The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-08-03

eminent have secured their real triumph; for
then comes the hour of faction and the struggle
In which the popular perception Of right and
wrong is confused and lost in vile scramble
for power and Office between selfish pre-
tenders. - Ir.. . o..
And this is our danger now. We stand be-
tween the factions. On one hand we have the
radicals, guilty Of every crime that oan stain
the history of party; guilty of the meanest
ohicanery in calling the national victory theirs,
and perverting it to their party purposes;
guilty of outraging humanity itself in the dis
organization of Southern society, aud of the
most diabolicsl hypocrisy in pretending that
their use Of the negro is for the sake of equal
rights; guilty of indescribabe dishonesty in
violating that great pledge of the nation that
the war was not waged against the integrity OF
the States, and was only to secure the Union.
Such is one faotion-a party whose morality,
moderation and purpose are fitly typifed
by such exempars as Butler, Stevens,
and Sumner. 1t would be stolid,
servile and broken down people among whom
q party in such hands would not awaken
reaction. Reaction, therefore, is earnest, and
the people repudiate the pretense of these
leaders to settle the future peace of the nation
in accordance with the extreme views their
diseased intellects take of our position. But
whittier will the reaction carry us Into the
hands of faction equally to be feared; into
the hands OF the Democrats, who promise by
authority to reopen the questions that began
the war-to unsettle what was settled by the
carnage of four years-to revive the spirit
that put the sections of the country face to
face in battle. If the Democrats come into
power animated by such purpose, we have
nothing before us but perspective Of destruc-
tive contests, in which one or the other politi-
cal party, as it succeeds to power, will only
use the name of the Government to gloss q
reorganization whose real object will be po-
litical revenge.
In view of this attitude aud character of the
respective factions, what can the people do ?
They must look personally at the candidates
presented for their sutfrages; and here the case
has more promise. Seymour is nothing ex-
cept as he stands by his party. Grant is a
great figure only as he stands alone. With
Seymour in the Presidential chair, we must
expect to see the country governed simply on
such bogus Democratic principles as prevailed
before the war; when Democracy merely
meant servility to the Southern element. And
If Seymour were pushed aside to make room
for the more aggressive Blair, We should see
the Government taken to pieces and
put together again in sense
favorable to the men who led
Southern armies against it for four success
sive years. On that hand, therefore, we can
hope for nothing from the candidates bat
what we fear from their party. On the other
hand, Grant aud the party that was compelled
to nominate him stand wide apart. Grant is
Enthusiastically committed by his acts and his
words against every distinguishing principle
of that party. His first instinct was to treat
the conquered 'os generously, and the whole
history of the radicals is a revolt against that
manly impulse. In this one fact we see the
intellectual difference between the man and
his party, and they are equally different in all
other ways. Under Grant we may hope to see
the country governed uprightly and vigor-
ously, and the factions crushed, out; and we
peleye it is, therefore, for the people to sus-
tam Grant, trusting that tho faction that uses
his name may not be able to cripple his ad-
ministration.