New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-07-08
A REAL DdNGER.

Republican papers which are discussing the
action proposed by General Hancock In 1876,
as if there were danger that the Democratic
party might now seize the Presidency, are told
by the insinuatlng and plausible supporters of
that gentleman that the only party which ever
"gave up the Presidency, when all its own mem
"be1s and many of the opposition thought its
candidate elected, was the Democratic party,
which is now charged by its opponents with
"lntending to seize the Government, whatever
"the result may be-" This is one way of stating
it. 1t leaves out Of sight Two or three essential
facts, however. In the first place, the only
claim they ever had for the election of Mr.. Til
den was based upon the fact, which cannot be
successfully controversial that in two or three
Southern States the colOred Republican vote
was suppressed by intimidation and violence.
Had this suppression not been foreseen by those
who gave the blacks their freedom and the
ballot, OF had it not been provided against by
statute law, the claim might be made with tech
meal Justice. But the conspiracy was foreseen,
and the remedy provided; the enforcement OF
just laws defeated the conspiratoIs The
Democratic claim is that except for these laws
and their legal execution, their candidate
would have been elected. Leaving them out,
perhaps he was elected. But theIe they were. and
they stood stubbo1nly in the way. The Demo-
Gratis "gave up the Presidency because their
leader knew the weakness of their claim.
But the party did not, IN fact. give ND the
Presidency Mr. Tilden did, and it was
simply, as stated, because he knew his claim
was rot sound and could not stand. There
were mischievOus men enough IN the party to
have undertaken resistance and revolution, had
he but consented to take the lead and give the
word. How much credit is due the party, or
the leaders Of the party, for their great act OF
solf-denial in giving up the Presidency, Is well
shown by their ursparing condemnation OF
Tildcn's co waIdice, and their liquidation OF his
claim for a denomination. So much of self
denial as they showed they were driven to by
his refusal to act. That refusal left them with
out leader; and how could they demand the
Presidency, or make movement toward SEEING
it, without having some enc on whose behalf to
make the demandY 1t is mistake to attribute
to the party the peaceable surrender that was
made, or give them credit for refraining from
violence through motives of patriotism or I'M
willingness to disturb the peace. They aCere
willing and eager to undertake the seizure OF
the Presidency. And the difference between
the situation in 1877 and the present Is, upon
their own showing, that whereas then they had
q candidate who was too timid to assert what
they call his rights, now they have one in whose
favor the strongest argument and the one most
constantly dwelt upon, is that he " will take bis
a. seat"
The fear that they will seize the Presidency
:. hn,D
they did not seize it il 1877 is not only no
proof that there is no danger now! but rather
increases the danger. For they now say
openly that Tilden's backwardness and cow
ardice stood in their way before, but that this
time they have a candidate they can depend
mon. What does all this mean. and what
does General Badly" Smiths talk about Han
cocks Willingness to recognize Tilden in 1877
mean, If not that they are prepared to take
desperate measures to get possession OF the
Government The nomination OF General
Hancock. taken in connection with the dlssatls-
faction at Tilden's course, the arguments used
with delegates in HancOcks favor, and the
outburst of fiery enthusiasm from the men
who, like General Preston, Of Kentucky, want
"a little powder and ball" will bear no other
Interpretation. These men propose to elect
General Hancock if they can, but whether they
elect him or not to " seat him." The fear that
they will seize the Presidency is not idle or
groundless.
People who are called upon to remember how
they gave up the Presidency" in 1877. will
remember as well the excellent reasons why
they gave 1t up. And as for the record OF the
party furnishing any guarantee for their keep
ing the peace, nothing could be more absurd.
They tell us 1t is the only party that ever gave
" up the Presidency" On the contrary, it is the
only one that ever refused TO abide by the re-
suits of ali election the only one that ever re-
belled and appealed to arms; the only one that
in the past forty years has not been unceas-
ingly engaged either in making war against
the Government or threatening it. If it has
nothing but its record to appeal to in proof OF
its pacific purposes, its assurances will have
little weight. The people believe they are bent
on mischief. In such circumstances the least
their candidate can do to assure the country
that his position in the Army will not be used
to further theiI designs, is to resign his commits
sion. Will General Hancock resignf
------
GAMBETTA'S FUTURE.
Two public questions have been temporarily
disposed Of in France. The Government, hay-