CHAPTER XXXI.
GRANT’S SECOND TERM.
THE BEST MAN FOR THE POSITION AND MOST DESERVING OF THE HONOR.—HOW THE
“BOOM” WAS WORKED UP IN FAVOR OF GRANT.—THE GREAT FINANCIERS AND
SPECULATORS ALL COME TO THE FRONT IN THE INTEREST OF THE NATION’S
PROSPERITY AND OF THE MAN WHO HAD SAVED THE COUNTRY.—THE GREAT MASS
MEETING AT COOPER UNION.—WHY A. T. STEWART REFUSED TO PRESIDE.—THE
RESULTS OF THE MASS MEETING AND HOW THEY WERE APPRECIATED BY THE
FRIENDS OF THE CANDIDATE, LEADING REPRESENTATIVES OF THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY AND THE PUBLIC PRESS GENERALLY, IRRESPECTIVE OF PARTY.
I wish to relate briefly the part which I took in the re-election of
General Grant, whose defeat, when he was spoken of as a candidate for
the second term, was foreshadowed among a large number of politicians of
every stripe. There were serious divisions in the ranks of his former
friends and adherents, and an organized effort was made to destroy his
prospects a long time in advance of the meeting of the Philadelphia
Convention.
All the political machinery of his enemies, and of disappointed office
seekers and their friends, was put in force, and all the tactics and
prejudices employed that were put into operation with greater success
four years later.
I felt assured that the nomination of any other man might result in the
defeat of the party, and that it was absolutely necessary to its
strength, maintenance and autonomy that General Grant should again be
our choice. He had been tried for one term and found to be a very
satisfactory executive. There was no important risk involved in trying
him for a second term while the experiment with another man in the then
sensitive, unsettled and tentative condition of reconstruction, might
have been injurious to the best political and industrial interests of
the country; and the experiment would have been especially risky if the
nominee should have been a Democrat.
The people of the South were not then in a proper frame of mind to be
trusted with any power implying the mere possibility of obtaining a
controlling influence in the affairs of the Government. I perceived it
was important that the Republicans should make a nomination that had a
fair prospect of being successful, and I felt satisfied that the result
would be extremely doubtful if we should nominate any other man.
Besides, no other man was more deserving of the national compliment,
considering that he had done so much to terminate the struggle for
national existence, and had been the chief force in suppressing the
Rebellion. His genius and courage had been chiefly instrumental in
preserving to the country the blessing of a Republican form of
Government. For this boon no people could ever be too profuse in the
manifestations of their gratitude.
This was the patriotic feeling deep in the hearts of the people at
large, but there was a secret movement engineered by “sore-head”
politicians, behind whom were even more dangerous enemies, to thwart
patriotic purposes. Some of these conspirators had been brooding over
latent schemes of anarchy for a long period, and had been attempting to
put them in organic shape before half the first term of General Grant
had expired. They were hard at work training public opinion, by every
means in their power, to prevent Grant’s renomination.
This hostile element was sedulously hatching scandals and ventilating
them in subsidized newspapers, and through various other disreputable
channels.
This opposition increased in violence and intensity, and as the time
approached when the country was to choose its next President, the
renomination of General Grant became a matter of serious doubt, even to
some of his most enthusiastic supporters. It had become a foregone
conclusion that the Democrats would draw largely from the Republican
ranks, and the anxiety on this point was intensified by the hostility of
the _Tribune_, and the prospect of Horace Greeley’s candidacy. It was
absolutely necessary, therefore, that an energetic effort should be
made, and the requisite steps taken to ensure General Grant’s success at
the Convention.
I entered into this feeling with a great deal of personal enthusiasm.
What was my motive? some one reading this may ask.
Because I believed the sacredness of contracts, the stability of wealth,
the success of business enterprise, and the prosperity of the whole
country depended on the election of Grant for President.
