we have created our warriors, our
pacificators and our great teachers of the country’s sublime duties
and necessities. It is not always our most polished scholars, or our
ripest statesmen who have the true inspiration of the loyal leader.
Ten years ago one of the most illustrious scholars and orators of our
age, was called to dedicate the memorable battle-field of Gettysburg,
as the resting place of our martyred dead. In studied grandeur he
told the story of the heroism of the soldiers of the Republic, and in
chaste and eloquent passages he plead the cause of the imperiled and
bleeding Union. The renowned orator has passed away, and his
oration is forgotten. There was present on that occasion, the chosen
ruler and leader of the people. He was untutored in eloquence, and a
stranger to the art of playing upon the hopes or grief of the nation.
He was the sincere, the unfaltering guardian of the unity of the
States, and his utterance, brief and unstudied, inspired and
strengthened every patriotic impulse, and made a great people renew
their great work with the holiest devotion. As he turned from the
dead to the living, he gave the text of liberty for all time, when he
declared: “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task
remaining before us,—that from these honored dead we take
increased devotion to the cause for which they here gave the last full
measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that the dead shall
not have died in vain; that the nation shall, under God, have a new
birth of freedom, and that the government of the people, by the
people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Neither birth, nor circumstance, nor power, can command the
devotion of our people. Our revolutions in enlightened sentiment,
have been the creation of all the varied agencies of our free
government, and the judgments of the nation have passed into
history as marvels of justice. We have wreathed our military and civil
heroes with the greenest laurels. In the strife of ambition, some have
felt keenly what they deemed the ingratitude of the Republic; but in
their disappointment, they could not understand that the highest
homage of a free people is not measured by place or titled honors.
Clay was none the less beloved, and Webster none the less revered,
because their chief ambition was not realized. Scott was not less the
“Great Captain of the Age,” because he was smitten in his efforts to
attain the highest civil distinction. But a few months ago two men of
humblest opportunities and opposite characteristics, were before us
as rival candidates for our first office. One had been a great teacher,
who through patient years of honest and earnest effort, had made his
impress upon the civilization of every clime. He was the defender of
the oppressed, and the unswerving advocate of equal rights for all
mankind. Gradually his labors ripened, but the fruits were to be
gathered through the flame of battle, and he was unskilled in the
sword. Another had to come with his brave reapers into the valley of
death. He was unknown to fame, and the nation trusted others who
wore its stars. But he transformed despair into hope, and defeat into
victory. He rose through tribulation and malice, by his invincible
courage and matchless command, until the fruition of his rival’s
teachings had been realized in their own, and their country’s
grandest achievement. In the race for civil trust, partisan detraction
swept mercilessly over both, and two men who had written the
proudest records of their age, in their respective spheres of public
duty, were assailed as incompetent and unworthy. Both taught peace.
One dared more for hastened reconciliation, forgiveness and
brotherhood. The other triumphed, and vindicated his rival and
himself by calling the insurgent to share the honors of the Republic.
Soon after the strife was ended, they met at the gates of the “City of
the Silent,” and the victor, as chief of the nation, paid the nation’s
sincere homage to its untitled, but most beloved and lamented
citizen. Had the victor been the vanquished, the lustre of his crown
would have been undimmed in the judgment of our people or of
history. Our rulers are but our agents, chosen in obedience to the
convictions which govern the policy of the selection, and mere
political success is no enduring constituent of greatness. The public
servant, and the private citizen, will alike be honored or condemned,
as they are faithful or unfaithful to their responsible duties.
When we search for the agencies of the great epochs in our
national progress, we look not to the accidents of place. Unlike all
other governments, ours is guided supremely by intelligent and
educated public convictions, and those who are clothed with
authority, are but the exponents of the popular will. Herein is the
source of safety and advancement of our free institutions. On every
hand, in the ranks of people, are the tireless teachers of our destiny.
Away in the forefront of every struggle, are to be found the masters
who brave passion and prejudice and interest, in the perfection of
our nationality.
Our free press reaching into almost every hamlet of the land; our
colleges now reared in every section; our schools with open doors to
all; our churches teaching every faith, with the protection of the law;
our citizens endowed with the sacred right of freedom of speech and
action; our railroads spanning the continent, climbing our
mountains, and stretching into our valleys; our telegraphs making
every community the centre of the world’s daily records—these are
the agencies which are omnipotent in the expression of our national
purposes and duties. Thus directed and maintained, our free
government has braved foreign and domestic war, and been purified
and strengthened in the crucible of conflict. It has grown from a few
feeble States east of the Ohio wilderness, to a vast continent of
commonwealths, and forty millions of population. It has made
freedom as universal as its authority within its vast possessions. The
laws of inequality and caste are blotted from its statutes. It reaches
the golden slopes of the Pacific with its beneficence, and makes
beauty and plenty in the valleys of the mountains on the sunset side
of the Father of Waters. From the cool lakes of the north, to the
sunny gulfs of the South, and from the eastern seas to the waters that
wash the lands of the Pagan, a homogeneous people obey one
constitution, and are devoted to one country. Nor have its agencies
and influences been limited to our own boundaries. The whole
accessible world has felt its power, and paid tribute to its excellence.
