Indianapolis Journal, Indianapolis, Marion County, 1 November 1884 — Page 12

12

THE “KNOW-NOTHING” OBDER Its Relation to Existing Political Parties —Facts from Official Sources. The Democratic Party ami the Know-Nothing in Accord— Republicanism Opposed to Its Principles. By William Hoy lie*. Professor of Law at Notre ]>amo University. It is commonly regarded as a disgrace to have been a member of the Know-nothing order. Liberal, progressive and fair minded men regret that so bigoted an organization ever existed in this country. It is not surprising that persons •who were members of it seek to hide the fact, nor it is remarkable that they took solemn oaths not to divulge either its secrets or the names of their fellow members. Inasmuch as it is freely charged by Democratic speakers, newspapers, circulars, etc., that the "Republican party is measurably responsible for the existence of Know nothingism and the the dissemination of its pecular priuciples, it is deemed proper to meet the charge. Justice demands that the facts be laid bare and the truth told. Honest and impartial men have a right to know the truth in this matter, and in the light ©f the official records it shall be stated. WAS MR. BLAINE A MEMBER? It has also been charged that the candidate of the Republican party for the presidency was at one time a Know-nothing, and circulars so stating have been widely distributed. But that accusation is altogether mendacious. The charge that Mr. Blaine was ever a Know-nothing, or that he ever countenanced Know-nothingisrn, or that he ever voted a Know-nothing ticket, is glaringly and maliciously false. The extracts from the Kennebec (Me.) Journal, published by Democratic newspapers, and quoted by Democratic speakers, in reference to the riotous proceedings at Bath, and the indignities there offered to a certain Catholic priest named Father Bapst, were published months before Mr. Blaine became a resident of the State. So the Boston Journal avers, and Mr. Blaine himself corroborates the statement. John L. Stevens, of Augusta, who was one of the editors of the Kennebec Journal, writes as follows touching the charge of Rnow-notbingism preferred against Mr. Blaine: As his [Blaine’s] editorial associate at the time, and thoroughly informed as to his political principles and affiliationft. I declare that he had no pympathy with the distinctive views of the Know-nothing organisation, never was a member of it, but on the contrary was adverse to its doctrines and purposes. Mr. Blaine himself unequivocally avers that he was never in any wav connected with the Know nothing order, that he never indorsed its principles, and that he never voted for its candidates. He has a nature too sympathetic, a liberality too broad, a philanthropy too ardent, a disposition too candid, a character too manly to render it possible for him to have belonged to the Know-nothing party or to have indorsed its narrow and prosenptive principles. He never was in any way connected with it. RELATIONS OF EXISTING PARTIES TO THE KNOW NOTHINGS. But lot us examine the relations of the Republican party to the Know nothings. Let us investigate the matter and ascertain whether it had any sympathy with their distinctive views, ©r at any time indorsed their proscriptive policy. Let ns examine the records and see the attitude, not only of the Republican, but also of the Democratic party, in relation to Know nothingism. Let us appeal to official sources, and thus learn reliably which party, whether the Democratic or the Republican, is the more responsible for the growth, and spread, and outrages of the Knownothing organization. Know nothingism first attracted attention in the winter of 1843-4. At that time it took shape and was organized as a secret society. For several years it was confined to a few localities near the seaboard. Its members generally repre--©ented the most bigoted and uneducated classes of the communities where its lodges were established. As early as 1847, however, they sent a representative to Congress from a Democraticdistrict in Pennsylvania. His name was Lewis C. Levin. In 1851 he was succeeded by Wm. H. Kurtz, a Democrat. In the Thirty-second Congress. which met that year, there was not one Know-nothing. People were inclined to believe that the proscriptive organization had died of its ©wn inanity. But in that they were mistaken. Conditions w ere merely changing. In 1852 the Democrats nominated as their candidate for the presidency a comparatively obscure man named Franklin Pierce. The Whigs nominated General Win field Scott, a man in every way superior to Pierce. Yet the Democrats were so powerful that* they elected their candidate by a prodigious majority. Pierce carried twenty seven States and had 354 electoral votes, while General Scott carried but four States and had only 42 electoral votes. That signal defeat caused the Whig party to break and crumble to pieces. The Whigs were bewildered. They hardly knew whither to go or what to do. In the North, however, many of them became members of the Democratic and Free-soil parties, while not a few of them joined the American or Know-nothing organization. Jn the South numbers of them joined the Democratic party, but probably the majority identified themselves with the Know nothing order. The attendant agitation in political matters effected many odd changes. The Knownothings spiritedly propagated their doctrines, and soon surprised and startled the country by the exhibition of strength they made. Hundreds of thousands of Whigs and Democrats entered the order. They acquired political supremacy in Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland, Virginia. &c. Indication - promised them speedy domination in politic The sources whence the order derived its h* vength are clearly indicated by the twelfth section of the national Know-nothing platform, adopted in June, 1855. The preliminay part of that section reads as follows: The American [Know-nothing] party having ripen nturn the ruins, and in spite of the opposition of the Whig and Democratic parties, cannot be in any manner responsible for the obnoxious acts or violated pledges of either. Referring to how rapidly it grew, and how powerful it became in a short time, one of its members. Bayard Clarke, who was a representative in Congress from New York, said in the eourse of remarks made by him in the House, July 24. 