The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1878-05-22
t. 0. HOWE WELL SPANKED.
The Wolverine Statesman Sharply
Taken in Hand by Mr.. George
W. Julian.
HIS Defense of the Republican Party
~ Made a whip TO Scourge -
Himself.
To the Editor of the World !:

the last number OF the North American
Review, entitled sis the Republican Party
in its Death Struggle?' This is the text he
chooses, but, strangely enough, the sermon
which follows it fails 70 answer the question.
He probably remembered that in his late
speech in the senate he had answered it in
the affirmative, but now, in arraigning me
as an assassin of his party, he should have
remembered also that in thai same speech
he charged its ruin upon its own trusted
leaders
The senator, for some unaccountable rea-
son, deals with my article as q studied de-
Tense of the democratic party. | entered
upon no such task. My subject neither
involved nor required it. My purpose was
to show the readiness of the republican lead
ers, after the late war, to condone the vices
and profigacies which began to assume the
name of republicanism on the plea that the
democrats could not be trusted and that the
country would perish in their hands. l
insisted that 1.-The philosophy which regards
a particular party as Of divine appointment
aud necessary to salvation would place the
administration of the government in its
hands forever" and that while the corrupt
and venal elements of society would certain
~ gravitate into it through its prolonged
hold on power, the good men in its ranks
instead of joining the other side or becoming
the nucleus of a new party, would be obliged
to keep their places and quietly submit TO
the unhindered rule of roguefy and plumber
lest the opposite party should gain power
and ruin the country" This was my posi-
ton; but instead of meeting the logic by
which l supported it and exposed this party
devil worship, the senator wastes his time
and strength in assailing the democrats. In
declining to meet the issue / rendered him
he confesses his inability to do so.
The senator surprises the public by deny
ing that the republican party favored the
abolition of slavery upon compulsion.
Every man who is even specifically &C
quainted with the history of the first two
yesrs of the war knows that am right. L
do not speak of the abolition element in the
party, but of the great body of its members,
when say that il tried with all its might to
save the Union and save slavery with 1t. The
very letter the senator quotes from Mr.. Lin
coin to Horace Greeley proves the truth of
the statement he contrOverts, while the
proclamation of emancipation furnishes off,
cial evidence that the great act was done las
a military necessity" What the senator
means by denying statement which is as
VIGOROUSLY true as any fact connected with
the war am at loss to divine; but rather
think he needs liberal diet of fish.
The senator is equally entertaining and
picturesque in his attempted defense of his
party. From my arraignment for its start
ling misdeeds and crimes during the past
eight or nine years. covering some ten pages
and embodying undisputed or well authen-
ticated facts, he picks out some half dozen
items and pours himself forth upon them
in all the force of his senatorial feebleness-
He says Mr.. Flanagan was not at the head
of the committee on education and labor,
and that Sumner was not placed on it. The
senator ought TO know having been in the
senate at the time but he does not. The
congressional directory, to which he invites
my attention, fatty contradicts him.
think he should have been more pains
taking" In my article mentioned Sharpe,
a brother in-law of the president, as having
been made surveyorof the port OF New York
in violation of the civil service rules. The
senator, instead of meeting my accusation.
denies that this particular Sharpe is the
presidents brother in-law. / believe he is
right, and that the Sharpe who was broth
er in-law was marshal of the district of
Columbia but the point is wholly imma-
terial and my charge stands uncontradicted.
/ also mentioned that one Cramer, another
brother.in-law, disgraced our diplomatic
service during General Grants first admins
tration, and was afterwards made naval
officer at New Orleans. The senator says he
was not made naval officer, but is still in
the foreign service at Copenhagen. If so.
he is thus disgracing the government abroad
instead of at home, and the senator seems to
his readers are all fools, or is he mentally
afflicted himself?
The senator denies that Sumner was
driven from the Guardianship of the COM
mittee on foreign relations on account of his
opposition to the Santo Domingo job; and
then, in effect. admits it by saying that IF
a representative body really favors the
adoption of a public measure ii is difficult
TO say why ii should place at the head OF
committee any man whose employment
there would endanger the success OF the
measure" He then makes another wriggle
by ridiculing the idea that the senate which
rejected the treaty would have deposed Sum-
ner for opposing it-sneakingly keeping back
the fact that Summers magnificent fight
against it compelled recreant senate to
abandon it. If the senator knows any fact
connected with American politics he knows,
as does the public, that my statement as to
the cause of Mr.. Summers removal is true;
but he seems so charmiDgly innocent OF
conscience that he finds a real pleasure in
denying it. although he must know the pub
lie will not believe him.
Equally remarkable are the senator's
statements and denials respecting the New
York custom house investigations in 1872,
his wholesale defense of political corruption
in that institution, and the transparent
pettifogging by which he seeks to defend
General Grants administration in dealing
with the Chorpenning claim and the mis-
deeds of General Babcock. / need notdwell
upon these performances, nor can it be
necessary to notice his statement that 1
deserted the republican party on account OF
my retirement from congress. Any politi
clan In Indiana of moderate intelligence
could have told him he was bearing false
witness, and that the prizes of politics were
within my reach when my connection with
the party was severed.
l fear the senator is unhappy. Notwith-
standing bis unchristian temper towards the
Greeley republicans he has himself become
factionist and a disorganizer in his party.
He brands the president he helped to elect
as an usurper, or else the accomplice of one
in the person of Governor Nichols. He
lavishes upon Secretary Schurz his sincerest
and most heartfelt abuse and defamation.
He deals with such men as Sumner. Chase,
Seward and Greeley as apostates and traitors,
while defending the worst of the thieves who
held office under General Grant; and yet he
declares in the close of his article, with
sancumonious whine, that criticism and
calumny are two very different agents." and
that "the example is evil and the effort only
foA