The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1880-09-23

llcan voter went to the war, and yet the figures
show that there were over 2,800,000 Union SOL
the whole Republican vote of the country |
Now, my Republican friends, will you tell me |
where this extra ], ,o00, 900 of Union soldiers
came from? 1t is mathematica1ly demonstrat-
ed that they could not have come from the Re- |
publican party, and yet evidently they had |
something to do with putting down the re-
bellion.
You know, fellow-citizens, where this extra |
], ,000, 900 of soldiers came from, They came |
from the Democratic party. zz1f ~
Mr.. Lincoln was elected by minority vote |
he lacked more than 900 votes of major |
ity. Had the 100000 men who supported |
Douglas at the North refused to sustain Mr.. |
Lincoln in putting down the rebellion, where |
should we have been? This was nearly half |
the loyal vote of the country, and the South |
fair and Just. As one who differed from the |
Democratic party in those days, it is only the |
simple truth to say that without their help this
Union would have been lost. -
Again, fellow-citizens, when we demand a
change in the Government, we are met by the
cry that the South is "solid" for the Demo-
cratic party. By this is meant, suppose, that
the Southern States are likely to cast their
electoral votes for Gen. Hancock. This, pre-
sumo, is quite probable to be the case as the
Republican leaders have declined to contestthat
section of the country, and practically with
draw all opposition to the Democratic party
there. But SUPPOSE, under these circumstances,
the South should be /" solid'' for the Democra-
cy. What is there unnatural or unlawful about
that? Nobody, not even the most stalwart Re
publican I take it, will dispute their legal right
to vote the Democratic ticket if they prefer that
to the Republican. Is it not natural that they
should prefer that to the Republican,? Why
what monstrous folly is all this talk of the Re
publicans about the "solid South !" First, they
abandon that whole section. take care that the
South shall be " solid" and then fly in our
faces with the pretense that this will be the
success of the rebellion which was suppressed
fifteen years ago, and the restoration of the
slave pow er in the Government fifteen years
after slavery itself has ceased to exist. .l,s--,
Now, there is no question that the eleven
Southern States went into the rebellion, the
States that supported Breckenridge in 1860;
but they were reconstructed under Republican
rule after the war, and since 1868 have been
equal members in the Union the same as before.
Republicans cannot find fault with this, for it
was their party that restored them to their
rights in the Government after freeing their
slaves and giving them the ballot. 1t is COM
planned now that these States do not support
the Republican party and give majorities for
the Republican ticket. What are the facts2
In 1869, the first Presidential election after re-
construction, these States were nearly all car
ried for Gen. Grant, the Republican candidate,
and this was the case alsO at Grants second
election in 1872. Even in 1876, the last Presi-
Dental election, the Republicans claimed to
have carried three of these States they took
them whether they carried them or not. At
that election there were, in round numbers
1000, 900 Republican. votes in the South. But
since then Hayes, their own 7. esident, has re-
moved the bsyonet, the negroes are leaving
them, the South is recovering from the war and
the carpet-bag devastation and growing pros
porous, and these States are all passing out OF
their hands and giving nlajorities against them.
Kindred to this talk about a "solid South, :"
and exceeding it in effrontery, is the outcry
aoout '.delivering the country over into the
hands of the men who tried to destroy it"
said this exceeded the other in effrontery, be-
cause, however senseless and baseless. that Is
urged as simple argument or proposition from
plain facts and figures, but this, coming from
Republican organs and speakers, il stamped
with such utter inconsistency and such damna-
BILE qualification as ought almost to blister the
tongue that utters it. I have no patience to
argue with such a pretense as this. can only
| denounce it. When we come this year and pre-
sent great Union soldier for President, man
| who has risked his life q hundred times, and
| shed his blood to save this Union, and loyal
Northern man for Vice President, we are met by
such a cry as this from party which for twelve
| years has honored conspicuous and blood
| stained rebels with some Of the highest offices
in the Government. 1t is rebels, is it, that you
mean by the "men who tried to destroy this
| Government?n Let me tell you there hasn't
been day for twelve years that you have
not rewarded rebels with Office. Grant
| took an obscure rebel Colonel, who tried In his
small, mean way to destroy this Government,
| fourth-rate lawyer though he was, and made
| him Attorney General, the law officer of the
| Government which he "tried to destroy.
Have you forgotten that? A rebel Judge pre-
sided over your convention that nominated
Grant the second time, convention that
| cheered to the echo James L. On, of South
| Carolina, an original ire-eater and secess1omst
A,a& au
| Ambassador to Russia. Longstreet, next 10
Lee, the leading rebel General, was early re-
warded by your administration with fat Fed
eral Office. and has only lately been sent Of
Minister to Turkey to represent the Govern,
i ment which he came SO near destroying.
And do you remember Mosby, the rebel BUSH
fighter and guerrilla, who shot our brave boys
down from the fence corners and the thlcke-
o name which we used to pronounce in the wal
times with objurgation and horror? Well, he, too
under a Republican administration represents
| abroad the country which he "tried to destroy
Don't you feel proud of him? And there il
| the late Postmaster General under Hayes, the
rebel Col. Key, who "tried to destroy the
Government, for experimenting whose mail
bags he was afterward paid 90, 600 year by
the Republican administration How does thai
look to you? But you tell me these men have
Joined the Republican party. Does that, then
atone for their treason to their country and III
flag? Do you wish to be understood to sa.
that United States army officer, who, at thu
beginning of the Rebellion, deserted his com
mand and his colors and went into the rebe
army and fought us for four years unto th'
bloody DEATH can square his account with th
Government by joining the Republican part
and taking lucrative office under it? And Il
he any better for his double desertion than tn
rebel officer who lay down his sword and re
turned to his allegiance at the close of the war
but concluded to vote the Democratic ticket?
But you say: sob! yes, Hancock is goo,
man. We don't find any fanlt with him, bu
we don't like his company" You complain
first that you can't trust the Democratic part
which is behind him. You charge that thi
party was disloyal in the war and will be en-
tirely controlled by the rebel influence. hav
already shown you the great changes that hav
occurred in the party, the new and different is
sues, and have just called your attention to tn
fact that what you call the rebel element In tina
party is a minority section in the country
Now, let me tell you another thing that ma
surprise YOU. Not only is the rebel element i
minority in the Government but it is in
very decided minority in tLe Democratic part
also. Look again at the figures. -Four year
ago. at the last Presidential election, the Demo
: cratic vote was, in round numbers, 1,600, 900 j
the whole South, and only ,03S, 900 in th
rebel States, while it was 2600, 600 at the Mort
"a vast preponderance of 100000 votes, a
SUb gublieans ans t talk in this campaign 20
would think that the whole Democratic strengt
! was at the South But you say the Democrat
expect to carry the South. So they do an
: they expect, also, to carry a good part OF th
: North. Do you know that their prospect
most excellent for carrying a majority of tt
3 electoral votes of the North2 All We shoul
> need, to do that, would be the States of Penn
sylyania and Ohio, now trembling in clos
: balance between the parties. Should you wal
3 up on the morning of Nov. and find th'
Hancock had carried the North, as well as th
' South, what then would you say?
) But, fellow-citizens, what is there to tn
e most-bigoted assumption of the Repubhca1
that all manner of evils and Of ills will come NJ
on the country if the Democratic party succee
a this year? Has anybody beside Republican
: any rights in this country Are all men outsic
of that organization public enemies? 1t is We We
: to understand some OF these Things. ~
eide lnrAcaAdR