The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1866-11-08
NAMEs vs.. TDRTNCTPLE.


forms of government, means govern
ment by the people, or that system of
government where the elective franchise
is extended TO its greatest limits, con-
sistent with the public safety, and gen.
eral welfare. A name having this
signi6cation, as matter Of course,
must be very popular with the masses
of the people. There might have been
time when the name and the eprinciples
of the Democratic party in this country
corresponded; but that time is so re-
mote as not to be within the recollection
of any of the present generation. Du-
ring all of the past thirty years, the
Democratic party has been the unyield-
ing advocate of slavery, and in favor of
a wealthy, landed aristocracy. Every
principle in sympathy with the masses
Of the common people has been ignored
by that party, By grand professions Of
love for the masses of the people. this
party was enabled so far to deceive the
ignorant, and especially the foreigners,
before they became acquainted with
parties in this country, as to keep the
ascendency for many years. But when
general intelligence had SO far enlight-
ened the masses as to endanger the
power Of this party longer to control
the Government, an attempt to per-
petuate this power by force of arms,
was the next resort. During the
progress of the late rebellion, the
Democratic party aided aud assisted the
rebels, rejoicing when a rebel victory
was achieved, and mourning over rebel
defeats. The party leaders, and the
party presses, declared that coercion
was unconstitutional, and that the re-
bellion never could be, or ought to be,
conquered. The doctrine of State
Rights, which is only another name for
secession, is yet held by the party as its
cardinal principle.
After the rebellion had been conquer
ed, and the traitors were in the power
of the conquerors, the Democratic party
demanded that the conquered traitors
should at once be restored to full power
in the Government they had fought SO
desperately to destroy. They demanded
this, as a right, and threatened another
rebellion if the people refused this lnso-
lent and outrageous demand.
The party went before the people
with this issue, and were again over
whelmed with defeat. Instead Of ac-
quiescing in the verdict of the people,
this party now claims that the people
are wrong, and that their decision shall
not stand, and that a man whom they
never elected President, but who occu-
pies that exalted position through the
crime of murder, perpetrated by a
Democrat, in the interest Of the Demo-
cratic party, shall force the people to
submit to his arbitrary will.
Now if the Democratic party has any
faith in the intelligence and integrity of
the people, and its name is designed to
mean what it imports, it ought to sub
init to the verdict of the people. But
the leaders Of the Democracy know, or
ought to know by this time, that the
: people have become too intelligent to
be deceived, and too honest longer to
perpetrate the Democratic practices of
wrong and oppression. This party
ought also to have learned by this time
that the people of this country cannot
be forced to do that which they refuse
to be persuaded to do. If the party has
not yet learned this salutary lesson, it
will be taught more forcibly, should an
other Democratic rebellion be inaugur-
ated