If the reader wants to get at the selfish motive, as all readers do, I
shall be perfectly candid with him in that respect also. Of course I
knew that Wall Street business would boom in the wake of this general
prosperity. That was the selfish motive, from which no man is free. Of
course, I expected to share in Wall Street’s consequent prosperity.
I did not want office, as several of the highest were offered me which I
respectfully declined; and no office in the gift of the people would
have compensated me financially; and moreover, my highest ambition has
been satisfied in my own line of business.
I went to work then in the interest of Grant for the second term. I
employed numerous canvassers at my own expense, to find out the minds of
the representative business men on the subject, and to talk the matter
up with those interested in Republican success. These men reported to me
daily, and in a short time I had sounded the minds of that part of the
business community who had the greatest stake in the country, and whose
influence is always most felt when any important achievement is to be
compassed. I sent out a petition, and obtained the names of a splendid
array of merchants and business men of all shades of opinion and
politics in favor of Grant. Following is the heading of the petition:
“A PUBLIC MEETING.
“To the merchants, bankers, manufacturers and other business men
in favor of the re-election of General Grant:
“The undersigned, desiring publicly to express their earnest
confidence in the sagacity, fidelity, energy and unfaltering
patriotism, so signally displayed by Ulysses S. Grant in
securing the restoration of peace at home, upholding national
rights abroad, and in maintaining throughout the world the honor
of the American name, do hereby invite their fellow citizens to
assemble in mass meeting at the Cooper Institute, on Wednesday
evening, the 17th of April, 1872.”
This call was chiefly the result of the personal canvass which I had
instituted a few weeks previously. I selected the names of the persons
to be called on from day to day, and kept these men working the matter
up, until I had secured almost all the reputable business firms in the
city of New York. The following, whose original signatures I have still
in my possession, were prominent in the list:
WILLIAM E. DODGE,
JOHN C. GREEN,
HENRY F. VAIL,
GEORGE T. ADEE,
REV. SAMUEL OSGOOD,
WILLIAM H. FOGG,
BENJAMIN B. SHERMAN,
ROBERT L. STEWART,
WILLIAM HENRY ANTHON,
E. D. MORGAN,
JAMES BUELL,
H. B. CLAFLIN,
W. R. VERMILYE,
WM. M. VERMILYE,
CHARLES L. FROST,
NATHANIEL HAYDEN,
JESSE HOYT,
WILLIAM BARTON PEAKE,
EMIL SAUER,
JACOB OTTO,
JOSEPH STUART,
J. STUART,
THOS. GARNER ANTHONY,
FREDERICK S. WINSTON,
MORRIS FRANKLIN,
WM. C. BRYANT,
R. H. McCURDY,
JOSEPH SELIGMAN,
THEODORE ROOSEVELT,
WILLIAM ORTON,
CHARLES P. KIRKLAND,
PETER COOPER,
HUGH J. HASTINGS,
SAMUEL B. RUGGLES,
CORTLANDT PALMER,
JONATHAN EDWARDS,
CHARLES KNEELAND,
S. R. COMSTOCK,
PITT COOK,
THOMAS J. OWEN,
OTIS D. SWAN,
GEORGE OPDYKE,
HARPER & BROS.,
JOHN C. HAMILTON,
GEO. W. T. LORD,
SAMUEL T. SKIDMORE,
JONATHAN STURGES,
WM. H. VANDERBILT,
SHEPARD KNAPP,
WM. H. ASPINWALL,
J. S. ROCKWELL.
It is sad to reflect that these are all now numbered with the mighty
dead.
These names will serve to show the great number of prominent people
gradually departing from us every few years.
The name of the number of those yet alive who signed that petition is
legion. In fact those who did not sign it were those whose names were
not worth having. To put it mildly, I secured through their own
signatures, by this method, all whose names were desirable. Our forces
having been mustered in this way, the next thing was to disconcert the
enemy, and inspire our own party by showing our available strength, and
the power and enthusiasm behind the movement. This we proceeded to do by
calling a mass meeting at the Cooper Institute for April 17, 1872.
