Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-02-03
THE DRIFT.
Horace Greeley on the Political
Situation.
He opposes the denomination
Of Grant.
THE DRIFT.

Correspondence Of the Cincinnati Gazette.
New YORK, Jan. 31.-The Tribune ha:
the following editorial this morning:
"The Tribune has never yet favored the
denomination of any President, and will
certainly not begin this year, and all offices
IN the Union cannot be so dispensed as to
affect this determination. The editor has
never favored the denomination of a Presi-
dent during his forty years of manhood,
and placed on record more than thirty wears
ago his reasons for his adhesion TO the one
term principle, which seemed to him then,
and still seem to him. conclusive. He has
once supported President for reelection,
and may do so again, for he does not exalt
the one-term principle above every other
consideration. lie not only believes ia it
himself, but has good reason for his faith
that Gen. Grant gave his assent to it less
tli41I f0SEE years 80 IIe - --@u .ecT7-ed
that the editorials in successive issues Of the
Washington Chronicle, wherein this princl-
pie was forcibly commended, were published
with his knowledge and consent, if not ex-
press approval. But we further object to the
denomination Of Gen. Grant, that he
is manitestly a weak candidate, and
because there are very many Republi-
cans who viii oppose him if renOmmated.
That it should be so in this State, and in
any other where his heavy hand has been
laid on one wing of the party which elected
him, is too plain to need proof. There are
hundreds of active, prominent, influential
Republicans who have been expelled from
office by him or his instruments, and who
can not, in the nature of things, work for
his reelection as they would work for one
who had never treated them rs enemies.
Who doubts that it is so in other States?
Who believes that he could carry Louisiana
after the Gatlin gun performances of last
summer, engineered in part by the brother
in-law who holds the best Federal office in
that State? We speak to sensible men, and
demand an intelligent judgment on the
undoubted facts.
"FoW or five years ago Republicans car
ried Georgia by majority Of eight thous-
and. That majority has been squandered
by mercenary corrupt officials, some of
whom have had the decency to run away,
and who have ruined the party's prospects
almost beyond redemption. But though there
rs but the skeleton Of party there, and the
State Committee, still that committee gets
together, elects to Philadelphia a delegation
b
them to Grant, first, last, and all the time,
well knowing that they can no more give
the electoral vote from Georgia than they
can make him Pope. Contrast this with
Connecticut, where the Republicans meet in
convention, nominate a State ticket, and
choose delegates to Philadelphia, taking care
not to pledge them to Grant. Can you ask
why? They want to carry their State in
April, and know that the way to do it is not
to nominate Grant.
''Now look at the case of Missouri. The
st. Louis Democrat, having turned its coat
since 1870, now belittles the liberal move
ment, saying that it is of no account, and
the Times Te-echoes it, of course; but the
men who led that movement to victory were
Carl Schurz, Gratz Brown, Grosvenor, ETC.,
and not one of these is for Grant; on the
contrary, they are all dead set against him'
The Times says they only led off twenty
two thousand Republicans in 1870. We
answer, they led off enough to carry the
State by over forty thousand majority. Per-
haps enough of these have come back to
reverse that verdict; but we know that there
are thousands of them who would vote for
another Republican candidate, but will not
vote for Gen. Grant.
'And there is scarcely a nearly balanced
State in the Union wherein Gen. Grant is
not weaker candidate than almost any
other Republican who could be nominated.
1--WE state facts well known to intelligent
politicians. We do not say that Gen. Grant
will not, if nominated, be elected. We do
not say that we shall not support him. We
do not say that his nomination renders
doubtful Republican triumph, which, with
a new candidate publicly pledged to the
one-term principle, would be morally GER
tain, and this is so palpable that intelligent,
thoughtful Republicans who esteem the
cause more than any man, are bound to
consider it."