The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1869-03-04
Must ROgues Rule I!

According to indisputable Republican
authority (see Chicago Tribune extract
elsewhere), there are friends of thieves"
in the u. g. Senate,-who want to keep
other thieves, their personal and political
friends,-in Office,-and so they decline to
repeal the Tenure-of Office bill. The new
President having declared in favor of
honesty, economy, retrenchment, is
pledged, before the people, to turn these
thieves neck and heels out of office,-but
with this Tenure-of-0 Office bill tying his
hands, he can do little or nothing to make
that pledge good. The friends of the
thieves y in the Senate have him at their
mercy.-while the "thieves" out of the
Senste,-in the Custom Houses, the Post
Offices, the Internal Revenue Department,
etc.,-may keep on thieving, as much as
ever swapping their fingers at him, and
telling him to lay finger on them if he
dare.
The people ought to watch the contest
sharply. 1t concerns them more closely
even than it concerns General Grant To
keep the thieves or the thieves party in
Office, means an increase instead of q dimi-
mutton of the national debt, with indefi-
mite additions to the burdens of taxation
under which labor and industry are groan-
ing. There are scores of "truly lOil"
demagogues, now holding office under the
| Federal administration, who have grown
wealthy by other processes than savings
| from their salaries, and General Grant
thinks it would be a good way to begin
bis administration by turning these leeches
adrift-in order, if possible, to pat honest
men in their places. Here the thieves
| friends in the Senate are at issue with him
but as Grant, in business of this kind,
has the people with him, and for him, at
all hazards, let us hope that he will not
| flinch-but insist upon it, that, if he Is TO
| be President in fact, and if he is to exc
cute the laws in accordance with his oath
of office, somebody mas got to leave, v
and that that somebody must be not
the occupant Of the Executive man
I sion, but what the Chicago Radical
editor calls the thieves friends in and
out of the house at the other end Of the
avenue.
The Tcnure-of- Office bill was passed to
"spite" President Johnson, and the OK
cuse for it was, che was in sympathy
with rebels" Now, are we to be told
| that Gen. Grant, also, is in sympathy
/ be trusted" than Andrew johnson
| w SHsilA Dr. IlNSC SuDb(l1uSCo Clt
allowed to have weight with many people
who did not believe in Mr.. JOhnsOn'l
discretion or prudence, but We do not be
lieve they will avail now, simply in order
to keep public plunderers and the friends
of public plundercrs in Office.
The storm brewing between the Repub
! lean ms and outs on the repeal of th'
Tenure-of Office bill, EFFORTS the following
query from the Times, ian organ of The
outs y
! why does not some Senator bring in bill Il
abolish the Office of President and declare thu
Senate, rather the dominant party majority .
| the Senate, TO be the Executive power in the Gov
| eminent? IL would certainly look better to Dc
this, than to seek the same end by pecc-mea
legislation and by practical construction, as tn,
Senate is now doing"
Our neighbor is rather late in asking
question of this kind. Democrats asked
it years ago,-but were only scofed at by
the Times, and journals like the Times
therefor. Nevertheless, if the Conserva
tive Republicans are really sincere now
in trying to restore to the Executive tn,
Constitutional power and privileges o
which usurping Senate have deprived it
we shall try and forget their past short
comings-Ne,o York EreniRg ErpreSs.