bold plan to secure the organization of the Convention. It was the rule for the chairman of the National Committee to call the Convention to order and then to give way to a temporary chairman selected by the Committee. The Committee's choice would be anti-Grant, but Cameron would recognize a motion from the floor to substitute a Grant man and on this vote he would apply the unit rule and likewise on any appeal from his ruling. The temporary chairman so chosen would continue the same parliamentary practice, a permanent organization friendly to Grant would be effected and he would be nominated on the first ballot. An analysis of the delegations shows clearly that, if the unit rule could have been enforced, this plan might have been carried out to the letter. The plan leaked out and the anti-Grant men were in dismay, for they lacked cohesion and were supporting several candidates, while the Grant party was like a military force obeying implicitly its leaders. On May 30, Garfield arrived in Chicago and brought order out of chaos by insisting that the defeat of the unit rule was more important than the nomination of any candidate. He, with a number of other delegates, representing different candidates, waited upon Conkling and gave him to understand that, on questions of organization, the anti-Grant men would act together. Under this inspiration, which brought jarring elements into union, the majority of the National Committee threatened to depose Cameron as chairman, unless this plan of the triumvirate should be abandoned. A compromise was arrived at. Senator George F. Hoar, who was neither for Grant nor for Blaine, was agreed upon as temporary chairman and the question of the unit rule went to the Convention, where the anti-Grant forces were

in a majority. John M. Forbes, who was the Massachusetts member of the National Committee and an Independent, made this private note of opinion and of the action of the majority, "In spite of the objections to Grant, I preferred him, as being an honest man, to Blaine; but, for the purposes of a fair organization of the convention, a combination with the Blaine leaders was necessary, and by patience and firmness we prevented the breaking up of the convention."

The Convention-building on the shore of the lake was said to be "one of the most splendid barns that was ever constructed." It held the delegates, alternates, press reporters, officials, distinguished guests and 10,000 spectators. The acoustic properties were good. Flags and pictures of prominent Republicans covered the walls. The weather was comfortably cool during the first part of the proceedings and the demand for tickets to the galleries was great. The Convention was called to order at noon of Wednesday, June 2, by Cameron, who, after a few remarks, said that the Republican National Committee had instructed him to place in nomination, as temporary chairman, George F. Hoar. Hoar was elected unanimously and, on taking the chair, made a brief speech, when the Convention accomplished some routine business and, after a session of three hours, adjourned until the next day.

Conkling and Garfield were the heroes of the Convention and led the opposing forces. Conkling stopped at the Grand Pacific Hotel and, despite his supercilious manner, courted publicity. While eating his breakfast, he was gaped at by curious crowds. Frequenting the office, the lobby and other public rooms, and reclining on the

public sofas, he apparently desired personal homage from the crowd of lookers-on who, coming from various States to witness a convention and shout for their candidate, wandered about the hotels, eager to see the leaders of their party. Perhaps he thought to win favor for Grant by treating the crowd with unusual affability. His entrance into the Convention hall was a studied performance. Waiting until the opening prayer had secured order he moved with a graceful stride down the long aisle, his physical attractions displayed to the best advantage. And like a popular actor coming upon the stage he got his round of applause. But once in his seat, he laid affability aside and, relishing the contentious part of his mission, he allowed the spirit of domination full sway and, by sarcastic words and sneering tone, irritated his opponents and alienated wavering delegates whom different tactics might have won to his cause. Nevertheless, his leadership was effective in holding the following of Grant together without a break. When Conkling, early on the second day, was arguing in favor of his motion for a recess, Garfield, the time of whose entrance had perhaps been craftily arranged, entered the hall, eliciting a burst of cheers which drowned Conkling's voice. These two brought into opposition in this episode remained antagonists throughout the Convention and it was an encounter of giants. Garfield was fair, conciliatory, persuasive and, in every move and speech, made friends for his cause, - opposition to the unit rule and the third term.

The first conflict in the Convention hall between Conkling and Garfield occurred early on the third day when Conkling offered a resolution that each delegate was

bound in honor to support the candidate, whoever he might be, and all who refused should lose their seats in the Convention. On a roll-call of the States the ayes were 716, the noes, 3. On this announcement Conkling moved that all who had voted "no" had forfeited their votes in this Convention. These three were from West Virginia; they rose in their places and said that they intended to support the nominee, but did not deem the resolution wise. It was a question how the Convention would act, to what extent it might rebuke this exhibition of independence, when Garfield rose and, in a brief but impassioned speech, espoused the cause of the three dissentients, ending with a request to Conkling to withdraw his motion. Garfield had so evidently carried the Convention with him that Conkling, after an exhibition of bad temper and an unsuccessful attempt to draw the presiding officer into the controversy [Hoar had been made permanent chairman], complied with Garfield's request. It is said, however, that he wrote on a newspaper, "I congratulate you on being the dark horse," and sent this to Garfield; or, as another version of the incident has it, the message was written on a card which was passed to Garfield, who read, "Is this the first appearance of the dark horse in this Convention?"

The action of the Convention on the report of the Committee on Credentials was on the whole favorable to the anti-Grant forces. The important decision was that the eighteen anti-Grant delegates from Illinois were given seats. It was during the consideration of the case of Illinois on Friday, the third day of the Convention, that a scene occurred which throws doubt on the claim of a National Convention to being a deliberative body.

It was midnight and Emery A. Storrs, an eloquent lawyer from Chicago, in a speech advocating the admission of the entire Grant delegation from Illinois, mentioned almost in one breath, "James G. Blaine" and "the grand old silent soldier." When the galleries resounded in cheers for Grant, Conkling rose and waved his handkerchief to the galleries; these responded with the waving of handkerchiefs and the brandishing of umbrellas. The cheers, accompanied by singing, lasted twenty or thirty minutes after which followed a wild demonstration for Blaine. Robert Ingersoll, who was on the platform, waved a woman's red shawl. Men took off their coats and used them for flags. Forbes wrote that the enormous audience was made up largely of Grant's Chicago friends; on the other hand, the New York Times [which favored Grant] declared that the galleries were packed with Blaine shouters. Both seem to have been partly right. Forbes wrote further that the delegates "caught the fever, and one faction after another yelled and paraded with the flags about the hall, acting like so many Bedlamites. An enthusiastic woman jumped on a rail behind the chairman and began to harangue the meeting, balancing herself doubtfully on the narrow edge until ex-Governor Jewell gallantly supported her by both his hands until she could be pacified. In swinging her parasol about, she nearly struck me, just below her, and to avoid further danger, I raised my umbrella, and sat safe under her (its) lee until she subsided."

One of the rules which governed the Convention of 1876 had left it doubtful whether the unit rule prevailed and on that account an "unseemly controversy" had arisen. For the sake of avoiding any uncertainty, the