The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1870-03-04
s. C.
Friday Morning, March 4, 1870.

The Policy OF the State.
THE CHARLESTON NEWS, COURIER AND OUR.
SELVES.
The views setforth in this journal have
been made the subject of comment both
in the Nercs and the Courier. We shall
take the liberty of making q rejoiuder.
In recent article upon ''the regenera-
ton of the State" the Ne,os travels out
OF its way to suggest other reasons than
those we have given for the faith that is
in rs. It is not disposed, it says, to ques-
tion our "dsinterested sincerity" but
really does throw doubts upon it. It is
SO unfair as to attribute to us o policy
which we have disavowed. Because we
stated that prior to convention OF anti
radicals, it was competent for journals to
seek to impress their views upon that
coming body, it charges that we have
suggested in State affairs the policy of
-'eyery man for himself" We shall con-
tent ourselves with the simple declara-
ton that this is no policy of ours. But
thisis not all. The Ne,cs suggests reasons
for the direction which our views have
taken. For adhering to mn organization
which We think cannot properly be ig-
nored, it offers the suggestion of the
petty pride of former place, or the force
of recent political associations. For our
steady and consistent carrying out of
deliberate programme of political action.
it twits us with undue devotion to the
fwatch-words of other days"-as if the
views advocated by us were not the logi-
cal carrying out of views scarcely two
years old=-as if our views were hoary
with age. and did not bear, as they do,
the freshness of recent birth. But we
shall forbear from further allusion to
what may be called the unparliamentary
portion of the Ne,ps' article. The public
can take no interest in o mere contro-
versy between two journals. So, without
even seeking the laurels of bootless war
of words, we lower our lance and pass
on. Discussion, at the best, is poor
method of eliminating truth, and there
is ample work for both ourselves and
the Neaos beyond the sphere of individual
controversy. Only let the NeDs bear
this in mind-it is we'll for views to be
discussed upon their merits, and to let
motives alone.
In an article on "the redemption of
the State" the Charleston Courier, re-
ferring to the views we expressed as to
the points of agreement between the
anti-radicalists of the State, and to the
ground upon which we should make our
fight, expresses concurrence therein, but
dissents from our suggestion that the
Democratic organization of the State be
used to consummate our ends In reply,
we have to say that this is the very point
at issue, and this is the point for the
anti-radicalists themselves to settle. The
Courier wants victory, "not of party,
but of the people. and for the redcmp-
ton Of the State" We, too, want q vic
tory for the redemption of the State, and
if, in our judgment, party organization
is the best method of winning it, we shall
advocate that method. The Democratic
programme proposes to array against
radicalism every element that can be
brought to bear against it. 1t will invite
all the anti-radicalists of the State to
unite with it, and it will go before the
people of the State with its allies in every
State of the Union, and with its liberal
principles emblazoned upon its banners.
The Courier appears to regard it very
unusual thing for party organizations of
q national character to be used in State
elections. The fact of the matter is, it
is almost universally used. So far as we
can Judge, from its general propositions,
the Courier concurs with the Ne,cs in the
policy of sinking the Democratic organi-
zation, and essaying an independent
party, without name, without distinctive
principles, and SO very accommodating
as to meet the tastes of any and every
man. We do not believe in those looso