Daily globe., 1880-04-05

warning for those who might be inclined to
engage in Washburnism. 1t is to be hoped
the committee will still be able to probe
the matter to the bottom.
| If a subcommittee could be sent to Min
nesota, mine OF sooundrelism could be de-
veloped which would make present develop
ments seem insignificant. All that is neces-
sary is power and means to compel wit
nesses to be present and the meat will be
produced.
MODEL DEFENSE OF WASHBURNISM m
The most unique vindication of Mr.. Bill
Washburn which we have met appears in
the columns of our esteemed cotemporary,
the Rochester Post. Most of the Republi-
can papers fall to abusing Donnelly, fire a
few heavy shots at the Democracy on gen.
eral principles and wind up with shout
about 5000 majority. That, they consider,
settles it.
The Post approaches the subject with a
philosophical, "they all do it" sort of an air
and finds great deal of comfort in the de-
velopments. 1t announces thet no one could
be elected in this district 'twithout a resort to
some means that Geo. William Curtis and
political saints of his sort would disapprove
OFF, We presume that this is intended to
indicate that "politicaI saints'' are fools
enough to favor political honesty. Our
critic having conceded that the "political
saints" do not reside in the Third Minnesota
District, confesses his disappointment. He
says zone would expect to find some
revelations of unuSuGI skullduggery
| in the report of the committee, but
they will be disappointed" The editor of
the Post displays familiarity with this dis
trict which almost leads US to suppose that
he has resided in Minneapolis. He is disap-
pointed, not because the report failed to ex-
pose "skulduggery'' but it was simply the
'FuSudP' kind of ''skulduggery," such as
| buying up an election, etc. Nothing short
of some rascality more monstrous than
Washburn's would be regarded by our CO.
temporary as "aInusuGE'' for the Republican
party, and the GLOBE is constrained to agree
with the critic on this point.
He approaches the details with commend
able resolution. "The voting for Washburn
of couple of camps of lumbermen IS
sHOaon.' The editor comedies that this was
an ''entirely unjustifable outrage" He is
working too straight from the shoulder to
assume that the Republicans of the Wash
burn stripe repudiate this "unjustifable out
rage, 'but he cautiously declares that "no Re-
publican is under obligation to defend it. "
That is excellent; the Republicans do defend
political outrages, but they are not under
any obligation to do so. This announce
ment will undoubtedly be great relief to
many perturbed souls who have supposed that
defense of Washburnism was essential to
party loyalty. Our Republican friends,
however, should not be led into any hasty re-
pudiation of rascality by the authoritative
annou ncement that they are under no obli-
cation to defend it, for in the next breath
the editor announces that he suspects this
"unjustiiable outrage" "has always been
practiced up there" In other words they
not only call do it'' but have always done it.
This is a strong point for Washburn.
The next point in this remarkable vindi-
cation is settler. The buying up of men
by the wholesale is conceded, but astonish-
ing as it might seem to political saint they
were presumably unscrupulous fellows" +"
and as if that was not sufficient defence they
went cheap. "Cheap bummers" who only
| demanded ''cheap price, and-rendered
"cheap services" is the way our champion
of Washburnism explains that there was no
corruption about it. The Post was doubt.
less again the victim of disappointment
when it found that the market price of vot-
ers in the Third Minnesota district is not ex-
orbitant, and hence it finds an excuse for
Washburn's bribery on the ground that they
were "cheap bummers" and sold themselves
at a "cheap price," Regulating the standard
of morality by the price paid for the scoun-
drelism is,certainly worthy of Washburnism.
The only other feature presented is that
these "unjustifable outrages" which Repub-
licans defend without being under any obli-
cation to, were perpetrated by the Republi-
can committee and not by Washburn in per-
son. The Post comedies that there is a
''single instance" where it is asserted Wash
burn did the bribing personally, but the fell
low he bought is denounced as "dead beat." "
Of course, this excuses Washburn if the fell
low he bought was "dead beat" and if he
bought him "cheap" it is rather virtue than
otherwise.
After making so clear defense of Wash
burnism, we are surprised that the Post
should fail back on the committee as an ex.
cuse for Washburn personally. AS matter
of fact, the working portion of the commit
tee consisted of Charley johnson and such
other clerks as Washburn hired. Charley
johnson was sent out through the district to
buy the nomination away from DR.. Stewart,
and, having succeeded in that, Washburn
had him appointed secretary of the commit
tee. The committee headquarters were re-
moved from st. Paul to Minneapolis in order
to be near the source of supplies, and the
skulduggery, which we are assured by on,
esteemed contemporary is not "unusuaI' in
the Republican party, followed.
Washburn ought to head the Post article
with wood cut of himself, and circulate il