The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1870-08-11
George IN and Ulysses 5. Grant. Grant.

There are many striking points of
resemblance between old King George
LII, Of Great Britain, and Ulysses s.
Grant, President of the United States.
They were both, by their want of nat
ural capacity and experience, unqnaliz
fed to be in the nositions to which
accident, and not merit, had elevated
them. George Ill was noted for his
obstinaey and for his marrow and Bit
ter prejudices. Grant. has the same
peculiarity: George III, for season,
.inaugurated the reign of personal
government in Great Britain. Grant
has done, the same in = the, United
States. George sought to rule through
the fundamentally of some miserable
creatures Of whom a 9 Scotchmali,
whom he subsequently, ennobled UNI
der the title ofoLord Butte, was the
chief They +, were. known las, the
Kings friends" and gained under
that designation q most unenviable
reputation Theyh had no eniinence Or
talent, no parliamentary strength nor
prestige, except, that derived from
their relations with the King. Grant
likewise is ruling through his friends
and reiationsAthrough his 'father-fI-'
law and father, and such personages
as Alderman and Tom Murphy. The
.ft Kings friends, who constituted the
Ministry of George, had foreign
question ON hand, which was the tax
alton of the Ameriean Colonies. Our
Grant and his friends have their for
eigR question tn the annexation of the
island of San Domingo. Grant has
had his heart upon that as strongly as
George had upon tyrannizing over, the
Colonies. But while the friends, of
the King were known to be personal
ly corrupt, it was not charged upon
the monarch that he was so, Herein
is a difference. between Grant and his
prototype, 70 ,Fhe early part of the
reign Gfl George III is the most cor
rupt in the modern history of Great
Britain. We may ohserve, with
truth, that corruption has held d high
carnival ever since the accession Of
Grant to the Chief Magistracy. The
Congresses under Grant are as noto-
riously corrupt as the Parliaments
were under George. II under wan.
ton perversion Of the idea of @privi-
lege,"n and by AagEant usurpation of
power, the House of Commons re-
peatedly expelled John Wilkes from
sitting as a member, so our HRuse has,
its, Patrick Woods and Porter case,
which is even more rascally, if possi-
BILE, than that of Wilkes. To conclude
dishonorable peace with Spain was
the first act of eieorge's personal
reign, To retain peace with that pow
er upon the same shameful terms, has
been the great effort of Grants Ad-
ministration!51aIn In Georges day the
" "rotten-borough1 p system fourished
most extensively, Ten thousand men
elected q majority of the House of
Commons, and made laws for ten
miltansl of NBritQns. Under Grant
eleFen States of the Union have been
converted into the same s rotten bor-
oughs,"' and have as their representa-
tives not those wing are elected by the
people, hat those forced upon them
hYithe. Government. George H. By
bis, silly presQmptiop, lost the. Amer
Jean Colonies, and GraNt'a course win.
permanently ALLEVIATE the hearts of the
people of the South, Both George
And Grant desired to govern by the
fundamentally mainly Of a standing
array. GeopGe entertained high ideas
of his prerogatives, but they were not
higher than those of iGrant.--ERq.aa,i