Wilmington daily gazette., 1872-04-25

HannS ON the q round Of Liberal Repub.
Dicnns Or Fuse with Them.
MICHIGAN, KALAMAzo March 2S, 1872.
Hon. Alexander H. Stephens. Craaefordcils,
Georgia:
DEAR SIR-In consequence of the timidity,
hesitancy and vacillation Of the leaders OF the
Democratic party, much uncertainty and easi-
uess exists as to the position the party will
assume during the coming Presidential cam
paign.
in the field ofx Democratic PLATFORM; while on
the other hand, many men holding prominent
positions in the party are in doubt whether or
not that is the proper course. Others think that
the Democracy ought not to make nomination
but simply support the nominees ofthe Liberal
wing OF the Republican party; and still others
advocate and promuglate the policy and ex-
pediency OF union Of the Democracy with the
Liberal wing Of the Republican party.
In my letter to you OF the 10Th ult., having re-
ferred to the proptiety Of Democratic candidates
being placed in the field by the Democracy; also
the fattering prospects of the ultimate success OF
such a ticket and The Improperly of either the
Passive or Fusion Policies; and also the disas-
trous consequences which would result from the
adoption ofeither the one orthe other-it is.prob-
able, with the following exceptions, unnecessary
to again allude to the subject
Those exceptions are these: Can the Democra-
cy consistently step forward on 10 and occupy
with the Liberal Republicans the ground only
which they occupy, or concede some Of its vital
principles, and accept some of those of the Liber-
. al Republicans; and by these means either ac-
cept the nomination of the Liberal wing of the
Republican party-making none Of its own--or
join with it in forming new party to accomplish
particular object, based upon an embodiment
of some Of the principles of both?
The principles OF tine Democratic party being
the limitation Of the powers of the Federal Ex-
ecutive and Congress-or IN other words, that
the Federal Government can exercise only such
acts of sovereignty as are delegated to it by the
Constitution, and that the States can exercise
suoh acts Of sovereignty as they have not, by the
Constitution, delegated 10 the Federal Govern
ment, or restrained themselves from exercising.
The principles upon which the Republican
party now act are Numerically opposed to
these. The Liberal wing OF that party has gone
great part OF the way with their Radical breth
ern in their journey upon this road. They adj
vocated and assisted in passing the socalled l4tf
and 18th Amendments; their several Enforce
ment Acts and many other acts not warrante,
or authorized by either the Constitution or tn,
10 called Amendments
This they at the time Judging from their con
DUCT to the present time, did with the best o
though mistaken, motives. But to their credi
be it said, seeing how subversive to our institu.
tions and preiadicial to the country that kind u
legislation was they have paused in their reck
less career and have not only done that, bu
are also endeavorng to check their more Radi
cal brethren. But this check ia only in references
to the propriety and necessity OF the rigiC
enforcement OF the Enforcement Acts of tn
so-called Amendments, and the adoption OF som
fiscal measures, which, though concerning tn
general prosperity, yet do not concern the grea
fundamental principles Of the several parties.
Notwithstanding this commendable eleventh
houf Repentance, they still tenacously cling t
the bo-chiled Amendments, and even 70 SOM
aXtspt al their Enforcement Acts thu
still retaining sufficient anti Democratic princ
pies a not to admit of their being classed Dem
Ocrats. About the only principles they advocat
in common with the Democracy are either fire.
trade or IN impoet duty for revenue only; an,
vague, underlined Limitation Of assumptions Q
power on the part OF the FEDERAL Government
which are subersive of Local Governments an
ageneral amnesiy.
How much more consistent j. It that the Lib
erll Republicans should come on to Democrat
ground, than that the Democracy should adol
their principlss? Slavery is constitutional
abolishe1; consequently all that can stand be
tween them are the Issues involved in IN
qhestiohA OF revenue, amnesty, State Rights, an
the ID LED AmendMepts,
UpoA the questions Of revenue and gener'
amnesty they agree; and lately the acts Of III
Adninlaration wing Of the Republican par,
have aifardesi such cogent reasons for the nece
sity Of the State Rights doctrine, that the Lii
al Vine Of that party are stronRlv advoCatln,