The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1880-09-09
ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN SETTLED
BY PARTY ACTION.

ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN SETTLED
BY PATTY ACTION.
John Hancock has written very
bitter letter TO a friend ofhis in Gal
weston Part of this letter is pub
lished in the Ne1cS. He saws that he
is not in harmony with many of the
Democracy, and that the present is
the day of the demagogue, and that
when he (the demagogue) is retired,
that he (John Hancock) may come
out. This but proves what we have
hitherto thought of John Hancock
that he is an 'arrant demagogue,
and was only Democrat because he
thought it would give him power
and place. Should the Republicans
be successful this fall. they may
count, as an accession to their ranks,
the Hon. John Hancock, for he is
already one in sentiment.-ClorLS-
rifle Times.
The letter referred to was a pri-
vate one, but as to bitterness"
the STATESMAN fails TO see it in this
light. Judge Hancock usually says
what he thinks, and when he declares
he is not in harmony with many of
the Democrats of his district he
tells a demonstrated fact, and this
truth is by no means to the discredit
OF Judge Hancock. He was not in
harmony with many Democrats in
this district upon questions at issue
in the late war, and the bitterness of
some of these was still shown in
the last canvass, when they scattered
throughout the district pamphlets
condemning him most bitterly, in
sequence of his having been a Union
man. Here he was not in
harmony with many Democrats.
and while the STATESMAN re-
grets to recognize this as a fact,
it is the truth, and truth, being pow
erful, we submit to it. Before this
Col. Jones, now member of Congress
from this district, defended Judge
Hancock, because of his being at
tackled in this wise, and yet Col
Jones, in the last election, obtained
the votes of these very so-called
Democrats, who opposed Judge Ham
cock because of his Union ideas.
These things are of record, and the
pamphlet, of Col. George Flournay
and others will attest the enmi-
ty. Col. Jones, about three years
ago, appealed to Judge Han
cock to become an indie
pendent candidate for Governor,
and the reply of Judge H. was as
decided as anything could be. In
this letter he fell back upon sound
Democracy, and avowed he would
even retire into private life before
he would abandon Democratic prin-
ciples as he understood them. Here
again is where Judge III. has differed
with many Democrats Of his district,
and with very many of the entire
state. just where the Democratic
party now stands, as shown by state
and pationaf platforms, upon finan-
cial questions, here has stood Ham
cock through all thesesyears.. All
over the state Democrats. and lead
ing ones too, men who may be DEM
agogues, were frightened out of their
boots by the organization of Green
back clubs. In theory they became
Greenbackers. and, had the cat not
jumped back on the Democratic
side of the fence, many of these
wavering politicians would have
been more decided Greenbackcrs
to-day than even Hon. George WASH
ington Jones. Hancock has been
bold in his convictions, even de-
nouncing these Democrats who
went of after the fiat god, and they
do not like him for il. Whether this
has anything to do with expressions
in the Times and other papers that OPP
pose Judge Ii. we known not. Many
so-called Democrats have OPP
posed him because of his pure
" Democratic convictions about
"honest money! lie has remained
one and the same while even Demo-
cratic platforms were changed for a
time TO sOothe the wild ideas of the
disaffected. A demagogue courts
popular favor though wrong. and
while Col. Jones appeals TO igno.
rance for. votes Judge Hancock
openly opposes and has opposed
these heresies to which the former
appeals. He has been true repre-
sentative of the Democratic party in
its ancient purity, has abandoned no
principle for votes nor for popular
favor, and is with the party to-day
in everything, as we understand
party principles. The Democratic
party asserts it in its platforms that
it is party of the Union. Judge
Hancock is Union man, as he has
always been, and if condemned for
this he is condemned by anti-Union
men and not. by true Democrats.
This question of disunion should be
put at rest, and it is renowned in
every state and in the national plat
form. Does the Times and these
other papers propose to keep it
alive, and if so what position do they
assume in the premises?