New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-04-13
SELF srU1rIF1cA11oN OR DISHONESTY

swer offered by The OharIestOn Mems and
Courier to THE TR1BUNE's question what Mr..
Tilden has done since 1875 that Southern
Democrats should say they despise him, and
threaten a bolt in case Of his denomination. And
yet the question remains unanswered. What
we want to know is in what particulars Mr.. Til
den has so changed that his nomination, which
was hailed with such enthusiasm and supported
with such zeal by Southern Democrats in 1875,
would not be acquiesced in Ivy the same class in
1880. The Charleston paper answers that IL OPP
poses his denomination because he has proved
himself to be tricky, narrow and illiberal too
"tmd to lead and too arrogant to follow alive
Railways to his own interests and oblivious OF
the needs of his countrymen incapable of
@magnanimous act ;|unforgetting and unt0r-
"giving, sacrificing great party to desire for
"revenge-an old man, in fine, who joins the
"rooted preiudices and sour grudges OF age to
the whimsical irTesOlutiOn OF second child
"hood." This is frankly enough stated, and the
reasons set forth are sufficient to justify indi-
vidual opposition 10 the nomination. 1t Is
question, though, whether they would be reck-
oned enough tn found bolt on. Let us con-
slider them briefly.
THE TRIBUNE's proposition was that not one
sufficient argument against TIlden's nOmina-
ton can be adduced which does not involve
self qualification or confession OF dishonesty.
Now, OF the above specifications, we may leave
out those which characterize him az selfish and
unforgiving and capable of sacrificing the party
to his desire for revenge. These things are true,
no doubt, but they were equally true in 1876,
equally notorious and we beg our Charleston
contemporary attention to the fact that at that
time the whole Democratic party and press
were strenuOusly denying them, and asserting
the direct reverse as true. And Mr.. Tiden has
lived so much in seclusion since then; that it is
not competent for any one to assert, from any
public or official record he has made, that he
has changed in the slightest degree. But it is
charged that be has proved himself to be
tricky, narrow and ilberal too timid to lead
aand tuo arrogant to follow" All, that is more
to the point. Has proved himself % That, of
course, relates to matters Of record it is not
mere opinion or assertion here we have some
thing to guide us. "TrIcky" you say and
Gproved HIMSELF so We also believe it ; hut
do you not know that upon the very record on
which you make this charge a Democratic Con-
eress no Democrat dissenting, pronounced him
innocent of anything tricky" and sOlemnly re-
solved that he was the victim instead of the
perpetrator of wrong7 Nothing has been added
to the record on which that Judgment was pro-
nounced no new developments or revelations.
"Tricky"4 Yes, it's as true as gospel. But
what was your Democratic party doing when II
certified his innocence to the public 7 Was It
lying prayf And what are you doing when
you come forward urging against him an indict-
ment on which you and yours solemDly pro-
nounced him innocentS Is it disqualification
or confession of dishonesty
Then 1t is charged that he is "narrow and
@illibcral." These arc rather vague and gen.
eral terms upon which to arraign candidate
or yindicate bolt, but the statement that he
has @proved himself so warrants the inference
that his narrowncss and illberality are of pub
lie record. And we presume we are correct in
tracing this charge to the letter written by him
on Southern claims during the campaign of 1876
which created such dissatisfaction in the party
at the South. There Is no other record that we
know of upon which such charge from such
source would be likely to he based. But South
ern Democrats voted for him Notwithstanding
that letter. Not only that they protested that
they were actually in accord with him in his
hostility to the claims referred to. Were they
sincerei Why, then, this charge Of narrOwness
and iiberality Is it disqualification or q
confession of dishonesty 7 "ToO timid to lead,
and too arrogant to fOllOw"i And "proved
himself SO I? This bears but one cOnstruc-
ton, to wit, that he was too timid to take the
initiative in revolutionary proceeding, and
attempt to seize the Government by violence
and too arrogant to follow the lawless and tur-
bulent spirits who threatened insurrection.
n,,k Tho eatflaOnonf oF fhn EIantnrol ooOfroxoro,
was guided by Democratic Congress, and tSat
party protested then, and has protested ever
since, that it was peaceably disposed and law
abiding, and had no seditiOus designs whatever.
How is IT, then, that the sacrifice of Mr. Tilden
is demanded because he proved himself too
timid to lead and too arrogant to follow those
who were ready to plunge the country into civil
warY Was not the party honest in its profes-
siOns of Willingness to abide by the decision Of
the Electoral Commission
The Charleston paper says it advocated Til
denis nomination in 1876 because it believed
him to have lofty aims and generous desires,
to be straightforward, scrupulOusly honorable
and absolutely stainless" 1t opposes him
now because "he is not what he was believed to
abe, and he is what nc was believed not to lie y;
and it adds that 80 /" far from involving the
qualification of the Democratic party, it estab-
fishes our sincerity and good faith" We
have no disposition to impugn the sincerity or
good faith of our Charleston contemporary.
We cheerfully recognize its candOr and fearless
ness But the fact nevertheless remains that
Southern Democrats are opposing Tllden's re-
nomination upon the same grounds that Repub-
licans opposed his election In 1876 and upon
a record which has not been changed in a syl-
liable since a Democratic Congress, upon
thorough investigation, pronounced it pure and