The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-07-29


respect nothing to choose. Both we're hostile
to the authority of the Union at the outbreak
Of the war. Neither became loyal under cir
cirstances which entitled him to any special
credit Ex-Governor Brownlow, who can be
no more suspected of sympathy with Rebels
than Mr.. Boutwell,, declares that, with twen-
ty-ive years knowlege of both candidates, his
preference is for Senter. 81 have closely
watched their political course, says the old
man, land give it us my candid opinion that
Governor Senter's personal character is the
better of the two; that his political record is
more consistent; and that, in point of ability
and craftsmanship, he is far superior" We
do not accept this testimony as conclusive,
but it forms n tolerably good set-off to the
Secretary's partiality for Stokes.
If a superior personal or political record
cannot be claimed for Stokes, is he entitled
to consideration because of greater regular
ity in his nomination? Is he the regular Re-
publican candidate, and Senter the bolter?
Certainly not. The convention called to
nominate a candidate did not outlive the pre-
llminaries; a row arose about the chairman
ship, and the proceedings went no further
And nasmuch as no nominations were made
neither Stokes nor Senter can pretend to be
the regular candidate Both are self-nomi-
mated. This fact however, seems unques-
tlonable-of the delegates to the convention,
majority We're friends of Senter: the dis
turbance which terminated the convention
having been gotten up by supporters of Stokes
and in his interest
The consistency of the two candidates
being equal, Judging of them in relation to
the Union in the early stages of the war, and
the irregularity of their candidacy being the
same, in what direction shall we look for
the justification of Mr.. Boutwells inter
ference? The proper test, next to the regu-
lalty of party nomination, is the platform
on which the contest is conducted. Tried by
this standard we have no hesitation in say
ing that the platform occupied by Senter is
more in accord with that of the administra-
tlon and of the Republican party than that
of his opponent. The canvass so far, has
been marked more 10y an interchange of Of
fensive personalities than the discussion of
principles. But an important principle, never
theless, separates the candidates. Senter and
his friends Brownlow included, favor the ear
hest possible enfranchiSement of those on
whom the local law has heaped disabilities
They proclaim that prescription was a neces-
sity of the time at which it was resorted to.
but that the necessity has passed. and that its
continuance serves only to keep alive angry
feeling and foster difficulties in the State.
The Stokes party, on the other hand, under
the plea of preserving partisan ascendancy,
NN"AN I'AOINLlSs NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS., WIFI All llS
irritation and injustice
On the leading issue of the canvass, then,
Senter is and Stokes is not, in harmony with
the present policy of the Republican party.
That policy in regard to prescription is hap
PLY unmistakable. The Chicago Convention
which nominated Grant placed him on plat
form of which the removal of disabilities was
a conspicuous feature; and successive State
conventions have reatlirmed the same pur-
pose. The latest instance is that of the Cali
fornia Republicans, who resolved "That the
ratification of the fifteenth amendment should
be followed by an act of universal amnesty
md the enfranchisement of the Southern
Nople.' The Republicans of Mississippi,
deal and conservative, are agreed upon
point which commands the almost un-
S approval of the Republican press
,ide, out the country BY yidentifying him
ough, prescription, Stokes runs counter to
f with feeling in other States, and 50
publican Senter the vantage ground.
lcedes to I to the fifteenth amendment,
With regarC rence between the candidates.
re is no diffe. ed himself its advocate in
lter has avow rting that it's adoption by
eided terms, asse stature is dictated by
Tennessee Leg and wise statesman
tice sound policy, therefore, he is unob-
D." In this respect,
tionable. en-, seems to us
Mr.. Boutwell's letter, th g all the more
stake-a mistake that elections upon
ious because involving Han supporters
, patriotism of the Republl> Nave built up
Senter, the leaders of whom and stood
Republican party in Tennessee alculating
it when Stokes was selfshly It for the
chances. 1t is not prudent or juA. ,re be-
cretarv of the Treasury to interf, % ac-
cen Republicans, and least of all ions
mpany interference with imputa. he
on those of them who have espoused
use of Senter. There is no valid reas4.
identifying the administration with tne I
umph of one candidate or the other. BoVh /
ing Republicans. with large Republicans
lowing, the interest of the administration
d of the party will be best promoted by the
aintenance of a neutral attitude at Wash
gton. There may be little apparent lmprro-
iety in an expression of preference for
okes; but is it desirable to make enemies OF
e Senter Republicans, who will in all pro-
pbility carry the State?