Europe has been convulsed from centre to circumference by the
resistless throbbings of oppressed peoples for the liberty they cannot
know and could not maintain. The proud Briton has imitated his
wayward but resolute child, and now rules his own throne. France
has sung the Marseillaise, her anthem of freedom, and waded
through blood in ill-directed struggles for her disenthralment. The
scattered tribes of the Fatherland now worship at the altar of
German unity, with a liberalized Empire. The sad song of the serf is
no longer heard from the children of the Czar. Italy, dismembered
and tempest tossed through centuries, again ordains her laws in the
Eternal City, under a monarch of her choice. The throne of
Ferdinand and Isabella has now no kingly ruler, and the inspiration
of freedom has unsettled the title of despotism to the Spanish
sceptre. The trained lightning flashes the lessons of our civilization to
the home of the Pyramids; the land of the Heathen has our teachers
in its desolate places, and the God of Day sets not upon the
boundless triumphs of our government of the people.
 Robert G. Ingersoll, of Illinois,

In the National Republican Convention at Cincinnati, June, 1876, in

nominating James G. Blaine for the Presidency.
“Massachusetts may be satisfied with the loyalty of Benjamin H.
Bristow; so am I; but if any man nominated by this convention
cannot carry the State of Massachusetts, I am not satisfied with the
loyalty of that State. If the nominee of this convention cannot carry
the grand old Commonwealth of Massachusetts by seventy-five
thousand majority, I would advise them to sell out Faneuil Hall as a
Democratic headquarters. I would advise them to take from Bunker
Hill that old monument of glory.
“The Republicans of the United States demand as their leader in
the great contest of 1876 a man of intelligence, a man of integrity, a
man of well-known and approved political opinions. They demand a
reformer after as well as before the election. They demand a
politician in the highest, broadest and best sense—a man of superb
moral courage. They demand a man acquainted with public affairs,
with the wants of the people; with not only the requirements of the
hour, but with the demands of the future. They demand a man broad
enough to comprehend the relations of this government to the other
nations of the earth. They demand a man well versed in the powers,
duties, and prerogatives of each and every department of this
Government. They demand a man who will sacredly preserve the
financial honor of the United States; one who knows enough to know
that the national debt must be paid through the prosperity of this
people; one who knows enough to know that all the financial theories
in the world cannot redeem a single dollar; one who knows enough
to know that all the money must be made, not by law, but by labor;
one who knows enough to know that the people of the United States
have the industry to make the money and the honor to pay it over
just as fast as they make it.
 “The Republicans of the United States demand a man who knows
that prosperity and resumption, when they come must come
together; that when they come, they will come hand in hand through
the golden harvest fields; hand in hand by the whirling spindles and
the turning wheels; hand in hand past the open furnace doors; hand
in hand by the flaming forges; hand in hand by the chimneys filled
with eager fire—greeted and grasped by the countless sons of toil.
“This money has to be dug out of the earth. You cannot make it by
passing resolutions in a political convention.
“The Republicans of the United States want a man who knows that
this Government should protect every citizen, at home and abroad;
who knows that any government that will not defend its defenders,
and protect its protectors, is a disgrace to the map of the world. They
demand a man who believes in the eternal separation and
divorcement of Church and School. They demand a man whose
political reputation is spotless as a star; but they do not demand that
their candidate shall have a certificate of moral character signed by a
Confederate Congress. The man who has, in full, heaped and
rounded measure, all these splendid qualifications, is the present
grand and gallant leader of the Republican party—James G. Blaine.
“Our country, crowned with the vast and marvelous achievements
of its first century, asks for a man worthy of the past and prophetic of
her future; asks for a man who has the audacity of genius; asks for a
man who is the grandest combination of heart, conscience and brain
beneath her flag. Such a man is James G. Blaine.
“For the Republican host, led by this intrepid man, there can be no
defeat.
“This is a grand year—a year filled with the recollections of the
Revolution; filled with proud and tender memories of the past; with
the sacred legends of liberty; a year in which the sons of freedom will
drink from the fountains of enthusiasm; a year in which the people
call for a man who has preserved in Congress what our soldiers won
upon the field; a year in which they call for the man who has torn
from the throat of treason the tongue of slander; for the man who
has snatched the mask of Democracy from the hideous face of
rebellion; for the man who, like an intellectual athlete, has stood in
the arena of debate and challenged all comers, and who is still a total
stranger to defeat.
 “Like an armed warrior, like a plumed knight, James G. Blaine
marched down the halls of the American Congress, and threw his
shining lance full and fair against the brazen foreheads of the
defamers of his country and the maligners of his honor.
“For the Republican party to desert this gallant leader now, is as
though an army should desert their general upon the field of battle.
“James G. Blaine is now and has been for years the bearer of the
sacred standard of the Republican party. I call it sacred, because no
human being can stand beneath its folds without becoming and
without remaining free.
“Gentlemen of the convention, in the name of the great Republic,
the only Republic that ever existed upon this earth; in the name of all
her defenders and of all her supporters; in the name of all her
soldiers living; in the name of all her soldiers dead upon the field of
battle, and in the name of those who perished in the skeleton clutch
of famine at Andersonville and Libby, whose sufferings he so vividly
remembers, Illinois—Illinois nominates for the next President of this
country, that prince of parliamentarians—that leader of leaders—
James G. Blaine.”
 Roscoe Conkling, of New York,

In the National Republican Convention at Chicago, June, 1880,

nominating Ulysses S. Grant for the Presidency.
“And when asked what State he hails from,
Our sole reply shall be,
He hails from Appomattox
And the famous Apple tree.”

Obeying instructions I should never dare to disregard, I rise in behalf

of the State of New York to propose a nomination with which the
country and the Republican party can grandly win. The election
before us will be the Austerlitz of American politics. It will decide
whether for years to come the country will be ‘Republican or
Cossack.’ The need of the hour is a candidate who can carry doubtful
States, North and South; and believing that he more surely than any
other can carry New York against any opponent, and carry not only
the North, but several States of the South, New York is for Ulysses S.
