The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1865-10-27
Was tho Press Honest I'm 1868 or II
IL Honest MOVIE

It praised Mr.. RICE as one of the most
pat riotic of the citizens of the Northwest
in 1868. It now denounces him as the
most unpatriotic knave. 1t commended
him then as a model ofloyalty. It de.
nounces him now as disloyal traitor. He
was then "the glass Of fashion and the
mould of form for all Democrats to mould
and fashion themselves by. He is now
unworthy of being trusted or followed by
either Democrats or Republicans.
Now when We consider that Mr.. RICE has
done no act since 1868 except to refuse to
follow them into all the coils, kinks and
twists of niger equality and opposition to
President JoHNsoNs reconstruction poll
cies; when we consider that the dreadful
crimes of disloyalty and sympathy with
rebels which are now charged on him by
the Press in such glazing capitals and
perorations, were each and. all as well
known matters of record then as now, the
question comes up with much foroo was
the Press honest in 1868 when it COM
mended Mr.. RICE az loyal, honorable
glorious Union man and statesman whose
patriotism is a. wide as his country and as
sincere and self.sacri6cing as 1t was wide.
Was the Press sincere and honest in these
opinions Of Mr. Rloz3 Ofoourse it was hon.
est. The Press will hardly impeach its own
honesty. It will not deny that it was
honest. It buried Mr.. RIoEs record in
oblivion then, just as it did ANDREW JoHN-
soHs secession record, and BEay. Bur1xRs
JIM. DAvu-ism, and DANIEL 8. D1oXM.
soHs and HORACE GRxNEYs seoessionism.
Each and ill of these men had the same
opinions about peace and war, coercion
and compromise, As Mr.. R1oz, and all
changed as soon a. war was declared.
The Press, like Senator WILSON, warmly
embraced and fraternized with Mr.. R1or.
he is precisely the same now he was then
his acts since then are not the acts COM
planned Of The only charge is he is now
Democratic candidate for Governor.
Now the Press wishes to elect MARSHALL
Governor, and this loyal, patriotic Union
man of 1868, endorsed and vouched for
by the Press, suddenly becomes ga trait
Or" "a disloyal wretch" q seoessionist
who was willing to betray his country to
rebels, and utterly unworthy trust orc on.
fdenoe. Is the Press honest now in 1866
in this changed opinion.
Are you honest or not, Mr.. Press a.?
Is white white or is it black2 Is black
black or is it whitea Is q Union man q
disunionist? or is q patriot traitor?
If patriot is q traitor, is q traitor a pa.
triot. 1868 and 1865 must be made to
agree; for you are honest and of course
will not blow hot and cold. Did you fra
ternize and endorse and take to your
bosom in 1868 man whose record Won
now say was 'reeking With treason" then.
for that record aoas then made up. Did
you try to palm him off on your readers
as patriot and Union man? Did Won
commend his example, with that record
"reeking with treason" to the Demo-
Gratis Of 4innesota7 If you did these
things, Mr.. Press, one of two things must
be true. Either you honestly believed
Mr.. RICE q patriot and Union man with
all Luis record before you, or you willfully
and wickedly tried to cheat and defraud
the honest people of Minnesota into &C.
cepting and trusting a deep-dyed traitor
and scoundrel by your own confession for
the meanest and basest party purposes.
Which horn of the dilemma will you
take2 viii you admit that you were
wickedly trying to palm off q traitor for
Union man In order to make party cap
ital?
OF course, being honest you win not,
but will take the other horn, and say 1--WE
were honest in commencing NJ. RIoE as q
patriot and Union man, entirely worthy
Of the trust and confidence of the people
of Minnesota"