New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1879-04-30

helped to save the nation as the men
who went into the battle. All honor
to the bondholder! All honor to the
Government for keeping faith with
him! Let us who review this history.
learn to Judge ntelligently, or not at
all.
Lereno Cerrespsndencs
LoRENo, April %, TO-
Editor ReDiew:
observe that you seem to give all
parties hearing iii your journal. One
week the Woods harvester holds the
ed to the Osborne. therefore trust in
the liberality of the REVIEW to allow
me to notice the communication of Mr..
Champlin in yonr last issue. Not that
I wish to bore the public with politi.
cal discussion. / am no orator as Bru-
tus is. i will not attempt to compete
with the great CAB factory at Wash
ingtOn, nor seek to convince an ELI.
lightened public with my own particu.
lar views of political issues. But as
Mr.. G.. lays SO much stress on facts and
lays down his s0-called facts with such
emphasis and seeming incontrOvert.
ibleness, will only take occasion to
show the fallacy of his facts.
He says of the law alluded to:
every Democrat in the Senate yot.
ed for it while every Republican voted
against it; and when it went before
the House of Representatives it receiv.
ed every Democratic vote there. Dem
0cratic votes passed the measure
Now, Mr.. Champlin, ''the simple be-
lieveth every word; but the prudent
man looketh to his going.
When that law was passed the Z. S.
Senate numbered thirty.six Republi-
cans and ten Democrats. BY what
means or device could that law pass
the Senate with thirty.six votes against
it and only ten in favor Of it! How can
you claim that Democratic votes pass
ed the measure when the House also
was overwhelmingly Republican!
You neat say that IAN extra session
would give the minority early control
of the national legislation. 1t was de-
termined to have this" If you mean
by this that the Democrats desired an
extra session, ! challenge you to lay
your finger on a single utterance of any
Democrat to prove it. l challenge you
to prove it in any manner.
You next say: ''The present session
of Congress is chargeable to Demo-
cracy." Why! How! Because the Dem.
ocrats would not agree with your party!
Why then did not your party agree with
the Democrats! When the mountain
would not come to Mahomet, Mahomet
| very wisely determined to go to the
mountain.
You next speak of the ex-rebel SOL
diers in Congress and compare their
number with that of Union soldiers in
Congress. It might be worth while to
stop and ask if it is not shame to us
of the North that while the South
sends up her foremost men, as you term
them, we have failed to give our high.
est honors, to the same degree, to the
men who went forth upon the battle
field to fight for our cause; but must
remember that am not arguing the
value Of facts upon whose truth We
are agreed.
You say that the first act of the Con.
federate Brigadiers (the term is not,
however, used by you) in Congress is
one of coercion. Mr.. Champlin, these
men have had 4 majority in the House
for the past three and half years.
During that time they have record
when for efficiency, honesty, economy
and devotion to the interests Of the
American people will compare very
fayorably with that OF their pre-.
decessors or their Republican associ-
ates and yet you say their first act is
one OF coercion.
Next quote: ''The jurors test oath
and the removal OF the army from the
vicinity of the polls might be repealed.
Republicans as well as Democrats favor
their repeal. II so why do Republi.
cans in Congress defend the section,
providing for the use Of tie army at
the polls!
Senator Robson, whose admirable
efficiency anu economy in the admins
tration Of the Navy Department, com.
mended him SO dearly to his party, that
they elected him to the y. 5. Senate,
made a strong speech against the re.
peal OF this section and was loudly ap
plauded and warmly congratulated by
his party friends.
You say further: "a Democratic
Congress proposes to compel the Presi
dent to yield to its mandate or starve
and that is revolution You do we'll t.
say Democratic Congress. 1t is moth
ing revolutionary in Il Republican Con
gress to do it; for it has been done. i
IS nothing revolutionary for the Eng
llsh House OfCOmmOns to dictate terms
to the throne when it votes it's supplies
1t has cost more than one English SO
!, vereign dearly indeed to oppose tn,
right of the House to do this; and ye
it is revolutionary for the representa-
tives of a free people to do it.
quote from speech made in Con
. gress upon this very point by Senate
Davis, of Ill, an independent membe
elected by a Republican legislature:
''If it is true, as charged, that tn
success Of one Of the great parties 0
the country means revolution and ruil
to constitutional liberty, OF what valu
would be tire security of the govern
, ment, or indeed Of any other specie
, of property? In the nature of things
. if revolution was impending, or ther
: was any danger apprehended to fire
government or popular liberty, tn
) government would not be able to Sc
! bonds at per cent. interest, nor tn
: stock market in New York lnaintai
/. its present high rate. This charge
5 Mr.. President, is mere fiction, and ha
J. no foundation.
BUT 1T PROMISES INFINITE MISCHIEF,
] and tends to demoralize the countr
and every material interest in it, {
J. larms the thoughtless and timid, III
! settles business and values, and pr
duces state Of unrest in every cou
munity. It may succeed in winnin
; elections, but it cannot restore pro-
: perity.
J, Iquote again. '.The law is necel