John Harrison Wilson, The life of Charles Henry Dana

[423] his own measures through. To that end he gave his fullest support to Fish's plans for a settlement with England, and had the pleasure not only of seeing the haughty and recalcitrant Sumner deposed by his fellow-senators from the chairmanship of the Committee on Foreign Relations, but also of seeing the treaty of arbitration negotiated, approved, and carried into effect. On the other hand, the senatorial group, aided by the Sun, after a long and bitter struggle, succeeded in defeating the annexation of Santo Domingo, largely because of the taint of corruption which had been fixed upon the treaty, and its negotiation as well, as of the questionable methods by which its friends had sought to secure its ratification. This was one of the bitterest controversies of the times, and brought upon Dana the intense displeasure of the administration and its supporters; but on the whole it strengthened him with the people, and to-day it would be difficult to find an intelligent man anywhere to blame him for the independent and effective part he took in the discussion.

Late in October, 1870, Dana replied fully to the charge that he had not treated Grant fairly in the columns of the Sun, and in justifying his course he contended that the system of bestowing office upon those who had conferred pecuniary favors upon the President was “a shocking innovation upon all the former practices and traditions of the country” ; that in giving utterance to these feelings “the Sun had expressed the feelings of the whole American people,” and that no serious effort had ever been made in any quarter “to controvert the views of the Sun on this subject.”

Again he contended that Grant's foreign policy,

... by its weakness, indecision, want of character, and anti-American sympathies, stood forth in glaring contrast with the vigorous sentiments and statesman-like promises