Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1880-07-28
Do the People Demand Change?

Gen. Hancock for President, who is a
soldier and nothing else, over Gen. Gar
field, who was a soldier and statesman,
remarked:
We need a ch ange. 1 admit there is necessity
for the two great parties We now have, and
would not destroy either OF them; but by Inter-
changing the administration between them,
keep both In sound and conservative condi-
ton. Despotism is nation without political
We want to change I don't mean change Of
the amendments of the constitution hold
them sacred (applause) We want change. L
mean change in the administration. And the
whole purposes may be stated IN these few
words: This government shall not be an empire
(appause); these States shall never be provinces
(aDplause); both must remain as they are under
the sovereignty OF the people (applause).
These, we presume, are the best reasons
that Mr.. Groesbeck could offer for q
change in the administration of the gov
eminent; and yet they must strike every
intelligent reader as decidedly feeble rea-
sons-reasons, too, that are unworthy of
gentleman of Mr.. Groesbecks ability
and intelligence. He is right in desiring
the maintenance of two opposing parties
in this country. These will never be
wanting In Republic; but it devolves
upon Mr.. Groesbeck to show why the
change he favors should be made under
existing circumstances.
There are two great parties In the coun-
try at the present time. The conduct of
these parties is matter of record. 1t is
known to every intelligent citizen. By
this the parties are to be judged, rather
than by what they promise for the future.
The Democratic party was defeated in
1860. In that year began the rebellion
against the government to which the
Democratic party in its organized Ca
pacity committed itself, by active hostili-
ties on one side of the sectional line, and
substantial sympathy on the other. This
is fact that Mr.. Groesbeck will not dis
pute. He, with hundreds of thousands of
other Democrats, disapproved of
the party at that time, and
separated from it. He united with
the party of the Union and the Con-
stltution in aiding to overthrow the rebel
lion. But the Democratic party as an
Organization, gave aid aud comfort tc the
rebellion and sought to make it success.
Even in 1864, near the close of the war,
the Democratic party, in national conven.
ton assembled, declared the war for the
Union failure, and demanded peace
upon the best obtainable terms. But tor
the support given to the rebels by the
Democratic party, the war would not have
lasted near so long IS it did, and half the
cost in blood and treasure would have
been saved. This is another fact Mr..
Groesbeck will not deny. He can not
deny it, for the reason that during those
dark days of the Republic he opposed
his party and acted with the Republicans.
When the war closed the Democratic
party opposed every measure of recon
struction. 1t opposed every one of the
that abolishing slavery, and no one of its
recognized leaders has, up to this day, ad-
mitted that the amendments were consti-
tutionally made or legally binding. Mr..
Groesbeck. for himself, says they are
sacred; put his party does not say 50. It
acquiesces, with sundry mental reserva-
tons, while the Southern section of that
party has and still does def1antly disre.
gard several of them. These amendments,
therefore, which Mr.. Groesbeck holds
sacred, are not 80 held by the party that
he now supports. This is another fact
that Mr.. Groesbeck cannot successfully
deny. And, since the war closed, what
has been the course of the Democratic
party? It has not aided, but it has oppos-
ed measures looking to the resumption of
specie payments. The progress made to
ward and the accomplishments of the re.
establishment Of honest money has been
made and secured, not with the aid of the
Democratic party, but in spite of it.
The Democratic party, too, has sought
to nullify the laws This was the cause
of the extra session of Congress. Having
secured the control of Congress, it sought
to trample under foot the constitution. 1t
refused to appropriate money to enforce
constitutional laws, and it said to the
President: "Sign the bills we pass, or we
will starve yod into submission" Among
other things, it sought 10 nulllfy the cleo.
ton laws. The object and effect of these
laws is to insure free and honest elections.
Such laws are necessary, as experience
has abundantly proved. Does Mr.. Groes-
beck desire change in order that the
effort to secure honest elections may be
defeated? Does he believe one of the
rights of State is to stuff the boxes with
tissue ballots? overawe the voters with
shotguns and Ku-Kux Klans? Does he
favor such organizations as existed here
in 1876, to corrupt the ballot-box? Does
he know that the whole. power of the
Democratic party was used to carry the
election in 1876, by fraud, murder and
arson? Does he not know that several of
the Southern States were carried for Til
oOA An eAAS WoJ lDOCs uC uOl huOW,
furthermore, that Wade Hampton openly
promised larger majority for Hancock
in South Carolina than any other State
would give, when it is well known fact
that majority of the legal voters in that
State are colored and are Republicans !?
Does he not know, besides, that the 1873
electoral votes of the South are already
virtually counted for Hancock, regardless
of the vote that may be cast? And does
he not know that no free or fair election
can be held in any one of the late rebel
States? This is the record of the Demo.
cratic party.
On the other hand, look at the record
OF the Republican party. 1t suppressed
the rebellion, aided by war Democrats, of
which Mr.. Groesbeck was one. 1t met
the opposition of the Solid South and of
the Democratic party, IL Its organized Ca.
paclty. 1t amended the Constitution.
1t adopted those amendments which Mr..
Groesbeck says are sacred. 1t restored
every one of the disloyal States to their
places IN the Union, and placed them