The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-08-21
The Political SituntiOn-1S6S and 1852
Seymour Another Poor Pierce.


saying is true. We see it in the records of
empires and dynasties and in the vicisstudes Of
our own political parties. In truth, the polti-
cal contests of the present day, in the Old
World and the New, are the same as those of
the past with some changes, more or less in
the issues and in the mixing of the elements
on both sides. The terrible deluge of 1889,
which overwhelmed the ancient no6tesse Of
| France and swept off her Bourbons, did not
extinguish her pre-existing political parties.
| So from the wrecks and ruins of the great
| American deluge of 1861 our two great parties
of 1860 substantially reappear to day. South
ern slavery and the old ruling Southern
Bourbon aristocracy have been swept of, but
still there is a striking general resemblance be-
tween the democratic campaign of 1852, under
the banner of poor Pierce, and the campaign OF
| 1868, under the banner of Seymour.
In 1852 the wing candidate was General
| Scott, chieflain who in his military reputation
stood as General Grant now stands or as King
Saul stood among the mighty men of Israel in
| his day-a head and shoulders above them all.
In the outset the supporters of Scott supposed
that his military renown would surely give
them the victory; but there were underlying
causes at work which brought about the cleo
ton of poor Pierce in an overwhelming
majority of the electoral and popular vote,
North and South. The position of Scott was
satisfactory; there was nothing alarming,
though much that was amusing, in his letters
Al
and the other ruling abolition spirits Of the
whig party that stood behind Scott were dis
trusted by the people. Those leading spirits,
it was feared, would control his administration
if Scott were elected, and in upsetting on the
abolition tack the great compromise measures
of 1850 would endanger the peace and safety
of the country in the reopening of Pandoras
box on the slavery question. Hence the other
wise astonishing electoral and popular vote by
which poor Pierce and his party were restored
to power. Thus all the military glories of
Scott, from Chippewa and Niagara to Vera
Cruz and Chepultepec, were as but dust in the
balance.
Now, is il not apparent to the naked eve
that there are underlying and overshadowing
causes in this campaign which obscure the
military glories of Grant? Admitting that he
is a safe and sound man, and that the people
so believe him to be, are there not reasons for
the declaration that the people distrust the
ruling spirits and managers of the party who
stand behind him? We have only to look back
to the vote of New York in November, 1864,
to see that while Seymour was weaker than
Fenton the republican party was stronger than
Lincoln. We see in 1868 the party in its con-
fessed weakness, from the elections of 1867,
relying upon tie strength OF its candidate; but,
on the other hand in the local elections of the
present year, so far, since the nomination of
General Grant we have no evidence that his
great name has turned the drift of the popular
tide of last year. In fact, as in 1892 on the
national bank question the run of General
Jackson was surprise to both parties, 80 in
1868 there is possibility that on the national
banks, bonds and taxes there may be an equally
surprising result.
We think there is no reason TO fear that with
General Grants election the administration
will fall under the control of the revolutionary
radicals, but every reason to believe that in
his quiet way, and more decisively than Lin
coln Grant will be the master of the admins
tration and of Congress, and that the country
will be safe In his hands, although his general
policy may bring about complete reconstruc-
ton of principles and parties. On the other
hand, from the popular distrust of the revolu-
tionary radical leaders, and from the universal
uneasiness of the people upon these important
matters of the debt and the bonds, and the
burden of taxes necessary to meet even the
gold interest on the bonds, assuming that there
is probability Of Seymour's election and
possibility that II may be as decisive as that of
poor Pierce, what shall we gain thereby?
From all the lights before us we shall gain only
another Pierce administration. The same lead
ers, the same fire-eaters, the same heresies
and the same laundering influences that con-
trolled Pierce will, from oil the signs of the
times, control Seymour.
Pierce was elected on the compromise mea-
sures of 1850. He was thus elected because
on this platform the people believed he would
maintain the peace and harmony Of the coun-
try on the slavery question inaugurated by
those great peace measures Of Henry Clay.
But we all know that poor Pierce became as
| pliable as wax in the hands OF the revolu-
tionary Southern slaveholding oligarchy; we
know that he thus became willing tool in the
repeal of the Missouri compromise, the founda-
ton stone Of the adjustment of 1850, and we
know what followed. His administration pre-
pared the way, and that of his successor,
Buchanan, plunged the South into the abyss
of the shareholders rebellion. We see now
that, as far as they have survived, the same
elements that controlled poor Pierce controlled
the Tammany Convention and control the
democracy In this canvass, and will control
20 alaa4ai