The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-07-18
Sham Democracy Brought to the Test of
Facts.


lenged on that very account. Both their authors
and everybody else know them TO be false. VI
this character are the following from our
Democratic contemporary
GAS long as the Democratic party held the
reins of government the nation was united AM
prosperous, the people band OF DrotneFs' Ine
constitutional Tp BIT, OF the states we're respeCUel,
their Just functions admlVled, anu tnelT re'eIVyu
power unuuC STONED. From Maine 10 Texas the
same prInciple was applied. The Democratc c
rule admitted no sectional or geO9rapntcdl
division or distinction. The same Constitution
that held the North IN subiecton, aad guaraa.
teed the rights OF its humole,t citizen, presided
over the des ines OF the South. No North, no
South, no Fast, no West was a reality under
Democratic administration. Sectiolallsm was
impossible while tAe Democratic party was III
Lower"
1t would be difficult to crowd greater num-
Der of notorious alsehoods into an equal num-
Der of lines. We would like to ask our contem-
porary who ''beld the reins OF government
when this Rebellion broke out? Who was in
the Presidential char? Who constituted the
Cabinet? Who had msiority of the Senate!
Who controlling voice in the Supreme Court?
The Democratic party was in full possession Of
every department of the Government. 1t was
only by its dark-hearted treachery to the Uuion,
and its thorough compl cicy with traitors, that
the Rebellion was enabled to obtain such head
way before Alr. LINCOLN and the Republican
party assumed the "Teins of government"
that terrible and Lloody war was
forced upon the country. Had the Democratic
party been oval the Rebellion would have been
crushed in the bud; ay, had that party been
loyal there would have been no Rebellion at all
The Rebellion ,Ods itself a rebellion Of Me Demo-
cratic party. That party had been beaten in the
Presidential election of 1860, and straightway
it's leaders organized the Rebellion, and Demo
cratic administration allowed them to prosecute
it unchecked until it had assumed such dl,nen-
sious that tremendous war or the overthrow
of the Government was inevitable. This was
the condition of affairs when the Democratic
parry, in the person of JAMES BUCHANAN,
dropped the '1eins Of governmen~ from its
imbecile grasp, and the Republican party took
them up. Hardly five years have passed since
these events occurred, and yet this tool OF the
dsunioulsrs has the braZen etfronJery to assert
that ''as long as the Democratic party held the
reins of government the nation was united and
prosperous, and the people band OF brothersW
So too, its assertion that ''scctionalism was i'm
possible while the Democratic party was in
power" is notorously, glariugly, unmitigatedly
false. The Democratic party, during all the
later years Of its power, wa: essentially, emphati
cally, and entirely sectional party. 1t lived,
moved, and had It's beng in sectioualIsm. Its
ideas were sectionai; its policy was sectional;
its aims we're sectionPl its administration of me
Government was sectional. From the advent OF
FRANKLIN PIERCE to the departure of JAMES
BUCHANAN, the Democratic party was nothing
butya sectional pro-slavery party. 1t was the
Zoo = oil nd in oil nj of
every truly national idea. The only interests
it pretended to conserve we're the sectional in
terests OF mere handful Of Southern slave
holders-a miserable oligarchy OF only
some three hundred thousand out of
thirty millions OF people. To these sectional in
terests it bent all its energies. To build ND this
sectional power it prosututed all the depart.
ments of the Government Ali our foreign min
listers were pro-slavery fanatics, the toaties of
foreign despo's, and reproach to our tree insti-
tutions. Our domestic officers we're the lackeys
of the slave power. Devotion to pro-slavery
sectlonalism was prerequisite to Advancement
and position in the Democratic party. No man
who failed to abase himself body and soul at the
feet of the sectional slave power was tolerated
in the Democratic party. 1t slaughtered MAR
TIN VAN BUREN because he would not cat dirt at
its bidding. 1t pursued STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS
to his grave with Unsuitable revenge, because
ne dared, Oh the Lecompton question, to follow
the dictates OF Justice and the national good,
rather than the wicked sectional demands of the
slave power. The infamous sectionalism oi
slavery was all that the Democratic party lived
TOR. In obedience to that it dragged the Judi
cial ermine iu the mire, and gave US the doc
trines of atheishc barbarism from the highest
tribunal in the land. In obedience to that, il
tramp.ed down the rights OF the States
violated the trial by jury, offered brides tt
Federal officers to send innocent men int
hopeless bondage, and made the cities and field
of the North a vast huntingground wher
hendish slaye-catchers might hunt their huma
game!
These are facts-notorious, known of all mer
paIt OF the common poli-cal history OF tn
country; and yettOis sectional, pro-slavery orga
has the duddcity TO say that "sectonalsm wa
impossible while the Democratic party was
powerl" Does this impudent scribbler suppo;
that the people have all lost their memories
Or does he imagine that because he lDr1tes fals
hoods an intelligent community believes them
Vain work, all this. The Democratic part
has written its record in the woes of the copl
try. Every life lost, North and South, durin
the late Rebellion was victim laid upon I'll
altar of Democratic sect onalism, Every dollI
of taxes beyond what we used to pay, is a CO.
trbution from our pockets to deIray the e
penses of Democratic sectionalism. All IL
perils of our past we're due, and all the DANCE