The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1872-05-08
PARTY AND PRINCIPLE.

The Republican party, like every other
healthy political organization, will always
have its essential points Of controversy,
necessarily arising from time to time, either
from diversified political and social ar
Engagements and complications in the body
polite, or from some extrinsic cause,
which can only be disposed of by frank
and fair discussion of their merits; and,
generally, nothing short of such discus
sion, conducted in spirit Of the utmost
fairness and candor, will lead to any
thing like a satisfactory solution of the
difficulties involved. There must always
be more or less of concession, Or of the
spirit that would work it, in order to reach
an amicable and satisfactory adjustment OF
party disputes. They do not necessarily
foist themselves upon the public mind
they spring up spontaneously as the off
shoot of great pIinciples-such as indis-
putably underle the basis of all political
and social order. Nobody is in fault be-
cause they are agitated. They agitate
themselves, in fact, and oftentimes de-
mand solution before political parties have
time to crystalize into shape and activity
around them.
We cannot slur them over, if we would;
nor rid ourselves of the intense irritation
they sometimes create. No balmy da-
chylon of compromise will entirely heal
them over. They constantly encroach
upon our attention, and will no more down
at our bidding than volcano will cease to
spit it's fires until the causes which led to
their irritation have subsidized. No mas
terly inactivity will answer the conditions
Of the problem they present. They are
like the serpents in the cradle; they must
be disposed of by the party they beset,
after the fashion of the infant Hercules, or
it will be crushed by them in the very
cradle.
Not few of these vexed questions have
presented themselves for solution to the
political parties Of the country in former
years. The constitution itself, which was
Graded in the fierce storms of party con-
troversy, was one of these questions and,
although apparently well adjusted at the
time, it contained within itself the seeds of
future disruption which ultimately shook
the government to the very verge of its
overthrow, for the want of such adjust
ment as should have been made in the day
and time of it. To the true student of
history, study into these causes and their
directive tendency, is what constitutes the
philosophy of history. The Democratic
party in ls4s, and again in 1860, split into
factions upon essentially vital principles
They were both serious splits, and both re-
suited in the complete overthrow of the
broken and severed party.
But we have looked in vain to the Gin
cinnat movement for any such vital princi-
pie of severance. The only question that
could by any possibility be regarded as
question of principle, was entirely set aside
by the Convention, or absurdly RENTED to
the people, as if the people had eper COM
mitted the question Of protection to the Fen
ton-Nc C2ue faction at Cincinnati What
ever of sincerity or honesty there was in
the movement, was entirely ignored and
thrust aside by this adroit dodge of the
politician, and that politician Mr.. Greeley
himself. The Wing party in 1914, divided
on principle, and the little band of for
lorn hope, led by James G. Birney, de-
feated the election Of Henry Clay in
that memorable campaign. In each of these
instances there was a detection arising
from principle, and the dominant party of
the country went down in the general
melee. Not so now. The whole move
ment, so far as the immediate leaders Of it
are concerned, is one for change in the
distribution Of the spoils, or for such
change in the leadership of the party as
snail remit the question of spoils to
o.her hands than those now controlling
tleir distribution. Had Mr.. Fenton of |
New York, Mr.. Mcclure of Pennsylvania,
and the other chief fomenters of the Gin
cinnati movement, been fully consulted by
the Administration in the distribution of
the public patronage, according to their |
own notions of their own merits, we should
have heard nothing of Cincinnati fasco,"
eve in the columns of the Tribune. OF
principle, there is absolutely none in the
controversy. The nearest approach to it
is that plank which looks to reform in the
civil service but no man in the country
more distinctively represents that principle
or, more properly speaking, policy
than General Grant himself. At all