Wednesday, February 28, 2018

CRISIS ACTORS AT IT AGAIN& CDC DOCTOR LIKELY DEAD

By Jim Stone

Highly probable: Story about CDC doctor connecting flu shot to outbreak probably true

Everyone from Snopes to the New York Times debunked this, which means it is probably true. I waited to post this for quite a while because I did not know what to think. But after reading over the MSM versions of this story, it reeks badly of a coverup, it is highly probable someone nailed him in his home, and pulled him through an open window while his house was locked, with his dog, keys, credit cards, EVERYTHING inside the house. How do you have your keys on the table, with you not in the house, with everything locked up and you not begging family for an extra set of keys to get back in? ANSWER: you get dragged out the window. Gee. Two windows were open!


Heavy.com had all the details, then debunked the vaccine side of the story, and failed to draw an obvious conclusion, or ask the obvious question: If this was not foul play, why did this dear doctor not ask the family for the spare set of keys?

I now believe this story is true, he got offed for speaking out against vaccines and there will be both hell and high water before anyone in the scamming MSM will ever report it. so up it goes:

PREDICTABLE: Teacher holed up in classroom making threats with a gun.

Yep. David Hogg 2. Libs just won't give it a rest. After the Florida fakery, there were many people calling for guns to be allowed in schools, and for teachers to be armed. Like clockwork, as soon as they could possibly set it up, CNN backed fakers are faking it yet again, but this time it is a teacher in Dalton Georgia, who fired shots (probably blanks) in a classroom. Teacher captured. No one hurt. Here's the twitter stream from the police department.


GET THIS: Even in the first tweet it says no children are in danger! The first tweet, at 9:16 AM. How would the police know that? Bullets go through walls you know, and the kids were not out of the school yet, and they did not have the guy in custody yet, so HOW, PRAY TELL, could they tweet that no one was in danger??!!?? YOU GUESS.
Obviously what we have with this is an excuse to not allow teachers to be armed. There was too much discussion about putting guns in the schools, and this is the libs attempt to quash that discussion.


Here's the story line prediction: It will be a substitute teacher with a history of mental illness who shot up a classroom with a hand gun and missed everyone. Therefore we need mental health checks, and school zones have to be gun free. Waiting . . . . . Waiting . . . . .

HA HA HA, I Called it!! LOOK AT THIS TWEET ON THE PD TWITTER

HA HA HA, NO ONE IS GOING TO BE STUPID WITH THIS!

Sorry, but the public is no longer composed of a bunch of stupid asses!

PART 5: THE HISTORY OF TAMMANY HALL: WORKINGMEN'S PARTY,TAMMANY &THE BANK CONTEST,EQUAL RIGHTS PARTY

CHAPTER X
The Workingmen’s Party
1829-1830


IN 1829 the indignation against the Tammany leaders crystallized in a “purifying” movement.  Under the direction of its banker, merchant and lawyer leaders, Tammany Hall had been made a medium for either coercing or bribing the Legislature or the Common Council into passing dozens of bank charters and franchises with scarcely any provision for compensation to either State or city.1  In 1819 the Tammany Society, in one of its pompous addresses, had recited the speculative spirit and consequent distress brought about by the multiplication of incorporated banks, and suggested that the Legislature adopt a prompt and decisive remedy tending to the abolition of those institutions.  This sounded well;  but at that very time, as before and after, the Sachems were lobbying at Albany for charters of banks of which they became presidents or directors.  By one means or another these banks yielded fortunes to their owners;  but the currency issued by them almost invariably depreciated.  The laboring classes on whom this bad private money was imposed complained of suffering severely.  Each year, besides, witnessed an increase in the number of chartered monopolies, armed with formidable powers for long periods, or practically in perpetuity.2  To the first gas company, in May, 1823, the Common Council had granted the exclusive right to light all the streets south of Grand street for thirty years, without returns of any kind to the city.3  At the rate at which the city was expanding, this was a concession of immense value, and formed one of the subjects of complaint in 1829.

While laws were instituted to create a money aristocracy, the old debt and other laws bearing on the working classes were not changed.  No attempt was made to improve a condition which allowed a dishonest contractor to put up a building or a series of buildings, collect his money and then swindle his laborers out of their wages.  The local administration, moreover, continued corrupt.  It was freely charged at this time that $250,000 of city money was being stolen outright every year.  The city charter drafted and adopted in 1829-30 contained provisions which, it was thought, might remedy matters.  It created two bodies of the Common Council — the Aldermen and Assistant Aldermen — and gave each a negative upon the propositions of the other, vesting a supreme veto power in the Mayor.  It again separated the election of the Common Council from the general election.  It abolished secret contracts and compelled all resolutions involving appropriations of public money or placing taxes or assessments to be advertised, and included other precautionary measures against corruption.  But it opposed the public wish in still vesting the appointment of the Mayor in the Common Council.

To battle against the prevailing injustices the Mechanics’ or Workingmen’s party was formed.  Its chief inspiration was Robert Dale Owen, son of the famous Robert Owen.  “Dale” Owen, as he was familiarly known, and others had recently returned to the city after an unsuccessful experiment at cooperative colonizing at New Harmony, Indiana, and a number of bright and ardent intellects gathered about him.  Boldly declaring against the private and exclusive possession of the soil and against the hereditary transmission of property, the new party won over a large part of the laboring element.  “Resolved,” ran its resolutions adopted at Military Hall, October 19, 1829,
“in the opinion of this meeting, that the first appropriation of the soil of the State to private and exclusive possession was eminently and barbarously unjust.  That it was substantially feudal in its character, inasmuch as those who received enormous and unequal possessions were lords and those who received little or nothing were vassals.  That hereditary transmission of wealth on the one hand and poverty on the other, has brought down to the present generation all the evils of the feudal system, and that, in our opinion, is the prime source of all our calamities.”
After declaring that the Workingmen’s party would oppose all exclusive privileges, monopolies and exemptions, the resolutions proceeded:
“We consider it an exclusive privilege for one portion of the community to have the means of education in colleges while another is restricted to common schools, or perhaps, by extreme poverty, even deprived of the limited education to be acquired in those establishments.  Our voice, therefore, shall be raised in favor of a system of education which shall be equally open to all, as in a real republic it should be.”
The banks, too, came in for a share of the denunciation.  The bankers were styled “the greatest knaves, impostors and paupers of the age.”  The resolutions continued:
“As banking is now conducted, the owners of the banks receive annually of the people of this State not less than two millions of dollars in their paper money (and it might as well be pewter money) for which there is and can be nothing provided for its redemption on demand...”
The Workingmen put a full ticket in the field.
Tammany Hall, dominated by some of the same men and interests denounced by the Workingmen’s party, opened a campaign of abuse.  Commercial and banking men outside the Wigwam joined ardently in the campaign.  The new movement was declared to be a mushroom party, led by designing men, whose motives were destructive.  The Evening Post, which represented the commercial element and which sided with Tammany in opposition to the new party, said that it remained for the really worthy mechanics who might have associated accidentally with that party, to separate themselves from it, now that its designs and doctrines were known.  The Courier and Enquirer, partly owned and edited by Noah,4 styled the Workingmen’s party an infidel ticket, hostile to the morals, to the institutions of society and the rights of property.  The Tammany Hall, or to speak more technically, the Democratic-Republican General Committee, declaiming on the virtues of Jackson and Democracy, advised all good men, and especially all self-respecting laborers,-not to vote the Workingmen’s ticket.