Grant. He alone of living Republicans has carried New York as a
Presidential candidate. Once he carried it even according to a
Democratic count, and twice he carried it by the people’s vote, and he
is stronger now. The Republican party with its standard in his hand,
is stronger now than in 1868 or 1872. Never defeated in war or in
peace, his name is the most illustrious borne by any living man; his
services attest his greatness, and the country knows them by heart.
His fame was born not alone of things written and said, but of the
arduous greatness of things done, and dangers and emergencies will
search in vain in the future, as they have searched in vain in the past,
for any other on whom the nation leans with such confidence and
trust. Standing on the highest eminence of human distinction, and
having filled all lands with his renown, modest, firm, simple and self-
poised, he has seen not only the titled but the poor and the lowly in
the utmost ends of the world rise and uncover before him. He has
studied the needs and defects of many systems of government, and
he comes back a better American than ever, with a wealth of
knowledge and experience added to the hard common sense which
so conspicuously distinguished him in all the fierce light that beat
upon him throughout the most eventful, trying and perilous sixteen
years of the nation’s history.
“Never having had ‘a policy to enforce against the will of the
people,’ he never betrayed a cause or a friend, and the people will
never betray or desert him. Vilified and reviled, truthlessly aspersed
by numberless presses, not in other lands, but in his own, the
assaults upon him have strengthened and seasoned his hold upon the
public heart. The ammunition of calumny has all been exploded; the
powder has all been burned once, its force is spent, and General
Grant’s name will glitter as a bright and imperishable star in the
diadem of the Republic when those who have tried to tarnish it will
have mouldered in forgotten graves and their memories and epitaphs
have vanished utterly.
“Never elated by success, never depressed by adversity, he has ever
in peace, as in war, shown the very genius of common sense. The
terms he prescribed for Lee’s surrender foreshadowed the wisest
principles and prophecies of true reconstruction.
“Victor in the greatest of modern wars, he quickly signalized his
aversion to war and his love of peace by an arbitration of
international disputes which stands as the wisest and most majestic
example of its kind in the world’s diplomacy. When inflation, at the
height of its popularity and frenzy, had swept both houses of
Congress, it was the veto of Grant which, single and alone, overthrew
expansion and cleared the way for specie resumption. To him,
immeasurably more than to any other man, is due the fact that every
paper dollar is as good as gold. With him as our leader we shall have
no defensive campaign, no apologies or explanations to make. The
shafts and arrows have all been aimed at him and lie broken and
harmless at his feet. Life, liberty and property will find safeguard in
him. When he said of the black man in Florida, ‘Wherever I am they
may come also,’ he meant that, had he the power to help it, the poor
dwellers in the cabins of the South should not be driven in terror
from the homes of their childhood and the graves of their murdered
dead. When he refused to receive Denis Kearney he meant that
lawlessness and communism, although it should dictate laws to a
whole city, would everywhere meet a foe in him, and, popular or
unpopular, he will hew to the line of right, let the chips fly where they
may.
“His integrity, his common sense, his courage and his unequaled
experience are the qualities offered to his country. The only
argument against accepting them would amaze Solomon. He thought
there could be nothing new under the sun. Having tried Grant twice
and found him faithful, we are told we must not, even after an
interval of years, trust him again. What stultification does not such a
fallacy involve! The American people exclude Jefferson Davis from
public trust. Why? Because he was the arch traitor and would be a
destroyer. And now the same people are asked to ostracize Grant and
not trust him. Why? Because he was the arch preserver of his
country; because, not only in war, but afterward, twice as a civic
magistrate, he gave his highest, noblest efforts to the Republic. Is
such absurdity an electioneering jugglery or hypocrisy’s
masquerade?
“There is no field of human activity, responsibility or reason in
which rational beings object to Grant because he has been weighed in
the balance and not found wanting, and because he has had
unequaled experience, making him exceptionally competent and fit.
From the man who shoes your horse to the lawyer who pleads your
case, the officers who manage your railway, the doctor into whose
hands you give your life, or the minister who seeks to save your
souls, what now do you reject because you have tried him and by his
works have known him? What makes the Presidential office an
exception to all things else in the common sense to be applied to
selecting its incumbent? Who dares to put fetters on the free choice
and judgment which is the birthright of the American people? Can it
be said that Grant has used official power to perpetuate his plan? He
has no place. No official power has been used for him. Without
patronage or power, without telegraph wires running from his house
to the convention, without electioneering contrivances, without
effort on his part, his name is on his country’s lips, and he is struck at
by the whole Democratic party because his nomination will be the
death-blow to Democratic success. He is struck at by others who find
offense and disqualification in the very service he has rendered and
in the very experience he has gained. Show me a better man. Name
one and I am answered. But do not point, as a disqualification, to the
very facts which make this man fit beyond all others. Let not
experience disqualify or excellence impeach him. There is no third
term in the case, and the pretense will die with the political dog-days
which engendered it. Nobody is really worried about a third term
except those hopelessly longing for a first term and the dupes they
have made. Without bureaus, committees, officials or emissaries to
manufacture sentiment in his favor, without intrigue or effort on his
part, Grant is the candidate whose supporters have never threatened
to bolt. As they say, he is a Republican who never wavers. He and his
friends stood by the creed and the candidates of the Republican
party, holding the right of a majority as the very essence of their
faith, and meaning to uphold that faith against the common enemy
and the charlatans and guerrillas who from time to time deploy
between the lines and forage on one side or the other.
