Litchfield enquirer., 1879-04-17
dbe Gitebhs!S G1qllirer,
 s'TcAFssil, G0Mk.
Thursday, April IT, 1879.
Grant.


 The New York Times has been making a special canvass of Republican preferences for the next presidency, and asserts that there is decided preponderance in favor eff third nomination of Grant The last Harpers' Weekly, in very able article copied upon cur outside page, is of like opinion Both these papers, of as dissimilar political views as can be found in the same party, believe that Republican National convention, called this summer, would certainly be Third Term convention. While we agree with them in re- gard to the probable action of such conven- tion, we have little faith in this latter-day popularity of Gen. Grant. The demand for his nomination comes down from the politicians above, not up from the people below.
 In the first place we believe that the cry for Grant-for a ''strong man"-arises from no urgency of desperate times, but from the ur- gency of desperate politicians. Is the Deme- cratic party so strong that even if it attains power in the doubtful contest of 80. it is like ly to venture on any extreme measure, such as allowance of Southern War claims, or disfran- chisement of the colored race? The conduct of Southern members of Congress does not in dicate it. Senator Hill is not alone in his de- nunciation of war claims nor Senator Lamar in his support of negro suffrage The very crisis now agitating Congress is of Nnrtharn not of Southern origin. It is the Northern Democrat, determined to eliminate the federal supervisor from the adverse chances of 1880 who has insisted upon tacking these election issues upon the supply bills.
 But, even admitting that there is any special need of strong executive, in what will Grant be an improvement on Hayes? The abandon ment of Kellogg and Chamberlain was the closing policy of Grant as we'll the opening policy of Hayes. If there is government of intimidation in any of the United States there is such government in Mississippi. Yet Grant was not strong" enough to protect tie Republicans of that State in 1875. Is there any reason to suppose that, with sure Dem- ocratic Senate, he will be strong enough to put down intimidation in South Carolina, Louis jana and Mississippi which he was not strong enough to deal with in the latter State alone.
 Then, too, in a crisis like the present, in what could Grant prove stronger than Hayes? :? Republican Senators might feel more certain of their control of Grant than of Hayes; but would veto of Grants weigh as much as veto of Hayes with the people? We believe that, for the very reason that Hayes cannot be relied on to interpose veto merely for parti- san use, his veto will go vastly further towards convincing the people that the action of the Democracy is of revolutionary char acter, than would the veto of any mere stall wart Republican like Grant.
 Our chief objection, however, may be gath cred from the following sentence in Times editorial of Monday
 Men may be ready to admit that there is distinct coarseness of fibre in the character of Grant, and that much as he may lave profited by experience, the country will run the same risks as have already been experienced from his stubborn preferences for unworthy favor ties.
 We most distinctly deny that there is the least need that the better elements of the Re publican party should submit for four years more to that savor of corruption which hung about Grants last term, and which the Times SO inadequately characterizes as ''coarseness of fibre." The times demand no such risk.
 The stalwart Times adds to the foregoing sentence,
 But they will nevertheless insist that the blunt directness of a man who, right or wrong, followed his own course, regardless of abuse, entreaty, or political pressure, is a safer pilot in time of public peril than one who trims his sails to every breeze of shifting public sentiment.
 Has not Hayes followed his own course, regardless of abuse, entreaty or political pres surc?" Did not his ''coarse fibered' prede- cessor on the other hand allow the business cabinet which he nominated in March 69 to be broken down irretrievably by the "stalwart'; Senate of hls day? We are not of those who look to coarseneSs for moral strenghth. The two qualities may be combined in the same person but there is no natural affinity between them When the politician offers such a re- source from present evils as return to Grant ism, il strikes us that he overrates not only the importance of what he delights to term the ''existing crisis" but the merit of the rem- edy he offers.
 There is quite tempest in the Dominion teapot, and Lord Lorne is being roundly abused by the very same people who hallooed the loudest over his arrival. The difficulty arises from his reference of a disagreeable question to the home government, without regard to the advice of his Canadian ministry There at the Canadians are inquiring very noisily whether they are their own rulers, or whether they are mere dependency of Great Britain.
 The Springfield Republican calls attention to the fact that recent Western elections have shown that however plasusible the policy of union between Nationals and Democrats might seem in advance, it does not work well in practice In the elections of last fall the Re- Publicans had only plurality in Michigan. The Democrats and Nationals together had a clear majority of over 25,00O. They united for the judicial election of this spring. and were beaten. The Republican infers that the similar combination proposed in Ohio will re- suit in like defeat.
 The report that the editor of the New Mil