Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1875-09-23
The Democratic State Convention.

A
the work of selecting a State ticket
by re~nominating Taylor, Doyle
Kuehn and all the rest of the humbug
Reformers. A platform Of principles
was adopted, most of the planks Of
which would fit wellin any Republican
manifesto.
The second declaration sets forth
the elementary principles that are
very good, but have no more bearing
upon the present issues before the
country than the Declaration OF In
dependence or any other statement Of
acknowledged fundamental principles
They are principles embodied in our
State and National Constitutions all
over the land. The resolution ends
with this sentence: "Hostiity to
all state or federal enactments which
usurp jurisdiction over the private
conscience, or punish one man for
the offences of another" We should
like to know what law. the Conyen-
ton bad in view, State or National,
which has usurped jurisdiction over
the private conscience or made one
man responsible for the crimes Of an
other. This clause has some covert
meaning which the initiated can un-
derstand. We do not, and would
like an explanation.
The Convention further s~es On tn
say that the Constitution with all Its
amendments must be acknowledged
as the Supreme law throughout the
land, and no effort be made to coun-
teract the letter or spirit of its pro-
misses. This is Republican doctrine
certainly. The Democratic party op-
posed these Constitutional amend
ments to the very last letter and
syllable. The Democratic mule
thrusts his head into the trough and
devours with avidity this Republican
proyender, but with his heels he
spitefully kicks at the party that
starved him till he was glad to get
this unsavory fare. They can easily
shake hands with their rebel breth-
rem acr oss the Lloody chasm. 1t is
easy for them to forgive men who
have committed no offence, but they
have no christian charity for the Re-
publican party that defeated these
rebels, saved the government and en-
acted these Con stitutional Amend
Inents. This is an offence and crime
in their view far greater than that OF
rebellion. We don't expect TO be for
given by the Democratic party.
Resolution number four says:
"That under our constitution the school
fund and its revenues are set apart and ex.
ciuSlVelN upNOIeu 10 the SuppOtI anu
tenance of public schools; that all agitation
relating to a division of the same is impohtic
and uncalled for; that such schools are an in
dispensable element of republican Institutions,
and we believe in more and more perfectine
the system, so as to bring thorough and free
common school education within the reach Of
all but we also insist that, as required by
our constitution, the public schools throughout
our State shall be kept free from sectaran in
struetion, in order that they may become ac'
cessible to all without interference with the
rights of conscience.
In this wordy, resolution which tells
what the Constitution provides, and
that which everybody knows, we can
not learn whether the Democratic
party is in favor of the division O
the school fund or not. They say
that "all agitation relating to The
school fund is impolitic and uncalled
for" If we understand this language
the Taylor Democracy is as much op
posed to agitation against the division
as in favor of it. They know yer.
well that high ecclesiastical authority
influencing a great many votes ha
expressed it self thoroughly in favor o
the division of the school fund
Shall the Republican party not b.
allowed to agitate against th
measure? Tn short if the Democrat
party are opposed to division of tn
School fund why do they not com
out squarely and say 30. After prefer
inc their friendship to the common
schools they continue the sentence wit
an unfortunate "but" Here is wha
they saw: "But, we also insist tina
as required by our Constitution til
public schools throughout orr State
shall be kept free from sectarian ii
struction in order that they may be
come accessible to all without inter
ference with the rights of conscience.
! There of course would be no use {
meaning to this clause if the Demo
cracy did not believe that the con
mon schools as at present carried 0
are under the influence of sectaria
instruction. The party is certainl
not satisfied with the system as col
r Quoted at present. They have libele
the system. Whose rights of col
science in our common schools is il
terfered with by the system as
present carried on2 There is but OF
sect of religioni.ts in the Unite
y States that have uttered such cor
plants.
Is the Democratic party dispose
. to Join with them in their opposite
to our common schools? If it
| kr,,