“The Democratic party is a standing protest against progress. Its
purposes are spoils. Its hope and very existence is a solid South. Its
success is a menace to prosperity and order.
“This convention is master of a supreme opportunity, can name
the next President of the United States and make sure of his election
and his peaceful inauguration. It can break the power which
dominates and mildews the South. It can speed the nation in a career
of grandeur eclipsing all past achievements. We have only to listen
above the din and look beyond the dust of an hour to behold the
Republican party advancing to victory, with its greatest marshal at its
head.”
James A. Garfield, of Ohio,
 In the National Republican Convention at Chicago, June, 1880,
nominating John Sherman for the Presidency.
“I have witnessed the extraordinary scenes of this convention with
deep solicitude. No emotion touches my heart more quickly than a
sentiment in honor of a great and noble character. But as I sat on
these seats and witnessed these demonstrations, it seemed to me you
were a human ocean in a tempest. I have seen the sea lashed into a
fury and tossed into a spray, and its grandeur moves the soul of the
dullest man. But I remember that it is not the billows, but the calm
level of the sea from which all heights and depths are measured.
When the storm has passed and the hour of calm settles on the
ocean, when sunlight bathes its smooth surface, then the astronomer
and surveyor takes the level from which he measures all terrestrial
heights and depths. Gentlemen of the convention, your present
temper may not mark the healthful pulse of our people. When our
enthusiasm has passed, when the emotions of this hour have
subsided, we shall find the calm level of public opinion below the
storm from which the thoughts of a mighty people are to be
measured, and by which their final action will be determined. Not
here, in this brilliant circle where fifteen thousand men and women
are assembled, is the destiny of the Republic to be decreed; not here,
where I see the enthusiastic faces of seven hundred and fifty-six
delegates waiting to cast their votes into the urn and determine the
choice of their party; but by four million Republican firesides, where
the thoughtful fathers, with wives and children about them, with the
calm thoughts inspired by love of home and love of country, with the
history of the past, the hopes of the future, and the knowledge of the
great men who have adorned and blessed our nation in days gone by
—there God prepares the verdict that shall determine the wisdom of
our work to-night. Not in Chicago in the heat of June, but in the
sober quiet that comes between now and the melancholy days of
November, in the silence of deliberate judgment will this great
question be settled. Let us aid them to-night.
“But now, gentlemen of the convention, what do we want? Bear
with me a moment. Hear me for this cause, and for a moment be
silent, that you may hear. Twenty-five years ago this Republic was
wearing a triple chain of bondage. Long familiarity with traffic in the
bodies and souls of men had paralyzed the conscience of a majority
of our people. The baleful doctrine of State Sovereignty had shocked
and weakened the noblest and most beneficent powers of the
National Government, and the grasping power of slavery was seizing
the virgin territory of the West and dragging them into the den of
eternal bondage. At that crisis the Republican party was born. It
drew its first inspiration from that fire of liberty which God has
lighted in every man’s heart, and which all the powers of ignorance
and tyranny can never wholly extinguish. The Republican party came
to deliver and save the Republic. It entered the arena when the
beleaguered and assailed territories were struggling for freedom, and
drew around them the sacred circle of liberty which the demon of
slavery has never dared to cross. It made them free forever.
Strengthened by its victory on the frontier, the young party, under
the leadership of that great man who, on this spot, twenty years ago,
was made its leader, entered the national capital and assumed the
high duties of the Government. The light which shone from its
banner dispelled the darkness in which slavery had enshrouded the
capital, and melted the shackles of every slave, and consumed, in the
fire of liberty, every slave-pen within the shadow of the Capitol. Our
national industries, by an impoverishing policy, were themselves
prostrated, and the streams of revenue flowed in such feeble currents
that the Treasury itself was well nigh empty. The money of the people
was the wretched notes of two thousand uncontrolled and
irresponsible State banking corporations, which was filling the
country with a circulation that poisoned rather than sustained the
life of business. The Republican party changed all this. It abolished
the babel of confusion, and gave the country a currency as national
as its flag, based upon the sacred faith of the people. It threw its
protecting arm around our great industries, and they stood erect as
with new life. It filled with the spirit of true nationality all the great
functions of the Government. It confronted a rebellion of
unexampled magnitude, with slavery behind it, and, under God,
fought the final battle of liberty until victory was won. Then, after the
storms of battle, were heard the sweet, calm words of peace uttered
by the conquering nation, and saying to the conquered foe that lay
prostrate at its feet: ‘This is our only revenge, that you join us in
lifting to the serene firmament of the Constitution, to shine like stars
for ever and ever, the immortal principles of truth and justice, that
all men, white or black, shall be free and stand equal before the law.’
“Then came the question of reconstruction, the public debt, and
the public faith. In the settlement of the questions the Republican
party has completed its twenty-five years of glorious existence, and it
has sent us here to prepare it for another lustrum of duty and of
victory. How shall we do this great work? We cannot do it, my
friends, by assailing our Republican brethren. God forbid that I
should say one word to cast a shadow upon any name on the roll of
our heroes. This coming fight is our Thermopylæ. We are standing
upon a narrow isthmus. If our Spartan hosts are united, we can
withstand all the Persians that the Xerxes of Democracy can bring
against us. Let us hold our ground this one year, for the stars in their
courses fight for us in the future. The census taken this year will
bring reinforcements and continued power. But in order to win this
victory now, we want the vote of every Republican, of every Grant
Republican and every anti-Grant Republican in America, of every
Blaine man and every anti-Blaine man. The vote of every follower of
every candidate is needed to make our success certain; therefore I
say, gentlemen and brethren, we are here to take calm counsel
together, and inquire what we shall do. We want a man whose life
and opinions embody all the achievements of which I have spoken.