Nevertheless, its principles made such an impression that in November it polled over 6,000 votes, while Tammany, with its compact organization, could claim little more than 11,000 votes.  It was well settled that numbers of Whig workingmen voted the new party’s ticket;  and that the rich Whigs secretly worked for the success of Tammany Hall, whose ticket was almost entirely successful, though the Workingmen elected Ebenezer Ford to the Assembly.

Tammany was dismayed at the new party’s strength, and determined to destroy it by championing one of the reform measures demanded.  In January, 1830, a bill for the better security of mechanics and other laborers of New York City was introduced by Silas M. Stillwell.  The Tammany men immediately took it up as if it were their own, urged its passage and secured the credit of its adoption, when in April, much emasculated, it became a law.  It required, under penalties, the owner of a building to retain from the contractor the amount due to the mechanics employed thereon.  By exploiting this performance to the utmost, Tammany succeeded in making some inroads on the Workingmen’s party.  The organization leaders had recognized that it was time they did something for the laboring classes.  They were fast losing caste with even independent Democrats of means, because of their subservience to the aristocracy and of the common knowledge of the illegitimate ways in which they were amassing wealth.

One result of the Workingmen’s movement was the failure of the Wigwam to secure a majority in the Common Council.  This seemed to frustrate the design to reelect, as Mayor, Walter Bowne (Grand Sachem in 1820 and 1831).  Fourteen Aldermen and Assistants were opposed to Bowne, and thirteen favored him.  There was but one expedient calculated to reelect him, and to this Tammany Hall resorted.  Bowne, as presiding officer of the Council, held that the constitution permitted him to vote for the office of Mayor.  “I will persist in this opinion even though the board decide against me,” he said.  To prevent a vote being taken, seven of Bowne’s opponents withdrew on December 28, 1829.  They went back on January 6, 1830, when Tammany managed to reelect Bowne by one vote.  How this vote was obtained was a mystery.  Fourteen members declared under oath that they had voted for Thomas R. Smith, Bowne’s opponent.5  Charges of bribery were made, and an investigating committee was appointed on January 11;  but as this committee was composed of Bowne’s own partisans, it announced its inability to find proofs.  Meanwhile the general committee 6 had issued a loftily worded manifesto saying that it (the committee) was established and was maintained to watch over the political interests of the Democratic-Republicans of the city and “to expose and repel the insidious and open machinations of their enemies,” that it could not discover anything wrong in the conduct of the Chief Magistrate of the city, and that it “repelled the accusations of his enemies.”

The Workingmen’s party continued its agitation, and prepared for another campaign.  In the meantime the Wigwam’s agents skilfully went about fomenting divisions, with the result that three tickets, all purporting to be the genuine Workingmen’s, were put into the field in October, 1830.  One was that of the “Clay Workingmen”;  it was composed of a medley of admirers of Clay, the owners of stock in various great manufacturing establishments, workingmen who believed in a protective tariff, Whigs,7 and a bunch of hack politicians who had taken up the Workingmen’s movement for selfish ends.  The second was that of a fragment of the Workingmen’s party of the year before, standing resolutely for their principles and containing no suspicious politicians or monopolists.  The third was that of the Agrarian party, embracing a few individuals of views too advanced even for the Workingmen’s party.

To the Clay Workingmen’s party 8 Tammany Hall gave little attention, since it was made up mainly of Whigs who had always, under different names, been opposed to the organization.  But the genuine movement Tammany Hall covered with abuse.  “Look, fellow-citizens,” said the address of the “general nominating committee,”
“upon the political horizon and mark the fatal signs prognosticating evils of a dire and fatal nature Associations and political sects of a new and dangerous character have lately stalked into existence, menacing the welfare and good order of society.  These associations ... have assumed to represent two of the most useful and respectable classes of our citizens — our Workingmen and Mechanics. ... Confide in them, and when they have gained their ends they will treat you with derision and scorn!  Then rally round your ancient and trusty friends and remember that honest men and good citizens never assume false names nor fight under borrowed banners!”
To display its devotion to the cause of Democracy, Tammany Hall celebrated, on November 26, the revolution in France.  It persuaded former President James Monroe to preside in Tammany Hall at the preliminary arrangements, and made a studied parade of its zeal.  There was a procession, Samuel Swartwout acting as grand marshal.  Monroe, in a feeble state of health, was brought in a stage to Washington Square, where for ten minutes he looked on.  A banquet, the usual high-flown speeches, and fireworks followed.

The election was favorable to Tammany.  About 3,800 workingmen who had supported the independent movement the previous year, went back to Tammany, because of its advocacy of the mechanics’ lien law.  The average Tammany plurality was 3,000.  The real Workingmen’s ticket polled a vote of about 2,200;  the Clay Workingmen’s ticket a little above 7,000, and the Agrarian, 116.

For the next few years the contest of Jackson with the United States Bank drew together the energies of all Democrats supporting him.  Dropping local contests, they united to renew his power.  For the time, the Workingmen’s movement ceased to exist.

CHAPTER XI
Tammany and the Bank Contest
1881-1834


TAMMANY lost no time in announcing its intention to support the renomination of Jackson.  The general committee, on March 3, 1881, unanimously passed a resolution approving of his renomination by the Democratic members of the Legislature.  Seven days later the General Committee of Democratic Young Men and the ward committees acted likewise.

Since the campaign of 1800 there had not been a Presidential contest in which the masses joined with such enthusiasm.  Although the national election was more than 18 months distant, the excitement was intense.  The late Workingmen’s party and Tammany men fraternized.  The ward resolutions were full of fire, the meetings spirited.  The Democratic electors of the Sixth Ward “friendly to regular nominations” resolved, on March 15:
“...That aristocracy in all its forms is odious to us as Democratic-Republicans, and that of all aristocracies an aristocracy of wealth, grinding the faces of the poor and devouring the substance of the people, is the most alarming.  That we regard an incorporated association of rich men wielding the whole monied capital of the country as dangerous to our rights and liberties.  That we consider the next Presidential election as substantially a contest between the people on one side and the monied aristocracy of the country on the other.”1
 Image result for images of Clarkson Crolius
The organization’s first object was to gain a majority of the local offices in the Spring election of 1881 on the Jackson issue.  The National Republican party, recently organized in New York City on the same general lines as Tammany Hall, and headed by Clarkson Crolius, a former Grand Sachem, set out to crush the Jackson movement.  If a defeat could be administered to it at this time, the practical effect would be great; New York would possibly influence the entire Union.  To accomplish this, the National Republicans tried to divert the issue to local lines and agitated for the election of the Mayor by the people.  The Tammany men joined issue at once, and in February, 1881, the Common Council committee on application, composed chiefly of Tammany men, reported adversely on a motion to suggest to the Legislature a revision of the charter.  The time was declared to be inexpedient for such an innovation, one Tammany Alderman, Thomas T. Woodruff, declaring, when the matter again came up, on April 8, that the people could not be trusted with the choice of that important official.  The National Republicans replied by denouncing the Common Council for its lavish expenditures of public money, its distribution of favors in the shape of “jobs” and contracts among a few retainers whose sole merits lay in their close relationship to certain managing members of the board, and for its efforts to prevent the people from having the right to elect their own Mayor.2

