The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-07-20
The Democratic Party-Its Issues and
t t. Its Future. UtH


t. L.. Its Future. uF
FTom the Times. f.f
The Democratic journals protest that the
party they serve is not dead. They predict
not only its continued existence, butts return
to power. And in corroboration of their state
ments they point to the numerical strength of
the Democratic minorities in New York and
other States which at present have Republican
governments.
Now, it is quite true that in respect of the
numbers that sustain its candidates, the Demo
cratic party is still powerful organization.
1t were idle to decry the force of party which
in more than one State came near success, and
which in many wages vigorous, though, for
the time, hopeless fight. The mere vitality
of a party, however, is not an assurance of
ultimate victory, nor is the cohesive quality
of strong minority a reason for believing that
it will soon grow into the majority. For grow
ng power implies an active sympathy with
public opinion-an appreciation of the tend
encies of contemporary thought, and an ability
to adapt itself to these as to the sources of
coming victory. 1t is because the Democratic
party lacks these characteristics that, with all
its numbers, it may still be described as dead
rallying for battle under the cries of bygOne
era, and persistently ignoring events which
have changed the whole aspect of our national
life.
The platforms adopted by the various Con-
ventions of the Democracy are the platforms
of party which has no claim upon the future.
All its sympathies, all its affiliations, all its
pretensiOns are connected with the past Its
only hope is that the country will discard the
war and its lessons, blot out of history the
trials and triumphs of the last six years, and
60 back to the questions of the Breckenridge
and Douglas campaign. The Constitution is
indeed the subject of much resolving on these
occasions. Take it at its own valuation, and
the Democracy might be considered the party
of the Constitution, if the frequent use of the
word were the only criterion of attachment. A
little examination destroys the illusion, and
reveals the fact that the Constitution by which
the Democratic Conventionists swear is the
! Constitution according to Taney. Slavery,
! bred Scott decisions, and States rights, as
! Calhoun expounded them, are essential fea-
! lures OF Democratic constitutionalism. The
war, in the opinion of the same party, was un-
! constitutional from beginning to end.
The means by which the war was carried to
a successful termination were in Democratic
| eyes grossly unconstitutional. When, there
fore, successive Conventions profess to make
the Constitution their anchor and at the same
time exclude from view the achievements and
consequences of the war, it is not unfair to
assume that the party concerned is Indifferent
to the great interests for which Union men
have contended and that the Constitution"
is cry used to conceal hostility to the only
condltons on which the peace and prosperity
OF the Union may be restored. The inference
is rendered yet more reasonable and just by
the pertinacity with which the Democratic
party oppose and assail all measures of recon-
struetion, imposing conditions by way of
guaranteeing the supremacy of the Union SEN
timent. The party which pretends to cham
pion the Constitution would bring back the
Southern States just as they were with Rebels
rampant and the freedmen at the mercy of a
cruel and arrogant class.
The leading orators of the party do not even
pretend TO accept as settled the lessons and
results OF the war. Mr.. Pendeton former
nominee for the Vice Presidency, in his recent
speech at st. Paul, makes no attempt to con
ceal purpose to disturb and, If possible, re-
verse the work Of Congress in the matter Of
reconstruction. AS he states the case, the wal