The meeting was an immense success, in numbers, brains and
respectability. The hall was crowded and the outside meeting was several
times larger.
Mr. A. T. Stewart had been invited to preside. He had been a warm friend
of General Grant, but had then become lukewarm and indifferent, owing to
the fact that he had failed to obtain a Custom House promotion for one
of his wife’s near relations. I had endeavored for several days to
soften Stewart’s heart and get him to consent to be chairman of the
meeting, but he was incorrigible. Finally, I succeeded in extorting a
promise from him that if he did not vote for General Grant he would not
vote against him, but beyond this it was impossible to mollify him. He
was a paragon of obduracy when he had once resolved upon any course.
Even the recollection that he, though an alien born, had been offered
the second highest position of trust in the nation, Secretary of the
Treasury, which he could not accept on account of being in business,
failed to draw out his feelings of gratitude sufficiently to forget the
fancied slight of refusing his wife’s relative promotion.
Failing to secure Mr. Stewart, I invited Mr. William E. Dodge to
preside. He graciously accepted the invitation and made a very good
chairman indeed.
The array of Vice-Presidents was said to excel anything that had ever
appeared in a similar list of the proceedings of any meeting in this
city.
I had invited Fred. Douglas and P. B. S. Pinchback, the eminent colored
orators, to the meeting, but they could not attend, as they were at a
New Orleans convention of their own people. Mr. Rainey, a colored
gentleman, spoke most eloquently and with telling effect. This was the
first time since the war that a colored orator had addressed a meeting
of whites on politics in New York, or probably in the North. Prior to
this the colored vote for Grant had been in doubt, as Horace Greeley,
whose name was a word to conjure with among these people, had recently
been swinging around the circle down South, with a view of capturing
alike the vote of the colored people, who loved him, and that of the
Democrats, who hated him. By a curious fatality he failed to capture
either. As Blaine has truly said of him: “No other candidate could have
presented such an antithesis of strength and weakness.”
There had been no meeting for a long time previous to this that had been
the cause of such an enthusiastic awakening in the party and among
politicians generally over the whole country, as this great
demonstration of the people at the Cooper Union. It crushed the
aspirations of the so-called Independents and smothered the lingering
hopes of the Democratic party.
In order to show the influence of this mass meeting upon the destiny of
political parties in the Presidential election of 1872, it will be
necessary to take a retrospect of the impression it made on parties most
deeply interested in the result, and to make known their private
opinions on the subject. Inside history of this nature is always
instructive, and time has clothed with the attribute of public property,
what at one time was a very precious political secret.
Among the striking incidents of the night of that meeting I distinctly
recollect one that was truly prophetic, in regard to Senator Henry
Wilson, of Massachusetts. A number of the speakers and other prominent
men took supper with me at the Union League Club after the meeting, and
in proposing the health of Senator Wilson, who had spoken so eloquently,
I nominated him for the Vice-Presidency, and sure enough he was
afterwards elected to that position.
I shall take the liberty in this place of introducing to the reader a
few letters hitherto unpublished, which throw considerable light on the
value of the political work done by myself and friends at that time, and
how it was appreciated by those most deeply interested in its outcome.
The following from the White House shows how anxiously the current of
events was being watched from that great centre:
“EXECUTIVE MANSION, }
WASHINGTON, D. C., April 17, 1872 }
MY DEAR CLEWS:
I have received your several interesting letters in regard to
the great meeting in New York, and have shown them to the
President, who read them with deep interest. I have not
written any suggestions, because I know you, being on the
ground, could judge so much better of the situation, and the
temper of the New York people. You have done a great work, and
this evening’s success will, I have no doubt, be the reward of
your efforts. We shall look anxiously for the reports. What
you say is curious about the use of Dix’s name and others. Our
people are at work in Congress getting up telegrams signed by
the Republican members of all the State delegations endorsing
the administration of General Grant. I wish we had thought of
these sooner, but still we can get them all in time, I hope. I
have just come from the House, where I was looking after this
matter. Wishing you every success,
I remain yours very sincerely,
HORACE PORTER,
(Sec’y to President
Grant.)
