Dallas herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1849-1873, 1871-09-09
The ,"New DEPARTURE is "
Democracy.


No political movement sinse the famO",,
Popular Sovereignty doctrine announced
hy stephen A. Douglas, has erea'ei 'ueh
I a profound sensation In the Democratic
pariy as the " New Departure of which
that l.menled Statesman aud fearless
champion Of popular liberty, Clement u,
Vallnndishsm 4. the accredited author.
Noihins In PARTY tactics could have orea'
| led more CONSERVATION In the ranks OF The
enemies of Democracy, or thrown them In
! ia greater confusion than this announce
meni, The inquiry now l. will II be
adopted by the Democratic party rs an mr.
ticie Of faith ani rule Of practice, and can
| TINT party consistently, with itspasl record
and sill following the strict line OF its sdu-
~ TO the country, accept that thccry' The
question 1. one net easily answered, The
! history Of the amendments (which the
! New Departure recognizes as part OF
| the constitution Of the United States, Is "a
violation Of tho plightcd faith, gross us.
urpntion of delegated power, and 8 glaring
fraud on the people. The Chicago Conrcn-
! which Nominated Gen Grant, said TO the
people that the question OF suffrage IN the
late rebelliOus States was subject 10 the
will Of Congress under the decentralization
laws while il was left in the Loyal states
a. those State. themselves. While such
solution cf the problem Of reconstruction
ii should have been rcIlcfahon-was en-
tirely oppossd to the principles of repre-
sentative democracy yet even IL was ig-
nored when the radical party got new
lease of power. by n popular majority uf
si,ty.tho,lsand Ohio had rejected negro
suffrage, Indiana. Michigan and other
Northern States followed by overwhelming
maiorjlies, but the government was now
securely held by party who's, leaders did
not intend 10 respect the popular will or
the rights of the peUpie-those rights which
had been deemed too sacred TO be delcga.
ted to the general government, but hnd
been reserved "t0 the states respectively
and to the people" Congress now proposed
the 18th amendment, and the history OF its
ratification furnishes ntothcr instance of
the pcriidy OF the radical party, in the
long catalogue of it's usurpa,ions. While
no Democrat can justify the mode by which
those amendments were made n part of the
Constitution. the fact, nevertheless, that
tbev are nor 10 all intents and purposes, a
mart of tbc Cvnfnution, can not be denied
| Not dtIHrt D'lt ucJuet"' ""u 10 e"S" Wv
democratic party will be compelled to rec.
ognize them. That those amendments are
an infraction of the Constitution, rs inter-
p-etcd by both Whig and Democratic
statesman in the better days Of the Repub-
lie, can not be gainsnycd. But all is not
vet lost beyond the hope of recovering,
and the democracy must now put forth IT'S
mich,iest effort to gain what is lost and to
save what little is left Of the spirit Of free.
dom. The issue is no longer freedom or
.loycry-as it was once understood
though those terms we're misappied for
III. mutual subordinntion of the negro to
the Caucasian race--it is no longer an ex-
elusive white citizenship or negro suffrage
MI these h,Se been decided by frauds and
hayonets. But the great issue nov is o
Republic of States or centralized Despot-
ism. or. in the words of Governor Hoffman,
{. n strong government or strong people"
This beinc the issue. what does it avail TO
still agitatc the questions which have been
set nj rest by the amendments What
beneft can in any manner accrue from
such agitation? Nay, does u not place
the democratic party in false position
before the people to persist in such poli-
cy? The democratic party is party of law
and order. The amendments have been
adopted in CO iformity with the provisions
in the Institution i G the forms OF the
constitution. That the means used for
their adoption have not been in accord
ance with the manner contemplated py
that instrument, there can be no rational
doubt; but they have been declared part
of the constitution by the proper authority
and every officer Of the government 10
sworn to support that instrument; not q
part, but the whole Of il, including the
amendments. The democratic party, then,
for example, elects John C. Conner ta, rep
resent the ID Congressional District Of
Texas in the Congress of the United States.
Ue can not be admitted to that body with
ont having taken au oath to support the
Constitution of the United States. But
how can he take such an oath when he is
plcdped TO ignore legitimate part Of said
a,onstitution? The dilemma in which the
democratic party is ,hHs placed can be sue
cessfully overcome only by recognizing the
amendments after the manner Indicated
py the New Departure
II must either do this or disband, for
how can Il be maintained spceessfully
when it's principles are so plainly opposed
10 the established law Of the land How
ever unpleasant such proceeding rnsy be
or opposed TO the time honored pffrctF'es
Of the ancient Democracy, yet the plafresi
precepis Of duty require that the Democfs'
CIV of to-day, come forth untrammelled by
any obstacle that may impede its advance
ment. Il must again come forth in ths
countrys defence, as forlorn hope sgains
a.. .;nls and waves Of r.dicalism which