employes give their votes in support of its principles and policy, or those of the dominant party, while the latter declared that an employer had a right to insist that his employes vote as he does. Mr. Bingham denounced these contentions as unsound and antagonistic to republican principles, and that their enforcement in practice would put an end to republican government. It would make the employer master and his employes merely so many cattle. As for himself he was born with faith in republican institutions, and would do his best to sustain them until his latest breath. As for the proposition that the administration had a right to demand that the federal employes vote to sustain it, he denied it most emphatically, and declared, moreover, that it did injustice to the Republican party, according to its recent professions of devotion to the principles of civil service reform.

Another measure upon which Mr. Bingham was heard, and with due effect in this case, was a resolution calling for the holding of a constitutional convention. A recommendation in favor of the same had been embodied in the governor's message, but a special committee, to which the matter had been referred, had reported unfavorably, and the report adopted by the House. Subsequently Mr. Albin of Concord had moved a reconsideration of the vote adopting the committee's report, and had carried the same by a small majority, but upon bringing the resolution in favor of a convention forward a debate ensued in which Mr. Bingham spoke earnestly in opposition, and was followed by Mr. Emery of Portsmouth in the same line, and the result was that it was defeated by a strong vote.

The year 1874 witnessed another political overturn in New Hampshire, in that it saw the complete restoration of the Democratic party to power in the state, though the election was again so close that there was no choice of governor by the people, James A. Weston, again the Democratic candidate, receiving 35,608 votes to 34,143 for Luther McCutchins of New London, Republican nominee, while John Blackmer, Prohibitionist, got 2,097, and there were forty-five scattering votes. Only two of the five councillor districts made a choice at the polls and but not secure control of the Senate, seven Democratic and five Republicans being chosen; but the Democratic margin in the

House, though not heavy, was a safe one, sufficiently large, indeed, to render impracticable any scheme of the opposition to "doctor" the membership roll through connivance with the clerk, even were it seriously considered in any quarter.

Mr. Bingham was again at the front, at the head of the Littleton delegation, which included, this year, J. C. Goodenough and Hon. John G. Sinclair, at that time a resident of the town. The House organized promptly by the election of Hon. Albert R. Hatch of Portsmouth as speaker, he receiving 176 votes to 163 for James W. Emery. Charles H. Smith of Newmarket was chosen clerk and John B. Mills of Manchester, assistant clerk. Mr. Bingham was made chairman of the judiciary committee, his associates, in the order of their assignment, being: Blodgett of Franklin, Emery of Portsmouth, Burrows of Plymouth, Briggs of Manchester, Jewell of Laconia, Hall of Dover, Sanborn of Franklin, Woods of Bath, Paul of Unity, Healey of Manchester and Foss of Hillsborough.

The four senate vacancies (as well as the three councillor) having been filled, in joint convention by the election of the Democratic candidates, that party was in complete control, and prepared to devote the session, in the main, to a complete overturn and reorganization of the state government in its own interest. A new arrangement of the councillor and senatorial districts was effected, city ward lines were changed wherever it could be done to the apparent advantage of the party and the judiciary system was reorganized, the existing "Supreme Judicial Court" being abolished and a dual system, including a Superior Court of Judicature, and a Circuit, or trial, Court,

*Albert R. Hatch, born in Greenland, October 10, 1817, died at Portsmouth, March 5, 1882. He graduated from Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Me., in 1837, studied law with Ichabod Bartlett at Portsmouth, was admitted to the bar in 1841, and established himself in practice in Portsmouth, where he continued through life, gaining a successful practice and a high reputation both as a lawyer and advocate. He was active in politics as a Democrat and was chosen a representative in the Legislature in 1847 and 1848. In the latter year he was appointed solicitor for Rockingham County and clerk of the United States District Court, holding the former position till the political overturn in 1855, and the latter for twenty-five years. In 1873 he was again chosen a representative and reëlected the three succeeding years, serving as speaker in 1874. He was prominent in Free Masonry and in the affairs of the Protestant Episcopal Church.

established in place thereof. The Republican minority, of course, protested, and resisted to the extent of its ability, but was powerless to interpose any substantial obstacle, and the work was carried through even to the removal of nearly every officer in the state who could be reached through legislative address, so that the Governor was kept more than busy during the session, and for some time afterwards, in selecting men to fill the places of the deposed.

In carrying through the reorganization program, which included the framing and enactinent of the measure creating the new judiciary system, Mr. Bingham was the leading spirit and directing mind, and, although the party majority behind him was sufficient for all practical purposes, with due care and discretion in management, it was not sufficiently large to permit of any carelessness or indiscretion, and a cool head and steady hand were requisite to the successful accomplishment of the purpose in view; nor were these at any time found lacking.

