New-York tribune., 1876-11-22
LESSONS FOR PARTY LEADERS.

IF it were possible for managing politicians
ever to fully comprehend the truth that In the
long run honesty is really the best policy, and
that all sharp practice or double-dealing or dis
honesty Of any sort will sooner or later return
to nIague the inventor, we should not be with
out hope of some practical good resulting from
the existing condition of political uncertainty
and distrust Each side doubts the other,
with good reason; for each has given the
other good grounds for something more than
suspicion If either one of these two great
parties which have contested and are now
claiming the Presidency were able to stand up
before the country and assert its own absolute
purity and integrity ; if either one could 90 to
the record and show that it had always refused
to take unfair advantages of opponents, and
that at some cost of political power and posi-
ton or some sacrifice of selfish interests had
maintained truth and justice, and steadily de-
manded pure elections and an honest
ballot the present complication would be
half unraveled at the START the situation
wouI1 lose at once half its embarrassment
For then the people would have confidence
that entire Justice would be done and an
honest conclusion of the whole matter reached
1t would be idle to claim that there is now
any such general or widespread confidence
| existing. Enough is known OF the tendency
| in both parties to accomplish their purposes
by overreaching and duplicity, and all the
questionable methods so well known i'll poll
! tics, to warrant the most careful scri-
tiny of every step taken. The record
of neither party is so clean that it can safely
appeal to the country on that alone for the
purity of its intentions and the integrity of its
purposes. If the people demand that there be
nothing in the course of this whole business
that is not open and above board, nothing
that shall have loophole for suspicion of
fraud, no evasions nor cOncealments, no
ouibbling nor pettifOgging on either side, it is
only because there is nothing in the history Of
either party that absolutely forbids suspicion.
We speak now not only of the effect upon
the public mind and conscience of the fraudu-
lent practices of merely ministerial agents in
the exercise of their official functions. We
include the larger generalization created by
the acceptance of the results thus frauduently
attained-the proceeds of fraud so to speak
by the representative men OF the two parties !;
the men of position and influence, who are con-
sidcred honest honorable and upright, and are
looked up to as such, but who have heretofore
sustained the perpetrators of frauds either
by openly defending them or witnessing them
silence without protest. 1t IS not the men
who personally commit the crimes upon pure
ballot, but they who are high up in each party
and who, being personally above suspicion,
make no protest against wrOng-dOing the
men who in the intensity of parti-
sanship consent to be accessories after
the fact, and whom Mr.. Greeley in
his celebrated letter to MIR. Tilden in 1868
placed in the category of receivers of stolen
goods lit is these men who are chiefly respOn-
sible for the doubts now so generally felt and
expressed as to the probabilities of perfectly
faIr and honest count of votes and declaration
of the result Had there been heretofore in
either party something more of a disposition
among the leaders to apply the test of
thorough investigation and impartial
searching scrutiny to the questionable
transactions of their own political friends and
associates, and a little less eagerness
to profit by bubbles and technicalities, there
would be more confidence now in the public
mind that just and honest conclusions will be
reached. If among the ardent partisans on
either side there is the hope, and among sober
minded, good citizens the fear, that party
triumph may be gained at the expense of
truth and the sacrifice of honor, the repre-
sentative men of each party in positions of
power and influence, who have put party sue