1856: Within a few short months, not years, after its establishment, the American [Know-nothing] party traversed the whole Union and defied its enemies at the ballot-box. so silently, so certainly, ho overwhelmingly, that faction stood aghast at such a revelation of undreamed-of power. No matter what combinations were arrayed in opposition, oo matter what intrigues were entered into to arrest its progress: no matter what anathemas were hurled against its friends, the result was still the same. The Know nothings sought to name their organization “The American Party.” but people generally preferred to apply the term “Knownothing'' to it. as its members habitually answered, “I don’t know,” to questions relating to the internal working and purposes of the order. All knew, however, that it was bigoted and proscriptive in its objects. It aimed to change or modify the naturalization laws, so that people of foreign birth com ing to this country to live would have to reside here for twenty-one years before being en titled to vote. It proposed to prevent foreignborn citizens from holding public offices. It undertook to abridge the constitutional rights of Catholics, and to exclude them from all positions of official trust and emolument. It persistently discriminated against them, and stubbornly dis credited their patriotism, fidelity and honesty of purpose as American citizens. Bigotry and ig norance were enlisted on the side of that intolerant party, and its members were held together by all the solerfnity of the most formal and binding oaths. Elisha D. Cullen, of Delaware, who had been u Pierce Democrat in 1852, but who subsequently became a Know-nothing, and as such was elected to Congress as representative from his State, gave expression to the sentiments of his party on this subject in a debate in the House. Jan. 9, 1850. Said lie: ] will tute here that I indorse every word my honorable friend from Alabama (Mr. Walker) said the other day on Catholicism. Igo against Catholics in toto. I never will support them. They are not fit to be supported by Americans. The people of the State from which I come look upon them with abhorrence." As early as 1 854-5 the Know nothings had beeom'. very numerous and powerful. John 8011,

Know-nothing senator from Tennessee, bore witness to this fact by saying in his place in Congress. Feb. 2, 1858: I said Americanism was the main issue, and almost the exclusive issue (in 1855); for I had a perfect recollection that the canvass was opened on the part of the Americans (Know-nothings) with the most assured and confident feeling that they would carry our State officers by an overwhelming vote. So confident were they that they asked aid from nobody. I believe, as a general proposition, who did not belong to tue order, and had not been regularly initiated. The Know-nothing movement assumed form as a dangerous political power in 1854. or a short time before the North began to unite for the purpose of opposing Southern aggression in the interest of slavery. Though it is said to have originated in New York, it nevertheless attained its chief power and most sinister influence in the South. In the North it confessed to hardly any specific declaration of principles, and many of its most enthusiastic adherents were the sons of foreigners. They wanted to discourage immigration, and they baseu their opposition to immigration upon the ground that foreigners were entering into all avenues of employment and causing a reduction of wages by their competition with American workingmen. In the South were comparatively few Catholics and foreigners, and there the Know-nothing movement became firmly fixed and particularly powerful. Emigrants from Europe came almost exclusively to the North, and here settled. They added largely to the population, and increased in like ratio the representation of the North in Congress. Besides, they were a growing menace to slave labor and slavery. The famine of 1848 in Ireland and the revolution of the same year in Germany drove them in vast numbers to this country. They came in multitudes, and for years they continued so to come. They helped to increase the material and political power of the North, and leading men of the South plainly saw that this power was rapidly becoming an element of danger to Southern interests. They perceived that, though they had long and persistently sought to extend the territorial area of slavery, yet their sectional supremacy was fast disappearing, and the North was swiftly acquiring political ascendency. In view of such facts, the popularity, strength and vitality of Know-noth-ingism in the South find easy explanation. In the Thirty-fourth Congress the Know-noth-ings had a representation of about forty mem bers, and but very tew of the number were from the North. New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are the only Northern States that ever sent avowed Know-nothings to Congress. The Thirty-fifth Congress, which was organized in 1857, the members having been elected in the spirited campaign of 1856, comprised five .Senators and fourteen representatives who were identified with the Know-nothing party. All of them were from Southern slave-holding States. The names of all the Know-nothings then in the Senate and House of Representatives, as taken from the official ‘list published in the Congressional Globe, are as follows: Senate—Anthony Kennedy, Maryland: John B. Thompson, John J. Crittenden, Kentucky; John Bell, Tennessee; Sain. Houston, Texas. House—. Tames B. Kicand, J. Morrison Harris. H. Winter Davis. Maryland; John A. Gilmer, North Carolina; Robert