After the meeting the President’s Secretary writes as follows:
EXECUTIVE MANSION, }
WASHINGTON, D. C., }
April 19, 1872. }
MY DEAR CLEWS:
I have only a moment before the mail closes to say how earnestly
all congratulate you upon the great success of the meeting.
It was glorious and genuine. We read the proceedings in full in
the _Times_ last night. It has created a marked effect in
Congress and elsewhere. Nearly every Republican in the House
would have signed the congratulatory telegrams, but the movement
was started so late in the day that the paper was not presented
to any one.
Yours very truly,
HORACE PORTER.
The following, from the Hon. Roscoe Conkling, is a very flattering
reminiscence, which I highly appreciate:
UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER, }
WASHINGTON, April 19, 1872. }
MY DEAR SIR:
As a New Yorker and a Republican, I want to thank you for the
great service you have rendered our country and our cause in
conceiving and carrying forward the great meeting of night
before last.
The effect of it will be wholesome and widefelt; it was most
timely, and its whole management was a success. Our friends all,
I think, know and appreciate the large debt due you in the
premises.
Noting your suggestions as to the future, I lay them to heart.
Yours sincerely,
ROSCOE CONKLING.
HENRY CLEWS, Esq.
The New York _Herald’s_ special from Washington next day after the
meeting said:
“The President, in conversation with Senators who called upon
him this morning, expressed himself as much pleased with the
demonstration in New York last night, which he regards only as
evidence of the popularity of the Republican party. He has been
assured, from reliable sources, that the leading Democratic
merchants and bankers in different parts of the country are
anxious that the Republican party may completely triumph at the
coming Presidential election, as the surest way of maintaining
our credit, and resisting anything like a financial crisis,
which they regard as certain if their own party should succeed.”
Following are the address and resolutions expressed through the
representatives of a grateful people in favor of the hero who had saved
the country:
_Grant Meeting at Cooper Institute, March 17, 1872.—Address and
Resolutions._
ADDRESS.
Hon. E. Delafield Smith, on behalf of the Committee of
Arrangements, read the following address, remarking that it was
prepared by one of the most eminent and substantial of our
business men:
The administration of public affairs under the government of
President Grant has been eminently wise, conservative and
patriotic; our foreign relations have been conducted with a
scrupulous respect for the rights of other nations, a jealous
regard for the honor of our own; the noble aspiration with which
General Grant emphasized his acceptance of his great office,
“Let us have peace,” has been happily realized; the Union has
been completely re-established on such principles of justice and
equity as to insure its perpetuity; the Constitution, with all
its amendments, has been adhered to with rigid fidelity;
domestic tranquility has been restored; a spirit of humanity has
been infused into our Indian policy; the revenues of the country
have been faithfully collected and honestly disbursed, so that,
while the burdens of taxation have been materially lightened,
the public debt has been largely reduced, and the national
credit appreciably strengthened; all branches of industry have
been stimulated to healthy activity; and throughout the length
and breadth of the land security, prosperity and happiness
reward the perils and sacrifices by which the rebellion was
suppressed and the Union preserved.
It is an act of poetic justice that the soldier whose victories
in war, and the statesman whose triumphs of peace have made the
last decade the most glorious in the annals of American history,
should receive an earnest of the gratitude of his countrymen by
his re-election to the Presidency.
It is an auspicious circumstance that the people are evidently
awakening to a higher sense of the duties and responsibilities
of public officials. There is a general disposition to hold men
entrusted with place and power to a strict accountability for
their acts, and to demand that honesty and capability shall be
the inflexible conditions of appointment to office. The
recommendations of the president in favor of the principles
enunciated in the report of the Civil Service Commission, were
timely and apposite, and deserve universal endorsement.
Numerous investigations have been set on foot during the present
session of Congress, having for their object the discovery of
corruption in the public service. Disaffected Republicans and
partisan Democrats have made common cause in the endeavor to
elicit evidence tending to show acts of wrong doing, and to
implicate the President in knowledge or toleration of such acts.
