Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1880-10-21


LATE STATE ELEcTIoNs.-It would
be uncandid 10 say that the result oil
che late State election in Indiana IN moi
disappointment 60 democrats. u ID
q democratic State. II voted for Tilden.
is State government il democratic and
lis State machinery 10 the same way
II 10 different in some material respects
with Ohio. This il o republican State.
is government and State machinery are
alec republican. Among well-iniormed
men, no other result was expected than
that this State would 90 republican,
And the republican gains there in mem
bers OF Congress can be easily explained.
The lines of certain of the COMPRESSION.
nj districts Of this State have recently
been changed and so rearauged - to
give the republicans an Unfair advan-
tags in the distribution Of Its congress
sioaal populations. No. the late vote
in Ohio is no disappointment to demo-
Gratis. But 10 return To- Indiana. Whilst
II - admitted that the result there Is o
disappointment, ID may De well to beer
m mind that October % not November
nor State election the same thing as o
presidential election. The National
Government won the late battle in In
diana II 10 the merest nonsense, and
imposes upon nobody familiar with the
facts, 10 attribute the late republican
victory in this State 10 democratic mis-
management, tariff influences. Solid
South prejudices, etc. The influence
that won the battle for The republicans
IN Indiana was The influence Of the Ma
tional Government. 1.-THE Government
were not called upon to scatter its
blows, II could probably do The same
thing in November. To scatter its
blows. however, IL November necessi-
ty. II would do little good 10 hold Ia
diana and LEI New York. Pennsylvania,
New Jersey. Connecticut. Maine. Cal
ifornia. Nevada end perhaps Illinois es-
cape. Strong as il is. il 10 not strong
enough 10 win wheat scattersiike this.
And lift follows that Indiana should
not be counted by the democrats In No.
Il
vember because BY small majority she
voted for therepubIicans in October,
Why should not Maine BE excluded from
the republican presidential estimate for
the same reasons Besides, Garfield
r. much weaker. or ought to be, than
his party. Bad as this party is. We are
not yet prepared 10 believe that all OF
its following il ready to uphold bribe-
taking and perjury. And yet this 10
precisely what every man does, either
knowingly or ignOrantly. who supports
The republican presidential nominee
That M. Garfield took Ames' brides
end Afterwards deliberately swore, not
once but twscs. that he bad never
touched them, j. not now depied even
BY republicans. II was republirsn ev-
idence--recerd evidence .oo--that orig
inally accused him and accuses him
to-day. When he 10 arraigned On these
charges. bis stump and press defenders
either hang their heads and ear noth-
Ing. or plead The "baby act" 10 mitiga-
tson. They say.-''well. we admit he
took this stock. received $500 in the
way OF dividends. but he didn't know
at the time II was wrong and was anno-
cent oil any evil intention" Suppose
We admit this I What theni Your
candidate IL still guilty Of false swear
ing. He swore. not once but twice.
that he never touched or received this
stock nor . single dollar Of its incre-
ments. Everybody knows and nobody
denies that IN swearing thus he swore
falsely. Could be lave thought that
this also gas . harmless iraasactions
Away via such mockeryl There i
ssill molsl senses public conseience
in The country-which. however II may
differ about other ahings, isagreed - 70
the criminalisy beth Of bribe-laking and
0fprlury. But to return. The late
Stale election In Insiana proyes no more
Or The repub'icans in presidential 90
pect than Maine proves against them.
But suppose il dOes1 In neither d