19 minute read
The Taft Victory in Utah in 1912
The TAFT VICTORY in Utah in 1912
BY DON D. WALKER
THE CONVENTION PHASE
In the Wilson landslide of 1912, two states, more than 1,800 miles apart but side-by-side in the roll call of states, went for William Howard Taft. Vermont kept unbroken a Republican tradition going back to 1856, and Utah, though less traditionally in the ranks of the G.O.P., kept faith with the incumbent President. Vermont's four electoral votes went to Taft with 37.27 per cent of the total count and a plurality of 1,235 over Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson ran a weak third with 24.44 per cent of the votes. Utah's four electoral votes went Republican with 37.418 per cent of the ballots, Taft polling 5,434 more than Wilson. Roosevelt trailed with 21.534 per cent. There was another interesting, though minor, difference. In Vermont Eugene V. Debs pulled an insignificant 928 votes; in Utah he rolled up an impressive Socialist count of 8,999. Apparently voters in Vermont were more interested in prohibition than in socialism as Eugene W. Chaffin won 1,154 followers, 226 more than Debs.
In voting for Taft, Utah became an isolated Republican stronghold surrounded by the Democratic mountain states of the West. Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado all voted for Wilson, with three of these states, Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, approaching the Democratic candidate's national percentage. In two of these states, Arizona and Nevada, Taft ran fourth, not merely behind Wilson and Roosevelt, but behind Debs as well.
Why did Utah so strikingly deviate from the national political pattern and from the political leanings of her sister states? Here indeed was an anomaly, an oddity to irritate and tease the puzzled historian. In the perspective of national development the oddity has seemed small indeed, and oddities, unlike wars, may not rightly seem to claim the historian's full power of search and understanding. Nevertheless, something of importance may be kerneled in even so tiny an historical nut. Let us see.
I
The story begins in May of that election year when both Democrats and Republicans met to choose their delegates to the national conventions.
"Showing unusual strength in numbers and enthusiasm," the Democrats convened on May 14 in the Salt Lake Theatre. Upwards of 400 delegates represented all Utah counties but three. Observed the pro- Democratic Provo Herald, "Men came from far and near and brought their wives and sisters to listen to the deliberations of that eloquent body." Some of the enthusiasm was no doubt traditional, the worked-up steam of renewed party fellowship, but some fresh hope came also from the brighter prospects for victory. The Republicans were fighting among themselves. In his keynote speech, Judge S. R. Thurman, chairman of the state committee, turned on his best convention satire:
When rogues fall out, honest people get their just dues. Roosevelt, the highest authority, says Taft is not fit to serve as president. Taft, a next highest authority, says that Roosevelt is not fit to serve as president, and I believe both of them. . . . Roosevelt went to Africa to kill elephants, and he is proving himself to be the greatest elephant slayer of the age. Here in the United States he is killing more elephants than have ever existed in the jungles of Africa since the foundations of the world were laid.
The platform, adopted without a dissenting vote, reaffirmed a "belief in the principles of progressive democracy." It favored a graduated income tax; popular election of U.S. senators; a direct primary law, initiative, referendum, and recall legislation; a corrupt practices act; and some provision for employers' liability. Two of the most important resolutions were on tariff and the kind of candidate to be nominated at Baltimore. "We favor a revision of the tariff downward," agreed the delegates, "in harmony with the policy of the Democratic party." And "we demand that our representatives to the Baltimore convention support progressive candidates and all progressive measures."
Even before the convention got underway, some delegates had decided on their progressive candidate, but the Wilson movement at first "met with opposition in all quarters." 8 When L. R. Martineau tried to get an indication of preference from the convention, his motion was tabled "with the promptitude and a Democratic yell." The delegation, with William R. Wallace as national committeeman, was left uninstructed. Nevertheless, Wilson had won a Utah following. "It is safe to say," reported the Tribune, "that two-thirds of the delegation's numbers are Wilson men....One thing is certain, and that is that no other than a progressive Democrat need expect support from the Utah delegation."