We want a man who, standing on a mountain height, sees all the
achievements of our past history, and carries in his heart the
memory of all its glorious deeds, and who, looking forward, prepares
to meet the labor and the dangers to come. We want one who will act
in no spirit of unkindness toward those we lately met in battle. The
Republican party offers to our brethren of the South the olive branch
of peace, and wishes them to return to brotherhood, on this supreme
condition, that it shall be admitted forever and forevermore, that, in
the war for the Union, we were right and they were wrong. On that
supreme condition we meet them as brethren, and on no other. We
ask them to share with us the blessings and honors of this great
Republic.
“Now, gentlemen, not to weary you, I am about to present a name
for your consideration—the name of a man who was the comrade and
associate and friend of nearly all those noble dead whose faces look
down upon us from these walls to-night; a man who began his career
of public service twenty-five years ago, whose first duty was
courageously done in the days of peril on the plains of Kansas, when
the first red drops of that bloody shower began to fall which finally
swelled into the deluge of war. He bravely stood by young Kansas
then, and, returning to his duty in the National Legislature, through
all subsequent time, his pathway has been marked by labors
performed in every department of legislation. You ask for his
monuments. I point you to twenty-five years of national statutes. Not
one great beneficent statute has been placed in our statute books
without his intelligent and powerful aid. He aided these men to
formulate the laws that raised our great armies and carried us
through the war. His hand was seen in the workmanship of those
statutes that restored and brought back the unity and married calm
of the States. His hand was in all that great legislation that created
the war currency, and in a still greater work that redeemed the
promises of the Government, and made the currency equal to gold.
And when at last called from the halls of legislation into a high
executive office he displayed that experience, intelligence, firmness
and poise of character which has carried us through a stormy period
of three years. With one-half the public press crying ‘crucify him,’
and a hostile Congress seeking to prevent success, in all this he
remained unmoved until victory crowned him. The great fiscal affairs
of the nation, and the great business interests of the country, he has
guarded and preserved, while executing the law of resumption and
effecting its object without a jar and against the false prophecies of
one-half of the press and all the Democracy of this continent. He has
shown himself able to meet with calmness the great emergencies of
the Government for twenty-five years. He has trodden the perilous
heights of public duty, and against all the shafts of malice has borne
his breast unharmed. He has stood in the blaze of ‘that fierce light
that beats against the throne,’ but its fiercest ray has found no flaw in
his armor, no stain on his shield. I do not present him as a better
Republican or as a better man than thousands of others we honor,
but I present him for your deliberate consideration. I nominate John
Sherman, of Ohio.”
 Daniel Dougherty, of Pennsylvania,

In the Democratic National Convention at Cincinnati, June 1880,

nominating Winfield Scott Hancock for the Presidency.
“I propose to present to the thoughtful consideration of the
convention the name of one who, on the field of battle, was styled
‘The Superb,’ yet won the still nobler renown as a military governor
whose first act when in command of Louisiana and Texas was to
salute the Constitution by proclaiming that the military rule shall
ever be subservient to the civil power. The plighted word of a soldier
was proved by the acts of a statesman. I nominate one whose name
will suppress all factions, will be alike acceptable to the North and to
the South—a name that will thrill the Republic, a name, if
nominated, of a man that will crush the last embers of sectional
strife, and whose name will be hailed as the dawning of the day of
perpetual brotherhood. With him we can fling away our shields and
wage an aggressive war. We can appeal to the supreme tribunal of
the American people against the corruption of the Republican party
and their untold violations of constitutional liberty. With him as our
chieftain the bloody banner of the Republicans will fall from their
palsied grasp. Oh, my countrymen, in this supreme moment the
destinies of the Republic are at stake, and the liberties of the people
are imperiled. The people hang breathless on your deliberation. Take
heed! Make no mis-step! I nominate one who can carry every
Southern State, and who can carry Pennsylvania, Indiana,
Connecticut, New Jersey and New York—the soldier-statesman, with
a record as stainless as his sword—Winfield Scott Hancock, of
Pennsylvania. If elected, he will take his seat.”
 George Gray, of Delaware,

In the Democratic National Convention at Cincinnati, June, 1880,

nominating Thomas F. Bayard for the Presidency.
“I am instructed by the Delaware delegation to make in their
behalf a nomination for the Presidency of the United States. Small in
territory and population, Delaware is proud of her history and of her
position in the sisterhood of States. Always devoted to the principles
of that great party which maintains the equality and rights of the
States, as well as of the individual citizen, she is here to-day in grand
council to do all that in her lies for the advancement of our common
cause. Who will best lead the Democratic hosts in the impending
struggle for the restoration of honest government and the
constitutional rights of the States and of their people, is the
important question that we must decide. Delaware is not blinded by
her affections when she presents to this convention, as a candidate
for this great trust, the name of her gallant son, Thomas Francis
Bayard. He is no carpet knight rashly put forth to flash a maiden
sword in this great contest. He is a veteran covered with the scars of
many hard-fought battles, when the principles of constitutional
liberty have been at stake in an arena where the giants of radicalism
were his foes, and his bruised arms, not ‘hung up,’ but still burnished
brightly, are monuments of his prowess. Thomas F. Bayard is a
statesman who will need no introduction to the American people. His
name and his record are known wherever our flag floats—aye,
wherever the English tongue is spoken. His is no sectional fame.
