Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1880-09-22


cratic candidate for Congress in the
Carlisle district, is fair specimen of
the kind of Democrats that find the
way to Congress. They are of the
weak kneed sort who claim to believe
in the Northern system of government;
who claim to disbelieve in the State
right, secession doctrine of the South
who claim to disbelieve in slavery and
the other pet theories of the brigadlers,
but when they get to Congress they are
influenced BY the Southern leaders, who
believe in everything but the ideas Of
the North that prevailed against rebel
lion. The Beltzhoover kind of Con
gresham has two faces; the one he
turns to the North, the o;hee be turns
to the South. To the Northern con
stituency he turns for votes to the
Southern brigsdiers he turns, and acts
in such a way as a co-operatOr against
Northern soldiers, and Northern inter
ests such as have been stifed in Con-
gress.
w DCAALuOOfCA W a. ochOt Aaoh VIZ
ter as to the passage of certain pension
acts of Congress, be wrote back, that
with the Democratic House, pension
bills 10 not have much favor, and the
rebel general who is at the head Of the
Pension Committee in the Senate is still
more averse to allowing such bills to
pass" He did not say TO the citizen
of Cumberland county who had made
the inquiry of him, that be would stand
up for Northern interests in the House.
No, he did not say that, but he con-
fessed bis weakness before the rebel
element that was controlling blm. His
weak letter has been published. Last
week it was published in these columns,
with the fact that Beltz5ooyer denies
the letter. We published the letter.
and also that the Congressman denies
it, but, as an apologist for the Democ
rscy that tremble before the crack OF
the Hampton and Toombs whip, the
Tribune in this place, in its last issue,
charges US with not giving Beltzhoover
credit with denial of the letter. 1t
also says that the Congressman brought
suit against the man who published the
letter. Well, it would not be hard to
bring a suit, but when a man brings
suit and has bad case the suit gener-
ally does not amount to much. The
nearest point to a suit that We have any
knowledge of, is the fact that Beltz-
hoover asked his lawyers about it, and
they advised him not to sue, as be had
no case. The Tribune does not need to
take it so high about Mr.. Beltzhoover,
for he is representative man Ninety
Eve per cent. of the Democratic Con
gressmen from the North are of the
same quality they weaken before
Southern thunder. And Hancock,
their candidate is one of the same quail
ity. Perhaps on his part it Is more on
account of choice than weakness. But
his order No. 40, which they are pleased
to call bigh specimen of civil order,
is nothing more or less than the State
Rights doctrine of Jefferson and Cal
houn, and later still, that of JEFF
Davis. 1t is in accord with the first
resolution In the Democratic Plat
form, that the Constitutional provi-
sIoDs and traditions of the Democratic
party" shall be carried out when they
get into power. Order No. 40 wss the
first step that was taken to obstruct the
reeonstruction laws as passed oy Con
gress in 1867. 1t was the first step
that was taken to nullify- the acts of
Congress after MIR. Stanberry, Andy
JOhnson's Attorney General, had pro
nounced them unconstitutional and null
and void, and it is on a perfect level
with the notification efforts of the Con-
gress to which Mr.. Beltzhoover be-
longed. Belrzhoover's letter Is on a
perfect level with Hancoek's Nulifca-
tion order No 40, which was in sup
port of the Notification opinion of the
Attorney General of Andrew johnson
it ia in perfect accord with the nullIf-
cation efforts of the Congress to which
Beltzhoover belonged, when it attempt
ed to bulldoze President Hayes BY re
fusing to pass the appropriation bills ;;
and we regret to say it. but the fact is
apparent, tLat the Tribune is as wicked
as uulli6csnon order Nc. 40; as wicked
as the notification opinion of Johnson's
Attorney General; as wicked as the
bull-dozing efforts Of the Democratic
Congress against Hayes; as wicked rs
the Beltzhoover letter, when it tells
that we did not give Beltzhoover the
credit of denial. The preface that We
published to the BeltznooveT letter con-
iainea the statement of denial.