New-York tribune., 1876-10-27
DE1TH-BED REPENT1NCR.

"WhOever excuses, accuses Nobody cares
70 have Gov. Hayes promise that he will not
consent TO the payment OF rebel war claims
Everybody knows that he would not sign such
q bill, and that his election involves the sue
cess of a party whIch would never pass such u
bill. But Gov. T'ildcn recognizes the fact that
his party cannot be trusted. When he thrustS
into the canvass, at its very close, his pledge
to veto such bills he cOnfcsSeS that Il Demo
cratic Congress may reasonably be expected to
pass them, and that our only hope, in event
of Democratic success, would be in the firm
ness of Mr.. Tilden-and in his living
through his term. Has it come to this, then,
that the honor Of the nation, its hope of pros
perity, its safety from bankruptcy, must all be
staked upon tho ability Of one man to resist
his party-and upon his ability to undergo
safely now an amount Of labor and anxiety
a hundrcd-fOld greater than that to which he
has more than once heretofore slccumbcd (!
Had we not better intrust power TO IA Prcsi-
dent who would not have to resist his party,
and to q party which would not tempt or try'
to cocrce its PresidcntY
Mr.. Tildcn not only arraigns his party; he
accuses himself. Virtually he acknowledges
that his career and record and party aSsOcia-
tiOns have not been such that, without formal
pledge from him, men would feel sure that he
would not consent to pay disloya men for
their losses in rebellion. Everybody knows
that Gov. Hayes, Il man who riSlcd his own
life in the suppression Of rebellion, would do
no such thing. Everybody knows that a
Republican Congress would never hunt for
tricky devices for the payment OF SUCH claims
by indircctOn. But Mr.. Tildcn found it ncccs-
sary to produce n speech which was never
delivered, ten years after the war had ended
in order to prove that he had not Sympathized
with rebellion He found it necessary to sum-
mon several questionable witnesses to prove
that, though he allowed himself to appear as
publicly responsible for the declaration that
the war was a failure, he privately dls>cntcd.
His associations have been with party which
leaned toward the South when the South was
in rebellion. During many years. though that
party has earned many defeats and lasting
infamy by its subservicncy to the South Mr..
1ilden has never vcntured to oppose its wll
or protest against its conduct. Therefore he
rightly udg d that from him some pledge was
necessary. The natural presumption, he viz
tually admits, was that his party would obey
the demands of the South, and that lac would
obey his party, as usual. Therefore he rushes
to the front, and promises that, in this one
thing, if elected he will not yield to his party.
Now, what is such pledge worthP In the
nature of the case, it smacks of death-bed re-
pentance During all these years of civil war
and reconstruction, when the very existence of
the nation was at stake, Mr.. Tildcn never op-
pOsed his party. Even now, being candidate
for the Presidency, he gives his promise only
at the last moment, when defeat appears I'M
minent No such pledge appears IN that
elaborate letter of acceptance, which cost 80
many weeks Of study. Only when it became
apparent that MIR. Tilden, as the servant of
an odious party, itself the tool of solid
South, would be beaten, he volunteers his
promise that in one thing he will not obey its
orders. But are such pledges trustworthy I
Let the history of Polk, Pierce, and Buchanan
answer! Polk promised to resist the
known desire of his party for the repeal