The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1878-08-22
GREEN AND DEMO
CRATs---THE DIFFERENCE.

We have often stated that the Dem
ocratic party would have enacted its
platform of to-day many years ago, if
the liberation of Southern States had
not overshadowed this and ell other
public questions and necessities. The
cooperation of Eastern Democracy
was essential to the liberation of the
South, and therefore the party was ST.
lent when it was proposed to augment
the volume of Currency. Taking sd-
vantage of this prudent non-commit-
tslism and inaction, new class of Of
fice-seekers rushed forward to seize
power by seizing the George Pendle-
ton and Henry Clay Dean platform of
1S77-7S. Foremost of these noisy par
tisans was BricE Pomeroy, u great and
good man. who distinguished himself
as an operator in cotton when Gen.
Curtis commanded IN Arkansas. Gen.
Tom Ewing, of Ohio is an apostle of
the Conservative Greenbackers. In his
speech last week at Columbus. Ohio,
Mr.. Ewing said:
Meantime a new party is rising as
the special advocate of currency reform.
have not word to say against that
movement in those States where the
Democratic organization is in the fist
of the money power. But in OHIO
where the Democracy have made and
fought these issues from first to last
aye, in almost every State from Penn
sylvanis southwark to the Gulf and
westward to the Pacific, where the
Democracy stands firm and practically
united upon them-I think there is
neither room nor occasion for new
party to represent the people against
the money power.
1t is true the National Democratic
Convention, in 1876, ignored the bank
question and equlvocated on resump-
ton. But at that time self govern
ment was the sole and absorbing ques-
ton throughout the South, and no
other issue was considered. Had the
South been, as she Is to-day, alive to
these great issues, the last presidential
contest would have been made on
them as well as on the restoration of
self government in the South; and
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois and Mich
igan would have put the election of a
DEMOCRATIC candidate representing
these issues beyond the reach of re-
turning boards.
1t is true the Democratic leaders
not the mssses-of New York, New
Jersey and New England-except a
few, among whom is Sam Cox, God
bless him-have stood with the Repub-
llcans on these questions. But it is
also true that they are petty minority
of the Democratic party, and will
have to yield to the majority, or quit.
1t is not the first time that the Demo.
cratic ship has bee incrusted with
bank money barnacles. Jackson drove
out of the party, or forced to sub
mission, powerful section of
the Democracy when he declared
war on the United States Bank in 1889.
Aye, Democratic congressman from
this very district, the Hon. William
Irwin, lost his seat IN Congress and his
influence as Democrat by standing for
the bank. The cultured lawyer gave
way to plowboy, who yet lives, in a
splendid old age, to attest the power
of that hostility to bank money which
has animated the Democracy from the
day when Jefferson demanded its ex-
tirpation and called for the substitution
of a government paper money redeem
able, not in gold, but in receiva bility
for public dues.
The Democracy is practically a unit
on these questions almost everywhere,
except in the northeast corner of the
Republic. They are the supreme con-
trolling issues of the day. They come
home to the business and bosoms of
men," and are studied, discussed, and,
above all, felt, at every hearthstone in
the land. They demand and will re-
ceive honest, open, fearless action at
the hands of our great party. No
adroit equivecstions can obscure, no
trading politicians can suppress them.
The great mass of the party has them
at heart and in hand; and the whole
party IS braver, wiser ana stronger than
any leaders or factions in its fold.