With sympathies as broad as the continent, a private character as
spotless as the snow from heaven, a judgment as clear as the
sunlight, an intellect keen and bright as a flashing sabre, a courage
that none dare question, honest in thought and deed, the people all
know him by heart, and, as I said before, they need not be told who
and what he is. But you, gentlemen of the convention, who must keep
in view the success so important to be achieved in November, pray
consider the elements of his strength. Who more than he will as a
candidate appeal to the best traditions of our party and our country?
In whom more than he will the business interests of the country, now
re-awakening to new life and hope, confide for that economy and
repose which shall send capital and labor forth like twin brothers
hand in hand to the great work of building up the country’s
prosperity and advancing its civilization? Who better than he will
represent the heart and intellect of our great party, or give expression
to its noblest inspirations? Who will draw so largely upon the honest
and reflecting independent voters as he, whose very name is a
synonym for honest and fearless opposition to corruption every
where and in every form, and who has dared to follow in what he
thought the path of duty with a chivalrous devotion that never
counted personal gains or losses? Who has contributed more than
Thomas Francis Bayard to the commanding strength that the
Democratic party possesses to-day? Blot out him and his influence,
and who would not feel and mourn his loss? Pardon Delaware if she
says too much; she speaks in no disparagement of the distinguished
Democrats whose names sparkle like stars in the political firmament.
She honors them all. But she knows her son, and her heart will
speak. Nominate him and success is assured. His very name will be a
platform. It will fire every Democratic heart with a new zeal and put
a sword in the hand of every honest man with which to drive from
place and power the reckless men who have for four years held both
against the expressed will of the American people. Don’t tell us that
you admire and love him, but that he is unavailable. Tell the country
that the sneer of our Republican enemies is a lie, and that such a
man as Thomas F. Bayard is not too good a man to receive the
nomination of the Democratic party. Take the whole people into your
confidence, and tell them that an honest and patriotic party is to be
led by as honest and pure a man as God ever made; that a brave
party is to be led by a brave man whose courage will never falter, be
the danger or emergency what it may. Tell them that our party has
the courage of its convictions, and that statesmanship, ability and
honesty are to be realized once more in the government of these
United States, and the nomination of Thomas F. Bayard will fall like
a benediction on the land, and will be the presage of a victory that
will sweep like a whirlwind from the lakes to the Gulf and from ocean
to ocean.”
 Frye Nominating Blaine.

In the Chicago Convention, 1880.

“I once saw a storm at sea in the nighttime; an old ship battling for
its life with the fury of the tempest; darkness everywhere; the winds
raging and howling; the huge waves beating on the sides of the ship,
and making her shiver from stem to stern. The lightning was
flashing, the thunders rolling; there was danger everywhere. I saw at
the helm, a bold, courageous, immovable, commanding man. In the
tempest, calm; in the commotion, quiet; in the danger, hopeful. I saw
him take that old ship and bring her into her harbor, into still waters,
into safety. That man was a hero. [Applause.] I saw the good old ship
of State, the State of Maine, within the last year, fighting her way
through the same waves, against the dangers. She was freighted with
all that is precious in the principles of our republic; with the rights of
the American citizenship, with all that is guaranteed to the American
citizen by our Constitution. The eyes of the whole nation were on her,
and intense anxiety filled every American heart lest the grand old
ship, the “State of Maine,” might go down beneath the waves forever,
carrying her precious freight with her. But there was a man at the
helm, calm, deliberate, commanding, sagacious; he made even the
foolish man wise; courageous, he inspired the timid with courage;
hopeful, he gave heart to the dismayed, and he brought that good old
ship safely into harbor, into safety; and she floats to-day greater,
purer, stronger for her baptism of danger. That man too, was heroic,
and his name was James G. Blaine. [Loud cheers.]
“Maine sent us to this magnificent Convention with a memory of
her own salvation from impending peril fresh upon her. To you
representatives of 50,000,000 of the American people, who have
met here to counsel how the Republic can be saved, she says,
“Representatives of the people, take the man, the true man, the
staunch man, for your leader, who has just saved me, and he will
bring you to safety and certain victory.””
 Senator Hill’s Denunciation of Senator
Mahone.

In Extra Session of the Senate, March 14, 1881.

Very well; the records of the country must settle that with the
Senator. The Senator will say who was elected as a republican from
any of the States to which I allude. I say what the whole world knows,
that there are thirty-eight men on this floor elected as democrats,
declaring themselves to be democrats, who supported Hancock, and
who have supported the democratic ticket in every election that has
occurred, and who were elected, moreover, by democratic
Legislatures, elected by Legislatures which were largely democratic;
and the Senator from New York will not deny it. One other Senator
who was elected, not as a democrat, but as an independent, has
announced his purpose to vote with us on this question. That makes
thirty-nine, unless some man of the thirty-eight who was elected by a
democratic Legislature proves false to his trust. Now, the Senator
from New York does not say that somebody has been bought. No; I
have not said that. He does not say somebody has been taken and
carried away. No; I have not said that. But the Senator has said, and
here is his language, and I hope he will not find it necessary to
correct it:
It may be said, very likely I shall be found to say despite some
criticism that I may make upon so saying in advance, that
notwithstanding the words “during the present session,” day after to-
morrow or the day after that, if the majority then present in the
Chamber changes, that majority may overthrow all this proceeding,
obliterate it, and set up an organization of the Senate in conformity
with and not in contradiction of the edict of the election.
The presidential election he was referring to—
 If an apology is needed for the objection which I feel to that, it will
be found I think in the circumstance that a majority, a constitutional
majority of the Senate, is against that resolution, is against the
formation of committees democratic in inspiration and persuasion,
to which are to go for this session all executive matters.
