The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1873-08-14
THE SAN ANTONIO HERALD AND
OURSELF.

We have tried hard to keep on the most
friendly terms with the San Antonio Herald.
We have often expressed our friendship for
the Herald itself, the good old city where
it has been so long published, and even for
its favorite railroad, the international So
much did we consider ourself its friend,
that we undertook, as many friends have
done to their cost, the ungrateful task of
giving it some good advice. The Herald
has not taken this very kindly, though it
would now seem, that from its present posi-
ton, it has profted thereby. 1t complains
that we have not done it justice-that we
have misrepresented its position and treated
it with discourtesy, though it hopes not in
tentionally. We can assure the Herald that,
if either of these things has happened, there
could not have been the least intention on our
part. But we are certain that nothing of
the sort, intimated by the Herald, has ever
occurred. If we failed to particularly no
tice the Heralds article of the twenty-sixth
ult., 1t was from an oversight, arising from
the belief that the Herald was toning itself
down, getting about right on the bond
question, and that fuTthur discussion was
not needed and would be improbable.
What is the history of the whole matter?
The Herald, with our many's friends at San
Antonio, was warmly excited about the In
ternational Railroad, road of great i'm
portance to that city, tine whole of Western
Texas, and, as we think, the whole State,
when completed to the Pacific. twas mad,
very mad, at the course pursued by the last
Legislature in relation to this road, ac-
cusing it and some of its leading men
of favoring Reputation; and it poured forth
broadside after broadside, full of indigna-
ton and threats, of what the people of
Western Texas would do unless its own pc
culiar views were adopted and acted on.
It would divide the State. It would dis
rupt the Democratic party 1t would have
nothing to do with a Democratic party
which did not agree with it about railroads.
II the numerous articles, written and pub
lisned in the Herald, did not have that
meaning, then we are unable TO comprehend
the English language The Herald may
pick ont extracts. which might seem to con-
tradict this assumption, but we made up
our Judgment from the whele tenor and
tone of these articles. We Thought its
course wrong. and -wc said so. Our posi-
ton was this: There seemed to be
danger of a split in the Democratic party
on this question Of the Information Railroad
and bonds, the very thing hoped for and
desired by the Radicals. On the one side
were Democrats, who wanted an expression
Of the party in convention against them, and,
on the other side were Democrats, like the
editors Of the Herald, who seemed deter
mined to have an expression in their favor.
both sides threatening 70 bolt i tho object
Of each could not be obtained. We deprc-
Gated strongly such result. We took the
ground that there should be no expression,
one way or tho other; that the matter
should be left to the courts, and that the
Democrats party, simply asserting that 1t
would pay al the legal debts Of the
State, should be ktp, together on general
Democrats PRINCIPLES acl.nowledged by
ali. and thus be enabled to caz-y all
things before il with clean sweep
AZ the canning December elections.
That was our position from the first, is now,
and wiz be until the Democratic State Con-
....ts,,, ,..t,7 and l.s,, l.,,r,, r1, r-