P. Trippe. Joshua Hill. Georgia: George Eustis. jr., Louisiana: Warner L. Underwood. Humphrey Marshall, Kentucky: Horace Maynard. Charles Ready, Felix K. Zollicoffer, Tennessee; Thos. L. Anderson, Samuel H. Woodson, Missouri. The Thirty-sixth Congress, which began its work in 1859, had two senators and thirty-six representatives who were elected as Know-noth-ings. Twentv-four of them were Southerners, while the others were from New York and New Jersey, as the following official list indicates: Senate—Anthony Kennedy, Maryland; John J. Crittenden, Kentucky. House—Luther C. Carter, George Briggs, New York; John T. Nixon. L. N. Stratton. New Jersey; E. H. Webster, J. Morrison Harris, H. Winter I)avi9, Maryland; Alexander T. Boteler, Virginia; Wm. N. H. Smith, John A. Gilmer, Jas. M. Leach. Zebulon B. Vance. North Carolina: Thos. Hardeman, jr., Joshua Hill, Georgia; Edward Bouligny, Louisiana; Francis M. Bristow, Wm. C. Anderson, Green Adams, Robt. Mallory. Laban T. Moore, Kentucky; T. A. R. Nelson, Horace Maynard. Reese B. Brabson, Wm B. Stokes, Robert Hatton. James M. Quarles, Tennessee. Eleven Southern States have been represented by avowed Know-nothings in Congress. These States are Delaware. Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri. Tho Knownothing party was most powerful, defiant, audacious and dangerous during the administration of Franklin Pierce, when the Democrats had complete control of the government and held all the federal offices. Then, too. were perpetrated many of the disgraceful excesses attendant upon -the growth and unrestrained license of the Know-nothing organization. The lives, property and churches of foreigners and Catholics were subjected to all kinds of violence—to the deadly weapon of thugs and the fire of midnight incendiaries. ORIGIN OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. When that political chaos was at its height the anti-slavery sentiment of the North became crystalli/pd. Greeley, Weed. Seward, Webb. Phillips, Sumner, Giddings, Wade, Chase, etc., determined to organize anew party —a party opposed to the extension of slavery and to the enforcement of the fugitive slave law. They met, organized that party, and christened it ‘ Republican,” taking the name of the old antifederalist party of revolutionary times. As was said by John Perry, of Maine, in the House of Representatives, on May 1, 1856: As the principles of that party are but the revival of the doctrines of the immortal Jefferson and the Republican fathers, it is perfectly natural and proper ior it to assume the time-honored name, Republican. To the same effect spoke Joshua R. Giddings, of Ohio, in the course of ardebate between him and Representative William Smith, of Virginia, in the House, Dec. 18, 1855. Said Mr. Giddings: Now. let me say to those gentlemen who speak sneeringly of Republicanism that we find its definition in the Declaration of Independence. The provisions of that great instrument embody the aims of the Republican party. Upon this rock the Republican church is built, and tile gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Mr. Smith asked: Why is it that your party has assumed the name Republicans? In answer, Mr. Giddings said: “For the reason that we advocate the principles, stand upon the doctrines and advocate the policy of the Republicans of 1776 —the founders of our government. They consecrated this Republic to the support of liberty: we do the same. They excluded slavery from the Territories; we do the same. They left the States to guide their own governments within their own jurisdiction; we do the same. Their doctrines are our doctrines; their name is our name; their God is our God. Then Mr. Smith put this question: Why did you not take the name before? And the answer was: Our party has just been formed. It yet stands at the baptismal font; christened Republican, and consecrated to the support of liberty by the most solemn obligations resting on men, on Christians, on statesmen. Those who entered the new party at that early day, were almost exclusively Democrats, Freesoilers and Whigs. The anti-slavery Democrats of the North joined in great numbers. According to Henry Winter Davis, a leading Know nothing of Maryland, the great majority of the Democrats of the North abandoned their party and became Republicans. In a speech delivered in the House of Representatives, Aug. 7, 1856, Mr. Davis said: The Democratic party of the North has melted away into the Fremont party. They form its strength. * * * They had alway been what in other people had been called Free Soil. That shone out in Ihe remarks of the honorable gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Leiter.] whoso series of resolutions for fifteen years spoke one language—beginning in the Democratic conventions and ending in the Republican conventioas—with a unity of sentiment and language defying the detection of the point where the Democrat shaded off: into tho Republican. These remarks appear all the more exact and cogent when it is remembered that in the Thirty-third Congress the Democrats had 159 representatives, while in the Thirty-fourth they had seventy four, although they hod received large accessions of Whigs prior to the election. In 1852 the Democrats carried all the States of the Union except four, two of which were Southern and two Northern, the latter being Vermont and Massachusetts. Four years later these and nine other Northern States, which had just swung out of the Democraticjcolumn, gave large majorities to the Republican presidential elect ors. In other words, John C. Fremont, the first Republican candidate for the presidency, carried eleven Northern States, all but two of which had previously been Democratic. The representation of the Democrats in the popular branch of Congress had been reduced more than one half, and the vacillation and imbecility of their party excited general contempt, and threat enea its complete destruction. The Demo

THE INDIANAPOLIS JOURNAL, SATURDAY, NOVEMBER I, ISSi.

