People, Jul. 22, 1935

“Names make news.” Last week these names made this news:

Day before a bronze bust of Alexander Hamilton was unveiled atop the Palisades on the rock upon which he rested his head after being fatally wounded by Aaron Burr, a Manhattan autograph dealer announced he had acquired from the descendants of Burr’s second, William P. Van Ness, the correspondence which led up to the duel. Included was Burr’s opening letter wherein he told Hamilton: “I send for your perusal a letter signed Ch. D. Cooper. . . . Mr. Van Ness . . . will point out to you that clause of the letter to which I particularly request your attention.” Hamilton’s ironic reply:

“I have maturely reflected on the subject of your letter . . . and the more I have reflected the more I have become convinced that I could not, without manifest impropriety, make the avowal or disavowal which you seem to think necessary.

”The clause pointed out by Mr. Van Ness is in these terms: ‘I could detail to you a still more despicable opinion which General Hamilton has expressed of Mr. Burr.’ To endeavor to discover the meaning of this declaration, I was obliged to seek in the antecedent part of the letter for the opinion to which it referred … I found it in these words: ‘General Hamilton and Judge Kent have declared in substance that they looked upon Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not to be trusted with the reins of Government.’ The language of Doctor Cooper plainly implies that he considered this opinion of you, which he attributes to me, as a despicable one; but he affirms that I have expressed some other still more despicable; without, however, mentioning to whom, when, or where. ‘Tis evident that the phrase ‘still more despicable’ admits of infinite shades, from very light to very dark. How am I to judge of the degree intended? . . .

“Between Gentlemen despicable and more despicable are not worth the pains of a distinction. When, therefore, you do not interrogate me as to the opinion which is specifically ascribed to me, I must conclude that you view it as within the limits to which the animadversions of political opponents upon each other may justifiably extend and consequently as not warranting the idea of it which Dr. Cooper appears to entertain. If so, what precise inference could you draw as a guide for your future conduct were I to acknowledge that I had expressed an opinion of you still more despicable than the one which is particularized? . . .

“I stand ready to avow or disavow promptly and explicitly any precise or definite opinion which I may be charged with having declared of any Gentleman. More than this cannot fitly be expected from me. … I trust, on more reflection, you will see the matter in the same light with me. If not. I can only regret the circumstances; and must abide by the consequences. . . .

“I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obed. Servt.,

A. Hamilton.”

In Manhattan, Thomas Joseph (“Big Tom”) Pendergast, Democratic boss of Kansas City, surveyed with scorn the sorry plight of Tammany Hall, gave the following advice:

“Tammany Hall needs another Murphy, and won’t be strong again until it gets someone like that. A political machine has got to have a boss. It can’t be run by a board of directors, even if you give them Indian names. You’ve got to have a boss to tell those guys with fancy names what to do. . . Now look at me. I’m not bragging when I say I run the show in Kansas City. I am boss. … I have controlled Kansas City for 25 years, and I’ll continue in control as long as I treat the people right.”

Boss Pendergast’s formula for treating the people right: “I am honest with the people. I gave them a good government. I take care of the poor. I give out all the jobs I can find. I never ask a man his politics, but I do him a good turn if I can. When I have treated the people right, they will vote my way on election day—that is, 75% of them will. The other 25% aren’t worth bothering about.”