Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-10-14
The Indiana Result.

Democrats have heen placing SO much
reliance upon Indiana that they are un-
duly troubled by the unexpected loss of
the state. To most Democrats the loss
has been very unlOoked-for, though, upon
what they based their great confidence
We never have been able to see and sew
eral weeks ago we tried to warn them of
the unsulstantial nature of their eXpec-
tatiOns and to persuade them to keep
their eyes upon their own work in Penn
sylvania, state that there is every rea-
son TO expect to carry for Hancock, and
which should rather inspire Indiana and
her sister states than be inspired by them.
This is what we then said = The lndi-
ana election in October, although it will
be of great Importance in inspiriting OF
dispiriting parties with its result, will
not be of such vital consequence as to
disastrously affect the canvass in General
Hancock's state. He can carry that
though his colleague in the contest should
not he able to hold up his end of the
string. We do not know anything of the
Indiana canvass in detail, nordO we need
to. We Pennsylvanians have our own
work to do in seeing that General Han
cock gets his native state. This we
know his popularity will enable us to
give him. 1t is Il guarantee of his secur-
ing it outside the party strength. 1t is
an element in the contest here which, of
course, does not enter into the canvass
in Indiana or any other state just as
the popularity or unpOpularity Of Mr..
English i'm Indiana does not affect the
political battle in Pennsylvania. We
hold, therefore, that our fight is quite in
dependent of that in Indiana, and that
our good sense demands that we keep it
separate"
But Democrats are very curious crea-
lures, who are likely to be inspirited and
dispirited with equal lack of reason.
Many of them really found fault with us
for speaking in a doubtful way Of the
Indiana result, and thought it was very
wrong thus to dampen the ardor of the
people. They would not look ahead and
contemplate the greater discouragement
which would come from the possible loss
of Indiana, and reason, with us, that i:
was better to get ready for an agreeable
surprise than mortifying disappoint-
ment. They probably realize their folly
now.
But it was gross folly. There was
nothing in the situation in Indiana to
entitle us to he confident of the state if
it was vigorously contested against us.
1t was Democratic four years ago by a
meagre majority of some five Thousand
at the October election in 1876, when
the candidate for vice president was
the favorite son of that state. How
could we think that the great popularity
of Hendricks was not the controlling
element in that canvass? We did not
think it. We knew it, but refused to
read its lesson, which was that in
1880, with an unpopular candidate for
governor, and a candidate for vice presi-
dent who seems to have had the esteem
but not the warm affection of the people
of his state, the five thousand majority
of 1876 would be likely to he more than
dissipated.
To these positive elements of
weakness was added the fact that the
enemy perceiving them and knowing
the discouraging effect which the loss of
Indiana would be likely to have upon
the Democracy strained every nerve to