The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-03-13
"rhe President and All of Us. /"

The infamous and revolving despatch
which Secretary Belknap sent to New Or
leans in January, 1875, contained an apt
phrase, which is more truly descriptive
now than it was on that memorable oc-
cassion. Nobody who listened to Mr.
Evarts can have forgotten his scathing de-
nunciation of the ''all of u.s. despatch at
the great indignation meeting in this city,
Immediately after the dispersion of the
Louisiana legislature by federal soldiers.
The rebuking eloquence of the great law
yer and inoensed patriot rose to its highest
strain of burning vehemence while he COM
meDted on that official proof that 'all of
u.s. were accomplices in that daring act of
military usurparion, and the effect of his
speech was so great that within three
days Mr.. Fish and other respectable mem
bers of the cabinet denied that they were
consulted or had ever given their consent.
But the moral obliquity of that disgraceful
transaction in which Belknap telegraphed
that the president and all of us" were i'm.
plicated did not approach the turpitude of
sordid corruption at which the country
now stands aghast w lille it may be true
that only the president was consulted be-
fore sending the ''all of us" despatch, the
fact that Belknap and his chief dared to
commit the other members of the cabinet
to such an act without their knowledge be-
tokened the servile complaisauce which
emboldened the authors of the telegram to
take such liberty with members of the
cabinet whom they had not consulted
Their subsequent disclaimers did not help
them, because the public rightly judged
that if they had been men of spirit and in
dependence Belknap and the president
would not so coolly have presumed on their
acquiescence. and the fact that they did not
resign after so unwarrantantable an insult
to their self-respeCt confirmed the public
opinion of their abject servility. If the
''all of US" telegram was not literally true
in fact it was substantially correct in spirit
the failure of the unconsulted members tc
resign after such an affront to their indie
pendence making them accomplices ir
spite of their disclaimers.
Be that as it may, there can be no reason
able doubt that not only the administration
but the whole Republican party must share
the deeper and more damning disgrace
which has now fallen upon Belknap. 1t il
impossible for AL of US" to shirk it with
out denial of that party responsibility
which is essential to the success of the Re
publican institutions. 1t is the accepted
rule Of our politics that the party in power
is answerable tor the conduct of the men
it puts in ofhce-a rule which is never dis
puted except In some astounding emer
gency like the present, when the thick and
thin organs of disgraced party try L
limit responsibility to the Individual offend
ers.
There would have been as much politica
sanse in attempting to shield the Demo
cratic party four years ago from tn
ruinous consequences of the disgrace c
Tweed 1t was true in point of fact tha
not one Democratic in hundred thousan
had any completely with the Tweed ring
but nothing was said by the Republica
press at the time about isolated acts,
or Individual weakness" or ''particula
shame" The whole Republican pres
held the Democratic party answerable IL
Tweed's colossal thefts, and with perfe'
Justice, according to accepted ideas
party responsibility. The Democrat
party of the United States staggered an
reeled under that tremendous blow
although the crimes had been perpetrate
by a small knot of local politicians in
single city, without the knowledge or con
plicity OF the party at large. The DEM
cratic organization was so broken ar
crippled by the Tweed exposures that
burst not go into the presidential canva
of the following year on an independel
footing and was forced to the humiliatiC
OF taking shelter behind the Cincinna
convention aud accepting Mr., Greeley, i
bitterest foe and reyiler, as its PRESIDENT
candidate. 1t was in vain that the Dem
cratic organs asseverated and protests
that Tweed aud his immediate accoI
pices were the only guilty parties and r
monstrated against the injustice of holdir
the Democrats Of every state in the unit
responsible for frauds of which they we
Ignorant until tho blasting exposure. 1t
idle to resort to this line of argument in
country where government by polite
parties is of the very essence OF our ms
tutions.
Party responsibility does not mitiga
individual guilt, but the public securi
requires that both personal and par
obligations be rigidly enforced. Ii d
doctrine were accepted that only individu
officers are answerable for their person
crimes we should lose the chief guarant
of honest government under Republic
institutions. 1t is the nature of free
situations, where government is possil
only through the agency of political pa
ties, to put the successful party und
bonds for the good behavior OF all its me-
bers whom it elects or appoints to off,
Party responsibility is similar in its natu
to that of the personal bondsmen of pub
officers; but with this difference, that t
penalties are not pecuniary, but polite
In one view it may seem hard that t
innocent bondsmen of the official whjsk
thieves in the west should suffer for Grin
committed without their knowledge, but
Is sufficient answer to say that the pr
lie security requires it, In d higher degr
and broader sense the public security
quires that each political party be b,