Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1880-09-02
FOR OLD DEMOCRATS TO
READ.

De
The Government took him when he
was little boy, and at great expense
educated him in the military school al
West Point. After giving him {
good Education it gave him an officia
position, and as an officer it has EN-
ployed him and literally paid him
ever since
After all that he has received
from the government why should he
not be good soldier?
But you say he served in the wal
to preserve the Union.
Yes, so he did. Is he entitled tC
and particular credit or honor fol-
that?
Did not two million of men from
farms, work shops and other industri-
al pursuits of life, rally around the
old flag and do their whole duty.
many of them even to the giving W
their precious lives. for the same
cause?
Are not each and every one Of them
just as deserving of honor and credit
as Gen. Hancock?
But you say that Hancock was a
great soldier
So he was. But what do you want
of a great soldier in times Of pro
found peace?
If you want a job of carpenter
work done do you employ butcher ?
If you want law case attended to do
you employ a physician? IF you
want farmland do you employ a
dry-goods clerk
Then why do you want Great
Soldier for Statesman?
But you say Washington was a
Great Soldier!
Aye, so he was!
But he was a Great Statesman and
a thorough patriot before he ever be-
came soldier.
Had Washington been Hancock he
he would have been Tory instead of
Rebel.
Hancock is a machine soldier,
blindly obeying orders without stop
ping to even think of, much less
question, their justice or their wis
dom.
Washinton was a thinking soldier.
Hancock is an animated bayonet,
an unthinking, unfeeling piece of ar
tillery, without a soul to inspire or a
heart to feel the wants or the aspira-
tons of the great masses.
Being lifelong soldier in the
regular army he is an aristocrat, nay,
tyrant
During his whole life he has been
among men, CHS equals in everything
save the uniform and shoulder straps, J
whose duty and custom it has been
to 'salute him as he passes in and
out Of his tent even as the Russian
soldiers salute the Gar
His word has been law. At his
word of command men were punish
able for failure to black their boots or
polish their muskets.
But such is the custom you say in
military life !!
So it is. And because Gen, Han
cock has been educated and accus-
toned to such a life do aee sag that
he as u,ft to be the president of
this Republic.
The point we can make is this, that
for forty years he has been machine
soldier, regarding every man around
him in the light of a mere machine,
instead of in the light Of thinking,
souE-gJted human being!
And such a man for president
And especially Democratic pres
dent
Your great Democratic light, jeff
erson, was not soldier.
He was thinker, a statesman, a
philosopher :!
He was the founder of the Democ-
racy.
Why did not the patriots, fresh from
the scenes of 1776, select soldier
instead of Jefferson for the second
president ?
Why not soldier fer the third and
fourth president?
B Jause they abhorred military
rule
They detested anything like tyran-
ny.
It was the presence of King Geo, S
red-coats in Boston that fired the pa
triotic hearts of the rebels of 1776.
The very suggestion of purely
military man for president should be
regarded as an insult by every lover
of freedom and humanity.
And let us ask you farther, Mr.
Democrat, how do you reconcile Han
cocks nomination with all the utter
ances Of the Democracy during the
last Is years ?
Ever since the close of the war
Democrats have been bowling about
military rule military dicta-
torship," "men- on-horseback," etc.
etc
In 1868 you nominated civilian
In 1876 YOU nominated civilian
In 1880 you suddenly about-face
and nominate lifelong soldier !! a
nan-on- horseback
In 1880 ysu stultify all that Dem
ocracy has professed since 1868 :!
In the midst of the war you NOM
mated ''peace man In the days
of peace you nominate a lifelong sol
der
Why is it?