The Portland daily press., 1868-09-11
The Politics of the Ar1,sy.

When the Democrats are charged with dis
loyalty they undertake 10 repel the charge by
showing the number of Democrats in the ar
my during the war. They have very con-
venient way of reckoning. They subtract
from the whole number OF men in the field the
number who voted for Lincoln and call the
rest, as well those who did not as those who
did vote, Democrats. The charge of disloyalty
is brought against the present Democratic par
ty and hence they are not at liberty to prove
their loyalty by pointing to the example Oh
those who were Democrats before the war Dut
have since become Republicans How unfair
the Democratic mode of reckoning is, may be
seen by the conflicting results which 1t gives
when applied to our State.
Among the Maine so diers in the army Lin
coin received 1892 votes in 1864. Setting the
whole number OF soldiers from our own State
in the army at that tine at the very low esti-
mate of $4,000, We have if this IN ode of reckon
lag be correct, upwards of $4,000 Democrats
among them.
But what is the result of applying to the
Democratic vote this rule that all who do not
vote with one party belong to the other? for
Mcclellan had 473 votes among our soldiers
from Maine, leaving more than 4OOO Republic
cans instead of $4,000 Democrats. Any one
can see that this mode Of reckoning is hum
bug
Now it is reasonable to suppose that about
the same proportion OF Democrats as of Re
publicans voted in the army, and the best
available test of the relative patriotism of the
two parties is in comparison of the votes on
each side among the soldiers Lincoln's vote
among the soldiers of Maine was 1892; McClel-
lan's, 473. Among the soldiers of New Hamp-
shire Lincoln's majority was 1347 while his
majority on the much larger home vote was
only 2l82.
In Pennsylvania, Lincoln's majority on the
home vote was 5712, while on the army vote
not one tenth as large in the aggregate, bis
majority was IA 1863, there being more than two
Republican votes to one Democratic, among
the Pennsylvania soldiers.
In Ohio on a total home vote of 419 819 Lin
coins majority was 2S,197. while on soldiers
vote of 5O113, his majority was 1921, giving
more than four ffths of the Ohio soldiers to
the Republicans. aal1e
Among the Kentucky soldiers more than
two thirds were Democratic, the reason OF
which need puzzle no one.
Among the Iowa soldierst here were II $40
Republican votes to 1921 Democratic, the rela.
tive strength of Republicans on the home
vote being only 60 per cent. while on the ar.
my vote it was 80 per cent.
Statistics from the other states are not al
hand, but these are fair sample. They show
which party it was that furnished the soldiers
and fought the battles of the Union. They
fully explode the boast so often made by Dem
ocratic orators that the Republicans monopo-
lized all the offices in the army leaving the
poor Democrats to do the hard fighting. They
show that in no case did the Democratic party
furnish more than one soldier when the Re-
publicans furnished two, and that oftener the
latter sent to the war five where one was sent
by the former. Figures do not lie. Let not
tt at party which is now and always has been
leagued with the traitors who stole our forts
and arsenals, succeed in stealing from the 10y
al party the honor of suppressing the REBEL
ion.