The convention day had ended with the high enthusiasm of its beginning. It was, said the Herald, "the greatest day in the history of Utah Democracy since the pioneers of the Jeffersonian days held the reins of power."
Political attention turned the following day to Provo, where the Republicans gathered in the Opera House. Here a more dramatic fight was expected. "The sentiment of the Republicans of the state," Senator Reed Smoot had written a few days earlier, ". . . is for President Taft, and if so, they [the delegates] should not hesitate a moment to instruct for him, no matter if every other state in the union went back on him." Yet State Chairman C. E. Loose, absent because of the death of a son, was known to be for Roosevelt, and others as well were believed to favor the Roughrider. On May 13, the Provo Herald reported:
As the convention opened, many of the delegates were to be seen wearing "T.R." buttons.
Taft sentiment soon showed itself. Delegate Carl Hopkins called attention to the fact that no picture of the President was in the convention hall. When H. L. Cummings, substituting for Loose, ruled Hopkins out of order, two-thirds of the delegates "stood up and yelled for Taft, throwing their hats in the air and waving their handkerchiefs. Their cheers resounded throughout the hall and could be heard for a block in all directions from the convention hall. 'Get his picture!' they called, and then cheer after cheer split the air." When the noise subsided, the chair quickly sent a delegation to get a picture, and the image of Taft soon reigned on the stage.
Cummings himself, it should be noted, was no Roosevelt man. As he presented Carl A. Badger, the keynoter, he said: "I hope the Republicans in this state will not be led astray and seek after false gods, but will follow in the footsteps of those illustrious leaders, Lincoln, Grant and McKinley, and last but not least, William Howard Taft." Here an uproar of applause lasted two minutes. "Let us send those delegates," Cummings went on, "to use every honorable means to secure the nomination of that fearless leader and eminent statesman, William Howard Taft." Again there was long and loud applause.
If the Democrats liked the label progressive, the Republicans liked it too. "From Hamilton and Washington to Taft," said Badger, "the Republican party can fairly and honestly lay claim to the title of being the progressive political party of our nation." To Taft "we owe in great degree our present era of peace, good will, friendship and progress in Utah." Furthermore, with nothing to gain, said Badger, the President has espoused the cause of Senator Smoot, saying "he would take the stump, if necessary, in behalf of the assailed Utah senator." And one other argument no doubt had persuasive power. Taft, Badger emphasized, had upheld "that great mainstay of national prosperity, the protective tariff."
The adopted platform likewise put its blessing upon both tariff and Taft. In its longest and most poetic plank, the resolution committee said: "Without it [the protective tariff] the profitable cultivation of the sugar beet and the manufacture of sugar from the beet root would cease, the flocks would be swept from our hills and plains, our low grade lead and silver mines would be closed and other kindred pursuits would disappear from the industrial life of Utah." Taft the committee praised "as an advocate of peace, as a friend of the people, as an honest administrator of the law, as a dignified, able and conscientious president and, above all, as a true friend of Utah and her interests." "We pledge," the resolution concluded, "the delegates ... to use all honorable means to secure his nomination."
This last resolution was not accepted, however, without a minor but lively fight. For meanwhile the insurgents had been hard at work. Medil McCormick, of Chicago, and Everard Bierer, Jr., of Salt Lake, had opened Roosevelt headquarters and had begun active campaigning. About 50 delegates had visited the headquarters while the convention was in session. Then the fight for Roosevelt came to a head on the floor of the convention as John E. Bagley, of Weber, obviously skeptical of attaching the insurgents' own favorite label to Taft, introduced an amendment asking simply that delegates be instructed for the candidate who, in their judgment, would best bring "four years of progressive Republican administration." The rebellion, however, was soon put down. After E. C. Ashton, of Davis County, had spoken the reasons against instruction, the resolution to instruct was adopted viva voce, the preponderance, observed the Tribune, being more than two to one.