The Senator has announced to-day that the majority on this side of
the Chamber was only temporary. He has announced over and over
that it was to be a temporary majority. I meet him on the fact. I say
there are thirty-eight members sitting in this Hall to-day who were
elected by democratic Legislatures, and as democrats, and one
distinguished Senator who was not elected as a democrat, but by
democratic votes, the distinguished Senator from Illinois, [Mr.
Davis,] has announced his purpose to vote with these thirty-eight
democrats. Where, then, have I misrepresented? If that be true, and
if those who were elected as democrats are not faithless to the
constituency that elected them, you will not have the majority when
the Senate is full.
Again, so far from charging the Senator from New York with being
a personal party to this arrangement, I acquitted him boldly and
fearlessly, for I undertake to say what I stated before, and I repeat it,
to his credit, he is no party to an arrangement by which any man
chosen by a democratic Legislature and as a democrat is not going to
vote for the party that sent him here. Sir, I know too well what
frowns would gather with lightning fierceness upon the brow of the
Senator from New York if I were to intimate or any other man were
to intimate that he, elected as a republican, because he happened to
have a controlling vote was going to vote with the democrats on the
organization. What would be insulting to him he cannot, he will not
respect in another.
Now, sir, I say the Senator has been unjust in the conclusion which
he has drawn, because it necessarily makes somebody who was
chosen as a democrat ally himself with the republicans, not on great
questions of policy, but on a question of organization, on a question
of mere political organization. I assume that that has not been done.
No man can charge that I have come forward and assumed that his
fidelity was in question. I have assumed that the Senator from New
York was wrong in his statement. Why? Because if any gentleman
who was chosen to this body as a democrat has concluded not to vote
with the democrats on the organization, he has not given us notice,
and I take it for granted that when a gentleman changes his opinions,
as every Senator has a right to change his opinions, his first duty is to
give notice of that change to those with whom he has been
associated. He has not given that notice; no democrat of the thirty-
eight has given that notice to this side of the House. I therefore
assume that no such change has occurred.
But there is another obligation. While I concede the right of any
gentleman to change his opinions and change his party affiliations,
yet I say that when he has arrived at the conclusion that duty
requires him to make that change he must give notice to the
constituency that sent him here. I have heard of no such notice. If the
people of any of these democratic States, who through democratic
Legislatures have sent thirty-eight democrats to this body and one
more by democratic votes, have received notice of a change of party
opinion or a change of party affiliations by any of those they sent
here, I have not heard of it; the evidence of it has not been produced.
Sir, I concede the right of every man to change his opinions; I
concede the right of every man to change his party affiliations; I
concede the right of any man who was elected to the high place of a
seat in this Senate as a democrat to change and become a republican;
but I deny in the presence of this Senate, I deny in the hearing of this
people, that any man has a right to accept a commission from one
party and execute the trust confided to him in the interest of another
party. Demoralized as this country has become, though every wind
bears to us charges of fraud and bargain and corruption; though the
highest positions in the land, we fear, have been degraded by being
occupied by persons who procured them otherwise than by the
popular will, yet I deny that the people of either party in this country
have yet given any man a right to be faithless to a trust. They have
given no man a right to accept a commission as a democrat and hold
that commission and act with the republicans. Manhood, bravery,
courage, fidelity, morality, respect for the opinions of mankind
requires that whenever a man has arrived at the conclusion that he
cannot carry out the trust which was confided to him, he should
return the commission and tell his constituents, “I have changed my
mind and therefore return you the commission you gave me.” Sir, I
do not believe that a single one of the thirty-eight gentlemen who
were elected as democrats and whose names are before me here, will
hold in his pocket a commission conferred by democrats, conferred
on him as a democrat, and without giving notice to his constituency,
without giving notice to his associates, will execute that commission
in the interest of the adversary party and go and communicate his
conclusion, first of all, and only, to the members of the adversary
party.
Sir, who is it that has changed? Whom of these thirty-eight does
the Senator rely upon to vote with the republicans? That one has not
notified us; he has not notified his constituency. Therefore I say it is
not true, and I cannot sit here quietly and allow a gentleman on the
other side of the Chamber, however distinguished, to get up here and
assume and asseverate over and over that somebody elected as a
democrat is faithless to his trust, and not repel it. No, gentlemen, you
are deceived; you will be disappointed. I vindicate the character of
American citizenship, I vindicate the honor of human nature when I
say you will be disappointed, and no man elected as a democrat is
going to help you organize the committees of this Senate. I do not say
so because I know. No, I have no personal information, but I will
stand here and affirm that no man who has been deemed by any
constituency in this country to be worthy of a place in this body will
be guilty of that treachery. And how is the Senator’s majority to
come? How many are there? He has not told us. The papers said this
morning that there were two or three, and they named my good
friend from Tennessee, [Mr. Harris.] When I saw that I knew the
whole thing was absurd. The idea that anybody in this world would
ever believe that my friend from Tennessee could possibly be guilty
of such a thing, and my colleague [Mr. Brown] also was named—
gentlemen who were born and reared in the school of fidelity to their
party. How many? Have you one? If you have but one that was
elected as a democrat and who has concluded to go with the
republicans, then you have only half, you have 38 to 38, and I
suppose you count upon the vote of the Vice-President. Has that
been arranged? Sir, I will not blame you if you vote for voting
according to the sentiment that elected you, for voting according to
the professions of your principles which you avowed when you were
elected. I deny myself the right of the Vice-President to take part in
the constitution and organization of this Senate; but I shall not make
the question. If you have got one, the vote will be 38 to 38. Who is
the one? Who is ambitious to do what no man in the history of this
country has ever done, to be the first man to stand up in this high
presence, after this country has reached fifty million people, and
proclaim from this proud eminence that he disgraces the commission
he holds. [Applause in the galleries.]