It was during this session of 1874 that the bill authorizing the union of the Boston and Lowell and Nashua and Lowell railroads was introduced and eventually enacted, its passage through the House being characterized by one of the most earnest and bitter contests that had ever been witnessed in the Legislature up to that time. Introduced early in the session it was kept in committee till well along toward the close, being ordered to a third reading after a sharp debate, July 1, and defeated the following day by a vote of 141 to 146. Mr. Sanborn of Franklin, one of its most active supporters, gave notice of a motion to reconsider, and, on July 7, introduced such motion, which was finally passed by a vote of 175 to 137. A season of warm and bitter debate, dilatory motions and general fillibustering followed, and adjournment for the day was finally taken without action upon the bill, upon motion of Mr. Bingham. The matter was reached again on the morning of July 9, and was finally made a special order for the afternoon of that day, when it was ultimately passed by a vote of 168 to 149, promptly going through the Senate and becoming a law. Charges of corruption and undue influence had been made, and an investigating com

mittee appointed, but nothing of importance was brought to light, whatever the real facts in the case may have been.

Mr. Bingham was active and earnest in his antagonism to this measure, and might properly have been designated the leading spirit of the opposition. The contest, however, was not made along partisan lines. John G. Sinclair, who had long been conspicuous in Democratic leadership, in and out of the Legislature, was the most active and prominent champion of the measure, being ably supported by E. B. S. Sanborn of Franklin, then a Republican, and James W. Emery of Portsmouth, while James F. Briggs of Manchester and Joshua G. Hall of Dover, also leading Republicans, were arrayed with Mr. Bingham against it. There were decidedly sharp passages at arms, figuratively speaking, between Mr. Bingham and Mr. Sinclair at times, the latter even going so far on one occasion as to accuse Mr. Bingham of having told Col. John H. George, who, as the attorney of the Boston and Lowell railroad, was a prominent sponsor of the measure, that he would not oppose it. This Mr. Bingham denied in the most emphatic terms, declaring that he had never seen the bill until it was reported, and had never contemplated supporting or assenting to any such scheme of consolidation as the measure involved a scheme which was manifestly a steppingstone toward the upbuilding of a gigantic railroad monopoly. In view of subsequent actual results the accuracy of Mr. Bingham's diagnosis is scarcely to be questioned, whatever may be said as to the wisdom of his position, which depends entirely upon the view point from which it is regarded, and which it is not pertinent to discuss in this connection.

In 1875 the Republicans regained control of the House by a majority substantially the same as the Democrats had in the year previous, and by virtue thereof were enabled, finally, to elect their candidate for governor, Person C. Cheney of Manchester, who had failed of election by popular vote; but they did not secure control of the Senate, seven Democratic and five Republican senators having been found elected by the Governor and Council, in their canvass of the returns, and summoned to meet for organization, though it had been, for some time after election, the popular understanding that no choice had been

made in the Second and Fourth Senatorial Districts. It was discovered, however, some weeks before the time for the assembling of the Legislature, that the Republican candidate in the Second District had been voted for as "Natt" Head, whereas his lawful name, and the name by which he himself voted at that election, as it stood upon the check list, in his town of Hooksett, was "Nathaniel" Head; while in the Fourth District, where forty-five votes were cast for the Prohibition ticket the nominee of that party, Arthur Deering of Pittsfield, had not been a resident of the state for seven years preceding the election, and was therefore ineligible, as were, also, some of the men who received scattering votes. The Governor and Council, in canvassing the returns, took cognizance of the facts presented, and, in accordance with the express language of the statute declaring that all ballots not bearing the full Christian and surname of the candidate shall be regarded as blanks and "not counted," threw out the returns of votes for "Natt" Head in the Second District, as well as those for Arthur Deering in the Fourth, which left James Priest, the Democratic candidate, elected in the former, and John Proctor, also the Democratic candidate, in the latter, and the Governor issued his summons to them to assemble with the other senators-elect in the Senate chamber on the day set for the opening of the Legislature, which they did and the Senate was duly organized by the seven Democratic senators constituting a majority of the body, the five Republican senatorselect refusing to participate, flocking by themselves, and setting up a temporary "rump" organization.

The House of Representatives, to which Mr. Bingham had been returned again from Littleton, along with his brother, George A. Bingham and Otis G. Hale, organized by the election of Charles P. Sanborn* of Concord as speaker, Samuel C. Clark

*Charles P. Sanborn, born in Concord, September 13, 1834, died in that city, June 3, 1889. Mr. Sanborn was a student of Yale College for three years, but did not graduate. He subsequently taught school for a time, and then studied law with the late Judge Henry A. Bellows. Upon admission to the bar he became junior partner in the law firm of George, Foster & Sanborn, his associates being the late Col. John H. George and William L. Foster, subsequently associate justice of the Supreme Court, which firm commanded a large and lucrative practice. He served in the Legislature in 1862 and 1863, and again in 1875 and