New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-01-14
Tile GRE1T DEB1TE.V

Congress has discussed for four full days
the question of amnesty The most conspicu-
GUS men of each party in Congress have been
engaged, and it may safely be called the
great debate Of the session. Other times
have furnished great debates. There have
been occasions in Congress within the
memory of living men when Webster, Clay,
Calhoun, Wright, Benton, and the other states
men of their time wrestled in that arena !;
when Charles Sumner, and Stephen A. Doug
las, and Winter Davis, and Thaddeus
Stevens, and the leaders of that still
later time addressed themselves to questions
of gravcst import TO the nation, and the
whole country listened. If there were giants
in those days there were also themes worthy
their discourse; questions OF gravity so pro-
found as to enlist their highest intellectual
efforts; differences which might well engage
such champions and put them to their
mettle. They were debates in which there
was something more than tactical Skill
or word-play, moro than the mere parry and
thrust of fencing, or the exhibition OF intel
lectual dexterity and Gdroitness. Opinions,
doctrines, facts were all involved; theories OF
government, fundamental principles OF pohu-
cal and social science, questions OF con-
stitutional law, of personal liberty, Of the
relations of States and of the rights OF
man. were the themes, and they who treated
them were worthy to be called statesmen. The
"feld days" of that long period-and they
were not few-were days i'll which the nations
foremost men gave Their best thought ana
highest powers to the consideration OF ques-
tons of the most vital importance, and the
listening people knew there wa nothing trivial
in the occasion, as there was nothing trlillng
OF petty in the argument.
And this too has been "great debate"
and these the - field days. of a new period
The subject Amnesty. The question
Whether one man, no more and no less
guilty than all the rest, shall be excepted
from the universal pardon. And no.
not that either. The real question at the bot
tom of the whole debate has been which party
shall make the most political capital out OF
the amnesty discussion for the Presidential
campaign 1t is around this that all these
speeches have revolved. They have been made
not to Congress, but to the country. Mr..
RandaIrs original resolution might have waited
certainly until the more pressing business of
the session was under way. No one would
|
ever is benefited by it would be benefited just
as much two or three. months hence as now,
and would have lost nothing by the delay.
And as to Mr.. Blaine's amendment-we hardly
| need discuss it. 1t was so plainly a tactical
maneuver, with so much of the quality of poll
tics and 50 little OF craftsmanship in it, that
the press of his own party has very generally
pronounced it a mistake. The general sense of
| the public has been indicated in the comments
that have followed the debate. The discus
sion in the press and among the people has
not been upon the merits of the question
raised, but almost entirely upon the tactical
advantages gained At first it was said that
Blaine had gained an advantage over
Randall in his motion for reconsd-
Grafton, which opened the whole
subject to debate. Then it was said that Cox
had damaged Blane's Presidential prospects
| by his lively rejoinder. Then that Hill had
injured his own party by the energy of his
| assault upon the administration of the Govern
ment during the war and the warmth OF his
defense of Jefferson Davis and the Confederate
authorities. And this has been the range Of the
whole outside discussion. The "great debate"
is Judged by the people to be nothing more
nor less than struggle between the two
parties for position i'll the Presidential contest.
They see no deeper significance in it. The
vehement defamation and passionate ora
tory on both sides have no effect upon
them. They see through it ALL and the only
interest they feel in it is, not to know what
becomes of jeff Davis, but which side makes
most capital out of the debate.
And that remains to be seen. Mr. Blaine does
not seem to have strengthened himself or his
party by his motion, if we can judge anything
| from the comments of the press of both par
ties. If he intended to revive the animosites
of the war at the North and bid for the sup
port of the intensely unforgiving and relent-
| less element, he has not succeeded. Keeping