If this was the high point of drama, after one more touch of the Rooseveltian subplot, the comic relief soon followed. There was first the problem of Colonel Loose. "I would like to have Mr. Loose nominated as a delegate to Chicago," Senator Smoot had written before the convention. "I am not afraid of Mr. Loose's judgment. I know what he thinks of Mr. Roosevelt, but I know that he will take into consideration the political situation in the state, and I trust that he will be nominated." On the first ballot, however, Loose fell short of enough votes, the delegates believing he would not accept under instructions for Taft. But this "misunderstanding" being removed, he was elected on the second ballot — no doubt to the later regret of the Taft faithful. The comedy arose when Mayor William Glasmann, of Ogden, led the "cow counties" to victory over Salt Lake County. Apparently the Salt Lakers were a squabbling bunch. When their inner quarrel, as the Tribune put it, "had grown almost intolerable in the convention hall," they adjourned to the back alley at the side of the Opera House. Meanwhile, the "cow counties" inside were "making hay." Their own slate was carried when the voting began again. Although both Sanpete and Sevier counties were represented, Salt Lake County had no delegate to the national convention.
Depending on political point of view, major Utah papers offered different judgments. The Democratic Herald noted the Republican fractiousness. "During the recent State convention . . . there was more of the old time 'dog eat dog' than we have seen for several years. Men who were neighbors and friends at home arose and shook their fists at each other and threatened all manner of violence." The pro-Roosevelt Evening Standard felt that the "Federal Bunch" had run a steam roller over the T. R. faithful. "The convention as a whole represented nothing more than machine politics, back of which are two or three men."
In apparent impartiality, the Deseret News concluded: "Utah will be well represented in both national conventions." ' The scene could now change to Chicago and Baltimore.
II
Traveling "in style," as the Tribune put it, the Republican delegation reached Chicago on June 16 and established themselves at the Hotel Lexington. They were joined by Colonel Loose, who as national committeeman had been in Chicago some 10 days, and Senators Reed Smoot and George Sutherland and Representative Joseph Howell, who arrived from Washington. In surprise and amusement, they found themselves already claimed by the Roosevelt camp, which that day had issued a bulletin declaring the whole Utah delegation for the former President. Governor Spry, however, quickly put the false claim to rest by asserting that Taft would receive every one of Utah's eight votes.
Among the workers at the Roosevelt headquarters was Everard Bierer, but the mistake in Utah's Republican allegiance probably stemmed from the fact that in committee decisions Colonel Loose had been consistently voting with the Roosevelt forces. It is surprising, therefore, that in the delegation caucus the next day Loose was re-elected unanimously a member of the national committee. The colonel pledged to vote for Taft on the first ballot, though not on any succeeding ballot. He said also that he would resign if Taft were nominated, but that he would nevertheless campaign for the President. In a gesture of impartiality, the delegation attended a Roosevelt meeting, deciding after hearing T. R.'s speech that he would bolt and form a third party.
The first important show of strength came the next day in the vote for chairman. Once again Loose broke ranks to vote for Francis E. Mc- Govern. However, the colonel had by then concluded that his choice could not be nominated, but that Taft would lose backing also, with a dark horse ultimately the nominee. Smoot and Sutherland did not agree, both seeing Taft stronger than Roosevelt, strong enough to win on the first ballot. Meanwhile, Sutherland was helping to write the very important plank on tariff.
Back home in Utah, as the citizens read the bulletin boards and their daily papers, interest mounted. Said the Tribune: "Salt Lake City thronged the bulletin boards, and displayed the greatest political anxiety of the year thus far." And followers of this paper could not mistake where it stood. In an editorial understatement, the Tribune said, "The Tribune is not supporting Col. Roosevelt hard enough for any one to notice it."
The report of the committee on credentials was presented on June 19, with a consequent seating of a good many Taft delegates. Senator Smoot had prepared to speak in its defense, but when a sudden and long demonstration broke out, the oratory was cut short to move up the vote. "Convention Spared a Speech by Smoot," said the Tribune in its typical anti- Smoot phrasing. Again Colonel Loose voted "nay."
