Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 24, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 July 1879 — THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. [ARTICLE]

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

It Has Been Too Long In Power—A Change N< ed'ed for the Good of the Country. During the closing hours of the recent extra session of Congress Mr. Charles Nordhoff sent the following significant dispatch to the New. York Herald: The course of the Republican leaders in the Senate this week has been atrocious. They have fought the army bill as though they were the rump of the Grant movement fighting for the last chance to secure an el ction; or as though, as is commonly conjectured, there were some secret motive in their opposition. The importance of what they have Baid has by no means justified their intensity and desperation of purpose. They’ have transcended all regular and legitimate opposition, and they have not shown any reasons that the bill ought not to pass. Their conduct has afforded a curious spectacle of men who have been too long in power for tiieir own or their cqpntryTs good—who have become intolerant of opposition from any source, either outside of, or withiD, their party, and who have forgotten how to submit to defeat, and are capable of seizing on power by any means, however violent. The display which they have made is of a spirit entirely and dangerously evil, and no thoughtful man can read the Senate debates of the last week and consider the tone, the temper, the spirit and the wide disparity between the subject and the Republican treatment of it without perceiving that it would be well for the country if these gentlemen could be for awhile retired from power, and that it would be an extremely hazardous thing to lease of it, which they seem determined at all hazards and by any means to seize. It is the Grant movement which has displayed itself in the Senate in these days, and has, with extraordinary arrogance and intolerance, insisted on troops at the polls. If nothing else justified the Democrats in insisting on their extremely mild prohibition of the use of troops for election purposes, the language and spirit of the Republican leaders in the Senate this week would give them abundant justification, and it is not too much to say that rather than trust these Republicans—Senators Conkling, Blane and others—with troops at the polls, it would be far better and safer to the country to disband the army. In this aspect the Senate debate of this week may and ought to serve a useful and important purpose. The Grant movement has its center m that Senatorial coterie which has aimed to control the House, has tried and is now trying to intimidate the President -"horn it hares, and which, with unerring .ostinct makes its desperate stand for troops at the polls as the true ground for the Grant movement to maintain. The Democratic determination to keep troops away from the polls has seemed hitherto to be inspired by foolish and ridiculous fears, but the apparition of the Grant movement in the Senate justifies them and ought to secure for their aims the support of all judicious voters. The spirit of the Republican leaders in the Senate shows that it is high time for the security and peace of the country to have a change of parties. Like the Democratic party in 186 J, these men have been too long in power. They are drunk with an unpatriotic ambition. They show plainly that they do not mean to let go of the Government; that they regard the country as their possession, and a political defeat as a personal wrong and robbery of themselves. The impression which this debate has made upon many thoughtful attendants upon it is -that no party can be so dangerous to the country as a patty led, inspired and controlled by these men, and that if the Republican party appears in the Presidential canvass under their leadership, it will be the duty es every man who values the country’s safety and peace to oppose it and them, no matter who is on the other side. The Republicans uttored a foolish cry of revolution early in the session, but your correspondent, whose duty it has been to watch all the tedious debates of the extra session, and who has not failed to expose to you the folly and weakness of the Democrats, has seen nothing on the Democratic side, when among the worst elements of that party, which at all compares for wickedness of purpose, for desperation and evil spirit, with the course and temper of the leading Republican Senators during this debate.

Assess the Army for Foster’s Benefit. Under the protection of Mr. Hayes and his fraudulent Cabinet, the Republican strikers are levying a tax upon the department clerks at Washington for money to be used in Foster’s campaign in Ohio. We are informed on credible authority that already more than $20,000 has been raised in the departments for this purpose. But $20,000 is not enough. At least five times that sum is needed and expected from Washington by Mr. Foster. The tax on the assistant auditors, clerks, doorkeepers, messengers, janitors, copyists and floor-scrubbers, has, therefore, been apportioned on a basis of something like SIOO,OOO. Yery few of the officeholders who are approached and requested to contribute to the Foster fund feel a lively interest in the political fortunes of the beneficiary. The majority of them, it is safe to assume, do not care a copper how Ohio goes provided they are allowed to remain in their little offices and draw their salaries in peace. Even the clerks who hail from Ohio would prefer to keep their money for their family expenses, or to provide innocent summer amusement for themselves and their wives and children. But they dare not send away the collector emptyhanded. They know that the request for “ voluntary contributions” is a demand which they cannot afford to refuse. They have plainly been given to understand that the demand is backed by all the power of the fraudulent administration, and that that power will be pitilessly employed. They submit to the blackmail because they know this.

The remarkable thing about the assessment is that no attempt is made by Mr. Hayes and his Secretaries to conceal, excuse, or palliate the outrage. The robbery of the clerks proceeds openly, in the face and eyes of the whole country. Yet it is only two years since the following letter announced Mr. Hayes’ determination to reform the civil service: Executive Mansion, ) Washington, June 22, 1877. f Bik— l destre t:> call your attention to the following paragraph in a letter addressed by me to the Secretary of the Treasury on the conduct to be observed"by officers of the General Government in relation to the elections: No officer shall be required or permitted to tike part in the management of political organizations, caucuees, conventions, or election campaigns. Their right to vote and express their views on public questions, either orally or through the press, is not denied, provided it does not interfere with their official duties. No assessment for political purposes on officers or subordinates should be allowed. This rule is applicable to every department of the civil service. It should be understood by every officer of the General Government that he is expected to conform his conduct to its reauirements. Very respectfullv, R. B. Hates. The sham, the cowardly hypocrisy of that order, and of all the snuffling professions that accompanied it, were lo ag ago exposed. It is too late in the day to waste words over it. In the interest of the civil service clerks who are to be forced to supply campaign-funds for Mr. Charles Foster, we desire to make a suggestion to the managers of that candidate’s cause. The issue made in the platform on which Foster stands is the old issue of the bloody shirt. Mr. Foster’s campaign is to be an aggressive war upon the late Confederate States of America. Of course Foster was deeply concerned in the fate of the Union, during the period between 1861 and 1865, although the exacting requirements of trade kept him away from the scene of actual hostilities. Now that he is about to that war oyer ag§jp, and is

in need of funds, instead of putting his hand at the throats of the department clerks at Washington, whose functions and sympathies are not at all military, and demanding their money, let him appeal to the patriotism of the officers and privates of the army, and to the volunteer veterans who were at the front when he was behind the counter of his shop in Fostoria. Let him assess the various encampments of the Grand Army of the Republic. Mr. Foster has become a soldier, in spirit if not in record; he ought to look to liis military brethren, and not to the civilian clerks and copyists, for the sinews of war. What a wild wave of enthusiasm would sweep over the veterans who served in the Union army, if Mr. Charles Foster should turn to them and eloquently request contributions for the purpose of defeating Maj. Gen. Thomas A. Ewing and Brig. Gen. Americus L. Rice !—New York Sun.