crats who left their party in the South united with the Whigs to form the Knownothing organization, while in the North the great majority of them became Republicans. Numbers of them, however, became Know-noth-ings. and remained members of the order until the war broke out, when they returned and resumed their Democratic allegiance. Speaking of the relations of this element to the Democratic party, John Kelly, of New York, then representing the Tammany Hall people in Congress, used this language in the House of Representatives May 26, 1856: This party [Tammauv Democratic] has sometimes been called the Soft-shell part}', iu distiction from the Hards, a faction whose leaders, though arrogating the Democratic name, are but Know-nothings in disguise. Yet these same Hards are designated “the regular Democracy of New York" in the minority report of the committee on credentials, in the national Democratic convention of 1856, and this report was made by Senator Bayard, chairman of the committee. Speaking to the same purpose, but referring to later developments, General B. F. Butler spoke as follows in the House of Representatives, Feb. 17. 1868: When' the Democratic party became a 5 party of traitors I left it. because I did not any longer support its doctrines. When it became the party of treason these old hacks, these old Whigs, came into it, because it suited them. And from that time to this these men —who were first Whigs, then Kuow-nothings,and then Whigs again; these men who were first Abolitionists, then Whigs,then Know-nothings, and then back again —became Democrats. Then brains went out and treason came into the Democratic party. The Republican party had no sympathy with the Know-nothing order. Those who organized it were unalterably opposed to Know nothingism in all its shapes. They denounced it as a conspiracy against human rights and indignantly spurned ail its overtures in the interest of fusiou. In corroboration of that fact it may not he out of place to quote the following pertinent remarks of one of the ablest Democrats then in congress, Mr. Branch, of North Carolina, who said, in tho House, July 24, 1856, while deploring the vitality of the Know-nothing party in the South after its virtual collapse in the North: The Northern members (of the Know-nothing party) who bolted when Fillmore was nominated, after having been insulted by the black Republican convention. a’d spurned from their doors, have lamely fallen into the ranks of Fremont, and will no doubt labor the harder for the kicks they have received. And F. K. Zollicoffer, a Know-nothing representative from Tennessee, said in the course of a debate iu the House, Dec. 20, 1855: I have reason to believe that the great lobby spirits that control that (Republican) organization are Greeley, and Seward, and Weed, and Webb—men of intellect and power at the North—who are as bitterly opposed to tne [Know-nothing] party as they are to the Democratic party. All the great men who assisted in organizing the Republican party were bitterly opposed to Know-nothiugism. They concurred with Seward in pronouncing it “an ephemeral organization based upon frivolous and foreign ideas. The temper ot the Republican party in that respect found expression in a speech delivered by Wendell Phillips, in April, 1856. He recommended a vigorous and unrelenting war against Know-nothiugism and the utter destruction of that bigoted and # proscriptive order. He appealed to his hearers to act promptly, earnestly and vigorously, saying that Nothing but an anti-slavery sentiment that will trample Know-nothing lodges indignantly under its feet, will save even Charles Sumner. Many of those who entered tho Know-nothing party in the North abandoned it with a sense of righteous loathing when they ascertained its true character. Os these it may not be invidious to instance Henry Wilson, senator from Massachusetts. A few months of contact and association with the know-nothings in 1855 thoroughly disgusted him. In referring to the matter at that time the Lowell Citizen made use of the language following: General Wilson said, in presence of a gentleman of this city, a few days ago, that the only act of his political life, of which he was heartily ashamed, and which he regretted having committed, was that he ever in any way became connected with the American [Knownothing J part}’. The Springfield Republican copied the item and commented upon it as follows: Wehavo no doubt that it is true, and it is certainly not disci’edi table to General Wilson to avow it, being true. The Know nothings favored and defended slavery as cordially as they hated and opposed for eigners and Catholics. So there could be no sympathy between them and Republicans—no fusion or co-operation between their party and the Republican party, which comprised the liberal and progressive men of the country, as well as many foreigners, and which was boldly, unalterably, aggressively and enthusiastically opposed to the wricked curse and loathsome institution of slavery. Preceding the election of 1856, or Aug. 4, the late E. B. Morgan, then a Republican member of Congress from New York, said in the House of Representatives, in the course of a debate upon this subject: The Northern Americans [Know-nothings] are mere bobs of the Southern kite, just as tho Northern Democrats are. The only question between the Buchanan and Fillmore parties is, which of the two parties, both intensely and exclusively Southern, shall vault into power. Now, I assert here that the thirty Fillmore members of this House from the South are even more rabidly and furiously pro-slavery than the Democrats from the South are. In a speech delivered in the House, Jan. 10, 1860, William B. Stokes, a prominent Knownothing representative from Tennessee, indignantly repudiated the idea that any sympathy existed between his political brethren and the Republican party. Said he: None of the gentlemen belonging to the party with ■which I act in this House indorse the doctrines of the Republican party, as I conceive, On December 19, 1856, Mr. Campbell, a prominent Know-nothing representative from Kentucky, said in the House, his object being to maintain his party intact against the allurements and persuasions of the Democrats in the interest of fusion: Have they [the Democrats] held less communion writh the Abolitionists —with