The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1876-07-26
WHAT Is TRUTH

The Belknap case is dead. We would
be the last to disinter its corpse, now
slowly Wondering in the Senate Cham
Der. But, as it has been chosen, both
here and in England. as specimen
case OF American official malfeasance.
as 1t has been followed by host Of
brothers, alike it in every feature, it is
not even now too late to remember some
few facts concerning it that may help
to explain the moral condition Of this
country.
There was no dispute concerning the
facts In this case; none, at least. at the
time it was publicly tried before the
people, though, we believe, Belknap
has since discovered the advantages of
denial and defense. With all the facts
then admitted, it would seem the sim
plest matter In the world to put our
hand upon the guilty man. Who is he ?
Is 1t Marsh, the tempter and briber ?
Is 1t Mrs. Belknap No. 1, who sold her
husbands honor? Is it Mrs Belknap
No. 2, who persuaded her husband to
this infamy? Or is it Belknap himself,
the trusted officer who sold his country
and his people. All are more or less
guilty, but who is the real criminal, on
whom the punishment OF public obloquy
should fall?
The answer would seem simple, easy
apparent; yet; though the country has
talked the subject over, for months and
vnnnthu II ruh nj liz,
answer 1t. 1t is Marsh, says the Inter
Ocean-Marsh the tempter, not his vic
tim that Is the criminal; 1t is not Mrs.
Belknap, say the Kentucky papers
when they discover her birth place; 1t
is Mrs. Belknap, say the Cincinnati
Commercial and host Of others; it is
Belknap, cry thousand voices; whilst
to the New York Graphic is reserved the
discovery Of the greatest criminal Of
them all in Blackburn, OF Kentucky.
chairman Of the committee that dis.
covered this infamy. 1t was he who,
forgetting how in his school-boy days
he had sat by Mrs. Belknap's side and
shared her lunch, refused to listen to
her prayers, now that In her sorrow, she
knelt before him and begged him, by
these old memories, not to make public
her weakness and offenses. Belknap
did but err, weakly yielding to loved
and tempting wife, she was but the vic
tim Of extravaganza Washington society
and female vanity. But Blackburn-he
was coolly, calmly, diabolically guilty Of
treachery. ingratitude and party hate
and malignity.
What Is the meaning OF these differ
ences? Are these papers honest in the
sentiments they give birth to, or do they
serve these dishes to the public because
the public want them, sound or rotten,
true or false2 II the latter be so, II the
people want lies, because lies are pleasant
to their vanity, then is the public senti.
ment, the honesty Of the American peo-
pie seriously diseased and affected; a
moral blindness has come over them,
rs II Adam had left the apple uneaten
and his descendants knew not the differ.
once between good and evil.
Twenty centuries ago this might have
well been. To the Athenians, lying; to
the Spartans, theft; to the Corinthians,
y still greater vice, were virtues; but il
was thought that Christianity had set
tied forever the lines between right and
wrong. virtue and vice, so we'll that nc
one could ever mistake the one for the
other. And yet, with this guiding light,
We are cropping in u moral darkness, with
no common standard Of public morality