South-eastern Independent. (McConnelsville, Ohio) 1871-1871, 1871-10-27
THE ST. LOUIS
MOVEMENT.

IN recent issue, SPEAKS OF the matter
rs follows
Our suggestion ola passive poll
cy on The part of the Democracy IN
the Presidential contest of 1872, has
had and is having the effect we n
tended. 1t has provoked an earn
est and interesting discussion Of the
subject IN all it's bearings by the
opposition to President Grants add
minislratIon. This discussion will
go TO the bottom of our political
II will reveal the
whole truth about that condI-
tticn as disclosed from q point of
view above the present parties, and
whatever the result of this cain and
dispassionate review may be, II can
not but be sanitary.
At the very threshold of the DIS
cussion stands the fact that Presi-
dent Grant Is q disturbing element
IN the Republican party. and that
u large and influential clement IN
that party who will certainly either
vote for him rs against "a Demo,
cratic nominee, Or not vote at all,
would welcome an opportunity 10
oppose and defeat him, if they
could do so without placing their
life loug opponents in power. AZ
between Grant and a Democratic
nominee, they would reluctantly
support Grant. As between Grant
and any other possible Republican
candidate, they would gladly sup
port the latter. This maIconten:.
anti Grant clement of Republicans
ism is no insignificant power. IL
Is represented by Senators Schurz,
of Missouri, Sumner and Wilson, 0:
Massachusetts, Fenton, of New
York, West, of Louisiana, Horace
Greedy and Cassius u. Clay, Gov.
Geary, of Pennsylvania, Cox and
Noyes, of OLio, Trumbull and Lo-
gan, Of Illinois, The Chicago TrI-
bune. the Cincinnati Commercial,
the New York Tribune, and the
New York Evening Post. In Mas
sachuselts, New York, and OHIO il
embodies the better part of the Re-
publican party (; In Missouri, and,
indeed, the whole West, 1t embraces
the Germans and the liberals who
support cd Brown in 1870 and if il
does not include the better part o.
Republican party IN Louisiana, Al
ALBANIA, and Arkansas, it embraces
ev,n there q portion which, in
point Of numbers, at least, discon
tented with the Iul NJ proscrip.
tion of the Republican party,
larmed at its progress toward cen
tr~alization. and dissatisfied with the
personal usurpations Of the Prcsl
dent, has not been able, thus far, t
assert its independence; it Is hello
in thralldom by a power which
gives 1t the narrow choice of sup
porting Grant, Or going over 70 tn,
Democracy and while an homes
Democratic partisan would easily
solve the difficulty for them by tell
ing them to cast their fortunes will
the Democracy, it should BIO re
membered that an honest Repabll
can may not find 1t SO easy to &C
cept such u solution. Party alleg
lance is q powerful sentiment il
this country and while Independ
ent and CONSCIENTIOUS men are eve,
ready 70 oppose the policy of thei.
own party. they do not readily es
pouse the policy Of ITS opponent.
A passive attitude by the Dem
ocracy in the next Presidential cam
paign would give TO Liberal Repub
%!icans the freedom which they cal
not ecure for themselves. Tho,
could assert their own policy, pro
claim their own platform, and nom
mate their own candidate, wIthou
any violation Of Their party o5iIgs
tIous and in appearing 10 the PEG
pie tor support, they would have al
| immense moral advantage over th
administration party, whose ad
verse appeal would be neeessaril.
limited to the Presidents partisans
1t is true, this passive attitud
would involve a sacrifice on III
part of the Democracy which the,
might find il hard to make. Dem
ocrats have q right 10 say that.
their principles arc worth anything
they are worth struggling for, eve
in the face of defeat and to with
draw, as a party, from a great ma
tIopal contest, might argue a IacI
of devotion to their principles, an
willing to see heir party disband
But In answer to this may be ad
duced the universal conviction q
m1ng Democrats that our constItu
tional polIty can not survive q re
election of Grant and the four year
of increased Capitalization tina
would follow. 1t is the Democrat
Opposition and the fear of q posslbl
Democratic triumph that cause tn
administration party to resolve tha
the Democratic party shall not tri
| umpb, and induce it to resort I
violent legislation and still NOR
violent acts to prevent such an e
. vent. AS long as the administra
! ton party is confronted with
, Democratic opposition which i
, strong enough TO alarm 1t, so Ion
will 1t resort to new schemes of un
constitutional legislation, and 8
$ long will it uphold the Ezecutiv
e in violent measures of interferehc
10 maintain itself in power, an
! thus. even though undeniablo fact
: prove that the Democracy are
majority of the people, there is n
assurance that tho party in powe
would yield Llace TO them. UndG
these circumstances may not th
highest patriotism demand of III
Democracy the sacrifice indicated
tThey would waive the possibility
3 Democratic triumph, indeed, bI
they would secure, IN exehang'
the almost certainty of q Radio:
, Republican defeat. They woul