Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1872-04-26
What Mr. Beecher has to say Of the
President and his Acc users.

MeEsrs. SchuIz and Trumbgll aarge thEs the
President Is himself responsible Il r crying e7ils
in the civil service. which he doe not earnestly
desire TO remove; that he c5uaiv es for political
reasons a. corrupt misgogernmen in the South;
that he overri5es the Laws, perm Is his nearest
su6ordinates so override them. and encrosches
more and more upon TIE rights Of citizens, com
muuites aud Stztes This II alignment is as
unwise as it is weak. Not one Of these accuse
tons sgsiust General Grant 3 new; not one Of
them hss stood the test Of EXAMINATION. They
are al based upon facts 60 t-iyisl Is TO mske
the alarming deiuo,ilas rii.cal5ul. The
people hsye watched ii cir President, not
ing many uist2ke9 in bis oourte,
but noting as vel stesdy purpose to
DO right; aud personal be 1esiy which has de-
fed the storms Of flsnder. We regret extreme
ly the alienation from h'l 4 Of some Of the best
men in the Senate, who loul be his cordial
supporters and c5uuEeors; but We feel hist this
unfortunate result is not al together his fault ltis
SD indeed that the Presii .ut's measures should
be opposed by the Presider Is prolessed friends
but it IS equally SAD tina the same measures
him. Amnesty, for iusu nee, was strsnelei in
Congress by the c0ubineC folly Of its friends and
its foes
But the question 81 Pc g, Row much should
the Executive 60 toward / afleuciug legislation
Andrew johnson was &c iouuced for having
policy, Snd trying TO 20 -ce 1t upon Congress.
Now, Grant is denoun e, for net forcing his
policy upon Congress. Ana the leaders Of the
Cincinnati movement, Ignoring apparently the
necessity Of g change u Congress, which defeat
ed Amnesty and he ioru, propose to assSil the
President who re;c mmendei these measures.
This part Of the tsu tu-.'s wholly on the per-
sonsl character and SINGER. y Of the President.
These gentlemen hs We loft faith in him. We
hsve not; and we think ihc people have not.
That is the whole lift renee.
On the other 81 pposiuou, that be Is well
meaning but unat lie to control the party leaders
in Congress, there il stronger case 10 be made
Only, We may fairy inquire, isit the President's
business 10 control the party Ard If 1t were,
could any Preside ut do it ! Il Senstor Irum
bull, for instance. gere President. could he make
the country poll icisnt of the two Houses give
up their hold on D )litcAl patronage Could he
make reformers ut Of csrpet-baggert! Could
he legitmstely Dc anything more than propose
measures to Cong -efs, and quietly submit if
they were defp .ted And hss General Grant
done less than u s?
The logical VI Akneso Of the Cincinnati move
men' has beer Is element Of personal hostility
70 Grant. Th hiss brought the movement into
the dilemma have indicated /; and the only
way Of escspe lesds TO an alternative which Mr..
Schurz has bC l,lly s1optei. Declaring hostility
10 Grant, he al 90 declares the impOssibility of
reform within the Republican party, as i, now
exitts, and d lsu uctly announces the creation Of
new party hat party will peed platform;
and that pls tform must be made up of hostility
10 Grant, 1lts sd vocscy of Grants measures
Outside Of this the re is only left revenue reform
IN the dire eeiou of Tree trade, which, as q party
measure, is to , dangerous and the Z" one
term - rrinciple, which is too ridiculous to be
adopted by skilfu managers.
Is it nee sssary t, attempt the destruction of
the old II publican party on such grounds as
thete!- Christian Union.