the [Republican] faction which preaches tho doctrine of political larceny, of prlitieal infamy, than ours? Have they made less capital by pandering to the prejudices of Northern fanaticism? Have they not sought the votes of men who are false to their country? To the same effect spoke John S Carlisle, a Know nothing representative from Virginia, in the House, June 21, 1856: Mr. Chairman, can you account for the similarity of objects aimed at by the Democratic and Black Tiepublican parties? Each is anxious to crush out the American [Know-nothing] p arty. Each complains of this party as an obstacle to an effective union in its section upon the slavery issue. * * K May we not see here why neither the Black Republicans nor the Democrats would under any circumstances vote for an American [Know-nothing] for Speaker of this House, and why a sufficient number of Democrats to pass it were found voting for the plurality resolution with the Black Republicans under which tne present Speaker, [Banks], of this House was elected, alter it had been demonstrated by a trial of more than two months that under no other rule could he, or one entertaining his views, be elected? Numbers of the Know-nothings, however, did become alarmed at the rapid growth of the Republican party—so much alarmed that they returned to the bosom of the Democracy, hoping there to be able to do more effective work against the growing anti-slavery sentiment as represented by the Republican party. Conspicuous among these was Percy 5V alker. a represeniative from Alabama. In a speech delivered in the House, Aug. 6, 1856. he gave the reasons that actuated himself and most other Know-nothings who acted with him to bolt the nomination of Fillmore and support Buchanan. He said, however, that in doing so he felt he was actiug as a consistent Know-nothing, and that as a Know-nothing he would support Buchanan. The Know-nothing movement in the North appeared contemptible to him, and in his speech he asserted that there were ouly two non slaveholding States in which it had seemed worth whilo to nominate Fillmore electors. Four Southern States, however, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky and Tcnnesse, gave large majorities to the Know nothing presidential electors. No Northern State ever voted in favor of a Know-nothing candidate for the presidency. KNOW-NOTIIING AFFILIATIONS OF THE DEMOCRACY. Notwithstanding the remarks of Mr. Carlisle and a few others, the Know-nothings and tho Democrats were not separated by any vital differences in relation to principles or policy, and their reciprocal antagonisms were comparatively trifling and altogether subordinate to their common hostility to the Republican party. Mr. Dowdell, a prominent Democratic congressman from Alabama, said in tbe House, January 11, 1856: I have little fear of tho Know-nothing party. Not fto with the black Republican party. Sectional and fanatic, it is built on the destruction of the rights of a whole section. To like purpose were remarks of a distin-

guished Democratic congressman from Mississippi, Reuben Davis, in the House of Repreresentatives, Jan. 7, 1860. Said he: There are but minor differences between the parties opposed to the Republicans. There are but minor differences between the Democrats and the South Americans (Know-nothings); but minor differences between theanti-Lecompton Democrats and the Americans (Know-nothings); * * * What do we differ about? Are Americans (Know-nothings) in favor of a United States bank? No, sir. Are they in favor of the government adopting a system of internal improvements, such as has been condemned for years past by the people of this Nation? No, sir; they are not. Are they in favor of protection at the expense of the South? No, sir thoy are not. * * * What do we differ about? In much tho same strain spoke Representative Wm. Smith, a prominent Democrat of Virginia, in the House, Dec. 18, 1855. But perhaps enough has been said. It would become monotonous to go more fully into details. It must be regarded as lamentable, however, that it did not trouble such distinguished representatives of the Democratic party to see a narrow and pusillanimous political organization flourishing in the maintenance of principles of bigotry and proscription. The existence of that dastardly organization inspired no fear. It did not, judging by what was said and done at that time, annoy Democrats to see the churches dedicated to the faith of a large proportion of their follow-citizens wantonly attacked and burned. Such outrages did not impel them to execute tho laws with vigor—to suppress riotous assemblages and tumultuous proceedings, although at the time they were in power, and all the federal offices were in their hands. They had but,*, little fear of a bigoted organization that aimed to deprive a large class of their fellow-citizens of fundamental and constitutional rights. But they did dread the Republican party, for this party entered the lists with the declared purpose of fighting them on the only issue that to them seemed vital—the issue of slavery. Let the great events tbatfollowed answer for the Republican party as to whether it was right or wrong. In the winter of 1859-60, when John Sherman, of Ohio, was nominated and supported by the Republican representatives in Congress for Speaker of the House, tho Democrats and Knownothings found it difficult to unite for the purpose of defeating him. But the difficulty did not proceed from incongruity of principles. It rested rather upon the selfish and humiliating ground of inanility to agree upon the distribution of the offices. In reference to the matter Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, said: Mr. Clerk, it is shrewdly suspected that tho want of organization here by a union of the national Democratic party and tho American [Know-nothing] party, and the auti-Lecompton men, is dependent upon the division of spoils. * * * In what do Americans [Know-nothings] and Democrats differ? In nothing sir. But January 24. 