The Vice-President rapped to order.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. Who is it? Who can he be? Do you receive
him with affection? Do you receive him with respect? Is such a man
worthy of your association? Such a man is not worthy to be a
democrat. Is he worthy to be a republican? If my friend from Illinois,
my friend from Kansas, or my friend from New York, were to come to
me holding a republican commission in his pocket, sent here by a
republican Legislature, and whisper to me “I will vote with the
democrats on organization,” I would tell him that if he so came he
would be expelled with ignominy from the ranks of the party.
And why do you beg us to wait? If all who were elected as
democrats are to remain democrats, what good will waiting do you?
You will still be in a minority of two, the same minority you are in
this morning.
Mr. President, I affirm that no man elected and sent here by a
democratic Legislature as a democrat, whatever may have been local
issues, whatever may have been the divisions of factions, and above
all no man who professed to be a democrat when he was elected and
who procured his election by professing to be a democrat, in the
name of democracy and republicanism as well, in the name of
American nature, I charge that no such man will prove false to his
trust; and therefore why wait? Why delay the business of the
country? Why should the nominations lie on the table unacted on?
Why should we spend days and days here with the parties on the
other side filibustering for time to get delay, to get a few days? Why
should we do that when upon the assumption that the Senate is not
to blush at an exhibition of treachery the result will be the same one
week, two weeks, six months, two years from now that it is now?
Sir, I know that there is a great deal in this question. The American
people have had much to humiliate them; all peoples have much to
humiliate them. I know that the patronage of this Government has
become very great. I know that the distinguished gentleman who
presides at the other end of the Avenue holds in his hand millions
and hundreds of millions of patronage. To our shame be it said it has
been whispered a hundred times all through the country by the
presses of both parties until it has become absolutely familiar to
American ears that the patronage of the Federal Government has
been used to buy votes and control elections to keep one party in
power. It is a question that confronts every honest statesman
whether something shall not be done to lessen that patronage. I
respond to the sentiment of the President in his inaugural when I say
there ought to be a rule in even the civil service by which this
patronage shall be placed where it cannot be used for such purposes.
If it is not done, I do not know what humiliations are in store for us
all.
But, Mr. President, here are facts that no man can escape.
Gentlemen of the republican party of this Senate, you cannot
organize the Senate unless you can get the vote of some man who
was elected as a democrat. You cannot escape that. Have you gotten
it? If so, how? If you have, nobody knows it but yourselves. How?
There is no effect without a cause; there is no change without a
purpose; there is no bargain without a consideration. What is the
cause? If there has been a change, why a change? How does it
happen that you know the change and we do not? What induced the
change? I deny that there has been a change. I maintain that all the
distinguished gentlemen who make up the thirty-eight democrats on
this side of the Chamber are firm, firm to the principles that sent
them here, firm to the professions that sent them here, and firm to
the constituencies that sent them here. They were elected as
democrats. Now on the question of organization, which is nothing in
the world but a pure political question and a party question at that,
they will act with the democratic party, and you, gentlemen, will be
deceived if you calculate otherwise. Therefore, there is no necessity
for you to enter into all this filibustering and producing this delay for
the purpose of getting the organization.
Mr. President, as I said before, the Senate should be a place where
there should be no masquerading; men should deal frankly with each
other. If I were to charge any gentleman on the republican side of the
Chamber who was elected as a republican, who professed to be a
republican when he was elected, with having made arrangements
with the democrats to vote with them, I should insult him and he
would resent it as an insult, and gentlemen excuse me for repelling
the charge which if made against you, you would repel as an insult. I
repel as an insult the charge made against any democrat that he
would be false to his colors and is intending to vote with you on the
organization.
Mr. Harris. Mr. President, I rise only to say that I regret that the
honorable Senator from Georgia should have deemed it proper to
dignify the miserable newspaper twaddle in respect to my political
position——
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I will say to my friend I did not intend——
Mr. Harris. I am quite sure the Senator did not intend anything
unkind to me; yet, by mentioning the matter here, he gives a dignity
to it that it never could have had otherwise, and one that it is not
worthy of, especially in view of the fact, as I very well know, that
there is not a democrat or a republican in America, who knows me,
who has ever doubted, or doubts to-day, what my political position
is. It is unworthy of further notice, and I will notice it no more.
Mr. Mahone. Mr. President, I do not propose to detain you and
the Senate more than a few minutes. The distinguished Senator from
Georgia has manifestly engaged in an effort to disclose my position
on this floor.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I do not know what your position is. How
could I disclose it?
Mr. Mahone. Sir, the Senator might be a little more direct as he
might well have been in the course of his remarks in asking my
position; and that I will give him.
Now, Mr. President, the Senator has assumed not only to be the
custodian here of the democratic party of this nation, but he has
dared to assert his right to speak for a constituency that I have the
privilege, the proud and honorable privilege on this floor, of
representing [applause in the galleries] without his assent, without
the assent of such democracy as that he speaks for. [Applause in the
galleries.] I owe them, sir, I owe you [addressing Mr. Hill] and those
for whom you undertake to speak nothing in this Chamber.
[Applause in the galleries.] I came here, sir, as a Virginian to
represent my people, not to represent that democracy for which you
stand. [Applause in the galleries.] I come with as proud a claim to