Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1880-07-13
ted to "the deliberate Judgment Of the

ted to "the deliberate Judgment Of the
assembled Democracy"
1t thus appears that Gen. Hancock
was nominated because 1t occurred to
the Convention that he would be "the
f.test standard bearer" But"fttest"
in what sensei Surely not because he
would, II elected, make better Presi-
dent than would the Senator. Perish
the thought II may have been observ-
ed to that this kind Of fitness Is not
generally sought for or even desired In
Democratic Conventions. We are, there
fore left to conclude that Gen Hancock
was nominated not because Of his #
ness for the Presidency, but because in
the judgment Of the Convention
he would be "the fttest stand
ard. bearer to lead the party to q
present victory" which, being trans
lated into honest English, means that
Gen. Hancock was nominated because
the Convention thought that he could
draw more votes than any Of the other
Democratic aspirants.
We now understand why Gen. Han
cock was nominated. The assembled
Democracy" were in search, not OF MT
ness, as the primary object, but Of
votes. They wanted ga present vic
tory" Then why not say SO openly
Why omit to mention the matter o.
votes {? Why speak Of the conscience
and "self.control" Of the nominee 7
Why compare him with "the good and
great Washington :" Why laud his
willingness to subordinate military
power to civil authority Why assign
all conceivable reasons for his nomina'
zion save the true one Is not this in.
tentional deception Are not these false
pretenoes All, gentlemen, We COM
mend to your attentive perusal these
simple lines:
"Tls great, tits manly to disdain disguise, :,
1t shows our spirit. or 1t proves our strensth'
But there is a Democratic reason why
Democratic leaders should not give the
true explanation Of Gen. Hancock's
nomination. This reason must be ap'
parent to every intelligent man. With
out pausing to remark upon its sufi
cheney or morality, it is enough to say
that it naturally results from their un'
willingness to confess that in the nomi'
nation of Gen. Hancock they are en-
deavoring to psrpetuate a gross fraud
upon the American people. Is there
an intelligent man who does not know
that Gen. Hancock is but q gilded fig
ure-head, and that he would be the
plant tool of the Democratic party,
controlled by the "solid South ?" Has
the Democratic party by nominating
Gen. Hancock changed its nature Of
purposes ? He has been nominated fol
the sake Of obtaining votes under false
pretences. As an officer, high in com
mand, who was assigned to most i'm
portant duty in the South during the
reconstruction, he endeared himself tc
the hearts of the Southern Democracy
by his violation Of the spirit, If not the
letter, of his instructions. 1t is to be
expected that he will secure Their
votes. As an eminent Union General.
it is hoped by the Democratic leaders
that he will receive the votes Of Union
soldiers. They hope that he may be
supported in the North, not for what
he is, but for what he was. Without
known ideas upon any of the great
questions of the day, purely military
man, he has been chosen as a mere
availability to catch the votes of the
unwary. 1t is the history of the Nc
Clsllan campaign repeated. Anything
for success, nothing for principle. II
is the fitting programme of the party
that, abandoning all its principles and
traditions, supported Horace Greeley in
1872, and that to day in Massachusetts,
falls down and worships "Beast But
ler." Surely, the people Of this country
will not crown sHch gigantic fraud
with success.