Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1879-11-29
Is 1T GRANT?

If we are to believe certain papers
there is a very general movement
in the South to break up existing
political organizations and hope for
better things by trying Grant. If
we are to believe certain other
croakers, the results of the recent
elections in Ohio and New York
render any further effort nugatory
to sustain the Democratic party in
Congress; that those results have
discouraged Northern Democratic
politicians, who seek office, if at all,
in some other organization and
drop their Southern allies, and then
that these last have no resort but to
fall in in the rear of the Grant move
ment and actively or passively pro-
mote the establishment Of Grant
and the empire. Those who are
talking in this way seem to have
convinced themselves by some in
scrutable process that Grant as
hereditary sovereign (fOr the success
sion of Fred. Grant is openly spoken
of by them) will do better for the
South than Grant as President did
from 1868 to 1876. They have so
far given no shadow of a reason for
this conviction.
Being of rather a skeptical pre-
disposition, we give very little
credit to either of these theories.
We do not believe that Gen. Grant
has any large number of adherents
in the South, nor do we believe
that the recent elections were fatal
to the Democratic party, and shall
remain uncOnvinced upon the sub
iect until at least some better reasons
are given for the belief than we
have yet heard.
Let us take the latter assertion
first. 1t is true that Ohio elected
the Republican candidates, but that
is nothing new; she has always
done so when the election has been
of sufficient political import for the
Federal Government to put forth
ITS whole power in the struggle.
New York gave a large Democratic
majority, one of the largest she has
ever given, only it was divided
between two conflicting Democratic
candidates, which let the Republi-
can candidate in. 1t is not true,
either, that there has been any con-
siderable Grant movement in the
south, but it may be found possible
to make it true by persistent and
uncOntradicted assertions that it is
true. We are too much like sheep,
and if once we are made to believe
that a large number are jumping
the fence, a stampede in that direc-
ton is likely enough to occur with
the rest. Such an impression has
been industriOusly inculcated by an
influential journal, the Louisville
Courier-JOurnal, ever since the New
York election. That course, how
ever, was not dictated by the New
York election. To an attentive
reader of the c. j., preparations for
the Grant boom as an alternative
were manifest long before the New
York bungle had demolished Til
den. For some time that paper has
been in no true sense Democratic;
it has been for Tilden, it is true, but
its warfare has been not so mnch
for Tilden against the Republican
party as for Tilden against all other
Democrats, and it was specially
active in smirching and belittling
all other possible Democratic candi-
dates. Nor was 1t obscurely init
mated that if Tilden was out of the
race, any other Democrat would
run with the deadly hostility of the
Courier-Journal against him. As
soon as it was seen that the New
York election was going against
Gov. Robinson it was distinctly an
nounced that no Democratic Gov
ernor would be allowed to ride into
office over the dead body of Tilden,
and readers were mysteriously re-
ferred to a disclosure 10 be made in
good time confirmatOry ofthat posi-
ton. From that time to the present
the paper has abounded with Grant
ism. Not that even now the edito-
rial columns contain any direct
commentator of Grant as a Presi-
Dental candidate. In truth the ed
itorial columns are singularly
barren at present; but in every
other part of the paper, in the form
of communications, correspondence,