Democratic Sentinel, Volume 2, Number 28, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 August 1878 — THE RULE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. [ARTICLE]

THE RULE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

[Extract from Senator Thurman’s Speech, at Hamilton, Ohio.] Thu claim r f a party in power to a prolongation of its rule necessarily involves an inquiry into its policy and government in the past. If its past rule has been vicious or unwise, prudence obviously dictates that an end, for the lime being at least, should be put to its domination. Now, has the rule of the Republican party since the close of the civil war, thirteen years ago, been wise and beneficent? I think that this question must be answered in the negative. It is not necessary to go into a detailed examination of all its measuros ; nor could that be done in the limit if a speech, or, indeed, of many speeches. Nov is it necessary to assert that all its measures have been bad and injurious. It is sufficient to look at the general result, and see whether that is-good government and prosperity, or the reverse. Now, certainly no one will deny that this country has for tfio last five years suffered, as perhaps no other country ever did suffer, from depression in every branch es business, in every industrial occupation. The entire body of tho producing classes—employers, employe's, and middlemen have been affected. Bankruptcies are numbered by tens if not by hundreds of thousands, and the aggregate of losses almost defies com putation. The number of laborers thrown out of employment or reduced to half-time and diminished wages lias boon estimated by millions ; and, however exaggerated the estimate may be, the extent of the evil has no parallel in this, if, indeed, it has in the history of any people. Star I ling is the fact, and at first view almost incomprehensible, that, in a country whose population averages, but eleven persons to the square mile, there have been, and there yet are, thousands destitute of bread. A single interest—the moneyed interest —has flourished, and yet flourishes; and that, it is to be remembered, is precisely that interest that has received the fostering care of Republican legislation. Now, my friends, so far as this deplorable state of things is the result of vicious legislation or of the omission of wise legislation, the Republican party, or at least those who have controlled it, are responsible. From the 4th day of March, 1861, to the first Monday iu December, 1875, more than fourteen years, that party had uncontrolled power in every department of the Federal Government; and since then it has continued to hold the Senate and the Presidency, and so have the consequent power to negative any measure of relief a Democratic House of Representatives might propose.

Is there, then, any injustice in calling that party to account for the evils the country has suffered and yet suffers? Can it with truth be said that these evils could not be foreseen, or, if foreseen, could not have been avoided or diminished ? He would be a bold man who would make that assertion. For, although no Government ever was. or ever will ho, omniscient and omnipotent; although disasters have happened that no rulers, however wise, could have foreseen or averted—yet the disasters of which I am speaking are not of that character, and might have been foreseen, ana, to a great extent, prevented. It is but justice, then, to say to our Republican rulers, You have had every opportunity to do good and avert evil, and you have failed to do either. You have had opportunities such as no other party ever enjoyed to benefit your country, and you have, by want of intelligence or virtue, or both, brought it to the verge of ruin. It is time, high time, that you surrender the reins of Government. I now turn to another topic, the expenditures of tne Government, to which too little attention has been paid. I propose to compare Democratic expenditure with Republican expenditure, in order that you may judge which of the two-parties is the better entitled to praise for honest and economical government; or, to put it ia another form, which party ought to be condemned for dishonest and wasteful extravagance. The last fiscal year of Democratic administration was that ending June 30, 18G0. The ordinary expenses of the Government for that year, exclusive of pensions and interest on public debt, were $58,055,052. These expenses, stated in detail, were (omitting cents):

For the War D?partmont $16,472,202 For the Navy Department. 11,514,649 For the Interior Department 2,991,121 For miscellaneous, or civil 27,977,978 Now, compare these expenditures with these of the last year in which the Republican party had unlimited control, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1875. The ordinary expenses of the Government for that year (exclusive of pensions and interest on the public debt) were $142,073,632, being $83,117,682 in excess of the last year of Democratic administration; or, ia other words, the Republican expenditures were nearly two and a half times as great as the Democratic expenditures. But it may be said that our population was much greater in 1875 than in 1860, and that this accounts for the increased expenses of Government. The explanation wiil not suffice. The population in 1860 was 31,443,321, and the expenditures were at the rate of per capita. In 1875 the population, as nearly as it can be estimated, was 43,000,000, and the expenditures were at the rate of $3.30 per capita. Again, it may be said that the increase of expenses grew out of the war. This explanation will not answer. By the figures I have given, and those I shall hereafter give, I exclude the expenditures -occasioned by the war, namely, pensions, the public debt and interest thereon, and confine my comparison to the ordinary expense.! of Government, namely: the cost of the War, Navy, Indian and Civil departments in time of peace. Tta increase in these departipont* is shown in getail ip the following table i