As in the days of Daniel, “they sought to find occasion against
him.” But, like the enemies of Daniel, “_they could find none
occasion nor fault, forasmuch as he was faithful, neither was
there any error or fault found with him_.”
The more incisive the scrutiny, the more palpable the
demonstration of his purity. The cost of pursuing these
investigations has exceeded the aggregate loss incurred by the
Government through the dishonesty of its subordinates since the
administration came into power.
A record so clear and honorable challenges the admiration, and
compels the approval of citizens whose only aim is to secure a
stable and beneficent Government—to preserve inviolate the faith
of the nation—to give security to capital, adequate reward to
labor, and equal rights to all.
With the grievances of disappointed office seekers, the masses
who thrive by their own toil, cannot be expected to find time or
patience to sympathize. Whether this Senator has had more or
that Senator less than his share of patronage, are insignificant
questions compared with the grave issues involved in a
Presidential canvass. It is the constitutional prerogative of
the President to make appointments to office. That he has not
exercised these functions unwisely, the success of his
administration abundantly proves.
Believing that General Grant’s civic career fitly supplements
his military greatness, that he has brought to the discharge of
his duties to the State the same energy, foresight and judgment
which marked his achievements in the field, and made his
campaigns from Donelson to Appomatox for ever illustrious; and
that he possesses and deserves the confidence of the American
people, we pledge to him our united and hearty support as a
candidate for re-election.
RESOLUTIONS.
Hon. E. Delafield Smith, Chairman of the Committee on Resolutions,
presented the following:
_First._ That the merchants and mechanics, the bankers and
business men of New York, represented in this meeting and in the
call under which it is assembled, are satisfied with the wisdom,
ability, moderation and fidelity with which the national
government is administered, and in common with the bulk of our
brethren throughout the Union favor the continuance of its
distinguished head in the office which he holds with usefulness
and honor.
_Second._ That the practical result of the coalition movement,
if successful, would be to restore the Democratic party to
power.
_Third._ That such a restoration, after the late glorious
triumph over rebellion, would read in history like the record of
a Tory resurrection at the close of our revolutionary war.
_Fourth._ That Republicans elected to office mainly by those who
assailed the Union at the South and at the North embarrassed its
defenders, would inevitably become serviceable to the powers
that sustain them, like those northern presidents who were
chosen by the South and did its bidding better than its own
statesmen.
_Fifth._ That the patriotism that made Grant President of the
Republic he saved, is akin to that which placed Washington at
the head of the nation he created. The trust was accepted by
each at a manifest sacrifice of interest and inclination, with
modest misgiving as to civic experience and qualification. But
having been well and wisely administered, the confidence implied
in a re-election is an appropriate reward for faithful services,
and accords with the broadest views of public policy.
_Sixth._ That against hostile criticisms and unfounded
imputations, against alluring promises and prismatic
theories,—we array the practical reforms constantly inaugurated
and the substantial results already achieved by the present
administration. The chronic vices of existing systems, unfairly
paraded to its injury, have been placed in a course of
amelioration or removal. The reduction of the national debt has
elicited the admiration of the world. Our diplomacy has made
peace the ally of national honor. And our President has been in
deed as in name a kind and “great father” to the Indian tribes
still lingering within our borders.
_Seventh._ That while honorable opposition is entitled to
respect, every effort to blacken, for political purposes, the
character of President Grant, is a crime against truth which
vindicates him, and an insult to the American people who honor
and exalt him. Pure in private as irreproachable in public life,
with strong convictions yet deferential to the popular will,
patient under attack, more ready to listen than to speak, with
no display and no ostentation—those who know him best bear
testimony to the sense, the sagacity, and the power of analysis
by which his utterances are characterized and impressed.
_Eighth._ That in the judgment of this meeting a majority of the
people of the country expect, desire, and decree the
renomination and re-election of Ulysses S. Grant.
