Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-06-07
ESpRkw xor.Sso1


against all men, who seek by covert
and opprobious filings to cast stigma
upon the men of 1872, who voted for
and supported Mr.. johnson.
The above are the strong points in
an article of the Franklin Reuie1o and
Journal, copied and commended editor
tally by the Banner. 1t is not our
habit to give metropolitan circulation
to heated expressions here and there
on the one side or the other, which can
have no good effect But since our
city contemporary, in its consuming
desire for harmony, copies a threat
about shivering the party to atoms,
we may be excused for defining our at
titude toward Mr.. johnson. As pub
lie journal, we have taken decided
stand on certain matters discussed by
him, which the fdus ct audas, faithless
and fearful, Banner has not done. Be-
cause we have felt it our duty to criti'
else his utterances in some respects,
We are possibly included among the
certain parties represented by our
Franklin contemporary as very zeal
GUS in disappearing him"
Every reader of the UNION AND
AMERICAN can testify that never once,
even during the red-hot canvass of
1872, have we questioned the abilities
or the Democracy of ex-President
johnson. He is now generally under
stood to be candidate for the United
States Senate. He is not our fayorite
for the Office, because we have no ia,
vorite, for two distinct reasons:
First. The same reason that we have
no favorite for next Governor. A jour
nal with numerous patrons In every
county from Carter to Shelby, cannot
afford to take sides between candidates,
any one of whom is fully competent for
the Office and whose advocacy at this
early stage of the canvass is largely lo-
cal and sectional. If some great in
competent should push himself for
ward, it might be our duty to the
whole people to cry him down. But
Mr.. johnson is none such, and there
would be no excuse whatever for per-
sonal abuse of him. The Franklin Re
Uielo and the Nashville Banner knows
full well that we do not give the benefit
of our circulation to heated articles
against him which occasionally crop
out over the State, and this course is
ample evidence of our desire not to
make Mr.. johnson a frebrand in the
camp, or renew the proftless quarrel Of
1872.
Secondly, we do not think the cleo
ton of the next Legislature should
hinge on this one question of Federal
Senator. Some regard John c. Brown
as an aspirant. We have also heard OF
Gen. VIM. B. Bate, and there may be
others. We do not think the people OF
Tennessee will act wisely if they allow
the shibboleth of johnson or Brown OF
Bate to be raised in the election of the
coming Legislature. That body has
other important functions and duties
as well as the choice of Brownlow S sue
cessor. Our motto is, elect honest, In
tellIgent legislators, and there need be
no fear for our proper representation
in the American Senate. To make the
election of any one aspirant a dividing
line among Democrats and Conserva-
tives, Will lead to a multitude of can.
didates and ieopardize the next Legis.
lature.
Being, for these reasons, free from
bias, we can we'll afford to be impartial
toward Mr.. johnson. The UNION AND
AMERICAN has never acquired the habit
of advocating or approving either men
or measures without assigning the
reasons for its course. If we have
criticised some utterances Of Mr.. John
son in regard to State finances, it is NO
more than We have done with others,
and in all cases we have given the ar
guments that convinced ourselves. 1t
would not be an act of friendship in us
to disguise our impression that the Ex-
President has injured his chances
rather than promoted them by his out
givings in State affairs, while running
for an Office in which he could have no
power to shape those affairs.
For veal or woe, Infamous or praise
worthy, the funding law is law. If the
last Legislature did not represent the
people, what guarantee can We have
that the next one will? How can it be
asserted that the last Legislature did
not represent the people, without ac-
cusing the people of being dolts, and
throwing the responsibility of the fund
ing law on them? They were as free
to vote their will then as now? They
cut loose from the conventions and all
party machinery to an unusual extent
Mr.. johnson was In the field, as now,
running for a Federal Office. Wheth-
er he actually used his influence to
help the funding measure through the
Legislature as charged by the Clarks-
UiUe Tobacco Leaf or not, We do not
pause to Inquire. He has right to
change his opinion on the subject. But
however it become a law, it
is such and the only PRACTICAL
question is whether We shall carry
out its provisions or not. The question
of the States duty to pay its debts is
not debatable. We do not understand
Mr.. johnson as debatingit. The ques-
ton he opens is the ability of the peo-
pie to pay the interest. The plea of
poverty is an unfortunate one, holding
l.