The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-09-21
General Grant and His slanderors.


General Grant and Ills Slanderers.
From 1te ~. Y. Times. .-
IT ia very evident that respectable Demo-
orats are disgusted at the way in which their
partisan journals have carried on the canvass
against General Grant. When it is remem-
bered how this distinguished General stood
before the American public three years ago
what a career of unequalled military bril-
liancy and success his had been; what faithful
service he had done for the country; what
patience and tenaoity he had manifested while
all others were discouraged; what power Of
combination, of tactics, OF strategy he had
shown, placing him, in the view of all Euro
pean military critics, in the first rank of
great historical soldiers, and how humbly and
mOdestly he had borne himself under his
laurels; how unanimous the journals of both
parties we're in his praise at the close OF the
war; how all lauded his moderation in victory
as equal to his energy in the campaign and
his genius in the battle e-feld-when all this
is remembered, it is impossible to read the
abuse and calumny printed against him now
in Democratic sheets without indignation and
amaZement.
II is comparatively easy now to sit down and
criticize and calumniate the heroic labors and
grand services of such men as General Grant
and his associates. But the party hounds who
are trying to hunt down noble game with their
scandals, cannot have yet forgotten the years
of Encouragement and defeat in the early part
of the war, when General after General was
tried and found wanting, and our bravest and
best were laid in bloody graves. 1t is not SO
long ago, that they cannot remember the thrill
OF elation that passed through the free States
when Fort Donelson was captured by the en-
ergy of Grant-the first ray of victory, except
that from Fort Henry, after long night of
defeat or the long waiting for Vicksburg-so
long that their present candidate ventured
openly to sneer at the possibility OF its capture
and then the news of that bold stroke of ge-
MUS by Grant, when he passed the fortress,
left his base and supplies, struck into the
enemy's country, and separating two of the
Rebel armies who together outnumbered him,
beat them each in detail and fastened his
grasp on the key Of the Mississippi, never to
be relaxed.
Surely some Of these petty detractors who
are cropping around amid the refuse of gossip
In society, to cast filth at heroic name, might
have the grace to recall the public gratitude
when We first heard that, through the genius
of this great soldier, the Mississippi was ours,
and, whatever now happened, the Confederacy
could never extend to the westward OF that
great river. Or they might recall the relief
of the North, when they first heard that the
army OF Rosecrans was relieved from its state
OF siege in Chattanooga, and the Rebel forces
were attacked in their heights Gin the clouds,
leonic tactics originating solely from the brain
OF this butcher and "cotton speculator,n
and 30 beaten that no head was afterwards
made by the Rebel armies in any region out
side of Virginia. .s'o. .
Surely, too, these captious critics cannot
forget the shout of admiration which then rang
from Democratic mouths over this action--the
most brilliant battle Gn tactics) in modern
times; or that great campaign in Virginia
great in the tenaoity and energy displayed
against vast obstacles, and to be considered as
only part of vast plan, conceived and con-
trolled by this able strategst; campaign, it
Is true, sadly memorable for its losses (Which,
however, were no greater than had followed
the unsuccessful campaigns of preceding
Generals), but made forever illustrious by its
Valor and its magnificent victories and results
lis this to be forgotten? The great army
and chief of the Confederacy were here held in
an iron grasp, while General Sherman gutted
the South and our whole forces finally closed
about the Rebel armies. If the losses were
great, so was the victory; and in war, the most
thorough success is the greatest humanity.
In 1868 General Grant stood as no one but
General Washington has ever stood in our his
tory the second savior of the country-a
soldier unstained by cruelty and man never
sullied by dishonor, and never involved in our
party strifes, and therefore entitled to a re-
spectful treatment by his political opponents.
How is he treated, now when three years have
passed away! The Democratic press can
hardly find words to express their contempt
for his abilities or their condemnation for his
character. He is not General Grant, he is
"H. U. Grant," he is the "molasses thief"
the "pony stealer," the "cotton speculator,"
the "drunkard," the "deaf and dumb" He
is spoken of as "HiraIn on a SPREE" or, in
more dignifed abuse, as the "butcher," the
"tyrant," the military ignoramus," and as
"holding million bayonets to the throat of
the South.'
This abusive slang reminds one of the low
ISLANDERS at Washington when the Democracy
began their career. 1t will surely end in the
same manner.