Morning journal and courier., 1881-07-07
Price Four Cents.

of the Whig party and the Know nothings kicked against party majorities, refused to be, bound by platforms he did not believe in,
 or to support party candidates he regarded as unworthy, and yet by the unanimous con- sent of men who used to objurgate him as an impracticable theorist and disturber of the party harmony he has been sent to the Sen ate. His is not the only instance in which the majority has comne over to the minority
 We might cite others were they needed to prove that resistance to the Cardinal rule' laid down by MT. Case is not infrequently not only duty owed to manhood, conscience and self respect, but moreover-and this the practical politician will understand and respect-the surest way to success in the business of politics.
 "Insubordination to the rule of the major ity," MT. Case tells us, is the 'tchiefest fault aof culture, and he adds that while 'there is something very plausible in this talk of po- itical independence'' it is neither clear nor coherent. Because we obey the law, which is ''the expressed will of the majority whether it is repugnant to the individual sense or notnZhow if it be repugnant to the moral sense, Mir. Case ?-we should obey the rule of caucus as expressed by the voice of the majority. We should be unwilling to do Mir. Case any injustice, and therefore we quote his words, most remarkable words to come from gentleman who is a lawyer as well as politician: 9iI
 The memorable condition of popular gov ernment is surrendry of the individual will Now the political struggle which precedes and results lln law is 8 struggle of two com tending forces, and there can be- no intelli- gent and effective contest without organiza- tion, drill and precision of concerned effort, and this means the caucus and political ma chinery in some form or other. But cuI- ture complains of the caucus, denounces ma chinery, and affects the shibboleth of inde- 1<,z~s. IL
 cry in politics IS equally effective against ma chlnery in government. It is impossible to understand why we should bow to the will of the majority in the crystallized form of law, and resent as personal impertinence the CO., ercion of the majority in those preliminary steps which make law possible
 Here we find the caucus an irresponsible gathering, elevated to the lofty level of the legislative body representing, not party but the whole people. We are told by gentle man who is lawyer and has been Speaker of the House that the citizen owes the same allegiance to the voice of 8 fraction of the political party to which he belongs that he owes to the laws and constitution of his country, and when the caucus speaks consci- ence must be silent and obey. Law comes, not as Hooker tells us from the bosom of God but oozes forth through the key-hole of the closed door of the partisan caucus, and the Imperative duty of all good citizens is to
 
 And this is the entertainment to which Mr. Case kindly invites the scholar in politics Is it strange that some scholars and some honest men of scant scholarship but high sense of manhood and patriotism should not be anx- ious to accept itp Before they can enter the door they must strip themselves of their inde- pendence, lay aside the right of private judgment and vest themselves in the motley garment of the vena1 or blind partisan, to whom temporary success is more than prin- ciple. At this cost the scholar may purchase the privilege of sitting at the feet of the post master who has packed the caucus, drawn up its platform and fixed the slate of candidates in advance At this price the scholar in politics may, perhaps, be allowed to express his dis sent, inside the closed doors of caucus, from the pre- arranged programme, but having done so must hasten to gulp it down and pretend he likes it. He must use his schol- arship in defending and promulgating it. and If 1t should be that he knows the party can didate to be corrupt, one who has obtained the nomination by scandalous means and dirty tricks, he must, nevertheless, support him. And this is the way the scholar in pol ties is to do his share toward making our politics pure. He is to begin the work of reform by sinking himself to the level of the lowest, craftiest wirepuller who is an adept in the art of packing caucus.
 Yes, from his standpoint of an expert in politics we fear MT. Case is right. If the scholar in politics be impatient of recogni- tion and reward from the men who run the machine he must sell himself to their service and do their bidding. As reward they may lot kim pick s1p soEs5 of tks~oramb5 tlGS fall from the table of spells, or even, should they need a respectable lay-fgure, permit him to sit at it's head, on the condition that the practical fellows shall carve the dishes and fill the platters. If such be the success he \ aims at he can have it with but little trouble. It only needs that he should abnegate his If he will not consent to pay this price, and yet consider that he owes a per sonal duty to his country, he must fall back upon the right to bolt. He will be called a ''sorehead,' an 'idealist, D impracticable and laughed at by the practical politicians who run the machine. Laughed at so long as there is not enough of him to make bolting effective. When there is, when he joins un- to himself others who think with him, and their votes are sufficient to defeat the party candidates the independent bolter is treated with respect. Even on the theory that poli- tics mean nothing but that ''majorities shall the party that has the greater number of noses must be right-his nose and those of his fellow bolters count in the sum total. What the practical politician most cares for is success, and when he finds by bitter experience that he cannot hope for that without the aid of independent votes he will hasten to make terms with the scholar in politics, whom he now treats with such condescension.