Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1878-07-24
BEN BUTLER
Tells Just What is the Matter with the
Red-HOt Communists, the Working
men and the NatiOnaIists, OF
whom lie is which.
He Defines the Word ''NatiOnal," and
Declares himself in UnequivOcal
Terms-Whereas the Know
nOthings Failed, the
Nationals Must be
Successful.

New York World: A World reporter
said good morning to General Butler, In his
rooms at the Fifth Avenue hotel, yesterday,
soon after the arrival of the Essex statesman
in the city. General Butler was cool and COL
larless, sitting in his slippers, driving a fan
briskly, and applying himself occasionally to
a conveniently placed pitcher and tumbler.
He said good morning, and intimated that
he had really nothing more to say. In spite
of the heat the World reporter mentioned
the National party. 81 do not know what
the National party may be" said General
Butler. 81 never knew there was any such
party. Don't you confuse the Nationals, who
do exist everywhere, with the National party,
which so far has not been called into exist
ence-an organization for which there is no
necessity? The ballot-b will exist, and the
people can express their views and enforce
their opinions through it, despite the fact that
no organization exists"
care you National, General?"
''What Is National, asked the general in
a quick, cross examining fashion"
"Pretty much anything that is nothing
else,' suggested the reporter.
General Butler thought half a second,
shook his head and said: mo. Let me tell
you how you can tell a National when you
see him. When you see a man who
thinks that the relations of the
parties as they at present exist are not
man is a National. When you see man
who believes that the financial system of the
country as at present conducted Is founded in
error and sure to produce mischief and sus-
tain the miseries which we now suffer, that
man is National. When you meet one who
looks upon the present government as fail
ure as regards the fundamental aid of the
government to give the greatest comfort to
the greatest number, that man, too, is a Ma
tional. When you find a man who believes
that every one has right to his own at all
risks, and that nothing can destroy that right,
that man is a National"
But does it require new party, or com
bination, or split, or something to fix man s
right to his own? Does not the law at pres
ent guarantee the right of property?"
mo, the law does not guarantee man s
right to his own. 1t does not provide that he
shall not die a beggar in the street while an
other has enough and more than enough"
care not the present laws equitable?"
''No, sir; they cannot be when under them
| and by their administration the condition OF
things we see every day about US is brought
| about"
"Then what do you propose to do?"
Correct abuses and give to every one his
own. Tax every man equally, according to
his ability to pay for the support of the COM
monwealth.
without the aid of party organization and
machipery?"
son, there is no need of that. Party dis
clpline is rather a drawback, and | notice
that when the people want change they get
it, whether the parties will it or no. The
Nationals distrust 10th parties, because they
see in neither any chance OF permanent re-
form. The Democrats are just as bad as the
Republicans and there Is no choice between
them, as the Nationals see It. The National
in one State is anti Democrat and in another
anti Republican, according as one party or
the other is in power. He is opposed to
wrong doing wherever it is.
''Then, of course, you are Nationally"
Eyes, so far as that is l am. Instances are
not wanting of cases where popular move
ments have gone through without party back
of them. Consider the knownothings-
how they rose to power and swept State after
State, and yet they had no ostensible central
power or body as we know a party. The
knownothings had no reason for being.
They set out with an erroneous view when
they proposed to oppose man on account cf
the accident of his BIRTH They were fools,
and the Nationals differ from them in having
their belief founded on right and justice-on
the rights of man and true principles of po-
litical economy. The knownothings died
out, of course, but the Nationals must live
and come out victorious"
''How do you propose to treat the question
of the relation of labor and capital?"
oppression must cease"
"But does not the present law ?"-
mo, sir; it does not. 1t is oppressive,
unjust and altogether illogical. It cannot
stand"
DO you propose, then. to equalize prop
erty-possesslon?"
1--WE propose that each shall have his
share, what is rlghtfully his according to the
natural laws of God and man. The Nationals
insist that no man shall suffer-"
but if that suffering is imaginary and
mental?''
els starvation ar imaginary ill-one to be
met by reference to law books and closed
factory -doorsP"
"But if the trouble is laziness'-
''Well, leave that for you to settle how
far laziness and i'll thrift shall be regulated
by law and statute. l only know that when
my shoe is tight my toe protests, whether
the head feels all right or not, and that toe
will have its right if the whole body be af-
fected in securing them"
Its rights as toe?'
''As part of the body corporate, without
drawing lines of distinction"
"But where will your party principles
stop?"
pardon memo party-Nationals pure
and simple; an uprising of the people, with
out coercion or manipulation.
"Well, where do you suppose the people of
the National persuasion will stop In their
reforms ?"
"Only when wrongs now patent shall be
set right and the present incompetent parties
be swept out of existence"
"What part would Justus Schwab, for in
stance, play in the uprisingP'
81 never saw the man; but who is he?
Does he not sell beer under license granted
by the city of New York? Is he not in a
lawful business, entitled to the laws protec-
ton p
but his views and projects?
81 tell YOU. sir, that Justus Schwab is in
fnitely superior to the fellows who drive in