Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-03-01
BEAUTIFUL DREAMER.

The organ denounces Grant and
Brownlow on the salary-grab, but 1t
has no word Of censure for the Demo-
Gratis who participated IN that wicked
scheme Of public Misunderstanding
Press.
OF course it has not. Il it had 1t
would not be the UNION AND AMERI-
CAN. In this enlightened age. Demo
cratic paper can't be true to Its own
party when 1t ceases to have some word
Of censure and advice for deserved
faults, and continually harps upon
ideas and issues Of the long ago. And
this is why the UNION AND AMERICAN
Is utterly worthless and unreliable as a
Democratic organ.-NGskUilte Banner.
We don't know what our contempor-
airy would do, without that Woodbury.
Press. If we didn't fill our space to
better advantage, we might quote ten
criticisms on the Banner from country
exchanges, where It can quote one, But
we have something better to do. The
above classification Of our UncOmprO-
missing attitude on the salary grab, we
Law before our readers without any
comment, farther than to say that the
Woodbury. Press does not perhaps see
our paper regularly; but the Banner
has no such excuse. As the latter pa
per has nothing but continuous "cen-
sure and foods of "advice" for the
Democracy, we suppose it thinks itself
very worthy and reliable as Demo-
cratic organ. Whether Democrats so
consider it. is another matter. As to
dead issues" the difficulty with
the Banner Is to bring it up
% the scratch on live issues. A few
months ago 1t gave editorial types to a
statement that the Republican Is the
best party there is in the country.
We thought that a rather live issue
between US. The Banner lodged by
rcprinting the statement with quota
ton marks, which showed its origin to
be the Near YOrL; Post. The latter is
Republican Journal, and its course is so
similar to the Banners that, without
quotation marks, no one could tell
where the Republican journal finished
and the What-is-it began. But having
again copied this eulogy of Radical
ism without comment or contradiction,
and considering the question a live
one. we asked the Banner whether it
endorsed the opinion Of the Post, to
which it had given the benefit of its
circulation-yes or no. To this good
day it has never answered. Such
is the style in which the
Banner meets live issues; that
Is. If it considers the struggle against
Radicalism now waging from ocean to
ocean a live Issue. So of the live work
of organization on which depends the
success of the people this year. 1t IS
only a few weeks since our efforts IN
this direction, now beginning to bear
fruit. led the Banner to denounce us as
sswhippers-in, the ''organ of organ
izers." and such ike epithets. Since
then the Banner has apparently bowed
70 the popular viii, but only the day
before yesterday it renewed its old howl
of "drin-sergeants." 1t has professed
IN endorsement OF the Shelby move
for organization on a Democratic
basis; yet its columns are filled
daily with promiscuous filings at the
Democracy, the less excusable because
they are indefinite and unsPecific. We
don't know whether it regards organl-
cation by counties as live issue. Ger
tainly it is doing nothing TO advance
the work, and much to retard 1t. VIII
the Banner tell US for once what 1t does
consider a live issue, outside of its anx-
iety to bury" the Democracy which
obstinately refuses to die at its imperi-
Gus biddings?