New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-04-08
THE LESSON OF COyNECTYCUT

There is danger that the Administration
party will repeat the fatal error of its old OPP
ponent, learning nothing from current events
and giving no heed to the lessons of the hour
The old Democratic party, either through
perverseness or blindness, failed TO discern in
the reverses it sustained in 1854 the indica
tons of political revolution which was des
tined very shortly to Danish it from place and
power. Afterward, when there was no installing
the change in public sentiment and the grow
ing hostility to the dominant party, it settled
back into a stubborn resistance to the popular
will, and became a tedious, carping, unhappy
minority. The history of parties does certainly
repeat itself. Whatever may be the causes
which lead to the building up and the sue
cessful career of party, those which con-
tribute to its downfall are as invaria-
BILE as the processes between Tipeness and
decay. The party i'll power is stronger to-day
than was the Democratic party when it cul-
minated and began its downward course. Now,
as then, the element Of weakness is concealed
under this apparent strength. The self
appointed leaders think they can afford to
disregard the lessons of the annual elections,
and 20 on with their schemes of self-seeking
and their plots and cOunter-plots for per-
sonal advantage and gain, and that the people
who have supported the party and kept them
in office so long will cOntinae to do so. 1t is a
grievous mistake.
The lessons of the Connecticut election are
misnterpreted to them by the Administration
press in the same spirit in which in 1854 the
Democratic organs deceived themselves and
their leaders regarding the drift of public
sentiment against the Kansas-Nebraska bust
ness. The leaders of the party in power will
make the mistake of a political lifetime
il they allow themselves to be deceived by
the unfOunded assumptions of some of the
Administration organs concerning the causes
of the Connecticut defeat. The theory that
the overwhelming disaster to the Administra-
ton party in that State was attributable to
personal or local causes or to the Temperance
movement, or to all of them, is so alb
ture to advance it. The Administration candi-
dates were almost without exception person
ally popular-certainly more so than the aver
age nominations on either side. No local dis
affection disturbed the harmony or weakened
the vote. And as for the Temperance move
ment. there was nothing in it that could in
any way account for the result of the vote on
the general ticket, to say nothing of the
Legislature. The Prohibition vote was
about 1000 larger than last year, but this was
occasioned by dissatisfaction with the Admin
istration party, and unwillingness to go over
entirely to the Opposition, not by any new or
unusual interest in the issue represented by
the ticket. Even then the large increase in
the Prohibition vote, and consequent falling
Of from the Administration, was more than
balanced by the Democratic split in New
Haven, which cut down Ingersoll's majority of
3,763 in that city last year to 305 this
The local and personal side issues that en-
tered into the canvass Injured to the benefit of
the Administration party, while the increased
Prohibition vote represented unquestionably
Republican disaifectiOn rather than zeal for
Temperance. And yet the Opposition majority
in the State is 1880 and the plurality $500. A
still more significant feature of tho result is