When the Roosevelt bolt developed, the Utahns naturally remained firm. Loose insisted he would not follow, that he would vote for Taft on the first ballot. However, such pledges did not make peace within the delegation. The Taft seven insisted that Loose was disobeying instructions. Advisor E. H. Callister asked Loose to resign not only as committeeman but also as delegate.
Meanwhile, if the Utah Republicans had been mistakenly taken for insurgents before their arrival, they were now playing important roles in the Taft maneuvering. Little Hawaii was wavering, pulled between the Rooseveltian persuasiveness of Hiram Johnson and the Taft enthusiasm of Reed Smoot. During the week, Prince Kalianiaole bolted "back and forth like a balky mule," as the Tribune put it. By the weekend, however, Smoot had won the prince's doubtful pledge.
After so dramatic a build-up, the climax was flat indeed. With the villain gone, the political play became a mere formality. Taft won without genuine opposition.
All eight of Utah's votes were in the Taft column, but it was L. N. Stohl, an alternate, not Loose, who had voted that eighth ballot. The Utah colonel, like the national colonel, had after all bolted.
With the Taft victory, naturally the Tribune was pleased, but the vigor of its editorials lay more in the blasting of Roosevelt than in the praising of Taft. "Col. Roosevelt's attitude throughout has been that of a brawler and disturber," it said on June 23. "He insisted upon having every- thing his own way, he was in favor of himself, first, last, and all the time, with no consideration whatever for the Republican party." "The re-nomination of President Taft," it added the following day, "... will, we fully believe, prove entirely satisfactory to the Republican party as a mass. The uproar created by the dictatorial Roosevelt raid upon the convention will soon subside, and although Roosevelt will probably be able to retain about him a body of shouters, these will have but little effect upon the country at large."
Some of the Utah delegates were equally rough on the Roughrider. Judge Jacob Johnson, on his return to Utah, called Roosevelt the biggest fourflusher he had ever seen. "If the colonel does form a new party," he told a Tribune reporter, "it will be composed of a few disgruntled Republicans and Democrats and a great many anarchists and socialists."
Meanwhile, at Baltimore the Democrats were getting set for a more drawn-out battle. The Utah delegation, traveling in the "regal style" of an electric-lighted Pullman, had reached Chicago on June 20, where they were the guests of the Republicans from Utah and Idaho. The 16- man delegation, each with one-half vote, stood 13 for Woodrow Wilson, three for Champ Clark, with William Jennings Bryan the second choice of all.
The Clark promoters in Baltimore at once got off to a bad start with the Utahns. On their map showing preferences across the nation, the Utah spot was occupied by a portrait of their contender. "This," reported the Tribune, "has occasioned considerable adverse criticism by the Utah delegates." A new poll showed six votes for Wilson, one for Clark, and one for Harmon.
Then in the first matter pending before the convention the Utah delegates revealed their divided sympathies. In prominent favor for the temporary chairmanship was Alton B. Parker, who had carried the Democratic colors into defeat against Roosevelt in 1904. However, to the Bryan forces Parker represented the reactionary element of the party. Wilson agreed. The first Utah caucus, with national committeeman William R. Wallace not voting, showed five for Parker, seven opposed. When the national committee selected Parker, Nebeker, of Utah, voted with the Bryan men for Ollie M. James. Next day, when the issue reached the floor of the convention and after Bryan had nominated Senator Kern, of Indiana, and Kern had withdrawn his own name and nominated Bryan, four Utah votes went to Parker, four to Bryan. Like other political observers, the Utahns regarded Parker's victory as "a hard blow to Wilson."
Repercussions from home soon followed. Supporting Parker seemed a violation of the state convention pledge to "support progressive candidates and measures only." S. R. Thurman and C. C. Richards reminded the delegation, in a telegram, that the convention had been "uncompromisingly progressive."