18G0, they did unite, and tho Know-nothings did not go to the Democrats, but the Democrats did go to the Know nothings. All the Democratic Representatives in Congress fused and coalesced with the Know-nothings in their common struggle against the Republicans, and together they put forth their best efforts to defeat John Sherman, the Republican candidate for the Speakership. Wm. N. H. Smitfi, a Know-nothing representative from North Carolina, was their candidate. On the 39th ballot he received 112, votes or only three less than enough to elect him to the third place of official power and dignity in the Nation. About three-fourths of the votes cast for this Know-nothing candidate were the votes of Democrats. Not one Republican so voted. Tbe Democrats continued to vote for Smith until the forty-second ballot had been taken. Having meanwhile changed from Sherman to Pennington, of New Jersey, the Republicans caused a stampede among their opponents and succeeded in electing their candidate on the forty fourth ballot, thus saving the country from the disgrace of having a Know-nothing Speaker of the House of Representatives. Mr. Larrabee, of Wisconsin, gave voice to sentiments of his party associates in Congress when he said that he “would rather vote for the most bigoted Know-nothing in the country than a black Republican.” And in passing it may be worth while to mention that Air. Larrabee came from that part of Wiscon whence hailed that other Democratic statesman and ex congressman who said in the Democratic convention recently held in Chicago that he and his associates love Grover Cleveland, the moral monstrosity at the head of the Democratic ticket, for the enemies he had made within his own party. That sweeping language particularly refers to the workingmen and the Irish element, as represented by such men as Kelly. Grady, Cochran, etc. Grady has exhibited sufficient manhood to rebuke the insult If the others can now tamely support for the presidency that despicable product of a blunder, it must be conceded that Bragg read them correctly, and proved that he knew the pusillanimity of their souls when he heaped upon them his verbal filth and vituperation. But enough has been said to show that the Republican party is in no way responsible for either the outrages or the existence of the Knownothing order. It was started in the North, and did its worst here before the Republican party was organized. As soon as this great party secured a foothold it spread at once throughout the free States, and Know-nothingism slunk away and forever disappeared before its defiant mien, its courageous opposition, its uncompromising enmity. In the South it was otherwise; there the Know-nothings and Democrats were divided into pro slavery parties of almost equal numerical strength, and so they continued until they united in the iniquity of secession, coalesced in treason, together raised the standard of rebellion, and together invoked the horrors of ii.ternecine war in defense of slavery and disunion. Ever since they have acted together, and acted as one party—the Democratic party, that fatal virus, that poisonous leaven—goes far to account for the un-American tendencies and pro British affiliations, and treasonable instincts of the Democratic party. Patriotic and independedt men have no place in that degraded, vacillating and unprincipled organization. Adherence to its policy and principles reduces a man to the lowest level of subservience to and dependence upon “bosses” and “bossism.” Its insincerity, duplicity and Know nothingism have been exhibited time and again since the war—and reliable signs happily indicate that the popular verdict will bo overwhelmingly against it in the great trial to be decided Tuesday, Nov. 4.

Home Life in America. Burdette in Brooklyn Eagle. Scene —The next room. Door shut. Nothing visible except an audible voice on the other side of the door. Enter audible voice, audibly, speaking orally in vocal accents: Hah! There, now' Hoi’ up! Hold dup! Hole dup your red! Can't you hold*your head dup! Put tin! Pnttit tin! Put tin your foot! Turn around! Turn a round! Oh, goodness gracious, don't you know how to turn around? Hold your head still! Don’t do that! T'other arm! The other arm! Oh, great land, go to your mother! It is a man, dressing his infant son in the morning. Thin Hair and Dandruff. New York Times. “Hair’s getting pretty thin in front,” said the customer as he came out of his bib. “Keeps coming out, too." “Put vinegar on it once a week and a little grease,’’ said the barber. “What causes dandruff?” asked the customer. “It's dead skin. A man would have dandruff all over his body if it didn't rub off on towels or his clothing. Some men have dandruff in their eyebrows and theirtnustache. Fair-haired men always have more dandruff than dark haired, because there is more alkaline matter in their skin. The skin gets dry and dies and then flakes off. A Pitiful Sight. What sadder sight can be imagined than that of a noble man, whom the world can ill afford to spare, stricken down in the prime of a useful life by consumption. Thousands are yearly filling consumptives’ graves who might be saved by the timely use of Dr. Pierce’s “Golden Medical Discovery,” which is a positive cure for consumption in its early stages. It is the best alterative and pectoral in the world. All druggists.

THE POLITICAL CALENDAR. REPUBLICAN NOMINATIONS. National Ticket. PRESirWNT—JAMES G. BLAINE, of Maine. Vice-president — .JOHN A. LOGAN, of Illinois. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS. State at large—Milo S. Hascall, of Elkhart; John M. Butler, of Marion. First District—James C. Veatch, of Spencer. Second—William B. Roberts, of Sullivan. Third—John G. Berkshire, of Jennings. Fourth—William D. Ward, of Switzerland. Fifth—Marshall Hacker, of Bartholomew. Sixth—Josiah E. Mellette, of Delaware. Seventh—Thad. S. Rollins, of Marion. Eighth—Eliots S. Holliday, of Clay. Ninth—. Tames Si. Reynolds, of Tippecanoe. Tenth—Truman F. Palmer, of White. Eleventh—James F. Elliott, of Howard. Twelfth—Joseph D. Ferrell, of Lagrange. Thirteenth—L. W. Royse. of Kosciusko. State Ticket. Governor— WlLLl AM H. CALKINS, of La Porte county. Lieutenant-governor —EUGENE 11. BUNDY, of Henry county. Secretary of State— ROBERT MITCHELL, of Gibson county. auditor of State— BßUCE CARR, of Orange county. Treasurer of State —ROGER R. SHIKL, of Marion countv. Attorney-general— WlLLlAM C. WILSON, of Tippecanoe county. Judge of the Supreme Court. Fifth District —EDWIN P. HAMMOND, of Jasper county. Reporter Supreme Court —WILLIAM M. HOGG ATT. of Warrick county. Superintendent of Public Instruction — BARNABAS C. HOBBS, of Parke county.