The opposition to Tammany was ineffectual.  In the ensuing election, not less than 22 of the 28 members chosen for the new double-chamber Common Council were Tammany men, elected solely upon their pledge of allegiance to the national and State administrations.  The first trial of the new charter, therefore, showed that the separation of municipal from general elections did not prevent the division of the voters on national party lines.  The extent of this preliminary Jackson victory made a sensation throughout the Union and caused gloom among the United States Bank supporters.
Image result for images of Lewis CassImage result for images of Nathaniel P. Tallmadge
The prestige of Tammany Hall was now overwhelming; its influence upon the Democratic party, great before, became greater.  No aspirant for public favor could ignore its demands and decrees.  When, on May 12, the society held an imposing celebration of the forty-second anniversary of its founding, politicians from the highest to the lowest, national and local, four hundred and over, crowded there with words of flattery.  Lewis Cass,[L] Nathaniel P. Tallmadge,[R] the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor of the State of New York; members of the National Senate and of the House of Representatives — these and the rest were glad to avail themselves of the invitation.  William Mooney was there, very old and feeble, beaming with pride at the power of the institution he had founded.3  After the banquet, which was described in the old Indian terms, as consisting “of the game of the forest, the fish of the lakes, the fruits of the season and the waters of the great spring,” came the reading of letters.  Jackson wrote:  “Nothing could afford me greater gratification than to participate with your ancient and honorable society of Republicans on such an occasion,” but that press of official duties kept him away.  A letter of regret, in high-flown and laudatory diction, from Secretary of State Martin Van Buren followed.  James Watson Webb proposed this toast:  “Martin Van Buren, the Grand Sachem of the Eagle Tribe — The Great Spirit is pleased with his faithful support of the Great Grand Sachem of the Nation and smiles graciously upon the sages and warriors of the tribe who aim to elevate their chief in 1836 to the highest station in the country.”  This was greeted by nine cheers, and instantly disclosed Tammany’s choice for Jackson’s successor in 1836.  The only troublous’ note was furnished by Duff Green, who sprang this toast upon the surprised gathering:  “De Witt Clinton — His friends honor his memory — his enemies dare not assail it!”  By “enemies” he referred to those present;  they retorted that he was an intruder, was not invited, and had not paid for his ticket.4  Mayor Bowne was then installed as Grand Sachem in place of Stephen Alien, the former Mayor.

The Fall election of 1831 also turned upon national issues.  Upon Jackson’s popularity nearly every Democratic candidate in New York city was elected by an average majority of 6,000.  There were rumors of illegal voting, but no proof was submitted.  The Wigwam was so overjoyed at the result that a banquet was held on November 21, presided over by Benjamin Bailey, who for a dozen years had been chairman of the general committee.  He had reached his seventy-second year and could claim little political influence.  But as a captain in the Revolutionary army, and as one of those confined in the Jersey prison ships, the Tammany chiefs considered him a valuable figurehead.  Gen. Wool, Cols. Twiggs and Crogham and five hundred men of various importance spent the night in the Wigwam drinking to Jackson, Tammany Hall and coming victory.

Not only did Tammany take the initiative in supporting Jackson, but it was the first body to nominate Van Buren for Vice-President.  On the news of the Senate’s rejection of Van Buren as Minister to England, an indignation meeting was held in Tammany Hall, January 30, 1832, this being the opening expression of public opinion.  Van Buren was suggested for Vice-President, and the Wigwam gathering showed its satisfaction by repeated cheers.5  Twenty-four leading Tammany men drew up a letter containing their sentiments on Van Buren’s rejection, and on May 31 an outpouring in the Wigwam approved his nomination.
Image result for images of Mayor BowneImage result for images of Nicholas Biddle,
Then followed a striking revelation, showing the venality of some of Tammany’s leaders.  The United States Bank officials began bargaining for the betrayal of Jackson.  The Courier and Inquirer suddenly abandoned him for the support of the bank candidates, giving as a reason the fear of the “fearful consequences of revolution, anarchy and despotism,” which assuredly would ensue if Jackson were reelected.  The real reason was that Webb and Noah, as revealed by a Congressional investigation,6 had borrowed directly and indirectly $50,000 from the United States Bank, which had now called them to time.  Mayor Bowne[L] was their sponsor to Nicholas Biddle,[R] head of the bank.  Some of the other Tammany leaders, it appeared, had been for years the bank’s retainers.  Representative Churchill C. Cambreleng enjoyed a place on its pay rolls.  Gulian C. Verplanck, another of the Wigwam’s representatives in Congress, had voted in its behalf, and Stephen Allen, in the State Senate, had voted for a resolution in its favor.  Peter Sharpe, Ogden Edwards,7 William H. Ireland, John Morss — all influential men in times past — now vigorously opposed Jackson, and the services of other Tammany chiefs were secured.

Two influences, however, prevented the organization leaders from betraying the Democratic cause — one the common people, the other the owners of the State banks,  whose self-interest called for the speedy downfall of the United States Bank.  Finding that they could not control the Wigwam, the Tammany agents of that bank seceded, and joined the National Republicans.  The State Bank men remained in the organization and labored for Jackson, with no other idea than that their institutions would benefit in the distribution of Government funds if the United States Bank were put down.  The course of the leaders remaining in Tammany smacked of double dealing.  Refusing to renominate Verplanck, they put in his place Dudley Selden, who had borrowed $8,000 from the United States Bank, but who had professed to support Jackson’s veto.  It looked as though certain potent influences were operating in Tammany Hall for the election of a pro-bank Congress, whoever might be chosen President.

The Tammany ward organizations, assisted by the men of the late Workingmen’s party, appointed vigilance committees to undo any mischief the leaders might attempt, and to electioneer for Jackson’s success.  So enthusiastic was the Jackson feeling that many politicians of note, understanding its depth and having a care for their political futures, made haste to change front.  Almost daily the people were rallied to the Wigwam by the beating of drums.  A few years before, a hickory tree had been planted in front of the Wigwam;  now, on October 30, a second was put there, and a barrel of beer was used to moisten its roots.

