The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-05-11

late Mr.. BowLEs, is Mr.. HAYEs's own
tanned In his letter accepting tho Cincinnati
nomination Of 1870.
II this were all that stood between Mr..
HAYES and denomination, We could readily
relieve the mind Of our Massachusetts, con-
temporary. 1t is now universally admitted
that the letter accepting the Cincinnati
nomination was not written by an uneided
mental effort OF Mr.. HAYEs's, like the veto
message OF last week, but by Mr. CARL
SCHURz, an eminent civil service reformer,
who is himself, for reasons beyond his con-
troll, Ineligible for the office OF President.
Now, Mr.. CARL 6oHUnz, whatever may have
been his personal opinion on the ono term
question, had no moral or legal right TO
sign away the political future OF Mr.. HAYES
OF Ohio. Whether Mr.. CARL SoHURz held In
his own fingers the pen that renowned
Interior ambition. or stood over Mr.. HAYES
OF Ohio as Mr.. HAYES OF Ohio wrote, dom
mating him by tho force OF superior
Psychologist force and clearer notions OF
what constitutes true civil service reform,
makes no difference. II the letter OF ao-
eeptanoe was forgery by Mr.. CARL
SoHuRZ, It's promises and declarations are
invalid; II 1t was wrung from Mr.. HAYES by
an exercise Of intimidation on tho part OF
Mr.. CARL SoHUBz, it ls equally invalid. We
hold that Mr.. HAYES is not bound by Mr..
CARL SCHURZ's promises.
But even II Mr.. HAYES had himself oom-
posed the letter OF acceptance, without rho
torical or other assistance from the eminent
$500 reform orator, there would still be no
force in the objection reluctantly raised by
the Springfield Republican.
Surprising, for the sake Of the argument,
that the letter OF acceptance was the legiti-
mate offspring Of Mr.. HAYEs's BRAIN We call
the attention Of our contemporary of West
ern Massachusetts, TO tho exact language OF
tho passage In question. II desire to per-
form" says tho letter OF acceptance, what
regard as a duty in stating now my lnliex-
ible purpose, Il elected, not to be candidate
for election to second term" The SUN
knows, and the Springfield Republican
knows, and the whole country, including
Mr.. HAYES, knows that RUTHERFORD b.
HAYES was not elected President in 1876.
He was defeated at the polls on the
seventh of November, 1875. Ho failed
OF an election by quarter OF mil
lion OF the popular vote, and not less
than twenty-one votes In tho Electoral
College. He was the defeated candidate,
and although he was afterward put into the
White House by a conspiracy that enlisted
many forms of fraud and crime, the histori-
cal fact remains that he has never yet been
elected President. He can become can
didate again In 1880 without breaking any
PROMISE violating any pledge or straining
in the slightest degree what the Republican
styles his delicate sense Of personal honor"
So far, therefore, as the alleged pledge
not to run second time is concerned, there
is nothing to prevent the Springfield Repub-
lcdn from embarklng in the HAYES move
ment with all the zeal which IL may choose
10 expend. There are other reasons why
he cannot again be the candidate OF the
Republican party. Chief among these are
the facts that he is a fool, and that every
body knows him to be one.
But there are various degrees OF folly,
and We do not think that Mr.. HAYES is fool
enough to believe that he can ever again,
under any circumstances command a ma
jority OF votes in Republican Convention.
II he were disposed 10 cherish such an idea,
there is at least one man in his Fraudulent
Cabinet who could speedily disabuso his
mind. Whatever influence the Fraudulent
Administration can exert to shape the
action OF next year S Convention will continue
10 be exacted in behalf OF JOHN SHERMAN,
whose political interests are now in the as
cendant.