Ottumwa weekly courier. (Ottumwa, Wapello County, Iowa) 1872-1899, 1874-06-04
rHr aNrr.NrccEn pAnTY,

lengthy editorial, that in many points,
touching the democratic party, tells
wholesome truths. In so fAr a. It
charges upon some Of the republican
party that they are repudiationists,
because they desire an increase Of the
currency, the Times utters one of |
its falschoods. well knowing it to be
such. The Times, editorially does
however 90 well show up the folly,
the Hypocrisy, the arrant knavery and
absolute fact in regard to the Times
old democratic party, that We are con-
strained to give it to our readers en-.
tire. The logic of the Times, however,
don't hold water worth { cent when 1t
calls on the democratic party to die to
make room for the new and glorious
party Of economy and reform, which
it claims 10 to rise up out of the ashes
Of democracy. II would take real
case Of genuine cremation to make q
reform party out Of the men comprise
ing the democratic party, whose prin-
ciples and character the Times 20 atly
epitomizes in its editorial. The trou.
BILE with the Times logic 10, that while
it says the democratic party, under
that name, is powerless for good, yet.
it claims by simply giving it new
name. that 10, call the same body of
men by another cognomen, economy
and reform win follow. This 70 rs 10
singular doctrine, for we cannot see
how the polecst could be any more
sweet-scented. if he was called a
ground hog. The editorial is rather
pat, and we AJAX Cor it careful perus-
al. The Times says
The party that The World calls the
party of free trade and farmers rights
hard money and home rule, takes
/ every opportunity to proclaim through
its Representatives. in Congress that the
| sole end and aim OF its existence is to
persecute the Ethiopian. When q tar
| III bill, or currency bill, or any meas
ure iDolving economic principles, is
voted upon, party lines are not drawn.
Fernando Wood, the chosen standard
bearer of the democrats in the House,
| il q prOtectioAist. Nearly two.thirds
Of the democrats in the House, and
about one-half Of the democrats IN the
Senate are intlationists and repudia-
tionists. Democrats are quite as like
~ as republicans to vote away the
public credit, or the public money, or
the public lands, to private corpora.
tons. They are Quite ~ likely ~ re.
publicans to vote tor such acts rs those
under which the Credit MObilicr and
the Sanborn robberies were commit
ted. They arc quite ss likely as re-
publicans to support any measure
which is condemned by sound moral
ity, and the principles of political
economy. Party lines are never drawn,
and strict party vote is never cast
except upon question Of admitting .
republican or q democrat to a contest
ed seat, or Of recognizing the equal
rights OF black men. Democrats can
be relied upon to vote solid every
to q contested seat, whether he is en-
tilted to il or not. or TO vote solid
| every time against any measure hRv
ing for it's object the protection of ne
groes in the exercise of their natural
rights; and they cannot be relied upon
for anything else.
| The truth of this statement has beer
ahundsntly proved during the present
| session. When the Senate was con.
sidcring the civil rights bill, the dem.
ocrats fought it ut every point. They
fought it all one night and probably
, would have fought It night and day
for whole year, If by so doing they
could have defeated il. They never
have fought tariff spoliation bill, or
a reputation bill whole night, nor
even single hour. In like manner
the democrats in the House ON We'd
uesday, voted solid against . bill the
object of which was 70 protect negroes
in the exercise of the Same rights that
are enjoyed by ChOctaw and Chicka-
saw Indians. Tho bill in question pro-
vides that al cOlored persons residing
| in the territory of these tribes at the
| time when the thirteenth amendment
to the constitution took effect, may
hold Office, send their children to the
public schools, and exercise all the
rights and privileges enjoyed by the
Indians. aThe BILL" says the report
of congressional proceedings, "was
passed By . strict party vote" or
course Il was. There was "nigger
in it, and @ . matter Of course every
democrat voted loud against It.
Can anything be more absurd
than 10 callsuch . party the party
of free trade, and fArmerS rights,
or the party of hard money and
home rule? So far from being the
party of hard money, it is tho party
which, in convention assembled, de-
clared it to be in favor Of Issuing
some fifteen hundred millions
Of greenbacks for the purpose of pay
| ing (repudiating) the national debt
So far from ito being the party of free
trade, it is the party which made Mr..
l Greeley its candidate for tho Presiden.
cy, and which voted to relegate the
tariff question out Of sight. 1t is
, | moreover, the party which helped The
Pennsylvania protccti0nists to repeal
the revenue duties on tea and coffee
and to retain enormous duties on iron
and cotton and wooden goods. So fol
. from being the party offarmcrs' rights
Il Is the party Of no right whatever
except that Of white men to deprive
black men of all rights. As for home
rule, il is in favor of that when the
: democrats are in the majority at home
, but not otherwise. The party which
in Virginia attempted 20 impose Z
: government from without upon city
where the republicans happened to bt
, in the majority is not exactly the party
a | of home rule.
Il Now that slavery is abolished, such
party as this is utterly odious. The
, only service that the party OF Pendle.
! ton, and Greeley, and Fernando Wood
aud Merrimop, can render the country
10 TO take itself out of the way, and
leave room for party of free trade
and honest moneys party which ha,
the wisdom 10 accept, and the courage
to contend for, sound principles o.
economy. Such party is destined Il
arise and come into power, no matter
whether the rotten old pro-slavery
organization gives its consent or not
. The best thing that the ancient preju.
dice can do, therefore, Is to accept the