Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1876-02-16

party, aud that the tragedy OF killing OF
a score or n1uTe negroes every fall L
make campaign powder was entrel,
played out. As will be readily perceivet
the whole movement fi2vors strongly o
Morton and looks like oneUf his sdrowC
games 10 free the seating OF Pinchbscl
and undermine Grant the form Of which
results have certainly been aided by
the event. Thinking Il worth while
! however, aside from this, to find ou
just how Bruce did s.ald, a long con.
versatiOn wss had with him to day, II
the couise OF which he expressed him
self freely, giving your correspondent
| permission to publish bis views. On thu
subject Of Grant ard third tenn be ex'
| pressed himself vely st1ongl-.
! I'll may say fo- r1e,n said he, "thst
7 pAasil oppose MI Grants nomination,
: and, il be Is reconstructed, shall oppose
his reelection with 81 my power"
In reply to question as TO whether
he thought his people were with hitnjn
this feeling he replied at once, and with
| the greatest confidence: Why, three
years ago the simple name OF Grant
was sufficient to rouse the enthusiasm
OF every coiored msu in the south to fe-
yer neat, but row the very laborers In
the field say: 1--WE don't want no more
of dat man Grant; we can't trust him. %
"L know," be ssid, "that every etfJrt
will be made to make it appear that
don't represent my people. l know that
papers will be paid to write against me
/ Know that negroes will be hired to
hold indignation meetings ell over the
sluth, bup'-snd his face betokeDed the
utmost confidence as he said, II know
that represent my people in this mat
ter, and know that the only southern
votes Grant will get will bs the office
holders who hold their tenure by crying
Third term"
L asked him il, in case Grant was re-
nominated, and a good, sound, honest
Democrat was put up against him, bis
people would vote ior the Democrat.
''That,n he replied, 'tis question ] am
not quite prepared to answer yet. am
only a6le to say that they Will not vote
fur Grant,
How about Morton?" 1 said. "Do
they like him?"
"Oh yes," he replied; 'sny of them
will do except Grant"
He was specially sevrra on Grant for
The favoritism be had shown toward
Louisiana and for the corrupt men who
had been sent dswn to govern his own
State, and reiterated over and over
again, "a!l we want is for the President
to cali off bis b'oodbounds and let US
govern ourselves" He thinks the DEM
Ocrsts might easily have obtained last
year large proportion Of the cOlored
vote which was then hopelessly divided,
and thinks they were foolish for not do
ing it, His chief grievance, however, is
against Grant, ard whatever influence
he has among his people may becoCnted
upon as to be used against him.
Mr.. Bruce further declared that he
should take opportunity during the de-
bste On the Pinchtack case, from his
place in the senate, to exprtss exactly
and fully his views on the subject.
SENATOR RBUCE's sPEECH-wEY THE
SOUTH Is DEMOCRATIC.
New York Herald (zdltoriap.
The extraordinary attack upon the
President and his southern policy by
Senator Bruce, the colOred senator from
Mississippi, opens upa question which
has heen frequently RskGd-Why is the
south q Democratic unit? Senator
Bruce gives one reason-namely, that
the President has abandoned his friends,
the colored men. Therefore we hear
much talk from the Republican leaders
about the pefil5 TO the country of a
"unitei southn and the necessity of
voting dcwn the Democratic party, be-
cause il has behind 1t "solid s3uth;"
and sectionaIism In politics is so danger
Gus an element, and has been so potent
for mischief in our past history, that
this promises TO be very effective. 1t is
useful to see on what foundation it rests.
There ia no doubt that il one part OF the
U1ion is permanently arrsyed against
the other fer some selfish purpose, as
was the case before the war, when the
south WAS united for the One end of
spreading the area of slavery, or, as
happened in General Washington'S
time, when the west was jealous Of the
east, this is an inconvenience and may
become peril to the whole country.
This is properly sectiOnalism; and a sec-
tionsl party, party having at heart
not the good of the whole Union, but
the selfish advantage Of part OF it, is
undoubtedly mischieyCus. 1t is fact
that the southern States are now solidly
Democratic. Doss this make them sec
tionaI? We think not; for they have
no sectional or selfish aim; they do not
seek to advance any selfish policy they
have no objects in view, in their politi-
csl agitation, inimical to the whole
Union. 1t i5 an error, therefore, to
speak Of the present political condition
Of the south as "sectionar in the proper
and usual sense Of that word; and one
proof of this is seen in the fact that dur
ing aud shortly after reconstruction the
Republican leaders themselves planned
anu hoped TO make the south sOlidly
Republican by the overwhelming
numbers of it's c0lored voters,
and believed they were III this
following a quite legitimate political
aim. Nevertheless, il is not g pleasant
nor healthful thing that the whole Of
a great and important geographical Sec
tiOn OF the Union should deliberately
join itself TO one of the two political
psrties which divide the country. In
stead of raising the mad-deg cry OF Sec
tIonalism about it, it would be far wiser
to look for the causes of this phenome-
non. We propose to examine them
briefly, In 1868, Of fourteen southern
States-excluding Marylaud-au but
Georgia, kentucky and Louisiana either
cast their votes for General Grant or
cast no vOte. In 1872 Georgia, Ken
lucky, Missouri, Tenneesee and Texas
went Democratic, and Louisiana was
also fairly carried by them. In 1874 ali
the southern States, except South Caro-
lins snd Mississippi, had become Demo.
cratic. La 1875 the Democrats carried
slso Mississippi; and at this time even
South Carolina is not certain to remain
Republican. Thus, since the accession
Of General Grant to the Presidency
the Republican party has lost
almost the whole south, and this il
spite OF the fact that the Federal power
and infiuence--alWays very potent il
the southern States have been used q:
they never were before since the foun
dstion Of the government, to maintain
the Republican ascendsncy in thost
| States; and in spite Of another fact, o
equal importance, that there are in al
those States two paities as strongly op
posed by sentiment, opinion and uadi
| tion SIS The Republicans and Democrat
! in the north, and leaders in each @
| these PARTIES ambitious for power ant
| place, and very ready 10 seize these from
their opponents il the opportunity Of
! fered. How, then, is 1t that these tWG
| parties and their copteudiug leader.
have been welded into solid mass o
opposition to the Republicans? How il
| 1t that Wbigs and Democrats have sunf
/ their traditional sninosities and jeRl