Both sides were guilty of election frauds.  Votes were bought at the rate of $5 each, most of the buying being done by the National Republicans, who were supplied with abundant resources.  The National Republicans, moreover, had sought to bribe certain men with the promise of offices, and on the three election days they foisted upon the voters a Jackson electoral ticket containing forty-three names, instead, of the legal number, forty-two, thereby invalidating each of these ballots voted.  This trick, it was calculated, lost to Jackson more than a thousand votes.  Of a total of 30,474 votes, Tammany carried the city by 5,620 majority.  The Wigwam for many successive nights was filled with celebrating crowds.  Jackson gave a conspicuously public display of his recognition of Tammany’s invaluable services, when, on the evening of June 13, 1833, he visited the society, attended by the Vice-President, Secretary Woodbury, Gov. William L. Marcy, the Mayor, and the members of the Common Council.

The United States Bank supporters did not surrender with Jackson’s reelection.  They exerted themselves to influence Congress by means of a defeat for the anti-bank forces in New York City in the Fall election of 1833.  Tammany Hall during the campaign sent out runners ordering every office-holder to his electioneering post.  Vigorous meetings were held, and all the secret influences of the general committee were employed.  On the other hand, merchants laid aside their ruffled shirts and broadcloth coats, put on their roundabouts and worked at the polls on the three election days for the Whig ticket.  Tammany carried the city by between 2,000 and 3,000 majority.  Touching this and previous elections a committee of Assistant Aldermen reported on February 10, 1884:  “That frauds have been practised at the polls, the committee are convinced.  At any rate, a universal and deep conviction prevails among our citizens that tricks have been resorted to for the purpose of defeating the election of one candidate and securing that of another.”  It was further set forth that persons were brought up to vote who were not citizens of the United States nor qualified to vote in the State.  Others voted in more than one ward.  Voters also were transferred overnight from a sure to a doubtful ward.8  No remedy followed the report.[Some things never change,we have the latest cheating charges in the 2016 election,that sound exactly as above,and 2000 forgetaboutit DC]

The Spring election of 1834, though local, again turned upon national issues.  For the first time in the history of the city, the Mayor was to be elected by the people.  The growth of public opinion had been such that the Legislature was forced, in 1833, to grant this reform.

The contending hosts were swayed, first, by the question of the United States Bank, and second, by the spoils.  The merchants shut their shops and sent their whole body of clerks and laboring men to surround the polls and influence voters against Tammany Hall.  The United States Bank spread abroad the cry of “panic.”  If its directors could show that public opinion in the foremost city in the Union had altered so as to favor the continuation of the bank charter, then they could use that as a good basis for influencing Congress.  There was no concealment of coercion of voters; the weak, the timid, the fearful were overawed by the increasing clamor of paid newspapers that the destruction of the United States Bank meant “widespread revulsion of trade and everlasting injury to the poor.”  In fact, a general depression of business was produced.  A row began in the “bloody ould Sixth,” by the breaking of some ballot boxes.  Both parties armed with stones and bludgeons, and turned the scene into one of violence.  The riot became general.  A crowd, composed chiefly of Whigs, ransacked gun-shops in Broadway and made for the State arsenal at Elm and Franklin streets.  Rumors of their intentions spreading, a gathering of peaceably inclined citizens arrived before them and held the arsenal until the militia hastened there and restored order.9

Cornelius W. Lawrence, the Tammany candidate, was declared elected by 181 votes out of a total of nearly 35,000 10 over Gulian G. Verplanck, who had gone over to the Whigs.  Verplanck never ceased to contend that he had been defrauded of the office.  The Whigs obtained a majority in the Common Council, 17 members to the Wigwam’s 15, and joyfully said that Tammany Hall in electing the Mayor had the shadow; while they, in securing the corporation, had the substance.  With the Common Council they could carry the whole patronage of the city, amounting to more than $1,000,000 a year.


This election demonstrated clearly that the propertied classes as a whole were combined against the laborers, mechanics, farmers and producing classes generally, and that they were as much concerned over the spoils of office as was the most rabid Tammany man.  As a protest against the indifference of the local leaders of both parties to the real interests of the people, and to put a stop to the granting of special privileges, the Equal Rights party now came into existence.

The History of Tammany Hall
By Gustavus Myers
Image result for images of a corrupt tammany hall

CHAPTER XII
The Equal Rights Party
1834-1837
Image result for images of Levi D. Slamm


THE Equal Rights movement, which began its activity inside the Tammany organization, was virtually a moral, then a political, revival of the Workingmen’s movement.  Its principles, however, were less radical, and its demands more moderate.  It advocated the equal rights of every citizen in his person and property and in their management;  declared unqualified and uncompromising opposition to bank notes as a circulating medium, because gold and silver were the only safe and constitutional currency, and a like opposition to all monopolies by legislation.  It also announced hostility “to the dangerous and unconstitutional creation of vested rights by legislation, because these were a usurpation of the people’s sovereign rights,” and asserted that all laws or acts of incorporation passed by the Legislature could be rightfully altered or repealed by its successors.  The Equal Rights movement comprised men of various classes.  Moses Jacques and Levi D. Slamm were its principal leaders.  To comprehend its nature, a brief review of the causes which conspired to bring it into being will be necessary.

Up to 1831 the repeal of the law for the imprisonment of debtors had been a subject of almost constant agitation by reformers and workingmen.  Under this law more than 10,000 persons, mainly unfortunate laborers, were imprisoned annually in loathsome prisons, without inquiry as to their innocence or guilt, lying there at their creditors’ will, unsupplied by the city with any of the necessities of life.1  Tammany Hall had taken no action until 1831, when its leaders gave a belated approval to a bill introduced in the Assembly, abolishing imprisonment for debts of any sum except in the cases of non-residents.2
This bill had become a law in that year;  yet by 1833 the interest of Tammany’s chiefs in the workingman had died away to such an extent that the Assembly was allowed to pass a measure entitled “a law abolishing imprisonment for debt,” but re-instituting imprisonment on all debts under $50, thus completely nullifying the law so far as the poor were concerned.

The measure failed to become a law;  but the sharp practice shown in its wording, and in the means taken to push it through the Assembly, disgusted the Equal Rights men, and in their meetings they passed resolutions denouncing the chiefs responsible therefor.  Their resolutions furthermore declared that the proceedings at Tammany Hall were a sealed book.;  that a few men — William Paxen Hallett, Elisha Tibbits, J.J. Roosevelt and John Y. Cebra — made up important nominations in Wall street after the bankers had decided upon the candidates and then had the nominating committee accept them.

Popular disaffection was increased by the manner in which the Legislature and the Aldermen continued to create corporations with enormous grants.  The scandals over the procurement of legislative charters, particularly bank charters, had for more than 25 years aroused a growing indignation among the people.  In 1805, shortly after the passage of the Merchants’ Bank charter, Peter Betts, an Assemblyman, declared in open session of the lower house, that Luke Metcalfe, a fellow member, had sought to bribe him to vote for the measure.  The price promised was 15 shares of the bank’s stock, valued at $50 each.  Conflicting testimony was given on the matter, and a motion was made to expel Metcalfe;  the house, however, retained him in his seat by a vote of 87 to 16.3

Charges of the same kind, affecting practically every session of the Legislature, were common, though only occasionally were they made the subject of official investigation.  In 1812, however, shortly after the Assembly, forced by public criticism, had passed a resolution compelling each member to pledge himself that he had neither taken nor would take, “ any reward or profit, direct or indirect, for any vote on any measure,”4 another scandal arose.  The Bank of America, with very moderate assets of any sort, received a charter on a stated capitalization of $6,000,000, an enormous sum in those days.  Charges of corruption were bandied about, one Assemblyman, Silas Holmes, declaring under oath that the sum of $500, “besides a handsome present,” had been offered him.  A committee of the lower house listened to testimony in the case, and then, by a decisive majority, voted that the body was above suspicion.5  But in a pronunciamento to Gov. Tompkins during the same year the same house graciously reported:  “ We are well aware that the number of charters for banking institutions already granted has awakened general solicitude and anxiety.”

