The Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1865-1870, 1868-09-23
HOW THE ISSUE WAS MADE.

1
. ate consistency while deploring its lacl
, of discretion. The assembled repre-
seutatives of the National Republican
party at Chicago insisted upon making
the war for the Union and it glories al
Issue in the Presidential campaign
When the Democracy met at Tammany
they might have done much toward
spiking our gun if they had acted upon
wiser counsels, and nominated Hancock
At Chicago too, the justice of the re-
suit of the war in its effect upon slavery
was made an issue. The Democracy
had an opportunity to steal our thun-
der by nominating Chase. They chose,
instead, to attack our strong points,
when greater wisdom and superior gen.
eraiship would have sought to flank or
turn them.
Grant is the embodiment of vigorous
war for the suppression of the rebel
lion and Colfax is as good represen-
tative as could be found of the progress
and strength Of free soilism. There is
every evidence that the war was popular
at the North and that its just results
are demanded by the people. 1t re
quires no extraordinary ssgacity to see
these things yet the Democracy has
the hardihood to set its face against
existing facts and stake the hazard OF
the die upon a chance of reputation
of the victory at Appomattoz. Apar.
from his evident fitness for the position
of President, Grant is considered en-
titled to it because Of his great military
services and yet as near as ny of his
subalterus might do so, Hancock would,
as the Democratic candidate, have d.
yided the honors with him. Cass was
war man but Taylor with the laur-
els won in Mexico was judged entitled
to the glories of the hour. The Wing
party in 1852 thought to gain another
victory with another hero of that war
and SO they nominated Scott but the
Democracy divided the Mexican Donors
by nominating General Pierce, and the |
hero of Lundy's Lane was defeated |
With this hint to guide them, the Dem
ocracy of 1868 would have displayed |
more sagaci,y had they given their
to Hancock. 1t seems to US |
that, taken as matter of judgement.
or misjudgement rather, the Democ
racy have been as unwise in their selec
ton of a candidate for the Presidency
as the Republicans would have been
bad they made their nominations after
The Democrats, and put a civilian like
Stanton in the field against such rec
oguized hero of the war as RoSecraus
TIE fact is, no sound war man would
enter the field against Grant. The
: loyal Governor cannot be pointed
~, who would have accepted the nom
nation which Seymour took. The men
IF perfect war record like Curtain and
Tod aud Morton and Andrew and Yates ,
ejoice in Grants nomination. Each t
# them had as much claim upon the
Presidential nomination al the hands !
f the Republican party as any other q
ood friends of the country in the civil :
7a.izs of life. But their principles and
be ends which they wished to see sub :
ervei lie parallel with those which
rant represents and which his canli
acy promises most certainly Of all 4
Their men, to conserve and yiHdicate. \
he ugly question comes Up, then, I" If
eymour approved Of the war and its
esults las i, is claimed he did why =
oes he desire to defeat tie great hero
that war % The answer is in the
emocratic Platform and that answer ?,
consistent with the acts and declara- Il
ons Of Hura,io Ssymou: il 1868. ii
The head of the Democratic ticket is,
lerafcre, tie representative maa OF ic
lat party at the North which tried to u
e the hands Of the Government when f,
WAS DEALING with Rebellion and ID