SPEECH OF HON. E. DELAFIELD SMITH.
Mr. E. Delafield Smith said:—Fellow Citizens:—It is manifest to
us all that President Grant will be renominated at the
Convention in Philadelphia. It is equally clear that such is the
wish of the American people. This is due to a confidence reposed
in him by the “plain people” of the country, which no
misrepresentation seems able to impair. His opponents assert
that the public declarations in his favor are influenced by the
office holders. But this cannot well be, for the office
_holders_ are always far outnumbered by the office _seekers_.
With regard to executive patronage, it is as true now as when
Talleyrand first said it, that every office conferred makes one
ingrate and forty-nine enemies. The truth is, possession of the
offices is a source, not of strength, but of actual weakness to
any political party. In spite of this, General Grant is so
strong and popular that a coalition is frantically sought as the
only and forlorn hope of defeating him. It is thought that the
Democratic masses can be carried over bodily to the few
Republican seceders. But the moment the Democratic organization
is relaxed, it will lose its hold upon thousands of its own
members, and they may and will prefer in voting for a Republican
to make the choice themselves, and they will rally in large
numbers to the hero of our patriotic armies. The coalition
meeting, lately held in this city, recalls the old arrangement
as to colored troops, where the officers were white men, but the
rank and file negroes. So here, the platform was covered with
Republicans, but the audience was made up of Democrats. In thus
acting with their old opponents our disaffected friends boast of
their independence, and impute servility to us. But they are
wrong. That man is most independent who is at once loyal to his
country, true to his party, and faithful to his friends! With
these brief observations, I move the adoption of the address and
resolutions.
My only apology for inserting the above address and resolutions is, that
I believe they constitute a valuable epitome of a very important
chapter, yet to be more fully written, of the political history of the
United States.
A greater criterion of the success of the meeting, however, was the
editorial opinion of the _Evening Post_ next day, which had been for a
long time previously very bitter in its attacks upon General Grant. It
said:
“The meeting held last evening at the Cooper Institute was, we
believe, without precedent in our political history. It was
expressly called as a gathering of that branch of the Republican
party which desires the nomination and re-election of President
Grant. Yet, when it came together, the officers and speakers
assumed that it was a mass meeting of the Republicans of New
York. This is to say, according to the organizers and promoters
of this gathering, the one test of Republicanism now is the
political support of one man’s aspirations, and that before any
nomination has been made by that party. This is a singular
position to receive the approval, at least, by their
acquiescence, of such men as some scores of those whose names
are prominent in the report of the meeting, and who, as we know,
would prefer some other candidate than General Grant, if they
could hope to control the Philadelphia nomination.
“The power of this meeting was wholly in its organization. The
list of officers chosen by it is, on the whole, the best, most
reputable, and most influential commanded by any partisan
meeting within our recollection. There are a few names on it
which disgrace their fellows; there are many which carry no
weight, but an unusually large proportion of the very long list
are eminent and representative names in this city. The audience
assembled was in many respects in keeping with the officers. It
consisted mainly of reputable, thoughtful voters.”
The good work was continued until November with the result that is now
historical.
The New York _Sun_ said: “We believe that Henry Clews did more, in a
pecuniary way, to promote the success of Grant, than any Republican
millionaire of the Union League Club.”
Another mass meeting was held late in the fall. Referring to it, and
other events of that period, the President’s Secretary writes a few days
prior to the election as follows:
WASHINGTON, D. C., Nov. 2, 1872.
MY DEAR CLEWS:
We are all greatly obliged for the documents and information
which you have sent us during the campaign. The President says
the list of vice-presidents of the last Cooper Institute meeting
is the most remarkable list of prominent names he has ever seen
upon one paper. It will of itself do great good.
Our news is charming from all quarters, and all our hopes will,
without doubt, be fully realized on Tuesday next.
If the defeat of the enemy is overwhelming, it will be
sufficient reward for all our labors.
Your very truly,
HORACE PORTER.