The Chemical Bank was a more modern instance.  The report of the joint legislative committee in 1824 had shown that its promoters set apart $50,000 worth of stock at par value 6 to buy the votes of members, Gen. Robert Swartwout -he who had defaulted for $68,000 in 1820 -acting as one of the lobbyists and claiming $5,000 for his services.7  Other scandals throwing strong light on legislative practises were those of the Ætna and Chatham Fire Insurance Companies.  The testimony brought out in the investigation of these companies in 1826 showed that William J. Waldron (one of the line of Grand Sachems) gave $20,000 in certificates of stock to Gen. Jasper Ward, a State Senator, and $20,000 more to various other persons to get the Ætna charter through the Legislature.8  The Chatham charter, passed in 1822, cost $20,000 in stock at par value, additional sums being paid for the passage of certain amendments in 1824.9  Ward wrote from Albany to a friend in the city, complaining that the Jefferson Fire Insurance Company, which secured a charter at the same time (1824), had paid only 5 per cent. of what it had promised, giving notes for the remainder.10  These were but a few examples of the general legislative corruption.  The men who profited by these charters brought about, in 1830, the exemption of bank stock in the city from taxation.  That nearly every Tammany leader held bank stock was proved by the testimony before an investigating committee in June, 1833, which set forth how the organizers of the newly founded Seventh Ward Bank had distributed thousands of shares among over one hundred State and city office-holders, both Tammany and Anti-Masonic.  Every Tammany Senator was involved.  James Perkins, the principal lobbyist for the charter, swore repeatedly that $5,000 in stock at par value had been taken directly by State Senators and from $10,000 to $25,000 in stock distributed indirectly.11  Perkins charged Thurlow Weed with accepting a $500 bribe.12  The investigating committee reported finally that it could find no proof involving any but one of the accused.13  As the bill for the charter had originally passed the Senate by a vote of 27 to 2,14  and as the members of the investigating committee had been’ chosen from this majority, its conclusions were naturally viewed with a good deal of suspicion.

The Equal Rights men complained that 75 per cent. of the whole of the bank notes circulating in New York City consisted of depreciated paper.  The circulation of these in notes of $5 or under amounted by March, 1835, to nearly $1,500,000.  One establishment alone, whose weekly pay-roll in 1834 amounted to $40,000, paid the greater part of this sum in depreciated notes.  The wage earner was in constant fear that any morning he might wake to hear that the bank whose notes he held had failed.  Frequently the worst deceptions on the public were connived at by the officials.  The Hudson Insurance Company, for instance, with a nominal capital of $200,000, was permitted to issue bonds to the amount of $800,000, upon the most fictitious resources.  This was far from being an isolated instance.  The law allowed a bank with only $100,000 capital to loan $250,000, thus receiving interest on more than twice the capital actually invested.15

The Council was more than ever a hotbed of venality.  Numberless small “jobs” were perpetrated without public notice;  but when it was proposed in October, 1831, to give the Harlem Railroad Company the franchise for the perpetual and exclusive use of Fourth avenue, free of all payment to the city, Alderman George Sharp, one of the few public-spirited members, drew general attention to the matter by an energetic denunciation.  After every other means had been resorted to without success to influence his vote, he was told that he would be excluded from the party by certain persons at Tammany Hall.  Alderman Stevens, who declared that he had seen stock given to members of the board and to the “corps editorial” to secure their influence, was also threatened.  The words of these two men proved conclusively the truth of what for a long time was common report:  that the group of Tammany leaders not only controlled the party nominations but threatened public officials with their displeasure, with all which that implied — exile from public life, loss of political influence, perhaps ruin of fortune — in case they did not vote for certain measures whose “merits” were recommended to them.

The laborer had other grievances.  For seventeen years the Council had refused to grant any additional ferries between New York City and Brooklyn.  During that period the population of New York had increased 150,000 and that of Brooklyn 15,000.  This growth involved a vast amount of marketing and increased the business intercourse between the two places more than fourfold.  The lessees of the Fulton Ferry — the sole ferry — had made an agreement in 1811, it was alleged, with the New York City Corporation, by which the latter undertook to bind itself not to establish, any additional ferries from south of Catherine street to the Village of Brooklyn for twenty-five years.  The large landholders influenced the Common Council to continue this monopoly, their aim being to force the people to stay in New York, where rents were 35 per cent. higher than in any other city in the Union.  The exaction's of the water, gas and steamboat monopolies likewise had a share in causing the formation of the Equal Rights party.

Besides the dispensing to favored knots of citizens of trading privileges and immunities which were withheld from the great body of the community, the laboring element believed that there was a gross inequality of taxation in the interests of the rich.  Taxes rose from $550,000 in 1832 to $850,000 in 1833, but the increase fell upon the poor.  The Merchants’ Bank was assessed at $6,000; the lot and building had cost that sum twenty years before, and were now worth at least twice as much.  The Merchants’ Exchange was assessed at $115,000, yet it was known that the land and building had cost $300,000.  Dozens of like instances were cited by the reformers and they now determined upon a concerted effort looking to better government.

A powerful influence came to the aid of the Equal Rights men when William Cullen Bryant and William Leggett assumed the editorship of the Evening Post.  This journal now advocated industrial and political reforms with singular independence and ability.  It revived the original conception of the nominating committee’s functions.  It urged the electors to remember that the nomination by a nominating committee was but a recommendation to the people of certain candidates whose merits and qualifications were as fair a matter of discussion as any under Heaven; and that it was for this very purpose that nominations were made so long before the great popular meeting was convened.  Besides his editorial support of the movement, Leggett participated in the practical work of its organization and management.  The clear thought and definite expression shown in most of the Equal Rights manifestoes and resolutions are perhaps directly due to him.

The Equal Rights faction became especially active in the Fall of 1834.  Its orators raised such a stir that both Tammany Hall and the Whigs suddenly developed an astonishing care for the workingmen.  To conciliate them, the Tammany Nominating Committee exacted a written pledge from every one of its candidates requiring an expression of his sentiments on the monopoly question.  To counteract the Wigwam, the Whigs gathered a meeting of “Whig Mechanics” at Masonic Hall, October 14, at which opposition to monopolies, especially banking monopolies, was declared Not to be outdone, the Wigwam got together a meeting of “Democratic Mechanics,” who resolved to oppose monopolies and to restore the constitutional currency.  Tammany also began to recognize, even more liberally than before, the naturalized citizens.  As a consequence, it won the Fall (1884) election by over 2,300 majority, most of the Equal Rights men voting with it.  One-third of its 18,000 voters were estimated at this time to be of foreign birth.

