New-York tribune., 1873-07-30

the Cincinnati movement last year. inueed'
oxcept that Mr. Groesbeck intimates, though
he does not clearly assert, that he would make
Free Trade an issue instead of leaving 1t
where the Cincinnati platform did, we do not
observe that he enunciates any new doc
trine OF contemplates any new departure
The debate to which his letter has gwen an
impulse is over the question whether the
Democratic party Is or is not dead. That
there are Democrats who stubbornly deny it
ia not strange. Like Mr.. Groesbeck they are
strongly attached TO " the old political home
"steadn Unlike him, they have not taken
broad view of the political field and discov-
cred, as he has, that it has no further oppor-
tunity for usefulness, no chance for any new
success. And so they are quite disposed to
deny the proposition and hold on. Nor is 1t
without precedent that they should somewhat
warmly berate Mr. Groesbeck for his frank
ness and manlincss in stating disaTeeable
truths. Political differences have engendered
lust such things before, upon no more ade-
quate prov0cation.
A very brief recital Of recent political his
tory vindcates Mr.. Groesbeck's position and
establishes the wisdom and sound sense OF
his views. To go back no further than 1861.
From the outbreak of hostilities till their
close the Democratic party was in natural
antagonism to the policy of the war as well
as to the Administration which carried 1t on.
If it be granted that their influence was
merely conservative, and that they meant not
to oppose the war or its objects, but only to
hold the dominant party under constitutional
restraints, still the fact remains that the popu-
lar mind was in such state OF tension, and
men were 80 wrought up with anxiety Tor the
cause on which so much Of life and treasure
was staked, that almost all criticism was held
unfriendly, and the persistent carplng OF
partisan Opposition was accounted dlsioyaIj
and so the party had the name at least OF being
opposed to the war. 1t had that name when
the war ended, and its record was an oifense.
It opposed, as an organized body, emancipation,
negro suffrage the constitutional amendments
touching those subjects, and all the steps
taken by the party in power in the new adj
iustment 1t made distinct issue and fair
fight on all of them. 1t was beaten,
and the defeat was final. Llnger
as they might around the ashes, the
old fires had gone out utterly, and there
was no rebindling of them. 1t may be an
unpleasant reminder, but the fact is and 1t
cannot be denied that with all these defeats
upon them, and all the issues they had fought
mon SO long, settled finally and iTrevOcably
against them the old Democratic party had
nothing in its record, It's status, or its pros
poets to commend it to favor. 1t invited no
recruits; it had no spirit and little organza-
ton; nothing but o name, and that was an
ofVo,ao -, tIa ,,octri1a Of tho npnnle
The Baltimore Convention was only recog-
milton of this state of facts. The National
Convention of the Democratic party then and
there deliberately abandoned its past, adopted
a platform which represented the high-water
mark of distinctive Republicanism, and which
was the work Of Republicans; and nominated
a candidate who had represented always and
everywhere all the ideas and sentiments their
party had fought against. 1t cannot be said
they were urged or invegled, or even invited
to such action. They ran to ii without invi-
tation. 1t was their opportunity to get rid of
their record and take new departure,
and perhaps they hoped to come into power.
The revolt from personal government and the
centralizing tendencies of the Administration
which the Cincinnati movement gave ex-
preston to- they naturally sympathized with,
and they took up platform and candidate
without hesitation or question. They knew
we'll enough that there was no hope OF success
for the old party with its old name and
offensive record. With all their strength of
numbers they were wise enough not to invite
dissatisfied Republicans to come under their
banner OF into their organization. 1t was wise
in them rather to 90 over themselves to the
Cincinnati Republicans, and they did so. Hav-
ing done this there was an end of it. Mr..
Groesbeck says they surrendered; it was if
possible more than n surrender. And the facts
of the situation are unchanged to-day.
The party of the Administration invites a
vigorous opposition. There are thousands of
Republicans who are opposed to what they see
are its tendencies and its policy. That oppo-
sition would be confused and disspated by
being brought under the name of the
party whose opposition is open TO the
suspicion of dating back to the period of the
war and of being based upon ideas and senti-
ments not consistent with thoroughgoing
loyalty. The philosophy of the situation seems
plain enough, and Mr.. Groesbeck has stated
it very fairly and frankly in terms that can
not be disputed. The Democratic party strong
as it has been in numbers, has had its last
success 1t lags superfluous. Better new
organization and new name than the old
concern and continued defeat.
-