THE STATE CANVASS. Republican meetings will be held in the State and addressed as follows: HON. BENJ. HARRISON AND JOHN L. GRIFFITHS Will speak as follows: Connersville, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. GOV. ALBERT G. PORTER Will speak at Bloomfield, Saturday. Nov. 1, afternoon. Rochester, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. GEN. LEW WALLACE Will speak as follows: Rockville, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. WILLIAM H. WEST, Os Ohio, will speak as follows: Monticello, Saturday, Nov. 1. afternoon. Delphi, Saturday, Nov. 1. night. Peru. Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. JOHN M. BUTLER, Candidate for presidential elector at large, will speak as follows: Crawfords'ville, Saturday, Nov, 1. afternoon. HON. A. J. BEVERIDGE, Os Illinois, will speak as follows: Waterloo, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Lagrange, Monday, Nov. 3. afternoon. HON. CHAS. FOSTER. Os Ohio, will speak at Waterloo, Saturday, Nov. 1. afternoon. HON. A. C. RANKIN, Os Pennsylvania, will speak at Cambridge City, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. JOHN M. THAYER, Os Nebraska, will speak as follows: Shoals, Saturday. Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. SAMUEL. R MASON, Os Pennsylvania, will speak as follows: Snoddy’s Mills, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. CAPTAIN JOHN M’CAFFEKTY, Os California, will speak as follows: Seymour, Saturday, Nov. 1. night. hon. John fehiienbatoh, Os Ohio, will speak as follows: Crown Point. Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Elkhart, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. J. MILTON TURNER, Os Missouri, will speak as follows: Lima, Saturday, Nov. 1, night. Lagrange, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. WILLIAM H. GIBSON, Os Ohio, will speak as follows: Kokomo, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. E. O. HUBBARD, Os Kentucky, will speak as follows: Mount Vernon, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon; HON. A. M. HARDY, Os Kentucky, will speak as follows: Shoals, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. GENERAL J. W. FINNELL, Os Kentucky, will speak at Mount Vernon, Saturday. Nov. 1, at 2 P, M. HON. WILLIAM B. ROBERTS Candidate for presidential elector, will speak as follows: Bloomfield. Saturday, Nov. 1. night. Sullivan, Monday, Nov. 3, night. HON. JAMES C. VEATCH. Candidate for presidential elector, will speak as follows. Pike county, Saturday, Nov. 1. HON. C. T. DOXEY AND B. K. HIGINBOTHAM Will speak as follows:* Anderson, Saturday. Nov. 1, night. HON. CHAS. L. HOLSTEIN Will speak at Montezuma, Saturday. Nov. 1. afternoon. HON. LEE YARYAN. Will speak at Mount Vernon, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Clinton, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. THOMAS HANNA, Lieutenant-governor, will speak at Crown Point, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. THOMAS H. NELSON Will speak as follows: Muucie. Saturday. Nov. 1, afternoon. Mitehel, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. WILL. A. KEARNEY, The young Irish orator, will speak as follows: Fort Wayne. Saturday, Nov. 1, night. Lafayette, Monday, Nov. 3, night. GEORGE W. HIPPLE, The eloquent blacksmith, will speak at Indianapolis, Saturday. Nov. 1, night. Now Albany. Monday, Nov. 3, night. HON. W. R. GARDINER Will speak at Alfordsville, Saturday. Nov, 1. afternoon. Mitehel, Monday, Nov. 3, night. HON. BILLY WILLIAMS. Will speak as follows: Waterloo, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Warsaw, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. SIMPSON LOWE Os Bedford, will speak in Daviess county, Saturday, Nov. 1. HON. A. C. HARRIS Will speak as follows: New CastK Saturday, Nov. 1. Franklin, Monday, Nov. 3. HON. JAMES C. DENNEY Will speak as follows: Ed ward sport, Saturday, Nov. 1, night. HON. WILL CUMBACK Will speak as follows: Anderson, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. OLIVER T. MORTON Will speak as follows: Decatur, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Lagrutige, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. JOHN OVERMYER Will speak as follows: Corydou, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. THAD 8. ROLLINS Will speak at Veedersburg. Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. N. R PECKINPAUGH Will speak as follows: Jericho. Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. Alton, Saturday, Nov. 1, night. Leavenworth, Monday, Nov. 3, night. HON. WM. D. WARD, Candidate for Elector, will speak as follow*: Dearborn county, Nov. 1. HON. J. F. ELLIOTT Will speak as follows: Adams county, Nov. 1. HON. EDWARD H. GREEN Will speak as follows: Dearborn county, Saturday, Nov. 1.

