The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-06-01
NORMAN VS.. GRANT \
svk,eh VIII Be the Republican
Candidate for Presidents
4. Plan and Policy Of the Republican
Party Sherman Would Be
the More Available
Candidate.
RVs..ta III Correspondence #of the DernocrHt.l
WASHINGTON. May AT. 1879.

rhs contest for
xrr REPUBLICAN, PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION
ssrt year begins to assume shape sufficiently
| ssanite and to present aspects sufficiently
.ssricsl to warrant serious survey.
a THE GRANT BooM,.
Z M termed, which began with Mccullough
1 Z the st. Louis Gtobe-D Democrat, appears to
e Eliminating with Glapp Ia The Washington
) fpabticdn Whether there IL any real de-
nd among the masses Of the Radical party
I n tle nomination OF Grant does not signify,
I'D the inquiry u hardly worth space In any
#Hsctical survey Of the situation. 1t may OF
Snay not be- true that some part on faction
BYthoBe who iii general vote the Radical
|a1Est would rather vote for Grant than TOR
HSny body else III 1880; II may OF II may not
|Is i iact that there IL Id the heart of the
NH Guard of Radlcalism vague notion that
NV presidential succession IL going to involve
SriWar, and that therefore Grant Is the only
"a possessing the prestige requisite to the
Kz.daship. All these things are asserted by
~ rroup OF agttators and party managers
+ "a profess to be for Grant. But there are
svpral reasons why 1t is, as I said, inmates
"a whether they are true or not, OF which
,susonS II ID necessary to my present purpose
/ Y introduce only two. The first Ii the fact
YtfE ORGANIZATION or RADIuAL1sM,
Il lkat IA VI say, the machine Lii stronger than
IVA psrty itself; and the machine IL not now
Mix hands Of the Grant group.
A The second reason ID the fact that the real
candidate Of the machine or the organization
not Grant, but
JOHN SHERMAN.
am aware that q great many
m who are accounted politicians of acumen
s lnsor at the idea of John Sherman beating
50rsnt IN contest for the Republican presi-
SllntiAl nomination. John Sherman beat
Amt In q Republican conventionl A man
/ Vho never knew how to get anything except
&Atough back stairs intrigue and BY dark Ian
I'M conclave beat the man who never had
( 1oppouent. and who has always been ynomi-
iGsed by acclamationl
& Perish the thought
* Nsll, Its just ~ easy to say one thing as
\ mother, for talk ID cheap. But Ia the real
tfsrs Of the world 1t Ii facts that count.
Moreover, your facts must be current ana not
0t6olete; they must be surroundings and not
"reminiscences. Judged In this light the cam
dldacy OK John Sherman, as opposed tn that
1 rate subject OF q sneer; becomes, really, the
{enttal fact OF the time.
# Whatever may be the plans, hopes or as
3lfstiDns OF Blaine, gonallng, John Logan
nd their various small clans OF admirers, the
h I'M contest ID between Grant and John SHEER
5ta IA ,xxA
NJ se&r Bo much about, 1t will never be either
ISS thG three expeGtaIltH mentioned above, but,
H. c&HD Grant and Sherman destroy each
the chances are nine III one that Hayes
AENiIl haye enough Ut the reversion to ren0nl-
M himself.
Eell as inteiligently comprehend the ma
INN Ut this contest between Grant and John
5n4tnRn, Ii Is necessary to understand the
tnpceltlOn, the character and the rationale
"a to political organization whose foremost
NR00ents they are, or have been, one In the
Military and the other IN the civic sense, par
FAMlienoe
tis q common error with Democratic poll
4 MAINS even those who aspire to the repute
4 n thnkers--tD assume that the Radical party
bMalIy an anaehronism, living on its his
y txY and snbsisting on "Reminiscences. But In
ct the Radical party never at any period Of
\ ~ history had 30 well defined
"A FOLIGYt
4 systematic d plan OF operations, 90 meas
N lNless q fund Of resource or 90 grim q deter
SxDAtIon to accomplish its ends as now.
n Whatever may have been its beginnings In
Il tslcand whatever Its vicissitudes OF action,
4 2must new be conceded by all thoughtful
& 1en TO be the permanent instrument Of the
oaigns Of the aggressive, ieonoclastie forces
II nAmerican society as against that other
pamanent instrument of the forces OF con-
Nsatsm known as the Democratic party.
Perhaps 1t would be clearer to say that the
&dlcal party Is
BASED UPON HUMAN NATURE,
vaAAthe Democratic party is based upon the
yns1tution. This is q broader distinction
&1lM. Our constitution, together with the
Moe governmental system that grew up out
MgEcr rather around 1t prior to 1860, was In
| n@ protest against human nature. That 10