Then in the last big scene before the struggle of nominees began, the Utah delegation split again. On Bryan's move to throw out Belmont and Ryan, nine Utah Democrats said "yea," while seven voted "nay." Though telegrams arrived urging a vote for Wilson, the delegation kept its balanced and waiting impartiality by refusing to participate in a Wilson parade.
Wilson sentiment, however, showed up strongly in the first of the famous 46 ballots for the presidential candidate. The delegation voted six for Wilson, one and one-half for Clark, and one-half for Harmon. On the next ballot, John Dern, the Harmon follower, switched to Wilson. But for 43 counts the three Clark votes from Utah remained firm.
Meanwhile, Bryan, like Roosevelt, had for many good Democrats become the villain. A member of the Utah delegation received a telegram, purportedly from Jesse Knight and J. W. N. Whitecotton of Utah County, saying: "Nominate any good Democrat before marplot Bryan." The Tribune applied its editorial rhetoric to Bryan as it had to Roosevelt.
With Wilson's nomination at long last a fact, the Utah Democrats were highly pleased. In a matter of hours more than a thousand of them gathered between First and Second South on Main Street in what the Deseret News called a "jollification." Led by a 24-piece band and accompanied by banners and exploding red fire torches, the Wilson parade marched to the Brigham Young Monument, then back again. The first explosions of oratory were enthusiastic too. Brigham H. Roberts declared: "I take it that this is to be a campaign in which an appeal will be made to the reason of men. If there has been a struggle at the Baltimore convention it has been to find out whether or not the man nominated should have the dollar mark on him. The man who was nominated today, if elected, will be answerable to the people and not to Wall Street." Uncle Jesse Knight took the occasion to correct the report of his telegram. "I never sent or signed such a telegram," he said, "and I never saw or heard of it until I saw it in the paper this morning.... I don't even know what marplot means, but it sounds bad and I admire Bryan, instead of believing him to be bad."
The Tribune, however, struck a quieter, Republican note. "Mr. Wilson," it observed, "is really an untried experiment, a man who has never been put to the proof.... We consider... that the nomination of Mr. Wilson is as favorable a one for President Taft as the Democrats could have made."
Meanwhile, as everyone knows, T. R. had not slipped into quiet defeat and retirement. When a bull moose bolts, he bolts with vigor and the sure knowledge that less than a mile away is another convention hall filled now with the faithful. An hour after Taft had been renominated, T. R. had become the candidate of a new party. Utah's Everard Bierer, Jr., was on the committee to confer with him. 54 Of the Utah delegation that had voted for Taft, Roosevelt was later to remark that they "helped to steal from the people the right of nomination, which is the people's."
On June 25 the Tribune editorialized: "The emblem of the new party, the red bandana handkerchief, serves so clearly to identify the movement with anarchy, that the conclusion cannot be escaped that anarchy is the true aim and basis of the new movement."
In spite of the Tribune's conclusion, however, the progressives were making some progress in Utah. On July 3 a large and enthusiastic group set up a provisional organization and started a campaign fund. Four days later, the call came for a convention in Chicago on August 5. Colonel Loose signed for Utah, and in Utah T. R.'s supporters announced plans for a state convention to choose delegates. The Tribune reported some talk of nominating Loose for governor but implied that this might be awkward and difficult since Loose was an admirer of Spry, and Governor Spry, as everyone knew, was solidly for Taft.
Clearly, in this period of post-convention waiting and confusion, the local Bull Moosers were at a disadvantage. Although they had a national candidate representing great energy and continuing popularity, the first concentration of that energy had been spent in Chicago. Unless Roosevelt could hope to win on a third party ticket, there was no chance to build for a greater climax. The followers of Wilson could hope for a strong swell of progressive insurgency, but the Taft admirers must have felt as comfortably solid as their hero looked. No amount of campaign talk, they must have told themselves, could prove T. R.'s claim that their decision at Chicago had been "rascality" instead of the exercise of high political wisdom. Still, whatever one's doubts or satisfactions, the lines of history went on. Taft, Wilson, Roosevelt — or Debs? The battle for Utah had now begun.
For full citations and images please view this article on a desktop.
