Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1874-12-24
TIE SENATORSHIP.
Why He Shoald not be Excepted from
the Custom of Second Election.
Some Of the Obj eciIons TO Hts r


At the outset d. DOT hesitate to
express my decided preference for
Hon. hi. FL. Carpenter, over Ill 9th
ers who are canC.idases for the post
ton Ex-senator. And | will give my
reasons tor he preference L. the
first place J think he is entitled to a
RET lection.
LONG CUSTOM
has SANCTIONED the practice OF keep
ing Ien4tors in their places az least
two terms. Is there any good rea.
500 for departing from this custom
DOW? What has Senator Carpenter
done to forfeit the confidence of the
people a: WHAT offenso has be com
mitted that demands his expul ION
from the Senate under circumstances
which leave stain upon bis reputa-
ton? If be lis defeated now the re-
suit can receive no other construc-
ton, for hl his r publican predecess-
ors have received the com ment Of
a second term. Durkee, d ,oIittl-
tial endorsement. The latter is now
upon his tt ird term aud no one can
deny that his colleague has not been
AS faithful to his trus; as Senator
Howe. If Senator Carpenter is to
be sacrificed in The pending contest
tten coGsi- tency demands thaG Re-
publican Legislature shall insist up,
on the resignation of Senator Howe.
There ia no escape from this concla-
sion 1t is out of the question for
them to retain the one and sacrific-
the other. without being gull OF
gross inconsistency and gross par
tiality.
Now, it is a significant fact that
Senator Carpenter has been made
most conspicu ously THE candidate
BET the people during he election,
and the result is Republican tri-
umph notwithstanding No one can
say that he did not contr butte large
ly to this victory. He stumped the
State, ana wherever his eloquent
voice was heard we note the most
GRATIFYING GAINS.
Compare this with the results of one
year ago, when Washbu alone can
vassed the state. La that election
Senator Carpenter took no part, and
yet the Republican party was beaten,
and beaten badly. Had the sena-
torial question been involved IN the
issue of that election, the results
might have construed as fatal TO the
prospects of Senator Carpenters re
election, B It it was not Mr.. Car
penter was not then before the peo-
pie. His voice was NOT heard, and
for the disastrous results Of tho c)n-
test, be can 10 no wise be responsi,
bile. AT the recent election il wa
different. In this contest about the
only issue before the peopl,, wa the
senatorial question. Al all events
that was the predominant, the con
trolling issue, and with it Senator
Carpenter was most conspicuous
Identified. Indeed it may be said
that he was
THE VERY EMB )DIMGNr OF THAT ISSUE.
FL was u candidate for re- lection
ID was on trial before the people.
HIS senatorial career was made thv
constant topic of severe crisici~ N
by the orators and the press OF the
opposition. He bad been Republ,-
can senator, and he Republican par
ty was held justly responsible for hi
'tfical acts as such. There is 30 us
"a trying to ign IRE or deny this no.
torlous fact. L. was made too prom
inent to be met with denial. Indeed
here was no attempt AT denial dur
ing the campaign. Neither the press
nor the orators of the Republican
party dared to repudiate their soma
TOR. He was fighting their battle-
ADD advocating their cause wi .
bower and ability that none OF the n
couli ma Oh. They couli not affJrd
90 loose his vallablc services, for had
ne and bis hosts Of warm friends re-
tired from the canvass, my word for
It, the reault of tho election would
have been far different. Senator
Carpenter has fought the battle and
won the victory, and he is entltled
TO the fruits of the trIumphs IL
nas the right to claim the victory as
Al endorsement of his senatorial con-
iuct.
And this brings me to the question.
What has he done to forfeit the con
lnued confidence of the parry Tor
which be has done so much ? "Why,
be
TOOK BACK PAY,
says an objector. So did Washburn,
40 did Hows, and 80 did other R.
Dublicans
Yes, but" continues the ohjector,
Carpenter even defended the odious
measure
And 50 be did, oh most sapiens sir
but what of that? Woul you have
nim admit that he voted wrong
knowing 1T to be so at the time? Ii
defended the measure because be :
lieved it was right. Had be acted
tiff ,rently, had he made a cowardly
,uomissIon and left his friends IN the
urcb, be would have incurred th
just contempt Of every honest man.
He undertook to boldly defend hi
own conduct on his back pay qpe-
ton, and on doing 80 he demonsJrat-
ed the fact tina be had been gDvern
ed by honest motives in voting foi
it. This is certainly to his credit
for had be confessed the measure t.
be wrong, he wouli have stood be-
fore the country seii-convicted 81
dishonesty. For my part l tank
the back-pay bill wrong in principle,
and that those who advocated il
made mistake. Ga that subject
my own opinion is in full accord
With popul., sentiment. But | AN
unwilling TO forsake true friend be-
cause be has made single mistake.
1t is enough for me to know that