Nearly all the Tammany Assemblymen proceeded to forget their pledges, only four of the delegation voting in the February following against the bill giving exclusive privileges to the Peaconic Company.

The first clash between the Equal Rights faction and the Tammany monopolists occurred at a meeting at the Wigwam on March 31, 1835.  Certain that the Aldermen would never grant additional ferries, the Equal Rights men favored a measure, then pending in the Legislature, for the establishment of a State Board of Commissioners clothed with that power.  Gideon Lee,16 a Wall Street banker, called the meeting to order and nominated Preserved Fish for chairman.  Many objections were uttered, and Fish retired.  The radicals howled down the Tammany speakers and ran the meeting themselves, adopting resolutions prepared by Joel P. Seaver, declaring for the creation of the State board.  A bill for a new ferry — the present South Ferry — was passed the same year.  The Equal Rights men still hoped to gain their ends inside the organization.  When Cornelius W. Lawrence 17 stood for reelection as Mayor in April, 1835, there was scarcely any opposition to him from any quarter, he receiving 17,696 votes out of a total of 20,196.

In the Fall of 1835, however, the Tammany Nominating Committee recommended for State offices candidates of a character most obnoxious to the Equal Rights men, and called a meeting for the evening of October 29, to ratify its nominations.  Barely were the doors opened when the Equal Rights men rushed in and frustrated an attempt to place Isaac L. Varian in the chair.  In the melee, the Bank Democrats, finding themselves unable to control the meeting, withdrew, but in doing so turned off the gas, leaving the Equal Rights men in total darkness.  The trick must have been anticipated;  for each man drew forth a candle and a lucifer, or “loco foco” match, and in a twinkling the hall was resplendent with dancing lights.  The Equal Rights men adopted resolutions and a suitable ticket of their own.18

Three sets of candidates stood for election.  The Native Americans, who opposed the election of foreigners to office and urged the repeal of the naturalization laws, took the place of the Whigs.  In the face of this strong sentiment, Tammany Hall acted with its usual diplomacy.  The general committee boasted that the regular Tammany ticket was composed of only native Americans, which was true, the naturalized citizens having been cajoled on the promise of receiving the usual quota among nominations the next year.  Of the nearly 23,000 votes cast at the election, Tammany Hall obtained an average majority of about 800.  The Native Americans polled 9,000 votes, and the Equal Rights men, or Anti-Monopolists, over 3,500.  It was estimated that 2,000 Whigs voted the Tammany ticket to defeat the Anti-Monopolists, and that about 5,500 Whig votes were divided between Tammany Hall and the Native Americans.

The news of its slight plurality was hailed with anything but pleasure at the Wigwam, where the Anti-Monopolists were denounced as political swindlers and adventurers.  Instead, however, of making a show of outward fairness, the organization leaders blindly took the course most adapted to fan the flame of opposition to themselves.  After the great fire of 1835, which destroyed $20,000,000 worth of property, and the extent of which was due to the refusal of the corrupt Aldermen to give the city a proper water supply, the Common Council agreed to loan $6,000,000 at 5 per cent. interest for the relief of insurance companies and banks which had suffered from the fire.19  Nothing was said or done for the relief of the poor sufferers whom the Wigwam claimed to have under its especial protection.  The Council allowed pawnbrokers 25 per cent. interest and prohibited them from loaning more than $25 on a single pledge.20  The city institutions were in a melancholy state.21  Most serious of all on the public mind were the disclosures concerning the Commercial Bank, from which funds were embezzled in the scheme of cornering the stock of the Harlem Railroad.  As a step towards this end, Samuel Swartwout and Garrit Gilbert (a sometime Sachem) lobbied for the passage of a bill to increase the capital stock of this road, which in turn, it was thought, would increase the price of all the stock —two Senators agreeing to raise- objections temporarily “so as to blind the eyes of the New Yorkers.”22

The leaders made no effort to stop the granting of charters, or to curtail the monopolist privileges already granted.  It was admitted generally that no legislation even remotely affecting the interests of the banks could pass without the consent of those institutions.  Tradesmen also had their combinations.  But combinations, legal enough when organized by capital, were declared illegal when formed by workingmen.  At this time the Supreme Court of the State of New York decided that combinations to raise the wages of any class of laborers amounted to a misdemeanor, on the ground that they were injurious to trade.  Later, in June, 1836, twenty tailors were found guilty of conspiracy under that decision and fined by Judge Edwards $1,150 in the aggregate for engaging in a strike for higher wages.

The mechanics prepared to hold an indignation meeting and applied for permission to use Tammany Hall.  This was refused by the Sachems.23  In defiance of the Wigwam, the meeting, a gathering of 20,000 persons, was held in the park fronting Tammany Hall.  “Are workingmen,” read the address of the committee of this meeting,
“free in reality when they dare not obey the first instinct of all animated beings;  when our courts pronounce it criminal to exercise nature’s paramount law of self-preservation?  Trades unions and mechanick societies are only self-protective against the countless combinations of aristocracy;  boards of bank and other chartered directories;  boards of brokers;  boards of trade and commerce;  combinations of landlords;  coal and wood dealers;  monopolists and all those who grasp at everything and produce nothing.  If all these I combinations are suffered to exist, why are trades unions and combinations of workingmen denounced?  Should they not have an equal chance in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness?  Should they not have an equal right with the other classes of society, in their person, in their property or labor, and in their management?”
The meeting, in strong resolutions, condemned the Supreme Court decision and that of Judge Edwards.

At this moment the peculiar Wigwam methods were being displayed in another direction to an edified public.  In the first days of May, 1836, the Board of Aldermen found itself divided equally, Tammany Hall and the Whigs each having eight votes, precluding either from electing a president.  The Tammany members, in the tea-room downstairs, made merry over refreshments.  The Whigs could not muster a quorum, and sent word to the organization men to appear;  the Wigwam men replied that they didn’t choose, and bade the Whigs come to them.  Meanwhile the public business stood still.  Finally the balloting was begun.  On May 23, seventeen votes were found to have been cast, although there were only sixteen voting Aldermen.24  By the end of May more than 120 ballots were had.  At last, on July 1, the Tammany men persuaded Alderman Ward, a Whig, to offer a resolution electing Isaac L. Varian, a Wigwam candidate, for the first six months, which was done.

Taking these proceedings as a cue, the Equal Rights party, on June 6, at Military Hall, adopted a long series of resolutions stating that the aristocracy of the Democracy, or in other words, the monopolists, the paper-currency Democrats, the partisans of the “usages,” had long deceived and misguided the great body of the Democrats.  Through these “usages,” the tools of the banks and other incorporated and speculative interests were enabled to take advantage of the unsuspicious self-security of the people, both before and at primary meetings.  By the aristocracy and through secret caucuses, candidates were chosen, proceedings were cut and dried, and committees were packed.  When committees could not be packed without opposition, the resolutions further read, two sets of committeemen were usually elected, and that set whose political complexion best suited the packed majority of the general committee was always accepted without any regard to the majorities of the people.  The Union did not furnish a more dangerous usurpation upon the sovereignty of the people than the fact of the Tammany Hall Nominating Committee sending recently a petition to the Legislature in favor of chartering more banks and banking paper capital and designating themselves, not as citizens, but as members of the nominating committee, notwithstanding the very nominees of such a committee had given their written pledge to oppose new banks and monopolies.