DETAILS. 1860. 1875. Increase. War Department.sl6,472,2o2 $41,120,645 $24,648,443 Navy 11 514,649 21,497,626 9,982 977 Indian 2 991,121 8,381,656 5,393,535 Miscellaneous, or civil 27,977 978 71,070,702 43,092,724 Increase $83,117,676 But it may be said that tho comparison should not be of a single year with a single year, because special circumstances nught make such a comparison unfair, and that the only fair mode is to compare a period of several years with a like period. Very well; let us see the result of such a comparison. Let us take a period of seven years of Democratic administration, and compare it with a like period of Republican administration—both periods being years of profound peace. Let us take the seven fiscal years commencing July 1, 1853, and ending June 39, 1860, when the Democracy were iu power, and compare them with the Beven fiscal years commencing July 1, 1868 (three years after the close of the war), and ending June 30, 1875, when the Republicans had unlimited control, and what is the result? The following table shows it: July 1, 1853, to Juue 30, 1863, seven years. ORDINARY EXPENDITURES, LESS PENSIONS. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1854 $ 50,734,863 Fiscal year ending Juno 30. 1865 .. 54,838,585 Fiscal year endiug June 30, 1856 65 376.298 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1857 64,730,763 Fiscal year ending June £O, 1858 71,110,669 Fiscal vear ending June 39, 1859 65,133,728 Fiscal year ending June 30, iB6O. 58,955,952 Total $430,880,858 Average annual expenditure, $61,554,409. Expenditure, per capita, $1.94. July 1, 1868, to Juno 30, 1875, seven years. ORDINARY EXPENDITURES, LESS PENSIONS. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1860 $ 162,019 733 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1870 133,081,305 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1871 123,139,933 Fiscal year ending Juue 30, 1872 124 668,451 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1873 151,129,210 Fiscal year ending June 3'>, 1874 165,080,571 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1875 142,073,632

Total $1,004,192,838 Average annual expenditure, $143,456,119. Expenditure, per capita, $3,45. All these figures are derived from official sources, and it appears by them that the average annual ordinary expenses of the Government, in seven years' of Democratic rule, were $61,524,409, while the like average annual expenses in soven years of Republican rule wore $143,456,119, being an average annual excess under Republican administration of $81,901,710. And this excess cannot be explained by tho inc-ease of population, for the expense per capita iu the seven Republican years was $3.45, while in the seven Democratic years it was only $1.94. Nor can it be explained as necessarily resulting from tho war ; for, as I havo said, l have excluded from the comparison expenses caused by it, namely: ponsions, public debt and interest thereon ; and the first of the seven Republican years I have taken was the third year after tlie war. Of the corruption that has brought disgraco upon the republic, and furnished tlio advocates of despotism, the world over, with arguments against popular government, it is not forme to speak in detail. Unfortunately for the credit of the nation, the instances are so notorious that a bare reference to them brings forth a picture from which the mind turns with loathing and indignation. The Credit Mobilier, tho Pacific Mail, the Belknap trial, the villainies of tho Custom House, the straw bids of the Postoffice, the Indian and whisky rings, and the long list of defaulters in every department, have become matters of history, and attest too clearly for controversy the need of reform. But no substantial reform, yonmay rest assured, will take place so long as Republican rule shall prevail. The evil iH too deep-seated to bo reached by anything short of an entire change of administration.

