The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1878-07-31
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE

ARMY.
1t is rather interesting than otherwise to
note the difficulties experienced by the radi-
cal organs in hunting for vulnerable points
to attack the democratic party. They go
back to the war and declare that it was
caused by democratic rebellion. But this
foolish lie makes precious little impression
upon the minds of the people. Next, the
Potter committee is attacked with about as
much discretion as the bull evinced in his
scufie with the locomotive and finally, when
all else fails, the organs declare that
the democratic party is opposed to the army.
The St. Louis Globe-Democrat, whose chief
proprietor was one of the patriotic whisky
thieves, whose devotion to radical principle
was so intense that he stole his pile early
and hoped thereby to escape detection,
on;its no opportunity to huzzah for Grant
and with equal enthusiasm denounces the
democratic party. In a recent issue the
Globe-Democrat, in an article captioned
Democracy and the Army" remarks that
the ''Indian war demonstrates beyond cavll
the supreme folly of the democrats who de-
sired beyond all things else to reduce the
numbers and efficiency of the army. Ever
since the war the democrats, particularly
those of the south, have shown no affection
for the military arm of the government, and,
indeed, have manifested disposition on
every possible occasion to impair its useful
ness wherever they could" The Globe
Democrat knows full well that it lies when
it attributes to the democratic party any
hostility to the army. An army sufficiently
large to do all that the government can con-
additionally demand, has always been ad.
vocated by the democratic party, and the
fact that the army had been required to per-
form duties in distinct violation OF the con-
stitution is what attracted the attention of the
country and made it necessary for the demo-
cratic party to compel the administration to
regard the constitution and the law, and the
GlObe-Democrat explains the action of the
democratic party by saying that ''this spirit
of opposition was intensified by the use of
the army as posse comitatus in the three
| doubtful southern states at the last general
election, and the bitterness felt in conse-
| 'quence of the action of the government in
| ordering troops to be sent to Louisiana,
South Carolina and Florida, eliminated in
the positive refusal OF the house to make
amy appropriation for the army so long as it
could, by any chance, be used to promote
/ the interests of the dominant party" Here
then we have the facts plainly set forth that
the opposition of the democratic party was
confined exclusively to the duties
which Grant had compelled the
army to perform, and in NO
sense to the army itself. The democratic
party is in favor of an army sufficiently
large to preserve order on the frontier, and
there would have the rank and file instead
of at interior towns where federal soldiers
are not wanted. AS for the Indian war, the
fact is established beyond controversy that
1t was caused by set of thieving Indian
agents appointed by Grant and retained in
Office by Hayes. Nevertheless the democratic
party is in favor of putting down the Indi
ans with strong arm, and if the necessity
for soldiers is as great as the radical organs
would have us believe, lot one should be
kept east OF the Mississippi river. The time
for quartering federal troops IN states, tC
control elections is, we conclude, past, to re
turn no more, and every lover of liberty
should rejoice to know that the democratic
party has made it impossible for Hayes tC
use the army for any such nefarious purpose
hereafter. The democratic party Is the
friend of the army. Itdoes not however favol
a large standing army. or Its employment fol
abridging the liberties of the people.