Theodore Roosevelt [excerpt]
McKinley was young and
well and strong. [255][256] There was
no thought of such a thing as his assassination, and the average
New York Republican organisation man made no concealment of the
clever trick they had resorted to, to rid themselves of an obnoxious
Governor by placing him in a sinecure. The delegates returned to
New York singing, “I guess that will hold him down awhile.” No man
understood better than did Governor Roosevelt the motive, the purpose,
the temper of his nomination, or the men who planned it and brought
it about.
In the Vice-Presidential office he
was a veritable Pegasus hitched to a plow.
When the horrid crime which removed
McKinley brought Roosevelt into the Presidential office, he came
in under conditions hardly less trying than those imposed upon Tyler
as successor of Harrison, and much more difficult than those attending
Fillmore’s or Arthur’s succession. If Harrison’s death was a great
blow to Henry Clay, who had calculated so much upon Harrison’s subjection
to his dominancy, what must have been the blow of McKinley’s death
to Mark Hanna and his thoroughly entrenched coterie?
When Harrison died Clay was not yet
firm in his seat, and what he lost was what he had hoped for rather
than what he had realized. When McKinley died, Mark Hanna’s peculiar
but forceful plans had been in complete operation for four years;
he had secured their endorsement for [256][257]
another term; had tasted one lease of great power and influence
to the full; and was just preparing for another four years of even
more thorough control. No matter how great or how dominant one may
insist that McKinley was, no one questions that the days of McKinley
were full of sunshine for Mark Hanna and his compact, thoroughly
organised political machine. For nobody questions that Mark Hanna
had a great machine, whether it was a good or a bad machine; or
that he was the chauffeur, whether McKinley was owner or merely
an honoured guest. And no machine ever had a harder or more sudden
jolt on the highway of politics than did Mark Hanna’s when McKinley
died and Roosevelt mounted in his place.
The world can never know what Mark
Hanna and his political syndicate felt when McKinley died, or how
in their inmost hearts they welcomed the advent of his successor,
or how he in his inmost heart regarded them.
He was and is a person altogether
different in temperament, and in party associations, from McKinley.
Andrew Johnson himself differed no more radically from Lincoln than
did Roosevelt from McKinley. As for Mark Hanna and the style of
political management known as Hannaism, which was synonymous with
McKinleyism, certainly Roosevelt had never theretofore operated
upon such lines. The people loved McKinley; they seemed to have
faith in Hanna [257][258] and Hannaism.
They were not prepared to give them up for any unknown and untried
policy of Mr. Roosevelt.
It is to the credit of Roosevelt and
Hanna alike that both behaved admirably in a trying time; and both
agreed that, continuing the personnel as well as the policy of McKinley’s
Administration, they would subordinate all antagonisms, disappointments
and incongruities between them and strive together for the public
good. It certainly was not a natural alliance. No two men that ever
came together in politics had more irreconcilable view-points, ideals
or standards, than did Theodore Roosevelt and Mark Hanna. How they
succeeded in pulling together as well as they did for the common
welfare during the three years after McKinley’s death that Hanna
lived is a wonder, and to the great honour of both of them; for
while, in that time, McKinley’s policies were adhered to, Hanna
methods and Hanna dominancy and men of the type which Hanna chose
in the day of his control under McKinley, rapidly gave place to
Roosevelt methods, Roosevelt dominancy, and men of a very different
type from those who flourished under Hanna.
Whether the friendship between Roosevelt
and Hanna could or would have survived the strain of these inevitable
changes if Hanna had lived need not be discussed. Outwardly at least
it did continue until Hanna died, and that is surprising [258][259]
enough to the general public, who had been taught to look upon Roosevelt
as rash, and stubborn, and unyielding. I have watched him closely,
and know that when any question vital to his support by his party
followers arises, he is not rash, or stubborn, or unyielding. On
the contrary, no man weighs more quickly or calculatingly which
of two inconsistent plans it is best to yield in order to retain
party support. And no man is more politic in not confessing that
he abandoned one purpose in order to attain another.
|