The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-02-16
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1867.
Democracy Learning Primary Lessons


and break up the publication of anti-slavery
newspapers. In those days, our Democratic
brethren thought such affairs quite lively and
entertaining 1t was the faction Of the people,"
the "voice of the masses,' etc. etc. The sup
preston of an abolition journal was "good
thing, - to be rejoiced over and applauded.
The freedom of the press, that great and
glorious bulwark of civil liberty, was a subject
that they then took very little interest in.
The "whirligig of time'' has brought Won
derful changes. 1t is pro-slavery, and not
anti-slavery that is now unpopular. 1t is
pro-slavery journals, especially such of them
as support treason and rebellion, as they
generally do that now encounter the storms
of popular wrath. And it is quite amusing
to see how these journals have suddenly
become the most earnest advocates for the
freedom of the press. They can see its beauties
now. The suppression of newspapers is not
SO cheerful a subject as it once was to them.
They view it from quite new standpoint.
About ten years ago anti-slavery papers
we're mobbed and destroyed in st. Joseph,
Parkville, Leavenworth, and several other
places on the Missouri and Kansas border.
Inc Oeu1OCTdIC press VI Ille country udu no
remonstrances to offer. On the contrary, it
applauded the business as entirely proper and
right But the other day little ''conserva-
tive' organ in Ray county, Missouri was
'tgone for'' by some Of ''Fletcher's militia"
and 10 chorus of indignant remonstrances
went up from Democratic newspapers from
Missouri to Maine. 1t was their OK that was
gored this time.
In 1886 the party then in power in Ten
nessee, by an act of pure tyranny, disfran-
chised a portion of her citizens who had
enjoyed equal rights with themselves from
the foundation of the Government. These
disfranchised citizens were guilty of no crime
The act of disfranchisement was a simple and
inexcusable act of injustice We have never
to this day heard so-oalled Democrat denounce
that act. But just now the State of Tennessee
is proposing to disfranchise that portion of her
people who took part in the recent Rebellion
against the United States Government; and
we find the Democratic press of the country
generally descanting upon the rights of the
elective franchise and upon the injustice of
DISTINGUISHING Rebels. They have not even
yet raised themselves to the height of prin-
cjpIe on this question. They are not now op-
posed to the disfranchisement of citizens of
African descent, guilty of no crime
whatever, while they are opposed to the dis
fIanchisement of Rebels who they think
would vote the Democratic ticket.
In the days when the Democratic party bore
sway-those good old days of the ''Union as it
was"-when United States mails were rifed to
burn Abolition documents, when Atherton gag
rules prevailed to strike down the right of petit
tion in Congress, and when fugitive slave laws
abolished the trial by jury and made the whole
North vast hunting ground for human chat
tels--in those days We never knew or heard of
Democratic journals troubling themselves about
the rights of he minority. The only right the
minority had in those days was to be rode over
rough-shod by the brutal majority. Such men
as Wade and Chase and Sumner were even left
off of the Senate Committees, because they
were outside of any ''healthy' political organi-
cation.
Now, however, the Democracy has dis
covered that minorities have some rights, espe-
oially if they are Democratic minorities.
Who ever heard Democratic complaint, if
teen years ago, against ''gerrymanderingl' 1t
was one of the things upon which they prided
themselves. Congressional Districts, in which
one county would be tied to another fifty
miles away, for the express purpose of securing
Democratic member, were an everyday
affair. Now, however, we are lugubrously
told by a contemporary that ''the practice in
augurated and followed out by the radical
party of districting States so as to leave to the
minority Scarcely voice in State and national
affairs, has turned the attention of thinking
men to the subject, with view of curing the
evil, if possible, by legislation"
We would not have it inferred from the line
of remark we have taken that we countenance
injustice by any party or under any circum-
stances. The views we maintained when the
Republican party was in the minority, upon
the great topics of freedom of speech and of
the press, the rights of the elective franchise,
the rights of minorties, etc., we hold more
firmly than ever, now that we are in the ma
iority. We would see the rule of equal and
exact justice strictly and impartially applied,
irrespective of party color race, or condition.
Our simple desire in calling the attention OF
our Democratic brethren to the discrepancy of
their present and past positions is, il possible,
70 lead them to base their views upon the rock
of pr,pciple; so that they shall regret to see
Iii. ~ .