To show still further the interest which the leading merchants, bankers
and business men of this city took in the movement to re-elect General
Grant at that time, the following circular furnishes an excellent and
historical record. It constitutes, in a small compass and compact form,
a valuable chapter of financial history:
CIRCULAR
_Of the Business Men of New York on the Financial Condition of
the National Debt of the United States. Further Reduction
October 1, 10,327,000 Dollars._
The undersigned, merchants, bankers and business men of New
York, respectfully submit the following statements for the
information of all parties interested therein:
The Republican candidate for President of the United States is
Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, who was unanimously named for re-election
at Philadelphia, in May last.
At the commencement of Gen. Grant’s first term of office, March
4, 1869, the national debt was $2,525,000,000. On the first day
of September, of the present year, there had been paid and
cancelled of the principal of this debt, $348,000,000, leaving a
balance of principal remaining unpaid at that date, in
accordance with the official statement of the Secretary of the
Treasury, the sum of $2,177,000,000.
Of this amount, $1,177,000,000 are represented in a funded debt,
bearing interest in gold, while $400,000,000 remain unfunded in
Treasury circulation.
Up to the close of the last session of Congress, the annual
reduction of taxes, as measured by the rates of 1869, had been
as follows:
Internal revenue tax $82,000,000
Income tax, (repealed,) 30,000,000
Duties on imposts, 58,000,000
———
Making a total reduction $170,000,000
of
The reduction of the yearly interest on the public debt exceeds
the sum of $23,200,000, of which $21,743,000 are saved by the
purchase and cancellation of the six per cent. public
securities.
A careful consideration of these results of a prudent and
faithful administration of the national Treasury, induces the
undersigned to express the confident belief, that the general
welfare of the country, the interests of its commerce and trade,
and the consequent stability of its public securities, would be
best promoted by the re-election of Gen. Grant to the office of
President of the United States.
New York, Oct. 4, 1872.
PHELPS, DODGE & CO.,
GEORGE OPDYKE & CO.,
A. A. LOW & BROTHERS,
JOHN A. STEWART,
VERMILYE & CO.,
JAY COOKE & CO.,
JOHN STEWARD,
HARPER & BROTHERS,
JOHN TAYLOR JOHNSTON,
FREDERICK S. WINSTON,
PEAKE, OPDYCKE & CO.,
MORRIS FRANKLIN,
SCHULTZ, SOUTHWICK & CO.,
J. S. ROCKWELL & CO.,
ROBERT H. McCURDY,
WILLIAM M. VERMILYE,
R. W. HOWES,
WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT,
C. L. TIFFANY,
SPOFFORD BROS. & CO.,
JOHN C. GREEN,
H. B. CLAFLIN & CO.,
MOSES TAYLOR,
WM. H. ASPINWALL,
ROBERT LENOX KENNEDY,
S. B. CHITTENDEN & CO.,
JAMES G. KING’S SONS,
HENRY E. PIERREPONT,
EMIL SAUER,
BOOTH & EDGAR,
WILLIAM ORTON,
ISAAC H. BAILEY,
SHEPHERD KNAPP,
WILLIAMS & GUION,
EDWARDS PIERREPONT,
RUSSELL SAGE,
PETER COOPER,
ANTHONY, HALL & CO.,
GARNER & CO.,
J. S. T. STRANAHAN,
E. D. MORGAN & CO.,
DREXEL, MORGAN & CO.,
AUGUSTINE SMITH,
WM. H. VANDERBILT,
MORTON, BLISS & CO.,
JONATHAN STURGES,
J. & W. SELIGMAN & CO.,
J. & J. STUART & CO.,
JOHN A. PARKER,
BENJAMIN B. SHERMAN,
JOHN D. JONES,
J. D. VERMILYE,
SAMUEL T. SKIDMORE,
HENRY F. VAIL,
LLOYD ASPINWALL,
JACOB A. OTTO,
GEORGE W. T. LORD,
SAMUEL McLEAN & CO.,
HENRY CLEWS & CO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------