But. fellow-Citizens, there is one great drama of fraud, one huge black spot upon the national escutcheon, that cannot be passed by with a mere allusion. The seat of tho Chief Magistrate—that scat that in times past has been, andiu all times should be—an emblem of purity and honor —is occupied by a man who was "never elected to it, and whose elevation was accomplished by the grossest frauds and boldest usurpations that ever disgraced the history of a free people. I have no timo today to go into a detailed statement of these frauds and usurpations. I havo no timo to show you how the Returning Board of Florida, iu plain violation of the law of the State, iu equally plain violation of the solemn decision ot the highest court of the State, threw out a number of Democratic ballots to give the vote of the State to the Hayes electors, instead of to tho Tilden electors, who had been chosen by the people. Nor how, in like manner, tho Returning Board of Louisiana threw out from 6,000 to 8,000 votes given to the lilden electors —thereby disfranchising the people of whole precincts and counties, and completely reversing the vote of the State. Nor how, by a vote of eight to seven in the Electoral Commission, all inquiry into these frauds and usurpations was precluded, and the doctrine solemnly announced and acted upon that, no matter by what frauds, no matter by what illegalities, no matter by what usurpations, a Returning or Canvassing Board may defeat the will of the people, the wrong is remediics's, tho constitution is powerless, the people are helpless, and usurpation must triumph and prevail. These, fellow-citizens, are now all matters of history: but, although the erroneeus decision by which Congress counted in Hayes and Wheeler may not be reversible, that fact only makes it the more incumbent upon tlie people to condemn the decision, and the means by which it was brought about. If such an usurpation can pass without rebuke, it will soon be in vain to talk of constitutional modes and honest elections. If the will of tho people can with impunity be overthrown by obteure and corrupt returning boards and there is no remedy for the wrong, it will soon be the voice of such boards, and not the voice cf the people, that will make your Presidents. And how long, I pray you, could your Government stand under such a system, or what claim would it have to be called a government of the people? My friends, if the people ever condone this great sin; if they ever pardon the guilty meD who perpetrated it—and nearly every one of whom has been rewarded by office under the administration —the most sanguine advocate of popular government will have reason to hang his head in shame and doubt the possibility of its success. Yes, my fellow-citizens, the very existence of popular government, tue question whether it is possible to maintain it, ana to maintain it in purity, is now on trial before you. As you love the institutions bequeathed to you by the fathers, as you reverence your constitution and value your freedom, as you .esteem virtue and doteßt wickedness, you are bound, in no uncertain tones, to manifest your abhorrence of ths great usurpation. Fellow-citizens, nothing in politics seems more certain to me than that the Republican leaders rest their hopes of a prolongation of their power npori the success that may attend a studied and energetic effort on their part to excite and perpetuate sectional feeliog. And nothing seems to me more unwarranted, unpatriotic and d testable than this scheme. It is not enough that the South has frankly and manfully accepted the results of the war; that, waiving all questions as to the mode of their adoption, no voice is raised against the binding force of tho constitutional amendments; that every law passed by a Radical Congress, however doubtful its constitutionality, or manifest its injustice and impolicy, is nevertheless obeyed ; that a desire for harmony and peace, and’ a determination to aid in the preservation of tho UuioD, are unmistakably and plainly the dominant sentiments of the Southern people—all this is not enough to deter the Republican managers from resorting to all the weapons in the arstnal of the demagogue, by which sectional hatred can be aroused and perpetuated, and a solid North thereby creattd to rule with a rod of iron a prostrate South. It is thirteen years since the close of the war—thirteen years sinca a hand was raised or a word spoken against the preservation of the Union —and yet articles are written and speeches are now made by men prominent in tae Repubbcan jiarty, tho bitterness of which is scarcely paralleled by anytLing that was written or said when war was flagrant and the Union was iu danger. Fellow-citizens, nothing more unjust, nothing more unpatriotic, nothing more injurious to the peace, welfare and prosperity of the republic, nothing more clearly demonstrative of the necessity for a chauge of rulers and the inauguration of an era of justice and fraternity than is afforded by these facts can be imagined. Do you wish the Union preserved? Then support those who would bind it together by the ties of fraternal feeling and a common interest, as well as by constitutions and laws. Do you revere justice and advocate equality of rights ? Then support the party ou whose banner “Justice and Equality” are indelibly inscribed. Do you wish to see the country strong and prosperous? Then support the policy that is shedding its benign influence upon every part, gives irresistible strength ana universal well-being to the whole.