The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1878-06-27
A Dilemma.

Ccllb iCttcl VI lloH. "A. Ii. Ii. OIlldTl. OH Tile
subject OF the financial condition of the
country, has been received. Although not
so intended, there has not been presented
to the country from a Southern pen such an
able and conclusive defence of Republican
administrative policy, as this same letter,
and we fear our Democratic friends will be
in no mood to further accord to this eminent
Virginian and philosophic statesman the
high need OF praise his production merits,
when they read the financial exposition of
Hon. John L. Harris. recently given in Con-
gfess. We have purposely withheld Mr..
Stuart's letter from our columns until our
Democratic contemporaries had committed
themselves to the views it presents, and now
mat this part Of our programme has been
as our space viii admit, in placing Mr.. Stu
arts facts, figures and deductions upon
record. We shall not only do this, but we
shall lay before our readers the speech of
Hon. John 7. Harris, published in the
Record of the 18th, and more recently cir
cuIated in pamphlet form throughout the
district. Ii our Democratic friends so I'M
conditionally accept Mr.. Stuart's calm and
wel-matured arrangement of facts and con-
illusions, so conclusively indicating the wis
dom of Republican administration, we shall
feel some anxiety to learn what disposition
they are going to make of Judge Harris,
the recognized exponent of their party poll
cy. They cannot do less for Judge Harris
than they have done for Mr.. Stuart, and
hence it is confidently expected that those
papers which have published the letter of
Mr.. Stuart will extend the same courtesy to
their representative in Congress, who has
formulated his financial views and given
them to the country. One thing, however,
we may safely assume, coming so close to-
gether, our contemporaries cannot endorse
them both. for they present divergent or
rather antagonistic views. Had there been
intervening space OF several months, it would
not have interfered with the hearty endorse
ment of each, for Democratic elasticity and
disregard of consistency is one of the privi-
leges enjoyed in a district with 5000 Demo-
cratic majority. 1t must be borne in mind,
too, that Mr.. Stuart is not a candidate for
any public position, and therefore the en-
dorsement of his letter must necessarily
carry with it sincerity, and to that degree
acceptance of Republican policy. Not so
with Judge Harris. He is the representa-
tive Of the district in the national Congress,
and is a candidate for reelection, and to sup
port him is to give sanction to his speech,
which conflicts in the conclusions drawn,
with the very ideas which have been en-
dorsed in Mr.. Stuart's letter. And then,
too, the election of Judge Harris places him
in position to give practical effect to his
views, and thus antagonize the position
taken by those Of our Democratic cotempo-
raries who have so unreservedly accepted
Mr.. STARTS exposition of this important
and even paramount subject.
We regret that this dilemma confronts cur
unsophisticated and too hasty cotempora-
ries. To be consistent they must either use
their endeavors to defeat the nomination of
Judge Harris, or they must bolt the Con-
vention, for the fundamental rule of the
Democratic party is: PRINCIPLES, NOT MEN.
They must either present solid front
against Harris, or stultify themselves by
going back upon the faith they have ell
dorsed in Mr.. Stdart's letter, so earnestly
and ably sustaining the administrative pol
icy OF the Republican party.
There is but one way to escape from this
unforeseen embarrassment, and that is to
insist upon Mr. Stuart becoming candi-
date for Congress, with his financial letter |
as his platform, supplemented by his we'll |
known opposition to and condemnation of |
The proposed Potter revolution" II our
Democratic friends are true to their de- |
clared convictions, they would not hesitate |
to support Mr.. Stuart upon the vital issue in
volved in his letter, and the support that
would be drawn to him by reason of his sa-
gacious condemnation of the Potter move
Inent and opposition to the banking views
Of Judge Harris, would render his cleo
ton but a matter of form. 1t should |
w iShiShioOiOo3 wv III SOLolSlCl |
that the DISTINGUISHING clause of |
the State. Constitution. which takes the |
right of Suffrage from those who are not |
able to pay the poll tax, would operate
greatly to his advantage, which added to |
the growing unpopularity OF the caucus,
would augment his following to numerical
force that could defy the Convention and |
The ring managers successfully.
We merely throw out these suggestions in
5he hope of relieving our Democratic confre-
res of the press from the EN- barassing predic-
ament in which they find themselves, and
not as indicating any policy or purpose Of our
OWN. We recognize their stupidity in politics,
md hope by friendly intimation to lead
hem out Of the clouds and doubts, not to say
fears, by which they are surrounded. We
shall watch, with some interest, the progress
If the campaign, and take pleasure in lend
ng helping hand to extricate our thick
headed, yet harmless contemporaries out of
he political .mire into which they have
stuck their feet.
The Senate rejected clause in the General
Appropriation bill providing $4,000 to pay
he McVeigh Commission sent by the Presi-