Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1880-07-08

and she stammered out, "P-p-p-please
sir, I don't wa-wa-want him; 1 wan
m-m-m-my d-d-dog." Then the chic
remembered that the pet dog of the chill
dren of the family had been caugh
roaming around without tag, contrar,
to the peace and dignity of the state O.
Virginia and the ordinance in such case,
made and provided, and was at the same
time incarcerated in the pound connected
with the jail. Both parent and pur
were restored to liberty.
HANCOCK AND THE DEMOCRATS.
CFrom tho Chicago Inter-Oceanl
The National Democratic Convention
has nominated the man for President
who was beaten by Seymour in 1868, by
Greeley in 1872, and by Tlden in 1876.
Gen. Hancock has been standing
Democratic candidate for President
ever since the defeat of Mcclellan in
| 1854. He, in his person, reputation and
fame, represents the same element that
forced the nomination of Mcclellan in
1854, and his nomination now is but a
return to the veneering policy of that
campaign.
Mcclellan was nominated in the face
Of the violent protest of the Copperhsads
OF Ohio and Maryland, and he received
only twenty.one electoral votes out of
total of 233. In the convention of
1868 Hancock fell naturally in the line of
succession, but the experience with
military candidate had been so disas-
'trous that the convention, abandoning
the veneering policy, went back to first
principles and nominated that old Bour-
bon, Horatio Seymour. The campaign
/ was made on the theory that military
man was dangerous to the country.
Seymour received seventy-one electoral
votes, to PA for Grant.
In the convention of 1879 Hancock
was again mentioned, but the hook was
baited with Greeley, an old Republican,
and again the Democratic campaign
was made on the idea of hostility to a
military candidate. Mr.. Greeley carried
six States, giving sixty-two electoral
votes, and Grant received 286 electoral
votes.
Discouraged by this experiment, the
convention Of 1876 turned again to
Bourbonism and nominated Tilden. In
1880 the party that tried Mcclellan in
1864, Seymour in 1868, Greeley in 1872,
and Tlden in 1876, decides with re-
markable unanimity to call out the re-
serve candidate in the person of Gen.
Hancock, and, in so doing, decides to
abandon the war cries of the last three
campaigns.
The men who opposed Grant because
he was military man are now asked to
vote for Hancock, not because he ever
framed or supported Democratic meas
ure, but because he is noted soldier.
The men who raised the cry of no mill
tary candidate when Garfield was nomi-
naattfffdl. mated. are commanded now to catch
The Democratic party, despairing of
success under the old flag of Bourbon
ism, hopes to sneak into power under
cover Of Hancock's military record.
Fearing reputation at the hand Of the
people, the solid South puts forward
Hancock just as the anh-war or peace
at-any- price Democrats did Mcclellan
in 1864
It will not do. Hancock cannot
change the spirit of the Democratic
party. He cannot stretch his splendid
record as a soldier, as he would a man
tie, to cover all the sins of his party.
His work at Gettysburg, placed side by
side with the work of the Democrats in
Congress-, makes a painful contrast.
Principles and motives come to the
front, and leave the candidate in the
rear. The party that nominates him is
the party that makes the fight against
the election laws in Congress is the
party that organized the White League
and rifle clubs in the South; Is the
party that bulldozed and disfranchised
the colored people in Alabama, Missis-
sippi, South Carolina, and Louisiana.
Hancock may lend himself to the party
just as Mcclellan did, but he cannot
alter its record, change its purpose,
modify it's programme, or save it from
defeat. His fame as Union General
weighs little against the domination of
men. like Wade Hampton, Hamburg
Butler, Ben Hill, and others of that
class.
The nomination is weak one, not be-
cause the man is not strong in his way,
but because the rank and file of the
party never have been in sympathy with
him, and will not support him. His
name will have no talismanic influence
among the Bourbon herds in New York,
and will not call out the old Golden
Circle men in Indiana. The fact of his
nomination being in the nature OF a
concession to the strength Of the Repub-
lican candidate. will aid the Republicans
party: His personal record, standing in
contrast with the record Of the party
leaders who push him to the front, is III
the nature of fnger-board directing
public attention to the principles at
stake in the contest. The spectacle OF
even so reputable a soldier as Gen.
Hancock playing cat to pull the chest
nuts of the Democratic monkey out OF
the fire may grieve the people in the old
loyal States, but it will not excite their
sympathy, or turn them aside from the
merits of the contest.
Hancock is simply new experiment
Of party that has tried many schemes
for deceiving the people. he may carry
! the solid South, simply because the old
Confederate leaders will it. But he will
lose Indiana and New York, because, as
against the Legislative and other govern
| m6uGdl 01p6ElcuC0 VI O0As O0AACASA3 liz
has only his military record to present
to men who have professed for sixteen
years to be violently opposed to all mill
tary men.
On one side is Gen. Garfield, thor
oughly identified with the principles
and measures of the Republican party
On the other side is the fgure-head
Hancock, making q vain endeavor to di
vert attention from the measures anl
principles of his party. It is fight TO:
principle, and men of principle vii
fight it to the end. Garfield is just tn
man to put Republican principles to tn
front in q way to attract attention
while Hancock is not the man to turl
public attention away from Democratic
policy.
!. The ox-eye daisy has become grea
pest in some sections of the country
Those who are troubled with this wee
should bear in mind that it is propagate
, | nd hot tn -