The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1881-02-03
WELLINGTON. O.. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY g. 1881.

anu, foregoing the paTIlSau duNduts1So
which offered, have reported in favor OF
the candidate for Governor for whom
small, indeed, but still
a majority-of the voters manifestly
meant to cast their votes. 1t may be
said that they deserve no special credit
for doing what was SO obviously right,
and that upon the whole it was wise as
a mere matter of party policy to pursue
done otherwise would have exposed
them to adverse criticism, and in the
end worked to the injury of the party.
This must be admitted. The right
thing was the polite thing; and for
simply doing right a party which asks
public confidence, and is trusted be-
c ause it promises to regard justice and
act honestly, can claim no particular
merit.
Let us say, then, that they have done
no more than their plain duty, and this
more as a matter of policy than con-
science. AS patriotic citizens, we are glad
to believe that political honesty is not SO
that the exercise of it in
a single instance entities the party ex-
hibiting it to special favor. As Re-
publicans, we are not unwilling to
admit the possibility that the party in
its organized action may be governed
as much by policy as by conscience; for
the party that holds to a belief in the
ultimate honesty and good sense of the
people, and fears to offend them. is
under such salutary restraint that it
can always safely be trusted. But
between parties there is choice, and
in view of the action taken by the Re-
publicans the question naturally arises,
What would have been the course of
their opponents under similar circum-
stancesP Would they have refused to
take advantage of technicalitles to
secure the office of Governor? Is there
any reason to believe that they would
have been governed in the matter by
conscientious sense of right and
justice, or by the motives of common
honesty that regulate transactions
between individuals? Would they
to put the action on the lower plane
would they have had the prudent sagac-
ity, the wise forethought, to see that.
as a matter of policy, it were better to
resist the temptation TO sharp practice
and do the square and manly thingP
We are not left to suspicion or conject-
ure for the answer. The party has q
record in this same State of Maine just
q year old, that sets at rest all doubt as
to what they would have done under
similar circumstances. There is no
need to recite it. 1t is enough to say
that Just year ago the Democrats of
Maine and their allies. the Greenback-
ers, were engaged not merely in taking
advantage of every technicality and in
formality that actually existed, but in
making technicalities and informalities
by fraud and forgery by which to cheat
the voters of Maine of their fairly-ex-
pressed preference at the polls. That
tells what they would do if they had
the opportunity. There can be no
question about it in the mind of any in
telligent man.
Now. though no special merit may
attach to this action of the Republicans.
we submit that it fairly illustrates the
character of the party as contrasted
with that of the Democracy. No matter
whether they acted from conscientious
purpose, or from an enlightened
partisan selfshness; whatever the
motive, they have done the fair and
square thing. Their opponents made
no attempt, from any motive, to act
honestly or even decently. We put
the action of the Republicans this year
over against that of the Democrats last
year, and ask honest men to note
the contrast. And yet the party that
revealed its character and purpose so
thoroughly in the infamous Garcelon
conspiracy of last year had the
effrontery to make a Presidential can
vass Immediately afterward upon the
issue the only one to which it clung
from beginning to end of the campaign
that the Republican party was dis
men of personal integrity. Was it at
all to be wondered at that the last
desperate shift to which they resorted
in that campaign involved the crimes of
forgery, perjury and subornation?
There is here and there, even now, q
Democratic newspaper that has the as
surance to say with chuckle that
"the old party is not dead yet" True
enough, and more shame to it, and to
the men who keep it alive. We agree
with them; it is not dead. But in
Heavens name ought it not to beP
Here is enough in one years record
the fag ends of which are just now COM
ing out in the shape OF confessions of
forgery, perjury and fraud-to condemn
any party to death that did not subsist
on its own rottenness; but this party
lives on and shows neither penitence
nor remorse. We are not hopeful of
its immediate dissolution. But there is
much comfort in the reflection that the
more it is found out the less power it
has for mischief.-M y Tribune.