The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1879-12-03
INDIANA AND NEW YORK.

INDIANA AND NEW YORK.
1t may be we'll for the Democratic party to
make a note of few pivotal facts upon
which some very important events are likely
to turn in the near future. There is moth
To obscure facts is largely equiva-
lent to stating falsehoods. Equivo.
cation leads to disaster. To look
facts squarely in the face is the supreme de-
mand. The Democratic party under certain
circumstances Is invincibls. Its principles
are invulnerable. Its policy invites crit
cism and challenges attacks. If it fails to
elsewhere than in the principles upon
which it is founded, or the measures
It advocates. The Democratic party
had right to expect success in the late
election in New York. That such was no.
the case relates to men, and not to princi
pies or measures. United, the Democratic
party could have achieved a triumph; di-
vided, failure was almost inevitable. We do
not care to analyze the local politics OF New
York; still, they have a national significance,
and the discussion upon the results OF the
late election are widely credited with an
important bearing upon the choice of the
next Democratic candidate for president
With the electoral vote of New York and
Indiana the next president will bs Demo
crat. If either State is lost, all is in peril.
We would do Governor Tilden no in
justice. We do not enter the ranks of
those who seek to stignatizs him. But it
so happens that Mr.. Tilden can not unite
the Democratic party OF New York, hence,
his nomination, instead of making New
York certain for the Democratic party,
would almost inevitably insure its loss to
the Democratic column in 1880. Tae Sc
verest analysis OF the situation leads to this
conclusion. The lat, election demonstrates
and emphasizes the fact. There is absolutely
no escape from the conclusion. Hence circu N
stances, however unfortunate they may be,
or however much deplored, place Mr.. Tilden
outside of the probabilities and virtua'l y
beyond the possibilities of a nomination.
Mr.. Tilden is therefore not central figure in
the present state of politics, whatever may bs
said of the immediate past. In the case of Mr..
Hendricks and Indians, the situation is en-
tlIcjf QlucI6ut. MI 1cAuflSAS 1uAUcuCc
in political affairs sol1difi IS, unites and bar
monies the Democratic party, and makes it
invincible, instead of dividing and making
defeat possible. In Indiana the name of
T. A. Hendricks is q tower OF strength |;
in New York the name of Samuel J. Tilden
| is an element of weakness; and, since the
two States are necessary to the success of the
Democratic party, the logical conclusion is
that Mr.. Hendricks ought to be the choice oil
both States. The arguments that can be ad
vanced in favor OF the proposition are
of unanswerable cogency. They do not an
tagonize Mr.. Tilden in any regard calculated
! to deprive him of the high esteem the Dem
ocratic party of the country have enter
tanned for his abilities. They relate to cir
cumstsnces which appear to be above and
beyond the control of the politicians of New
York, and which the party beyond the boun-
daries of the Empire State can not change
Mr.. Hendricks being the choics of a pivotal
State necessary to success. and having been
on the ticket with Mr.. Tilden IN 1876, there
Is no good reason to be assigned why hs
should not be acceptable to the Democracy
of New York in 1880. As We have shown
Mr.. Tilden is not available by vir
tue of the action of the Democratic
party of New York, while Mr.. Hendricks i
available by virtue of the hold he has upor
the Democratic party of Indiana In thi
connection it is we'll to refer to events tina
TRANSFERRED in 1876. 1t should be remem
bered that Indiana did not go int
the National convention asking 70
the second place on the ticket 70
Mr.. Hendricks. The demand was for tn
first place. and for that position Mr.. Her
bricks had strong array of delegates out
side of Indiana The convention, and nc
Indiana, demanded of Mr. Hendricks that b
should make the sacrifice for the good OF til
party, and after all the State
had voted, Indiana acquiesced, leAvin
results with Mr.. Hendricks himself. He
too, acquiesced. and the result was
7 triumph. In all OF this Mr.. Hsndrick
| demonstrated his patriotism, his devotion
bis country, and his loyalty to the Demo
! cratic party, Tor which he 10 deserving Of th