Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1880-08-26


twice the amount of the total revenue
Of the National Government, and
though the five years after the panic Of
'73 were the worst ever known, they
still managed to divide for the last ten
years $700,000000 in dividends. The
capital invested in manufactures and in.
dustries is fabulous. There are over
4,0OO dutiable articles on our glorious
tariff, and there is hardly manufactur-
er under our present system OF protec.
ton who does not have to look 10
Washington for tariff legislation. Now,
nearly all these powerful interests are
united in the support Of the Republican
party. so, oil course, are the 100000
oiiiceholders. To all Of them Republi
can rule means personal prosperity, sure
enough. But the masses of the people
may stop to remember that history does
not show single Republic that did not
perish after its people became rich.
No Republic perished while il was poor.
No Republic lived after it became rich.
History has no exception to this rule
that as long as Republics are poor they
are pure. As they grow and become
richer and richer, corruption grows,
public virtue declines and popular self
government becomes difficult and de.
Gays. This is the teaching OF Rome
and Greece. 1t is the lesson Of history.
1t is the danger of this Republic-the
very fact that ii is almost incredibly diff.
ferent and changed from what it was
when it was iounded-the very fact
that it is no longer poor, but rich, daily
growing richer.
We all want prosperity, but not at
the expense of liberty. Poverty is not
as great a danger to liberty as wealth,
with its corrupting, demoralizing inHu.
ences. Suppose all the influences
have just reviewed were TO take their
hands off instead Of supporting the Re.
publican party, would it have ghost of
a chance of success? Let US have pros
perity, but never at the expense of lib.
erty, never at the expense OF real self.
government, and let us never have a
Government at Washington owing its
retention TO the power of the million.
aires rather than the will Of the mil.
lions.
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST CHANGE AN AR.
CUMEST FOR MONARCHY.
Point No. 3. is that the Democrats
are terribly hungry for place, and that
a change in the 100000 offices Of the
country would be calamity--would,
in the language of Mr.. Schurz, take the
very machinery of the Government into
pieces-would be something dreadful to
contemplate. But this is a direct aIgu.
ment in favor of permanent Govern
ment--a permanent office. holding dy.
nasty.
II we cannot afford TO change the
ruling party because that means the
change Of 100 900 office holders, we shall
certainly be much less able to do 50
four, eight or twelve years hence, when
the power and number of these office.
holders will be much greater. In my
opinion a change Of administration does
not imply a change in every Office of the
country. Nor would such sweeping
changes be desirable. But TO hold that
the country cannot afford 10 elect Han.
cock simply because OF the Office holders
WHO would lose their places is TO give
up the very spirit OF our institutions,
the character of representative Re.
public based upon government by polit-
ical parties, their accountability To the
people and frequent changes. If we
cannot have a change now we can new.
er have one. If Mr.. Schurzs argument
against a change because II would put
the ins out and the outs in is good TO.
day. it will be still better in the future,
and we might as well settle down 10
the idea of "A permanent party dynasty
l.. A. 10 ,g
reproachable-the monsrchical idea in
Republican clothes.
THE SOLID SOUTH.
Point No. 1 is the cry about the Solid
South. understand the Republican
position to be this-that il is a great
political crime for ten Southern States
TO be all Democratic, but il would be
the highest political virtue for twenty.
two Northern States TO be all Republi,
can. A Solid South is monstrous, a sol.
id North is Misunderstanding to Re.
publican logic. Now, what is there in
all this cryf When the war closed
every Southern State was made Repub.
lican by force. They were put under
military rule. Next they were put un.
der the rule Of thieving carpet baggers.
To make Republican rule permanent a
million negroes just emerged from slav.
cry were made voters and masters over
the disfranchised whites. What ensued
you know--the most monstrous misgov.
ernment, robbery and corruption, prob.
ably, the world ever saw. Then the
South was solid for the Republicans.
But a reaction had 10 come. II came.
Gradually these Southern States regain.
ed local government. To them Re.
publicanism meant robbery, oppression
and government set up by bayonets and
kept up by bribery. Dem ocracy meant
local selfgovernment. There was no
alternative-they had to become Demo
cratic. There was no other place to go
to, and the Republican party itself is
alone responsible for IL. There is not a
single State in the North that would
not have done the same thing under