The weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1878-1881, 1880-10-12
THE FATEFUL OCTOBER EIECIloNs.

As near as can be made out from contra
dictory dispatches and party biased ~"~tract
from the press, neither side isgaE all over con
fdent Of Indiana orsOhio. The former viii
probably 30 democratic, as itEhas always been
known = a democratic state, still the repub
licans might manasesto carry it, and henc'
their liberal and persistent efforts to that end
On the other hand, Ohio, Garfield's own state
ought surely to go republican if the campaign
has been fairly conducted in his interest. Blu
the democrats naturally regard a reduction 0
the republican majorlties given by Ohio ii
former years as almost equivalent to victory
so they leave no means untried of reducing
the adverse majority of $4,000 given for gov
ernor last year. If Indiana and Ohio be boil
carried by the republicans it would greatly
obscure but not by any means destroy demo
cratic chances of victory. There would still
be many doubtful states, besides New York
almost sure for the democrats, and of these
enough to compensate for the loss OF Indiana
might readily be won. If, however, Indiana
and Ohio be both carried by the democrats
in the election of the 18th lust, then the
campaign will be virtually over, provided the
republican party remains under its present
leadership. Ii Garfield loses his own state
any further progress under his leadership
would be a march towards inevitable defeat,
and with that prospect staring the party in
the face the question arises-would Garfield
continue to be the republican candidate, or
would the party defeat in Ohio and Indiana
be attributed to his questionable record ?
If the latter view were taken, as most likely it
would afford an excellent pretext for calling
upon Garfield TO resign from an impossible
candidacy, leaving TO the National Central
Committee the task Of making a nomination
to the vacant place. Who the nominee
would be we already know from the control
openly exerted over the committee by a GER
tain faction of the republican party. The
central committee is already owned. In case
pressure enough could be brought upon Gar
field to induce hin to step down from the
candidacy, the boss would only have to say
the word when the country would be imme-
diately plunged into the anxiety and appre-
hension which lowered over the land as long
as a Third Term menaced our future.
To the reader the above may appear a
highly improbable programme, but it at least
furnishes the only key by which We can ra-
tionaIly explain the recent performances of
the Grant crowd. Following the nomination
at Chicago they stood sullenly aloof from the
victorious wing of the party, their actions
furnishing an acceptable basis for the charge
accusing them of conspiring to defeat Gar
field in 80 in order to make Grant a necessity
to the party in 'S4. This was kept up
until Garfield, in his letter of acceptance,
was forced down on his knees in abject
humiliation before Cohkling, chief com
mander of the Grant forces. Following
came the virtual deposition of jewell from the
craftsmanship of the republican national COM
mittee, and the investiture of a Grant man
with the powers and prerogatives Of the chair
man. As soon as this work is satisfactorily
completed, we find the Grant crowd taking a
much more active part than they had former
ly taken in the campaign. Gonkling address
ses the multitude at Cooper's Union, New
York, but curiously enough his speech is al
most exclusively a panegyric of Grant M
Grantism, while the mention so rarely made
of Garfield was contemptuous rather than
laudatory. And so in all other speeches late
ly spoken or written by any member of the
gang; their attack seems directed at Hancock
and Garfield next. Take for instance Grants
recent attack on Hancock. In perusing his
charges can we escape the conviction that that
attack was made far more in the interest OF
Grant than in the interest of Garfield? Or,
still palmer, take the report of his interview
with a Chicago journalist, the interview in
which he explains how he could break the
solid South how he could build up our Ian
gushing commerce.. Can such claims be
otherwise than an indirect slur upon the can
didacy of Garfield, who, as we are plainly
plishing any sucn desirable result2 In fact,
if the Grant wing had set out to betray Gar
field in order to force his resignation, they
could not have taken a better plan of accom-
pllshing this purpose than the one lately pur-
sued. But a short time vet will tell the story.
With any kird of fair play Garfield can carry
his own State. But If Ohio goes democratic,
then we may be assured that there is treach.
cry in the republican camp; even If the
schemes in whose behalf that treachery is
practiced fail to ripen into the fruitlon of an
open appearance on the arena of politics.
HANCOCK WILL REPLY.