HON. W. A. JOHNSON Will speak in Jamestewn, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. __ HON. D. P. BALDWIN Will speak at Crown Point, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. , HON> R * B. F - PEIRCE \\ ill speak at Shoals. Saturday, Nov. 1. afternoon. Mitehel, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. JAMES M. SHACKELFORD Will speak as follows: Mount Vernon, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. WM. C. WILSON Will speak at Delphi, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon, liemingston, Monday, Nov. 3, afternoon. * HON. JOHN B. ELAM W ill speak at Huntington, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. GEORGE W. FRIEDLY Will speak as follows: Corydon, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. OOL. K. P. DE HART Will speak at Delphi, Saturday, Nov. 1, afternoon. HON. JOHN W. RAY Will speak at Westfield, Monday, Nov. 3, night. HON. JOHN L. GRIFFITHS Will speak at Winamac, Monday. Nov. 3, afternoon. HON. JOHN A. BRIDGLAND AND HON. JOHN L. RUPE Will speak at Knighttown, Monday. Nov. 3, night,

LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE. Can Any Consistent Man Vote the Prohibition Ticket. To the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal: Will the Prohibition party persist in its determined effort to help elect the Democrats to office? It is now reduced to a certainty that the only hopes of the Democratic party entertain of electing Cleveland and Hendricks are founded upon what they can accomplish with the Liquor League on one side and the Prohibitionist on the other, thus presenting the strange spectacle of using men of diametrically opposite opinion to accomplish the same end. If the Prohibition party so called is so utterly devoid of principle or its leaders 30 dull they cannot comprehend the fact that it is being used as a tool to consummate a Democratic triumph it is time temperance men would disown the entire Prohibition ticket If any evidence is lacking to prove the enormity of the corrupting influences the Democratic party is willing to select to gain the offices we refer them to the action of the Democratic Supreme Court of Ohio, in breakingdowu the Scott law. After taxing saloons enormously and after the saloon men have paid the license exacted and made arrangements to carry on a traffic'in conformity with the provisions of the law, and have demanded the shutting up of the many little drunk holes which have been causing dissipation, the announcement is made that tho municipal authorities that have beeu using this tax thus collected to save the people from a direct tax must refund it to the men who, if the Democratic theory be correct that the consumer nays the duty, have collected this amount from their customers. The people of Ohio must now have their homes taxed to pay back what has already been paid from the pockets of the men who drink, thus making the people pay twice and in two assessments a* tribute to Democratic corruption. If the Prohibition ticket is supported by temperance men under these circumstances, we will tell them right here and now that it will set back that great reform ten years, and maybe disorganize any reliable temperance work in the country. The liquor men are disgusted with a movement so revoking as this act of the Supreme Court of Ohio, and the Germans. who the Democrats think can only bo captured with whisky, aro disgusted with it. I was in Cincinnati when the decision was announced and talked with two leading Germans of that city who openly owned that no such bait could catch the German vote of Ohio, and that in their opinion it would drive thousands of Democratic Germans from the support of that party. J. w. h. Oct. 30. A Word to tlie Nationals. , To the Editor of the Iml anapoliw Journal: ' I desire to say a word to the Nationals. The leading issues you have made are: First—That the United States had power, under the Constitution, to issue Treasury notes whenever they saw fit. and to give them the legal tender quality. Within the last year the Supreme Court has decided that such power was vested in the government, thus taking this issue out of politics. Second—For the coinage of silver, Third —For issue of gold and silver certificates. Fourth—That the government should honor its own paper by making its notes receivable for customs duties. This is all done under the law as it now stands. And I do not believe that any party would dare lay a finger on any of these laws to repeal them. Fifth—You demanded the abrogation of all banks of issue. The fact that there is now nearly $-40,000,000 in the treasury of the Nation for the purpose of redeeming national bank notes goes to show that they are likely to disappear as banks of issue without any legislation on the question, and if such is a fact, you will surely admit that to be the better way to dispose of the question. You and the Republican party are one on the tariff question, Butler being one of the soundest men on that question in the Nation, occupying precisely the same position that Blaine does. Blaine is surely as true an American as Butleria. The Republican party has declared for the eighthour law and labor bureau. What more can you hope to accomplish in that direction? Now, candidly, what is left of the original Greenback priuciples except what the Republican party is now advocating? Inflation is a Democratic idea, originated and urged by M. M. Pomeroy, one of the shrewdest and most unscrupulous of the Democratic leaders. You surely have no hope of electing Butler, and if you are honest about the labor question, how can you throw your vote away on a man you can not otect, when by voting for Blaine you can make the triumph of your principles an assured fact? John N. Hudelson. Col. Ritter Has Been for Blaine All the Time. To the Editor of tho lndiaunpolin Journal: You publish an interview with me in this morning’s paper. My conversation yesterday with a Journal man was not understood to be an interview, and I feel that I am entitled to an explanation in your paper. Your interview and comments would indicate that I had just become a convert to the support of Blaine. I was for Blsine before his nomination. and have been ever since. In the prohibition movement in this State are a large number of men who are for Blaine and the Prohibition State ticket also. Many are for Cleveland and the Prohibition State ticket. My position has been well understood by the Prohibition people all the time as for Blaine and the Prohibition State ticket. My confidence in Blaine, and my admiration and love as a soldier and comrade for John A. Logan, compel me to support these men, especially while Cleveland has any chance of being elected. E. F- Ritter. Indianapolis. Oct. 31.

A Too-Too Wedding. Philadelphia Press. Somebody writes to me describing a wedding which cortainly combined the aesthetic with the . picturesque and the “too-too” witlr the “utter.” The bridal pair stood under an awning of white flowers, supported on twenty-four silvered poles, which were held by young men and young women, alternately arranged. The gills wore amber silk, and the young men had amber velvet suits, with whito waistcoats. Burnett's Oocoaiue Promotes a vigorous and healthy growth of the hair. It has been used in thousands of cases where the hair was coming out, and has never failed to arrest its decay. Use Burnett's Flavoring Extracts—she best