The “usages,” the Equal Rights party next resolved, so productive of secret caucuses, intrigues and abuses, furnished the avenue through which one portion of the Democracy had been corrupted, and the other portion — the great mass — led astray.  The latter was taught to believe that “usages” alone made men Democrats, and that to keep Federalists and Whigs out of office was the very essence of Democracy.25

The Equal Rights party then nominated Isaac L. Smith, of Buffalo, for Governor, and Moses L. Jacques, of New York City, for Lieutenant-Governor.  To draw from the strength of the new party, some of Tammany’s leaders — Samuel Swartwout, Jesse Hoyt, Stephen Allen, Saul Alley and a few others — professed to favor the repeal of the Restraining law, which in effect prohibited private banking and gave the incorporated institutions a monopoly.  The Anti-Monopolists were not to be deluded.  On September 21 they declared that in the recent professions of the Tammany corruptionists in advocating this repeal and in favoring some other few minor democratic measures, they beheld the stale expedient of luring the bone and sinew of the country to the support of their monopoly and banking men and measures and that they had no faith in Tammany “usages,” policy or its incorrigible Sachems.

The characters of most of the Wigwam nominations were so tainted that it seemed as if the candidates were put forward in defiance of the best public sentiment.  It is not so certain that outside the Equal Rights party the voters were repelled by the current methods of buying legislation and dictating nominations.  A low tone of public morals was manifested.  Men were bent on moneymaking.  He who could get rich by grace of the Legislature was thought “smart” and worthy of emulation.  The successful in politics were likewise to be envied, and, if possible, imitated.  A large part of the community bowed in respect to the person of wealth, no matter whence came his riches;  and the bank lobbyists were the recipients of a due share of this reverence.

From these men the Tammany leaders selected candidates.  One of the Assembly nominees was Prosper M. Wetmore, who had lobbied for the notorious State Bank charter.  This bank, according to the charter, was to have $10,000,000 capital, although its organizers did not have more than a mere fraction of that sum.  This was going too far, even for Albany, though upon modifying their application, the charter was granted.26  Reuben Withers and James C. Stoneall, bank lobbyists; Benjamin Ringgold, a bank and legislative “ go-between,” and Morgan L. Smith, preeminent among lobbyists, were other Tammany nominees.  Notwithstanding the low standards of public morals, these men were so unpopular, that when the form of submitting their names for ratification to the great popular meeting it the Wigwam on November 1, was carried out, a hostile demonstration followed.  The names of Wetmore, Smith and Ringgold especially were hooted.  But the leaders had groups of “whippers-in” brought in hurriedly to vote affirmatively, and the presiding officer declared all the nominees duly accepted by the people.

Only six of the organization’s thirteen Assembly nominees survived the popular wrath, and the nominees for nearly all the other offices were beaten, notwithstanding the expectation that the Presidential election would carry them in on the party ticket.  A number of Tammany men of principle refused to vote.  The Whigs, the Native Americans and some “Locofocos” joined forces.  They were aided by the panic, which, breaking out shortly before election, reacted against the Democrats.  The Equal Rights men as a rule voted for Van Buren.  Tammany Hall and the Whigs both committed frauds.  Van Buren received 1,124 majority in New York City, which in 1832 had given Jackson nearly 6,000 majority.

Made wiser by defeat, the organization, leaders realized the importance of the Equal Rights movement, and caused, as a sop, the passage, in February, 1837, of the bill repealing the Restraining act.  The Common Council likewise modified the Pawnbrokers’ act by cutting down the interest to a more reasonable percentage.27

Their providence stopped at this point, however,28 and during the panic Winter following neither Legislature nor Common Council did anything to alleviate the miseries of the poor.  On the contrary, the poor complained that the tendency more and more was to use the power of the law to make the rich richer.  While the suffering was greatest, Alderman Aaron Clark, a Whig, who had made his fortune from lotteries, proposed that the city spend several millions of dollars to surround its water front with a line of still-water ponds for shipping purposes, his justification for this expenditure being that the North River piers would “raise the price of every lot 5 x 100 feet west of Broadway $5,000 at a jump.”29  “Millions to benefit landowners and shippers, but not a dollar for the unemployed hungry!” exclaimed the Anti-Monopolists.  Alderman Bruen, another Whig, at a time when the fall in the value of real estate in New York City alone exceeded $50,000,000, suggested the underwriting by the city to the speculators for the sum of $5,000,000, to take in pledge the lands they had bought and to give them the bonds of the city for two-thirds their value.  To the Equal Rights men there was not much difference between the Tammany Hall and the Whig leaders.  Both, it was plain, sweated the people, for their own private interests, although the Whigs, inheriting the Federalist idea that property was the sole test of merit, did not flaunt their undying concern for the laborer so persistently as did the Wigwam.

The city in 1837 was filled with the homeless and unemployed.  Rent was high, and provisions were dear.  Cattle speculators had possession of nearly all the stock, and a barrel of flour cost $12.  On February 12 a crowd met in the City Hall Park, after which over 200 of them sped to the flour warehouse of Eli Hart & Co., on Washington street.  This firm and that of S.B. Herrick & Son, it was known, held a monopoly in the scarce supply of flour and wheat.  The doors of Hart’s place were battered down, and nearly 500 barrels of flour and 1,000 bushels of wheat were taken out and strewed in the street.  Herrick’s place likewise was mobbed.30  On May 10, when the banks suspended specie payments, a vast and excited crowd gathered in Wall Street, and a riot was narrowly averted.31

The Equal Rights party could not be bought out or snuffed out.  To deprive it of its best leaders Tammany Hall resorted to petty persecution.  Jacques and Slamm had headed a petition to the Legislature protesting against the appointment of a certain suspicious bank investigating committee.  The Wigwam men in the Legislature immediately secured the passage of a resolution for the appointment of a committee to investigate this petition, and this committee instantly haled Jacques and Slamm to appear at Albany and give testimony.32  The purpose was plain.  The Tammany men sought to have the Equal Rights leaders at Albany, which was not as accessible from the city as now, and there keep them under various pretexts while the Spring campaign for Mayor was going on.  Jacques and Slamm did not appear and were adjudged guilty of contempt.  When they were most needed in New York City they were arrested and arraigned before the Legislature.  William Leggett also was threatened, but escaped arrest.

