New-York tribune., 1876-07-22
4 TENI POINT.

Some excellent gentlemen at this time are
proclaiming their JOY because the Democratic
party has experienced a change OF heart. In
its platform they lind great many fine phrases
about hard money, specie resumption, fidelity
10 national obligations, reform of the public
service, economy Of expenditure, and the like.
similar phrases have embellishod Republican
platforms for many years. Then, as sad
experience teaches, thcy meant little. DO they
necessarily mean much because another party
utters theml Are We 10 believe that II Demo
Gratis should gain power there would be no JOBS,
no schemes of plunder no selection OF uuWor-
thy men as reward for parry services! BiT
the conversion" Of the Democratic party to
hard money gives especial satisfaction. Men
rs worthy and guiie}esS as Frank w. Bid
and Judge Stalo hasten to embrace
the ncw convert with enthusiasm. Mean
while, not only before but after the adoption
Of this array of glittcIing phrases, two-thnds
Of the Democratic members of the House vote
for the immediate and unqualified reputation
OF pledge of the public faith.
Every party should be judged not only by
its rofcssions and pledges, made when it IS
irving to eusuarc voters, but 10y its record, its
constituent clements, and its established tend
encies. We knew something Of the Demo
cratic party, in relation to the currency and
the public faith before 1T assembled liz Con-
vcntion at St. Louis. We knew that Ii had
denounced the grecnback as unconstitutional
during the war. We knew that, when peace
returned, that party demanded the pay
ment of United States bonds III these de-
prcciatcd notes, well knowing that much
greater depreciation must follow so large an
issue OF them. We knew that a large majority
OF Democratic members had voted for unlim
tied initiation Of the currency in 1874 We
know that nearly every Democratic vote in
Congress had been cast against the Rcsump-
ton act of 1879, notwithstanding the pro-
vision for unlimited increase of bank notes
which many Democrats had urged, because
of hostility to the formal pledge to
resume specie payments at fixed
time. We knew that after the passage
Of that act, the Democratic party began to
clamor for its repeal, and, by the most dan
ecrous appeals to the spirit of communism and
reputation, poiled 10000 more votes IN ONO
than over before. We knew that in January
last, and weel, after week ever since, Demo
cratic leaders had moved the unconditional
reputation of that pledge, and had been Sis
tained by the votes of more than two-thirds
Of the Democratic members. And yet, because
that same party adopted certain fine phrases At
St. Louis, in the hope to gull simple people
who read platforms, there are worthy gentle
men who rush forward TO greet the newly
converted party with tears Of joy.
The prevailing tendencies of both parties on
this question are known. The Republican
party has been weak, unready, tardy i'll the
discharge of duty, but never false TO the pub
lie honor, for the overwhelming sentiment Of
It's voters has restrained even the worst dem
agocucs among its leaders. In every contest
on that question its voters have put it on the
night side, aud they forgive many Of Grants
misdceds because, when demag0gucs and weak
leaders yielded and went with the Democrats,
lis veto prevented initiation. On the other
hand, the overwhelming sentiment Of Dem
ocratc voters has been hostile TO re-
sumption, in favor of imitation, and un-
sound in respect to pledges of the public
faith. The dishonest platform OF that party
in 1868 did not misrepIosent its voters. The
constituents who stand behind two-thirds OF