Daily Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1876-1884, 1880-12-15

WE w AotS al tuo oIkutcst uc-
gree, dsprecate any conceivable OK
treme Of Republican denunciation
Of the Democratic party. But we
do object, with an energy which
cannot be put into words, to hav-
ing such sheets rs the Chicago
Times quoted as Democratic. This
paper bounded Tilden just as it
bounded Hancock, Away back in
the adumbra Of time 1t and its editor
was Dsmooratic-tbat is to say,
Democratic from . "dough-facs"
point Of view. Nothing used to
delight 1t so much as getting down
In the mire and licking the feet Of
Southerners. Like all of this sort
Of dough-face cattle, it has been for
years Republican. It wore out its
Democratic gaberdine decade
ago. It Topped then; and, like all
the venal creatures Of its kind, it
has blackguarded the Democratic
party ever since. In an article re :
pl oducsd by u Republican paper OF
this city, this stool pigeon Times
says that the young and growing
voters of the country are not Dem
ocratic-cannot be Democratic
that they are all Republican from
the moment they reach the
benches of the free school, and read
the Radical text books of the war.
Lot US examine this matter lit.
tie, beginning with Massach usetts.
During and at the end of the war,
the fashionable Republican major.
titles in the Bay State ranged from
70, 600 to 81. 600. That State barely
succeeded in rolling up $1,000 for
Garfield. At the end Of the war,
Boston was Republican by 10000
majority. Now the "hub" is DEM
oeratic by from six to ten thous-
and majority, according to circum-
stances, but always Democratic,
mind you. Take any other in
stance In which the young vote
may be supposed to have some in.
fusnce! Pennsylvania, in 1872
gave Ulysses 8. Grant $4,000 ma.
jority over Horace Greeley. This
year the Keystone State gave Gar
Geld largely purchased majority
Of only $1,000. Surely the vote OF
young men must have had some.
thing to do with that terrible Re
publican failing off New York, in
1880. only gave Garfield about .
third of the majority she gave for
Fremont in 1856 and for Lincoln
In 1850. Surely, the young
vote must have had some
thing to do with this en-.
phatic declension of the Republican
vote In the State of New York
. dselension which was made more
noticeable by TiIden's triumph for
Governor in 1874 by q majority Of
$1,000 over Gen. Dix, and by his
triumph for President in 1875, by q
majority Of $1,000. Without ques-
ton the young men of the country
had something to do with these
emphatic representations of the
Democratic strength and corrss-
ponding diminutions Of the Repub-
loan poll. But we have even .
more striking instance in our own
State. San Francisco was made to
give . large majority for Hayes in
ls76-a majority so large A. to
ovsrslaugh the rest Of the State.
Yet Ian Francisco, in 1880, gave
Hancock q majority of nearly
three thousand, assuring the State
to the Democratic nominee. How
did this happen? The San Fran.
CISCO Post, q few days after the
slestion, told the story of the revo-
luton, without meaning to do it,
BY publishing table OF 5000
"twsnty-onesters," who voted fol
the first time at that election, apd
who voted Democratic.
30 much for the parasitic and
apostate Chicago Times and iti
vsnal political phiIosophixing.
| afnrv 10 told - VNy;e-~..-y