Pros: Illuminates one of the lesser moments in our electoral history.
Cons: Somewhat dry.
The Bottom Line: History buffs with an interest in the time period should go no further than this book to satisfy their curiosity in this controversial election.
BBailey182's Full Review: Roy Morris - Fraud of the Century: Rutherford B. H...
Can you remember a Presidential election that was, essentially, too close to call? Where the final result fell into the range of the margin of error of the electoral process, causing a long delay in certifying a new President?
Of course you can. It happened in 2000, when George Bush may or may not have defeated Al Gore in the election for President. (We'll never know for sure.)
Roy Morris Jr. certainly could remember such an election, and it got him to thinking. This wasn't the first time a Presidential election was so close that the winner had to be declared by people other than voters. So he wrote a book on the 1876 election. It's called "Fraud of the Century." There's little doubt that this book will be the place to go for historians who want more information on this election.
The 1876 election came with a unique set of circumstances. The two major party candidates were Rutherford B. Hayes, governor of Ohio, and Samuel Tilden, governor of New York. Hayes was known as a war hero while Tilden achieved fame as a reformer who helped to smash corruption in New York City's City Hall.
If there was ever a time in American history that didn't need a close election, 1876 was it. U.S. Grant was just finishing his second term, and his stay as President is best remembered for corruption by less-than-trustworthy aides. Tilden, the Democrat, should have carried a reform banner on to election, but circumstances were more complicated than that.
America had gone through more than a decade of reconstruction after the Civil War at that point, and it was pretty tired of the whole process. The Republicans still had plenty of power on the state level, and they were on a four-election winning streak for President. They weren't going to roll over and play dead.
When election night finally arrived, Tilden had a good-sized lead in electoral votes but didn't own a clear majority -- just a plurality. Three Southern states were still up for grabs, and both sides apparently took extraordinary, and in some cases illegal, steps to win. Hayes needed to win them all, plus capture a disputed elector in Oregon to be declared winner of the election.
And that's what he did, taking the election by a 185-184 margin. Morris writes that Tilden certainly had enough votes stolen from at least one of the states so that he had actually won the election. However, Tilden seemed to suffer from the same problem Al Gore did 124 years later. The people involved in the vote-counting mechanism favored the Republicans. (If you don't think every office counts in some manner, these two elections should be a reminder that they do.) And Tilden wasn't the type of personality to personally lead his party into confrontation over the whole matter.
This is all told in a very straight-forward, matter-of-fact style. Of course, it helps that the election was so long ago. In contrast, it's difficult to get an objective look at the 2000 election, since many carry their own political viewpoints into their interpretation of events.
Morris goes through the process of review events in 1876 with an historian's eye. He knocks down the myth that Hayes was given the needed electoral votes in a deal to end Reconstruction; in fact, America had no stomach for the continued presence of Federal troops in the South by then.
There's one big drawback to Morris' treatment of the subject, which is why I couldn't give it a higher rating. The story never really "comes alive," despite some interesting elements. I had some trouble keeping all of the players in the story separated, except for the two candidates. (My knowledge of the lesser political figures of 1876 isn't what it should be, I guess.)
Now, considering how dramatic the situation, you'd think it would have been easy to come up with a book filled with theatrics. I know both candidates sat back and watched the process while subordinates did the dirty work, and that hurts the storyline a bit. Still, I never got a feeling of tension building throughout the 250+ pages. So I had to push myself a bit to get through this. Morris' approach may be just a little too dispassionate for a mass audience.
In other words, it takes a little effort to get through "Fraud of the Century" if you aren't a good-sized student of history. But if you have enough interest to start reading this in the first place, you should learn a lot about the 1876 election when you are done.
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.