The Equal Rights party, however, was soon to demonstrate its capacity to do harm to Tammany.  The organization nominated John J. Morgan for Mayor;  the Whigs named Aaron Clark, and the Equal Rights party opposed them with Jacques.  The 3,911 votes Jacques received were enough to defeat Morgan, with his 12,974 votes, against Clark’s 16,140.  Worst blow of all, Tammany Hall lost the Common Council.  When the new body came in it removed all of the Wigwam’s office-holders that it could.  The spoils in the form of annual salaries paid by the city, amounting to $468,000;  the perquisites and contracts — such as that for the Croton Aqueduct, in favor of which the people had voted some years before — and other improvements, all went to the Whigs.

The Tammany men, regarding the Equal Rights men responsible for this loss of power, were now disposed to treat with them and willing enough to throw over the banker-corporation element.

next
Tammany 'purified'





1 “The members [of the Legislature] themselves sometimes participated in the benefits growing out of charters created by their own votes;... if ten banks were chartered at one session, twenty must be chartered the next and thirty the next.  The cormorants could never be gorged.  If at one session you bought off a pack of greedy lobby agents ... they returned with increased numbers and more voracious appetite.” — Hammond, Vol. II, pp. 447-48.
    Four conspicuous “charter dealers” at Albany were Sachems Samuel B. Romaine, Michael Ulshoeffer, Peter Sharpe and Abraham Stagg, all powerful organization leaders.
2 Hammond, Vol. II, pp. 447-48.
3 MS. Minutes of the Common Council, Vol. 48, pp. 59-60.
4 Noah, after falling into financial difficulties, had been ousted from the editorship of the National Advocate and had now become associated with his former political enemy, James Watson Webb, in the conduct of the Courier and Enquirer.
5 MS. Minutes of the Common Council, Vol. 70, p. 311.  Shortly after this the Wigwam men removed Smith from his post of Commissioner of the Almshouse for opposing Bowne.  So great was the haste to oust him, before the Aldermen went out of office, that one of the board seconded the motion for his removal before the motion was made.
6 The general committee was now composed of thirty-six members, mainly the directors in banking and other companies.  Remonstrances at this time were frequent that its important proceedings were a sealed book to the electors.  Among other things it dictated to the wards not only when, but where, they should meet.
7 The term “Whig” had now come to have a definite party meaning, being used as a popular designation of the group led by John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay, officially known (1828-36) as the National Republican party.  The term is first found in American politics applied to the Separatists during the Revolution.  About 1808 it was taken by the anti-Burr faction of the Democratic-Republican party.
8 The men of this party, as a rule, voted the Anti-Masonic State ticket.  While the Anti-Masonic party occasioned political commotion in the State, there is no evidence that it had any perceptible effect on Tammany’s career.

Chapter 11
1 Advertisement in the New York Evening Post, March 17, 1831.
2 Resolutions of the Sixth Ward Anti-Tammany Republicans, March 24, 1831.
3 Mooney passed away the following November.  Tammany passed panegyric resolutions on his character, and organized a large funeral procession which escorted his body to the grave.
4 Green was an influential and intimate friend of Jackson and a member of his “Kitchen Cabinet.”  He had come up from Washington to attend the banquet as one of Jackson’s personal representatives.
5 The Courier and Enquirer, owned by Webb and Noah, promptly came out with this ticket in large black type upon its editorial page:  For President, Andrew Jackson.  For Vice-President, Martin Van Buren.
6 The First Session of the Twenty-Second Congress, Vol. IV., containing reports from Nos. 460 to 463, Washington, 1831.
7 Edwards was for many years a person of great power in the organization.  In 1821, while Counsel to the Board of Aldermen, a salaried office, he was specifically charged with having mulcted the city out of $5,414 as a payment for a few hours’ service in arranging the details of a delinquent tax sale.  Further charges credited him with having cleaned up more than $50,000 in five years, through various pickings connected with his office.  Such, however, was his influence, that he not only escaped prosecution, but retained an unimpaired prestige in the organization.
8 Documents of the Board of Aldermen and Assistant Aldermen, 1834, No. 82.
9 Documents of the Board of Alderman, 1839, No. 29.

10 Lawrence, 17,576; Verplanck, 17,395;  blank and scattering, 18;  total, 34,989.

Chapter 12
1 The minutes of the Common Council covering these years show continuous records of petitions from imprisoned debtors, praying for fuel and the patching up of windows in the dead of Winter.  Charitable societies were in existence to supply the jailed debtors with food.
2 This singular provision, by which non-residents were liable to imprisonment for debt, while the natives of the city were exempted, was erased in 1840.
3 Journal of the Senate and Assembly, 1805, pp. 351 and 399.
4 Ibid., 1812, p. 134.
5 Journal of the Senate and Assembly, 1812, pp. 259-60.
6 Stock given at par value meant an almost immediate rise in value to the legislator.  Most stocks went upward from 10 to 15 per cent. on the passage of the charter, and in the case of the more profitable and exploitative corporations, far higher advances were scored in a short time.
7 Journal of the Senate, 1824, pp. 498-532.
8 Journal of the Senate, 1826, Vol. 6, Appendix B.  A considerable part of the money and stock promised the members of the Legislature for their votes was withheld owing to the expected investigation.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Senate Documents, 1834, No. 47, and Ibid., No. 94.  Walter Bowne was the bank’s president.
12 Ibid., No. 94.
13 Ibid., No. 47.
14 Journal of the Senate, 1833, p. 396.
15 Documents of the Senate, 1834, No. 108.
16 Lee was the last Mayor elected by the Common Council (1833-34).
17 Lawrence had a curious habit of strolling the streets carrying his spectacles in his hand behind his back, and ogling all the pretty girls he met, a habit which was broken later when one winsome lass tangled him in a plot, much to his financial and mental distress.
18 The next day the Equal Rights men were dubbed “Locofocos,” a name afterward applied by the Whigs to the entire Democratic party.
19 Documents of the Board of Aldermen, 1836, Nos. 65 and 100.
20 Ibid., 1837, No. 48.
21 Ibid., 1837, No. 32.
22 Documents of the Senate, 1836, Vol. II, No. 94.
23 A short time before, at an Anti-Monopolist meeting, Chairman Job Haskell had represented that the Tammany Society — the secret body, responsible to no one and enforcing its demands through the Tammany Hall political organization — was to blame for the political corruption.  Resolutions were then passed setting forth that whereas the self-constituted, self-perpetuating Tammany Society had assumed a dictatorial attitude and by usages made by itself endeavored to rule the people as with a rod of iron;  and as they (the Equal Rights men) believed the people were capable of managing their own affairs without the aid of said inquisitorial society, “that we deem the Tammany Society an excrescence upon the body politic and dangerous to its rights and liberties.”
24 Proceedings of the Board of Aldermen, Vol XI, p. 16.
25 These resolutions were published officially in the New York Evening Post, June 8, 1836.
26 Cornelius W. Lawrence, the Tammany Mayor, became the bank’s first president.
27 Documents of the Board of Aldermen, 1837, No. 48.
28 Excepting some instances of private charity by Tammany leaders.
29 Documents of the Board of Aldermen, 1836, No. 80.
30 Documents of the Board of Alderman, 1839, No. 29.
31 Ibid.
32 Documents of the Assembly, 1837, Nos. 198 and 327.