The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-09-11
Parties and the People.

From the ~. y Times,
In connection with either the prospect OF
the existence of the Rebellion or with the
great question of restoration, we have had
three appeals to the people. The first was in
1860. Then the question was, shall those
who intimidate the country by the threat OF
war, in the event of their defeat, control the
Government Even the Democrats were not
united, and the Republican party obtained the
succession.
The advent of this new party to power was
marked by moderation. 1t held out the olive
branch of peace. 1t took the defensive atti 4.
tude. 1t said-'If you of the South attack
the Government, our pledge is recorded to
defend it; but we contemplate no aggression
upon established institutions" This was no
new attitude on the part of the incoming party.
1t had never been identified with abolitionists
1t had opposed slavery in the Territories only
and that was fair field for the antag onism.
The result of this territorial conflict was to
decide the history of the nation for many
generations to come. But the Democratic
party in the South had distinctly threatened
disunion in case this contest ehould result in
favor of the free labor system, and it kept its
word. 1t is true that when Fort Sumter was
attacked, the whole North was swayed by the
patriotic enthusiasm of the moment. But
soon there was q schism among Northern
Democrats-a division upon the very question
And what was the resultP When the Re-
publican party again appealed to the people,
in 1864, large portion Of the old Democratic
party refused TO support the Chicago Conven-
tion which nominated Mcclellan and Pendle-
ton. That Convention was an insult to the
people; it assumed that the republic could
not maintain itself against rebellion; it coun-
selled surrender. That invitation came TO
the people as ''an idle wind which they re-
spected not;" and Mcclellan gained only
twenty electoral votes.
Two years later, in 1866, a third appeal was
made. The war was over. The disbanded
soldiers OF the Union army had returned to
peaceful pursuits; the soldiers OF the Confede-
derate army had returned home with their
paroles in their pockets. The question was
no longer one of maintaining the war against
rebellion, for the nation had gained COM
plete victory-a victory which was complete,
be 1t remembered, only because we refused TO
follow the cowardly advice of those who de-
pTecated nothing SO much as the consumma-
tlon of such triumph. The question now
was, how best to secure the Submission of a
defeated section to honorable and Just terms
| OF civil restoration" Here again, the people
maintained their old purpose, and decided in
! favor OF the Fourteenth Amendment.
Another and final appeal is now to be made
| to the same tribunal. And under what cir
cumstances The opposition remains pre-
clsely the same that 1t was on the previous
occasions. Why should it have been defeated
then, and be sucoe sful now Has the Demo
cratic party learned anything from its former
defeats, and dees it now present any more
reasonable or more honorable policy ? What
distinction are We to make between either the
agents or the motives which respectively con
trolled the Democratic Conventions of 1864
and 1862
The Democrats contend that though they
L. II
Of action, they have more favorable basis Of
operations in the present campaign. But have
they Their claim rests upon an alleged popur
lar reaction against the Congressional policy
OF reconstruction. They cannot gain single
vote except upon this consideration. Now, in
the first place, what is called reaction was
indicated only by the absence from the polls