The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1876-08-10
CARL sCHURz,s POSITION.

tive Letter to Oswald Ottendorfer--The
Professions of the Two Parties and the
Character or the Two Candidates Thor
oughIy acknowledgements Unsound-
ness on Finance-Hayes Bold and Ener-
setic in Reform-Ihe Fifth Avenue Con-
ference-Kesults of Independent Move
mentS.
Fort WASHINGTON, MONTGOMERY Co., PENN
July %, 1876.
Mr.. Oswald ottendorfer, Editor of the New York
Stats Zeitung:
DEAR SIR: Although read the Stats Zeitu1eg with
toerable regularity, yet several numbers the con.
tents of which have only now been communicated
to me, escaped my notice during recent journey.
In them find the accusation directed against me
that have " turned back " upon the path which
have been travelling for years that my 9 present
course is absolutely irreconcilable with all that l
have advocated and commended until within the
last few weeks" that L am s. treading under foot
my own convictions" etc.
wherefore these charges? Because prefer Mr..
HAYES to the Democratic ticket. You will admit,
on calm reflection, that the accusations hurled
against very serious, and your sense OF JUS
tice will not deny to examination OF them In
the same journal which made them. l request OF
you therefore, the publication of this letter III the
Stats Ze5t111g, not merely by means OF extracted
passages, but entire.
What convictions. then, are those which you so
carelessly accuse me of having "trodden under
foot?" Of course you only refer to those
which touch the most important questions of our
Ou.Y
/ must have become false to my convictions in
regard to the financial question, because prefer
the Republican to the Democratic candidates? Let
us see 1chO has changed his views
You know fully well as do, and have often
enough admitted the fact in your paper, that with
reference to the financial question, the Republican
party is assuredly not all that should be- but that
it is much sounder" on the whole than the Demo
cratic party The history of the last few years. the
votes in Congress- the elections in single States,
the party organs, furnish lnd1sputaole evidence
i+J IF fhn GtcOft
ment and about all the lust Of reputation that ex-
lists is to be found the Democratic side. now, II
such party-which still almost daily. as l write,
shows itself through its majority IN the House OF
Representatives hostile to hard-money-would new
ertheless have us believe that the hard-money IN
terest would be safe in its hands, it must OF neces
sty give us, both by explanations and by acts,
stronger guarantees than we should require OF
party with better antecedents In order to deserve
confidence, the Democratic Convention should at
least have adopted a hard-money platform, free
from all stipulations and compromises, and then
have nominated for the Presidency-and no less
for the Vice Presidency-ca whose pr1nc1-
pies in regard to the hard-mOney question stood
beyond the reach of doubt. Less than this could
not have been demanded. And what has the DEM
ocratic party done in this convention? After ar
raigning the Republicans for great SINS OF om1s-
sion chiefly to raise dust for the concealment OF
it's own far record, it proposes, as the only
specific measure, the repeal OF the Resumption bill
of January, 1875.
You and have been of the same opinion, that the
Resumption bill of 1875 insufficient in its de-
tails but of value the distinct promise OF the &C
ceptance OF specie payments the side OF the Gov
ernment You and 1 during the session of this Con-
eress have condemned every attempt to repeal the
Resumption bill as vancouver of the infationists.
With perfect truth you have declared IN the StGtz
ZeStu1g that .such a repeal, without at the same
time accepting some practical measure Tor specie
payments, would be moral victory OF the 1nt1a-
tionists" You and know that for two years past
the batte-cry of the natonists has been the repeal
of the Resumption act, and if now the Democratic
platform acting upon the finance question pre-
sents as it's only specific demand that the Resump-
ton bill shall be repealed, every honest nard-money
man who seriously considers the question Will ask
what does this mean? The reason can certainly
not be that which the platform Itself puts forth,
that the promise to resume is in itself the hind
rance to resumption, for among rational people 1T is
an unheard-of thing that man was unable to pay
his debt simply because he had promised 10 do SO.
No. that demand was Incorporated into the plat
form for the simple purpose of pacifying the IN
fatonists, and binding them to the party by con-
cession. This is no mere conjecture. Inc Cnalr-
man of the Platform Committee openly declared IN
the convention that this platform was
compromise, against which the hard-
money party of the Eastern States had already
strongly protested. And they have justly protested,
because as you yourself admit this was "moral
victory of the inhatonists" The extreme imitation
lists the convention We're not satlshed win In1s
compromise naturally so, for compromise never
satisfies because it only gives part OF what is de-
sired. And what was the argument whereby the
Chairman of the committee endeavored to move
them to accept a compromise? Ihat IN THIS ques-
ton the convention could not retrograde further
without running every chance of success for the
Democratic party in the State of New York. This
had It's effect and the compromise was accepted by
largo majority Thus, for the sake OF victory, the
infiationists refrained from further demands. But
what follows party victory? Must not every hard
man. who is faithful to his CONVICTIONS, nrsC
of al ask this question?
THE NOMINATION OF HENDRICKS.
Still. this was not the only concession which
made to the infationists. The convention with
singular uuanimity nominated Mr.. Hendricks as
candidate for the Vice Presidency. Who is MI.
Hendricks? You name him in your journal; 6 a
politician without character, who has no views OF
his own concerning the question of finance" But
you know just well as that he was one OF the
fayorite candidates of the indationists, and that
characterizes his position in regard to the question
of finance. And this man is candidate for Vice
President with Mr.. Tilden! 1t is true that men
have been nominated on the same ticket
heretofore who unequal IN ability
and strength of character, but, for the first
time in the history Of the country the Democratic
Convention has furnished an unheard-of example
of placing two candidates together who on the chief
question represented exactly opposite principles.
Why was this done? To pacify the soft-money men
by giving them a chance. And what chance? Inc
chanco that in case Mr.. Tiden, who is no more i'm
mortal than YOU or should be overtaken by the fate
OF mortals the favorite candidate of the sofmoney
party would POSSESS the executive power OF the
nation What is therefore the meaning OF the COM
promise made with the soft-money party IN the
Democratic Convention? In case OF d Democratic
victory the soft-money Democrats would IN all
rrobability as at present, control the majority OF
the party in the House of Representatives. We may
accept this as very nearly certain The hard-money
Democrats would then, in accordance with the
platform, help them to repeal the Resumption act,
aas the most of them already do. An unfortunate
casualty. affecting single human life, might then
deliver the executive power into the hands OF the
goft-noney party, and, far the Senate is con-
cerned, hard-money majority there is so preca-
rious that few Democratic successes in the West
ern States, where the inhationists have the upper
hand. might turn that body in the same direction.
What effect will such compromise have on the
infatonists in the Democratic party? Will it con-
vert them to the hard-money side? Exactly the
opposite: it will encourage them to persevere
boldly in their policy, since it gives them a
chance eventually to get part If not the
whole power of the Government in their hands.
am convinced that but little while ago you
would have repeled with indignation the Thought
of such game OF chance with the fortunes of the
country; and you have right to be surprised if
others who feel the gravity of the question do the
same thing now. You cannot deny that you are
running the risk of immeasurable misfortune.
There is no use in lightly ignoring the possibilities
of the situation. for, in case If Democratic vic
tory neither you all the hard-money men to-
cether could effect the least toward preventing such
a disaster. In my opinion, we have no right to