Washington, D.C. 20 May 1877.

Dear Grace Greenwood,

I wish I could now tell you in a modest and temperate way and in fitting words how much and how sincerely I am obliged to you. I have just read your able and sparkling letter in the New York Times of Saturday.¹On 19 May 1877 in the New York Times, Grace Greenwood came to Douglass’s defense, arguing that much of the “Our National Capital” speech had been misquoted and misleadingly dis- played. She admits that some of his criticisms of Washington may have been harsh, but that they nonetheless did not negate his duty or genuine affection for the city. In the end, she says that the truth, though hard, will better serve the city than flattery. Over the years, Greenwood had written quite favorably of Douglass, and he probably believed her responsible for the Times’s positive coverage of his nomination by President Rutherford B. Hayes to become marshal of the District of Columbia. The New York Times has its origins in the 1850s, when Henry J. Raymond was its first editor. The Times grew into prominence in the early 1870s when it published stories about the corruption in New York City, centered on the political machine in Tammany Hall and the man behind it, William Tweed. Throughout that time, the Times was a Republican-oriented newspaper. New York , 16, 17, 18, 20, 24 March, 19 May 1877; Hudson, , 618–45. You have done many services with your facile pen, guided by justice and en- lightened liberality during the last thirty years, but you have never come to the rescue more chevalrously and effectively and I may add, when your help was more needed than in the present instance. After you have spoken in such manner and through such a medium I can afford to be silent. You have redeemed my lecture from the curse of popular wrath and largely set me in safty from those who have been puffing at me with might and main during the last ten days. Of course my accusers will rail on for yet a while longer, but the force of their charges are now broken and spent.

My only fear now is that you have invited to your own head blows that ought to fall upon mine alone. You have in your efforts to give a true interpretation of my unfortunate Baltimore lecture sinned if you have sinned at all, in good company. The New York ’Times, “Tribune”²Horace Greeley founded the New York in 1841. Greeley printed the first four-page, five- column issue of the Tribune on 10 April 1841. It was conceived as a “cheap” political paper that working- men could turn to for moral direction and nonpartisan political analysis. Helped by the financial talent of a Whig lawyer named Thomas McElrath, Greeley built the Tribune into a profitable enterprise, printing a daily morning edition and a weekly edition, which were sold mainly by $2 yearly subscriptions. Within only a few years, the Tribune became the leader in national news, and Greeley was the best-known newspaperman in the country. The Tribune’s success was enhanced by the high quality of the journalists that Greeley hired as reporters and editors, including Charles Anderson Dana, George William Curtis, Bayard Taylor, Sydney Howard Gay, and Henry Jarvis Raymond. After Greeley’s death in 1872, William Whitelaw Reid, an experienced journalist as well as Republican party politician, became its editor. The Tribune briefly reviewed the “storm” Douglass faced over the “Our National Capital” lecture and largely dismissed the controversy: “The probable explanation of the whole matter is that it was written about two years ago, and has by this time become a little out of date.” New York , 14, 15 May 1877; George H. Douglas, The (Westport, Conn., 1999), 39–43; Louis M. Starr, (New York, 1954), 98–116. and “Evening Post,”³The New York Post was founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1800 and, despite undergoing many modifications in its name, format, and politics, still survives. The abolitionist and poet William Cullen Bryant guided the Evening Post to support first the Free Soil party and then the Republicans. Though many articles in the Evening Post in the week after his Baltimore lecture criticized and chided Douglass, an article on 14 May called readers to recognize that the whole affair had been blown out of proportion, though it reiterated that most of what Douglass said was in poor taste, especially if he was simply reusing an old speech. New York Evening Post, 14 May 1877; Hudson, , 216–25. The Chicago “Inter ocean,”⁴Founded in 1865, the daily Chicago was relaunched as the after that city’s devastating fire. In 1876, William Penn Nixon became the principal owner and editor in chief and remained in that position until his death in 1912. A brief article entitled “Washington: Marshal Douglass” notes that “there is nothing in the lecture that is not true,” but questions Douglass’s pur- pose in making such a speech, given his recent appointment as marshal of the District of Columbia. Chicago , 12 May 1877; (online). “Journal”⁵The Chicago claimed to be “‘the oldest paper in the Northwest,’” though there is likely no way of corroborating this claim. In the 1870s, the paper was Republican leaning, largely isolationist in its economics, and strongly supportive of free trade. While not as big as the Chicago or , the continued as a successful Republican paper in Chicago after the Civil War. Hudson, , 204 and Post⁶Resulting from the merger of two competing dailies in 1875, the Chicago operated under that combined name until 1878, when it was absorbed by the Chicago . Donald J. Abramoske, “The Founding of the Chicago Daily News,” , 59:341–53 (Winter 1966).—The Cincinnati Gazette⁷The Cincinnati Gazette, which began publishing in 1806, was considered one of the best papers in the Midwest, largely because of its editor, Charles Hammond. Hammond was an antislavery man, and this sentiment bled into his paper, no doubt endearing it to Douglass in earlier days. After Hammond’s departure, it continued to be run by New England–born journalists. In the early 1870s, it was the most successful paper in Cincinnati. Hudson, , 196–98. and the Rochester Democrat⁸The Rochester opinion of Douglass’s words was that “their taste is no more questionable than their truth,” but that they had created far more tumult that they ought to have done: “Verily there is a tempest in a tea-pot.” The story had been blown out of proportion, and the Democrat felt that the people of Washington were not only upset at the truth of Douglass’s words but were further angered that they had been uttered by a black man, whom they thought “shouldn’t have any brains, and, most of all, he shouldn’t be a federal office holder.” Rochester , 14 May 1877.” and many minor Journals are in the same boat with you.

You will be glad to know that there is not the least danger of my removal from office at the bidding of those who have raised this Storm against me. There is a country as well as a capital and the country is too large hearted to take up this reproach against me. It understands how easily a cry is raised against an insolent negro in this latitude—no matter

how insufficient and ridiculous the Cause—and will set down the attacks upon me at their true value. However the press here may rave and rant here—Your words of truth and soberness will be received with approval by the country. In any case my friend (for such you really are as well as a friend to truth) you have well and bravely performed a high duty—one which only a soul as noble as yours, could perform. You could have remained silent and drifted with the popular tide against me, but you have chosen a nobler path. You have again sided with the wronged and persecuted and I give you all honor and gratitude both for myself and my cause. Do not take this note as an effort to pay you for what you have done in this matter, but simply as a relief to my own feelings.

Your friend

FREDERICK DOUGLASS

ALS: Alexander Gumby Manuscripts, NNC. Another copy is in JNH, 36:80–82 (January 1951).