Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 26, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 July 1884 — The Political Campaign. [ARTICLE]

The Political Campaign.

The following from the Chicago News (Republican) is in response to a lvtter from a young Republican of * e sseiaer who seems to be e-dowed with more zeal than good sense;

A good friend, of I’ensselaer, Ind. writing in a spirit of sincerity and fi iendship which merits recognition, expresses his grief that the Daily News seemed disposed to “bolt” the Republican ticket. He says: “I take it that a caper which exhibits a lively interest in the result of a convention—l do not mean the interest of a spectator but that of a partisan—by that action places itsself in the position of a delegate, and agrees to abide the the result of the convention. Let ns put the view of the Naily News before, during, and since the Republican convention, as clearly as we may: Ne urge the nomination of Arthur upon the very highest grounds of public policy. Not because Arthur was a repub lican. nor the Daily News a Republican organ. We were under no possible obligation to him as a man or as an official. "'e never asked or received a favor at his hands. w e believed, as we still do. that his administration, began under circumstances of such extraordinary character, had ..been clean, honest, conservative, and in every aspect prudent and wise. When he was wellnigh overwhelmen with the duties and responsibilities of the high office which was thrust upon him by the act of Providence, when he was struggling heroicially to bring peace ana prosperity out of turmoil ana adversity, when newspapers like the Uaicago ribune were seeking to add weight to his burden by* denouncing him daily as “the acting president’—as ts he were an usurper instead of an unfortunate citizen diven unwilling to the discharge of his imperative duty—in that hour from as high a sense of justice as ever moved a newspaper, the Daily news called a halt and demanded that he be given a fair chance. As time went on and he gave fresh* evidence day by day of his capability and integrity, we confess that our admiration grew.

Finally, we sought to test the public judgement concerning him, and one morning we published four solid pages of mcomiums from the best men in the country—from Main to California—Republicans and Democrats alike. Men who, by the score, had believed his accession to the presidency boded only evil, honestly and sometimes enthusiastically approved his course. Then the Republican conventions of several states, with one accord, commended his administration. At last the merchants and manufacturers of all the leading cities, men who had no pliticaj favors to ask, without regard to their party affiliations, joined in the gen eral acclaim. Then came the national convention. Arthur’s administration had been redeemed by a policy which drove the adventurers of his party into retirement, which refused to turn over the patronage to ‘‘bosses” of questionable political moraly, which evicted and and prosecuted the star-route rascals, which honestly and vigorously enforced the civil-service laws, which made office holding a trusteeship for the people instead of a personal gain and advantage. At the convention, all the adventurers, all of the “bosses” of doubtful standing, all the star route thieves, all people to whom civil-service reform was an offense—in short, all of the disreputables for the displacement of whom Arthur had earned the good opinion of the country—assembled and made a last stand for power. The circumstances were pro-

pitious. A candidate of the robustious class —a very master of inexplicable dumbshows and noise, }et frail as wanton in virtue—precisely the character to make the unthinking shout and the judi cious grieve— was offered to the delegates. To the inthusiasm which such a name was well fitted to evoke was ad ded—notoriously and undisguisedly—the persuasive force of money. They triumphed. They passed a resolution that Mr. Arthur was honest, wise, careful, prudent—he gave no opportunity to plunder the treasury, he enforced civilservice rules, he prosecuted thieves, he held an office to be a trust, and therefore they want no more of him. And this ticket-born where in a moment of excitement which palsied self-control, the Republican party was ravished by the banditti of political society—good men are asked to support. And what shall be the reply?

As to Mr. Blaine: The indisputable evidence of his offenses, written by his own hand, stands to-day, as it lias for eight long years, unanswei ed, unexplained. We are told that his boldness and his brilliancy countervail his moral defects. The same argument might be made, and indeed has been made, for Jack Shephard and Jessie James and both have enjoyed the admiration oPunthinking. Then what shall good mendo? Shall they turn to the opposing party? w ait and see. Never was scripture phrase more applicable than now to the Democrats: Mde is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction. Straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” If the convention next month shall nominate a man who, in his person and record, will represent the idea that a public office is a public trust, on (i platform to make this question the paramount issue of the campaign, the Democracy ought to win. If the candidate is to be one of the old copper head crowd, if the lines are to be drawn on the old issues, if there is any evidence that the Democratic party is wanting in conviction on the subject of administrative reform, or that it is disposed to cling to the policy which made it the promoter of rebellion in 1860, the obstructionists in 1864, the opponents of reconstruction in 1868, and the partner of kuklux and white leagues in 1872, the bands may cease playing at once, for in such a campaign Blaine and Logan, however objectionable, must and of right ought to be elected.

Andnow something about “bolting.” It may rightfully be accounted dishonorable that one should refuse to support a canditate for whose nomination he is in some way responsible. A party manor a party organ, expressing a judgement before a convention, with the distinct understanding that that judgement is to be waived if the decision of the convention be adverse, is certainly bound by the understanding. But the Daily News is no party organ, nor has it ever been. And assuredly no one will say that we in any way share any responsi bility for the nomination of Mr. Blaine. If to admonish the Republican party day as ter day and week after week that he was an unfit man, if to illustrate our opinions by citations of column after column of unanswered and unexplained accusations from the files of the Chicago Tribune—if these things furnish any reason why we should now advocate Mr. Blaine, then our friend of Rensselaer is right, otherwise not.