The New York herald., 1877-03-23
How Does Hayes Southern Policy
Differ from Grant'ss

AZ lS mOIIllyluS cuOuBn W 10 SoMPSAAS~
to ask this question after our strong and
warm Endorsements of the new Presidents
Southern policy given on our faith in his
declarations. But it is acts, not words,
performance, not mere promises. that must
control our Judgment of the conduct of
public functionary when he has had
time to translate his good words and fine
promises into acts and performance.
We do not yet despair of President
Hayes and if it shall turn out that he sue
ceeds in accomplishing circuitously what
we should have preferred to see him do
directly, we will not withhold just need
of praise. But the time is past for judging
him by his words. We await his acts and
hold our Judgment in suspense. He cannot
very we'll afford to disregard our opinion
and advice. Our columns aim to express,
and more or less succeed in expressing,
the average judgment Of the country.
We are FREQ from. any temptation to
indulge in the snarling, captious invec-
tives of the opposition press, and
have no motive for Ginning in with the
adulation of administration organs. We
think we have some skill in estimating and
Interpreting the drift of public sentiment,
following its changes, and judging how far
it rests upon reasons which are likely to
make it steady. We tell the President. with
the frankncss of honest friendship, that the
first flush Of popularity which attended his
accession to Office will be as transient as the
moving cloud and the early dew if he
disappoints the expectations raised by
his admirable promises and declarations
in the inaugural address This great
tide of popularity, these "blushing honors
thick upon him" are tribute paid by an
eager country which seeks repose, to the
supposed sincerity Of his declarations The
people understood him to mean that his
Southern policy would be contrast to that
of his predecessor, and their joy at the ex-
pected change sprang up like favoring winds
to watt him on his projected voyage. But
if they find, after all, that he does nothing
different from what President Grant would
have done had he remained in power, all the
fattering applause and marks Of encourage
ment with which the new President has been
greeted will give way to feeling OF pro-
found discouragement.
Judged by actual measures and not by
mere promises, what is President Hayes
doing which would not be equally in char
acter if done by President Grant? He is
maintaining the status quo precisely as Grant
maintained the status quo. He does it with
professions OF reluctance, but Grants profess
sions of regret and reluctance were never
wanting. He even falls behind Grant in one
respect, for before Grant went out of Office he
publicly said that State governments which
cannot sustain themselves ought to
be abandoned, and he continued the troops
in New Orleans and Columbia merely not
to embarrass his successor or deprive him
of the credit of his policy by anticipating
it. Why should President Hayes hesitate at
point where President Grant was prepared
| to act Had Grant remained in Office he
would have withdrawn the troops before
now, for he was not o man to shrink from
doing thing to which he had once made up
his mind. What, then, have we gained by the
exchange? AS yet, nothing We walk by faith
and not by sight; and our faith, too, exactly
corresponds to the description that it is ''the
substance Of things hoped for and the evil
dence of things not seen." Do let us have
some visible evidence that there is change
in Southern policy and that our exuberant
| rejoicing has not been in vain.
|