Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-11-06

ion, as best under the circumstances.
The case was wholly different from
that in Tennessee, where enfranchise
ment depended on the election OF
SENTER. In Mississippi the plat
forms are the same as TO that matter,
and, taking the candidates from asso-
citation with the men who support
them, and the influence which that
may give in future, we doubt whether
Mississippians would give a straw for
choice.
But our cotemporary thinks it is
very damaging for the APPEAL not to
follow its own blind lead into univer-
sal suffrage in Mississippi. We hope
now, that DENT is not SO weak as t.
be hurt by our saying that we at least
know where to find ABCOBN, while
his own abolition record is concealed.
II he is, it is very apparent that in
the outset Of the contest we were right
in ~preferring a different selection.
When the contest between the two
parties was begun in Mississippi, the
most stupid observer detected a grave
fault computed by the Conservatives
Of the State. In order TO control the
white vote it was unnecessary 10
change front or adopt dark eolors.
Plainly enough the contest was one
between whites and blacks, and be-
tween Democracy-State Rights De
mocracy, as its creed has been modi-
fed by the results of war-and Radi-
calism. 1t was this and nothing more
nor less.
With infinite chagrin we saw how
concessions were made; how d plat
form was adopted full of infamous
heresies; and hOwthefact and shadow
of true conservatism was lost. Moth
ing was to be gained by this detection
10 principle in Mississippi. In Ten
nessee, when we supported SENTER
against STOKES, SENTER supported
and served us. He gave "free pa
pers;" he made voters; he returned a
gUid pro gro. In Mississippi DENT
was impotent. He had nothing,
could give nothing, and we gained no
augmentation Of strength by support
ing him instead OF ALCORN or any
one else. Even GRAM, land
we pity those who bow before
this empty igurehead of con-
solidation), even GRANT was not won
by suffering him to nominate a Demo-
cratic candidate for the chief magis-
tracy Of a State. Seeing all this: that
no end was subserved by asserting to
a false and trucking platform, or by
accepting candidates at the hands of
the central government, and bitterly
opposed to the humiliation of the
Democratic party in Mississippi, the
APPEAL did say that in Mississippi
the contest was one which involved
more a personal issue than one Of
principle.
Subsequent events have materially
changed the aspect Of affairs in Mis-
sissippi. Speeches have been made,
or reported, which make ALCORN a
very ieEd in partizanship; and, main
ly for that reason, the whites are
against him and the blacks for him.
DENT has ever been a Republican or
Radical, and always rs much the en-
envy of The South as either SENTER,
Stokes or ALCORN. 1t is an unfOr-
tunate state Of things in Mississippi,
for which we are not responsible. We
do not propose to go the whole length
with the Irl}aRche in supporting
SENTER, DENT, or the Board OF COun-
ty Commissioners. We only regret
that a straight out Democratic candf-
date had not been nominated at the
proper time. As it is, if we were in
Mississippi, and it was our business,
we should vote for the white mans
candidate because he was so. But we
must be excused from responsibility
for the election of DENT, KELLOGG,
or SINCLAIR. If the ACaIaRche can win
the negroes to DENT by its universal
suffrage and common gratitude"
prestige. we wish it all success in its
mission.