The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1881-07-28

"Maj. Yost is rather invidious when he
would distinguish the Readjusters and Fun
ders by the Greenback badge We
think there are Greenbackers in both parties
Maj. Daniel is the only prominent Virginian
who has yet undertaken to argue the green
back question in all its phrases. Has Major
Yost forgotten that Lynchburg speech?
Again, Mai. Daniel wrote long letter to the
Dispatch disclaimIng any purpose to bolt on
this greenback question, but again insisting
on his views, and stating, rs we understand
his letter, that Mr.. Tucker agreed with him at
that time. Maj. Yost seems also to have for
gotten Judge Harris circular of rs, in which
he proclaimed himself Greenbacker, and
even in favor of paying the $50 bonds in
greenbacks Maj Yost must try to recall
these things, and along with them Judge
Harris letter to the Richmond Wing explain
ing not only his own, but the views of Gen.
Hunton also. For this of course, Gen. Hun
ton is not responsible We have these docu-
ments and will cheeriully supply them to
Major Yost SO that he may start fairly on
tins question.
The above paragraph is from the Woodstock
Vnyiniaas, edited by Capt. H. H. Riddleberger
The msapprehension that seems to exist with
our friend, is that we have been defending the
Democratic party in something, when the fact
is we have been arraigning its record, whether
posing under the colors of Re-adjusters or
Bourbons. We draw no distinction between
the prominent leaders Of either faction. They
made their record as Democrats-they claim
yet to be Democrats, and this claim we have
no disposition to dispute. We hold them to
their record as Democrats. Maj Daniel and
Judge Harris are just as offensive, in this re-
spect, as Capt. Paul and Capt Blair, and until
they give some evidence that they have
changed their views, cannot expec: to escape
the censure they deserve. We oppose both
factions OF the Democratic party, because they
are committed against the cardinal principles
of the Republican party, and not because of
any personal considerations, as affects ind-
viduals.
The difference between them Is that the
Bourbons adhere to their old dogmas, and
make no pretensions to anything else. The
Re-adjusters avow that they are better Demo
Gratis than the Bourbons, and yet want Repub-
licans to support their faction because OF a
wordy assertion of liberalism. They are too
| much Democrats to be Republicans and zoo
much Republicans to be Bourbons and just
| enough of each to entitle them to the spoils
Of office-the end and aim of their existence.
If the Readjusters intend to act with the
Republicans let them say SO, and identify
themselves with that organization. If they
have abandoned their wild notions about
| finance, their opposition to the national bank
ing system and the tariff. the best way to test
that is to act with the party which has eyer
proclaimed these as their cardinal doctrines
The Bourbons are making no movement in
| that direction and making no appeals for Re-
publican support. The Re-adjusters are de-
pendent upon Republican votes for nearly all
the strength they will show this fall, and pro-
claim all indefinite and underlined and indetin-
able liberalism in lusty words, so as to make
believe they are approaching to Republican
ism. If they are sincerelet them place them
selves squarely upon the Republican platform,
and that would solve the difficulty. Republi-
cans cannot endorse their record upon the
financial question, either as it affects State OBJ
legations or national. 1t is distinct and in
disputable record, and in direct antagonism to
the creed and history of the Republican party
Their liberalism is not such as to compensate
for this record, or neutralize it. Republicans
cannot, without stultifying themselves, en-
dorse the position Of the Re-adjusters on the
National or State debt question, and it is tc
this that our remarks heretofore have been di
| rected.