The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1876-01-14
Presidential Nominations.

Never In Inc history OF the country
have presidential possibilities been so
numerous as in this centennial year of
our National existence. The names of
men absolutely unknown to the Nation,
and perhaps never heard of beyond the
bounds of their own Congressional dis,
tricts, have been proclaimed by the
''local papers" as the "strongest can
didates" for the Presidency.
That both political parties find them
selves embarrassed by this excess of
riches is becoming painfully apparent.
We would not, in this behalf. reafirm
the Shakspearean proverb that, "there
is small choice in rotten apples," be-
cause some Of the men whose names are
becoming conspicuous In connection
with the Presidential nomination are
men of eminent worth and ability; while
others, and not few, unquestionably
belong to Shakspeare's category of veg
etable undsoundness that might render
choice somewhat perplexing. But,
omitting all these, there remains good
sound material before both parties
wherefrom to select worthy and suit
able candidates.
AS the political developments become
more and more positive by the progress
of time and events, it seems to be pretty
generally conceded that the nominees
of Of beth hsstb parties most likely to come
from the West. That this is true of the
Republican party can scarcely be doubt
ed, inasmueh as they have really no very
prominent man for the nomination in the
East, with the exception of Mr.. Blaine;
and he Is considered. in some quarters,
as quite too far East to suit the occasion.
The Democrats are much in the same
position with regard to their prominent
men, of whom Bayard and Tilden are the
representatives in the East; and neither
of them likely to preponderate against
Groesbeck, Thurman, or Hendricks in
the West.
These Western names are all of them
good. The Democracy might proudly
enter the field under the banner of
either. But, even as among these, there
still remain reasonable grounds of pref
erence. 1t is objected to Hendricks that
he has carried his caution to the extent
of timidity in making any positive dec
laration of views upon the great issues
involved in the coming campaign; that
his public utterances have been mean
ingless and equivocal; that he has placed
himself astride of the party fence with
no positive intimation as to which side
he might fall upon.
AS to Thurman, the objection is that
he has displayed himself on both sides
of the party fence, and thereby has
made his record ambiguous and uncer-
tain. And the movement now in prog
ress to place him first upon the Dem
ocratic ticket with Curtin of Pennsyl-
yania as the second, indicates pur-
pose to cover up the quasi secession SEN
timents of Thurman in 1854, by the
war record Of Curtin during the rebel
lion. But, in all this, weakness will be
developed that may imperil the pros
poets of Democratic success in the elec-
lion OF their nominees.
From the foregoing considerations,
and others that might be urged, 1t seems
plain that Mr.. GRoEsBECK is the best
candidate, in all respects, that the DEM
ocracy can find in the West. His polit-
ical record is without blot or shadow
Of Inconsistency. His public utterances
have always been positive and unequiy-
ocal; and always true to the Democratic
standard Of faith and practice. His in
tellectual eDdowments and attainments
are of the very highest order; and his
private character is without blemish.
We are not particularly concerned as
to whom the Democracy shall nominate
for their Presidential candidate. But, II
they propose to elect their nominee, we
feel some interest In their having an un-
exceptionable man for President OF
these United States. II he is TO be a
Democrat, we want him to be a good
one; and that we desire for the common
good of the country. And we verify be-
Iieve that the Democratic party could
not commit its own interests nor the in