The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1880-08-26
New York Times.l
Democratic APOLOGIES.

The Democratic Party occupies a peculiar
position. 1t is at once an opposition party and
a party in power, and it is neither one nor the
the Executive, and pleading with the people
for grant of it, it should naturally assail the
Republican Party, which now holds that de-
partment of the Government. Having ma
jority in each house of Congress, it is COM
PEELED to defend the policy which it has there
developed. The noteworthy feature of the
situation is, that the Democrats occupy them
selves much more with defense than with at
tack. OF the latter, with the exception of
some clumsy efforts at soiling the reputation
of Mr.. Garfield, there is almost nothing. And
for that matter, what is there that any posi-
tive aggressive tactics could be based on? The
distinctive features of the Republican policy
are beyond any effective criticism. 1t has for
years quietly but earnestly devoted itself to
the best interest of the country. While it was
still in complete power it perfected the scheme
for the resumption of specie payments, and
the branch of the Government which still re-
mains in its possession has steadily carried out
that scheme with entire loyalty to the end for
which it was framed, and with singular skill
and 6rmness. In the same way, the Treasury
Department, under Republican management,
and by means Of the laws passed by a Republ-
can Congress, has pursued the project of re-
ducing the interest on the public debt, while
keeping above all possible reproach the public
credit. In purely political affairs the admin
istration has conducted itself with such impair
tiality, discretion, and good faith that its most
bitter opponents fed little to criticise or even
to misrepresent.
There is, therefore, practically no tangible
ground for an aggressive policy on the part of
the Democrats toward the Republicans But
there is ample room and need for defensive
policy by the Democrats with reference TO
themselves. This was very forcibly shown by
Gen. Hancock, when he began his letter of ac-
ceptance by declaring that the amendments to
the Constitution should be 'inviolable," and
proceeded to add that, were he elected, he
should defend the Union against all attacks.
Why should the Democratic candidate deem it
necessary to make such pledges as these? Be-
cause his political opponents had falsely
charged him with intending to violate the
amendments and to undertake the subversion
or weakening of the Union? No such incen-
tive would have been sufficient. Charges
however serious known to be without founda-
ton, would have been disregarded by Gen.
Hancock. These were noticed because there
is much in the acts and tendencies of his party
to make them seem just. The controlling sec
ton of his party does not believe that the re-
cent amendments to the Constitution, embody-
ing the results of the war, were legally
adopted and does not intend that they shall
be carried into effect if it can be in any way
prevented. Those amendments freed the
slaves, made them citizens, gave them the bal
lot, and empowered Congress to carry out these
provisions by legislation. AS matter of
fact, in many parts of the South the slaves are
only nominally free, their rights as citizens are
denied them, they are deprived OF the benefit
of the ballot and, if the Democrats came into
full power, not only would no additional legis-
lation, however necessary to the enforcement of
the Constitution, be enacted, but that already
on the statute-books would not be executed.
No wonder, then, that Gen. Hancock finds
himself compelled to give promise that he
will maintain the amendments "lnviolable :"
But, however sincere the promise may be, he
will not fulfill it. He cannot. Forces against
which he would be as helpless as child would
against assaults, which, though not open, nor
directed as they once were, against the Fed
eral Government never theless, are intended to
destroy the very essence Of the Union, namely,
the equality of all American citizens before
the law. The Democratic candidate recog-
nizes that the country has good reason to sup
pose that, if he is elected, this vital principle
of the Union will be in danger, and it is quite
proper that he should bind himself to protect
it. But his very pledge reminds us that a
safer and better and more effective means of
maintaining the Union would be to intrust the
Government to party whose candidate does
not have to promise resistance to its tenden-
cies.
The Democratic press, especially in the
North, is strongly imbued with the apologize
No Ire fh<a1 lat of
Gen. Hancock. The truculent tone in which
the Democratic leaders in Congress announced
that they would go to the country on the is
sues raised at the extra session and the one
preceding it, is completely abandoned. Those
issues were the repeal of the election laws and
the abrogation OF the statues giving the Presi-
dent the use of the Army on election day, as
on the other days, for the execution of the
laws of the United States. We hear nothing,
or almost nothing, of either of these questions,
whlch only lew months since were declared
to be vital. The fact is, that the long and Wig
orous discussion which took place when these
measures were up in Congress and in the en-
suing canvass was fatal to the Democratic no.
sition. 1.-The bayonet at the polls'' was shown
to be a scarecrow. The election laws were
benefcent in practice. Neither subject af-
forded any ground for conducting national
canvass, and both have been practically given
up by the Democrats.
otiil more unfortunate is the party with ref
erence to finance. Its organs find themselves
forced to either ignore the matter or to try to
explain away the record of the party. Every
thing which the Democrats predicted from the
Republican policy has failed to happen; every
measure which they proposed themselves has
been shown to be either mischievous or ridicu-
lous. The whole course of the party has been
against the current of events, contrary to the
interests of the country, and threatening disas-
ter. 1t is not strange, under the eircum-
stances, that the party which set out so boldly
TO convince the country that a change" was
needed should be reduced TO constantly ex-
planning how the change would not be dan
gerous.