The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1870-09-14

UuGEOT LOT stSis AAN .,o
as 1t is, is the cause, to a great eA'e". "aas
GOODNESS and aversion Of the ro"he S'>
The Conservatives, The Enquirer a4o
the Radicals.
some weeks since the Enquirer was
brought out by some doubts eSpien.
20 &c nor;t;on. and declared lfSeH cIhp""'''
.or, os oct;np with the Conservative party
- a,rnsst,v proclaimed that it any
~ al wbo ayowed their opposition to the
Renublican party. and itscdltor coopera'eo
with ,he Conservatives in their recent or
s,uization. 1t said;
uCortoin Journals seem to be anxious TO
.onrnsent the Enquirer. They have
auemed that we have demanded a change OF
the name of Conservative, 10 'Demo.
cratic and that we oppose the elcctlon OF
any candidate who will not avow himself 10
be a Democrat. The readers OF the En-
ouircr very well know that both OF these
demonstrations are untrue"
Again, it further proclaimed its political
relations thus:
"We have repeatedly declared not only
orr willingness to support members OF the
old Whic party, but our readiness TO sus-
tain them with as much alacrlty as II they
had been lifelong members OF the Demo
cratic party, provided they announce the
purpose of continued opposition to Repub-
iicanism. BY Republicanism, whenever we
use the word, we wish t. be understood as
including not only Radicalism, but all shades
of RepublicaniSm. even those that are most
smildlv DRAWN No candidate who is not
opposed to Republicanism in this sense, be
he former Wing or Democrat, can receive
our support !: and any candidate, no matter
how tiercely or vehemently Wing he may
have been in former years, or how reso-
autely he may now refuse to take the name
of Democrat, will be cheerfully and COR
daily sustained by us if he declares his pre-
sent and future hostility 10 RepuDncanlsn,
both radical and mild"
Here, then, the Enquirer Indignantly de-
MED that it was anxious to change the
name of the Conservative party. and 1t pro-
claims its willingness to support old Wings,
provided they declare their opposition to
Republicanism. There was, therefore, no.
thing in the way to obstruct the Enquirer
in giving its hearty support to the ConSer-
vative party. That party is opposed to the
Republican party. The phraseology en-
ployed by the Enquirer was absurdly x
acting-all Conservatives being opposed to
Radicalism-but the professions of that pa
per were taken as a declaration of alliance
with the Conservative party-that party
being, according to the Enquircr's W de-
~fnition, exactly what that paper would have
1t to be.
And yet, notwithstanding this, the En-
0uirer has directed its editorial labor>
chiefly to the disparagemcnt Of the Conser-
yatives, to 4 depreciation of the results of
their great victory in 80, and to predic-
tions Of their defeat. Yesterday that paper
went further than it has yet gone. 1t as>ails
the Conservative Executive Committee,
ridicules their advice to the party, and, on
the other hand, praises the Republican Exc
cutive Committee rs such that we no
"~lonser have that superiority Of talent,
land ability, and character, that we once
"claimed." And are there any new names
on the Republican committee to excite
the Enguirer'S admiration: Are MeSsrs.
RivEs, STEARSs, WIcKHAM, and HUGHES.
recent accessions to Republicanism, anG
has new manifestation Of intellectual
superiority appeared from them to show
that they have surpassed them-elres, that
the Enquirer should find fresh cause for
admiration Of The Republican Committee:
Are they not the old staSers, so familiar
that every harness mark is known to all on
the road?
Turning to the Conservative side, the En-
quirer finds nothing to admire, and it de.
clares that it has no faith in some of the
Conservative leaders. On that point these
distrustcd ones may reciprocate the COM
pliment to some of the carpers and sore
heads who follow the lead Of the Enquirer,
and, while attempting the ~disparagement OF
the Conservative party, affect TO believe that
if we only had the Democratic party in the
field the State would be safe!
This sort Of aspersion of the ConServa-
tives, coupled with eulogies of the Rcpub-
licans, praise of Mr. HuGHEs's letter, and
OF the Republican address, are strange
things from a newspaper which has, in the
~clearest and most emphatic manner, de-
clared that it would support with ~alacrity
any man who received q nomination who
declared his opposition to the Republican
party. Anything but Republicanism, the
Enquirer's steady prayer seeming to be
"from that good Lord deliver lis :"
The address of the Republican party,
which the Inquirer calls cable" is not
marked for anything above mediocrity,
and it is full Of ~fallacies and mis-.
statements. One that is conspicuous j.
the charge that Virginia got admit
ted into Congress through deception,
pretending to be Republi can. This i,
simply false. There was no such pretense
ever made by Virginia. The people of Vir-
ginia opposed Radicalism with untllgging
consistency and determination. The great
campaign of '69 was carried on openly and
above board by the Conservatives on the
one side and Radicals on the other. The
outrageous proscriptiveness of the Rcpub-
lican party caused some Of its members to
leave it and join the Conservatives-these
recruits bearing the name Of "True Re-
publicans." These fought together, and
overcame the Republicans.
General GRANT secured to us the oppor-
tunity Of voting out the most obnoxious
clauses of the Constitution. His liberalitv
towards Virginia in this particular was
called bis "Virginia policy" and that we
sustained, never protesting to be anything
but Conservative, acting without respect to
party distinctions to save Virginia from mis-
rule. Through all the rigid investigations
OF the Committee on Reconstruction it
never was asserted or admitted that Vir.
gina was Republican by any Conservative.