The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1872-06-14
From Harper's Weekly.

1t is often asked whether il is wise TO
insist upon proonging party bitterness
and emphasizing party lines when par
ties have really ceased to exist. What
is the Republican party to-day? some
one demands. What is Democratic
party which is willing TO nominate the
Whiggest of Wings and an original Re-
publican? Does 1T not show, says the
inquirer, that the old issues are settled,
and that it is mere folly to insist upon
rafting dry bones and cracking whips
without snappers? Indeed, is it not an
absurd misunderstanding Of our political
system to suppose that parties, as such,
have any essential permanence, and that
we are all and always to be divided into
two hostile political camps? Shall we
refuse to vote for Mr.. Seymour in 1872
because we would not vote for him in
1868? And is Mr.. Robert Toombs not
a proper person to be supported for
Senator because of certain obsolete
some things which are now happily and
forever in the deep bosom of the ocean
buried? Do you propose to stump
against the alien and sedition laws, or
to wax eloquent over Garafilia Mohalbi
and the Greek revolution? Is political
warfare to be battle of the Huns,
conflict with ghosts in the air after the
actual field is won or lost? There must
be an end some time, why not now?
To such questions another series in
the adverse sense might easily be OPP
posed. But without stopping for that,
let us assume for the argument that
what are called the old issues in this
country are settled, and that parties are
dissolving then what? The inference
constantly drawn is-then vote for Mr..
Greeley. But why? Suppose that there
were no questions of policy to be con-
sid red, and the only point were what
is called honesty and economy of ad.
ministration OF an accepted policy; still
a mans vote should be given according
to the probabilities of securing such an
administration. Slavery, for instance,
is abolished. That issue is settled. But
the abolition of slavery and the war
have left certain feeling, and have oc-
casioned certain legislation for the sc.
curity of the results of emancipation.
If the sole question be of administra-
ton, TO whom can the enforcement of
laws growing out of the abolition of
slavery in the late slave States be most
wisely intrusted-to those who believed
in the Justice and wisdom and economy
of emancipation, and secured it, or 10
those who disbelieveo and opposed?
Granting that they now acquiesce in
such laws because they can not defeat
them, are men trained in the school of
contempt Of the colored race and disre-
gard of their rights better fitted to de-
| tend them reasonably and sympathet-
ically than those trained in the opposite
school? Upon what ground should the
former be preferred to the latter? If
! laws of this kind are to be faithfully
executed, to whom do we naturally
turn? Let us suppose that there had
been a contest upon free trade and pro-
lection, and that free trade had carried
the day. That issue would then have
been settled. Parties formed upon it
would dissolve. We should hear j effer
sons famous phrase, We are all Fed.
eralists; we are all Republicans" echoed
in the newer form, I'VE are all protec-
tionists; we are all free-traders." But
would any sensible free-trader see the
reason of voting against all those who
had been always and by conviction free.
traders, for the purpose of intrusting
the administration OF the freetrade sys.
tenn to party of which the enormous
majority had always been high and BIT
ter protectionists?
If, as is claimed, parties are now
really dissolved or dissolving, it is be-
cause the Republican policy is so gener-
ally approved that organized opposition
TO it under the old form is hopeless.
But the Democratic party does not pro
fess to approve-it acquiesces only. 1t
does not, indeed, let us suppose, pro-
pose TO reverse that policy. Then 1t
proposes-or those who composed that
party agree-that it shall be main
tanned and enforced Now, according
to the theory, the old parties are gone.
Will any body show why the mainten-
ance and enforcement are likely to be
more sincere or more efficient in the
hands of those who were lately Demo.
Gratis than in those of late Republicans
II the old issues are settled and the Old
parties dissolved, will somebody prove
that Mr.. Greeley and the late Demo.
Gratis are stronger guarantee of stabil-
ity than Gen. Grant and the late Re-
publicans?
There is great deal said about the
settling of issues and decay of parties,
J which seems to imply that at certain
junetures in public affairs men sudden
ly abandon their convictions, princi
Piles, feelings, habits, and traditions
and take a new departure. But this is
curious error. There is reality in
, political differences which this theory
entirely disregards. The support o.
Mr.. Greeley by Wade Hampton and the
, Democratic leaders in the Southern
States does not signify that they have
, changed single view nor lost single
hope. 1t does not mean fraternity, MOI
remuneration of State sovereignty, moi
desire of civil service reform, nor pro
found regard for the Union soldiers anC